• Is the Mercury in LEFPC a Significant Hazard?
• Does a Little Radiation Cause a Lot of Serious Diseases?
• Will the ORR Waste Pits Undergo Nuclear Criticality?
• Do Environmental Pollutants Cause All Worker Illness?
• Is TSCA Killing the Pine Trees? And The Humans
• Does DOE Significantly Pollute the Clinch River?
• Is Scarboro So Close to Y-12 so as to be Badly Polluted?
• Is Oak Ridge an Unhealthy Place to Live?
• Is Oak Ridge Alone in this Mess?
• Will the Mess Go Away All by Itself?

• During the Cold War (1960), mercury was discharged to the UEFPC by Y-12.
• The process was quickly changed to reduce the emissions and effective mitigation actions are still going on. The current mercury LEFPC levels are about 5000 times less than the historic maximum, the water meets mercury drinking standards. But LEFPC was contaminated. About 1983, DOE was forced to go public by two separate efforts.
• The remediation studies of LEFPC, Lower East Fork Popular Creek, were begun and several public meetings were held. The mercury was assumed to be methyl mercury, a very toxic compound. The initial proposed cleanup level was 10 ppm and the original estimated cost was $ 1.6 billion.
• The mercury was shown to be, not methyl mercury, but a very insoluble form possibly mercuric sulfide, which is used in Chinese traditional medicine (to calm the nerves). In 1986, the ORR including LEFPC was declared an NPL site and EPA entered the picture.
• The cleanup level became 50 ppm and the cost $370 million. But the EPA had no standards for mercuric sulfide and had based the risk analysis on the soluble mercuric chloride. EPA regulations and risk assessment methodology have deliberate numerous safety factors which lead to enormous over all safety factors (1,000 to 1,000,000)
• A Citizens Working Group was created, many open meetings were held and the public questioned the very large safety factor and presented technical data and arguments to support their concerns. There was a protracted tug-of-war between the EPA (with regulations) and the public (with data). The remediation level rose to 400 ppm and the cost dropped to about $10 million. After 12 years and $31 million of studies a truce was declared and remediation was started and finished.
• Now, following the receipt of a letter from one individual, dissatisfied with the results and the public process, the EPA is again sampling the LEFPC to determine if a recent flood could have re-contaminated the Creek.

1. This is a complex serious question. And badly defined.
2. There are three schools of thought about low level radiation

a) Yes - the extrapolation to the origin is linear, a little is a little bad.
b) No - there is a threshold below which there is no ill effect
c) Hell No - a little bit is good for you , stimulates the immune system
3. Even if we knew the answer to 2) and could agree on which illnesses were serious we would not know what a "lot" is.
4. Permitted radiation levels for the public are about 1 % of background.
5. About lifetime risks, the courts have said:

a) 1 in a billion is too small to worry about.
b) 1 in a thousand is big enough to worry about.
c) Debates are about the range of 1 in ten thousand to 1 in a million.
6. In the real world, 1 in ten thousand is way down on the list of biggies.

The real biggies run about 1 in ten to 3 in ten.
7. Twelve million children die each year of diseases related to malnutrition.
8. Senator Moynihan said: "Well, life is about risk and it ends badly."

1. It has been repeatedly alleged that one or more of the waste disposal areas (just which one and when is seldom clear) have undergone nuclear criticality event releasing all manner of pollution into our atmosphere resulting in all kinds of illnesses.
2. All attempts to verify such an event in the records have failed to do so. The recommended contacts with the FBI, DOE AG and the K-25 Plant were made and the rumors denied. The nuclear events then evolved into "slow cookers" - very low level emissions.
3. In additions to endless discussions on the EUWG, a "criticality workshop" comprising numerous expert (local and outside) and the public was held. The results indicate that the depleted and normal uranium and the very small amount of enriched uranium simply cannot undergo a chain reaction.
4. Slow cookers are very, very difficult to produce under the very best of conditions and are even hard to detect.
5. Nevertheless the claims are still made and some of the non-technical members of our community are led to believe a great cover-up exists and that they have been exposed. Newspapers just love this one.
6. For the record, there was one accidental critical event in the Y-12 processing facility in 1958. It was known by the press in about 20 minutes and announced by AEC in about one hour. Five workers were exposed without serious effects. All other critical events occurred under controlled research conditions or in reactors. Criticality is our business.

1. First and clearly, the cases of Chronic Beryllium Disease (CBD) are well established. Y-12 started using beryllium just before the dangers and treachery of this metal were well known. Unfortunately some workers were harmed and many are receiving benefits.
2. The Oak Ridge sick worker syndrome is different in nature and not unique to Oak Ridge. The occurrence is sometimes known as the "sick building syndrome"; in Oak Ridge it might be called the "sick site syndrome". It is a collection of diverse symptoms that the medical profession does not completely understand and cannot readily identifies the causes. The phenomenon has been studied. Most medical views are that it is a collection of diseases, not a single disease; others disagree and see the disease as a complex response to multiple low levels of toxic exposure.
3. The causes have allegedly been cyanide, TSCA emissions, heavy metals and radiation. As each have been investigated and found non contributory the study has been discredited and the next cause invoked. At the present time a detailed medical study is (hopefully) nearing conclusion and will report soon. Another multi-agency study is being contemplated.
4. Make no mistake these people are ill. Some are seriously ill, some are moderately ill and some may be marginally ill but all experience symptoms that are real to them. Some may be work related.
5. The question is not, "Are they ill?" It is, "What is causing it and what can be done about it?"
6. The ill workers believe that DOE should know or find the answers but the medical profession cannot seem to do so. There are differences of opinion on who is responsible for what and a lot of confusion and, also, accusations.
7. In the absence of definitive information, alleged massive conspiracies abound. DOE, the Contractors, the newspapers, the Hospital, the doctors, the medical laboratories, the other Agencies, etal.

1. It has been repeatedly alleged that the ORR Pine Trees are dying from TSCA emissions and that pine seedlings have an immune system similar to humans. It seems to make no difference that the pine trees started dying 25 years before TSCA started operations. The early cause became radiation, especially Sr-90. In truth, it's the Southern pine tree beetle.
2. The pine tree deaths are given as evidence that humans are at risk and there is a great cover-up of fallout and worse.
3. This would be amusing if it were not repeated until those seeking a cause for their problems believed it. It also has made great newspaper copy. It is almost unbelievable but it resulted in a study of pine trees and seedlings.
4. Unfortunately there are no continuous monitors for TSCA emissions. The TSCA incinerator is issued a permit after careful test burn conditions and is required to operate in an almost identical manner. The removal of contaminants is assumed to be the same as in the test burns. If you sit and examine TSCA operations, they are held to exceedingly close tolerances, closer than most analytical instruments. The result is a very reliable performance as indicated by "grab" samples. Talking with outside experts one finds that they believe TSCA is an efficient and well-run incinerator.
5. The emission levels of TSCA are about 1 % of the EPA allowed emission levels for chemicals. And about 0.06 % of the radiation background. One could not possibly detect any effect.
6. In the bigger picture, the alleging that TSCA emissions were large and dangerous resulted in the governor appointing an independent panel to investigate the safety of TSCA operations. They reached the same conclusion that any one examining the TSCA emission and operating data would reach - TSCA is safe.
7. Still there are those who say it is all a big cover-up.

In the past, significant amounts of radioactivity were introduced into the Clinch River. Effective actions to reduce the amounts were taken and the present rates of release are small but need to be smaller. The past releases are now in the Gulf of Mexico or are buried in the deep sediments under new sediments. After a short mixing region below the mouth of White Oak Creek, the Clinch River meets drinking water standards.

The only hazards in the Clinch River are the inaccessible deep sediments and the PCBs in certain fish whose consumption should be limited. The PCB levels are marginally above the allowed levels and only about 25 % of this is from DOE operations. Other near by water bodies are also contaminated.

The ATSDR measured PCB and mercury blood levels of heavy fish and turtle eaters from the Lower Watts Bar Reservoir and did not find significantly elevated levels. The margin of safety seems to be more than adequate.

The Clinch River Tributaries - Especially WOC

1. These are waters of the state and some do not meet the state regulations
2. The DOE is committed to cleaning up these streams and the ORR planned remediation should do so.
3. The remediation methods include some excavation, hydrologic isolation (keep the buried waste dry) and treatment of intercepted shallow ground water.
4. About an 80 % reduction in pollutants is projected

1. There is no evidence to show that this is an immediate hazard. Ground water moves slowly and most pollutants lag behind. Natural processes remedy many plumes.
2. Effective treatment is expensive largely due to the inefficiencies of the technologies now used.
3. New and better technologies are being sought. The process will be slow.

If you believe that DOE will follow through on their responsibilities and plans and you can accept some small risks for the near future, this is an acceptable situation.

If you believe that small involuntary risks are intolerable then this is not an acceptable situation.
 

1. Building Scarboro as an isolated, segregated community was abominable.

It is the closest residential community to a DOE production or waste area.
2. However the evidence is that the amount of contamination from Y-12 is negligible. The background levels are within the range of normal. The uranium from Y-12 is about 1 % of the natural uranium level and uranium contributes less than 1 % to the background radiation level.
3. Other data such as the fly-over radiation surveys show Scarboro to be normal. The monitoring data in Scarboro shows it to be normal. As do the past sampling data.
4. In spite of this, the Scarboro community (and Oak Ridge) with the help of the Nashville Tennessean has been labeled as contaminated and rife with illness. Many of its residents are concerned. Others are concerned with the negative aspects of the image Scarboro has received.
5. There have been numerous meetings that have become a sounding board for all kinds of issues including sick workers and general conspiracy. An environmental justice committee has been formed.
6. The Center for Disease Control and TN Dept. of Health has spent $300,000 for a study, which showed the Scarboro respiratory disease rate to be normal with nothing alarming. A think tank has been granted $500,000 to explain the results. A new multi-agency study is anticipated.

One detractor says: "Oak Ridge, as an area, has been highly affected by toxic metals[sic] releases from the nuclear plants and TVA that have taken decades of the lifespan of workers and residents in the area."

An EPA regulator stated if my son found employment in the ETTP, I would be greatly concerned about his safety and future health.

Consider the following from the TDH - Statistical Profiles of Tennessee:
 

Now we know why the Tennessean reporters like to come to Oak Ridge, TN

In spite of all this, the Oak Ridge image is getting worse; it makes the attraction of industry more difficult; it depresses property values.
 

• All DOE sites are under similar attacks.
• All EPA Superfund sites are under similar attack.
• Science is under attack and its relation to reality is questioned.
• In the new philosophy, you can believe what you want to believe

and it's just as true and valid as any other belief.

All sites share similar problems in their relation to the public.

If we are to have the benefits of a technological society, then we better learn how to deal with technological waste rationally.
 

• Very few citizens are speaking out for their community.
• DOE is not speaking out in its own defense and it needs to do so.
• The contrary-to-fact statements are not corrected.
• The naysayers set the tone of the meetings and the media coverage.
• The pro-Oak Ridgers are badly organized.
• Money is being spent on new studies or efforts.
• The studies themselves denigrate Oak Ridge.

Why would the government spend millions if there were not a problem?
We told you it would be another cover-up!!!
• The coming ORHASP dose reconstruction studies will make it worse.