EIS-0113_Section_9 - Hanford Site

.
05'7 05'7
Page Three
RECEIVED DOE-RL
JUL 1? 1986 ot5l
WM DIVISION
Page Pour
RECEIVED DOE-RL
JUL. 1 4 1986. X59
Wh1 DIVISION
Do
O
p- C
STOP MAKING MORE WASTE, Now
This document fails to-meet the requirements of the National
environmental Policy Act of 1969, because it fails to even mention
2.5 e6. the most desirable alternative to disposing of the additional
2,5 , 6
military high-level and transuranic radioactive waste now being
produced at Hanford: STOP HAKING.IT, NOW. STOP MAKING TOR PROBLEM
MASS. The HIS state. that the radioactivity of the 'future tank
waste' produced between now and the year 1995 will by then exceed
that of the 'existing tank waste . by a factor e£-3 (200 million
curie. v. 70 million curies). We non eliminate three-fourths of
the problem by not producing more waste.
Where does all of the waste come from? It results from the
production of plutonium for nuclear weapon.. Low-enriched uranium
fuel is irradiated in the N-Reactor. The spent fuel is then -
chopped up and dissolved in the PURKX reprocessing plant, which
extract. the , tonium and leaves the fission products and
transuranic elements (including some of the plutonium) as liquid
high-level radioactive waste, which is still pumped into huge tanks
buried under about le feet Of _dirt.
and moreplutonium for nuclear weapons. NO(. We do not need to
expand our nuclear arsenal. But the Reagan Administration is now
engaged in the biggest build-up of nuclear weapon. and plutonium
ever. The testimony presented before my Subcommittee on June 16 by
the Department of Defense and two independent experts on nuclear
arms (including Dr. Theodore Taylor; . former nuclear weapon designer
and former deputy director of the U.S. Defense Atomic Support
2.5.6
Agency)) showed that, in any event, continued plutonium production.
at Hanford I. not needed for national security. We could . shut down
the N-Reactor right now, halt the PUNRX reprocessing plant, stop
producing high-level radioactive waste at Hanford, and still get an
equal amount of plutonium (about 600 kilograms per year) in leas
dangerous ways, such asm
-1. Recycling the plutonium in retired warheads. We already have
2.
100,000 kilograms of plutonium in existing weapons--160 times
the annual production of the N-Reactor and PUNSX. Plutonium
has a half-life of 24,000 years. It doesn't wear Oct.
more efficiently using plutonium scrap. The existing scrap
may be equal to as such as 10 years of N-Reactor production.
Does our nation need to use Sanford facilities to produce more
3. If absolutely"neee.sary,' expanding plutonium productionat