[Organize] How is Bechtel spending your tax dollars?

[nonlethal film project]

is anyone working on contacting any activists near hanford to see if  
they can do something on aug 6?


On Jul 18, 2006, at 12:09 PM, ralph hutchison wrote:

>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> From: Scott Kovac <scott at nukewatch.org>
> Date: July 18, 2006 11:51:16 AM EDT
> To: <bananas at lists.drizzle.com>
> Subject: [Bananas] This Just In...Estimated cost of Hanford's  
> vitrification plant may increase
>
> http://www.tri-cityherald.com/tch/local/story/7978372p-7871699c.html
>
> Estimated cost of Hanford's vitrification plant may increase
> This story was published Tuesday, July 18th, 2006
> By Annette Cary, Herald staff writer
>
> The estimated price of Hanford's vitrification plant could increase  
> to $13.2
> billion after the Army Corps of Engineers completes a study of the  
> project,
> according to a Washington, D.C., trade publication.
> Weapons Complex Monitor relied on an anonymous source for the  
> information.
> "We have not received any formal transmission from anyone with that
> information," said Carrie Meyer, spokeswoman for Bechtel National, the
> Department of Energy contractor building the plant.
> The Corps is working on a draft report commissioned to validate  
> cost and
> schedule estimates prepared by Bechtel National.
> "We have not received the final report," said Megan Barnett,  
> spokeswoman for
> the Department of Energy in Washington, D.C.
> Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., also still is expecting the report, said
> spokeswoman Jessica Gleason.
> The final report from the Corps was expected by the end of July,  
> according
> to a Bechtel report in June on the plant's cost and schedule.
> Now DOE is saying the Corps report is expected to be issued in late  
> summer.
> In June, Bechtel finished a detailed cost and schedule estimate for  
> the
> plant that estimated the cost at $11.55 billion and the start of  
> operations
> in 2019. DOE gave that report to the Army Corps to validate.
> At the start of 2005, the plant was estimated to cost about $5.8  
> billion and
> was supposed to be ready to begin operating by a 2011 deadline.
> As problems have been revealed since then, Energy Secretary Samuel  
> Bodman
> has called for a valid and defensible cost and schedule estimate.
> Problems have included technical challenges and an earthquake study  
> that
> showed key parts of the plant may not withstand a severe earthquake.
> Congress believes the project should have been better managed, and an
> independent expert review panel said the cost and schedule  
> estimates needed
> a greater contingency. Budget cuts also are adding to the cost  
> increases.
> The plant is intended to turn millions of gallons of radioactive  
> waste held
> in aging underground tanks into a stable glass form for disposal.  
> The waste
> is left from the past production of plutonium for the nation's nuclear
> weapons program.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Organize mailing list
> Organize at august6.org
> http://mail.august6.org/mailman/listinfo/organize_august6.org