Utahns' concerns about "hotter nuclear waste" coming to Utah were put to rest Wednesday, Nov. 18, when Envirocare withdrew its federal application to accept the waste from Ohio's Fernald facility.

"The waste will not be coming to Utah anymore now that Envirocare has withdrawn their application for a license to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to bring the waste to Utah," said Dane Finerfrock, director of the Department of Environmental Quality.

Finerfrock said Ohio's radioactive mill-tailings are more radioactive than what Envirocare is licensed to receive, and this is why Envirocare needed to apply for a license with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to bring the waste to Utah.

Many Utahns have been confused by conflicting stories they have read in newspapers and have seen on nightly news reports. Utahns flooded KSL radio's Doug Wright show with phone calls when Ken Alkema, senior vice president of Envirocare, and Rep. Rob Bishop, R-Utah, addressed the issue. Utahns asked questions about the levels of the nuclear waste, transportation of the waste and why the waste was being brought to Utah. A KSL news poll taken during the interview showed 63 percent of Utahns were greatly concerned about the waste coming to Utah, while 5 percent were only somewhat concerned and 27 percent had mixed feelings.

One caller asked Bishop about concerns of possible lung cancer associated with the waste.

"I have heard those reports and it depends on how capsulated the material is," Bishop said during the interview. "Those are once again issues we can argue about without a whole lot of expertise."

Bishop addressed this issue with the Department of Energy and asked them about alternate transportation methods so the waste would be brought more securely to Utah.

Bishop's proposal included bringing the waste by train to Utah's Envirocare facility in Southern Utah, which Bishop said would be safer and less expensive for Utah taxpayers. Alkema said they want to make sure the public isn't confused by any misinformation press officials have issued and have requested that Utah regulators and technical experts make the final decisions on bringing the waste to Utah.

"I think that Congressman Bishop, having proposed the waste come to Utah and it being beneficial to the state in revenue, should explain in more detail everything that is involved with this waste," said BJ Forsgren, political science major at the University of Utah. "I don't feel as if everything is being completely explained to the public, and I think a greater explanation needs to be put forward to the people of Utah."

Both Gov. Olene Walker and Sen. Bob Bennett, R-Utah, are against bringing "hotter" waste into the state.

"Senator Bennett and Governor Walker are in complete agreement that no waste should be allowed to come to Utah that is any less safe than the materials which are already housed and processed in the state," said Mary Jane Collipriest, Bennett's spokesperson. "Senator Bennett is working to bring to a halt any shipment of waste until the state has determined whether these materials are consistent with those already licensed by the state to be here."

Alkema said the Fernald waste is not classified as "level C" waste as many people believe; however, it still contains radioactive Uranium levels.

"Governor Walker does not want anything 'hotter' than what the state currently accepts, which is level 'A' waste," said Amanda Covington, Walker's spokesperson. "We believe this waste is in fact hotter than what is accepted in the state."



Copyright Brigham Young University 19 Nov 2003