Nuclear material doled out ‘like it was candy’ 50 years ago |
Valley News Dispatch

Nuclear material doled out ‘like it was candy’ 50 years ago

Mary Ann Thomas
Robert Alvarez

Maybe the only way to know the whereabouts of 200 pounds of bomb-grade uranium allegedly missing from an Apollo processing plant since the 1960s is to dig up the skeletons in the backyard — a 50-year-old nuclear waste dump.

The Nuclear Materials and Equipment Corp. (NUMEC) of Apollo came up short on highly enriched uranium in 1965, essentially bomb-grade nuclear material for a nuclear-fueled rocket intended to fly to Mars.

The company and its officers were suspected by some of diverting the uranium to Israel for its secret bomb program, but there was no hard evidence and numerous government investigations over the decades came up empty — no indictments, no charges and no definitive information on where the material could be.

To really know what happened to the highly enriched uranium, a mass balance — a calculation of what went in and what went out of the plant — has to be done, said Robert Alvarez, a project director and associate fellow at the Institute for Policy Studies and a former senior policy adviser to the U.S. Department of Energy.

And a mass balance can't be done until the Army Corps of Engineers is done digging up, identifying and shipping out up to 100,000 tons of nuclear waste at NUMEC's dump in Parks Township — a job that will take at least a decade.

“That's the only way,” Alvarez said. “Someone with proper clearances, when the burial ground is exhumed, will know.”

Alvarez doesn't subscribe to the diversion theory. When he worked at the DOE and received CIA assessments, he said, “You can't get enamored with the information. You've got to realize intelligence isn't necessarily the truth. It's an art form.”

As world leaders try to decrease the world's stockpile of highly enriched uranium — atomic bomb material — NUMEC stands as the first major investigation into the possible trade of bomb material.

It remains one of the most famous nuclear mysteries 50 years later.

“Imagine sending out many tons of (highly enriched uranium) to countries around the world for 10 years,” Alvarez said. “We would never do that today.”

But the United States did, sending tons of the stuff around the world during the 1960s and 1970s under a program started by President Dwight Eisenhower called “Atoms for Peace.”

“There was a great effort by (the Atomic Energy Commission) to commercialize nuclear energy and they were doing everything to attract private business to get contracts.

“They were doling out tons of fissile materials like it was candy,” he said.

Private companies such as NUMEC fabricated and sold nuclear fuel for nuclear reactors and other applications.

Today, the U.S. Department of Energy's National Security Administration conducts nuclear material accounting, “but they have not paid much attention to places like (NUMEC),” Alvarez said.

“Where (highly enriched uranium) went is important these days,” he said. “This is a material that fuels some of the world's most destructive weapons. We need to keep track of this stuff as much we can.”

Mary Ann Thomas is a Tribune-Review staff writer. She can be reached at 724-226-4691, [email protected] or via twitter @MaThomas_Trib.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.