-------
analysis of only one grab sample from both the upstream and the
downstream flow. Also., the measured radioactivity concentrations
of both the liquid and suspended fractions of both of these river
water samples are well within the typical background range for
naturally-occurring radioactivity (Holtzman, 1964). The slightly
elevated activity in the suspended sediments indicate that any
future efforts to resolve whether there is any contribution of
radioactivity to the stream should include sediment sampling.
Additional water sample results are shown in Table 8. The
incoming water (Well #5) and the discharge water from the West
Plant Outfall are at typical background radioactivity concentra-
tions. The cold pit water sample, however, shows an elevated
radioactivity content of the suspended fraction, again reflecting
the water insolubility of these natural radionucl ides. The cold
pit water is recycled water within the plant which is not dis-
charged to the uncontrolled environment.
SCRUBBER DISCHARGE SAMPLES
Results of the suspended and liquid fractions of various
scrubber discharge samples are presented in Table 9. Again, the
suspended fraction contains the greater radioactivity content.
The lowest radium-226 concentration of 2.5 ± 1.1 pCi/g was
measured in the suspended fraction of the 200 Plant-phosphoric
acid scrubber discharge sample. The highest radium-226 content
of 33 ± 1.1 pCi/g was obtained from the suspended fraction of the
calciner scrubber discharge. These results are similar to those
obtained from the calciner scrubber discharges from the Thermal
Process Plant (ORP/LVF, 1977).
AIRBORNE PARTICIPATE RADIOACTIVITY
Background Airborne Radioactivity Concentrations
Poet et al. (1972) reported the average polom'um-210 and
lead-210 concentrations; in ground level air to be 0.001 and 0.01
22
-------
I
LiJ
i
a:
o
a:
^r~~+. 1 i 1
^ ^ LJ_I
LO
r--. o
*^ ^*
O l-H
^^^
^* Z3
o
Q 0
LU
_J i
Q.
r^i
_l
0
O
11
f)
Q
_l
O
0
in
m^
i
i
LU
3
LU
1
3
'(O
LU £
CD i^_ r
fV ^~V "^"x.
^£ !
n: a: o
o LU a
oo h-
«-H<
Q 3
X*^«
Q
1.1 1
Q D
oc -z. --.
UJ LU -i
t Q- 0
0 O
+ 1 +1
co ^d"
^D
r
0
f
CO i
O i
+1 +!
00 CM
CM LO
0 *
r~\
* i J
CM ?Z
+ 1
cn
CM
VO CM
co oo
0 0
+1 V
o
o
vo o
CM i
CM CM
1 1
O
+1
VO
*
CTl
r~
co
o
o
-}-|
o
CM
O
r-»
CM
+i
cn
CO
=!
O
+l
CM
CO
^~
co
CM
1
33
O
1
o
+1
LT>
CO
O
1
^^
o
o
o
V
CM
O
+1
co
I
CO
o
0
+1
CM
^_
0
uo
co
CM
1
^
LO
VO
o
+1
CM
vo
00
co
o
o
+i
co
CM
O
I
CM
+1
cn
CO
CM
0
+1
CM
*
p
00
CO
CM
1
^
O
co
0
+1
vo
^«
CM
CM
O
+1
r
LO
i
O
+1
CM
O
**3~
o
o
V
o
CO
CM
1
£
O
1
o
V
LO
f
o
o
+1
oo
o
o
CO
CO
o
o
V
^^
0
o
V
CM
co
CM
1
-C
CM
,
+1
-J-
co
^~
o
+1
LO
^>
0
VO
,
+1
o
CO
cn
CO
o
+1
CM
r.
O
CM
1
J3
Q.
LO
CO
+1
O
^J
cn
V
IS)
CO
V
r-~
co
V
00
CM
CM
1
(O
a:
0)
f*i
(O
o
CD
ai
-o
i
o
c
a>
(0
o
^j
c
Q
*
23
-------
3E
LU
|_
~~*a:
mo
r-. Q£
O LU
ro
^? ^
i i
O 1
LU Z
_ 1 ZH
0. C
5 ^
00 (,
CO 0) T3
O) ^3 '*""
3 J3 3 i
3 0-^
Q. t. !-!-
OO s- -a
to CU C
3 .a a. 01
3 U) -v.
a. S- 3-i-
00
CM a- oo a.
"O ^D
4-J -r- Ct)
c o s- -a
re CMCM«»-
CMOOOOOCSJO' t
CO CO CM UT) O O 1-^
CO fO VD
o
CsJ Ol ^O CM C3 fcfc^ ~*J O^
r LO r^ ^- ID o o LO ^
C3OOOOOOOCO
--I +1 +1 +1 +1 +\ V +\ V
vo i-~ oo CM o o eo
IO OO . CM
n . 10 LO CM
o o o
o
co o oo oo en
i ioi r^voocooo
r-i r- O> OOOO
ro 10 ^* C3 r*^ ^f ^"~ co
CO f~ i CO
«3- in . oo i
o
00
O OO CM
i r^cMOCMOOOrol
ooir>r~-r-cMO CMO^
i ^- oo ro r~
CM LO
0
O
f i~"
HI 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 V
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
LI")
00
U3O1-LOCOOCMOOC
OJ r CO OO CO CO CO i~~ <
OJCMCNJCMCMCMCMCMCX
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
t3 O=3=>=3J=J=J3
o: a. i i Q. a
re
re
X)
0
c
re
u
\~>
c
en
C
re
r»
-Q
(U
^
re
o
+J
QJ
o
1
C
o
c
in
01
re
u
^3
C
'*~
0
z
24
-------
pCi/m3, respectively. NCRP (.November, 1975) summarizes reports
by geographic areas of the normal polom'um-210 and lead-210 air
concentrations. In Colorado, the reported polonium-210 concen-
trations ranged from 0.00005 to 0.003 pCi/m3, whereas the lead-
210 ranged from 0.001 to 0.021 pCi/m3. The highest reported
lead-210 concentrations were 0.026 pCi/m3 for several locations
in Illinois and Utah.
NCRP (November, 1975) also discusses the background level of
airborne concentrations of the other naturally-occurring radio-
nuclides. Natural uranium concentrations ranged from 120 aCi/m3
(one attocurie is 10-18 curie or 10~6 pCi) near Chicago, Illinois,
to a reported high of about 400 aCi/m3 for several sites in New
York State. Typical radium-226 concentrations are usually less
than 100 aCi/m3. Sedlet et al. (1973) reported thorium-232 and
thorium-230 concentrations of 30 and 45 aCi/m3, respectively,
near Chicago, Illinois.
In-Plant Air Sampler
Air samples were obtained in the in-plant areas using a
portable air sampling unit.* This unit has a carbon vane vacuum
pump with a regulator which permits constant air flow sampling.
Usually, sample collections were made at two cubic feet per
minute (CFM) using a 47-millimeter diameter, Type E glass fiber
filter. This corresponds to a linear flow rate of about 106 feet
per minute. The air sample dust load was determined by measuring
the mass of material collected on each filter.
Airborne particulate sampling was conducted in several
working areas within the Wet Process Plant using the portable air
sampler. The radioactivity concentrations of the naturally-
occurring radionuclides are usually expressed as picocuries per
* Regulated Air Sampler, Model RAS-1, Eberline Instrument
Corporation, Santa Fe, New Mexico
25
-------
cubic meter of sampled air (pCi/m3). Dust loading of the air
filter samples was also determined and the specific activity of
the dust, expressed as pCi/g, is also given. The solubility of
airborne particulate matter was not determined in this study.
Gross Versus Net Results
Eadie and Bernhardt (1976) have reported that radiochemical
analyses of blank glass fiber filters (4-inch diameter) indicate
appreciable quantities of naturally-occurring radioactivity.
Such activity may be due to the composition of the filter media
itself, or due to contaminants in reagents, glassware, or other
analytical equipment. The analytical sensitivity of the radio-
chemical techniques may also mask the identification of the true
source of such low levels of radioactivity.
Table 10 presents data on the radioactivity content of blank
glass fiber filters (4-inch diameter) and the extrapolated
activity content for the 47-mm diameter filters which were used
in this study. In order to account for this radioactivity
content associated with blank filter analyses, the appropriate
blank filter activity (Table 10) has been subtracted from the
measured gross analytical result to obtain a "net" result. No
blank subtractions have been made for the three radionuclides
(radium-228, polonium-210, and lead-210) which are at the
analytical minimum detectable activity (MDA) levels. Gross
analytical results for all of the in-plant air samples are shown
in Appendix B.
26
-------
TABLE 10. RADIOACTIVITY CONTENT OF BLANK GLASS FIBER FILTERS
(pCi per filter)
***
Radi onucli de
Ra-226
Po-210
U-234
U-235
U-238
Th-230
Th-232
Pb-210
Ra-228
4-inch Diameter
0.35 ± 0.09
<0.17
0.10 ± 0.03
(0.0035 ± 0.0010)
0.08 ± 0.02
0.20 ± 0.08
0.13 ± 0.02
<0.32
<1 .6
**
47-mm Diameter
0.07 ± 0.019
<0.036
0.021* 0.0064
(0.00075± 0.00021)
0.017* 0.0043
0.043± 0.017
0.028± 0.0043
<0.068
<0.34
+ Average pCi per filter with standard error term about this
mean based on the t-distribution at the 95 percent confidence
1 eve! .
* Taken from Eadie and Bernhardt, 1976.
** Extrapolated value based on the area ratio between 47-mm and
4-inch diameter filters of 0.214 times the 4-inch diameter
activity content. Average 47-mm filter mass ± two standard
deviations was 0.1249 ± 0.0013 grams.
***Calculated U-235 content based on U-235 to U-238 natural
activity ratio of 1:21.45 (0.0466).
27
-------
In-Plant Air Sampler Net Results
Tables 11 to 16 present the net radionuclide concentrations
obtained for the various in-plant sampling locations. As pre-
viously noted, the leacl-210 results are underestimated by up to a
factor of five, which results in a potential overestimate of
about a factor of ten or more for the polonium-210 results. Data
which narrows this uncertainty for specific samples are given in
Appendix C.
Of all the in-plarit samples, the highest airborne radio-
activity was measured in the area of the No. 3 Calciner (Table
12). There, the measured airborne concentrations were orders of
magnitude greater than results obtained in the Technical Building
Library (Table 16). Although the library had the lowest airborne
radioactivity measured in this study, even these levels were
slightly elevated compared to reported background levels as
discussed above.
Specific Activity of Airborne Particulate Matter
The specific activity of airborne particulate matter
(reported in units of pCi/g) was also determined for the portable
air sampler filters. The highest polonium-210 activity was 371 ±
146 pCi/g in the control room of the Calciner Building (Table 12)
with roughly one-half of the sampling locations having essentially
a non-detectable polonium-210 level (Tables 11, 13, 14, 15, and
16). The highest radium-226 activity of 41 ± 11 pCi/g was also
obtained in the Calciner Building (Table 12) and the lowest
activity was less than 2.1 pCi/g in the Technical Building
Library (Table 16). These results for the Calciner Building also
show possible disequilibrium between the individual radionuclides
of the uranium-238 decay series, the most noticeable being the
polonium-210 and thorium-230 contents compared to the other decay
chain members. (Thorium-232 and radium-228 are members of a
different decay series.) It should be recognized that the
28
-------
*
*
UJ
1
73
oo
Q_
^.
CD
*
UJ
CD
Du
o
1
oo
CD
z.
1 1
Q
o
=?
^
UJ
rv^
O
*
^t.
0
_J
1 1
2:
1 1 1
c
^^
1 (
oi
f n
ID
r
ID
I/)
S-
CM
, 1
"*J
O
4JC
O
CO
cn
o
* ,,
ID
p**.
^^
r
^^^
ID
'
i-
f
ID
5
'
0(
4-3
LO
=1-
cn
o
^
ID
C^
o
CO
**^
«^-
«^_^
.
s-
^
CM
CM
CO
O
.(-3
<£>
0
O
E
.p.
O
Q.
cn
r
O
a
r)
i
CJ
a
O"
i
O
a
T)
E
r
o
o.
UJ
Q
i i
_J
O
jy
o
t 1
Q
2
VO
^-
o
o
o
+1
o
1
o
VO
ID
+1
cn
CM
CO
0
o
+1
^
o
cr.
«3-
-f i
^o
^^
r_
CO
o
o
+!
co
CM
O
10
CM
CM
1
re
QL
CM
UD
O
O
+|
CM
CM
O
O
*y
Q
CO
.3-
+1
O
0
r^"-
OJ
o
+i
f«x.
VO
CD
O
r
CM
1
0
O.
CM
r
O
o
o
+1
CM
f*^
o
o
o
ID
CM
+1
^J-
r
si-
r
O
o
+1
vo
f^.
o
o
00
CM
+1
cn
i*^
i
o
o
+1
CM
o
^J.
co
CM
1
=
^O
^
0
o
o
o
y
CO
CD
+1
ID
r
ID
^f-
0
o
o
+1
,3-
00
o
o
o
^.
**
o
v
CO
CM
o
o
o
y
ITS
CO
CM
|
=
,
r^
o
o
o
+1
cn
o
o
o
CO
CM
+1
f-
r
ID
r
O
0
+1
CM
cn
o
o
cn
CM
+i
^~
CM
OO
o
o
+1
co
r
O
CO
co
CM
|
=
CO
CM
O
o
o
+1
CM
CO
o
o
0
ID
+1
CM
co
f*v.
CM
0
0
+1
r^
r
O
*d-
ID
+1
VJD
^~
«sj-
CO
O
O
, 1
cn
CM
o
o
CO
CM
1
.£:
I
to
^J-
o
o
o
o
+1
1
ID
O
O
O
o
CO
r
+1
«^-
*~
^.
VO
0
o
o
+1
o
CO
o
o
o
CO
cn
o
y
cn
ID
o
O
o
y
CM
co
CM
1
.c:
1
vo
o
o
o
+i
10
p^
o
o
CO
r
+1
in
^*
r~~
^^,
o
o
+i
^j.
CM
O
£Z
+i
^~
CO
CO
10
o
o
+1
cn
r
O
o
r
CM
1
.a
a.
ID
ID
o
o
o
y
cn
y
O
O
y
r^
y
o
"~
o
y
CO
CO
CM
1
re
on
Cn
*j-
O
O
o
-Q
re
o
a>
re
3
O
r-
»->
s_
re
a.
4J
1/5
3
-o
re
jz
+->
S
CD
CM
0
cn
o
o
o
T3
re
o
<
(D
re
3
0
-l->
i.
re
a.
4->
(/5
13
-o
re
-C
4->
r~
co co
E
^°.
vo
~
q-
O
OJ
i
'o
>
T3
OJ
Q.
E
OO
*
29
E
.
vo
~
it-
CD
OJ
E
O
>
"O
OJ
CL
oo
*
*
i.
re
^
CD
JT
C
A
x.
CO
0
^3
0)
4->
u
01
o
o
CO *
c^
co
CO
l(-
o
OJ
§
"o
^>
T3
OJ
"o.
oo
*
*
*
4->
3
l/l
£
r
re
o
-M
^
re
c
re
co
C3
+
-------
UJ
1
r
C£
OL
LU
CD
CD Z
^^ i i
11 h-
Q. ^
3£ 0
VJ
O
C
cx
LU
Z
,_^
LO
C^
CO rj
CM ~^
«d" CJ
- " O.
*
* to
OL S-
LU JZ
"5?*
i i in
O CO
5: r^
O CO
o E
CO -l-> ».
=tt= !-
** CJ
in Q.
r
r
o in en
O^ **"x^ *r~
CO CJ
_l CM Q.
o :*«
t^s «^~
1 «
O
O tO
s_
1 JECO
CtL CM ^>-
Z. i CJ
1-1 Q.
CJ O
_J +J
^^
O CO
ID
O
C.
1 H
___
{_J
^y*
O
I-H
el
C£
CO
CM
+1
CM
CO
^~
<
O
+1
IO
r1 *
+1
^
CT>
O
O
+1
CT>
vo
O
*
O
to
CM
*~
o
CM r
0
+1 +1
CO O
O"^ r~
^D O
i LT>
+1 +1
i t{"i
f*s^ r
CO
mi>
oo
VO O
CM O
0 0
+1 +1
O 01
VO CM
O
O
0
_l_
o «a-
i CO
CM CM
1 1
O Z3
O.
0
LO
O
+1
CO
1
in
CM
o
o
+i
CM
01
0
o
in
,
V
in
CM
o
o
o
V
in
co
CM
i
~^
o
CM
+i
O
CM
O
O
+1
o
f~~
10
IT)
+1
O^
r
VO
o^
o
o
o
+ 1
*sj~
co
o
0
CO
co
CM
1
ZD
r
CO
+1
(«^
CO
10
r
0
+1
00
^*~
in
01
+i
in
CO
|"-^
r
0
o
+i
10
o
o
o
CO
CM
1
e~
^-
,3.
l*»
O
+1
^j-
r~~
CO
co
C
o
+1
^
^^
0
o
CM
,
V
CM
O
O
O
V
CM
CO
CM
1
g~
1
00 CM
CM IO
V V
*^* r^
r CO
0 0
V V
CO 10
+1 V
CM
^~
in
^
p^^
o
o
*4~ {
0 00
i CM
CM CM
1 1
J3 <0
O1
00
CM
O
O
It-
Q
T3
(0
O
0)
4_>
ro
3
O
"43
i.
CL
4_>
to
3
"O
ro
^
l ^
r
s
CO
E
in
^o
^
M-
O
O)
E
6
^>
T3
(U
"o.
rC
CO
*
O)
^~
r-.
CM
0
*+
o
-o
ro
O
CU
rO
^
0
"43
s_
ro
O.
4J
to
3
TD
ro
f-
l ^
^
S
CO
*^"
^.
,
LO
t^
O
OJ
o
-o
1
Q.
i
CO
*
4^
r~
3
to
(U
i.
r
ro
U
|
£
ro
C
ro
to
to
o
S-
CD
+
30
-------
^
i-
H-
Z
0.
~
^
o x
5 £
o fr
re
Q. ct:
i i
CL. LLJ
o z
CO -«
*-* C
C
g 1
cr
3E §
^ t
+1
UJ
t z
3 c
0 <
i s
CX (_
z c:
C£.
0 UJ
CD C
C
(
o
it
Ul
CO
u
c_
UJ
o
ca
^
,
in
r-
oo -^
CM *-
** a
i/j
i_
-C
r--
in
°m
r^-^
CM -
CM O
» a
( ^
LT) C
r ,
sy
"«*
-^"^
5 ui
o t_
g^
S-
o-§
CM >-
O 0
r- Q
m o
f-^ *-v
CO O
CM Q
2,
,
V)
-C
CM
in
,
2 "*>
E
CD "^
CM -r-
. C
in o
-"^ !
CO C
^
t/t
i~
in
°m
E
O 0
r- Q
UJ
Q
i r
C
<
c2
^~
+i
10
CO
o
o
+1
10
ICM
O
O
10
in
10
o
o
CO
*3"
1
CM
a>
CM
o
o
CO
o
o
r--
fs^
un
CM
CM
o
+1
en
CO
o
10
CM
CM
t
CM
V
CO
o
V
§
CM
CD
i
0
^
C3
Z
O
CM
1
O
Q.
CD
^0
+1
O
CO
8
o
+ 1
o
o
00
10
CM
CM
CO
o
o
°
o
CO
CO
+1
CO
CM
CM
O
O
CM
O
r"-
CO
10
CTi
un
o
o
+1
^.
CM
O
CO
CM
1
2
cn
CM
V
8
0
V
CO
*-
CO
o
o
o
CM
,
O
CM
CO
0
o
0
CO
o
ID
,
CO
CM
O
O
V
in
CO
CM
1
=3
O
to
+1
^
8
0
+1
UD
o
0
So
o
CM
CM
s
o
r-.
CO
f~-
CM
Lfl
CM
O
0
«*
o
ID
CO
CM
If)
ID
O
O
+1
00
o
CO
CO
CM
1
^
O
en
+)
LD
B-
O
O
+1
CM
CM
O
O
_
en
ID
CM
ID
CM
O
O
en
to
o
o
en
ID
CO
CO
S
O
o
CM
CM
O
in
UD
CO
CM
CD
CD
+1
CO
^"
CD*
O
CO
CM
1
^
f
Cf*
CD
V
8
0
V
CO
C\J
s
o
o
,_
r_
[s^
to
8
o
CO
CM
in
CM
^-
CO
0
o
+1
en
CO
^
o
CM
CO
CM
1
_f-
t
^^
+1
8
CM
0
+1
IO
d
S
to
tO
2
o
CO
o
Cn
in
un
CO
o
10
CO
CD
CM
a-
m
o
o
+i
CM
00
o
o
CM
1
.a
o
»-
V
£
o
V
S
en
o
ex
t
CD*
ff
cu
. O
o
cu
r- >"*
o E
in t/i (/>
* * *
* * *
« *
*
31
-------
s:
LU
1
C
o;
LU
y
O I-H
*z i
I-H ^*
Q- C
GO cC
S
LU tl
eC GO
1 1
ID O
C_) 3
h-H |
ct: +i
o 2;
O
LU I-H
cc: «=t
O Di
CQ |
a: z:
i H LL.
- CM
a; r
0 Q
+>m
a- E
1 CO !
CO O
O Q.
LO
en 01
CM ^v.
^ x c
^f
LU
DC CO
LU
CD CM
^y* _f-
O i
00 2°°
Q. E
GO O ^->
1 CM -i
o o
1 c
LL
c.
^
o
^
c
CO
r
+1
^~
CM
CM
CM
o
o
in
o
o
l~^
r
+1
r^.
r
r*^
in
o
o
+1
vo
in
0
en
«x
+i
0
1
vo
CO
o
o
o
+1
sf
o
o
vo
CM
CM
1
(O
CXL
en in co CM
i in to
in i *tf~ i co co to
+1 +1 +1 -H ~H +1 +1
Q
~^ vo vo co m co co co
CM i in in i
i CO r-
co vo
m co CM en co ^a-
i o CM o en m
OOOOOOi
o o o o o o o
^^
2^ ^O CT^ 00 LO 00 vJ ^^
VO CO ^ i CO i CO
o o o o
o o o o o
O 0
o o
co in
rinococoococo
+1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 V
en co vo i co vo o
co vo ^ r^ vo CM
"~ o
«3" CM
i^ P*~ r C\J O i CM CO
LOi Or-i O> r-
oooooooo
+1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 V
"tj" i *? ^f vo co co
LO CM *-f^
CM O CM O
O
0 O
CO
r^ ^d" O*J ^f1 ^Q C3 LO 00
V +1 V +1 +1 V +1 V
en i oo in
CO
oo en r-..
vo
co r-- r^~ «a- co
in CM in en o en
r-ooooof-»o
OOOOOOi
oooooooo
V +1 V +1 -H V +| V
CO CO i CM
o o o "~I
o
o o o
-1- 4- +
O"d-mCOOCMOOO
i cococococoi CM
CMCMCMCMCMCMeMeM
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
OIDZ3I3^:^=X1 (0
0. H- 1 0_ 0£
CT
en
O
CD
M-
O
T3
to
o
*~~
cu
to
^
o
r-
1 ^
S-
tO
Q.
^_>
CO
3
-o
to
05
CO
en
en
CO
0
M-
O
-o
to
O
'
cu
to
-*T
o
r->
) *
t_
10
o.
4J
CO
3
a
to
o>
CM
CO
CO
O
eD
M-
o
-o
10
o
r""
cu
to
f~
3
O
r
^~
to
o.
4J
to
3
-o
10
CU
JD
(O
[ ^
O
cu
4-*
0)
-o
1
£=
0
c
CO
cu
M
(O
O
r
o
CO CO CO
«HT i CM CO
r CU
O O O r
10
cu eu cu u
O i
eu cu
'a. 'o.
ro
XJ
cu
i CO
a. co
E o
GO GO GO CD
* * * +
* *
*
32
-------
2EI
LU
1
rv
O
CC
DC
1 t_J
UM
CD
o z
z 1 1
1 1 1
1 ^*
CL, ID
s: o
«=C O
co
, i ^
LU «5^
1 0
_J CO
> i
o o
1 1 s
1 I
a:
^C "f 1
o
^^
LU O
e^ I-H
fV |
o
E
r O -^
O
a.
* *-»
K LO
LU '
>- ^
a; en
Q CM
-^
1 -S.-5!
i ^-^ .f
^ i- <->
«a; o "> o.
I O S-
Q- i C
ci_.
CO f
o-o c
1C C CM
Q- 3
O O
s s- o
«t -
LO
o co
f~^ (^^rt
CM o e
o
a
LU
a
14
1
(^ J
3
P**
O
o
fy
r-~
CO
+i
0
co
CO
o
o
+1
en
00
o
*
o
UD
,_!
+1
f
^f
CO
o
-M
^
o
o
vo
CM
CM
1
IB
a:
cvi
V
CO
o
V
a
z
o
u^
.^.
"^
--
^J
1
o
Q.
^t-
+1
CTi
CM
VO
CO
o
o
+i
in
CM
O
vo
CM
-H
o
CM
CO
O
+1
1
CO
o
^«
CO
CM
1
*
in
!>
o
+i
co
CTi
O
LO
*«o
o
o
o
+1
^_
00
o
o
o
r
CO
o
CM
^J-
o
CO
o
0
o
+1
I--
o
o
0
IX}
co
CM
1
33
«!j-
«3-
+ 1
r
CO
CO
co
0
o
+1
f^
CM
o
**
CM
+1
00
ID
^"
O
o
+1
LO
co
o
CO
ro
CM
1
)
CM
CO
+1
CM
VO
CM
!*>.
O
o
+1
^f
m
o
CO
CO
+i
P
CO
VO
10
o
o
+1
r-
in
d
0
CO
CM
i
c-
h-
CD
CO
0
V
in
i^
o
o
o
V
en
CM
O
V
CO
LO
O
O
O
V
CM
CO
CM
1
c~
H-
VO LO
r CM
+1 V
CO
r~
*t CM
i CM
O O
+1 V
10
O
VO
r~- I
+1 V
CO
^J" ^
r CM
0 0
+1 V
^J.
co
o
+ "(
O 00
i CM
CM CM
1 1
JD (B
O. Q^
D>
CM
in
<
o
>+-
Q
a
*4~>
(O
r^
3
O
*P""
i-
*TJ
DL
4~>
{/>
Z3
a
H3
f
4-)
^
S
«
co ro
CM
00
0
ai
^
o
^>
o
r*-
CL
-!-> 0
fO QJ
i +-*
3 ai
0 T3
!{3 c
s- o
re c
CL
CO
-M OJ
CO 4->
3 (B
-o o
r
(O "X3
C*
_C «r-
-M
i- Q
^ ^
\ t/^
£
CTt CO
0)
O
IB
a; u
3 -P
1 >,
0 r
> (B
C
T^ T3
-------
y
cc.
LU
1
Qi
O
CC
or
LU
C3
CI3 i i
^ 1
-> :r
__] *J J
Q- O
5 o
OO CC
LU C3
\ >--i
<: OO
t |
=> 0
0 3:
i i h-
o: +i
d. Z
0
LU I I
Z 1
Oi eC
C ry
rf\ \
I_LJ f
C£ 2:
. I LU
«=C (_>
IO o
o
LU
_J LU
CQ O
2 '""'
(_j
i
"2Z.
O
i t
/ *(
rv^
1
LU
Z
^^
LO a
1 ^~-
CTl O
CM O
^^
d-
It "
K
It to
t IO
00 oo r-
o m
2:0 0 E
OL. 1 4-> "^
CO *^" »f
SILO 00 0
S i «3" a
=Cr CM
C_J)
O
^~
LO D
h^ ^
^-^ -i
CTl 0
CM Q
^^
^^-
*
*
\
1^
1 r Q
OCO CO
O i CM
CM i
*~~*
It L^
^ r^-
LlJ O
-
a:
^C i/)
a: s_
CD x:
t 4
1 O
CD
* VO
£"^
_J O
CQ 4->ro
E
2: vo -r-
O OO r_)
LU O Q
1 i
LU
Q
i i
_
0
*"~
^
C
c
^r
Cc
OO
.
oo
+i
oo
LO
^*
r~-
O
CD
+1
r
CM
O
O
ID
+1
IT)
CM
in
i
o
c
+1
,
CM
C
o
CM
v
M
*^-
C
C
C
(~
^
<£>
cs
ex.
i
(^
tt
LO
LO
Q +1
IO
OO
CO
CM
0
O
Q
z. +i
LO
r^.
.
O
00
oo
Q
Z +1
00
CM
CM
OO
O
0
Q
z: +i
^j-
CM
.
O
CM
LO
Q
Z +1
,
r
OO
r
O
0
o
a
LO
CM
O
O
O
+
o ^r
> oo
CM CM
1 1
O !T3
a.
LO
CTl
0
+1
CTl
CTl
O
^~
o
o
o
+1
CM
^^
O
f^.
vo
o
+1
CTl
CTl
.
O
<£>
LO
O
o
0
+1
1
CO
0
0
o
LO
CM
V
LO
LO
O
O
o
0
V
LO
OO
CM
1
i
'O
LO
+ 1
r^
00
*^-
CM
O
O
+1
ID
.
0
P-~
OO
+1
oo
CM
CM
OO
O
O
+1
^j.
CM
0
O
LO
+ 1
V£)
r^
CM
f-~
O
o
o
41
r
O
o
o
CO
oo
CM
1
)
** LO
CTl CM
-H
r^
oo
CTl
oo i
o o
0 0
+1 +1
CO LO
CM r
0
o
o
0
-a
ai
i
a.
E
ro
OO
₯
CTl
CM
O
t^
O
o
0
CU
ro
r
3
(J
l_
ro
Q.
^>
to
3
ro
-C
r
2
m
E
C\J
14^
0
CU
,2
o
;>
TD
CU
Q.
E
ro
oo
*
*
cr
p.^
O
LO
O
<*-
0
-o
ro
O CU
r_ t
JD
CU ra
iS ^ S
ro u
i a>
3 .4-)
O CU
t- -0
i^ 1
t ' 1
ro O
0- C
4-1 00
to cu
3 -4->
-O ro
O
ro T-
T3
^: c
4-> *i
r-
f Q
. ~
m .
(^ r^
3
CM IO
r CU
i.
lt-
o ^~
ro
CU U
3 +J
'o r
> ro
C
-O ro
CU
I tO
a. f
E O
§ t.
oo o
K +
*
34
-------
apparent disequilibrium can be partially accounted for by the
errors in the polonium and lead-210 data and analytical uncertain-
ties (see Appendix C). The results for #3 calciner do indicate
the strong liklihood of excess polonium-210 (see Appendix C).
Specific activity determinations of the airborne particulate
matter may also be compared to the results of analyses of the raw
material input to the wet process (Table 3). The highest polonium-
210 content of the input ore was 48 ± 5.9 pCi/g (Conda Mine-low
grade ore). The specific activity determinations of the airborne
particulate samples from the Calciner Building indicate potentially
higher polonium-210 than the input ore concentration. The specific
activity concentrations for the other radionuclides in the input
products are generally comparable to the airborne particulate
sample results for all locations sampled.
PARTICLE SIZE CHARACTERIZATION
Cascade Impactor Sampling
*
High volume cascade impactors were used to measure the size
distribution of airborne particulate matter for both the indoor
and outdoor environments. The impactor filter stages attach to a
** ***
high volume air sampler which is electronically controlled
to operate at a flow rate of 40 cubic feet per minute (CFM).
This corresponds to a linear air velocity of about 72 feet per
minute through the final 8 x 10-inch filter stage.
Whatman #41 paper filters were used for each impaction
stage. Glass fiber (Type E) was used for the final 8 x 10-inch
filter. Typical particle size ranges for each filter stage, as
reported by the manufacturer, are:
* Model 252 Series, six stage, cascade impactor from Tech Ecology, Inc.
(Now produced and marketed by Sierra Instruments, Inc.)
** Model GMWL-2000, High Volume Air Sampling System from General Metal Works, Inc.
***Model 310/310A, High Volume Constant Flow Controller from Sierra Instruments,
Inc.
35
-------
Equivalent Aerodynamic Diameter at 50
Stage No. Percent Collection Efficiency (micrometer)
1 Greater than 7.2 ym
2 3.0 - 7.2
3 1.5 - 3.0
4 0.95- 1.5
5 0.49- 0.95
Final Filter Less than 0.49
"Equivalent aerodynamic diameter" is defined as the size of
a spherical particle of unit density which has the same terminal
settling velocity as the sampled particle. Radioactivity analysis
of each impactor stage provides an indication of the activity
content for the various particle size ranges.
Gross Results of Impactor Sampling
The cascade impactor sampler was used at four locations in
the Wet Process Plant - the Calciner, the ore unloading and
storage area, the 200 Ammophos Plant (18-46-0 storage area), and
at the gypsum p-'le. Gross analytical results for these samples
are presented in Tables 17 to 20. Tables 21 and 22 show the
results of radiochemical analyses of blank impactor filters - the
slotted Whatman #41 paper and the 8 x 10-inch glass fiber filters,
respectively. Since most of the blank slotted paper filters
contained radioactivity concentrations at the minimum detectable
activity (MDA) levels for the analysis, a blank filter subtraction
has not been performed for all the radionuclides for the impactor
samples. As noted in subsequent discussions, tabulations of net
results have been used in some of the data plots. The previously
noted reservations concerning the lead-210 and polonium-210 data
also apply to these results (i.e., lead-210 may be low by a
factor of five or more and polonium-210 high by a factor of ten).
Data for narrowing the uncertainty on specific samples are given
in Appendix C.
36
-------
en
E
S^
LU
«| i
g^
00 C£
O
OS Ct
CC.
t n 1 1
< I-H
O (
1 Z
rs c
o
LU
ct: <
LU >-^
I OO
i i \
CD +1
Z
a!2
$ «x
OO CC
a: z
O LU
1 o
%E
3,0
a
LU >-i
o _
- Z _l 00
1- o< a:
i i i LU
> h- ce i
§ 3^ ""
OO
a:
LiJ
z
Lf>
01
LU
U-
^
ce
LU
1
14
LL.
ro
=tt
CC.
LU
1-
_l
U.
CM
=tfc
a:
LU
vJ
U-
o:
LU
_l
U-
RADIONUCLIDE
^J- LO CO i r-~CMCMi CM
COLOCMOCMLOOIOCO
ooooooooo
V V V
f^. CM
CM tOCMVOOOLOCOrO
CMt^i Oi CMO1-LO
O OOOOOOO
ooooooooos*
CM
+1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +! +1+1 V LO
CMCOr lOr-CO. CM
.0 o
0 O O O 0 O O
o
o
to 10 to
i CM f^. CO CM VD CM
i r OOi OCOLO
o ooooooo
0 OOOOOOO4*
+1 +1 V +1 +1 V +1 V
LO Z CO 00 CO CO
LO O CM CM OO
o o o o
o
o o o o
CM Cn ^t" CM r-~ O">
OO CO t ^° O"> ^" tD 1^-
o OOOOOCOLO
o ooooooo
o ooooooo*^
a cr>
+1 Z +1 V +1 +1 +| +| V
1^. CO «3- CM LO i
CM r i CO O CO
O 0 O O 0 O
o o o o o o
r-* vc LO UD to
tD p^ CvJ r^. CO t£) CM
O OOOi OCOtO
o ooooooo
o ooooooo
+1 Q +1 v +l +l v +l V o
en to oo 00 oo oo"
t CM i CM OO
O 0 00 0
o o o o o
>o oo co
tD tO r ^O CO tO ^J"
§o o o i o co to
ooooooo
O OOOOOOO
O )><
+1 Z +1 V +1 +1 V +1 V to
^- en CM ^- ^j- vo
I CM O P^
o o o o
o
O O 0 O
i tO to
tO CM CO CM tO "3-
o^> o* i ocoto
o< ooooooo
ooooooooo
+1 +1 +1 V +1 +1 V +1 V tO
co vo ^ "st co r^
r^ i o o LO o
o o
o o o o . o
o
o
a>
cr
>*- TO
O 4->
toottocoocMOco in i >
CMr COCOCOcOCOi CM+-> TO-4->
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM CI-+J-I-
Q) Q) O >
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 U +-> | -
TJ O 1^ "~i *"*» f~ t~ r~\ TO QJ *^ O t
o: a. i t a. ae a. LL. 4-> «c
O
a>
ai
o
c
o
to
5
o
ai
o
>
o
01
oo
*
37
-------
m
E
CJ
Q
,_,
*
Q LU
_J 1
-_ Q£
-8
ce ce:
UJ UJ
o z
_j tt
"~ o
LU '
_J Q
ss
f
to
to
c>
C£.
CD
O
H-
_J
>- i
h-
o
in
o
UD
CM
O
^2
o
^.
CM
O
CTt
O
CT>
O
CO
CO
o
o
m
CM
o
in
o
ps..
oo
o
o
CM
t
O
CL
r
ro
O
CM
O
O
0
o
LO
§
o
3
CO
O
0
o
o
o
CO
°
o
o
o
0
en
CM
o
o
^.
8
o
^
CD
C3
CM
O
o
f
o
CD
CO
CM
1
=
,_
O
O
V
CM
O
o
o
CO
8
o
^j.
CM
O
O
O
V
d-
CM
O
o
CD
CO
8
o
CM
O
O
O
V
CM
O
CD
O
V
CM
8
O
V
un
ro
CM
i
=
CM
cn
o
CM
O
O
o
o
ID
CTi
8
o
o
o
o
p^
8
o
10
CO
o
o
8
o
CO
CO
o
o
CO
o
o
o
CM
0
o
CM
o
o
V0
CO
o
o
s
CM
1
=3
O CM
in o
0 0
V
ro
CM O
0 0
o o
o *o
CM LO
CD 8
CD
^j.
CM CM
O
O O
0 0
V
in
9-
O
0
in *d-
01 CM
8O
0
o o
in oo
°- 8
o
o
CM CM
CD
O O
O O
CM OO
O O
o
o
CO
CO
r CD
0 O
o o
^ o
° i
o
o
Ch cxj
5 8
0 0
o
o
O CM
ro ro
CM CM
1 1
1 J
^"
OO
0
V
10
CO
O
o
CM
O
CM
ro
O
0
o
LO
O
o
CM
ro
o
o
CO
o
o
V
CTi
O
0
ro
CM
O
O
ro
ro
O
O
CO
o
o
CM
1
.0
^~
CO
o
ID
O X
O ro
V
LO
10
O a*
O "~
V
CO
ir>
o **
o
LO
0 g
O CM
v
LO *e
O CO
O CT*
V
to
o *«
o
V
t.
Q)
1E5
o
H- r-
o
CO O >
CM 4-» *-> +-
CM C f
I U CTl-f-
i- *D *-
rO C
o; Q. co <
g
o
t_
r
O
L.
4->
O
(J
QJ
-C
«->
CU
>
J3
CU
CM
O>
C
O
>>
U
-4-1
O
.C
CU
.c
o
4->
4->
X
CU
"
1
u
fO
o
CO
5*
01
^
4-)
UJ
CU
^^^^
in
r-s.
"*-s.
CO
CM
*t
*
tn
S-
.C
^
^±
o
+->
^
*s-
ro
g
s_
**-
cn
E
ro
ro
«*-
o
J
*©
>
o
Ol
Q.
1
Ifl
«
38
-------
ID
£
n)
cu'fc
(O "^
J- o
">
O C£
VO LLj
' a;
2 °
1 ^
|==
00 O
D_
f^
§
°d>
LU *-
? +l
So
z ^
^ ^
4 z
0:°
P.LU
C
O ,__
Is
g
§1
to ^
<->£
W43
LU
_J
CO
t
to
a:
LU
1
_J
3= LL.
>- O
« h- 1
O
«£ CO Li-
ar
t
1
£
2=
u.
in
^tt
^
UJ
5
U.
^~
CC
LU
(_
Lu
=*fc
C£
LU
_J
LL.
CO
a:
LU
1
_J
U-
*
r*
LU
J
U-
LU
O
_l
^3
Z
0
ex
^.
o
o
00
0
o
o
^
CM
O
O
CT
O
O
o
^
o
o
o
0
o
o
00
8
o
U3
a-
o
o
o
+1
n
Ol
8
O
in
8
0
8
0
5
o
o
o
CM
§
O
o
VO
CM
CM
1
n
ex.
o
ro
o
V
^
o
CM
0
a
z
0
z
CM
O
^
0
o
V
o
CM
1
o
o
,_
CM
O
O
o
o
o
0
^
ro
o
o
01
o
o
0
ro
in
o
o
CM
O
o
+1
CT
o
CM
o
o
d-
ro
o
ID
ro
o
o
CM
Q
CO
CM
1
in
ro
O
o
V
CM
g
O
1C
ro
g
o
^.
CM
O
o
o
V
CM
O
o
o
V
CM
8
O
+1
CO
1
o
CO
o
o
o
g
o
CM
1
0
CM
o
o
in
ro
CM
1
O
,
O
o
CM
g
O
CM
O
o
o
0>
CM
O
O
Ol
8
o
g
o
CM
O
O
4-1
r-*
s
o
CM
O
O
in
ro
o
U5
ro
o
o
ro
*
o
00
ro
CM
i
00
,
CM
O
o
o
CM
O
CM
O
O
ID
O
O
o
o
g
o
^
o
o
+1
CO
o
ro
o
o
CM
in
o
IO
o
o
CO
00
o
o
ro
CM
1
.£=
t
*f
CM
o
o
V
ro
CM
8
0
V
*»
CM
o
o
o
V
CM
8
o
V
CM
o
o
o
V
00
g
0
CO
g
o
r-.
o
CO
PO
CO
1
t
00
^>
o
V
CO
ro
o
o
V
r-..
o
o
^
g
o
ID
O
o
1
o
o
^
s
o
+1
o
o
in
CO
o
o
ro
o
o
^
CO
o
o
"~I
o
o
CO
1
.0
Q.
CO
CO
o
V
LO
in
o *«
o ?
V
CO
LO »<
o r^
o in
V
to
m *«
C? CTi
O \O
V
^.
m »«
O LO
O O>
V
LO
to
O *5
O CO
^.
m
o **
o ro
V
t.
r- (Q
U +*
. o
o1^
00 O >
CM J-> JJ +J
CM C !-
i u er'«-
1. « 4J
to a> -»J t
tt a. i/> «t
01
C
o
C
wl
OJ
4->
O
|
z:
^4.
m
^^
«d-
Jt
V-
LT>
-
O
OJ
r-
g
>.
m
£
ro
ro
«+-
O
g
o
^
-a
a>
"o.
§
t/i
*
39
-------
UJ Z
_j K
5s
a. r-
> i
CD
UJ -«
sl
a. c/i
i
Q£
§§
'2
S
sL
< UJ
(/> U_
>- -J
I QC
1 O
<
DC
UJ
1
r
_j
u.
in
UJ
_j
LL.
«,
UJ
-J
LL.
CO
«
UJ
t
_J
U.
!*
oe
UJ
I
_j
u.
^
o:
UJ
_j
LL,
C
C
I
c
c
CO
0
8
o
Lf>
o
i
o
-H
CO
s
°
o
VO
8
CD
+i
CO
px.
8
o
i
0
-H
CO
Uf)
8
o
i
o
+i
s
o
CM
S
O
"*"'
3
8
CD
CO
C\J
CM
1
3
o
C\J
o
o
o
8
CD
O
Z
a
o
z
o
0
z
o
CM
\
O
OL.
CO
o
O
8
o
CM
o
o
CO
8
o
o
+1
IA
m
o
o
CO
1
o
fl
.
1
O
<*>
I
0
i
o
_
8
o
+1
CO
g
d
fo
1
o
*'
J
g
o
v
CM
\
=
c>
1
o
V
f)
CM
C)
^<
c>
C3
8
o
C-J
8
C3
CJ
VJ.
8
C5
^-
8
£3
*£
|
CD
in
CO
r*.
K
IT
O
^
O
*c
r"
If
»<
0
ff
w
S
^"^
o
° o
C i-
1) OJ
S S1^
0) **
a. */> ^
a>
"S
u
i)
i
c
o
c
I/I
0)
CO
cn
o
i_
Ct-
m
^
CO
CM
t>-
O
O)
i
"o
^
01
Q.
i
!T
40
-------
Q. o:
CC UJ
Q. I
a: a:
i cc
<_> o:
C3
a- «n
i CM
o o
o
o
o
in
o
§
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
O .-
c
r- ,
H-
"- O
o
O (/)
I- 111
o
>> c
o
o
CO
o
o
ex
01
CM
o
CO r
o o
O i
O) l/>
m c£
1_
t I.
ro Of
u >
41
-------
u- a:
LJ
cc Q-
3 §
to en
UJ
Z U!
35
CO I-
O
CM
d
CO
LD
d
i^
CD
O
r-
d
IT)
CM
O
d
ro
d
'
d
C\J
CM
d
CO
o
!£
d
o
o
Q
in
c
o
o
ro
o
1
o
ro
d
CO
o
V
CO
o
CD
ro
CM
d
VO
CM
O
o
vo
d
vo
o
*
ro
d
^.
o
d
CM
d
§
o
d
ro
O
d
0
d
+l
CM
ro
d
o
"«O
r
O
+l
CO
CM
d
*
*4- 4-»
O r
3
O)
t.
<5
o>
u
c
OJ
TD
»r
o
u
^J
c
o>
0
OJ
Q.
in
en
OJ
JC
CO
C
*- N 0
\£> >r-
*t 3
O J3
in
in -i~
CM
X> JO
ro
t. C
ro
M* S
> l/l
*-> JC
U 4->
to
CO 3
ro o
CM ja
ZD
S-
O 0
*-> S-
s-
ro
CM "^
ID (0
o
'ro ro
t. -4-*
u in
M
na jz
c: *->
c: j
o
t/i
l/t 3
ro t/)
J3 O>
QJ ,
*3 *t-
u o
rO (U
U Oi
ro
in t-
ro
i
-------
Table 23 provides a summary of the gross results of the
cascade Impactor sampling for the four sampling locations. Except
for the results from the 200 Ammophos Plant the majority of
radioactivity (ranging from 32 to 77 percent of the arithmetic
total) was measured in the particle size fraction less than
0.49 ym. The average of all four sampling locations indicates
that roughly 52 percent of the arithmetic total airborne radio-
activity was in the sub-micron particle size range.
Comparison of Air Sampling Results
The activity summation for all filters of the cascade
impactor may be compared to the activity concentrations determined
from the portable air sampler for the same sampling location.
Good agreement has been obtained between the results of the
radioactivity determinations using these two different sampling
systems, even though the samples were not necessarily obtained
during simultaneous time periods.
For the Ore Unloading and Storage Area, impactor results
(Table 17) are roughly two to three times the activity concen-
trations as measured using the portable air sampler (third column
of Table 11). In both cases, decay chain members appear to be in
equi1ibrium.
In the Calciner Building, the cascade impactor results
(Table 18) are about one-third of the activity measured using the
portable air sampler (third column of Table 12), except for the
radium-226 which was one-seventh of the portable air sampler
result. Of the four locations sampled for airborne radioactivity
using both sampling systems, only the Calciner Building impactor
results (Table 18) showed less airborne radioactivity than did
the results obtained using the portable air sampler (Table 12).
Of all the sampling locations, the highest airborne radioactivity
measurements were obtained in the Calciner Building, regardless
of the air sampling system used. (This conclusion recognizes the
previously denoted uncertainties for the lead-210 and polonium-
210 results.)
43
-------
1
CD
H:
i i
_j
D_
CO
O£
o
<_>
CO
LU
3C
H-
l_i_
0
CO
_J
^>
co
LU
OC
co
co
o
ct
CD
U_
O
>-
ct:
j>~
s:
CO
ro
CM
LU
1
CO)
I i
cz.
-
1
l i
>
P
c_>
<:
0
h<
O
o:
LU
Q_
c
a E
5 a
a>
co ^3-
t/>
CD O
_1
LO
en
0
o E
»-> 3.
a\
^j-
o
LO
1
0 E
+-> 3.
to
CT>
O
0
ro
o E
+» 3-
LO
CM
f**^^
1^**-
0 E
--> 3.
0
CO
c
res
^"
+-> E
j- ^
CU CM
+->
ro t^-
CU
i.
e?
c
o
r-
4->
«O
O
O
_J
CM CM CO r-~ «3"
oo to i (*» «*
«j- r^ CM oo
f CT> LO LO r^
f
I7l G^ O^ ^ij
o t^ <& .O O «3- CO
-H CO O _i OLU
i < - QCLU
O CO CJ CM CD
-------
Impactor sampling in the 18-46-0 storage area of the 200
Ammophos Plant (Table 19) showed about three times the airborne
radioactivity as obtained using the portable air sampler (third
column of Table 16). Excellent agreement was obtained for the
results from both sampling systems at the Gypsum Pile (Tables 20
and the fifth column of Table 11).
Particle Size Distribution
Figures 2, 3, 4 and 5 present the log-normal probability
plots of data from the cascade impactor sampling. The plotted
points are based on both the gross activity and in some cases,
the net activity (i.e., gross minus the appropriate activity
associated with a blank filter). Only total uranium, thorium-
230, and radium-226 data have been plotted. Data for the other
remaining radionuclides were not plotted because of inadequate
blank filter results or because the gross results were so low
that meaningful net results could not be calculated. The actual
points were calculated by allocating all the activity in all the
stages subsequent to and including that particular stage to the
specified size cut off for that stage (Elder et al. , 1974). The
manufacturer sppcified size cutoffs for the impactor at 40 cfm
are 7.2, 3.0, 1.5, 0.95, and 0.49 micrometers (equivalent aero-
dynamic diameter). These are partially based on a study by
Willeke (1975). Thus, in the actual calculations, the percent of
the total activity on the 3.0, 1.5, 0.95, and 0.49 and final
filter stages was designated as less than 7.2 micrometers. The
percent of the total activity on the final filter was ascribed to
the 0.49 micrometer stage, etc. The lines are based on hand-
drawn estimates and not based on regression analysis.
The plotted distributions (Figures 2, 3, 4 and 5) have not
been statistically tested to demonstrate the appropriateness of
describing the data with a log-normal distribution. The log-
probability plots are used as a tool to summarize the data and
describe its central tendency.
45
-------
10'
5.0-
2.0-
UJ
N
35
UJ
_i
u
H
1.0-
0.5'
0.2-
0.1
D U-Total (Gross)
Th-230 (Gross)
Xg = 0.2 um
Sg = M = 19
0.2
A Ra-226 (Net)
Xg = 0.23 um
Sg = °^I§ = 3.4
a 0.23
Ra-226 (Gross)
Xg = 0.2 um
Sg = L2 = 6
M 0.2
0.01 0.1 125 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99
ACCUMULATED PERCENT LESS THAN INDICATED SIZE
99.9 99.99
Figure 2. Ore unloading and storage area log-probability plot of the
particle size distribution (Table 17).
46
-------
10-
5.0-
2.0-
N
V)
Ul
u
1.0-
0.5-
0.2-
0.1-
O U-Total (Gross)
Th-230 (Gross)
Xg = 0.9jum
Ra-226 (Gross)
Yg = 0.4pm
0.01 0.1 12 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99
ACCUMULATED PERCENT LESS THAN INDICATED SIZE
Figure 3. Calciner building log-probability plot of the
particle size distribution (Table 18).
99.9 99.99
47
-------
10-
5.0-
2.0-
S
UJ
N
55
UJ
U
1.0-
0.5-
0.2-
0.1-
A U-Total (Net)
D U-Total (Gross)
Th-230 (Gross)
Xg = 6 urn
AD
Ra-226 (Gross)
Xg - 0.7 um
Sg = I? = 6
0.7
0.01 0.1 12 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99
ACCUMULATED PERCENT LESS THAN INDICATED SIZE
99.9 99.99
Figure 4. 200 Ammophos plant log-probability plot
of the particle size distribution (Table 19).
48
-------
10'
5.0-
2.0
S
ui
N
55
UJ
u
1.0'
0.5'
0.2-
0.1-
0.01
D U-Total (Gross)
Th-230 (Gross)
Xg = 0.1 um
A Ra-226 (Net)
Xg = 0.03 um
0.03
Ra-226 (Gross)
Xg = 0.04 um
Sg = 0.57 = 14
0.04
0.1 12 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99
ACCUMULATED PERCENT LESS THAN INDICATED SIZE
99.9 99.99
Figure 5. Gypsum pile log-probability plot of
particle size distribution (Table 20).
49
-------
The geometric mean (X ) is given by the fiftieth cumulative
percent intercept. The geometric standard deviation (S ) is
indicated by the slope of the line and is usually calculated by
dividing the particle diameter at the 84 percentile by the diam-
eter at the 50 percentile. Due to the limited data and the
uncertainty of analytical results, there is considerable uncer-
tainty in the log-normal probability values. Many of the values
have been rounded to one significant digit, and those that have
not are not accurate to more than one significant digit.
In order to present as much inforamtion as possible, size
distribution plots of the gross activity are given in Figures 2
to 5. When the measured sample activity was sufficient to allow
calculation of reasonably accurate quantities of net activity for
most of the impactor stages, the size distribution of the net
activity results were also plotted (Figures 2, 4, and 5). The
significance of the quantity of blank activity compared to the
net sample activity is illustrated in Figure 2. Subtraction of
the blank radium-226 activity resulted in a slightly different
particle size distribution plot with essentially the same geo-
metric mean value (X" of 0.20 versus 0.23 ym) but an apparently
different standard deviation (S of 6.0 versus 3.4). The thorium-
230 sample activity was sufficiently greater than the appropriate
blank activity such that the resulting "net" values are essen-
tially identical to the gross distribution therefore the net
values were not shown.
The data for the Ore Unloading and Storage Area, the Calciner
Building, and the Gypsum Pile (Figures 2, 3, and 5, respectively)
indicate geometric means of less than one micrometer. These
results are within expected values for atmospheric and industrial
dusts (Lee, 1972; Elder et al. , 1974; and Willeke, 1975).
Relatively large geometric means, indicating rather coarse
particulate matter, was obtained in the 200 Ammophos Plant
(Figure 4).
50
-------
Geometric standard deviations (S ) ranged from 3.4 to 19.
These values are similar to, but slightly higher than reported
values for ambient data (generally less than S of 10; Lee,
1972). These relatively high geometric standard deviations
probably reflect the composite of several size distributions.
That is, there may be several particle size distributions from
the plant in conjunction with ambient dust. The results for the
Ore Unloading and Storage Area (Figure 2) and the Calciner Build-
ing (Figure 3) show concentrations above ambient levels.
Knuth (1976), in his evaluation of the impactor, indicated
that it tended to underestimate the size distribution and over-
estimate the geometric standard deviation. Thus, it is possible
that this is also reflected in the data. Although Knuth's
results indicated that this appeared to be more of a problem for
the larger size distributions (X of 7 micrometers) but was less
of a problem for distributions around 4 micrometers.
Results from Lee (1972) indicate average geometric standard
deviations of up to 20 for ambient air. Elder et al. , (1974)
indicate geometric standard deviations in the thirties for
processes using plutonium; thus, the values noted in this study
appear to be realistic.
As shown in Figures 2 to 5, two different particle size
distributions are implied by the data for total-uranium and
thorium-230 data versus the radium-226 data. The geometric mean
of the uranium and thorium data for the Calciner and the Gypsum
Pile (Figures 3 and 5) are about twice that of the radium data
and about a factor of 10 higher for the 200 Ammophos Plant
(Figure 4). The geometric means are similar for the Ore Area
(Figure 2), but the thorium and uranium data have a higher
geometric standard deviation than the radium data.
51
-------
STACK SAMPLING
Stack sampling was conducted in late September 1975 using
the RAC Train Stacksamplr* and methods specified in the Federal
Register, Volume 36, No. 247 (December 23, 1971). Representative
samples were obtained from each process-type discharge stack;
however, every plant discharge stack was not sampled.
Particulate matter was collected on a glass fiber filter
(2.5-inch diameter) which was subsequently analyzed for natural
radioactivity content. To determine the blank filter natural
radioactivity content, two sets of unused filters were analyzed
and these results are shown in Table 24. Also shown is the
extrapolated filter content based on the area ratio between the
2.5-inch and the 4-inch diameter filters of 0.391 times the 4-
inch diameter activity content as reported by Eadie and Bern-
hardt, (1976). These results show fairly good agreement between
the measured and the extrapolated activity contents. The extra-
polated filter content (last column of Table 24) has been used as
a blank filter activity content which has been subtracted from
the gross analytical result to obtain the reported "net result".
No blank subtractions have been made for the three radionuclides
(radium-228, pol onium-2!l 0, and lead-210) which are at the analyti-
cal minimum detectable activity (MDA) level. The net results for
the stack effluent discharge radioactivity concentrations are
reported in Table 25.
The 100 Calciner Scrubber and the 100 Ammophos Reactor
stacks were sampled, but the sampling was not done under iso-
kinetic conditions. Thus, these results have not been reported.
Assuming the results were not grossly in error (sampling was 25
and 35 percent outside of isokinetic), the concentrations of
activity in these stacks (uranium-238 chain) were around 1 pCi/m3
The flow rates for these stacks were similar to those given for
the data in Table 25, indicating that a large proportion of the
*Research Appliance Corporation (RAC), Gibsonia, PA.
52
-------
effluent was not missed. That is, more radioactivity is accounted
for by the Mill Stacks and TSP Dryer than by the Calciner Scrubber
and Ammophos Reactor.
TABLE 24. RADIOACTIVE CONTENT OF BLANK GLASS FIBER FILTER (2.5-INCH DIAMETER)*
(pCi/filter ± two-sigma counting error term)
5- Filter
Radionuclide Composite
Ra-226
Po-210
U-234
**
U-235
U-238
Th-230
Th-232
Pb-210
Ra-228
0.52 ± 0.14
0.29 ± 0.11
0.060 ± 0.038
<0.0012
<0.026
<0.075
<0.080
No data
<0.81
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
<0.
6- Filter
Composite
42
058
022
001
025
089
029
088
No
+
+
+
2±
+
+
+
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
16
015
018
00079
017
040
023
data
Average Blank Extrapolated ++
Filter Content Filter Content
0.47 ± 0.21
0.17 ± 0.11
<0.041
<0.0012
<0.026
<0.082
<0.055
<0.088
<0.81
0.
<0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
<0.
<0.
14 ±
066
039 ±
001 4±
031 ±
078 ±
051 ±
13
62
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
035
012
00039
0078
031
0078
''Average 2.5-inch filter mass ± two standard deviations of 0.2159 ± 0.0050 grams.
**U-235 calculated based on natural U-235 to U-238 activity ratio of
1:21.45 (0.0466).
+ Average of the 5-filter and 6-filter composite results.
++Extrapolated value based on area ratio between 2.5-inch and 4-inch diameter
filters of 0.391 times the 4-inch diameter activity content (Eadie and
Bernhardt, 1976).
Table 25 presents the stack results in units of picocuries
per cubic meter. These can be converted to discharge rates by
multiplying by the stack flow rates given in the footnote. These
values can then be related to the total plant process by multiply-
ing by the number of similar stacks. It has been assumed that the
various stacks have similar discharge parameters (i.e., there
were four 200 Mill Stacks but only one such stack was sampled).
53
-------
a:
ID CE
E CD
"t «
C/l l/l
^ o
<_>3
Z
o
in ii
- o
z
o
S
CM
o
<
CL
g
00
o
OJ
s
o
+1
o
o
o
s
°
o
o
in
i .
0\
to
CM
C3
01 vo
.fet
x ai
W Q) "U
CU 4-> IO
Q. S-
of^r
C CJ
01 3
S. C 1.
3 -r- 10
!- t- E
V QJ »
a. ex 01
a^
(M
co « un
1= r-^.
o
a: uj
o co
DC CO <*i *""
a. zs E u~>
oo a: r^
o o u-> ^^
X co LO ro
a. co -^
oS -°
o o
CM O
CO CX
01
TJ >> 0
0) S- J=
! in !-
E 0) O
10 ^: O
^ o.
54
-------
It is emphasized that there are considerable uncertainties
in estimating releases, especially annual releases, from single
short-term samples. Such estimates are only a general indication
and are impacted by variations between stacks, analytical uncer-
tainties, daily variations in the operations of the plant, etc.
Thus, without additional verification, release estimates probably
have at least an order of magnitude uncertainty. Based on the
reported data, the annual releases are estimated to be about 5 to
10 mCi for the uranium-238 chain nuclides (uranium-238 through
lead-210). The lead-210 estimates could be somewhat higher than
this, based on the previously mentioned uncertainties in the
lead-210 data. The higher levels of lead-210 may be related to
its volatility in the calcining and other heating processes. The
low levels (compared to lead-210) of polonium-210 in the stack
effluents are not readily explainable, given the volatility of
polonium. It is possible a discharge point for polonium-210 was
overlooked.
The stack sampling data for the 200 Mill and the 200 Phos-
phoric Acid Scrubber indicate somewhat higher concentrations of
lead-210 and radium-226 than for the other nuclides. Uranium-234
and -238 and thurium-230 appear to be present in similar quanti-
ties as the radium-226 and lead-210 for the TSP Dryer stack
sample.
The estimated stack discharges of uranium, thorium-230,
radium-226, and lead-210 for the wet process plant are of the
same order of magnitude (millicuries per year), but generally a
bit lower than those estimated for a thermal phosphate plant
(ORP/LVF, 1977). The two plants processed similar volumes of ore
(1 to 2 million tons per year), but produced different products
(i.e., fertilizer for the wet process plant and elemental phos-
phorus for the thermal process plant).
55
-------
The highest stack discharges from this plant, both pCt/m3
and pCi/sec, were for the TSP Dryer. Since this study, the air
pollution control equipment for this process has been upgraded
(additional cyclone and scrubber), resulting fn significant
decreases in the particulate and fluoride effluents and, undoubt-
edly an associated reduction in the quantities of radioactivity
discharged to the environs.
56
-------
SUMMARY
External gamma radiation measurements conducted in various
working areas of the J. R. Simplot's Wet Process Plant near
Pocatello, Idaho ranged from background to 120 yR/h, including an
estimated background level of about 9 yR/h. Ambient radon-222
concentrations in several buildings ranged from 0.14 to a high of
1.9 pCi'/l. which was measured outside the Control Room of the 300
Phosphoric Acid Plant. Out-of-doors, the ambient radon concentra-
tion ranged from 0.23 to 0.31 pCi/1 in the Ore Loading and
Unloading Area and the Gypsum Pile, respectively. These ambient
radon concentrations are within expected ranges due to natural
terrestrial background sources alone.
The highest airborne particulate radioactivity was measured
in the area of the #3 Calciner Building. There the radium-226
was 1.6 pCi/m3, and total uranium was about 2.1 pCi/m3. These
airborne concentrations are orders of magnitude greater than
results obtained in the Technical Building Library.
Particle size characterization (of selected cascade impactor
results) indicates geometric means of equivalent aerodynamic
diameters of less than one micrometer, except for one value of
six micrometers (values ranged from 0.03 to 6.0 ym). These
values are within the expected ranges for atmospheric and indust-
trial dusts. The average of all cascade impactor sampling results
indicated that roughly 52 percent of the arithmetic total airborne
radioactivity was contained in the particle size fraction less
than one micrometer.
Difficulties in the radiochemfcal analysis of samples for
lead-210, discovered subsequent to the completion of analysis of
the reported samples, indicates up to an order of magnitude
57
-------
uncertainty in many of the reported lead-210 and polonium-210
results.
Stack sampling of representative effluent discharge points
showed radium-226 release concentrations ranging from 0.74± 0.29
to 9.5 ± 1.6 pCf/m3. Natural uranium and lead-210 concentrations
ranged up to about 15 pCi/m3. Estimates based on these results,
the number of similar stacks, and associated stack flow rates
indicate annual discharges of about 5 to 10 mCi/year of lead-210,
radium-226, and uranium-234 and -238, with lower values for
thorium-230 and polonium-210.
58
-------
REFERENCES
BERNHARDT, David E. (May 1976), Evaluation of Sample Collection
and Analysis Techniques for Environmental Plutonium. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Technical Note ORP/LV-76-5.
EADIE, Gregory G, R.F. KAUFMANN, D.O. MARKLEY, R. WILLIAMS (June
1976), Report of Ambient Outdoor Radon and Indoor Radon Progeny
Concentrations During November 1975 at Selected Locations in the
Grants Mineral Belt, New Mexico. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Technical Note ORP/LV-76-4.
EADIE, Gregory G. and D. E. BERNHARDT (December 1976), Sampling
and Data Reporting Considerations for Airborne Particulate
Radioactivity. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Technical
Note ORP/LV-76-9.
EISENBUD, M. (1963), Environmental Radioactivity. McGraw-Hill
Book Company, New York.
ELDER, J.C., M. GONZALES, and H.J. ETTINGER (1974), Plutonium
Aerosol Size Characteristics. Health Physics. 27:45-53.
(EPA, February 1977) - U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
(February 3-5, 1977), Report of the Workshop on Issues Pertinent
to the Development of Environmental Protection Criteria for
Radioactive Wastes. Washington, D. C.
FEDERAL REGISTER. Volume 36, No. 247 (December 23, 1971),
"Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources." Also,
Volume 41, No. Ill (June 8, 1976), "Proposed Amendments to
Reference Methods."
GUIMOND, R.J. and S.T. WINDHAM (August 1975), Radioactivity
Distribution in Phosphate Products, By-Products, Effluents, and
Wastes. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Technical Note
ORP/CSD-75-3.
HARLEY, J.H. (1975), "Environmental Radon," in The Noble Gases,
R.E. STANLEY and A.A. MOGHISSI, eds., U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, D.C. pp. 109-114.
HOLTZMAN, R.B. (1964), "Lead-210 (RaD) and Polonium-210 (RaF) in
Potable Waters in Illinois," in The Natural Radiation Environment
J. A.S. ADAMS and W.M. LOWDER, eds., The University of Chicago
Press, Chicago, pp 227-237.
59
-------
JOHNS, F.B., ed. (February 1975), Handbook of Radiochemical
Analytical Methods. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
EPA-680/4-75-001.
JOHNSON, Raymond H., Jr., D.E. BERNHARDT, N.S. NELSON and
H.W. GALLEY, Jr. (November 1973), Assessment of Potential Radio-
logical Health Effects for Radon in Natural Gas.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-520/1-73-004.
KAPLAN, Irving (1958), Nuclear Physics. Addison-Wesley Publishing
Company, Inc. Reading, Massachusetts, U.S.A.
KNUTH, R. H. (1976), Calibration of the Sierra High Volume Slotted
Cascade Impactor. HASL-Technical Memo 76-6.
LEE, R. E. JR. (1972), The Size of Suspended Particulate Matter
in Air: Science. 178:567-575.
(NCRP, January 1971) - NATIONAL COUNCIL ON RADIATION PROTECTION
AND MEASUREMENTS, NCRP Report No. 39 - Basic Radiation Protection
Criteria. Washington, D.C., p. 135.
(NCRP, November 1975) - NATIONAL COUNCIL ON RADIATION PROTECTION
AND MEASUREMENTS,NCRP Report No. 45 - Natural Background Radiation
in the United States. Washington, D.C., p. 163.
OAKLEY, D.T. (1972), Natural Radiation Exposure in the United
States. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, ORP/SID 72-1.
O'BRIEN, K. and R. SANNA (1976), Absorbed Dose-Rates in Humans
from Exposure to Gamma Rays. Health Physics 30:71-78.
(ORP/LVF, 1977), Radiological Surveys of Idaho Phosphate Ore
Processing - The Thermal Process Plant, ORP/LV-77-3 (November,
1977). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation
Programs - Las Vegas Facility.
PEARSON, J.E. (May 1967), "Natural Environmental Radioactivity
from Radon-222." Environmental Health Series, U.S. Public Health
Service Publication No. 999-RH-26.
POET, S.E., H.E. MOORE and E.A. MARTELL (1972), "Lead-210,
Bismuth-210 and Polonium-210 in the Atmosphere." J. Geophys Res.
77, 6515.
SEDLET, J., N.W. 60LCHERT and T.L. DUFFY (1973), Environmental
Monitoring at Argonne National Laboratory - 1972, USAEC Report
ANL-8007, Argonne, Illinois.
STATE OF IDAHO (June 1, 1977), Technical Policy Memorandum No. 7-
Concerning the Use of Radium-Contaminated Phosphate Slag in
Idaho.
60
-------
SWIFT, J.J., J.M. HARDIN and H.W. GALLEY (January 1976), Potential
Radiological Impact of Airborne Releases and Direct Gamma Radia-
tion to Individuals Living near Inactive Uranium Mill Tailings
Piles U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-520/1-76-001.
UNITED NATIONS (1972), Ionizing Radiation: Levels and Effects,
Vol. 1: Levels. (A report of the United Nations Scientific
Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation for the General
Assembly.) New York.
U.S. PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE (1969), Evaluation of Radon-222 Near
Uranium Tailings Piles, DER 69-1. U.S. Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare, Rockville, Maryland.
WILLEKE, K. (1975) Performance of the Slotted Impactor. Presented
at 15th American Industrial Hygiene Conference, Minneapolis,
Minn., June 1975. Mechanical Engineering Department, University
of Minn., Minneapolis, Minn.
WINDHAM, S., J. PARTRIDGE and T. HORTON (December 1976), Radiation
Dose Estimates to Phosphate Industry Personnel. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, EPA-520/5-76-014.
61
-------
APPENDIX-A
RADIOCHEMICAL ANALYTICAL METHODS
-------
APPENDIX-A
RADIOCHEMICAL ANALYTICAL METHODS
All analyses were completed at the Environmental Monitoring
and Support Laboratory in Las Vegas, Nevada (EMSL-LV). The
following sections present brief descriptions of the analytical
methods employed for this study. Specific details of the pro-
cedures are contained in the Handbook of Radiochemical Analytical
Methods. F. B. Johns, ed. (1975).
Analysis of Radium-226, Radium-228 and Lead-210
A sequential method for the determination of radium-226,
radium-228, and lead-210 in environmental samples has been
developed by the EMSL-LV. This method is initiated by the
precipitation of radium from the sample aliquot using barium
sulfate. Barium-radium-sulfate is then dissolved in a diethylene-
triaminepentaacetate disodium solution and transferred to an
emanation tube and the radon allowed to come to equilibrium,
approximately 30 days ingrowth with its parent - radium.
Radium-226 (Tij = 1602 years) decays by alpha emission to radon-
222 (Tij = 3.8 days). Radon-222, a noble gas, is then collected
from the liquid by a de-emanation technique. Radon-222 is
usually counted for 30 minutes by alpha scintillation at four and
one-half hours after the de-emanation step to allow for the
build-up of the daughters.
The solution from the radium-226 determination is saved and
the total radium is reprecipitated. Radium-228 (Tj, = 6.1 years)
is a beta emitter and decays to actinium-228 (Ti, = 6.13 hours).
The actinium is allowed to ingrow for three days and is extracted
with diethylhexylphosphoric acid and back extracted with nitric
acid. The actinium-228 is beta counted for 30 minutes in a low-
level beta counter.
Lead is also precipitated with the radium sulfate in the
original solution. Advantage is taken of the 30-day storage, for
63
-------
radon-222 ingrowth, to allow the bismuth-210 to grow in. Lead-
210 (Tjj = 20.4 years) decays by beta emision to bismuth-210
(Tjj = 5.01 days). The bismuth-210 is precipitated from the
supernatant liquid in the radium-228 separation step. Bismuth is
converted to an oxide, dissolved in nitric acid, mounted on a
two-inch planchet and beta counted for 30 minutes.
As noted in the text of this report, subsequent to the
analysis of the samples reported in this report, it was found
that the lead-210 recovery was less than expected. This is
discussed in Appendix C .
Analysis of Isotopic Uranium and Thorium
Samples are decomposed utilizing techniques of nitric-
hydrofluoric acid digestion, potassium fluoride fusion or igni-
tion. The residues are dissolved in dilute nitric acid and
successive sodium and ammonium hydroxide precipitations are
performed in the presence of boric acid to remove fluoride and
soluble salts. The hydroxide precipitate is dissolved, the
solution is adjusted to 9N. in hydrochloric acid, and uranium is
absorbed on an cnion exchange column, separating it from thorium.
Iron is removed from the column by washing with hydrochloric acid
and the uranium is eluted with dilute hydrochloric acid. The
thorium is converted to a nitrate form and absorbed on the same
anion exchange column separating it from calcium and other inter-
ferences. The thorium is then eluted with 9J1 hydrochloric acid.
The uranium is electrodeposited on stainless steel discs from an
ammonium sulfate solution and subsequently counted by alpha
spectrometry. Usually 1000-minute counting times are used for
analysis. Chemical yields are normally determined by the recovery
of internal tracer standards (e.g., uranium-232 and thorium-234)
added at the beginning of the analysis.
64
-------
Analysis of Polonium-210
Samples are decomposed by digestion with hydrofluoric acid
and nitric acid in the presence of lead carrier and a polonium-
208 tracer. Polonium is co-precipitated with lead sulfide from a
dilute acid solution separating it from calcium, iron, and other
interferences. The sulfide precipitate is dissolved in dilute
hydrochloric acid and polonium is spontaneously deposited on a
nickel disk. Polonium-210 and polonium-208 tracer are measured
by alpha spectrometry. Usually, 1000-minute counting times are
used for analysis.
Polonium-210 Activity Estimations
Due to the time delay between sample collection and radio-
chemical analysis for poloniurti-21 0, the following considerations
have been utilized to estimate the polonium-210 activity in a
sample.
1. Polonium-210 decays with a radiological half-life of
138 days. Therefore, a decay correction factor should
be considered for samples which are held for a rela-
tively long period between collection and analysis.
2. Concurrently, there will be some polonium-210 ingrowth
from lead-210 and bismuth-210 contents of the original
sample during the elapsed time between collection and
analysis.
The consideration of radioactive series transformations
is discussed in detail in Kaplan (1958) For the
specific case of lead-210, the decay scheme is as shown
in Figure A-l. The solution of the system of differen-
tial equations, which describe this lead-210 decay
series, was derived by Bateman and is summarized here.
65
-------
IIJI
CO
UJ
-^ W
a. g
CM
II
:»
«
o
CM
>.
ID
o
ui
n
:S
>»
CO
111
O
(0
<
o
Ul
Q
CN
O
<
UJ
5
UJ
oc
O
CO
O>
I
O CM
r- CO
CM
CM
II
66
-------
a. For polonium-210 ingrowth from lead-210. in the original sample:
APb «
APo
1.01 Ajbe-0-0000931t t 0.0377 A^e'0'138' - 1.06 A^e'0-005011
Where
APo = P°lonium~210 activity at time of measurement due
to ingrowth from lead-210 in sample
Apb = lead-210 activity at time of sample collection
t = Elapsed time (in days) between sample
collection and analysis
Since the bismuth term is negligible and allowing for typical
values of t, the following simplification of the above
expression results:
apb - A° M m i nc Q-0.00501tN
ApQ = Apb (1.01 - 1.06 e )
b. For polonium-210 ingrowth from bismuth-210 in the original
sample:
A^ = 0.0377 A° e-°-00501t- 0.0377 A° e'0-1381
rO Dl bl
Where
Ri
Apo = polonium-210 activity at time of measurement due to
ingrowth from bismuth-210 in sample.
An- = bismuth-210 activity at time of sample collection
This term is insignificant for typical values of t and even in
the case of the complete decay of bismuth-210, the polonium-210
ingrowth factor would be less than four percent (i.e., decay
constant for polonium-210 divided by the decay constant for
bismuth-210 equals 0.036).
67
-------
c. The polonium-210 decay correction term:
«Po .0 -0.005QK
APo " MPoe
Where
Po
ApQ = polonium-210 activity at time of measurement due to decay
of original polonium-210 in sample.
ApQ = Original polonium-210 activity in the sample at time of
collection.
Therefore, the polonium-210 activity at the time of measurement
(Ap ) is the summation of the two source terms (i.e. due to the
ingrowth from lead-210 and due to the decay of the original
polonium-210 in the sample).
A = APb + APo
MPo MPo MPo
or
a - a° n m i n* 0-0.00501tx . flO -0.00501t
Po Pb '' ' " ' "Po
d. Due to the relatively long half-life of lead-210 (T^ = 20.4
yea1"*), the lead-210 activity at the time of measurement (Apb)
is essentially equivalent to the original Pb-210 activity in
the sample (Ap. ). Solving the above expression for the original
polonium-210 activity in the sample at the time of collection
(A°Q) yields:
All reported polonium-21Q analytical results are calculated
values obtained from the above equation. Whenever the apparent
polonium-210 content from its ingrowth from lead-210 exceeds
the measured polonium-210 activity, a non-detectable (ND) value
has been reported.
68
-------
e. The estimated counting error term associated with thts calcu-
lated polonium-210 activity is simply the sum of squares of the
individual counting error terms, or:
.
MPo APo MPb
Where
aflo = Estimated counting error term of the calculated
Po
polonium-210 activity in the sample at the time of
collection.
a. = Counting error term of the measured polonium-210 activity.
APo
a. = Counting error term of the measured lead-210 activity.
APb
In the tables, the estimated counting error terms at the 95
percent confidence level (i.e., twice a.o ) have been included
Po
for the calculated polonium-210 activities.
Throughout this report, the symbol for less than (<) has been
used to indicate the equivalence of the error term (at the 95
percent confidence level) to the reported result.
69
-------
APPENDIX-B
AIRBORNE PARTICULATE SAMPLING
GROSS RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATION RESULTS
70
-------
^"
rv
LU
*~
O
C£
LU
CD
z:
CD i i
z: H-
. I ^^
^^ *-_
_J 13
0- O
S 0
OO «=C
LU CD
«=C OO
_J 1
=> O
O 2
1 1
r-
CH +\
O- z:
o
LU l i
^^ 1
0 C£.
ml
| ~
o: z
I-H LU
«=C 0
Z
. o
,_! o
^S
. __J
«=C "^
*~~ o
s
oo
oo
0
C£
O
LO
r-.
^^
r
^^^
LO
*
* '"oj
LU -C E
_l "^
> i CM -r-
o_ «a- o
«=J- Q.
13
oo o
Q- (->
CD O
CO
CT>
0
* * cn
* LO
LU r*. -r-
n ^^. cj
^
E
LU LO -~-^
O CT> 0
O O.
LO CT
r^ "*^^
^^ »f
O 0
* CO O.
r-- ~~^
o
_] S-
i -c
s: CM
CM
ry* CO
LU i
0
2: om
I-H -(-> ^°
o: E
CD VD "»-
O T-
CTi O
O Q.
LU
O
i i
O
2^
o
1 1
0
^f
c^
vr> cn
LO i r i VO CO LO
T3 ^
(O
(O
O)
(O
O O O
vo
r
V
+->
s-
(0
Q.
to
^
-o
<0
4J
4->
S-
-------
s:
o:
LU
i
o;
o
cc
CC
LU
CD CD
Z Z
1 \ \ 1
_l h-
Q_ Z
s: r>
«=C O
OO <_}
LU
<£ E
CJ 0^^
4J-r-
co o
=«t=
*~?
^^
o
C
CM
,
+1
CO
o>
vo
«d-
+l
r
r^-
CO
(O
CM
O
+i
o
vo
o
o
r-*
CM
1
O
Q-
0
CM
+1
0
CM
O
O
+1
o
*
r
o
in
+i
I--
^~
LO
CO
o
o
0
+1
CO
o
o
*3-
co
CM
1
r>
o
in
o
+i
CO
r
in
CM
o
o
+i
CM
O
m
^~
V
in
CM
o
o
O
V
LO
co
CM
1
rD
o
CM
+1
O
CM
O
O
+1
O
r
VO
in
+i
o
CM
LO
CTl
O
O
O
+1
to
co
o
o
CO
co
CM
1
^>
r
CO
+1
|-~
co
VO
o
+1
CO
fM
LO
Oi
+1
r~-
co
vo
o
O
+i
CO
vo
o
o
0
CO
CM
1
.C
h-
«J
r^
o
+i
LO
r
CO
CO
o
o
+1
vo
r~>
o
o
CM
CM
V
r-^
CO
o
o
o
V
CM
co
CM
1
jr
h-
00
CM
V
*fr
o
V
VO
co
+1
CM
«*
in
VO
o
o
+i
r^
r^
o
o
o
CM
1
.Q
a.
CM
VO
V
t
CO
O
V
^
VO
V
o
r
0
V
CO
CM
CM
1
(O
C£.
*
CT> CD
LO CM
CO *
CM r~
O CM
0 0
4 *l
0 0
o -o
«J fO
o o
f^ ^
(U 0)
4-> 4J
(0 «}
3 3
U 0
r «r-
M 4J
S- S_
m to
Q. 0.
-U +J
CO CO
3 3
-o -o
HJ r«
^: jc
»-> +J
r- »r-
S 2
A A
CO CO
viJ
. «*
vo
i LO
«4- >
T3 T3
-------
+
h-
z
^
f\
O
* '
*
s
V-^
ex!
oo
O
;*
C^
OO
I
I
Z
o
z
CX,
S
l/i
1-
3
^
i
^^
LU
Z
Ct
CO
DC
I
CO
'"
£9
^^
i
i
LU
g
1
Z
|I^
Z
{_J
g
s
on
i
^
+ l
0
p
^f
2
t^
£
2j
8
Uj
l_
Q
^f
t 1
o
00
c
.p
in -.,
~ o
co a
CM
S
* m
CX E
1- I-~ <.
Z CM <-
O CM <_>
CJ r- CX
CT
in '*~
d
* s
"^.
i°|
= is
~"^ ^- *^
S '*""<*>
t 2 E
8 S£
0 °
r
*"^ CJ
in -^
* ^~ o
oo a
CM
§? 5-"
- -
i
O
^ £
o
O CM
in
Q i
t t
00 O
l_ j m
=> E
o en <.
CM -r-
r a
* CT
in ^
^ cj
co ex
* CM
a: -^,
LJJ *
00
UJ
S JC
LU r^
> in
S £- m
0 ~^
o
vo ex
o
u.
C
z
o
c
s
^2
+i
CM
O
o
+i
^^
oo
o
C3
vo
1^
en'
.
00
^_
CM
O
o
+1
in
CM
o
o
00
^
+i
00
r
00
CM
O
O
+1
00
o
o
!
1^
+1
1^
CM
CM
C3
+1
,_
^"
O
VO
CM
CM
1
IO
Of.
VO
CM
V
OO
a-
o
V
oo
V
CM
O
V
0
Q
Z
0
a
z
o
CM
1
O
ex
o
VO
+1
CM
I
O
+1
00
o
o
00
vo
+1
oo
CM
00
o
0
+1
oo
VO
o
o
oo
00
+1
00
CM
CM
o
o
+1
CM
1
C3
r-
oo
+1
vo
en
LO
o
o
+i
in
CM
o
^
00
CM
^
0
oo
V
in
o
o
0
V
oo
,
V
in
oo
o
o
o
V
CM
,
+1
o
CM
00
o
o
o
4.,
00
o
o
in
r_
V
oo
CM
O
O
V
in
00
CM
1
~^
0
vo
+1
CM
g
O
o
+1
oo
o
o
vo
,
V
00
^f
o
o
o
V
^
oo
+,
,_
CM
in
CM
o
o
+ [
2
.
0
in
oo
+i
CM
in
in
o
o
+i
en
0
00
00
CM
i
rs
0
en
+i
oo
oo
o
o
+i
^^
CM
O
O
en
+i
CM
in
CM
O
0
+1
^«
o
o
01
in
q.
00
CO
o
o
+1
CM
CM
O
in
vo
^.i
en
CM
o
o
+i
^.
^^
o
o
oo
CM
1
f
\
0
00
V
in
o
0
o
V
vo
00
V
00
en
8
o
V
in
,
V
in
en
8
o
V
oo
CM
+1
f,^
.
OJ
tt
oo
0
o
+1
00
o
o
CM
00
CM
.c
t-
oo
+1
8
CM
O
+1
VO
o
<.
+1
VD
VD
2
O
+1
co
o
^
+i
in
in
oo
o
-^.i
VD
OO
O
CM
+1
««^
m
^^
^F
o
+i
CM
oo
CO
o
CM
f\
0.
0
£1
V
1^
o
V
CO
vo
V
en
o
V
IO
CM
V
^
o
V
00
V
CTi
o
V
00
CM
CM
1
IO
oc.
o en en
CM i in
VO VO r
«* VO CM
o o o en
. . . *r
O O O 00
D- ii_ vi_ O
o o o a>
4-> 4~> 4-> CU
3 3 3 10
T3 -O T3 3
o
J= J= JC
ai
J3
73
' l<_ V)_ M-
§ O O 0<£
c O) CU CO
Q) f I i S
!-> O O O
nj > > > o
o >
r- T3 TJ "O
"o a> a) oj "o
C ^ r r- Q)
r- ex ex a."
g E g ex
-------
g
LU
1
CC
O
Ct
a:
1 [ |
.
CD ^
-^ 2£
""* |
n^ ?T
ji ~
^J3 f^
00 <->
£ 1
C_5 1
tl ^
r^ i
~b
2: +
1 1 i
^? C
o n!
00 CO -,-
CO "^ CJ
1 I *3- O.
Q-
OO to
I i.
^f
O r--.
i i O
fN.1
VNI
i
3 °ro
i i £
J , "^
r 0
LU
o
lt
,_,_
o
~
{^
c
c
cC
eg
oo
t*^
4.1
i&
CM
^->
CM
0
CD
+1
r-~
^~
O
C3
r--
^J
+i
r^-«
n-
p**
m
0
o
+i
r
LO
o
cyi
^
+i
^^
r
r^.
C3
0
o
+1
cn
O
O
VD
CM
CM
1
rO
CC.
a
z.
Q
in
+ 1
O">
CO
,
Lf)
0
+i
^.
f^
P*.
^>J
V
P«N,
<
o
V
0
CM
1
Q
Q_
cn
LO
+ 1
f*^
OJ
un
r
o
o
+i
CO
l£>
O
CD
in
+i
CO
IO
r~-
r
O
+1
,
CM
r-
Cj.
+1
O
WO
LO
CD
O
o
+1
^j-
r
O
o
^d-
co
CM
1
"^
in
r
-)-|
IO
^J
00
CO
o
o
0
+1
^-j-
o
0
CD
CO
*S"
o
+1
ID
r
^J-
r-.
0
C3
+1
^-
LO
0
o
o
CM
V
CO
CM
CD
0
o
V
in
CO
CM
1
~~\
co
^"
+1
o^
r~*
C\J
r
O
o
+1
O">
^^-
o
o
U3
CO
+1
r
^"
CM
r
O
+1
^.
r^
i
*f
+i
o
r
V£>
in
CD
O
0
+1
^~
r
O
CD
CO
CO
CM
1
~^
r
r^
-f-|
VO
LO
cy>
CM
0
0
+i
in
r
0
^
CO
+i
00
r-^
0
o
+1
vo
CM
r
vo
+1
o
CO
CO
o
o
+1
^~
^
o
o
o
CO
CM
1
e~
I
CM
OO
-f 1
1
^:
in
CO
0
0
o
+i
,_
i
o
o
LO
CO
o
+i
CO
r-.
o
CM
o
o
+1
LO
CM
0
CD
O
CM
V
CO
CM
CD
CD
O
V
CM
CO
CM
1
r
r-
LO in
co in
+i +i
co o
LO i
^*
CTI in
o «
0 O
+i +i
^1- ,
r CO
0 0
to co
CO CO
V
+1
0
CM
CM CO
r r
O O
V
+1
00
VO
*
o
rx^ vt*
i^*» ^"J
V
+1
IT)
CO
cn
O r
o o
V
+1
CM
^~
O
O CO
i CM
CM CM
1 1
f** ro
a. cn
CD
f»
cn
o
0
tf-
o
-o
rO
O
^>
cu
rO
3
O
s_
rrt
ro
ex
^^
to
3
a
ra
f^
-»->
i
^
OJ
^ «"
-*-> ^
0 ^
O)
CIJ r-~
T3
1 4-
E O
o
c: cu
to 3
OJ i
U 0
ro >
O
r- -O
-o cu
C i
i- Q.
O ra
z co
+ *
CD CD
CO CM
CT> CO
cyi co
CO O
0 0
t|- M-
o o
-a -a
ro ro
0 0
r r~
cu a>
(0 rO
15 3
O O
S_ S-
^rt tr\
O fO
Q. Q.
4-) 4-3
to to
3 3
o -o
ro ro
-C _C
4-> 4->
r- *r~
5 5
CO CO
.5 Er
cO ^o
i OJ
^ ^~
t+- q-
0 0
(I) CU
§CI
t
3
i r
O O
> >
TD -O
0) O)
, ~ ,
Q. Q.
E E
ro ro
CO OO
* -X
* *
*
74
-------
+
CJ
1 1
_J
1
CO
LU
(
_J
ID
O
t 1
<
Q-
LU
Qi
O
CO
^
_ o1* o
^C\l Q.
^^
^^
^^ *
^1 t/)
1 J
_g*7
_
|8
o1"
i°m
E
~f tj- .,_
, o^ <->
o a
«-^N,
^ LO cr
Q£'^.T-
>_ CT> O
QX CM O.
^^ s^^*
1 ^
Z^
3 "*
CL ^
_
<^^> ^~
^°
1"
i°m
E
/ -\ LO "^*x
^^ OO !
C\J O^ O
t^j ^^
LU
Q
i i
_J
0
ID
^^
O
i (
O
rf
cc
f^
00
+1
,
r
CM
OO
O
O
+1
CO
en
0
o
10
,_!
V£>
5J-
cn
CM
0
CD
+1
UD
CO
o
0
(0
CM
CM
1
fO
Q£
CM
V
CO
O
V
o
^
Q
^
o
1
CM
|
O
a.
r
^.
+1
cn
CM
(0
oo
o
o
+1
LO
CM
O
UD
CM
+1
O
CM
CO
«£j-
o
o
+1
1^^
oo
o
^^
00
CM
1
~i
LO
!*»
O
+1
^j.
cn
c>
LO
vo
o
o
0
+1
CM
CO
o
o
o
^^
oo
l_J
+1
CM
O
CO
<0
o
o
o
+1
CO
o
o
0
LO
oo
CM
1
ID
*=*
(3.
+1
,
OO
CO
oo
o
o
+l
PX.
(NJ
o
*s-
CM
+1
CO
^o
^^
o
o
+1
LO
oo
o
CO
oo
CM
1
i
CM
CO
+1
oo
<~o
CM
o
o
+l
LO
to
o
oo
oo
+1
,
oo
IO
<0
o
o
+1
CO
uo
o
o
oo
CM
1
.E:
1
oo
r- r
V
+1
CO
>
^
O i
0 0
+1
^o
r
o
f-*^
«i- vo
CD r^*
V
+i
CO
I--.
CO
S^J"
o o
V
+1
^}-
oo
o
CM O
OO r
CM CM
1 1
-C jQ
|_ CX
CM
V
CM
CM
V
[H
V
r
CM
CD
V
CO
CM
CM
1
(O
B£
9
ss
LO WD
i O
do
C^ C|»
0 0
T3 ^3
ro rd
O 0
^ ^
^"^ ,
~- QQ fXfc
^
g-s-s
C OJ O O
>
O
*^~ T^J ~^_j
T3 0) O)
C t r
r- Q. Q.
E fr
/^^\ TO <^
z to co
+ + 4*
75
-------
l_i 1
I
CfL
O
Hr*
fv
LU
c PJ CD
z z:
i i «
_i h-
D. Z
§ 0
CO ^^
i . i eT
LU<
^C ^^
J *~~*
r3 <"
CJ 1
M 0
fy» |
^f
Q- +1
LU ^
zo
a: " '
C? C£
HH 1
«=C Z
LU
0
. z
ID O
1 ^-^
^LU
LU Q
CO ^J
| ^3
1 1
Q
^r
r?
OO
OO
CD
LO
p^
* -^
* CT.
* CXI
I -^.
Z -51-
1 LiJ
QL. CD t/I
OO S J=
0 0
a: i r-.
ex. oo c 3
O IQ
EO r
|
"^ «?± O
LO +->
0 1
0 CO
1 ^ ^~
CVJ
I
LO
p-x.
"^
CT>
NJ
K "^^
* *
h- LU--^
Z CD
<: «=c
1 Q; co
a. o s-
f -C
oo oo
0 0
^: o
o. o vo
O, __
i *^
2: vo
s: ^- o
00
0 r-- I
O CO
CM CNJ
r
-^~**
* LO
LU ^
CD O
<£. CO
f^ \
O CTl
I CM
OO ^
^* ^t"
DC
*^C t/)
Qi S-
OQ -E
i i
I O
^^D
CD i
Q
_l O
CQ -!->
.
:n vo
C_> CO
LU O
I i
.
5.
.^.
< ^
o.
CO
c?
s^^
1
O
a.
5]
P-
i^
a.
"°
e
r*
^J
O.
en
.,_
O
Q.
CO
£
r
<_>
.Q.
LU
/""^
H- H
_J
<->
"~~
^^
o
14
Q
<
CO
co
+1
r*«.
.
UD
co
r
O
o
-f»
CM
o
o
o
ID
V
CM
r
O
o
C3
V
VO
CM
CM
1
o
+i
o
~
Cj.
O
O
0
+1
cr
+1
^«
LO
CM
LO
O
O
+1
CO
1
o
CTi
+1
r
CM
CO
^
o
o
o
+1
r
^J-
o
0
o
o
CO
CM
1
-C
1
LO
CM
+1
CM
**
^~m
O
o
+1
f^
t
o
CD
^
CTi
O
V
CO
o
o
o
V
CTi
,_
V
CO
CO
0
o
o
o
V
CM
CO
CM
1
-C
h-
CM O
CM CO
V
+1
^«
CO
^J.
CTl CNJ
O r
0 0
V
+1
3-
1
*
O
r r-^
V
+1
0
CM
,
O^ **^t"
o
o o
V
+1
P"**
r-~
o
. 1 f*
^^ u t
t^ CTi
V
+1
o
CM
^J* ^)
r i
O O
0 0
V
+1
CO
«j-
o
0
O CO
r CM
CM CM
1 1
XI 03
0. OH
*
CT CT» C7*
o^ CM r^
r^ ^^ ^^
O LO
O r- O
H- i*- M-
O O O
T5 T3 -O
(O (O fO
o o o
(/>(/)
333
^3 "T3 "^
rO fO fO
c- _g- c-
t ^ ^1 ^ J S
i *r »i
OJ
_Q
1^3 m oo on
4-> ^ grr grr
O O O O
ra > > >
o
r T3 T3 ^O
-O OJ CD
-------
APPENDIX C
UNCERTAINTIES IN LEAD-210 AND POLONIUM-210
AIR SAMPLE DATA
77
-------
APPENDIX C
UNCERTAINTIES IN LEAD-210 AND POLONIUM-210 AIR SAMPLE DATA
Tables C-l and C-2 present a tabulation of the polonium-210
concentrations, as of time of analysis, and lead-210 concentra-
tions, as of the time of collection, for air samples listed in
Tables 11 to 20 of the text. This tabulation can be used to
assess the uncertainty associated with individual lead-210
results and to estimate the correct value.
Comparison of lead-210 interlaboratory duplicate results
(ORP/ LVF, 1977) and special method evaluation samples indicates
that the EMSL lead-210 results for solids and air samples may be
underestimated by up to a factor of five or more. Due to the
delay of about 280 days between sample collection and analysis
for polonium-210, the polonium-210 values are generally indicative
of the lead-210 collected in the sample. That is, while the
polonium-210 collected in the sample would have decayed to 25
percent of its level 31: time of collection prior to analysis, the
ingrowth of pol oni um-2"i 0 from lead-210 collected in the sample
would have reached about 75 percent of the lead-210 value. Thus,
the polonium-210 at time of analysis would be indicative of the
lead-210 (within 50 percent) under the range of extreme conditions
of a polonium-210:lead-210 ratio of one-tenth (normal ambient,
NCRP, 1975) to three.
Therefore, the true lead-210 concentrations should fall
between the reported lead-210 values and the polonium-210 values
of time of collection (Tables C-l and C-2). Furthermore, with
minor exceptions, the lead-210 values should be near the high
side of the range indicated.
78
-------
The notable exceptions are cases where the polonium-210
concentrations are excessively above the reported lead-210 values
(e.g., about an order of magnitude). Specifically, the sample
from the #3 Calciner Area (from Table 12) indicates that the
polonium-210: lead-210 ratio was probably greater than three and
thus, especially for this Calciner sample, it appears the
polonium-210 in this sample at time of analysis was primarily due
to polonium-210 collection, and not due to ingrowth. For this
sample the best estimate for lead-210 is about 0.70 pCi/m3 or
less (up to about five times the reported lead value). For the
remaining air sample results, although there is some evidence of
elevated polonium-210, the individual sampling results are
insufficient to clearly denote even the positive presence of
polonium-210 (beyond that ingrown from the lead-210). That is, a
polonium-210:1ead-210 ratio of up to four at time of analysis for
these data (if analysis is at 280 days after collection) can be
solely due to a factor of five error in the lead-210 analysis and
75 percent ingrowth of polonium-210 from the lead. Although such
a situation of elevated lead-210 with no polonium-210 is not
likely, much of the data are insufficient to demonstrate that it
could not occur.
In summary, the best estimates for the lead-210 values are
the polonium-210 values at time of analysis, except for the value
denoted above. The polonium-210 values can only be approximated
as discussed above.
79
-------
TABLE C-l. ESTIMATED UNCERTAINTY FOR LEAD-210 IN AIR FILTERS*"1"
Referenced Table/ Reported Lead-210 Polonium-210 at Time
Location Description (pCi/m3) of Analysis (pCi/m3)
Table 11
Grinder Mill No. 7 0.19 ± 0.068 0.30 ± 0.041
Ore Unloading and Storage 0.24 ± 0.071 0.11 ± 0.033
Gypsum Pile 0.076 ± 0.006 0.11 ± 0.015
Table 12 - Calciner Area
Control Room 0.077 ± 0.065 0.20 ± 0.04
#3 Calciner <0.14 2.5 ± 0.27
Table 13 - 300 Phosphoric Plant
Above Digester 0.82 ± 0.40 0.53 ± 0.13
Outside Control Room 0.36 ± 0.13 0.24 ± 0.047
Continuous Filter 0.18 ± 0.14 0.16 ± 0.052
Control Room 0.16 ± 0.12 0.22 ± 0.088
Table 14
TSP Storage Area 0.12 ± 0.079 0.13 ± 0.029
TSP Dryer 0.68 ± 0.12 0.83 ± 0.084
Acidulation TSP Discharge 0.14 ± 0.094 0.094 ± 0.026
Table 15
200 Ammophos Plant Dryer 0.34 ±0.014 0.15 ±0.068
100 Ammophos Plant - Dryer 0.16 ± 0.14 0.16 ± 0.14
Table 16
Library 0.048 ± 0.014 0.025 ± 0.0063
200 Ammophos Plant-Storage 0.17 ± 0.091 0.12 ± 0.0063
100 Ammophos Plant-Storage 0.14 ± 0.094 0.093 ± 0.056
These data are gross results prior to blank filter activity subtraction.
The statistical uncertainty of values as expressed by the two-sigma
counting error must be considered in comparing values. For example,
5 ± 2 is not statistically greater than 3 ± 1. Furthermore, counting
error does not include other analytical and sample collection uncertain-
ties.
80
-------
TABLE C-2. ESTIMATED UNCERTAINTY FOR LEAD-210 IN AIR FILTERS*"1"
Referenced Table/ Reported Lead-210 Polonium-210 at Time
Location Description (pC1/m3) of Analysis (pCi/m3)
Table 17. Ore Unloading Area
Filter 1
2
3
4
5
Final filter
Table 18. Calciner Building
Filter 1
2
3
4
5
Final filter
Table 19. 200 Ammophos Plant
Filter 1
2
3
4
5
Final filter
Table 20. Gypsum Pile
Filter 1
2
3
4
5
Final filter
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
<0.
<0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
<0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
07
074
088
081
083
21
088
023
03
032
050
12
11
073
10
07
097
032
on
on
017
015
017
11
+
+
+
±
+
+
±
±
+
±
+
±
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
035
035
036
036
036
043
033
019
032
036
037
035
037
036
037
0051
0052
0055
005
0051
016
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
09
039
056
042
044
25
13
077
19
082
10
27
096
083
067
04
052
052
007
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
0077±
008
007
012
13
+
+
+
+
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
024
014
018
009
027
028
028
015
094
02
031
03
024
024
018
016
016
014
0025
0026
0022
002
0025
014
These data are gross results prior to blank filter activity subtraction.
The statistical uncertainty of values as expressed by the two-sigma
counting error must be considered in comparing values. For example,
5 ± 2 is not statistically greater than 3 ± 1. Furthermore, counting
error does not include other analytical and sample collection uncertain-
ties.
81
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
ORP/LV-78-1
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Radiological Surveys
Processing - The Wet
2.
of Idaho Phosphate Ore
Process Plant
7. AUTHOR(S)
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Office of Radiation Programs - Las Vegas Facility
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
P. 0. Box 15027
Las Vegas, NV 89114
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME
Same as above
AND ADDRESS
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
5. REPORT DATE
April 1978
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
Radiological surveys conducted at the J. R. Simplot's Wet Process Plant in
Pocatello, Idaho indicate slightly elevated ambient levels of natural radio-
activity. Compared to an estimated natural background annual dose equivalent rate
of about 79 mrem, net gamma dose rates ranged from 42 mrem in general plant areas to
152 mrem per work year (2000 hours) on the ore piles. Ambient radon-222 concentra-
tions, ranging from 0.14 to 1.9 pCi/1, were measured in various indoor locations.
Elevated airborne radioactivity concentrations were measured in several work areas,
with polonium-210 and radium-226 being the most predominant radionuclides of the
natural uranium decay series. Particle size characterization indicates roughly 52
percent of the arithmetic total radioactivity is associated with the particle size
fraction less than one micrometer equivalent aerodynamic diameter. Stack sampling
results also show thau appreciable concentrations of the naturally-occurring
radionuclides are being discharged into the local environs. In general, the dose
estimates and the interpretation of results have been oriented toward evaluating
the maximum potential impact of the plant on the environment; however, no attempt
has been made to determine the annual average dose to workers within the plant from
all exposure pathways.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
a. DESCRIPTORS
Phosphate, Natural Radioactivity
Radium, Radon
Gamma Radiation
Particle Size
Airborne Radioactivity
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to public
b. IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
Phosphate Industry
Environmental Surveys
Radiation Surveys
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report/'
Unclassified
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page)
Unclassified
c. COSATl Field/Group
1806
1807
1808
21. NO. OF PAGES
92
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (Rev. 4-77) PREVIOUS EDITION is OBSOLETE
-------