Panel’s Vote for Nuclear Waste Site Points to House OK

A plan to bury the nation’s nuclear waste in southern Nevada won lopsided endorsement Thursday from a congressional committee, signaling easy passage by the full House to override the state’s objections.

While approval from the House Energy and Commerce Committee had been expected, the breadth of the margin gave a bipartisan stamp to the Bush administration’s effort to make Yucca Mountain a permanent site for tens of thousands of tons of radioactive waste now stored in many states.

17 Democrats Join Forces With GOP

In the panel’s 41-6 vote, 17 Democrats joined 24 Republicans to back a bill to allow the federal government to move ahead with opening Yucca Mountain to receive waste as early as 2010.

The vote came amid continuing scientific debate about the Yucca Mountain plan. The site is about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas and 215 miles northeast of Los Angeles.

In an article to be published today in Science magazine, two researchers who describe themselves as “pro-nuclear” contend that the government should postpone decisions on Yucca Mountain until more is known about its geology and the durability of storage devices.

“A project of this importance . . . should not go forward until the relevant scientific issues have been thoughtfully addressed,” wrote Rodney Ewing, a geologist at the University of Michigan, and Allison Macfarlane, director of the Yucca Mountain Project at MIT.

Ewing and Macfarlane wrote that politics rather than science is driving the Yucca Mountain decisions, a view that Bush administration officials vigorously dispute.

Rep. W. J. “Billy” Tauzin (R-La.), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, said Thursday’s vote was “an enormous show of support” for an administration plan backed by the nuclear energy industry.

“Whether you like nuclear energy or not,” Tauzin said, “this country can’t do without it.”

President Bush signed off on the Yucca Mountain plan in February, but Nevada Gov. Kenny Guinn, a Republican, reversed that decision earlier this month. Under federal law, a simple majority vote in both houses of Congress is required to overrule Guinn.

Tauzin said a vote on the House floor would come within two weeks.

Gephardt Says Store It Where It’s Produced

House Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt (D-Mo.) is among those intending to fight the proposal.

“I don’t think it makes sense to have all this nuclear waste travel across the country by truck or rail,” Gephardt told reporters. He said he favors a European approach: “Do your best to store this stuff safely at the site where it has been produced.”

The six opponents in Thursday’s vote were all Democrats, three from California: Reps. Jane Harman of Venice, Lois Capps of Santa Barbara and Anna G. Eshoo of San Mateo.

Still, House opponents appear outmatched. In its last vote on Yucca Mountain in early 2000, the House approved a waste-storage plan, 253 to 167. Most of the opponents at that time were Democrats. But some foes of the earlier plan have now switched, including Rep. John D. Dingell of Michigan, top Democrat on the commerce panel.

Barring a surprise in the House, the focus of the battle would then move to the Senate, where foes hope to make a last stand against the Yucca Mountain plan. A Senate vote is projected for June or July.

At first glance, the Senate would seem a formidable obstacle for the plan’s advocates. Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), the assistant majority leader, and Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) are vehemently opposed to it. So is Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-S.D.).

But in this case, federal law bars most parliamentary maneuvers against the legislation. Opponents have said their only hope to kill the plan is to amass a 51-vote majority; so far they appear to be well short.

In a Senate vote in May 2000 on the issue, 35 senators opposed nuclear waste storage at Yucca Mountain. That vote upheld President Clinton’s veto of a Republican-crafted bill.

Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham expressed confidence that in the current dispute, the Bush administration would prevail.

“The actions here in the House demonstrate the broad bipartisan support we have to move ahead in this process,” Abraham told reporters. “At the end of the day, the Senate will follow the House’s lead.”