30.10.2014 Views

Plutonium Sludge Case Study - Tri-Valley CAREs

Plutonium Sludge Case Study - Tri-Valley CAREs

Plutonium Sludge Case Study - Tri-Valley CAREs

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

March 1994 Rainwater at LLNL is found to contain tritium at concentrations 7 times higher than state and federal maximum<br />

limits; equipment from Building 331 "off-gassing" is thought to be the cause.<br />

1995 Additional soil sampling in Big Trees Park undertaken jointly by USEPA, LLNL and the State of California reveals<br />

concentrations of plutonium up to 1.02 pCi/g in the top two inches of dirt.<br />

February 7, 1996 Inventory reveals 12 pounds of plutonium at LLNL unaccounted for.<br />

February 7, 1997 HEPA filter failure in Building 321 releases uranium-238.<br />

February 1997 <strong>Plutonium</strong>-contaminated tissue cut out of worker's body.<br />

March 1997 Uranium filings catch fire.<br />

July 2, 1997 Curium contamination during filter shredding operation.<br />

1997 The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) initiates a Public Health Assessment of the<br />

potential human health impacts of Livermore Laboratory’s activities.<br />

1998 LLNL conducts a third round of sampling to investigate plutonium in Big Trees Park. Elevated levels of plutonium<br />

found at numerous sites in the Park, near (but not in) the nearby creek, along the baseball field that borders the<br />

elementary school and by a little grassy hill between the park and the sidewalk. Slightly elevated levels of<br />

plutonium also found behind an apartment complex between LLNL and Big Trees Park.<br />

May 1999 The California Department of Health Services (CDHS) and ATSDR jointly recommend the historic distribution of<br />

sewage sludge be investigated.<br />

November 2002 CDHS concludes, “sludge at LWRP was contaminated by routine and unintentional releases of plutonium from<br />

LLNL … [and] the historic distribution (1958-1976) of sewage sludge from the LWRP poses an indeterminate<br />

health hazard due to a lack of data.” CDHS recommends that “LLNL/DOE [should] provide funding to Alameda<br />

County Department of Health Services to implement a process to address the historic distribution of sludge from<br />

LWRP.”<br />

August 2003 ATSDR concludes, “the historic distribution of Pu-contaminated sewage sludge is determined to be no apparent<br />

public health hazard.”<br />

October 2003 <strong>Plutonium</strong> "glove box" leaks due to missing seal, emergency generator, alarm system and negative air flow<br />

system fail simultaneously.<br />

May to August 2004 LLNL cited for "chronic airborne radiation levels" of plutonium over a 4-month period due to continual use of faulty<br />

equipment in waste packaging operations.<br />

March 2005 LLNL cited for storing plutonium in paint cans and food tins.<br />

April 22, 2005 Radioactive spill at LLNL tracked off-site; spill area left unsecured for several days.<br />

November 2005 U.S. Department of Energy issues decision to double the amount of plutonium that can be kept at Livermore<br />

National Laboratory having determined its review showed no adverse environmental impacts associated with the<br />

weapons research even if more plutonium is made available.<br />

Research Methods<br />

Although the recommendation to investigate the sludge distribution was made jointly by CDHS<br />

and ATSDR, the federal and state researchers completely diverged in their methods of inquiry.<br />

Two research models to address the potential public health impacts of plutonium-contaminated<br />

sludge distribution emerged: (1) A collaborative approach, undertaken by CDHS; and (2) a<br />

dose-assessment approach pursued by ATSDR.<br />

A collaborative approach<br />

Key characteristics of the CDHS research method were: (1) gathering and incorporating of local<br />

knowledge into the scientific analysis; and (2) fostering the growth of mutually respectful<br />

relationships between scientists, governmental, and non-governmental collaborators by<br />

including them in all aspects of the research.<br />

Absent a complete and accurate written record about the sludge, and by virtue of their<br />

commitment to a transparent, collaborative process, CDHS researchers recognized that input<br />

from workers and community members would be essential to their investigation. However, in<br />

8

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!