http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=513&ncid=691&e=10&u=/ap/20031118/ap_on_go_ot/radioactive_waste
"The Bush administration is considering allowing low-level radioactive waste to be dumped at toxic waste sites and other facilities that currently aren't permitted to receive it... "The notice...asks the public to weigh in on whether certain levels of radioactive waste can be stored in landfills or hazardous material disposal sites. "Nuclear power companies can dispose of low-level radioactive waste at a handful of sites around the country, and about 20 sites can dispose of hazardous material. The EPA notice says a rule change could simplify the process for getting rid of hazardous and radioactive waste for nuclear power companies and others that generate it. "The need to comply with two separate regulatory systems, each of which is targeted to a different component of the waste, creates a certain regulatory and economic burden on mixed waste generators," the EPA states in its notice... ..."They can save a lot of money if their waste doesn't have to go to a facility designed to safely contain it," said Daniel Hirsch, president of the Committee to Bridge the Gap, a Los Angeles-based nuclear watchdog group. "Environmentalists urged new EPA Administrator Mike Leavitt, the former governor of Utah, not to make the changes. "EPA's proposal, within days of Gov. Leavitt's confirmation as the new EPA chief, to deregulate radioactive wastes, is a deeply troubling assault on the environment," said Diane D'Arrigo, nuclear waste project director for the Washington-based Nuclear Information and Resource Service... "...The notice focuses on commercial nuclear waste but asks for input on whether the Energy Department should also loosen its rules governing the disposal of radioactive waste from weapons plants." >From http://www.iem-inc.com/newregr.html "November 18, 2003 - 68 FR 65119-65151 - ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY - Approaches to an Integrated Framework for Management and Disposal of Low-Activity Radioactive Waste: Request for Comment - This Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) requests public comment regarding options to promote a more consistent framework for the disposal of radioactive waste with low concentrations of radioactivity (``low-activity''). Of immediate interest is low-activity mixed waste (LAMW). This waste is both chemically hazardous according to the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) and is radioactive with low radionuclide concentrations under the purview of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (AEA). Such waste is regulated and managed under both authorities but under certain conditions, one authority may be sufficient to provide public health and environmental protection. In particular, given appropriate limits on radionuclide concentrations in LAMW, disposal of LAMW in RCRA Subtitle C hazardous waste landfills, with their prescribed engineering design and associated RCRA requirements (e.g., waste treatment, waste form), **may** provide protection of public health and the environment. This document focuses on effective use of the RCRA-C disposal technology for the disposal of LAMW. We (the Environmental Protection Agency) seek comment on standards that would codify this approach and provide greater flexibility for the safe disposal of LAMW." **Emphasis mine. Not "known" "studied" or "found" to be safe. This seems as potentially dangerous as the motion, quashed after public outcry, to allow recycling of various radioactive wastes (I'm recalling something about *nickel in dining utensils)...I think this might be a reference(?): "...It is significant that the EPA is considering a rulemaking on the issue of nuclear waste dumping in conjunction with the NRC. The current NRC efforts are essentially a repackaging of their earlier attempt, developed in the 1980s under pressure from the nuclear industry, to allow the release of radioactive waste. Radioactively-contaminated waste materials given the deceptively innocuous description of being "below regulatory concern" (BRC) were to be labeled as safe, and eligible for unrestricted release from nuclear facilities, where they could be incinerated, reused, dumped or recycled. After a massive outcry from environmental, consumer, labor and citizen groups, Congress banned the BRC policy in 1992... "...Already, many existing landfills are contaminated with radiation, despite lacking the design or safeguards to isolate and contain the radiation. A report earlier this year indicated that many California landfills have measurable radioactive contamination, some of which is leaking into groundwater and exceeding limits in safe drinking water standards... "The EPA will be accepting comments through March 17, 2004. Public Citizen will be submitting comments soon, and will post them at www.citizen.org/cmep ." http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NucNews/message/13317 We do not have a threshold for "safe at this continuous exposure level of radioactivity" for young children, pregnant women, or adults, although areas with naturally higher background radiation might be reasonable controls/standards. The problem of 'permanently' containing waste (both nuclear and chemical/toxic) is not yet solved. While not radioactive, the ongoing issues at Lowery (former AFB) here, supposedly 'reclaimed' to be safe for families to live, with asbestos contamination and sarin bomblets found, are cautionary. Debbi who tried to find this particular Advanced Notice on the EPA site, but gave up after many minutes of searching :P __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Free Pop-Up Blocker - Get it now http://companion.yahoo.com/ _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
