Radiation for the Average Landfill : Nuclear waste: Deregulation by the NRC could open virtually every American site to low-level radioactive material.

Apparently buoyed by the success of the deregulated savings and loan industry, the Bush Administration has just opened the door to deregulation of nuclear waste. This policy is not only potentially threatening to the public health, but it is unnecessary.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has announced that it will allow disposal of some “low-level” nuclear waste along with common household garbage in ordinary landfills. This defies common sense. It also represents a historic and unwarranted reversal of current policy, which requires the use of licensed low-level radioactive waste sites.

The NRC commissioners who proposed the change argue that deregulating low-level nuclear waste will free the agency’s overworked staff to better regulate “real problems,” such as more dangerous radioactive waste and nuclear plant operations.

But instead of receding from its responsibilities, the NRC should better utilize its ample resources to regulate the nuclear industry. Given the already low credibility of the industry, discarding the NRC’s responsibility to monitor low-level radioactive waste will further undermine its image.

The NRC policy is in conflict with the opinions of many scientists, who believe that low-level radiation may pose a greater threat to public health than originally thought.

In June, the International Commission on Radiological Protection recommended that radiation-exposure limits for workers be cut by more than 50%. And in December, 1989, a panel of the prestigious National Academy of Sciences concluded that the risk of developing cancer after exposure to low levels of radiation is three to four times higher than previously believed.

The new NRC policy would permit an unlimited number of exemptions as long as the total exposure to an individual from all exemptions is less than 100 millirems per year. Deregulating low-level nuclear waste could increase exposure to radiation by as much as 25% for some people. The NRC argues that the increased exposure is acceptable because it is smaller than the 360 millirems that the average American receives every year from background radiation and radon gas. The NRC neglects to mention that radon exposure alone causes lung cancer in up to 20,000 Americans every year.

Supporters of the NRC policy argue that deregulating nuclear waste would reduce the American nuclear industry’s radioactive waste disposal bill by as much as $35 million per year by exempting up to one-third of the radioactive wastes from nuclear plants from current regulation.

But is it rational to turn virtually every landfill in the country into a potential, unregulated radioactive waste dump to save money? And even if there is some level at which radioactive waste is not hazardous, it would be very difficult to ensure that unscrupulous operators do not try to save even more money by putting extremely dangerous waste in the local dump rather than in a licensed repository. The policy is also troublesome because it could exempt a large volume of presently hazardous waste from cleanup at radiation sites, like decommissioned nuclear plants.

Even more disturbing, the NRC deregulation policy would permit higher radiation exposure than similar policies proposed by our Environmental Protection Agency, Great Britain, Canada, Japan and Finland. The NRC policy is also inconsistent with recommendations of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the National Council on Radiation Protection. Furthermore, the NRC is pursuing this policy over the objections of its own experts.

As further justification, the NRC points to similar exemptions allowed for medical technologies, such as X-rays. But the NRC fails to understand that the public supports the use of radiation for medical purposes because it saves lives. There is no such benefit from the deregulation of nuclear waste, In fact, the policy could cause additional cancer deaths.

Already, a number of states and locales have passed laws banning the disposal of radioactive waste in ordinary landfills. It seems likely that more communities will pass such restrictions if the NRC continues to insist on its nuclear-deregulation effort despite the hostility of the public and the skepticism of industry. Unfortunately, under current law, the NRC has the power to force states to accept its policy.

If the NRC continues to pursue this misguided policy, Congress should, at a minimum, remove the NRC’s authority to impose it on the states.