Jeremy L. Dillon
WC Monitor
7/25/2014

In a move that could aid the Department of Energy’s cleanup program in tackling difficult waste, Waste Control Specialists filed a petition for rulemaking earlier this week with the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality to allow the disposal of some transuranic waste and Greater-than-Class-C waste in its federal facility. TCEQ now has 60 days to decide whether to initiate a rulemaking process that, if enacted as WCS has petitioned, would enable the disposal of GTCC waste that currently has no disposal pathway. “Disposing of this GTCC waste, which has been orphaned for decades, is an important issue that needs to be addressed for environmental and national security purposes,” WCS spokesman Chuck McDonald said. “The very definition of Greater Than Class C waste—waste that should be containerized and disposed of at least 40-to-50-feet below grade—reads like a description of the state of the art repository constructed by WCS.” WCS plans to submit an amended version of its petition next week, McDonald said.

The DOE Office of Environmental Management has been working for years to identify a disposal site for GTCC-type waste. In 2011, DOE issued a draft environmental impact statement, which estimated the total inventory of GTCC waste at approximately 1,100 cubic meters with an additional 175 cubic meters expected to be generated annually from DOE and commercial activities over the next 60 years. The draft EIS evaluated a number of sites under consideration for GTCC disposal, including Hanford in Washington state; the Idaho National Laboratory; the Los Alamos National Laboratory and the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico; the Nevada National Security Site; the Savannah River Site; and a “generic” commercial disposal site. Once the final EIS is completed, DOE must then submit a report to Congress on the alternatives under consideration and wait for final action by lawmakers before moving forward with establishing a disposal site.

The DOE Office of Environmental Management had been hoping to have the EIS done by now, but it appears its efforts are still ongoing. “[Environmental Management] is continuing to evaluate the various options outlined in the draft environmental impact statement for disposal of greater than Class C waste,” EM spokesperson Candice Trummell said this week.

Petition Would Also Allow for TRU Disposal

WCS’ petition also includes a request that would enable the disposal of transuranic waste. Under the Texas Radiation Control Act (TRCA), passed by the Texas legislature, and the federal Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Act of 1985, the term ‘federal facility waste’ includes certain low-level waste that is classified as GTCC and GTCC-like low level waste, but TCEQ’s regulations differ from that definition by excluding GTCC disposal expressly, as well as the disposal of transuranic waste. WCS’s petition wants to align TCEQ’s regulations with those of the TRCA. In a similar line of logic, WCS cites the Environmental Protection Agency’s regulations that enables in some cases the classification of some transuranic wastes as GTCC waste if its fits within the Agency’s regulatory exceptions. By aligning with the legal definitions of a ‘federal facility waste,’ WCS would then be able to dispose of the transuranic waste in its federal facility.

Currently, the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico is the only facility where DOE can send defense-related transuranic waste for disposal. WIPP, however, has been shut down since a set of incidents occurred there in February, and it remains to be seen when the facility will reopen. WCS is currently storing drums of transuranic waste from Los Alamos National Laboratory while WIPP is shutdown, and those drums, along with other transuranic waste, would be capable of disposal in WCS’s federal facility if the company’s petition is granted.

Schedule for Rulemaking Uncertain

While WCS has submitted its petition, it could be a long time before any action is taken. After 60 days, should TCEQ initiate a rulemaking, there is no timetable for the release of a proposed rule. Even after the proposed rule is released, there is a lengthy stakeholder engagement process that will take additional time. WCS would then need to get a license amendment that would enable its facility to accept GTCC waste, another lengthy process. “We recognize that if the petition were granted, that would only be the first step in a lengthy process that would involve a great deal of stakeholder input and review,” McDonald said.

Enviro. Group Opposes the Idea

The rulemaking would not go un-opposed, though. Environmental groups within Texas have been accusing WCS of turning the facility into the nation’s all-purpose nuclear waste dumping ground, and this petition for rulemaking is only adding fuel to the fire. “This latest attempt by WCS to add more categories of radioactive waste to its facility goes beyond the specific authorization granted to them by the Texas Legislature,” said Cyrus Reed, Conservation Director of the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club. “Authorization to dispose greater than Class C or transuranic waste was neither contemplated nor authorized. This represents a pattern of deception by WCS where their true intentions belie what they originally told the Legislature. What originally was authorized is being methodically transformed to make Andrews County the radioactive dumping ground for the United States. The Sierra Club will be filing comments against this petition should it be granted a rulemaking.”