• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

Recent administrative action that would allow a 1,540-pound increase in the amount of plutonium stored at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory is causing concern over the possible health hazards to surrounding residents.

According to a new environmental impact statement by the National Nuclear Society Administration (NNSA) to be released today, the amount of allowable plutonium stored at the University of California-managed lab and handled by scientists in individual rooms would double, permitting multiple research experiments to occur at the same time. The new, less stringent restrictions would potentially allow a total of 1.5 tons of plutonium into the facility over the next decade.

The increase in plutonium levels would allow the laboratory to conduct more experiments regarding national security. John Belardo, a member of the nuclear administration, said the reason for the enlargement of the plutonium storage is “potentially to conduct classified research experiments for the NNSA.”

“Although (the legislation) raises the administrative limit, it does not necessarily mean we’ll take the amount of plutonium to that level,” he added.

Plutonium is a radioactive material that is used to make nuclear bombs. Scientists at the laboratory are researching ways to apply plutonium’s ability to generate a nuclear chain-reaction to the manufacturing and redesigning of nuclear technology. According to an April 23 article in the Oakland Tribune, one reason for the increase may be a new laboratory experimental production line for casting plutonium pits. These, along with explosives and detonators, could serve as miniature atomic bombs.

Tom Grim, who managed the environmental impact statement with a group of 20 writers, contradicted this, saying, “The reason for the new limit is to store excess plutonium. Some of the facilities to dispose of that plutonium have already started, and some will take over a decade. We accumulate this excess plutonium and store it in a bank-like vault.”

Plutonium’s radioactivity, as well as possible safety breaches within the actual laboratory, have many California environmental groups concerned over the increase of the material within the facility.

“There is a long history of plutonium leaks at the Livermore lab. It has escaped from the lab and turned up in the community, and workers are exposed. It is true to say that our health is at risk,” said Marylia Kelley of the Tri-Valley CARES, a Northern California environmental group.

“The plutonium, in exposed victims, can tear up the cell in cellular DNA, causing medical problems anywhere from cancer to a suppressed immune system,” she said.

Within the past decade, the lab has been shut down three times because of safety breaches. Plutonium has escaped from smoke stacks, been accidentally dumped into drains and has escaped through ventilation ducts that were covered using only duct tape. The lab has been shut down since Jan. 15 of this year for further safety inspections, according to Kelley.

“The other problem is with safety management. There are no safety procedures because they don’t even have enough to know the magnitude of the safety problems,” Kelley said. She added that the plutonium may be vulnerable to theft or terror attacks because of the location of the laboratory in an urban area.

Grim said the new amount of plutonium stored at the facility would cause no further safety risks.

“We already store plutonium. Storing more will not be any additional risk,” he said.

But Kelley pointed out that the use and storage of plutonium within the lab is unneeded and poses a safety risk.

“The small fraction of work that needs to be done could be done at the more isolated Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico without vamping up their plutonium activity. We believe that this impact statement is 180 degrees the wrong way to go. The Department of Energy should make a decision to reduce the plutonium at Livermore, not increase it,” she said.