Re: Hanford Site cleanup standards

["Jerry Cohen" <jjcohen@prodigy.net>]

Maury,

    From the information I have on the subject, I would agree with what you

say. I also recall that it was discussed on radsafe a while ago with pretty

much the same conclusion.

    What I really wanted to know was weather someone genuinely believed that

if no cleanup were done, future occupants at the site could face a serious

peril, and the rationale for their belief.      Jerry









----- Original Message -----

From: maury <maury@webtexas.com>

To: Jerry Cohen <jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET>

Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2003 12:23 AM

Subject: Re: Hanford Site cleanup standards





> Hi Jerry,

>

> The question you have posed seems quite relevant to all of the govt.

> endeavors to clean sites, the superfund, and so on. Unfortunately, too

> many people would snort and object to the very idea.  Too many seem to

> think the need for cleanups is so obvious and so urgent that they would

> even reject the relevance of questioning the result of no cleanup at

> all.

>

> Wasn't some serious research performed at Hanford to quantify and

> evaluate the movement of that underground plume? I thought it was found

> that the plume was moving so slowly that when/if it ever reached the

> Columbia R. the contamination would enter the river at such a slow rate

> that dilution would render it a non-threat. Maybe my Alzheimer's is

> catching up <g>, but I thought there was something like this reported on

> Radsafe a year or two ago.

>

> Much of this "cleanup stuff" would be humorous if it were not so costly

> and divisive. One of my "favorites" is the dioxin farce when the govt

> forced the permanent evacuation of Times Beach, Mo. Then, they built an

> incinerator at the site and proceeded literally to burn dirt for many

> years. The burning was finally completed just a year or so ago. EPA

> continues to maintain that dioxin is a serious carcinogen in spite of

> more recent findings that it poses no threat to humans at all -- unless

> you just about drown someone in it.  Sigh ....

>

> Cheers,

> Maury

> _______

> The scientific theory I like best is that the rings of Saturn are

> composed

> entirely of lost airline luggage.

>

> ===========================

>

> Jerry Cohen wrote:

>

> > This discussion leads me to wonder what would result, in terms of

> > adverse effects to humans and/or the environment, if no site cleanup

> > activity were undertaken at Hanford.Suppose the laws and regulations

> > on site cleanup were ignored and life were allowed to continue at the

> > site as originally planned (before EPA, CERCLA, Superfund, etc.etc.).

> > Hypothetically, what's the worst that would happen?It seems we should

> > have some idea of the potential consequences  before judging weather

> > cleanup costs are reasonable.  ----- Original Message -----

> >

> >      From:Conklin, Al

> >      To: 'Dukelow, James S Jr' ; William V Lipton ;

> >      BLHamrick@AOL.COM

> >      Cc: RuthWeiner@AOL.COM ; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

> >      Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2003 7:15 AM

> >      Subject: RE: Hanford Site cleanup standards

> >      You probably are correct. I was only trying to clarify what

> >      the groundawater plumes are and that the tank situation has

> >      been significantly improved from what it was a few years

> >      ago.

> >

> --------------  snipped  --------------



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/