UPF Lawsuit

NUKEWATCH WORK PRODUCT

NUKEWATCH MEDIA

Atomic Histories & Nuclear Testing

VIEW OUR RICH ARCHIVE OF
NUCLEAR NEWS ARTICLES HERE

LANL’s Central Mission: Los Alamos Lab officials have recently claimed that LANL has moved away from primarily nuclear weapons to “national security”, but what truly remains as the Labs central mission? Here’s the answer from one of its own documents:

LANL’s “Central Mission”- Presented at: RPI Nuclear Data 2011 Symposium for Criticality Safety and Reactor Applications (PDF) 4/27/11

FOLLOW THE MONEY!

LANL Expands Nuclear Bomb Production, Rejects Cleanup, Still Plans to Release Tritium

Sophia Meryn

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, August 3, 2025

Contact: Scott Kovac – 505.316.4148 | Email

Santa Fe, NM – Eighty years after the first radioactive waste was buried at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), Lab officials have released plans to “defer” cleanup of one of the older radioactive dumps. Material Disposal Area C (“Area C”) is an 11.8-acre site that was active from 1948 to 1974. It contains metals, hazardous constituents, and radioactively and chemically contaminated materials in six unlined disposal pits and 108 shafts. The total waste and fill in the pits and shafts are estimated at 198,104 cubic meters. Area C also has a serious gas plume of industrial solvents. Given the amount of long-lived plutonium wastes that are likely to be in Area C, leaving it buried 25 feet deep in a landfill rated for only 1,000 years is not acceptable.

On June 18, 2025, the Department of Energy (DOE) sent the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) a letter outlining its plans to “defer corrective action” (i.e. cleanup) at Area C. It stated that the dump “is associated with active Facility operations and will be deferred from further corrective action under [NMED’s] Consent Order [governing cleanup] until MDA C is no longer associated with active Facility operations.”

Continue reading

NukeWatch Compilation of the DOE/NNSA FY 2020 Budget Request – VIEW

LANL FY 2020 Budget Request – VIEW

Sandia FY 2020 Budget Request – VIEW

Livermore Lab FY 2020 Budget Chart – Courtesy TriValley CAREs – VIEW

UPF Lawsuit Documents & Resources

Memo from David Jackson on Seismic Risks at UPF

"I have reviewed the relevant documents associated with NNSA’s analysis of seismic risks at the Y-12 National Security Complex, and I find the agency’s analysis to be badly lacking. In my expert opinion, NNSA’s review is not a scientifically based review of seismic risks."

Memo from Robert Alvarez on Inadequacy of Existing DOE/NNSA UPF & Y-12 Site Analyses

"In my expert opinion, the NNSA's current methodology for reviewing the environmental impacts of its modernization of the Y -12 National Security Complex falls far short of what is logically or legally required, in large part because the NNSA is failing to consider its actions as a unified whole."

2019

November 12, 2019

 Reply to Government RE: Motion to Enforce November 2019

 Government’s Response to Motion to Enforce

 Motion to Enforce October 2019

 NNSA Amended Record of Decision, Oct 2019

Ruling of Judge Pamela Reeves in legal challenge to UPF bomb plant

Response to Government Motion for Summary Judgement and Reply

Exhibit RE: Earthquake Activity

Motion for Summary Judgment

Memo in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment
2017

September 2017

 Answer to Complaint for Relief

September 28, 2017

 Motion to Transfer Venue

September 28. 2017

 Memo Supporting Change of Venue Motion

September 28. 2017

 Declaration by Geoffrey Beausoleil

[embeddoc url="https://nukewatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/UPF-Fact-sheet-6.17.pdf" download="all" viewer="google"]