NRC racing to answer questions on depleted uranium
NRC racing to answer questions on depleted uranium chron.com By BROCK VERGAKIS Associated Press Writer © 2009 The Associated PressMarch 25, 2009,
SALT LAKE CITY — The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is rushing to meet an April 2 deadline to turn over stacks of internal documents that could shed light on why it recently decided to classify large quantities of depleted uranium as the least hazardous type of low-level radioactive waste.
The NRC’s decision, which still must undergo a rule-making process that could take up to two years, would open the door for federal facilities and companies around the country to dispose of more than 1 million tons of depleted uranium in Utah and Texas.
Democratic Reps. Jim Matheson of Utah and Edward Markey of Massachusetts, who is chairman of the subcommittee that oversees the NRC, have demanded the documents because they believe the agency’s March 18 decision disregards the risk depleted uranium poses to public health and safety.
They called the NRC’s decision an “arbitrary and capricious mischaracterization” of the waste…………………………………..
Depleted uranium is unique in that unlike other waste, it becomes more radioactive over time, leading to criticism from environmental groups that the NRC is downplaying the long-term risks of radiological exposure.
“It’s kind of like saying someone isn’t a drunk driver because he passed a breathalyzer test before he started drinking,” said Christopher Thomas, public policy director for the nuclear waste watchdog group Healthy Environment Alliance of Utah………………………………
Matheson and Markey’s letter questioned how the NRC could make the ruling when in the 1980s it was considering higher classification.
“The depleted uranium waste stream which will flow from commercial uranium enrichment facilities is expected to be … ten times greater than what the commission believed was safe,” the letter says.
NRC racing to answer questions on depleted uranium | AP Texas News | Chron.com – Houston Chronicle
No comments yet.
-
Archives
- January 2026 (8)
- December 2025 (358)
- November 2025 (359)
- October 2025 (377)
- September 2025 (258)
- August 2025 (319)
- July 2025 (230)
- June 2025 (348)
- May 2025 (261)
- April 2025 (305)
- March 2025 (319)
- February 2025 (234)
-
Categories
- 1
- 1 NUCLEAR ISSUES
- business and costs
- climate change
- culture and arts
- ENERGY
- environment
- health
- history
- indigenous issues
- Legal
- marketing of nuclear
- media
- opposition to nuclear
- PERSONAL STORIES
- politics
- politics international
- Religion and ethics
- safety
- secrets,lies and civil liberties
- spinbuster
- technology
- Uranium
- wastes
- weapons and war
- Women
- 2 WORLD
- ACTION
- AFRICA
- Atrocities
- AUSTRALIA
- Christina's notes
- Christina's themes
- culture and arts
- Events
- Fuk 2022
- Fuk 2023
- Fukushima 2017
- Fukushima 2018
- fukushima 2019
- Fukushima 2020
- Fukushima 2021
- general
- global warming
- Humour (God we need it)
- Nuclear
- RARE EARTHS
- Reference
- resources – print
- Resources -audiovicual
- Weekly Newsletter
- World
- World Nuclear
- YouTube
-
RSS
Entries RSS
Comments RSS


Leave a comment