Jeremy L. Dillon
RW Monitor
3/27/2015
A Nevada congressman is calling for a more open dialogue on potentially opening Yucca Mountain in the state, according to an editorial appearing in the Las Vegas Review-Journal last weekend. Rep. Cresent Hardy (R-Nev.), who represents the district that hosts Yucca Mountain, wrote that the state of Nevada should be more engaging in negotiations to open Yucca Mountain in an effort to secure economic incentives to improve the state while maintaining its ability to say no to the project. Hardy argued that having a conversation about the project could only prove beneficial for Nevada. “Nevadans may never want nuclear waste stored inside Yucca Mountain,” Hardy wrote. “We certainly won’t let it be forced upon us. But if the dialogue changes and a discussion is had — and safety standards are overwhelmingly met — we should at least be up for an honest conversation.”
Earlier this year, Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) said he was working on an incentives bill that he hopes could will entice Nevada through infrastructure upgrades and economic development to embrace Yucca Mountain. That bill is planned for introduction sometime this summer, Shimkus has said. With Hardy’s remarks, it appears some political will in Nevada may be shifting towards being more open to Yucca. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission, meanwhile, has in recent months released Safety Evaluation Reports on Yucca Mountain that found the repository design meets most regulatory safety requirements.
Others in Delegation Don’t Agree
Senate Minority Leader and long-time Yucca opponent Harry Reid (D-Nev.), though, maintained in a response statement this week that Yucca Mountain will remain a dead project. “Rep. Hardy is living in a world that doesn’t exist,” Reid said in a statement. ”Opening the door to a nuclear dump in Nevada is not something I will ever accept. Yucca Mountain is not ‘an issue that long ago lost its middle.’ When it comes to protecting the health and safety of Nevadans from a potential environmental catastrophe, there is no benefit worth bargaining for. Nevada’s own experts, the Nuclear Waste Project Office, have worked for years with scientists and technical experts to reveal that Yucca Mountain is a highly risky, half-baked proposal riddled with technical flaws that guarantee eventual failure.”
Reid’s statement was echoed by Rep. Diane Titus (D-Nev.), who has tried to fight funding for Yucca Mountain on the House side through amendments, but has ultimately failed. “There is no middle ground when it comes to protecting Nevada,” Titus said in a statement. “If Rep. Hardy truly wants to look out for his constituents as he says, he should sign on to our bill, the Nuclear Waste Informed Consent Act, giving Nevada veto power, not sign up for a photo-op with Rep. Shimkus who has been trying to ram Yucca Mountain down our throat for years.”
The Department of Energy has maintained, despite Republican pressure, that Yucca Mountain remains “unworkable” for spent nuclear fuel and high-level waste storage due to the lack of consent for the repository in Nevada. Moniz has emphasized that the Department’s strategy has not changed in the new Congress, which includes Republican control of both houses. DOE still intends on moving forward with a consent-based pilot interim storage facility as the preferred strategy to satisfy the nation’s spent fuel issues.
