reply to post by seagull
Oh, I completely agree that this task is incredibly important and should be done no matter how long it takes.
It should also be done right the first time, rather than just kicked down the road for future generations.
It sounds like this particular can is being kicked up to a higher level too:
Committee Considers Enhancing Whistleblower
Protections
January 27, 2012 /24-7PressRelease/ -- Recently, a bipartisan subcommittee of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee
heard compelling testimony from an employee of a government contractor who was removed from a government project for voicing concerns over safety. The
hearing was held in conjunction with debate over a new bill that would solidify and even expand whistleblower protections for employees of government
contractors.
As the law is written now, employees of contractors and their subcontractors are not offered the protection federal employees have in cases like this.
This is how the DOE is able to sidestep what would otherwise be a clear case of retaliation (assuming the whistelblower's case has substance) in
which someone is exposing a potential danger.
Speaking of potential dangers:
Top Hanford Scientist Says Treatment Plant Pipes
Not Strong Enough
RICHLAND, Wash. – Over the last two years we've brought you numerous stories about high-level whistleblowers at the Hanford Nuclear
Reservation's nuclear waste treatment plant. It's one of the largest environmental cleanup projects on Earth. Now, yet another top expert there is
risking his career to speak openly. He says the plant's vessels and pipes — as they're designed now — will leak radioactive waste within their
planned lifespan.
This is just kicking the can down the road as any solution that will have to be revisited in a short time frame is not a permanent fix.
"I want to see us be successful," Alexander says. "And remove this problem that was created out here by people in my grandfather's
generation."
Commendable, in fact his is the attitude which we need to make sure these issues don't come back to haunt us again in the same way they are now.
"On a scale of 1 to 10, with the hardest metal being a 10, the one that can resist erosion the best being a 10, the metals that were selected for
the plant are about a 2," he explains.
Here's why that's a problem: The sludge has a lot of heavy metals, abrasive particles and it's corrosive. It could eat holes in the metal. And
Alexander says it could happen in the section of the plant that's sealed off from humans because it will be so radioactively hot.
So, they're using materials which will degrade in a short period of time (compared to the half life of the waste product) in areas which will be too
dangerous to check routinely. Does this seem like a smart thing to do?
Does this guy know what he's talking about or is he an alarmist?
These concerns are not Alexander's alone. Experiments run for plant contractor Bechtel showed much more erosion in far less time than predicted
by other scientists.
What's more, the federal Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board recently issued a report outlining similar concerns with the pipes and
vessels.
Ok, the company which is contracted to perform the clean up (which has a subcontractor that employes the whistleblower in the previous story) has
research that shows this degradation of the metal could happen even sooner.
Brilliant.
Is this only now coming to the surface?
And the Department of Energy said in a statement, that it's aware of the concerns about pipe strength and continues to test the durability of the
plant's materials.
But Alexander says he raised these issues years ago. Since then a lot of the pipes and vessels have been installed. Alexander says the longer project
managers wait the more costly it will get to fix these issues.
"Everybody is saying everything is fine, everything is fine," he says. "Everything will be fine until we operate right?"
So, it "looks" ok, but don't try to use it...
More brilliance...