HANFORD WATCH NEWSLETTER
April 25, 1999
EARTH DAY IN A HUNGRY WORLD
Seattle Post-Intelligencer -- April 18, 1999
According to the U.S. Forest Service, in 200 years we have lost 80 percent
of our forest land. The State Fisheries Department estimates that there
has been a 95 to 98 percent decline from "historic levels" in the fish
population in the Columbia River.
http://www.seattle-pi.com/opinion/erthop.shtml
LEGISLATURE APPROVES PROTECTION FOR WHISTLE-BLOWERS
Seattle Times – April 15, 1999
Tom Carpenter of the Government Accountability Project says even with
the new law and another popular bill designed to improve the state's
whistle-blowing program, Washington still lags behind other states in
protecting its conscientious employees. Carpenter, who advises whistle-blowers
at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, wishes the state had gone further
by expanding the definition of a whistle-blower and letting juries decide
whether retaliation occurred.
http://archives.seattletimes.com/cgi-bin/texis.mummy/web/vortex/display?storyID=37165cb53e&query=Hanford
FORGET MISSILES; IT'S THE INSECTS THAT WORRY ME
Dave Barry -- April 17, 1999
My point is that we cannot trust ``officials'' any farther than we can
throw them by the leg. This is especially true when it comes to the
Hanford nuclear complex. When this complex was built, ``officials''
said it was safe; now the whole area glows like a Budweiser sign. So
when ``officials'' tell us that the radioactive Hanford insects are
NOT going to mutate into giant monsters like the ants depicted in the
1954 movie ``Them!'', it clearly is time to study this movie and see
what happened, because it is about to happen again.
http://spyglass1.sjmercury.com/columnists/barry/docs/db041899.htm
BARRY'S MUTANT ANTS REALLY BUG TRI-CITIES FOLKS
Tri-City Herald – April 19, 1999
Dave Barry's next column mentions Hanford's radioactive ants. "I start
to worry when officials tell me not to worry," his column begins. In
this case, he's worried about assurances that Hanford is safe. The radioactive
ants were first discovered last fall, along with radioactive flies and
gnats. The bugs, which authorities call "contaminated" not radioactive,
were eliminated. But on a regular basis, officials find contaminated
tumbleweeds.
http://archives.seattletimes.com/cgi-bin/texis.mummy/web/vortex/display?storyID=371b6a7355&query=Hanford
OFFICIALS BUG DAVE BARRY TO VISIT TRI-CITIES HIMSELF
Tri-City Herald – April 21, 1999
And how about this if Barry comes to town? Present him with a "Rad Dog"
T-shirt from the Octopus' Garden, which features a two-headed dog on
front. On the shirt's back it says: "Rad Dog Ale is handcrafted from
the finest radioactive wastes and aged underground for years in traditional
leaky tanks. Following recipes so secret that even they don't know what
ends up in the tanks, our brewmasters have created the only ale hot
enough to glow in the dark. Rad Dog -- the choice of mutants everywhere."
http://www.tri-cityherald.com/news/1999/0421.html#anchor596559
N-WASTE BILL BY COOK WINS ENDORSEMENT
deseretnews.com -- April 19, 1999
The National Taxpayers Union has endorsed a bill by Rep. Merrill Cook,
R-Utah, to mandate continued storage of nuclear waste at the plants
generating them until permanent, national storage facilities are developed.
The tax group said Cook's strategy would save the $4 billion cost of
developing regional or national interim storage sites.
"The government needs to start working to save taxpayers
money," Cook said, "and to protect our children from the threats of
nuclear waste (by providing a permanent facility), instead of wasting
taxpayers' hard-earned dollars shipping nuclear waste to unsafe storage
sites in Utah." Among proposed alternatives for interim storage has
been a proposal to store some on the Goshute reservation in Utah.
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,75004706,00.html?
STATEMENT OF ARJUN MAKHIJANI ON THE NUCLEAR WASTE PLAN OF THE INSTITUTE
FOR ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
April 13, 1999
I have been studying the DOE's performance on managing the high-level
waste program for almost two decades and have concluded that so long
as the DOE is in charge, it is highly unlikely that there will be a
change of direction that will allow sound science to emerge. There are
many competent and qualified people in the DOE. But the DOE is a major
waste generator and has an institutional and cultural conflict-of-interest.
Because the current program is highly politicized, a new
framework will be required to change direction on waste management.
Utility ratepayers who have paid billions of dollars into the Nuclear
Waste Fund deserve better management of the program. That is why IEER
recommends that a federally chartered non-profit corporation be created
to:
• fund additional on-site storage for spent fuel from existing reactors
for currently licensed periods, if necessitated by government delays;
• take over waste management at closed nuclear power plants, so that
the waste is not neglected when the revenues from the sale of power
have dried up;
• fund research and development on the three long-term options outlined
above.
http://www.ieer.org/ieer/sdafiles/vol_7/7-3/arjun.html
CONSIDERING THE ALTERNATIVES: CREATING A FRAMEWORK FOR SOUND LONG-TERM
MANAGEMENT OF HIGHLY RADIOACTIVE WASTES IN THE UNITED STATES
Arjun Makhijani, IEER – April 1999
The management of long-lived radioactive wastes is one of the most vexing
and difficult challenges created by modern technology. Some radionuclides
will persist for millions of years. Plutonium-239, present in substantial
quantities, can be used to make nuclear weapons, making the reversal
of any disposal attractive for future proliferators. Solutions to reduce
the longevity of the wastes by transmutation, possible in theory, create
intolerable proliferation risks and leave residual contamination and
waste that would still require long-term management.
In other words, there are no ideal options for managing
highly radioactive waste. The menu is a poor one and any "solution"
will be from among options that each have some drawbacks. That is one
reason why phasing out nuclear power and stopping nuclear weapons production,
both of which should be done for other reasons as well, are important
complements to the search for the least environmentally destructive
waste management approaches.
http://www.ieer.org/ieer/sdafiles/vol_7/7-3/longterm.html
FFTF WASTE GENERATION
Government Accountability Project, comments on proposed 1999 Hanford
budget -- 1998
Beyond its questionable technical basis, the restart of FFTF poses a
formidable threat to public health and safety in the new waste streams
its operation will create. Government planning documents reveal that
restarting FFTF will create up to 60 tons (2 per year for 30 years)
of high-level nuclear waste at Hanford, in the form of spent nuclear
fuel. Up to 40% of the spent nuclear fuel generated by FFTF would be
weapons grade plutonium (90% Pu239). Extreme safety precautions would
have to be used with this waste stream because "the spent fuel will
be so reactive that it would have to be protected against fast criticality...the
spent fuel will eventually have to be reprocessed."
DOE response: The operation of the FFTF will generate
additional waste. However, the quantities are very low and the releases
well below any legal limits. The FFTF does not release hazardous or
radioactive material to the environment. Operation of the FFTF is expected
to generate up to 60 spent fuel assemblies annually. Current plans involve
cleaning the components and placing them into interim above-ground dry
storage until a national repository is completed.
http://www.hanford.gov/doe/cfo/budget/budget_data/fy2000comments.html