Ted Lewis knew the plutonium plates at the government lab where he worked could leak potentially lethal radioactive dust.
He had seen it occur in the 1970s, when he was helping load some of those plates into a nuclear reactor at the lab near Idaho Falls, Idaho. A steel jacket enclosing one of the plates somehow cracked, spilling plutonium oxide particles into the air. But Lewis and his colleagues were lucky — they were wearing respirators and given cleansing showers, so their lives weren’t endangered.
Three decades later, Lewis, an electrical engineer who had become chairman of the lab’s safety committee, had a bad feeling this could happen again, with a worse outcome. And he turned out to be right.
[…]
He said in a sworn court deposition in January 2016 that he shared his concerns with at least 19 others at the laboratory, which holds one of the world’s largest stockpiles of plutonium, the explosive at the heart of modern nuclear weapons. But they didn’t respond, he said, and some of the precautions he urged — checking the plates more carefully before they were unwrapped and repackaged for shipment and setting up a decontamination shower — were ignored.
Then, at 11:04 a.m. on Tuesday, Nov. 8, 2011, Lewis’s fears came to life in a cavernous room at the lab where workers were readying some plates the size of Hershey’s chocolate bars for shipment to other federal sites and to researchers. The workers had a lead shield between themselves and the plates, but the table where they sorted the plates wasn’t sealed, and none of them had respirators on.
So when a nuclear material handler named Ralph Stanton noticed that one of the plates had a label warning that its corner was “swollen,” he asked a shift supervisor for guidance. The supervisor phoned one of the lab officials whom Ted Lewis had briefed on his worries, but after finishing the call the official told the workers to continue, according to an internal Department of Energy report in January 2012.
[…]
Accidents persisted at the lab after the 2011 incident. But officials in Washington charged with overseeing worker safety — and annually deciding how much profit BEA would be paid based on its performance — decided not to let the incidents seriously dent the company’s revenues.
They failed, in short, to use either of two key federal levers available to force improved workplace protections for those involved in handling the nuclear materials that underpin America’s security — by imposing fines or cutting profits enough to compel an end to new safety hazards, or by holding up or completely blocking an extension of the lab’s private management contract.
During the period of the five worker radiation contaminations from 2011 to 2014, the Energy Department paid BEA $68.5 million in pure profits, amounting to 92 percent of the maximum its contract allowed, the Center’s tally shows. (Its actual expenses in running the lab were reimbursed in full.)
[…]
They didn’t learn about it until three months after their highest exposure, the investigation report said, because the technicians who read and record their exposures didn’t make it a priority to tell them. As a result, one exceeded his annual company-set radiation dosage limit of 10 rem in 2010, and the other worker nearly exceeded his limit.
The reports said workers should have been told along the way of their monthly exposures, so they were not surprised by their cumulative doses. Also, in a problem that would recur in multiple incidents, the lab did not check the glove box for a particular type of radiation commonly exuded by the material they worked on, according to the BEA investigative report. That type of radiation is not harmless — it can cause cell damage, cancer, and even death in high doses.
[…]
Numerous problems contribute to the mass inhalation incident
Then came the radiation contamination of 16 workers on Nov. 8, 2011, which occurred in a white, mound-shaped building that was once home to a mothballed nuclear reactor and still has a massive vault resembling a walk-in freezer. It’s there that the government stores several metric tons of surplus plutonium, which the Department of Homeland Security and the NNSA use to help develop and refine radiation detection devices deployed by Washington at ports and border crossings around the globe.
[…]
The gravity of their exposures has nonetheless been contested, partly because the urine samples the workers provided on the day of their exposure were altered by the medication that four of them, including Braase, Simmons and Stanton, were swiftly given. In his lawsuit, Simmons said BEA radiation control officials initially showed him a report saying that his bone surface dose could have been as high as 265 rem, a level five times the annual federal occupational dose limit, 212 times the Occupational Safety and Health Administration limit, and 2,650 times the annual federal dose limit for the public.
[…]
Even Simmons’ claimed exposure of 265 rem would not be worrisome if it were an estimate of exposure to the bone over 50 years, Kathren said. But he added that “if a guy had gotten 250 rem in the first year, I would be very concerned.”
Uncertainty about exactly how — or when — the inhalation of plutonium might affect his health haunts Stanton. “I’m always worried this will be what comes back and gets me,” he said.
Stanton and Simmons also say they encountered public hostility from some of their colleagues after they pressed managers and health officials from the company for details of their contamination levels and lax workplace safety practices. “Brian and I sat alone at lunch,” Stanton recalled. “We were total outcasts. But when we were alone and saw them in the hall, people that wouldn’t acknowledge you around management thanked us.”
[…]
New contamination incidents
The plutonium contamination of 16 BEA workers was followed by two other significant radiation exposures, with the first occurring in August 2014, when workers in the Fuel Manufacturing Facility, a low structure next to the building where the plutonium exposures occurred, were fabricating radioactive americium in a glove box.
[…]
The fifth contamination incident occurred just two weeks later, in a long, low building just a block from the Idaho fuel manufacturing facility known as the Analytical Laboratory. There, on Sept. 9, 2014, a researcher poured some nitric acid containing plutonium-238 into another bottle, all inside a small room with a special exhaust fan. A week later, routine monitoring detected plutonium contamination in the room. Those involved had their noses swabbed, and two workers had nasal contamination, but no plutonium was detected in their lungs. The room was then shut for a week for decontamination.
Featured Topics / 特集
-
A nuclear power plant in Byron, Illinois. Taken by photographer Joseph Pobereskin (http://pobereskin.com). カレンダー
-
Latest Posts / 最新記事
- Australia declines to join UK and US-led nuclear energy development pact via ABC News 2024/11/20
- Australia mistakenly included on list of countries joining US-UK civil nuclear deal, British government says via The Guardian 2024/11/20
- 被ばく研究の灯は消さない 国や自治体が「風化待ち」の中、独協医科大分室が移転してまで続ける活動の意義via東京新聞 2024/10/05
- Chernobyl-area land deemed safe for new agriculture via Nuclear Newswire 2024/09/26
- 長崎「体験者」の医療拡充 なぜ被爆者と認めないのか【社説】via 中国新聞 2024/09/23
Discussion / 最新の議論
- Leonsz on Combating corrosion in the world’s aging nuclear reactors via c&en
- Mark Ultra on Special Report: Help wanted in Fukushima: Low pay, high risks and gangsters via Reuters
- Grom Montenegro on Duke Energy’s shell game via Beyond Nuclear International
- Jim Rice on Trinity: “The most significant hazard of the entire Manhattan Project” via Bulletin of Atomic Scientists
- Barbarra BBonney on COVID-19 spreading among workers on Fukushima plant, related projects via The Mainichi
Archives / 月別アーカイブ
- November 2024 (2)
- October 2024 (1)
- September 2024 (5)
- July 2024 (4)
- June 2024 (3)
- March 2024 (1)
- February 2024 (6)
- January 2024 (4)
- November 2023 (8)
- October 2023 (1)
- September 2023 (7)
- August 2023 (5)
- July 2023 (10)
- June 2023 (12)
- May 2023 (15)
- April 2023 (17)
- March 2023 (20)
- February 2023 (19)
- January 2023 (31)
- December 2022 (11)
- November 2022 (12)
- October 2022 (7)
- September 2022 (6)
- August 2022 (22)
- July 2022 (29)
- June 2022 (15)
- May 2022 (46)
- April 2022 (36)
- March 2022 (47)
- February 2022 (24)
- January 2022 (57)
- December 2021 (27)
- November 2021 (32)
- October 2021 (48)
- September 2021 (56)
- August 2021 (53)
- July 2021 (60)
- June 2021 (55)
- May 2021 (48)
- April 2021 (64)
- March 2021 (93)
- February 2021 (69)
- January 2021 (91)
- December 2020 (104)
- November 2020 (126)
- October 2020 (122)
- September 2020 (66)
- August 2020 (63)
- July 2020 (56)
- June 2020 (70)
- May 2020 (54)
- April 2020 (85)
- March 2020 (88)
- February 2020 (97)
- January 2020 (130)
- December 2019 (75)
- November 2019 (106)
- October 2019 (138)
- September 2019 (102)
- August 2019 (99)
- July 2019 (76)
- June 2019 (52)
- May 2019 (92)
- April 2019 (121)
- March 2019 (174)
- February 2019 (146)
- January 2019 (149)
- December 2018 (38)
- November 2018 (51)
- October 2018 (89)
- September 2018 (118)
- August 2018 (194)
- July 2018 (22)
- June 2018 (96)
- May 2018 (240)
- April 2018 (185)
- March 2018 (106)
- February 2018 (165)
- January 2018 (241)
- December 2017 (113)
- November 2017 (198)
- October 2017 (198)
- September 2017 (226)
- August 2017 (219)
- July 2017 (258)
- June 2017 (240)
- May 2017 (195)
- April 2017 (176)
- March 2017 (115)
- February 2017 (195)
- January 2017 (180)
- December 2016 (116)
- November 2016 (115)
- October 2016 (177)
- September 2016 (178)
- August 2016 (158)
- July 2016 (201)
- June 2016 (73)
- May 2016 (195)
- April 2016 (183)
- March 2016 (201)
- February 2016 (154)
- January 2016 (161)
- December 2015 (141)
- November 2015 (153)
- October 2015 (212)
- September 2015 (163)
- August 2015 (189)
- July 2015 (178)
- June 2015 (150)
- May 2015 (175)
- April 2015 (155)
- March 2015 (153)
- February 2015 (132)
- January 2015 (158)
- December 2014 (109)
- November 2014 (192)
- October 2014 (206)
- September 2014 (206)
- August 2014 (208)
- July 2014 (178)
- June 2014 (155)
- May 2014 (209)
- April 2014 (242)
- March 2014 (190)
- February 2014 (170)
- January 2014 (227)
- December 2013 (137)
- November 2013 (164)
- October 2013 (200)
- September 2013 (255)
- August 2013 (198)
- July 2013 (208)
- June 2013 (231)
- May 2013 (174)
- April 2013 (156)
- March 2013 (199)
- February 2013 (191)
- January 2013 (173)
- December 2012 (92)
- November 2012 (198)
- October 2012 (229)
- September 2012 (207)
- August 2012 (255)
- July 2012 (347)
- June 2012 (230)
- May 2012 (168)
- April 2012 (116)
- March 2012 (150)
- February 2012 (198)
- January 2012 (292)
- December 2011 (251)
- November 2011 (252)
- October 2011 (364)
- September 2011 (288)
- August 2011 (513)
- July 2011 (592)
- June 2011 (253)
- May 2011 (251)
- April 2011 (571)
- March 2011 (494)
- February 2011 (1)
- December 2010 (1)
Top Topics / TOPトピック
- anti-nuclear
- Atomic Age
- Capitalism
- East Japan Earthquake + Fukushima
- energy policy
- EU
- France
- Hanford
- health
- Hiroshima/Nagasaki
- Inequality
- labor
- Nuclear power
- nuclear waste
- Nuclear Weapons
- Radiation exposure
- Russia/Ukraine/Chernobyl
- Safety
- TEPCO
- U.S.
- UK
- エネルギー政策
- メディア
- ロシア/ウクライナ/チェルノブイリ
- 健康
- 公正・共生
- 兵器
- 再稼働
- 労働における公正・平等
- 原子力規制委員会
- 原発推進
- 反原発運動
- 大飯原発
- 安全
- 広島・長崎
- 廃炉
- 東京電力
- 東日本大震災・福島原発
- 汚染水
- 米国
- 脱原発
- 被ばく
- 資本主義
- 除染
- 食の安全
Choose Language / 言語