The U.S. Department of Energy plans on moving in next door to your mom. Although there’s been a longtime policy of keeping defense and civilian nuclear programs separate, the department is interested in using civilian reactors for nuclear weapons production.

Not produced since the late 1980s, there is concern that the rapidly decaying tritium stockpile may be depleted by 2011. Tritium is essential for warhead production.

But not willing to spend billions on a new reactor, or to utilize linear particle acceleration for gas production, officials have begun to consider using commercial-electricity producing reactors. The search for an appropriate site has therefore begun.

Prospective budget cuts may be severe, which makes the use of an existing reactor even more attractive.

However, is this such a good idea? While nuclear experts claim that there would be no rise in safety concerns, should neighbors of prospective conversion sites feel at ease? Should residents feel safe in their own homes?

What about the ugly lessons learned from shoddy tritium production sites like Savannah River? How many grave mistakes need to be made before we’re taught a most decisive lesson? Using civilian sectors for a perpetual proving ground may not exactly be prudent. But hey, it’s cheap, right?

Most governmental nuclear weapons operations have traditionally not been in residential neighborhoods, and most likely have not been there for a reason, one that goes beyond “national security.” The word “danger” has a familiar ring to it. Pray that there’s someone there to hear it.

The new future tritium source is expected to be chosen by Energy Secretary Hazel O’Leary in early November. Hopefully she’ll be both wise and responsible enough to not put it in your mom’s backyard.