EIS-0113_Section_9 - Hanford Site

.rte
M
OG1
A fiscal year 1988 budget with funds for constructing a
waste vitrification plant is but one sign of good faith.
Coe ed is of Richard Betsey, M.D. regarding tM1e
Hanford Defense Waste Environmental lepact Stateeenk
[ a. Richartl Bel zey, a physician, a ember of the Portland Chapter of
PM1 ysi ci anz for cf al Rnp pna ibf city antl a mambar of the Oregon Department
of Energy r Hanford SO Advisory Committee.
We are tired of promises that are not backed up with a
conu.LtmenY of resource.. To talk about cleaning up the
military waste on one hand, and to than request FY 198 7
budget authorisation to construct additional surface ponds
2 . 2. (^ 9 in which . to dump PUREX and N-Reactor racioactive liquids is
a slap in the face to a region that has borne, for the sake
11o 4 tile, First, to c vey sa go cif i awns' reaction to the Defense
Waste EIS 01 expressed. during o public information ...tin, sponsored Jointly by
the US a ..... . of Energy and the. Greg.. DOE Advf.... Cbgo III.. do Hanford.
A number of people x concerned that the agencies and Individualsrezponsib-
1e for the development e and d unageeeat of nuclear defense...pan. production
had at plan..d for. the. safe and pertinent tlisposal of the ft. u volume of high
level radioactive Pastas associated with their production. furthermore, they
were concerned that an important question, which they thaught should have been
..led forty years ago, still needs to be ..had today, 'Doss continued productionof
plutonium for nuclear weapons at Hanford or anywhere else any site in
this country inc or decrease the security of the people of this country?'
2.5.5
W
of national defense, the risk. fzom. improper waste storage
Door over forty year...
PD555.008.4
RECEIVED DOE-RL
JUL 14 1996
WM DIVISION
Permanent and safe dis posal of the forty year accumulation of radioactive
..at.argenerak ed during plutonium production and pDrifie ti.. fa r use i0
eaponz is eOan.ti.1 because current 'temporary' storage sir ategiez,
the 'No 6l sp meal Action- alternative, have been lead equate. There Is a high
likelih oo d that these systems will continue to fail and it is avirtual
ertai.ty that they will be unable to contain the high level nuclear .alms
for the required tore. I cannot feel tonlidt a
. that current and past
activities and the knees r.eimactiv. rol e.... fro. the Hanford sit. have NOT
at r wady been a 'ter eat to the :heal th of Gran,mxana. The tie Deparbent of
Energy has tried to r s that M e'publfc health antl Oaf efy of
individuals in the region have not been compromised but sa.. authorities
have questi oned the assumptions on which their judgment I. based. In
wading this environmental impact statement I am particularly struck by the
inadequacy of infor ma tion about potential biologic effects of the
alternatives for permanent tlisposal of radioactive Pastes resulting from
plot eni um production at Nanf Ord. Consequently, the sl ateant is seriously
fl ... d and should be expanded antl corrected before any further action is
Considered.
2.2.1
3.3.1.1
2.5.5
REFERENCES
(1)
(2)
Battelle Pacific NorthwestLaboratory. A........t of
Ein le-Shell Tank Residual LS maid Iasssesat^pr
te, Naeh n ton. Tune 9
D E Contract r -AC
ALO ..830.
Battelle Pacific NorthwestLaboratory,Rent State Univarsity.
Erosion Potential .from Nieaoula Floods in the
Pasco Basin as m ton, Dcce et, OE orttzact
D -AC -]bHL0 ludo.
RECEIVED DOE-R IL
JUL141996 ob66
An expert panel [ netl with the long-term management of commercial
.clear wastes r ended that the sa fest method would. be disposal In a dee p .
geologic repository % This acs. z ea to he the safest Pay to deal with
radioactive waste produced d 1 g the production of plutonium for nu leap
capons. I bel that m 1 and disposal of all high level clear Paste
fros the Hanford site and its storage a deep geologic repository Ss khB
safest and most reassuring of the offered options.The engineering -solutions
proposed in the 'En-Place Stabili.ati. and-Reference- alternatives involve
unproven, technology which will have to ma intain its integrity for a
thousands of years if it is 0pro tect the environment and proximal populations.
This is unprecedented and it is likely that the technology will,
or later, fail. What will be the impact on the people and the economy
oe to 'region when high level radioactive .mast.% get into our wa ter and into
the food chain] Will the c ..try's population, at that ties, be willing to
invest their resources to deal with What let th en, only a regional problem?
3.3.1.1
PD555.009.1
WM DIVISION
In dealing with the heal th and safety of people in this region it is
RECEPotJ DOE-RL
Def.oEls - 719,86 Page d
JUL 1.4 06
90
WM DIVISION