CAL RAD Letter of Opposition to SB 243

["Sandy Perle" <sandyfl@EARTHLINK.NET>]

The following letter was sent by Cal Rad in response to SB 243:



April 30, 2001



By FAX                 



Cal Rad requests a "no" vote on SB 243



The Honorable Byron Sher, 

Chair and Members Senate Committee on Environmental Quality   

Room 2082, State Capitol                    

Sacramento, CA 95814  



Dear Senator Sher and Members,



The California Radioactive Materials Management Forum (Cal Rad Forum) 

respectfully requests a "no" vote on SB 243 (Kuehl) (Radiation Safety 

Act of 2001) when it is heard in Committee on May 7th.  



Cal Rad Forum has worked for safe, assured disposal of low-level 

radioactive wastes since 1983. Our association includes universities; 

electric utilities with nuclear power plants; medical centers; 

industries including biotech and pharmaceutical; and professional 

societies in radiation protection, engineering, and medicine. These 

public and private organizations are located in California and the 

other three states of the Southwestern Low-Level Radioactive Waste 

Disposal Compact region (Arizona, North Dakota, and South Dakota). 

Cal Rad conducts legislative, regulatory, and public information 

programs. We were the sponsors of California’s low-level waste 

disposal facility siting law enacted in 1983 whose principal author 

was former Senator Alfred E. Alquist. We supported the Legislature’s 

ratification of the Southwestern Compact in 1987 and consent by the 

Congress in 1988.



SB 243 will not enhance safety in the handling of radioactive 

materials or in the disposal of low-level radioactive waste (LLRW). 

On the contrary, the proposed measure will undermine California's 

attempts to fulfill its statutory and contractual obligations under 

the Southwestern Low-Level Waste Disposal Compact Consent Act (P.L. 

100-712).* SB 243 will significantly delay the goal of reliable, 

assured permanent access to a safe low-level radioactive waste 

disposal facility for organizations that use radioactive materials in 

California and the other three states of the Southwestern Compact.  



Please consider the following points:



1) Now is the time for action on the long-deferred issue of safe, 

reliable disposal of low-level radioactive waste. It is not the time 

for one state -- California -- to attempt a rewrite of federal 

regulations.  On our present course, i.e., without establishment of a 

regional LLRW disposal facility in California, California and the 

other three states of the Southwestern Compact region (Arizona, North 

Dakota, and South Dakota) along with 32 other states -- a total of 36 

states -- will soon be totally dependent on one commercial facility 

in one state — Utah — for disposal of LLRW. Talk about concentration 

of market power! Hopefully, we have learned from our electricity 

debacle. Prompt, faithful implementation of existing laws and 

regulations will solve this problem for California and the 

Southwestern Compact under California safety and rate regulation.  



In 1980, Congress found that dependence of 50 states on three states 

for LLRW disposal was politically unstable. This led to enactment of 

the federal Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act. How much riskier 

now to have thirty-six states dependent on only one!  



2) There is nothing wrong with the existing regulatory framework for 

disposal of low-level waste. As former Governor, now Mayor, Jerry 

Brown said last January in describing where California went wrong on 

electricity deregulation, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." There is 

a problem, but it is beyond the reach of legislation: it is lack of 

political will to implement the existing laws and regulations.  



In particular, there is nothing inherently wrong with "shallow land 

burial" as asserted by SB 243. In fact, desert sites such as Ward 

Valley are ideal for advanced near surface disposal as prescribed in 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations at Title 10 Part 61 of 

the Code of Federal Regulations and as incorporated in Title 17 of 

the California Administrative Code. The safety of the proposed Ward 

Valley near surface disposal facility in the Mojave Desert is 

supported by a huge federal and state administrative record including 

a license from the California Department of Health Services and a 

joint federal-state EIS/EIR. Judicial proceedings, including a final 

decision by the California Supreme Court in 1996, reject the claims 

of opponents. A federal Supplemental EIS, and a special study carried 

out by the National Academy of Sciences in 1995 further support the 

safety of near surface disposal at the Ward Valley desert site. 

Please review the attached compilation of statements by scientists 

and officials (including former Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt) 

that support the safety of the proposed Ward Valley near surface 

disposal project.  



There is simply no basis for the proposed SB 243 ban on "shallow land 

burial."



3) Existing regulations establish qualifications for operators of low-

level radioactive waste disposal facilities. There is no need for new 

legislation on this point.  



4) Provisions in SB 243 to divide waste by source (institutional 

pedigree) rather than by hazard as required by the U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission would render California's regulatory program 

inconsistent with that of the NRC and compromise California's status 

as an "Agreement State" under the Atomic Energy Act. NRC regulations 

require waste to be segregated by hazard as specified in the Class A, 

B, and C designations in 10 CFR 61. Under federal law, the federal 

government, not the states, is responsible for disposal of the most 

hazardous category of low-level waste ("Greater-than-Class C"). 

The proposed legislation would elevate ideological preference over 

safety.



4) Acceptance of waste from only biotech, universities, and medical 

sources as required by SB 243 is inconsistent with the Low-Level 

Waste Policy Act and California's statutory and contractual 

obligations under the Southwestern Compact. It also makes no economic 

sense and would mean higher disposal costs for biotech firms, 

universities, and medical centers than if they disposed of their 

wastes in a facility accepting waste from all users including nuclear 

power plants.  



5) California's obligation to Arizona, North Dakota, and South Dakota 

under the Southwestern Compact is for permanent disposal of low-level 

waste, not storage as proposed by SB 243.  



Provisions of SB 243 are in conflict with federal law and 

regulations. By undermining efforts to safely dispose of low-level 

waste, the proposed legislation would signal our medical and academic 

research institutions and the industrial sector — including the 

biotech and pharmaceutical industries — that California is hostile to 

their use of radioactive materials. Is that the signal the 

Legislature wants to send?  



It is time to get on with the job of providing safe, reliable 

disposal for California and the other states of our compact. 

California's electricity debacle demonstrates that we cannot forever 

depend on other states to provide the vital infrastructure that our 

economy and health and welfare require.  



Cal Rad Forum respectfully requests a "no" vote on SB 243.



Sincerely,



Alan Pasternak



Enclosures: Statements of officials supporting the safety 

of the proposed Ward Valley near surface disposal facility.



cc: Grantland Johnson, Secretary for Health and Human Services

    Diana Bonta, Director, California Department of Health Services

    Dana Mount, Chairman Southwestern Low-Level Radioactive Waste 

        Commission

    Don Womeldorf, Executive Director, SWLLRWC

    Richard Meserve, Chairman, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

    Carl Paperiello, Executive Director of Operations, USNRC

    Cal Rad Forum Corporate and Institutional Members

    Cal Rad Forum Board of Directors

    Betsy Hite



------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sandy Perle					Tel:(714) 545-0100 / (800) 548-5100   				    	

Director, Technical				Extension 2306 				     	

ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Service		Fax:(714) 668-3149 	                   		    

ICN Pharmaceuticals, Inc.			E-Mail: sandyfl@earthlink.net 				                           

ICN Plaza, 3300 Hyland Avenue  		E-Mail: sperle@icnpharm.com          	          

Costa Mesa, CA 92626



Personal Website: http://sandyfl.nukeworker.net

ICN Worldwide Dosimetry Website: http://www.dosimetry.com



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.