Ward Valley comments/response

[JMUCKERHEIDE@delphi.com]

Ed,

> Jim-Keep up the good fight on the info hiway.The time for action is now.

Of course. Next time I'll try to say "Colorado River" instead of "Columbia"?!  
(I was also asking about natural radioactivity in the Columbia when the
Hanford dose-reconstruction study was being discussed.  Didn't get any info
there either.) 

Can you help here:

What is the Colorado River rad data? or source? 

And count all radionuclides, not just a "gross alpha" or Uranium/Thorium conc
that does not include daughters (oops, "progeny") U: 17 in chain - 8 alpha, 6
beta, 3 gamma; but cut off at radon and assume radon and "progeny" discharged
to air? (and not just "short-lived" daughters re lung dose, but also
Pb/Po-210, Bi-214 with 20-year half-life! Th: 14 in chain (but Rn/dau short
for rad risks -- except people on the river). 

What is the river flow rate (cu ft/sec) in the lower stretch? (and multiply)
for "discharge" flow of radioactivity!  (What are downstream uses of the river 
water - irrigation, drinking, etc that are "at risk"  ---   what are site
nuclides with >50 yr half lives? 

What is conc/inventory of natural radionuclides in ground volume from site to
river (to 1000 foot depth)? 

> The NAS has done a very credible job on their Ward Valley report in spite 
> of extreme harrassment by the opposition.

Unfortunately, NAS contributes explicitly to public fears by its dishonest
treatment of the data and the risks. They continue to shill for big bucks
science to "monitor", etc. So while Ward Valley may now be sited, BIG BUCKS
will be spent by the public (since utilities and hospitals, etc just pass the
costs on to the ratepayers, etc.); and less ideal sites will be subject to the 
perception that massive costs and efforts are required, and the argument that
if they are not as good as Ward Valley they must be deficient. 

I find this a very short-sited view, and as I said before I think its
disingenuous for the Ward Valley supporters to put a big $ effort into this
"political" battle and not do one iota of technical or forthright, honest,
lick of work to provide real data to the public that they can understand
(though I suspect some of the Coalition make their $ from this fear-mongering
of the public and its representatives and would not appreciate letting the
public see the truth.) 

If this isn't the case, I'd appreciate hearing from someone there who has done 
some work, and has some data on site releases and discharges. I again offer to 
work with anyone who would want to put such material together! 

I recommend, propose that you prepare a letter/statement that provides such
information. To do less is disingenuous, especially without criticism of the
NAS statements that will require continuing large costs and imply substantial
uncertainty in the safety of disposing of rad materials at Ward Valley. 

> The opponents can only attack the academy now 
> because they don't like the answer.

> It looks like even Barbara Boxer may walk away from the issue because
> there are no remaining arguments to contest.
> Regards,Ed Fuller

I don't mean to be objectionable, but I see us having lost YET ANOTHER
opportunity to let the public see the truth about radioactivity and radiation, 
and have actually REINFORCED public fears and hysteria in this process! 

The NAS and your organization might as well have told them we are building the 
isolation chamber for the smallpox virus here!  that can only be "safe" with
massive stringency, and eternal vigilance, and horrendous costs (with a
negative message that will ripple thru the issues about siting other
facilities). 

I look forward to hearing from you or someone there with more information. I
don't think it is too late to make a positive contribution, but you will have
to do it SOON.  

(I'm admittedly frustrated by the fact that when we have massive funds being
committed here, with your organization and others, we are getting no benefit,
while efforts to bring the responsible science community together at ANS we
have ZERO $, and when trying to get some basic technical data and research
together, or try to organize a Newsletter and proactive effort, there are ZERO 
$ .  Where are the responsible people in this effort?) 

I apologize for my lack of temperment, and time, to be less troublesome.

Regards, Jim