The Bureau of Land Management has invited the public to comment on Private Fuel Storage's application to use public land in Skull Valley for a rail line to its proposed temporary storage facility, or for an intermodal transfer facility.

I encourage all who have information relevant to this issue to respond to the BLM by the May 8 deadline.

For those who are undecided or unclear about the plan, please consider the following:

PFS has received a license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to build and operate a facility for storing spent nuclear fuel for 20 years, with a possible 20-year extension. The approved license application specified that the spent fuel will be carried on dedicated trains on DOT-approved routes to Skull Valley.

PFS's preferred method for transporting the spent fuel from the Union Pacific main line to the site is by rail, on a proposed line down the west side of Skull Valley. Another option is to transfer the spent fuel from rail car to truck for the last 26 miles to the facility.

The environmental effects of both options were thoroughly reviewed, along with public comment, before a Final Environmental Impact Statement was issued by the NRC in 2001. The statement found no significant effects for either transportation option.

Though the truck option is less expensive for PFS, I believe it is in the public interest to build the rail line since it is on the opposite side of the valley from ranches, homes and road traffic. The rail line is also a substantial infrastructure that could benefit federal, state or local governments in the future, as well as the Skull Valley Band of Goshute Indians and other land owners in Skull Valley.

The licensing process took more than eight and a half years, during which there were many weeks of hearings to thoroughly examine issues related to safety and environmental concerns. During those hearings, the burden of proof was on PFS to show that the design and construction of the facility and storage casks would withstand earthquakes, fires and other natural disasters, as well as a crash of an F-16 airplane.

Utah countered with expert testimony and evidence intended to show why the facility would not be safe. After a rigorous process, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board and the NRC commissioners found that the plan complies with the federal regulations designed to protect public health and safety, and a license was granted.

Like other major commercial projects, the PFS facility is market driven. It will not be built until there are funds in place and agreements with customers to ensure the viability of the project. With more and more nuclear plants running out of space in their storage pools each year, we believe that there is a growing need for interim storage if we are to maintain or expand the nuclear component of our electricity supply.

When the time comes to construct the PFS facility, it will create hundreds of construction jobs. There is also a huge potential for highly skilled jobs in the steel fabrication industry if the contracts for construction of canisters and casks are awarded to Utah firms. It is our intent to spend as much of PFS's budget within the state as possible.

Arguments that the presence of a interim storage facility for spent fuel will somehow tarnish Utah's reputation and inhibit economic growth are nothing more than fear tactics.

Analysis of economic effects of nuclear plants on surrounding communities has shown positive results. The presence of a nuclear plant and spent fuel storage facility about 40 miles from the nation's capitol apparently has not discouraged millions of visitors to the area each year.

The argument that the PFS facility may somehow threaten the mission of Hill Air Force Base is another misleading fear tactic. It is more likely that the proximity of Hill to the PFS facility may help support Hill's mission for as long as the temporary PFS facility exists.

It is becoming clear to many policy makers that our country will need to expand its nuclear power generation if we are to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, maintain a thriving economy, and strengthen our commitment to clean air. This means, of course, that the U.S. Department of Energy must solve the spent fuel storage dilemma by getting a permanent repository up and running.

Until that can happen, centralized interim storage, such as that offered by PFS, must be part of the solution.

John D. Parkyn is Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Private Fuel Storage, a constium of nuclear power companies that wants to build a waste storage facility in Skull Valley. He lives in Wisconsin.