Hooker Electrochemical

SEC Petition Evaluation Report and 

Technical Basis Document Reviews

Henry Anderson, M.D.

Chairman

William Field, Ph.D, member

Mark Griffon, member

Uranium Refining AWEs Work Group

August 2011

Richland, WA
Background

 Hooker Electrochemical classified as an 

Atomic Weapons Employer (AWE) facility 

from 1943 to 1948

 Residual contamination period through 

1976

 Primarily produced non-radioactive 

chemicals (P-45) for the MED

 Concentrated uranium-contaminated 

magnesium fluoride slag using waste 

hydrochloric acid from P-45 process
Background

(Continued)

 Building was constructed to perform the 

concentrating operation; Building was 

completed on July 11, 1944

 Most slag-handling conducted outdoors

 P-45 operations ended January 15, 1946

 Concentration of incoming material was 

0.2% uranium by mass

 Material was concentrated to 1% to 2%
Petition Overview

 Submitted on March 6, 2009 – proposed 

class was for the “furnace room”

 Proposed finding sent to petitioner May 

15, 2009 – not qualified for evaluation

 Petitioner revised proposed class 

September 26, 2009

 Qualified for evaluation October 16, 2009

 Evaluation Report issued on May 3, 2010
Key Review Documents

 NIOSH ER – May 2010

 SC&A ER Review – January 2011

 Hooker TBD – April 2011 (Revised June 2011)

 Allen White Paper (DCAS) – Observation A & 

Finding F. Hooker Electrochemical SEC Review,

April 2011

 Allen White Paper (DCAS) – Surrogate Data 

Evaluation: Hooker Electrochemical Company, 

April 2011 (revised May 2011)

 SC&A White Paper – Review Of NIOSH White 

Paper, “Surrogate Data Evaluation – Hooker 

Electrochemical Company,” July 2011
Petition Bases and Concerns

 Unmonitored workers

• Petition presented an affidavit 

indicating there was no internal or 

external radiation monitoring at Hooker.

• No indication of monitoring was found 

in records.
Hooker TBD

 Dose reconstruction methodology was 

originally described in Appendix AA to 

Battelle-TBD-6001 

 Hooker TBD replaced Appendix AA and 

changed proposed method of dose 

reconstruction, including revising 

approach to use of surrogate data for the 

internal dose
Process at Hooker

 C-2 slag was received in 500-pound 

barrels from Electro Metallurgical

• The barrels were dumped onto a conveyor belt 

that carried slag to one of three digest tanks

• Waste HCL from the P-45 plant was added to 

the tank and diluted to a ph of 4.0

• The tank was agitated for 20 hours

• Once in two days the liquid was decanted and 

more HCL was added.

• At the end of the digestion, the slurry was 

neutralized with lime and pumped to a filer 

press

• The filtered material was rebarreled
Internal Exposure Modeling

 Based on air samples for handling C-2 

slag at Electromet, Fernald, and 

Mallinckrodt

 Used 95th percentile of air sampling 

results

 More than 70% of air samples are BZ

 For residual period deposition/ 

resuspension model used with 

resuspension factor of 1E-06/m and no 

source term decay
External Exposure Modeling

 Exposure to workers handling slag in 

wooden barrels based on MCNPX 

calculations

 Exposure to workers from surface 

contamination based on MCNP 

calculations of slag dust settling from 

95th percentile air concentrations

 External doses rates for residual period 

same as for operating period
Work Group Review –

Resolution of Findings

 In its initial review of Appendix AA of 

TBD-6001, SC&A developed 10 findings 

and 3 observations. These findings were 

resolved to the Work Group’s 

satisfaction based on new information 

included in the Hooker TBD. 

 In its review of the ER, SC&A developed 

7 findings and 1 observation. These 

findings were resolved to the Work 

Group’s satisfaction based on new 

information included in the Hooker TBD. 
Work Group Review –

Use of Surrogate Data

 In May 2011, NIOSH issued a white paper 

evaluating the use of surrogate data at 

Hooker against ABRWH criteria. 

 The Work Group requested that NIOSH 

revise the white paper to fully document 

sources of air samples, and requested that 

SC&A review the revised white paper. 
Work Group Review of Use of 

Surrogate Date

(Continued)

 SC&A reviewed the revised NIOSH white 

paper and concluded that: “Based on our 

review, we believe that NIOSH has 

addressed the ABRWH surrogate data criteria 

in an appropriate manner, and that the use of 

surrogate data at Hooker is consistent with 

the Board criteria. Use of the selected 

surrogate data will result in plausible 

bounding estimates for internal exposures at 

Hooker.”
Work Group Recommendation 

 Work Group believes that doses for 

workers at Hooker can be plausibly 

reconstructed using information in the 

Hooker TBD (revised June 2011). 

 Work Group recommends that Petition 

SEC-0014 be rejected.