Editorial: Questions on oversight

Friday, Sept. 16, 2005 | 8:54 a.m.

The U.S. Energy Department wants to cut by 89 percent what it pays to another government agency to conduct independent scientific research on the department's Yucca Mountain project. The cuts, affecting the U.S. Geological Survey, would effectively end that agency's oversight of the project. If granted a license to operate, Yucca Mountain, 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, would store 77,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste. The department's action is raising questions from Nevada's congressional delegation, especially since both agencies are at the center of a controversy as to whether some USGS scientists may have falsified data regarding how water moves through the mountain. The allegations that scientific work had been altered have been the focus of a congressional probe by Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., since April.

USGS officials have told aides to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., that no clear reason for the cuts was offered by the Energy Department. Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev., said the cuts give the Energy Department a means to get rid of employees "who may know exactly what corners were cut and what findings were doctored." She also added that cutting the USGS funding is the latest sign that the Bush administration isn't interested "in answering lingering questions about the shoddy science and lack of quality assurance that has been well documented." And Rep. Jim Gibbons, R-Nev., in a letter to Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, asks whether the research conducted by the USGS will now be done by the Energy Department or an outside agency.

The only thing clear about the Yucca Mountain project is that it should have been shut down years ago. In this latest mess, the Energy Department -- and Bodman specifically -- needs to give straight answers about why the USGS oversight of the Yucca Mountain Project may be ending.