Published in Midland Report-Telegram, Midland, Texas, January 6, 1998

Andrews County nuclear waste site could start receiving shipments

By Gary Shanks

Staff Writer

ANDREWS - The Andrews County hazardous waste site may soon be receiving low-level radioactive waste from Texas commercial sources, but negotiations for federal low-level waste have been derailed, at least for the time being.

A landfill site operated by Waste Control Specialists Inc., is already receiving waste material contaminated by hazardous chemicals and heavy metals, according to Ron Hance, a spokesman for the Andrews facility.

The site is located about 30 miles northwest of Andrews on the Texas/New Mexico border.

A permit from the state of Texas has been issued to WCS; a 30-day comment period began about two weeks ago, explained WCS attorney John Kyte.

Depending on the comments received in this 30-day period, the WCS facility could be in a position to receive commercial, low-level waste within two or three weeks, Kyte explained.

The facility cannot, however, receive federal low-level waste, which is regulated by the U.S. Department of Energy.

WCS officials had been close to an agreement with the state of Texas and the DOE for the storage of this federally regulated low-level waste, Kyte said.

But WCS officials contend that these negotiations were undermined by the efforts of Envirocare of Utah Inc., the only company in the nation currently licensed for the treatment and storage of this federal radioactive waste.

WCS officials have filed a lawsuit against Envirocare under state antitrust, business defamation and tort interference regulations, Kyte explained.

The lawsuit alleges that Envirocare and its lobbyists disseminated false and misleading information to Texas and federal government officials in an effort to scuttle WCS attempts to secure licensing for DOE-regulated wastes.

"Envirocare created a sham radioactive waste disposal operating in Andrews County, Texas, only five miles from the WCS disposal facility and filed a sham license application with Texas regulators in an attempt to derail WCS efforts to secure government authorizations to compete against Envirocare," Kyte writes.

WCS officials maintain that Envirocare created the allegedly bogus sites and applications, along with organized letter-writing campaigns, in a successful attempt to scare lawmakers away from the WCS venture, Kyte said.

In an answer to the WCS lawsuit, Envirocare denied all of the charges alleged by WCS in the original filing. Envirocare officials maintain that the WCS bid for DOE wastes was because of Envirocare's "superior product and business acumen."

"The defendants only engaged in reasonable competition within the realm of fair play," said Roy Minton, spokesman for Envirocare.

Envirocare has asked for a change of venue in the lawsuit, claiming that a fair and impartial jury cannot be seated in Andrews County.

Because of "widespread notoriety and great prejudice" against Envirocare, the defendants suggest moving the trial to Austin where it will be more centrally located for both sides, according to Minton.

Kyte also pointed out that Envirocare owner Khosrow Semnani is currently under investigation by the FBI, citing a recent front-page story in the Wall Street Journal concerning alleged payments to a Utah regulator.