Las Vegas Sun

November 22, 2009

Currently: 62° | Complete forecast | Log in

SUN EDITORIAL:

Keeping up the fight

Gibbons wrong to oppose funding for law firm to help Nevada block proposed nuke dump

Thursday, Aug. 13, 2009 | 2:09 a.m.

Thanks to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., the Obama administration has agreed that the only money in the 2011 federal budget for the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste dump will be to close the project down.

Even though no money would be left for the Energy Department to pursue its licensing application before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to build the dump 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, the project cannot officially be declared dead until that application is withdrawn or is rejected by the commission.

Nevada is fortunate that Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto and Secretary of State Ross Miller recognize this.

As members of the state Board of Examiners, they voted Tuesday over the objections of the third member, Gov. Jim Gibbons, to spend $10 million over the next two years on a Washington law firm to help the state fight Yucca Mountain.

The money for the contract with the law firm Egan, Fitzpatrick & Malsch will come from federal funds, so it will not put a further strain on the state’s bare-bones budget.

As reported by the Nevada Appeal, Gibbons still questioned whether the spending was necessary “since, in essence, the permitting process is dead.” Though the governor has opposed the dump plan, he should have recognized, as his colleagues did, that it is still premature to give up the fight against Yucca Mountain.

As the state’s elected leader, Gibbons should continue that fight until there is no longer an active dump application before the commission. By voting against the funding for the law firm, the governor left the impression that he has softened his position against the nuke dump, even if that was not his intent.

Having the law firm in Nevada’s corner is necessary because the potent nuclear power industry and its friends in Congress will still try any trick they can to dump the nation’s high-level nuclear waste in this state.

This state should remain vigilant in the fight against Yucca Mountain, and it needs a governor who will do the same.

Discussion: 12 comments so far…

  1. By davelv
    8/13/09 at 6:14 a.m.
    Suggest removal

    Doesn't it seem to be unethical misuse of ratepayer money from the Nuclear Waste Fund to pay Nevada $10 million to use in legal fees to fight against the very thing for which the fund was setup? Only in America....

    BTW, the Sun should be congratulated by their community on allowing comments to be posted on their editorials. A true sign of supporting freedom of speech. Thank you!

  2. By abevanluik
    8/13/09 at 7:18 a.m.
    Suggest removal

    I wish the prospects for Yucca Mountain success through industry "tricks" were bright enough to warrant keeping all the parties enagaged in licensing, but in this case the Governor is right, the Administration has made its decision, it is implementing its decision, and I suspect that a law change will follow the Blue Ribbon Panel's recommendations.

    When our senior Senator says he will make sure that this state will not be used for this dangerous activity, is he not sending a loud and clear message to every other state to get ready to defend themselves against this same danger? NIMBY-ism at its finest and worst: deny the activity here, and poison the water for it everywhere else as well.

    Is it a dangerous activity? Not unacceptably so, it is an industrial activity being seriously planned by about 5 North/South American, about 17 European, at least 4 Asian, and one African nation, and the prospects are that their repositories will be safe, as Yucca Mountain promises to be safe, or any other US repository in the future. All are planned to meet the International Atomic Energy Agency's safety standards for repositories promulgated in 2006.

    Yucca Mountain would meet these international safety standards, according to its safety case in its license application. Read the summary of the license application safety case available at http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/uploads/1/The_S....

    Yucca Mountain is likely to meet all safety requirements that US regulators have laid at its feet, including giving a reasonable expectation that the system will be safe for a million years, when our self-destructive, war-making species may no longer dominate this world. Making war is almost infinitely more dangerous than hosting a repository, yet we engage in that activity as a nation for reasons that are not always clear, but with safety and death implications that are known and insecapable.

    At some point in the future, Nevadans will look with envy at the research, educational, and industrial facilities accompanying the national repository, whether it is in the Dakotas or New Mexico or Wisconsin or New York or wherever. No matter what the new fuel cycle, there will be one or more national repositories. And they will all be safe, like Yucca Mountain promised to be if built as described in the license application.

    I'll join Dave in saying "thanks, Sun, for letting my opinion be made accessible under yours." Yesterday I got an email from someone who has been and is in the reporting business who considers the Sun one of the nation's 10 best papers. I had to agree with him, except with respect to this issue of a Nevada repository where I believe the paper is completely unreasonable and is on a mission. A misguided mission, in my opinion as a Nevadan: I had 4 generations in Nevada until our last parent died and made it 3, but I'm sure it will be back to 4 before I pass on).

  3. By Birdiedreamin
    8/13/09 at 8:03 a.m.

    Comment removed by staff.

  4. By Patrick_R_Gibbons
    8/13/09 at 9:12 a.m.
    Suggest removal

    How much was Reid, Masto and Miller paid by Egan, Fitzpatrick & Malsch to get this contract?

    This smells like another shakedown of taxpayers.

  5. By Patrick_R_Gibbons
    8/13/09 at 9:22 a.m.
    Suggest removal

    Yesterday the article said something about the casks failing much sooner than 10,000 years...how much sooner like 2,000 years sooner?

    Sounds like that would be plenty of time to fix the problem...

    There aren't really any strong legs to stand on when it comes to opposing Yucca mountain. The only reason why you would is because you have an irrational fear of nuclear power and a preference for less efficient and effective alternatives like solar and wind power and you know if nuclear power got off the ground in America there really wouldn't be such a need for such wasteful alternatives (at least in the present day).

  6. By Birdiedreamin
    8/13/09 at 9:29 a.m.
    Suggest removal

    hey gibbons...
    are you related to monkey boy???
    hmmm???
    anyway...
    there is a most rational fear...
    whenever someone form the government tells me that they are going to bury the most toxic stuff know to man in a hole in the ground in an earthquake prone area...
    i know there is going to be a problem...
    a huge problem...
    period...
    end of story...
    by the way gibbons...
    do you live in vegas???
    hmmm???

  7. By mywallet700
    8/13/09 at 9:47 a.m.
    Suggest removal

    $10 million dollars to pay for lawyers to fight a project lawyer Reid says is dead. Ya' gotta love lawyers. Always taking care of themselves first.

  8. By neiman1
    8/13/09 at 11:57 a.m.
    Suggest removal

    Nevada has plenty of money. Let's waste some fighting this President and our Senate leader?

  9. By jemster
    8/13/09 at 1:40 p.m.
    Suggest removal

    I went to Yucca on a tour. Looked safe for the most part. I am not an expert by any means as to how safe it actually is. I am an expert on train and truck accidents. Transporting the waste to Yucca is my biggest concern. Every time you see a tanker accident or a train derailment think about that nuclear waste being transported through or near major metropolitan areas. With all the money already spent on Yucca how about making it an amusement park? Of course that is just my opinion and I could be wrong. I also agree with the Sun allowing opinions on all the articles is why I mainly read their newsletters and support them. Unfortunately I finally gave up on the RJ paper for numerous reasons. This may be the way of the future for the Sun.

  10. By Patrick_R_Gibbons
    8/13/09 at 4:42 p.m.
    Suggest removal

    what is the frequency of earthquakes, the likelihood of higher magnitude quakes, what is the likelihood of flooding? The Sun and the left reports the dangers but never gives the hard facts, what is the likelihood of failure? 1 in 100 on in 1000, 1 in 10000000?

    If it does fail, how long does it take for the radiation to leak? How long will it take to reach water sources or populations? Hard facts please.

  11. By Future
    8/13/09 at 4:56 p.m.
    Suggest removal

    "Transporting the waste to Yucca is my biggest concern. Every time you see a tanker accident or a train derailment think about that nuclear waste being transported through or near major metropolitan areas."

    The part you were not told was that nuclear fuel is NOT a liquid or gas. It is not "free" to be released to the public like the propane, chlorine, and methane tankers going through town.

    Spent fuel is a small ceramic pellet inside a steel clading while in a reactor.

    When it is shipped it is put into a welded shut 2" thick vessel. The steel vessel is placed in the Yucca mountian burial cask which is 1" thick. Then the burial cask is placed in a shipping cask to address all of the potential tranportation accidents.

    So what would you be "concerned about shipping.

    This was resolved way back when Clinton was president.

    Harry Reid and Goodmen have not stopped the hazardous gaseous tankers.

    Harry says he has stopped the money but that is not true.

    Congress will be passing a $200 million FY 2010 budget.

    All he did was convince Chu to not put money in the President request in March of 2010 FOR the 2011 FY budget. Past his election.

    So what Reid is trying to do in year 4 of a 4 year NRC Review cycle is Harry wants to stop the approval of Yucca - why? Because it will pass the sound science muster

  12. By abevanluik
    8/13/09 at 6:40 p.m.
    Suggest removal

    I wonder where people get the idea that my being pro Yucca makes me a Republican. This comes up in these discusions, and it is simply incorrect. This is not a partisan issue, Dems helped craft the laws that put Yucca into play. In my opinion, denying access to health care for the poor is far more dangerous to the US populace than shipping waste to Yucca Mountain or placing it underground there. Put that hypothetical risks into perpective and compare it with the real daily risks we face being alive and moving about in our vehicles and you can see that we ought to be focusing our attention on the well being of real people, today, rather than worrying over a few millirem a million years from now, or a little sooner.

Post a comment

Commenting requires registration.

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Full comments policy.

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

OR Create an account (It's free)

  • Most Read
  • Discussed
  • Most E-mailed

Complete Listing

Calendar »

  • 22 Sun
  • 23 Mon
  • 24 Tue
  • 25 Wed
  • 26 Thu

All events on Sunday »