DOE beat goes on...

[Jim Muckerheide <jmuckerheide@delphi.com>]

...led by Physicians for Social Responsibility campaigner.

Some indication of internal questioning; but setting up to leave the incoming
administration in an untenable position.

Regards, Jim
muckerheide@mediaone.net
========================

Plant's radiation dwarfed limits 
  Up to 400 Paducah workers got doses 20 times current cutoff 

  By JAMES MALONE, The Courier-Journal 

   A C-J in-depth look: The Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant 


  PADUCAH, Ky. -- As many as 400 former Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant
workers received an annual radiation dose up to 20 times the limit now
considered safe, a Department of Energy report said.

  Assistant Energy Secretary David Michaels called the 180-page report
released yesterday a "groundbreaking study" that has "important implications
for the future -- for workers to get compensation."

  President Clinton issued an order last month setting up a program to
compensate workers with job-related illnesses at the Paducah plant and similar
government facilities where uranium was enriched for use in nuclear weapons.

  The Energy Department report did not identify exposed workers, nor did it
suggest that the government intends to track down those at greatest risk to
offer medical testing. Such tracking "isn't planned at the moment," Michaels
said.

  However, the department will discuss the report at a public meeting Feb. 1
in Paducah. Michaels said he hopes publicity about the findings and the public
meeting will encourage former workers to step forward.

  The report's researchers estimated that up to 4,000 workers performed duties
between 1952 and 1985 in plant areas where they could have received high
radiation exposure. One in 10 received doses "that approached or exceeded"
regulatory limits, the report said, and many more workers went untested
because managers did not think it necessary.

  Based on an analysis of workplace air, the report's authors determined that
some workers in the plant's riskiest jobs could have been exposed from 7 rem
to nearly 100 rem of radiation a year. The current Energy Department limit for
safe exposure for nuclear workers is 5 rem a year. A rem is a measure of
radiation biological damage.

  The report said workers at greatest risk would have been in one of three
plant buildings, including a decontamination and cleaning building and a
metals recovery building. It said maintenance workers and operators of
uranium-processing equipment also showed evidence of high exposure, based on
urinalysis records.

  Workers in the decontamination and cleaning building "were possibly exposed
to large quantities of radioactive materials in the form of aerosols," the
report said. It also said the potential for radiological exposure was high in
jobs to clean residue out of large metal casks used to ship uranium.

  The conclusions were based in part on recently discovered results of
airborne dust monitors in plant work areas.

  William McMurry, a Louisville attorney in a $10 billion lawsuit brought on
behalf of workers against former plant contractors, said the report "certainly
does verify what we have believed and what we have uncovered." He said the
report "is consistent with, and compatible with, air filtration information we
have already received and have an opportunity to go through."

  Excessive radiation exposure can cause leukemia and cancers of internal
organs, notably the kidneys and lungs. Records show the Energy Department was
tracking leukemia and lymphoma cases at the plant in the mid-1980s.

  The yearlong exposure assessment project, conducted with help from the Paper
Allied-Industrial Chemical and Energy Workers International union and
researchers at the University of Utah, examined records at the
uranium-enrichment plant to see what jobs held the most risk and what the
exposure to workers may have been.

  The report, coming amid numerous lawsuits alleging that Paducah workers were
harmed by unknowing exposure to radiation, concluded that some exposure was
either under-reported or missed. "It is likely that some or perhaps many
worker radiation doses are not in the record," the report said.

  But the report also cautioned that its focus on "work locations" means that
"the data presented should not be used to infer exposures that may have
occurred to individuals."

  Last fall, officials from the Energy Department's operations office in Oak
Ridge, Tenn., sharply criticized a draft version of the report, saying it
could lead to "unfair conclusions" and "confuse (a) layperson."

  But the final report largely supported the draft. In one change, the final
report "recommended" a further study to compare radiation-exposure database
records at the plant to its paper files. The draft had said the comparison
would be conducted.

  An Energy Department spokesman said the change was made to leave the
decision to the incoming Bush administration. 

  Mark Griffon, a health physicist who worked on the study, said it's
important for the new administration to verify the data. Griffon said the
study showed for the first time a "significant potential exposure for
thorium," a radioactive metallic chemical, and established doses that workers
received for neptunium and plutonium, two other radioactive metallic
chemicals.
************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html