New Barnwell N-waste planWeb posted Nov. 08 at 09:32 PM
Augusta Chronicle Editorial Staff It looks like Barnwell's low-level nuclear waste landfill is going to be front and center again in the South Carolina legislature next year. A large chunk of the state's education funding hangs in the balance.The controversial site, operated by Chem-Nuclear Systems, was allowed to stay open in 1995 based on predictions it could raise up to $140 million a year for school construction and college scholarships. The estimate was wildly optimistic.
The landfill has produced only about $24 million a year -- and the company says even that is hurting its bottom line. But now it is developing a new proposal which it is expected to present to the General Assembly.
The plan calls for Chem-Nuclear to collect two decades worth of landfill fees up front for the state to earn interest on. Pre-selling the storage space, says company spokesman David Ebenhack, could create a $1 billion education trust fund.
Here's how it would work. Waste generators would sign contracts and agree to pay a set fee to reserve landfill space, nearly all of which would go to the state. When customers deliver their waste, they would pay an additional fee. Even though the fee paid to the state would decrease under the prepay plan, the money set aside for education would grow because it would be held in trust earning interest.
The plan benefits everyone involved, says Ebenhack. The state would be guaranteed money for education, waste generators would get disposal space at a set price, and Chem-Nuclear would have steady business. But, he adds, ``If we don't get 5 million (cubic feet) signed up, we don't think it's doable and we won't even try.''
There was also the dark hint that if there are not enough signups, or if the legislature turns down the proposal, the company may shut down. ``We will not be able to continue (writing big checks to the state) year after year,'' says Ebenhack,
The proposal is sure to explode into heated debate, as it did in 1995, between lawmakers who see the Barnwell landfill contributing to the state's image as the nation's ``nuclear dumping ground'' and those who see it not only as a revenue source, but as a useful service.
Foes now have additional ammunition because those rosy 1995 predictions never materialized -- and they claim Chem-Nuclear is taking the state for another ride.
Maybe so, but anti-nuclear prejudice should not override the reality -- and the reality is Chem-Nuclear has operated safely for decades and the residents of Barnwell are the landfill's biggest boosters. It provides jobs and is good for the area's economy.
The plan should not be rejected out of hand, nor should it be rubber-stamped. It deserves careful scrutiny with a decision based on a realistic assessment of its reliability as a source of education revenues, not on anti-nuclear hysteria.
Return to News