DOE Review 08/04/2014

Division of Compensation Analysis and 

Support

Document Number: Battelle-TBD-6000 

Appendix G

Effective Date: 8/19/2014

Revision No. 1

Site Profiles for Atomic Weapons Employers that Worked 

Uranium Metals

Appendix G – Anaconda

Page 1 of 6

Document Owner: David Allen

Approval: Signature on file Date: 08/19/2014 Supersedes: Appendix G

 J.W. Neton, Associate Director for Science Revision 0

 

RECORD OF ISSUE/REVISIONS

ISSUE 

AUTHORIZATION 

DATE

4/30/2007

EFFECTIVE 

DATE

4/30/2007

REV. 

NO. 

0

DESCRIPTION

Appendix to Battelle-TBD-6000 

describing the use of the TBD for 

claims at Anaconda

8/04/2014 8/19/2014 1 Revised to incorporate changes 

made in the revision to BattelleTBD-6000.
Document No. 

Battelle-TBD-6000; Appendix G

Revision No. 1 Effective Date: 

8/19/2014

Page 2

G.1 Introduction

This document serves as an appendix to Battelle-TBD-6000, Site Profiles for Atomic 

Weapons Employers that Worked Uranium Metals. This appendix describes the results 

of document research specific to this site. Where specific information is lacking, 

research into similar facilities described in the body of this Site Profile is used.

G.2 Site Description

The Atomic Weapons Employer Anaconda Company was located in Waterbury 

Connecticut. During the time of the AEC work, the facility was known as American

Brass Company. It is listed as an Atomic Weapons Employer in 1942 and 1956 through 

1959. In 1942, the American Brass Company produced the barriers used in the gaseous 

diffusion process. In the late 1950s, under contract to Nuclear Metals Inc., the company 

extruded copper-clad uranium billets into tubes at least two separate times for the 

Savannah River Site. While the original plans called for work on 500 billets, only around 

50 were actually processed. The operations involved plating, heating, extruding, sawing, 

drilling, deburring, cleaning, testing, crating, and shipping. Work was conducted at the 

West Tube Mill. AEC Health and Safety Laboratory personnel visited the site in 1956 

and 1959, and obtained air quality and surface radiation measurements during the later 

visit (DOE web site). 

G.2.1 Site Activities

In 1956, two projects were planned. The first was a pilot project involving the extrusion 

of 4 uranium billets that had been clad with copper at another facility (Harris 1956). The 

second would involve extruding about 500 billets and was expected to take three 16 to 24 

hour shifts to accomplish the work (Harris 1956). The pilot operation with 4 billets was 

planned for September 29, 1956 (Harris 1956). Other documentation indicates American 

Brass performed 10 extrusions in March of 1957 (Thornton 1977b) while others indicate

American Brass extruded about 50 billets (Thornton 1977a, Thornton 1977b). This 

appears to be the second extrusion project that was originally intended to be 500 billets. 

An additional project to extrude uranium billets occurred on October 19th, 20th and 21st of 

1959 (Herde 1959). The rate of extrusion reported during this project was approximately 

4 billets per hour.

The original plan was to extrude 500 uranium billets in 48 to 72 hours (three 16 to 24 

hour shifts). That represents a rate of at least 7 billets per hour. If only 50 billets were 

extruded and the actual rate was 4 billets per hour (as reported in 1959), the amount of 

time necessary for the project would have been 12.5 hours. The pilot project (4 billets) 

would have taken about 1 hour.

This estimate will assume the pilot project took one full 8 hour shift on September 29th, 

1956. The 50 billets are assumed to take two full 8 hour shifts in March of 1957 and the 

work in 1959 is assumed to take three full 8 hour shifts each day between October 19th

and October 21th of 1959. Individual operators are assumed to be present for the full 

shift in 1956 and both shifts in 1957. However, in 1959 operators are assumed to work 
Document No. 

Battelle-TBD-6000; Appendix G

Revision No. 1 Effective Date: 

8/19/2014

Page 3

one 8 hour shift on each of the three days. That is, they are not assumed to be present at 

work for 72 consecutive hours.

No additional information was found on what work was being done in 1942. Production 

of barriers used in the gaseous diffusion process would not involve radioactive material 

and so no radiation dose to Anaconda employees would result. Therefore, medical x-rays 

will be the only dose estimated for 1942 at this site.

G.3 Occupational Medical Dose

No detailed information regarding occupational medical dose was found in any of the site 

research or telephone interviews. Information to be used in dose reconstructions, for 

which no specific information is available, is provided in ORAUT-OTIB-0006, the 

technical information bulletin covering diagnostic x-ray procedures. This estimate will 

assume each employee received one AP chest x-ray each year of the covered period 

which includes 1942 as well as 1956 through 1959.

G.4 Occupational Internal Dose

Monitoring was performed in the work areas in 1956 and 1959 by the Health and Safety 

Laboratory (HASL). HASL reported the highest air concentration was 39 dpm/m3 while 

approximately one third of the samples had no alpha activity detected. HASL also 

reported breathing zone samples at the sawing operation were below detection and the 

average breathing zone concentration at the drilling and debarring operation was 5 

dpm/m

3

. Lastly, they reported the average general area samples were 3.3 dpm/m

3

at the 

press and adjacent areas and 0.3 dpm/m3in the saw, drill and testing areas (Glauberman 

1959).

This estimate will use 39 dpm/m

3

as the airborne value during extrusion operations. For 

the time periods between operations, operators will be assumed to be exposed to residual 

contamination. This is estimated by first estimating the general surface contamination 

levels. That is done by assuming the 39 dpm/m

3

settled at a rate of 0.00075 m/s during 

the entire 96 hours (section G.2.1) of operations without any cleanup or removal by any 

means. Even though these operations were spread over a four year period, this estimate 

will assume the resulting contamination level was present during the entire period of 

1956 through 1959. This results in a contamination level of 10,109 dpm/m2.

The estimated contamination level was then resuspended with a resuspension factor of 

1E-5 m-1to arrive at an airborne concentration of 0.1 dpm/m3during the periods between 

uranium operations. This airborne concentration is assumed to be present at all times and 

is added to the operational airborne concentration during periods of operation. The total 

inhalation intake for each year is calculated based on these concentrations and the 

operational times discussed in section G.2.1. The total inhalation intake was then divided 

by 365 calendar days per year to find an average airborne concentration a worker would 

have been exposed to throughout the year. The estimate will vary by year due to the 

different durations of operation. Values are included in Table G.1. Since the maximum 

airborne concentration is used for this estimate, doses derived from this intake will be 

assumed to be a maximum and no uncertainty is assigned.
Document No. 

Battelle-TBD-6000; Appendix G

Revision No. 1 Effective Date: 

8/19/2014

Page 4

Potential ingestion intakes are also assigned based on OCAS-TIB-009 (OCAS 2004). 

This TIB estimates ingestion intakes assuming contamination levels have reached a 

maximum level during continuous operations. Therefore using this method at Anaconda 

will result in ingestion intakes higher than likely occurred and is considered a bounding 

estimate. The ingestion intakes derived from OCAS-TIB-009 were assigned every work 

day of the year since the earlier assumptions are that the contamination was present at 

that level from the start and not removed by any mechanism. This intake was then 

adjusted to a calendar day basis and included in Table G.1.

G.5 Occupational External Dose

The HASL survey performed in 1959 included a radiation survey for beta radiation. The 

levels reported for the billet storage area were 19 mrep/hr one foot from the billets and 6 

mrep/hr three feet from the billets (Glauberman 1959). There was no other reported

radiation levels found for the Anaconda plant. A mrep is an outdated unit approximately 

equal to a mrem of beta radiation (NBS 1952, pg 4). TBD-6000 uses a default beta dose 

rate value of 20.8 mrem/hr at one foot from uranium. This is in reasonable agreement 

with the measured 19 mrep/hr. Therefore, the TBD-6000 default dose rates and 

assumptions will be used to estimate the dose here. 

The TBD-6000 default assumptions for operators are 2.08 mrem/hr photon at one foot, 

20.8 mrem/hr beta at 1 foot and 230 mrem/hr beta on contact. Also, operators are 

assumed to be exposed at 1 foot from the metal for 50% of the work day. The operators’

hands are assumed to be in contact with the metal for that same time frame.

In addition to the metal dose, operators are assumed to be exposed to uranium 

contamination. The contamination levels were estimated in section G.4 and conversion 

factors from Table 3.10 of TBD-6000 were applied to estimate the photon and beta dose 

rates from contamination. These dose rates are assumed to be present every work day 

from 1956 through 1959. The total dose each year from both sources of external 

exposure are added and presented in Table G.2. 

G.6 Residual Contamination

Residual contamination potentially existed between operations with uranium at 

Anaconda. However, surveys showed the potential was low and so no residual 

contamination period was designated after 1959. The periods between operations is 

accounted for in a favorable manner in sections G.4 and G.5. Also, since there was no 

radioactive material associated with the operations described for 1942, no residual 

contamination is assumed prior to 1956. 

G.7 References

DOE website, DOE Office of Environment, Health, Safety and Security, EEOICPA web 

site. https://hsspublic.energy.gov/search/facility/findfacility.aspx
Document No. 

Battelle-TBD-6000; Appendix G

Revision No. 1 Effective Date: 

8/19/2014

Page 5

Glauberman 1959, Memo from Harold Glauberman to A. J. Breslin, Survey at American 

Brass Company, Waterbury, Connecticut, December 2, 1959, SRDB 9363 pp. 7 & 8.

Harris 1956, Memo from W. B. Harris New York Operations Office to G. H. Giboney 

Savanah River Operations Office, Visit to American Brass, September 20, 1956, SRDB 

9363 pp. 5 & 6.

Herde 1959, Memo from Karl E. Herde to A. J. Breslin, Request for Survey at American 

Brass Company, Waterbury, Connecticut, October 9, 1959, SRDB 9363 pg. 4.

NBS 1952, National Bureau of Standards Handbook 51, Radiological Monitoring 

Methods and Instruments, April 7, 1952.

OCAS 2004, Office of Compensation Analysis and Support, Estimation of Ingestion 

Intakes, OCAS-TIB-009, April 13, 2004.

Thornton 1977a, Memo from William T. Thornton to R. Kennedy, ERDA Resurvey 

Program – American Brass, Waterbury, Connecticut, March 7, 1977, SRDB 16439.

Thornton 1977b, Notes from telephone conversations, SRDB 14811 pp. 6-8.
Document No. 

Battelle-TBD-6000; Appendix G

Revision No. 1 Effective Date: 

8/19/2014

Page 6

Table G.1 – Intakes

a – Shifts of exposure represent the number of 8 hour shifts an individual is assumed to be exposed to 

uranium operations.

Table G.2 – External Dose

Year Photon (mR/year) Beta - whole body 

(mrem/year)

Beta - hands and 

forearms (mrem/year)

1956 8.3 84 921

1957 16.6 167 1841

1958 0.008 0.77 0.77

1959 25.0 250 2761

Year Shifts of 

Uranium 

Operations

Shifts of 

Exposure a

Inhalation 

(dpm/day)

Ingestion 

(dpm/day)

1956 1 1 1.69 5.34

1957 2 2 2.72 5.34

1958 0 0 0.66 5.34

1959 9 3 3.74 5.34