t Question F. { asks that the responder indicate either documents or statements pro-
vided by affidavit that indicate that radiation exposures and radiation doses potentially
incurred by members of the proposed Class, that relate to this petition, were not moni-
tored, either through personal monitoring or through area monitoring. And describe
completely as possible, to the extent it may be unclear, how the attached documenta-
tion indicate that potential radiation exposures were not monitored.
i

In The pamphlet ‘The History of the Dayton Project” on page 14, the writer
states:

“Employees who were exposed to significant amounts of radioactivity on a daily
basis were checked regularly both for their own health, and to assure no contamination
was leaving the laboratory and entering the community’.

The statement “radioactivity in the laboratory had to be carefully controlled. Here
scientists were working with the largest amounts of polonium ever isolated, and the
associated radioactivity was significant.”

The reader finds that in the above statements there is no indication that the doses
of polonium the class of workers received were monitored daily, either individually or
through area monitoring where they worked. There is no indication of any dosimeters
that were used, how often the employees were monitored, how tong the employees
were exposed to harmful substances. individual radiation doses or area doses is never
mentioned.

As a result, the reasonable person can only conclude that individual or area monitoring
did not occur. “That they were checked regularly ...for their own heaith* does not
denote monitoring. And the very fact that when NIOSH asked for records on dose
exposue, the answer always is NA. Except for the two pamphlets | previously sent, !
have no knowledge of any radiation procedures since my husband and ! were married
October and 1 came out to St.Louis.



A PERSONAL NARRATIVE

By ARTHUR HOLLY COMPTON

NEW YORK - OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS - 1956



Wa NIOSH Dose Reconstruction Activity Report, January 2006 Public Health Service

han National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health,

Robert A. Taft Laboratories

4676 Columbia Parkway. MS C-45
Cincinnati, OF 45226-1998
Phone: $13-333-8423

Fax: 513-533-6840

This is your January 2006 Dose Reconstruction Activity Report, It has been Sent to update you on the current status of
your case and dose reconstruction Program. No response or action is required from you at this time. Ifyou do not wish
to receive vour Activity Report, please contact our office at 13-533-8423 and we will remove your name from
our report's mailing list,

Your Dose Reconstruction Activity Report has two parts, Part I contains information on the current status of ‘your case.
This part of your report may remain unchanged if your case has not reached the Next step in the dose reconstruction
Process at the time this report was created. Part 2 is updated in each report to Provide you with current information
‘about our dose reconstruction program,

Part 1: Individual Dose Reconstruction Case Status i

Major Steps of the Dose Reconstruction Process

The major steps of the dose Feconstruction process are listed in the left column. The date that each step occurred is
listed in the right column. An "N/A" under “Date Step Occurred” means that the step has not occurred yet.

Steps in the Dose Reconstruction Process Date Step Occurred

= — Case Received from DOL:

The Department of Labor (DOL) is responsible for this Compensation program. Once a claim
has been filed, DOL must first determine if the period of energy employee's employment and
medical condition are covered under this compensation program, After DOL determines that a
Claim involves a covered energy employee with cancer, DOL sends the case to NIOSH for
dose reconstruction.

¢ Acknowledgement Letter Sent:
The jetter lets claimants know that NIOSH received the case for dose Teconstruction. The
Jeter includes the NIOSH Tracking Number and general information on dose reconstruction.

« Telephone Interview Conducted:

The telephone interview provides claimants with the opportunity to inform NIOSH of; ‘any
additional information regarding the work history of the energy employee. When we reach the
Point in our process when we are ready to conduct the imerview, we will contact the claimant
to arrange a convenient date and time for the telephone interview. Prior to the interview, we
will send a detailed copy of questions to help the claimant prepare for the interview.



- ues

ro : preenne Ont fe.
| rrom Monsanto CHEMICAL COMPANY

| Sr.Lovis,Missocr1 4

j -

\ For Release* ©n Receipt _

f NOTE TO EDITORS: 179s

The following statement has been cleared by the War Department for
release and is offered for whatever interest it may be to you,

J. Handly Wright
Director, Industrial
.and Public Relations
Monsanto Chemical Company

OAK RIDGE, TENN., August 14 ~ With army epproval, Mon- ¥
oa ES Pproval, Mon-

santo Chemical Company disclosed today that both the company and

many of its leading scientists had been closely associa with
she deve ib_since .
Rroject

It was revealed that Monsanto's principle contributions

to the program included research, process development, design of

Plant and Subsequent production of Some of the meterial. Later,

the company assumed responsibility for the operation of a jdarge

part of the Oak Ridge project.

Many picked scientists participated in Monsanto's part

of the undertaking in the company's. Qrerations at Dayton, Obie,
ing in the company'
but _so weil was the secret kept that even fel. low workers et Day-

ton did not “now what ves being dons, von some of the _compeny's

high officers were uninformed about it.

Dr. Charles Alien Thomes, Vice President of M
a OF

f the Company's Central Research Labora-

end formerly Directo:
a mer ey Directo:

. tories at Dayton, headed a starr of Monsento Scientists vw!

includea Dr -

C. AL Hochwait, Dr. James Lum ond his assistant,
~ SE Sm ae bis assistent,

Dr. W. Conrad Fernelius, who worked at the Compeny's Dayton .

(more)



vl
conrEnTs

fi. VROM JAPAN ‘TO BEKINE

Uroshinn and Nagasaki
Asie ng, the Damage
Toward Crossroads

The Crossroads Safely Plan

Crossroads Dolayedt
6 CROSSROADS
Crossroads Able
Able Recovery
Test Baker
Decontamination
The End of Crossroads

EPILOGUE: CO!
; CONTINUIT ‘
AD SRIATTON SAFETY AND CHANGE IN
PEI 2
EXPOSURS Cea EOS, INDEX OF
NOTES ms
NOTE ON SOUR
;CES
INTERVIEWS
REVIEWERS
BIBLIOGRAPHY
INDEX

RADIATION

109
109
113
116
120
124
128
128
131
136
140
146

163

165
219
221
224
227
247

Foreword

a
=

‘the Department of Energy’s Nevada Operations Office (DOH/NV) con-

ceived this research project in the fall of 1977. At that time many ques-
tions and concerns were being raised by the public and Congress re-
garding nudear test participants’ radiation exposures and radiation
safety practices in the nuclear weapons atmospheric testing program.
No single document describing radiation safety practices in the nuclear
test program then existed, but the need to develop such a document
was becoming obvious. Hence we initiated the development of a manu-
script that would (1) document the development of radiological safety
in the nuclear weapons testing program, (2) be easy enough for the
layman to understand yet contain enough specific information to make
it useful for technical purposes, and (3) capture the reader's interest.
‘Time was of the essence; oral interviews had to be conducted with
key former participants: who were aging—many already in their sev-

enties. Written documentation existed but was spread out over various
documents were approaching

ocations across the country, and many
the end of the required document retention period, Furthermore, &
‘a radiation sciences proved rare; the person
hived for the job had to undergo a steep learning curve. Compounding
the time constraints, the historian had to be investigated for a DOB
security clearance to allow him access to classified documents. In the
spring of 1978 the author/historian was hired by Reynolds Blectrical &
Engineering Co., Inc., a DOE/NV prime contractor, to develop this
comprehensive history. With the administrative details taken care of,

Dr. Barton C. Hacker's efforts were under way by mid-1978.
As the early chapters were developed, it became evident that the
initial two-year completion goal could not be met if the manuscript was
Integration of oral interview informa-

to fulfill our original objectives.
tion with written documentation, all properly referenced, was a more

hustorian knowledgeable i





F. 3 of the SEC petition requests documentation of the limitations of existing DOE
or AWE records of radiation exposures at the facility, as relevant to the petition and
that these limitations might prevent the completion of dose reconstruction for members
of a class of workers, which in this case is my application for Special Cohort Exposure
for the class of employees who worked for the Monsanto Chemical Company in
Dayton,Ohio from 1943-1949.

My principal source fo demonstrate the limitations is the book "The DRAGONS
TAIL, Radiation Safety in the Manhattan Project, 1942-1946” by Barton C. Hacker, 1987,
University of Califomia Press. The Department of Energy, Health Physics Division,
Nevada Operation Office, Las Vegas, Nevada in 1977 commissioned this book in
response to public demand and congressional questions “ regarding nuclear partici-
pant's radiation exposures and radiation safety practices in the nuclear weapons
atmospheric testing program.” Lawsuits were filed and questions had to be answered.

The search was on to find a historian knowledgeable in radiation sciences and one
who could also pass DOE security clearance. In 1978 Dr. Barton C. Backer was select-
ed. It was decided the content of the book would cover the Manhattan Project from
1942 - 1946. In developing this book, to achieve his goals Dr. Backer interviewed
more than 81 of the leading scientists from ail over the country who participated in the
atomic weapons program, and those associated with the development of a Health
Program during World War 11 to protect atomic workers at Los Alamos and participat-
ing laboratories across the country from harmful radiation. Before being published his
book was also reviewed by leading scientists from top universities, institutes, institu-
tions, such as the Smithsonian, government agencies, and those he had interviewed
who were either involved in the “project or were scientific or historical experts.

To start, I think it is important to begin with important scientific discoveries of bril-
liant European scientists that set in motion the dynamics that were eventually to
become the core of the formation of the atom bomb.

William Contad Roentgen (1845-1923) a physicist discovered the X-Ray machine
in 1895 and presented his findings before the Physico Society of Wurzburg. In 1896,
he made a radiograph of his hand to demonstrate what he had found. A. Henry
Becquerel (1852-1908) also a physicist, discovered in1896 the phenomenon of radio
activity (qv). He continued his research on fluorescence, phosphorous and published
“The Discovery of the Invisible Radiation emitted by Uranium”. He was a colleague of
the Curies. Marie Currie (1867-1934) and Pierre Curie (1867-1906) both physicists,
who were wed in 1895 began their work together on the radio activity of uranium( qqv)
which led to the discovery of polonium (qv) or radium F in1898. and radium (qv) in
1902. Although they worked together, most of the credit is given to Marie for the isola-
tion of the elements. Then Ernest Rutledge (1871-1937) British physicist, named the
radiations: alpha, beta, gamma particles and showed that alpha particles are helium



To answer question F. 2, | understand that | can select the following part of the
statement....; hat there is no information regarding monitoring, source, source term, or
process from the site where the employees worked. |

Since | sent my husband's application to the Department of Labor in and the
file went to NIOSH, whenever | received a report from either office, that you asked for
information regarding exposure monitoring on my husband's position at the Monsanto
Chemical Co. in Dayton, Ohio from it always came back N A or NO as the
recent report from NIOSH indicates. The Dose Reconstruction Activity Report.

— which is enclosed, still indicates the Monsanto Chemical Company does not
accept their request (as they have done a number of times before), for exposure moni-
toring information. | can only assume those employees for whom | am seeking class
action status of which my husband is a member, who worked for the Monsanto
Chemical Company from 1943 -1949, and applied for SEC status received the same
information that | have received on my husband's reports from NIOSH.

| am also enclosing aletter from the Monsanto Company dated May 2, 2003, in
which Mr, Brian B. Buettner indicated that | was hired by
Monsanto on He was employed as a Research Chemist in the Centra!
Research Department at the Dayton, Ohio facility. | do not have a complete history of
his employment but it does look like he continued to work for Monsanto up until his
retirement on (can only assume that other Monsanto employees who
applied to the SEC received a similar statement, for they probably wrote to the
Monsanto Headquarters in St. Louis. Therefore, this statement is intended to cover
the employees wo worked for the Monsanto Chemical Company at the Dayton facility
during the period 1943-1949.

The only reason i can think of for the non-availability of the records for the period
1943-49 is that the archivist at Monsanto Headquarters told me during my visit to her
office, that they are in Los Alamos and the only person who can get them is if that per-
son gets top security clearance. However, | think one might assume that they are lost
or destroyed because of time limits to retain papers. As a result there is no information
regarding the monitoring, source, source term, or process from the site where the
employees worked



National Institute for Occupational Safety & Health

Office of Compensation Analysis and Support

4676 Columbia Parkway

Cincinnati, Ohio 4226 . 93-15-06 po2:27 IN

Dear Members of the Commision,

| am sending this information in reponse to the written report I received from you,
February 14, 2006, of our telephone conversation in response to my application sent to
you requesting SEC class status for the employees of the Monsanto Chemical
Company from 1943 -1949 in Dayton,Ohio. My husband's track number is:

In response to your indication of the deficiencies, | am revising my answers and
enclosing answers to questions F.1, F.2 and F.3. | hope the information | am sending
will be satisfactory responses to the questions asked.

My knowledge of what was happening in Dayton is sparse to say the least for
after my marriage, | only met a few Monsanto people and my husband never dis-
cussed the Dayton years. ! only came into his life when he was working on light emit-
ting diodes.

| would like to thank you for your suggestions and assistance on filling out the
application.

Sincerely,





| hereby swear that | have written the information requested for questions F.1, F2,
and F8, and have enclosed the necessary documents needed to support my answers
as indicated in the documents and in answer to your response to my first application to
request SEC status for the workers employed by the Monsanto Chemical Company
during the years 1943-1949.



World War 11, scientists from all over the world grew aware of the possibility of an
atom bomb. Albert Einstein met with President Roosevelt and urged him to sponsor
research to see if such a bomb were possible Roosevelt followed suit with a modest
program at first. When the British indicated that such a bomb could be produced within
a short time and affect the outcome of the European War, and information came from
the University of California indicating that the newly discovered plutonium, element 94,
could cause a chain reaction, the matter became serious. It was then the President
ordered his staff, the armed services of the country, and appropriate government offi-
cials to look into the matter. It was unknown at that time whether or not such a bomb
could be built from the conversion of uranium 235 to Uranium 238 then finally to pluto-
nium, element 94. By the summer of 1940, the National Defense Research Committee
was formed in June with Vannevar Bush as Chairman. The NDRC was to assist in
the culling of the best scientists from across the country to become part of the Project.
Contracts were let out to scientists associated with the top universities. Because of
the European War, a number of scientists had emigrated and established themselves
also at our universities. The challenge was to create the atom bomb and the
Metallurgica! Project was placed on the doorsteps of Chicago University under the
guidance of Arthur H Compton, a physicist on the faculty of Chicago University and a
Nobel prize winner. Enrico Fermi, also a Nobelist, who arrived in the U.S. after flee -
ing fascist Italy was then at Columbia University. He was asked to go to Chicago
where he became head of the Physics Division. In December of 1941 the Japanese
dropped bombs on Pearl Harbor and World War 11 began. With top scientists already
working on the bomb, the country now organized its civilian and business forces
Immediately; the whole country took on a “war operations mode”. Secrecy and the
development of the bomb had “top priority” and safety from the hazards of the enter-
prise fell in between.

The status of dosimetry during World Wart1 was found to be unreliable due to the
instrument itself and the conditions under which dosimeters were used. In this case,
during the development of the atom bomb . While dosimeters were used for radiation
exposure, there were many variables affecting the readings It appears, the Victoreen
Minometer was none too reliable since shock or moisture might affect the results. It
was only in 1945 that the pocket dosimeter was used (Backer, p.36). However it still
had to be charged and depending upon the individual it may or may not contain the
appropriate reading. There were also times when under war conditions they weren't
used at all as when the first model of the atom bomb was tried in 1944, and didn’t
work. Nor were there instruments developed to measure the harm that resulted from
the chemicals that formed from the resultant materials used to make the “bomb.”
(Backer, p.35) One might say dosimetry was still in its infancy and new instruments
suffered through growing pains until well after World War11 as new ones, more stable
and more precise, were developed. Measuring such a huge amounts of radiation in
the making of the atomic bomb and the fallout from its testing had never been done
before. Many questions arose conceming just what was to be measured, how radia-
tion was to be measured, and the amount of radiation the body could tolerate, if at all,
without il effects. Research had to be done conceming the health of nation-wide work-



oek Ridge, Termessee
January 19, 19h9

Dr. C. A. Hochwalt

Vice President - Research
Monsanto Chemical Company
Dayton, Ohio

Bear Dr, Hochwait:

I want this inform note to convey to you and your
associates my sincere thanks for the real and important
contributions you made to the progress of the Atomic
Energy Commission during 1948.

Your solution of the problems involved in development of
Unit V -~---- facilities in time to permit discontimance
of operations at Unit IV before | the year's end, and your
accomplishments in the
especially worthy of Tecognition. You are also to be com-
mended for your fine co-operation with the Commission in
its effort to reduce the number of personnel required at
Mound Ieboretory to the mirimm consistent with the pro-
grams assigned to Monsanto.

Unfortunately, security considerations prevent our giving
you this recognition and commendstion publicly as we would
like to do, However, I do want you to know the earnest
efforts expended on our behalf by you, members of your
staff, and your entire organization are both recognized.

and appreciated.

Sincerely,

d. C. Franklin

Manager
Qak Ridge Operations

ce: Mr. K. A. Dunbar
Area Manager, AEC
Dayton, Ohio

JCF-ED

Note: Above deletions to permit unclassified copying.



Qperations, They have devoted most or much of their time to the

wroject since its inception, wor some of the manufacturing
— i een
id production problems which bore fini fruit in _the _bomib which

smote Hiro Shima and which Promises an card nd to Japen's Pesis-

en
tence and the saving of hundreds of thousands of American casual-

ties.

Dr. Thomas also Supervised a staff of many chemists who

worked in other parts of the country. wHe_is in charge of all Mon-_

Sento operations which 1 pertain to the pri Oject. Dr. M.D. Whitaker

is in cherge of the work for Monsanto at at Oak Ridgo.

Hee



| hereby swear that | have written the information requested for questions F.1, F2,
and F3, and have enclosed the necessary documents needed to support my answers
as indicated in the documents and in answer to your response to my first application to
request SEC status for the workers employed by the Monsanto Chemical Company
during the years 1943-1949,



At the end of World War 11, the Atomic Energy Commission began, ~

the construction of the, Mound. Laboratory, at Miam isburg, Ohio,
and ultimately all of the Monsanto personn id .
research were transferred to the new’ site. This atomic energy
unit was placed r ral

5 as 2A
under the administration of Monsanto's Central
Research Department, The Nicho: s Road Laboratory also __
acquired additional space for expansion: surplus defense plant
on the adjacent premises. This building provided space

for the administrative staff, the engineering department,

the maintenance and construction shops, and several specialized
labora;
staff has continued to expand and today 240 individuals are
employed. ~The Céntral # Research Department conducts a large
part of the fundamental research undertaken by Monsanto, and
cooperates with the various operating divisions on their

special problems. Some of the current activities will be
described by the laboratory staff during your tour of the
research facilities.

October 23, 1951

\
}
4

jes. Since acquiring the additional space, the laboratory i



NIOSH Dose Reconstruction Activity Report Page 2 of 3

. mary Report from Intervi it:
After the telephone interview has occurred, a summary report of the interview is sent to the
claimant. The claimant is asked to review the report and provide comments and additions if
necessary.

. nflict of Interes! ent: N/A

‘This letter will be sent to the claimant explaining our Conflict of Interest Policy—that a dose
reconstruction will not be assigned to a Health Physicist who worked at the same covered
facility as the energy employee represented in the case.

° ¢ signed to Health Physicist for Dose Rec tion: NIA

This indicates the date that NIOSH assigned the case to a Health Physicist for dose
reconstruction. Once the dose reconstruction is completed for a case, a draft report is sent to
the claimant, Once the draft dose reconstruction Teport has been sent, claimants will no longer
receive a Dose Reconstruction Activity Repoit.

Employment and Exposure Information

The table below provides information on when a request for the energy employee's exposure monitoring records was
submitted and when NIOSH received a response to the request for records. Under the "Employer Accepts Requests for
Exposure Monitoring information” section, there may be a "No" listed. "No" can mean:

1. The employer does not accept requests because it does not have any exposure monitoring information,

2. A point of contact for obtaining the exposure monitoring information has not or cannot be established with the
employer.

3. NIOSH already has possession of all monitoring information,

| _ Date Exposure |
itoring Response
Received

. _ Employer(s) | Kimployer Accepts Request for | Date Request for Exposure | 4D:
| Verified By DOL [Exposure Monitoring Information; Monitoring Information Sent

*Monsanto. | 1 _ 7 |
5 _Ghemical Co, | Ne : NA | NA

a ce
*Hundreds of thousands of documents have been collected that may contain information on the worksite(s) indicated
above (*), In an effort to sort through this information in a timely manner, NIOSH has hired a contractor specifically
dedicated to analyzing these documents over the next year. During this time, if the documents can be used to complete
dose reconstructions for the worksite(s) identified with an *, we will begin working on the dose reconstruction. If at
any time the contractor or NIOSH determines that there is not enough worksite or personal monitoring information
available to complete your case, we will notify you that a dose reconstruction cannot be completed and your case will
be referred to DOL for a decision without a dose reconstruction. NIOSH will also discuss with you other options for
seeking possible compensation that do not require a completed dose reconstruction.



jeeaner eq Bunsey

belt ao ~ OTE

“Office for Emergency Management

National Defense Research Committee

Office of Scientific Research & Development

1530 P Street, N.We

Washington, D. Ce PLEASE REPLY TO
4g00 FORBES STREET
PITTSBURGH, PENNSYLVANIA

: TELEPHONES:
CARRICK 6900; OLYMPIA 5552

April 17, 1943

Dr. C. A. Thomas

Central Research Laboratory *
Monsanto Chemical Co.

Dayton, Ohio

Dear Charlie;

I do not know whether you or Mr, Belknap have already heard from

Dr. Conant of his appreciation of the very generous and broadminded
action of the Monsanto Company in giving up its patent rights to the
U.S. Government in connection with composite propellants. In any case
I would like to express my deep personal appreciation for this action,
It seems to me that it sets a magnéficent exapple to American industry
in emphasizing that the work done with NDRC funds is work done for our
country and not for private interests.

With reference to your letter of April 2nd addressed to Captain Bull
advising of your decision to release all patent rights in respect to
the U.P. Propellants to the Government, I would like to call your
attention to Administrative Circular 10.03, paragraphs 9 and 12, a
copy of which I am enclosing herewith.

th order to assist Captain Bull in taking care of the U.P. Propellant
patent situation, it would be appreciated if you would request your
patent counsel to review the Monsanto work from a patent point of view
and to prepare invention reports in the form of complete patent applica-
tions, The cost of this work, as provided in paragraph 12 of 10,03, is
properly reimbursable to Monsanto, I would suggest that you send these
reports directly to Captain Bull so that he may correlate them with the
cases which he will prepare covering the ERL work, Captain Bull will
use his own judgment as to the proper scope of the claims in the various
eases and therefore it is suggested that the Monsanto reports be submitted
in tentative form using ordinary letter-size stationery, If your counsel
desires any further information in regard to the form of the invention
reports, I would suggest that he contact Captain Bull, directly.

Cordially yours

G. Be KISTIAKOWSEY
ce. Dr. James B, Conant Chief, Division 8
Captain Benton A. Bull

n. Maw Dow



The Story of Monsanto

Faith, Hope
and $5,000

THE TRIALS AND TRIUMPHS
OF THE FIRST 75 YEARS

by Dan J. Forrestal

‘3

Simon and Schuster

New York
19



Grovgh,- Rackigrownd of Marine & Hoohwalt ~ Hoghwalt -D-

“tonsa wos courting = Dayton gist ab the tise, for one reason, >
Se they decided to.sct up their own Isboreteries, They were |
asgured. by tha coupany that hought their fire extinguisher

‘hot they would bo roteined as consultants, and also get a
woyelty on 3%; a0 thix would seh ‘thom up in business.

, Porm Widgeley, head of GM research, didn't want to leave

Dayton either, and he yent to Jom with & uynthetio rutber

- ea, Tuber was nigh priced. then becuse ‘of tho stevens Act,
a Sloan rotahaeil Masitey, ‘he had apvided fo jain teresa with

a Jab boy and cinh So mgs he insioens ent, He. Setsa, (apt) i
madd up the atetr. .
; Se me Ste i a a, ft cenbered. Fe



of hazardous open air experiments in the canyons around Los Alamos the next six
months..... “ ...testing the first bomb (Trinity) posed safety problems far more serious
than even the broadest meaning of good housekeeping might span.” (Backer, p. 5).
There was not only danger to the AWE workers but also danger to the public.

7. The records no longer exist or can’t be retrieved because of security rea-
sons, and lost or destroyed files which seems to be an answer since “NA or No was
consistently noted in the reports | received from NIOSH concerning dose reconstruc-
tions and most likely applies to all applicants who were atomic workers at the
Monsanto chemical company during the 1943-1949 period.

Based on the limitations mentioned above, | believe it is very difficult for NIOSH to
assess the amount of radiation exposure the AWE employees from the Monsanto
Chemical Company were exposed to. Even though Federal Regulation rules spell out
that default values will be applied and that applicants will receive the benefit of worst
case conditions, | feel there are too many variables and exigencies that cannot be
accounted for, particularly in this case when most of the AWE workers are deceased
and | am assuming the information on the circumstances under which they worked are
still unavailable.

1- Funk & Wagnells New Encyclopedia. Funk & Wagnells Inc., New York
Antione Henri Secquerel, Vol. 3, p. 275; Matie & Pierre Currie, Vol, 7, p.218; Roentgen, Vol.20,
p.342 Emest Rutherford, Vol. 21, pp. 14-15

2- DeSantis MD. & DeSantis B S., Radilogic History Exhibit, Wrong Turns on Radiologies Road of
Progress, Radiographics, Vel... 11, NO 6, 1991, pp.1121-1238,

& Jennings, lan The History of Radiation Dosimetry, Centenary of the Discovery of X-rays NPI (National
Physical Laboratory), 1995.

4 Fairlie, lan & Resnikoff, Marvin, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Nov/Dec87, Vol. 53, Issue 6.



ers

Time was of the essence to develop new studies. Yet, time the United States did
not have time to research, according to scientific standards, develop new methods and
instruments for assessing new radiation hazards to protect the health of the valiant
men and women who changed their lives to protect our country, no matter what the
cost. Issues arose nationally and intemationally. Some were resolved; some are still
going on today, namely the dosage the human body can accommodate without harm
(Fairlie, |.& Resnikoff, M).4

How does this information limit the Dose reconstruction that Niosh will perform to
determine tha amount of radiation the employees of the Monsanto Chemical Company
received from 1943-19497

1- The same problems that plagued the development of standards for the meas-
urement of radiation doses from the X-ray and the assessment of bodily harm, are the
same ones that the development of the atom bomb workers faced during World
Wart1 (Backer, pp. 4-5)

2- Dosimeters that were reliable and not affected by variations such as shock and
moisture did not exist and measurements that did exist were unreliable. it also seems
possible that those workers who needed them did not get them because of their scarci-
ty at that time (Backer, pp. 36-42,.64, 65).

8- When film was introduced to back dosimeter badges, they too suffered from dif-
ficulties. Backer indicates “standardization presented problems as did questions about
how photographic emulsions responded to different rays. Films value remained chiefly
qualitative as one dosimetry pioneer suggested in 1939...” Only fate in 1943 did film
begin to join pocket chambers in tracking the X and gamma - ray exposures of project
workers.

4. There was also a question of the dosage that was to be tolerated by the work-
ers. Dr. Stone, one of the health physicists employed by the Chicago Health Division
Stated later “that established tolerances when the project began...rested on rather poor
experimental evidence” Backer also indicates “Little or nothing was known about toler-
ance for other active nuclides. (p.p. 37, 38)

5. “New and reliable instruments were needed to detect the whole range of parti-
cles and rays produced in nuclear reactions....The hard and complex task of turning
theory into working tools lasted throughout the war and after” (Backer, p. 39).
“Devising dosimeters to measure Alpha rays required intense efforts while high speed
neutrons in the presence of gamma rays also presented problems”.

6. There were times when hazardous open air experiments occurred when the
mid 1944 test of the first atom bomb failed “Developing new designs entailed a series



MONSANTO IN DAYTON *

Prior to 1926, Charles Allen Thomas and Carroll A. Hochwalt
were employed by the General Motors Fuel Research Labora-
tory in Dayton where they were engaged in the research on

the anti-knock additives for gasoline. This program of
research led to the development of tetraethyl lead and its

use in gasoline. When the General Motors coxporation
announced their intention of transferring their fuel re-

search laboratory to Detroit and its consolidation with

their General Research Department, Drs. Thomas and Hochwalt
resigned, formed a partnership for private chemical research,
and established a laboratory in downtown Dayton. The newly
established laboratory cooperated with General Motors
Corporation on a research contract for several years, Among
their activities was an investigation of the chemical structure
of natural rubber.

In 1928 the organization was incorporated as Thomas and och-
walt Laboratories, Incorporated and was moved to its present
site on Nicholas Road. ‘The research staff at this time was
comprised of eight individuals including the founders. The
‘Thomas and Hochwalt Laboratories did research on the manu-
facture of paper, on the development of uses for phosphorus
and phosphoric acid, and in the preparation of synthetic

resins from petroleum derivatives. ‘The Monsanto Chemical
Company became interested in the synthetic resin research
and purchased some of the laboratory's developments in 1933.
Three yeaxs later, in 1936, Monsanto acquired the entire or- .
ganization which became the Central Research Department of
the Company. By this time the laboratory staff had expanded
to fifty-two and had accumulated a large stock of apparatus,
instruments and other equipment for conducting chemical and
physical research.

As new projects and respo sibilities were assigned to the xy
Department, additional buildings were constructed, including
poratories, pilot plant buildings for the process
development of new products, and shops for maintenance and

the construction of necessary equipment. During World War_! iL,
the projects included the velopment of rocket ‘propeliants—
ch uns the Manhattan District. Additional.

sad research sites were acquired for these opexations.

* Prepared for a Monsanto board of directors meeting in Dayton
October, 1951,



rusting window screens and had no relationship to work at
Runnymeodo. It is significant te note that not single
accident occurred at either Monsante location causing any

injury to the public. .

Great care was taken to assure the safety of the surrounding
aroas. Trucks equipped with rodiation detoction equipment ,
made regularly scheduled runs throughout the greater Dayton
area. Even as (as as 75 wiles distant, aic and sail and

water were sumplad to ensure that radioactivity was not re-

luasod in tho community.

Hore, selontists wore wo

__Pelontum over isolated, ond the associated ragiogetiyi
Employes who ware exposed to sireulegatene
of cadiouctivity on o dally basis were chocked regularly’

for thoir own health, ond to, assure thar no_contaminotios

deloy the courier arrlving to pick up the potoniu

_Nnes were so close that an employe would b

sh

i
iets *

the packages. Still, all commitments wore met end shipments
were made on schedule.

thought might lear only

meriths had grown. to a ‘ejate of,
3 ate of
permenence. Among the locations considered, for the, proposed

facility was @ site midway between the atomic plonts ot Los

Alomos, New Mexico ond Hontord, Washington. A Tennessee
locotion near the Oak Ridge Atomic plant was also investigated.
The Dayton area was finally selected for a number of regsons
among which were o good supply of skilled labor ond adgquato
water ond power supplies. The, site selected for Mound Lobs

hil 8 ts he age level ond about 200,

the laboratory is the largest co conical I Indion mound i in the
camel aan saaeianalal ia

storie b burial gound ths lob:

pe 9 lang] $25, 5 million soplen
Oe



nuclei, Through his continued work on t he nature of radiations, he was the first to
come up with an atomic theory in 1919. All five of these outstanding scientists won
Nobel prizes: Wilhelm Conrad Roentgen in 1901, Marie and Pierre Curie, and A.
Henry Becquere! in1903. Then Ernest Rutledge in 1908.1

The discovery of the X-ray machine created a sensation. It was embraced by the
medical profession and the public. The medical doctors immediately saw the advan-
tage of the machine in the treatment of patients while the public in general found it a
novelty, “the in” thing to use in the roaring twenties. After primitive X-ray machines
were made long lines formed and demonstrations were given Businessmen grasped
its saleable features and before you knew it, radium was showing up in cocktails,
creams, beauty parlor products, clock dials, clothes, toothpaste, china and vials of
water that were to be consumed by the purchaser for his health (DeSantis &
DeSantis).2 This brouhaha went on for approximately 25 years until the case of the
women dial painters received publicity.

In 1903, imminent warnings about the hazards of the X-ray machine started to
emerge. Although scientists, the medical profession, and layman were struck by the
prospective benefits of this new invention, they soon were to learn of the hazards as
reports of sustained injuries such as burned skin, loss of hair, bone and bload defects
and deaths among radiologists, technicians and the public, filtered through the excite-
ment. Yet, the wamings were dismissed by the majority.

Backer phrases it this way “Lacking precise measures either of hazards or gains,
workers relied on their own judgments to strike some balance....Safety long remained
@ matter of personal choice and judgment. Trial and error, art more than science, gov-
erned the early use of X-Rays. The problem began with erratic machines. Although
improved in detail, for nearly two decades (the) Roentgen X-Ray tube retained the
same basic design” (p.11). .

The first X-Ray tube was invented by William Crookes and consisted of a partially
evacuated bulb containing 2 electrodes. When electric is passed through the tube, the
residual gas is ionized and positive ions striking the cathode eject electrons from it .
The electrons formed a beam of cathode rays that bombard the glass walls of the tube
and produce X-Rays.” 3 Then came the curved cathode to focus the electrodes on a
heavy metal object called an anode. This produced harder rays of shorter wave
lengths and greater intensity. The next improvement was made in 1913 by David
Coolidge. He devised a thermionic tube. The cathode emits electrons because it is
heated by an auxiliary current, not because it is struck by ions. The electrons are
accelerated by high voltage across the tube. As the high voltage increases, the mini-
mum wave length.of the radiation decreases. Most X-Rays today are modifica~
tions of the Coolidge tube with improved shock-proof insulation and grounded cables.
(Backer, pp. 13,14) .



sont wes, abs.

P.O. BOX 1663
SANTA FE, NEW MEXICO

September 8, 1945

Dr. CG. A. Thomas,
Monsanto Chemical Company,
P. 0. Box 86, Station B,
Dayton 7, Ohio.

Dear Charlie: -

I am sure that you will have had from
many illustrious sources appropriate expressions of
appreciation for the work that Monsanto has done on
the atomic bomb project. I would like to add my
own voice to theirs, because I am perhaps in a po-
sition to know more intimately how decisive were
the contributions that the workers of your company
made and how helpless we should have been without
their ekill and devotion, and without your leader-
ship. I wish that you would express to them this
word of appreciation so that they may know, as we
do, that we could not have made the bombs without
their help.

I cannot write to you in any adequate
terms of my own personal debt, nor of the bonds of
affection and loyalty which are its consequence. I
hope, in the years to come, that you will not regret
your association with us at Los Alamos, and that the
friendships which have grown from it will not languish.

Sincerely,

} 2 oe Me

J. R. Oppenheimer

atw



ATOMIC QUEST

There I was in close contact not only with our crucially im.
ortant pilot plant operation but also with Colonel Nichols, who”

as_the District Enginoor maintained his Theadquarters at Oak
Ridge. While he gave a great “part “of his personal “atten

ra ions .
fe

is project that were being handled
h bending more than twenty-five million,
edollars a year, To make sure that this_was_heing used wisaly
toward. Promoting the wartime program, I requested 1 guthorizg.
tion from Groves to set up an Advisory Board. This board cone
sisted of James B. Conant, who was keeping in close contact with _
all aspoctsiof the atomie project, Charles A. Thomas, whom Gen-.
eral Groves had put in general charge of plutoni
sEntico Fermi,

The .
advice of this board on matters of major policy was invaluable, |

At Hanford: construction began early in 1948, First, housing
had to be Supplied for the construction crew itself. The almost
deserted village swelled quickly to a size of fifty or sixty thou-
sand, Barracks were built, and great mess halls, schools, and
recreation areas, All of this was of the most temporary construc. -
tion. Within three years the construction crew was gone, and
Hanford wds again ‘a ghost town,

It was at the mess hall of Hanford that in the opinion of
Julian Bernacchi was to be found the best food anywhere on the
entire atomic project. As the thousands of mon poured in to
seat themselves at the tables they found in front of them the
food already served in Breat platters and bowls, It came hot,
fresh from the kitchen. As soon as a bow! was emptied and held
up a waitress would replace it with a full one,

The constiuetion of the production plant itself involved large
quantities of ‘concrete. The land where the structures were to be
186



hhundred-foot steel tower ich ¢

completely evaporated. The surface sand around it

sand feet was melted into glass. _ - ~ ~
Such was the weapon 2. had forged. Succe:

inary calculations had indicated that_th

; ne energy of roughly 10,000 tons of TNT: "he theoreticians

recognized, however, that thelr calculations could not be relied

spon closer than to_a factor. of two, leven at the last moment.

cism as. to whether_an_atomic-cx

upon Cros

“poms wese expressing skept
would in fact occur, They had accordingly given ont

splosion wee an
his estimate cautiously as_5000_tons.of TNT-24 .
energy actually, released_in_ the test_was equivalent to 20, 000.46
sons: The predictions were as reliable as could have heen ex-—

ected.
The result—awesome, terrifying.



Cue to the splendid cooperation of your organization
at Plant B, we will be able to make the first shipmenr
of a product to the Government on time. This meterial
kes so important that the Government had requested us
to heve another industrial concern work on Broducing
the same Material as g Stand-by. Monsanto came through
while the other source did not develop on schedule,

We want

bo congratulete You on this work ane Slucerely
&poreciate the fine ccoperetion of 42} * uhe men
curnected with the work. Dr, Burbage, “ SUDre sentative
-prom Centrel Research, séys that everyone vas most helpful
on this project,

rés Charles Allen Thoxag



NIOSH Dose Reconstruction Activity Report Page 3 of 3
Medical Information

The table below provides information on the energy employee's cancers that were vetified by DOL.

Cancer Description Diagnosis Date ,

DOL js responsible for verifying covered employment and medical information for your case, If you have any
questions regarding the employment or medical information stated above, please contact either your case examiner with
DOL or the District Office where you filed your case.

Cleveland, Ohio 1-888-859-7211 Jacksonville, Florida 1-877-336-4272
Denver, Colorado 1-888-805-3389 Seattle, Washington 1-888-805-3401



f-oorr Ave

ec - Messrs..Schneider _
Thomas (C.4.)

April 21, 1943

Bre_¥_ Bush, Diregtor

Office of Belentific Research
1536 P Street BE

Washington, D. Ce

My @ear Br. Bushy

Many thanks for your letter of April thirteenth which
reached me this morning,

This Company was very glad to contribute to the govern-

ment any part tt played in the development of pro-

pellents, am was gled te approve the recommendation

of Drs '2ee Alien Thomas, Director of Central Research

of this -G pay relative to the patent situation con-
ts,

Should you come this way, we should be delighted to have
you tet us know so thet we might, in some way, make you
stay in 8t. Louis more interesting to you.

Yours most sincerely

Ses

—=—

Charles Belknap
President



THE DRAGON’S TAIL

Radiation Safety in the
Manhattan Project, 1942-1946

BARTON C. HACKER

‘

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS, /787
Berkeley Los Angeles London



However, not all were caught up in the glee that pervaded the country. Jn 1907,
members of the America X-Ray Society discussed some of the problems but not much
came out of the meeting. The British X-Ray Society was also formed around the same
time and the same thing occurred. As stories of the the ill effects of radiation contin-
ued, The American Roentgen Ray Protection Society was formed in 1921 and the
British Roentgen and X-Ray Commission was formed also to establish radiation pro-
tection and recommendations. They decided to meet every three years. Other
European countries followed suit. At the 1924 American meeting. Arthur Mutscheller, a
physicist who had emigrated to America to accept a job as chief physicist with an x-ray
equipment company presented a paper before them on his concept of tolerance dose,
the type of shielding required, and the cost. He proposed a worker would be safe from
radiation exposure if he did not receive over a period of thirty days, a dose exceeding
1/100 of an erythema dose for all radiation exposure (Backer, pp. 14-15). At the first
meeting of the International Congress in London in 1924, the physicists wanted an ion-
ization based unit to measure doses from the X Ray machines even though most doc-
tors were satisfied with the unit skin dose to measure radiation exposure. The physi-
cists won out. The Committee was to report back at its next meeting in Stockholm,
Sweden in 1928. It was then “ The Congress adopted the roentgen as measured by
the ionization of the air as the international X-ray unit. They also followed Mutscheller’s
dosage recommendations of 1/100 roentgens erythema dose per month as the toler-
ance dose” Names change and the Congress soon became known as Intemational
Committee on Radiation Protection (ICRP). European scientists and the public were
ahead of the United States in realizing the dangers of these new scientific discover-
ies. They tackled the problems almost immediately after new discoveries occurred as
can be seen by the attached information on the the hundred year "History of
Dosimetry” NPL by W.Alan Jennings (4). The American’s had no central protection
group at that time. However, Lauriston Taylor who had a position with the National
Bureau of Standards in 1927 attended the British meeting and returned to the U.S. to
remedy that fact with the establishment of the Advisory Committee on X-RAy and
Radiation Protection which was to become the National Committee on Radiation
Protection (NCRP). The first thing the Committee produced was a report entitled “X-
Ray Protection” in 1931. The National Bureau of Standards published it in their NBS
Handbook, 15 although it was not authorized by the government. It was not govern-
ment policy. At the 1931 meeting the ICRP converted tolerance values of the erythe-
ma dose to roentgens. “The tolerance dose became 6 roentgens monthly, 2 roentgens
daily or 0.00001 (10-5) roentgens per second).” In 1934, the American Advisory
Committee suggested 1/ 10 r per day for hard X rays ... as a guide for radium protec-
tion”. A tolerance dose still had to established for gamma rays.(Backer, pp. 15-1 9).
wasn't till 1941 that the NCRP published its standard for radiation dose and body toler-
ance.

The drums of war were rolling across Europe in the latter part of 1939. A German
Laboratory first recognized nuclear fission that could culminate in the development of a
nuclear bomb (Backer, p. 3). When in 1941 Plutonium was discovered just prior to



esechenivcsanwsonsiiaincntuan an iatiedre

World War II and Its Aftermath 103

for the Army a lightweight armor material for actual wearing by mili-
lary personnel. It was called Doron and was named for Brigadier Gen-
eral George F. Doriot of the Quartermaster Corps. The product was
. made of glass cloth and resin, a forerunner of reinforced plastics typi-
fied by the famous Fibergias.
War's end also enabled Edgar Queeny to report that Dr. Charles Ad
who

omas ap of scientists Cin

a
the 94th element, plutonium, preparing the way for the development of _
the atom bomb,

‘This story is best told by a letter written to Fd ar Queeny on Ai

“With the advent of V-J Day and the realization of the United States oy
and the world that the atomic bonib played = ‘Tajor pare In _bringin;
abpat peace at an earlier date than could otherwise be expected, 1 wish
to_personally thank you for the work done by _ Monsanto Chemical
Company,

~A detailed description of your efforts must still remain, undisclosed .
because of security requirements, but I want you to know that Dr. C. A.

omas and his associates made a major contribution to our success,
Thomas Personally’ coordinated a very_important phase of the
chemical research pertaining to the project; he also
research aiid solved prodiittion problems of" “extteme Complexity without __

which the atomic bomb could not have been... . i
also "appretiaté your taking over the contract for the operation of
Clinton Laboratories (near Oak Ridge, Ténn.).... Your recognition of
the “need Yor “Intustrialrmerragerent of Chater Laboratories showed |
your continued coi cti cess af a time
success had not yet been achieved or even as:
“Tam sure Monsanto Chemical Company will continue to ) give aid to.
the hatlon in carrying on future development in the field of atomic.
eng ”

This was prophetic. Within a few years Monsanto would indeed be wx
busily engaged in researching peacetime uses of atomic energy as a
«contractor for the Atomic Energy Commission at. a_large_installation

called Mound Laboratories at Miamisburg, Ohio,

The message from General Groves vas reproduced in Monsanto Mag:

_ - In addition, a letter went to all employes saluting them for all

they had done to help their nation during World War II.

No one seemed happier in 1946 than Josiah B. Rutter, Merrimac
alumnus and now director of Corporate engineering, when the company
purchased from the government the Texas City styrene plant. Rutter
had been the construction boss when the gleaming towers of Texas City

i i lays less than a year during the pressure-cooker

Strain of war’s demands. He called the plant his “pride and joy.” And

he reveled in the company’s postwar plans to expand and modernize, to

add polystyrene molding compound as well as several petroleum-based



Work
ould have the first pounds ready by 1 January 1945. ‘If you do
‘hat? was his answer, ‘Tl give you a champagne dinner.
“Ié we don't; I replied, ‘the dinner will be on me. I missed the
Jate by six weeks, but we were all elated that the delivery was
possible so soon. After the war'was over, I was bappy to be host
at a dimer in Saint Louis to Conant and Groves and Greenewalt,
with others who had shared in drawing these schedules.
‘The costs had obviously been great. It remained yet to be seen
whether they would be justified in terms of shortening the war.
At Jeast the power of the atom had not fallen first into the hands
of our enemies where it could have been used to destroy us.
+ ‘Two days after the phone call from Robert Oppenheimer, Lk
had to give to the project Jeaders, who were meeting this time
at Oak Ridge, my bisweeldy report on the progress ef the project.
‘Nothing has happened since our last meeting,’ I told them,
“that is discouraging with regard to the ability to achieve a vio-
lent explosion.” Already by grapevine the news of the success
of the New Mexico experiment had spri jut no one was
‘speaking of it out Joud.
‘That evening Charlie Thomas came with me to our Oak Ridge
home. Thomas was at that time the able head of the Monsanto
! Ghemical Company laboratories at Dayton which had in hand an. %
i ¢ special assignment regarding the bomb itself. Fr

1948 he was General Groves's chief adviser with regard fo the

cchemical work at Los Alamos. He had been a member of the
arty that viewed the New Mexico test.

‘As Thomas stood there in our yard telling me of what he had.

een it was evident that the rience had given him a shock

ne chomed as dear as in daylight. We were siationed ten miles

away from the explosion. At the five-mile station two men were
Ynocked over by the blast. ‘The immense ball of flame rapidly ——

_—going up into the sky was followed by a cloud of dark dust. The.

2s