Re: AW: Hanford Site cleanup standards

[John Andrews <andrewsjp@chartertn.net>]

Susan L Gawarecki wrote:



> SNIP...

> The other part of the equation I've not seen discussed in this thread 

> is that of protecting wastes left in situ or sites left contaminated 

> effectively forever.  For those who say that these DOE reservations 

> will never be developed, I say look at the explosion of development 

> over the past 30 years into areas you never thought would be 

> developed.  A good example of what might be faced are the types of 

> problems that are arising due to reuse of closed military bases.  Many 

> of these have hazardous contamination in soil and groundwater and/or 

> unexploded ordnance scattered over wide areas.  This is the 

> "stewardship" problem that DOE also faces.  DOE is discovering that 

> the stewardship of a closed site has long-term costs that must be 

> factored into the equation, if the public is to remain protected from 

> remnant contamination.  And who takes this over if DOE is put out of 

> business by Congress?  Seems to me the current Secretary of Energy was 

> once in that camp.

>

> Opinions expressed are mine alone.

>

> Susan Gawarecki



Has anyone been to the Watertown Mall near Boston.  Seems there might 

still be some uranium there...



John Andrews

Knoxville, Tennessee



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

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/