Public Comment Draft PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT White Oak Creek  Radionuclide Releases
38 Pages
English

Public Comment Draft PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT White Oak Creek Radionuclide Releases

-

Downloading requires you to have access to the YouScribe library
Learn all about the services we offer

Description

Oak Ridge Reservation: White Oak Creek Radionuclide Releases Public Health Assessment - Public Comment Release - Do not cite, quote, or release 1 Appendix D. Summary Briefs 2 TDOH’s Phase I Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Study 3 TDOH’s Task 4 Radionuclide Releases to the Clinch River From White Oak Creek on the Oak 4 Ridge Reservation 5 TDOH’s Task 7 Screening Level Evaluation of Additional Potential Materials of Concern 6 ATSDR’s Health Consultation on the Lower Watts Bar Reservoir 7 ATSDR’s Watts Bar Exposure Investigation 8 TDEC’s Watts Bar Reservoir and Clinch River Turtle Sampling Survey 9 TDOH’s Task 6 Uranium Releases From the Oak Ridge Reservation D-1 Dose Reconstruction Feasibility StudyORRHES Brief Oak Ridge Reservation Health Effects Subcommittee Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Study Oak Ridge Health Study Phase I Report Site: Oak Ridge Reservation and oversight for the Oak Ridge Health Study area: Oak Ridge Area Studies. These health studies focused on the Time period: 1942–1992 potential effects from off-site exposures to Conducted by: Tennessee Department chemicals and radionuclides released at the of Health and the Oak Ridge Health reservation since 1942. The state conducted Agreement Steering Panel the Oak Ridge Health Studies in two phases. Phase 1 is the Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Study described in this summary. Purpose Methods The Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Study had two purposes: first, to identify past The ...

Subjects

Informations

Published by
Reads 26
Language English

Oak Ridge Reservation: White Oak Creek Radionuclide Releases
Public Health Assessment - Public Comment Release - Do not cite, quote, or release
1 Appendix D. Summary Briefs
2 TDOH’s Phase I Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Study
3 TDOH’s Task 4 Radionuclide Releases to the Clinch River From White Oak Creek on the Oak
4 Ridge Reservation
5 TDOH’s Task 7 Screening Level Evaluation of Additional Potential Materials of Concern
6 ATSDR’s Health Consultation on the Lower Watts Bar Reservoir
7 ATSDR’s Watts Bar Exposure Investigation
8 TDEC’s Watts Bar Reservoir and Clinch River Turtle Sampling Survey
9 TDOH’s Task 6 Uranium Releases From the Oak Ridge Reservation
D-1

Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Study
ORRHES Brief
Oak Ridge Reservation Health Effects Subcommittee
Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Study

Oak Ridge Health Study Phase I Report

Site: Oak Ridge Reservation and oversight for the Oak Ridge Health
Study area: Oak Ridge Area Studies. These health studies focused on the
Time period: 1942–1992 potential effects from off-site exposures to
Conducted by: Tennessee Department chemicals and radionuclides released at the
of Health and the Oak Ridge Health reservation since 1942. The state conducted
Agreement Steering Panel the Oak Ridge Health Studies in two phases.
Phase 1 is the Dose Reconstruction Feasibility
Study described in this summary.
Purpose
Methods The Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Study
had two purposes: first, to identify past The Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Study
chemical and radionuclide releases from the consisted of seven tasks. During Task 1, state
Oak Ridge Reservation (ORR) that have the investigators identified historical operations at
highest potential to impact the health of the the ORR that used and released chemicals and
people living near the ORR; and second, to radionuclides. This involved interviewing both
determine whether sufficient information active and retired DOE staff members about
existed about these releases to estimate the past operations, as well as reviewing historical
exposure doses received by people living documents (such as purchase orders, laborato
near the ORR. ry records, and published operational reports).
Task 1 documented past activities at each
Background major facility, including routine
operations, waste management practices, In July 1991, the Tennessee Department of
special projects, and accidents and incidents. Health initiated a Health Studies Agreement
Investigators then prioritized these activities with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).
for further study based on the likelihood that This agreement provides funding for an
releases from these activities could have independent state evaluation of adverse health
resulted in off-site exposures. effects that may have occurred in populations
around the ORR. The Oak Ridge Health
During Task 2, state investigators inventoried Agreement Steering Panel (ORHASP) was
the available environmental sampling and established to direct and oversee this state
research data that could be used to estimate evaluation (hereafter called the Oak Ridge
the doses that local populations may have Health Studies) and to facilitate interaction
received from chemical and radionuclide and cooperation with the community.
releases from the ORR. This data, obtained ORHASP was an independent panel of local
from DOE and other federal and state citizens and nationally recognized scientists
agencies (such as the U.S. Environmental who provided direction, recommendations,
Protection Agency, Tennessee Valley Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Study

Authority, and the Tennessee Division of health effects, such as irritation. Likewise,
Radiological Health), was summarized by although chlorofluorocarbons (Freon) were
environmental media (such as surface water, used in significant quantities at each of the
sediment, air, drinking water, groundwater, ORR facilities, they were judged unlikely to
and food items). As part of this task, result in significant exposure because they also
investigators developed abstracts which rapidly disassociate. Also, some other
summarize approximately 100 environmental contaminants (see Table 2) were not selected
monitoring and research projects that for further evaluation because they were used
characterize the historical presence of in relatively small quantities or in processes
contaminants in areas outside the ORR. that are not believed to be associated with
significant releases. Investigators determined
Based on the results of Tasks 1 and 2, investi that only a portion of contaminants identified
gators identified a number of historical facility in Tasks 1 and 2 could have reached people in
processes and activities at ORR as having a the Oak Ridge area and potentially impacted
high potential for releasing substantial quanti their health. These contaminants, listed in
ties of contaminants to the off-site environ Table 3, were evaluated further in Tasks 3
ment. These activities were recommended for and 4.
further evaluation in Tasks 3 and 4.
The next step in Task 3 was to determine, for
Tasks 3 and 4 were designed to provide an each contaminant listed in Table 3, whether a
initial, very rough evaluation of the large complete exposure pathway existed. A com
quantity of information and data identified in plete exposure pathway means a plausible
Tasks 1 and 2, and to determine the potential route by which the contaminant could have
for the contaminant releases to impact the traveled from ORR to offsite populations.
public's health. During Task 3, investigators Only those contaminants with complete
sought to answer the question: How could exposure pathways would have the potential to
contaminants released from the Oak Ridge cause adverse health effects. In this feasibility
Reservation have reached local populations? study, an exposure pathway is considered
This involved identifying the exposure path complete if it has the following three elements:
ways that could have transported contaminants
from the ORR site to residents. • A source that released the contaminant
into the environment;
Task 3 began with compiling a list of contami
nants investigated during Task 1 and Task 2. • A transport medium (such as air, surface
These contaminants are listed in Table 1. water, soil, or biota) or some combination
The contaminants in the list were separated of these media (e.g., air ➔ pasture ➔
into four general groups: radionuclides, livestock milk) that carried the contami
nonradioactive metals, acids/bases, and nant off the site to a location where
organic compounds. One of the first steps in exposure could occur; and
Task 3 was to eliminate any chemicals on
• An exposure route (such as inhalation, these lists that were judged unlikely to reach
ingestion, or—in the case of certain local populations in quantities that would pose
radionuclides that emit gamma or beta a health concern. For example, acids and bases
radiation—immersion) through which a were not selected for further evaluation
person could come into contact with the because these compounds rapidly dissociate in
contaminant. the environment and primarily cause acute Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Study

In examining whether complete exposure In Task 5, investigators described the historical
pathways existed, investigators considered locations and activities of populations most
the characteristics of each contaminant and likely to have been affected by the releases
the environmental setting at the ORR. identified in Task 4. During Task 6,
Contaminants that lacked a source, transport investigators compiled a summary of the
medium, or exposure route were eliminated current toxicologic knowledge and hazardous
from further consideration because they lacked properties of the key contaminants.
a complete exposure pathway. Through this Task 7 involved collecting, categorizing,
analysis, investigators identified a number of summarizing, and indexing selected
contaminants with complete exposure documents relevant to the feasibility study.
pathways.
Study Group
During Task 4, investigators sought to deter
A study group was not selected.
mine qualitatively which of the contaminants
with complete exposure pathways appeared to Exposures
pose the greatest potential to impact off-site
Seven completed exposure pathways populations. They began by comparing the
associated with air, six completed exposure pathways for each contaminant individually.
pathways associated with surface water, and For each contaminant, they determined which
ten completed exposure pathways associated pathway appeared to have the greatest poten
with soil/sediment were evaluated for tial for exposing off-site populations, and they
radionuclides and chemical substances compared the exposure potential of the conta
(metals, organic compounds, and polycyclic minant's other pathways to its most significant
aromatic hydrocarbons) released at the ORR pathway. They then divided contaminants into
from 1942 to 1992. three categories—radionuclides, carcinogens,
and noncarcinogens—and compared the
Outcome Measures
contaminants within each category based on
their exposure potential and on their potential No outcome measures were studied.
to cause health effects. This analysis identified
Conclusions facilities, processes, contaminants, media, and
exposure routes believed to have the greatest The feasibility study indicated that past
potential to impact off-site populations. The releases of the following contaminants have
results are provided in Table 4. the greatest potential to impact off-site
populations.
The Task 4 analysis was intended to provide
a preliminary framework to help focus and • Radioactive iodine
prioritize future quantitative studies of the The largest identified releases of radioac
potential health impacts of off-site contamina tive iodine were associated with radioac
tion. These analyses are intended to provide tive lanthanum processing from 1944
an initial approach to studying an extremely through 1956 at the X-10 facility.
complex site. However, care must be taken in
attempting to make broad generalizations or • Radioactive cesium
draw conclusions about the potential health The largest identified releases of radioac
hazard posed by the releases from the ORR. tive cesium were associated with various
chemical separation activities that took
place from 1943 through the 1960s. Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Study

• Mercury the feasibility study, and should characterize
The largest identified releases of mercury the actual release history of these contaminants
were associated with lithium separation from the reservation; identify appropriate fate
and enrichment operations that were and transport models to predict historical
conducted at the Y-12 facility from off-site concentrations; and identify an
1955 through 1963. exposure model to use in calculating doses
to the exposed population.
• Polychlorinated biphenyls
Concentrations of polychlorinated The panel also recommended that a
biphenyls (PCBs) found in fish taken from broader-based investigation of operations and
the East Fork Poplar Creek and the Clinch contaminants be conducted to study the large
River have been high enough to warrant number of ORR contaminants released that
further study. These releases likely have lower potentials for off-site health effects,
came from electrical transformers and including the five contaminants (chromium VI;
machining operations at the K-25 and plutonium 239, 240, and 241; tritium; arsenic;
Y-12 plants. and neptunium 237) that could not be
qualitatively evaluated during Phase 1 due to a
State investigators determined that sufficient lack of available data. Such an investigation
information was available to reconstruct past would help in modifying or reinforcing the
releases and potential off-site doses for these recommendations for future health studies.
contaminants. The steering panel (ORHASP)
recommended that dose reconstruction Additionally, the panel recommended that
activities proceed for the releases of radioac researchers explore opportunities to conduct
tive iodine, radioactive cesium, mercury, and epidemiologic studies investigating potential
PCBs. Specifically they recommended that the associations between exposure doses and
state should continue the tasks begun during adverse health effects in exposed populations. Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Study

TABLE 1

LIST OF CONTAMINANTS INVESTIGATED DURING TASK 1 AND TASK 2

X-10 K-25 Y-12
Radionuclides
Americium-241 Neptunium-237 Neptunium-237
Argon-41 Plutonium-239 Plutonium-239, -239, -240, -241
Barium-140 Technetium-99 Technetium-99
Berkelium Uranium-234, -235, -238 Thorium-232
Californium-252 Tritium
Carbon-14 Uranium-234, -235, -238
Cerium-144
Cesium-134,-137
Cobalt-57,-60
Curium-242,-243,-244
Einsteinium
Europium-152,-154,-155
Fermium
Iodine-129, -131, -133
Krypton-85
Lanthanum-140
Niobium-95
Phosphorus-32
Plutonium-238, -239, -240, -241
Protactinium-233
Ruthenium-103, -106
Selenium-75
Strontium-89, -90
Tritium
Uranium-233,-234, -235, -238
Xenon-133
Zirconium-95
Nonradioactive Metals
None Initially Identified Beryllium Arsenic
Chromium, (trivalent and hexavalent) Beryllium
Nickel Chromium, (trivalent and hexavalent)
Lead
Lithium
Mercury
Acids/Bases
Hydrochloric acid Acetic acid Ammonium hydroxide
Hydrogen peroxide Chlorine trifluoride Fluorine and various fluorides
Nitric acid Fluorine and fluoride compounds Hydrofluoric acid
Sodium hydroxide Hydrofluoric acid Nitric acid
Sulfuric acid Nitric acid Phosgene
Potassium hydroxide
Sulfuric acid
Organic Compounds
None Initially Identified Benzene Carbon tetrachloride
Carbon tetrachloride Chlorofluorocarbons (Freons)
Chloroform Methylene chloride
Chlorofluorocarbons (Freons) Polychlorinated biphenyls
Methylene chloride Tetrachloroethylene
Polychlorinated biphenyls 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
1,1,1-Trichloroethane Trichloroethylene
Trichloroethylene Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Study
TABLE 2
CONTAMINANTS NOT WARRANTING
FURTHER EVALUATION IN TASK 3 AND TASK 4
Radionuclides
Americium-241
Californium-252
Carbon-14
Cobalt-57
Cesium-134
Curium-242, -243, -244
Europium-152, -154, -155
Phosphorus-32
Selenium-75
Uranium-233
Berkelium
Einsteinium
Fermium
Nonradioactive Metals
Lithium
Organic Compounds
Benzene
Chlorofluorocarbons (Freons)
Chloroform
Acids/Bases
Acetic acid
Ammonium hydroxide
Chlorine trifluoride
Fluorine and various fluoride compounds
Hydrochloric acid
Hydrogen peroxide
Hydrofluoric acid
Nitric acid
Phosgene
Potassium hydroxide
Sulfuric acid
Sodium hydroxide Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Study

TABLE 3
CONTAMINANTS FURTHER EVALUATED IN TASK 3 AND TASK 4
Radionuclides Nonradioactive Metals Organic Compounds
Argon-41 Arsenic Carbon tetrachloride
Barium-140 Beryllium Methylene chloride
Cerium-144 Chromium (trivalent and hexavalent) Polychlorinated biphenyls
Cesium-137 Lead Tetrachloroethylene
Cobalt-60 Mercury 1,1,1-Trichloroethane
Iodine-129, -131, -133 Nickel Trichloroethylene
Krypton-85
Lanthanum-140
Neptunium-237
Niobium-95
Plutonium-238, -239, -240, -241
Protactinium-233
Ruthenium-103, -106
Strontium-89, 90
Technetium-99
Thorium-232
Tritium
Uranium-234 -235, -238
Xenon-133
Zirconium-95 Dose Reconstruction Feasibility Study

TABLE 4
HIGHEST PRIORITY CONTAMINANTS, SOURCES,
TRANSPORT MEDIA, AND EXPOSURE ROUTES
Contaminant Source Transport Medium Exposure Route
Iodine-131, -133 X-10 Air to vegetable to dairy Ingestion
Radioactive lanthanon (RaLa) cattle milk
processing
(1944-1956)
Cesium-137 X-10 Surface water to fish Ingestion
Various chemical
separation processes Soil/sediment Ingestion
(1944-1960s)
Soil/sediment to vegetables; Ingestion
livestock/game (beef); dairy
cattle milk
Mercury Y-12 Air Inhalation
Lithium separation
and enrichment operations Air to vegetables; Ingestion
(1955-1963) Livestock/game (beef);
dairy cattle milk
Surface water to fish Ingestion
Soil/sediment to Ingestion
livestock/game (beef);
vegetables
Polychlorinated K-25 and Y-12 Surface water to fish Ingestion
biphenyls Transformers and machining Radionuclide Releases to the Clinch River from White Oak Creek
ORRHES Brief
Oak Ridge Reservation Health Effects Subcommittee
Reports of the Oak Ridge Dose Reconstruction,
Radionuclide Releases to the Clinch River from White
Oak Creek on the Oak Ridge Reservation—an Assessment
of Historical Quantities Released, Off-Site Radiation
Doses, and Health Risks (referred to as the Task 4)
Background
Site: Oak Ridge Reservation
Construction of the Oak Ridge National
Conducted by: ChemRisk/ORHASP for Laboratory (ORNL, which is also known as the
the Tennessee Department of Health “Clinton Laboratory” or “X-10 facility”) began
on February 10, 1943. The laboratory was built T ime period: 1999
as a pilot plant for demonstrating the production
Location: Oak Ridge, Tennessee
and separation of plutonium. In 1944, the first
radioactive effluents from the X-10 site entered
White Oak Creek and flowed into White Oak
Lake. White Oak Lake served as a settling Purpose
basin for contaminants released to White Oak The purposes of Task 4 of the Oak Ridge Dose
Creek. Radionuclides remaining in the water Reconstruction were (1) to estimate the histori
column were released from the X-10 site with cal radiological releases from the X-10 facility
the flow of water over White Oak Dam into the to the Clinch River, (2) to evaluate the potential
White Oak Creek Embayment, and then entered pathways by which members of the public
the Clinch River. The radionuclides in the surcould have been exposed to radioactive efflu
face water and sediments that traveled through ents in the Clinch River between 1944 and
the Clinch River eventually flowed into the 1991, and (3) to calculate radiation doses and
Lower Watts Bar Reservoir. risks to reference individuals who were poten
tially exposed to radioactivity released to the
During the early years of X-10 operations, Clinch River from the X-10 facility. Direct
the graphite reactor and the “hot pilot plant” measurement of the amounts of radionuclides
(a chemical separation plant) were the major taken up by the organs of specific individuals
sources of radioactive wastes. Wastes from the since 1944 was no longer feasible because most
“hot pilot plant” were placed into open waste of these radionuclides do not stay in the human
pits; in 1959, high levels of ruthenium 106 (Ru body for long periods of time. Therefore, a dose
106) began seeping from the pits into White reconstruction was necessary to determine the
Oak Lake. Amounts of Ru 106 as high as 2,000 magnitude and extent of past exposure and to
13 curries (7.4 x 10 Bequerel [Bq])per year were interpret the health consequences of these
released from White Oak Dam between 1959 exposures. This dose reconstruction relies
and 1963. From 1944 to 1991, approximately upon independent evaluation of the amounts of
200,000 curies of radioactivity were released radionuclides released, reported environmental
over White Oak Dam to the Clinch River; of measurements, and mathematical models to
this amount, 91% was tritium and the rest was estimate the magnitude and extent of past
mixed fission and activation products. exposures, doses, and health risks.