[Fwd: [OEM] USAToday: Depleted Ur Incr Exposures]

[Chuck Cooper <ccc@pp.pdx.edu>]

> Study flags radioactive threat

> By Peter Eisler, USA TODAY

>

> http://www.usatoday.com/news/poison/2001-06-25-hotnukes-lede.htm

>

> WASHINGTON — Thousands more people than anticipated face health and

> pollution threats from plutonium and other highly radioactive elements

> that fouled vast amounts of uranium recycled by the U.S. nuclear

> weapons program over the past 50 years. Recycled uranium was shipped

> worldwide from 1952 until 1999, when distribution was halted by

> revelations of its contamination.

>

> Now, new federal studies reviewed by USA TODAY show that the program

> yielded 250,000 tons of tainted uranium — roughly double the estimates

> of two years ago. The material was handled at about 10 times the

> number of sites revealed previously, reaching more than 100 federal

> plants, private manufacturers and universities.

>

> The studies suggest that thousands more workers than expected might

> have unwittingly faced radiation risks beyond those associated with

> normal uranium, increasing their odds of developing cancer and other

> ailments. That places an unexpected burden on a soon-to-begin federal

> program to compensate sick nuclear weapons workers.

>

> Contaminants from the tainted uranium also raise the potential for

> soil and groundwater pollution at some of the newly recognized

> processing sites. That threatens to complicate cleanup plans.

>

> Most recycled uranium went back into nuclear weapons production or was

> used as fuel for power reactors. But thousands of tons also were used

> in everything from academic research to the making of armor for Army

> battle tanks.

>

> The vast majority of the material contained only traces of impurities

> — too little, scientists say, to pose risks beyond those posed by

> natural uranium, which is mildly radioactive and raises health hazards

> if inhaled as dust. But some plants handled recycled uranium in ways

> that concentrated its contaminants, significantly boosting its

> hazards.

>

> "This stuff circulated much more widely than we'd thought," says

> Robert Alvarez, an official at the Department of Energy when it

> launched the new studies in 1999.

>

> "The problem is, they really don't have reasonable estimates of how

> much (contamination) was in a lot of this recycled uranium," adds

> Alvarez, now a scholar at the Institute for Policy Studies. "It could

> range from very tiny amounts to relatively high levels."

>

> Federal researchers conclude in the new studies that contamination

> generally was "extremely low." But that finding masks problems.

>

> The uranium's contaminants apparently were concentrated at a dozen or

> more previously unrecognized sites, raising pollution and worker

> health threats. But it's unclear which batches of uranium were most

> dangerous — or where they went — so not all high-risk sites are

> identifiable.

>

> Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., says, "The government has a responsibility to

> follow up."

>



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.