Talk:Fernald Feed Materials Production Center

Good articleFernald Feed Materials Production Center has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 3, 2025Good article nomineeListed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on November 2, 2025.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Fernald Feed Materials Production Center produced uranium for nuclear weapons between 1951 and 1989?

Untitled

It sounds like you were there. I'd like to help, but I can see this page being split into three or four pages; a history page, your 'chemometallurgical process' page, a page linking to the feed process destinations, and one for environmental decontamination. Rick.mend 02:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How about a page for Criminal Misconduct? A lot of that type of activity transpired at the Fernald Closure Project, including: destroying records, altering data, and falsifying environmental reports; certifying compliance reports to be true when they weren't; and willfully giving false testimony and committing perjury in federal court. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fernald Uncovered (talk • contribs) 19:25, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Wikify this artricle

The article needs to be "Wikified." The references need to be made into Wikipedia-style references. --KJRehberg (talk) 17:58, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Working on it

Could use some help. Are the FMPC and NLCO documents available online somewhere? Watchpup (talk) 15:59, 9 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Non-POV and bad tone for an encyclopedia

This article needs the opinions removed. --KJRehberg (talk) 18:04, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It appears this concern has been addressed. I'm going to remove the NPOV tag. Karmos (talk) 02:21, 12 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV? Really?

I don't believe the NPOV claim is accurate, since it cites a research program that is not controlled by the DOE or plant administrators.

The bulk of the article is a detailed discussion of plant operations, and sources are cited (though not readily available online)

Watchpup (talk) 20:31, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

locals thought that it was a facility for making dog food?

according to this webpage:

http://biology.clc.uc.edu/Fankhauser/Society/nuclear/fernald/fernald.html 69.76.132.166 (talk) 03:34, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not ALL the locals

The site was "hidden in plain sight", with a clever disguise and name.

But some of the locals (the ones paying attention) definitely knew what was going on. I attended C.A.R.E (citizens against a radioactive environment) meetings in 1979 at the local university. There were articles in the newspaper about Fernald releases of uranium to the environment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watchpup (talk • contribs) 12:08, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

There was a proposal to merge Fernald Closure Project into Fernald Preserve. It seems more accurate to merge this article here as the closure is derectly related with the center.Beagel (talk) 05:38, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that both topics are important/notable enough that they deserve separate articles. The closure project has ongoing health assessment components, and will be getting new content over time.

The feed materials production center article will probably remain fairly static once it's converted to wiki format. Watchpup (talk) 20:12, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Merge. The closure project is a natural progression of the center's history, so it belongs here. Besides, the closure article is so short and, contrary to User:Watchpup, its revision history shows that hardly any new content is added over time. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 17:01, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Merge done. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 21:03, 11 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merge?

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I agree that Fernald Preserve should be merged into this article (or vice versa), so why does it appear that they were not merged? Did someone rebuild the Fernald Preserve page after the fact? --TomStike (talk) 05:18, 30 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There was a lot of criminal activity that transpired at the Fernald Closure Project, including: destroying records, altering data, and falsifying environmental reports; certifying compliance reports to be true when they weren't; and willfully giving false testimony and committing perjury in federal court, that has nothing to do with the Preserve. Merging the two might give the false impression that the Preserve was somehow connected to the wrongdoing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fernald Uncovered (talk • contribs) 18:12, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Having just attended a graduate course outing for a hazardous waste management course at Fernald Preserve, it only makes sense to merge Fernald Feed Materials Production Center with the Fernald Preserve page in order to accurately portray the morphology of the site. The site had half a dozen or so names as the cleanup progressed, and it truly is a topic of site evolution, not of the names. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.137.187.69 (talk) 15:15, 2 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I think the article should be merged as it can be fit cleanly into the history of the Production Center as its own section. It would benefit this article, and I see no reason why the preserve should have an article of its own given that it is the next stage in the Production Center's history. Karmos (talk) 23:07, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merged. Karmos (talk) 23:19, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

30year cover up

For 27 years, from birth until I moved away, I lived in the vicinity of Fernald. I was aware that Fernald was involved with some kind of nuclear project, although the company had the appearance of Purina because of the red and white checker pattern on the water towers. Their sign was listed as National Lead Corporation, Material Feeds Plant. Because of the checker pattern that resembled Purina's logo and the sign referencing "Feeds" it was easy to over-look what was going on in this rural farming community. Around 1991 or 1992, I came upon an article in US NEWS and WORLD REPORT, referencing Fernald, the 30 year cover up and a contaminated community. Being a Registered Nurse, I immediately became concerned because of my occasional close proximity to this plant. I provided the article to the Radiation Safety Officer at the hospital where I worked. He told me that my concern was valid and provided me with the name and phone number of a physician at Cincinnati's University Medical Center. I contacted that physician and was informed that the airborne contamination from the plant was carried north east. I lived to the north east of this plant for for 26 of those years and 1 year to the south east of the plant. In my last year in the area, we rented a log cabin that was located directly across the road from this plant. This cabin, on 40 acres of wooded farmland, was our weekend retreat. We had no idea of how we were being contaminated. The cover up was real and so is the contamination. — Preceding unsigned comment added by M.Hackney,RN (talk • contribs) 09:43, 15 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Cites for Plant 2/3 "Who?" and "Dubious" Objections

The following are excerpted from transcripts originally published by the Fernald Living History Project (FLHP). The FLHP has since morphed into the Fernald Community Alliance, which lists the transcripts on their website; regrettably, they all "404" at this time.

While they have no copyright notice, they are all prepended with the following:

NOTICE This transcript contains a Living History Interview conducted and prepared as part of the Fernald Living History Project. The narrations, descriptions, perceptions, opinions and beliefs expressed in this interview are solely those of the interviewee(s) and are not to be attributed directly or indirectly, to the United States Government, to the U.S. Department of Energy, to Fluor Daniel, Inc., to any Fluor Daniel Fernald teaming partner company, to any of their officers or employees, to the Fernald Living History Project or to anyone associated with the Fernald Living History Project.

The following excerpts address the "bee-sting" and "shoe corrosion" issues.

[BEGIN EXCERPTS]

FERNALD LIVING HISTORY PROJECT Transcript Name: Paul Davies Date Interviewed: 5/27/99 Date Transcribed: 7/6/99 Tape: #23 Project Number 20012 Tape FLHP0045

...

Q: You mentioned to me early about uh, going out to the parking lot. A: Oh, you mean like coming in on third shift? Yeah, if it was a you know, a lot of moisture in the air and if they were running like the NAR tower, the nitric acid mist would you know, you would feel a sting in your arm and stuff when you'd walk in there and you'd always know when they, when they had that going because it felt just like bee stings on ya. The mist would come it, you know if the air was real heavy where it would settle down, you could feel that sting sensation.

FER\FLHP\TRANS\FLHP-23.WPD\March 4, 2005 9:36 /P

...

FERNALD LIVING HISTORY PROJECT Transcript Name: Charles Porter Date Interviewed: 6/22/99 Date Transcribed: 9/07/99 Tape: 40 Project Number 20012 Tape FLHP0084


16:05:09 Q: Oh, I see. Well. And um, in the mid-80s, there was quite a lot of talk about Fernald and when they shut the plant down. Tell me your impressions a little bit of hearing about when they shut the plant down. A: In what way? 16:05:26 Q:Um, I guess mainly uh, I guess like in the mid-80s when there was a dust collector problem and those kinds of things, there was a lot of media attention on Fernald, what was your reaction to that? A: A lot of it, they were talking, to make conversation. Uh, it was sensational, so they made the most of it. That’s the news media. I don’t have much use for the news media. And uh, because they don’t write the news, they make the news. But anyway, I saw a lot of the problems coming on. You take a leakage that had existed for a while, and uh, this oughta be taken care of. 16:06:12 A: Oh, forget it for the time being. And a month later you bring it up again, oh, forget it. And uh, though I resented that, I sortta, I understood it, that everything couldn’t be done right at once. And uh, it used to be in the Refinery, after the towers went bad, and they operated on just half capacity, uh, on a windy, usually in the evening or at night, the nitric acid fumes, oh, they’d choke ya, 16:06:57 A: And they’d just let ‘em blow. Instead o’ going through those towers and being be condensed, and reclaimed. Uh, and until some o’ the farmers around there called, what’re you doing over there? Something is wrong. My face is stinging. Then they would cut down on the capacity, so that they wouldn’t have all that overflow. 16:07:20 A: Now I saw that for years. I would say the last 10 years at least that I worked there, that was a common thing.

FER\FLHP\TRANS\FLHP-40.DOC\March 4, 2005 9:53 /P 23


...

FERNALD LIVING HISTORY PROJECT Transcript Name: Jerry Green Date Interviewed: 8/17/99 Date Transcribed: 11/17/99 Tape: #70 Project Number 20012 Tape FLHP0161


22:07:38 Q: What were some of the hazards associated with working in extraction? What were some of the things you saw that you felt were dangerous? A: Well, when I first started there, they were really cautious about ah, and ah, you couldn't even have ah, regular tools. You had to have a beryllium, I think is a brass type, so wouldn't be no sparks at all. Well I think that lasted about, well they were so heavy and bulky and everything and ah, they discontinued using 'era. FER\FLHP\TRANS\FLHP-70.DOC\March 4, 2005 10:35AM 13 FERNALD LIVING HISTORY PROJECT Transcript 22:08:10 A: I don't think remember every getting any authority to do that, but the maintenance man working in other plants and everything, they'd just bring their tools and do the job. But ah, and ah, the hazard was mostly, I think ah, walking in the material. We had acids and caustics and uranium solution on the floor and there's been times when I know my shoes didn't lasted only about 4 days. A: They just eat 'em up. Well we had 4 days off ah, we worked a days off schedule which was 4 days off, and then 1 day off. And when I got on that 4 day off and I'd leave my shoes in the locker, well when I'd come back they'd done be caustic or something got on 'em. They weren't good shoes there later on, they kind of cardboard in fact I thought [(laughing).

[END EXCERPTS]

Note that not all interviewees expressed negativity, some reflected complete satisfaction and confidence in the overall safety and "industrial hygiene" at the plant. As well the interviewees came from a wide cross-section of society and education ranging from Ph. D. researchers to HS dropout laborers, area residents, politicians and community activists.

I believe I'll see if I can find a home for the transcripts I have at archive.org so others can read them, too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.23.84.242 (talk) 02:19, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Fernald Feed Materials Production Center. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 10:28, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fernald Feed Materials Production Center. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:42, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Fernald Feed Materials Production Center. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:04, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA review

Passed. Dumelow (talk) 06:07, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Fernald Feed Materials Production Center/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) 19:54, 29 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Dumelow (talk · contribs) 06:56, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Hawkeye7, I enjoyed reviewing your A-class submission on the Manhattan Project feed materials program so would be glad to take this on. This is my first GA review so please bear with me! - Dumelow (talk) 06:56, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. Well written

Background
  • "However, when Mallinckrodt opened a new plant in 1949, the AEC decided to cease using the Niagara Falls plant"
    Presumably this was producing uranium metal? Might be worth just mentioning this to make it clear.
    checkY "Union Carbide's Electro-Metallurgical Division turned green salt into uranium metal." Repeated this. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:22, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Site selection
  • "At least 1 square mile (2.6 km2) of flat land"
    You use acres a fair bit later on so would be helpful to
    Using the measurements in the sources. In the old measurements, an acre was a furlong x a chain, so a square mile was 8 x 8 x 10 = 640 acres. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:22, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I switched to conversion template to output both acres and hectares if you are happy with that? - Dumelow (talk) 11:20, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It was close to Cincinnati, where there was large labor force and ample housing for the technical personnel who would have to be drawn from other parts of the country."
    Missing "a" before "large"?
    checkY Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:22, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Construction
Production
  • Plant 1: "In 1970, a safe-geometry digestion system was installed"
    What did this digester produce? If it was uranyl nitrate, did this mean that plant 1 took on part of the work of plant 2/3?
    checkY Only for enriched uranium. Moved this down to the paragraph on digestion in Plant 2/3. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:22, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Plant 2/3: "Here uranium values were recovered from feed materials (i.e., ores, concentrates and residues) and were converted to concentrated uranium trioxide (UO3)"
    I am not familiar with this use of "values", is there an alternative word we can use, or a link/definition you can add?
    checkY Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:22, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The process at Fernald differed from that of Harshaw in that it used a series of "pulse columns" to mix and separate the uranyl nitrate and solvent"
    Do we know what Harshaw used?
    Unfortunately not. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:22, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Plant 4: "Orange oxide was received from the Refinery in mobile hoppers, and was fed into stainless steel fluidized bed reactor s"
    Extraneous space between "reactor" and "s"?
    The two uses in this section are the only mention of "orange oxide" in the article, presumably this is a synonym for "orange salt" used elsewhere and we should change to that for consistency?
    checkY Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:22, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "After about four hours a thermite-type reduction reaction occurs"
    You've already mentioned this was a thermite reaction earlier in the section so probably don't need to again? If you keep it thermite needs delinking at second mention.
    checkY Yes. Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:22, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "stored awaiting processing for reuse as refractory liner."
    Might be worth linking Refractory? You state the slag is "transferred back to the reduction area for use" as a refractory liner, is this the thermite reduction in Plant 5 or the hydrogen reduction in Plant 4? We haven't mentioned refractory use before so would be worth stating where it is used.
    checkY In Plant 5. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:53, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Standard and depleted uranium metal derbies weighed about 168 kilograms; enriched derbies were smaller, weighing about 236 kilograms."
    You've not mentioned the difference between these before. Was there any difference in the process for making each type?
    checkY No difference, but it required more careful handling. Corrected to 136 kilograms. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:53, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Plant 6: "The FMPC had the equipment for rolling, forming, and machining uranium rods and slugs, but from 1971 on from they were sent offsite to Reactive Metals Inc. (RMI) in Ashtabula, Ohio, for extrusion into tubes and rods. A lathe was used to cut the tubes and rods into the appropriate length.They were then stamped for identification purposes, cleaned and degreased."
    Was the cutting to length etc. done at Plant 6 or at RMI?
    checkY At Plant 6. Clarified. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:53, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Was this the uranium hexafluoride produced in Plant 4? If so, might be worth mentioning?
    The actual process isn't detailed at all here, while the other processes are. Is there a reason why?
    Because it only operated for a short time and so is not covered by the source. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:53, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "when it was imploded twice in 1994"
    Any reason why it was imploded twice, did the first time fail or was it planned?
    The source says "Plant 7 was the first major production plant demolished, requiring two separate implosions to bring the seven-story structure to the ground." Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:53, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Plant 8
    No comments here, except perhaps (if not too complicate) a quick summary of the conversion process from scrap to black oxide, or is this the washing, furnaces, kilns etc. mentioned later?
  • Plant 9
    The first paragraph starts off discussing uranium production then says Plant 9 was built to produce thorium. I was left a bit confused as to if it was doing both or started off on thorium before being used to produce enriched uranium. The thorium process isn't detailed at all.
    checkY Re-written. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:53, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pilot Plant
    Perhaps would be worth mentioning more about the thorium process used here?
  • Analytical building
No comments
Health and safety
  • "Releases from the Fernald site to the surrounding area resulted in exposure to community residents included ionizing radiation, soluble and insoluble forms of uranium, and various other hazardous chemicals."
    Doesn't read right to me. Perhaps "... the exposure of community residents to ionizing radiation..."
    checkY Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:53, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "funded by settlements of class action litigation against National Lead of Ohio"
    Duplicate link on National Lead. You've also already established that they were under contract to the AEC. If we bring DoE into it, maybe mention that it was a successor to the AEC?
    checkY Unlinked. Added that the DOE was the successor to the AEC. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:53, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Samples of whole blood, serum, plasma and urine were obtained from all FMMP participants at the time of the initial examination, and over 100,000 one-ml aliquots of these biospecimens have been stored at −80 °C since then"
    Think "ml" needs a conversion or at least spelling out, also aliquot is not a common term. You could perhaps just remove that bit and say "100,000 samples" or similar?
    checkY Spelt out "milliliter". Linked aliquot to sample (material)#aliquot part. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:03, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "believed that he was murdered by one or more coworkers who suspected him of being a whistleblower in the 1984 nuclear emissions scandal"
    The emissions scandal isn't mentioned until the next section so this came as a surprise. You could perhaps bring the first sentence of "Fernald Closure Project" into the "Contamination" section?
    checkY Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:03, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fernald Closure Project
  • Perhaps mention whichever plant took over the DoE's feed material production and when?
  • Nothing. By about 1965 the US had enough nuclear weapons and started decommissioning the production complex built in the 1950s. New nuclear weapons now use material recycled from earlier ones. US nuclear power plants source uranium from overseas. [1] Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:32, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Low-level waste was shipped to Waste Control Specialists in Texas"
    Begs the question where did high-level waste go, but perhaps not known?
  • checkY Added a bit more about waste disposal. Wastes included thorium-230 and radium-226 from the decay of U-238 and protactinium-231 and actinium-227 from that of U-235. These are present in the original ore. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:32, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fernald Preserve
  • "With the $4.4 billion cleanup of the surface areas was completed, management of the site was transferred to DOE's Office of Legacy Management on 17 November 2006."
    Think the first "was" needs deleting here?
    checkY Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:03, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The site is permanently unfit for human habitation and "will have to be closely monitored essentially forever""

Prose review complete, will look at the other five criteria soon

2. Verifiable with no original research

  • There doesn't seem to be any particular order that the general references are listed in either (author name, date...)
  • Are these general references by the definition of WP:GENREF or should this be "further reading"?
    checkY The article was originally written by another editor using those documents, but without inline references. So they were general references. But they are not available online and I don't have them, so I reworked the article, adding new references. I was unsure what to do with them. Changed to "Further reading". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:03, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sources are cited inline throughout and all look to be reliable.
  • Spotchecks:
    the front page of the 31 March 1951 edition of The Cincinnati Times-Star announced that the AEC was planning to "build a $3 million uranium ore refining plant near Fernald." checks out to citation 16, though for completeness if an archive of the Cincinnati Times-Star was available it would be good to cite that also.
    "Between 1954 and 1975, the FMPC occasionally produced small quantities of thorium metal in Plant 8, Plant 9 and the Pilot Plant" checks out to citation 23
    "The operating temperate of each was higher than the one before, with the first operating at about 149 °C (300 °F) and the third at around 649 °C (1,200 °F)" checks out to citation 34
    "The plant was demolished in 2003" checks out to citation 45
    "However, some, including Bocks' family, believed that he was murdered by one or more coworkers who suspected him of being a whistleblower in the 1984 nuclear emissions scandal" is mostly supported by citation 55 but only to this extent: "Some suspected Bocks was murdered for allegedly being a whistleblower, but no evidence of foul play was ever officially recorded". citation 56 doesn't load for me.
    It is available from Wayback machine but I could not see its value, so removed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:03, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    "Fluor Fernald completed their portion of the cleanup on 29 October 2006, 12 years ahead of schedule and $7.8 billion below the original cost estimate." I couldn't verify the cost or time saving. citation 61 didn't load for me, I don't think citation 62 holds any useful information at all and citation 63 supports the date only.
    checkY Added another source. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:03, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Quote: "will have to be closely monitored essentially forever" checks out to citation 66
  • I didn't pick up any issue with overly close paraphrasing from the sources I read but the Earwig copyright violation detector shows you should probably rephrase some bits, though I acknowledge that sometimes the technical language doesn't leave much flexibility:
The principal function of the Sampling Plant was to weigh, sample, classify and sort representative samples of the large quantities of incoming ore concentrates.
At one time, the principal function of the Sampling Plant was to obtain representative samples of the large quantities of incoming ore concentrates.

—Wikipedia text on left and Westinghouse citation on right

The Green Salt Plant, the common name for Plant 4, produced "green salt" (uranium tetrafluoride - ) from uranium trioxide. Green salt was the key intermediate compound in the overall process of producing uranium metal, the
The Green Salt Plant, the common name for Plant 4, produces green salt (UF,) from UO,. Green salt is the key intermediate compound in the overall process of producing uranium metal.

—Wikipedia text on left and Westinghouse citation on right

In 1970, a safe-geometry digestion system was installed to process enriched uranium materials assaying up to 5% uranium-235.
In 1970, FMPC installed a safe-geometry digestion system to process enriched uranium materials assaying up to 5% U-235

—Wikipedia text on left and Westinghouse citation on right

The Fernald (Residents) Medical Monitoring Program (FMMP) is a voluntary ongoing medical surveillance program for community residents living within five miles of the perimeter of the Fernald site,
The Fernald Medical Monitoring Program (FMMP) was a voluntary ongoing medical surveillance program for community residents living within five miles from the perimeter of a former US Department of Energy uranium-processing site.

—Wikipedia text on left and University of Cincinnati College of Medicine citation on right

Samples of whole blood, serum, plasma and urine were obtained from all FMMP participants at the time of the initial examination, and over 100,000 one-ml aliquots of these biospecimens have been stored at −80 °C since then.
Samples of whole blood, serum, plasma and urine were obtained from all participants at the time of the initial examination, and over 160,000 1 ml aliquots of these biospecimens have been stored at minus 80 degrees C since then.

—Wikipedia text on left and University of Cincinnati College of Medicine citation on right

Most residents received their water from wells or cisterns, many farms had no electricity, and many local roads were narrow and unpaved.
Most residents received their water from wells or cisterns, many farms had no electricity, and local roadways were often narrow and unpaved.

—Wikipedia text on left and Cold War - Complete Story on right

checkY These have been removed. Most of what is left is proper nouns. Earwig score is reduced to 33.8% Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:40, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]


3.Broad in its coverage

Yes, the article covers a complex topic well and in an appropriate level of detail

4. Neutral

Yes, I picked up no issues with neutrality. Though please review the issue with verifiability of the accusations of murder in section 2.

5. Stable

I found no evidence of recent editing disputes, some disputes on talk page about tone and neutrality but these are at least 8 years old and look to have been addressed by more recent edits.

6. Illustrated

  • The article is well illustrated with relevant images. Most images are from PD DoE sources, the image in "Fernald Preserve" has been uploaded and appropriately licensed by its author.
  • The linked source for File:Fluor Fernald Workers.jpg is dead, perhaps it can be rescued by an archive link.
    ☒N No archive link available. Alamy has it for sale, noting that it is a public domain image. [2] She I remove it?
Thanks for checking, I think better to leave the deadlink there but worth adding the new link also to support - Dumelow (talk) 21:38, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That completes my review, probably a bit in depth for GA but if you take this onward to ACR I'd be happy to look over again and wouldn't have much further to add - Dumelow (talk) 16:59, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved
Looks good, passed for GA - Dumelow (talk) 06:07, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. You can locate your hook here. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by MisawaSakura talk 17:22, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Testing fuel elements
Testing fuel elements
Improved to Good Article status by Hawkeye7 (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 453 past nominations.

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 09:52, 3 October 2025 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
QPQ: Done.

Overall: Uriahheep228 (talk) 21:34, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To Prep 4

allikas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Fernald_Feed_Materials_Production_Center