From Deseret News archives:

Fight over 'hot' waste may lose its sizzle

Utah official says Envirocare backs ban of Class B, C waste

Published: Tuesday, Jan. 18, 2005 11:09 p.m. MST
 |  E-MAIL | PRINT | FONT + - 
The call by Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. to ban importation of Class B and C radioactive waste in Utah may take the sizzle out of what had seemed one of the hottest environmental battles facing the Legislature.

Jason Chaffetz, Huntsman's chief of staff, said in an interview Tuesday that the governor not only would call for the ban, but that it would be supported by the new buyers of Envirocare, the only disposal facility in Utah licensed to handle radioactive waste.

"It should be clear to anyone" who has listened to Huntsman over the last year "that the governor will do all he can to keep these higher level of wastes out of Utah," Chaffetz said.

Envirocare is the West Desert firm that now is licensed to handle Class A wastes — low-level radioactive material, largely contaminated dirt. Envirocare has an application pending to import B and C wastes, "hotter" material but still considered low-level.

"We will prohibit Class B and C wastes in this (legislative) session," Chaffetz said.

And that will be done with the agreement and understanding of Envirocare's new owners, he added.

Story continues below
Envirocare is in the midst of an announced sale to a consortium that includes Steven Creamer, a Salt Lake entrepreneur. Earlier this month, Huntsman was severely criticized for accepting $40,000 in campaign donations from Creamer, and returned the money. Envirocare officials have said they do not intend to import B and C waste.

Creamer said he couldn't comment on the reported agreement.

Under state law, B and C waste cannot be brought into Utah without specific permission of the Legislature and the governor. But activists want more, demanding that Huntsman immediately issue an executive order banning it.

Members of a legislative joint task force on radioactive waste recently voted not to call for a legal ban on B and C. The main argument against a ban, according to Sen. Curtis Bramble, R-Provo, is that it could throw the debates into the courts, should Envirocare object. In the judicial arena, the Legislature could lose control of the matter, he argued.

The reason a suit could be filed is that Envirocare spent a considerable sum pursing a permit under the present setup, and could take legal action if it still wanted to import B and C and the rules were changed while its application was pending.

Without the potential of a legal objection from Envirocare, the decks would be cleared for the Legislature to ban B and C, waste experts have said.

Comments

You can be the first to comment on this story.

Related content
previousnext

Latest comments

Letters: Marxist takeover

I didn't say America became communist. And I think you quoted me, thus my...

Accord reached in Copenhagen

is it about 2900 pages worth??? Good job Mr. B+!!!

The mtn. owns rights to Y. games

I'd rather NOT watch BYU games if those lousy announcers (Bill Reilly -...

"Now, ask me if I use 3,000 tons of them." Given the number of comments...

Top 20 boys basketball

I love basketball and wrestling. I chose wrestling over basketball in high...

Williams,Maynor Gay,Matthews...

Depleted uranium contains much less U-235 as natural uranium but it is not...

To Tragic: Gun control only takes guns from LAW ABIDING citizens. It won't...

BYU football notebook

Let's hope Heaps turns out just a little bit better than the last No. 1 prep...

Aggies face former Big West rival

LBSU is a more athletic team than St Mary's, who is picked to challenge or...

Advertisements