[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Brookhaven National Lab
Perhaps an excerpt from a DOE report, "Integrated Safety Management Evaluation
of the Brookhaven National Laboratory," April 1997, will help explain.
"In 1986, potable supply Well#1, south of the HFBR, was found to contain
volatile organic compounds and tritium at levels higher than previously noted.
The well was closed due to the level of volatile organic compounds, but the
source of the tritium was not pursued by management.
"A BNL engineering analysis of a 1992 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Information Notice indicated a need for three to five monitoring wells down
gradient of the HFBR (i.e., south of the HFBR; and the direction of the
groundwater flow is to the sourth). These wells were not installed, and the
responsibility and the basis for this managment decision cannot be
ascertained. Documentation is not available to support this decision.
"In 1993, the EH Spent Fuel Vulnerability report noted that leakage from the
unlined HFBR fuel canal could go undetected. Based on input from the site,
that report incorrectly indicated that the fuel canal was being monitored for
leakage through groundwater monitoring wells. BHG [Brookhaven Group] and BNL
management did not challenge this conclusion or take action to install
monitoring wells.
"In 1995, as a result of a seal failure on a primary coolant pump in the HFBR,
water containing very high levels of tritium was released into the reactor
building equipment space. Alghouth some primary coolant could not be
accounted for, site management did not take action to determine whether this
primary coolant could have leaked into the groundwater, nor did they assess
the deteriorating condition of the floor seal material.
"In 1995, the tritium levels within the fuel canal increased significantly,
but the source was never investigated or determined; management did not take
actions to reduce the tritium levels and address the potential increased
threat to groundwater.
...
"In 1994, BNL made a commitment to the Suffolk County Department of Health
Services under Article 12 of their sanitary code (which covers storage tanks
containing hazardous materials) to install two monitoring wells south of the
HFBR, but did not follow through.
"In 1995, BNL made a decision to delay installation of the HFBR monitoring
wells because of funding reductions; BNL did not adequately consider the
commitment to Suffolk County in the decision process."
A urge you to look at the complete report, on the Web at:
http://tis-hq.eh.doe.gov/web/eh2/bnl/bnl_apr97.html
I suggest to my colleagues at BNL that the only way to maintain any chance of
keeping the Lab open is to stop denying that there's a problem and demonstrate
that you are taking comprehensive and effective corrective actions to provide
a reasonable assurance that there will not be any similar events in the future.
The opinions expressed are strictly mine.
Here's to a risk free world, and other fantasies.
Bill Lipton
liptonw@detroitedison.com
Ed, why is BNL being attacked?
----------
> From: kaplan@bnl.gov
> To: Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
> Subject: Brookhaven National Lab
> Date: Thursday, September 04, 1997 10:27 AM
>
> This is being forwarded for Friends of BNL, an ad-hoc group of
scientists,
> engineers, union folks, etc ...
>
> In <E0x6GfH-0006oT-00@users.buoy.com>, on 09/03/97 at 10:44 AM,
> Friends of BNL <fob@users.buoy.com> said:
>
>
> >Yesterday, (Tuesday, Sept. 2), Congressman Forbes and Senator D'Amato
> >introduced legislation in both houses to permanently shut down the High
> >Flux Beam Reactor at Brookhaven National Laboratory.
>
> >This action short-circuits a process which is already underway to
> >determine whether or not the HFBR should restart. The current process
> >includes input from experts and the local community and will take into
> >account the value of HFBR research as well as environmental and safety
> >concerns.
>
> >Friends of Brookhaven, Brookhaven Scientists Association, and the BNL
Retired
> >Employees Association, are protesting this legislation with a petition
> >which was circulated today at lunchtime (wednesday Sept. 3) at
> >Berkner cafeteria. Over 600 signed petitions will be delivered to
Congressman
> >Forbes' office during a rally there tomorrow.
>
> >If the HFBR is shut down, any one of the other major scientific
> >facilities at BNL may be the next target.
>
> >A copy of the petition is available at the Friends of Brookhaven web
> >site, http://www.buoy.com/~fob/)
>
> >Sincerely,
> >Friends Of Brookhaven
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------
> Be happy and connect!
> kaplan@bnl.gov [Ed Kaplan (516) 344-2007 (voice)/5810 (fax)]
Brookhaven
> National Laboratory
> ----------------------------------------------------
>