NERC-LV-539-21
PARTICULATE EFFLUENT STUDY
NRX-A6, EP-HIA -- December 15, 1967
Environmental Surveillance
National Environmental Research Center
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Las Vegas, Nevada
Published March 1973
This study performed under a Memorandum of
Understanding No. AT(26-l)-539
for the
U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
-------
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by
the United States Government. Neither the United States nor
the United States Atomic Energy Commission, nor any of their
contractors, subcontractors, br their employees, makes any
warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability
or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness
of any information, apparatus, product or process disclosed,
or represents that its use would not infringe privately-owned
rights.
Available from the National Technical Information Service,
U. S. Department of Commerce,
Springfield, VA. 22151
Price: paper copy $3. 00; microfiche $. 95
-------
NERC-LV-539-21
PARTICULATE EFFLUENT STUDY
NRX-A6, EP-IIIA -- December 15, 1967
by
Environmental Surveillance
National Environmental Research Center
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Las Vegas, Nevada
Published March 1973
This study performed under a Memorandum of
Understanding No. AT(26-l)-539
for the
U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
-------
ABSTRACT
The NRX-A6 Experimental Plan III was a full-power nuclear reactor
operation conducted as part of Project Rover. The reactor ran from
1059 to 1159 PST, December 15, 1967 at the Nuclear Rocket Develop-
ment Station, Jackass Flats, Nevada.
This report, covering information on large particles of high activity,
includes particle deposition density at various distances; and gross
physical characteristics, chemical composition, and gross and spe-
cific radioactivity of these particles.
Surveys along arcs out to a distance of 68 miles showed a peak
2
deposition density at 15 miles of 1 particle/ 10m . No particles
were found beyond 40 miles from the reactor. At 40 miles the peak
density was approximately 4 particles/100 m .
The particles were porous and fragile and had a metallic black
appearance. Sizes ranged from two to 430 JJL; some consisting of
up to 3 discreet particles adhering to one another. Many of the par-
ticles were shattered during collection and separation from the soil
with which they were collected.
The chemical composition of the particles was primarily UC and
L*
various uranium oxides. In some cases alpha quartz was closely
bound to the particles. The density of the material ranged from
slightly less than one to 3. 6.
8 12
Gross activity of the particles was 10 - 10 fissions. Alpha ac-
tivity was not determined because of the method of mounting the
sample on glass slides with collodion. The primary radioisotopes
found by gamma spectroscopy were those of Sr, Zr, Ru, I, Ba,
Mo, and Ce.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ' i
TABLE OF CONTENTS ii
LIST OF TABLES iii
LIST OF FIGURES iv
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. STUDY OBJECTIVES 2
III. FIELD ASSAY , 3
A. Methods of Collection 3
B. Field Results 4
C. Discussion of Field Results 14
IV. LABORATORY ANALYSIS 15
A. Separation 15
B. Physical Characteristics 15
C. Radiometric Analysis 18
D, Microprobe Analysis 24
E. Discussion of Laboratory Results 26
V. INTERPRETATION OF FIELD & LABORATORY RESULTS 29
VI. SUMMARY 34
DEFINITION OF TERMS 35
REFERENCES 36
APPENDICES 37
DISTRIBUTION
11
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Arc data for sampling. 3
Table 2. Particle survey location--on-site locations
(PAA stake numbers). 5
Table 3. Particle survey locations--off-site locations. 6
Table 4. Results of density analysis. 18
Table 5. Activity and location of samples. 20
Table 6. Comparison of data analysis methods. 25
Table 7. Microprobe and X-ray diffraction data. 27
111
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Survey results. 11
Figure 2. Survey results in three-dimensional representation. 12
Figure 3. Deposition concentration versus distance. . 13
Figure 4. Reactor bead. 16
Figure 5. Shattered bead. 16
Figure 6. Shattered bead. 16
Figure 7. Comparison of beta decays. 22
Figure 8. Typical beta absorbtion curve. . 23
Figure 9. Activity per unit area versus distance. 30
Figure 10. Average activity per particle versus distance. 31
Figure 11. Activity across surveyed arcs. 32
IV
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
The NRX-A6 Experimental Plan III was conducted from 1059 to
1159 hours PST on December 15, 1967 as part of Project Rover
operations by the Westinghouse Aerospace Nuclear Laboratory.
The experiment was conducted at Test Cell C at the Nuclear
Rocket Development Station. The reactor was operated at full
power for 60 minutes (1100 Mw equivalent thermal).
Previous reactor tests, in particular Phoebus-IB EP-IV, resulted in
effluent releases which included particulate matter. This report
concerns •work by the National Environmental Research Center-Las
Vegas (NERC-LV)*, Environmental Protection Agency, as outlined
in the Project Proposal for Reactor Effluent Studies - Particulate,
dated August 1, 1967. Definitions of terms appear on Page 35.
*At the time this work was performed, the Center was named the
Southwestern Radiological Health Laboratory and was part of the
Public Health Service.
-------
II. STUDY OBJECTIVES
The objectives presented in the Project Proposal which were
i
pursued in this study were to determine:
The deposition concentration (particles per unit area) of
particles both downwind and normal to the downwind axis.
The concentration hotline of deposited particles.
The physical, chemical, and radiometric parameters for
isolated sources.
The particle size distribution for downwind distances.
An added objective was to compare collection methods used by the
NERC-LV and Pan American field monitors.
-------
III. FIELD ASSAY
A. Methods of Collection
Sampling routes were established in the downwind direction at
approximately 11, 16, 25, 40, and 60 miles from Test Cell C fol-
lowing existing roads. The distances between sampling locations
and areas of plots are listed in Table 1. Specific instructions
were given to each sampling team, Appendix A.
Table 1. Arc data for sampling.
Arc
(miles from
Test Cell C)
11
16
25
40
60
Plot Area
(M2)
30
30
30
50
80
Number of Locations
(along the arc)
19
38
17
29
51
Distance
between
locations(mi)
*
At PAA stakes
0.5
0. 5
1.0
1. 0 & 2. 0
*PAA - Pan American World Airways, Inc.
On the day of the reactor operation one location on Highway 95 was
surveyed. On the day following the reactor operation two NERC-LV
monitors and two PAA monitors collected particles along an 8-13
mile arc from Test Cell C. Eight other NERC-LV teams conducted
particle searches along arcs from 16 to 68 miles from Test Cell C.
The segments of the arcs to be surveyed were determined by
preliminary ground monitoring and aircraft cloud tracking on the
day of the event.
-------
On Run + 1 (R + 1) day, after all arcs were sampled, an additional
effort was made on the 16 mile arc to obtain particles for a
special biological study.
B. Field Results
Survey results are presented in Tables 2 and 3. Table 2 presents
results for on-site locations which were obtained while working on
a side-by-side search with PAA. Initially 10 one-square-meter
plots were surveyed at each location, but the number was increased
to obtain additional particles. Table 3 presents results for off-
site locations. Both tables give azimuth and distance of the
location from Test Cell C, total particles found at a location, and
the particle concentration. In the off-site search, a few particles
were located outside the required plot area. These are so noted
in the last column. These finds were recorded for information
only as the particles were not included in the deposition con-
centration, nor were they collected.
The sampling locations and particle concentrations from Table 2
and 3 are presented in Figure 1. A particle hotline approximately
o
219 as determined from these is also indicated in Figure 1.
A three dimensional representation of the particle deposition
concentration is shown in Figure 2. The concentration has been
normalized to particles per square meter. The number of
particles located on the survey was sufficient to define the hotline,
but insufficient to define cross wind distributions past the 15-mile
arc. The change in average deposition concentration with distance
is shown in Figure 3. Curve A is the ratio of the total number of
particles found along an arc to the total positive plot area versus
distance from Test Cell C, while Curve B is the ratio of the total
number of particles found along an arc to the total plot area between
edges of the deposition pattern. Both curves indicate a maximum
concentration peak at 15 miles.
-------
Table 2. Particle survey location--on-site locations(PAA stake numbers).
Date
Collected Location
Stake
No.
12/16/67 93
" 94
u • 95
" 96
97
11 98
99
11 110
" 111
11 112 •
" 113
" 114
" 115
" 116
" 117
11 118
" 119
" • 120
" 121
Azimuth
^ Distance
from Test . ... .
Cell C (mil6S)
238°
235°
233°
230°
226°
222°
219°
232°
226°
222°
219°
217°
215°
213°
212°
210°
209°
208°
207°
11
11
11
12
12
13
13
8
9
11
12
13
13
13
12
12
12
12
12
No. Part.
per area
surveyed
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
1/30 m2
1/30 m2
0/30 m2 '
0/30 m2
2/30 m2
5/30 m2
4/30 m2
1/30 m2
0/10 m2
1/10 m2
0/10 m2
1/10 m2
0/10 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
Particle Particles*
Cone. found out-
(particles side tem-
m2! plate
0. 0
0. 0
0.0
0. 0
0.033
0. 033
0. 0
0. 0
0.067
0. 167
0. 133
0.033
0. 0
0. 1
0. 0
0. 1
0. 0
0. 0
0.0
'• not reported
-------
Fable 3. Particle survey locations - off-site locations.
Date Azimuth from
Tollected Location Test Cell C
12/16/67 Lathrop Wells
" 0. 5 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
11 1 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 1. 5 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 2 mi N on Hwy 95
11 2. 5 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
11 3 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
11 3. 5 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 4 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 4. 5 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 5 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 5. 5 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 6 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" ' 6. 5 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 7 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 7. 5 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
*Not reported
208°
212°
214°
215°
216°
218°
219°
221°
223°
224°
226°
227°
229°
230°
231°
233°
Distance
(miles)
15
15
15
15
15
15.5
15,5
16
16
16.5
16. 5
17
17
17.5
17. 5
18
No. Part.
per area
surveyed
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
1/30 m2
4/30 m2
6/30 m2
3/30 m2
1/30 m2
2
0/30 m
0/30 m2
0/30 m
0/30 m
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
Particle Particles*
Cone. found out-
(particles side tem-
m2) plate
0.0
0. 0
0. 0
0. 0
0. 033
0. 133
0. 2
0. 1
0. 033
0. 0
0. 0
0. 0
0. 0
0.0
0. 0 '
0. 0
No
No
No
Yes
-
-
'
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
No
No
No
No
-------
Table 3. Particle survey locations - off-site locations, (continued)
Date Azimuth from
Collected Location Test Cell C
12/16/67 8 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 8. 5 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 9 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 9. 5 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 10. 5 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 11 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 11. 5 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 12 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 12.5 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
11 13 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 13.5 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 14 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 14. 5 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" 15 mi N Lathrop
Wells on Hwy 95
" Junction Hwy 95 &
234°
235°
237°
238°
240°
242°
244°
245°
246°
248°
249°
250°
251°
253°
253°
Distance
(miles )
18
18.5
18.5
19
19.5
19.5
20
20
20
20.5
21
21
21.5
21.5
21.5
No. Part.
per area
surveyed
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m
0/30 m2
Particle
Cone.
(particles
m*)
0.0
0. 0
0. 0
0. 0
0. 0
0.0
0. 0
0. 0
0.0
0. 0
0.0
0. 0
0.0
0. 0
0. 0
Particles
found out-
side tem-
plate
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
No
4
No
No
No
No
No
No
_
Crater Flat Road
-------
Table 3. Particle survey locations - off-site locations, (continued)
Date
Collected
12/16/67
1 1
1 1
ii
ii
n
ii
1 1
1 1
1 1
n
1 1
n
n
n
. Azimuth from
Location Test Cell C
0. 5 mi N Crater
Flat Road
1 mi N Crater
Flat Road
1. 5 mi N Crater
Flat Road
2 mi N Crater
Flat Road
2. 5 mi N Crater
Flat Road
3 mi N Crater
Flat Road
3. 5 mi N Crater
Flat Road
4 mi N Crater
Flat Road
2 mi W Hwy 29 on
Amargosa Road
4 mi W Hwy 29 on
Amargosa Road
7 mi W Hwy 29 on
Amargosa Road
7. 5 mi W Hwy 29 on
Amargosa Road
8 mi W Hwy 29 on
Amargosa Road
8 mi W, 1 mi NW on
Amargosa Road
9 mi W, 2 mi NW on
254°
255°
255.5°
256°
257°
258°
260°
262°
204°
209°
215°
216°
217°
219°
220°
Distance
(miles )
21
21
20
20
19.5
19.5
19
19
23. 5
24
25.5
25.8
25. 5
25
25
No. Part.
per area
surveyed
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
1/30 m2
1/30 m2
1/30 m2
3/30 m2
2/30 m2
3/30 m2
0/30 m2
Particle Particles
Cone. found out-
(particles side tem-
m2") plate
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
033
033
033
1
067
1
0
Amargosa Road
-------
Table 3. Particle survey locations - off-site locations, (continued)
Date
Collected
12/16/67
1 1
it
ii
it
ti
u
II
II
n
ii
n
n
n
M
Azimuth from
Location Test Cell C
8 mi W, 3 mi NW on
Amargosa Road
8 mi W, 4 mi NW on
Amargosa Road
8 mi W, 5 mi NW on
Amargosa Road
8 mi W, 6 mi NW on
Amargosa Road
8 mi W, 7 mi NW on
Amargosa Road
8 mi W, 8 mi NW on
Amargosa Road
8 mi W, 9 mi NW on
Amargosa Road
8 mi W, 10 mi NW
on Amargosa Road
From DVJ to 15 mi
NW on 190
16 mi NW DVJ on
190
17 mi NW DVJ on
190
18 mi NW DVJ on
190
19 mi NW DVJ on
190
20 mi NW DVJ on
190
21 mi NW DVJ on
190
222°
224°
226°
228°
231°
233°
235°
237°
191-215°
216°
217°
217°
219°"
221°
222°
Distance No. Part.
(miles) per area
surveyed
24.5
24
23. 5
23
23
23
22. 5
22.5
37
38
39
40
40
40
40
0/30 m2
1/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
1/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m2
0/30 m
0/50 m2
2/50 m2
1/50 m2
0/50 m2
0/50 m2
1/50 m2
5/50 m2
Particle
Cone.
(particles
m')
0. 0
0.033
0. 0
0. 0
0.033
0. 0
0. 0
0. 0
0. 0
0. 04
0. 02
0. 0
0. 0
0. 02
0. 10
Particles
found out-
side tern
plate
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
Yes
_
Yes
_
_
-------
Table 3. Particle survey locations - off-site locations, (continued)
Date
Collected
Azimuth from
Location Test Cell C
Distance
(miles )
No. Part.
per area
surveyed
Particle Particles
Cone. found out-
(particles side tem-
m^) plate
12/16/67
20-30 mi NW DVJ
on 190
Between Trail
Canyon in Death
Valley and
Shoshone at 1 and
2 mi intervals
224-234
181-228
40
0/50 m
52-68 0/80 m
0.0
0.0
10
-------
£**•..1.P Lathrop Wells
CMnrj *^
Furnace Creek 0 *s ^
n Trail Canyon
~~V
V. D Bennetts Well
a Shoshone
-.'
• (no particles found)
o.oo Particle Concentration
(part./sq. meter)
Figure 1. Survey results.
11
-------
Figure L.. Survey results in l.h rrr-d j mr us i on;i I re|> res cnt;i I i on.
-------
A. Total No. Part.
Total Pos. Area
B. Total No. Part.
Total Area Between Edges
2O 3O 4O
DOWNWIND DISTANCE (MILES)
Figure 3. Deposition concentration versus distance.
13
-------
C. Discussion of Field Results
The field results, as presented, are about what was expected, (Ref. 1).
Correlation of the field data with weather data(Ref. 4) indicates that
large particulate material was ejected from the reactor during the
latter part of the run.
The length of the run and wind shear during the run may explain
the bi-modal patterns (Figure 2) at all but the 15-mile arc. The
patterns may also be a result of the intermittent rain and snow
showers during the run. The peak concentration at the 15-mile arc
(Figure 3) follows the same general pattern as observed on the
Phoebus IB EP-IV test.
Several samples were collected for a special biological study. Since
the concentration of particles was so low, no attempt was made to
determine the area from which the particles were collected.
14
-------
IV. LABORATORY ANALYSIS
AH samples were returned to the NERC-LV for analysis. After the
radioactive material was separated from the matrix, its physical
characteristics were determined. On selected samples radiometric
and microprobe analysis -was performed.
A. Separation
Initial separation was done by subdividing the sample into
small portions and checking each portion with a lab monitor.
The portions containing activity were mounted on 1-by 3-inch
glass slides as "specimens- "
All samples yielded more than one portion containing
activity. As many as 26 specimens were obtained from a
single sample. These specimens were identified as sub
parts of the sample, i. e. , 202A, 202B, etc. A radio-
autograph technique described in Appendix B indicated
several radioactive spots on many specimens. Figure 4
is a photomicrograph of one that appears to be a bead or
shell. Figures 5 and 6 show specimens of shattered beads
or shells.
B. Physical Characteristics
The appearance of the radioactive material (when viewed
under the microscope) varied considerably. Some pieces
appeared black or metallic, some appeared porous, while
others looked like black flakes adhering to colorless sand
particles. A few pieces were spherical and in some cases
were clustered into 2 or 3 beads. These beads were in the
50-100(Jt range.
15
-------
o so 10
I imill millil|||[[
MICRONS
REACTOR BEAD
FIGURE 4
O SO 1OO
I iililiniliiiilinil
MIC'RONS'
SHATTERED BEAD
FIGURE 5
t 1
so 100
MICRONS
SHATTERED BEAD
FIGURE 6
16
-------
All the pieces identified under the microscope were sized
with the exception of those that were attached to what ap-
peared to be sand particles. These are noted as "f/s"
(flakes on sand). The dimensions of the pieces measured
are reported as the maximum dimension and dimension
perpendicular to it, reported in Table 1, Appendix C.
The particles collected for the biological study were iso-
lated and sized. These data are reported in Table 2 of
Appendix C.
Density analysis was performed on ten particles which were
selected on the basis of shape and activity. The weights of
the particles were determined by using a balance boat,
described in Appendix D. Mass measurements were ob-
tained on six of the particles as the other four a'ppeared to
be too fragile and breakage may have occurred.
The particles were then dropped into a column containing
ethyl alcohol to measure their settling velocity as described
in Appendix D. Each particle was timed by two separate
watches and the average time reported. Specimen 207 was
not observed to fall from the slide. Specimens 235 and 204H
shattered as they fell through the solution.
Each particle was sized again before weighing. The size
given is the maximum dimension and the dimension per-
pendicular to the maximum dimension. These size data
may be different from those reported in Table 1, Appendix C,
because of the reorientation of the particle from the original
slide and/or the amount of collodion used in mounting. Data
from the selected particles are reported in Table 4. The
density ranged from 0. 95 to 3. 6 gm/cc with an average of
2. 7 gm/cc.
17
-------
Table 4. Results of density analysis.
Sample No.
Size
Weight Distance of Time of Fall Density
(ug) Fall(cm) Fall Velocity (gm/cc)
(sec) (cm/sec)
202B
204E
204J
20 5 H
207
213D
220A
238B
234x225
131x168
112x122
140x117
126x108
187x173
323x225
347x328
8.
-
•-
2.
0.
8.
8.
25.
00
25
50
75
25
5
21.
21.
21.
21.
21.
21.
21.
21.
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
11
1
1
13
75,5
25
28
.
12
23.5
51. 5
1.
0.
0.
0.
-
1.
0.
0.
6
28
84
75
76
90
41
2.
1.
3.
2.
-
3.
1.
0.
1
4
6
9
2
3
95
- = Not observed
Viscosity of Liquid = 2.49cp
Standard particles were used to calibrate the solution
before the analysis was performed. The particles used
were whole reactor beads, spherical in shape. The data
obtained from these calibration particles are reported in
Table 1, Appendix D.
C. Radiometric Analysis
All specimens -were beta counted and gamma scanned. Beta
counting was done on each specimen while the gamma scan-
ning was done on individual specimens and groups of
specimens from the same sample. There were no dissimilar
data observed in this method. The groups of specimens
method was used to decrease the time necessary for counting.
Due to the method of mounting the particles, covered with
30% collodion solution, alpha counting was not attempted.
18
-------
Beta activity, as of December 27(R + 12), is reported in
dpm, fissions, and picocuries for individual specimens
in Table 1 of Appendix C. The activity for the sample,
i. e. , sum of individual specimen activities from the same
sample, is listed in Table 5 along with the location of the
samples (Azimuth and Distance from Test Cell C). Fifteen
specimens -were beta counted over an extended period of time
to follow the decay and to determine the average maximum
beta energy. Decay curves of the samples plotted on log-log
paper had essentially the same shape and slope, indicating
sample homogeniety. Comparison of the decay curves with
published data (Ref. 5) indicates fair agreement -with
fission product decay, Figure 7.
Beta absorption tests, using aluminum absorbers, were run
on the fifteen specimens at various times to determine
average maximum beta energy (average of the maximum
beta energies in the specimen). The average maximum
beta energy for each specimen was determined from the
half-thickness value of aluminum absorbers and was used
to select the beta counting efficiency. All absorption curves
exhibited essentially the same shape as that shown in Figure 8.
The average maximum beta energy for the specimens was
determined to be about 1. 1 MeV and no trends were observed
as a function of age. The average maximum beta energy is
in fair agreement with the 1. 2 MeV reported in the literature
(Ref. 6). Calibration and other pertinent data concerning
the beta counting data are given in Appendix C.
Specimens were gamma scanned on a multichannel analyzer
with a 4-by 4-inch Nal(Tl) detector. Analyses of data were
19
-------
Table 5. Activity and location of samples.
Sample
Arc
No.
11 Mile 200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
15 Mile 215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
dpm
94,000
110, 000
49, 000
220, 000
33,000,000
29, 000, 000
5, 100, 000
6,000,000
1,600
5, 000, 000
160,000
31, 000, 000
37, 000, 000
15, 000, 000
150,000
230,000
1, 100
6,000
63,000
18, 000,000
210,000
120,000
130,000
170, 000
2,000,000
440, 000
pCi E03*
42
50
22
99
15,000
13, 000
2,200
2, 700
0.7
2,200
74
14, 000
17, 000
7, 000
65
100
0.5
3
28
8, 100
96
52
59
75
900
200
Fissions
E09##
9
10
5
20
3,200
2,800
500
550
0.2
460
15
2,900
3,500
1,400
14
22
0. 1
0.6
7
1,800
20
11
12
15
190
41
Location
Azimuth Distance
(°True) (Mile)
210
217
213
222
222
222
222
222
219
219
219
219
226
226
226
216
219
219
219
218
218
218
218
223
221
221
12
13
13
13
11
11
11
11
12
12
12
12
9
9
12
15
15.5
15.5
15.5
15.5
15.5
15.5
15.5
16
16
16
20
-------
Table 5. Activity and location of samples, (continued)
Sample
Al>c
No.
25 Mile 226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
40 Mile 239
240
241
242
243
244
245
246
dpm
5,600
1,200
670,000
3, 000
22,000
2, 100, 000
35,000
5,600,000
4,000,000
140,000
91,000
60,000
4,600
29,000
1, 700,000
130,000
22, 000
3,400
3,200
4,600
50, 000
pCi E03*
3
0.6
220
1
10
950
16
2,500
1,800
63
41
27
2
13
760
59
10
2
2
2
23
Fissions
E09'##
0.5
0. 1
62
0. 3
2
190
3
520
470 -
13
9
16
0.4
3
160
12
2
0.3
0. 3
0.4
5
Location
Azimuth Distance
(°True) (Mile)
231
219
219
219
204
217
216
216
217
209
215
216
224
216
217
221
222
222
222
222
222
23
25
25
25
23. 5
25. 5
25. 75
25. 75
25. 5
24
25.5
25. 75
24
38
39
40
40
40
40
40
40
*E03= 103
**E09 = 109
21
-------
z
5
^
U
* Bo lies & Ballou, Ref 5
DAYS
Figure 7. Comparison of beta decays.
-------
Figure 8. Typical beta absorbtion curve.
23
-------
performed by two methods. Four randomly selected specimens
were analyzed by hand methods using a series of gamma
scans to obtain qualitative and quantitative information. The
qualitative information was used to make up a library for
the least squares method for quantitative analysis on the
remainder of the specimens.
Comparisons of data results from both methods are presented
in Table 6. Results generally agree by much less than a
factor of two. The isotopes with the lower activities and
poorer counting statistics show the worst agreement.
The isotopic data for each specimen are reported in Table 3
of Appendix C. These data have been extrapolated to 1ZOO
hours on run day.
In some cases the specimens were too active to give good
results with the least squares method of calculation. These
specimens are marked with an asterisk. The high count rate
associated with these specimens probably caused a gain shift
in the spectrum which exceeded the limits of the program.
Activities were calculated, but residual spectra and error
terms were too high to meet the criteria for acceptance of
the calculations. Hand calculations on these scans were per-
formed to complete the data. Error values cannot be given
for the method, but can be given for individual isotopes. In
general, the error associated with each value -was i25%.
D. Microprobe Analysis
Electron microprobe data and x-ray diffraction data -were
collected on a series of selected specimens containing par-
ticulate material which exhibited various levels of radioactivity.
24 •/.. : • .. - '. • . •--
-------
Table 6. Comparison of data analysis methods*.
Specimen No. 218-A
Method of
_ , , Hand Computer
Calculation
Isotope
91Sr 1. 7 E04 4.4 E04
95Zr
97Zr
99
Mo 1.8 E04 1.2 E04
103_
Ru
131I 1. 1 E03 1.3 E03
132Te-I 1. 1 E03 1.4 E03
133I 3. 1 E04 5.7 E03
135i
140
Ba-La 1.2 E03 5. 6 E02
141Ce 2. 8 E02 1. 2 E02
143^
Ce -
226-
Hand
4.9 E04
-
8.4 EOS
3.4 E03
-
4. 7 E02
2. 6 E03
ND
7. 5 E03
1.2 EOS
2. 9 E02
-
B
Computer
5. 1 E04
-
4. 0 E03
2. 5 EOS
-
6. 1 E02
2. 8 EOS
4. 0 EOS
1. 5 E04
4. 0 E02
1. 2 E02
-
227-A 243
Hand Computer Hand
9. 3 EOS 1.2 E04 9. 5 E04
4. 4 EOS
2. 0 EOS
5.9 EOS 8. 6 EOS 2. 7 E04
2. 3 EOS
5. 2 E02 3.9 E02
ND 1. 6 E02
6.4 EOS 3.6 E03
2.9 E04
ND
8.4 E02
3. 6 E04
Computer
6. 7 E04
2.6 EOS
1. 7 EOS
1. 5 E04
1. 8 EOS
-
-
-
ND
1. 5E02
3. 8 E02
4. 9 E04
"Activity (pCi @ 1200 hours 12-15-67)
- Not present
ND - Not detected
E04 = 10
-------
The purpose of the microprobe examination was to deter-
mine the elemental composition of the sample. The purpose
of the X-ray diffraction analysis was to determine the type
of material which was exhibiting the radioactivity and to
determine the chemical composition of the fragments.
Electron microprobe and X-ray diffraction analyses were
done on specimens 224B and 205A. Electron microprobe
analysis only was done on 233, 236, and 228B, because
these specimens were lost in transferring from one system
to the other. The data are reported in Table 7. Several
fragments were located on each slide by radioautography.
Each piece was individually analyzed.
E. Discussion of Laboratory Results
The relatively large particle sizes reported in Table 1,
Appendix C, appear to be reactor material adhering to sand
particles. This was verified by the electron microprobe;
alpha quartz was the basic matrix, and in the density tests,
lower densities were observed than would be expected for
compounds of uranium, carbon, and oxygen.
The density data, although lower than expected, (uranium
compounds should have density greater than 7.3gm/cc)
appear to be valid. The low values may be due to a com-
bination of reasons. It is known that for sizes greater than
50|J., a departure from Stokes velocity occurs. Although
this difference is not sufficient to account for the lower den-
sities reported, it may be one source of error. The shape
of the particles, porous appearance, and adherence to sand
particles may also account for the lower values. A method
of separating the reactor material from desert sand was
26
-------
Table 7. Microprobe and X-ray diffraction data.
Specimen No. Particle No.
224 B 1
2
3
4
5
6
205 A 1
2
3
4
233* ' 1
2
236* 1
2
3
4
5
228 B* 1
Elements
Si, Ca, K, O & S
Si, Na, K, Ti, Ca &
Si, Ca, Mg, S & O
Si, Zr, Ca, O
Si, Ca, Al, K, Na,
Fe, &O
Si, Fe, K, Mg, & O
Si, K, Na, Al, Mg,
Ca, Fe, & O
Si, K, Al, Fe, & O
Si, Al, Ca, K, & 0
Si, Al, Mg, & O
U, O, C, & Nb
Th, O, Si, Al, &K
U, 0, & C
U & C
U & O
U & C
U & O
Si, K, Ca, Fe, Mg
Ti, O, &U
Compounds
alpha-Quartz
O " "
ii it
ii ii
ii ii
ii ii
alpha-Quartz &c
sodium calcium
aluminum silicate
hydrate
alpha-Quartz
ii n
alpha-Quartz &
magnesium
aluminum silicate
hydrate
UC2 + uranium
oxides
UC? + uranium
oxides
uc2
uranium oxide
uc2
uranium oxide
Particle Size
10x18 microns
27x50(0.
30x50|i
25x35|JL
50 n diameter
21x21(0.
300 n diameter
75 |JL diameter
60x 125|J.
100 jo. diameter
65 micron sphere
5^
6^
less than 2 (J.
5xl5n
6x12(1
l-2(i
180(1
*Electron microprobe analysis.
27
-------
attempted. One sample was washed, dried, and placed in a
solution of 1, 1,2,2, tetrabromethane (density 2.96). After
agitating and centrifuging the sample, two portions, one that
settled to the bottom and one that floated on the surface,
were radioautographed to determine which had the activity.
The activity was found to be in the portion that floated. The
settled material was made of iron compounds, as determined
on the electron microprobe. This supports the above ideas
and data.
No attempt was made to determine correlations or enrich-
ment factors with the gamma data. It was felt that the
method of calculation, with the associated error, did not
warrant additional calculations to expand the data. Al-
though the data presented are valid, it should be noted there
can be a relatively large error associated with each value.
Since the least squares method of calculation cannot be
147
applied to isotopes with energies less than 0. 1 MeV, Nd
239
and Np activities could not be calculated. These isotopes
were detected by inspection of the spectra.
The electron microprobe data supports the size and density
data. Although several particles were reported to have
an alpha quartz matrix, reactor material, as verified by
/
radioautograph, •was present.
28
-------
V. INTERPRETATION OF FIELD AND LABORATORY RESULTS
Correlation of activity per unit area and distance demonstrates an
exponential decrease of activity with distance, Figure 9. Curve A is
the ratio of the total activity (fissions) to the total positive plot area
versus distance. Curve B is the ratio of total activity (fissions)
to the total plot area surveyed between the extreme edges of the
deposition pattern plotted against distance.
It is assumed that larger particles will be deposited closer to the
source if all particles are the same density and are ejected to the
same height. The average number of fissions per particle is
shown in Figure 10 to follow an exponential decrease with distance.
If the particle size does vary inversely with distance, as assumed,
then this activity per particle to distance relationship indicates a
direct correlation of size and activity. Due to the nature of the
isolated particles, i.e., shattered pieces, the actual sizes of the
particles as .they were deposited were'not obtained. Because
of this, no correlation can be made between measured particle
sizes and activity.
A graph of activity (fissions) per unit area versus azimuth from
Test Cell C, Figure 11, indicates patterns similar to deposition
concentration, Figure 2. The 15-mile arc has a bi-modal pattern,
which is similar to the other arcs. The similarity in pattern of
the particle concentration curves in Figure 2 and activity con^
centration in Figure 10 shows that the activity per particle along
a given arc was relatively uniform. As expected, there are some
29
-------
fiss./total Area
fiss./pos. Area
28
32
36
40
DISTANCE FROM TEST CELL "C" (MILES)
Figure 9. Activity per unit area versus distance.
30
-------
10 20 3O 4O
DISTANCE FROM TEST CELL "C" (MILES)
Figure 10. Average activity per particle versus distance.
31
-------
10"
OJ
IV)
10'
10'
1 "T .1 1 1 1 1 1 i i I
"" *'_'*
- n Q 5
^J •••••• ^
i ^ ^
i A I
1 * l/\ i
<'"' f i
' * :' X\ I
^x^***! v Qi • *\ •
^x^/^Hj / \ 1
f/ ;\ • \ ^4- — * ®
/ *i **'**\G1 \\
/ O * -M /'
V «^^ 1 •
fp'\ I
1 • 1 '
1 • 1 •
1
: i
i 1
-^
/ \ I I l/TNl 1 1 1 1 1 1
32 23O 228 226 224 222 22O 218 216 214 212 21 0
T I
12 mile Arc =
15 mile Arc _
15 mile Arc _
4O mile Arc
-
-
-
_
-
—
»
\
_
^
/-
1 I
2O8 2O6 2C
AZIMUTH FROM TEST CELL "C
Figure 11. Activity across surveyed arcs.
-------
deviations, notably the low activity per unit area at 219 at 1 5
miles. Six particles were found at this location, but weather
conditions prevented collection of more than three. THe three
collected were all of low activity. This may also account for
the values at 15 miles being low on the curves of Figures 9 and 10.
33
-------
VI. SUMMARY
Particulate material was located after the NRX-A6 reactor test
on a hotline that generally agreed with the second standard level
winds. Analysis of the particles indicated they were fragile, had
high specific activities, were less dense than reactor core
material and were composed of core material and sand. The
small number of particles limited definite correlations of par-
ticle parameters, but a good indication of the deposition pattern
was found.
34
-------
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Particle - Reactor material, may be beads, shells, flakes, etc.,
identified as a single hot spot in the survey of a one
square meter plot.
Particle Concentration - Number of particles per area, as deter-
mined from the survey.
Sample - The volume of material (sand and reactor material)
collected with one identifiable hot spot obtained in the
field, i. e. , Sample 204.
Specimen - The volume of material containing activity from a
sample, i. e. , 204-A, 204-B, etc. , mounted on a
1-by 3-inch glass slide - more than one radioactive speci-
men may result from a single sample (particle) due
to fracturing, separation, etc.
Plot - Each one square meter area that was surveyed at a location.
Location - Place identified by azimuth and distance at which a
specific number of one square meter plots were
surveyed.
35
-------
REFERENCES
1. Project Proposal for Reactor Effluent Studies - Particulate
August 1, 1967, Environmental Surveillance, SWRHL.
2. Preliminary Report of Off-Site Environmental Surveillance
for NRX-A6 Full Power Test, January 1968, SWRHL.
3. Preliminary Report of Aerial Surveillance and Monitoring
NRX-A6, EP-III, January 1968, Environmental Surveillance,
SWRHL.
4. Synopsis of the Meteorological Conditions Associated with
NRX-A6, EP-III, January 1968, U. S. Department of Com-
merce, Environmental Science Services Administration,
Air Resources Laboratory, Las Vegas, Nevada.
235
5. Calculated Activities and Abundances of U Fission Products,
R and D USNRDL-456, NSO81-001, by R. C. Bolles and
N. E. Ballou.
6. Critical Analysis of Measurement of Gross Fission Product
Activity in the Air at Ground Level, NRL 5440,
February I960, Lockhart and Patterson.
36
-------
APPENDICES
Appendix A - Sampling Instructions A- 1
Appendix B - Particle Isolation Method B-l
Appendix C - Beta Counting Information C- 1
Appendix D - Density Analysis Methods D- 1
Figure B - Sketch of X-ray film attached to glass slide. B-3
Table 1. Activities and size of individual specimens. C-2
Table 2. Special collected samples. C-9
Table 3. Isotopic activities for individual specimens. C-ll
Table 1. Density analysis calibration data. D-2
37
-------
APPENDIX A
SAMPLING INSTRUCTIONS
1. Drive to the designated area.
2. At a distance of at least 50 feet from the road, place a
oner-meter square template on the ground as many times as
necessary to obtain the specified plot area. (Example - on
arc at 16 miles, 30 placements of the template would be
required).
3. With an E-500B survey instrument, search the area inside
each template for hot spots. Trace a path back and forth across
the area, sweeping a one-foot-wide path, with the probe held
horizontally six inches above the ground. The beta shield is
to be open and oriented downward.
4. After a hot spot is found insert a small stake in close proximity
to the spot.
5. After surveying the one-meter area, the activity is picked up
using laboratory scoops to obtain the smallest amount of
material. The activity is placed in small labeled bottles.
Fill out a log sheet at each plot indicating the numbe.r of
particles collected.
6. Move to the next sampling plot and repeat the above procedure.
A-l
-------
APPENDIX B
PARTICLE ISOLATION METHOD
The sample contained in a small plastic bottle was emptied into a
large planchet. Small portions of the sample were scooped out and
checked with the lab monitor. When the small portion contained
activity it was subdivided to a minimum amount of material. This
material was spread on a 1-by 3-inch glass slide and a 30% collodion
solution was used to fix the material to the slide.
After the collodion was dry, the slide was radioautographed (AR'ed)
by placing a 1-by 2-inch flap of unexposed X-ray film next to the col-
lodion, holding it in place with a piece of masking tape, Figure B.
The slide with the attached film was placed in a light tight
exposure holder.
After the exposure period, the slide and the film flap were placed
in a rack and developed in small trays with only the film coming in
contact with the developing solutions. After drying, the film was
folded away from the slide and a small pin hole punched in the
center of the dark spot. The dark spot on the filter indicates the
location of the radioactive particle in the collodion film. The slide
was placed on a microscope stage and the microscope was focused
in the center of the pin hole. The stage was lowered and the flap
folded back. The stage was raised until the particle came into view.
In the event more than one particle (radioactive or non-radioactive)
was present in the field of view and the observer was unable to
determine the exact radioactive particle, a small area was picked
from the slide and transferred to a second slide. A drop or two
of collodion was put on the slide and the particles were dispersed
B-l
-------
with a pick. The initial slide had a drop of collodion placed
where the piece was removed. Both slides were then AR'ed and
the above process repeated. After positive identification was
made, the particle was located for future reference by starring
the collodion around the particle.
B-2
-------
FLAP OF X—RAY FILM
MASKING TAPE
MICROSCOPE SLIDE
PARTICLE COVERED WITH COLLODION
Figure B. Sketch of X-ray film attached to glass slide.
B-3
-------
APPENDIX C
BETA COUNTING INFORMATION
Procedure
Samples were counted at various fixed distances from the detectors
in order to reduce count rates to minimize resolving time losses.
The samples were counted and logged by date and time of count.
Counting times of one minute were adequate for all samples.
Count rates were corrected for resolving time losses and the data
were plotted for decay and absorption.
Equipment
Detector End window GM
Atomic Accessories Inc. Model FC-214
2
Window - 1. 14 mg/cm
Sealer RIDL Model 49-25
Absorbers Atomic Accessories, Inc. Model AB-23
Sample Holders - Glass Slide Mounts (microscope)
Standards Cs deposited as a point source on glass
slide
Resolving Time - 46(i Sec.
-------
APPENDIX C
Table 1. Activities and size of individual specimens.
Sample No.
200
201
202-A
202-B
203-A
203-B
204-A
204-B
204-C
204-D
204-E
204-F
204-G
204-H
204-J
204-K
205-A
205-B
205-C
205-D
205-E
205-F
205-G
205-H
205-J
205-K
DPM1
94,000
110., 000
1,500
48,000
180,000
40, 000
2, 700,000
4,500
19,000
21,000
12,000,000
44,000
54,000
9, 900,000
8,600,000
290,000
3,800
13,000
1,300
3,500
120,000
110,000
620,000
28,000,000
4,300
4,500
Fission
(E09)
8. 7
10
0. 1
4.6
17
3. 7
260
0.4
1.7
1.9
1, 100
4. 1
5
960
850
27
0.4
1.2
0. 1
0.3
11
10
56
2, 700
0.4
0.4
Pico^
curies
(E03)
42
50
0. 7
21
81
18
1,200 '
2
8.4
9.3
5,500
20
24
4,500
3,900
130
1. 7
5.8
0.6
1.6
54
50
280
12,000
1.9
2
Size (|JL)
53x50 shell
120x120
f/s4
200x230
200x250
Shattered bead
48x68 (shattered bead)
105x93, 50x41, f/s
50, f/s
8.8, f/s
105x130
15x18, 8.8
42x25, 35x22, 50x50, 12.5
70x93 (shattered bead)
100x83 (shattered bead)
f/s
f/s
f/s
f/s
104x150
4.2, f/s
2.2
100, 150, 140, f/s
100x117, f/s
f/s
280x100
C-2
-------
Appendix C (continued)
Table 1, Activities and size of individual specimens (continued).
Sample No,
205-L
205-M
205-N
205-O
205-P
205-Q
205-R
205-S
205-T
205-U
205-V
205-W
205-X
205-Y
206-A
206-B
206-C
207
208
209--A
209-B
209-C
209-D
210-A
210-B
__-,l Fission
DPM (E09)
11,000
8,400
71,000
8, 100
1,500
11,000
7,500
8,600
17,000
5,300
28,000
5,000
31,000
6,700
3,800,000
440,000
860,000
6,000,000
1,600
73,000
700
200
4,900,000
2,300
2,300
1.0
0.8
6.6
0.8
0. 1
1.0
0.7
0.8
1.6
0.5
2.6
0.5
2.9
0.6
370
41
79
550
0.2
6.8
0. 1
0. 02
460
0.2
0.2
Pico3
curies
(E03)
5. 1
3.8
32
3.7
0.7
5. 1
3.4
3.9
7.6
2.4
13
2.2
14
3
1,700
200
390
2,700
0.-7
33
0.3
0. 1
2,200
1.0
1.0
Size (n)
36x100,25
f/s
f/s
Shattered pieces 17-25 n, 35
430
25, f/s
8.8, f/s
6.6, f/s
f/s
f/s
f/s
f/s, 140
35, 12.5, f/s
44, f/s
17.5x17. 5, 140x150, 70x66,
35x42, 25x25
25, f/s
f/s
114 (bead)
f/s
f/s
f/s
f/s
70 (in paper)
f/s
f/s
C-3
-------
Appendix C (continued)
Table 1. Activities and size of individual specimens (continued).
Sample No.
210-C
210-D
210-E
211-A
211-B
212-B
212-C .
212-D
212-E
212-F
213-A
213-B
213-C
213-D
214-A
214-B
214-C
214-D
214-E
215
216
217
218-A
218-B
218-C
DPM1
1,300
1, 100
160,000
31, 000,000
2,200
200
37, 000, 000
56,000
71,000
11,000
190,000
19,000
5,200
15, 000,000
51,000
39, 000
11,000
23, 000
22,000
230,000
1, 100
6,000
4,700
5,400
9,300
Fission
(E09)
0. 1
0. 1
• 15
2,900
2.0
15
3,500
5. 1
6.6
1. 1
19
1.8
0.5
1,400
4.8
3.6
1
2. 1
2
22
0. 1
0.6
0.4
0.5
0.9
Pico3
curies
(E03)
0.6
0.5
70
14,000
9.9
0. 1
17,000
24
32
5. 1
85
8. 6
2.4
6,900
23
17
4. 7
10
9.8
100
0.5
2.7
2. 1
2.4
4.2
Size (fa.)
f/s
f/s
Shattered piece
Bead (lost)
165x170, 8.8, (several
flakes 9-17|JL)
511
239x150
On paper
5
On paper
_ 5
On paper
f/s
f/s
f/s
140 (bead)
f/s
12.5, f/s
f/s
4-12u, f/s
25x25
8.8, f/s
185x328
f/s
f/s
73
6, 8.5
C-4
-------
Appendix C (continued)
Table 1. Activities and size of individual specimens (continued).
Sample No.
218-D
218-E
218-F
218-G .
218-H
218-J
218-K
218-L
218-M
218-N
218-O
219-A
219-B
220-A
220-B .
220-C
220-D
220-E
221-A
221-B
222-A
222-B
223-A
223-B
223-C
DPM1
1,200
1,800
23,000
2, 100
900
1, 700
6,500
2, 100
1,000
800
2,000
18,000,000
310,000
110, 000
34, 000
800
6,400
58,000
7, 100
110,000
45,000
86,000
95,000
19,000
1, 500
2
Fission
(E09)
0. 1
0. 2
2.2
0. 2
0. 1
0.2
0.6
0.2
0. 1
0. 1
0.2
1,800
29
11
3. 1
0. 1
0.6
5.4
0. 7
10
4. 1
8. 3
8.8
1.8
0. 1
Pico
curies
(EOS)
0. 5
0.8
11
0.9
0.4
0.8
2.9
0.9
0. 5
0.4
0.9 .
8, 100
140
51
15
0. 3
2.9
26
3.2
48
20
39
43
8. 7
0. 7
Size ((J.)
390
1,1, 3
f/s
f/s
f/s
245
1.5, 48, 140, 172
f/s
Several flakes less than 10 (JL
561
220
117 (bead), f/s
42x30
12-17u, f/s, 8. 5, 12, 230,
130x100, 135, 273
185
f/s
48 .
17.5x25
f/s
f/s .
f/s
f/s
160x120 (bead)
f/s
f/s
C-5
-------
Appendix C (continued)
Table 1. Activities and size of individual specimens (continued).
Sample No.
223-D
223 -E
223-F
224-A
224-B
224-C
224-D
224-E
224-F
224 -G
224-H
224-J
225
226-A
226-B
227-A
227-B
228-A
228-B
228-C
' 228-D
228-E
228-F
228-G
228-H
228-J
„ 1 Fission
DPM (E09)
4,800
26,000
19,000
23,000
330,000
250,000
270, 000
25,000
290,000
13,000
750,000
30,000
440,000
3,000
2,600
300
900
19,000
200,000
26,000
31,000
20,000
18,000
11,000
27,000
18,000
0.4
2.4
1.8
2.2
30
25
26
2.3
27
1.2
70
2.8
41
0. 3
0.2
0.03
0. 1
1.7
18
2.4
2.9
1.8
. 1.7
1
2. 5
1. 7
Pico
curies
(E03)
2.2
12
8. 6
11
150
120
122
11
130
6
340
13
200
1.4
1.2
0.2
0.4
8.4
8.8
12
14
9
8. 1
5
12
8. 1
Size (n)
8-15fJL, f/s
9.8x12, 8. 5x4. 2
12.5, 17, 25
8.4x12, 7. 1x5
f/s
140x100
12, f/s
60, 140, f/s
50x50
f/s
- f/s
f/s, 12.5x12.5
100x51, 35x31, f/s
295
f/s
f/s
f/s
f/s
70x35, f/s
12.5, f/s
17. 5x6.2, 35x35
16x13
f/s
f/s
48x53, f/s
f/s
C-6
-------
Appendix C (continued)
Table 1. Activities and size of individual specimens, (continued)
Sample No.
228-K
228-L
228-M
228-N
228-O
228-P
228-Q
228-R
228-S
228-T
228-U
228-V
228-W
228-X
228-Y
228-Z
229
230
231
232
233
234-A
234-B
235
236
^^^,1 Fission
DPM (E09)
83,000
9,400
12,000
16,000
7,800
8,400
17,000
4,600
4,500
15,000
5,900
35,000
22,000
15,000
42,000
9, 100
3, 000
22,000
2, 100,000
35,000
5,600,000
3,000, 000
1, 100,000
140,000
91,000
7. 7
0.9
1. 1
1. 5
0. 7
0.8
1.6
0.4
0.4
1.4
0.5
3. 3
2
1.4
3.9
0.9
0. 3
2
190
3.3
520
270
99
13
8.5
Pico3
curies
(E03)
37
4.2
5.3
7. 1
3.5
3.8
7.6
2. 1
2
6.7
2. 7
16
9.9
6.7
19
4. 1
1.4
9.8
950
16
2,500
1,300
480
63
41
Size (fx)
f/s
12x8.5, 3x6, f/s
f/s
f/s
23x36.
13.2x17. 5
17.5x17.5, 12.5x17. 5, f/s
8.8, f/s
f/s
3, 24,220, f/s
f/s
88, f/s
f/s
f/s
140, 140, f/s
145, f/s
50x55
95x93 (Shell)
100 (half bead) 75x110
f/s
66x63 (shattered bead)
68
40x50
70x53
Shattered shell 50 pieces
= 17. 5|J.
C-7
-------
Appendix C (concluded)
Table 1. Activities and size of individual specimens (continued).
Sample No.
237
238-A
238-B
239-A
239-B
240
241
242-A
242-B
243
244 .
245 •
246-A
246-B
246-C
1 A •
At time of
2 9
E09 = 10
3E03 = 103
_. . 2 Pico3
_„,,! Fission
DPM fFOQl curies
{E°9) (EOS)
60,000
2, 100
2,500
28, 000
1, 700
1,700,000
130, 000
1,900
20,000
3,400
3,200
4,600
15, 000
5, 300
30,000
count 12/27/67
5.5
0.2
0.2
2.6
0.02
160
12
0.2
1.8
. 0.3
0.3
0.4
1.4
0.5
2.8
27
0.9
1. 1
13
0.8
760
59
0.8
8.9
1.5
1.5
2. 1
6.6
2.4
14
Size (n)
72x100
f/s
320
< lOji, f/s
f/s
80x110
12.5x25, f/s
f/s
70x75
10x8.4
130x92, 4.2, f/s
f/s
8.8, f/s
84x78
60x50, f/s
Flake on Sand
Particle in paper due to separation process
C-8
-------
APPENDIX C
Table 2. Special collected samples*.
Sample No.
100
101
102
103
104
105
D
106
107°
108
109°
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118°
119°
120
121
122
123
124
125
Size in (Jt
94x84
47x38
113x113
122x94
94x75
38x84
338x375
564x497
75x75
141x150
113x94
38x28
75x122
130x150
94x113
141x130
75x75
113x141
281x263
319x188
94x94
122x150
113x66
94x94
12x12
15x17
Sample No.
127
A
128
B
129
B
130
131
c
132
133
134
E
135
136
137
D
138
E
139
140°
141
142C
143
144
145E
146B
147
B
148
149
E
150
151
152
Size in [i
23x19
94x94 .
131x103
40x31
31x28
47x47
26x28
35x57
94x113
42x31
31x28
375x563
62x85
656x1126
109x123
94x94
31x39
54x83
92x49
77x77
31x39
37x53
15x15
94x38
19x17
22x14
C-9
-------
Appendix C (concluded)
\
Table Z. Special collected samples* (continued).
Sample No. Size in n Sample No. Size in \i
126 84x75 153 31x31
*3-3. 5 miles west of Lathrop Wells on Highway 95.
A - May have sphere attached
B - Smooth surface
C - Spherical
D - Sand grain
E - Sand grain with particle - particle size given
Note: All particles very dark, all particles irregular in shape
unless otherwise noted, sizes given are greatest linear
dimensions and length perpendicular to greatest linear
dimension.
C-10
-------
APPENDIX C
Table 3. Isotopic activities for individual specimens .
91 95 97 99
Sample No. Sr Zr Zr Mo
200
200**1
202A
202B
203A
203B
204A-G**!
204H-K**
205A-Y**1
206A-C**
207
208
209A-C**
209D
210A-D**
210E
211A
2MB**
212B
212C-F**
213A-C
213D
214A-E
215
1.
9.
5.
2.
2.
1.
2.
6.
8.
8.
1.
1.
6.
2.
2.
2.
4
3
2
6
2
6
3
5
0
1
1
3
1
0
2
5
E02
£04
£03
£02
EOS
EOS
EOS
E04
£04
E04
E02
EOS
EOS
£05
£05
EOS
1.
1.
2.
1.
3.
4.
6.
4.
1.
5.
3.
1.
1.
5 E04
6 EOS
4 £04
7 EOS
0 EOS
2 EOS
0 £02
2 £03
0 E07
7 £03
6 £06
7 £05
3 £06
103,,
Ru
8.5 £03
4. 1 £03
1.3 £05
1. 2 EOS
2.0 EOS
3.4 E04
3.5 E04
8.3 E02
7. 2 £04
2.6 EOS
1. 1 E05
1. 1 EOS
2.5 EOS
1.0 EOS
1. 4 EOS
131 132 133T
I Te-I I
1. 0 E03
1. 3 E02
2. 1 £03 8.4 £03
1. 1 £03
3.6 E02
1.8 £04
1. 7 £03
2. 8 £03
6.5 £03
1.5 EOS
3. 1 EOS 1.3 E06
9.3 E02
7. 8 E04
5.8 EOS
8.3 E04
2.5 EOS 5.6 EOS
4. 0 E03
135 14l
4.
1.
3.
4.
1.
4.
3.
2.
1.
1.
8.
1.
1.
1.
5.
3.
6.
5.
3.
2.
3.
2.
2.
5.
°Ba-La
5 EOS
7 £02
4 E02
3 E03
4 E04
6 EOS
0 £05
3 EOS
9 EOS
5 EOS
5 £04
9 E02
3 £04
1 £05
8 £02
0 E04
0 EOS
6 £03
8 £02
0 EOS
7 E04
3 £05
5 £04
7 £04
141,, 143
Ce Ce
5.
3.
5.
2.
1.
3.
5.
1.
8.
8.
6.
9.
3.
3.
2.7 £05
0 £03
3 £03
2 E02
1 EOS
8 EOS
4 EOS
4 E04
3 £05
5 £04
5 £01
9 £05
3 £04
0 £05
0 £05
-------
Appendix C (continued)
o
Table 3. Isotopic activities for individual specimens . (continued)
Sample Xo.
216
217
218A.
218B
213C
218D
218E
218F
218G
218H
218J
218K
216L
2 IBM
213X
2 ISO
2 19 A
219B
220A-D-:
220E
221A
221B
222A
222B
223A-D**
223E
22iF
Sr
3. 7 E04
4.9 E04
6. 1 E04
1. 3 E04
6. 0 E04
2.5 £05
1. 6 E04
9. 3 E03
6.8 E04
3.2 E03
6.2 E03
1. 1 E04
1.6 E04
1. 5 £03
95 97
Zr Zr
5.0
3.6
1. 1
6.5
2.6
1.4
6.0
8. 5
2.2
2.9
7. 3
6.3
1. 3
5. 7
2.9
6. 1
£02 6. 3 E04
E02 2.0 E04
£02 2.2 E04
£01 4.2 E03
E02 2.2 E04
E02 6.4 E03
E01 3. 3 E03
£01 5. 1 E03
1. 3 E03
7.0 E02
£05
E04
E01
E03
E02
E02
E03
E01
Mo Ru I
1.4
7.9
1.0
9.3
6. 5
3.6
4. 3
5.8
1.9
1.4
6.0
6.0
1.0
1. 7
1.6
9.3
5.7
2. 0
4.8
4.8
1.6
5.4
5.0
E03 1. 1 E02
E03
£04
£03
£02
E02
E02
E04
E04
£02
E02
E02
E02
E03
£02
1. 1 £05
E04 2. 8 £03
£04 1. 1 £03
£03
£04 1. 3 £03
£02
£04
£04 1.2 £03
£02
1. 0 E02
3.0 £02
1. 1 £03
4. 8 £03
1. 1 E02
1.4 E02
1.4 E02
3.8 £03
1.4 £03
2. 9 £02
5. 5 £01
9. 3 £01
1. 0 £02
2.3 E03
1. 5 £03
2. 6 E02
3.9 E03
6. 7 £02
1.4 E03
2.4 E03
3.0 £02
1.8 E02
132Te-I
1.2 £03
2.9 £03
1.2 E03
1. 3 £04
2.6 £03
3.8 £03
5.6 E02
1.4 E03
9.3 E02
2.9 E03
2. 1 E03
133I 135I
4.
3.
1.
2.
6.
1.
1.
4.
1.
7.
5.
8 £03
6 E04
4. 1 £04
3. 1 £04
4 E03 7.8 £03
6 E04
4 E03 2.0 £04
6.3 £03
1 £03
0 £03
4 E02
6.4 E03
3 £05
3 £04
5 E03
Ba-La
1.8 £02
1.6 E03
4.8 E02
3. 7 E02
4. 9 E02
1. 1 E02
6.8 E01
2.2 E03
7. 1 E04
4.6 E01
1.4 E02
1.0- E03
3. 7 E02
2.9 E02
3. 1 E02
1. 7 EOS
2. 0 E04
2. 1 E04
1. 6 E04
1. 7 E03
2.9 E04
1.0 E04
2. 3 E04
1.8 E04
6.0 E03
4.2 E03
141Ce .
2. 6 E02
2. 5 E02
1. 0 £02
2.4 E02
4.8 E02
8.2 E01
6.5 E01
2. 1 E03
4. 3 E02
5.0 E01
1. 7 E02
7. 1 E01
2.6 E02
1. 0 £02
2. 7 £05
2. 7 E04
1. 1 E03
1.4 £03
143Ce
9.3 £03
1.8 E04
2. 5 E03
2. 2 £03
2.6 £03
3.4 E03
2.5 E03
5.0 E02
3.6 £03
7.0 £02
-------
Appendix C (continued).
Table 3. Isotopic activities for individual specimens . (continued)
o
1
1— »
OJ
Sample No.
224A
224B-F**
224G
224H
224J
,225
226A
226B
227A
227B
228A
228B
228C
228D
228E
228F
228G
228H
228J
228K
228L
228M
228N
228O
228P
228Q
228R
228S-Z**
229
230
91,. 95,,
Sr Zr
9.
5.
3.
3.
2.2 E04
4. 3 E04
1.6 E04
1 . 2 E04
1.
9.
2.
3.
1.2 E07 3.
8.
1.
4.
1.
3.
1.
5.
3.
2.
2.
3 E02
8 EOS
2 E02
0 E04
3 EOS
3 E02
5 E02
8 E02
8 E02
5 E02
7 E01
2 E02
9 E01
7 E02
2 E01
0 E02
8 E03
5 E03
1 E04
97Zr
3.4 EOS
1.4 EOS
1..5 EOS
3.2 E04
6.9 E04
9. 3 E04
6. 6 E04
3. 7 E04
5. 7 E04
4. 1 E04
3.4 EOS
Mo
3.8 EOS
1. 1 EOS 8.2
5.2 EOS
2.5E05 6.1
1.2 E05
5.5 E04
4. 7 E02
2. 1 EOS
7. 3 EOS
2. 1 E04
2.8 EOS
2. 7 EOS
8.5 E03
1.6 E03
5. 1 EOS
6.6 EOS
2.8 EOS
3.6 EOS
2.7 EOS
5.0 EOS
2.5 EOS
9. 5 E02
9.3 E02
2.9 E03
5.0 E02
4.3 E04
3.5 E04
7. 8 E04
'RU 131I 132Te-I U3I 135I 14°Ba-La
EOS 7.
7.
EOS 1.
8.
2.
5.
3.
9.
1.
1.
8.
3.
1.
2.
1.
3.
4.
9.
5.
' 1.
3.
8.
2.
8.
5.
3 E03
2 E02 1.6 EOS
4 E04
5 E02
5 E02 6. 2 EOS
2 E02 2.4 EOS 3. 4 EOS 1.3
3 E02 1.4 E02 3. 1 EOS
3 E02 5.0 E02 6.0 EOS 4.3
1 E02
2.2 EOS
0 EOS
3 E02
7 E02 8. 3 E04
1 E02 5.9 E04
6 E02 3.6 E02 1.4 E04
4 E02 6.6 E04
8 E02
7 E02
3 E01
0 E02 1. 1 EOS
4 E02
1 E02 4. 0 E04
4 E01
0 EOS
5 E01
0 EOS
3. 2 EOS
1, 8 EOS
8.5 EOS
3. 5 E04
4. 1 EOS
3. 8 E04
2.4 E02
E04 3. 4 E02
E04 9.3 E01
3.6 EOS
4.2 E04
4.6 EOS
5.4 EOS
3.5 EOS
4. 7 EOS
2. 0 EOS
5. 3 EOS
3. 1 EOS
3.4 EOS
1.2 EOS
2. 7 'EOS
7.3 E02
7. 5 E02
2.2 EOS
2.5 EOS
4.5 E01
1.4 E04
9.3 E02
1.7 E04
141Ce
2.6 E03
3.0 EOS
3.2 EOS
2.5 E04
7.8 E01
1.0 E02
2. 6 E02
4. 3 E02
1. 5 EOS
4.8 E02
1.7 E02
8.4 E02
1.7 EOS
9.3 E02
5. 7 E02
1. 1 E03
3. 1 E02
9.3 E01
8.2 E02
5.3 E02
4. 9 EOS
1.2 EOS
1.5 E04
143Ce
2.
1.
1.
3.
2.
2.
1.
8.
3.
5 E04
2 E04
2 E04
4 E04
1 E04
8 E04
9 E04
5 EOS
5 E04
-------
o
-Appendix C (concluded)
Table 3. Isotopic activities for individual specimens , (continued).
Sample No.
231
232
233
234 A**1
234B
235
1
236':'*
237
238A-B
239A
239B
240
241
242A
242B
243
244
245
246A
246B
246C
91_ 95
Sr Zr
6.
. 3.
7.
7.
1.
2.
2.
2.
1.
7.
6.
5. 7 E04 2.
7.
1.
4. 5 £06
5.
6 E04
5 E03
9 £04
1 £04
1 £05
0 E04
0 EOS
1 E02
8 £05
7 £02
1 £03
2 E03
4 £02
9 £02
0 £02
97Zr 9
6.
1.
1.
1.
1.
4.
4.
2.
2.
1.
4.
1.4 £05 1.
2.
2.
3.
9X, 103^ 131 132 T 133T 135T 14
Mo Ru I Te-I I . I
2
7
3
2
4
2
8
1
8
7
1
3
4
7
0
£05 1.3 E04
£04 3.4 £02
E06 2.4 E04
2. 0 E04
£05 8. 1 E03
EOS
6. 2 E04
EOS
E02 2.6 £02 1.3 £03
2. 7 E02 2. 5 £02
E07 2. 1 £04
£04
£03
£03
E04 1. 5 £03
£03 1. 7 £02 5.2 £02
1.4 £02 5.0 E02
E03 2.9E02 4.2E02 4. 2 £04
2.2 E02 7.0 E02
£03 3.2 £02 8.5 £02
2.
3.
7.
1.
8.
3.
1.
7.
1.
4.
1.
6.
1.
2.
4.
4.
1.
6.
0
Ba-Ba
8 E04
2 E03
1 E04
1 £05
5 £04
0 E03
4 £05
3 £04
0 £03
1 £03
4 £05
0 £01
3 £02
0 £03
0 £03
9 £03
2 £03
8 £03
141Ce
5.
4.
8.
7.
1.
1.
1.
7.
1.
3.
2.
3.
5
5
5
3
1
0
2
6
5.
2
2
2
E04
E03
E04
E04
£05
E04
£05
E04
£05
E02
E03
E02
143Ce
9.3 EOS
6.0 £05
1.4 E04
4. 2 £04
1 = pCi @ 1200 hours 12-15-67
**. = Grouped in one sample holder
= Grouped in one sample holder (hand calculation)
*
£02=
-------
APPENDIX D
. DENSITY ANALYSIS METHODS
Selected particles were weighed and their fall velocity in a liquid
was observed to determine their density.
The particles were weighed on a Cahn Electobalance in the fol-
lowing manner. The particles were loosened from the slide with
a small quantity of amyl acetate. The particles were either lifted
or pushed from the slide onto a previously weighed balance boat
using a small pick. The mass of the pan and dry particle was then
recorded. The particle was then pushed or lifted from the
balance pan with a pick, placed back on the microscope, slide and
fixed again with another drop of collodion.
The fall velocity of the particles was determined as follows. The
particle on each slide was first loosened with a drop of amyl
acetate. Each slide containing the particle in question was then
lowered into the solution of ethyl alcohol. The particle was ob-
served to fall from the slide, and the time of fall was measured
using two independent stop watches. The fall velocity was calcu-
lated using the average of the two times. Recovery of the individual
particles for a second fall time, etc. , was not feasible.
Standard particles were used to calibrate the solution because it is
known that a departure from the Stokes settling velocity occurs
with particles greater than 50 (JL in size. The particles used were
whole reactor beads, spherical in shape. The composition of
these beads according to present calculations is a core of uranium
carbide (UC?), density 11.28 gm/cm , surrounded by a reported
uniform 25 \i thickness of pyrolytic carbon, density 2.0 gm/cm .
The results of this calibration are presented in the following table.
D-l
-------
APPENDIX D
Table 1. Density analysis calibration data.
Radius
(H)
65.9
68.8
81.4
94.9
77.5
Weight
(Kg)
4. 00
6.25
14.75
15.00
5.75
Distance
of fall
(cm)
21. 11
21. 11
21. 11
21. 11
21. 11
Time of fall
(sec)
27.5
-
9.5
8. 5
14.5
Fall
velocity
(cm/sec)
. 77
-
2.22
2.98
1.46
Viscosity
(cp)
2.49
2.49
2.49
2.49
2.49
- = Not reported.
D-2
-------
DISTRIBUTION
1 •» 13 National Environmental Research Center, Las Vegas, Nevada
14 Mahlon E. Gates, Manager, AEC/NVOO, Las Vegas, Nevada
15 Robert H. Thalgott, AEC/NVOO, Las Vegas, Nevada
16 Henry G. Vermillion, AEC/NVOO, Las Vegas, Nevada
17 Donald W. Hendricks, AEC/NVOO, Las Vegas, Nevada
18 Robert R. Loux, AEC/NVOO, Las Vegas, Nevada
19 Mail & Records, AEC/NVOO, Las Vegas, Nevada
20 Technical Library, AEC/NVOO, Las Vegas, Nevada
21 Chief, NOB/DNA, AEC/NVOO, Las Vegas, Nevada
22 Harold F. Mueller, ARL/NOAA, AEC/NVOO, Las Vegas, Nevada
23 Howard G. Booth, ARL/NOAA, AEC/NVOO, Las Vegas, Nevada
24 D. Gabriel, SNSO, Washington, D. C.
25 George P. Dix, SNSO, Washington, D. C.
26 - 29 Richard A. Hartfield, SNSO-N, NRDS, Jackass Flats, Nevada
30 William C. King, LLL, Mercury, Nevada
31 James E. Carothers, LLL, Livermore, California
32 Ernest A. Bryant, LASL, Los Alamos, New Mexico
33 Harry S. Jordan, LASL, Los Alamos, New Mexico
34 Charles I. Browne, LASL, Los Alamos, New Mexico
35 W. S. Wilgus, NRTO, NRDS, Jackass Flats, Nevada
36 Eastern Environmental Radiation Facility, EPA, Montgomery, Ala.
37 Donald R. Martin, Pan Am. World Airways, Jackass Flats, Nevada
38 Martin B. Biles, DOS, USAEC, Washington, D. C.
39 J. Doyle, EG&G, Las Vegas, Nevada
40 Richard S. Davidson, Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, Ohio
41 Carter D. Broyles, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico
42 Maj.Gen. Frank A. Camm, DMA, USAEC, Washington, D. C.
43 Stanley M. Greenfield, Assistant Administrator for Research &
Monitoring, EPA, Washington, D. C.
44 William D. Rowe, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Radiation
Programs, EPA, Rockville, Maryland
-------
DISTRIBUTION (continued)
45 Ernest D. Harward, Acting Director, Division of Technology Assessment,
Office of Radiation Programs, EPA, Rockville, Maryland
46 - 47 Charles L. Weaver, Dir., Field Operations Div., Office of Radiation
Programs, EPA, Rockville, Maryland
48 Gordon Everett, Dir., Office of Technical Analysis, EPA, Washington, D. C.
49 Library, EPA, Washington, D. C.
50 Kurt L. Feldmann, Managing Editor, Radiation Data & Reports, Office of
Radiation Programs, EPA, Rockville, Maryland
51 Regional Radiation Representative, EPA, Region IX, San Francisco,
California
52 Arden E. Bicker, REECo-, Mercury, Nevada
53 John M. Ward, President, Desert Research Institute, University of Nevada,
Reno, Nevada
54 - 55 Technical Information Center, USAEC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee (For public
availability).
------- |