Compiled by leaders of groups from communities located in the shadows of U.S. nuclear weapons sites. The report card grades looks to the future and lays out an agenda for the next administration.
2008 Radioactive Report Card Grade Book
Press Release
| | |
|
|
| | | published Friday, January 29, 2010 | 892 Views | |  |
By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer
January 27, 2010
http://www.hanfordnews.com/news/2010/story/14707.html
RICHLAND -- Speakers at a public hearing Tuesday night split their comments between calling for the Fast Flux Test Facility to be saved and worries that proposed cleanup plans for Hanford would not protect the environment and human health.
The Department of Energy hearing in Richland kicked off a series of eight meetings in three states to hear public opinion on a wide-ranging draft study that lays out options for cleanup of many areas of the Hanford nuclear reservation. More than 100 people attended.
Among the decisions that the Draft Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement recommends are entombing FFTF, emptying 99 percent of radioactive waste from underground tanks, leaving the emptied tanks in the ground and extending a ban on sending many types of radioactive waste to Hanford.
The draft study did not include cleanup alternatives that would meet legal requirements and comply with drinking water standards, said Tom Carpenter, executive director of Hanford Challenge, a watchdog group.
"Every alternative shows severe risks to drinking water in wells miles away (in the future)," said Gerald Pollet, executive director of Heart of American Northwest, a watchdog group.
In addition, DOE knows too little about what is in the soil under Hanford's old tanks to have good information on which to base sound cleanup decisions, Carpenter said.
The profile of the Hanford Site changes, he said, pointing out that 12,000 years ago it was under several 100 feet of water because of glacial flooding.
"When you put material in the ground, it's likely to wash out," Carpenter said.
Liz Mattson, also of Hanford Challenge, said she would prefer to have tanks removed from the ground because the 1 percent of waste that could remain after emptying contains a disproportionate share of radioactivity. DOE's preferred alternative calls for filling them with grout and leaving them in the ground.
Supporters of FFTF, a 400-megawatt research reactor, said DOE should restart the reactor or leave it as is for a possible future restart. Some said that even though liquid sodium once used to cool the reactor has been drained, the reactor still could be restarted.
There have been significant events since DOE decided to take FFTF off "hot standby" and permanently shut it down, they said.
Gerald Woodcock, a former Hanford worker, summed up the potential uses of the reactor offered by five speakers, saying it could be used to research nuclear fuels and materials as new nuclear power reactors are built; it could be used as a resource for recycling spent nuclear power fuel and it could be used to produce isotopes for nuclear medicine.
Republican and Democratic administrations earlier concluded that there was no economically viable use for the reactor, but those decisions were "purely political," Woodcock said.
The government frequently subsidizes projects it deems are for the public good, such as wind power and "Cash for Clunkers," he said.
Comments on the draft environmental study may be sent to Mary Beth Burandt, EIS Document Manager, DOE Draft TC&WM EIS Comments, Office of River Protection, P.O. Box 1178, Richland, 99352.
Comments also can be submitted by e-mail to TC&WMEIS@saic.com.
|
|
|
|
|