1. LICENSE HELD BY PUBLIC AGENCY

A publicly accountable state agency, not a private company, should be licensed to a manage radioactive waste. The State may contract with private companies to operate management sites. Private companies have an economic incentive to handle/import as much waste as possible to maximize profits. Issuing a private license opens the door to creating a national radioactive waste dump in Texas and increases the financial risk to Texas taxpayers. The House Environmental Regulation Committee correctly stated that "effective long-term management and monitoring low level radioactive waste requires a stable entity, without the potential for bankruptcy or abandonment."

2. CLOSE THE COMPACT LOOPHOLE: PROHIBIT IMPORTATION OF OUT-OF-STATE WASTE

No new states should be added to the existing radioactive waste compact (Texas Health & Safety Code Chapter 403). Currently, Texas is the host state and Vermont is the only party state (Maine dropped out). The compact "loophole," allowing Governor-appointed Compact Commissioners to contract with any state, group of states, or company to import unlimited amounts of radioactive waste to be disposed of in Texas must be closed. The use of compact sites for the disposal of nuclear weapons waste should be prohibited. The compact should be amended to require that Texas and Vermont permanently manage waste produced within their respective borders. The compact is up for Congressional review in 2003, so changes made now can easily be ratified in 2003.

3. NO BURIAL/BELOW GROUND DISPOSAL

All six existing commercial radioactive waste landfills have leaked. Above-ground storage has the potential to avoid the health hazards of burial grounds prone to releasing radioactivity and avoid the high cost associated with remedial action that, inevitably, will be required. Assured Isolation (AI) is a relatively new concept for which there are currently no federal or state regulations or rules for licensing. If Texas decides to use AI, it must be statutorily defined so as to require the following for the length of time the waste remains radioactive:

· inspection and monitoring on all sides of the facility (interior and exterior)

· environmental monitoring

· easy access to the waste canisters and ability to repackage the waste as leaks are detected

· preventative maintenance

· adequate financial assurances to repair damage or degradation

· zero-release as a design objective

4. MINIMIZE WASTE TRANSPORT KEEP WASTE NEAR OR AT SITE OF GENERATION

Whenever radioactive materials are handled or transported, the risk of accident or injury to workers and the public rises. Security issues also arise when radioactive waste is transported on busy highways through densely populated areas. Radioactive waste should be kept as near the site of generation as possible, with sites of the largest generators (the nuclear power plants) used for management of waste from other locations. Since the power plants create the vast majority of the risk (in both volume and radioactivity of the waste), their sites should be used as permanent repositories.

West Texas should not be viewed as a radioactive waste disposal area because of the large transportation distances.

In Texas, 96% of all low level waste comes from the two nuclear power plants. Over 75% of the total amount of low level radioactive waste (LLRW) from Texas Compact generators over the next 35 years will come from nuclear power plant decommissioning alone. In all, only 44 entities in Texas generate radioactive waste on an annual basis.

5. INCREASE ROLE OF PUBLIC IN DECISIONS

All decisions on the management, siting, storage, and transportation of radioactive waste should be made with full and effective public participation so that decision-makers and the public have a full range of information on which to base decisions. The opportunity for a contested case hearing should accompany any licensing for radioactive waste storage, processing, assured isolation, disposal, or license amendments. The public should be represented in any agency decision making by a Public Interest Counsel that has the authority to appeal agency decisions and a budget that allows it to hire independent technical experts in order to adequately protect the public interest. Affected citizen parties should also receive assistance (as applicants do) in order to participate in contested case hearings on a level playing field with applicants.