Skip to main content

Feds say LANL Failed to Track Toxic Beryllium

Feds say LANL Failed to Track Toxic Beryllium

By Rebecca Moss | The New Mexican Feb 23, 2018 

Federal officials say Los Alamos National Laboratory failed to keep track of a toxic metal, potentially exposing an unknown number of workers to serious health consequences.

The failure to adequately track beryllium — a substance used in nuclear weapons production and of which small amounts can cause lung disease and cancer — violates federal regulations put in place to prevent worker overexposure, according to a report released this week by the Energy Department’s inspector general.


http://www.santafenewmexican.com/news/local_news/feds-say-lanl-failed-to-track-toxic-beryllium/article_30900b79-4331-568a-a3dc-7d03ad5e25a6.html

Comments

Anonymous said…
Could this be the next $100M screw up by LANL?
Anonymous said…
No. (Deleted 3 times. Simple question, simple answer, but Scooby can't handle that?) Please explain how that violates the rules?????
Anonymous said…
Beryllium is a controlled substance under OSHA Subpart Z and thus also DOE 851. IF the Lab failed to properly control it and workers exposure to it then yes, the Lab (DOE/NNSA and contractor (LANS)) could be open to multi-million dollar lawsuits and hundreds of thousands of dollars in fines.
Anonymous said…
"If...then. And if...then...could..." Hardly a convincing argument.
Anonymous said…
The Laboratory has never properly controlled beryllium. There ARE multiple, multi-million dollar lawsuits and claims against them. Most of them are won with plaintiffs on their death beds. Go LANS!
Anonymous said…
So all these lawsuits that "ARE" against them "are won"??? Prescient much?

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.

Why Workplace Jargon Is A Big Problem

From the Huffington Post Why Workplace Jargon Is A Big Problem http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/25/work-words_n_5159868.html?utm_hp_ref=business&ir=Business When we replace a specific task with a vague expression, we grant the task more magnitude than it deserves. If we don't describe an activity plainly, it seems less like an easily achievable goal and more like a cloudy state of existence that fills unknowable amounts of time. A fog of fast and empty language has seeped into the workplace. I say it's time we air it out, making room for simple, concrete words, and, therefore, more deliberate actions. By striking the following 26 words from your speech, I think you'll find that you're not quite as overwhelmed as you thought you were. Count the number that LLNLs mangers use.  touch base circle back bandwidth - impactful - utilize - table the discussion deep dive - engagement - viral value-add - one-sheet deliverable - work product - incentivise - take it to the ...