Speaking for Nevada - January 2002

A Yucca Mountain Update

by Shelley Berkley

For the first time since 1982, the momentum is with us. The proposed nuclear dump at Yucca Mountain has suffered a couple of significant setbacks lately. This is not to suggest that the fight is all downhill from here -- the federal government is as determined as ever -- but we have managed to level the playing field a little.

Earlier this past year, I received an anonymous letter at my office, detailing gross mismanagement in the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Yucca Mountain Project office. While I do not usually respond to anonymous tips, this particular letter displayed such detailed knowledge of the project that I forwarded the letter to the General Accounting Office (GAO) with a request to investigate all the various allegations of bias and mismanagement. Senator Harry Reid joined me in the request to the GAO, citing the same anonymous letter and the longstanding need for oversight.

Nevadans have known for years that the DOE was willing to bend the rules in approving Yucca Mountain, but we had never had access to the kinds of information the GAO reviewed in the course of its investigation. The GAO released its report to me in late November, and I knew immediately this was a momentous event in the history of the project. The report states unequivocally that a recommendation by the Secretary of Energy would be premature, and that the DOE does not have the necessary information to make a decision. According to the report, the "DOE is unlikely to achieve its goal of opening a repository at Yucca Mountain by 2010 and has no reliable estimate of when, and at what cost, such a repository could be opened." The GAO estimates that the DOE may finish the required scientific studies by 2006, which would extend the construction date until at least 2015. The GAO also notes that this would be an optimistic schedule.

The second issue that has come to the fore has involved the Winston Strawn law firm. The firm has worked for DOE for several years, assisting the department in navigating the Yucca Mountain regulatory and legislative process. But while the firm was working for the DOE, it was also working for the Nuclear Energy Institute, the trade and lobbying association with the greatest interest in the approval of the project. After learning of the apparent conflict of interest, I requested that the District of Columbia Bar investigate the matter, and at the end of November, the firm was forced to quit its association with the DOE. However, the termination of the contract does not deflect the need for a thorough investigation into how much damage has already been done. Over several years, the Winston Strawn law firm has been in a position to oversee a project in which it has a vested interest.

Another avenue I have pursued has been the issue of nuclear security. In the wake of the September 11th attacks, it became crystal clear that a central, nuclear waste repository would be an attractive target for terrorists. But not only would a national repository be vulnerable to terrorist attack, the transportation routes and exchange hubs throughout the country would also prove highly insecure against attack, or even unintentional accidents. In order to address this problem, I have authored legislation to mandate that the Office of Homeland Security design and implement a counter-terrorism plan for nuclear waste. The bill incorporates three main components: the administration would plan and implement counter-terrorist measures to safeguard nuclear waste from attack, implement a "first-responders" plan in case of attack, and bar the Secretary of Energy from recommending the approval of Yucca Mountain until such plans had been reviewed and implemented. Furthermore, the legislation would mandate cost studies at each stage of the process, underlining the difficulties of transporting and securing over 77,000 tons of nuclear waste. While the final provision, barring the Secretary of Energy from recommending Yucca Mountain, may prove too contentious for most of my colleagues, I am working with other members of the Homeland Security Task Force to incorporate the counter-terrorist design and implementation portions into a broader Democratic security bill.

I am also continuing to work closely with my colleagues in the House and Senate to improve security at the nuclear plants where waste is stored and to have the federal government take control of the waste facilities. Improved security and federal control of the nation’s nuclear plants will relieve pressure on the DOE to build a national repository, as the government is long past the statutory deadline for accepting the waste.

Between the GAO report, the Winston Strawn issue, and nuclear security, I feel, for the first time in many, many years, that the momentum is with us. It is still an uphill battle, but in this long campaign, we have enjoyed few instances as successful as these.