|
| ||
|
The Moab Times Independent Newspaper January 30, 2003
For more information, contact:
|
Progress on Atlas tailings cleanup appears to be bogged down by lack of approved funding By Lisa Church While the U.S. Department of Energy considers how to deal with the contamination at the Atlas uranium mill site north of town, many area residents are frustrated that a cleanup decision has taken so long. At a DOE "scoping meeting" held last week in Moab, Donna Bergman-Tabbert, manager of the DOE Grand Junction office, which will oversee the Atlas project, said Congress still has not approved funding for environmental impact statement process and the Atlas reclamation project, and budget decisions will have a major effect on how quickly the DOE can make a final recommendation on cleaning up the 13 million ton Atlas tailings site. "We don't as yet have the budget approved for this year, so we're not sure how much money we'll have for this project," Bergman-Tabbert said. "That obviously could affect our schedule." Last fall, the DOE estimated that the completed environmental impact statement would likely be available by fall of 2004 if Congressional funding is approved for 2003 and 2004. If the funds are cut, progress on the work will be delayed, Tabbert said. At the Jan. 22 meeting, DOE Project Manager Joel Berwick, outlined a number of scenarios the agency will study for dealing with the tailings. Most involve moving the ammonia and uranium-tainted pile to one of five possible sites: Klondike Bluffs near the Grand County airport, a location on federally-owned land near Crescent Junction, a landfill site owned by the East Carbon Development Corp. in Carbon County, a uranium mill disposal site near Green River, or the White Mesa recycling mill in San Juan County. Since January 21, the DOE has held public meetings in all the communities that may be affected by any of the possible cleanup alternatives. Representatives from the White Mesa Ute tribe said they opposed transporting the contaminated waste to the White Mesa mill. Thelma Whiskers, one of a dozen tribe members who attended the Moab meeting, said White Mesa residents oppose the plan because the mill, located adjacent to the Ute reservation, has endangered their water supply and is located on ancestral burial grounds. "My people are against it. We don't like it to be close to our reservation. It hurts us," Whiskers said. "Our people are sick. And the deer too. They've got cancer. [The mill] is ruining the meat." Officials from International Uranium Corp., owner of the White Mesa mill site, have repeatedly disputed those claims. Berwick said the DOE would also examine the feasibility of capping the tailings in their current location. Another possible solution would be to "do nothing," Berwick said. But that is an alternative the DOE believes is not feasible. "We don't think that's very likely, and don't want that to happen," Berwick said. Most Grand County residents in attendance urged the DOE to move the 13 million ton tailings pile away from its current site on the banks of the Colorado River. "Something that's completely unthinkable as an action [capping the pile in place] is something that is a prime alternative now," said Bill Hedden, director of the Moab office of the Grand Canyon Trust, a group that has long supported moving the tailings. Hedden said if the DOE chooses the cap in place alternative "we're basically guaranteeing that even if we comply in the short term, the entire site will eventually be dumped into the Colorado River" as the river channel slowly changes course. Hedden said Congress specifically stated that the tailings should be moved away from the river in the legislation that transferred oversight of the Atlas project to the DOE. "The Grand Canyon Trust certainly will ask the court to determine what Congress meant if the final decision is to not move the tailings," he said. County Council member Rex Tanner said local government officials should be allowed involvement in the decision-making process. But Tanner made clear that the county wants the tailings relocated. "Definitely move the pile. And definitely to Klondike Bluffs, not to White Mesa," Tanner said. "And certainly, don't truck that stuff through town." DOE representatives said additional public meetings would be scheduled as new information is revealed through the ongoing EIS process. The DOE will take comments about the environmental impact statement by phone: 800-637-4575. Comments also can be made by e-mail: moabcomments@gjo.doe.gov. The public has until Feb. 14 to submit comments. More information about the project is available at the Grand Junction DOE Web site www.gjo.doe.gov/moab/moab.html. |
