Larry Luong, Contributing Writer, Daily Californian, April 19, 1996

Residents Question Lab Safety: Despite Expansion, Officials Call Health Risks Unlikely

Frustrated area residents grilled officials from the Lawrence Berkeley National Lab over proposals to expand the facility's waste storage sites, raising health and safety concerns during a public information session Wednesday night.

Residents Question Lab Safety: Despite Expansion, Officials Call Health Risks Unlikely

"We want to know the figures and the facts," said Frederica Drotos, who lives near the lab, "What are the health risks?"

Wednesday night's meeting was the fourth public information session held by lab officials since September. Lab administrators want to modify their permit with the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) to allow them to expand their waste storage facilities.

Such a modification would permit expansion of the lab's current storage facility from 3,000 square feet to 8,000 square feet. It also would permit officials to add a new 12,000 square foot storage site, slated to be completed in August. The lab would then be capable of storing 5,060 gallons of mixed waste, a combination of materials classified as either hazardous or radioactive.

Residents have raised concerns over tritium gas, a radioactive isotope of hydrogen used in cancer research. While the lab traps most of the tritium vapor produced during experiments, some escapes into the air.

Chris Whipple, a private researcher who lab officials asked to review an environmental assessment conducted in response to residents' concerns over tritium emissions, told those who attended the meeting that tritium exposures have been "very low compared to EPA standards."

Whipple added that the lab's tritium emissions last year would equal about one-third of a cup of water if condensed.

Residents also expressed concern that disaster situations could unleash such toxins from lab facilities. They questioned lab officials about "worst case scenarios," such as an earthquake hitting the area or a fire, like the 1991 Berkeley/Oakland Hills fire, burning down the lab.

"The 1991 fire was a meltdown," said Berkeley resident L A Wood "Your (safety precautions) are nothing."

Robin Lendt, the waste management project leader, said yesterday that the prevention mechanisms in the lab make the possibility of fire "highly unlikely."

"It just wouldn't happen," Lendt said. "The waste-handling facilities are made of metal (with) two-hour fire-rating walls, and (if fire) affected the integrity of the storage facility there are fire suppression (mechanisms)."

Officials also said that the wastes stored in the lab do not pose a major health concern for area residents.

"The (radiation) levels are so low, I can't lose sleep over it," said Brian Smith, head of the lab waste minimization group.

Doris Willingham, a member of a local residents group called the Committee to Minimize Toxic Waste, said she was not completely satisfied with officials' answers to safety concerns.

"I don't think you have convinced us that your facilities are (located) in the best site," she said. "You have not proven your preparedness for a worst-case scenario."