There was an opinion article in the New York Times about the former Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant that was intended to create an emotional response, or at least it created an emotional response from me. The first sentence reports that the author grew up “…in the shadow of a nuclear bomb factory, so I read the just-released report on the Fukushima meltdown in Japan with special interest.” You have to read several paragraphs before you find why the author had a special interest in the Japanese disaster. “The connection between Fukushima and Rocky Flats was made explicit when recent soil tests for offsite plutonium at Rocky Flats found cesium — from Fukushima.”
Linking Fukushima to Rocky Flats is puzzling. The plant never had a nuclear reactor or a tsunami. There are background levels of cesium around where the plant once operated, but the same can be said of any other location in the world. Am I being too suspicious that the author has written a book about Rocky Flats that might sell better if there is some connection, no matter how tenuous, with a recent disaster?
The local cities, State of Colorado, and Environmental Protection Agency all performed independent monitoring of the site, and probably would find a comment about “little environmental oversight” to be surprising. The State of Colorado funded a massive nine year long project to study Rocky Flats, the environment around the plant, and risks to people living in the area. That one study is an example that oversight was extensive, and “extensive” is undoubtedly understated.
The most shocking statement in the article is that there was “…potentially three tons of plutonium…” released by Rocky Flats. Vincent Carroll has an article in the Denver Post titled “Again, raising a false alarm” (yes, I plagiarized part of my title to this posting from his) in which he describes how he contacted the author to learn the source of that statement. “She responded in some detail, basing her case on various estimates of what’s known as Material Unaccounted For, or MUF…” She does note that there is “…some plausible explanation for where the MUF went—such as in waste drums buried at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory—hardly pose a threat to metro residents.”
The actual releases ranged from as few as two ounces but less than thirty ounces released from all routine operations, storage areas, and fires over the life of the plant. Details are given in Chapter Twenty-five of “An Insider’s View of Rocky Flats” with reference to the Colorado agency that completed the nine year assessment of plutonium releases from the plant.
The New York Times article proves the adage that goes something like, “It is easier to make an accusation than it is to explain the truth.” I do give points for creative language. I don’t recall seeing “profoundly contaminated” and “drenched in plutonium” in previous articles that were critical of Rocky Flats.