Dumping radioactive materials On The Public

[Guest guest]

>

> > Dumping On The Public

Karen Charman is an investigative journalist specializing in agriculture,

health and the environment.

> >

> >

> > What would you think if you heard that radioactive materials from aging

> > nuclear power plants and weapons complexes were going to be dumped in

> > community landfills? Or that they would be " recycled " into everyday

> > consumer goods, building materials, roads, playgrounds and more just to

> > save those who created the waste the trouble and expense of keeping it

> > isolated? That is exactly what the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

> (NRC)

> > is considering -- despite the fact that the agency is statutorily

required

> > to protect the public's health and ensure our safety in regards to the

> > nuclear materials it regulates.

> >

> > The NRC has begun the process of writing rules that could allow

> > across-the-board deregulation of so-called low-level radioactive

materials

> > from aging nuclear power plants, weapons complexes and other facilities

> the

> > agency licenses. These rules will determine what will happen to the

> metals,

> > concrete, soil, plastics, chemicals, glass, paper and other items that

> > become radioactively contaminated at nuclear facilities.

> >

> > Despite downplaying the risks of low level radiation exposure, the NRC

Web

> > site says " any increase in dose, no matter how small, results in an

> > incremental increase in risk " for cancer and passing on birth defects.

> > Further, radiation exposures are cumulative in the body, meaning that

each

> > exposure adds to the danger from previous exposures.

> >

> > If unlabelled radioactive materials are released into our daily lives,

> > there would be no way to figure out how much additional radiation anyone

> > was actually exposed to. That is partly because NRC projections only

> > consider the potential amount of radiation from one source at a time,

not

> > the combined amount from multiple sources which would exist in the real

> > world. In September 2002, NRC commissioner Jeffrey Merrifield pointed

out

> > an additional problem: the " potential that the radioactive component may

> be

> > concentrated in the recycling process or that the material will be

> recycled

> > in a form resulting in more actual contact with the general public. "

> >

> > Nobody knows exactly how much of this material currently exists. The

best

> > estimates are on metals, which are said to account for the largest

amount

> > of radioactive material destined for recycling. The United States' 123

> > commercial nuclear power plants (some of which are already closed down)

> are

> > expected to contribute 1.4 million to 2 million tons to the radioactive

> > scrap metal heap. On top of that, over the next few decades more than a

> > million tons of radioactive scrap metal are expected to be recovered

from

> > the nation's nuclear weapons facilities, according to a report by the

> > Department of Energy (DOE), which runs those sites.

> >

> > Currently, the NRC allows " slightly radioactive " materials to be

released

> > on a case-by-case basis. But the agency has been pushing to standardize

> the

> > practice, and it has proposed four other options. The first would

> establish

> > acceptable levels of radioactive contamination that would allow

materials

> > below that threshold to be released without any restrictions. Under the

> > second option, the materials would be restricted to certain industrial

> > uses. Option number three would allow the material to go to hazardous

> waste

> > facilities that are not designed to handle radioactive materials. The

> > fourth option would restrict this material to radioactive waste dumps.

> >

> > If this material is deregulated for unrestricted use, as the industry

> > hopes, it will end up in everything from our knives and forks, zippers,

> the

> > braces on our kids' teeth -- even artificial hip joints and IUDs -- to

> > gardening tools, potting soil, building materials, furniture, computer

> > equipment, and children's toys. In other words, it will be everywhere --

> > unlabeled and unmonitored.

> >

> > Environmental groups, the metal industry and the steelworkers union

> > vehemently oppose unrestricted release. But it remains to be seen

whether

> > the steel industry, the environmental community or the public can stop

the

> > nuclear establishment from dumping this portion of its waste into

general

> > commerce. The safest option is to keep it isolated in facilities

licensed

> > to deal with radioactive waste, and phase out nuclear power and weapons,

> > which only create more.

> >

> > But the Bush administration is aggressively promoting both new nuclear

> > power plants and weapons, while both the DOE and the NRC are looking at

> > ways to cut costs. And as recently departed NRC chairman Richard Meserve

> > observed, recycling the waste is definitely a lot cheaper for the

nuclear

> > waste generators. In January 2001, Environment News Service reported him

> > saying that releasing contaminated solid waste materials into everyday

> > commerce is necessary to ensure the continued viability of both the

> nuclear

> > power industry and the DOE's clean-ups of its highly contaminated

weapons

> > complexes.

> >

> > In 1986 and again in 1990, the environmental community blocked NRC's

> > attempts to deregulate radioactively contaminated materials for

> > unrestricted recycling, but now it may be a lot harder to stop. Other

> > countries face mountains of nuclear garbage, and the European Commission

> > and the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency have already set

> > permissive recycling standards. International transport regulations have

> > also been amended to allow the free flow of unlabeled radioactive scrap

> and

> > products made from it, and the U.S. Department of Transportation is now

> > looking at doing the same.

> >

> > But it's not a done deal yet. The dangerous and irresponsible dumping of

> > radioactive waste into our daily lives is not inevitable. Raise hell --

in

> > the media, with the NRC and your federal, state and local

representatives

> > -- to permanently prohibit it. Time is short.

> >

> > <http://www.nrc.gov/who-we-are/contactus.html>Contact the NRC

> >

> > <http://www.congress.org/congressorg/home/>Contact your elected

officials

> > http://tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/8342

>

> List address: http://www.topica.com/lists/SpeakIt

> Subscribe: SpeakIt-

>

> >