Stephen + 67 SM February 2, 2018 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced a proposal to spend $236 million to partially excavate the decades-old nuclear site in Missouri. The proposed remedy would both remove a majority of the radioactive waste linked to the Manhattan Project at the West Lake Landfill and construct a cap over the area. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
李伟王芳 + 77 ZL February 2, 2018 You can't remediate nuclear waste. All you can do is haul it somewhere else. Where's Pruitt taking it? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Meanwhile + 49 PT February 2, 2018 Somewhere away from major populations and ground water I assume, I hope. The site in Missouri is pretty close to a river. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
李伟王芳 + 77 ZL February 2, 2018 I feel bad for anyone in the EPA with this current administration. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnAtronis + 78 JA February 2, 2018 Well, this move is perfectly within common sense. Its the only way you can handle radioactive material. The site mentioned is close to a river and has a good chance of contaminating ground water. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnAtronis + 78 JA February 2, 2018 6 minutes ago, Stephen said: The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced a proposal to spend $236 million to partially excavate the decades-old nuclear site in Missouri. The proposed remedy would both remove a majority of the radioactive waste linked to the Manhattan Project at the West Lake Landfill and construct a cap over the area. Residents who have been fighting to have the nuclear waste removed since the site was identified in 1970, the decision will be a welcome relief amidst public health and safety concerns. Until now the nuclear waste at Westlake has been contained on site and the surrounding area has been routinely monitored for ground water contamination. The site has been on the Superfund National Priorities List since 1990. In December, the EPA named the sites one of 21 pinpointed for "immediate, intense action" by the Superfund Task Force. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TraderTate + 186 TS February 2, 2018 Good to know, but would be even better to know where it's going. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Joanna + 68 JT February 2, 2018 The main point is...should the EPA be used to prevent this kind of disastrous intentional polluting of our communities in the first place, or just come along 75 years later and partially clean it up? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites