ORAU TEAM

Dose Reconstruction

Project for NIOSH

Oak Ridge Associated Universities I Dade Moeller I MJW Technical Services

Page 1 of 41

DOE Review Release 07/27/2011 

Document Title:

Pinellas Plant – Site Description

Document Number: ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 

Revision: 02

Effective Date: 04/01/2011

Type of Document: TBD

Supersedes: Revision 01

Subject Expert(s): Marquis P. Orr, Paul J. Demopoulos, and Brian P. Gleckler

Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 03/25/2011

Brian P. Gleckler, Document Owner

Concurrence: Signature on File Concurrence Date: 03/28/2011

John M. Byrne, Objective 1 Manager

Concurrence: Signature on File Concurrence Date: 03/25/2011

Edward F. Maher, Objective 3 Manager

Concurrence: Signature on File Concurrence Date: 03/29/2011

Kate Kimpan, Project Director

Approval: Signature on File Approval Date: 04/01/2011

James W. Neton, Associate Director for Science

New Total Rewrite Revision Page Change

FOR DOCUMENTS MARKED AS A TOTAL REWRITE, REVISION, OR PAGE CHANGE, REPLACE THE PRIOR 

REVISION AND DISCARD / DESTROY ALL COPIES OF THE PRIOR REVISION.
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 2 of 41

PUBLICATION RECORD

EFFECTIVE 

DATE

REVISION 

NUMBER DESCRIPTION

08/05/2005 00 New technical basis document for the Pinellas Plant – Site 

Description. Incorporates formal internal and NIOSH review 

comments. First approved issue. Initiated by Marquis P. Orr.

10/04/2006 01 Approved Revision 01 to make changes according to the public 

outreach meetings of 09/2004 and 11/2005 and claimant 

communications. Added required language from NIOSH in the 

Introduction. Incorporates internal formal review comments, 

including adding the pilot plant information at the end of section 2.2. 

Added a Purpose and Scope, Sections 2.1.1 and 2.1.2. Incorporates 

NIOSH formal review comments. This revision results in no change 

to the assigned dose and no PER is required. Training required: As 

determined by the Task Manager. Initiated by Paul J. Demopoulos.

04/01/2011 02 Revised predominantly to address SC&A comments on the 

document, as identified in SCA-TR-TASK1-0015. Incorporates a

large amount of newly captured information. Incorporates formal 

internal and NIOSH review comments. Constitutes a total rewrite of 

the document. Training required: As determined by the Objective 

Manager. Initiated by Brian P. Gleckler.
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 3 of 41

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION TITLE

Acronyms and Abbreviations ...............................................................................................................

PAGE

5

2.0 Site Description........................................................................................................................7

2.1 Introduction ..............................................................................................................................7

2.1.1 Purpose........................................................................................................................8

2.1.2 Scope...........................................................................................................................8

2.2 Site Location ............................................................................................................................8

2.3 Background and History...........................................................................................................8

2.3.1 Origin of the Pinellas Plant and Relationship with GEXM............................................ 11

2.3.2 Temporary Plant and Construction Era for Pinellas Plant ........................................... 11

2.3.3 Main Operating Era (1957–September 1994) ............................................................. 12

2.3.4 Decontamination and Decommissioning Era (October 1994–1997)............................ 13

2.4 Radiation Sources..................................................................................................................13

2.4.1 Radioactive Materials ................................................................................................. 14

2.4.1.1 Tritium.......................................................................................................... 14

2.4.1.2 Plutonium..................................................................................................... 15

2.4.1.3 Krypton-85 ................................................................................................... 15

2.4.1.4 Uranium ....................................................................................................... 15

2.4.1.5 Nickel-63...................................................................................................... 16

2.4.1.6 Carbon-14.................................................................................................... 16

2.4.2 Radiation-Generating Devices .................................................................................... 16

2.5 Overview of Major Site Operations.........................................................................................17

2.5.1 Neutron Generator Production.................................................................................... 17

2.5.1.1 Early Neutron Tube Loading ........................................................................ 19

2.5.1.2 Later Neutron Tube Loading ........................................................................ 20

2.5.1.3 Neutron Generator Testing........................................................................... 21

2.5.2 RTG Production.......................................................................................................... 21

2.5.3 Neutron Detector Production ...................................................................................... 23

2.5.4 Target Assessment..................................................................................................... 23

2.5.5 Other Products ........................................................................................................... 23

2.5.6 Research and Development ....................................................................................... 24

2.5.7 Product Testing .......................................................................................................... 24

2.5.7.1 Spin Tests.................................................................................................... 24

2.5.7.2 Explosive Tests ............................................................................................ 25

2.5.8 Radioactive Waste Disposal ....................................................................................... 27

2.5.8.1 Liquid Radioactive Waste............................................................................. 27

2.5.8.2 Solid Radioactive Waste .............................................................................. 27

2.5.8.3 Gaseous Radioactive Waste ........................................................................ 27

2.6 Major Facility Descriptions .....................................................................................................27

2.6.1 Building 100................................................................................................................28

2.6.2 Building 200................................................................................................................31

2.6.3 Building 300................................................................................................................31

2.6.4 Building 400................................................................................................................32
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 4 of 41

2.6.5 Building 800................................................................................................................33

2.6.6 Building 1000..............................................................................................................33

2.7 Radiological Releases............................................................................................................34

2.7.1 Environmental Releases............................................................................................. 34

2.7.2 Releases Due to Unusual Events ............................................................................... 34

2.8 Attributions and Annotations ..................................................................................................35

References ........................................................................................................................................36

LIST OF TABLES

TABLE TITLE

2-1 Other radiation-generating devices ........................................................................................

PAGE

18

2-2 Functions and sizes of Pinellas Plant buildings ...................................................................... 28

2-3 RMMAs in Building 100.......................................................................................................... 30

2-4 Chronology of unusual events................................................................................................ 34

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE TITLE

2-1 Location of Pinellas Plant in Pinellas County, Florida...............................................................

PAGE

9

2-2 Aerial photograph of Pinellas Plant ..........................................................................................9

2-3 Site map................................................................................................................................. 10

2-4 Early neutron tube tritium loading manifold ............................................................................ 20

2-5 Cut-away illustration of an RTG unit....................................................................................... 22

2-6 Exploded illustration of a 238PuO2 heat source........................................................................ 22

2-7 Spin tester..............................................................................................................................25

2-8 Firing tubes and the boom box configuration.......................................................................... 26

2-9 Boom box and collection container......................................................................................... 26

2-10 Building 100-300 with second floor mezzanines and offices................................................... 29

2-11 Layout of Building 400............................................................................................................ 32

2-12 Layout of Building 800............................................................................................................ 33
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 5 of 41

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AEC U.S. Atomic Energy Commission

ALARA as low as reasonably achievable

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

Ci curie

cm centimeter

CPE Ceramic Product Engineering

d deuteron

D deuterium (2

H)

D&D decontamination and decommissioning

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

dpm disintegrations per minute

EEOICPA Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000

ERDA U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration

ft foot

g gram

GE General Electric Company

GEND GE Neutron Devices (a.k.a. the Pinellas Plant)

GENDD GE Neutron Devices Department (a.k.a. the Pinellas Plant)

GEPP GE Pinellas Plant

GEXF GE X-Ray Division in Florida (a.k.a. the Pinellas Plant)

GEXM GE X-Ray Division in Milwaukee, Wisconsin

H hydrogen (1

H or protium)

HEPA high-efficiency particulate air

hr hour

in. inch

keV kilo-electron volt

LANL Los Alamos National Laboratories

LMSC Lockheed-Martin Specialty Components

m meter

M&O Managing and Operating

MeV mega-electron volt

min minute

MMSC Martin Marietta Specialty Components

mrem millirem

MT metal tritide

mW milliwatt

nCi nanocurie

NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 6 of 41

NTTL neutron tube target loading

oz ounce

PAO Pinellas Area Office 

PCIC Pinellas County Industrial Council 

POC probability of causation

RMMA radioactive material management area

RTG radioisotopically-powered thermoelectric generator

s second

SECS stack effluent control system

SEM scanning electron microscope

SNL Sandia National Laboratory

SRS Savannah River Site

T tritium (3

H)

TRS Tritium Recovery System

U.S.C. United States Code

XRD X-Ray Diffraction

XRE X-Ray Emission

yr year

μCi microcurie

§ section or sections
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 7 of 41

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

2.1 INTRODUCTION

Technical basis documents and site profile documents are not official determinations made by the 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) but are rather general working 

documents that provide historic background information and guidance to assist in the preparation of 

dose reconstructions at particular sites or categories of sites. They will be revised in the event 

additional relevant information is obtained about the affected site(s). These documents may be used 

to assist NIOSH staff in the completion of the individual work required for each dose reconstruction.

In this document the word “facility” is used as a general term for an area, building, or group of 

buildings that served a specific purpose at a site. It does not necessarily connote an “atomic weapons 

employer facility” or a “Department of Energy [DOE] facility” as defined in the Energy Employees 

Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act [EEOICPA; 42 U.S.C. § 7384l(5) and (12)]. 

EEOICPA defines a DOE facility as “any building, structure, or premise, including the grounds upon 

which such building, structure, or premise is located ... in which operations are, or have been, 

conducted by, or on behalf of, the Department of Energy (except for buildings, structures, premises, 

grounds, or operations ... pertaining to the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program)” [42 U.S.C. § 

7384l(12)]. Accordingly, except for the exclusion for the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program noted 

above, any facility that performs or performed DOE operations of any nature whatsoever is a DOE 

facility encompassed by EEOICPA.

For employees of DOE or its contractors with cancer, the DOE facility definition only determines 

eligibility for a dose reconstruction, which is a prerequisite to a compensation decision (except for 

members of the Special Exposure Cohort). The compensation decision for cancer claimants is based 

on a section of the statute entitled “Exposure in the Performance of Duty.” That provision [42 U.S.C. § 

7384n(b)] says that an individual with cancer “shall be determined to have sustained that cancer in the 

performance of duty for purposes of the compensation program if, and only if, the cancer ... was at 

least as likely as not related to employment at the facility [where the employee worked], as 

determined in accordance with the POC [probability of causation1

The statute also includes a definition of a DOE facility that excludes “buildings, structures, premises, 

grounds, or operations covered by Executive Order No. 12344, dated February 1, 1982 (42 U.S.C. 

7158 note), pertaining to the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program” [42 U.S.C. § 7384l(12)]. While this 

definition excludes Naval Nuclear Propulsion Facilities from being covered under the Act, the section 

of EEOICPA that deals with the compensation decision for covered employees with cancer [i.e., 42 

U.S.C. § 7384n(b), entitled “Exposure in the Performance of Duty”] does not contain such an 

exclusion. Therefore, the statute requires NIOSH to include all occupationally-derived radiation 

exposures at covered facilities in its dose reconstructions for employees at DOE facilities, including 

radiation exposures related to the Naval Nuclear Propulsion Program. As a result, all internal and 

external occupational radiation exposures are considered valid for inclusion in a dose reconstruction. 

No efforts are made to determine the eligibility of any fraction of total measured exposure for inclusion 

in dose reconstruction. NIOSH, however, does not consider the following exposures to be 

occupationally derived (NIOSH 2010):

] guidelines established under 

subsection (c) ...” [42 U.S.C. § 7384n(b)]. Neither the statute nor the probability of causation 

guidelines (nor the dose reconstruction regulation, 42 C.F.R. Pt. 82) define “performance of duty” for 

DOE employees with a covered cancer or restrict the “duty” to nuclear weapons work (NIOSH 2010).

• Background radiation, including radiation from naturally occurring radon present in 

conventional structures

• Radiation from X-rays received in the diagnosis of injuries or illnesses or for therapeutic 

reasons. 

 

1 The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) is ultimately responsible under the EEOICPA for determining the POC. 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 8 of 41

2.1.1

This TBD represents a specific support mechanism concerning documentation of facilities and 

processes that manufactured neutron generators and other components for nuclear weapons. The 

manufacture of neutron generators required equipment, facilities, and expertise that could be applied 

to a variety of specialty components.

Purpose

2.1.2

The Pinellas Plant Site Profile provides supporting technical data to evaluate the total Pinellas 

occupational radiation dose that can reasonably be associated with the worker’s radiation exposure. 

This dose results from exposure to external and internal radiation sources in Pinellas facilities.

Scope

This site description provides general information on where some of the processes occurred and 

some details of the processes. This might include when the processes occurred and details of the 

devices produced. For example, neutron generators are described as consisting of a miniaturized 

linear ion accelerator assembled with pulsed electric power supplies. The ion accelerator, or neutron 

tube, required ultra-clean, high-vacuum technology; hermetic seals between glass, ceramic, glassceramic, and metal materials; and high-voltage generation and measurement technology. The 

Pinellas Plant manufactured only neutron generators for its first 10 years of operations.

2.2 SITE LOCATION

The Pinellas Plant is in central Pinellas County, Florida, on 99.9 acres in Section 13, Township 30S, 

Range 15E, of the Tallahassee Meridian (Figure 2-1). Pinellas County is in the west-central part of 

peninsular Florida. It is bounded on the north by Pasco County, on the east by Hillsborough County 

and Tampa Bay, and on the west and south by the Gulf of Mexico.

The site is bordered on the east by Belcher Road (Pinellas County Road 27), on the south by Bryan 

Dairy Road (Pinellas County Road 135), and on the west by a spur of the Seaboard Coastline 

Railroad. The area is surrounded by light industry and warehouse operations. The closest residential 

area is approximately 400 m (1,300 ft) from the Plant. 

The area around the Pinellas Plant is characterized as urban land consisting of high-density 

residential developments, commercial buildings, streets, highways, parking lots, and other types of 

development (Lewis et al. 2004, p. 8). Figure 2-2 is an aerial photograph from 1992 that shows the 

proximity of residential and commercial development to the Pinellas site. 

2.3 BACKGROUND AND HISTORY

The Pinellas Plant (Figures 2-2 and 2-3) has been known by several names throughout its history. 

Those names include: 908 Plant, Pinellas Peninsula Plant, GE X-ray Division-Florida (GEXF), GE 

Neutron Devices Department (GENDD), GE Neutron Devices (GEND), GE Pinellas Plant (GEPP), 

and the Pinellas Plant. The initial mission of the Plant was the manufacture of neutron generators and 

other components of nuclear weapons. Throughout their history, neutron generators have been 

referred to as external initiators, 908 products, portable radiographic instruments, Zippers, and 

nuclear weapons triggers. The manufacture of neutron generators required equipment, facilities, and 

expertise that could be applied to a variety of specialty components. As a consequence, DOE 

expanded the Plant mission to produce multiple electronic and support components for other DOE 

programs. These components included: neutron detectors, specialty capacitors, thermal batteries, 

electromagnetic devices, vacuum switch tubes, Lithium AMBient (LAMB) batteries, frequency control
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 9 of 41

Figure 2-1. Location of Pinellas Plant in Pinellas 

County, Florida (FDOT 2005).

Figure 2-2. Aerial photograph of Pinellas Plant (FAS 2004). 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 10 of 41

Figure 2-3. Site map (DOE 2002).

devices, resonant accelerometers, lightning arrestor connectors, foam support pads, product testers, 

alumina ceramics, alumina ceramic feedthroughs, ferroelectric ceramics, glass ceramics, 

optoelectronics, shock transducers, and radioisotopically-powered thermoelectric generators (RTGs) 

(GE 1990).

The Pinellas Plant (Figure 2-3) eventually had approximately 755,584 ft2 of interior space on the 99.9-

acre site. The Plant was constructed in 1956 by the General Electric Company (GE) for the 

development and production of nuclear generators for the nation’s nuclear weapons programs. The 

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) [predecessor of the U.S. Energy Research and Development 

Administration (ERDA) and DOE] purchased the Plant from GE in 1957, and contracted GE to operate 

it from its startup in 1957 until May 31, 1992. In June 1992, Martin Marietta Specialty Components, 

Inc. (MMSC) (later renamed Lockheed-Martin Specialty Components, Inc.) took over operation of the 

facility and served as the Managing and Operating (M&O) Contractor (FDHRS 1994, p. 1). As part of 

the strategy to promote commercial uses of the site, DOE sold the Pinellas Plant to the Pinellas 

County Industrial Council (PCIC) in 1995 (DOE 1995).

DOE has an ongoing environmental restoration program for a 20-acre plot in the northeast corner of 

the site and another 4.5-acre area near the northwest corner of the site. Both areas have 

groundwater contamination caused by previous storage and disposal of drummed waste and 

construction debris that contained solvents and volatile organic compounds. Remediation of these 

sites is being addressed under a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act permit that includes 

corrective action requirements and cleanup under Florida State Superfund statutes (DOE 1998, p. 1).
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 11 of 41

2.3.1

The Pinellas Plant was the progeny of the GE X-Ray Division’s 908 Product Section in Milwaukee, 

Wisconsin. The X-Ray Division was originally located in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and was also known 

as the GE X-Ray Department and GE X-Ray Division-Milwaukee (GEXM). In December 1952, 

Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) and Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) personnel agreed 

that the design and development of a new type of nuclear weapons external initiator would be 

assigned to GEXM. On July 16, 1954, the first unit of the new initiator design was delivered to SNL. 

These initiators were later referred to as neutron devices or neutron generators. GEXM work included 

the operation of a small pilot plant for the production of neutron generators. In December 1954, 

indications from SNL were that a release would be given to GEXM to proceed with the manufacturing 

of 50 neutron generators per month. GEXM estimated that 175,000 ft2 of interior space would be 

needed in a new production facility to meet that requirement. Because there was no expansion 

acreage available at the GEXM site, it was necessary that the new plant be built at a remote location. 

On February 20, 1956, a letter of intent for production quantities came from SNL, which triggered 

accelerated activities for constructing the new production facility. In March 1956, it was decided to 

locate the new 908 Plant in Pinellas County, Florida. After reviewing several potential site locations in 

Pinellas County, the location on Bryan Dairy Road was selected and purchased in June 1956. On 

April 17, 1956, the H. K. Ferguson Company of Cleveland, Ohio, was awarded the contract to design 

and build the Pinellas Plant. On October 24, 1956, the contract order of intent for the Pinellas Plant 

was received with a new option for the AEC to buy the Pinellas Plant from GE within 30 days of the 

plant’s completion (Persons 1977). 

Origin of the Pinellas Plant and Relationship with GEXM

The GEXM relationship with the Pinellas Plant continued long after the Pinellas Plant became 

operational. GEXM continued to perform research and development work regarding the neutron 

generators and continued to assist with meeting the government’s neutron generator production 

quotas through the continued operation of its pilot plant. The Pinellas Plant radiological control 

programs were originally based on the GEXM radiological control programs. However, once the Plant 

became operational, the available documents indicate that the GEXM radiological programs appear to 

have been managed by the Pinellas Plant (GE 1957–1973). In addition, the Pinellas Plant processed 

GEXM film dosimeters and performed tritium analyses on GEXM urine, water, oil, contamination 

smear, soil, and vegetation samples once it became operational (GE 1957–1973; Jech 1963).

During the years of 1956–1966, a number of GEXM employees transferred to the Pinellas Plant. 

Because the employment records received from GE typically do not identify which GE site that an 

employee worked at, the EEOICPA-covered employment for Pinellas Plant workers might include 

some GEXM employment at the beginning of their covered employment. When this has occurred, the 

amount of GEXM employment can typically be determined in the worker’s dosimetry records. 

Because of the connection between the GEXM and Pinellas Plant dosimetry programs, the similarities 

between the activities performed at the sites, and the similarities between the doses received at these 

two sites, the GEXM dosimetry data can be assessed using the information provided in the 

Occupational External and Internal Dose TBDs for the Pinellas Plant (ORAUT 2011a,b). 

On October 1, 1966, the 908 Product Section was reorganized into the Neutron Devices Department 

within GE’s Nuclear Energy Division (Persons 1977). In 1966, all remaining neutron generator-related 

activities at the GEXM site were relocated to the Pinellas Plant, including a number of GEXM 

personnel.

2.3.2

Because of the need for an interim manufacturing facility, a temporary plant was built near the 

intersection of 24th Street North and 26th Avenue North in St. Petersburg, Florida (DOE 1987; Forest 

1974; Persons 1977). The temporary plant consisted of two concrete buildings that were leased by 

Temporary Plant and Construction Era for Pinellas Plant
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 12 of 41

GE. One was a 9,600-ft2 building that was used mostly as a warehouse for equipment and tool 

storage, soldering training, quality control, shipping and receiving, and possibly maintenance. The 

other was a 20,000-ft2 building that was used for offices and manufacturing (DOE 1987; Persons 

1977). The H. K. Ferguson Company designed the internal arrangements for the 20,000-ft2 building, 

which were completed in August 1956. The first neutron generator released to be built was the 

MC757. The manufacturing of this neutron generator began at the temporary plant on September 4, 

1956. By early January 1957, there were 285 employees working at the temporary plant (Persons 

1977).

The operations in the manufacturing section were similar to those now used in neutron generator 

production at the Pinellas Plant, except they were on a smaller scale. Tritium was first received at the 

temporary plant on December 12, 1956 (DOE 1987). Operations using tritium were performed in a 

350–ft2 hood room (Forest 1974). 

On May 19, 1957, operations at the temporary plant were concluded (DOE 1987; Persons 1977). 

When operations at the temporary plant were terminated, the hoods were transferred to the Pinellas 

Plant for continued use; the liquid waste and the exhaust ventilation systems were disassembled, 

packaged, and shipped to the Savannah River Site (SRS) for burial; and the hood room was 

decontaminated to the minimum detectable radioactivity level of 50 dpm/100 cm2 as measured by 

surface swipes (Forest 1974). In addition to the hood room, surveys were performed throughout the 

entire building (DOE 1987; Forest 1974). These surveys revealed no detectable contamination 

(Forest 1974). At the conclusion of the decontamination efforts, the building was unconditionally 

released, and the Pinellas County Health Department certified that the dismantling and 

decommissioning of the building and equipment were done satisfactorily (DOE 1987; Forest 1974).

On June 14, 1956, ground was broken for the construction of the Pinellas Plant. The Plant was 

originally built and owned by GE. The initial size of the total interior space was approximately 

161,000 ft2

. Occupancy of the Plant began on January 5, 1957. With the exception of the Tube 

Exhaust Area, the move into the newly constructed plant was completed by January 29, 1957. On 

May 29, 1957, the AEC exercised its option to buy the Pinellas Plant, and on June 28 ownership of 

the plant was transferred to the AEC (Persons 1977). 

2.3.3

The AEC and its successor agencies (ERDA and DOE) contracted with GE to operate the Pinellas 

Plant from its startup in 1957 until May 31, 1992. In February 1958, the AEC established its Pinellas 

Area Office (PAO) (Persons 1977). On January 15, 1973, the PAO received formal notification of the 

assignment of production responsibility for the RTG to the Pinellas Plant (Kuntz 1973). In November 

1975, Plant operations were expanded to include the production of RTGs (Author unknown undated 

a). In 1990, the RTG product line was discontinued (MMSC 1992). All plutonium, with the exception 

of calorimeter sources and very small instrument calibration check sources, was removed from the 

Plant in February 1991 (MMSC 1992).

Main Operating Era (1957–September 1994)

On June 16, 1992, President Bush of the United States and President Yeltsin of Russia signed an 

arms agreement that significantly reduced nuclear weapons stockpiles and the corresponding 

production operations that supported them. To meet those challenges, the Secretary of Energy, 

James Watkins, reconfigured and consolidated the nuclear weapons complex into Complex 21 (DOE 

1993). In December 1991, Secretary Watkins identified the plants slated for closure and the preferred 

sites to which production activities would be transferred (Pope 2007). The Pinellas Plant was one of 

the plants slated for closure. After that, GE announced that it would no longer continue as the prime 

contractor for the Plant (YRSC 2010).
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 13 of 41

In June 1992, Martin Marietta Specialty Components, Inc. (MMSC) took over operation of the Pinellas 

Plant and served as the M&O Contractor. In November 1993, DOE initiated the phase-out of the 

production activities at the Plant, and the transition of the Plant from the DOE Office of Defense 

Programs to the Office of Environmental Management with the eventual goal of releasing the site for 

commercial use (DOE 1995). In 1994, Lockheed merged with Martin Marietta and the M&O

Contractor was renamed Lockheed-Martin Specialty Components (LMSC).

On August 15, 1994, the Assistant Secretary of Energy for Environment, Safety and Health issued a 

Finding of No Significant Impact for the proposed action to allow mixed-use commercialization of the 

Pinellas Plant. The proposed action also allowed for limited cleanup activities in association with 

preparing the site for commercial uses (DOE 1995).

2.3.4

The Pinellas Plant completed its war reserve fabrication of neutron generators at the end of 

September 1994 and began the transition from a defense mission to an environmental management 

mission (Pope 2007; DOE 2010). Disconnection of the equipment at the Plant began in October 1994 

and was completed by the end of September 1995. When the last war reserve product crossed a 

piece of equipment, the equipment was calibrated (when required), disconnected, packaged for 

shipment, and shipped to SNL (Pope 2007).

Decontamination and Decommissioning Era (October 1994–1997)

The new mission for the Pinellas Plant was to clean up the plant from the past AEC/ERDA/DOE 

mission and transition the plant to commercial uses (LMSC 1996). As part of the strategy to promote 

commercial uses of the site, the DOE sold the Pinellas Plant to the Pinellas County Industrial Council 

(PCIC) on March 17, 1995 (DOE 1995). The sales contract and related lease, which provides for 

continued DOE occupancy at the site, included clauses to ensure continued compliance with Federal, 

State of Florida, and local regulations and cleanup of the site (DOE 1995).

The first Pinellas Plant employees were transferred to the SNL in July 1994 to meet specific needs at 

the SNL. A few more employees were transferred over the next few months. The majority of the 

Pinellas Plant employees transferred to the SNL in September and October 1995. The last Pinellas 

Plant employees transferred to the SNL in December 1995. Approximately 83 individuals were 

transferred from the Pinellas Plant to the SNL. Those individuals were mostly managers, technical 

staff, and technicians. No floor operators were transferred to the SNL (Pope 2007). 

With the cessation of operations in 1994, the remaining major sources of external radiation (neutron 

generators, 85Kr leak detection systems, other radiation-generating devices) were removed. As 

indicated above, RTG plutonium sources, which were one of the other major sources of external 

radiation at the Pinellas Plant, were removed in February 1991. Table 2 of the 1995 ALARA report for 

the Plant confirms this, because a noticeable drop in the average and highest annual external doses 

to the workers occurred after the RTG plutonium sources were removed from the site (Weaver 1996).

In addition, there is no indication that any significant changes were made to Pinellas Plant radiological 

control practices as the Plant transitioned into its decontamination and decommissioning (D&D) era. 

Given that and given that LMSC remained the prime contractor through 1997, the radiological 

program documents that were in place during the pre-D&D era can be assumed to be applicable to 

the entire D&D era, which ended in 1997.

2.4 RADIATION SOURCES

Radiation sources at the Pinellas Plant included a variety of radioactive materials and radiationgenerating devices. The following subsections identify the major sources of radioactivity and radiation 

at the Plant. 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 14 of 41

2.4.1

Radionuclides were used at the Pinellas Plant for the following purposes:

Radioactive Materials

1. To be made part of a product, such as tritium in neutron generators, plutonium in RTGs, and 

uranium in certain borosilicate glass products;

2. Leak-testing certain products, as in the site’s use of 85Kr;

3. Tritium storage, as in the site’s use of depleted uranium in sealed containers;

4. Instrument and dosimeter calibrations and checks; and

5. Analytical standards for laboratory analyses, as in plutonium and tritium analyses of urine 

samples.

With the exceptions of radionuclides used as analytical standards, tritium (3

H), 14C, and 85Kr were the 

only dispersible radionuclides normally encountered at the Pinellas Plant. All other radionuclides at 

the Plant were in nondispersible forms (plated sources, containerized sources, encapsulated sources, 

solid metal sources, etc.). Tritium, 85Kr, plutonium, and uranium were the radionuclides encountered 

by the most workers. The remaining radionuclides were predominantly calibration and check sources 

that were used by the relatively small number of workers who were involved with calibrating 

dosimeters, response-checking instruments, and calibrating instruments (MMSC 1995; Author 

unknown undated b; Weaver 1995a). 

For the purposes of this TBD, a containerized source is a radionuclide in any form (liquid, gas, or 

solid) that is normally kept sealed in a container that would only be unsealed in an accident situation. 

The most common examples of containerized sources at the Pinellas Plant were liquid scintillation 

calibration sources and the depleted uranium metal powder contained in the tritium storage beds.

The following subsections describe the forms and uses of the predominant radionuclides that were 

encountered at the Pinellas Plant.

2.4.1.1 Tritium

Tritium (also denoted as T, H-3, and 3

H) is a hydrogen atom with two neutrons. It is the heaviest of 

the three isotopes of hydrogen [protium (

1

H), deuterium (

2

H), and tritium (

3

H)] and is the only 

radioactive hydrogen isotope. Tritium is a low-energy, beta-emitting radionuclide with a half-life of 

12.28 years. The average and maximum beta particle energies are 5.7 keV and 18.6 keV, 

respectively (Kocher 1981). Between 1957 and 1993, annual tritium inventories at the Pinellas Plant 

ranged from 5.44 g (5.24 × 104 Ci) to 53.27 g (5.14 × 105 Ci) (Biedermann 1994). Tritium is not 

considered to be an external radiation hazard, because the beta particles being emitted have too low 

of an energy to penetrate human skin. However, inside the body its radiation can cause damage to 

tissues and organs.

Four primary forms of tritium were present at the Pinellas Plant – tritiated water (HTO), tritium gas (HT 

or T2), organically bound tritium (OBT), and metal tritides (MTs). One of the most common forms of 

organically bound tritium at the Plant was contaminated pump oils. The MTs (primarily scandium 

tritide, erbium tritide, and titanium tritide) formed during production processes could have been 

released in the work environment as particulate aerosols. The gas was allowed to react with metal 

surfaces, thin metal coatings, and metal powders for various purposes. Powders were normally 

contained with vacuum systems, and metal systems normally remain intact (Burkhart 1995, p. 2).
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 15 of 41

2.4.1.2 Plutonium

In terms of radioactive decay, 238Pu and 239Pu are alpha and X-ray-emitting radionuclides with halflives of 87.75 years and 24,131 years, respectively (Kocher 1981). The alpha particle emissions from 

these two radionuclides are the primary concerns for internal dose. The photon (gamma ray and 

X-ray) and neutron radiation emitted from the sources containing plutonium are the primary concerns 

for external dose. Gamma rays and neutrons are predominately emitted from the spontaneous 

fissions of plutonium, alpha-neutron reactions, and photon-neutron reactions.

The first plutonium at the Pinellas Plant was a 7-g 239Pu source that was received in January 1957. 

The source was used for calibrating health physics monitoring equipment. Based on the available 

information on this source and its use, it was most likely an encapsulated plutonium-beryllium (Pu-Be) 

neutron source. The triply encapsulated plutonium oxide (238PuO2) heat sources used for RTGs did 

not start arriving at the Plant until November 1975 (Author unknown undated b). There were two 

different types of 238PuO2 heat sources, 8.75-g sources and 10-g sources (DOE 1982). With the 

exception of 1975, no information was found on the annual inventories of 238PuO2 heat sources. In 

November 1975, the site received seven 238PuO2 heat sources (Author unknown undated b). All 

plutonium, with the exception of calorimeter sources and very small instrument calibration check 

sources, was removed from the Plant in February 1991 (MMSC 1992).

2.4.1.3 Krypton-85

Krypton-85 is a noble gas and a beta-emitting radionuclide with a half-life of 10.72 years. The 

average and maximum beta particle energies are 251.4 keV and 687.0 keV, respectively. Krypton-85 

emits a 513-keV gamma ray for less than 1% of its decays (Kocher 1981). 

Relatively small quantities of 85Kr were used in two leak detection systems (Radiflo® and TracerFlo 

systems) that were used at the Pinellas Plant from September 1963 until 1996 (Burkhart 1990; LMSC 

1997a; MMSC 1993a). These systems were housed in separate rooms in Area 109 and surrounded 

by ventilation shrouds (DOE 1983, 1987). Each shroud was connected to ductwork that exhausted 

3,300 ft3

/min to the east main exhaust stack (DOE 1983). During 1996, this leak detection equipment 

was decontaminated and relocated, along with unused storage containers of 85Kr gas, to Building 800 

(LMSC 1997a). By the end of 1996, all the Radiflo® and TracerFlo leak detection equipment and 

unused cylinders of 85Kr gas were shipped back to their manufacturers (LMSC 1997a).

2.4.1.4 Uranium

Depleted and natural uranium, which consist of 234U, 235U, 238U and some of the radioactive progeny 

for these radionuclides, were present at the Pinellas Plant. In terms of radioactive decay, the uranium 

isotopes emit alpha particles and X-rays. However, some of the radioactive progeny emit beta 

particles and gamma rays.

The major use of depleted uranium was for the tritium storage beds that were first used in 1968 

(Phillips 1975). Depleted uranium metal was used for the particulate uranium metal tritide in the 

tritium storage beds (Ward 1973). Because the uranium in the tritium storage beds was sealed in 

stainless-steel canisters, it was a containerized source and would have posed little to no internal dose 

hazard. There was no indication that the uranium ever leaked from the storage beds at the Pinellas 

Plant. Given that particulate uranium metal is pyrophoric, any uranium metal leaking from the tritium 

storage beds would have ignited and resulted in a uranium fire incident. Of the reported incidents for 

the Plant, which are summarized in Table 2-4, none were uranium releases or uranium fire incidents. 

The depleted uranium (mainly 238U) inside the tritium storage beds presented no significant external 

radiation hazard due to the low specific activity and the nonpenetrating radiation.
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 16 of 41

The major use of natural uranium was the use of borosilicate glass that was doped with natural 

uranium (1.5% by weight) in the form of U3O8 (Weaver 1992). Because the uranium would have been 

encapsulated in the glass prior to its arrival at the Pinellas Plant, the glass was considered to be a 

sealed source and would have posed little to no internal dose hazard.

2.4.1.5 Nickel-63

Nickel-63 is a low-energy, beta-emitting radionuclide with a half-life of 100.1 years. The average and 

maximum beta particle energies are 17.13 keV and 65.87 keV, respectively (Kocher 1981).

The information on the Pinellas Plant’s use of 63Ni includes documents from the GEXM site. Because 

many of the same nuclear weapons-related activities were performed at the Pinellas Plant and GEXM 

and because many items were obtained from the same vendors, use of 63Ni and the form in which it 

was obtained were likely the same for both sites.

Nickel-63 was electroplated onto a nickel mesh inside a sealed glass tube (a krytron) by U.S. Radium, 

and averaged 0.3 μCi per spark gap (Weaver 1994a; Jech 1963). Krytrons are cold-cathode, gasfilled tubes intended for use as very-high-speed switches, which have been used for igniting 

exploding-bridge wire detonators and slapper detonators in nuclear weapons. The 63Ni is used in 

conjunction with the keep-alive electrode, where the beta particles being emitted by the 63Ni make the 

ionization inside the krytron easier. The available information indicates that the Pinellas Plant was not 

involved with the process of electroplating 63Ni to the keep-alive electrodes for the spark gap bodies, 

and received only the spark gap bodies containing the electroplated 63Ni from U.S. Radium. It is not 

known if the electrodes plated with 63Ni were already sealed in the glass tubes before they arrived at 

the Plant or if the Plant was creating and sealing the electrodes in the glass tubes. Given that one of 

the Plant’s areas of expertise was glass formulation, it was likely sealing the electroplated 63Ni 

electrodes into the glass tubes to create the krytron.

2.4.1.6 Carbon-14

Carbon-14 is a low-energy, beta-emitting radionuclide with a half-life of 5,730 years. The average and 

maximum beta particle energies are 49.47 keV and 156.48 keV, respectively (Kocher 1981).

The use of 14C at the Pinellas Plant is indicated only in the gaseous effluent release reports and an 

environmental assessment (DOE 1983; GE 1980, 1981, 1982a, 1983, 1984). The gaseous effluent 

release reports indicate that 14C was used between 1979 and 1983 (GE 1980, 1981, 1982a, 1984). 

Based on the reported gaseous effluent releases for those years, 14C was used in much smaller 

quantities than tritium. A comparison of the annual quantities of gaseous effluents released indicates 

that the curies of tritium being processed were over 100,000 times greater than the curies of 14C being 

processed. A 1983 environmental assessment indicated that small quantities of 14C labeled solvents 

were used in a laboratory testing operation (DOE 1983). No other documentation was found to 

indicate other uses of 14C.

2.4.2

Radioactive materials were not the only source of ionizing radiation at the Pinellas Plant. Many 

pieces of equipment produced and used at the Plant were capable of generating radiation. Unlike 

radioactive materials, radiation-generating devices emit radiation only when they are connected to a 

power supply and are activated. When not in use, these devices did not emit radiation.

Radiation-Generating Devices

The most common type of radiation-generating device at the Pinellas Plant was its primary product, 

the neutron generator. Neutron generators are miniaturized linear ion accelerators (DOE 1987). A 

pulsed electric power supply accelerates deuterons (i.e., deuterium nuclei) into either a tritium or 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 17 of 41

deuterium target, depending on the type of neutron generator, to create a controlled source of 

neutrons (DOE 1987; NCRP 1983; Weaver 1994b). The neutrons are generated by either a 

T(d,n)4

He or D(d,n)3He fusion reaction. Most units produced at the Pinellas Plant were the T(d,n)4He 

type that produced 14-MeV neutrons; however, a few were constructed to produce 2.5-MeV neutrons 

from the D(d,n)3

He reaction (Weaver 1994b; NCRP 1983). The neutron generators also produce 

some X-rays by other interactions within the accelerator (NCRP 1983).

An ion accelerator, a Model 200 HP Ion Implanter that was manufactured by Accelerator Inc., was 

also used at the Pinellas Plant (Malbrough 1983). It was a Cockroft-Walton-type linear ion accelerator 

and was first installed in 1975 in Area 161 of Building 100 for use by the Chemistry Laboratory (GE

1977; Malbrough 1983). The accelerator was originally used for ion implantation work and eventually 

for target assessment work prior to being relocated (GE 1977; Malbrough 1983). In 1979, the 

accelerator was relocated to Building 800. After the accelerator’s relocation, it was used for a larger 

variety of activities that included target assessment; material analysis; low-energy nuclear, solid-state, 

and atomic physics; and material science (Malbrough 1983). Personnel working with this accelerator 

were required to wear dosimeters that measured both photon and neutron doses (Weaver 1994b).

Table 2-1 summarizes the remaining types of radiation-generating devices that were used at the 

Pinellas Plant and their locations. In addition to the devices identified in Table 2-1, a diagnostic 

medical X-ray unit was used in the Plant’s Medical Center. More information on that device can be 

found in the Pinellas Plant Occupational Medical Dose TBD (ORAUT 2006). 

2.5 OVERVIEW OF MAJOR SITE OPERATIONS

The major operations described in this document primarily focus on the operations that potentially 

contributed to the Pinellas Plant workers’ radiological exposures.

2.5.1

The Pinellas Plant manufactured precisely timed neutron generators, which were used to initiate 

nuclear explosions, as its primary product from 1957 until 1994. As older nuclear weapons, which 

used Po-Be initiators, were removed from the national stockpile, they were gradually replaced by 

nuclear weapons of newer designs that used accelerator-type neutron generators produced at the 

Pinellas Plant. In addition, neutron generator production at the Plant was used to replace decayed 

accelerator-type neutron generators in the nation’s aging nuclear weapons stockpile because of the 

relatively short half-life of tritium.

Neutron Generator Production
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 18 of 41

Table 2-1. Other radiation-generating devices.

a

Location Quantity Type ID Number

107 2 X-Ray Emission (XRE) Units CCN87103, CCN99591

114 2 Industrial X-Ray Units MN87904, MN87851

114 1 Faxitron X-Ray Corporation MN87243

114 1 TFI X-Ray Television None found

127 1 Inspector Unit None found

138 1 Electron Beam Welder MN62183

161B 2 X-Ray Diffraction (XRD) Units MN86640, MN86641

140/141 1 Electron Beam Welderb 140/141

161B 1 Micro XRD Unit MN86747

161B 1 Electron Microprobe MN86607

161B 1 Energy Dispersive Analyzer MN86475A

162 2 Scanning Electron Microscope (SEM) MN94109, MN94225

162 1 Transmission Electron Microscope MN94168

163 1 X-Ray Thickness Gage MN550042

164 1 Cabinet X-Ray Unit CCN91407

175 1 XRD Unit CN87952

176 1 XRE Unit None found

192B 1 Sedigraph MN94285

193N 1 SEM MN91992

194E 1 Picker (Cabinet X-Ray Unit) MN87042

300 2 Electron Beam Welder MN61660, MN76803

300 1 Phillips (Cabinet X-Ray Unit) MN87810

300 2 Faxitron X-Ray Corporation MN088001, MN099915

400 2 Electron Beam Welder MN61346, None found

400 1 Cabinet X-Ray Unit MN63294

Warehouse 1 X-Ray Television None found

a. Sources: Author unknown (undated c); GE (1986, p. 1).

b. Murray (2005). 

Neutron generators are miniaturized linear ion accelerators (DOE 1987). A neutron generator 

consists of a neutron tube, power supply, and timer (March et al. 1999). There are two basic types of 

neutron generators, those with discrete electronic power supplies and those with ferroelectric ceramic 

power supplies (DOE 1987; March et al. 1999). In ferroelectric ceramic power supplies, the 

ferroelectric materials are activated by an explosive charge that destroys the structure of the material 

(DOE 1987). Neutron generator parts and assemblies were encapsulated with phenolic resins and/or 

foam to provide electrical or mechanical insulation (DOE 1998).

The main subassembly of a neutron generator is the neutron tube, which contains tritium and 

deuterium (DOE 1987). The neutron tubes themselves are capable of generating neutrons when 

activated. Initial design and development of the vacuum tubes used in neutron generators occurred in 

Areas 181 and 182 of Building 100. Normal production of the neutron tubes took place in Areas 107, 

108, 109, and 126.

The neutron tubes are a glass, metal, and ceramic construction with glass-to-metal and metal-toceramic seals (DOE 1987). Neutron generator tube production involves loading various metal films 

with deuterium and tritium under vacuum conditions to form metal hydrides (Burkhart 1990). When 

the metal hydrides were used for capturing tritium gas or tritium gas storage, they are referred to as 

metal tritides (MT). Each neutron tube contains an MT target and a deuterium gas reservoir in the 

form of a metal hydride.

Neutron tube target loading (NTTL) was an operation that involved the loading of tritium gas onto 

metal target disks. At the Pinellas Plant the processes used to perform the NTTL changed over the 

years. The significance between the earlier and later processes is that the early NTTL process 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 19 of 41

involved the entire neutron tube and the processing systems included a significant number of glass 

components. The later NTTL process involved only the targets, which were installed in the neutron 

tubes after they were loaded, and the processing systems were an all-metal construction. The 

following subsections describe the processes for two different eras. Information indicates that 

portions of these processing systems transitioned from a glass to a stainless-steel construction during 

the period of 1965–1968 (GE 1979, Phillips 1975). The available information does provide a more 

precise date on the hydride storage beds, which were a key part of those processing systems. In 

1968, the Plant transitioned from using titanium hydride encased in glass to depleted uranium hydride 

encased in stainless-steel for the hydride storage beds (Phillips 1975). 

2.5.1.1 Early Neutron Tube Loading

The early neutron tube loading systems included a significant number of glass components that were 

subject to breakage. Because glass breakage was a frequent occurrence with these systems, the 

systems were eventually replaced with all-metal systems (Burkhart 1990). From 1957 through 1967, 

glass tritide storage beds that utilized titanium metal were used. These storage beds were glass 

cylinders that contained an extremely fine titanium metal powder (similar to talc). On occasion, 

breakage of a glass tritide storage bed would cause high levels of floor contamination due to the high 

specific activity of the titanium tritide that existed as an extremely fine powder (Burkhart 1990). This 

was the primary reason for the replacement of the glass tritide storage beds in 1968.

Elemental target material (typically erbium, scandium, or titanium) was deposited as a vapor onto a 

ceramic or metal target substrate (DOE 1987; LMSC 1995), after which the targets were loaded in the 

neutron tubes. The nearly completed neutron tubes were then attached to a glass manifold vacuum 

system under an exhaust hood. The normal arrangement had two neutron tubes on each system and 

four systems under each hood. There were 20 hoods in Area 108, but not all were used all the time 

(Burkhart 1990).

As shown in Figure 2-4, the system contained two vacuum pumps and a quartz glass manifold to 

which deuterium and tritium bearing hydride storage beds and the neutron tubes were attached. A 

roughing vacuum pump was used for the initial system evacuation. A mercury diffusion pump 

reduced system pressure to a near-perfect vacuum as measured on a mercury U-tube manometer. 

Once the system reached vacuum, valves isolated the manifold and the tritium or deuterium bearing 

hydride storage bed was heated to flood the system with tritium or deuterium gas. After the required 

exposure time, the storage beds were allowed to cool, which caused the hydrogen gas to be 

reabsorbed (Burkhart 1990, p. 1).

When the manometer showed zero system pressure, the operator would use a mobile pulse tank to 

test the functionality of the neutron tubes still attached to the manifold. The pulse tank would cause 

the neutron tube to fire a brief burst of neutrons. This in-place testing of the freshly loaded neutron 

tubes was discontinued in April 1966. Tubes that functioned correctly were removed using a torch to 

melt the glass manifold connection, seal the neutron tubes, and cut them free of the manifold 

(Burkhart 1990). 

After manufacture, the neutron tubes were leak-tested. Initial leak-testing used helium or Freon for 

leak detection. In 1963, the nonradioactive leak-testing units were changed to leak detection systems 

that used 85Kr gas (Radiflo® and TracerFlo systems) (Burkhart 1990; DOE 1983; MMSC 1993a).

Tritium releases to the environment occurred during removal of neutron-generating tubes and the 

maintenance of the system. Vacuum pump seal oil would become contaminated with tritium gas, 

tritium oxide, and mercury vapors. The interior of the glass manifold would become coated with 

grease containing tritium and deuterium. The pumps and valves were removed periodically to a 

separate hood area to be cleaned and repaired while the glass manifold was cleaned with solvents to 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 20 of 41

remove accumulated greases. In addition, components in the glass systems occasionally exploded or 

imploded, causing gas release, loss of contamination control, and personnel exposure (Burkhart 

1990).

091504_01_TB

Glass Manifold

#1 Valve

Deuterium

Bed

Tritium

Bed Diffusion Pump

Mercury

Manometer

Neutron

Generator Tubes

Vacuum Pump

Exhaust

Figure 2-4. Early neutron tube tritium loading manifold (Burkhart 1990).

2.5.1.2 Later Neutron Tube Loading

The later neutron tube loading systems were metal systems that minimized accidental tritium 

releases. The general design of the metal systems was similar to that of the glass systems. In 

addition, the glass encased titanium hydride storage beds were replaced with stainless-steel encased 

depleted uranium hydride storage beds in 1968 (Phillips 1975). 

Target manufacturing involved depositing elemental target material (typically erbium, scandium, or 

titanium) as a vapor onto a metal target substrate (DOE 1987; LMSC 1995; March et al. 1999). This 

was achieved by heating the elemental target material in a vacuum to the point of elevated vapor 

pressure. At such elevated temperatures in a vacuum, the metal evaporates and then condenses on 

any cooler surface in the line of sight, including the substrates to be coated (March et al. 1999).

Neutron tube target loading was an operation that involved the loading of tritium gas onto metal target 

disks (hydriding) under an inert nitrogen atmosphere using a glovebox. In the later process, the 

targets were hydrided prior to being installed in the neutron tubes. After the targets were hydrided, 

they were assembled into neutron tubes. Quality evaluations would include the destructive testing of 

a limited number of neutron tube targets. The targets would be destructively tested by heating them 

to measure the amount of tritium released from the surface of the target disk (MMSC 1994). 

After manufacture, the neutron tubes were leak-tested using leak detection systems that used 

radioactive 85Kr gas (Radiflo® and TracerFlo systems) (DOE 1983; MMSC 1993a). Functional testing 

of the completed neutron tubes was performed in Area 128 (LMSC 1997b).

After a uranium hydride storage bed was determined to no longer be useful as a process bed, it was 

stabilized by converting the pyrophoric uranium metal powder to a more stable uranium oxide before 

proper disposal. To do this, the uranium hydride storage bed was installed on the uranium bed 

oxidation system in Room 21 of Area 108C. The hydrogen isotopes were evolved from the hydride

storage bed by heating it and absorbed by another hydride storage bed that was at room temperature. 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 21 of 41

After all the hydrogen was released and the hydride storage bed had returned to room temperature, 

oxygen was added to the bed by a batch process. This process continued until there was no more 

oxygen uptake by the uranium in the hydride storage bed. The oxidized uranium hydride storage bed 

was then leak-tested and removed from the uranium bed oxidation system for disposal (MMSC 1994). 

Improved management control of the hydride process and replacement of the mercury manometer 

with vacuum gauges in 1959 and 1960 significantly reduced the amount of tritium released to the 

environment. Additional reduction resulted after installation of the Stack Effluent Control System 

(SECS), which used heated copper wire in the exhaust stream to convert tritium gas to tritium oxide. 

Chillers and demisters condensed and collected the vapor, and that liquid was routed to underground 

tanks for dilution and discharge (Burkhart 1990).

The neutron tube assembly area was exhausted through a ventilation system that vented a total of 

802.5 m3

/s (28,340 ft3/min) from two exhaust stacks in the building roof. An exhaust stack alarm was 

activated when the discharge exceeded 60 μCi/m3 for more than 2 minutes (Ward 1973).

2.5.1.3 Neutron Generator Testing

Neutron generator testing involves experimental testing and production-lot sample testing of explosive 

neutron generators (i.e., ferroelectric neutron generators) and 100% functional testing of electronic 

neutron generators. Explosive neutron generators are one-use items that are tested in a protective 

enclosure, and testing results in the generation of classified mixed waste. Electronic neutron 

generators are reusable and typically do not generate waste when tested (March et al. 1999). Final 

testing of the neutron generators for production purposes was performed in Area 131 (LMSC 1997b). 

Neutron generator testing for laboratory support and development took place in a number of areas in 

the western portion of Building 100 (GE 1978).

2.5.2

RTG production took place in Building 400 at the Pinellas Plant from late 1975 though 1990 (DOE 

1982; Author unknown undated b; MMSC 1992). The facility was able to produce approximately 50 

units per month and production rarely exceeded 500 units per year (Author unknown 1988b, p. 4). 

Outside the source inspection hood (i.e., where the receipt inspections of the plutonium sources were 

performed), no plutonium contamination was ever found in the facility or the environment at the Plant. 

No releases of plutonium from Plant operations have been detected in the environment (GE 1982b;

1991a; Author unknown undated a).

RTG Production

RTGs are used to provide a long-life source of relatively low-energy electric power (approximately 

25 mW at 2 volts for more than 25 years). An RTG consisted of a sealed heat source containing a 

small amount of 238PuO2 (manufactured at another site) and a thermopile (manufactured at the 

Pinellas Plant) that was enclosed in thermal insulation and packaged in a welded steel case. 

Figure 2-5 shows a cut-away view of an RTG unit (GE 1982b). 

Two different heat sources were used in the RTG units. One contained 8.75 g of plutonium dioxide 

and the other contained 10 g. The configuration of both types of heat sources is the same; both were 

triple encapsulated. Figure 2-6 shows an exploded view of a plutonium heat source. The outer layer 

was a nickel alloy and the two inner layers were a tantalum alloy. The plutonium was predominately 

composed of 238Pu with significantly smaller percentages of other plutonium isotopes, decay products, 

and radioactive impurities (GE 1982b). 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 22 of 41

Figure 2-5. Cut-away illustration of an RTG unit (GE

1982b).

Figure 2-6. Exploded illustration of a 238PuO2 heat source (GE 1982b).
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 23 of 41

Shipments of the 238PuO2 heat sources were delivered directly to Building 400. The shipping 

packages were surveyed for surface contamination by instrument and swipe, then transferred to the 

source storage vault room. When shipping packages were to be opened, they were moved from the 

vault room to the source inspection hood. Upon opening the shipping packages, the sources were 

surveyed for contamination. If the sources were free of contamination, they were placed in a source 

storage container and returned to the vault. Contaminated sources with less than 200 dpm of alpha 

contamination were decontaminated before returning them to the vault. Contaminated sources with 

200 dpm or more of alpha contamination would have been repackaged and immediately returned to 

the manufacturer; however, no sources were ever found to have that much contamination (GE

1982b). 

When 238PuO2 heat sources were needed for assembly into an RTG, they were transferred from the 

vault to the source inspection hood, surveyed again, cleaned with alcohol, placed in a clean source 

storage container, and transferred to an assembly glovebox. The other components for final RTG

assembly were introduced through a pass box that was evacuated and then backfilled with argon 

before moving them to the assembly glovebox. The heat source was removed from the source 

container and placed on the top insulator using tongs. The RTG container was slid over the 

assembly, the base plate, and container configured for the joining operation. The base plate 

container joint was then tack-welded. The heat source was not damaged by the excessive heat input 

during the welding cycle because of its location in the center of the assembly and the protection 

provided by the insulation in the RTG unit. The RTG was then placed in a rotating welding fixture in

the electron beam welder chamber and the weld operation was completed. The RTG units were then 

leak-tested. After leak testing, the RTG units were removed from the glovebox line via a pass box. 

The RTG units then received a final contamination survey, after which they were not considered a 

potential source of contamination. They were then moved to a workstation where a final pinch-off 

operation was made. A protective cover was then cemented over the pinch-off (GE 1982b). 

The completed RTG units were then subjected to a series of testing procedures. These included: 

dimensioning, electrical input, temperature, vibration, and shock tests. Shelf-life studies were also 

performed on the RTG units. When testing was completed, the RTG units awaiting shipment were 

stored in the vault room (GE 1982b). 

2.5.3

Neutron detectors were small electronic assemblies used in joint test assemblies to verify the output 

of a neutron generator during actual tests. The neutron detectors were used to verify operability of 

the weapon system without initiating a nuclear explosion (GE 1990, p. 15). These components were 

manufactured in Building 100 and tested using the linear accelerator in Building 800.

Neutron Detector Production

2.5.4

The ion accelerator, originally located in Area 161 of Building 100 prior to being relocated to Building 

800, was used to assess various tritium targets (GE 1977; Malbrough 1983). Target assessments 

were performed by accelerating a beam of deuterons (deuterium nuclei) to determine the 14-MeV 

neutron output of various types of tritium targets. This operation was performed in the ion 

accelerator’s pulse mode, which duplicated the testing of the neutron tubes in Building 100 (GE 1977).

Target Assessment

2.5.5

In addition to the products discussed, the Pinellas Plant produced other special mechanical and 

electronic devices and test equipment for a variety of DOE and GE applications. These components 

included long-life batteries, high-speed switching circuits, and specially designed capacitors. These 

Other Products
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 24 of 41

products did not require direct use of radioactive isotopes for their manufacture, and this document 

does not cover them further.

2.5.6

Research and development at the Pinellas Plant was normally limited to the applied research 

necessary for the production of the Plant’s products. Extensive product development was also 

conducted at the Plant. In conjunction with SNL, the Pinellas Plant did production development work 

on all the products it produced. Development consisted primarily of the receipt of a basic product 

design from SNL and the construction of sufficient numbers of those products in a laboratory 

environment to determine the factors and parameters whose variations could cause production 

difficulties. The advantage of this arrangement was obvious. It assembled a cadre of technical 

personnel who had the experience and the intimate product knowledge necessary to solve, efficiently 

and quickly, production problems that might have been encountered (GE 1983). 

Research and Development

2.5.7

Mechanical and electrical testing of products, including the destructive testing of neutron generators, 

was conducted in Building 200. A typical regimen includes tests of vibration, acceleration, 

temperature and pressure cycling, and mechanical shock. Such testing ensured compliance with 

product specifications (DOE 1987). 

Product Testing

The destructive testing of neutron generators included shock, vibration, and explosive tests. The 

explosive tests involved the destruction of the neutron generators by explosive detonation, resulting in 

fragments of the neutron generators as well as other materials. The neutron generators were typically 

packed in urethane foam that also fragmented, adding to the radioactive waste. The Styrofoam was 

rigid and ranged from pieces to grain sized. Styrofoam was also used as a spacer to position the 

neutron generators in relation to the measurement instrument. In addition, instrumentation cables and 

connectors became part of the waste. The following subsections describe some of the destructive 

testing processes and equipment.

2.5.7.1 Spin Tests

The spin testing equipment looked like a big top-loading washing machine, as shown in Figure 2-7. It 

was located inside the secured room. The neutron generators were wired and assembled in a hard

plastic material fixture and inserted into a heavy aluminum fixture. The very heavy lid on top of the 

equipment was closed. The workers left the secured room and detonated the neutron generator. 

After the test, the equipment was opened, the fixture was removed, and the debris contents (neutron 

generator and plastic fixture pieces) were manually pried out, placed on a workbench, and placed in a 

plastic bag. There was no direct vent for this equipment other than the room’s ventilation.
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 25 of 41

Figure 2-7. Spin tester (Demopoulos 

2006).

2.5.7.2 Explosive Tests

These quality assurance tests included destructive testing of the units inside test chambers known as 

“boom boxes”. There were two complete testing systems, each having instrumentation, firing tubes, 

and boom boxes. Each system had two firing tubes (large and small) on one side of the wall, and on 

the opposite side of the wall a boom box was located. The boom box had two compartments 

(chambers), two access doors, and two sliding trapdoors, all of which was aligned behind each firing 

tube. The boom box was actually one large welded unit and had a permanent steel barrier between 

each compartment (Zerfas 2005). Figure 2-8 is an illustration of the configuration of this test 

equipment.

The neutron generator was wired and assembled in a urethane foam fixture and inserted into the firing 

tube. The tube was closed and the area where the firing tubes were located was cleared before the 

neutron generator was detonated. On the opposite side of the wall (in the secured room), a steel 

boom box was mounted. The boom box contained the detonation. The top of the boom box was 

connected to a duct system. The bottom had a funnel shape with a sliding trap door. After the 

detonation, a plastic bag was placed in a standard office trash can placed under the boom box. The 

firing tube was opened and a rammer inserted to push debris out of the tube into the boom box. The 

boom box’s trap door was opened, and the main access door was opened as well. Any surviving 

debris was brushed down using a standard dust pan brush. The bag was tied and stored in case 

further examination was needed. The test technicians might not have used protective wear (gloves,

dust masks, or respirators). The ventilation system for Building 200 passed through high-efficiency 

particulate air (HEPA) filters before exhausting out the building roof.
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 26 of 41

Figure 2-8. Firing tubes and the boom box configuration (Zerfas 

2005).

The radioactive waste would have consisted of the generator remains, Styrofoam pieces and 

particulates, plywood, cables, and connectors. This would be collected in the container as shown in 

Figure 2-9. (Zerfas 2005) 

Figure 2-9. Boom box and collection 

container (Demopoulos 2006).

For the boom boxes, a special treated plywood barrier was installed inside the chamber doors to 

deflect some of the detonation. The barriers were rotated 90 degrees after each generator test, 

enabling four tests. Particles of the generator would imbed into these boards. The outer part of the 
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 27 of 41

boom boxes were constructed of steel, about 1/8 to 1/4 inch thick. They were of welded construction. 

The hinged doors swung up to access the area to be cleaned (neutron generator debris). On the 

back side of the door, the plywood panel was mounted in a simple frame. The door was flat sheet 

metal with about a 1

/8 inch gasket cemented to the inside to make contact with the boom box face. It 

was by no means an airtight fit. The door was not latched down, but held in place by elastic cords. 

On top of each chamber was an exhaust duct, about 4 in. × 8 in., that joined together and then went 

up to the exhaust system. The sliding door on the bottom was of a guillotine design.

2.5.8

2.5.8.1 Liquid Radioactive Waste

Radioactive Waste Disposal

Four types of liquid waste were generated during Pinellas Plant operation: sanitary, industrial, 

chemical and, potentially, tritium-contaminated waste. Before 1982, sanitary wastes were processed 

by an onsite sewage treatment facility and mixed with neutralized industrial waste in the west pond. 

Chemical drain lines from inside the plant routed industrial waste to an onsite treatment facility where 

it was chemically neutralized and pumped to the west pond. Water from the west pond was sprayed 

on a 10-acre irrigation field. A subsurface drain system under the 10-acre field collected liquids and 

routed them to the east pond. Liquid in the east pond was sampled and periodically discharged to a 

Pinellas County drainage pipe and roadside ditch that drained into Cross Bayou Canal and Tampa 

Bay (DOE 1983, p. 2-14).

It is possible that tritium-contaminated liquid waste generated during operations and tritium oxide from 

the Tritium Recovery System (TRS) was piped to a group of three underground holding tanks in the 

health physics area outside the southwest corner of Building 100. The liquid was sampled and 

discharged if the radioactive content was below the limits specified in Chapter XI of DOE Order 

5480.1 (DOE 1980). Liquids with higher concentrations of tritium were incorporated into a solid for 

offsite burial. Effluent discharge from the holding tanks was pumped to the west pond where it mixed 

with the sanitary and industrial wastes discussed above (DOE 1983, p. 2-13).

2.5.8.2 Solid Radioactive Waste

The majority of radioactive waste from the site consisted of tritium-contaminated classified 

components. These components were packaged and shipped to a DOE-controlled site for disposal. 

Small quantities of radioactive liquids were solidified with absorbing compounds and included with the 

solid radioactive waste (DOE 1983, p. 2-21). Between 1965 and 1982, tritium-contaminated paper 

was incinerated at the site (DOE 1987).

2.5.8.3 Gaseous Radioactive Waste

Gaseous radioactive effluents were produced and released during the operation of the Pinellas Plant. 

Gaseous tritium, tritium oxide, 85Kr, and a very small quantity of 14C were the only identified releases. 

The four main discharge points were the two exhaust stacks on Building 100 and the single exhaust 

stacks on Buildings 200 and 800. During the initial years of Plant operation, tritium releases were as 

high as 42,400 Ci/yr. Installation of the SECS in 1960 reduced tritium emissions to less than 

1,000 Ci/yr, and installation of the TRS in 1982 further reduced tritium emissions to less than 

500 Ci/yr. 

2.6 MAJOR FACILITY DESCRIPTIONS

The Pinellas Plant contains multiple structures and support facilities within the controlled area. 

Table 2-2 lists the floor space and function of each building, and the following sections discuss each 

building.
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 28 of 41

Table 2-2. Functions and sizes of Pinellas Plant buildings. 

Building Function

Area

Square meters Square feet

Building 100/300 – 1st Floor Offices, Production, Laboratory 42,271 455,000

– 2nd Floor Offices, Utilities 9,625 103,600

– Mezzanines Offices 6,317 68,000

Building 100/300 – Total All floors and areas 58,213 626,600

Building 200 Product Quality Assurance Testing 1,505 16,200

Building 400 RTG Assembly and Testing 1,375 14,800

Building 500 Utilities, Deionized Water Plant 1,691 18,200

Building 550 Wastewater Neutralization 204 2,200

Building 600 Chemical Storage 669 7,200

Building 700 Maintenance Bldg., Fire Department 464 5,000

Building 710 Maintenance Storage Shed 36 384

Building 800 Ion Accelerator Facility 334 3,600

Building 900 Fire Training 65 700

Building 1000 and 1040 Waste Storage and Management 790 8,500

Building 1010 New Container Storage 232 2,500

Building 1100 Special Storage 37 400

Building 1200 Security 2,722 29,300

Building 1400 Remote Receiving 669 7,200

Building 1500 and 1600 School, Child Day Care 1,189 12,800

Site Total 70,195 755,584

Source: DOE (1995, p. 3-3). 

2.6.1

Building 100 was the initial plant building. During DOE ownership of the Pinellas Plant, Building 100 

provided space for manufacturing, engineering, and administrative support services. Figure 2-10 

shows the layout of Building 100.

Building 100

Radioactive materials in Building 100 were used in the production, manufacture, storage, and testing 

of various weapons components. Multiple areas were considered Radioactive Material Management 

Areas (RMMAs), which indicated the possible presence of unconfined radioactive materials or 

emissions (DOE 1995, p. 5-2; 1991b, pp. 2, 3, 11, and 13). Table 2-3 lists the RMMAs in Building 

100.

Area 107 was the assembly area for neutron tubes. A neutron tube is the main subassembly of the 

neutron generator. The neutron tube is a high-vacuum tube similar in operation to a miniature linear 

ion accelerator (GE 1990, p. 14). Tube manufacturing required clean-room conditions and used 

specialized vacuum-sealing technologies and metal spray deposition equipment (Author unknown 

undated d). Section 2.5.1 provides additional information on the production of neutron tubes.

Area 108 was the primary tritium handling area at the Pinellas Plant. Pure tritium gas was received 

from the SRS in standard LP50 containers and transferred to depleted uranium beds for storage. 

Overall tritium use at Pinellas was generally low, with an average yearly inventory of approximately 

15 g (0.53 oz) (Author unknown undated e, p. 94). Using a specific activity of 9,640 Ci/g, the average 

yearly inventory of tritium was approximately 144,600 Ci. There have been indications that 

maintenance workers were asked to reset tritium radiation area alarms in Area 108 without the use of 

respirators during power outages. This occurred with no negative pressure for the gloveboxes 

(Williams 2004).

The major tritium activity in Area 108 was production loading of neutron tubes and other components 

with tritium. The assemblies were loaded with tritium through a hydriding process in which the
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 29 of 41

assemblies were evacuated and filled with tritium gas and the tritium was captured by a thin film of 

metal on the inside of the tube. Initial test firing of the neutron tubes occurred in Area 108 until April 

1966 (Burkhart 1990), after which test firing took place in Area 128.

Other activities in Area 108 included mass spectrometer analysis of gas samples and maintenance of 

the spent uranium storage beds for use and disposal (MMSC 1994). Most tritium was stored and 

used in Area 108 (Author unknown undated e, p. 94).

351

350

349

348

307 310

352

309

353

336

330 347

306

Building 300

139

116

110

109 111

114

131128 130

149

125 122

134

133

121

126

108

138

140

141

142

146 145 143

117

112

194 195

124 105

118

193 192

104

152

151

163 162

161

160

159

183 182

184

185

175

181

180

158

157

155 164

150

154

153

176

174

103 106

119

170

Building 100

104

103

152

151

118

102

105

106

190 189

172 173

171

113 129

135

137

136

132

147

148

115

040405_03_TB

Figure 2-10. Building 100-300 with second floor mezzanines and offices (DOE 1994).
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 30 of 41

Table 2-3. RMMAs in Building 100. 

Room/Area Name Activity

107 Tube Assembly Vacuum tube manufacturing and coating

108 Tube Exhaust and Test Vacuum tube evacuation and testing

109 Product Analysis Magnetic and radioactive gas leak checking

113 Mezz Health Physics Laboratory Instrument calibration and check sources

132 Mezz Fan Room Stack effluent control and tritium recovery 

157/158 Gas Analysis Laboratory Hydrogen isotope analysis

176 Radioanalytical Laboratory Radiological Laboratory, tritium recovery

182-C Tube Assembly Vacuum tube development and testing

182-G Tube Exhaust Vacuum tube development and testing

191 CPE Hood Room Ceramic product testing facility

Source: DOE (1995, p. 5-3). 

Area 109 contained product testing and analysis facilities for neutron tubes and completed neutron 

generators. Manufactured components were tested for operability and vacuum-sealed components

were checked for leakage in Area 109. Part of the neutron generator testing included test firing of the 

devices and leak testing. Initial leak testing used helium and Freon leak-checking systems. In 1963, 

the Pinellas Plant began using leak test equipment that utilized radioactive 85Kr gas for leak checking 

vacuum tubes (Author unknown undated d).

Area 113M was on the second floor of Building 100 and housed the check sources and calibration 

laboratory for health physics instruments.

Area 126 was the tube processing area, which included the deposition of the neutron tube target 

material onto the target substrates (DOE 1987).

Area 128 was used to test fire completed neutron tubes from April 1966 and later.

Area 131 was the final testing area for the neutron generators.

Area 132M was on the second floor of Building 100 and housed the central exhaust fan room. It 

contained the SECS from 1960 until 1982, when that system was replaced by the TRS (Weaver 1993, 

p. 3).

Area 157/158 contained the gas analysis laboratory. This area was used for tritium target sample 

preparation for the linear accelerator in Building 800 and mass spectrometer analysis of completed 

components for tritium content. Most of the activities in Area 157/158 were completed inside 

ventilated laboratory hoods that exhausted through the west exhaust stack.

Area 161 was the initial location for the ion accelerator from 1975 to 1979 (GE 1977; Malbrough 

1983). This area also served as a surface science and X-ray analysis laboratory (LMSC 1997b). 

Those activities included surface analyses, thin films analyses, X-ray analyses, and process 

development (LMSC 1997b).

Area 182 was the vacuum tube development engineering section. It was used to engineer, design, 

fabricate, and test prototype vacuum tubes for neutron generators and other components. Areas 

182-C and 182-G were considered RMMAs due to the small quantities of tritium used in vacuum tube 

development. Area 182 was exhausted through the west main stack on Building 100.

Area 191/192 was the ceramic product engineering (CPE) section. Minor levels of tritium were used 

in the production and development of specialty ceramic components.
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 31 of 41

The Radioanalytical Laboratory was installed in 1966 in Area 176 on the southwest corner of Building 

100. It housed the TRS from 1982 until plant shutdown in 1992. The TRS recovered tritium from the 

plant ventilation stacks and converted it to tritium oxide for dilution and disposal.

Building 100 has two exhaust stacks. The west main stack exhausted 770 m3

/min (27,200 ft3/min) 

from the west side of Building 100. The stack is 1.5 m (5 ft) in diameter and 30.5 m (100 ft) high 

(DOE 1983, p. 2-18). The east main stack exhausted 1,140 m3

/min (40,240 ft3/min) from the east side 

of Building 100. The stack is 2.4 m (8 ft) in diameter and 21 m (70 ft) high (DOE 1983, p. 2-18). 

During plant operation, both stacks exhausted tritium and 85Kr from the vacuum tube exhaust, test, 

and assembly areas. Both stacks were equipped with continuous samplers to monitor the exhaust 

stream. An additional 12 sampling stations were located around the plant perimeter. All measured 

discharges of tritium and 85Kr were well below DOE and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

standards, and no plutonium release was ever detected during manufacturing or decontamination 

(MMSC 1995a, p. 3-2). Section 2.3.2 provides additional information on the annual tritium and 

krypton releases.

In 1988, a modernization task force conducted a detailed radiological survey of Building 100 to identify 

the level and extent of radiological contamination. A June 17, 1988, survey showed smearable tritium 

contamination in approximately 13% of Building 100. The maximum reading was a 1 × 108 dpm/ 

100 cm2 smear on the interior of an exhaust hood in Area 108. The average reading throughout the 

building was less than 220 dpm/100 cm2 (Author unknown 1988a, Bldg. 100/300 survey).

2.6.2

Building 200 was built in stages between 1959 and 1978; it covers approximately 1,505 m3

(16,200 ft2

). The building was used for destructive testing of neutron generators and other 

components manufactured at the Pinellas Plant (Author unknown 1988a, Bldg. 200 survey). 

Destructive testing included shock, vibration, and explosive tests.

Building 200

The modernization task force completed a radiological survey of Building 200 in 1988 to identify the 

general level of radiological contamination and perform an initial decontamination cost estimate. The 

June 1988 survey showed less than 5% of Building 200 contaminated with tritium. The maximum 

contamination level was a 1 ×104 dpm/100 cm2 smear inside a testing chamber, and the average 

contamination was less than 220 dpm/100 cm2 (Author unknown 1988a, Bldg. 200 survey). The final 

characterization report in 1997 found that radioactive waste and tritium were present in the building 

but did not identify specific contamination levels or types of radioactive waste; the report found that all 

quantities were less than reportable amounts required by 40 CFR Part 355 or 40 CFR Part 302.4 

(Author unknown 1996, p. 3).

During operation, the building exhaust system maintained negative pressure on three testing 

chambers (boom boxes) and a single radiological waste drum. The ventilation system passed 

through HEPA filters before being exhausted from the building roof (MMSC 1995b, p. 5-4). The stack 

exhausted 36.8 m3

/min (2,300 ft3/min). It is 17.7 m (58 ft) tall and 30.5 cm (12 in.) in diameter.

2.6.3

Building 300 primarily performed nonradiological activities. However, radioactive materials were 

handled in a number of areas within Building 300. Tritium was handled in Area 348 and glass doped 

with natural uranium was handled in Areas 327, 330, 331, and 336 (LMSC 1997b).

Building 300
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 32 of 41

2.6.4

Building 400 was built in 1968 for development and testing activities. It was expanded in 1978 and 

again in 1986. The facility was used to assemble and test RTGs from 1975 until 1990. Figure 2-11 is 

a layout of Building 400.

Building 400

Figure 2-11. Layout of Building 400 (GE 1982b, pg. 9).

The western half of Building 400 was used for nonradiological thermopile operations. The eastern 

half of the building was used for RTG assembly operations, which is where the 238PuO2 heat sources 

were stored and handled. The 238PuO2 heat sources and completed RTG units were stored in the 

source storage vault room (depicted as Cell 4 in Figure 2-11) (GE 1982b). Other than the source 

storage vault room and source inspection hood, the 238PuO2 heat sources were handled only in the 

gloveboxes in the final assembly areas (GE 1982b). Completed RTG units, containing the heat 

sources, were also handled in the final processing, inspection, and testing areas of the eastern portion 

of Building 400 (GE 1982b).

After production of RTG devices ceased in 1990, all plutonium heat sources were shipped off the site. 

During 1994, the building was fully decontaminated and released for use by a commercial tenant. 

The final decontamination survey found indoor radon levels to be below the action levels of the Indoor 

Radon Abatement Act. Other radiological surveys of the building showed residual radiation levels 

below free release limits (MMSC 1995b, p. 4-1).
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 33 of 41

2.6.5

Building 800 housed the ion accelerator. After the accelerator’s relocation from Area 161 in Building 

100 to Building 800 in 1979, it was used for a larger variety of activities that included target 

assessment; material analysis; low-energy nuclear, solid-state and atomic physics; and material 

science (Malbrough 1983). Figure 2-12 shows the layout of Building 800.

Building 800

Figure 2-12. Layout of Building 800 (MMSC 1993b, pg. 5).

The building ventilation system exhausted 38 m3

/min (1,350 ft3/min) through a 25 cm × 33 cm (10 in. × 

13 in.) exhaust stack that extends 6.3 m (20.8 ft) above the ground (DOE 1983, p. 2-18).

A radiological survey in 1988 identified a maximum reading of 1 × 108 dpm on a smear from inside the 

accelerator, and the average contamination was less than 220 dpm/100 cm2

. Less than 5% of the 

building area was considered contaminated (Author unknown 1988a, Bldg. 800 survey sheet).

2.6.6

Building 1000 was used to store low-level solid radioactive waste, solidified waste oil, and used 

equipment (MMSC 1995b, p. 5-5). Waste material was stored in the building until a sufficient quantity 

was collected for shipment to a DOE-approved disposal facility or for sale as scrap.

Building 1000

A radiological survey completed in 1988 identified low levels of contamination in as much as 75% of 

the radiological waste storage bay. The maximum measured contamination was less than 220 dpm/

100 cm2 (Author unknown 1988a, Bldg. 800 survey sheet).
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 34 of 41

2.7 RADIOLOGICAL RELEASES 

2.7.1

Radioactive airborne effluent releases were limited to tritium, 85Kr, and 14C. The majority of those 

releases were through the four exhaust stacks on Buildings 100, 200, and 800. Table 4-2 of the 

Occupational Environmental Dose TBD for the Pinellas Plant (ORAUT 2011c) lists the annual 

radioactive airborne effluent releases of these radionuclides.

Environmental Releases

Radioactive liquid effluent releases were limited to tritium. These releases were discharged to the 

west and east retention ponds through November 1982 (DOE 1983). After November 1982, they 

were discharged to the Pinellas County Publically Owned Treatment Works (POTW) (DOE 1983). 

Table 4-3 of the Occupational Environmental Dose TBD for the Pinellas Plant (ORAUT 2011c) lists 

the annual radioactive liquid effluent discharges from the east retention pond.

2.7.2

Other releases of radionuclides during operation of the Pinellas Plant have been identified. These 

were caused by accidents, operator errors, or similar unplanned events. Table 2-4 lists a chronology 

of some of the unusual events and the resultant radiological releases (if known) at the Plant from 

startup through 1982. In addition, Table 2-4 includes external radiation exposures incidents for the 

Plant. 

Releases Due to Unusual Events

Table 2-4. Chronology of unusual events. 

Date Description

Curies 

released

11-1957 Neutron generator output measured at 10 mrem/pulse at 2.5 cm (1 inch). 

12-1957 Raytheon X-ray units found to contain 10 nCi of Co-60

12-10-57 Operator error in reading manometer in Room 18 458

2-11-58 Error estimating amount of tritium remaining in charging system in Room 18 1,253

7-8-58 Glass system breakage in Room 22 280

3-7-58 Glass system breakage in Room 18 567

8-16-58 Operator error with tritium loader valve position in Room 21 780

8-18-58 Glass manifold breakage in Room 21 1,180

2-10-59 Operator error in valve positioning in Room 8 286

6-4-59 Personnel error working on SECS test system in Room 21 753

6-18-59 Excess air released from tritium loading system 423

1-1960 Operator error – stopcock left open on tritium loading system 40

2-5-60 Glass manifold broke from strain 72

2-11-60 Operator error – stopcock left open on tritium loading system 308

7-8-60 Broken sample bulb 6.8

2-1964 E-beam welder found reading 250 mrem/hr at startup – shielded to 4 mrem/hr.

2-4-65 Explosion during cold trapping of krypton 38

12-1965 X-ray diffraction unit found leaking – new shielding installed

5-1966 SECS cold water removal problems 252

1-27-67 Glovebox vacuum pump oil degassed 32

4-1967 HP surveying new X-ray machine received 1.6-rad exposure. Shielding installed.

1-17-68 Faulty relay in Radiflo® unit No. 1 – vented krypton-85 when placed in manual 129

2-1969 Leaking flange at absorption pump in Area 108 8

2-3-69 Equipment failure – Radiflo® valve did not seat properly – Kr-85 vented 20

9-1969 X-ray unit in Area 155 found leaking to 1.6 rad/hr
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 35 of 41

12-28-70 SECS column saturated due to air leak in Area 108 117

3-12-71 Copper gasket uncovered in Room 18 hood – high internal dose 7.3

10-9-71 Radiflo® Unit No. 1 – Krypton-85 storage tank leak 6.1

10-21-71 Tritium release from improperly baked evaporator system in Area 182D 129

4-1972 Area contaminated from liquid discharge in Area 182D 1.5

5-1972 Hand exposure from XRE X-ray emission unit No. 7R during cleaning 

8-3-72 Leaking absorption pump 12

1-31-75 Improper valve closure on uranium bed 150

2-10-75 Absorption pump leak – Area 182D 42

4-19-1993 TracerFlo - Leak Test Unit No. 2 – Kr-85 leak <10

Sources: Burkhart (1990); Hare (1993).

2.8 ATTRIBUTIONS AND ANNOTATIONS

All information requiring identification was addressed via references integrated into the reference 

section of this document.
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 36 of 41

REFERENCES

Author unknown, undated a, Item #7: The date plutonium was first delivered on-site and the nature 

and time period of use of the plutonium heat source and the isotopic ratio of Pu-238 and Pu239. [SRDB Ref ID: 12022]

Author unknown, undated b, Item #9: Update the inventory of radionuclides historically used at the 

Plant. [SRDB Ref ID: 12023]

Author unknown, undated c, X-Ray Registry, Semi-Annual Survey. [SRDB Ref ID: 12182]

Author unknown, undated d, Item #1: Monthly radiological exhaust stack laboratory analytical data 

from 1956 to the present. [SRDB Ref ID: 12021]

Author unknown, undated e, excerpt from Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Pinellas 

Plant. [SRDB Ref ID: 12004]

Author unknown, 1988a, collection of Modernization Task Force Decommissioning Worksheets, July 

15–29. [SRDB Ref ID: 12555]

Author unknown, 1988b, untitled handwritten notes, October 4. [SRDB Ref ID: 12185, p. 4] 

Author unknown, 1996, Characterization Report: Building 200 West, Pinellas Plant, March 22. 

[SRDB Ref ID: 13144, p. 2] 

Author unknown, 2005, untitled comment at public outreach meeting, ORAUT-2005-0273, November 

3. [SRDB Ref ID: 26129]

Biedermann, C., 1994, “Historical Tritium Inventory,” memorandum to R. Simonton (U.S. Department 

of Energy, Pinellas Area Office), Martin Marietta Specialty Components, Pinellas Plant, Largo, 

Florida, March 9. [SRDB Ref ID: 12020]

Burkhart, R. A., 1990, Environmental Health and Safety- Historical Report on Radiation Protection at 

GE Neutron Devices, GEPP-EV-1126, General Electric Company, Neutron Devices

Department, Pinellas Plant, Largo, Florida, July. [SRDB Ref ID: 12026]

Burkhart, R. A., 1995, Status of Standard Leak Contamination Incident Investigation, Lockheed Martin

Specialty Components, Pinellas Plant, Largo, Florida, May 23. [SRDB Ref ID 13503]

Demopoulos, P., 2006, “RE: Updated information on site profile comments,” ORAUT-2006-0163, email to W. E. Murray, Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, 

March 2. [SRDB Ref ID: 26397]

DOE (U.S. Department of Energy), 1980, Environmental Protection, Safety, and Health Protection 

Program for DOE Operations, Washington, D.C. [SRDB Ref ID: 11593]

DOE (U.S. Department of Energy), 1983, Environmental Assessment, Pinellas Plant Site, St. 

Petersburg, Florida, DOE/EA-0209, U.S. Department of Energy, Assistant Secretary for 

Defense Programs, Washington, D.C., July. [SRDB Ref ID: 9971]

DOE (U. S. Department of Energy), 1987, Environmental Survey Preliminary Report, Pinellas Plant, 

Largo, Florida, DOE/EH/OEV-13P, Office of Environment, Safety and Health, Washington 

D.C., November. [SRDB Ref ID: 88797]
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 37 of 41

DOE (U. S. Department of Energy), 1993, Nonnuclear Consolidation Environmental Assessment, 

Executive Summary, DOE/EA-0792(ES), Office of Defense Programs, Washington D.C. 

[SRDB Ref ID: 90548]

DOE (U.S. Department of Energy), 1994, DOE Handbook, Primer on Spontaneous Heating and 

Pyrophoricity, DOE-HDBK-1081-94, Washington, D.C., December. [SRDB Ref ID: 90549]

DOE (U. S. Department of Energy), 1995, Pinellas Plant Environmental Assessment for 

Decontamination and Dismantlement, DOE/EA-1092, Albuquerque Operations Office, 

Albuquerque, New Mexico, June. [SRDB Ref ID: 9965]

DOE (U. S. Department of Energy), 1998, “Pinellas Plant, Largo, Pinellas County, Florida,” Office of 

Environmental Management, Washington, D.C., February 10, accessed August 3, 2004. 

http://web.em.doe.gov/cercla97/pinellas.html. [SRDB Ref ID: 16545]

DOE (U. S. Department of Energy), 2002, Environmental Restoration Activities at the Young-Rainey 

STAR Center, GJO-2002-334-TAC, Grand Junction Office, Grand Junction, August. [SRDB 

Ref ID: 23002]

DOE (U. S. Department of Energy), 2010, “Environmental Management, Pinellas Plant,” Office of 

Environmental Management, Washington, D.C., accessed September 2, 2010. 

http://web.em.doe.gov/bemr/BEMRSites/pipl.aspx [SRDB Ref ID: 88770]

FAS (Federation of American Scientists), 2004, “Pinellas Plant.” accessed July 29, 2004. 

http://www.fas.org/irp/imint/doe_pinellas_01.htm [SRDB Ref ID: 16544]

FDHRS (Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services), 1994, Pinellas Plant Feasibility 

Study, Final Report, September. [SRDB Ref ID: 6501]

FDOT (Florida Department of Tourism), 2005, “Maps,” accessed April 27, 2005. 

http://www.floridasbeach.com/maps/ [SRDB Ref ID: 16517]

Forest, E. P., 1974, “Radiological Condition Surveys of Real Property,” memorandum to H. P. Garner, 

(U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Pinellas Area Office), General Electric Company, Neutron 

Devices Department, Pinellas Plant, August 13. [SRDB Ref ID: 12827, p. 5]

GE (General Electric Company), 1957–1973, collection of health physics reports, Neutron Devices

Department, Pinellas Plant, St. Petersburg, Florida. [SRDB Ref ID: 27095]

GE (General Electric Company), 1977, Preliminary Proposal, Ion Accelerator Facility, PAO, P 11, 

Pinellas Plant, Pinellas County, Florida, Neutron Devices Department, Pinellas Plant, Largo, 

Florida, December 8. [SRDB Ref ID: 12802, p. 23]

GE (General Electric Company), 1978, Safety Assessment Document – Building 100 West, Neutron 

Devices Department, Pinellas Plant, St. Petersburg, Florida, February. [SRDB Ref ID: 12817]

GE (General Electric Corporation), 1979, Manufacturing Engineering Report, New Uranium Bed 

Processing System, Process Technology Report No. 79-008, Neutron Devices Department, 

Pinellas Plant, St. Petersburg, Florida, April 6. [SRDB Ref ID: 13169] 

GE (General Electric Company), 1980, Pinellas Plant Environmental Monitoring Report, 1979, GEPPEM-484, Neutron Devices Department, Pinellas Plant St. Petersburg, Florida, April. [SRDB 

Ref ID: 12018, p. 187]
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 38 of 41

GE (General Electric Company), 1981, Pinellas Plant Environmental Monitoring Report, 1980, GEPPEM-570, Neutron Devices Department, Pinellas Plant St. Petersburg, Florida, March. [SRDB 

Ref ID: 12018 p. 110]

GE (General Electric Company), 1982a, Pinellas Plant Environmental Monitoring Report, 1981,

GEPP-EM-654, Neutron Devices Department, Pinellas Plant St. Petersburg, Florida, March. 

[SRDB Ref ID: 12018 p. 148]

GE (General Electric Company), 1982b, Safety Analysis Report, Expansion of Building 400 RTG 

Facility, Neutron Devices Department, Pinellas Plant, St. Petersburg, Florida, May. [SRDB 

Ref ID: 13264]

GE (General Electric Company), 1983, Pinellas Plant Environmental Monitoring Report, 1982, GEPPEM-729, Neutron Devices Department, Pinellas Plant St. Petersburg, Florida, April. [SRDB 

Ref ID: 12018, p. 223]

GE (General Electric Company), 1984, Pinellas Plant Environmental Monitoring Report, 1983, GEPPEM-806, Neutron Devices Department, Pinellas Plant St. Petersburg, Florida, April. [SRDB 

Ref ID: 12260]

GE (General Electric Company), 1986, Requirements for Use of X-Ray Producing Equipment at 

GEND, 1071-A, Neutron Devices Department, Pinellas Plant Pinellas Plant, St. Petersburg, 

Florida, June 30. [SRDB Ref ID: 12791]

GE (General Electric Company), 1990, Pinellas Plant Facts, GE Neutron Devices, Largo, Florida, 

November. [SRDB Ref ID: 9967]

GE (General Electric Company), 1991a, Pinellas Plant Site Environmental Report for Calendar Year 

1990, NDPP-OSP-0053, Rev. A, Neutron Devices Department, Pinellas Plant, Largo, Florida, 

August 9. [SRDB Ref ID: 12007]

GE (General Electric Company), 1991b, Area/Ownership Report, Operations Program, NDPP-OSP0076, Rev. A, Neutron Devices Department, Pinellas Plant, Largo, Florida, October 19. 

[SRDB Ref ID: 12122]

Hare, L. H., 1993, “Occurrence Report Number: ALO-PI-PINELLAS-MMSC-1993-0007,” 

memorandum to E. H. Detlefs, Martin Marietta Specialty Components, Pinellas Plant, Largo, 

Florida, July 13. [SRDB Ref ID: 12876, p. 41–47]

Jech, J. J., 1963, “Health Physics Report – 1962,” GE X-Ray Division, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, March 

25. [SRDB Ref ID: 12221]

Kocher, D. C., 1981, Radioactive Decay Data Tables, A Handbook of Decay Data for Application to

Radiation Dosimetry and Radiological Assessment, DOE/TIC-11026, Oak Ridge National 

Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee. [SRDB Ref ID: 32563]

Kuntz, A. J., 1973, “RTG Status Report #1,” memorandum to distribution, General Electric Company, 

Neutron Devices Department, Pinellas Plant,, St. Petersburg, Florida. [SRDB Ref ID: 12800, 

p. 7-8]

Lewis, D., R. Ford, K. Liudahl, and J. Vega, 2004, Soil Survey of Pinellas County, Florida, U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Natural Resource Conservation Services. [SRDB Ref ID: 23004]
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 39 of 41

LMSC (Lockheed Martin Specialty Components), 1995, Internal Dosimetry Technical Basis 

Document, MMSC-ESH-95062, Pinellas Plant, Largo, Florida, May. [SRDB Ref ID: 12945]

LMSC (Lockheed Martin Specialty Components), 1996a, Radionuclide Air Emissions Annual Report 

for Calendar Year 1995, MMSC-EM-96031, Pinellas Plant, Largo, Florida, May. [SRDB Ref 

ID: 12917, p. 41–132]

LMSC (Lockheed Martin Specialty Components), 1997a, Radionuclide Air Emissions Annual Report 

for Calendar Year 1996, MMSC-EM-97006, Pinellas Plant, Largo, Florida, April. [SRDB Ref 

ID: 12244]

LMSC (Lockheed Martin Specialty Components), 1997b, Pinellas Plant Environmental Baseline 

Report, Pinellas Plant, Largo, Florida, June. [SRDB Ref ID: 48197] 

Malbrough, D. J., 1983, The Pinellas Plant Ion Accelerator Facility: An Apparatus for Low-Energy Ion 

Scattering and Nuclear Reaction Analysis, GEPP-OP-741, General Electric Company, 

Neutron Devices Department, Pinellas Plant, St. Petersburg, Florida. [SRDB Ref ID: 88901]

March, F., J. V. Guerrero, W. H. Johns, and R. Schetnan, 1999, “Neutron Generator Facility Source 

Information,” Chapter 6 in Volume I of Sandia National Laboratories/New Mexico Facilities and 

Safety Information Document, SAND99-2126/1,L. S. Bayliss, K. A. Kuzio, and B. B. White, 

editors, Sandia National Laboratory, Albuquerque, New Mexico, September. [SRDB Ref ID: 

88887]

MMSC (Martin Marietta Specialty Components), 1992, Pinellas Plant Site Environmental Report for 

Calendar Year 1991, MMSC-EM-92047, Pinellas Plant, Largo, Florida, October. [SRDB Ref 

ID: 12025]

MMSC (Martin Marietta Specialty Components), 1993a, Operational Surety Program, Area Operating 

Envelope for Area No. 800 A through C, MMSC-AOE-0009, Rev. A, Pinellas Plant, Largo, 

Florida, May 28. [SRDB Ref ID: 12775]

MMSC (Martin Marietta Specialty Components), 1993b, TracerFlo Operational Readiness Approval, 

Pinellas Plant, Largo, Florida, July 1. [SRDB Ref ID: 12876, p. 49]

MMSC (Martin Marietta Specialty Components), 1994, Operational Surety Program – Area Operating 

Envelope for Area 108, MMSC-AOE-0001, Rev. B, Pinellas Plant, Largo, Florida, February 4. 

[SRDB Ref ID: 12768]

MMSC (Martin Marietta Specialty Components), 1995a, Moratorium Documentation Manual for the 

Pinellas Plant, MMSC-ESH-0016, Rev. G, Pinellas Plant, Largo, Florida, January 12. [SRDB 

Ref ID: 13505]

MMSC (Martin Marietta Specialty Components), 1995b, Pinellas Plant Environmental Baseline 

Report, MMSC-EM-9501, Pinellas Plant, Largo, Florida, February 8. [SRDB Ref ID: 13197]

Murray, W. E., 2005, “Fw: Pending Claim #[Redacted],” ORAUT-2005-0274, e-mail to P. Demopoulos, 

Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, November 23. [SRDB Ref 

ID: 26131]

NCRP (National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements), 1983, Radiation Protection and 

Measurement for Low-Voltage Neutron Generators, Report 72, Bethesda, Maryland, 

November 1.
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 40 of 41

NIOSH (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health), 2010, Radiation Exposures Covered 

for Dose Reconstructions Under Part B of the Energy Employees Occupational Illness 

Compensation Program Act, DCAS-IG-003, Rev. 1, Division of Compensation Analysis and 

Support, Cincinnati, Ohio, October.

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2006, Pinellas Plant – Occupational Medical 

Dose, ORAUT-TKBS-0029-3, Rev. 00 PC-1, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, July 4. 

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2011a, Pinellas Plant – Occupational Internal 

Dose, ORAUT-TKBS-0029-5, Rev. 01, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, April 1.

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2011b, Pinellas Plant – Occupational External 

Dose, ORAUT-TKBS-0029-6, Rev. 01, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, April 28. 

ORAUT (Oak Ridge Associated Universities Team), 2011c, Pinellas Plant – Occupational 

Environmental Dose, ORAUT-TKBS-0029-4, Rev. 01, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, July 15. 

Persons, A. F., 1977, Some Personal Observations about the Evolution of the General Electric 

Operation on Bryan Dairy Road, Pinellas County, Florida, Pinellas Plant, Pinellas County, 

Florida, February 22. [SRDB Ref ID: 88885]

Phillips, D., 1975, Suggestion No. 10582, memorandum to R. E. Meadors, General Electric Company, 

Neutron Devices Department, St. Petersburg, Florida, May 19. [SRDB Ref ID: 13125]

Pope, L. E., 2007, Neutron Generator Production Mission in a National Laboratory, SAND2007-3261, 

Sandia Corporation, Sandia National Laboratory, Albuquerque, New Mexico, August. [SRDB 

Ref ID: 88823]

Ward, W. E., 1973, Tritium Control Technology, GEPP-104, General Electric Company, Neutron 

Devices Department, St. Petersburg, Florida, July 16. [SRDB Ref ID: 13128, p. 15–40]

Weaver, A. S., 1992, Summary: Natural Uranium Glass Concerns, General Electric Company, 

Neutron Devices Department, St. Petersburg, Florida, January 31. [SRDB Ref ID: 13204]

Weaver, A., 1993, Pinellas Plant Radiation Safety Overview and Visitor Orientation, Martin Marietta 

Specialty Components, Pinellas Plant, Largo, Florida, February 22. [SRDB Ref ID: 12814]

Weaver, A. S., 1994a, Health Physics Consensus Statement #5, Pinellas Plant Internal Dosimetry 

Program, Lockheed Martin Specialty Components, Largo, Florida, November 22. [SRDB Ref 

ID: 12165, p. 13–14]

Weaver, A. S., 1994b, Health Physics Consensus Statement #6, Pinellas Plant Personnel External 

Dosimetry Program, Lockheed Martin Specialty Components, Inc., Largo, Florida, November 

22. [SRDB Ref ID: 12165, p. 15–17]

Weaver, A. S., 1996, “1995 Annual ALARA Program Report for Ionizing Radiation,” memorandum to 

distribution, Lockheed Martin Specialty Components, Largo, Florida, February 7. [SRDB Ref 

ID: 12917, p. 133–148]

Williams, W. H., 2004, “Pinellas Plant Site Profile,” ORAUT-2004-0127, e-mail to siteprofile@cdc.gov, 

September 9. [SRDB Ref ID: 2406126]
Document No. ORAUT-TKBS-0029-2 Revision No. 02 Effective Date: 04/01/2011 Page 41 of 41

YRST (Young-Rainey STAR Center), 2010, “About Us: History of the STAR Center,” Largo, Florida, 

accessed September 21, 2010. http://www.young-raineystarcenter.org/about/ [SRDB Ref ID: 

88809]

Zerfas, L., 2005, “Pinellas Plant Site Profile,” ORAUT-2005-0272, e-mail to NIOSH Docket Office, 

November 3. [SRDB Ref ID: 26128]