Editorial: Conflict of interest is alarming

Wednesday, Jan. 12, 2000 | 9:34 a.m.

In September 1999 the Chicago law firm of Winston & Strawn won a lucrative, $16.5 million contract with the U.S. Department of Energy. If the DOE decides a high-level nuclear waste repository should be built at Yucca Mountain, the law firm may have to spend up to 38,900 hours reviewing the DOE's application, which must be submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for final approval. A law firm that lost out on the bidding process, however, is claiming that Winston & Strawn has a conflict of interest, because that same firm already has provided legal advice for TRW, Yucca Mountain's prime contractor. LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae contend that quality assurance requirements mandated by the federal government require an independent review of a contractor's work, including any legal advice.

Some might suggest this is just sour grapes on the part of the losing bidder, but the arguments the firm makes are compelling and demonstrate that the DOE has a serious problem on its hands. As the Sun's Mary Manning reported Tuesday, LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae has hired two witnesses -- nuclear law experts -- who agree that this has created damaging conflicts of interest for the DOE. The former top attorney for the NRC, Howard Shapar, asserts in an affidavit that this conflict is so severe it could jeopardize the Yucca Mountain Project. In addition, former DOE general counsel R. Tenney Johnson believed that it was incomprehensible the DOE would place itself in this position.

In the meantime, as Manning reported, the DOE is exploring ways to get around this requirement for an independent review of its legal work, including leaving Winston & Strawn out of its final review to avoid the appearance of conflict. The DOE also believes the independent assessment only has to be a technical review, not a legal survey. Shapar, though, thinks this is nonsense. "To suggest that a multi-volume license application of this importance will be submitted to NRC with no prior review by attorneys skilled in nuclear law is unprecedented and would substantially increase the odds of its failure," Shapar stated in his affidavit.

Independent audits of work performed by both government and businesses are crucial to ensure that either the public or consumers aren't getting fleeced. Not only is there a danger that money will be spent inappropriately, but also that the work performed might not be up to basic safety standards, placing the public at risk. So when an audit is performed, it is essential that the auditor is truly independent -- his integrity can't be compromised by having any ties to the individual or organization whose performance he is reviewing.

Nothing should be left to chance when deciding whether or not it's safe for Nevada to store man's deadliest waste for thousands of years. The DOE's mismanagement of the Yucca Mountain Project and its failure to adhere to a rigorous scientific investigation has been responsible for cementing Nevada's opposition to entombing nuclear waste in this state. The department's nonchalant attitude, regarding its conflict of interest in its legal review of its Yucca Mountain application, is disturbing.