BOISE, Idaho -- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission may change its rules to allow the nuclear industry to dump some of its waste in landfills.

Opponents say the change poses a public health risk and would allow waste to go unmonitored.

The proposal would enable the NRC to reinterpret the meaning of low-level radioactive waste so that it could be accepted at dumps and hazardous waste sites, rather than regulated storage facilities.

Daniel Hirsch is president of Committee to Bridge the Gap, an organization that focuses on nuclear safety. He says a dump site in Idaho would benefit from this change.

"In addition to the waste potentially going to everyone's municipal landfill, the real focus of this is to allow the U.S. Ecology facility in Idaho to -- without a license -- start taking the material that up until today you're required to have a license for," he points out.

On Friday, the public comment period was extended from April 20 to July 20. But Hirsch and other opponents say the COVID-19 pandemic isn't allowing for proper scrutiny of the rule. They want it picked back up six months after the coronavirus crisis is over.

Diane D'Arrigo, radioactive waste project director for the Nuclear Information and Resource Service, says the change would allow the industry to dispose of any waste other than irradiated fuel at landfills. That includes concrete, soil, clothing or any material where radiation still exists. The limit would be 25 millirem per year, a unit of absorbed radiation.

D'Arrigo says the change poses a big public health risk.

"There's some so-called low-level waste that could give a lethal dose in 15 minutes if you're exposed unshielded,"
she point out. "So 'low level' has been a misnomer for a very long time."

Terry Lodge, an attorney who works on nuclear safety issues, says the industry has been working for this change for decades because of the cost of disposing waste at radioactive-storage facilities.

"The utilities build the expense of disposing of the waste into their electrical charges to us customers," he points out. "So it's not as though they don't have the money. But there is a relentless search for quick and dirty solutions."


get more stories like this via email

Some organizations are renewing calls to address radioactive contamination in U.S. food and drinking water.

The issue has gained prevalence in the past year, since Japan has started releasing treated and diluted radioactive wastewater into the Pacific Ocean from the major nuclear accident in Fukushima in 2011.

James Gormley, president of the advocacy group Citizens for Health, said in a webinar some of the substances in the wastewater can make their way into fish and other foods, and it can have harmful effects on ecosystems and the public.

"The most important effect is the effect on people," Gormley emphasized. "Bioaccumulation in the oceans. Bioaccumulation in people and in their organs. Pathological effects, epidemiological effects."

Some Missourians are familiar with the effect of radioactive contamination. Several St. Louis neighborhoods saw elevated cancer levels in the mid-20th century, after atomic waste spilled and contaminated the area.

Multiple state lawmakers have supported compensating the communities exposed to radiation.

The Food and Drug Administration has said it's maintaining its radioactivity standards as Japan discharges wastewater and doesn't expect changes to food or water supplies.

Some scientists have said they would like to see tighter standards and enhanced testing.

Bob Richmond, research professor and director of the Kewalo Marine Laboratory at the University of Hawaii-Manoa, agrees. In the same webinar, he explained once a company dumps something into the ocean, it does not quickly dilute.

"The ocean is not a sterile aquarium, and once these radionuclides go into the ocean, they are taken up," Richmond explained. "They are tropically transferred throughout the food web, and they can be bioaccumulated and biomagnified in organisms."

The FDA said it has tested numerous Japanese products including seafood, tea and ginger and has not detected anything close to problematic. Still, it will be an ongoing issue, as discharges at Fukushima are scheduled to continue for the next 30 years.


get more stories like this via email

Environmental groups in Tennessee will soon learn more about the approval process behind a radioactive waste landfill which has been processing and storing highly enriched uranium for six decades.

The group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility sued the Environmental Protection Agency to gain access to documents related to the approval of the Y12 Uranium Processing Facility in Oak Ridge.

Jeff Ruch, Pacific director for the group, explained the landfill is being built despite objections from senior government officials. He said they used a Freedom of Information Act request to obtain the documents and the EPA has agreed to provide 400 documents a month, through September.

"The fact that EPA is not being candid about this indicates that they have something to hide," Ruch contended. "And they've already produced several hundred documents, almost none of which are substantive. We do a lot of FOIA litigation and for us, it's a kind of a safe form of whistleblowing."

Ruch pointed out one issue is the Clean Water Act protections for the streams running by the landfill and emptying into other bodies of water have been set aside. He added unacceptable levels of radiation in the water will affect the fish and wildlife. Critics of the uranium-enriching process say it poses safety and health risks to Tennesseans.

Tanvi Kardile, coordinator for the Oak Ridge Environmental Peace Alliance, said her group continues to raise concerns to local communities and lawmakers about what it sees as the environmental hazards and public health risks tied to creating a landfill for toxic waste.

"Oak Ridge has pretty high cancer rates already, because of the Y12 weapons complex," Kardile asserted. "As an organization, we're worried about the increase of cancer rates because of a radioactive waste landfill."

"We all live downriver from Hanford," is the message painted on the windows of the Patagonia store in Seattle's Belltown neighborhood. It is a reminder of the continuing danger created by the remaining toxic nuclear waste at the Hanford Site in Benton County.

Advocates with the nonprofit Hanford Challenge painted the mural to remind people everyone will suffer if the waste seeps into the groundwater and into the Columbia River.

Nikolas Peterson, executive director of the Hanford Challenge, tracks the cleanup efforts.

"We are holding the federal government -- the contractors doing this work -- accountable," Peterson explained. "To make sure that they don't walk away from this cleanup and leave a mess that future generations will have to deal with."

During World War II, U.S. government nuclear scientists at Hanford created the plutonium used in atomic bombs, contaminating the soil and leaving behind 56 million gallons of high-level toxic waste. The current plan is to transform much of the waste into a glasslike material, put it in steel tanks and bury it underground.

The Yakama Nation's Environmental Restoration/Waste Management program has teamed up with the nonprofit Columbia Riverkeeper to teach future generations about the ongoing cleanup and offer field trips to the site.

Peterson noted his organization is working to get Hanford into the standard curriculum in all Washington state high schools.

"We want people, in especially the Pacific Northwest, to really take ownership of Hanford," Peterson emphasized. "And we can demand a better and safer cleanup for all of us."

The U.S. Department of Energy maintains a page dedicated to the Hanford Site cleanup. People interested in volunteering can contact Hanford Challenge and Columbia Riverkeeper.


get more stories like this via email