BOISE, Idaho - Saturday is the 41st anniversary of the partial meltdown at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant. Experts say there are lessons in the incident, including for Idaho, where waste from the plant eventually ended up.

Associate Professor of English and Sustainability at Stony Brook University Heidi Hutner is the director of the documentary "Accidents Can Happen: The Women of Three Mile Island," which features four women left in the dark about the accident, inspiring them to join the anti-nuclear movement.

Hutner sees a lot of parallels between 1979 and now. She hopes Three Mile Island can be instructive.

"Because we still have many nuclear power plants operating and there's talk about building new nuclear power plants, I think it's essential that we look back at how that was handled - before, during and after - and be sure we don't replicate those errors," says Hutner.

At the Idaho National Laboratory, a first-of-its-kind nuclear power plant project - involving 12 small, modular reactors submerged in a single pool of water - has been proposed and is awaiting federal approval.

Executive Director of the Snake River Alliance Holly Harris says the proposed project from Oregon-based company NuScale would mostly provide power out of state.

She says the project comes with a lot of risks since it sits above the Snake River aquifer, which provides drinking water for about 300,000 Idahoans, and the nuclear industry has yet to come up with a long-term storage solution for nuclear waste.

Harris adds that renewable energy is less expensive, cleaner and more reliable than nuclear, and that she believes NuScale is experimenting with the Gem State.

"Idahoans are expected to bear this burden just as they were asked to do it or forced to do it 40 years ago," says Harris.

Hutner says another parallel with Three Mile Island is that the public still often is left out of the loop. She says it's time to start listening to affected communities.

"Who gets to decide what kind of energy we use?" asks Hutner. "Who makes the decisions? Is it the local people who will be impacted or is it a larger industry that stands to make a lot of money?"

Public meetings in New Mexico this week will gather input on proposed expansion of a nuclear waste repository.

But watchdog groups are urging a federal rulemaking process be adopted before the expansion is approved.

The Department of Energy wants the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant outside of Carlsbad to stay open until at least 2083 - decades past a previous deadline.

WIPP is the disposal site of radioactive and hazardous wastes generated from fabricating triggers, or pits, for nuclear weapons at Los Alamos National Laboratory.

Organizations such as the Concerned Citizens for Nuclear Safety, led by Director Don Hancock, said they believe rulemaking is the fairest route the Environmental Protection Agency could take.

"Agencies, when they do rule-making, tend to be more rigorous," said Hancock, "because they know if they have to defend it in court, the court won't throw out what they've done."

A technical meeting among experts, regulators, and the public will be held tomorrow at the Santa Fe Hilton - at 100 Sandoval Street, from 1 to 3 p.m.

An evening meeting to receive public comment will be held at the same location starting at 6 p.m.

The WIPP site near Carlsbad stores waste like clothing, rags, soils and tools contaminated with radioactive elements due to nuclear weapons research and assembly.

It was originally set to close this year. Now, the federal government wants to continue receiving shipments there and expand the plant to store more waste.

Hancock said he fears New Mexico will be the destination of an unending stream of radioactive waste, unless rulemaking is adopted.

"So the EPA, DOE and the public all know that's what the process is going to be in the future," said Hancock, "so there won't be confusion about that and people won't have to spend time and effort saying, 'Is there going to be a rulemaking or not?' - because it will already have been decided that there will be."

WIPP has received 13,000 shipments of nuclear waste since 1999, arriving from about 10 sites across the country shipped in large drums on semi-trailers along state roads and interstates.




get more stories like this via email

A scientist who said he found extreme plutonium contamination in Los Alamos' Acid Canyon believes concerned residents should invest in monitoring equipment for greater peace of mind.

Over a 20-year period ending in 1963, liquid and often radioactive waste was dumped down the canyon.

Michael Ketterer, professor emeritus of chemistry and biochemistry, Northern Arizona University, presented findings to Nuclear Watch New Mexico about water, soil and plant samples he collected at the site 60 years later. He believes people living nearby should follow his lead.

"New Mexicans, you guys can do this too," Ketterer urged. "Your state needs a community instrument, not one run by the state or the locals or by DOE, one run by the community. You can do this too."

Ketterer pointed out the instrument would provide those downstream updated contamination readings. In 1967, the Atomic Energy Commission worked to clean up the area before releasing the land to Los Alamos County without any restrictions on uses. A County Councilor who attended the presentation said they have not received any notification from the federal government about Acid Canyon being unsafe.

The canyon now features a dirt trail shaded by pines, providing easy recreational opportunities. Ketterer noted the levels of plutonium contamination were the highest he's ever seen in an area without restricted access.

"You know this is happening in an area with full public access," Ketterer emphasized. "Anybody's child or dog can go down there, contact water, the sediments, the plants. What actions has EPA taken or should EPA take to stop this?"

Nuclear Watch New Mexico is pushing for increased cleanup of legacy waste from Los Alamos National Laboratory. The group also opposes new plutonium pit production proposed near the site and worries future wildfires in the area could possibly disperse plutonium through falling ash.


get more stories like this via email

A new agreement on plans for cleaning up nuclear waste at the Hanford site in Washington state is receiving pushback from environmental groups.

Public comment was originally scheduled to close at the beginning of August but has been extended to Sept. 1 for the Tri-Party Agreement between the U-S Energy Department, Environmental Protection Agency and Washington Department of Ecology.

Simone Anter, staff attorney and Hanford program director for the nonprofit Columbia Riverkeeper, said the new agreement means changes to the cleanup efforts including how and where the Hanford nuclear waste is stored.

"If new proposals are coming out to ship either grouted or liquid nuclear waste across the region, communities deserve to know that and deserve to have a voice and deserve to be engaged," Anter contended.

The agreement for dealing with 177 underground storage tanks at Hanford took four years of closed door negotiations. Columbia Riverkeeper and other environmental groups worry the new agreement opens the door for a storage method other than vitrification, which is used to turn high-level waste into glass.

Anter noted tribal nations in the region were not consulted about the proposal. She stressed even if they could not be part of the agreement, the agencies should have been considered before it was presented to the public.

"Tribal nations are not members of the public. They are government entities and should have been treated as such," Anter pointed out.

Anter added members of the public can play a big role in how the 56 million gallons of nuclear waste at Hanford are handled.

"It's really important that all these cleanup decisions put human health, the Columbia River and the environment first," Anter asserted. "I think public comments play an enormous role in reminding the TPA agencies about this."