July 21, 2010
Panel Discussing Raising Huntington Radiation Exposure Levels at Atomic Plant
Some Could Jump Ten Fold
By Tony Rutherford
Huntingtonnews.net Reporter
Huntington, WV (HNN) – A world recognized expert on nuclear radiation exposure of employees at Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) plants has told a government advisory committee that radiation levels for workers were underestimated at a former uranium processing plant and uranium recycling plant in Huntington, WV. Among the findings, levels of residual radiation at the site AFTER the structure itself was removed and buried in Piketon, Ohio, were used to approximate radiation doses of workers when it was in operation.
The Huntington site has been given a clearance for all uses, but a 2006 article in a scientific journal demonstrates that studies have shown uranium contamination with such surfaces as metal, concrete and steel has a relationship to ongoing environmental changes, such as weathering and corrosion. (“Complementary Spectroscopic Techniques to Model the Association of Contaminant Uranium with Structural Surfaces, Gary P. Halada, Journal of Electron Spectroscophy & Related Phenomena 150 (2006) 185-194.)
Formerly located on 3.2 acres of INCO property, the classified plant which processed components for nuclear weapons , operated from 1951-1962. It remained in “cold stand by” until 1978. During 1978-1979, it was dismantled and hauled by railcars to a pit on the grounds of the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Piketon, Ohio. The contents, structural components, and other classified items were entombed in Piketon under heavy security.
Continuing readers of this series know that the HPP/RPP processed and/or recycled uranium. Some of the uranium was enriched and came from one or more of the nation’s three gaseous diffusion plants --- Oak Ridge, Paducah, and Portsmouth. Due to the interest of national security workers were told a bare minimum of what type of melting, smelting or processing occurred.
The process according to the AEC included nickel powder, nickel scrap and nickel oxide that came from contaminated “barriers” at the gaseous diffusion plants. An AEC memorandum from 1951 described the work at the Huntington plant:
“The nickel is then volatized by combining it with carbon monoxide in a pressure vessel at approximately 300 lbs. PSI, thus forming a gaseous nickel carbonyl. This gaseous carbonyl is passed through a condenser to change it to a liquid status. The liquid carbonyl is then purified by selective distillation, removing the iron oxide and other impurities. The purified carbonyl then passes through the decomposer (a vertical vessel approximately 5’ in diameter x 13’ high) and, by controlled temperature, the pure carbonyl is broken down, dropping out of the bottom of the vessel as metal powder. The metal powder then passes over screens to remove lumps, etc. After screening operations are completed, the metal powder is packed and ready for shipment”
When the DOE acknowledged that workers and contractors had been exposed to cancer causing radiation in 2000, Congress passed a law allowing former workers with cancer (and/or their survivors) to apply for compensation under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA).
Former workers at the Huntington location, which is jointly referred to as the Huntington Pilot Plant (HPP) and the Reduction Pilot Plant (RPP), were deemed eligible in the Congressional legislation.
Work records and radiation monitoring of most DOE workers have not been available. Often, claimants must have former workers sign affidavits to prove they worked at a plant during the time(s) it did contract work for the Department of Energy. Without actual measurements for evaluation, various government agencies such as National Institute for Occupational Safety & Health (NIOSH) and the CDC commissioned dosage reconstructions to determine a workers eligibility for compensation. A private firm --- Sanford Cohen & Associates --- has served as an auditor for government agency compiled profiles of these former plants involved in the production of a variety of components in the Cold War weapons programs.
Dr. John Mauro, SCA’s project manager, has in evaluations of former DOE plants determined that NIOSH estimates were underestimated. Three examples were Bethlehem Steel near Cheektowaga , NY., Pinellas Plant (Florida) , and Rocky Flats (near Denver, Colorado). He has testified before the House Judiciary Committee, and was an expert witness in the Bikini Atoll nuclear claim in the Marshall Islands. http://www.bikiniatoll.com/Nuclear%20Claims%20Tribunal%20Dec.pdf )
Although NIOSH/CDC completed a profile for the Huntington uranium plant, Dr Mauro uncovered possible underestimates. These are revealed in a transcript of a March 22, 2010 meeting of the Advisory Board of Radiation and Worker Health that met in Cincinnati. At the March 2010 meeting in Cincinnati, committee members met to consider alterations in the “profiles” of eleven plants, including the one in Huntington, WV and another agenda item included reassessing radiation dose estimates on previously filed claims at all former DOE plants.
INCREASING THE PRIOR LEVELS FOR HUNTINGTON
External, internal and air exposure levels of workers at the former Huntington uranium/nickel recycling/processing plant may be increased from four to tenfold, Dr Mauro told the Advisory Board. Mauro advised that new data had been obtained on exposures of workers at the Huntington, WV uranium and nickel processing plant. The plant still entombed at Piketon, Ohio, operated from 1951 to 1962.
The Atomic Energy Commission owned plant processed nickel scrap which came from three atomic weapons producing gaseous diffusion plants in Oak Ridge (K-25), Paducah, and Portsmouth (i.e. Piketon, Ohio ). The “scrap” that was melted was contaminated with uranium and other radioactive materials such as plutonium 239, Neptunian 237, and nickel carbonyl.
Since many of these atomic energy weaponry sites were “classified,” the determination of employee exposure to hazardous materials has often been done by reconstruction of estimated doses. Records of employees and testing of employees were at the time classified. Thus, as additional information becomes known to the compensation program administrators, they may modify the site profile to include significant newly obtained information.
Based on the [new] data, Dr. John Mauro began a discussion of eleven or twelve necessary modifications to worker exposure projections at the (former ) Huntington plant. “You probably want to increase potential internal exposure from uranium by a factor of four. Dust loadings were higher in the earlier years...because we have readings. ”
NICKEL DUST HIGHER
Dr. Mauro stated that the dosage levels for both the “general air samples” and the “breathing zone samples” likely were “underestimated” by several fold. “Often the dust that’s being generated is the workers working with these machines, and the dust that is over here is a lot different than what the air sampler over there is reading. You see some big differences.”
DOSE INCREASE BY UP TO TEN FOLD?
However, the development of the data is considered preliminary. Dr. Mauro admitted he did not have a final “answer” to the dosage. Asked by a board member if the actual exposure could be higher than his projections, Mauro stated, “I don’t know, but it needs to be looked at,” conjecturing that combining nickel dust with “application of another factor” and “We’re talking some pretty big changes in the internal dose. Could be as much as a factor of ten.”
One factor influencing alteration of projected dose reconstructions was the Huntington, WV plant received materials from all three diffusion plants. “Portsmouth could run higher,” Chairman Mark Griffon stated.
BIRDCAGES PREVENTED CRITICAL MASS
Mauro: “Once they separated out the enriched uranium, they put them into these little containers, and put them into bird cages. These were little devices to keep the CRITICAL MASS (emphasis added) under control. There were arrays, I think five by five , two deep.”
Estimating about “25 of them all together,” Mauro stated, “That has a potential to cause EXTERNAL exposure. If a person were to stand one foot away or one meter away from these bird cages, what his internal exposure might be from this enriched uranium that’s sitting in there. We ran the numbers. We got different values. A bit higher. Maybe a factor of five-fold higher. “
Questioned as to whether these figures were his own scientific estimates, Mauro explained that “ this is our acknowledgement in the literature.”
X RAY DOSES HIGHER
Although he did not give reasons why, Dr. Mauro told the group that “it may turn out that the type of X-rays [given] to the workers at Huntington were different….. there’s good reason why you’re coming in with THREE times higher X-ray doses for specific cases.”
Stuart Hinnefeld, NIOSH interim director of Division of Compensation Analysis Support, speculated that “DOE facilities” had to x-ray “a large number of people with some regularity, and they would have these high volume photofluorography machines.”
RADIATION DOSAGE ESTIMATES WERE POST DECONTAMINATION
Mauro stated that the estimates for “residual contamination exposure” when the plant was on cold stand by (from about 1962 to 1978) had used “1980 post decontamination measurement data for dose reconstruction. It doesn’t seem like you would be using post decontamination measurements to reconstruct does pre-decontamination, even though they’re both during the post operation period.”
Thus, the dosages used were after the site had in 1980 been decontaminated of radiation.
Mauro revealed, the dosages were taken after the plant was entombed in Piketon, Ohio, had been used to “estimate exposures from surface contamination during plant operations 18 years earlier. I’m kinda troubled,” he said , adding, “there’s no reason to believe that host decontamination measurements would be meaningful to reconstruct doses 18 years earlier during operations. There’s a disconnect here .”
Interestingly, he explained, “I don’t think there was any data on surface contamination levels during operations at this facility [Huntington] , or maybe even immediately thereafter, of nickel milligrams per square meter of nickel on surfaces.”
COMING: Scientist Discusses Uranium Contamination on Steel, Concrete
(Editor’s Note: The findings in this article are closely based on the following transcript: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/pdfs/abrwh/2010/sctr032210.pdf.)
FOR PRIOR STORIES FROM HNN ON FORMER ATOMIC PLANTS IN THE REGION, CLICK:
Earlier Story on dosage revisions: http://archives.huntingtonnews.net/local/100503-rutherford-localpilotplant.html
Hazards at Huntington: http://archives.huntingtonnews.net/local/091203-rutherford-localinformant.html
Venting Dust at Midnight: http://archives.huntingtonnews.net/local/091204-rutherford-localnickelpowder.html
Huntington Workers & Cancer Cluster: http://archives.huntingtonnews.net/local/091130-rutherford-localradioactivematerials.html
SUPER S PLUTONIUM FACTORS
Although not included in the March 2010 transcript, other documents have indicated the presence of Plutonium 239 at the Huntington plant. This isotope is sometimes called “Type super S plutonium” and is weapons grade.
SEE: http://archives.huntingtonnews.net/local/100201-rutherford-localplutonium.html
© 2010 by Tony Rutherford and Huntington News.Net
Share This Story:
Make HNN Your Homepage (IE Users Only)
Panel Discussing Raising Huntington Radiation Exposure Levels at Atomic Plant
Some Could Jump Ten Fold
By Tony Rutherford
Huntingtonnews.net Reporter
Huntington, WV (HNN) – A world recognized expert on nuclear radiation exposure of employees at Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) plants has told a government advisory committee that radiation levels for workers were underestimated at a former uranium processing plant and uranium recycling plant in Huntington, WV. Among the findings, levels of residual radiation at the site AFTER the structure itself was removed and buried in Piketon, Ohio, were used to approximate radiation doses of workers when it was in operation.
The Huntington site has been given a clearance for all uses, but a 2006 article in a scientific journal demonstrates that studies have shown uranium contamination with such surfaces as metal, concrete and steel has a relationship to ongoing environmental changes, such as weathering and corrosion. (“Complementary Spectroscopic Techniques to Model the Association of Contaminant Uranium with Structural Surfaces, Gary P. Halada, Journal of Electron Spectroscophy & Related Phenomena 150 (2006) 185-194.)
Formerly located on 3.2 acres of INCO property, the classified plant which processed components for nuclear weapons , operated from 1951-1962. It remained in “cold stand by” until 1978. During 1978-1979, it was dismantled and hauled by railcars to a pit on the grounds of the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant, Piketon, Ohio. The contents, structural components, and other classified items were entombed in Piketon under heavy security.
Continuing readers of this series know that the HPP/RPP processed and/or recycled uranium. Some of the uranium was enriched and came from one or more of the nation’s three gaseous diffusion plants --- Oak Ridge, Paducah, and Portsmouth. Due to the interest of national security workers were told a bare minimum of what type of melting, smelting or processing occurred.
The process according to the AEC included nickel powder, nickel scrap and nickel oxide that came from contaminated “barriers” at the gaseous diffusion plants. An AEC memorandum from 1951 described the work at the Huntington plant:
“The nickel is then volatized by combining it with carbon monoxide in a pressure vessel at approximately 300 lbs. PSI, thus forming a gaseous nickel carbonyl. This gaseous carbonyl is passed through a condenser to change it to a liquid status. The liquid carbonyl is then purified by selective distillation, removing the iron oxide and other impurities. The purified carbonyl then passes through the decomposer (a vertical vessel approximately 5’ in diameter x 13’ high) and, by controlled temperature, the pure carbonyl is broken down, dropping out of the bottom of the vessel as metal powder. The metal powder then passes over screens to remove lumps, etc. After screening operations are completed, the metal powder is packed and ready for shipment”
When the DOE acknowledged that workers and contractors had been exposed to cancer causing radiation in 2000, Congress passed a law allowing former workers with cancer (and/or their survivors) to apply for compensation under the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA).
Former workers at the Huntington location, which is jointly referred to as the Huntington Pilot Plant (HPP) and the Reduction Pilot Plant (RPP), were deemed eligible in the Congressional legislation.
Work records and radiation monitoring of most DOE workers have not been available. Often, claimants must have former workers sign affidavits to prove they worked at a plant during the time(s) it did contract work for the Department of Energy. Without actual measurements for evaluation, various government agencies such as National Institute for Occupational Safety & Health (NIOSH) and the CDC commissioned dosage reconstructions to determine a workers eligibility for compensation. A private firm --- Sanford Cohen & Associates --- has served as an auditor for government agency compiled profiles of these former plants involved in the production of a variety of components in the Cold War weapons programs.
Dr. John Mauro, SCA’s project manager, has in evaluations of former DOE plants determined that NIOSH estimates were underestimated. Three examples were Bethlehem Steel near Cheektowaga , NY., Pinellas Plant (Florida) , and Rocky Flats (near Denver, Colorado). He has testified before the House Judiciary Committee, and was an expert witness in the Bikini Atoll nuclear claim in the Marshall Islands. http://www.bikiniatoll.com/Nuclear%20Claims%20Tribunal%20Dec.pdf )
Although NIOSH/CDC completed a profile for the Huntington uranium plant, Dr Mauro uncovered possible underestimates. These are revealed in a transcript of a March 22, 2010 meeting of the Advisory Board of Radiation and Worker Health that met in Cincinnati. At the March 2010 meeting in Cincinnati, committee members met to consider alterations in the “profiles” of eleven plants, including the one in Huntington, WV and another agenda item included reassessing radiation dose estimates on previously filed claims at all former DOE plants.
INCREASING THE PRIOR LEVELS FOR HUNTINGTON
External, internal and air exposure levels of workers at the former Huntington uranium/nickel recycling/processing plant may be increased from four to tenfold, Dr Mauro told the Advisory Board. Mauro advised that new data had been obtained on exposures of workers at the Huntington, WV uranium and nickel processing plant. The plant still entombed at Piketon, Ohio, operated from 1951 to 1962.
The Atomic Energy Commission owned plant processed nickel scrap which came from three atomic weapons producing gaseous diffusion plants in Oak Ridge (K-25), Paducah, and Portsmouth (i.e. Piketon, Ohio ). The “scrap” that was melted was contaminated with uranium and other radioactive materials such as plutonium 239, Neptunian 237, and nickel carbonyl.
Since many of these atomic energy weaponry sites were “classified,” the determination of employee exposure to hazardous materials has often been done by reconstruction of estimated doses. Records of employees and testing of employees were at the time classified. Thus, as additional information becomes known to the compensation program administrators, they may modify the site profile to include significant newly obtained information.
Based on the [new] data, Dr. John Mauro began a discussion of eleven or twelve necessary modifications to worker exposure projections at the (former ) Huntington plant. “You probably want to increase potential internal exposure from uranium by a factor of four. Dust loadings were higher in the earlier years...because we have readings. ”
NICKEL DUST HIGHER
Dr. Mauro stated that the dosage levels for both the “general air samples” and the “breathing zone samples” likely were “underestimated” by several fold. “Often the dust that’s being generated is the workers working with these machines, and the dust that is over here is a lot different than what the air sampler over there is reading. You see some big differences.”
DOSE INCREASE BY UP TO TEN FOLD?
However, the development of the data is considered preliminary. Dr. Mauro admitted he did not have a final “answer” to the dosage. Asked by a board member if the actual exposure could be higher than his projections, Mauro stated, “I don’t know, but it needs to be looked at,” conjecturing that combining nickel dust with “application of another factor” and “We’re talking some pretty big changes in the internal dose. Could be as much as a factor of ten.”
One factor influencing alteration of projected dose reconstructions was the Huntington, WV plant received materials from all three diffusion plants. “Portsmouth could run higher,” Chairman Mark Griffon stated.
BIRDCAGES PREVENTED CRITICAL MASS
Mauro: “Once they separated out the enriched uranium, they put them into these little containers, and put them into bird cages. These were little devices to keep the CRITICAL MASS (emphasis added) under control. There were arrays, I think five by five , two deep.”
Estimating about “25 of them all together,” Mauro stated, “That has a potential to cause EXTERNAL exposure. If a person were to stand one foot away or one meter away from these bird cages, what his internal exposure might be from this enriched uranium that’s sitting in there. We ran the numbers. We got different values. A bit higher. Maybe a factor of five-fold higher. “
Questioned as to whether these figures were his own scientific estimates, Mauro explained that “ this is our acknowledgement in the literature.”
X RAY DOSES HIGHER
Although he did not give reasons why, Dr. Mauro told the group that “it may turn out that the type of X-rays [given] to the workers at Huntington were different….. there’s good reason why you’re coming in with THREE times higher X-ray doses for specific cases.”
Stuart Hinnefeld, NIOSH interim director of Division of Compensation Analysis Support, speculated that “DOE facilities” had to x-ray “a large number of people with some regularity, and they would have these high volume photofluorography machines.”
RADIATION DOSAGE ESTIMATES WERE POST DECONTAMINATION
Mauro stated that the estimates for “residual contamination exposure” when the plant was on cold stand by (from about 1962 to 1978) had used “1980 post decontamination measurement data for dose reconstruction. It doesn’t seem like you would be using post decontamination measurements to reconstruct does pre-decontamination, even though they’re both during the post operation period.”
Thus, the dosages used were after the site had in 1980 been decontaminated of radiation.
Mauro revealed, the dosages were taken after the plant was entombed in Piketon, Ohio, had been used to “estimate exposures from surface contamination during plant operations 18 years earlier. I’m kinda troubled,” he said , adding, “there’s no reason to believe that host decontamination measurements would be meaningful to reconstruct doses 18 years earlier during operations. There’s a disconnect here .”
Interestingly, he explained, “I don’t think there was any data on surface contamination levels during operations at this facility [Huntington] , or maybe even immediately thereafter, of nickel milligrams per square meter of nickel on surfaces.”
COMING: Scientist Discusses Uranium Contamination on Steel, Concrete
(Editor’s Note: The findings in this article are closely based on the following transcript: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ocas/pdfs/abrwh/2010/sctr032210.pdf.)
FOR PRIOR STORIES FROM HNN ON FORMER ATOMIC PLANTS IN THE REGION, CLICK:
Earlier Story on dosage revisions: http://archives.huntingtonnews.net/local/100503-rutherford-localpilotplant.html
Hazards at Huntington: http://archives.huntingtonnews.net/local/091203-rutherford-localinformant.html
Venting Dust at Midnight: http://archives.huntingtonnews.net/local/091204-rutherford-localnickelpowder.html
Huntington Workers & Cancer Cluster: http://archives.huntingtonnews.net/local/091130-rutherford-localradioactivematerials.html
SUPER S PLUTONIUM FACTORS
Although not included in the March 2010 transcript, other documents have indicated the presence of Plutonium 239 at the Huntington plant. This isotope is sometimes called “Type super S plutonium” and is weapons grade.
SEE: http://archives.huntingtonnews.net/local/100201-rutherford-localplutonium.html
© 2010 by Tony Rutherford and Huntington News.Net
Share This Story:
Make HNN Your Homepage (IE Users Only)
