WASHINGTON - The Energy Department lacks a "detailed strategic plan" for transporting nuclear waste to Yucca Mountain, a congressionally appointed Yucca watchdog group said.

For example, the department needs more focus on how waste would be shipped on rail or roads inside Nevada once it is hauled to the state from nuclear sites nationwide, the Nuclear Waste Technical Review Board said.

In a Dec. 1 letter to Energy Department Yucca chief Margaret Chu, the panel wrote that the department has no "overarching implementation organization" to develop a safe and efficient waste shipping program.

"It is important for the DOE (Energy Department) to develop specific logistical plans that identify the entity that is responsible for each system component and the key interactions required of each involved entity," the board wrote.

An Energy Department spokesman was not available for comment.

The department has begun organizing itself to plan for a massive shipping campaign for the federal plan to construct a national high-level nuclear waste repository at Yucca, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas.

The plan calls for shipments of up to 77,000 tons of radioactive material made over several decades by road and rail from the nation's active and closed nuclear power plants and U.S. defense waste sites.

Critics say the plan invites the risk of accidents and terrorist attack.

But industry leaders say both scenarios are highly unlikely. They point to a long safety record. The nuclear energy industry has made 3,000 shipments of used nuclear fuel since 1964, and no fuel has leaked, according to the Nuclear Energy Institute, a top industry lobby group.

There is plenty of time to begin transportation planning and to do it right, said Jack Edlow, president of Edlow International Co., a waste shipping company.

The Energy Department is well aware of all the steps it needs to take, said Edlow, leader of the U.S. Transport Council, established in April 2002 to better represent waste shippers. The board's letter didn't reveal anything new, Edlow said.

"The department can now begin the process of putting in place all they pieces they need," Edlow said. "The timing becomes tighter the longer you wait. They need to begin now. But I wouldn't say they are behind."

Still, the board, established by Congress in 1987 to conduct independent analysis of the Yucca plan, is concerned that schedule and budget setbacks could "compromise" transportation planning.

Yucca has long been plagued by delays, some created by budget cuts that are orchestrated in part by incoming Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., a member of the Appropriations Committee.

The board is concerned that the department could "overlook" technical transportation issues in a rush to meet a self-imposed 2010 project opening deadline, according to the letter.

The board said the department's approach to assessing security risks to waste shipments is "appropriate," but has a few flaws.

For instance, tribal groups may not be represented as the department is deliberating routes, the board said. And the board cautioned the department to handle waste route planning with state and regional governments "carefully and diligently."

The department needs to better identify the technical issues involved in selecting routes and apply "sound methods" to address the issues, the board said.

The board also noted that the Energy Department needs to do a better job of communicating its transportation plan - and the perceived risks - to the public.

(Distributed by Scripps-McClatchy Western Service)