Document text
Machine-read from the scan, so expect some errors. Lines that couldn’t be read are left out.
Page 1
tious firc on 11 May 1969-said 10 bc on a mcsa at the foot of thc Rockics. Fivc niilcs to the cast b q i n thc dcnsc of thc Colorado c;ipital lies 21 niilcs to toniiini triggcrs for nuclear wcnpons are a Janics bond novcl, perhaps Doctor No’s automatic doori, ultraclcan rooms, a i d gleaming machincry. Instcad the visitor finds a rather shabby, gray cluslcr of :buildings sprcad likc a small town within a chain link fcncc. Govcrnnicnt invcstmcnt in Rocky Flats totalcd aboirt SI 30 million from 1952, when the plant opcncd, to 1969. Today tlic pl;in! cniploys sonic 3700 gram is ncarly finishcd, and i t will Icsult in a 50 pciccnt incrcnsc in piodtlction. Rocky Flats is, i n short, csscntial But in the last 2 ycars the plant has sit c pl 11toniu ni con t;i ni i nation. En\iironniciit~ilis!s, thcy say, arc trying to halt thc usc oE all radioactive n u - govcrnnicnt to StOi) building bonibs. Critics, on thc o t l ~ c rhand, say !he plant’s mrriiaymcnt is ncgligcnt froni sponsiblc toward its workcr poptil;ition. by onc, “Thcy’rc just playing \si!h 1111man lives out thcrc.” This ariictc rcvicws sonic of thc issucs that h a w Jogg~tl Rocky Flats sccrns that noi only national mood, and the advcrsc publicity causcd by thc firc, gcratcd and somctimes falsc stntcnicnts arc rcsponsiblc for thc fact that 2 ycars la!cr, Rocky Flats is still a subject of intcnsc neighborhood mistrust and SUSQuitc simply, the world around thc plant has changed. I n 1951, thc dca , fitting, isolatcd location for n topsccrct facility. But by 1970, Jclfcrson County, in which thc plant is !ocat:d, the nation. Rouldcr County, just nni-th of Rocky Flats, is the 25th instcsl-growing county. Ilcnver itself is no longer the mcditim-sized railroad hub it was just after World War 11: it is now a fulltion. Tlic controversy cruptcd a fcw months ;iftcr thc 1969 firc and is yct Toci, iir:i!!;t, tlic Fllant trics to achieve fine:;. llut local scientists iixiking a scrics of iiitlcl?ci:tlent surveys have found cvcr-greater qtrnntitics of pltrtoniuni fur from plant boundaries .in soils. Plutoniiini is found in thc direction of thc Each ncw survey I i x thrown niorc cold watcr on iii:in;qcincnt’s assertion achieving its containment gods. And cach siicccssive stiidy h:is brought on iinnoliccd plant practices-past and that only 0.038 curic of plutoiiiuni l i d history of the plant. This was a ciiiiliidanger from thc 1969 fire, as in prcvioils fircs, \vas that a cloud of s ~ iokc containing .pliitonitini osiclc particles might cscapc and blow away, possibly to contaminatc wats siipplics, buildings, soils, and to be inhalcd by people. In a Rovcrnbcr rcport on thc firc, A E C said that “thcrc is no evidencc that plutoniuni was carried beyond the Plant succrcd a “minor fai!ilrc,” and that the roofs of two buildings had “slight exterior con tamj na t i OI?.” : But sonic Boultlcr scicntists, principally Edward A. hlartcll, a nuclear chcniist a t thc Natinnd Center for. Atrnosphcric Research, suspcctcd that . plutonium oxidc had in fact escaped. niittcc f o r Environnicntal Inforniation (CCEI) Martcll madc his own survcy i n a January 1970 rc6ort that thcrc was Thc “hcalth and safety of the people of A sccoiid rcport issued a month later Tlic Colorado Statc Dcpartmcnt of iicaltii bcpn ;I siuciy wiiich, iii Mviay, sicatcr--pcrh;ips by n factor of 3. A t first, tlic scicntists suspcctcd thc mcciing, Dow oflicids suggcs!cd two firc. Tlic othcr was a 2-scrc sloragc arcn on-sitc, wlicrc drums of oil, liiccd with sniall 1~Ititonitini pnrticlcs, had stood rtisting a n d Icaking thcir contciits. This area bccamc the prinic SUS-
Page 2
The issue of cancer among workers, and the possibility that undctcctcd cancers might be occurring at thc Kocky Flats plutoniuii\ facility near Denver, Colorado, is the niost somber skeleton yet suspected of hiding in the plant’s rather crowded closet. Dow asserts that the incidence of cancer among its work force is “less than would bc expccted” from the wholc population. But the figures on which this clsini is bssed include only workers uho have caiicer while on the company payroll, or those who retire while on the company payroll. Totally excludcd from the figures are those cancer> which niay have occurred among mcn who left the plant to work elsewhere, becaus: neither Dow nor the AEC has instituted a rigorous followup study of ex-employccs. Their claim that cancer incidence is low at Rocky Flats is thereforc without a statistical base. Such followup as there is at Rocky Flats is recent and partial. For workers currently eniploycd (somc 3700) there are routine examinations. But these protime, the medical department only examined workers leave the plaut are invited to return for check~ps-but on a purely voluntary basis. Those who don’t want to. return or who find it impractical to d o so arc simply not followed by the plant. Nor has the Afoniic Energy Commission (AEC) made a n adcqiinle epidemiological study. I’lutonium is a provcn carcinogen in dogs aiid a highly dangerous potcntial carcinogen in nisn. Yet only the transuranium registry. in Richland, Wa\hington-n tiny office with a staff of four and a budget of $SO,OOO-collccts medical records of plutoniuni workers nationally. Rocky Flats has becn operating for 19 years; but only a year ago did it dccidc to turn over to the regihtry thc naincs of workers with records of cxposurc. So far, oiily 450 Rocky Flats workers are on file there, a!t!iough some 7700 men have workcd at thc plant a t Otic time or These deficiencies are serious for !wo reasons. First, the workers at Rocky Flats arc roiitincly esposed to plutonium, in accidents and small fires and esplosions (according t o management there werc 70 small fires in 19G9 and 35 in 1970). As such, they constitute one of tile few statistically large samples of human bciiigs ever esposcd to plutonium. Proper study of this group could yield the answer to whether and how plutonium causes cancer in man. And the need for those answcrs will grow motes a plutonium-based energy program as a matter of future national policy and encourages the growth of a much bigger labor force of plutonium wortters.-D.S. and sent away the leaky old drums and later laid down an asphalt pad over the sirrfnco where thcy stood to prevent plutonium 3till in the soil from also being blown away. After the CCEI report, houevcr, they added morc. Howcvcr, paving over one soiircc of the issue under the rug. Othcr posthat cillicr the stack eflltwnts have contniiicd m x h morc plutonium than was rliiinicd .b) the company or that thc on‘-site ccntamination conics from sonic other, yet tindisclnd, source. The f x t that the drunis wcrc pcrniittcd to stand ot,t in tlic open for systems did not indicate anything unusual during that time, has rcflccted stated po!icy of totnl contninmcnt. h.lan;igcniciit’s position, as expressed by James F. Willging, Director of Research and Ecology, is that “the difference bctwccn 1, 6, or 15 curies is not significant from a public health around Rocky Flats, the nniounts of pcrniissiblc international standards, h c says. Indeed, manager‘s retort to the off-sik contamination charge aiid other safety issues is that the international standards are rarely, il ever, escccdctl i n plant operations. What this rebuttal ignorcs, however, is the fact that almost since their inception, thc standards for plutonium have been a subject of concern and larly controversial latcly has liccn the den agreed on by the National Conimittcc on Radiation Prcltcction and tcrnational Commission o n Radiation At issue, scientifically, is thc question of how nonhoniogcncous bits of plutonium, cmitting very intcnsc, blit localparticles”-behave in body tissue. T h e standard for the lung was based on a niodcl in which tlic inhaled PILIloniuni behaved in the lung like a n aerosol and irradiated the lung walls arc thought by niany to behave differently. hlartcll and sonic of the AEC scientists, including A. 13. Long of Argonnc National Laboratory, Donald Gccsaninii of the Lawrencc Bcrkclcy Laboratory, and othcrs, h a w raised questions about the standard. They much morc intense radiation, alhcii over a smaller tissue arca, than thc uni-. that it itivolvcs much greater risk. O n the other hand, Wright I a ~ n ~ liain, an AEC scnicr plutonium scirntist, sags it is also possible that the “hot pariicle,” fewer ceils at risk. Taking yet ai:othcr view, Arthur Taniplin, of Livcrniore Laboratory, told Scicrice that ccrt:iin lions qualify acd, in some cascs, exempt the uniform-dosage standards from applying to hot plutonium particles. Langhaiii sunis 115the controversy by saying that, whcn the standards werc set, scientists agreed that further study The significance of all this to Rocky Flats is that hlartcll bclicves adaniantly that the standards, as they apply to the area soils, arc far too lax. Some of the critics of thc standards have suggcstcd that tlicy niitst bc revised downward by a factor o l 50 to 100. Dut at Rocky Flats, if the standards werc lowered, thc plant might I have to bc closed down, says Mirtell.
Page 3
ing ;L i 9 7 0 strike, for cxamplc, Rocky Flat’s carly records were shown to be vague and misleading. During aJdy strike four workers froin the United Mine Workers of Amcric3 appcarcd before the Joint Conimittcc o n Atomic agement had been burying radioactive, hazardous wastcs o n the plant grounds. A gubcrnatorial candidntc, Mark Hogan, licutcnnnt goveinor of Colorado, scizcd on the issuc and scnt a telegram urging JCAE to investigate. Whcn JCAE representativcs arrivcd a t Rocky Flats, manzgcnient had the wastes in the disputed arca, called the h4ound, dug up. But apart from tlic wastes which company records showed - were buried there in the 19SO‘s, 30 barrels of plutonium wastc turned up. These were not mcntionctl in company . The upshot of the incident was that . practices safe h d rcturncd to \Vashwere discontinued in the carly 1960’s and that thc ivastcs in the Mound area have bccn shipped OIT IO Idaho. Gut thcrc are scven trenches of bxicd wastes from the carly days iil the nor:l:- wcsf corncr of the sifc. The company ging admits that on thcsc, as well, company rccorcis may provc cqiially Another instance where managccase of an hourly employcc, loseph Sykcs, who refused io enter Lalldiiig from his job and askzj for compcnsaCommission granted his rccpicst, but sion. ‘Thc Cornniissioii held hcarings i n mission rulcd in favor of managemcnt Robert hlillcr, the lawyer ivho dc: fcndctl Sykcs, snys that nianagcmcnt bore a grudge a pin st the company o w r some unpaid n:oving expenses. Willgin: says, “Sykcs \\.:IS a Ioncr and FallY, he would try the same thing. If thcy fired nic, {or cxaniplc, I might try viewed by Scicwcr, howcvcr, said that thcy did not feel Sykcs was a Ioncr. Oiic tvho had bcen thcrc for 7 ycnrs would havc gonc back thcre and clcancd up aftcr that fire. A lot of people didn’t go back. They just plain The Sykcs case is over. But manitics in brznding Sykes a loner with a griidgc still lcxves open the issue of \\hat rccoursc tlicrc is for a worker who bcconics afraid of exposure at Rocky ieriis of Candor Public relations after the 1969 firc sounded very rcassuring, such as this statcnxnt in a press rclcasc: “Since the 1969 fire, thc spccial invcstigiition by the AEC, thc close surveillance by statc hcalth officials and a team from JCAE, and n hcaring by tlic Colorado Industrial Commission havc rcafirnicd the safety of Rocky Flats operations.” But the attempt to regain credibility thus pluninicted when their own superior, sistsnt Gcncral Managcr for Military frank words t o a congressional committee ahout Rocky Flats and conjured up the spector of anothcr firc. T h e tcstinioiiy occurred in October 1970; the Denvcr prcss picked it up in January buildings “cro\vded,” its cquipnmit r,umbcr of serioiis dcficicncics which similar to the previolis one, wc would havc a very scvcrc impact on public mittcc on public works of thc Housc apford to lose as much as a few months to get thc firc and safcty rcpnrations work going. k i t this ycnr, when it came timc for t h e confintiation of tlicsc funds, JCAE held back o n an added $12.8 from thc $IS niillion rcqucst lor Rocky Ihts. The rcnson, said tlic conimittcc in its rcport, was that “prcliminnry denc last 2 ycars have been loaded with constant challenges to the plant on thc issuc of safcty. Y c t despite this accuniulatcd cxpcrience in dealing with critics and the press, Rocky Flats rnanagers stilt display a remarkable ability to leave thcmsclves open to further Oficials maintain, for cxamplc, that their operation is carricd out with grcat precision and care. Yct what imnicdiately strikcs thc visitor to the plant is that thc sitc is a mcss. Old cquipmcnt, bits of metnl, tools, glove boxes, and discarded lumber lie alongside the roads. This visitor was taken to the asphalt wastc oncc stood-the pad is niennt to serve as testimony to thc fact that. officials run a tight ship. Yet the sanic corncI. of the plant sitc is used as a gcneral dumping ground for old machine parts, trash, cans, and so forth. Piant oficials arc ‘eager to impress the public with thc carc that they lake for worker exposurcs, and their foolproof testing and monitoring of pcrsonncl. This visitor was shown through the hcalth physics laboratories, whcrc thc doors carricd yellow signs saying that safcty glasses must be worn by cveryone inside. Yet, i,i a principal niciaiis wore no glasses at 311. wlicrc workcrs arc routiiicly monitored for internal radiation through half-hour body counts in .special closcts designed to sliicld out background radiation, o iki also pti d o.ic ciuor-which bore n o sign-thus inipcriling a test of a tvorkcr who was lying on thc counting in progrcss, but this closct was in fact empty, and n o tcst was taking place. plant is still dogged by criticism, and its nianagcrs’ crctlibilify remains low. As the Dcn:.cr suburbs grow u p around thc plant sitc, Rocky Flats will rcmnin a foctls of attcntion a:id mistrust. The prcssurcs to r clc atc, or autornalc, the lic opinion in which nuclcar installations opcrate thqc days has changcd. Thcrc have been some early signs lately that the ncw chairman of thc AEC, Jarncs Schlcsingcr, has scnscd this. But tlicrc arc plmty of signs :IS WCII that thc niaiiagcrs a t the Dow Chcniicnl Co., Rocky Flats Division,