[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Livermore Pu



It's interesting that they accept Livermore's sample results, and are
willing to accept their technology to clean up the Pu, but not their
scientific judgment as to its distribution, nor even any validity to EPA's
screening level. But you are dealing with a "one particle theory" crowd, so
rational thinking isn't necessarily a prerequisite to the discussion. If it
were, they might recognize that tax dollars are tax dollars-if it bothers
them that much, they have every right to clean it up with local tax dollars
or see if the federal government will chip in outside of Livermore. Kind of
like people who say over-population is the world's biggest problem-none of
them ever offer to remove themselves as part of the solution.
Jack

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Susan Gawarecki [SMTP:loc%icx.net@inet.rfets.gov]
	Sent:	Thursday, February 18, 1999 8:40 AM
	To:	Multiple recipients of list
	Subject:	Livermore Pu

	The following is a cross-post from the Center for Public
Environmental
	Oversight.  Obviously there are concerned citizens who believe the
level
	of Pu in the park is potentially dangerous to their children.  Any
	comments?

	Subject: 
	        More plutonium at Livermore park
	   Date: 
	        Wed, 17 Feb 1999 10:53:10 -0800
	   From: 
	        marylia@igc.org (marylia)
	     To: 
	        cpeo-military@igc.org




	Hi. There is an address for your written or email comments at the
end,
	along with public meeting info.

	More Plutonium Found in Park: Lab Says No Action Needed

	by Marylia Kelley
	from Tri-Valley CAREs' February 1999 newsletter, Citizen's Watch

	Three times, soil samples have been collected from a city park
	near Livermore Lab and tested for plutonium.

	Three times, the test results have come back positive. High levels
of
	plutonium have been found - in the loose dirt in the park, along a
	baseball
	diamond that sits between the park and the adjacent elementary
school
	and
	in a picnic area nearby.

	And, three times, Lab officials have rushed to assert that there is
no
	harm
	to human health or the environment from the plutonium, and that no
	cleanup
	or follow up action  is warranted.

	Plutonium is a man-made, radioactive metal used to create the atomic
	explosion that is at the core of a modern nuclear weapon. Plutonium
239,
	the bomb-grade isotope found in the park, has a radioactive
half-life of
	24,000 years. A material's hazardous life is generally calculated to
be
	10
	times its half-life. Thus, plutonium is, in human terms, forever.
The
	Lab
	has around 880 pounds of it on hand, enough for nearly 100 modern
	nuclear
	weapons.

	There is no safe level of plutonium exposure. A microscopic
particle, if
	inhaled, can cause cancer and other diseases.

	A problem is discovered

	Plutonium pollution was first discovered in  Big Trees Park when the
EPA
	analyzed a single dirt sample there. The EPA also took one sample
each
	from
	two other Livermore parks. The agency expected all three to be at
	"background," and to use them as a comparison for known plutonium

	contamination at the Lab.

	All 3 samples came up dirty, and the one from Big Trees Park
contained
	the
	highest level of plutonium. Big Trees is about one-half mile west of
	Livermore Lab.

	EPA uses a "background" range (representing global fallout levels
from
	nuclear testing) of .001 to .01 picocuries of plutonium per gram of
	soil.
	The initial sample taken from Big Trees Park measured .164, between
16
	and
	160 times "background."

	Amidst pressure from Tri-Valley CAREs and others, the Lab conducted
a
	limited number of soil tests at Big Trees Park in 1995. Those test
	results
	turned up even higher levels of plutonium,  including a finding of
1.02
	picocuries per gram, up to 1,000 times higher than attributable to
	global
	fallout. The highest levels of plutonium were found in the top two
	inches
	of dirt in the park.

	The EPA's "screening level" for plutonium in residential soil is
	2.5 picocuries per gram. So, while elevated levels of plutonium have
	been
	found atop park soils in which children run, dig and play, the
community
	has no regulatory mechanism to enforce cleanup. And, we still have
	questions about how the plutonium traveled to the parks and what the
	potential might be that other,  undiscovered, "hot spots" are
lurking
	within the community.

	Health agencies come to town

	Because the Lab is on the EPA's list of worst contaminated sites in
the
	nation (the Superfund), the federal ATSDR (Agency for Toxic
Substances
	Disease Registry) came to town to conduct a public health
assessment.
	Working through a cooperative agreement, the California Department
of
	Health Services and ATSDR together set up a "site team"  to guide
their
	assessment (which includes Tri-Valley CAREs' Stephanie Ericson),
held
	public meetings and undertook to write a health consultation on
	plutonium
	in Livermore.

	We shared our files with the agencies. In addition to data on
plutonium
	in
	the parks, we had information about plutonium accidents at the Lab,
	including several where the radioactive metal had been washed down
Lab
	drains and carried to the city sewage treatment plant. In a 1967
	accident,
	the Lab estimated it sent a half-gram of plutonium  to the sewage
plant.
	>From '67 until the early '70s that plutonium-laden sludge was given
to
	unknowing residents to use as fertilizer in their lawns and gardens.

	The draft plutonium health consultation, released in 1998, discussed
the
	sludge problem, pointing out that the Lab may have systematically
	underestimated the amount of plutonium in the sludge by failing to
	analyze
	the solids where it would likely concentrate. The consult also
covered
	the
	plutonium pollution in Big Trees Park. Whether the health agencies
will
	make final recommendations, and what those recommendations will be
is
	the
	subject of a crucial public meeting on February 17. Your voice is
	needed.
	(See Citizen's Alerts on page 3.)

	A third round of soil tests

	Last year, again under pressure, Livermore Lab decided to undertake
	another, more thorough, series of soil tests at Big Trees Park. The
	sampling goal was two-fold: to find out whether there was more
plutonium
	and to shed some light on how it got there.


	Wind, water and contaminated sludge formed the three basic theories
on
	how
	the plutonium got to the park. Airborne emissions from the Lab (due
to
	accidents and/or routine operations) could have transported it
there. If
	this is so, it is likely that other "hot spots" exist around
Livermore.
	A
	second possibility is via the  creek that cuts through the Lab
before
	going
	past the park. Plutonium may have entered the creek as storm run-off
and
	been tracked by kids and machines up into the park. Third, the Lab
	hypothesized, plutonium contaminated sludge could have been used on
the
	ornamental trees when they were planted in the early 1970s. This was
	repeatedly denied by the sewage treatment plant and the parks
district.

	The results

	Late last month, Livermore Lab released the sampling results. High
	levels
	of plutonium were found at numerous sites in the park, near (but not
in)
	the creek, along the ball field and by a little grassy hill between
the
	park and the sidewalk.  Somewhat elevated levels of plutonium were
also
	found behind an apartment complex between the Lab and the park. The
	highest
	concentration of plutonium found was .774 picocuries per gram, up to
700
	times "background," but below the EPA's screening level. Once again,
	most
	of the plutonium was found in the top two inches of dirt.

	The Lab took samples in tree wells. No plutonium was found in
samples
	about
	twenty inches deep, around the roots. So, the city was correct, and
no
	contaminated sludge was used in their planting. The Lab took samples
in
	the
	historic creek bed, covered over when the park was created and the
creek
	was rechanneled. Again, no findings. The way the plutonium is
	distributed
	suggests that it may have traveled by air to the park. The hottest
spots
	somewhat follow a line from the Lab's plutonium facility to the
park,
	and
	in some cases, but not all, the highest concentrations fall out
about
	forty
	inches or so away from the trees - which may have "captured" the
	airborne
	plutonium particles that then washed down when it rained.

	Livermore Lab, however, is aggressively pushing a new sludge theory:
	Namely that an unknown resident had an unknown amount of
contaminated
	sludge which he or she put  around the trees at an unknown time
after
	they
	were planted, for an assumed reason - to be helpful. The closer one
	looks
	at the Lab's "evidence" the more unlikely it seems. For example, the
Lab
	found lower concentrations of other metals than you would expect to
find
	if
	sewer sludge had been put on the trees. The Lab theorizes that the
other
	metals washed away. One could go on. It's all possible, but not
likely.
	In
	fact, the motivation seems political, not scientific. The Lab
appears
	unwilling to consider that the pollution source may be the
still-active
	plutonium facility and not a single, discrete occurrence from the
	distant
	past.

	Recommendations

	1. Sampling should be done of other likely "hot spots," including
east
	of
	the Lab where plutonium has been found in off site air monitors.
Samples
	should be analyzed for particle size to help determine the amounts
of
	plutonium escaping through the filtering system. (More on filter
	problems

	in an upcoming issue.)

	2. "Hot spots" should be cleaned up. There is no excuse for the Lab
	leaving
	elevated levels of plutonium in a park.

	3. The Lab should institute changes in its filter maintenance and
	operational procedures in the plutonium facility to help minimize
	further
	releases.

	4. The plutonium facility should rapidly be phased out of operation.

	5. The California Dept. of Health Services should head up an
	investigation
	into where the contaminated sludge ended up. The Lab should pay for
	sampling on demand for any area residents who think they may have
gotten
	plutonium-laden sludge for their home use.

	(Please attend a public meeting on Wednesday, February 17 at 6 PM.
The
	meeting will be held at the Marriott Hotel at 2600 Bishop Dr. in San
	Ramon,
	and is sponsored by the federal health agency ATSDR. If you cannot
	attend,
	send your comments and recommendations to: Paul Charp, mail stop
E-56,
	ATSDR, 1600 Clifton Rd. NE, Atlanta, GA 30333. Paul's phone is (404)
	639-6004. His email is <PAC4@cdc.gov>)

	Marylia Kelley
	Tri-Valley CAREs
	(Communities Against a Radioactive Environment)
	2582 Old First Street
	Livermore, CA USA 94550

	<http://www.igc.org/tvc/> - is our web site, please visit us there!

	(925) 443-7148 - is our phone
	(925) 443-0177 - is our fax

	Working for peace, justice and a healthy environment since 1983,
	Tri-Valley
	CAREs has been a member of the nation-wide Alliance for Nuclear
	Accountability in the U.S. since 1989, and is a co-founding member
of
	the
	international Abolition 2000 network for the elimination of nuclear
	weapons.

	[end cross-post]

	-- 
	==================================================
	Susan L. Gawarecki, Ph.D., Executive Director
	Oak Ridge Reservation Local Oversight Committee, Inc.
	136 South Illinois Avenue, Suite 208
	Oak Ridge, Tennessee  37830
	Phone (423) 483-1333; Fax (423) 482-6572; E-mail loc@icx.net
	VISIT OUR UPDATED WEB SITE:  http://www.local-oversight.org
	==================================================
	
************************************************************************
	The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and
subscription
	information can be accessed at
http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html