Pinellas Plant

Site Profile Update

Peter A. Darnell, CHP, RRPT

Health Physicist

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

Division of Compensation Analysis and Support

December 2011

Tampa, FL
Background

 DOE operations 1957 to 1997

• Plant was located in Clearwater, FL• Produced precisely‐timed neutron generators 

initiate nuclear explosions

—Accelerator‐type neutron generators produced at Pi

gradually replaced polonium‐beryllium initiators

manufactured at the Mound site

• Also fabricated other weapons components th

included: lightning‐arrestor connectors, speciacapacitors, crystal resonators, magnetics, andoptoelectronic devices
Background—cont.

 September 1994, Pinellas stopped producing

weapons‐related components and began to c

its mission to environmental management

• The Department of Energy (DOE) transferred much 

Pinellas production capability to the Kansas City Pl

Missouri and the Sandia National Laboratory in Ne

Mexico

 DOE completed cleanup of the site in Decemb

1997

 Contractors

• General Electric Company (1957‐1992)

• Lockheed Martin Specialty Components, Inc. (1992
History of the Site Profile Revi

 2005 – Initial Pinellas Plant TBD completed

 2006 – TBD updates (page changes) completed fo

External (2), Site Description and X‐ray sections

 May 2007 – SC&A review of the Pinellas profile

submitted

• 11 primary issues and 8 secondary issues

 June 2008 – Pinellas Work Group meeting

• Agreement in principle for satisfying SC&A issues
October 2011 WG Meeting

 Updates to the Pinellas Plant Site Profile

• July 2011 –

• Introduction (ORAUT‐TKBS‐0029‐1, Rev 01)• Site Description (ORAUT‐TKBS‐0029‐2, Rev 02)

• Occupational Environmental Dose

(ORAUT‐TKBS‐0029‐4, Rev 01)

• Occupational Internal Dose (ORAUT‐TKBS‐0029‐5, R

• August 2011 – Occupational External Dose

(ORAUT‐TKBS‐0029‐6, Rev 01)

• October 2011 – Occupational Medical Dose

(ORAUT‐TKBS‐0029‐3, Rev 01)
October 2011 WG Meeting—c

 Discussion of the review matrix

• 11 primary and 8 secondary issues

—Primary issues include:1. Reconstruction of doses in the absence of ea

health physics, industrial hygiene, and enviro

records

2. Potential doses from insoluble metal tritides 

sufficiently addressed

3. Minimum detectable concentrations and

uncertainties for plutonium and bioassaymeasurements are inadequately addressed(Occupational Internal Dose; ORAUT‐TKBS‐00
October 2011 WG Meeting—c

 Discussion of the review matrix—cont.

4. Assessment of personnel badging policy 

early years needs further review

5. Problems with personnel dosimetry

6. Decontamination and decommission (D&

of Pinellas operations is not sufficiently

addressed

7. Missing internal dose estimation method

unmonitored workers (e.g., maintenance support personnel)
October 2011 WG Meeting—co

 Discussion of the review matrix—cont.

8. Potential missed dose for depleted uranium

9. The TBD fails to adequately define and assess

occupational medical exposure

10. Techniques and protocols increase uncertaint

dose conversion factors listed in the TBD

11. Frequency and type of X‐ray exposure is unce
Work Group Path Forward

 NIOSH – revising Pu bioassay section of the 

 SC&A

• Reviewing documents to verify changes reporte

NIOSH

• Revisiting Pu bioassay data

• Conducting personnel interviews (December 9,