Much is already known about the Separations Process Research Unit (SPRU) from studies conducted after its shut-down in 1954. A 95-page document presents results of a 1984 study done by KAPL that concludes the facility should be completely dismantled and removed, at an estimated cost of $50.7 million. Although little follow-up occurred after the study, its findings differ markedly from the recently volunteered information.

KAPL now states that SPRU was considered to be a very low priority because there is no exposure concern. However, the 1984 study (obtained through a Freedom of Information request) acknowledged exposure concern in recommending that, "the long-range plan for the SPRU complex should be complete removal because other alternatives evaluated present various degrees of health and safety risk to both KAPL employees and the public as long as the facility remains.

How radioactive?

Additionally, KAPL now states that the amount of radioactivity they are concerning themselves with, in many cases, is lower than what would naturally occur in any soil. But, if it requires six years to complete the testing and cataloging of contaminants, by what means does KAPL foresee such subminimal radiation levels? In any case, this claim is contradicted by 1989 soil samples taken from the weapons factory contamination in the KAPL parking lot that measure radiation 1.200 percent greater than background.

However, it is the five sealed SPRU cells and the tank storage farm that contain the mother lode of all radioactivity at the site. KAPL itself now verifies that high levels of radioactivity are involved - by identifying the destination for SPRU waste as Yucca Mountain, the yet-to-be-completed US. "high level" waste repository in Nevada. A most worrisome, and relevant, statement in the 1984 study reads, "The potential for radioactive release is higher for complete demolition and removal of SPRU than for other courses of action during the active work phase." Demolition and removal are the actions now being undertaken by the Department of Energy.

The 1984 report identifies many occupied areas to be decontaminated and stabilized. The following are a few of the disturbing specifics:

• Structural (radioactive) contamination of Buildings G-2 and H-2 is extensive. Decontamination of these structures to unconditional release status cannot be achieved short of total demolition. Radioactivity outside of the SPRU cells and tunnels is slowly moving into the accessible areas and the fixed contamination in the accessible areas Is becoming loose.

• In 1979, it was determined that above-normal radiation levels were present in Room 154 office space. The floor was shielded with two Inches of lead and a false floor constructed. Personnel are presently housed above the shielding.

• In 1983, toilet facilities were closed off and isolated after the discovery of loose surface contamination In one of the over-head light fixtures, behind the partition, on the floor, and in wall penetrations. Isotopic analysis of the contamination indicated the presence of Cs-137 and Plutonium-239.

And finally, though your article identifies the U.S. Department of Energy, and not Naval Reactors, as conducting the cleanup, it does not indicate whether this work is in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act requirement for preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).

EIS needed

Since the 1984 study indicated a high potential for radioactive releases during demolition, and since no other DOE weapons factory cleanup has ever been initiated without an EIS, state and local officials should make certain that an acceptable Environmental Impact Statement exists before any further work proceeds on SPRU. It just so happens to be the law of the land.

Robert G. Stater, of Glenville, is a
nuclear engineer and a former KAPL employee.