Laserfiche WebLink
The Environmental Committee's minority report on resolution 96-187 <br />by Duane Limpert, Ward 1 Councilman <br />Radioactive waste greatly frightens me. That is why I stood firm when council was <br />requested to pass Resolution 96-187 under suspension of rules requiring three readings <br />and review of committee. Suspension would have meant passage in one night during the <br />busy holiday season where it could happen unnoticed. I thank the other members of this <br />council for standing with me and not allowing that to happen. When Resolution 96-187 <br />was introduced, I knew little of Senate Bill 19 or the radioactive waste issue. All I knew <br />was the subject was to important to sneak past ourselves and the people. <br />Why am I so frighten of radioactive waste? Everyday as I travel from my office to visit <br />my customers, I have to drive within tenth of a mile of a true radioactive dump site. I see <br />it from my car. It is a true dump in the fact that there is no concrete or lead shields. There <br />is no roof or walls. The Newburg Hts. site is where radioactive material was dumped, not <br />stored. It is material dumped with exposure to the weather. This careless dumping is <br />contaminating ow ground water and environment. This sort of dump should be <br />frightening to all of us. As it is under Senate Bill 19, it will be 10 years before a proper <br />storage site is constructed .Additional years of delay will increase the chances of more <br />problem areas like the one in Newburg Hts. and there will be additional years of delay if <br />we get off the course provided in Senate Bili 19. <br />Since the first reading of this resolution, I have read every article provided me from both <br />sides of the issue. I can now consider myself much more informed than the average <br />person reading literature from only one side or the other. People supporting Resolution <br />96-187 have one and only one very valid augment. What if the Federal rules regarding <br />radioactive waste are changed or the make up of the Compact is changed? I can not deny <br />that is a compelling argument. The rest of their arguments are based on unfair <br />comparisons and misinformation. Remember when comparing both sides, our state <br />employees are bound to a very high standard of providing very fair and accurate <br />information. <br />The panel supporting Resolution 96-187 segregate low level radioactive waste(LLRW) <br />into two categories. "Acceptable" LLRW is medical waste. "Unacceptable" LLRW is <br />from nuclear power plants. They have no plan for waste generated from fire exit signs, <br />luminous watch dials, tires, diapers, and other products we all use in our daily lives. I <br />submit alpha, beta, and gamma rays are just as dangerous to the environment and living <br />things from any radioactive source. Senate Bill 19 addresses all LLRW. If I or a loved <br />one is harmed by LLRW, it will make no difference to me as to who generated it or why <br />it was generated. We will be harmed either way. Even David Ellison stated to me Senate <br />Bill 19 addressed the problem of LLRW better than anything else he has read. He <br />admitted to me, he is against nuclear power. Personally given my present knowledge, if I <br />were voting on building the first nuclear plant in the area, I would question the wisdom <br />of such a plan. But we are not voting on nuclear power. We are voting on addressing the <br />existing problem of LLRW. We can not turn back the clock and make decisions on the <br /> <br />