|
One should not be surprised at the recent
success of the Committee to Bridge the Gap's (CBG) lawsuit against the
California Department of Health Services (DHS). The DHS's adoption of the
NRC's licence termination rule (LTR) of 25 mrem/y was of course counter to
current Sacramento legislation (also authored by CBG) based on zero
contamination, zero dose, and zero risk above background.
The NRC's LTR was promulgated after years of public
rulemaking and input during the mid-1990s during which CBG failed to submit any
comments to NRC. Thus the 25 mrem/y LTR has indeed received the very
public input, and assessment of alternatives, that CBG
demanded in its lawsuit.
To its credit, the NRC submitted a letter to DHS,
expressing its concern over the pending California
legislation. However I do not believe the NRC has written letters
directly to the California Senate opposing the bills.
Again to its credit, the US Navy has written
to the California Senate and Governor Gray Davis opposing SB 1444, SB 1623 and
SB 2065.
However, as of today, the Department of Energy has
been silent on the matter. This is especially surprising, since in April
2002, they issued a draft DOE G 441.1-XX, "Control and Release of
Property with Residual Radioactive Material", which reiterated DOE's support for
established cleanup standards, including NRC's 25 mrem/y LTR and Regulatory
Guide 1.86 surface contamination limits.
As of today, the EPA has also been silent on the
matter. This is especially surprising since both SB 1444 and SB 1623
require more stringent cleanup standards than even the lower end of EPA's CERCLA
Superfund risk range of 10-6 to 10-4. If EPA released a Superfund site in
California to its most strict 10-6 risk level, SB 1444 would still require deed
restrictions, and both bills would still require any material transferred from
the site to be disposed of as LLRW to a licensed LLRW disposal facilty.
The California legislation therefore usurps all EPA Superfund
authority.
If any NRC, DOE, DOD or EPA radsafers know of
any other official opposition to this California legislation by our federal
government, please let us all know.
___________________ |