PUBLIC HEALTH ASSESSMENT
PADUCAH GASEOUS DIFFUSION PLANT (U.S. DOE)
PADUCAH, MCCRACKEN COUNTY, KENTUCKY
HEALTH OUTCOME DATA EVALUATION
For people living near PGDP, complete and potential exposure pathways have been identified for different contaminants. However, the levels of exposure are low, and the potentially exposed population for each exposure pathway is very small relative to the county-wide health outcome data available. A health outcome data review compares the frequency of specific diseases within a particular area to the frequency in an outside population or standard. While this type of analysis can provide information about whether a population has experienced higher than expected rates of selected diseases, there are important limitations to the analysis and to its application for a very small population.
First, data are collected regularly only for select and limited health outcomes. Cancer registries collect data on the incidence of cancers, vital statistics bureaus collect data on mortality, and birth defect registries collect data on birth outcomes. The incidence of asthma was a community concern, but there is no database that would allow a comparison of the rate of asthma cases with an outside population or standard.
A second limitation of the data used for comparisons is that they are usually collected, assembled, and analyzed at the county or state level. The populations of concern near PGDP are extremely small--for each exposure pathway, only a few households are included. Expanding the study area to include everyone in the county as the potentially exposed group would dilute a possible association by including a large number of persons who were not exposed. In addition, with a small group of households, very few specific diseases occur over time. When there are few events occurring in a small population, it is difficult to get a good estimate of how many excess cases a group experienced.
Recognizing these limitations, we are limited in this report to using standard health outcome data analysis methods. (We do recognize that other options may be available for future studies.) Representatives of ATSDR and Boston University identified and reviewed data on cancer incidence for McCracken and Ballard Counties in Kentucky [172] and Massac County in Illinois [173], although there were no completed exposure pathways identified for people in Illinois. Statistics from cancer registries are discussed below. Data from the cancer registries are publicly available on the Internet and in written reports.
ATSDR representatives reviewed a report, "Report of an Environmental Health Survey of Individuals Exposed to Contaminated Groundwater From the DOE Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant", which was conducted in 1989 by the University of Cincinnati Medical Center at the request of Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc.[174]. The foundation evaluated residents in the affected area who were initially asked to stop using their well water. This report is discussed below.
ATSDR representatives also reviewed information collected in January 2000 by Tri State Consulting of Independence, Kentucky. The consulting firm nurses interviewed 77 individuals living within one and one-half mile radius of PGDP. The results of their report include self-reported symptoms and adverse health effects among those individuals.
Statistics From Cancer Registries
ATSDR and Boston University representatives evaluated data using age-adjusted rates for nine general types of cancer from 1991 through 1998. (Age-adjusted rates were used since it is widely recognized that the overall risk of getting cancer increases with age.) The types of cancer included brain/central nervous system, bladder, female breast, Hodgkin's lymphoma, kidney, leukemia, liver, lung, and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. These data are limited, since they are not linked to exposure and are recorded for counties and area development districts. The potential affected population (between 15 and 90 persons) is relatively small compared to the county populations (approximately 63,000 in McCracken County, 8,000 in Ballard County, and 15,000 in Massac County). The only type of cancer that may warrant further statistical review would be bladder cancer in Ballard County; however, we found no association between bladder cancer in Ballard County and exposure to environmental contamination from this site.
Environmental Health Survey of Individuals Exposed to Contaminated Groundwater [174]
In this survey, researchers from the University of Cincinnati examined 16 individuals (6 exposed to elevated concentrations of trichloroethylene, or TCE, and 10 non-exposed). Three of the exposed subjects were exposed to concentrations well above EPA's drinking water standard for TCE. The other three were exposed to levels at or very close to the standard. The evaluation included (1) an environmental and medical questionnaire; (2) a physical examination; (3) a complete blood count and fecal hemocult; (4) hepatic, renal, and hemopoietic parameters; (5) hair and fingernail samples collected for technetium 99 measurements; and (6) serum polychlorinated biphenyl levels. (Polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, had been detected in nearby surface water and sediment.)
The researchers found no evidence of clinically manifested medical problems associated with exposure. Although the exposed group measured consistently higher than the non-exposed group on renal, hemopoietic, and hepatic tests, the results were not statistically significant. The mean value for both groups was within normal range. The study consisted of self-selected, genetically related subjects, which may have biased the survey. The sample size was also too small to allow statistically significant comparisons between individuals with higher or lower exposures. Researchers did not look for TCE in the blood, because the biological half-life of TCE is very short and the study was performed too long after exposures to have detected TCE.
The recommendations made by the researchers were as follows: (1) provide medical surveillance, on an annual basis, to anyone exposed to drinking water that exceeded EPA's drinking water standard; (2) continue monitoring wells in the affected area and provide non-contaminated water supplies; (3) determine the extent and movement of contamination in the groundwater; and (4) remediate the sources of contamination. ATSDR scientists support these recommendations. DOE has continued to monitor wells in the affected area and have provided municipal water. The extent of the contamination has been determined and continues to be monitored. Movement of the groundwater plumes in the Regional Gravel Aquifer to the northwest and northeast of the site has been modeled. Although the sources of contamination have not been remediated, interim actions have been taken to reduce the movement of the plumes or the concentrations in the plumes. The sources of the contamination will eventually be remediated. DOE provided medical surveillance, on an annual basis, to people exposed to drinking water that exceeded EPA's drinking water standard and who voluntarily participated in the surveillance program; however, after a couple of years, the volunteers discontinued their participation [175].
ATSDR and Boston University representatives used various methods to gather community concerns at this site. ATSDR used direct mail to solicit concerns from about 1,700 community members. ATSDR received about 500 responses to this mailing. ATSDR also held five public availability meetings in Paducah and Heath, Kentucky, to gather concerns. Staff from ATSDR and Boston University also gathered concerns by participating in public meetings sponsored by DOE, by attending several Site Specific Advisory Board meetings, and through telephone conversations and informal meetings with members of the public.
Each individual concern may not be listed, since many concerns were very similar. For more detailed information about these concerns, refer to Appendix B. Community concerns regarding PGDP have been divided into three categories: exposures, health, and procedures.
In the past, people living along the site's northern fence boundary could have been exposed to airborne hydrogen fluoride and radioactive materials (primarily uranium and technetium 99). These exposures would have happened between 1954 and 1963. Also, people less than 2.5 miles (4 kilometers) southeast of the site may have been exposed to uranium and hydrogen fluoride during an accident on November 17, 1960. It is unlikely, though, that anyone was exposed during that accident: it happened at 4 a.m., and the temperature was freezing. Please see this report's air exposure pathways section for further information about exposure via air exposure pathways. For more about potential adverse health effects from such exposure, please refer to the public health implications section.
The "smoke" or "clouds" seen over the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant are steam or water vapor released during the operations of the cooling towers. Different weather conditions, with related wind and temperature variations, affect the behavior of these "clouds." On an overcast day or when the earth is cooler than the atmosphere, they may not rise--they appear as "low clouds." Visible releases also come from the C-310 stack and the coal-burning plant, but they are not as noticeable off site.
We believe that the incident this resident is referring to occurred in October 1989. At that time there was a release of uranium into the environment from the C-310 purge stack. Approximately 205 grams (a little less than ½ pound) were released into the atmosphere. The release resulted from a malfunction of the primary and secondary trap system that is used to keep uranium from escaping into the environment. The problem that led to this accident has been fixed. Refer to the air exposure pathway section for more information.
Odors are a common concern, but they do not necessarily mean that there is a health hazard. For some contaminants, the concentration needed to produce an odor can be quite small--not high enough to produce a health hazard. Refer to the air exposure pathway discussion for more information about airborne contaminants in the PGDP area.
We do not have information about airborne releases from the Tennessee Valley Authority (TVA) Shawnee Steam Plant. However, the plant's permit(s) from the Kentucky Division of Air Quality restrict emissions from its stacks. Every year, coal-burning plants should be reporting levels of particulates, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, etc., that they release. For more information, you may want to contact the Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection, Division of Air Quality. The state offices are in Frankfurt, but there is also a Paducah regional office: 4500 Clarks River Road, Paducah, Kentucky. For information about the release of airborne contaminants from PGDP, refer to the air exposure pathway section and the public health implications section.
This public health assessment presents information on the present and past levels of contamination arranged by medium (air, water, soil, etc.). There are no current exposures to contaminants from PGDP at levels that present a health hazard. There were past exposures that could have been of health concern to some people living near the site. Please refer to the public health implications section for descriptions of the potentially affected areas and for discussions of potential health effects by substance.
This public health assessment has listed the contaminants of concern at the site. We have also summarized the contaminants' concentrations in various media (air, water, soil, and food). One of the techniques used at the site for soil sampling is designed to spot-check a large area (approximately 3,000 acres, or 1,200 hectares) concentrating on areas most likely to have some contamination. This type of sampling is not all inclusive, and cannot be used to determine how many cubic yards of contaminated soils are in and around PGDP. More extensive sampling is done to characterize a site that has been identified as being contaminated and will be cleaned up. For each project, the volume of contaminated soil is estimated before the project begins--but even then, estimates are frequently in error.
There are no past or current off-site exposures to radioactive contaminants at levels that would be harmful to a person's health with the exception of the accidental release which occurred November 17, 1960. The concentrations of radionuclides in soil and sediment, surface water, groundwater, and food and biota are discussed under each exposure pathway. The potential for any health effect is discussed for all radioactive contaminants (radiation exposure) in the public health implications section. ATSDR is recommending continued monitoring of groundwater, surface water, and biota, and development of a spatially and statistically consistent soil sampling program.
A member of the public is concerned about toxic waste being dumped in Little Bayou Creek and being put in the landfill. "When we complained about the smell, they said it was chicken manure and in another case they said the smell was caused by bovine manure."
The creeks receive effluent from the plant. They are currently being monitored for contamination by DOE and the Commonwealth of Kentucky. PGDP has permits to discharge the effluent into the creeks as long as the concentrations of the various chemicals are kept below certain levels. In this public health assessment, we determined that certain contaminants were released to the surface water at their highest concentrations in 1959, 1960, and 1962. These highest levels were used in the public health implications section to determine past potential exposures. Estimated exposures would not have been a health hazard to humans based on the exposure scenarios we used. (Refer to the surface water exposure pathway section for more details.)
The landfills are permitted by the Commonwealth of Kentucky (Division of Waste Management). If you have concerns about what is permitted for these landfills, or about the management of the landfills, the Commonwealth should be able to provide you with this information.
We looked at the effects of the landfills on the groundwater, surface water, soils, and sediments. There is an inactive sanitary landfill outside the security fence to the southwest of the site that is affecting Bayou Creek and the groundwater in the immediate area. DOE is aware of the problem and continues to monitor the soils and sediment, and the surface water and groundwater. Several things could cause the smell referred to in the comment; however, without more details, we cannot comment. Although the smell may be a nuisance, it may not indicate a hazardous situation.
During a flood, when the creeks overflow into people's fields, it is possible that contaminated sediment can spread; however, the concentrations of the contaminants should be less than the concentrations in the creek sediment. This has been confirmed by results from sampling the creek banks. When the dose estimates were calculated for occasional exposure, the concentrations in the sediment were used. For incidental ingestion of soil or sediment, the contaminant concentrations do not present a health hazard.
Please refer to the previous pathway sections on groundwater and surface water.
If you are concerned about your drinking water well, and you are within DOE's Water Policy area (between the site and the Ohio River, and between Metropolis Lake Road and Bethel Church Road), you can contact DOE or their contractor (Bechtel Jacobs Company) to have your water tested. You can also contact the Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection, Division of Water. We have listed telephone numbers and contacts for several agencies at the end of this comment section.
Groundwater contamination has been detected west, northwest, and southwest of the site The groundwater plume west of the plant does not appear to have migrated off DOE property. The contaminated groundwater to the southwest of the plant is near an inactive landfill. This individual is concerned about residential wells directly west of the site on or near Bethel Church Road. We have no indication that residential wells west of the plant have been affected by this groundwater contamination.
DOE has indicated that the groundwater in the potentially impacted areas will continue to be monitored closely.
Please refer to the groundwater exposure pathway section. If you are located in the DOE Water Policy area, contact DOE or their contractor, Bechtel Jacobs Company, to get your water tested. You can also contact the Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection, Division of Water or Division of Waste Management. Refer to the list at the end of this section.
The groundwater gradients do not flow from the site toward Kevil. The aquifer where most residential wells are located is the Regional Gravel Aquifer. Although there are three groundwater plumes--one to the northwest of the site, one to the west-southwest, and one to the northeast--the groundwater gradients for this aquifer flow to the north-northeast, toward the Ohio River. If you are concerned about your water quality, you should contact the Purchase County Health Department or the West McCracken Water District. A list of agencies can be found at the end of this section.
Bechtel Jacobs Company (and previously Lockheed Martin Environmental Services) has a groundwater monitoring program that includes surveillance of over 200 monitoring wells, TVA wells, and residential wells. The purpose of this surveillance is to detect, as early as possible, groundwater contamination resulting from the movement of the groundwater plume or from past or present land disposal of wastes. Based on the results of this program, it appears that the northwest plume may surface in Bayou Creek near the TVA plant or in the Ohio River. We believe that the northwest and northeast plumes recharge to the Ohio River, but the trichloroethylene (TCE) and technetium 99 (Tc-99) concentrations are so low that they are difficult to detect.
Sampling on the other side of the river did not detect any contaminants characteristic of PGDP operations. The water in Metropolis is provided by the city. People outside the city limits receive water from the Fort Massaic Water District which purchases water from the Millstone Treatment Plant in Reevesville, Illinois. The water for this company is drawn from wells in northeast Massac County. The source of the water is the Ohio and Cache River Valley Aquifer.
A resident wondered how safe his/her drinking water really is.
Refer to the groundwater exposure pathway section for the areas potentially affected by the site. DOE has provided an alternative water source for anyone in the area of the plant whose well has been affected by contamination from PGDP. Any resident who is concerned about his/her own private well can request that his/her well be tested by the Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection, Division of Water. We have listed a number and a contact person at the end of the comment section.
In this case, the resident was not the land owner. The test results from the residential well had been supplied to the land owner, who chose not to sign the DOE Water Policy agreement with DOE (which would have restricted him from drilling additional wells). The land owner owns a lot of land in the area and did not want to be restricted from drilling additional wells on his property. Therefore, this residence was not put on municipal water. The well in question was not contaminated with TCE or Tc-99, and is not very close to the northwest plume. The tenant was assured that the test results were negative.
A description of possible health effects is given in the public health implications section.
We do not have enough information to specifically address this concern. Please contact the Reidland office of the Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection, Division of Water; the local representative of the Kentucky Division of Waste Management; or the West McCracken Water District Office. Phone numbers and contact persons are listed at the end of this section.
DOE is operating extraction and treatment systems to remove TCE from the northwest and northeast plumes. The northwest treatment system also removes Tc-99. The systems do not appear to be preventing the advancement of the plumes, although they may have slowed the plumes down and kept contaminant concentrations from increasing off site. DOE currently has a board of technical experts looking at alternative projects to remediate the groundwater; proposals for such projects have been presented to the public.
DOE is limiting the drilling of monitoring wells into the McNairy Aquifer to make it less likely that a conduit to this deeper water supply will appear. They also are looking at remediating the sources of the contaminants on site. They are continuing to monitor residential wells that could be in the path of the plumes.
A subsistence fisherman/hunter was concerned about health effects of eating animals he catches. He catches and eats crappies, bluegill, some largemouth bass (but not from KOW), and buffalo carp. His wife eats raccoon once or twice a year, and also rabbit. He eats squirrel once a year. He used to eat soft shell turtles, but he cannot find them anymore. He eats about 6 to 7 pounds of fish a month. He fishes in Barkley Lake (another fish and wildlife area nearby), KOW at this site, and sometimes the pond to the right of the main gate at PGDP.
Another citizen said that she had been on the site to fish from time to time. She fished for several different kinds of fish at various places. She made at least one meal a month from the fish she caught. She has fished in the game reserve; the lake north of the game reserve; lakes near Martin Marietta (PGDP); north in Barkley County; Noah Lake, when it was not drained to be cleaned; the West Paducah Coon Hunters Club; and near the TVA plant. She has eaten crappie, bluegill (most common), bass, buffalo, and carp. Also, she has cooked turtle once. If the fish is too fatty, she will not clean or eat it.
Another citizen said she did not hunt but would eat what was given to her. This included rabbit, groundhog, squirrel, possum, raccoon, and turtle. Her concerns were:
There is no evidence that occasionally eating the fish or game caught in the WKWMA will make you sick. In our calculations, we assumed that someone could be eating 20% of the fish and meat in their diet from animals caught there. The PCB levels in deer are very low and do not pose a health threat. Still, people should not eat fish from Bayou and Little Bayou Creeks as their main source of protein.
It is important that people limit their intake of fish (2 fish meals/month) caught in the WKWMA ponds or Little Bayou Creek where warning signs are posted. These signs list the types of fish because these fish have been found to contain chemicals that can harm you if you eat them in large amounts. (Because different fish have different food sources they ingest and retain different concentrations of contaminants.) Especially young women (who are, or can get, pregnant) and children should not eat the fish that are listed on the warning signs. However, occasionally eating other fish from this area will not cause harm, because they do not contain enough chemicals to make you sick. Also, if you eat turtles, you should only eat them occasionally and should remove the fat before eating them.
We advise that you do not eat any fish that appears to be deformed. Please report any deformed fish, deer, or other animals to the local Kentucky Fish and Wildlife representative who lives at the site. It is impossible to say, based on the information that we currently have, what may have caused the deformities. However, it is important that the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources be made aware of the type and frequency of these occurrences.
Fruits and vegetables in the area have been tested for arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, lead, manganese, nickel, vanadium, zinc, technetium 99, uranium 234, uranium 235, uranium 238, and plutonium 239. None of the potential exposure doses (based on maximum sample results) were at levels of health concern. No data were available for fluoride in vegetables, so we used the results from broadleaf grass samples, assuming that green leafy vegetables had the same levels. Based on this assumption, fluoride would not be expected to cause harm to humans. For more details, refer to the discussion for the food and biota exposure pathway.
Due to the past atmospheric testing of atomic bombs around the world, there is a low level of plutonium in the environment. PGDP has also released "small" amounts of plutonium since the 1970s, when PGDP reprocessed uranium that had been used in a reactor. Plutonium in the environment can be ingested by animals, including deer. Normally, animals absorb very little plutonium into the bloodstream; most of that absorbed material goes to the bone. However, as with other bone-seeking elements (e.g., calcium, strontium), a small amount of plutonium may end up in muscle tissue. The amount of plutonium reported in the deer was not enough to harm anyone who may have eaten it. Refer to the food and biota exposure pathway section for more information.
Even with the levels we used in this public health assessment (usually maximum concentrations), there should be no adverse effects on animals in the area from radionuclides.
Without more information, we cannot determine the cause of the calf's deformity or death.
If you are concerned about the depleted uranium cylinders and not barreled waste, be aware that we addressed such concerns in the "other" exposure pathway section for the depleted uranium cylinders. Please refer to that section.
If your concern is about other hazardous waste stored on site that is not currently impacting the off-site environment, you will need to contact the Kentucky Division of Hazardous Waste Management, DOE, or the U.S. Enrichment Corporation (USEC). If you have more specific information about this waste, you may contact our office with your concerns.
The transportation of hazardous waste is strictly regulated. Hazardous waste shipments can be inspected by regulators prior to shipment, during transport, or on arrival at their destination. If there are any violations, the shipper is responsible and receives stiff fines from the U.S. Department of Transportation and/or the state regulatory agency. The hazards involved in transporting the depleted uranium cylinders are discussed in the section on "other" exposure pathways.
We looked at monitoring data in several media for several forms of dioxin. Dioxins are not in off-site groundwater, surface water, or soils. Some dioxin is showing up in a few of the sediment samples, but not at locations where there would be a completed exposure pathway. No data were reviewed for dioxin in biota such as fish.
For details on the first part of this concern, please refer to the public health implications section. Only a small population, located close to the site, was exposed to contaminants of concern in the past. With the current plant operations and the access restrictions to Little Bayou Creek and the outfalls, no exposures are occurring that would cause harm to anyone off site.
For many of the areas named above, we do not see completed exposure pathways for contaminants from PGDP. The areas for which cancer statistics are gathered are too large to let us pinpoint any specific neighborhood. Please refer to the exposure pathways and health outcome data evaluation sections of this report.
Residents downstream on the Ohio River from PGDP should not have been adversely affected by PGDP.
The public health implications section describes the potential populations that could have been affected by contaminants and discusses the possibilities of adverse affects and types of potential effects by substance. ATSDR's Child Health Initiative recognizes that vulnerabilities are inherent in the developing young child, infant, or fetus. Some of the contaminants discussed in the public health implications section are of special concern to children and developing fetuses. If you have further concerns, do not hesitate to contact Carol Connell with ATSDR at (404) 639-6060.
One citizen asked, "What are the potential health effects on children whose parents have worked at PGDP or who have been exposed to contaminated air and water supplies?"
This public health assessment addresses the first part of the first concern. For exposures to off-site air and water releases, please refer to the appropriate exposure pathway sections. For children whose parents work at PGDP, their exposure would be from contaminants brought home by the workers or to exposures prior to their birth. A separate study is being conducted to examine the exposures of workers at PGDP. If you want to know more about the worker study, contact your union representative, the DOE public document room at the Bechtel Jacobs facilities in Kevil, Kentucky, or NIOSH. (Refer to the contact list at the end of this section.)
Probably none. ATSDR has developed a minimal risk level (MRL) for acute and intermediate duration external ionizing radiation exposure based on studies that evaluated the effect of radiation exposure on the developing fetal and embryonic human brain. These studies measured changes in intelligence test scores. Schull et al.[176] evaluated the effects on individuals exposed in utero during the atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. No evidence of radiation-related effect on intelligence was observed among individuals exposed within 0 to 7 weeks after fertilization or after the 25th week. The highest risk of damage to the embryonic and fetal brain occurred 8 to 15 weeks after fertilization [177]. The intelligence scores appear to be lowered from 21 to 29 points (mean of 25 points) per 1 Gy exposure. No threshold for ionizing radiation's neurological effects has been determined but this does not mean that a threshold does not exist. There appears to be a threshold response in the case of damage to brain stem cells or to cells that differentiate into brain cells. Although the lowest-observed-adverse-effect level (LOAEL) has not been determined, a study by Schull of the intelligence difference in monozygotic twins of 0.3 IQ points [178] was used to established a no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) dose. ATSDR used 0.3 IQ point as a NOAEL, 1 Sv dose per 25 IQ point reduction, and 3 as an uncertainty factor for human variability/sensitive population to determine a minimal risk level (MRL) (based on exposure during pregnancy) of 4 mSv (400 mrem).
This comment is acknowledged. Your request has been forwarded to DOE; however, the current operation of the plant is under USEC, with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission having regulatory jurisdiction.
This information is acknowledged and has been passed along to DOE.
Air releases are usually reported in terms of total releases for the year (in pounds or kilograms) because of the reporting requirements for site-specific air quality permits. To determine a contaminant's health impacts, one must either know or calculate concentrations of that contaminant (micrograms per cubic meter of air). This tells one how much chemical is measured in a given amount of air that a person may be breathing. This is called a unit of measurement. An adult breathes in approximately 20 cubic meters (5,200 gallons) of air into his or her lungs every day. However, no matter what units are used to measure the chemical, you can always ask for it to be explained in the form that is easiest for you to understand.
The Purchase District Health Department is the local health department agency for Ballard and McCracken Counties (among others) in Kentucky. Although they are closely following the situation at the site, they do not normally get involved with environmental monitoring. The environment around the site is currently being monitored by the Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection (water, air, and waste management), the Kentucky Department for Public Health (Radiation Control Program), and DOE. Formerly, the University of Kentucky Federal Facilities Oversight Unit (FFOU) performed local monitoring. Sampling independent of DOE has been done by the Commonwealth for biota, water, soils/sediment, and radioactive contaminants in air. A five-year report was published by the FFOU covering the years from 1991 through 1996 [85]. Citizens may correspond directly with the different agencies to find out the extent of their involvement at the site. Addresses and phone numbers for these agencies are listed at the end of this section.
For questions concerning landfill permitting and what is allowed to be buried in the landfills, please contact the Kentucky Division of Waste Management, Hazardous Waste Management Branch.
Please refer to the background section of this public health assessment for the history of these agencies' involvement with PGDP.
Although USEC now runs the operating plant, DOE's current mission at the site [179] includes:
Bechtel Jacobs Company is currently the prime contractor for DOE at PGDP. They perform or subcontract most of these services. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulates the plant operations under a license issued to the USEC. The Federal Facilities Oversight Unit was part of the University of Kentucky's Water Resources Research Institute; it was charged with helping the Kentucky Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Cabinet and the Cabinet for Health Services with the environmental monitoring of the federal facilities activities in the Commonwealth. The FFOU no longer exists. For more information, refer to the summary and background sections of this document.
Another citizen said that he never observed live or dead fish in the creeks. In 1993 or 1994, over 20 deer were found dead near Spring Bayou Church. The plant was told of the dead deer and investigated, but no one knows the results.
Several people mentioned that deer in the area looked "old" and sickly.
DOE does some monitoring of wildlife in the area. The FFOU did some independent monitoring of the wildlife; now the Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection carries out such monitoring. We used data from DOE and Commonwealth agencies in our evaluation of the wildlife. Information can be found in DOE's Annual Environmental Reports and the FFOU five-year report. However, concerns should be brought to the attention of the Commonwealth agencies and the local fish and wildlife manager.
The incident involving deer was mentioned by several people in the area; however, there was no information in the documents we reviewed. Without more information or sampling results from the dead deer, we cannot explain what happened. There could be several other reasons for such an incident (e.g., viruses, bacteria). Both the Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection and the Kentucky Department for Public Health have state veterinarians with expertise in this area.
It is difficult to say exactly what is behind this reduction in the number of animals. We do not see any reason to think that contaminants from the site may be at fault; however, our analysis of the data was intended to see if there are any reasons for human health concerns. You may want to contact one of the agencies listed at the end of this section.
Several citizens said that there is a lack of trust in the reports from PGDP, that DOE says that it is making headway on the problems but they don't see it, and that DOE and its contractors are insensitive to the concerns of the citizens affected by the site and the workers exposed on site.
These comments are acknowledged.
Table 30. Agencies That May Be Contacted for Other Concerns
| Concern | Individual | Agency | Telephone # |
| Questions about PGDP cleanup; also, fishing, hunting, etc. | Tuss Taylor Todd Mullins John Maybrier |
Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection Division of Waste Management 14 Reilly Road Frankfurt, KY 40601 |
(502) 564-6716 |
| Janet Miller (local contact) | Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection Division of Waste Management MS 103, P.O. Box 1410 Paducah, KY 42001 |
(270) 441-5279 | |
| Questions about surface water or groundwater contamination from PGDP | Marjorie Williams (Paducah Office) |
Kentucky Department for Environmental Protection Division of Water 4500 Clarks River Road Reidland, KY 42003 |
(207) 898-8468 |
| Questions about radioactive contaminants and monitoring around PGDP | John Volpe, Manager Steve Hampson |
Kentucky Dept. for Public Health Radiological Health and Toxic Agents Branch Radiation Control Program Frankfort, KY 40621-0001 |
(502) 564-3700 (John Volpe) (502) 564-8390 |
| Questions concerning DOE environmental activities at PGDP | Gregory Cook, Public Affairs Manager |
Bechtel-Jacobs Company 761 Veterans Avenue Kevil, KY 42053 |
(270) 441-5023 |
| Questions about cancer statistics and cancer cluster investigations | Thomas Tucker, Associate Director | Kentucky Cancer Registry 2365 Harrisburg Road Suite A230 Lexington, KY 40504 |
(859) 219-0773 |
| Questions about water quality that affects public health (e.g., lead) | Charles Seay, Environmental Officer | Purchase District Health Dept. 320 North 7th Street Mayfield, KY 42006 |
(502) 247-1490 |
| General questions about water quality and other water problems | William Tanner, Water Superintendent |
West McCracken Water District 8020 Ogden Landing Road West Paducah, KY 42086 |
(270) 442-3337 |
| Questions about livestock, agricultural products, etc. | Doug Wilson, Agriculture Officer |
University of Kentucky Cooperative Extension Service 2705 Oliver Church Road Paducah, KY 42001 |
(270) 554-9520 |
| Questions related to PGDP occupational problems | Leon Owens | PACE (Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical,
and Energy Workers Union); formerly OCAW P.O. Box 494 Paducah, KY 42002 |
(270) 442-3668 |
| Questions concerning medical surveillance for former Gaseous Diffusion Plant workers at DOE facilities (Paducah, Portsmouth, Oak Ridge) | Sylvia Kieding | PACE (Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical,
and Energy Workers Union)/formerly OCAW 2490 South Garfield Street Denver, CO 80210 |
(303) 759-2604 |
| Questions about the local economy and the city's role in the PGDP cleanup efforts | James Zumwalt, City Manager |
Paducah City Hall P.O. Box 2267 Paducah, KY 42002-2267 |
(270) 444-8503 |
| Questions about local development (traffic and new housing patterns) | Van Newberry, Engineer | McCracken County Planning Office 3700 Coleman Road Paducah, KY 42001 |
(270) 442-9163 |
| Questions about impact of PGDP on local economy | Kristin Reese | Greater Paducah Economic Council P.O. Box 1155 Paducah, KY 42002 |
(270) 575-6633 |
Next Section Table
of Contents
