Il governo ricorre contro le leggi anti nucleare

Il governo ricorre contro le leggi anti nucleare di tre Regioni
di Redazione, Il Giornale, 05 febbraio 2010

Roma Prima erano i Cpt, i centri di accoglienza per gli immigrati, adesso le centrali nucleari. Nessuno le vuole, non almeno in casa propria. L’elenco dei nuovi siti ancora non è ufficiale, ma le Regioni da mesi iniziano a mettere le mani avanti: non nel nostro territorio, dicono, gli impianti stiano lontani di qua. In particolare Regioni di colore politico opposto alla maggioranza di governo. Tre consigli regionali, Puglia, Campania e Basilicata, hanno deciso addirittura per legge che nessuna centrale potrà essere costruita sul loro suolo. Le azioni di ribellione sono state proposte e approvate in rapida sequenza nelle ultime tre settimane.
Ieri la risposta da Roma: il Consiglio dei ministri ha deciso di impugnare immediatamente tutte e tre le leggi anti-atomo davanti alla Consulta.
Un’iniziativa «necessaria per questioni di diritto e di merito», chiarisce il ministro dello Sviluppo economico, Claudio Scajola. La decisione è sua, d’intesa con il ministro per gli Affari regionali Raffaele Fitto. E apre, com’era prevedibile, uno scontro politico su due binari: suscita proclami di «disobbedienza» locale, come nel caso del lanciatissimo presidente uscente della Puglia Nichi Vendola, e scatena tutta l’opposizione nei palazzi del Parlamento, Pd e Italia dei valori. Anche se, nemmeno due anni fa, come predecessore di Scajola al ministero dello Sviluppo economico, Pierluigi Bersani diceva: «Sarà possibile ridiscutere della presenza del nucleare anche in Italia».
Ma adesso dal Partito democratico si contesta il metodo del governo: il decreto legislativo all’esame delle Camere «esclude di fatto dalle decisioni sui siti sia i cittadini che gli enti locali».
È Antonio di Pietro però a giocare d’anticipo, addirittura sui mesti Verdi, da due anni fuori dal Parlamento. Ventitrè anni dopo il referendum ’87, il leader dell’Idv si candida a promotore di una nuova consultazione plebiscitaria: «L’Italia dei valori darà inizio oggi in occasione del Congresso alla raccolta delle firme contro il nucleare».
Le tre leggi regionali che vietano impianti nucleari sono contestabili, a parere di Scajola, sul piano del diritto, perché «intervengono autonomamente in una materia concorrente con lo Stato (produzione, trasporto e distribuzione di energia elettrica) e non riconoscono l’esclusiva competenza dello Stato in materia di tutela dell’ambiente della sicurezza interna e della concorrenza». Inoltre non impugnare i tre provvedimenti «avrebbe costituito un precedente pericoloso, perché si potrebbe indurre altre Regioni ad adottare altre decisioni negative sulla localizzazione d’infrastrutture necessarie per il Paese».

Allarme leucemia: 7 bimbi ammalati in un solo mese

Allarme leucemia: 7 bimbi ammalati in un solo mese
Pazienti reagiscono a cure
di Redazione, Il Giornale, 15 febbraio 2010
Sette bambini hanno sviluppato la leucemia linfoblastica acuta tra il dicembre 2009 e il gennaio 2010: tre frequentano la scuola elementare di via Corridoni. Ma la Asl assicura: "In un anno 8-12 casi di media"

Milano - Sono in tutto sette i bambini di Milano con leucemia linfoblastica acuta che hanno sviluppato la malattia tra il dicembre 2009 e il gennaio 2010. Si tratta però di un "evento eccezionale" sottolinea Luigi Bisanti, responsabile dell’epidemiologia dell’Asl di Milano, in un incontro per parlare degli sviluppi sul caso dei tre bambini con leucemia scoperti a gennaio nella scuola di via Corridoni a Milano.

Sette casi di leucemia I sette casi sono tutti giunti all’osservazione della clinica pediatrica dell’ospedale San Gerardo di Monza. Tra questi, oltre ai tre bimbi di 6, 8 e 11 anni della scuola milanese, ci sono una bimba il cui fratello frequenta lo stesso istituto, e altri tre casi su bambini residenti in zone diverse della città (uno di questi in viale Certosa). "I casi di leucemia attesi in un anno sui bambini sono 8-12 - ha detto Bisanti - però quando si parla di leucemia non ci sono correlazioni causa-effetto certe, ma una serie di sospetti che danno deboli suggerimenti". Sulla base di questi ultimi, gli esperti della Asl, insieme a Regione, Comune di Milano, docenti della scuola e genitori degli alunni hanno formato un gruppo di lavoro che "sta già esaminando l’elenco completo di tutti i fattori di rischio che sono plausibilmente collegati alla malattia secondo la letteratura scientifica".

Il report definitivo Il report definitivo potrebbe essere pronto nelle prime due settimane di aprile, anche se "i valori misurati finora non si discostano da una situazione di normalità - continua l’esperto - soprattutto per quanto riguarda l’esposizione alle radiazioni o a composti chimici. Le evidenze, quindi, per ora sono proprio quelle che ci aspettavamo". Se tutto andrà come previsto dagli specialisti, non ci scoprirà nessun legame chiaro tra un particolare fattore di rischio e le leucemie: "Crediamo che il risultato più probabile dell’indagine sia un’assenza di legami. Se non troveremo questa correlazione - ha concluso Bisanti - ci saranno due possibilità: la prima è che si è trattato di un evento largamente improbabile ma non impossibile; la seconda è che le nostre conoscenze nel campo sono ancora troppo limitate per sapere in che direzione guardare".

Puerto Rico: Island residents sue U.S - CNN

Island residents sue U.S., saying military made them sick

By Abbie Boudreau and Scott Bronstein,
CNN Special Investigations Unit

February 1, 2010 4:03 p.m. EST

Hermogenes Marrero, as a young U.S. Marine, was stationed on the island of Vieques nearly 40 years ago.

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

• Vieques was one of Navy's largest firing ranges and weapons testing sites
• Thousands of residents say testing has made them seriously ill
• Government says under "sovereign immunity," residents have no right to sue
• See how residents are coping with illnesses on "Campbell Brown" tonight 8 ET

Hear from residents of Vieques, where thousands of people say U.S. weapons testing has made them seriously ill, on tonight's "Campbell Brown," 8 ET

Vieques, Puerto Rico (CNN) -- Nearly 40 years ago, Hermogenes Marrero was a teenage U.S. Marine, stationed as a security guard on the tiny American island of Vieques, off the coast of Puerto Rico.

Marrero says he's been sick ever since. At age 57, the former Marine sergeant is nearly blind, needs an oxygen tank, has Lou Gehrig's disease and crippling back problems, and sometimes needs a wheelchair.

"I'd go out to the firing range, and sometimes I'd start bleeding automatically from my nose," he said in an interview to air on Monday night's "Campbell Brown."

"I said, 'My God, why am I bleeding?' So then I'd leave the range, and it stops. I come back, and maybe I'm vomiting now. I used to get diarrhea, pains in my stomach all the time. Headaches -- I mean, tremendous headaches. My vision, I used to get blurry."

The decorated former Marine is now the star witness in a multibillion-dollar lawsuit by more than 7,000 residents of this Caribbean island -- about three-quarters of its population -- who say that what the U.S. military did on Vieques has made them sick.

Read: Are Americans being forgotten on Vieques?

For nearly six decades, beginning right after World War II, Vieques was one of the Navy's largest firing ranges and weapons testing sites.

"Inside the base, you could feel the ground -- the ground moving," Marrero said. "You can hear the concussions. You could feel it. If you're on the range, you could feel it in your chest. That's the concussion from the explosion. It would rain, actually rain, bombs. And this would go on seven days a week."

After years of controversy and protest, the Navy left Vieques in 2003. Today, much of the base is demolished, and what's left is largely overgrown. But the lawsuit remains, and island residents want help and compensation for numerous illnesses they say they suffer.

"The people need the truth to understand what is happening to their bodies," said John Eaves Jr., the Mississippi attorney who represents the islanders in the lawsuit.

Because he no longer lives on Vieques, Marrero is not one of the plaintiffs but has given sworn testimony in the case. He said the weapons used on the island included napalm; depleted uranium, a heavy metal used in armor-piercing ammunition; and Agent Orange, the defoliant used on the Vietnamese jungles that was later linked to cancer and other illnesses in veterans.

"We used to store it in the hazardous material area," Marrero said. It was used in Vieques as a defoliant for the fence line.

The military has never acknowledged a link between Marrero's ailments and his time at Vieques, so he receives few disability or medical benefits from the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Neither the Navy nor the Justice Department, which is handling the government's defense, would discuss the islanders' lawsuit with CNN.

But Eaves said his clients don't believe that the military has fully disclosed the extent of the contamination on Vieques: "Like uranium was denied, then they admitted it."

Dr. John Wargo, a Yale professor who studies the effects of toxic exposures on human health, says he believes that people on the island are sick because of the Navy's bombing range.

Vieques ... is probably one of the most highly contaminated sites in the world.
--Dr. John Wargo

RELATED TOPICS

• Vieques
• U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs
• Vietnam War

"Vieques, in my experience of studying toxic substances, is probably one of the most highly contaminated sites in the world," he said. "This results from the longevity of the chemical release, the bombs, the artillery shells, chemical weapons, biological weapons, fuels, diesel fuels, jet fuels, flame retardants. These have all been released on the island, some at great intensity."

Wargo is the author of a new book, "Green Intelligence," on how environments and toxic exposure affect human health. He is also expected to testify as an expert witness in the islanders' lawsuit.

He said the chemicals released by the munitions dropped on Vieques can be dangerous to human health and may well have sickened residents or veterans who served on the island.

"In my own mind, I think the islanders experienced higher levels of exposure to these substances than would be experienced in any other environment," Wargo said. "In my own belief, I think the illnesses are related to these exposures."

The effects of those chemicals could include cancer, damage to the nervous, immune and reproductive systems or birth defects, he said.

"This doesn't prove that the exposures caused those specific illnesses," Wargo added. "But it's a pretty convincing story from my perspective."

Since the Navy left the island, munitions it left behind "continue to leak, particularly from the east end of the island," Wargo said.

"My concerns are now predominantly what's happening in the coastal waters, which provide habitat for an array of fish, many species of which are often consumed by the population on the island," he said.

Scientists from the University of Georgia have documented the extent of the numerous unexploded ordinance and bombs that continue to litter the former bomb site and the surrounding waters. The leftover bombs continue to corrode, leaching dangerously high levels of carcinogens, according to researcher James Porter, associate dean of the university's Odum School of Ecology.

The Environmental Protection Agency designated parts of Vieques a Superfund toxic site in 2005, requiring the Navy to begin cleaning up its former bombing range. The service identified many thousands of unexploded munitions and set about blowing them up. But the cleanup effort has further outraged some islanders, who fear that more toxic chemicals will be released.

The U.S. government's response to their lawsuit is to invoke sovereign immunity, arguing that residents have no right to sue it. The government also disputes that the Navy's activities on Vieques made islanders ill, citing a 2003 study by scientists from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention that found no link.

That study, however, has been harshly criticized by numerous scientists, and the CDC is embarking on a new effort to determine whether residents may have been sickened by the contamination from the Navy range.

Asked whether his duty on the island made him sick, Marrero responds, "Of course it did."

"This is American territory. The people that live here are American," he said. "You hurt someone, you have to take care of that person. And the government's just not doing anything about it."

Uranium Burial Lost Worker Confidence

Feb. 4, 2010

Huntington Uranium Burial Lost Worker Confidence with Portsmouth Contractor

By Tony Rutherford
Huntingtonnews.net Reporter

Portsmouth, OH (HNN) – Can you imagine digging a hole and dumping rail cars, trucks, machines, bricks and everything else in, then cover it up? That’s what happened in Piketon when the Huntington Pilot Plant/Reduction Pilot Plant was entombed in 1979.

According to a November 1999 release by Vina Colley, President of Portsmouth/Piketon Residents for Environmental Safety and Security (PRESS) and co-founder of National Nuclear Workers for Justice (NNWJ)

Internal Goodyear Corporation correspondence from July and December 1977 described the material to be buried as 26,000 cubic feet of equipment and 10,000 cubic feet of pipe. The material was contaminated with nickel carbonyl and uranium. (At least?)

The disassembled plant arrived for placement in a ditch approximately 24 feet wide, 150 feet long and 12 feet deep. A former worker and eyewitness said it took six months and that “all kinds of stuff went into the ditch.”

The project has not been public knowledge Workers at Portsmouth were apparently informed only on a need-to-know basis. Geoffrey Sea in his thesis for Harvard University states that Goodyear "eventually lost credibility when an entire dismantled uranium processing plant from West Virginia was buried at the Portsmouth classified nuclear waste site and the workers were told it hadn't happened."

A July 11, 1977, memo discusses the contaminants: 1) Nickel Carbonyl-NI (CO)4- Nickel Tetra Carbonyl, a colorless, volatile, flammable, poisonous residue soluble only in alcohol and con nitric acid" and 2) Uranium: Uranium found in most process piping is in PPM range, "slightly enriched", and will present no health protection problems. However, some equipment may contain larger quantities and as such will have to be monitored. "This memo calls for the scrap to be covered with two feet of earth. A December 14, 1977 memo states that toxic and radioactive contaminated had been found to low enough no to require the two feet of cover.

This raised questions:

"To what extent have the buried materials contaminated the groundwater at Portsmouth?' Vina Colley of PRESS wanted to know. The Department of Energy (DOE) acknowledged that nickel and uranium are contaminates of the underground water at the site.

What took place at the plant in West Virginia? The cover of the official preliminary proposal for the burial, dated September 26, 1977,described the plant as a "reduction pilot plant." DOE was to award the contract for the plant's demolition. What did the Portsmouth workers that took care of the burial actually handle?

"Did the workers at the Inco facility know that they handling toxic and radioactive material.? Were they adequately protected,” asked Mary Byrd Davis of the Uranium Enrichment Project?.

The 1999 news release continued, “The buried plant appears to have been an early instance of what some in the Portsmouth area fear- the transformation of the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant into the a waste storage site.

"The project of the nickel plant is just one more example of the urgent need for a thorough investigation of what has taken place at the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant," Colley stated.

QUESTIONS FOLLOWING HNN ARTICLE:

Following the HNN article on nickel dust, several activist readers sent a letter to Ohio Senator Sherrod Brown and Ohio Congressman John Boccieri. Here’s An edited portion of the concerns shared with the Congressional representative and Senator:

“Yesterday we copied your offices on a news article from the Huntington paper regarding reported associations between nickel and Plutonium in the nuclear fuel cycle processes/ and centrifuge development. Because the Wingfoot Lake site near Uniontown Industrial Excess Landfill (I.E.L.) , was the precursor to the Portsmouth, Ohio centrifuge site discussed in the story, and, because, according to the NRC, both Portsmouth and Wingfoot were operated by what was called the Goodyear Atomic division, we have a keen interest in this new information for obvious reasons.

“First of all, you need to know that our citizens' group, Cuyahoga Community Land Trust ( CCLT), wrote the Ohio Attorney General's Office a letter citing a statement made to us back in around 1994 by a radiation expert from the Ohio Dept. of Health (ODH) in Columbus, Ruth Vandegrift.

“The following words [in 1994] from this top radiation ODH official are close to verbatim, when she called our attention specifically to the Wingfoot Lake operation/ Goodyear:

“...I'll probably get shot for saying this, but let's presume it's Goodyear's UF 6 . Tell me what kinds of things you are seeing in both the valid and invalid (IEL) data....(CCLT response): Plutonium 238/239, 241; tritium, thorium, uranium, radium etc. etc. Vandegrift's response: Yes, yes, they would all be there. It's called "crapped up fuel, crapped up nasties.' ....

The letter continues that radiation testing was geared toward “manmade” radiation, even though the plutonium’s existence had been on the table for a decade.

Paraphrasing, the letter stressed that ,“acceptance of the consultant’s spin on plutonium from these rounds of testing was appalling, especially since especially since an Akron lawyer had been told by a former ODH lawyer that ODH had documentation of barreled radiation at Uniontown IEL....

Well, we know something went radically wrong at Uniontown… We believe local officials were pressured/ coerced into not supporting a proper clean up at IEL … Some of the clues are found in the Kittinger depositions on the Plutonium, where local soils expert, James Bauder, who worked for the Stark H.D. and County Commission, told us that “"directives" had been issued from ODH to Stark ordering /allowing the "additional" chemical to be brought in!

…..

Senator Brown and Congressman Boccieri, Will such severe politics be allowed to prevail here, without regard to the health and welfare of our community?

Puntano alla guerra civile

Antonio Di Pietro, 4 Febbraio 2010

Puntano alla guerra civile

Il governo si accinge ad impugnare dinanzi alla Corte Costituzionale le leggi regionali di Puglia, Campania e Basilicata che impediscono l'installazione di impianti nucleari nei territori regionali. In termini di diritto la legge potra' anche permettere tale operazione, ma in termini di fatto e' una dichiarazione di guerra che porterà l’Italia sull’orlo di una guerra civile mettendo lo Stato contro i cittadini.

Le parole di Vendola quando ha affermato che il governo si dovrà munire dei migliori carri armati per disporre della Puglia e dei pugliesi a suo piacimento ieri appaiono come una provocazione.

Domani, con l’arroganza istigatrice di Scajola, potrebbero diventare realtà. Gli italiani sono scesi in piazza e si sono recati alle urne, nel 1987, ed hanno messo alla porta il nucleare con un referendum. Se Silvio Berlusconi, per interessi ed accordi interpersonali, ha deciso di riportarci indietro di vent’anni reintroducendo una tecnologia superata, nociva e fallimentare, deve farlo con le stesse modalità, piazza per piazza, regione per regione e non con i suoi sondaggi taroccati. Siamo stufi di dover far ricorso a mozioni, referendum, petizioni, per riaffermare ciò che è già stato deciso con il loro stesso utilizzo.

Se un governo può buttare nel secchio un referendum, c’è un'unica interpretazione: chi governa rappresenta un’organizzazione illegittima che minaccia la democrazia. E non si rispolveri il consenso elettorale che non è stato acquisito parlando del nucleare e di molte altre porcate realizzate dopo l’insediamento al potere. Sappiamo che dovremo ancora una volta essere noi cittadini a ricorrere al referendum per il No al nucleare.

Come per il Lodo Alfano è inutile aspettare che il governo si ravveda, pertanto, l’Italia dei Valori domani inizierà la raccolta firme per il referendum contro il nucleare. I quesiti sono già stati depositati presso la Corte di Cassazione ed hanno lo scopo di chiamare i cittadini ad assumersi responsabilità importanti che peseranno sul loro futuro e su quello dei propri figli. Nel XXI secolo il futuro è nelle energie rinnovabili, certamente non nell’uranio che esaurirà nel giro qualche decennio, provocando danni irreversibili per la salute e l’ambiente.

Faccio solo un’inquietante riflessione: se il Parlamento è bypassato dai decreti, se la macchina della Giustizia è ridotta all’impotenza, se si parla di stravolgere la Costituzione, se le regioni sono piegate al volere di un gruppo ristretto di persone, se le televisioni trasmettono a reti unificate, se la legge non è più uguale per tutti, se si calpestano i referendum da un governo all’altro, perché continuiamo a raccontarci che l’Italia è una Repubblica parlamentare in cui vige la democrazia? Siamo ipocriti o incoscienti nel negare la realtà?

Cittadini, svegliatevi! L’unica arma che avete per non farvi fregare è il voto: utilizzatelo bene.

2,000 tonnes of depleted uranium has been used in Iraq

2,000 tonnes of depleted uranium has been used in Iraq

Iraq to file lawsuit against US, Britain--The report says that 2,000 tonnes of depleted uranium has been used in Iraq. 01 Feb 2010 Iraq's Ministry for Human Rights will file a lawsuit against Britain and the US over their use of depleted uranium bombs in Iraq, an Iraqi minister says. Iraq's Minister of Human Rights, Wijdan Mikhail Salim, told Assabah newspaper that the lawsuit will be launched based on reports from the Iraqi ministries of science and the environment. According to the reports, during the first year of the US and British invasion of Iraq, both countries had repeatedly used bombs containing depleted uranium.

http://www.legitgov .org/price_ use_200m_ try_bush_ instead_of_ ksm_010210. html

or http://tinyurl. com/ybeum7s

Workers Exposed to Plutonium, Neptunium

Feb. 1, 2010

Workers at Former Huntington Plants Exposed to Plutonium, Neptunium
Buried Slurry in Piketon Leaking

By Tony Rutherford
Huntingtonnews.net Reporter

© 2010 BY TONY RUTHERFORD & HUNTINGTONNEWS.NET

Huntington, WV (HNN) – HNN has confirmed through publicly available, unclassified documents that the workers at the formerly ‘secret’ Huntington Pilot Plant/Reduction Pilot Plant (HPP/RPP) on the INCO campus were exposed to [at least] “trace quantities” of Neptunium and Plutonium. The Huntington facility received nickel from reactors at Hansford and Savannah River, as well as the Paducah and Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plants. The Portsmouth, Ohio, plant is located in Piketon, Ohio.

Vina Colley, a compensated Portsmouth (Piketon) Diffusion Plant former atomic worker and activist for compensation of workers, believes that plutonium and other residue on materials sent to Huntington for recycling and decontamination eventually made the Huntington plant contaminated beyond clean up.

The material that the Huntington plant received had been used at these various atomic energy plants as part of the chemical flow. Huntington’s job was to reduce/remove the radioactivity and separate the compounds. For instance, once process separated nickel carbonyl and enriched uranium.

In the early periods of attempting to attain an economic and safe recycling, HNN has seen documents that show still partially radioactive materials went to a second Huntington manufacturer for reuse. The workers at that plant have not yet been deemed eligible for atomic worker benefits, but they have petitioned for that status, HNN has learned.

RECYCLING RADOPACTIVELY CONTAMINATED PARTS?

Previously, there have been veiled and partial reports that have all but nailed governmental recycling in conjunction with commercial entities. The participation of companies such as Goodyear (which ran the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant), General Electric, and others related back to the military awarding different aspects of The Manhattan Project to private contractors.

However, the Energy Research Development Administration, Department of Energy and Atomic Energy Commission were not bound by OSHA and NIOSH exposure laws of private companies. These agencies, based on unclassified documents, worked to officiate the truth. Legally, the government has immunity from civil liability unless it consents to suit. The uproar by sick workers eventually led to government consent, but the award process is not necessarily a fair medical determination of a worker’s illness.

Even as the DOE issued a draft request to sell approximately 15,300 tons of radiologically-contaminated nickel scrap recovered from uranium enrichment process equipment at the Department’s Paducah, Ky. & Oak Ridge, Tennessee, facilities (http://www.emcbc.doe.gov/files/news/NR%20NICKEL%20Jul212009.pdf), serious concerns arise about how much radioactive recycled materials have already been marketed?

For instance, Dr. Cliff Honicker in a March 28, 2000 paper speculated and wisely surmised that nickel powder and nickel scrap recycling occurred in the 50s and 60s based on unaccounted for amounts (200 million pounds) of scrap. He correctly determined (as have interviews with former workers that so-called “decontaminated” scrap had been melted into ingots and commercially sold by the plant in Huntington, W.Va.

CLASSIFIED MEANT MANY NAMES

Gaps exist. This relates to the 50 year declassification rule. As additional time periods pass, more material becomes available. One of the gaps opening involve the relationships between plutonium and nickel.

The five story (by most reports) building once located on the INCO campus had several names. From 1951 to 1963, the Huntington Pilot Plant (HPP) performed work under contract to the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). During the SAME time period, the facility was also referred to as the Reduction Pilot Plant because of the special nickel processing operations the facility performed on behalf of the government which involved handling and processing of material contaminated with enriched uranium.

(See: Report to Advisory Board on Radiation & Worker Health, National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, Audit of Case PIID from HPP, John Mauro, Cohen & Associates, February 2005, hereinafter, Report to Advisory Board, http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/OCAS/pdfs/abrwh/drreview/scadrr02.pdf)

Actually, during the Manhattan Project, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, did not “exist” on maps. It was known as a part of the Clinton Engineering Works (C.E.W.) and Happy Valley was located next to the K-25 gaseous diffusion plant.

NICKEL CARBONYL AND GASEOUS DIFFUSION

“The AEC work at Huntington involved the processing of scrap nickel to produce refined nickel powder for use in the manufacture of gaseous diffusion barriers for gaseous diffusion plants. The feedstock for producing the nickel powder was uranium –contaminated nickel that originated from the Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant (ORGDP). The contaminated nickel scrap metal was offloaded by rail at Huntington , weighed and placed in buckets, while it was still in the steel cartons, [then] the nickel was loaded into a furnace, and melt refined, and in the process, the uranium contamination was separated from the nickel through a special step in the process involving the application of carbon monoxide, referred to as the nickel carbonyl process. After the scrap was melted, it was transferred to the nickel carbonyl chamber , where the carbon monoxide gas (CO) was added, forming two separate streams, nickel carbonyl gas and enriched uranium.” (Since the contaminated nickel remained in shipping cartons until melting, it had been concluded worker exposure was low prior to the melt.)

Editor’s Note: HNN would disagree that all of the feedstock for the HPP/RPP came only from one plant i.e. ORGDP. Our interviews suggest that several gaseous diffusion plants sent materials to Huntington.

WHAT IS ENRICHED URANIUM 235?

Enriched uranium has had the composition of Uranium 235 increased through isotope separation. It is critical for nuclear power generation and military nuclear weapons. During the Manhattan Project enriched uranium produced at Oak Ridge, Tennessee, was called “oralloy,” for Oak Ridge Alloy. It is used too for navel propulsion and small amounts for research. Little Boy, the first uranium bomb, in 1946, used 80% enriched uranium. Plutonium 239, later, replaced U-235 for the primary stage. The U-235 is compressed into a secondary stage. (Wikipedia.org)

(The gaseous diffusion process requires pathways for uranium hexafluoride --- which is solid at room temperature --- to be in vapor form and due to its reactions with common metals leak tight nickel or austenitic stainless steel are utilized.)



NEXT: Portsmouth Buries Disassembled Plant that Still Leaks onto other’s properties