TEXAS CONCERNED THAT FIRMS ARE STOCKPILING SEALED SOURCES

With the opening of a commercial disposal pathway for sealed sources—Waste Control Specialists’ radioactive waste disposal site in Andrews, Texas—on the horizon, and the National Nuclear Security Administration shifting its priorities to hold licensees more responsible for sealed source disposal, companies are finding loopholes to stockpile disused sources in Texas for access to disposal, a state regulator told the Low Level Radioactive Waste forum yesterday. At the inaugural meeting of the LLW Forum’s Disused Source Working Group, Susan Jablonski with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality said “There is a built-in monetary incentive for people to get very creative about” finding loopholes in regulations that identify who the rightful owner of the source is when it becomes disused or unwanted. “We’re already seeing this occurring,” Jablonski said. 

Jablonski said the TCEQ is “trying to get a handle on this and try to develop a clear policy, realizing that we are very fortunate to have a disposal pathway for these sources, but we don’t want to encourage … [the idea that] we have a disposal option so we should just open that up to anyone who wants it.” The issue “became obvious based on discussions with generators about, ‘When are you going to call something a waste? Is it when it’s no longer being used? Well, that’s really in the eye of the beholder right now. I think our regulations need to be a little more clear on where that line is.” The problem could grow as the Department of Energy and NNSA promote the Global Threat Reduction Initiative off-site source recovery project, which has begun to transition its goal to put more onus on generators to take responsibility for finding disposal pathways for their sources. “The more commercial options are available, the more we can work with [the Conference of Radiation Control Program Directors] to try to help people take advantage of those,” NNSA’s Abigail Cuthbertson told the Forum this week. “Our goal has always been to make sure these sources are not at the sites that they are at when they’re disused and unwanted, but at the same time to work to shift the risk and the burden onto the licensee instead of onto the taxpayer. Because, firstly, it’s the licensee that should take the risk, but secondly since we may not always be around or have the funding we have had.”