A panel from the National Academies of Sciences has recommended that low-activity radioactive wastes be managed according to the degree of risk they pose to human health. The current system is based more on where the wastes were generated than on their radiological risks.

The reason for this oddball system is that it grew up piecemeal as various nuclear industries (weapons, electric power, medicine) developed over time. Though the science panel points out that the current regulatory scheme is adequate to ensure safety, it is “complex, inconsistent and does not address risks of various low-activity wastes systematically.” It also is inefficient.

If you have ever tried to figure out the different classes of nuclear waste that are entombed at the EnergySolutions landfill (formerly Envirocare) in Tooele County, you understand the difficulty. More than a few conscientious Utah voters waded into this swamp in 2002, when a citizen initiative appeared on the ballot to change the tax and regulatory scheme for nuclear waste in Utah. That initiative failed.

The issue surfaced in a different form a year later when Envirocare attempted to import waste from Fernald, Ohio, that some experts said was more radioactive than Envirocare's Utah license allowed. That controversy, caused by federal legislation that reclassified the waste, was the poster child for exactly what the science panel is talking about. The radioactive properties of the waste had not changed; only its classification had. In the end, the waste never came to Utah.

The science panel recommends a four-tiered plan for reform that relies heavily on federal and state agencies cooperating to rewrite rules. In some cases, federal and state law may have to be modified.

The panel says that change will not be easy. But it is critical to Utah, which is home to the only commercial low-level nuclear waste facility on private land in the nation. Another is proposed. Utah's regulators, political leaders and congressional delegation should push the reform effort.