I was disturbed by your editorial entitled "Keep waging nuke waste battle" in the March 3 Deseret News.
The position which Gov. Leavitt has taken on the proposed temporary storage facility on the Goshute Indian Reservation is purely a political position and cannot be justified on the basis of health and safety considerations. He is spending taxpayer money to fight an unjustifiable battle.Let me make it clear that I have no connection with Private Fuel Storage. I am currently retired after serving for 18 years in radiation control programs for the state of Utah and six years with Envirocare of Utah.
I began my study of radiological physics in 1953 as an Atomic Energy Commission Fellow at the University of Rochester and received an M.S. in this field from New York University. I have been certified by the American Board of Health Physics although my certification is not current. I feel that I am qualified to make the judgments which I am expressing.
The anti-nuclear activists have succeeded in selling the politicians, the media and much of the public on the concept that the waste is so dangerous that the common viewpoint is "not in my back yard" or "not in my state." But that does not make it true.
I am disturbed at the viewpoint expressed by our governor and Legislature. That viewpoint reflects an obvious misunderstanding of the issues involved.
Let me summarize the basic points involved.
1. Nuclear reactors, when properly designed, constructed and operated, are safer and cleaner sources of electricity than power plants using coal. A coal-fired plant releases more radioactivity to the environment than a comparable nuclear plant. The volume of waste from a coal-fired plant is hundreds of times that from a nuclear plant.
2. Oil, gas and fossil fuel plants release oxides into the atmosphere which produce acid rain. Nuclear plants do not.
3. The fuel for nuclear power plants is available in the United States, and every nuclear plant we operate reduces our dependence upon foreign oil.
4. One of the major problems for the nuclear power industry is the proper disposal of the waste which is generated.
5. The spent fuel rods from reactors are really not waste since they still contain greater than 90 percent of the inherent energy which could be utilized by a complete nuclear program.
6. To place the spent fuel in a permanent disposal facility and deny future access to this source of energy would be a gross misuse of our natural resources.
7. Utilization of a temporary storage facility until our politicians can be educated about the basic facts of nuclear energy would leave this potential source of energy available for future use.
8. By joining the rest of the radiation hazard illiterate states in the philosophy of "not in my back yard," Utah is helping to close the door on nuclear power. I believe this is an unjustified position which fully informed Utah citizens would not want to take.
9. The transportation and storage problems have been fully addressed and approved by responsible agencies of the federal government including the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Environmental Protection Agency. The risks to the public from these operations are not sufficient to justify opposing the operation.
Whatever the real reason for the governor's opposition to the proposed facility, it is wrong when viewed from a true understanding of the principles involved, and Utahns should not support him.
I am appalled that the Deseret News suggests that unorthodox measures are justified and that whatever legal means are at the governor's disposal should be used to prevent the spent fuel from being shipped to Utah. I am willing to spend some time and effort to help the editorial staff of the Deseret News to understand the facts relative to this subject.
Blaine N. Howard is a health physicist who served 18 years in radiation control programs for Utah and six years with Envirocare of Utah.