Skip to main content

Flawed program for protecting Livermore lab workers from beryllium comes under federal scrutiny

By Suzanne Bohan, Contra Costa Times

Kelye Allen still speaks with pride about her 18-year career with Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, where she worked as a machinist helping to build components for nuclear weapons.

A feeling of patriotism and duty animates the workforce there, Allen said.

"You want to protect the country," she said. "Stuff we do there directly affects national security."

Along with her enduring pride, however, Allen is left with a permanent health condition from her work with a prized but hazardous metal called beryllium.

The Department of Energy, which oversees the lab, is currently conducting an enforcement investigation into whether the lab violated health and safety regulations related to its chronic beryllium disease prevention program.

On Aug. 3, lab officials will respond during an enforcement conference to preliminary findings by the National Nuclear Security Administration that the lab violated Energy Department regulations. If the agency determines enforcement actions are warranted, the lab could be subject to fines or penalties, or both, said John Belluardo, a spokesman for the nuclear security agency's office at the Livermore site.

"The LLNS system for beryllium hazard identification, assessment and abatement is not as comprehensive or thorough as it should be," Belluardo said.

LLNS refers to the Lawrence Livermore National Security, a partnership including the University of California and several companies led by Bechtel, which operates the lab under contract with the Department of Energy.

The enforcement investigation follows an October 2008 report from the nuclear security agency, which found lapses throughout the beryllium worker-protection program. The agency demanded the lab launch a corrective-action plan, which lab officials implemented earlier this year.

The lab takes the nuclear security agency's findings seriously, stated an e-mail response by lab spokesman Jim Bono.

"The lab has a sound hazards control system in place," he wrote. "However, some mistakes were made with regard to beryllium exposures. We have since taken steps to prevent such events from happening again."

Since a voluntary employee testing program began at the lab in 1999 for beryllium exposure, 1,068 people have been tested, Bono wrote. Of those, 32 were positive for beryllium sensitivity, and three had developed chronic beryllium disease.

Beryllium sensitivity is triggered by inhalation of beryllium dust or possibly through contact with skin. A small percentage of those with the condition develop chronic beryllium disease, which causes scarring of lung tissue and can prove fatal. Beryllium is also considered a human carcinogen.

In September, Allen discovered she had beryllium sensitivity through a free screening program for former lab workers to find out if they were exposed to radioactive or toxic substances. That program began in 2007 for former Livermore Lab and Sandia National Laboratories California division workers, and expanded this past week to cover previous Berkeley Lab workers.

"I was absolutely floored, shocked," said Allen, 49, a San Ramon resident who was laid off in 2008 from Livermore Lab. "I had gone through blood tests at work and had come up negative."

As a machinist, she regularly handled the metal.

The dangers of beryllium, a lightweight metal that stays stable at high temperatures, has long been known. In 1949, the now-defunct United States Atomic Energy Commission set the first workplace standards for beryllium exposure, which are still in effect today. Beryllium is used in a number of industries, including the automotive, electronics, aerospace, medical and defense industries.

And national weapons labs such as Livermore have in place programs to protect workers from beryllium exposure.

Protections at Livermore Lab, however, have been inadequate, concluded the October 2008 report, and possibly in violation of Department of Energy regulations.

The report sought to assess the lab's program for protecting workers from adverse health effects while working with beryllium. It also assessed if the lab had effectively analyzed the reasons behind 11 new cases of beryllium sensitivity found between 2006 and 2008, as well as the factors behind the four "reportable events" of beryllium exposure since 2006 at the lab, such as the discovery that at least 178 contract workers may have been exposed to the metal during a seismic retrofit project.

The report authors noted "deficiencies" and "overall program weakness" in all those areas, backed by observations during lab inspections.

In addition to conducting the enforcement investigation, the National Nuclear Security Administration is monitoring the Livermore lab's corrective action plan for preventing chronic beryllium disease.

"They appear to be making good progress," Belluardo said.

Bono said that after the release of the 2008 report, the lab "temporarily halted beryllium operations last fall to re-evaluate beryllium work controls, procedures and training." It also expanded its beryllium communication and education program for employees, among other measures, in addition to developing the comprehensive plan for improving the lab's chronic beryllium disease protection program.

"The laboratory is committed to improving our ability to protect the health and safety of all workers at the lab, and the NNSA assessment has helped us do that," Bono said.

Reach Suzanne Bohan at 510-262-2789 or sbohan@bayareanewsgroup.com.

Comments

Unknown said…
So, I just went through the screening and am found to have beryllium sensitivity a well. Any folks out there wish to share their experiences? After my discussion this morning with a Boston Univ doctor, I will be getting a second test to assure no false positive. Then a series of intensive tests including a lung biopsy. Any thoughts?

John Ledahl
johnledahl@gmail.com

Popular posts from this blog

Plutonium Shots on NIF.

Tri-Valley Cares needs to be on this if they aren't already. We need to make sure that NNSA and LLNL does not make good on promises to pursue such stupid ideas as doing Plutonium experiments on NIF. The stupidity arises from the fact that a huge population is placed at risk in the short and long term. Why do this kind of experiment in a heavily populated area? Only a moron would push that kind of imbecile area. Do it somewhere else in the god forsaken hills of Los Alamos. Why should the communities in the Bay Area be subjected to such increased risk just because the lab's NIF has failed twice and is trying the Hail Mary pass of doing an SNM experiment just to justify their existence? Those Laser EoS techniques and the people analyzing the raw data are all just BAD anyways. You know what comes next after they do the experiment. They'll figure out that they need larger samples. More risk for the local population. Stop this imbecilic pursuit. They wan...

Trump is to gut the labs.

The budget has a 20% decrease to DOE office of science, 20% cut to NIH. NASA also gets a cut. This will  have a huge negative effect on the lab. Crazy, juts crazy. He also wants to cut NEA and PBS, this may not seem like  a big deal but they get very little money and do great things.

LLNL un-diversity

Actual post from Dec. 15 from one of the streams. This is a real topic. As far as promoting women and minorities even if their qualifications are not as good as the white male scientists, I am all for it. We need diversity at the lab and if that is what it takes, so be it.  Quit your whining. Look around the lab, what do you see? White male geezers. How many African Americans do you see at the lab? Virtually none. LLNL is one of the MOST undiverse places you will see. Face it folks, LLNL is an institution of white male privilege and they don't want to give up their privileged positions. California, a state of majority Hispanics has the "crown jewel" LLNL nestled in the middle of it with very FEW Hispanics at all!