House Backs Nuclear Dump Site

The House on Wednesday backed President Bush’s decision to create a national nuclear waste burial ground at Yucca Mountain, a major victory for the nuclear power industry and a stinging defeat for Nevada.

The 306-117 vote brought the federal government one critical step closer to overriding Nevada’s objections to placing up to 77,000 tons of high-level nuclear waste in permanent storage at the proposed site 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas, one of the nation’s fastest-growing areas.

The issue now moves to the Senate, where opponents of the Bush plan face steep odds in trying to stop it.

Though the outcome in the House was expected, the vote’s margin was significant. Almost half of the House Democrats joined most Republicans in support of the administration.

By contrast, in a vote in early 2000, most Democrats opposed a GOP-led effort to store nuclear waste temporarily at Yucca Mountain. Then-President Clinton opposed the plan, and few House Democrats were willing to break with his administration on the issue.

But now a Republican is president--absorbing political brickbats from Nevadans--and the nuclear energy industry is waging an all-out campaign for the storage plan. Many Democrats say they agree that highly radioactive waste piling up at 131 sites throughout the country must be shipped somewhere.

“Ultimately we have to address the problem,” said Rep. John D. Dingell of Michigan, the top Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee and one of those who switched to the industry position.

Dingell noted that the vote is not the final step. If the Senate approves the resolution, the Bush administration will then apply for a site license from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Nevada also will mount a legal challenge.

Indeed, after the vote Nevadans vowed to keep fighting.

“We will continue our battle in the U.S. Senate and on a parallel track in the courts,” said Gov. Kenny Guinn, a Republican. He said Wednesday’s vote was “by no means the end.”

Bush chose to move forward with the Yucca Mountain plan in February on the recommendation of his Energy Department. In April, Guinn reversed Bush’s decision, using power the governor holds under federal law. The House resolution, if also approved by the Senate, would overturn Guinn’s veto.

Opponents of the Yucca Mountain plan have a powerful leader, Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), the chamber’s assistant majority leader. But Reid and freshman Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) acknowledge that they remain short of the votes they need to block the plan.

A Senate vote is expected in June or July.

In Wednesday’s House debate, Nevada lawmakers, as they have before, complained bitterly that their state is being unfairly targeted for nuclear waste. Congress first voted to focus federal studies of nuclear storage on Yucca Mountain in 1987.

The Nevadans noted that the state has no nuclear power plants. “Nevada does not produce one ounce of nuclear waste,” said Democratic Rep. Shelley Berkley, who represents much of Las Vegas. “Yet Nevada is being asked to carry the burdens of a problem it had no part in creating.”

Opponents also claimed that transcontinental shipments of nuclear waste by truck or rail would be vulnerable to accidents or terrorist attacks, a scenario they dub “mobile Chernobyl.”

But Rep. W.J. “Billy” Tauzin (R-La.), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, said that aside from Nevada’s home-state concerns, the opposition “basically comes from those folks who oppose nuclear energy.”

He ridiculed that line of argument, suggesting that opponents were also opposed to expanding coal mining and oil drilling.

“You have to wonder what sort of energy supplies do these folks support,” Tauzin said.

Many environmental groups lamented Wednesday’s vote, while the nuclear industry hailed it. The industry has spent millions of dollars on lobbying and campaign contributions in recent years in an effort to shed long-standing political constraints on its growth.

“Democrats and Republicans alike voted for this sensible approach to centralizing the nuclear byproducts of our U.S. defense applications, like nuclear-powered aircraft carriers and submarines, research programs, and nuclear power plants that produce electricity for 20% of Americans,” said Joe F. Colvin, president of the Nuclear Energy Institute.

In all, 102 Democrats joined 203 Republicans and one independent in supporting the storage plan.

Voting against it were 103 Democrats--including Minority Leader Richard A. Gephardt of Missouri and Minority Whip Nancy Pelosi of San Francisco--13 Republicans and one independent.

Of California’s 20 House Republicans, five broke with party ranks to vote against the plan: Reps. Elton Gallegly of Simi Valley, Jerry Lewis of Redlands, Howard P. “Buck” McKeon of Santa Clarita, Richard W. Pombo of Tracy, and George P. Radanovich of Mariposa. Reps. Doug Ose (R-Sacramento) and Henry A. Waxman (D-Los Angeles) did not vote.

Only two of the state’s 32 House Democrats voted for the plan: Reps. Calvin M. Dooley of Visalia and Ellen O. Tauscher of Alamo.

Times staff writer Tom Gorman in Las Vegas contributed to this report.