Biowarfare on Animals in Livermore

[Guest guest]

Below is an article on the lawsuit against the bioweapons lab that the Bush

administration is trying to build in the bay area. Of relevance to this

list, the lab will test biowarfare agents on animals. From the article:

" The facility would test airborne agents, which could also include

hantavirus, influenza, hepatitis, Q fever, brucellis, herpes and

salmonella, among others, on live animals. "

 

The Livermore non-profit Tri-Valley CAREs is the plaintiff in the lawsuit

and has been very supportive of coalescing with animal rights activists

around this issue. To learn more about the lab, the lawsuit, and how you

can help, go to trivalleycares.org.

 

-Matthew

 

 

http://www.ktvu.com/news/9364574/detail.html?taf=fran

Judge Troubled By Government's Biolab Plans

 

POSTED: 1:59 pm PDT June 13, 2006

UPDATED: 2:02 pm PDT June 13, 2006

SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal appeals court judge said Tuesday she found it

" troublesome " that the Bush administration wants to open a lab for testing

lethal agents including HIV, plague and anthrax in the densely populated

San Francisco Bay Area.

But a U.S. Department of Justice lawyer told the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of

Appeals that the administration had thoroughly researched its plans for a

biodefense lab at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and concluded

there was little risk of a disaster.

If pathogens were to seep from the proposed lab and reach the public, they

would have dispersed into such low concentrations they would be unlikely to

injure anyone, Justice Department attorney Todd Aagaard said.

A lawyer for the lab's opponents sharply disagreed, saying even a small

release could kill thousands.

The government also failed to consider the possibility that a plane or truck

could be deliberately crashed into the site 50 miles east of San Francisco,

said Stephan Volker, the lab opponents' lead attorney.

Instead, the administration used " a one-size-fits-all scenario, borrowed

from another agency " when it studied the possible risks, he told the

judges.

According to Volker, that scenario involved a lab worker failing to properly

screw on the top of a centrifuge containing the biological agent Q fever.

And it hypothesized that all the Q fever would twice pass through

high-technology filters -- what Volker called " the killer " assumption,

because those so-called HEPA filters are highly prone to failure. In a fire

they could become disabled by sprinklers, Volker said.

The Bush adminstration has been preparing the biodefense lab for years, and

said this week it plans to open the facility by August. But local residents

have been fighting it in the courts. A lower federal court said in September

2004 that it could proceed, and the opponents appealed. The appeals court

did not rule on Tuesday.

Volker said his clients want a new, thorough environmental assessment report

that would supplant the one the Department of Energy conducted in 2002, or

an even broader environmental impact review.

The Bush administration says the facility -- to be jointly used by the

Departments of Energy and Homeland Security -- is vital to national

security.

The facility " will significantly improve the nation's ability to detect and

respond to the threat of terrorism using biological agents, " the Department

of Energy said in its court brief. A court order blocking it " would directly

and adversely impact the national security, " the administration said.

The facility would test airborne agents, which could also include

hantavirus, influenza, hepatitis, Q fever, brucellis, herpes and

salmonella, among others, on live animals.

The opponents have several concerns about the project, and they want to see

the government reconsider it.

It sits in a region under which several faults lurk, and the lawsuit warns

an earthquake could trigger the release of potentially deadly agents in the

densely populated East Bay region near San Francisco. Some 7 million people

live in the broader bay area.

The Energy Department says that in 2002 it " thoroughly evaluated " the

potential impacts of an earthquake, accident or attack on the site, and it

found those fears were unwarranted.

" The department's analysis concluded that such a release was highly unlikely

and that, if a release occurred, it would not pose a danger to the public, "

the agency said in its court filing.

Because of its own findings, the department concluded a more sweeping

environmental impact review was not required under the National

Environmental Policy Act.

Chief Judge Mary Schroeder questioned the wisdom of locating the facility in

the Bay Area, a region where some 7 million people live.

" I don't see in the analysis any discussion anywhere of what is the most

troublesome thing, " she told Aagaard. " this is being built in a very highly

populated area of northern California. " New Mexico, where a similar facility

was contemplated, has a much lower population, she said.

Aagaard replied that the population-density question was taken into account

in the government's " catastrophic release scenario. " The most dangerous

pathogens are not " durable " or " dangerous, " and thus are unlikely to hurt

people, he said.