Heart of America Northwest

"Witch Hunt" at NRC to avoid safety improvements after Fukushima affects Reactor in Northwest and our Safety

2011-12-24T11:29:00.000-08:00

"Witch hunt" at the NRC in effort to avoid safety improvements after Fukushima affects us here in the Northwest:
Last night, I spent 2 hours watching the CSPAN replay of the US Senate Environment Committee hearing on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) with the 5 Commissioners.
Republicans are gleefully attacking the Obama appointed Chair Greg Jazcko over the other 4 Commissioners' letter to White House that he brought 3 unnamed women to tears and didn't share info.
Barbara Boxer called it right, a witch hunt, aimed at removal of a Chair who wants to implement some semblance of safety reforms after Fukushima. The lack of shared info, it turns out has to do with the other Commissioners not liking final versions of staff safety reports recommending that they implement some safety actions after Fukushima, and that they not eliminate a 30 day review period after appoval of a new reactor design.
2 of the Commissioners are people we (at Heart of America Northwest and others working on USDOE contaminated sites across the US) had direct experience with. One Commissioner was previously in charge of promoting nuclear power at USDOE. In that role, he didn't pass on to the Secretary the info on costs and safety about restart of Hanford's FFTF Reactor, was in denial about how "reprocessing" would create more High-Level Nuclear Waste...; another was the USDOE official who a federal judge said should be held in contempt of court for deliberately failing to carry out a court order to do environmental review of wastes and cleanup plans. That gives us confidence in the NRC, right? ....
Here in the Northwest this affects us directly as the Chair's political promise in testimony is that reactor relicensing will proceed "apace".
This rush to relicense regardless of safety concerns at individual reactors includes the Energy NW reactor at Hanford, which has applied to be relicensed to run until 2043. This explains why NRC refused our petition to extend the comment period in November until after NRC released its highly critical safety report (issued this week) finding violations and that the staff ignored safety procedures at the reactor. The NRC report was done by November 2nd and given to Energy NW that day. The comment period ended on November 16th... but, the report as only released to the public on December 21 - a month and five days after the NRC closed the comment period on the relicensing application environmental impact statement.
Here are excerpts from the report released on December 21 - you'll find yourself shuddering about the consequences if these actions happened while the reactor was operating instead of during its refueling:
The NRC found that:

“(O)perators chose to proceed with work when it was not approved, was outside the bounds of the procedure, or when they experienced unexpected plant conditions. In these instances, conservative decision making was not evident. In a few instances, operators suspected that something was wrong but didn’t speak up.”

NRC summary of the five events:

During the most recent refueling outage from April to September 2011, the licensee experienced five events. Those events included:

1. On April 11, while filling the reactor vessel to approximately the reactor vessel flange level, approximately 4000 gallons of reactor coolant inventory were lost to the containment sump because two in-series steam line drain valves were left in the open position (see NRC Inspection Report 05000397/2011002).

2. From July 28 to 30, operators inadvertently drained approximately 4300 gallons of water from the reactor vessel through two main steam line drain valves. Operators had failed to ensure that the reactor vessel level indication reference leg remained vented to atmosphere, which resulted in inaccurate reactor vessel level readings. This condition persisted for approximately 40 hours.

3. Licensee Event Report 05000397/2011-002-00: Loss of Shutdown Cooling Due to Logic Card Failures: On August 27, the licensee experienced a loss of residual heat removal event following the spurious trip of a reactor protection system train B circuit card. This licensee event report is closed based on the results from this inspection.

4. On September 10, operators failed to follow site procedures and, for a short period, inadvertently diverted water from the reactor vessel to the suppression pool through the residual heat removal pump minimum flow valve. Reactor vessel level decreased approximately 2 inches.

5. On September 15, operators failed to properly coordinate two control rod drive surveillances. Control rods were moving faster than expected and two control rods, when given a withdrawal command, inserted instead. Operators then manually inserted the control rods and they appeared to scram (insert very rapidly).

Good Ol’ Boys Club ... USDOE/Bechtel Name Team to Review Safety Culture at Hanford

2011-08-25T17:52:00.000-07:00

The Department on Energy (DOE) has begun a review of the safety culture at Hanford vitrification plant. Bechtel, the contractor for the vitrification plant, made recommendations for the seven member team to the DOE; which the DOE approved. The assembled team is made up of insiders from the DOE, NRC, and have connections to commercial nuclear sites. Interestingly enough, there were no women selected to the panel. The “independent review” is tasked with examining the safety culture of the Hanford vitrification plant. However, it is hard to claim that an independent review can take place when the company under review handpicked the review team. In a statement Bechtel proclaims; “We welcome the opportunity for a full and open review of the project by these experts, and we will accept and implement any actions they identify. [1]” I would also be welcoming to the members of a panel of my own creation.

We applaud the creation of a panel to review the safety culture – if it operates in the open with public input and transparency, and if it were truly independent.

However what has been announced leaves much room for doubt and concern.

If the panel operates openly, and allows for truly anonymous safety concerns to be presented by workers and engineers without fear of retaliation, the panel may be an opportunity for dialogue about safety to come to light. It may even be seen as an admittance of fault by Bechtel.

The idea that an independent review is possible with a panel that resembles the good ol’ boys is far-fetched. The ability of the panel to conduct a truly independent review was taken away when the DOE failed to contact concerned public interest groups to receive input on who should be on the panel, or how it should be organized. The panel is a fairly homogeneous group which does not allow for a diversified set of critiques and opinions on the safety culture at Hanford. Yet again, the concerns of the public and possibly those who work at Hanford have been muted by the insiders who care more about costs than safety.

Examining the biographies of the seven hand picked people, five of the seven have business relationships with USDOE, including consulting and contracts dependent upon USDOE. One of the other two defended nuclear power utilities in legal proceedings brought in response to whistleblower and safety concerns.

Heart of America Northwest is concerned that USDOE and Bechtel seek to avoid the open government legal requirements by having the private contractor who is building the plant, Bechtel, pick the panel and receive its recommendations – despite the fact that USDOE is paying the bill for the panel and holds ultimate responsibility for design safety. If the panel reported to USDOE, it would be subject to open government laws, including open public meetings and public comment.

The safety culture of Hanford has repeatedly shown need for improvement. Heart of America Northwest successfully led efforts to have Congress reject DOE and Bechtel's request to spend an additional quarter billion dollars in each of the coming years to accelerate construction of the vitrification plant BEFORE doing the testing of whether the chemical processes will work and whether they pose risks of explosions and nuclear criticalities (self sustaining nuclear reactions). DOE admits that the testing beyond the lab is necessary to ensure that the process and design will work and be safe. Yet, it wanted to make the same mistake it has repeatedly made - spending hundreds of millions pressing ahead on construction before design was done or tested to see if it would be workable or safe. While asking to spend a quarter billion more on construction of the vitrification plant in each of the coming years, without knowing if the work would all have to be redone due to safety, USDOE has been refusing to dig up Plutonium in the soil threatening health and water citing cost.

“Wasted Workers?”

Hanford was recently in the news for slightly different reasons than one would think... A small bag of pot was found in an office on site after the end of a work safety planning meeting. “The bag was found Aug. 8 in a conference room used by Washington Closure subcontractor S.M. Stoller at the Environmental Restoration Disposal Facility.” Immediate drug tests were ordered. Six employees quit rather than submit to drug testing. This incident speaks towards the larger picture of safety culture at Hanford.

[1] Hanford Waste Treatment Plant welcomes review by leading nuclear safety experts-August 22, 2011, Bechtel National, Inc.

http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2011/08/24/1613520/6-quit-after-pot-found-in-m Tri-City Herald August-25, 2011

Independent review of vitrtification plant safety culture under way, By Annette Cary-Tri-City Herald August-23, 2011

Picture retrieved from http://www.hopeforthesold.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/old-boys-club.jpg on August 25, 2011

Hanford Managers Report on State of Hanford Cleanup Meetings - but skip the top issues, such as public opposing use of Hanford as a National Radioactive Waste Dump

2011-04-25T13:25:00.000-07:00

Hanford's top Managers wrote the following guest editorial following up to 2011 State of the Hanford Cleanup Public Meetings in March.... at bottom, we respond wondering how they can ignore the public's top concerns voiced at the meetings: 1) opposing USDOE's plans to add even more wastes to Hanford and using Hanford as a national radioactive waste dump... and, 2) how they failed to understand public concern in light of the Japanese reactor meltdowns about use of Hanford facilities to make dangerous Plutonium fuel for the commercial reactor at Hanford...

Tri-City Herald Sunday, Apr. 24, 2011

Community vital to Hanford cleanup

By Matt McCormick and Stacy Charboneau, Special to the Herald

During our State of the Hanford Site Cleanup meetings in March, we heard many views, concerns and suggestions, with emphasis on requesting more funding for cleanup, accelerating the pace of our work and protecting the Columbia River.

Thanks to those who attended the meetings. Continued community involvement will produce quality cleanup and helps sustain funding for this critical work.

Not surprisingly, one issue that came up at the meetings was unrelated to our environmental cleanup mission at Hanford.

Because of recent events in Japan, more people are talking about nuclear activities than they were a month ago. Interest in nuclear activities creates an opportunity for education, public discussion and debate.

That is why we would like to take this opportunity to provide context for what the Department of Energy is doing here at Hanford.

It's clear from our meetings that many people around the Northwest don't know that the commercial nuclear reactor at Hanford is owned and operated by Energy Northwest, not the Department of Energy.

Environmental consequences of Hanford's past operations are well known to most Mid-Columbia residents, but it's easy to forget the magnitude of the problem.

From the 1940s to the 1980s, Hanford produced more than half of the plutonium for the U.S. nuclear weapons program. During that time, millions of cubic feet of solid waste was placed in trenches and other burial sites.

More than 50 million gallons of radioactive waste was stored in large underground tanks. About 450 billion gallons of less-contaminated liquids were discharged to the soil, creating an area of groundwater contamination in excess of 100 square miles beneath the site.

In addition, approximately 2,300 tons of leftover spent nuclear fuel was stored in water-filled pools near the Columbia River, which runs through the site.

Over the years, dozens of the large underground tanks had leaked contaminated liquids into the soil.

Today, we're engaged in cleanup of buildings, soil, debris, groundwater and liquid wastes that once were contaminated with radioactive material.

While several facilities on the site still store or contain hazardous materials, the material is monitored and configured to protect the public and the environment.

With continued proper storage and handling, the residual wastes do not pose a threat to site workers, visitors or the public.

Since cleanup began in the late 1980s, DOE and its contractors have addressed some of the most urgent environmental and public health risks. For example, 2,300 tons of spent nuclear fuel has been removed from storage pools near the river and placed in dry storage at the center of the site.

Twenty tons of leftover plutonium material has been stabilized and shipped out of the state. Eighty million gallons of groundwater are processed each month to remove contaminants, with more than 5 billion gallons treated to date.

Removable liquids have been retrieved from large, single-shell underground storage tanks, and a plant for treating the large volume of sludge and solid material remaining in the tanks is more than half built. The nine reactors on site that once irradiated uranium to produce plutonium have been emptied of fuel, and five have been demolished down to the shield walls surrounding the reactor cores.

Much has been done and there is more work ahead. Cleanup of the Hanford site is complex and is expected to take decades, primarily because of the amount and extent of contamination that resulted from producing plutonium -- not power -- for the United States.

The work is some of the most challenging and heavily regulated in the United States, and it hasn't always gone as planned. But workers, regulators, community members and others share a common goal to ensure safety is our No. 1 priority and that cleanup is completed safely and efficiently. We would like to build on that common ground.

We invite you stay or get involved, whether it's attending a Hanford public meeting, commenting on cleanup decisions or taking a tour of the site. Hanford is an unprecedented environmental cleanup effort. And it's in your backyard.

For more information, we invite you to visit our website at www.hanford.gov or view the first of several video chapters on Hanford at www.youtube.com/ hanfordsite.

* Matt McCormick is manager of the Department of Energy's Richland Operations Office. Stacy Charboneau is acting manager for the Office of River Protection.

RESPONSE by Gerry Pollet, Heart of America Northwest:

The number one topic brought up by the public at the 2011 Hanford Cleanup State of the Site meetings was opposition to USDOE’s plans to add even more waste to Hanford by using Hanford as a national radioactive waste dump – for which USDOE has TWO separate pending proposals. This is NOT addressed at all in the follow-up guest editorial from Hanford’s two top managers.

Nor do they address the reason why the public is so concerned, in light of the Japanese reactor meltdowns at Fukushima, about the relationship between USDOE, Hanford and the commercial reactor located at Hanford.

A stated goal of the State of the Site meetings is to hold Hanford and regulator managers accountable to public concerns in an annual public forum. Heart of America Northwest worked hard to have the public come to the hearings. We urged that USDOE and regulator managers record comments and offer a written response - so that they will be accountable.

This recap of “what we heard” from Hanford’s Managers shows the need for recording comments and responding, so the official report and record is not a biased partial accounting. Person after person at the Seattle and Portland meetings told USDOE that its credibility is undermined by USDOE clinging to keep in place its 2004 decision to use Hanford as a national radioactive waste dump.

The recap is a reflection of numerous other concerns, but not the top two issues on the public’s mind at the hearings. The Op-Ed does reflect the concerns about reduced cleanup funding – without responding to numerous urgings that USDOE should restore funding priority to the retrieval and treatment of Plutonium and mixed radioactive hazardous wastes. Hanford’ Managers report on the great progress made in some areas while acknowledging decades of work lie ahead in regard to those unlined ditches and tank wastes.

However, Heart of America Northwest members and so many other people at the meetings repeatedly objected to USDOE collaborating with Energy Northwest to bring weapons usable Plutonium back to Hanford to be fabricated to make experimental, highly dangerous Plutonium fuel for the Energy NW (formerly WPPSS 2) reactor in a contaminated Hanford USDOE building in the 300 Area along the Columbia River. USDOE’s senior managers claimed they knew nothing about this scheme to have Energy Northwest be the first US commercial nuclear utility to use the same dangerous Plutonium fuel as in Reactor 3 in Fukushima – with higher temperatures and greater offsite radioactive releases than uranium fuels. Yet, the proposal is to use a USDOE Hanford facility to fabricate the Plutonium fuel and to do the dirty work assaying spent fuel – creating more wastes. The public strongly objects to shipping Plutonium back to Hanford and using Hanford facilities to make more waste in the guise of dangerous Plutonium fuel for the commercial reactor. They owe us answers! And, we will not let them ignore our concerns.

We Are All in This Time Capsule Together…The Japan Nuclear Crisis at Fukushima

2011-03-20T13:59:00.000-07:00

By Dvija Michael Bertish

Of the many images the world has seen in the aftermath of the Japan earthquake and tsunami, one stands out as a powerful symbol of the vulnerability of humans on this planet. A 60 year-old man was swept nine miles out to sea, floating on the rooftop of what had once been his house. His village of 10,000 people had been obliterated. He watched as his wife disappeared in the tidal surge. He floated for two days on the ocean, surrounded by debris, unnoticed until he was finally spotted and rescued by a passing military ship. The man thought the day of his rescue would have been the day of his death. It is a humbling and sobering image.

As a child I was very interested in learning about Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the advent of nuclear weaponry during World War II, and warnings written by Albert Einstein about these quantum devices. Einstein also warned about the potential extinction of honey bees and the subsequent collapse of the global food supply within four years' time. Heavy thoughts for a ten-year-old, but it stuck with me. Currently, the United Nations has issued a warning that Colony Collapse Disorder of honey bees has become a pandemic that could impact the global food supply. The cause of the disorder has not been formally identified. One theory was that the bees were oversensitized by cellphone transmissions, another theory pointed to the possibility of a bacteriological pathogen. I wonder if the decline of honey bees could be attributed to advancing background radiation that continues to escalate in the global environment.

Radioactive smoke arising from Fukushima Nuclear Plant

At the time of this writing, the Fukushima plant has suffered various explosions and radiological releases. Some reports say that Chernobyl was far worse, others say the radiation levels at the Fukushima plant exceed Chernobyl without the confirmation of a total nuclear meltdown. Individual radiation exposure due to natural sources amounts to about 2.4 millisievert (mSv) per year. Those evacuated from around Chernobyl experienced 350 mSv per hour. Fukushima levels exceeded 400 mSv per hour, and spiked at the reactor site to 10,000 mSv per hour. However, there are reports that the disaster has corrupted the monitoring equipment. It appears Japan officials plan to dump tons of sand and cement on a leaking reactor in an attempt to seal off the radiation.

For an easy to understand guide to what the radiation doses being found in Japan mean in terms of health risk, and potential for fallout in the US are, see the Heart of America Northwest homepage http://www.hoanw.org/

It is estimated that 400 million human beings were exposed to Chernobyl’s radioactive fallout. According to agencies with the United Nations, Chernobyl caused 4,000 related deaths and 4,000 thyroid cancers (mostly in children, with a very high cure rate) [1] , and some 200,000 people have developed illnesses caused by radiological exposure. Other assessments are much higher: “The International Agency for Research on Cancer, another UN agency, predicts 16,000 deaths from Chernobyl; an assessment by the Russian academy of sciences says there have been 60,000 deaths so far in Russia and an estimated 140,000 in Ukraine and Belarus…” [2]

The Fukushima crisis has not yet reached full meltdown status, but the cooling systems have failed, the reactor cores are exposed and are venting radioactive smoke, and millions of people in Tokyo wonder if the air will shift, causing the radiation to drift toward the city instead of out to sea. Millions of people are at risk. A measurable radiation plume reached California, and there has been no mention of the cumulative impacts to the environment, though officials are quick to say there is no impact to human health. I guess its better to say something like that to avoid public hysteria and panic.

Also at the time of this writing, people are stampeding to vitamin shops to purchase potassium iodide pills in hopes of fending off thyroid cancer from radiation exposure, but no other organs are protected with this therapy. Doctors are warning the public not to take this supplement, but fear drives consumers to seek out the pills. News reports indicate cargo and luggage at US airports that originated in Japan show measurable levels of radiation, though US officals claim the levels are not enough to be dangerous. Japanese health officals discovered radiation in milk and spinach near Fukushima, and in tap water in Tokyo and five central prefectures.

Senators are asking if US nuclear plants are at risk from major earthquakes, yet one plant in California is built atop a major faultline on the coast. A representative of the San Onofre Nuclear Plant was interviewed on national news, wearing a powder blue shirt and sport jacket, saying repeatedly that his power plant could withstand a 7-point quake, and that the plant was protected by a 20-foot tsunami wall. Really? Doesn’t he know that the Japan quake was a 9-pointer, and the tidal surge swallowed whole towns at greater heights? Does he know that the US coast is comprised of the very same type of subduction zones that triggered the Japanese quake? Has he not seen the devastation from recent quakes in New Zealand and Chile, all within the Pacific Ring of Fire?

The Japan crisis led to Germany’s immediate shuttering of its pre-1989 nuclear power plants, costing billions of dollars, and Sweden is to follow this example. And yet, in this climate of global crisis, our own domestic nuclear industry is suing the US federal government in an attempt to stop nuclear waste long-term storage management fees, and an east Tennessee plant recently applied to import and treat 1,000 tons of radioactive waste to be imported from German nuclear facilites. The Chistian Science Monitor reports, “Nuclear plants in the United States last year experienced at least 14 "near misses," serious failures in which safety was jeopardized, at least in part, due to lapses in oversight and enforcement by US nuclear safety regulators,” the report produced by the Union of Concerned Scientists, a nuclear watchdog group. The Wall Street Journal reports that “dozens of nuclear reactors operate in earthquake-prone regions around the world, including at least 14 in high-hazard areas.” Go figure.

The collateral damage in this crisis is extensive. The city of Tokyo is at a standstill. American medics have been evacuated from Japan due to rising radiation levels. The Japanese stock market has tumbled, causing a cascade of economic downturns in countries around the world that were already weakened by the great recession. US automakers and electronic fabricators could become unable to produce their products since many components are made in Japan. General Electric, the company that made the Fukushima nuclear reactor, as well as the reactor at Hanford, is suffering from a devaluation of its stock due to the Japan crisis.

Reactor number 3 at the Fukushima plant was operated with experimental Plutonium “MOX” fuel -- reactor fuel mixed with weapons grade plutonium that increases the severity and danger of radioactive releases. Within the past few weeks, Heart of America Northwest discovered that Energy Northwest, the consortium of publicly owned utilities (formerly called WPPSS), made a secret deal to be the first commercial nuclear reactor in the US to use Plutonium fuel at the Hanford reactor without public consent or knowledge.

The Plutonium fuel at Fukushima Reactor 3 is being acknowledged by the US government and nuclear experts as posing the highest risks from partial meltdown and fire amongst the reactors. It melts more readily, and releases more radiation than uranium fuel rods.

Seattle Times front page story (March 19, 2011) on Heart of America Northwest filing suit this week over Energy Northwest’s effort to keep its plan to use Plutonium fuel a secret. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2014539881_plutonium19m.html

Americans are wondering if a nuclear meltdown in Japan would result in mass exposure to radiation through the atmosphere. Simultaneously, Japanese workers are experiencing extensive radiation exposure at the reactor site, and are sure to develop cancer from it. Washington State declares that there is no danger from radiation exposure, and EPA has deployed additional Radnet monitors to collect air samples in order to determine radiation levels in the atmosphere.

One question comes to mind in light of these developments – was it all worth it to pursue nuclear energy?

Of the 104 nuclear reactors in the US, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ranks the Hanford reactor 39th at risk of catastrophic failure caused by earthquake. The San Onofre reactors in California are ranked 46th, which indicates that Hanford is more at risk.

Another thought comes to mind. A very small number of people (nuclear regulators in the US) are making policy that can and may very well endanger the population in our own country. And this small number of regulators doesn’t seem to be phased at all by fears raised by the public that radioactive waste is dangerous, that nuclear reactors are prime targets for disaster (natural or terrorist types), and that the health and well being of all people is at risk because of the nuclear industry.

The US is the leader in nuclear energy use, and has the most reactors. And just today, 25 years after Chernobyl, more than 30 years after Three Mile Island, the federal government is just now wondering if US nuclear reactors are sturdy enough to withstand major earthquakes and tsunamis. Stress tests for US facilities are just now being ordered. There is something dramatically wrong with this picture.

At the time of this writing, Japan’s future is uncertain. Our collective futures are uncertain. Will there be a full meltdown? Will there be a nuclear explosion? Will parts of Japan become uninhabitable? However this crisis plays out, one thing is for certain – its not just Japan’s problem. Everyone in the world will be impacted by this crisis.

1983, Sculpture, Cast Cement, Steel & Shattered Glass

My childhood fascination with nuclear issues led to an art project during my college years. I created a sculpted rock base, a sort of cliff. Out of this cliff arose a steel aperture that formed a large question mark shape. I gathered many panes of tempered glass and flung them into metal garbage cans so they would shatter. I reached into this garbage can bare-handed to retrieve hundreds of shards of glass. I glued the glass in spiral forms around the aperture with aquarium glue, coating the question mark with ultra sharp spikes of glass. I never cut myself. The sculpture was placed on display in a student art show, set upon a large platform to avoid direct contact with the glass shards. It took 6 people to move the sculpture, and they all wore protective gloves because they feared being cut by the glass. The sculpture was wheeled about on a metal trolley, and the glass made strange noises as it was heaved into place. People were very nervous around this sculpture and kept their distance. They were afraid of it.

The sculpture was entitled “There Were Once White Sands Near Alamagordo in 1945.” The first nuclear exposion test took place in New Mexico in 1945. The desert sand beneath the test site was fused into a giant crator of glass shards. The sands of New Mexico constantly move -- vast white dunes that undulate in the winds like glistening snakes. I often wonderd if the nuclear radiation from the test site moved around with the white sands near Alamagordo. The first Nuclear bombs were dropped at Nagasaki and Hiroshima in 1945 to end World War II. Was it the end, or just the beginning of a larger war? What is the legacy of the nuclear age? I guess time will tell.

To discuss your concerns about how this relates to Hanford, and plans to use Hanford as a national waste dump, please come to public meetings at 7:00pm: March 29th in Seattle at Seattle Center's Northwest Rooms, March 31st in Portland at the Red Lion Hotel at Jantzen Beach, and a May 19th hearing in Portland (6:30pm Lloyd Center Doubletree Hotel) on US Department of Energy's latest plan to use Hanford as a national radioactive waste dump for extreme radioactive wastes from reactors and weapons.

Refferences:

[1] UN agencies and the government of the Russian Federation, Belarus, Ukraine with UN agencies: International Atomic Energy Agency and WHO, joint report; 2005 http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2005/pr38/en/index.html

[2] The Guardian, UK, January 10, 2010: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/jan/10/chernobyl-nuclear-deaths-cancers-dispute “Meanwhile, the Belarus national academy of sciences estimates 93,000 deaths so far and 270,000 cancers, and the Ukrainian national commission for radiation protection calculates 500,000 deaths so far. The mismatches in figures arise because there have been no comprehensive, co-ordinated studies of the health consequences of the accident. This is in contrast to Nagasaki and Hiroshima, where official research showed that the main rise in most types of cancer and non-cancer diseases only became apparent years after the atomic bombs fell. With Chernobyl there have been difficulties in gathering reliable data from areas left in administrative chaos after the accident. Hundreds of thousands of people were moved away from the affected areas, and the break-up of the Soviet Union led to records being lost.”

http://www.ajc.com/business/some-progress-seen-in-878219.html
Some progress seen in Japan's nuclear crisis, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Mar 20, 2011

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/20/weekinreview/20chernobyl.html?_r=1
Lessons From Chernobyl for Japan, NY Times, Mar 19, 2011

http://www.khaleejtimes.com/Displayarticle09.asp?section=health&xfile=data/health/2011/March/health_March60.xml
Radioactive contamination of food risks, Khaleej Times, Mar 20, 2011
http://www.suntimes.com/news/4413567-418/officials-pressure-rises-again-in-japan-reactor.html
Officials: Pressure rises again in Japan reactor, Chigaco Sun Times, Mar 20, 2011

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/19/science/19plume.html?_r=1
Radiation Plume Reaches U.S., but Is Said to Pose No Risk, NY Times, Mar 18, 2011

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703512404576208872161503008.html
Dozens of Reactors in Quake Zones, Wall St Journal, Mar 19, 2011

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2011/0318/Nuclear-power-report-14-near-misses-at-US-plants-due-to-lax-oversight
Nuclear power report: 14 'near misses' at US plants due to 'lax oversight', Christian Science Monitor, Mar 18, 2011

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,751245,00.html
Fear's Price Tag; The High Price of Merkel's Nuclear About-Face, Spiegel International, Mar 16, 2011

http://www.propublica.org/blog/item/charting-the-human-cost-of-different-types-of-energy
Charting the Human Cost of Different Types of Energy, Pro Public Blog, Mar 18, 2011

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/18/world/asia/18displaced.html
Radiation Fears and Distrust Push Thousands From Homes, NY Times, Mar 17, 2011

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-japan-quake-wrapup-20110318,0,2262753.story
U.S. nuclear officials suspect Japanese plant has a dire breach, Los Angeles Times, Mar 18, 2011

http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2011/03/17/17climatewire-fukushima-crisis-worsens-as-us-warns-of-a-lar-9187.html?ref=earth
Fukushima Crisis Worsens as U.S. Warns of a Large Radiation Release, NY Times, Mar 17, 2011

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/19/world/asia/19japan.html?_r=2
Japan Races to Restart Reactors’ Cooling System, NY Times, Mar 18, 2011

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-obama-japan-radiation-20110317,0,899196.story
Obama urges review of U.S. nuclear plants, reassures Americans on radiation from Japan, Los Angeles Times, Mar 17, 2011

http://www.publicintegrity.org/articles/entry/3039/
Regulators aware of years of understated seismic risks to nuclear plants, Center for Public Integrity, Mar 18, 2011

http://www.app.com/article/20110317/NJNEWS10/103170331/Report-faults-U-S-nuclear-oversight
Report faults U.S. nuclear oversight, Asbury Park Press, Mar 18, 2011
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/2011-03-18-1Ajapannuclear18_CV_N.htm
Three ways Japan's nuclear crisis could end, USA Today, Mar 17, 2011

http://www.mercurynews.com/science/ci_17637607?nclick_check=1
Radioactive particles arriving in the Bay Area, but pose no risk, say scientists and health officials, Mercury News, Mar 17, 2011

http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/ct-biz-0318-airport-radiation--20110317,0,901379.story
Trace radiation at airports determined OK, but highlights concerns about spread from Japan, Chicago Tribune, Mar 17, 2011http://timesfreepress.com/news/2011/mar/18/radioactive-waste-may-be-bound-state/
Radioactive waste may be bound for state (Tennessee), Times Free Press, Mar 18, 2011

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/mar2011/2011-03-16-02.html
Senators Question Safety of Nuclear Reactors in California and Vermont, Environmental News Service, Mar 16, 2011

http://af.reuters.com/article/energyOilNews/idAFN1616939220110317
WRAPUP 4-U.S. shows growing alarm over Japan nuclear crisis, Reuters, Mar 17, 2011

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/18/world/asia/18nuclear.html?_r=1
With Quest to Cool Fuel Rods Stumbling, U.S. Sees ‘Weeks’ of Struggle,Mar 17, 2011

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704396504576204672681780248.htm
Reactors on Fault Lines Getting Fresh Scrutiny, Wall Street Journal, Mar 17, 2011

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2014539881_plutonium19m.html
Plutonium fuel could be used at Hanford power plant, Seattle Times, Mar 18, 2011

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2011/03/san-onofre-nuclear-plant-can-withstand-quakestsunamis-officials-say.html
San Onofre nuclear plant can withstand up to 7.0 quake, is protected by a 25-foot tsunami wall, Edison, LA Times, Mar 15, 2011

http://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/energy/blogs/nuclear-power-and-earthquake-zones-overlap-in-the-us
Nuclear power and earthquake zones overlap in the U.S, Mother Nature News, Mar 15, 2011

http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/mar2011/2011-03-10-091.html
Nuclear Industry Sues to Lift Reactor Fuel Management Fee, Environmental News Service, Mar 10, 2011

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/stocks-drop-as-ge-utilities-hit-by-nuclear-doubts-2011-03-14
Stocks hurt as GE, utilities hit by nuclear doubts, Wall Street Journal, Mar 14, 2011

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/mar/14/nuclearpower-energy
Japan's nuclear crisis: regulators warned of reactor risks, UK Guardian, Mar 14, 2011

http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/decline-of-honey-bees-now-a-global-phenomenon-says-united-nations-2237541.html
Decline of honey bees now a global phenomenon, says United Nations, The Independent, Mar 10, 2011

Risky Nuclear Experiments on a Global Collision Course -- It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad Radioactive World!

2011-02-21T13:58:00.000-08:00

By Dvija Michael Bertish

New reactor being built next to old style reactor in Georgia,

Pictured here at the Vogtle plant near Savannah, Aug. 2010

It’s like watching Planet of the Apes from the 1970’s, where Charleton Heston’s bloodied hand weakly presses a crystal button that controls a nuclear bomb on a planet gone genetically wrong. All around us there are signs that long-term thinking, protecting the future generations 100-200 years from now, is not being thoroughly considered when placed in the context of nuclear energy production. All around us there are serious warning signs that nature, the world as we know it, is being tragically impacted by this lack of conscious thought. It’s a disturbing paradigm of ignorance and calculated misrepresentation of the truth, weakly justified by our need for expanded energy resources, jobs, and profit.

As a conscious human being, I often wonder how anyone with a heart and a mind can, without trepidation, gamble and dabble with nuclear radiation at the cost of countless lives. And yet, the proliferation of dangerous problems linked exclusively to the nuclear industry is quickly gathering momentum. It’s a legacy that mars our time, and reaches tens of thousands of years into the future.

Gerry Pollet, Executive Director of Heart of American Northwest, sent me information from Friends of the Earth and an article from the Tri-City Herald that was so disturbing, I had to think about it for a few days. The implications brought out in these items are huge, and I’ve tried to weave them into context in this blog. Here are my thoughts from developments in the nuclear industry over the past month.

The consortium of Pacific Northwest public electric utilities, Energy Northwest – formerly known as WPPSS, with the apparent blessing of the US Department of Energy, plans to haul fuel mixed with weapons-grade plutonium back to Hanford so it can be fed into a nuclear reactor in an experiment. No mention of what might be spewed into the air during this process, or if there is an accident. This plan was discovered on the tail of another plan to reformulate the experimental Hanford Vitrification Plant so that it would allow “controlled explosions” of radioactive gas while trying to turn high grade radioactive sludge into glass for long term storage.

Once again, the Pacific Northwest is being targeted as a guinea pig. Clearly, the public would be more than concerned about trucking in radioactive waste from around the country [after we worked so hard to have it removed from Hanford as part of cleanup efforts] so it can be burned up in a nuclear reactor. Moreover, this reactor sits near a plant that experts warn could explode with radioactive gas. Radioactive fuel combined with nearby explosions can’t be a good thing. And radioactive groundwater under the site continues to leak into the Columbia River to poison the drinking water source for downstream cities. And all of this is experienced so that energy can be developed to be sold out of state or even internationally for corporate profit. No, this would not make sense to the general public, so no wonder this controversial plan was kept secret and had to be exposed by watchdogs. Energy Northwest is a publc utilitiy consortium, not a private company- which makes the coverup even more egregious.

Internal emails reviewed by Freinds of the Earth and Heart of America Northwest via a Public Records Act request reveal that Energy Northwest officials feared that their plans to use Plutonium fuel at the Columbia Generating Station (formerly called the WPPSS 2 reactor) at Hanford would become public knowledge. These are “public officials” at public agencies hiding safety and financial risks and how they plan to spend your tax dollars. The nuclear waste mess has been building since World War II, and there isn’t a clear plan in sight to deal with the toxic aftermath of nuclear weapons, or the ongoing operations of existing nuclear power plants that have been in operation since the 1980’s. The waste stream is growing ever larger without safe and reliable long term storage. The nuclear salesmen say they will “reprocess’ the waste – which creates more liquid High-Level Nuclear Waste that will go to into tanks until who knows when? With an afterlife of thousands of years, it’s hard to imagine how nuclear regulators are thinking the solution is to put radioactive waste in tanks or drums to last 20-40 years. What happens after that? One associate of mine theorized that new space shuttles will haul our radioactive waste to be buried on the dark side of the moon. Out of sight, out of mind? The scheme to use Plutonium fuel is revealed in the documents as politically motivated to prove that melting down fuel from reactors and extracting the Plutonium for reuse is acceptable. But, the officials strive to keep the plan secret and never mention what happens to the liquid High-Level Nuclear wastes from this “reprocessing.”

The Key Lake facility produces U3O8 uranium, which is then shipped to

Refineries for the manufacture of fissile fuel rods used in nuclear reactors

Doesn’t civilization have to consider the long-term implications of nuclear waste before launching into a revival of nuclear energy? After the BP Oil spill, the once shouted slogan “Drill Baby, Drill!” isn’t as loud. The Fracking debate to pull natural gas out of the ground by pressurized pumping of toxic chemicals into groundwater is generating hefty opposition, as well as exploding natural gas lines that incinerate neighborhoods with failing infrastructure. Americans are definitely giving a huge thumbs down to mountaintop removal coal mining and coal-fired power plants, but there are attempts to ship American coal to be burnt up in China so we can all breathe the mercury spewed by China that blows back across the ocean. Dams are killing off rivers and streams. The masses are wondering if electric cars cure dependence on foreign oil, but where is the electricity going to come from to charge the batteries, and where are the rare earth minerals going to come from to make these technological wonders work when the mining of such elements causes severe contamination to the environment? Even China has decided mining these rare minerals is too dangerous and has curtailed exports, sending US automakers into a frenzy for new sources. Afghanistan is ripe for the picking.

Yes, we have to think of something to produce our needed energy. Wind, solar, and tidal wave energy are in the upswing of the energy revolution, touted as sustainable and green resources. But in the midst of this chaos, we are being fed stories that nuclear energy is clean, green, and ready to safely fulfill our every need and desire. Really? Remember the commercials from just 2 years ago where an actor wearing a costume of a giant piece of coal was gathering hordes of followers, walking hand in hand from coast to coast, demonstrating the friendly support for “clean coal,” a controversial theme that many cry out to be an oxymoron. Those commercials are long gone with public outcry. The term “nuclear energy” may also prove to be an absurdist thought, but that hasn’t put a damper on a resurgence of planned nuclear facilities. Where is the public outcry over radiation and nuclear pollution?

Four new nuclear reactors are currently proposed in the US, in Georgia, South Carolina and Tennessee. One facility started construction 30 years ago and is being resurrected after a 20 year hiatus. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is reviewing 20 additional applications for nuclear power plants. There are 60 nuclear reactors being built in foreign countries. Some call it a nuclear “Renaissance”, with a new uranium rod fabrication plant now operating in New Mexico with three others planned in the US. Currently, 50% of US nuclear fuel is created from decommissioned Russian warheads, and that source will only last until 2013.

Thus, new sources of enriched uranium will be on a fast track for development. Scientific American reports: “With 436 reactors worldwide consuming 65,000 metric tons (one metric ton equals 1.1 U.S. tons) of enriched uranium per year, demand for this nuclear reactor fuel outstrips available supply, which has caused uranium prices to jump from a low of $10 per pound a few years ago to more than $130 per pound in 2007 and still more than $50 per pound today.” The UK Guardian reports that uranium prices have reached $63.88 per pound in 2011 due to fast increases in nuclear consumption in China and Korea.

The landscape is being scoured for new sources of uranium to satisfy the fast growing need for reactor fuel. Since 2003, foreign companies have filed 2,215 claims to prospect for unranium on the edge of the Grand Canyon, where mining has been banned since 1908. The Guardian reports: “Denison Mines, based in Canada, already operates one mine in the [Grand Canyon area] with plans to reopen three further mines that were approved in the 1980s without being subject to the environmental review. Denison recently told investors that it will increase production by at least 10 million pounds a year by 2020, some of which will be destined for a new nuclear plant in the United Arab Emirates.” Mining operations could cause uranium to leach into springs and aquifers that then feed into the Colorado river, the drinking water source for 18 million people in Los Angeles, and this contamination could remain for decades.

The Associated Press reported on Feb 15, 2011 that The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will allow a French company, Areva Inc. to pursue a uranium enrichment plant in Eastern Idaho without “significant risks to the environment,” and that a new license will be granted to the Eagle Rock Enrichment Facility because it won’t harm the environment, public or worker health or safety.

Dozens of shuttered uranium mines in Colorado may reopen, and new mines and mills may be built, planners promising thousands of new jobs in a downed economy. These mines would produce and the mill could process 500 tons of uranium daily, second only to the other existing uranium mill in SE Utah. Meanwhile, a Canadian power company has been permitted to use the Great Lakes to ship 1600 tons of radioactive equipment and waste from a decommissioned nuclear plant for recycling in Sweden. The Great Lakes are the drinking water source for 40 million people, and officials throughout the region fear what could happen in case of a nuclear accident during shipment.

The upsurge in nuclear energy production will create an enormous radioactive waste stream without plans for how to deal safely with the waste. Furthermore, waste streams from nuclear production over the past 50 years continue to be a major pollution source that has yet to be remedied. The former Nevada Test Site, 65 miles northwest of Las Vegas, has received 40.8 million cubic feet of low level radioactive waste in many thousands of shipments from all over the country since 1999. The Energy Department estimates 1.6 trillion gallons of groundwater is contaminated with radiation at the site, but nuclear waste continues to be buried there… and the Energy Department continues to plan to use Hanford as a national radioactive waste dump for those weapons and reactor program wastes which it can’t send to Nevada (Heart of America Northwest is suing to overturn that US Department of Energy decision).

Semi truck leaving the Nevada storage site after delivery of radioactive waste.

Since 2000, there have been 5 trucking accidents and dozens of other mishaps like breaches or spills associated with the Nevada storage. Shipments travel through Las Vegas and residential neighborhoods in route. The site houses enough nuclear waste to more than fill the Empire State Building. Government officials claim the waste poses no threat to public health, except in cases of extreme exposure, but low level nuclear waste can cause death or cancer. Sometimes radiocative waste is turned back at the Nevada site, and the shipper has to truck it back to where it came from. Accepted waste is buried in stacked containers, then capped with dirt and vegetation, and the public is generally unaware of these risks and operations. Keep in mind that a recent study in Scotland shows that pregnant women exposed to x-rays or CT scans can increase the chances of childhood cancers. If controlled doses of radiation in a medical facility can cause this harm, what could happen with thousands of truckloads of radioactive waste moving through residential neighborhoods full of children?

The US Energy Department (under the nuclear program) has captured thousands of wild animals since 2009 to test them for radiation poisoning caused by nuclear facilities, including weaponry plants. Test animals include alligators, lizards, ants, rabbits, rodents, insects, turtles and deer. Research estimates cleanup costs of nuclear hazards to exceed $300 billion, and the wildlife is monitored to prevent contaminated animals from reaching human populations. The study cites contaminated rabbits and ants were discovered at the Hanford facility.

Deformity caused by radiation exposure from Chernobyl explosion

Twenty five years after the Chernobyl explosion, studies find the radiation continues to adversely impact wildlife, including visible tumors and decreased brain sizes in birds, yet only half of the money has been raised to date to build a sarcophagus to seal the blown out reactor, and the site is not secure. At least 200 tons of melted nuclear fuel rods remain on site. Studies show that animal diversity and survival of the young continue to decline, birth defects are common, and progress on confinement of the Chernobyl reactor has slowed without funds from the international community.

Meanwhile, back in the US, the states of New York, Connecticut and Vermont have sued the Nuclear Regulatory Commission over a federal policy that allows nuclear waste to be stored at a nuclear power plant for 60 years after it has been decommissioned. The three states challenge this policy because it allows long term storage of nuclear waste without environmental review. Most nuclear plants were developed without sufficient infrastructure for safe long term waste storage. With the millions of gallons of nuclear waste leaking into the ground from failed storage tanks at Hanford, one only wonders how the proliferation of nuclear reactor leaks all around the country will affect our water, our land, and our health.

We are witnessing a hard push at the federal level to advance nuclear energy. Our energy resources and dwindling and something must be done. However, no one seems to know how to deal with the toxic waste stream that could, with a serious accident or spill, cause the evacuations of whole counties or regions and make an area uninhabitable for thousands of years. Shouldn’t there be an exit strategy before we go running full boar down this dangerous path? Can’t we all take a moment to think big picture here, and wonder where we are going to put the radioactive waste that is piling up with the advance of nuclear reactors? Doesn’t it mean anything to our federal officials when no one wants this stuff buried in their state? Its not rocket science to understand there is a collision course about to happen with nuclear energy, and that Chernobyl could recur at any time anywhere on the planet.

I for one don’t think the US Department of Energy intends to really clean up Hanford. They now see it as a cash cow to create some new plutonium fuel hybrid that can be incinerated as a new form of energy. Hanford is no longer a disaster site or mitigation program. It has been transformed into a nuclear factory without complete thought.

What you can do: Heart of America Northwest urges you to write / email your local city electric or Public Utility District (PUD) officials to demand that they put an end to Energy Northwest’s plans to use Plutonium Fuel at Hanford. Our publicly owned utilities make up Energy Northwest – make them listen.

Seattle residents, write Mayor McGinn:

http://www.cityofseattle.net/mayor/citizen_response.htm

Snohomish PUD customers: email the PUD commissioners at:

http://www.snopud.com/?p=1236

Clark County PUD: mailbox@clarkpud.com

Resources:

http://www.foe.org/secret-plan-exposed-use-surplus-weapons-plutonium-washington-state-nuclear-reactor

Friends of the Earth Press Release, Secret Plan Exposed to Use Surplus Weapons Plutonium in Washington State Nuclear Reactor, Feb 3, 2011

http://www.tri-cityherald.com/2011/02/04/1354173/energy-northwest-considering-mixed.html

Energy Northwest considers mixed plutonium fuel, Tri City Herald, Feb 4, 2011

http://hoanw.blogspot.com/2011/01/hanford-nuclear-reservation-becomes.html]

Heart of America Northwest Blog “The Hanford Nuclear Reservation Becomes an American Pop-Icon Amusement Park?”, Jan 23, 2011

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=us-nuclear-revival-starting

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=finding-fissile-fuel

Is a US Nuclear Revival Finally Underway, Scientific American, Feb 16, 2011

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/feb/17/uranium-demand-grand-canyon-biodiversity

Demand for uranium threatens Grand Canyon biodiversity, UK Guardian, Feb 17, 2011

Uranium Plan Pits Prospect of Jobs Against Health Concerns, kjct Channel 8, Feb 6, 2011

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/ontario/bruce-power-gets-approval-to-ship-16-radioactive-generators-through-great-lakes/article1895721/

Bruce Power get approval to ship 16 radioactive generators through Great Lakes, Globe and Mail Canadian Press, Feb 4, 2011

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2011/feb/13/yucca-or-not-nuclear-waste-resides-here/

Millions of tons of low-level material are buried at the Nevada National Security Site — and the state can do little about it , Las Vegas Sun, Feb 13, 2011

http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_9387000/9387395.stm

Chernobyl birds are small brained, BBC, Feb 5, 2011

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12335595

Chernobyl nuclear plant shelter faces cash woes, BBC, Feb 1, 2011

http://news.scotsman.com/health/Xrays-and-CT-scans-on.6715908.jp

X-rays and CT scans on babies pose cancer risk, study shows, The Scotsman, Feb 11, 2011

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/16/nyregion/16nuke.html?_r=1

3 States Challenge Federal Policy on Storing Nuclear Waste, NY Times, Feb 15, 2011

The Hanford Nuclear Reservation becomes an American Pop-Icon Amusement Park?

2011-01-23T18:43:00.000-08:00

The abandoned city of Pripyat, Russia, near Chernobyl

By Dvija Michael Bertish

It’s already happening elsewhere in the world, something that makes a lot of environmentally conscious folks scratch their heads in confusion – Chernobyl, the site of the world’s worst nuclear disaster, has become a tourist attraction. For $100-$185, people can book private tours or participate in group tours of the Chernobyl disaster site under the guise of ecological curiosity. School groups are welcome!

Twenty-three years after the disaster, the area is uninhabitable, surface water is highly radioactive, and the surrounding forests are still red with radiation sickness. The devastating wildfires in Russia last summer choked Moscow with thick bellowing smoke, and fears were raised that the fire would spread radioactive particulates from the Chernobyl site. Somehow, all of this attracts tourists who want to see the devastation first hand. The nuclear accident at Chernobyl killed tens of thousands, wiped out the City of Pripyat where Chernobyl workers lived, and displaced hundreds of thousands more. Even the local dairy cows produce radioactive milk.

Just before the Chernobyl disaster, the city of Pripyat built a brand new amusement park that now stands desolate amidst the graveyard of broken glass and buildings being overtaken by deformed trees. Tour guides bring visitors to the amusement park, where small patches of grass make Geiger counters go crazy and the tourists are whisked away because the area is suddenly declared to be unclean and unsafe for human occupation by mere tour guides.

At the end of the Chernobyl tour, each visitor had to be scanned for radiation, standing between two pieces of metal with hands placed on the sides of a sensor machine. Remember, this area was once a thriving city, with a nuclear power plant nearby.

This real-life situation at Chernobyl exemplifies what could happen at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, and the nearby city of Richland, Washington.

How? If the vitrification plant for High-Level Nuclear Waste has an explosion, or if the High-Level Waste tanks have a major release.

Unthinkable? No. Our federal Energy Department (USDOE) is now designing that plant to accommodate “small” explosions, rather than do the engineering and safety testing to ensure explosions do not occur. The Seattle Times’ front page article (Jan 23, 2011) provides details of how USDOE is proceeding despite concerns raised by numerous outside experts and whistleblowers. http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2014001657_hanford23m.html

Imagine Disneyland with its brightly painted facades, candy wrappers, flowering baskets, and the never ending score of ‘It’s a Small World’ emitted from loudspeakers. It’s a fantasy land, with costumed attendants busily sweeping up any semblance of refuse from pristine sidewalks, and lines of smitten children taking turns to grab a hug from Mickey Mouse. Disneyland is an American ideal of adventurous fun. No offense to Walt, but it appears his fantasy has been usurped and warped by the US Department of Energy (DOE). Not to add salt to a wound, but the consumer advocacy group Center for Environmental Health tested Disney-themed bags sold at Safeway grocery stores, and found some bags had lead levels as much as 17 times above the federal limits for children's products [Tampa Tribune, Jan 12, 2011]. So yes, even the trusted Disney brand can poison children.

At various public meetings, DOE officials have offered that Hanford will become a national park, open to picnicking and tent camping directly over the footprint of nuclear reactor cores. Of course, DOE contends that the area is clean and has been made safe for the future public landmark on the pristine shores of the Columbia River, despite a vast radioactive plume that is already leaking into the River, where fish in the Hanford Reach are reversing sexes and may become unable to reproduce. DOE officials explain that decommissioned facilities should be made available for tours and museums, the surrounding lands will be made available for industrial redevelopment and maybe agriculture – never mind the 43 miles of unlined trenches leaching Hanford’s discarded toxic trash into the soil and groundwater. And the famous half-baked vitrification plant (that is supposed to magically transform millions of gallons of leaking nuclear sludge from ruptured storage tanks into storable glass logs) is not only years behind schedule and triple the budget at more than $12 billion and rising, but is also physically unstable and may be prone to explosions of radioactive gas.

What a lovely and charming premise for Richland property owners and residents. DOE may as well propose a giant fairy castle to be built at the entrance to Hanford, with fireworks shows going off nightly to the cheering hoards, and hungry kids munching on pink cotton candy. Yes America, the federal government has plans to giftwrap Hanford and hand it back to us as an amusement park where the deer and the antelope play.

In December 2010, the Wall Street Journal reported that a rabbit on the 586 square mile Hanford Site was dumping radioactive poop after having consumed radioactive water that leached from some unidentified nuclear waste heap -- not to mention radioactive mice, tumbleweeds, pocket gophers, pigeons, desert termites, harvester ants, toads, swallows, snakes, badgers, fruit flies, and mud-dauber wasps. Wall Street Journal, Dec. 23, 2010 http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704694004576019280235026892.html

Contractors found the answer was to shoot the rabbit (as if there was only one rabbit) with a pellet gun and call it good. Maybe they will stuff the corpse, give it a bow-tie and a carrot in its pocket, and put a neon sign over it that reads “The Real Bugs Bunny,” no offense Warner Brothers.

Back to the Hanford Vitrification Plant

At countless public meetings, citizens have repeatedly raised doubts as to whether the vitrification plant will really work. Construction began years before the design was ever completed, and fledgling equipment and processing hasn’t even been tested. Meanwhile, the federal government allows the leaking storage tanks to continue leaking without a backup plan in case the vitrification plant fails, and the radicactive waste has entered the soil and groundwater, which flows to the River. Federal officials have stated publicly that it would be impossible to remove all of the toxic waste from the soil and groundwater, that a cleanup project of this magnitude has never been attempted, and the snail’s pace cleanup is undertaken to protect worker safety and burdensome financial constraints.

With the local flora and fauna already spreading radioactive nuetrons at Hanford, how long would it be before Richland’s sewage facilities introduce volumes of radioactive waste into the environment caused by exposure to Hanford? After all, the city of Richland’s drinking water source is the Columbia River, downstream from the Hanford facility, and radioactive isotopes are measurable in shoreline seeps entering the River at levels well beyond drinking water standards. DOE’s Environmental Impact Analysis projects widespread radioactive contamination throughout the geographic region for thousands of years, and yet the leaking tanks, one of the primary sources of contamination at the site, still sit there. For how long? USDOE convinced Washington State to agree to let it delay emptying the leaky Single Shell Tanks by 22 years – until the year 2040. Until emptied, the contamination under the tanks can’t be cleaned up… but, of course, USDOE does not plan to clean that up. It will be up to us as active citizens to force them to empty the tanks faster, cleanup the leaks and the wastes in those 43 miles of unlined ditches.

On January 22, 2011, the Seattle Times published a duet of articles regarding the subject of the vitrification plant at Hanford:

Big cleanup questions still loom at Hanford http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2014001657_hanford23m.html

Will giant mixers keep nuclear waste stable? http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2014001657_hanford23m.html

The Seattle Times reports: “But parts of the [vitrification] plant still face risks of bursting into flames, exploding or triggering uncontrolled nuclear-chain reactions, according to project documents, interviews and formal critiques by scientists at other federal agencies…The government's own tests show that equipment may fail or pipes may clog in areas of the plant so hot with nuclear waste that no human or machine could ever get in and make repairs…Fast tracking this project has led to so many late design changes that DOE officials recently claimed the plant was too complex. So they began simplifying the design by scaling back safety measures…For instance, because waste can generate dangerous gases, builders first tried designing and aligning piping systems in ways that prevented fires and mini-explosions. But now, pipes are being designed so that explosions are expected and allowed; plant operators will just have to keep them manageable.”

Yes folks, our world-class Hanford vitrification plant is now being designed to allow explosions of uncontrolled radioactive gas. If not mistaken, this is the same kind of thing that led to the Chernobyl explosion, so the comparison is not far off, and Richland Washington may soon be the American version of Pripyat. Wonder what the Pacific Northwest’s forests will look like in radioactive shades of red?

To make matters worse, an official who spoke up about the potential for explosive disaster at Hanford was fired and forced to file a whistle-blower lawsuit against DOE. Scientists have declared that DOE has grossly underestimated how far a radiation accident could spread at Hanford, but DOE still insists that the public is safe in their hands.

The Seattle Times article notes that official statements include the opinion that the only option is to keep building the vitrification plant on "a leap of faith" that the plant will work. But taking a leap of faith about nuclear safety and radioactive explosions at a government facility is like clapping your hands until Tinkerbell comes back to life. It’s a fool’s errand, and Captain Hook is soon to be swallowed by the Crocodile with the ticking clock in its gullet.

DOE expects us all to have complete and total faith that this untested, unbuilt, undersigned, years late, over budget vitrifcation plant will eventually work so perfectly and never falter or break down, because if it does no human or machine will ever be able to fix it due to the extremely high levels of radioactivity of the waste being processed. REALLY! This plant is the salvation of the western hemisphere’s worst nuclear waste problem? REALLY! If we fall for this, the real world has turned into Disneyland. And if we question DOE’s ethics, we are simply demoted as critics and ushered into the crackpot round file, our concerns ignored.

Suggested Action Steps:

Instead of relying upon blind faith, Heart of America Northwest encourages the following action steps to deal with problems outlined herein. Please contact your Governor, Senators and Representatives with these points:

* Don't delay emptying the leaky High-Level Nucelar Waste Single Shell Tanks by 22 years. Instead, we need to build some new storage tanks, because we can't wait until 2040 to empty tanks or start cleaning up the leaks and deliberate releases under the tanks. Just over a year ago, hundreds of people attended hearings objecting to Washington State’s acceptance of decades of delays in emptying the tanks. Washington State needs to reverse its approval of the delays and begin construction of new holding tanks immediately.

* Stop trying to build the plant without testing the safety and chemical engineering, and reverse the decision that "small" radioactive explosions are acceptable. Congress should bar USDOE from installing the equipment until the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board certifies that the safety plans will work without accepting the possibility of "small" explosions.

* Divert funding away from the vitrification plant to build new storage tanks. This will provide time to properly test the chemical and safety engineering of the vitrification plant to see if it will actually work. Why spend billions on something that isn’t the best known science at this point?

* Demand that USDOE stop trying to plan to dump more waste at Hanford when it won't and can't cleanup the existing contamination. (Yes, while delaying emptying of the Single Shell High-Level Nuclear Waste Tanks until 2040, and proposing NOT to cleanup the leaks - USDOE still insists that it will use Hanford as a national radioactive waste dump after 2020!).

Support Heart of American Northwest’s federal lawsuit to overturn USDOE's decision to use Hanford as a national radioactive waste dump by donating on line at our website www.hoanw.org where you will find more resources for contacting officials and to volunteer.

The Next Generation brings you Hanford Awareness on YouTube

2011-01-10T15:05:00.000-08:00

Students capture the knowledge of Hanford and bring awareness to the history, current clean-up, and effects on environment and health through the use of this short video. I am impressed by its creativity in telling the story and facts of Hanford while inviting the diverse stakeholders in the Seattle area to talk about their concerns. It's critical that more innovative avenues be used to tell the story of Hanford, especially in the digital age, through visual and video means. Thanks to the hard work of these UW students in putting this video together!

Also a few links to YouTube channels featuring Hanford:
http://www.youtube.com/hanfordsite/
http://www.youtube.com/user/HanfordVitPlant
http://www.youtube.com/user/talkingsticktv
- Posted by Shannon Smith, HOANW Volunteer Coordinator and Field Organizer

What's the Penalty and Profit of the Washington Group Int'l Cleanup job?

2011-01-05T12:31:00.000-08:00

At USDOE site in New York, a USDOE contractor, Washington Group International (a URS subsidiary), directed workers to cut corners in order to meet timeline for cleanup of highly contaminated building – leading to large scale, massive, radioactive contamination release to Mohawk River and over 3 acres. The penalty? Just being docked $1.8 million of possible profit payments out of $7.6 million. USDOE still paid the company $5.8 million in profit on the contract for the year – despite deliberate conduct that was likely a criminal violation of environmental laws. Washington Group is also a major Hanford contractor. This is an illustration of the need for oversight, contract reform and prosecution of environmental crimes at USDOE sites.

Posted by Gerry Pollet, Heart of America Northwest

Knolls leaks cost $1.8M
Department of Energy penalizes atomic cleanup firm for air, water releases
By BRIAN NEARING Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 5, 2011

NISKAYUNA -- The federal government has hit the private company in charge of the cleanup of radiation-tainted buildings at Knolls Atomic Power Labs with a $1.8 million penalty because of poor performance that
caused radiation leaks into the air and the Mohawk River.

The U.S. Department of Energy took that action last month against URS, which has been running the cleanup for about two years as part of a $69 million contract to demolish two Cold War-era research buildings.

DOE spokesman Bill Taylor said Tuesday the penalty would come out of the potential $7.6 million maximum bonus that the company could earn under that contract, which is a "cost plus" contract. Cost plus means that DOE pays URS for all its expenses to run the cleanup, and then provides an additional payment as an incentive for good work.

Withholding part of such bonuses is "one tool DOE uses to hold its contractors accountable for poor performance," he said. Taylor said DOE has held back $1.5 million so far from URS, and will hold back the rest from future payments.

Read the rest of the story here

The Future Voices for Hanford: Are They Listening?

2010-12-19T10:37:00.000-08:00

This past quarter, I was fortunate enough to take a class at the University of Washington that focused on the environmental issues and public policies of the Hanford nuclear site. The class gave a holistic overview of the history of Hanford as part of the Manhattan Project up through the Cold War and present day issues. Throughout the class we had numerous speakers come in to give us their perspectives on Hanford and the environmental and human rights policies involved. At the beginning of the class, it was astounding how few people, even at the college level, even knew where Hanford was, let alone the fact that it is the single largest public works project in the U.S. and the most contaminated site in the western hemisphere. Therefore, when it came time to design my final project for the class my goal was education.

A small group of my peers and I put together a presentation for high school students on the history of the Hanford site, who is affected and the cleanup options. We decided to present to four different classes in the Greater Seattle area. (two at Roosevelt High School in Seattle and two at Juanita High School in Kirkland.) Towards the end of the presentations we always included a call to action where we told the students, "You are in high school and that means you are approaching voting age. Now is the time where you need to start learning about issues going on in your country and in your state and deciding how you feel about them. You also need to find out how the people who speak for you, Senators and Representatives, feel about issues too." We made sure to give them the email and office addresses of Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell and encouraged the students to get involved (part of which is pictured to the left).

Prior to our visits to the schools we had some preconceived notions about how effective our presentations would be with the short attention spans that many high school students seem to have. As we expected, not many of the students had any clue what Hanford was, but much to our surprise, we did not simply talk to rooms full of glassy eyed kids counting the seconds until lunch. When they realized how close Hanford is and how serious it is, most of the students seemed surprised and even outraged. That is exactly what we were looking for: passion. We were thrilled that students had questions or at points were even confused as to why cleanup had been neglected for so long and why government organizations were being dishonest about their intentions. These students are the future of Hanford and they care.

I would without a doubt call our visits to the local high schools a success. However, we are only a handful of informed college students and we only spread the word to a few classrooms full of students. Hopefully they will spread the word and do something with the passion that they seemed to be full of during class. But how can we reach more people? The contamination at Hanford will outlast you and me and even the students we reached. Future generations will inherit this problem and they need to know about how it will effect their planet and their people. How can we make sure that everyone knows and has an opinion about Hanford? Knowledge dies if it is not passed on and we need to make sure that Hanford's lethal legacy becomes a call to action and an inspiration for change.

Written by Stephanie Carson. Senior at the University of Washington studying Medical Anthropology and Global Health and Sociology, and Heart of America Northwest volunteer.

What Weighs 300 Tons, Moves 20 mph, Takes 4 Days to get to Hanford, and Heats Nuclear Waste over 2,100 Degrees?

2010-12-11T15:51:00.000-08:00

Migrating all the way from the Peterson Inc. construction plant located in Ogden, Utah, the 125-ton vitrification plant melter concluded its 800-mile journey to its new home at the Hanford Waste Treatment Plant. It is the second and final melter to be assembled at Hanford to begin operations on Bechtel’s plant that will be the world’s largest radioactive waste treatment plan for the United States Department of Energy. What has been termed the Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization plant aims to reduce and process Hanford’s 53 million gallons of radioactive waste.

Vitrification proves to be a bright possibility in reducing the massive amount of chemical and radioactive waste currently stored at Hanford. By combining the waste with glass-forming materials to over 2,100 degrees Fahrenheit, the mixture can be poured into steel canisters for permanent storage. Once in the glass form, the waste is stable and much less reactive.

With an estimated completed construction date of 2016 and fully operational date of 2019, we have several years until we can see the vitrification plant’s possibility. This proposal sheds hope for a possible step in the right direction for fully cleaning up the hazardous waste stored in Hanford. The Hanford Site has 177 tanks of liquid waste, with 67 of them suspected to have leaked in the past, and only 28 double-shell tanks. With a history of attempts at storing this hazardous waste in our Washington state, the ability to do something with what is a dangerous threat to our environment is promising. The repeating history of Hanford is ignoring the danger the nuclear waste poses on the environment, and leaving the responsibility of cleaning up to future generations. While we cannot take back what has been done in the past, we can still make sure these next generations would not have to deal with what we continue to avoid. We should start identifying this waste, and figuring out the best means of cleaning it up. I fervently hope in the cleanup of Hanford, especially the highly radioactive waste, and I believe vitrification can speed this along.

This post was written by Paul Glantz, a Medical Anthropology and Global Health Junior at the University of Washington and a volunteer with Heart of America Northwest.

Join HOANW to Petition WA State for a Cleanup of Commercial Radioactive Waste Dumps at Hanford

2010-12-07T15:03:00.000-08:00

You can take action TODAY by signing the petition asking Gov. Gregoire and WA Dept. of Ecology for clean-up! Please take a minute to sign - below is more information about the potential effects of this commercial radioactive waste dump.

"Contamination from Hanford's radioactive wastes continues to pose risks to the safety of food, fish and people.

Release of radioactive contamination from the site is leaching into the soil and groundwater — endangering the surrounding farmland and water used for irrigation, as well as the health of local citizens and wildlife.

Recently a leak was discovered just hundreds of feet from the Columbia River and less than a mile from the city of Richland's drinking water pumphouse — with contamination levels 10 to 20 times higher than those considered lethal from only one hour of exposure.

What can you do to help prevent future disasters? Sign this petition to Governor Gregoire and the Washington Dept. of Ecology calling for a proper investigation and cleanup of the unlined, leaking commercial radioactive waste dump in the center of Hanford."

Blowing the Whistle at Hanford

2010-11-30T16:54:00.000-08:00

The UW anthropology class recently listened to the story of Hanford whistle-blowers - Ed and Cindy Bricker. Although both worked at Hanford, Ed - a third-generation Hanford worker - was a nuclear technician and Cindy worked in public affairs. Their story is very interesting, and it is helpful gaining a perspective of Hanford from those who worked there.
Before learning more about this interesting couple, it's nice to refresh - or in case you did not previously know - on some of the logistics of Hanford. DuPont was one of the early contractors at Hanford. Fuel elements were reacted with solvents to extract Plutonium and Uranium. The set-up of Hanford involves the facilities being far enough apart from one another so that if something were to occur at one facility, there would be a minimum effect on other facilities. Because of this separation, there is also little worker interaction. From a sociological viewpoint, this seems to be put in place purposefully in order to maintain secrecy in Hanford. However, there is some connection in that the Plutonium and Uranium were removed to other facilities after running through processes i.e. the Plutonium Plant. Another plant was PUREX (Plutonium Uranium Extraction). At the time, it was thought that technology could solve anything.
Despite this structure, there have been issues of safety, as I'm sure we have all heard. Ed Bricker gave an example of his father being exposed to radiation coming at him; he managed to hide behind batteries, which blocked him from radiation. Before, Ed's father was pro-Hanford. His feelings in that regard did not necessarily change, but after this incident he was more involved with union workers.
Cindy is also a Richland native. She says that Richland natives follow the three H's: High School (Richland High School), Hanford, and Heatherhouse (a retirement home). Growing up, people were not worried about Hanford, but they were concerned that they could be bombed because of Hanford's existence. However, she added that Hanford is a self-sustaining area, and is insulated from the recession even now.
During his time working at Hanford, Ed began noticing safety issues. His wife didn't believe him, insisting she would know if there were any. Cindy was working in public affairs, after all. However, after strange occurrences began happening, she realized that he had been right. For example, someone tampered with Ed’s air hose, and he barely had time to rush to a safe room to gasp for air. If Ed complained, he could lose his badge, which would mean losing his job, going bankrupt, and then inability to work in a federal job again.
Ed eventually began reporting the issues to Congress and the press. He had a network set up with other employees to gain more information as well. Eventually, it was found out that Ed was the one leaking information, and Hanford investigators tried to see what he was up to. The investigators would listen to Ed's phone conversations. His son even noticed a red light on the ceiling in their house, which was found to be from a listening device that one can use from outside. There was even a Bricker War Room at Hanford, in which articles were posted. After Congress found out that Ed was being tapped, they finally put their foot down and furiously addressed the issue.
Now, Ed is a bus driver, and he is content with that. Although Ed's whistle-blowing caused tension between him and his coworkers as well as his supervisors, he stuck to his beliefs. It was amazing gaining the perspective of a previous Hanford worker. It is remarkable that one man was able to get the government involved in this issue. As we can see, it can be important to stick to one’s values even in the face of losing a job. I was surprised by the magnitude of danger to workers in Hanford besides simply being exposed to radiation. The narrative also gave me more of an awareness of the extent to which the DOE will work to remain secretive. I’d like to leave you with a question. It is not intended to be rhetorical, and I would like you to consider it as objectively as possible: After learning about Ed, do you feel you can put your trust in the DOE, especially in regards to their accountability and honesty in the clean-up of Hanford?

This post was written by Nazila Dabestani, a Medical Anthropology and Global Health Senior at University of Washington affiliated with Heart of America Northwest.

Using Visual Media to Raise Awareness: Putting a face to the Hanford Nuclear Waste Site and its Environmental Health Impacts

2010-11-19T08:24:00.000-08:00

Dr. Holly Barker, a visiting lecturer at the University of Washington, Seattle campus, is currently facilitating an undergraduate course centered on the Hanford Nuclear Waste Site. For ten weeks, forty students are researching the issue, listening to various perspectives in class and getting out into the community to raise awareness.

On Friday, November 12th, we had a special guest, Mike McCormick, who hosts "Mind Over Matters" on Saturdays & Sundays from 6 to 9pm on KEXP. He is also involved with Public Affairs matters for KEXP and expressed interest in helping students with their outreach efforts.

Students also presented a collaborative music project, which will be part of the 30 minute segment students are putting together for a special radio show on KEXP.

The Hanford interviews presented by Mike were extremely profound. The clip that impacted me the most is featured below. Watch it! He does a masterful job of capturing the human dimension of Hanford and its far reaching impacts on the community.

Written by Jacinta Heath, a University of Washington student focusing on environmental justice issues and the Hanford Nuclear Waste Site

Click here for Mike McCormick, "TalkingStickTV" Channel on YouTube to find more interviews.

The Latest on What's Underneath Hanford: 10X the Legal Dose of Radiation

2010-11-18T15:21:00.000-08:00

Thankfully, Heart of America Northwest led efforts to shut down building 324 and have it cleaned out and removed. As late as 2008, nuclear industry backers and USDOE proposed using the 324 Building for “reprocessing” High-Level Nuclear Waste. In the late 1990s and until 2001, USDOE was promoting use of 324 Building in support of the restart of the FFTF Nuclear Reactor, and again we led opposition pointing to past contamination and risk from Building 324. However, we never expected that leaks to soil were at levels more than ten times the level which will kill every individual in an hour.

In the early 1990s this building and all others in Hanford’s 300 Area dumped their untreated liquid wastes out a sewer line into a long ditch paralleling the Columbia River 800 feet away. The high radiation is apparently due to leaks from the sump for the sewer in Building 324. Heart of America Northwest successfully sued and organized to close the sewer and end dumping of untreated liquid wastes. Sadly, Washington Ecology and EPA sided with USDOE back then, and actually opposed our efforts to shut down the dumping of untreated liquid wastes.

Now, the question is how could USDOE have promoted use of the building for years without knowing about radiation levels so high in the soil under the building that they would kill in minutes??? What is needed Now: an emergency cleanup effort is needed due to proximity to the River and public, and an investigation as to how this was ignored or not found for years. This is going to be very expensive because of the incredible risk from the gamma radiation, and shielding needed. However, this comes at a time when Congressional pressure and the President’s announced response is to cut Hanford Clean-Up budgets in 2012. The waste should not be disposed at Hanford in landfills, it is so hot it should be treated as High-Level Waste, which is what it originated as.
- Gerry Pollet, Heart of America Northwest

Thursday, Nov. 18, 2010
Highly contaminated soil found at Hanford
By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer

HANFORD — Workers have found a nasty surprise beneath a Hanford building just north of Richland -- highly contaminated soil from an undiscovered leak.

"This is extremely high radiation. Nothing else compares in the river corridor," said Mark French, Department of Energy project director for environmental cleanup in the river corridor, the 75 square miles of Hanford along the Columbia River.
Radioactivity has been measured at 8,900 rad per hour, which would be about 10 times the lethal dose on contact, according to Hanford officials. The building where the leak was found is about 1,000 feet from the Columbia River.

Read more from the Tri-City Herald here

Radioactive Rabbit Killed at Hanford... Elmer Fudd at work

2010-11-07T11:35:00.000-08:00

Where’s Elmer Fudd when we need him??? This story on another radioactive rabbit at Hanford has made news across the US. Heart of America Northwest notes: Radioactive Rabbit killed at Hanford was near town and the Columbia River… It is not likely that it was the only one or that it didn’t move over a wide area. It’s hardly the first, and won’t be the last. Heart of America Northwest has two concerns:
1) There’s a significant source of radioactive contamination in the vicinity which may be running into the Columbia via groundwater, or exposing birds (including owls and hawks which eat rabbits), and blowing into the air.
2) This is a warning about USDOE’s unwillingness to plan to remove wastes from 44 miles of unlined radioactive waste burial grounds and many more miles of ditches into which USDOE dumped liquid wastes. Picture three lanes of interstate highway running 44 miles. Now picture this is a ditch with waste fifty feet deep, and then try to justify never cleaning it up. Leaving waste will expose future generations to unacceptably high radiation risks – especially the Tribes who want to exercise their treaty rights to use Hanford’s resources (e.g.,fish,hunt gather plants).

Radioactive rabbit trapped, killed at Hanford
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS November 5, 2010 (Seattle times, Seattle P-I.com)
RICHLAND, Wash. -- A radioactive rabbit was trapped on the Hanford nuclear reservation, but there is no sign any people were exposed to the animal.
Washington state Health Department workers with the Office of Radiation Protection have been searching for contaminated rabbit droppings. None have been found in areas accessible to the public, regional director Earl Fordham said Thursday.
Officials suspect the rabbit sipped some water left from the recent demolition of a Cold War-era building used in the production of nuclear weapons, the Tri-City Herald reported Friday.
Contaminated animals occasionally are found at the nuclear reservation, but more often they are in the center of Hanford, far from town.
The rabbit trapped at the 300 Area caught the Health Department's attention because it was close enough to the site's boundaries to potentially come in contact with people - if it had been caught by a dog or if its droppings were deposited in an area open to the public.
Workers first found contaminated rabbit droppings last week in the 300 Area, said Todd Nelson, spokesman for Washington Closure Hanford, the Department of Energy contractor cleaning up Hanford.
Several rabbits were trapped and the one was found to be highly contaminated with radioactive cesium. It was killed and disposed as radioactive waste, he said Friday. Routine monitoring for radioactive droppings continues.

Read the rest of the article

2010-08-10T11:02:00.000-07:00

Hot news: We file suit to overturn USDOE's decision to use Hanford as a National Radioactive Waste Dump!

Story running in the Tri-City Herald: "Heart of America files suit over sending waste to Hanford."

This week, Heart of America Northwest filed suit in federal court to stop the use of Hanford as a national radioactive waste dump. The United States Department of Energy continues plans to import and bury 3 million cubic feet of radioactive and toxic wastes from nuclear weapons and energy facilities in landfills near the Columbia River at Hanford, despite their own study showing that this action will contaminate the Columbia River and result in numerous cancer deaths over the next hundred years (and even through ten thousand years).

Thousands of truckloads of radioactive waste would go through Portland, Spokane and other communitites. Studies show that transporting radioactive waste can also cause fatal cancers in communities along the routes, even if there are no accidents.

We filed the suit because Washington State has not barred the United States Department of Energy (USDOE) from dumping more waste at Hanford in the Hanford Cleanup Agreement (aka Tri-Party Agreement) and/or in state permits.

We have also found that Washington State allowed USDOE to open a landfill for radioactive and toxic chemical wastes in the 1990's without a permit or public hearings.

Earlier in 2010, we led the effort to turn out hundreds of people in Washington and Oregon to comment on USDOE's new environmental impact statement. In the document, USDOE's own analysis of their plan to import 3 million cubic feet of waste shows cancer risks exceeding 10% for people who would use the Columbia River or Hanford's groundwater as drinking water in the future.

Despite this harrowing revelation, USDOE refused to withdraw the 2004 decision designating Hanford to receive these wastes, so we are forced to go to court.

In July, the New York Times quoted us in an article highlighting Robert Alvarez's study documenting that there is almost three times more Plutonium in the soil at Hanford than USDOE previously estimated.

Our lawsuit comes at a time when USDOE proposes dumping more waste instead of removing and cleaning up the wastes already at Hanford - in leaking, unlined landfills and ditches.

***

Please contact the Governor of Oregon and/or Washington and urge them to join us in suing USDOE to stop their plans to use Hanford as a national radioactive waste dump.

***

HUGE thank you's to our Seattle University and University of Washington Law School externs Jessica Dales, Adam Woodford, Alec Osenbach, Abe Kaul; and Gonzaga University School of Law Environmental Law Clinic Director Mike Chappell and extern Sarah Minkler for all of their hard work on the suit!

Hanford and Yucca Mountain add heat to the Senate race

2010-07-22T13:53:00.000-07:00

Elections are drawing near, and the competition is radioactive. Washington incumbent Patty Murray and challenger Dino Rossi are going head to head over nuclear waste - each focusing on proving that they support reopening Yucca Mountain more.

But beyond the political issue, we at HOANW see problems with reopening Yucca, the Nevada nuclear waste repository recently put on hold by the Obama administration.

Believe me, it's hard to even extend beyond the political issue. Obama supports Nevada senator and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, for whom the closure of a nuclear repository within his state would be a big boost to his election campaign. Washington State politicians seem to be following an Anywhere-But-Hanford mindset, appealing to our citizens by saying "Not In Our Backyard" -- but they simultaneously ignore key facts that should influence this highly crucial process.

We have a predominant issue with Yucca Mountain: the U.S. Department of Energy would be permitted to dramatically lower health standards to levels below the national requirements. If allowed there, the same policies could be applied at Hanford in the future. At Yucca, this would create a harmful excess that would extend 18 km around the repository, leaving waste levels that the EPA and NRC predict are high enough to cause fatal cancer in over 3 out of 10,000 exposed adults (the national standards are set at 1 out of 10,000).

The precedent that continuing Yucca Mountain sets does not bode well for our Hanford Nuclear Waste Site. Groundwater, drinking water, and cancer-causing agent standards exist for a reason, and permitting the USDOE to make exceptions harms all affected communities.

Yucca, like Hanford, is near farms and families. It lies only 12 miles away from Amargosa Valley, a farming community that provides milk across the entire southwest.

Also like Hanford, the federal decision at Yucca will affect Native Americans whose land in the area is protected by national treaties. The Western Shoshone Nation is protected by the 1863 Treaty of Ruby Valley, and violating this protection would put this community at enormous risk from exposure to nuclear waste.

Whether or not Yucca Mountain opens, its capacity would not be large enough to accomodate all of Hanford's wastes intended for a deep geologic repository. "Most of Hanford's High-Level Nuclear Waste has never been planned to go to Yucca Mountain," our executive director Gerry Pollet says. After the opening of Hanford's vitrification plant, 90% of the vitrified waste is planned to stay at Hanford, while the remaining 10% will require a whole new repository, as Yucca Mountain's capacity will by then be fully filled.

Cleanup needs to happen. But cleanup needs to happen without sacrificing health standards, Native American treaties, and food safety regulation.

The senators have invited nuclear waste into their electoral competition, and it certainly is a hot spot guaranteed to reel in votes. But we hope Washingtonians will consider the broader scope, and urge politicians to acknowledge the more complicated factors that should be affecting their decisions.

Gerry Pollet to Testify for Blue Ribbon Commission Today!

2010-07-14T14:55:00.000-07:00

We are excited to see the testimonial of our own executive director, Gerry Pollet, who has been a passionate and indefatigable leader in Hanford cleanup, before President Obama's Blue Ribbon Commission today at 4:20 PST.

President Obama has sought to close Yucca Mountain, the Nevada repository constructed for importing waste from Hanford and other nuclear waste sites. Today, his team visits Hanford, WA, to examine the nuclear waste area and consider the opinions of Hanford experts in their decision.

The commission is interested in exploring alternatives to the Yucca Mountain repository.

Mr. Pollet will present to the commission several key concerns over Hanford's capacity, waste disposal, and detriments of reprocessing this afternoon.

He will explain that the vitrification plant, which would combine waste and glass to form a more easily stored solid, would produce more than could be stored at Yucca Mountain even if it were to open according to schedule. As such, Hanford needs long-term, on-site storage for vitrified products.

Mr. Pollet will explain that this will be needed regardless of Yucca Mountain's status, due to the large quantities of vitrified waste which Hanford would not be able to currently accomodate without increased health and environmental detriment.

Mr. Pollet will also address the concerns over the vitrification plant's capacity. Slated to open in 2019, the plant is currently $8 billion over budget. The capacity will handle only 50% of the 54 million gallons of High-Level Nuclear Waste.
The Department of Energy recommends vitrifying Low Activity Waste as well; this will create releases that will exceed health and water standards of the Columbia River.

Mr. Pollet will emphasize that the capacity of Hanford land to withhold nuclear waste has already been overwhelmed, and contains pre-1970 waste with no plan for removal. He will point out the counterproductive practice of the USDOE's self-regulation, which prevents accurate and effective decisionmaking in regards to waste disposal.

Finally, he will discuss how reprocessing in fact creates enormous quantities of nuclear waste. It created the 54 million gallons of High-Level Nuclear Waste currently sitting in Hanford tanks, with no plan of action for disposal, and will only create more hazardous material if it is chosen as a plan of action.

Check out Gerry's speech this afternoon at 4:20 p.m. P.S.T.! His presentation hopefully will influence the decision of the presidential blue ribbon commission and help Hanford get the "Clean Up First" treatment that we support.

2010-07-12T13:01:00.000-07:00

Coverage of Hanford and Heart of America Northwest in the New York Times!

This weekend, a Sunday article in the New York Times quoted Gerry Pollet, Heart of America Northwest's Executive Director, on the Department of Energy's dramatic underestimates of the amount of plutonium in wastes at Hanford. Read the whole article: "A New Analysis Triples U.S. Plutonium Waste Figures.

Today (July 12, 2010) the Times' "Green Blog" covered Gerry's upcoming testimony to President Obama's Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future on July 14th:

A Watchdog’s Warning on Nuclear Waste

By MATTHEW L. WALD

Agence France-Presse — Getty Images The entrance to Yucca Mountain in Nevada. A commission opens hearings this week aimed at identifying alternative sites or methods for disposing of the nation’s nuclear waste.

When President Obama said he wanted to discontinue work to develop a nuclear waste repository at Yucca Mountain in Nevada, one of the entities that filed suit to protect the project was Washington State, where vast amounts of nuclear waste accumulated at the Hanford nuclear reservation, a weapons site. As I reported on Sunday, a new report suggests that Hanford has a lot more plutonium waste that the Energy Department had acknowledged.

This week, a blue-ribbon commission on nuclear waste established to seek alternatives to Yucca will hold two days of hearings near Hanford. And one of the experts giving testimony will be Gerry Pollet, executive director of Heart of America Northwest, which describes itself as a watchdog group focused on Hanford.

Mr. Pollet’s prepared testimony argues that Hanford has deeper problems than the possible demise of Yucca Mountain. Even if Yucca had opened as planned 10 years ago, it would not have enough space for all of Hanford’s wastes, he argues. The Energy Department is trying to build a factory at Yucca that will take liquid wastes and mix them with molten glass to produce a solid, as a factory at another bomb plant in South Carolina is already doing. But at the moment, there is no final resting place for these “vitrified” wastes.

“Long-term on-site storage capacity for vitrified wastes has always been needed, along with a second deep geologic repository for high-level nuclear wastes,’’ his prepared testimony says.

Heart of America’s main argument is that wastes already buried or dumped at Hanford will, by the government’s own projections, begin turning up in the Columbia River or in underground water supplies at levels hundreds of times higher than drinking water standards in centuries and millenniums to come, and that with no plan in place to clean up that material, the department should not bury any more.

But the group had a message more relevant to the blue-ribbon commission. The panel is studying whether the volume of used reactor fuel could be reduced and the longevity of its radioactive materials cut, by reprocessing it – that is, running it through chemical processes to retrieve materials that could be put into new reactors as fuel.

Heart of America’s argument is that the activity that produced the Hanford wastes was quite similar to this, with uranium from reactors chopped up to retrieve the plutonium created as a side-effect of nuclear fission. The lesson, Mr. Pollet warns, is that “reprocessing creates vast amounts of liquid high-level nuclear wastes.’’

The next comment period...

2010-07-09T13:13:00.000-07:00

Any given day of the year, there's usually at least one aspect of Hanford cleanup that the public can chime in on, which is one of the reasons why we're so busy at HOANW!

Through July 22, you can submit your comments on the proposed extension to an apatite barrier along the Columbia River (in Hanford's 100-N area) to reduce the flow of Strontium-90 into the River. Generally, we think this is a good idea, but we have a few concerns. Check out our new factsheet for more information, and submit your comments to 100NRPP@rl.gov by July 22nd!

Strontium-90 (a radioactive fission product) contamination of the groundwater at Hanford's 100-N area along the Columbia River. The federal Drinking Water Standard for Strontium-90 is 8 pCi/L, and the area shaded red is over 1,000 times the standard. Image from the 2008 Hanford Site Groundwater Monitoring Report

Video of Seattle Workshop!

2010-06-28T15:56:00.000-07:00

Thanks to Mike McCormick of KEXP for taping the public workshop at the University Heights Community Center last Thursday, June 24th. Representatives from the Department of Energy, Washington Department of Ecology and the Environmental Protection Agency and the public discussed the new geographic approach to cleanup on Hanford's Central Plateau; delays to retrieving Transuranic (i.e. plutonium contaminated) waste at Hanford; and who should draft decision documents for how cleanup is done.

The public comment period on these changes and delays ends on Wednesday, June 30th! For more background information, visit www.hoanw.org. Email your comments to TPACH@rl.gov.

2010-06-21T10:38:00.000-07:00

Public workshops on the Hanford Cleanup Agreement in Portland and Seattle this week!

Portland

Wednesday, June 23rd; 7-9pm

Portland State University Student Union, Rooms 327-328

1825 SW Broadway, Portland, OR 97207

DOE will provide parking vouchers for on-campus parking

Seattle

Thursday, June 24th; 7-9pm

University Heights Community Center, Room 209

5031 University Way NE, Seattle WA 98105

Free parking in the lot at the Center

Please join us at our offices for a brief open house immediately preceding the Seattle workshop! Our offices are just 4 blocks from the U Heights Center, located at 1314 NE 56th St, Suite 100. We'll have food and beverages from 5:45-6:30pm, and we hope to see you!

For background on each of the agenda items to be covered at the workshops, review Heart of America Northwest's briefing booklet by downloading it from our website. We'll have copies at both workshops!

Hanford's Vitrification Plant at a Pivot Point

2010-06-15T10:26:00.000-07:00

The Deputy Secretary of Energy, Daniel Poneman, visited Hanford's Waste Treatment Plant yesterday. The Waste Treatment Plant, also called the vitrification plant, or the "vit" plant for short, is a massive public works project on the Hanford Site which will turn the 53 million gallons of High-Level Nuclear Waste into glass. The vitrification process does not reduce radioactivity, but it converts the liquid/sludge waste into glass logs, which are more stable in the environment.

The vitrification plant project, historically, has been fraught with budget and design issues and delays. Below you can view a 60 Minutes expose of some of the design issues from a few years ago:

Thankfully, many of the technical issues previously identified have been resolved. One outstanding issue remains - a technical issue with designing equipment for mixing the wastes, reports Annette Cary of the Tri-City Herald. Department of Energy Headquarters recently has taken more interest in oversight of the project, exemplified by Poneman's visit this week and the appointment of a new federal project manager earlier this spring.

For more information about technical and budget issues with the Waste Treatment Plant, read the Government Accountability Office's 2006 congressional testimony (pdf). Here's a graph from the testimony of the ballooning budget as of 2006. The budget is now $12.2 billion:

Completing the Waste Treatment Plant on a reasonable schedule (the most recent delays pushed back the "hot-start" date to 2019), maintaining its budget, and ensuring that it will function as planned are all in the public's interest to protect the environment and human health. The High-Level Nuclear Waste, currently stored in underground tanks which have leaked over one million gallons, is one of Hanford's greatest threats to the environment and public health, and the Waste Treatment Plant is the major effort to address these wastes. The Department of Energy has acknowledged this, and Poneman reiterated this yesterday, saying, "This project is really important to the nation. It's really important to the department. It is really important to the secretary. We are committed to fulfilling our obligations to the state."

Report Recommends Moving Forward, but Identifies a Number of Weaknesses in Beryllium Program

2010-06-14T15:09:00.000-07:00

The report released June 2nd detailed a 4-month investigation into Hanford's program to address the health problems caused by beryllium. The metal is found residually in buildings, left over from the days when Hanford produced nuclear materials for the Manhattan Project, and causes serious health injuries such as chronic beryllium disease. Workers exposed to beryllium can develop a sensitivity to the metal, which restricts where they can work and, out of medical necessity, can force them out of jobs they may have held successfully for many years.

The report found that many buildings were inadequately marked with beryllium content, leaving workers in danger of inhaling contaminants without their knowledge. The program often failed to address changes in beryllium levels, which can occur as the dust is easily disturbed. Further flaws included insufficient medical attention for workers and a lack of diagnoses of new illnesses, two factors which inhibit efforts to understand the disease and the ability to adapt policies and treatment with this knowledge. Also, the report noted a breakdown of communication across the site that prevented standardized assessment of beryllium levels.

U.S. Department of Energy's Ines Triay emphasizes commitment to improvement and the dedication to "make sure our corrective actions not only are robust but they stay the course."

The report's provisions for the future included setting detailed standards for beryllium levels and contamination and requiring increased attention to fluctuations that can easily occur in these levels. It paid specific attention to medical treatment, urging increased analysis of new cases in order to assess and improve the protection program.

Heart of American Northwest supports the USDOE report's specific recommendations for the future and its function as a step towards increased transparency. We see the clarity and availability of the investigation as important in opening up communication. If we and the public commit to supporting change we believe we can improve the health standards for workers as part of our dedication to making Hanford a safe and rehabilitated place.

To hear KPLU's Anna King's report on chronic beryllium disease, click http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/kplu/news.newsmain/article/0/1/1658583/KPLU.Local.News/Hanford.Officials.Criticized.for.Lack.of.Focus.on.Beryllium

To read the full USDOE inspection report on the Hanford beryllium program, click
http://www.hss.doe.gov/indepoversight/reports/eshevals/2010/2010_Hanford_Beryllium_Reportv3_(final)_(June%202010).pdf

To read our other posts on the beryllium program and investigation at Hanford, follow
http://hoanw.blogspot.com/2010/02/chronic-beryllium-disease-rates.html
http://hoanw.blogspot.com/2010/02/update-on-hanford-beryllium-program.html

Hanford Beryllium Exposure Investigation Released Today

2010-06-02T12:57:00.000-07:00

Affected Workers and Advocates Will Respond To Issuance of Report

Immediately Following Official Briefing

Outside Courtyard

Wednesday June 2, 2010

Official report release briefing begins at 3 PM

WSU- Tri-Cities CIC

On Wednesday June 2^nd at 3 PM, the federal Energy Department (USDOE) will release the report of its four month independent investigation into worker exposure to beryllium at Hanford.

Dozens of Hanford workers exposed to beryllium have developed beryllium disease or “sensitization” leading to the incurable lung disease, which can be fatal. Very small amounts of beryllium dust, which is easily disturbed, can lead to sensitization and debilitating beryllium disease.

The independent investigation was ordered by senior USDOE officials after affected workers, the cleanup watchdog group, Heart of America Northwest, and the Hanford Advisory Board repeatedly raised concerns that Hanford managers and contractors had failed to prevent additional exposures and implement the recommendations from two prior formal reviews dating back to 2002.

Affected workers and Heart of America Northwest will respond to the report’s findings with a media availability in the courtyard outside CIC (River side) (and immediately inside if raining) immediately following the end of the official briefing by senior Energy Department officials Assistant Secretary of Energy Dr. Ines Triay and Glenn Podonsky, Director of USDOE’s Office of Health, Safety and Security.

In 2002, an independent review of exposures to beryllium and the Hanford site’s medical program for beryllium was issued with extensive recommendations by the Hanford Joint Council for Employee Concerns. Hanford site management pledged to implement recommendations to prevent additional exposures and to provide appropriate medical support to affected workers. Those recommendations, however, were never implemented.

In 2004, acting on behalf of potentially exposed workers, Heart of America Northwest filed a petition for an investigation and a “stop work” order regarding work at Hanford facilities with the potential to cause exposure to beryllium. An independent review of the concerns found many were substantiated and a violation of the rules designed to prevent exposures and protect workers. Recommendations from that report were never implemented.

A new beryllium control program was to be implemented, under the rules, by August, 2009. However, USDOE management gave contractors an extension until January, 2010. In January, the program was still not implemented. Heart of America Northwest’s review of the new program on behalf of concerned workers found that the new program would continue to fail to meet legal requirements for protecting workers and ensuring that they have medical “removal” after sensitization.

Areas of concern include:

Declaring facilities “beryllium free” based on inadequate characterization – leading to the likely exposure and disease in additional workers;

Fluor Hanford Corp. characterized beryllium contamination in buildings using a minimum detection limit for beryllium dust which was two and a half times higher than the “action level” set in USDOE’s rule to protect workers from exposure;
Continued inadequacies in testing for beryllium dust and declaring that workers could be in portions of facilities without respiratory protection while other areas of the same buildings have beryllium dust in areas where work was likely to be disturbing the dust.

Procedures requiring workers to return to work in buildings where they faced the potential for additional exposure after being diagnosed as sensitized – in violation of the federal rule.
Failure to provide the required medical support for workers with beryllium disease;
Failure to track where workers were exposed and to use that information to characterize and prevent exposures, and to warn other workers in those buildings of the need to be tested;
Requiring repeated medical exams challenging workers compensation claims after sick workers had already been diagnosed by the nation’s leading medical experts in beryllium.

“Hanford management failed to respond to findings that practices did not comply with federal law standards and were likely to be causing additional beryllium exposures. To protect the health of workers and provide the medical support for the exposed workers,” says Gerry Pollet, Executive Director of Heart of America Northwest, “solutions must include new independent oversight with authority – including the ability to penalize contractors – to implement the latest report on a firm timeline.” Heart of America Northwest also believes that the report referred to the US Attorney for review. “The Assistant Secretary of Energy and the Office of Health, Safety and security have responded forcefully and with excellent transparency to start this investigation and in how it has been carried out.”

For Info:

Gerry Pollet, J.D., Executive Director,

Heart of America Northwest

“The Public’s Voice for Hanford Clean-Up”

206)382-1014 office

Participate!

2010-05-27T09:53:00.000-07:00

Hey! We've got a list of 5 easy ways to get involved in Hanford Cleanup over on our website that you should check out!

And Portlanders, we hope to see you at the PROTECT PORTLAND FROM HANFORD concert tomorrow night, featuring Dana Lyons! The concert's at 7pm at the First Unitarian Church on SW 12th & Salmon; suggested donation is $10; all proceeds benefit Heart of America Northwest and Alliance for Democracy, Portland Chapter.

Obama's Blue Ribbon Commission to see Hanford first-hand

2010-05-26T11:36:00.000-07:00

Yesterday and today, President Obama's Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future is convening for the second time. The Commission is to determine what the US should do with our nuclear waste, and they're coming to Hanford in July to see some of the issues first-hand.

Here's the short article by Annette Cary at the Tri-City Herald:

"Richland: The Blue Ribbon Commission on nuclear waste announced this morning that it plans to visit Hanford July 14 and 15.

The commission was formed at President Barack Obama’s order to recommend what the nation should do with spent commercial nuclear fuel and high level radioactive waste from weapons production, including Hanford’s high level waste.

The waste was expected to go to the planned repository at Yucca Mountain, Nev., but Obama has opposed opening the repository and the commission has been instructed not to consider Yucca Mountain.

The panel stressed this morning that it is not a siting commission and Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., echoed that.

“This will not be an audition for making Hanford a permanent repository for nuclear waste,” she said in a statement.

The panel wants to visit Hanford to meet with a diverse group of people who have long dealt with radioactive waste issues technically, socially and politically, said a commission spokesman.

“While the commission will not be looking at specific repository sites, I am disappointed the Obama administration has dismissed out of hand any discussion of Yucca Mountain and I have made clear I will fight any attempt to make Hanford the site for a permanent repository,” she said.

Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., called the planned visit “a political endeavor.”

“The Blue Ribbon Commission was formed so that President Obama could terminate Yucca Mountain without having to answer the question of what next,” he said in a statement.

Even though the commission has said it is not a site selection committee, Yucca Mountain has been arbitrarily taken off the table, he said.

“Consequently we are left to assume that everything else is on the table,” he said."

Your chance to learn about the changes and delays to the Hanford Cleanup Agreement

2010-05-17T10:30:00.000-07:00

IT'S A WEBINAR!

What's the deal with the Energy Department scheduling to remove waste from Hanford 5 years after the repository it's destined for in New Mexico has started shutting down?

Heart of America Northwest is hosting a webinar to bring you up to speed on this & other issues with the proposed changes and delays to the Hanford Cleanup Agreement.

Please call in to prepare for the upcoming workshops in Seattle & Portland (mid-June); if you don't live in one of these areas, this webinar is your only chance to learn about these issues.

JOIN US:
Tuesday, May 25th, 7pm (PDT)
Dial Toll-Free 1.877.216.1555, passcode: 1040811

download the slides in advance: email Lisa@hoanw.org or check www.hoanw.org

A busy week for Heart of America Northwest

2010-05-14T14:07:00.000-07:00

Another busy week at the Heart of America Northwest offices comes to a close. Here's what we've been up to:

Gerry spent a few days in Richland at committee meetings for the Hanford Advisory Board, where they started the process to develop advice on the proposed changes and delays to the Hanford Cleanup Agreement and Transuranic waste milestones;

We're planning our webinar on these issues for May 25th at 7pm - shoot our field organizer an email if you're interested in joining us!

We put the final touches on our comments to the Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement - check it out! They cover everything from climate change to transportation risks;

We're planning a fun benefit concert in Portland on May 28th with internationally acclaimed singer/songwriter Dana Lyons! The show starts at 7pm at the First Unitarian Church, and we'd love to see you there;

We hung out with Bob Alvarez last night, heard some of his interesting stories and talked about Transuranic Waste - what a good time!

Finally, we stayed on top the Hanford news this week - follow us on twitter so you can always know what's going on! One interesting tidbit is that trucks hauling waste from the Columbia River to the central Hanford landfill logged 15 Million Miles this week. That's a lot of hauling...with more to come as cleanup activities continue.

Comment on Changes & Delays to the Hanford Cleanup Agreement

2010-05-05T09:20:00.000-07:00

Here's Heart of America Northwest's Fact Sheet on the issues (follow link to download pdf). The comment period runs May 3 - June 17th! Email your comments today to TPACH@rl.gov.

Portland's Mayor Adams' Comments on the Hanford EIS

2010-05-04T10:04:00.000-07:00

Office of Mayor Sam Adams
City of Portland

Mary Beth Burandt

DOE Draft TC&WM EIS Comments

TC&WMEIS@saic.com

May 3, 2010

Dear Ms. Burandt,

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Hanford Tank Farm Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). Hanford is the world’s largest and most complex environmental cleanup project, so I appreciate the complexity of the task ahead of the USDOE in proposing actions to clean up this facility.

It has come to my attention that a number of the recommended alternatives in this draft EIS pose serious threats to regional human and environmental health. While the City of Portland is not qualified to comment on the selection of one particular alternative over another in the draft EIS, we ultimately support the alternative that is most protective over the long term of the Columbia River. Portland sits at the confluence of the Columbia and Willamette Rivers, the health of which are vital to the success of this city. I am troubled that the USDOE’s preferred alternatives do not reflect this perspective.

In addition to the downstream impacts of the quality of on-site mitigation and clean-up activity at Hanford, I am significantly dismayed by Section 2.3, Waste Management Alternatives of the EIS and the USDOE’s preferred Waste Management Alternative of Alternative 2, which allows the retrieval of off-site waste for storage at Hanford.

Receipt of off-site waste at Hanford, especially if it contains (as would be expected) mobile long-lived radioactive materials, such as technetium 99 or iodine 129, is projected to have significant adverse long-term impacts on the groundwater, which ultimately impacts the Columbia River. Moreover, the transfer of nuclear waste through Oregon on its way to Hanford poses an unacceptable risk to the health of Portland citizens.

Assuming no accidents, the USDOE itself estimated 816 cancer deaths to residents along the route, and to people in traffic near the trucks, from a similar proposal in 2008. That estimate is based on radiation doses for an adult male and does not account for the possibility of traffic accidents, leakages, or acts of terror along the transfer route.

The City of Portland adamantly opposes the USDOE’s selection of Alternative 2 of the Waste Management Alternatives as the preferred alternative in this EIS. Given that there are alreadymany barriers to quickly and adequately cleaning up the existing nuclear waste at Hanford, it is plainly unacceptable to consider importing additional nuclear waste, even temporarily, from outside of the Hanford site. Furthermore, the actual transportation of that waste by river, rail, or road through Portland would be an unacceptable risk to the City.

We recognize that the treatment of nuclear waste is a regional and national issue that requires the collaboration of all levels of government to develop practical and safe solutions. In objecting to the transport of nuclear waste through this region, I offer this city’s support in developing a plan ror the on-site treatment of nuclear waste to either mitigate the health risks of the waste in transport or to eliminate the need for transport altogether. Treating nuclear waste on-site is the best opportunity for our communities to avoid further health and environmental impacts from waste produced from regional, decommissioned nuclear facilities.

The City of Portland, in solidarity with the City of Spokane, Washington, urges the USDOE to follow through on the agency’s fourth strategic theme: Environmental Responsibility:

Protecting the environment by providing a responsible resolution to the environmental legacy of nuclear weapons production.

The Portland City Council opposes the transportation of massive amounts of nuclear waste through our region and supports the alternatives in the Hanford Tank Farm Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement which are most protective of the long-term health of the Columbia River.

Sincerely,

Sam Adams, Mayor
City of Portland

News Coverage of our letter to Secretary Chu in the Tri-City Herald!

2010-04-30T14:39:00.000-07:00

Groups demand DOE end plans to send waste to Hanford

Article by Annette Cary, Herald staff writer

A coalition of Northwest environmental groups is demanding that Energy Secretary Steven Chu end any plans to import radioactive waste to Hanford.

The Department of Energy agreed as part of a proposed settlement with the state of Washington not to send most types of radioactive waste to Hanford for disposal until the vitrification plant is in full operation to treat the worst waste now stored in underground tanks. That's scheduled for 2022.

The coalition is asking Chu to issue a formal decision that DOE not add more waste to Hanford and conduct a new environmental study if DOE revisits the issue after 2022.

"Citizens of the Pacific Northwest will not tolerate off-site waste exacerbating Hanford's existing threats to the Columbia River and people of the Northwest," said the letter signed by leaders of Columbia Riverkeeper and Heart of America Northwest. It also listed 19 other organizations.

A new 6,000-page draft environmental study -- the Hanford Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement -- shows that importing radioactive waste for disposal at Hanford would significantly increase pollution in ground water beneath the nuclear reservation.

Under some scenarios that appear likely, the amount of certain long-lived radioactive isotopes that would be imported and buried at Hanford would account for as much as 90 percent of the releases of that isotope to the environment, according to the state. Some of the worst contamination could occur 1,000 or more years from now.

The draft study prepared by DOE looks at sending 107,000 cubic yards of radioactive waste, some mixed with hazardous chemicals, to Hanford for disposal. That waste would be covered by the moratorium until about 2022.

The environmental groups want a revised draft of the study to be released that does not propose adding off-site waste to Hanford low-level and low-activity radioactive waste to be buried at Hanford landfills.
The waste at Hanford now is left from the past production there of plutonium for the nation's nuclear weapons program.

DOE agreed in the study that importing waste to Hanford with specific amounts of certain radioactive isotopes, particularly iodine 129 and technetium 99, could have an adverse impact on the environment.
It suggested two alternatives: Robust treatment of imported waste such as turning it into glass before burying it at Hanford or restricting disposal of waste with those isotopes.

Additional groups signing onto the letter are the Sierra Club Cascade Chapter, the Oregon Sierra Club, Spokane Riverkeeper, Washington Chapter of Republicans for Environmental Protection, Northwest Environmental Defense Center, Friends of the Columbia Gorge, The Lands Council, Center for Environmental Law & Policy, Oregon Toxics Alliance, Rosemere Neighborhood Association, Eastern Washington Voters, Hanford Challenge, Portland Chapter of the Alliance for Democracy, Hanford Watch, Hells Canyon Preservation Council, Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility, Oregon Physicians for Social Responsibility, Olympic Environmental Council and Silver Valley Community Resource Center.

PRESS RELEASE

2010-04-29T12:16:00.000-07:00

Northwest Environmental, Public Health Groups Urge Energy Secretary to Withdraw Decision to Use Hanford as a National Radioactive Waste Dump

Over twenty leading environmental and public health groups in the Northwest sent a letter today to the U.S. Secretary of Energy, Steven Chu, urging him to withdraw the federal Department of Energy’s decisions to use Hanford, WA, as a national radioactive waste dump. The organizations, which include Columbia Riverkeeper, Heart of America Northwest, Sierra Club and the Washington and Oregon Chapters of Physicians for Social Responsibility, object to Energy’s plan to truck three million cubic feet of radioactive and toxic waste to Hanford for permanent burial. Perched on the banks of the Columbia River, Hanford is already the most contaminated site in North America.

Heart of America Northwest & Columbia Riverkeeper spearheaded this effort. Read the entire press release here.

Obligatory EARTH DAY post

2010-04-22T10:53:00.000-07:00

Today is the 40th anniversary of Earth Day, a testament to the enduring power of grassroots environmental advocacy! In honor of this occasion, please join Heart of America Northwest's grassroots efforts to prevent Hanford from becoming a national radioactive waste dump & protect future generations from nuclear waste. Take action today with the future in mind.

TAKE ACTION: Comment on the Hanford "Cleanup" Plan

Many of you attended public hearings and submitted comments on the Department of Energy's plan to import 3 million cubic feet of radioactive & mixed waste to Hanford - buried in its 6,000 page Environmental Impact Statement on Hanford cleanup! If you haven't spoken out yet, the comment period now ends on May 3, 2010, so you still have time!

It's easy to give a public comment! Heart of America Northwest has complied resources to help you comment, including our Citizens' Guide, and you can email your comments right now to TC&WMEIS@saic.com

TAKE ACTION: Urge your Senators to keep nuclear out of the Climate Bill

Next week, the Senate Climate Bill is set to be unveiled, and a vote is expected on it sometime this summer. Now is the time to contact your Senators and urge them to not support the billions in subsidies for nuclear power expected to be included in the bill. Nuclear Information and Resource Service has provided an easy format for contacting your Senator - take action right now!

A special note for our friends in Washington State: Senators Murray & Cantwell are on the top tier target list for this special effort. If any state's Senators should lead the fight against nuclear power and reprocessing, it's ours, based on the lessons to be learned from Hanford. Please take a minute today to contact Senator Murray & Senator Cantwell.

Oregonians can thank Senators Wyden & Merkley for opposing nuclear subsidies and reprocessing.

Environmental activism has changed dramatically over the last four decades; now a lot of organizing efforts are done simply by sitting at a computer. So, after you send a few emails today, go outside and remember what it's all about.

So who's in charge of Hanford's vitrification plant?

2010-04-19T14:53:00.000-07:00

[vit-ri-fy (v): to change or make into glass or a glassy substance, especially through heat fusion]

If you've paid attention to Hanford issues for any amount of time, you're probably aware of the largest public works construction project in the United States that is currently progressing on site: the Waste Treatment Plant (aka the vitrification plant). The project has been fraught with delays, design issues and is billions of dollars over its original budget.

Last week, multiple news stories reported that the manager of the U.S. Department of Energy's Office of River Protection at Hanford was no longer to oversee the construction of the vitrification plant. Shirley Olinger, as the manager of the Office of River Protection, had been in charge of overseeing the vitrification plant project since 2007.

A US Department of Energy (DOE) memo shifted the project to the DOE Headquarters in Washington, D.C. According to Annette Cary at the Tri-City Herald, "The federal project director for the vit plant at Hanford, Guy Girard, now will report to Dae Chung, DOE principal deputy assistant secretary for environmental management, according to a March 31 internal DOE memo." A DOE construction project review in August 2009 hinted that organizational changes were in the works in regard to Hanford's vit plant.

However, last Friday, April 16th, a second memo and organizational chart was released showing that Girard, the federal project director, is still to report to Olinger, the Office of River Protection manager. Yet, ties to DOE Headquarters in DC have been significantly strengthened; again, the Tri-City Herald reports, "A full-time program manager for the vit plant has been named for DOE headquarters. In that position, Ken Picha will oversee modification of the budget and evaluate program performance, among other responsibilities."

So why does any of this matter? The vitrification plant is designed to stabilize Hanford's nastiest High-Level Nuclear Wastes by mixing them with molten glass and storing them in steel canisters. It is widely accepted that vitrifying these wastes is the most protective action for the environment and human health. Construction of the vitrification plant was originally supposed to be completed next year, by 2011, but the time line has been delayed until at least 2019, with full operations commencing in 2022. Because this project has a long history of mismanagement of funds and resources (long before Olinger was put in charge), Heart of America Northwest has repeatedly advocated for increased accountability to finish on time and without wasting taxpayer dollars.

New Central Hanford Cleanup Deadlines

2010-04-01T12:57:00.000-07:00

The Tri-Party Agreement, the legally binding agreement between the U.S. Department of Energy, Washington State Department of Ecology & the Environmental Protection Agency that dictates Hanford cleanup, is undergoing yet some more changes. An article in today's Tri-City Herald, "DOE may face new central Hanford cleanup deadlines," outlines the basics of the changes.

The proposed changes include tighter deadlines for USDOE to cleanup contaminated groundwater in central Hanford, an area called the Central Plateau to those familiar with Hanford lingo. As a trade off, USDOE would have a longer schedule for completing remediation of the contaminated soil ("vadose zone") in the Central Plateau.

The Central Plateau (the tan area on the map to the left) is where the High-Level Nuclear Waste tank farms are located. The cleanup & closure of the tank farms is proposed in the draft Tank Closure & Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement (TC & WM EIS), which is still out for public comment until May 3, 2010. However, at the public hearings on the TC & WM EIS, the Department of Energy representatives were adamant that USDOE would not be cleaning up the deep vadose zone under the tanks, which is highly contaminated.

The new milestones for the Central Plateau, however, allow time for USDOE to conduct research and investigate new technologies on how to clean up the contaminated soil before it recontaminates the groundwater. It just goes to show that there's a big difference between the Environmental Protection Agency stating that it's possible & they just need time and USDOE claiming that there's no way and they're not even going to try.

Last year, Heart of America Northwest objected to the fact that some of the changes to the Tri-Party Agreement included unenforceable "target dates" in lieu of enforceable milestones. We have the same concern about this proposal, and will review it thoroughly. We will also be debriefed on the Central Plateau plans at the Hanford Advisory Board meeting in Portland next week, so stay tuned for updates!

Seattle Times Cover Story on Hanford

2010-03-31T15:58:00.000-07:00

On Monday, March 29th, the Seattle Times cover story featured Hanford:

Yucca Mountain out: Hanford nuke waste has nowhere to go

We encourage you to read the above article, and we were excited to see Hanford on the front page of the Times...it's been a while!

Our Field Organizer, Lisa Van Dyk, wrote a letter to the editor in response to the article that the Times chose not to publish in print or on the website. So, we're choosing to self-publish it here:

Editor, The Times:

Thank you for printing the front page story on Hanford & Yucca Mountain. However, the plans for and status of clean up at Hanford is a much more relevant issue for Washingtonians than the status of Yucca Mountain, as only a portion of Hanford’s High-Level Nuclear Waste would have been sent there for disposal.

The article expresses concern about Hanford receiving offsite radioactive waste as a result of Yucca Mountain’s closure, but fails to inform Washingtonians about the Department of Energy’s (DOE) current proposal that is out for public comment through May 3rd. In the Hanford draft Tank Closure & Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement, the DOE outlines its plans to import 3 million cubic feet of radioactive & mixed radioactive/hazardous waste to Hanford, regardless of the status of Yucca Mountain.

Adding any more waste to the most contaminated site in the Western Hemisphere without first bringing the existing wastes into compliance with the law is unreasonable, and will greatly impact the environment and public health. The public can comment on this plan through email (TC&WMEIS@saic.com) or U.S. Mail (TC & WM EIS, P.O. Box 1178, Richland, WA 99352).

Lisa Van Dyk, Seattle

What do you think of the Seattle Times article & this letter to the editor? What would you have said differently?

Obama's Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future meets for the first time

2010-03-25T11:28:00.000-07:00

Today and tomorrow, in Washington, DC, President Obama's Blue Ribbon Commission on America's Nuclear Future is meeting for the first time. This Commission is expected to make recommendations within 18 months on what to do with the United States' High-Level radioactive waste. This includes Spent Nuclear Fuel from commercial power reactors, as well as some of the defense waste currently stored at sites like Hanford. In fact, Hanford bears the bulk of the nation's liquid High-Level Nuclear Waste in aging and leaking underground storage tanks. Those tanks have already leaked over a million gallons into the soil, to contaminated the groundwater and the Columbia River. So, you can see why Hanford stakeholders are invested in the outcomes of the Blue Ribbon Commission.

The US has a long history of nuclear waste policy, which Don Hancock of the Southwest Research and Information Cen ter, says has "effectively failed." The Blue Ribbon Commission, according to Hancock, presents an opportunity to "chart a path for how to start over to develop a scientifically sound, publicly acceptable program."

You can watch the Commisson's proceedings via streaming webcast if you're so inclined. If that's too much, take a minute to read up on what experts have to say:

Max Powers' 3-25-2010 article, "Nuclear Deja Vu"
Bob Alvarez, "Advice for the Blue Ribbon Commission"

Yucca Unfit Site

2010-03-23T13:48:00.000-07:00

This op/ed appeared in the Tri-City Herald on March 23, 2010:

"While those of us in Nevada certainly sympathize with people in the Tri-Cities and in other areas (like South Carolina) over concerns about radioactive waste continuing to be stored at federal facilities in your neighborhoods, your March 14 editorial, "Joining forces against Yucca Mountain decision," is just plain wrong in asserting that there is no technical justification for U.S. Department of Energy's decision to terminate the Yucca Mountain repository project.

Yucca Mountain is a terrible site for a high-level nuclear waste disposal facility. The technical and scientific problems are legion, ranging from a highly corrosive subsurface environment, rapid groundwater flows through the subsurface, a highly fractured and seivelike host rock, evidence of geologic recent volacnic activity, its location in a major eqrthquake area, and many other problems. Yucca was selected in 1987 for purely politial reasons in spite of know technical deficiencies.

Moving radioactive waste from less-than-ideal storage locations in other states to a pattently unsafe repository at Yucca Mountain does not solve the problem. It compounds it. The fact that DOE has now (although 20 years late) acknowledged that the Yucca site is unfit and is moving, through the creation of the Blue Ribbon Commission, to find real solutions is something that should be encouraged and supported."

Joseph C. Strolin, Planning Adviser, Nevada Agency for Nuclear Projects, Office of the Governor

BREAKING NEWS!

2010-03-17T15:42:00.000-07:00

On Friday, March 19th (the original end date of the public comment period on the Tank Closure & Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement) the Department of Energy is going to announce in the Federal Register that it is extending the comment period 45 days, until May 3, 2010!

This has incited much speculation around the Heart of America Northwest offices as to why USDOE is extending the comment period. Perhaps, just maybe, USDOE is changing its preferred alternative to make Hanford a national radioactive waste dump! Obviously, this is just speculation, but stay tuned & keep those comments coming!

Related posts:

Why you should comment & what you could say (3.16.2010)
Update on Hanford hearings around the Northwest (2.25.2010)
Tri-City Herald finally reports what HOANW's been saying for months, years (2.17.2010)
Factsheet: Tank Closure & Waste Management EIS (1.12.2010)

Why you should comment & what you could say:

2010-03-16T14:18:00.000-07:00

The public comment period on the Hanford Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement is extended until May 3, 2010.

If you haven't spoken up yet, you still have time!

What is this document?

This Environmental Impact Statement (weighing in at a mere 6,000 pages!) outlines many crucial aspects for the future of cleanup at Hanford, the most contaminated site in the Western Hemisphere. However, the document outlines the Department of Energy's plans to begin transporting offsite radioactive waste to Hanford - making Hanford a national radioactive waste dump - while also abandoning contamination in the soil.

Why should I comment?

You should comment because you are a resident of the Pacific Northwest; you care about the Columbia River; you think it is wrong to leave nuclear waste for the next generations to deal with...the list goes on and on. The public pressure that has gained momentum over this document is reaching the top officials at the U.S. Department of Energy. The more comments that are united in opposing using Hanford as a national radioactive waste dump & advocating for complete cleanup of the High-Level Nuclear Waste tanks, the stronger the message!

What could I say?

Phrase your comments however you'd like, as long as your main message is clear. We're submitting comments that:

Oppose using Hanford as a national radioactive waste dump;
Advocate for complete cleanup (clean closure) of the High-Level Nuclear Waste Tanks;
Urge the Department of Energy to cleanup the contamination from High-Level Nuclear Waste tank leaks and deliberate discharges.

For more in depth analysis of the Environmental Impact Statement, see Heart of America Northwest's Citizens' Guide and/or webinar slides.

How do I submit my comment?

Email your comments right now! Send them along to TC&WMEIS@saic.com.

Heart of America Northwest's doing a webinar!

2010-03-09T10:34:00.000-08:00

Heart of America Northwest is pleased to announce a free webinar to help you formulate & submit comments on the Hanford draft Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement! This highly complex, 6,000 page document contains the U.S. Department of Energy's plans to use Hanford as a national radioactive waste dump & to abandon existing contamination at Hanford.

You are invited!

Monday, March 15th, 7:30pm PST

Dial toll-free: 1.877.216.1555

enter passcode: 1040811

Slides are now available for download at www.hoanw.org!

Last night concluded the series of 8 public hearings around the region on this Environmental Impact Statement - if you were unable to attend a hearing, or if you simply want to write really awesome comments, call into the webinar on the 15th!

Hanford Follies - Graphic Recording

2010-03-06T18:03:00.001-08:00

The Hanford Follies workshop this morning was a smashing success! We laughed & got serious as we talked about Hanford and the Environmental Impact Statement, and we are fired up and ready to go for the Seattle public hearing on Monday! The image above is the workshop - graphically recorded - by Anne Jess. Thanks to everyone who came out!

And, don't forget, the Seattle public hearing is on Monday night (March 8th)
Seattle Center - Northwest Rooms
6pm: pre-hearing workshop & open house
7pm: hearing & public comment

We'll have Anne's graphic recording work at the hearing, too! Join us to stand up for a safe & clean Pacific Northwest and oppose Hanford becoming a national radioactive waste dump.

Help us spread the word - email your friends, call 5 people, promote the hearing on facebook...whatever works for you!

Update on Hanford Hearings around the Northwest

2010-02-25T10:06:00.000-08:00

Six of the eight hearings on Hanford as a national radioactive waste dump are now over - as Heart of America Northwest turns to focus on the final two (Eugene on 3/1 & Seattle on 3/8), we also have a few thoughts & triumphs to share about the past hearings.

This week saw the La Grande, OR hearing on Monday and the Spokane, WA hearing on Tuesday nights. They both went very well with larger than expected turnouts in both cities, thanks to intense organizing efforts by stakeholders, including HOANW. There were around 80 in attendance in La Grande & 60 in Spokane! In Spokane, we had three City Council Members testify (Bob Apple and Amber Waldref are on our board of directors so it wasn't a surprise to us that they gave great testimpny, but it was a surprise to the USDOE)! See the article in the Spokesman-Review, which ran prominently at the top of the local section yesterday morning.

The misrepresentations from USDOE continue: We had another testy exchange with USDOE when the manager in charge of the hearings, Mary Beth Burandt, told the audience that Spokane was not on the truck routes to Hanford. Sound familiar? Just like in Portland! However, Spokane City Council Member Bob Apple exposed this as false during the Q and A period, forcing Burandt to admit that radioactive waste trucks very well might come through Spokane on I-90.

Burandt and WA State's spokespeople continue to use language implying that the current legally enforceable moratorium on importing waste will not end with the issuance of this Environmental Impact Statement. However, they've repeatedly failed to note that the proposed extension of the moratorium (until the vitrification plant operates) is simply an unenforceable USDOE promise.

What's next?

Eugene: HOANW's Executive Director, Gerry Pollet, is heading to Eugene today to give a pre-hearing workshop at a conference at the University of Oregon. Brent Foster, now with the OR Attorney General's Office and formerly with Columbia Riverkeeper, and Tom Carpenter of Hanford Challenge will be joining me at our workshop at 10:30am on Saturday.
The Eugene hearing is Monday, March 1st at 7pm at the Hilton. As always, HOANW will be hosting a pre-hearing workshop to help you prepare comments at 6pm.
The final hearing is in Seattle on March 8th (7pm at Seattle Center - Northwest Rooms, Lopez Room).
HOANW & Hanford Challenge are hosting a FREE, fun & interactive workshop featuring local improv actor Matt Smith on Saturday, March 6th, 10:30am at Hugo House.

Submit Your Comments!
The comment period runs through March 19th - Email your opposition to making Hanford a national radioactive waste dump right now! For more background information, see HOANW's Citizens' Guide.

Matt Smith + Nuclear Waste = Funny

2010-02-19T14:47:00.000-08:00

Hello, Seattle! Join Heart of America Northwest & Hanford Challenge at the nuclear event of the year:

The Tri-City Herald finally reports what HOANW's been saying for months, years

2010-02-17T10:36:00.000-08:00

IMPORTED WASTE WOULD INCREASE CONTAMINATION IN HANFORD GROUNDWATER

Annette Cary of the Tri-City Herald reported Tuesday on the devastating environmental impacts of making Hanford a national Radioactive Waste Dump - a drum Heart of America Northwest has been beating ever since the draft Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was released in October 2009. And it's absolutely correct - the U.S. Department of Energy's own analysis shows that importing more waste to Hanford will cause perpetual groundwater contamination for thousands of years.

Here's a graphic from the EIS itself, reproduced in a recent Oregonian article, showing the spread of Iodine-129 in the groundwater at Hanford over the next 1,500 years:

For more resources on the EIS & the dates of the 4 remaining public hearings (La Grande, Spokane, Eugene & Seattle), visit www.hoanw.org.

Update on Hanford Beryllium Program

2010-02-17T09:56:00.000-08:00

On Tuesday, February 16th, members of the Hanford Advisory Board, workers with Chronic Beryllium Disease and Hanford officials met with top U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) officials to discuss the status of Hanford's beryllium protection program. Beryllium is an metal that was historically used at Hanford, and when current workers inhale beryllium dust, they are put at risk for developing an incurable & fatal lung disease. At least 32 Hanford workers have been diagnosed with Chronic Beryllium Disease to date.

The top DOE officials yesterday said that they will follow all of the Hanford Advisory Board's advice (pdf) to the letter - to formulate a well-credentialed independent review panel of the program. Heart of America Northwest hopes that the panel is balanced and that changes to the program are quickly implemented to protect Hanford's workforce. It is absolutely unacceptable that the rates of Chronic Beryllium Disease among Hanford's workers are increasing by 10% annually.

To read the Tri-City Herald article on yesterday's meeting, click here.
Read the previous blogpost - Chronic Beryllium Disease Rates Increasing Among Hanford Workers

Senator Ron Wyden's (D-Ore) Statement on Hanford Cleanup

2010-02-15T11:07:00.000-08:00

Portland, OR - Senator Ron Wyden (D-Ore) issued the following statement (through staff) at the 2/10/2010 public hearing in Portland on the U.S. Department of Energy's draft environmental impact statement for cleaning up storage tanks and managing waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation:

"The Department of Energy has been working on Hanford clean-up for more than 20 years, and at best they have another 20 years to go, and probably a lot more. Now, the DOE is proposing to bring even more radioactive waste from other DOE clean-up sites to Hanford for disposal, making this toxic cesspool even worse. That puts Oregon at risk twice: First when the waste is trucked through Oregon and again when it seeps back via the Columbia River. If I have said it once, I have said it dozens of times: Hanford should not be turned into a 'national sacrifice zone.' I am not satisfied with the progress at Hanford and I am absolutely opposed to DOE bringing more waste to Hanford since they have been unable and unwilling to clean-up the radioactive mess that is already there."

A Tour Inside Hanford's Tank Farms

2010-02-08T10:19:00.000-08:00

King5 News' environmental reporter, Gary Chittim, had two spots on Hanford that aired on Friday, February 5th. The first, a discussion of stimulus dollars at Hanford (the single largest recipient of stimulus funds in the nation), and the second, an interesting look inside Hanford's tank farms. Go to -3:38 to watch the clip on Hanford:

Chittim calls the tank farms "a radioactive slow seep into the Columbia River," and reminds the public of the fact that the Department of Energy doesn't have plans to finish emptying the leaky, Single Shell High-Level Nuclear Waste tanks until 30 years from now.

Chronic Beryllium Disease Rates Increasing Among Hanford Workers

2010-02-05T09:57:00.000-08:00

This article will be on the desks of top U.S. Department of Energy officials in Washington, D.C., Friday morning. Heart of America Northwest hopes that this increased pressure will result in an independent investigation of Hanford's beryllium protection program.

A total of 32 Hanford workers have been diagnosed with chronic beryllium disease, an incurable lung disease caused by the inhalation of fine beryllium dusts that settle in the lungs and cause damage. Workers at Hanford are exposed to beryllium dust in some buildings because the beryllium metal was used in the production of fuel for some of the reactors. The Tri-City Herald reports, "Workers with an allergy-like sensitivity to beryllium are at risk of developing potentially debilitating and fatal lung disease if exposed to fine particles of the metal."

The Hanford Advisory Board has been concerned about the beryllium protection program at Hanford, and is expected to issue advice instructing the Department of Energy to order an independent review of the program, rather than reviewing it internally.

Increasing rates of chronic beryllium disease at Hanford mean that the "status quo is not adequate," according to the Board. Worker safety at Hanford is of utmost importance, and is something for which the Hanford Advisory Board and Heart of America Northwest have fought for decades.

HOANW on CNN!

2010-01-29T13:03:00.000-08:00

Check it out! Heart of America Northwest's Executive Director, Gerry Pollet, was interviewed by CNN's Patrick Oppmann about stimulus funding and Hanford cleanup:

IMPORTANT DATES: Stop Hanford from becoming a National Radioactive Waste Dump

2010-01-28T10:47:00.000-08:00

IF THERE IS ONE HEARING YOU ATTEND ON HANFORD, THIS IS IT!

Pre-hearing workshops & open houses at 6pm, Hearings begin at 7pm

PDX WORKSHOP! Monday, Feb. 1st
7:30pm, Fremont Whole Foods, Studio 1
15th & Fremont
Sponsored by Heart of America Northwest - join us to walk through the impacts of the EIS on health and the environment & to prepare your comments

Boise, ID
Tuesday, Feb. 2nd
Owyhee Plaza Hotel

Hood River, OR
Tuesday, Feb. 9th
Columbia Gorge Hotel

Portland, OR
Wednesday, Feb. 10th
Lloyd Center Doubletree

SPOKANE WORKSHOP! Wednesday, Feb. 17th

7:00pm, Spokane Community College
Lair Auditorium
Sponsored by Hearrt of America NW, with SANE

LaGrande, OR
Monday, Feb. 22nd
Eastern Oregon University
Hoke Union Building

Spokane, WA
Tuesday, Feb. 23rd
Red Lion Hotel at the Park

Eugene, OR
Monday, March 1st
Eugene Hilton & Conference Center

SEATTLE WORKSHOP! Saturday, March 6th

In the morning - time & location TBA
Sponsored by Heart of America NW & Hanford Challenge

Seattle, WA
Monday, March 8th
Seattle Center Northwest Rooms
Lopez Room (1st & Republican St)

Climate Change & Economy Portend Revival of U.S. Nuke Power?

2010-01-25T10:21:00.000-08:00

This special report run by McClatchey News on the politics and costs of nuclear power in the federal climate change legislation is well worth reading.

As the report points out, Congressional momentum is for expanding loan guarantees to provide 50% of the cost of construction for 8-12 new nuclear plants on top of the guarantees already passed under Bush; and, to allow nuclear to get the bulk of all funding from a new "clean energy" bank. While we were celebrating the end of USDOE's Bush Administration GNEP impact statement and program (Global Nuclear Energy Partnership program to double the number of nuclear reactors in the US accompanied by reprocessing as a claim to solve waste problems), the nuclear industry simply moved ahead to position the same proposal within the federal climate change bills. Progressive Democrats can not pass climate change legislation without support of pro-nuclear Democrats and some Republicans (whose price is massive support flowing to nuclear).

Wind power in the West is already significantly less expensive per kwh (kilowatt hour) than new nuclear power; and, of course, wind doesn't have to be bought in $8 - $10 billion packages. Conservation and investment in efficiency are far more cost effective. Essentially, without massive subsidies that starve all other energy investment, new nuclear power projects can't get off the ground.

The cost of reprocessing nuclear fuel rods doesn't even begin to get factored into these cost estimates.... nor does any of the cost estimates include how the liquid High-Level Nuclear Wastes from reprocessing will get treated and disposed. That's where our "lessons from Hanford" should be heeded - for the High-Level Nuclear Wastes that are threatening the Columbia River were produced via reprocessing.

Heart of America NW has been one of the few NW voices objecting to massive loan guarantees and what amounts to a nuclear industry bank account in the pending federal climate change legislation. Unlimited access to a "clean energy bank" without limits per project or for nuclear energy overall, plus more loan guarantees as being lobbied for, will starve conservation, solar, wind and true renewables. This is also a key reason to be critical of the abandonment of efforts to pass WA State Climate Change legislation and the lack of effort for state funding mechanisms for investment in true renewables and conservation. WA, OR and CA still have the opportunity to both set the marker for congressional action and to have a program with investments from cap and trade and emission auction fees invested in conservation and truly renewable clean energy that would be in place long before a federal program (and, once enacted will almost certainly not be preempted). Instead, state elected officials with tacit agreement from some quarters of the environmental community have washed their hands and said we'll just let Congress act. That's neither leadership on Climate Change nor a prescription for action and investment to meet our State's goals for reducing emissions.

What can you do? Email or tell your Senators and US Rep that you want climate change legislation that does not pour your money into the least cost effective option - nuclear - while starving true clean, renewable energy programs. Remind them that claims of nuclear being "clean" if the waste is reprocessed don't survive a visit to Hanford where we have no solution in sight for the liquid High-Level Nuclear Wastes produced from reprocessing. Write Governor Gregoire and Governor Kulongoski and your legislators saying you want Northwest states' climate change legislation put back as a priority - which is a good investment for our economy as well as for the health of our planet and children.

More Hanford downwinders claims to go to trial

2010-01-21T12:03:00.000-08:00

A recent article in the Tri-City Herald reports that Spokane judge William Fremming Nielsen will hear more claims concerning health problems resulting from radioactive emissions from Hanford. There are nearly 2,000 pending claims in the 19-year-old case. The judge said he will select a total of about 62 cases of hypothyroidism, a disease in which the thyroid is underactive, and thyroid cancer. Since 1991, when the case was filed, only 10 claims have been resolved through litigation, and Nielsen previously showed little interest in these cases, indicating that they would be too time consuming and costly. But he has recently stated that the plaintiffs and defense are far apart in their settlement talks, and they seem far from any agreements. So the defense has asked the judge to begin randomly selecting cases to move the process along.

The defense represents early Hanford contractors, who belive that they plantiffs' claims are weak. The plaintiffs argue that radioactive iodine from Hanford, which concentrates in the thyroid, was responsible for at least 636 cases or hypothyroidism represented by the plaintiffs, as well as many cases of thyroid cancer.

The defense and plaintiffs disagree on methods of measuring how much exposure was received, and how much is necessary to be considered responsible for hypothyroidism or thyroid cancer. It is generally agreed that exposure of more than 40 rads is dangerous, but parties disagree as to whether levels below 40 rads can be dangerous.

For more information, visit the Hanford Downwinders' Website.

High profile fail for USDOE

2010-01-18T08:40:00.000-08:00

Stimulus job count lowered by almost 50%

The US Department of Energy (USDOE) announced it was lowering its claims of stimulus jobs created or saved at Hanford by over 50%. This announcement comes in response to the Hanford Advisory Board's Budget and Contracts Committee meeting agenda and Heart of America Northwest Executive Director, Gerry Pollet, preparing questions asking how USDOE was counting jobs.

A Tri-City Herald article covered the lowering of the job count last week. Here, Heart of America Northwest provides you with fuller information:

USDOE at Hanford was including in its estimate of jobs created or saved an estimate of jobs from purchases and offsite contracts. The rationale for this does not hold up to sound economic scrutiny. Essentially, this was an invitation for double counting of jobs. So, if a contractor needed to buy a new backhoe for Hanford, the contractor might say that the need was caused by increased stimulus funded work. Then, an estimate was made of the new jobs created at the backhoe factory based on cost. This had no basis in reality.

Pollet raised this question after seeing the figure being touted by USDOE (actually increased to over 3,200 at year's end) compared to the Hanford site's total employment figures. The total employment was not up anywhere near 3,200.

Why is this significant? It appears that USDOE is a lousy investment in job creation due to the high cost of work and the contracting structure, high overhead costs, etc. One new teacher position in WA State with a fully funded classroom costs $75,000. Many construction jobs create a new FTE for less than that. Yet, each job created at Hanford costs over $200,000, and this figure will increase.

USDOE spent $273 million of stimulus money at Hanford through the end of November 2009. At the end of December, based on work hours reported funded with stimulus funds (based on 40 hours of work for each claimed FTE) there were only 1,423 jobs created or saved. By the time one full year of salary has been paid to these employees, USDOE will have spent at least another $90 million and more likely $150 million. Yet, few additional employees will be added with stimulus funds in the coming months.

USDOE's choice of "shovel ready projects" - demolitions - for stimulus funding should have led to far more job creation. Essentially, USDOE stimulus funds are going to neither creation of jobs or to the highest priority environmental and safety work which should be funded. USDOE says the highest safety and environmental priority it has in the nation is the emptying of Single Shell High-Level Nuclear Waste tanks. Yet, no stimulus funding is going toward speeding the emptying of tanks.

FACT SHEET: Tank Closure & Waste Management EIS

2010-01-12T14:41:00.000-08:00

Heart of America Northwest has produced a fact sheet for general background information on what's in the Tank Closure & Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement, and what some of the environmental and health impacts discussed in it are. Let us know what you think!

How did we get here?

2010-01-06T12:53:00.000-08:00

Tracing the paper trail leading to this draft Tank Closure & Waste Management EIS

The draft Tank Closure & Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement (TC & WM EIS), although released to the public in late October 2009, has a history that spans a decade. The years from 1999-2009 tell a story of the Department of Energy (USDOE) continually attempting to dump radioactive and hazardous wastes at the Hanford site, while the public actively and persistently fought back. And it’s not over, folks, for the document currently under consideration proves that USDOE plans have not changed at all, and USDOE still intends to use Hanford as a national radioactive and hazardous waste dump as soon as it will be politically ok to do so.

In 1999, USDOE released the Waste Management Programmatic EIS, in which USDOE identified Hanford and the Nevada Test Site as the two regional disposal sites for low-level radioactive & mixed low-level radioactive wastes. Despite the fact that these decisions were not based on meaningful analysis of the impacts of adding wastes to these two sites, USDOE forged ahead with site-specific Environmental Impact Statements – the draft Hanford Solid Waste EIS was released in 2003.

Over 500 members of the public showed up at the hearings on the Hanford Solid Waste EIS in 2003 to oppose the selection of Hanford as a national radioactive waste dump. Disregarding the public’s comments, USDOE started to ship highly radioactive plutonium wastes (RH-TRU) to Hanford. Heart of America Northwest and Columbia Riverkeeper sued and successfully won a federal court injunction against USDOE; the two citizens’ groups were later joined by Washington State.

Without revisiting the 1999 decision, USDOE implemented it with the release of the final Hanford Solid Waste EIS in 2004, including the preferred alternative to dump tens of thousands of truckloads of radioactive and mixed radioactive hazardous waste from the nation's nuclear weapons production facilities at Hanford. The State of Washington expanded the existing lawsuit to include the inadequacy of the EIS because it lacked groundwater modeling and flow analysis.

The same year, in 2004, Heart of America Northwest filed Initiative 297 to stop Hanford or other contaminated sites from having more mixed radioactive hazardous wastes dumped while existing wastes violate state hazardous waste laws and are contaminating the environment. I-297 passed with 69.09% of the vote - the highest vote total for any ballot initiative or candidate in Washington State history to that date – sending an overwhelming message that the citizens of Washington do not want Hanford to become a national radioactive waste dump.

Washington State and USDOE finally settled the lawsuit in July 2005. This settlement has proven essential in Hanford history, as WA secured a moratorium on shipping offsite waste to Hanford (with seven “minor” exceptions) until a new, final EIS is issued. The recently released TC & WM EIS is the draft of the final EIS to end the moratorium, and is supposed to be USDOE’s “re-do” of the failed Hanford Solid Waste EIS. Unfortunately, tens of thousands of pages of environmental impact statements later, public outcry is again needed to reinforce the decades-old message that Hanford should not be a national radioactive and hazardous waste dump.

Hanford gets an "A" on year-end report card?

2010-01-05T10:17:00.000-08:00

NW Public Radio and KUOW ran the following story on the year-end grade that Hanford officials gave themselves - an "A", believe it or not! However, the reporter simply took the contractors' year end email and used it for what was supposed to be a news story with the addition of Skinnarland's quote for Ecology.

Imagine giving an A:

to a polluter that the state had to sue due to violations of a consent decree timeline;
for 22 years of delay in emptying Single Shell Tanks;
proposing to never investigate or cleanup tank leaks and 40 miles of unlined trenches;
and, formally proposing to use Hanford as a national waste dump.

Heart of America Northwest encourages you to email the KUOW news director, Anna King (the reporter) and WA Department of Ecology's director Ted Sturdevant using the points outlined above and asking for more insightful reporting to the public.

Following is the text of the short blurb Anna King ran on KUOW on December 30th:

It's been a big year at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation. Cleanup there was one of the biggest items in the federal stimulus package. And the largest federally funded construction project right now — Hanford's Vitrification plant — reached the halfway point. But are we closer to cleaning one of America's dirtiest places?

If Hanford were a student, Washington State Ecology's Ron Skinnarland says he'd give the site an "A" on its end of the year progress report. Here's Hanford's list of got–it–done in 2009: A newly negotiated Tri–Party Agreement that sets deadlines for cleanup. A massive factory to treat nuclear waste is 50 percent complete. And 51 buildings were taken down. Ecology's Skinnarland says without the stimulus funding many projects would have been put off.

Ron Skinnarland: "We have a lot of decisions that Ecology and the EPA, the regulatory agencies, have to make to make sure that we can spend all this money efficiently and do the right thing. So we still have a lot of work ahead of us. But we are glad we have the opportunity."

DOE officials say in 2010 they will continue to shrink the contaminated footprint of the nuclear site. Also, they want to focus on improving worker safety in one of the most complicated and dangerous worksites in the world.

I'm Anna King in Richland.

Quick Overview of Environmental and Health Impacts of USDOE's "preferred alternatives"

2009-12-22T13:26:00.000-08:00

The draft Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement, released in October 2009, outlines the Department of Energy's "preferred alternatives" for the future of Hanford cleanup. These include:

Never cleaning up the million gallons of deadly radioactive waste leaked from Hanford's High-Level Nuclear Waste tanks - despite the fact that contamination is moving faster towards the Columbia River than USDOE presiously claimed was possible;
Never characterizing, or cleaning up, the 40 miles of unlined soil trenches into which DOE dumped massive amounts of chemical and highly radioactive wastes - including plutonium;
Not dismantling the FFTF reactor, instead "entobming" it;
And, adding even more waste to Hanford's existing problems.

The impacts to public health and the Columbia River of these "preferred alternatives" are nothing short of deadly - for future generations of our children, Native American tribes with treaty rights to live along the River at Hanford, and for the Columbia River itself. Heart of America Northwest's expert team is busy reviewing this 6,000 page document. Our team includes hydrogeologists, retired regulators and risk assessment experts. We're finding that USDOE's own hidden analysis within the 6,000 pages reveals:

Plutonium contamination entering the Columbia River will grow to over 300 times the Drinking Water Standards over the next thousand years due to existing wastes - this is not including the impact of dumping even more wastes at Hanford;
Using Hanford as a national waste dump - USDOE's own analysis shows - increases the cancer risk from groundwater tenfold - to 100 times WA State's cleanup cancer risk standard;

But no matter how many deaths are projected from USDOE's plans, USDOE is still free to adopt its "preferred alternatives."

It is up to us - with your help - to stop this from happening!

Hanford plutonium finishing plant ready for demolition

2009-12-18T10:16:00.000-08:00

Thursday, December 17, 2009, marked the first time the plutonium finishing plant at Hanford was open those without high security clearance. Media, community leaders and plant employees were invited inside to look at the plutonium storage vaults and celebrate the finalization of shipping the high-security materials from the plant. Until now, this plant was one of the most secure sites in the entire United States.

2/3 of the plutonium for the US's nuclear arsenal during the Cold War passed through the finishing plant, which is now slated for demoltion. The plutonium discs, the size of hockey pucks, were stored in canisters the size of coffee cans in a giant rack inside the plant. Read the full Tri-City Herald article here.

Hanford B Reactor passed over as National Park

2009-12-17T11:22:00.000-08:00

In 2004, the Bush administration mandated a study of four historic Manhattan Project sites to determine their eligibility for inclusion in the national park system. The four sites considered were:

Hanford Site (WA)
Los Alamos National Laboratory (NM)
Oak Ridge Reservation (TN)
Sites in Dayton (OH)

Five years later, in fall 2009, the National Park Service released a summary document of the findings of its study and a list of "preferred alternatives." The Park Service has ruled out the potential of including all four sites together as a Manhattan Project unit because of the vast distances between the sites and other limiting factors. In addition, the Hanford Site B Reactor, the nation's first production-scale nuclear reactor, was dismissed as an option for a stand alone national park. New Mexico's Los Alamos National Laboratory is the only site remaining under consideration.

If you're interested in being involved in the conclusion to the study, the National Park Service is holding a series of public meetings in late January and early February 2010 at each of the sites under consideration. Information is on page 7 of the study summary.

New cancer package for Hanford workers approved

2009-12-17T10:48:00.000-08:00

An article in today's Tri-City Herald reports that the automatic compensation granted to Hanford employees who developed cancer due to radiation exposure will be expanded. Hundreds of past claims that were previously denied will be reviewed again, in addition to 340 pending claims.

A new exposure cohort will be developed, granting "automatic $150,000 compensation and medical coverage [...] to any Hanford worker who was employed for at least 250 days from Oct. 1, 1943, through June 30, 1972." Workers during these years may have been exposed to polonium, thorium and neptunium. Dozens of cancers qualify for the extended coverage.

The issues represented in this article remind Hanford stakeholders of the necessity to ensure both effective cleanup of environmental contamination while arduously protecting workers' safety on site.

HOANW's Final Comments on the Proposed Settlement

2009-12-14T14:33:00.000-08:00

The comment period on the Proposed Settlement & Consent Decree and TPA Changes ended last Friday, December 11th. Heart of America Northwest worked hard to generate turnout at each of the 5 public meetings held in Washington and Oregon and encouraged everyone to submit comments. Thank you to everyone who attended hearings and gave comments!

Our comments are now posted on our website - check them out! Now we wait for Washington State and USDOE to issue their responses to the comments and see what their next actions will be.

What's next? USDOE released the draft Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement (TCWMEIS) in late October. Heart of America's attention is now turned to reviewing and analyzing the EIS and we are preparing a Citizens' Guide and organizing efforts for the public hearings to be held on it in early 2010. Stay tuned for updates & more information!

Hanford Bracelets, Just in Time for the Holidays!

2009-12-10T08:34:00.000-08:00

There is always a way to raise money for a good cause! A Hanford-focused anthropology department class at the University of Washington has created bracelets that show how simple projects can raise money for a good cause. The bendable copper bracelets saying STOP DUMP, HANFORD, WA concisely state what advocates for clean-up work for continuously.

To order a bracelet, contact rdgaspard1@gmail.com.
All proceeds go to Heart of America NW; while supplies last.

McCain claims Hanford stimulus funds a waste

2009-12-09T10:01:00.000-08:00

Hanford ranks #10 out of McCain's top 100 wasteful stimulus projects, according to a list released Tuesday, December 8th. The Hanford cleanup, McCain and fellow Republican Senator Coburn claim, has received "billions of dollars of stimulus funding that have been wasted, mismanaged or directed toward silly and shortsighted projects." The Tri-City Herald reports here.

Topping their list of concerns is the fact that of the 177 underground High-Level Nuclear Waste storage tanks at Hanford, none of them has been permanently closed. They are right to be concerned about this fact, and Heart of America Northwest is even more concerned that the State of Washington agreed to 22 more years of delay in emptying these leaky, outdated tanks in the recent settlement proposal that is under comment period until this Friday, December 11th. Submit your comment today - email TPACH@rl.gov.

Demolition of first Hanford processing canyon begins

2009-12-08T11:24:00.000-08:00

An article in the Tri-City Herald over the weekend reports on the initiation of a multi-year project do demolish a "processing canyon" at the Hanford site. A processing canyon is a long, narrow plant that chemically separated plutonium from irradiated fuel rods, similar to the nuclear "re"processing that is a current topic under hot debate. Hanford is home to 5 such processing canyons; this first one to be demolished was never actually used to extract uranium and thus is the least contaminated of the Hanford canyons.

The article comments on the final destination of contaminated materials from the canyon:

Plans call for leaving radioactive waste permanently in place as the lower level of the plant is made into a giant waste receptacle for contaminated equipment from the plant.

Then the ceiling and walls will be collapsed and covered with an environmentally protective earthen cap that would form a huge berm standing 40 feet high along the length of the former processing canyon.

Hanford pulls down big stimulus dollars

2009-12-07T10:40:00.000-08:00

An article in yesterday's Oregonian again analyzes the effect of $2 billion in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) stimulus dollars at the Hanford nuclear waste dump in Southeastern Washington. The Hanford site is the "single biggest recipient of federal stimulus contracts."

However, the influx of stimulus dollars, that doubles Hanford's annual operating budget, will not significantly expedite cleanup, an effect the public strongly desires. Plans to empty Hanford's outdated and leaking single shell tanks that store 53 million gallons of High-Level Nuclear Waste are unaffected by stimulus dollars. In fact, in a legal settlement reached in August 2009 between Washington and the US Department of Energy (USDOE), deadlines to empty these tanks - that have already leaked over one million gallons of radioactive waste and contamination is spreading towards the Columbia River - were delayed by 22 years.

The Oregonian article quotes Heart of America Northwest's Executive Director, saying, "They could be spending the money on emptying those tanks," says Gerry Pollet..."What should be the highest priorities of the Energy Department are not getting funded with the stimulus."

Pollet is bothered as well by the inequity of spending so much stimulus money at Hanford when other areas are hurting for jobs. "You could pay for an enormous number of teachers and an enormous number of health clinics with that $2 billion," he says.

Heart of America Northwest believes that stimulus funds should have gone to amending USDOE's legal violation and catching up for years of delay in emptying the single shell tanks, instead of to the many projects on which USDOE is spending money.

While USDOE hypes talk of cleaning up the contaminated groundwater flowing to the Columbia with stimulus funds - only 7.5% of the stimulus funds at Hanford are directed towards groundwater cleanup. Hundreds of million of dollars are going to projects to demolish buildings that do not pose high environmental of safety risks, but do make for nice photographs of "progress".

Simultaneously, USDOE "saved" over 400 million dollars by unilaterally slowing down the emptying of the High-Level Nuclear Waste tanks in the past five years. USDOE stopped or slowed down other important projects in violation of cleanup schedules, and USDOE has yet to commit to using sitmulus funds to attempt to reach compliance with the prior schedules.

The comment period on the proposed settlement ends this Friday, December 11th. For more background information and details on the proposed delays, read Heart of America Northwest's Citizens' Guide to the Settlement. And don't forget to submit your thoughts, directly to the agencies, by sending a quick email to TPACH@rl.gov!

One million years of isolation

2009-12-01T10:52:00.000-08:00

In an interview conducted by BLDGBLOG, Abraham Van Luik, a US Department of Energy geoscientist currently based at Yucca Mountain, Nevada - a controversial site chosen for nuclear waste storage - highlights the specialized aspects of his position. The interview illuminates the technical nature of nuclear waste storage from a geographical standpoint and is a great introduction to nuclear waste issues.

When questioned about the design of the Yucca Mountain facilities and other projects of similar magnitude, Van Luik emphasized the need to access all available storage resources. What geologies are available in the country in question? For instance, Sweden plans to use granite to isolate waste because that is the material most readily available in its geologic landscape. Meanwhile, France chose to use clay. In the United States, however, Van Luik argues that there are "many possible sites" for radioactive storage. In a situation where there are multiple potential sites, Congress tends to favor the most cost-effective option. As a result, cose was a significant factor in selecting Yucca Mountain as the nation's nuclear waste storage site.

He goes on to explain that the storage design involves "wrapping the stainless steel packages, in which we would receive the spent fuel, in Alloy 22 and sticking them inside this mountain with a layer of air over the top." Alloy 22 was chosen because it will stand up well to the top layer of oxygen. Additionally, it is compatible with Nevada's dry climate.

Van Luik notes that other nations, with the exception of Mexico, are approaching storage quite differently by using only salt, only granite or only clay. The United States' "philosophy of containment" for nuclear waste is that "two systems" must be used. He goes on to add that although it is not feasible to do a realistic mock-up of Yucca Mountain, the DOE has tested safety assessments by simulating how water moves through ranges and how spent fuel dissolves. When asked to comment on waste transportation, Van Luik assured the interviewers that specially made containers and cargo trains will ensure that "everything is shielded." Workers as well as the public will be protected from exposure. Van Luik then explains that there are no current plants to seal the repository's exterior door because these openings have little to do with how the mountain funtions; rather than harming the environment, these openings will serve as ventilation shafts, which are needed because the waste is so hot.

Currently, however, the world's 270,000 tons of spent nuclear fuel have no final repository. The Obama administration slashed funding for the Yucca Mountain project earlier in 2009, and has yet to appoint a Blue Ribbon panel to assess what to do with the US's nuclear waste. Finland is leading the world in actually moving on with it's repository - as this recent IEEE article illuminates.

Fair Trade Holiday Shopping Event!

2009-11-30T12:20:00.000-08:00

The event will take place at Ten Thousand Villages Seattle - 6417 Roosevelt Way NE #101, Seattle, WA 98115.

This is a great opportunity to get some holiday shopping done while supporting fair trade and Hanford cleanup. 15% of the net sales will be donated to Heart of America NW. We hope to see you tomorrw evening!

Hanford Summit in the works

2009-11-30T12:16:00.000-08:00

A week before Thanksgiving, a Seattle-based group, Hanford Challenge, organized a meeting with a number of interested parties and stakeholder groups to discuss how to move forward in the dialogue on Hanford cleanup and plan a broadly based summit. The morning of the meeting, the Tri-City Herald ran an article framing this preliminary meeting as Western Washington vs. Eastern Washington, a significant setback to expanding and building trust between the participants. The issue with the article is that the Herald used Hanford Challenge's own words, taken directly from their website:

Western Washington and Portland are "concerned about Hanford's environmental impact past, present and future," the advocacy group says on its website.

Tri-City residents "are less concerned with environmental impacts," it said, and characterized Tri-City groups as focused on jobs and economic development.

"This polarization has interfered with the ability to hold a dialogue about the important issues facing the region when it comes to Hanford," the group said, describing Hanford environmental cleanup as "broken."

This language is most likely aimed at a first-time visitor to the website, an audience unfamiliar with the dialogue which already occurs with surprising consensus at the Hanford Advisory Board on the values that should drive Hanford cleanup and which the US Department of Energy is loathe to adopt and apply. As Heart of America Northwest's Executive Director, Gerry Pollet, works in the Board and serves in the Board's leadership, we have seen the entire range of stakeholders on the Board forcefully join for a common vision.

This vision is what Heart of America has been the leading voice for: "Clean-Up First," the most basic environmental principle. No more waste should be added to Hanford until existing wastes are brought into compliance and cleaned up. In addition, everyone on the Board agrees that USDOE should investigate and remove the massive quantities of Plutonium and other wastes in soil and over 40 miles of unlined ditches at Hanford, and that groundwater needs to be cleaned up and restored for future use.

Ideally, the Hanford Summit will create a space for meaningful dialoge and will reinvigorate openness at Hanford. Much discussion is needed on an investment in sustainable, clean energy at Hanford tied to the cleanup mission and vision, for the benefit of the local and regional economy. The planning meeting had good participation from USDOE managment, the Washington Department of Ecology, the Environmental Protection Agency and a range of stakeholders.

And today, Tom Carpenter, the Executive Director of Hanford Challenge, has a guest editorial in the Tri-City Herald, arguing that everyone's interest in cleanup and protecting future generations is the basis for common ground.

Raging Grannies Sing at Seattle Hanford Hearing

2009-11-25T13:02:00.000-08:00

At the Seattle hearing on the proposed Settlement between WA and USDOE on November 12, 2009, the Raging Grannies were the first to give a formal comment, recorded here!

You can still submit comments to the agencies on the settlement until December 11th. Email your thoughts directly to TPACH@rl.gov and check out Heart of America Northwest's Citizens' Guide for more information!

Hanford Stimulus Funds Update

2009-11-23T10:08:00.000-08:00

"If you want to win the stimulus sweepstakes, it helps to have one of the planet's nastiest toxic waste sites in your backyard" [Mike Stuckey, MSNBC]

Why has Hanford received stimulus funds while some cities have been overlooked?

In this article on stimulus funding for Hanford cleanup, Mike Stucky argues that the Benton County area, which is home to the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, deserves stimulus dollars because government-employed or contracted workers are working, doing everything from "sealing up old reactors" to experimenting with vitrifying radioactive waste. Stuckey explains that Obama's American Recovery and Reinvestment Act allows the Department of Energy, which oversees Hanford (and other nuclear waste sites') cleanup, to use stimulus funds to accelerate clean-up efforts. This year, Hanford received an extra $1.96 billion to aid cleanup, in addition to the $2 billion that the project receives annually.

The stimulus package has certainly boosted the Tri-Cities economy. In fact, Hanford employment is projected to peak in 2010 at 10,800 workers. A decline (towards 2,100 employees) is not expected to take place until 2050, when most of the environmental cleanup work is expected to be completed. The stimulus money has created or saved the equivalent of 2,500 jobs. The creation of jobs has spurred retail sales in the Tri-City area, keeping the economy well-lubricated. This economic upswing during a national depression suggests that the Tri-Cities is "one of those communities where it [the stimulus package] has worked exactly like it was supposed to," as expressed by Carl Adrian, president of TRIDEC.

Unfortunately, other cities across the US have not fared as well. Elkhart County in Northern Indiana received only $49 million in stimulus funding, compared to Benton County, WA's $1.99 billion. This is despite the fact that the counties are economically and demographically similar - both counties are dependent on single-sector economies and agriculture, the cost of living in comparable, etc. So why the discrepancy in the amount of stimulus funds awarded to each county? Stuckey asserts that government money is better spent on clean-up activities because Hanford is an environmental threat & a hazard to those around it; in addition, the project cleanup project is ongoing, so the extra funds provided a burst of momentum, and jobs did not have to be created from scratch.

Heart of America Northwest is interested too in the compensations the top officers of the contractors at Hanford receive - this data was required to be released as part of the stimulus package and is available on recovery.gov. Tom Zarges, the top officer of the Washington River Protection Solutions LLC, is compensated $1,955,909 annually. Another interesting aspect of the distribution of stimulus funding is that of the 10 largest contracts awarded, 9 are related to nuclear waste cleanup. Stuckey is absolutely right - the biggest asset for getting stimulus funds turns out to be the nation's nastiest wastes.

Communicating danger of nuclear waste to future civilizations

2009-11-18T14:22:00.000-08:00

People familiar with Hanford and its clean-up struggle already know how dangerous and critical the radioactive contamination is, but what about everyone else? How are we to keep informing people of this nuclear mess in order for future generations to understand the necessary precautions of radioactivity? During a 2004 cleanup operation at the Hanford nuclear site in Washington state, personnel digging through a trench uncovered a safe containing a glass bottle. And inside the bottle was white sludge later determined as plutonium. The potential danger of this accessible bottle of plutonium, which could have been discovered by nearly anyone, is a startling idea.

Juliet Lapidos published an article on Slate illustrating these points and how there is a need for getting the information out there efficiently to individuals, centuries from now. Language and culture are constantly evolving and differ all across the world. The English language has continually changed throughout the centuries, and "universal symbols" aren't so universal. A skull-and-crossbones is one example that is too ambiguous: Even today, it connotes danger only to some. Latin Americans may associate it with the Catholic Day of the Dead holiday. Mere markings and symbols to warn people that hazardous materials are nearby is inefficient for their understanding. People also need to know what the extent of such hazardous dangers are; stumbling upon a radioactive waste site cannot be weighed the same as spilling some toilet cleaner. Sticking a "KEEP OUT" sign on fences of nuclear sites has a minimal chance of deterring trespassers.

So far the committees in charge of accessing this information haven't done the most satisfactory job. Thousands of Washingtonians still have no idea what or where Hanford is. It's important to keep a long-term outlook when making plans for radioactive waste; plans that will include a wide variety of people from all over the world. Anthropological, political, economical, biological, and linguistic ideas all offer points of view that can lead to a encompassing solution.

Seattle Crowd Opposes Hanford Cleanup Delays

2009-11-17T10:04:00.000-08:00

Yesterday, the SeattlePI.com published a great article on the Hanford hearing held last Thursday. Reporter John Stang nailed the essence of the hearing with a few selected quotes from the members of the public who gave formal comments at the hearing:

"It seems we're getting the short end of the stick," said UW Masters of Public Health student Erin Hurley;

"We're here tonight because the Department of Energy has broken its word (on the original 2028 completion deadline)," said Gerald Pollet, director of the Hanford watchdog organization Heart of America Northwest.

And another ringer: "Also, an unresolved question exists on how the 1 million gallons of highly radioactive leaked tank wastes should be tackled." Heart of America Northwest is beginning to review the recently released draft Tank Closure and Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement, in which the US Department of Energy proposes to never cleanup the majority of contamination that has leaked from Hanford's High-Level Nuclear Waste Tanks, plutonium and other wastes which USDOE deliberately discharged from the tanks and Plutonium processing facilities into the ground! Check back for updates!

Don't forget that it's not too late to comment on the proposed Settlement, the subject of the hearing last week. Submit comments via email to TPACH@rl.gov; Heart of America Northwest encourages you to copy your comments to Governor Gregoire (WA), Governor Kulongoski (OR) and Attorney General McKenna (WA).

Seattle Public Hearing 11-12-09

2009-11-13T11:09:00.000-08:00

The Seattle hearing on the proposed Hanford clean-up delays was held last night. We were excited to see that it was a packed house, with around 100 in attendance! Thanks to the classes at the University of Washington for showing up and giving great comments!

The first public comment was given by the Seattle Raging Grannies. They prepared a statement that strongly denounced the proposed settlement for its 22 year delay in emptying the High-Level Nuclear Waste from Hanford's leaky Single Shell Tanks & because it does not include an enforceable ban preventing the importation of off-site waste to Hanford. Then, they sang a brilliant song (I hope to get the lyrics to post here soon). That much said, they stole the show.

Over 20 unique individuals gave a formal comment, all of them concerned about the clean up delays. The majority of the comments also included statements about how disappointed the public is that the State of WA didn't secure an enforceable ban on off-site waste as a part of this settlement.

Last night marked the end of the series of five public hearings held during this comment period. But don't despair! You can still submit your own thoughts directly to the agencies by emailing them to TPACH@rl.gov. See our Citizens' Guide for more information and Heart of America Northwest's comments and concerns.

Ecology employee named new director

2009-11-11T09:59:00.000-08:00

On Monday, Washington Governor Chris Gregoire named Ted Sturdevant the new director of the Department of Ecology. Sturdevant replaces Jay Manning, who recently became Gregoire's chief of staff. For the past seven years, Sturdevant worked at Ecology as the director of governmental relations.

Ecology is one of the three signatory parties in the Tri-Party Agreement (aka Hanford Clean-Up Agreement), and serves as a regulator for the clean-up activities at the Hanford site. Sturdevant stated that Hanford is on the short list of priorities for Ecology. Heart of America NW hopes he sticks to that statement. It comes at a time when the State of WA is agreeing to 22 years of dealys in emptying the High-Level Nuclear Waste from Hanford's leaky single shell tanks. Over 100 square miles of groundwater at Hanford are already contaminated, and delays to emptying the tank wastes are compounded into delays in cleaning up the surrounding contamination.

You can still comment on this settlement by emailing your comments to TPACH@rl.gov, or attending the public hearing in Seattle tomorrow evening. The hearing is at 7pm at the Quality Inn (618 John St, near Seattle Center), and Heart of America NW will lead a pre-meeting workshop at 6pm. We hope to see you there!