Dr. Susan Woods is obviously a very bright, talented scientist who takes her work very seriously. However, I must respectfully disagree with her conclusion that Savannah River Site is a safe, risk-free environment and of no concern to surrounding communities and the work force.
Her recent guest column in The Augusta Chronicle ("Long-term study confirms that SRS is safe for area communities," Aug. 28) was based on a research analysis initiated by the Department of Energy. Talk about the fox guarding the hen house. The Department of Energy doesn't have the best track record for full disclosure and accuracy. And let's be honest: When you're dealing with tritium, plutonium, enriched uranium and the thousands of chemical processes and substances used in the production of the most lethal by-products known to mankind, risk is a reality that must be recognized.
I am compelled to write this rebuttal and highlight just how misinformed we are concerning the high-stakes game the Department of Energy is engaged in at the expense of this community. Just ask the thousands of people who have unresolved claims for the death/illness of their loved ones who sacrificed to build the nation's nuclear weapons program.
FEW ARE aware that there are currently more than 3,000 wrongful death claims from the families of workers (www.augustachronicle.com/stories/030905) who died prematurely and under conditions that would indicate, at a minimum, a significant causal relationship to working at SRS. More than 350 claims have been settled, and the Department of Labor's statistical conclusions are a stark reminder of the risk workers face. One family in this area recently received a settlement on a death claim with this curt comment: "There is a 63.3 percent chance that your husband's cancer was caused by radiation exposure." The family who received that conclusion will never be convinced that SRS is a risk-free environment.
Our community is rapidly becoming a pawn in a high-stakes game that revolves around the nation's strategic plan for the disposition of the huge stockpile of nuclear waste/plutonium - or should I say the lack of a strategic plan to deal with the nation's nuclear waste/plutonium.
Every leader in this community, reporter, talk-show host, radio announcer and citizen should read the July 2005 Government Accountability Office Report 05-665 commissioned by Congress on the Department of Energy's attempt to deal with consolidation and disposition of plutonium (www.gao.gov/new.items/d05665.pdf).
IT IS AN unbiased, research-driven, unabashed, scathing report on the organizational problems inside the DOE and the structural problems for which DOE has failed to plan. Unfortunately, the consequences of this failure could dwarf more high-profile disasters like the Challenger and Columbia space shuttles.
This is not an attempt to scare the community, but a wake-up call to the serious problems facing the nation's plan for disposition.
Exhibit A in the GAO report shows the current plan - every line from other DOE facilities comes to SRS, but the only line out is to Yucca Mountain, the nation's final resting place for high-level waste. Yucca Mountain is mired in controversy. The political leadership in the western United States has done a wonderful job in clogging the legal system, and there is serious doubt when and if Yucca Mountain will ever open.
Additionally, the state of Nevada and communities surrounding Yucca Mountain have received more than $350 million in DOE funds for community support, and not one ounce of waste is stored at Yucca Mountain. The latest stalemate was a legal requirement for a million-year life expectancy. After the waste arrives at SRS, it could be hundreds of years before it ever leaves.
TRANSLATION: WHEN waste comes to SRS, there is nowhere for it to go until Yucca Mountain opens. Yet DOE is moving blindly with actions that are inconsistent with its own plan. GAO concludes that DOE cannot consolidate plutonium in accordance with the National Defense Authorization Act of 2002 because there is no plan. Second, SRS cannot receive waste from the Hanford Site in Washington state because it is not in the form SRS planned for. This speaks volumes on the great job that political leaders at other sites have done in accelerating cleanup from their sites - and the poor job, by comparison, we have done in engaging issues on our behalf of our site.
The report also criticizes DOE's monitoring capability, storage capability, safety and defense capabilities. Two new buildings were originally to be constructed to receive and store waste until a mixed oxide, or MOX, fuel conversion facility was constructed to reprocess and vitrify it prior to shipment out. However, DOE cancelled the buildings because of resource shortages, and instead is proceeding with storage in 50-year-old structures that do not meet safety requirements as identified by the Defense Nuclear Safety Review Board.
The Pit Disassembly Facility is at least four years behind schedule; the MOX is more than a year behind; and the milestones established to protect the community have come and gone. Even though the last shipment of plutonium was in 2003, nothing prevents additional plutonium to be shipped to SRS, and bidders have been told by DOE to expect 4,500 shipments of waste in the new contract period that begins in 2006. The report points out that without proper monitoring capability, DOE faces increased risks of an accidental plutonium release that could harm workers, the public and/or the environment.
I could go on and on in dissecting the GAO report, but you should read it for yourself and draw your own conclusions. In my opinion, DOE is trying to solve a national problem - that Congress refuses to deal with - on the backs of this community. Their plan is inconsistent at best, and they refuse to adequately address the nation's most dangerous mission, while DOE's meager effort is on the cheap.
AT THE SAME time, we continue to lay off thousands of talented employees who will be needed eventually to deal with this. Something definitely is wrong with this picture. We must demand accountability and responsibility from DOE. This community has been a loyal partner in this relationship with DOE for more than 50 years. We certainly value maintaining it, but it's like a long marriage in which the partners spent years building a family. Now the relationship is fractured and needs serious counseling to save it. Trying to hide the seriousness of this problem - and the long-term consequences to safety, the environment and the destruction of the area's economic base that this community revolves around - is no solution.
It's time for this community to demand respect and attention to its safety and future.
(Editor's note: The writer, who sits on the Aiken County Council, is the vice-chairman of the Savannah River Diversification Initiative, which was created in 1993 to mitigate the impact of downsizing of the Department of Energy's Savannah River Site.)
"I'm not sure I'm going to get out of here alive. I'm scared of riots. I'm scared of the locals. We might get caught in the crossfire."
- Canadian tourist Larry Mitzel, who handed a reporter his business card in case he goes missing in New Orleans.
"This is just insanity. We have no food, no water ... all these trucks and buses go by and they do nothing but wave."
- Debbie Durso of Washington, Mich., who said she asked for help from a police officer whose response was, "Go to hell - it's every man for himself."
The Augusta Chronicle ©2012 Morris Communications, LLC. All Rights Reserved.