January 18, 2006

• What's New?
• Upcoming Events
• Action Alerts
• Who We Are
• Corbin Harney
• Staff
• Contact Info

Lawmakers Ponder Bill on Waste
Doable? Some wonder if it's right for the governor to have final say on approving new facilities
By Judy Fahys
Salt Lake Tribune
January 17, 2006

There has been talk about taking away from the governor the final say on approving new and bigger hazardous waste facilities, but House and Senate leaders said this week that such a bill has little hope of going forward in the 2006 legislative session.
   

Still, some lawmakers question whether it's right for the governor to have the ability to “trump” the majority of 104 legislators as Envirocare of Utah seeks to expand its Tooele County landfill.
   

“It's a much broader and much bigger policy issue” than Envirocare's expansion, said Provo Republican Sen. Curt Bramble, a supporter of Envirocare's expansion plans.
   

Envirocare wants to expand its landfill for low-level radioactive and hazardous waste from 536 acres to 1,079. But some have wondered if the company would abandon the plan when Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. announced in November that he would not give the expansion his OK - an approval now required by state law to finalize the license.
   

The announcement made some lawmakers bristle. They don't like the fact that the governor's decision can override a majority of the Legislature, which also must approve any expansion.
   

At the same time, some lawmakers say they don't want to look like they are granting the controversial company special favors if they approve a bill allowing them to bypass the governor.
   

"If it's dead,” House Speaker Greg Curtis said, “I'm guessing it's because it [changing the law] would be seen as an Envirocare thing."
   

Bramble also questioned the value of giving lawmakers override power on this issue. He concluded: “I don't know that Envirocare would have the votes to override it or not.”
   

In the 2005 session, legislators banned B- and C-level radioactive waste from the state but after Envirocare's new owners withdrew a license application for the stuff, a more concentrated form of low-level waste than the Class A waste currently permitted at the Tooele County site. Soon after, Envirocare applied to the state Radiation Control Division to allow the expansion and tried to get it on a spring special session agenda.
   

The Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah, an environmental group, appealed the division's approval.
   

But the state Radiation Control Board appeared poised a week ago to throw out the appeal and let Envirocare proceed. The board's final decision is expected at a special Jan. 26 meeting.
   

Under a 1990 law, both the Legislature and the governor must approve the expansion for it to become final. If the proposal goes forward, it would be the first attempt by a hazardous waste company to go to a legislative vote.
   

Rep. Jim Gowans, D-Tooele, had a bill to permit the expansion prepared last fall before Huntsman's announcement. He still has a bill file open, but he's not sure yet what to put in it.
   

First, Gowans wants to see what happens with the HEAL appeal. Then, he'd like to see if the governor might reconsider.
   

Huntsman said in November he opposed the expansion because of possible damage to the state's image. Since then, the landscape has changed a bit, given the dimming prospects for a high-level nuclear waste storage site that has been licensed for nearby Skull Valley.
   

Gowans reasoned that that might make Envirocare's expansion seem less troubling.
   

Envirocare probably will not “push very hard,” he said. “I don't think they want to get crosswise with anybody at this point.”
   

fahys@sltrib.com