[sci.military] DOE, Tritium and the media

jgd@gatech.edu (John G. De Armond) (11/04/89)

From: rsiatl!jgd@gatech.edu (John G. De Armond)

In article <10851@cbnews.ATT.COM> mamba@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Paul A Deisinger) writes:
>That reminds me, take a look at this story off of the AP newswire:
>
>"An Energy Department laboratory in Tennesee lost a significant amount of
>radioactive tritium in a test shipment between two lab buildings, raising the
>possibility of foul play, governmental records show.

To inject a bit of fact, the media raised the "foul play" issue.  The DOE 
accurately attributed the probable "shortage" to instrumentation problems
in the shipping container filling apparatus.

The actual ammount reported unaccounted for is about 4 grams, or in more
ordinary terms and assuming the physical form to be tritium oxide, about
a thimble-full.

I am personally familiar with the facilities at the DOE lab in Oak Ridge,
having bought thousands of curies of radioactive gas for my work.  A
description of the handling apparatus is in order.

High concentration gaseous radioisotopes are handled and shipped in partial
vacuum in order to ensure that any leakage will result in air dilution of
the specimen rather than release of the isotope.  Shipment is normally
in DOT class 7A radioactive gas shipping cylinders.  These containers
pass a set of physical abuse tests quite similiar to those required of
nuclear fuel shipping containers.

A typical filling operation is as follows.   A manifold assembly is used to
measure the shipment and contain it.  Typically, the gas is condensed in LN
or activated charcoal traps and the quantity is measured indirectly by means
of partial pressure measurements and a knowledge of the volume of the system.
The shipping container is evacuated and flushed with helium (used because it
will not condense in cold traps) several time to ensure an inert and dry
atomosphere in the cylinder.  A final mechanical hogging pumpdown leaves 
the pressure >29 in Hg in the cylinder.  Next, the manifold is opened and
the isotope gas is allowed to flow by differential pressure into the cylinder.
The quantity delivered is determined by measuring the rise in pressure in
the cylinder and by knowing the internal volume.  If the quantity of isotope
dictates, helium is used to flush the manifold of isotope.  Then the 
cylinder is filled with helium to leave the pressure a few mm below 
atomspheric.

After the cylinder is capped and sealed, the residual isotope is purged
either to a waste gas stack or to a recovery unit, depending on the 
value of the gas.  Kr-85 with is plentiful to the point of being a waste
gas is typically purged.  H-3 or Xe-133 would be salvaged for the most part.

This technique make for quite simple and safe handling and makes it easy
for the end-user to extract the sometime microgram quantity of isotope.
All he has to do is condense the isotope gas in a cold trap.  The helium
remains a gas and is purged.

The DOE preliminary report attributes the descrepancy between shipped and
received quantities (4 grams, remember) to an air leak in the manifolding.
An air leak would lead the operator to believe that more isotope had been
transfered than what had actually been delivered.  If calculations showed that
a sufficiently small quantity of gas remained in the manifold that recovery
was not justified, the contents would be purged to the stack.  The difference
between what was thought to be delivered and what actually was delivered
would go up the stack.

>Ironically, the secret test was done as a part of an internal investigation
>into troubling discrepancies in the amount of tritium shipped from the Oak
>Ridge National Laboratory at Oak Ridge, Tenn., to commercial buyers.

Troubling descrepancy mostly because of the anticipated media grandstanding
which they got.  BTW, QA testing and verification is a routine aspect of
radioactive and SNM materials handling.  The safeguards practiced by the
recipient of the material caught the descrepancy and prompted the additional
testing of the transfer apparatus.

>
>Tritium supplies are classified by teh government.  The material is produced
>in Energy Department reactors in South Carolina for use in nuclear warheads,
>although small amounts are sold to domestic and foreign companies.

Kinda makes sense that the government would classify our stockpiles,
especially in light of the problems in the production reactors.  Knowledge
of what we have would be an important barganing tool for the Soviets 
in weapons reduction talks.

>No explanation could be found for the tritium lost in the test shipment,    
>according to a report Wednesday."

Only in the popular media.  Preliminary scientific reports are very credible 
and  offer very likely explainations of what happened.

>Wonderful, just wonderful.

Yeah, I thought so too.  Nice to see the safeguards system works!

>Paul Deisinger

Just to put this thing into perspective relative to possible sinister
involvement in diversion, consider that the quantity involved here is
of the same magnitude as the tritium contained in the self-luminous 
emergency exit signs in airplanes and public buildings.  If I were
intent on collecting tritium for weapons use, I'd simply steal some
emergency signs.  There is no accountibility at this level which is
in sharp contrast to the safeguards involved in delivering the raw 
material.  It would be just plain stupid to try to steal from a DOE 
facility when the stuff is so readily available elsewhere.

John


-- 
John De Armond, WD4OQC                     | Manual? ... What manual ?!? 
Radiation Systems, Inc.     Atlanta, GA    | This is Unix, My son, You 
emory!stiatl!rsiatl!jgd   **I am the NRA** | just GOTTA Know!!!