DOE Facing Potential Lawsuits Over Tank Vapor Concerns
WC Monitor
11/21/2014
The Department of Energy is facing two threats of potential lawsuits over safety concerns posed by chemical vapors from Hanford’s underground high-level waste tanks. This week, the state of Washington threatened to sue DOE and Hanford tank farms contractor Washington River Protection Solutions to seek a legally enforceable agreement to protect workers from tank vapor concerns. Washington state’s threat was a followed a day later by one from a pair of government watchdog groups and a labor organization. On Nov. 19, Washington State Attorney General Bob Ferguson sent DOE and WRPS a notice of endangerment and an intent to sue, which under the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act starts a 90-day clock after which the state can formally file a lawsuit.
Washington state is seeking “an effective, legally enforceable agreement, or court order, with the federal government that lays out their plans to eliminate the health and safety risks for the Washington residents that work at Hanford,” Ferguson said during a press conference. “I expect a detailed implementation plan that finally, and permanently, addresses worker safety. I will make sure that this plan is legally enforceable, that we can hold the federal government accountable for following through on their plan and protecting workers.”
Tank vapors have long posed concerns at Hanford, but the issue gained new attention this spring when a number of site workers requested medical evaluations after potential exposure. In an effort to resolve the issue, DOE and WRPS commissioned a panel of experts led by Savannah River National Laboratory that issued a report last fall calling for improvements against brief exposures to tank vapors, among other recommendations. WRPS has already begun to implement the panel’s findings, such as by hiring additional industrial hygiene staff and requiring workers to use supplied-air respirators temporarily Describing the latest tank vapor report as a “game changer,” Ferguson said the report differed from previous studies in that “it recognized a stronger causal link between hazardous tank vapors and worker health than ever before.” He went on to say, “It does show in very strong terms much closer a causal link between the vapors and worker safety and in reading that report carefully, that was a critical component in my taking this step.”
‘Frankly, Worker Safety is Paramount,’ AG Says
Ferguson also said he did not expect efforts to improve worker safety at Hanford to affect the pace of the tank waste cleanup mission. “I think the federal government can do two things at one time,” he said. “I don’t think you have to sacrifice one for the other. Frankly, worker safety is paramount. They have a responsibility to cleanup Hanford. There’s no dispute about that. They need to do that in a way that’s safe for workers and protects workers. It’s not complicated, in a certain sense, and I expect them to do those two things simultaneously.”
DOE largely declined to comment on Washington state’s action this week, saying it was reviewing the state’s notice of intent to sue. “The Department of Energy is committed to protecting workers, members of the public, and the environment. The Department has received and is currently reviewing the Notice of Endangerment and Intent to File Suit from the State of Washington and cannot comment on its merits at this time,” a Department spokesperson said in a written response. For its part, WRPS said it is working on developing an implementation plan to address the findings of the most recent report. “WRPS has made substantial improvements in the Hanford tank farms’ chemical vapor management program since being contracted to operate the tank farms. WRPS is committed to continuously improve worker safety and health,” the contractor said in a statement.
‘We Have Had Enough’
Washington state’s threat to sue was followed by Hanford Challenge, union Local 598 and Washington Physicians for Social Responsibility sending DOE and WRPS on Nov. 20 a second notice of intent to file a lawsuit. “We have had enough,” said Pete Nicacio, business manager for United Association of Steamfitters and Plumbers, Local 598. “They don’t have the monitoring equipment in place. They don’t have enough people to do the monitoring.” Shortly after the announcement, the 55th Hanford worker since spring received a medical evaluation for possible exposure to chemical vapors from Hanford tank waste. The worker reported symptoms consistent with tank vapor exposure while working in the AW Tank Farm and was released to return to work later in the day.
Hanford Challenge supports the state’s notice of a possible lawsuit over tank vapors, after asking the attorney general in April to take action, said Tom Carpenter, executive director of Hanford Challenge. But Hanford Challenge and the other two groups want to make sure their goals are included in any legally binding agreement or legal order, particularly if the improvements they seek differ from those the attorney general wants, he said. The three groups want immediate action, including to equip workers with escape respirator packs and to improve monitoring of stacks. They want comprehensive medical monitoring for past and present Hanford workers and compensation programs to be changed to help workers get medical care for injuries and illnesses caused by exposures. Some former tank farm workers have developed serious lung and neurological problems. “We hope it does not go to a lawsuit,” Carpenter said. The 90-day notice period could be used to negotiate a binding agreement with steps enforceable by the state of Washington to make sure the recommendations in the latest study of tank vapors is implemented, he said.
DOE and WRPS leaders seem sincere in their efforts to implement recommendations and better protect workers, Carpenter said. But Hanford has frequent turnover in leadership and the question is whether their replacements will have the same level of commitment, he said. Typically reports are released, some changes are made and then protection wanes until the next round of publicity and worker complaints, he said. “We don’t have faith that the latest report will not go the way of other reports … and be stuck on a shelf,” he said.
Worker Describes Exposure Symptoms
Among the workers who gathered at the Local 598 union hall for the announcement of the intent to sue was Ron Johnson Jr., a Hanford pipefitter for nine years and the second generation of his family to work at Hanford. On May 29, he was one of five workers to develop symptoms consistent to exposure to Hanford tank vapors. He was working in the SY Tank Farm, where respirators were not required because no release of tank vapors was considered likely. But Johnson said he smelled an “onion-like odor” that he had sometimes smelled at the C Tank Farm, where waste is being retrieved, making vapor releases more common. Two other workers also smelled the odor, but Johnson said after the odors were reported a decision was made to continue work rather than evacuate the tank farm.
Johnson’s portion of the work was almost complete and he soon left the tank farm, but within about 15 minutes of smelling the odor he was ill — dry heaving, dizzy and tasting metal in his mouth. He was taken to the Hanford on-site medical provider where he was given an injection to help with his nausea. He said he was released to go back to work then, but “didn’t feel comfortable. I was out of it completely,” he said. He was taken to the Richland hospital then and more tests were run. The next day, concerned about earning a paycheck to support his family of six, he was back at work at Hanford. He filed a state Department of Labor and Industries claim, concerned about any future lung problems, but the claim was denied because he had no personal injury or occupational disease and the state found that his symptoms could have been caused by dehydration.
Tank farm workers can volunteer to wear supplied air respirators, but not enough of them have been available and workers felt pressure, including from their fellow workers, not to use them, Carpenter said. Now Johnson says “I would rather wear a bottle for two hours than 10 years.” Earlier this month an order was issued requiring workers to temporarily use the respirators for much of the Hanford tank farm work while the effectiveness of half-face respirators is evaluated. Carpenter guesses that this is the fourth time in the last 20 years that workers have been required to use supplied-air respirators due to tank vapors for periods that have ranged from weeks to more than a year. But they should be a last resort, he said. They are heavy, reduce visibility and make work more difficult. Instead other steps should be taken, ranging from providing escape respirators to using chemical scrubbers, he said.
Now if more than one worker smells an odor, tank farm policy calls for the area to be evacuated. “It is 2014 and one of the criteria managers rely on is the worker’s nose,” Nicacio said. By the time workers detect a smell they may already be exposed to dangerous chemicals, Carpenter said. The chemical mix varies from tank to tank, but some chemicals could be present that can cause harm after a single breath, he said.
