Public Opposes Nuclear Weapons Production at Los Alamos National
Laboratory
The August 9th meeting was the second of three public comment hearings held
by DOE to receive verbal comment on the draft Site-Wide Environmental Impact
Statement (SWEIS) for Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL). As a part of
expanded nuclear weapons production, the draft SWEIS states that 1,800
55-gallon drums of waste, 860 cubic yards of transuranic waste, 12,000 cubic
yards of low-level radioactive waste and 2,750,000 pounds of chemical waste
would be generated annually. The operations would require more water than
LANL is currently allotted from the regional aquifer, and would result in
LANL dumping 268 million gallons of industrial and sanitary waste water
annually into canyons which flow to the Rio Grande.
The DOE, who facilitated and organized the meeting, did not make a statement concerning the bombing of Nagasaki. When asked before the meeting if they
planned to, Elizabeth Withers, the DOEÕs manager for the SWEIS process, said that she would not feel comfortable leading a moment of silence in
recognition of the deaths because it would violate the separation of church
and state. She had no explanation for why DOE scheduled a hearing on that
day.
All the people who spoke opposed the proposed expansion of nuclear weapons
production. Many were concerned about the health impacts and the threat
that accidents, such as fire and earthquake, would have on their families.
Many spoke of the disproportionate impact operations have on low income and
minority communities which surround LANL. For example, LANL has not changed the economic situation for most people who live in surrounding communities. While Los Alamos County is the wealthiest county in the United States, several of the surrounding counties are some of the poorest.
One commenter stated that the DOE did not reach out far enough into the
surrounding communities about the hearings, indicating Òthe process was
purposefully done that actively or inactively, prevented people from knowing about their right to comment. And as a result, tens of thousands of people
have been disenfranchised.Ó
Many who spoke believed that DOE would disregard their opinions. Jan
Wilcynski-Chavez, DOE Deputy Manager at LANL, although unwilling to make a
statement, expressed her regret that the public felt their comments would
not be taken into consideration. When asked what public comment she had
heard that evening, if any, she felt was likely to be incorporated into the
final SWEIS, she was unable to offer an example.
Kalliroi Matsakis, of CCNS, said, "the DOEÕs lack of respect for public
comment is demonstrated by the lack of adequate time to prepare for the
hearing and the timing of the hearings."
DOE is legally required to collect and consider the publicÕs
comments. DOE has granted a two-week extension to submit comments until
September 20, 2006.
Learn more about the draft SWEIS
|
