Majority of Nevadans oppose repository

Environmental activist Richard Nielsen predicts that the nation's high-level nuclear waste will never come to Yucca Mountain because scientists will find the site unsuitable.

Fellow Las Vegan and former Nevada Test Site employee Bill Vasconi is so confident a repository will be built there that he believes Nevadans must begin negotiating for benefits from the federal government.

Compromise between those viewpoints is tougher to negotiate than rush-hour traffic through the Spaghetti Bowl. Debating whether Nevada should accept the nation's high-level nuclear waste evokes the same passion locally that abortion does nationally. When politicians run for office in Southern Nevada, one of the first questions they're asked is their position on nuclear waste.

Both sides agree that a majority of Nevadans -- more than 70 percent in most polls -- don't want nuclear waste coming here. Gov. Bob Miller and all four members of Nevada's congressional delegation are in that majority. So are most of this year's major gubernatorial candidates, including Democratic Las Vegas Mayor Jan Laverty Jones and Republicans Kenny Guinn and Aaron Russo.

The state Legislature, Clark County Commission and cities of Las Vegas, Henderson, Boulder City, Lovelock, Reno and Sparks have passed anti-dump resolutions. The Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects, which reports to the governor, and the Clark County Nuclear Waste Division are opposed to a repository even though they were formed to monitor the project from a neutral standpoint.

"We believe from an independent technical assessment that the dump site is not a good one," Bob Loux, executive director of the state agency, said. "We see impacts in the social and economic arenas. We're concerned that regulations such as for transportation are not adequate to ensure safety. The national infrastructure in any way, shape or form is not equipped to handle nuclear waste shipments."

The "antis," as they're often called, also include the Nevada Resort Association, Nevada State Medical Association, Nevada State Fireman's Association, Nevada Parent Teachers Association, Nevada Nuclear Waste Task Force and the Nevada League of Cities. Also on the list are leading local environmental groups such as Citizen Alert and the Shundahai Network.

"We're just rushing into this based on politics rather than science, and it will just come back to haunt us," Nielsen, executive director of Citizen Alert, said. "If science were driving the program, the idea of a repository at Yucca Mountain would be put to rest."

The opposite side of the fence is lonely by comparison. The only major state group calling for benefits in exchange for nuclear waste is The Study Committee, which reports a mailing list of 15,000 people who have requested information. Instead of charging membership dues, the group is financed by the Nuclear Energy Institute of Washington, the lobbying arm of the nuclear power industry.

Vasconi, vice chairman of The Study Committee, said his group would oppose a Yucca Mountain repository if the site wasn't acceptable. He said he would otherwise support a repository there as long as the waste wasn't transported through the Las Vegas Valley and was properly monitored and retrievable on site.

"We're saying leave the study up to the scientists," Vasconi said. "They're the ones who will determine whether Yucca Mountain is suitable. But while the study is going on, why don't we have negotiations with those in power for benefits for Nevada?"

Others who have urged the state to negotiate for benefits include officials from Nye and Lincoln counties. The position is supported by a handful of legislators, including state Sen. Joe Neal, D-North Las Vegas, who is running for governor.

Straddling the fence are such organizations as the Nevada AFL-CIO and the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority. Building trade unions have favored a Yucca Mountain repository because it would bring an estimated 1,000 construction jobs and a permanent work force of 1,600 to 2,000.

But Claude "Blackie" Evans, executive secretary-treasurer of the statewide labor organization, said union members overall are evenly split on the issue, forcing the state AFL-CIO to take no position. LVCVA spokesman Rob Powers said the authority also hasn't taken a position because the impact on tourism remains unknown.

Not long after Congress selected Yucca Mountain in 1987 as the only site to study for a potential high-level nuclear waste repository, Nevadans were bombarded by a media blitz urging them to support the proposed dump.

The campaign, financed by the nuclear power industry and dubbed the "Nevada Initiative," was orchestrated by such heavyweight local political consultants as Kent Oram and Don Williams. Las Vegas television reporter George Knapp and Nevada-based nuclear utility lobbyist Ed Allison also lent a hand. Unable to sway the anti-dump majority, however, the campaign was viewed as a flop.

The nuclear industry's presence in Southern Nevada is far more low-key today. Aside from the periodic "Nevada Monitor" newsletters distributed by The Study Committee and paid for by the Nuclear Energy Institute, the nuclear industry is represented by Las Vegas consultant A.C. Robison. Instead of showering the public with advertisements, Robison merely reports back to the industry on Nevada's nuclear waste position.

"Most people in Nevada would just as soon not have a waste repository in Nevada, but they also tend to be pragmatic," Robison said. "If you ask them if a repository will come, most of them say it probably will."

The state's leading anti-dump proponents argue, however, that a repository is far from inevitable. Clark County Commissioner Myrna Williams, a member of the state's Nuclear Projects Commission, said the longer Nevada can hold off a repository, the more likely scientific evidence will mount against the proposed site. The state commission, comprised of gubernatorial appointees, is opposed to the proposed dump.

"Ten years ago it was said that Yucca Mountain was inevitable, but we have managed all this time to keep our sovereign rights alive," Williams said.

Neal still believes a repository is inevitable, but he complained that his position on nuclear waste is grossly misunderstood.

"As governor I would have no problem vetoing the waste from coming here, but that option is no longer there," he said. "My opinion is the waste is going to come here whether we like it or not, and the votes in Congress have borne me out on that."

Former Nevada Test Site engineer Troy Wade, who served as assistant energy secretary for defense programs in the late 1980s, doesn't think it is wise for Congress to approve a temporary dump before Yucca Mountain is deemed a suitable permanent site. But he, too, believes the repository is coming.

"Dealing with nuclear waste and spent fuel is a national issue that has to be addressed," Wade said. "I have always thought that the Nevada Test Site was uniquely suited for that because of its isolation, geology and hydrology. The Nevada Test Site is uniquely suited for hazardous programs, including spent fuel."

Lt. Gov. Lonnie Hammargren, a GOP gubernatorial candidate, said in a prepared statement that the nuclear waste issue as it relates to Nevada has been a "triumph of politics and scare tactics over science."

"I am not anti-dump or anti-nuke, but I am in favor of taking the time to do things right, knowing the risks before we make a decision," Hammargren said.

Like other dump opponents, Williams said she wouldn't negotiate with the federal government for benefits. She cited an opinion from former Nevada Attorney General Brian McKay that the state would be signaling its support for the repository simply by agreeing to negotiate.

"It would be implied consent because you would be accepting money," Williams said. "Once we've agreed to negotiate, we're saying, 'Hey, if you come up with the right amount of money, we'll say yes.'"

Robison, who served as chief of staff for former Nevada Sen. Paul Laxalt, disagrees. He said Nevada will lose out if it doesn't come to the table.

"Nearly everything is done by discussion and compromise," Robison said. "We're in a position where we can go to the U.S. government and say that we're providing a service and ought to be compensated for that service. If we don't negotiate, we will get the repository with whatever benefits someone else deems appropriate for us, and I don't like that viewpoint."

New Mexico accepted cash from the government in exchange for agreeing to host the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant near Carlsbad. That facility is scheduled to begin accepting mid-level transuranic waste, which contains mostly plutonium, from federal nuclear weapons facilities as early as mid-June.

Dan Balduini, a spokesman for plant manager Westinghouse Electric Co., said New Mexico last year received the first of 15 annual $20 million installments that the state will be able to use for general-fund purposes such as new roads and sewage facilities.

Prior to that, New Mexico also received more than $117 million to improve state highways leading to the plant, including bypasses around several communities. New Mexico Attorney General Tom Udall continues to fight the plant because of concerns about possible underground leaks, but the facility has been licensed.

"The entire (New Mexico) congressional delegation has been supportive," Balduini said. "It's helping the economy, especially in southeastern New Mexico."

The amended Nuclear Waste Policy Act that selected Yucca Mountain as the sole site to study for a high-level waste repository -- the "Screw Nevada" bill, as dump foes call it -- also gives Nevada leeway to negotiate for benefits.

As the bill was being amended in 1987, then-Sen. J. Bennett Johnston, D-La., proposed that Nevada receive $50 million a year before the repository was opened and $100 million annually thereafter. But Robison, who was deputy assistant energy secretary for congressional and intergovernmental affairs at the time, said the senator dropped his proposal when Nevadans failed to cooperate.

Under the current bill, Nevada would receive only $10 million annually once it agreed to a permanent repository and $20 million annually from the first shipment of nuclear waste until the facility is closed. Robison doesn't believe that aspect of the bill is fair.

"That's why I keep tilting this windmill," he said. "It ('Screw Nevada') is becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy, but it doesn't need to be."

Robison and others who favor negotiations do like the section of the law that gives Nevada an opportunity to seek additional benefits. The Study Committee's wish list of potential benefits includes widening Interstate 15 from Las Vegas to Los Angeles, additional Colorado River water, a railroad between Southern and Northern Nevada, release of federal lands to the state, and a world-class environmental and energy research center for the University of Nevada system.

"My question is, what part of that $2.7 billion (spent so far on the Yucca Mountain study) would have gone toward benefits had we initiated negotiations at the onset of the study?" Vasconi said.

"We continue to believe that our elected officials should begin reasonable and meaningful dialogue with the federal government aimed at assuring significant health and safety standards while increasing and broadening our state's economic base."

Richard Nielsen, however, is repulsed by the thought of negotiating for benefits.

"I don't think there's enough benefits to be had to compensate for the long-term effects of having a repository at Yucca Mountain," he said. "Those impacts will be felt by our children and our children's children."

He defended that viewpoint despite the decades of nuclear testing in Nevada.

"It's like saying to someone who lost a foot in an auto wreck, 'Why not let us take your other toes?'" Nielsen said. "You'd be making Nevada a sacrifice zone. The nuclear waste will contaminate the environment and possibly the human population surrounding it from now on."

Shundahai Network spokesman Reinard Knutsen of Las Vegas said his anti-nuclear organization opposes negotiating for benefits because the Yucca Mountain study violates an 1863 treaty between the federal government and the Western Shoshone nation.

Knutsen said the treaty gave the Western Shoshones control of a broad swath of land that includes the mountain, allowing settlers to use it only as they were passing through the territory. The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to consider tribal claims to the land, but Knutsen said the Western Shoshones have taken their battle to the United Nations.

"They are totally against nuclear material on their land," Knutsen said. "They have a spiritual connection to the mountain. In their history they say that Yucca Mountain doesn't stay in one place, that it moves around the desert. They believe it is a snake moving across the desert, and that there's no way it can safely hold nuclear material."

Lincoln County officials, seeing benefits as a potential boon to their struggling rural economy, once offered to be the site for the nuclear waste. Nevada sued the county for attempting to violate a 1989 law that prohibits the storage of high-level nuclear waste in the state.

Lincoln officials agreed to drop their resolution in 1995 in exchange for a promise that the state wouldn't seek to oust them from office.

But Caliente, Lincoln County's largest town with a population of about 1,200, still is offering to serve as the transfer point for the waste should it come to Nevada via the Union Pacific railroad. Caliente Mayor Kevin Phillips has proposed trucking the waste from his town to Yucca Mountain about 120 miles away using rural back roads. That would alleviate fears about the waste coming through the Las Vegas Valley, he said.

In exchange, Phillips said the transfer operation would create 30 badly needed jobs in his town and spark economic development. As a county impacted by the waste, Phillips said there is potential for at least $5 million a year to flow into Lincoln's coffers.

"We're already used to rail shipments of all kinds," Phillips said. "More than 50,000 shipments come through town every year, including propane and explosives. If we were to have an accident with some of that stuff, we wouldn't make it out of the canyon. We're probably going to get this nuclear waste like a zillion other things anyway."

State Sen. Jack Regan, D-Las Vegas, suggests making Nevada the education capital of the world in nuclear research.

In a 1994 Sun survey of Southern Nevada candidates for the Legislature that year, 38 said they would oppose a dump, 17 were undecided, and eight would negotiate for benefits. Some of the latter were opposed to nuclear waste coming to Nevada but believed that the repository was inevitable.

Assemblyman Tom Collins, D-North Las Vegas, said then that he opposed nuclear waste coming through the Las Vegas Valley, but believed the repository was inevitable. He has since reversed course and now places himself in the anti-dump camp.

North Las Vegas City Councilwoman Paula Brown, a former member of The Study Committee, also has backed off her initial position of seeking benefits during the study and said she opposes a repository.

The debate over Yucca Mountain isn't only about whether the state should negotiate for benefits. There are equally sharp differences of opinion on what to do with the nuclear waste.

Wade said more can be done to reprocess spent nuclear fuel as a way of reducing the waste. As chairman of the Nevada Alliance For Defense, Energy and Business, which advocates increased commercial use of the Nevada Test Site, Wade would like to see such a reprocessing plant there.

"We could recover uranium for the next generation of reactors. I've always felt that throwing it away was nuts."

In the interim, repository opponents believe scientists are bound to come up with better long-term solutions to handle the waste than have it buried at Yucca Mountain for an anticipated 10,000 years. But Knutsen admits it's an uphill struggle.

The Nevada Policy Research Institute, a conservative Reno think tank, suggested last month that the federal government consider an offer by the Goshute Indians of Utah to accept a temporary nuclear waste storage facility funded by a group of private utilities. The proposed site is about 50 miles west of Salt Lake City.

"It could open the door to privatization of the entire waste problem, bringing an end to the failed, government-dominated process currently in place," the institute's D. Dowd Muska wrote.

However, Utah, a state that produces some of the nation's most fiscally conservative politicians, has been fighting the proposal. Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt and the state Legislature have decided to deny permits to transport nuclear waste over the only road that leads to the proposed site.

archive