Search By:
On October 23, 2024 a group of 16 UC Education and Research Center students and faculty visited the Fernald Preserve Visitors Center in Hamilton, Ohio. The group learned about the history of Fernald’s operations during the Cold War as well as current safety and health standards followed now that it is a nature preserve and visitor’s center. The group did a walking tour and visited the exhibits in the Visitors Center. Faculty on the trip included Dr. Tom Huston who shared about his understanding of the site and historical perspective. In addition, Dr. Henry Spitz shared his knowledge based on worked he did as a consultant during operation, closure, remediation, and final environmental restoration. Both provided a historical perspective and experiences that are unique to Fernald. Below are summaries of the trip written by the UC ERC students that participated.
Group listening to the site tour presentation
State and Federal Safety and Health Standards
Written by Lisa French
The tour of the Fernald Preserve was very informative. Historically and currently, the former plant had to follow federal and state regulatory requirements as the Fernald Feed Material Production Center progressed from management by the National Lead of Ohio to Westinghouse, later named Fernald Environmental Management Project during cleanup, and now known as the Fernald Preserve. Historically, regulations from the Department of Energy (DOE) forced employee safety considerations at the site to the forefront of its operations. During the period of the Cold War and the Manhattan Project, the Fernald site became an important player in uranium processing. The DOE Tiger Teams consisted of highly trained professionals who conducted on-site visits to assess and ensure compliance with regulatory safety requirements. During Westinghouse management of Fernald, employee safety was an important part of their operations.
Emblem from the Atomic Energy Commission
Over time, personal protective gear and hygiene practices changed as well. Some employees were required to take multiple showers and change clothing as part of the job; sometimes as many as four to six times per day as they traveled between buildings and outdoors. Employees were also required to undergo dosimeter checks for exposure as they were exposed to long-term low levels of radiation. Originally, the dust control measures were not the best, but the plant adjusted, and more effective respiratory protection became part of the protection requirements. While it was not a regulation, employees were also told what to say and not to say. Everyone knew to follow the rules or get fired as part of the job expectations.
Currently, the Fernald Preserve is still under federal regulations for monitoring the quality of the groundwater and wells. They perform the well checks daily as part of the agreement. This was an interesting trip to the former plant, and I was impressed with the level of change that took place. I think that it shows that the community, government, and plant operations can work collaboratively to meet the goals of contributing to maintaining a safe community.
Written by Kera Studer
State and federal standards for occupational and environmental safety and health have changed over the years for the Fernald Preserve. Fernald Preserve was once a Uranium production plant which had a different set of standards than what is practiced or monitored today. Uranium is a heavy metal and is toxic to the kidneys. Uranium is also radioactive representing an additional hazard. Responsibility for establishing standards for occupational and environmental safety have changed over time as well as the federal and state agencies assigned responsibility for developing and implementing the safety regulations. Radiation exposure limits have been established to protect workers and the public such that the likelihood of observing health effects are “as low as reasonably achievable” (ALARA). Over time, knowledge of health risks related to radiation exposure has improved which provided guidance in establishing the current limits on radiation dose. Currently, the dose limit for workers is 50 mSv/y whiled the limit for the public is 1 mSv. There is also a limit for the developing embryo/fetus of 5 mSv during gestation for workers who are pregnant.
Today, there is a hierarchy of controls ranked in order and shaped as an upside-down pyramid.
Elimination of the hazard, substituting the hazard, utilizing engineering controls, administrative controls, and personal protective equipment were put in order from top to bottom. This has changed historically by reorganizing the pyramid of priorities. Additionally, having an expert stay on site to monitor and supervise is one of many ways regulations have changed. Once Fernald reached the cleanup phases, employees onsite continued to be monitored for radiation exposures until exposures continually stayed below 500mSv. Today, employees are no longer monitored as aggressively as they once were, since exposure levels remain low.
Written by Dr. Henry Spitz
W. Roentgen discovered x-ray in 1895. The first knowledge of the hazards of x-ray exposure were reported separately by T. Edison and N. Tesla in 1896. X-ray protection recommendations were first adopted by the British Roentgen Society in June 1915 which were later adopted by the American Roentgen Ray Society in 1922. In 1925 the International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU) was founded and adopted the first “tolerance dose” of approximately 0.2 R/day as a safe limit for radiologists exposed to X-rays. The US Advisory Committee on X-ray and Radium Protection (USACXRT) published their recommendation for an X-ray limit of 0.2 R/day in 1931 in the National Bureau of Standards Handbook 15. In 1932 G. Failla suggested a lower X-ray exposure limit of 0.1 R/day for the whole body and a higher limit of 5 R/day to the fingers. The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) in 1934 adopted a “tolerance” dose of 0.2 R/day for exposure to X-rays. Although radium was discovered by M. & P. Curie in 1898, radiation protection standards for internal dose were not established until 1941 when the USACXRT reported a permissible body burden for 226Ra of 0.1 mCi. The development of atomic weapons during the Manhattan Project brought new concepts for radiation protection that included new units for radiation exposure and dose as well as radiation exposure limits arising from external and internal sources. The U. S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) was formed in 1946 as part of the Atomic energy Act. In 1949 the National Council on Radiation Protection (NCRP) established an occupational exposure limit of 0.3 rem/week and also introduced the risk-benefit concept in establishing limits on exposure and dose. The AEC adopted the NRCP s recommendations in 1950 regulatory authority was not established until 1957. The US Congress established the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency in 1970 and reorganized the AEC into two agencies, the NRC having regulatory authorities and the ERDA directing science in Energy Development. ERDA was renamed Department of Energy. The accompanying table illustrates how radiation exposure limits have changed from 1925 through 1989.
Written by Slater Payne
The first resolutions to protect people from overexposure to x-rays came out in 1915 by the British Roentgen Society. This was then adopted by American organizations in 1922 which continued to develop and expand guidelines regarding radiation safety as scientist developed a deeper understanding of radiation’s impact on organic material.
However, radiation safety was governed by non-governmental groups. The primary advisory group was the National Advisory Committee on X-Ray and Radium Protection which was developed in 1929 when two other advisory groups agreed to consolidate. Five years later in 1934, the global radiation community began to agree on recommendations regarding whole body and finger tolerance levels to radiation. The national advisory committee viewed levels below this dose to be safe.
Hazmat suit and other items on display in the exhibit
The federal government eventually stepped in with the establishment of the Atomic Energy act of 1946 which lead to the creation of the Atomic Energy Commission in 1946. At the same time national advisory committees began revising their recommended dose limits to lower levels due to a better understanding of radiological hazards.
As time went on growing concerns regarding radiation and nuclear fallout lead to the National Academy of Sciences National Research Council to investigate the impact of low-level radiation exposure in 1955. This led to the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation committee which provided further evidence of the harmful effects of radiation exposure in 1956. The same year the International Commission on Radiological Protection further lowered their permissible doses and set out additional recommendations regarding exposure limits.
Due to even greater fears of radioactive fallout and that worker protection standards were still in the hands of private organizations; in 1959 the Federal Radiation Council was formed. This group was meant to advise the president on radiological public health concerns, assist with the establishment of radiation protection standards, and collaborate with state governments on radiation related topics. Their first official act was to issue the Radiation Protection Guides which set occupational and population radiation exposure limits. After this point research and standards ramped up significantly as radiation exposure began to become much more regulated by the governmental agencies. Additional research also came out showing the significant health effects of radiation exposure.
After the 1970s significant shifts began to take place that led to our current system. With the founding of the EPA in 1970, there was finally a central federal agency to address environmental contaminants like radiation. OSHA was founded in 1971 which regulated occupational exposures and immediately put out occupational radiation standards. The FDA began to put forth regulations on ionization coming from products in 1973. Meanwhile, other agencies began to get divided or reformed like the Atomic Energy Commission which was split into two different agencies in 1974, the Energy Research and Development Administration and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Of the 28-radiation protection guidance's and regulations that were put out since 1957 to 2005, 21 of them came after 1970 with 9 coming out in the 1980s. While current knowledge and polices are much more stringent, it was truly during the Cold War when most work was done to combat radiation exposure.
EPA. (2018). Significant Discoveries and the History of Radiation Protection. https://www.epa.gov/sites/default/files/2018-12/documents/significant_discoveries_history_radiation_protection-worksheet_rp_1.pdf
Jones, C. (2005). A review of the history of U.S radiation protection regulations, recommendations, and standards. Health Physics, 88(2). https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0504/ML050400427.pdf
Current Radiation Monitoring at Fernald
Written by Angela Theil
The University of Cincinnati Education and Research Center had the pleasure of speaking with current safety professionals at Fernald Preserve. This site produced uranium feed material from 1951 to 1989. After its closure, a Citizens Task Force actively advocated for a thorough clean-up and the transformation of the site into a vibrant nature preserve for public enjoyment, rather than allowing it to remain a fenced-off area to be avoided. Using a unique budgeting system with chips on a playing board, citizens were able to visualize cost and prioritize clean-up efforts. With 323 buildings and many acres of land, the clean-up was very challenging and time-consuming. As of today, all the buildings, coal ash generator, waste pit areas, storage silos, and soil are all cleaned up. It was most cost-effective to bury the building materials with low levels of radiation on site versus shipping them out for disposal to other parts of the United States. This land mound can be seen on the property and has several layers of materials to contain any leaks. Most of the effort of today’s safety professionals focuses on cleaning the groundwater, because it still has some trace of uranium contamination and proves difficult to eliminate. Every day the water from the underground aquifers is pumped up into a system where resin is added to it. Uranium binds to this resin and is then filtered out and placed into a protected radioactive box which is disposed of to areas in the western United States. The safety professionals say that the groundwater pumped out has very low levels of uranium, and it takes about 10 years to fill the 6ft (1.83 m) x 6ft (1.83 m) radioactive box with any materials from the site that reach concerning levels of radiation. The safety professionals use the ALARA (as low as reasonably achievable) principle for radiation safety. They each monitor their exposure and have certain yearly exposure limits. The annual radiation exposure limit for a radiation worker is fifty times higher than the public, however it is still within a safe limit. The safety professionals are very proud of the Fernald clean-up and transformation to a beautiful public preserve. It is a success story and serves as a model for other communities on the power of citizen-led initiatives in environmental clean-up efforts.
Group listening to a presentation in the exhibit
Radiation Safety
Written by Grace Adkins
On October 24th, I had the pleasure of attending our ERC trip to the Fernald Preserve in Hamilton Ohio. While Fernald is now a beautiful nature preserve, bustling with wildlife, it was once a huge part of the uranium metal production industry. Because of the nature of uranium metal production, radiation was, at one point, a huge cause for concern at Fernald. However, in 2006 the ecological restoration of the site was deemed complete, minus the groundwater which will likely be under observation and treatment indefinitely. When this environmental clean-up began, it was one of the largest ever undertaken in the US. Fernald is now considered a site that only requires long-term surveillance and maintenance. That being said, radiation precautions are still being taken at the Fernald site. As I previously mentioned, there is still being work done with the groundwater. They regularly test radiation and contamination levels in the groundwater, commonly finding uranium to be the main contaminant. The groundwater at Fernald is also part of the Great Miami Aquifer and as such is being cleaned and treated to the EPA Safe Drinking Water Act standards. The equipment used for groundwater extraction and treatment must also be routinely checked for radiation and dealt with accordingly. On very rare occasions, items from metal production will be unearthed. Fernald has a system in place to ensure that these items are handled safely and there is no further spread of radiation. They have a health physicist who has the technology available to them to safely check these items for radiation and get them moved to a safe place before they are transported off of the premises to a facility that is equipped to handle radioactive materials. In general, there aren’t many radiological concerns left at Fernald, but the few that remain are taken incredibly seriously and those that are no more are monitored regularly.
Written by Shawn Howe
On Wednesday, October 23, 2024, the Department of Environmental and Public Health Sciences students visited the Fernald Preserve (formally a uranium processing facility for nuclear weapons development) 18 miles northwest of Cincinnati, Ohio.
The facility ultimately closed in November 1989, and due to community demand, waste management initiatives and the facility's conversion into a nature preserve took place. While the project was completed in 2006, continuous control measures are still in place for radiation safety and verification of remediation efforts.
The site is now focused on remediation. The main projects have already been completed, but maintaining the facility and surrounding areas is ongoing. The preserve primarily utilizes a pump-and-treat approach to pump any radiation-contaminated water to the surface for treatment. Once the water is treated, it is reinjected back into the aquifer it came from, this minimizes any spread of uranium .
Those who maintain the preserve also monitor wells installed around the affected areas to track cleanup progress, but according to the representative, it may take some time before monitoring is no longer needed. The preserve also makes a great effort to be transparent with the public with signage and restrictions on areas individuals are allowed to visit. Workers at the facility that directly work with areas of radiation exposure concern described important radiation exposure monitoring practices to the students, such as wearing dosimeters to ensure that radiation levels do not exceed Permissible Exposure Limits (PELs).
Overall, the visit was informative and immersive, providing rich insight into how far America has come in regard to radiation safety and its potential impact not just on workers but also on local and regional communities and environments.
Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. (2024, Octobere 25). Fernald Closure Project. Retrieved from Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board: https://www.dnfsb.gov/doe-sites/fernald-closure-project
U.S. Department of Energy. (2021, April). Draft fifth five-year review report for the Fernald Preserve. Washington D.C.
The Influence of Culture on the Workers and Community when the Fernald Site was Operational
Written by Hannah Frame
On October 23, 2024, students from the University of Cincinnati Education and Research Center (UC ERC) visited the Fernald Preserve. The Fernald Preserve is a nature preserve that sits on the same land that was home to a uranium production facility from the 1950’s to 1980’s. Workers in the production facility had to follow a strict regimen of uniform changes and showers to protect themselves from uranium exposure. Workers were also held to a high standard of secrecy, typically not even knowing what processes were occurring on the floors directly above or below their work area, much less the several other buildings at the site. This level of compliance and secrecy was made possible by the culture of both Fernald and the United States at the time. In the United States, there were strong feelings of patriotism and independence throughout the Cold War and conflict with the Soviet Union. Workers at Fernald were told that their jobs were integral to protecting and serving the US, which prompted a culture of pride and desire to produce the highest quality product. Further, Fernald was a small community of its own. With high pay, close friendships, and extracurricular activities, workers were eager to attain and maintain their positions at Fernald. Fernald became more than a workplace for these individuals- it became a community. This strong sense of belonging contributed to the culture of compliance and secrecy. Workers were actively encouraged to respond to questions about the plant with the phrase, “I’m not at liberty to say.” The cultural landscape of both the country and the plant contributed to high levels of pride in one’s work, loyalty to the company, and a culture that was focused on production and going to work, doing your job, and going home without questioning your work.
Current Risks at the Fernald Site
Written by Chien-Yu Hsu
On our recent visit to the Fernald Preserve, we got a unique glimpse into the history and current safety practices surrounding this transformed former uranium processing facility. Once a high-security site contributing to the nation’s Cold War efforts, Fernald’s operations left behind environmental contamination that posed significant occupational hazards, requiring extensive cleanup and monitoring efforts.
Today, Fernald Preserve serves as a wildlife habitat and educational site, but the legacy risks remain a focus for safety protocols and worker protection. Current occupational risks for workers at the site mainly involve exposure to low levels of residual radiation, heavy metals, and chemical contaminants still present in the soil and groundwater. Ensuring safe working conditions for staff includes rigorous monitoring, specialized protective equipment, and adherence to safety guidelines.
One of the key takeaways from our trip was the layered approach to risk management at the preserve. Workers involved in environmental monitoring or habitat management follow strict protocols to prevent contact with or disturbance of potentially contaminated materials. Additionally, there are ongoing groundwater treatment and air quality monitoring programs to safeguard both the environment and personnel.
Overall, Fernald Preserve exemplifies the importance of long-term occupational safety practices in managing former industrial sites. The measures in place reflect an evolving understanding of occupational risk and underscore the commitment to both environmental and worker protection.
Written by Max Matura
The Fernald Preserve located in Hamilton, Ohio is a relic of a period of time in which environmental concerns and moral obligations were disregarded in favor of preparing for potential doomsday scenarios. The former uranium processing facility was in charge of conversion and fabrication of uranium ores into different forms of uranium oxides, fluorides, and metal. Obviously, this fabrication process comes with numerous environmental and health risks most of which have been remediated as a result of site closure. The one significant remaining risk is groundwater contamination.
Old drum barrels from Fernald production days on display in the exhibit
Currently, the primary form of groundwater contamination is uranium which seeped into aquifers and wells through disposal of the nearly 1.5 billion pounds of waste material produced in Fernald’s history. This uranium poses a slight risk to surrounding wildlife and human life due to heavy metal toxicity and radioactivity. As of today, restoration wells are in continuous use to assist in purification and restoration of the groundwater at Fernald. According to a 2022 environmental report published by the Department of Energy, these wells (which have operated for nearly three decades) need consistent maintenance and monitoring to ensure proper function. This consistency provides another risk in the form of a need to constantly maintain the site to prevent further contamination. Fernald Preserve will need to continue to maintain the proper standards and procedures laid out by the EPA and the Department of Energy to mitigate the inorganic risks produced by the former uranium refinement facility.
Written by Amour Dondi
The trip to Fernald Preserve at the Ohio site, was an enlightening experience. I was delighted to visit and learn different exhibitions focused on the Uranium metals production, the ongoing environmental cleanup activities as well as the Health and Safety management during the operational phase.
I was impressed with the success story and efforts on the site clean-up and remediation activities following the discovery of uranium-contaminated ground water in the neighboring residential wells. Uranium processing at this site led to contamination of the site’s soil surface as well as ground water. The primary contaminants highlighted during the visit include:
In fostering efforts to enhance cleanup, the site was divided into 5 smaller operable sections:
The second interesting aspect was on Health and Safety of the workers. It was described that the whole division and the plant organization was of paramount importance due to the risks that existed such as radiation and chemical toxics and industrial hazards. It was explained that radiation checks were constantly done, and controls were in place including a through medical surveillance program which continues for Fernald workers and local citizens to screen for radiation induced health problems. Also, the plant maintained a health and safety clinic in response to any injuries and medical conditions.
Workers were being provided with personal protective equipment including overalls and safety shoes.
Lockers used by Fernald employees during production days
Legacy Management
Written by Tigist Zewde
The Office of Legacy Management (LM) is under the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) which serve as a steward for sites used in the past for nuclear development and production during the second world war. After DOE finishes remediation and cleanup of contamination, LM takes over the responsibility for monitoring and maintaining the site to protect human health and the environment for future generations. Protection is performed by using surveillance and maintenance of environmental waste.
Legacy Management has three main goals they work on, 1) Workforce, 2) Community, 3) Research. In the workforce, they work on transition of benefits of former workers and their beneficiaries, they fund the pension plan and life insurance policies by offering lump-sum buyouts or insurance company annuities. After transition, they keep site records; they oversee benefits for former contractor employees and collaborate to put land back into beneficial use. For community, it disposes and contains radioactive contaminants to protect ecosystems and the health of community members. LM monitors 92 sites in multiple states, they collaborate with the community members by engaging, educating, and supporting outreach programs. Scientists research to keep waste from entering the air, soil, or ground water. The research is focused on long term projects on soil remediating, ground, and water treatment.
Legacy Management started at Fernald Preserve in 2006. After the clean-up of contaminants, the preserve opened its door for visitors to enjoy miles of trails with habitats, prairies, forest, and wetlands including bird watching. Visitors can view exhibits, and guided tours are available to learn the history, ongoing clean up, restoration, maintenance, and the future of the site.
Thank you to the professionals at Fernald Preserve for providing a great learning experience for the UC ERC students and faculty! To learn more about the Fernald Preserve, visit the website.