Inspector General Audit of EPA RadNet system during Fukushima disaster highlights weaknesses of key national asset

Author: 4 Comments Share:

An April 19th report by the EPA Inspector General’s Office casts more doubt on an already embattled radiation monitoring system in the United States after the 2011 Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan.

This week in retort, the EPA stated emphatically that it stands by its radiation detection work in the aftermath of the Fukushima disaster.

However, advocacy groups – including the Natural Resources Defense Council, Physicians for Social Responsibility and Committee to Bridge the Gap – have repeatedly raised concerns about broken and out of service monitors in an August 2011 letter to the agency and during an October 2011 presentation to top EPA officials in Washington.


The RadNet Monitoring System and Operational Philosophy

In essence, the RadNet monitoring system consists of 124 stations scattered throughout U.S. territories and 40 deployable air monitors that can be sent to take readings anywhere, according to the IG report. The monitoring stations collect air, precipitation, drinking water and milk samples for analysis of radioactivity.

The RadNet system is managed by the RadNet Real-Time Air Monitoring operations manager, NAREL.  Computers at the EPA National Air and Radiation Environmental Laboratory in Montgomery, Ala., continuously review real-time air monitor data from the stations.

The RadNet operations manager has no backup person. The NAREL acting director acknowledged that staffing was a critical area to be resolved, but did not present any specific plans for resolution.

In addition, volunteer operators are expected to change the particulate air filters at the stations twice per week and send them to Montgomery for a more detailed analysis that can detect radiation the real-time computer monitoring cannot.

 Continued on Page 2…

[adsense]

Previous Article

TEPCO plans to divert 1,000 tons of contaminated water per day flooding Fukushima Daiichi reactors into the Pacific Ocean

Next Article

Japanese officials push for complete rewrite of national nuclear safety standards

4 Comments

  1. BTW: Dick Cheney sits on the Board of the Company that got a “sole source” contract for operation and repair of these monitors…

    I do not believe that they have been calibrated properly and or not still under the control of the US Government.

    Like Japan, once citizens start posting their own readings, the Government will then have to start posting actual rather than fictional feel good radiation readings…

    Until then trust your own Geiger Counter not the Government’s…

  2. >>> It’s interesting that the EPA wanted this sentence edited out of the report:

    “As a result, EPA may not have sufficient data to determine levels of airborne radioactivity and the associated threat to public health and the environment.”

    >>> And they didn’t want it referred to as a “Japan nuclear emergency,” they want it called a “Japan nuclear incident.”

    Page 45:

    http://www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2012/20120419-12-P-0417.pdf

    Four nuclear meltdowns…I think that qualifies as an emergency.

    By the way, another great summation, Lucas.

Leave a Reply