United States Office of Radiation Programs ORP/LV-79-2
Environmental Protection Las Vegas Facility January 1979
Agency P.O. Box 15027
Las Vegas NV 89114
Radiation
&EPA Ambient Airborne
Radioactivity Measurements
in the Vicinity of the
Jackpile Open Pit
Uranium Mine
New Mexico
-------
Technical Note
ORP/LV-79-2
AMBIENT AIRBORNE RADIOACTIVITY MEASUREMENTS IN
THE VICINITY OF THE JACKPILE OPEN PIT URANIUM MINE
NEW MEXICO
Gregory G. Eadie*
C. William Fort*
Mala L. Beard**
January 1979
*0ffice of Radiation Programs-Las Vegas Facility
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
**District Sanitarian, Indian Health Service
A.C.L. Hospital
P.O. Box 130
San Fidel, New Mexico 87049
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report has been reviewed by the Office of Radiation Programs
Las Vegas Facility, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, and approved
for publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not
constitute endorsement or recommendation for their use.
11
-------
PREFACE
The Office of Radiation Programs of the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency carries out a national program designed to evaluate population exposure
to ionizing and nonionizing radiation, and to promote development of controls
necessary to protect the public health and safety. This report describes
several field studies which were conducted to evaluate the ambient airborne
radioactivity levels for locations in the vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit
Uranium Mine in New Mexico. Readers of this report are encouraged to inform
the Office of Radiation Programs of any omissions or errors. Comments or
requests for further information are also invited.
Donald W. Hendricks
Director, Office of
Radiation Programs, LVF
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF FIGURES vi i
LIST OF TABLES viii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ix
INTRODUCTION 1
SUMMARY 2
STUDY AREA 3
RADIATION SURVEYS 4
RADIUM IN SOIL AND WATER SAMPLES 6
METEOROLOGY 7
AMBIENT OUTDOOR RADON-222 CONCENTRATIONS 9
Sampling System and Analytical Methods 9
Results and Discussion 9
Interlaboratory Comparisons 14
INDOOR RADON PROGENY LEVELS 16
Sampling System and Analytical Methods 16
Results and Discussion 16
Radon and Progeny Equilibrium Ratios 21
Regulations and Guidelines 23
Log-Probability Distribution of Indoor Radon Progeny Levels 24
AIRBORNE PARTICULATE SAMPLING 29
System Description 29
Gross Versus Net Results 29
Results and Discussion 31
Log-Probability Distribution of Ambient Airborne Particulate
Radioactivity 37
DOSE ESTIMATES 42
RADIOACTIVITY IN FOOD 44
-------
REFERENCES
APPENDICES
A - Ambient Outdoor Radon-222 Concentrations 48
B - Composited Monthly Ambient Air Sampling Results in pCi/m3 60
C - Composited Monthly Ambient Air Sampling Results in pCi/g 66
D - Air Sampling Results for Locations in the Vicinity of the
Jackpile Open Pit Uranium Mine (in pCi/m3) 72
E - Air Sampling Results for Locations in the Vicinity of the
Jackpile Open Pit Uranium Mine (in pCi/g) 78
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Number Page
1 Sampling locations and summary of radon and progeny
measurements in the vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit
Mine, New Mexico 3
2 Ambient indoor radon progeny working levels during 1976 22
3 Log-probability plot of ambient indoor radon progeny
levels at Laguna 26
4 Log-probability plot of ambient indoor radon progeny
levels at Jackpile Housing 27
5 Log-probability plot of ambient indoor radon progeny
levels at Paguate 28
6 Average monthly airborne radium-226 concentration (pCi/m3)
for locations in the vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit
Uranium Mine 34
7 Average monthly airborne total uranium concentration (pCi/m3)
for locations in the vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit
Uranium Mine 35
8 Average monthly airborne thorium-230 concentration (pCi/m3)
for locations in the vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit
Uranium Mine 36
9 Log-probability plot of the composited monthly ambient
radium-226 radioactivity concentrations for the five locations
in the vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit Uranium Mine 38
10 Log-probability plot of the composited monthly ambient
total uranium radioactivity concentrations for the five
locations in the vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit
Uranium Mine 39
11 Log-probability plot of the composited monthly ambient
thorium-230 radioactivity concentrations for the five
locations in the vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit
Uranium Mine 40
VI 1
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Number Page
1 Gamma Radiation Surveys and Soil and Water Sample Results 5
2 Ambient Outdoor Radon-222 Concentrations During June 1976
in the Vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit Mine, New Mexico 10
3 Representative Background Radon Levels in the Vicinity of
the Jackpile Mine 12
4 Exposure Limits for Radon-222 and Radon Progeny 13
5 Replicate Analysis Between Two Laboratories 15
6 Ambient Indoor Radon Progeny Levels at Laguna Tribal Building 18
7 Ambient Indoor Radon Progeny Levels at Jackpile Housing
(#16 House) 19
8 Ambient Indoor Radon Progeny Levels at Paguate Community
Building 20
9 Radon and Progeny Equilibrium Indications 21
10 Blank Microsorban Filter Radioactivity Contents 30
11 Volume Weighted Annual Average Airborne Radionuclide
Concentration (in pCi/m3) 33
12 Mass Weighted Annual Average Airborne Radionuclide
Concentration (in pCi/g) 33
13 Comparison of Means 41
14 Average Annual Lung Dose (mrem/year) for Insoluble
Radionuclides 43
15 Radioactivity in Food 45
vni
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to extend their grateful appreciation to The
Anaconda Company and Mr. William E. Gray for their cooperation during this
study.
IX
-------
INTRODUCTION
Starting in December 1975, a one-year study was conducted in the vicinity
of the Jackpile Open Pit Uranium Mine to measure the ambient airborne concentra-
tions of natural radioactive materials such as uranium, radium and thorium.
Radon progeny levels (expressed as Working Levels [WL]) were also determined
at several indoor locations in nearby communities. During June 1976, a
special study was conducted to measure the ambient outdoor radon-222 levels in
the area. This report discusses the results of these radiological surveys.
-------
SUMMARY
This report discusses the results of several radiological surveys conducted
in the vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit Uranium Mine in New Mexico. During
June 1976, ambient radon-222 concentrations were measured at eleven locations,
seven of which appear to have been at representative background radon levels -
averaging 0.50 ± 0.033 pCi/1. The other four locations had average radon
levels in excess of this typical background level; however, the highest
measured radon concentration was 2.7 pCi/1. The arithmetic average ambient
radon progeny working level obtained indoors at the Laguna Tribal Building
appeared to be at a representative background level of 0.0049 ± 0.00045 WL.
The arithmetic average ambient working levels obtained at the Paguate Community
Center and the Jackpile Housing were 0.035 ± 0.0038 and 0.015 ± 0.0025 WL,
respectively. Ambient airborne particulate radioactivity concentrations
measured outdoors at Old Laguna appear to be at typical background levels;
however, other locations exhibited higher annual average concentrations for
the naturally-occurring radionuclides.
-------
STUDY AREA
Figure 1 shows the study area and sampling locations. The Anaconda
Company operates the Jackpile-Paguate Mine which is the world's "largest open
pit uranium mine. About 5500 tons of uranium ore are produced each day.
Roughly one-half of the daily production is sent via railway for processing at
the Anaconda Mill at Bluewater; the remaining ore is stockpiled at the mine.
Bibo J
(0.50)
Moqumo
- (0.54)- —
Anaconda Co.
Jackpile —Pa guate
Mine
Paguate
(0.42 pCi/l. 0,035 WL)
Sampling Locations
Air
Water
Soil •
(Radon in pCi/l; WL)
Jackpile Housing
(1.1 pCi/l; 0.015 WL)
R.R. #2
(1-30) -
Laguna Health Center
(0.51 pCi/l; 0.0049 WL}
To Albuquerque
Figure 1. Sampling locations and summary of radon and progeny measurements
in the vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit Mine, New Mexico
-------
RADIATION SURVEYS
Upon selection of a site as a suitable air sampling location, gamma
radiation surveys were completed. These surveys were done to evaluate whether
the sampling location was constructed upon an area of elevated terrestrial
radioactivity, or if some uranium ore or other radioactive material was present
inside the structure. Such conditions could have biased the ambient outdoor
radon levels and/or the indoor working level determinations.
A pressurized ionization chamber (PIC - Reuter Stokes, Model RSS-111
Environmental Radiation Monitor) was used to measure the radiation exposure
rate in units of microroentgen per hour (yR/h). The PIC was calibrated using
a "shadow shield" method employing a cobalt-60 source calibrated by the
National Bureau of Standards. The PIC was then inter-calibrated to respond to
a radium-226 gamma spectrum. The PIC measures both the cosmic and terrestrial
gamma source exposure rates. All PIC measurements were made at a height of
one meter above ground surface. For the indoor measurements, the PIC determina-
tion was made in about the center of the room in which the indoor radon progeny
air sampler was located.
Radiation surveys were also made using a portable gamma scintillator
survey meter (Baird-Atomic, Type NE148A - Gamma Scintillator Ratemeter). This
instrument was calibrated with a radium-226 standard and measured the relative
gamma radiation exposure rate in units of yR/h. Table 1 presents the radiation
exposure rates measured at each location (indoor and outdoor) for both types
of detectors.
-------
TABLE 1. GAMMA RADIATION SURVEYS AND SOIL AND WATER SAMPLE RESULTS
Location
Outdoor
PIC Scintillator
(uR/h) (uR/h)
Indoor
Pic Scintillator
(uR/h) (uR/h)
Ra-226 in Soil
Top 5 cm*
(pCi/g)
Ra-226 in Water
(Total)*
(pCi/1)
Laguna (#2)
Bibo
Mesita (#1)
Mesita (#2)
Moquino
Paguate
Jackpile Housing
Railroad Trestle
11.5
14.3
11.0
12.0
11.9
13.1
15.9
13.4
5 14.1 8
7
5
7
5 -
7 14.5 11
14 17.0 14
9
0.62 ± 0.15
0.86 ± 0.18
-
0.78 ± 0.-17 .0.37 ± 0.097
0.15 ± 0.064
1.1 ± 0.19 0.65 ± 0.12
3.9 ± 0.36
1.7 ± 0.24 4.7 ± 0.32
*Result ± Two-Sigma Counting Error
-------
RADIUM IN SOIL AND WATER SAMPLES
In addition to the radiation survey, a soil sample was also collected at
several of the outdoor air sampling locations. Each soil sample was obtained
at the same location as were the outdoor radiation measurements. The results
of analyses for radium-226 content are also reported in Table 1. A standardized
sampling procedure, which utilized a steel scoop, 5-cm deep and 100-cm2 in
surface area, was established to obtain a standard soil sample of 500 cm3,
representing the average activity in the top five centimeters of soil. The
highest radium content in soil (3.9 pCi/g) was at the Jackpile Housing Area.
The soil content at the Railroad Trestle was also high at 1.7 pCi/g. Both of
these areas showed elevated radon levels, as discussed later. The background
location at Laguna (#2) had the lowest radium in soil content of 0.62 pCi/g.
Four non-potable water samples were collected from nearby streams and
these results are also shown in Table 1. Radium-226 in the total water sample
(both dissolved and suspended components) was measured, ranging from a low of
0.15 pCi/1 at the Rio Moquino to a high value of 4.7 pCi/1 for a stream near
the railroad trestle.
-------
METEOROLOGY*
Surface winds are monitored continuously at the Jackpile-Paguate mine by
the Anaconda Company using a Bendix Aerovane wind transmitter located on the
roof of the maintenance shop. The approximate height of the instrument is 60
feet above ground level. Wind speed and direction are recorded on analog
recorders and later reduced to hourly averages by Anaconda personnel.
Surface winds at the mine occur primarily from the east and west. The
nocturnal wind (1800-0600 MST) is characterized by light, westerly flow
influenced by drainage from nearby terrain. During the early morning period
(0000-0600 MST) westerly flow accounts for 41.5 percent of all occurrences;
27.4 percent are less than 5 mph. During the late evening (1800-2400 MST),
flow is also westerly, although wind speeds average slightly higher.
The daytime wind (0600-1800 MST) is characterized by light to moderate
flow distributed primarily between the eastern and western sectors. The
influence of drainage winds from the west can be seen to diminish during this
time as wind speeds in these sectors increase. In the morning period (0600-
1200 MST) light to moderate winds still account for the majority of occurrences
although they are increasingly associated with easterly flow. By afternoon
(1200-1800 MST) light winds account for only a small fraction of occurrences
in either the western or eastern sectors; moderate to strong winds predominate
in both.
Wind speeds at the mine exemplify the early morning effect of drainage
winds, which are replaced later in the day by strong westerly flow. Wind
speeds in the early morning average 5.6 mph and increase to an average of 10.6
mph during 1200-1800 MST. Although winds are more frequent from the east
during this period, the stronger winds are associated with westerly flow; wind
speeds in this sector average 13.5 mph between 1200-1800 MST.
* This section provided by The Anaconda Company (1976).
-------
Wind speeds at the mine are generally of light to moderate intensity with
wind speeds greater than 15 mph accounting for less than 11 percent of all
occurrences. Average wind speeds range from 5.3 mph from the east to 11.6 mph
from the west-northwest. The strongest winds generally occur from the WNW
although the frequency of their occurrence is extremely small. Maximum hourly
average wind speeds are most prevalent during the afternoon hours (1200-1800
MST); ranging from 18.0 mph from the ENE to 45 mph from the WNW.
Wind speeds and directions recorded by Anaconda at the maintenance shop
provide a general indication of surface winds in the area but, because of the
irregular terrain, should not be considered representative of any other
specific location at the mine.
8
-------
AMBIENT OUTDOOR RADON-222 CONCENTRATIONS
SAMPLING SYSTEM AND ANALYTICAL METHODS
A continuous, low-volume, 110-volt AC sampling system was used to obtain
the ambient outdoor sample (U.S. Public Health Service, 1969). This sampling
technique consisted of pumping filtered air via a small, low-volume air pump
(less than 10 ml/min sampling rate) into a 30-liter Tedlar bag*. The air
intake was about one meter above the ground surface. Usually a continuous 48-
hour air sample was collected in the Tedlar bag which was then transported to
the laboratory facility for radon content analysis.
Radon analyses were completed at the Eberline Instrument Corporation, in
Albuquerque, New Mexico. Eberline flow thru cells (volume of 0.51 liters),
similar to the radon scintillation flasks described by George (1976), were
used for radon analysis. The cells were counted on the Eberline SAC R-5
counting system for a 100 minute counting period. The minimum detectable
activity (MDA)** achieved for these particular cells and counting system was
0.12 pCi/1. Replicate analysis was also completed at the Environmental
Monitoring and Support Laboratory in Las Vegas (EMSL), as discussed in another
section.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Table 2 summarizes the results of this study. Ambient radon concentrations
ranged from the minimum detectable activity (MDA - also shown as less than or as
< in the following tables) of 0.12 pCi/1 to the highest level observed for 2.7
pCi/1. These summary results are also shown on Figure 1. Basic data for each
sampling location are presented in Appendix A, Tables A-l to A-ll. The lowest
average radon concentration measured (0.42 ± 0.14 pCi/1)*** was at the Paguate
* Air Sample Bag made of 0.002 inch (2 mil) thick Du Pont Tedlar (T.M.) poly
vinyl fluoride (PVF) material; from Environmental Measurements, Inc., San
Francisco, CA.
** MDA was defined as that sample net activity which was equal to the total
counting error term (due to both sample and instrument background) at the
95 percent confidence level.
*** The error term associated with average determinations is two times the
standard deviation of the sample population divided by the square root
of the number of samples.
-------
TABLE 2. AMBIENT OUTDOOR RADON-222 CONCENTRATIONS (in pCi/1) DURING JUNE 1976
IN THE VICINITY OF THE JACKPILE OPEN PIT MINE, NEW MEXICO
Location. Description
* * Average
Maximum Concentration Minimum Concentration Concentration
Old Laguna-(#l)
Laguna-
Training Bldg. (#2)
IHS-Laguna
Health Center
Bi bo-Wei 1 house
Mesita-Industrial
Plant (#1)
Mesi ta-Communi ty
Building (#2)
Moquino-Pri vate
Residence
Paguate-Community
Building
Jackpile Mine-
Company Housing Area
Railroad Trestle (#1 )
Below Jackpile housing
area
(Location #2)-One mile
south of Railroad
Trestle (#1 )
1.
1 .
1.
1 .
0.
1.
1 .
0.
1 .
2.
2.
3 ±
5 +
6 ±
4 ±
89 ±
7 ±
4 ±
74 ±
8 ±
1 ±
7 ±
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
18
39
19
29
33
22
23
06
23
26
24
0
0
0
Les
0
Les
Les
Les
0
Les
0
.20 ±
.14 ±
.22 ±
s than
.18 ±
s than
s than
s than
.25 ±
s than
.44 ±
0.10
0.07
0.11
0.12
0.05
0.12
0.12
0.12
0.10
0.12
0.05
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1 .
0.
1 .
51 ±
51 ±
63 ±
50 ±
47 ±
55 ±
54 ±
42 ±
1 ±
99 ±
3 ±
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
28
29
36
23
31
49
31
14
34
54
50
* Source of Analyses: Eberline Instrument Corporation, Albuquerque, New
Result ± Two-Sigma Counting Error Terms
** Average Result ± Two-Standard Error Terms (i.e., standard deviation of
population divided by the square root of the number of samples)
Mexico
the sample
-------
Community Building (Table A-8), which is directly west and roughly within two
kilometers of the border of the active open pit mining area. Six other
locations appear to have average ambient radon concentrations which fluctuate
within the two-standard error terms about the Paguate results. Therefore,
these seven locations have been considered as representative background areas
and the ambient radon levels measured at these locations are listed in Table 3.
In summary, ambient radon levels at representative background locations ranged
from less than 0.12 pCi/1 to a maximum measured value of 1.7 pCi/1. The grand
average radon level for the seven background locations was 0.50 ±0.033 pCi/1.
For comparison, a background radon level of 0.72 ±0.42 pCi/1 (average ± two-
standard error of the mean) was observed during November 1975 at five locations
in the Ambrosia Lake area of active uranium mining and milling (Eadie, et al.,
1976).
The remaining four sampling locations showed ambient radon levels in
excess of this typical background level (i.e., greater than 0.50 ±0.033 pCi/1),
The Jackpile Housing Area (Table A-9) is obviously in immediate proximity to
the ore body and mining activities. The two sampling stations near the
railroad (Tables A-10 and A-11) showed elevated radon levels possibly due to
ore spillage or the use of mine overburden material along the right-of-way.
Ambient radon levels measured at the IHS-Laguna Health Center (Table A-3)
are only slightly elevated compared to the background locations and probably
reflect the natural variability of radon emanation from uranium bearing
minerals in the local geologic structure. For comparison purposes, current
federal and state exposure limits for radon-222 concentrations are shown in
Table 4.
11
-------
TABLE 3.
REPRESENTATIVE BACKGROUND RADON LEVELS (pCi/1)
IN THE VICINITY OF THE OACKPILE MINE
Location
Maximum
Concentration*
Minimum
Concentration*
Average
Concentration**
Paguate
Old Laguna (#1)
Laguna (#2)
Bibo
Mesita (#1)
Mesita (#2)
Moquino
0.74
1.3
1.5
1.4
0.89
1.7
1.4
± 0.06
± 0.18
± 0.39
± 0.29
± 0.33
± 0.22
± 0.23
<0.12
0.20 ± 0.10
0.14 ± 0.07
<0.12
0.18 ± 0.05
<0.12
<0.12
0.42
0.51
0.51
0.50
0.47
0.55
0.54
± 0.14
± 0.28
± 0.29
± 0.23
± 0.31
± 0.47
± 0.31
Highest
Summary: Maximum 1.7
Lowest
Minimum <0.12
Average 0.50 ± 0.033
* Result ± Two-Sigma Counting Error; less than shown as <
** Average Result ± Two-Standard Errors (i.e., the standard deviation
of the sample population divided by the square root of the number
of samples)
12
-------
TABLE 4. EXPOSURE LIMITS FOR RADON-222 AND RADON PROGENY*
40 hour 168 hour
Exposure Limits Exposure Limits
Regulation Source (Restricted Area (Unrestricted Area
Annual Average) Annual Average)**
Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(10CFR Part 20) January 29, 30 pCi/1 3 pCi/1
1976 Appendix B (0.33 Working Levels) (0.03 Working Levels)
New Mexico Environmental
Improvement Agency
Regulations for Governing
the Health and Environmental 100 pCi/1 3 pCi/1
Aspects of Radiation
June 16, 1973, Part 4
Appendix A
* Concentrations Above Natural Background
** Population exposure in unrestricted area may be limited to one-third
of these listed values per NRC 10CFR20, Section 20.106 (e) and/or
NMEIA-Part 4-160, para. E.
13
-------
INTERLABORATORY COMPARISONS
During this study, radon analyses were completed at both the Eberline
Instrument Corporation and at the U.S. EPA, Environmental Monitoring and
Support Laboratory in Las Vegas, Nevada (EMSL) on 18 different replicate
samples (i.e., two separate sample aliquots drawn from the same Tedlar bag),
as shown in Table 5.
The EMSL technique used a radon concentration apparatus (Johns, 1975}
capable of analyzing a 5-liter sample and counting on a 2-inch diameter
photomultiplier tube using the standard 125-ml Lucas cell. The Eberline
method employed the 0.51-liter scintillation flask as described above, with no
sample concentration. Therefore, considering only the counting error terms, 10
of the 18 replicates were within the two-sigma counting error terms of each
other (a 56 percent agreement). On the whole, the Eberline results ranged up
to a factor of 6 times the replicate results from the EMSL. For radon concentra-
tions less than 0.11 pCi/l> the Eberline analyses averaged about four times
the value as reported by EMSL. For radon levels greater than 0.11 pCi/1, the
Eberline results were less than twice the EMSL determinations. Obviously, the
lower sensitivity of the EMSL radon determinations (due to the larger sample
size) emphasizes the limit of the scintillation flasks for completing analysis
at typical background radon concentrations without enrichment of the sample.
Since only six out of the total 99 samples of this study were at a radon
concentration less than 0.12 pCi/1, the reported radon values from Eberline
are probably within a factor of two of the "real" level and therefore, the
Eberline results reported here have been considered as valid results.
14
-------
TABLE 5. REPLICATE ANALYSIS BETWEEN TWO LABORATORIES
(Radon ± Two-Sigma Counting Error Term, pCi/1)
Eberline* EMSL** Factor***
0.26 ± 0.10
0.20 ± 0.10
<0.41
0.32 ± 0.10
0.44 ± 0.12
<0.12
0.50 ± 0.12
0.32 ± 0.10
<0.35
0.19 ± 0.13
<0.12
0.48 ± 0.12
0.36 ± 0.10
<0.34
0.25 ± 0.10
<0.12
0.82 ± 0.06
0.84 ± 0.17
0.049 ± 0.018
0.090 ± 0.028
0.090 ± 0.022
0.18 ± 0.033
0.071 ± 0.025
0.041 ± 0.019
0.18 ± 0.033
0.065 ± 0.020
0.090 ± 0.024
0.11 ± 0.010
0.056 ± 0.020
0.12 ± 0.029
0.11 ± 0.026
0.31 ± 0.043
0.20 ± 0.035
0.14 ± 0.029
0.53 ± 0.055
0.84 ± 0.077
5.3
2.2
4.6
1.8
6.2
2.9
2.8
4.9
3.9
1.7
2.1
4.0
3.3
1.1
1.3
0.86
1.6
1.0
* Eberline Instrument Corporation. Less than values shown as <
** Environmental Monitoring
*** Factor = Eberline Result
and Support
; less than
Laboratory
values considered as real
EMSL Result
numbers
15
-------
INDOOR RADON PROGENY LEVELS
SAMPLING SYSTEM AND ANALYTICAL METHODS
The indoor radon progeny levels were measured using a Type II, TLD-Radon
Progeny Integrating Sampling Unit (RPISU) (Schiager, 1971). This sampling
unit uses thermoluminescent dosimeter disks (TLD) to absorb the alpha particle
emissions from the radon progeny collected on a membrane filter through which
the sampled air has passed.
The measurement of stored energy in the exposed TLD disk was obtained
with a Harshaw Model 2000-TLD reader. The reader gave a readout (in nanocoulombs)
which was converted to a working level (WL) value by utilizing a working
level-liter per nanocoulomb (WL-l/nC) conversion factor which was obtained
through calibration tests in known radon progeny atmospheres. All WL determina-
tions were completed at the Office of Radiation Programs-Las Vegas Facility
(ORP-LVF).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Three locations were selected for conducting the indoor radon progeny
level determinations - the Laguna Tribal Building (#2), the Paguate Community
Center, and the Jackpile Housing (#16 House). This study ran for one year
from December 1975 to December 1976 and all sample results (i.e., ambient
values uncorrected for background level) are shown in Tables 6 to 8. Samples
indicated as "NV" are not valid due to some type of operational error associated
with the sample collection. For example, misreading time clock resulted in
negative sample collection time, or having a non-determinable off flowrate
could not permit the correct sampled volume determination. Hence, such NV
samples were ignored and were not included in the averaging process.
The arithmetic average ambient working level value of 0.0049 ± 0.00045
WL (ranging from 0.0017 to 0.0094 WL) obtained at the Laguna Tribal Building
(#2) (Table 6) appears to be a representative background level. For a similar
16
-------
study conducted in the Grants area of active uranium mining and milling
operations, a mean "background" working level of 0.0069 WL was obtained during
November 1975 (Eadie et al., 1976). Therefore, for the purposes of this
study, the value of 0.0049 ± 0.00045 WL is considered to be the background
working level in the vicinity of the Jackpile Mine.
The arithmetic average ambient working level obtained at the Jackpile
Housing was 0.015 ± 0.0025 WL (ranging from 0.0023 to 0.038 WL) (Table 7).
Subtraction of the average representative background value of 0.0049 WL yields
an average net value of 0.010 WL for the Jackpile Housing.
The arithmetic average ambient working level obtained at the Paguate
Community Center was 0.035 ± 0.0038 WL {ranging from 0.0082 to 0.073 WL)
(Table 8). Subtraction of the average representative background value of
0.0049 WL yields an average net value of 0.030 WL for the Paguate Community
Center. These relatively high working levels appear to be caused by the
build-up of radon progeny due to the exhalation from the natural radium content
of the dirt floor and adobe block walls. Samples of the dirt floor material
averaged 0.90 ± 0.18 pCi of radium-226 per gram. Soil samples outside this
structure also had a similar radium content of 1.1 ± 0.19 pCi/g. Unfortunately,
a sample of the adobe block could not be obtained for analysis of radium
content. Also, high equilibrium concentrations of radon progeny would be
expected for this structure since it was seldom occupied and had rather poor
natural ventilation. For the period 6/8 to 6/30/76, the average ambient
outdoor radon concentration measured at the Paguate Community Building was
0.42 pCi/1 (Table A-8). At 100% equilibrium with its daughters, and assuming
that the indoor level was equal to and due solely to this measured outdoor
radon level, a maximum working level of only 0.0042 WL would be expected.
However, for essentially the same time period (i.e., 6/4 to 7/2/76), the
measured indoor working level averaged 0.033 WL (Table 8) - - over seven times
greater than could be explained on the basis of the outdoor radon concentration.
Therefore, since the measured indoor working levels cannot be substantiated by
the observed outdoor radon levels, the build-up of radon progeny levels must
be attributable to the radium content of the dirt floor and adobe block wall
construction versus radon releases from nearby mining activities.
17
-------
TABLE 6. AMBIENT INDOOR RADON PROGENY LEVELS AT LAGUNA TRIBAL BUILDING
oo
DATE
START
l<"/0-/ 7-.
IcVI l/fs
i«;/ii/'s
\|'.'t^/ /s
01 /U/-//I,
01/u'/ "-
oi/i<;/ 7*.
OI/I«//S
Ul/i> J//S
01/3-I/7K
0^/U''/ Ir.
0<>/1 J/ /•*
0<;/i!U/ 7<.
o<;/i7/7».
0 J/0>/"-
OJ/l J/7»>
0 J/ 1 • fl\t* lb~>.-> .OMh7| Oa/^d/76
U/1H//5 C.IIU7 Ib'l.l ,OllJ7h 06/U-//^
M/S')/!'} «.U/U) ib".." .OUbJl 06/1I/7J,
UI/"?/7t> 1-».71 1UU.T .00.111 Ub/lrt/7»,
U1/H7/7M ^5<-0 !S-yb4 ll-p.M .0»'>70 07/0 .OU<*bJ U7/0^/7^
Ul/i"3/70 «".UU». 171. ( .OUh^i 07/l^/7».
Ul/JO/7'i ^"oJO Ib7.l ,OU37o 07/«rl/'(<
o^/ll6/7>> 0/7^ in'i? bu.i .OOJ^J (iH/Ju//^
U?/<-7/7h <; 10'•^ Ud.^ .003ttb 09/OJ/7h
ul/»5/7o ifOiuft Ib'i.- .00311 uw/lu/7*
03/13/76 Ib^HJ lbU.« .0'l3Hh 09/17/7*
UJ/19/70 |OJ<:1 V|. i. .OO'.hU USP/^"/7*
U)/^h/7h 7t>3 i,.i. .OOlb'* 1U/OI/7*
gi./ll9/7>, b789 JJ.b .OObJl lU/0^/7•.
U<./19/7h <.Uo7b ^«U.U rO«<.?l !U/lj/7<>
Ok/X3/7b ll'.Bi bl.o .0')J9H !0/<;-.-v .OU377 \\/0~>/IH
Ub/U7/7b b<;i>6 37.il -.Ollul NV-<. ||/|
U5/ Sd-(6 J|.«. .OU?bl ll/<;<:/7»,
u^/«-B/7f, .
DATE CORRECTED SAMPLING AMBIENT
FINISH VOLUME TIME WORKING
(liters) (hours) LEVEL
(WL)'
U6/U4/76 <>b*li 17U.^ .00«.J1
0^/ll/7b i*ttQ 16-5. J
U7/U^/76 i!Ui|67 ISb.v .OUtfcO
07/U9/7h <•!"> uO ji.', .O'i31i
UM/06/7-) 'U* •,•>.' .0'IShl
oq/<;0/7b J9UI8 <;<.7.t: .00<.«T7
u-J/OJ/7'i l'<60 n.i ,00?6'.
u9/io/7»i <;<:.)'.) ibo.i. .oo5v»
09/17/7') 1/ .OtieJB
lU/lb/7b ^Mb? I6M.1 .OD7H7
IO/^-J/7') ^Sd^i Ih7.7 .006H1
Il/il8/7fi ".076? l
IS/liS/l* J"-33 ^Ji.l .OU'.'o
ic'/in/?') ^"rtt( 1".-
Tolal number of samples = 48 Ircxn 12/4/75 to 12/10/76
Average Working Level 0 0049 ±0.00046WL
Range ol 0.0017 to 0 0094WL
' Value calculated by computer but should be
rounded lo two glgnlllcant digits.
NV-not valid «imo1o
-------
TABLE 7. AMBIENT INDOOR RADON PROGENY LEVELS AT JACKPILE HOUSING (#16 HOUSE)
DATE DATE CORRECTED SAMPLING AMBIENT
START FINISH VOLUME TIME WORKING
(liters) (hours) LEVEL
(WL)'
lcVO-/7S lfVll/7l J-«.>U<« Ib-J."- .O^bU
lrVll/7s l/y9/7b JM.J., .M.. .OIHD
l7
OI/U*//S «l/l?/7,, 1.7,? 17.,, .Ol9,b
OI/I-V7* ul/lfc/7'j 0 .1) " 'JV-i>
01/l-/7b .MA-3/70 ^no4 ,70., .0^/«
01/rf>/7b ul/IQ//'- (fScJJM lb(.' .0?31h
OI/J-V/S 0^/.,b/7.- ^.4, ,«,,.„ .0^,^
0(?/0''//^ 0^/1.1/7': ^.1H<«<» lOT*1* .OMVJ
0,/1, //^ u^/.0/7t 77, ,., .0107V
u^/^0//t% u^/^?//^ 101^8 7^.1 .0141?
U.J/2//^ lH/t.5/7- ^l« IM.o .011,1^
•UJ/u-,/»h ul/UX/r, «rOI»5 1^.1 .0^!,,,
OJ/1J/76 Oj/l9//h b/ U bU.r> .0^?VV
U J/ l^/ /*> ui/^^/^n ^It>t> un/lfl/'/h ^-»7i;3 16^. .1
Ob/1-1/76 Uf-/£;b/7h <;01f>') 1 6 7 . i
Ob/^/76 u»/l)?/y, U.^7 1^.,
07/0^/7^ u7/il4/7(> J.l'' J.I
07/0^/'"i u//lb/7i 10JV. S*b. U//^J/71 SlJH b^.'i
Ov/ln/7'. 04/I7/7R ^-ilUb'* Ifti.i
m/l//7'-> u^v/r'^/yb iO^.j^ 1 fc -1 . r
U-rf/c'-/7<. I0/"l/7r /'•l^riS Ib'.J
lU/lil/'S 10/0 R/'S ^|T3() Ib'i.D
lil/i'ir./ 7ij iu/lb/V- r'H >D3 l'>7.7
10/1.//S M,/^/7, ^-.7 I/O.-
lo/^///s i|/JS/7o Jl)'''//t'< 1-1 iH Mi. 7
I I /«;<'//*• il/^9/7-i -•V'lJ'. -s->. 7
ll/^'//-i l,-/'l )/>"> lo/vl 4 ).-
1^/1)1/7'- l^/l !)//'> cV-'Jb IJ->.(
Total number ol samples = 39 from 12/4/75 to 12/10/76
AMBIENT
WORKING
LEVEL
(WL)'
.010.17
.0(l7«f2
.0060-5
.0(1 H-?
,0'lSb6
.O.IHJ2
.0-.0«
.00:1 1 3
.0-I9JJ
.OOHo'l
• .OIO<.<.
.OW^
.OdH^u
.O.bb^
.01M )
.019 N
.0 )7 7g
. OOMUU
-.0(1 1 JM
. 0 JOtJ )
.O^bM
Average Working Level 0015 ±0.0025WL
Range ol 0 0023 to 0 038WL
' Value calculated by computer but should be
rounded lo two significant digits
NV=not valid sample
-------
TABLE 8. AMBIENT INDOOR RADON PROGENY LEVELS AT PAGUATE COMMUNITY BUILDING
IN3
DATE DATE CORRECTED SAMPLING AMBIENT
START FINISH VOLUME TIME WORKING
(liters) (hours) LEVEL
(WL)'
l/>/0~/'-> I 317* <;v.i .o->h**
OI/l-?//*i ul/l"S/7b 1-bO •'•> )<^1? M"l .0-1 OH
UI/0>/7>< ul/OS/7h bl/2 b<;.v .0 ul/^r^/lb 17-01 1S-.I .036^1
U3/2b/lh 0*/')?/7h l^)7ii? lb».v ,04'»<**
0-/0£/7n u*/l^/7b )3- .Oi^OVB
0*/|V/|.> 0-/ u-/30/7b IV-.03 1B7.J ,03S*H
0*/30/7*. uS/M7/7ft l^<*bO ll^.i' .0*3«H
O'j/O'/'^ US/l*/7ft -7^7 J3t3 .nO**VH
O'l/tl/lk v-S/^8/7b IBKb* 1*1. i .OiSH1*
Oi/Zrt/M Oft/0*/ ?h i-M.1.7 Jbrt.o .OISS1
DATE DATE CORRECTED SAMPLING AMBIENT
START FINISH VOLUME TIME WORKING
(llt«r») (hours) LEVEL
(WL)'
Ob/O"/'"! Ub/ll/7b 3.* ,0/7*» u7/02/7'> ?2i-* lb7.H .037-1
0//0^//h ul/09/7b I£-U6 IH.B .0-?-*
07/0''/7>, u7/lfr/7b 15SV3 Vb.i ,03l*b
07/l'»/7h 07/^3/7b llvi? V4.3 .0** UR/J6/7-1 J/IO/7b I1VI3 10-,. •) .0300V
OV/l'/7^ o-*/<;*/7b I7(ih3 IJ/.h .Ob?VO
UV/> I." .0*301
IJ/UI/". IO/OH/7-) 1 7i>1S l«?b.v .OJ6H1
IO/II1//S l(i/IS/7b 16J1) 131. « .07^6*
IW/lD/r*. IO/r*?//O llh/ ll.f .O^H//7t, lv.'<^ llr.v .Olvvs
II/I-//S ll/^/l" r^'-S I*/.. .OIM1
l./^/^ ll/^/7n -bb -./ .OOM?/
ll/^'/IK l//-l3/ln !•»» l.ll .OUB'^
|'/UJ/;^ l^/IO/7-i 1 7iuv I3'>. • .0^111
Total number ol umplaa 52 from 12/4/75 lo 12/10/76
Avaraoa Working L«vsl 0.035 10.O03BWL
Ronrje of 0 0082 to 0 073WL
* Valut caicuteo by computer but Wxik) be
rounded to two significant dlglB
NV=not valid sample
-------
Figure 2 shows a plot of the ambient working level values obtained for
these three sampling locations. This graphic display provides some evidence
of the seasonal variation in indoor radon progeny levels, with the winter
months exhibiting higher working levels than the summer months. This feature
was probably the result of higher radon progeny equilibrium concentrations due
to poor ventilation rates in the winter when the doors and windows were usually
closed.
RADON AND PROGENY EQUILIBRIUM RATIOS
Assuming that the indoor radon concentration would be equal to the measured
ambient outdoor level, the percent equilibrium of radon and its progeny may be
calculated. These results are shown in Table 9. The 96 percent equilibrium
calculated for results at Old Laguna (#1) indicates a rather high value but is
not too unreasonable since the structure was seldom used and was unoccupied
during most of the study period. The other two equilibrium values exceed 100
percent and signify that it is erroneous to assume that the indoor radon
levels are equal to the measured outdoor concentrations. It should be noted
that the radon levels were obtained during June; whereas, the working level
determinations were averaged for an entire year. Therefore, the yearly average
indoor radon levels are probably in excess of the reported 1.1 and 0.42 pCi/1
for these two locations. These high equilibrium values provide further
incentive to conduct monitoring over longer time periods in order to determine
the seasonal variability of ambient radon concentrations and its effect on
indoor radon progeny levels.
TABLE 9. RADON AND PROGENY EQUILIBRIUM INDICATIONS
Average Ambient Yearly (1976)
Outdoor Radon Average Indoor
During June 1976 Radon Progeny Percent
Location (pCi/1) (Working Level) Equilibrium*
Laguna (#2)
Jackpile Housing
Paguate
0.51 ± 0.29
1.1 ± 0.34
0.42 ± 0.14
0.0049
0.015
0.035
96
136
833
*Percent equilibrium equals the working level value divided by the ambient
radon concentration divided by 100 pCi/1; since, one working level is equivalent
to 100% equilibrium of 100 pCi/1 radon and its progeny.
21
-------
ro
ro
.0030
.0015
.0003
JANUARY FEBRUARY
MARCH
APRIL
MAY
JUNE JULY
YEAR 1976
6 16 26 6 16 26 6 16 26 6 16 26 ' 6 16 26
AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER
Figure 2. Ambient indoor radon progeny working levels during 1976
-------
REGULATIONS AND GUIDELINES
Current Nuclear Regulatory Commission regulations (January, 1976) limit
radon progeny levels to 0.03 working levels (above natural background) for
continuous exposure in unrestricted areas (Table 4). Another guideline for
continuous exposure to indoor radon progeny concentrations was established by
the U.S. Surgeon General in 1970. These guides were promulgated as a result
of the health hazard evaluation of the use of uranium mill tailings material
for construction purposes. These guides provide remedial action recommendations
for three ranges of working level values above natural background. In summary,
for locations with WL values less than 0.01 WL, no remedial action is recommended.
For sites exceeding 0.05 WL, remedial action to reduce WL exposure is indicated.
For the range 0.01 to 0.05 WL, the need for any remedial action may be suggested
after due consideration of all exposure routes and cost estimates of remedial
action alternatives. These Surgeon General Guidelines have effectively been
applied to the Grand Junction, Colorado remedial action program for structures
incorporating tailings material. The natural background WL value for the
Grand Junction area was determined to be 0.004 WL (Joint Committee on Atomic
Energy, 1971).
23
-------
LOG-PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTION OF INDOOR RADON PROGENY LEVELS
The following discussion is offered as a simple approach for comparison
of data collected at the various sampling locations. Although it is recognized
that the data may represent more than one distribution superimposed upon
another, the plotted lines represent the best least squares fit of all data
points for an exponential function (Brownlee, 1965). Figures 3, 4 and 5 are
log-normal probability plots of the observed ambient indoor radon progeny
levels, expressed as working levels (WL), for Laguna, Jackpile Housing and
Paguate. 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 working level value at the
84 percentile by the working level value at the 50 percentile.
The goodness of fit of the data points on these log-probability plots, as
illustrated by Figures 3, 4 and 5, provides an indication that the measured
indoor working levels can generally be described by the log-normal distribution.
Also shown on the plots are the respective arithmetic averages (X), taken from
Tables 6, 7, and 8. Obviously, the best estimate of the annual average would
be a time or volume weighted arithmetic average of samples collected on a
continuous basis over the annual cycle; however, the collection of such samples
is often difficult to achieve due to equipment or operator shortcomings.
However, the arithmetic average can be estimated from the parameters of the
log-normal distribution by the equation:
X< = X e
-------
In order to test the adequacy of conducting less frequent sampling to
estimate the annual average indoor radon progeny level, data obtained during
this study for the first week of each even numbered month, and also for each
odd numbered month, was also plotted for each sampling location. (As shown in
Figure 2, there appears to be some seasonal variability of indoor working
levels, hence the proposed sampling scheme covering every-other month over a
one year period should eliminate this possible sampling bias.) On the plots,
the geometric mean and standard deviations are shown with sub-scripts "ge" for
the even number months and similarly, "go" for the odd months. As an example,
from Figure 3, the arithmetic average (X") working level at Laguna was 0.0049
WL. The geometric mean (X_) obtained from the best-fit curve of all data was
0.0051 WL. The geometric mean for the first week data of even numbered months
(X) was 0.0054 WL, and similarly, "X was 0.0047 WL. Estimates of the
annual average based on the log-normal parameters for the even and odd month
sampling scheme resulted in relative errors of 16 and 1.5 percent for the
Laguna data (Figure 3).
Similar statistical analysis of the data obtained at Jackpile Housing and
Paguate indicate a relative error of less than 24 percent for conducting one
week sampling for every-other month. Based on this limited data, it would
appear that to be cost effective and to maximize equipment and manpower
utilization, completion of a one week sampling period using the RPISU sampler
for every other month over at least a year's duration would provide sufficient
data to plot a log-probability distribution from which the annual average
indoor radon progeny level could be reasonably estimated from the log-normal
parameters.
25
-------
ro
0.020-
> 0.0100-
~- 0.0090-
^3 0.0080-
> 0.0070-
UJ
_J 0.0060-
O
Z 0.0050-
CC.
O
i.0040-
00030-
LU
00
5
< 0.0020-
0.0010-
I I I
1 I I I I
I I
I I
X = 0.0049 WL (all data-arithmetic)
Xg = 0.0051 WL (all data)
Sg = 1.35
Xge = 0.0054 WL (even months)
Sge = 1.37
Xgo = 0.0047 WL (odd months)
Sgo = 1.40
0.01 0.1 0.2 0.5 1
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE
90 95 98 99
99.8 99.9 99.99
Figure 3.
Log-probability plot of ambient indoor radon progeny levels
at Laguna
-------
= 0.015WL (all data-arithmetic)
= 0.017WL (all data)
Sg = 1.65
Xge = 0.014WL (even months)
Sge = 1.93
Xgo = 0.018 WL (odd months)
Sgo = 1.83
0.0010-
0.01
T—I—I 1 r
0.1 0.2 0.5 1
1—i—i r
30 40 50 60 70
T
80
-r
90
T
95
98 99
99.8 99.9
CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE
Figure 4.
Log-probability plot of ambient indoor radon progeny levels
at Jackpile Housing
99.99
-------
ro
co
I I I I I I I i I | I
X = 0.035 WL (all data-arithmetic)
•- Xg = 0.037 WL (all data)
Sg = 1.46
-•*- Xge = 0.039 WL (even months)
Sge= 1.59
Xgo = 0.032 WL (odd months)
Sgo = 1.94
Z
UJ 0.0100
0.0090
^0.0080
0.0070
0.1 0.2 0.5 1
0.0040-
0.0030
0.01
T 1 1 1 1 1 T
20 30 40 50 60 70 80
CUMULATIVE PERCENTAGE
T r
90 95
T T
99.8 99.9
99.99
Figure 5. Log-probability plot of ambient indoor radon progeny levels
at Paguate
-------
AIRBORNE PARTICULATE SAMPLING
SYSTEM DESCRIPTION
Air particulate sampling was conducted using a heavy-duty air sampler*.
This sampler has a carbon-vane pump with a 10.5 cubic feet per minute (CFM)
free flow capacity. The pump was driven through a V-belt system by a 110-
volt, 3/4-hp motor equipped with thermal overload protection. Each unit had
a built-in vacuum gauge, and was calibrated to provide a calibration curve of
air flow rate versus pressure drop. A running time meter, with readout to
tenths of an hour, measured the total sampling time and could be reset to zero
for each new sampling period. The air volume collected was determined from
the calibration curve by averaging the "on" and "off" air flow rates and
multiplying this average by the total time of sample collection. A quick
change filter holder was mounted at one meter above the ground surface and was
secured such that the open face of the (four-inch diameter) filter was toward
the ground. For this study, Microsorban filters were used.
GROSS VERSUS NET RESULTS
Eadie and Bernhardt (1976) have reported that radiochemical analyses of
blank (i.e., unused) four-inch diameter Microsorban filters indicate some low-
level content 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 radiochemical 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 Microsorban
filters which were used for 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
*Heavy-Duty Air Sampler, Research Appliance Corporation, Allison Park, PA;
or Tempest Air Sampler, Gelman Instrument Corporation, Ann Arbor, MI.
29
-------
Radium-226 Thorium-230
TABLE 10. MICROSORBAN FILTER RADIOACTIVITY CONTENT
{pCi/filter ± two-sigma counting error terms)
Thorium-232 Uranium-234 Uranium-235(2) Uranium-238 Radium-228 Polonium-210
Lead-210
CO
o
0.18 ± .07
0.15 i .07
0.06 ± .05
0.05 ± .05
0.19 ± .08
Grand , .
Average * '
0.13 ± .08
(ll. Averaae
<0.015
<0.030
<0.032
<0.022
<0.021
<0.024
four- inch d
<0.012
<0.027
0.047 ± .038
<0.016
<0.0)1
<0.023
iameter Hicrosorb
0.024
0.016
<0.
0.015
0.018
0.017
an filtf
± .015
± .012
.010
± .013
± .013
4 .006
?r ma";<; +
0.003 ± .001
<0.0004
<0.0003
< 0.0004
< 0.0006
< 0.0009
two standard de
0.067 ± .023
<0.009
<0.008
<0.009
0.0)8 ± .012
<0.022
:viations of 1 ,C
0.73 t .62
<0.67
<0.68
<0.62
<0.60
<0.66
I960 ± 0.1510 c
0.22 ±
0.16 ±
0.24 ±
0.19 ±
0.39 ±
0.24 t
irams: fou
.09
.09
.09
.06
.08
.11
ir fill
<0.071
<2.95
1.21 ± .
<0.50
J.75 i .
<1.30
.er composi
75
42
te analvze<
(2). U-235 calculated based on natural U-235 to U-238 activity ratio of 1:21.45 (or 0.0466).
(3). Grand average of all results with standard error about this mean based on the t-distribution at the 95 percent confidence level.
-------
result to obtain an "adjusted gross" result. Only blank radioactivity contents
for isotopic uranium and radium-226 were subtracted from the gross analytical
result to obtain the reported values. The reported isotopic thorium values
are gross analytical results. Although air samples were also analyzed for
polonium-210, lead-210 and radium-228 contents, subsequent evaluation of the
analytical procedures uncovered technical problems and hence, these particular
analytical results have not been reported.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Air sampling was conducted at five locations - - Jackpile Housing, Paguate,
Bibo, Mesita, and Old Laguna. The radioactivity concentrations of the naturally-
occurring radionucl ides are usually expressed as picocuries per cubic meter of
ambient 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 for this study.
The composited monthly ambient air sampling results (in pCi/m3} are
presented in Tables 8-1 to B-5. These data reporting considerations are
discussed in Eadie and Bernhardt (1976). Tables C-l to C-5 contain the summary
results of dust loading determinations (in pCi/g) for these same samples.
Appendices D and E contain the individual adjusted ambient air sampling results
in units of pCi/m3 and pCi/g, respectively. An appropriate "normal background"
value has not been subtracted from any of these reported results. Tables 11
and 12 summarize the annual average ambient air sampling radiological results
in units of pCi/m3 and pCi/g respectively, for the five locations of this
study. Also shown in Table 11 are background concentrations as reported in
NCRP, 1975. Comparison of these values to results from this study indicates
that the airborne concentrations measured at Old Laguna appear to be at typical
background levels. (This result is consistent with the observed background
levels of radon and progeny which were discussed above.)
Figures 6, 7 and 8 also show the monthly average airborne concentrations
(in pCi/m3) of radium-226, total uranium and thorium-230 measured at these
sampling locations for the year 1976. Comparison of these graphs indicates a
seasonal variability specific to each location but having no common cycle for
31
-------
all the locations. For example, at Mesita (Table B-4), the rach'um-226 airborne
concentration ranged up to a factor of 17 between the minimum measured in
August and the maximum measured in July. Similar comparison of results obtained
at Bibo (Table B-3) result in only a factor of 6 between the minimum value
measured in January and the maximum in June. Such incongruities with respect to
month of maximum or minimum airborne concentrations may be a reflection of the
level of industrial activity in that particular area or perhaps, a change in
meteorological conditions. Such a situation provides further support for the
need for long-term sampling schemes per specific site to evaluate the impact
of the seasonal variability of airborne radioactivity.
32
-------
TABLE 11. VOLUME WEIGHTED ANNUAL AVERAGE AMBIENT AIRBORNE RADIONUCL10E
CONCENTRATIONS* i STANDARD ERROR AT THE 95% CONFIDENCE
LEVEL (IN pC1/m3)
Radium-226
Uranium-234
Uranium-235
Uranium-238
Jackpile Mousing
Paguate
Bibo
Mesita
Old Laguna
NCRP-45 Background**
* Samp) ing period
** NCRP, 1975
00
CO
0.0024 i
0.00086
0.0012 ±
0.00042
0.0002 i
0.000051
0.00034 ±
0.00021
0.00016 ±
0.000081
0.0001
from December 1975
0.0027 i
0.00065
0.0012 i
0.00041
0.00038 i
0.00019
0.0003 t
0.00012
0.00025 ±
0.00011
0.00012
to December 1976; volume weighted
0.00011 i
0.000029
0.000047 i
0.000015
0.0000077 ±
0.0000032
0.000013 i
0.0000051
0.0000091 ±
0.0000043
0.0000056
average per
0.0027 ±
0.00063
0.0012 i
0.00039
0.00037 t
0.00019
0.0003 i
0.00012
0.00026 i
0.00011
0.00012
Eadie and Bernhardt (1976)
TABLE 12. MASS WEIGHTED ANNUAL AVERAGE AMBIENT AIRBORNE RAD10NUCLIDE
CONCENTRATIONS* t STANDARD ERROR AT THE 95% CONFIDENCE
LEVEL (IN pd/g)
Jackpile Housing
Paguate
Bibo
Mesita
Old Laguna
Radium-226
70 .• 21
13 i 4.9
4.6 i 1.7
3.4 • 2.2
3.0 i 1.5
Uranium-234
78 i 9.1
13 • 4.5
8.9 • 5.8
2.8 i 1.1
4.6 i 2.3
Uranium-235
3.0 • 0.46
0.50 i 0.17
0.17 i 0.10
0.22 s 0.24
0.16 • 0.095
Uranium-238
76 - 9.3
13 ! 4.4
8.7 ; 5.8
2.8 t 1.0
4.6 • 2.5
Thorium-230
0.0028 i
0.0022
0.0011 i
0.00039
0.0003 i
0.00016
0.00018 i
0.000079
0.000081 *
0.000039
0.000045
Thorium-230
80 • 61
12 i 5.4
7.0 i 4.6
2.0 l 1.1
1.5 i 1.2
Thorium-232
0.000042 •
0.000018
0.00012 i
0.000047
0.000055 i
0.000026
0.000077 i
0.000036
0.000024 i
0.000017
0.00003
Thorium-232
1.2 J 12
1.3 i 0.29
1.3 i 0.74
0.71 t 0.35
0.44 • 0.37
* Sampling period from December 1975 to December 1976; mass weighted average per Eadie and Bernhardt (1976)
-------
00
9-
8-
7-
6
5-
4
3-
X
O
a
CO
Z
Z
111
10-'-
9
8
7
6
5
4
2 1O-«
O 3
O
ui
Z 2
DC
O
CO
DC
< 10'«-
10 9-
a 78
5 6H
D
O
6-
4
3-
2-
• ' '—' • • • I • i i • i i t i • i i I i i i i i i i ... i . I i
Jackpilu
Paguate
Bibo
Jackpile
~i—I—I—I—I—I—I—T—t—I—TT—I—I—i—I—f—I—i—I—r" I <—| I i I i i II—I i i I i—i—i—I—T—i i \—r i i—i—f—i—r—i—i—i—«—i i i i—••—~f—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—I—i—I—r-
6 16 26 S 16 25 6 16 26 6 16 26 6 16 26 6 16 26 6 16 SB 6 16 SB ' 6 16 Z6 6 16 26 B 16 26 6 16 26
JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
MAY JUNE JULY
YEAR 1976
AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER
Figure 6. Average monthly airborne radium-226 concentration (pCi/m3)
for locations in the vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit
Uranium Mine
-------
CO
in
' ' i • • ' ' ' '—I—l—L_j—I—I—l_l—• • ' •—I—l_J_l—L_i—l—i—l—I—I—I—i_l—J—I I I—I—I—l_l—I l I i i—i I l—1—1—i—"
— i — l — * — r — r — i — i — i i i
.
b 16 26 6 16 25 6 16 JS b IB 26 6 16 26 6 16 26 6 16 25 6 16 26 6 16 26 6 16 26 ' 6 16 25 6 16 26
JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL
MAY JUNE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER
YEAR 1976
Figure 7. Average monthly airborne total uranium concentration (pCi/m3)
for locations in the vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit
Uranium Mine
-------
CO
cr>
10-J
E
X
(3
A
z
o
z
UJ
o
z
o
o
UJ
z
cc
o
OQ
CC
O
to
N
5
D
C
O
I
2-
10-*
10 •
I i i
Paguate
Jackpile
Paguale
BibO
6 16 26 ' 6 IB 25' 6 IS 26
JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH
6 16 25 ' 6 16 26
APRIL MAY
6 16 26 6 16 26
JUNE JULY
YEAR 1976
6 16 26 6 16 26 6 16 26 6 16 26 6 16 26
AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER
Figure 8. Average monthly airborne thorium-230 concentration (pCi/m3)
for locations in the vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit
Uranium Mine
-------
LOG-PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTION OF AMBIENT AIRBORNE PARTICULATE RADIOACTIVITY
Log-normal probability plots of the composited monthly ambient radioactivity
concentrations for the five sites for radium-226, total uranium and thorium-
230 are shown in Figures 9, 10 and 11, respectively. The plotted lines
represent the best least squares fit of all data points for an exponential
function (Brownlee, 1965). The visual inspection of these log-probability
plots provides an indication that the measured ambient airborne radioactivity
concentrations can generally be described by the log-normal distribution.
Table 13 shows the comparison between the arithmetic average (X,), the volume
a
weighted arithmetic average CXW)> the geometric mean {X_)> and the estimated
average based on the log-normal parameters ("X') for each sampling site.
Except for the total uranium results at Mesita, X_ was always less than X"
(Table 13). This feature of the geometric mean is probably due to the equal
weighting of all data points when obtaining the log-probability plots; whereas,
the volume weighted arithmetic average takes into account the sample size and
gives more "weight" to the larger samples. Also, the larger samples result in
more accurate analytical determinations since there is more radioactivity to
measure and consequently, better counting statistics are obtained as compared
to analytical results from smaller samples. Obviously, simple arithmetic
averaging (i.e., without weighting factors) also does not consider sample size
and provides equal weight for each sample. It would therefore seem appropriate
to choose the volume weighted arithmetic average as the best estimate of the
annual average airborne radioactivity concentration. Considering the volume
weighted arithmetic average (T) as the best estimate of the annual average
airborne radioactivity concentration, the highest relative error associated
with estimating the average based on the log-normal parameters was 89 percent
for the thorium-230 results at Mesita. Except for the total uranium data
obtained at Mesita, the relative error between the X~w versus the X"1 was much
less than 15 percent - - providing further support that it is reasonable to
assume a log-normal distribution for the airborne particulate radioactivity
and that annual averages may be reasonably estimated based on the log-normal
parameters.
«D /
-------
10-'-
9-
8<
7'
6
4
10-3
3
£
C
a
10-' _|
9<
8'
7
6
5
<
CC
I I
JACKPILE • Xg = 0.0022 pCi/nv1
Sg = 1.89
PAGUATE O Xg = 0.00095 pCi/m3
Sg = 2.15
BIBO • Xg = 0.00016 pCi/m3
Sg = 1.66
OLD LACUNA » Xg = 0.00013 pCi/m3
Sg = 2.15
MESITA O Xg = 0.00027 pCi/m3
Sg = 1.96
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99 99.8 99.9 99.99
CUMULATIVE PERCENT
0.01
0.1 0.2 0.5 1
Figure 9. Log-probability plot of the composited monthly ambient
radium-226 radioactivity concentrations for the five locations
in the vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit Uranium Mine
38
-------
a
_c
a:
3
10-'.
9
8
7
6
5
4-
10-3
2-
10-*
9
8
7
6
5-
4-
4
3-
2-
9
8
7*
6<
5
4-
3-
2-
0.01
JACKPILE • Xg = 0.0053 pCi/mJ
Sg = 1.50
PAGUATE O X.g = 0.0023 pCi/m3
Sg = 1.65
BIBO • Xg - 0.00062 pCi/m5
Sg = 1.90
OLD LAGUNA t %g - 0.00042 pCi/mJ
Sg = 2 29
MESITA O Xg - 0.00065 pC'i/m'
Sg = 2.47
0.1 0.2 0.5 1
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
CUMULATIVE PERCENT
90 95 98 99
Figure 10.
Log-probability plot of the composited monthly ambient
total uranium radioactivity concentrations for the five
locations in the vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit
Uranium Mine
39
-------
10-J
E
x
o
Q.
_c
o
m
cs
IT
O
9
8
7-
6
5
4-
TO'3
10-J-
9
8
7
6
4-
10-*
10-*-
9
8
7
6
5
4-
io-8
i i t I I I
JACKPILE • Xg = 0.0016 pCi/m3
Sg = 3.15
PAGUATE O Xg = 0.00096 pCi/m3
Sg = 1 75
BIBO .• Xg = 0.00022 pCi/m»
Sg = 2.71
Xg = 0.00006 pCi/m'
Sg = 2.47
MESITA O 5
-------
TABLE 13. COMPARISON OF MEANS (IN pCi/m!
Site
Jackplle Mousing
Paguate
81 bo
Mesita
Old Laguna
V
0.0026
0.0013
0.00019
0.00037
0.0001?
Radium- 226
X **
w
0.0024
0.0012
0. OOOZ
0.00034
0.00016
V
0.0022
0.00095
0.00016
0.00027
0.00013
*'++
0.0027
0.0013
0.00018
0.00034
0.00017
Y
0.0058
0.0026
0.0008
0.00064
0.00058
Total Uranium
V*
0.0055
0.0025
0.00075
0.00061
0.00052
y
0.0053
0.0023
0.00062
0.00065
0.00042
X'+t
0.0058
0.0026
0.00076
0.00098
0.00059
Y
0.0030
0.0011
0.0003Z
0.00018
0.000085
Thor1um-230
X **
w
0.0028
0.0011
0.0003
0.00018
o.oooo!!!
V
0.0016
0.00096
o.oooez
0.00015
0.00006
X'tt
0.0031
0.0011
0.00036
0.00034
0.00009
* Arithmetic average (Tables B-l to B-5)
** Volume weighted arithmetic average (Eadle and Bernhardt, 1976)
+ Geometric mean from log-probability plots (Figures 9 to 11)
+ t tstiiwated average base on log-normal parameters
-------
DOSE ESTIMATES
Listed in Table 14 are the dose conversion factors for each radionuclide
measured in this study. (The doses due to polonium-210 and lead-210 have not
been estimated since these radionuclides were not evaluated for this study.)
This factor represents the average annual dose equivalent in rems for each
year of chronic inhalation at a concentration of 1 pCi/m3. Dose estimates
have been maximized by assuming that the indoor concentration of radioactive
materials would be the same as the levels measured outdoors during this study.
The highest total dose of 38 millirem was calculated for an individual exposed
to the annual average ambient radionuclide concentrations measured outdoors at
the Jackpile Housing (assuming continuous exposure for the entire year at the
volume weighted arithmetic average value reported in Table B-l). Similarly, a
total dose of 2.7 millirem was calculated for an individual exposed to the
annual average ambient radionuclide concentrations measured outdoors at Old
Laguna - - the location having the lowest measured ambient airborne concentrations
of this study. Therefore, considering Old Laguna as representative of "background"
conditions, the additional dose to an individual (above background) at Jackpile
Housing would be about 35 millirem for each year of exposure to the airborne
radionuclide concentrations measured during this study. For comparison
purposes the dose estimates for typical background concentrations of naturally
occurring radioactive materials as reported for New York City and Argonne
National Laboratory (NCRP, 1975) are also tabulated in Table 14.
42
-------
CO
TABLE 14. AVERAGE ANNUAL LUNG DOSE (MREM/YEAR) FOR INSOLUBLE RADIONUCLIDES
Isotope
U-234
U-235
U-238
Th-230
Th-232
Ra-226
Dose
Conversion
Factor*
3.7
3.4
3.2
3.4
3.0
3.7
(no radon+)
Jackpile
Housing
10
0.34
8.6
9.5
0.13
8.9
Paguate
4.4
0.16
3.8
3.7
0.36
4.4
Bibo
1.4
0.024
1.2
1.0
0.15
0.74
Mesita
1.1
0.044
0.96
0.61
0.21
1.3
Old Laguna
0.93
0.031
0.83
0.28
0.072
0.59
Argonne Nations
New York City Laboratory
(NCRP, 1975) (NCRP, 1975)
0.93
0.04
0.80
No data
No data
0.37
0.44
0.023
0.38
0.15
0.09
No data
Total Dose (mrem/year)
38
17
4.5
4.2
2.7
1.4
1.1
* Rem per year for continuous inhalation of 1 pCi/m3 for particles of l.Oym AMAD; using a quality factor for
alpha of 10, and a pulmonary lung mass of 480 grams (U.S. EPA, 1973; Mills, 1976; Sullivan, 1977)
+ It has been assumed that radon-222 and its progeny escape from the aerosol particle and that the only dose
is due to radium-226
-------
RADIOACTIVITY IN FOOD
During the course of this study, some concern was expressed about the
possible ingestion of radioactive materials due to their uptake by food grown
in the local area. Only samples of cucumbers and onions were obtained and the
results of radiochemical analyses of these food are shown in Table 15. Unfor-
tunately, samples of meat from animals which grazed on areas close to the
mining activities were not available.
Previously reported analyses of vegetables indicated a radium-226 content
of less than 0.002 pCi/g (Hallden et al., 1963). Welford and Baird (1967)
reported a total uranium content for vegetables of roughly 0.00053 pCi/g. The
radioactive content of the cucumbers from this study are essentially comparable
to these reported "typical background" values with the exception of radium-
226, the results for the onions are several orders of magnitude greater than
the cucumber results. The fairly high radium-226 content of the cucumbers or
the relatively high thorium-232 content of the onions cannot be resolved
without additional sampling and further analyses. In any event, the results
reported here for cucumbers and onions may be indicative of increased plant
uptake from elevated radioactivity in the soil and/or plant foliage adsorption
of airborne radioactive materials. Such a possibly significant exposure
pathway should not be ignored in future studies of the radiological impact of
uranium mining and milling activities.
44
-------
Radionucllde
Radium-226
Uranium-234
Uranium-235
Uranium-238
Thorium-230
Thorium-232
TABLE 15. RADIOACTIVITY IN FOOD
(CONCENTRATION ± TWO-SIGMA
COUNTING ERROR, IN pCi/g)
Cucumber
0.11 ± 0.011
0.00018 ± 0.000032
Less than 0.000011
0.00013 ± 0.000027
0.0032 ± 0.00049
0.00042 ± 0.000091
Onion
0.047 ± 0.0083
0.026 ± 0.002
0.0011± 0.00034
0.027 ± 0.0021
0.035 ± 0.0052
0.039 ± 0.0057
45
-------
REFERENCES
Brownlee, K. A. (1965), Statistical Theory and Methodology In Science and
Engineering. John Wiley & Sons.
Eadie, G. G., R. F. Kaufmann, D. J. Markley and 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. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Technical Note ORP/LV-76-9.
George, A. C. (1976), Scintillation Flasks for the Determination of Low Level
Concentrations of Radon. In: Proceedings of the Ninth Midyear Topical
Symposium of the Health Physics Society, February 9-12, 1976.
Hallden, N. A., I. M. Fisenne and J. H. Harley (1963), Radium-Zee in the Diet
in three U.S. Cities. In: the Proceedings of the 7th Annual Meeting on Bioassay
and Analytical Chemistry; held at Argonne National Laboratory on October 12-
13, 1961.
Johns, F. B., ed. (February 1975), Handbook of Radiochemical Analytical
Methods. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA-680/4-75-001.
Joint Committee on Atomic Energy (1971), Hearings on the Use of Uranium Mill
Tailings for Construction Purposes. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington,
D.C., 515 pp.
Mills, William A. (September 13, 1976), Revised Dose to the Lung form UFC
Participates, letter to C. R. Porter.
(NCRP, 1975), National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements,
Natural Background Radiation in the United States, November 15, 1975 NCRP
Report No. 45.
(NMEIA, 1973), New Mexico Environmental Improvement Agency-Regulation for
Governing the Health and Environmental Aspects of Radiation. June 16, 1973.
(NRC, 1976), Nuclear Regulatory Commission (January, 1976), title 10 Code of
Federal Regulations Part 20-Standards for Protection Against Radiation. (Federal
Register, Vol. 40, No. 211-Friday, October 31, 1975 for amended radon values).
Schiager, K. J. (1971), The Evaluation of Radon Progeny Exposures in Buildings:
A Report on Equipment and Techniques Colorado State University, Fort Collins,
Colorado.
46
-------
Sullivan, Robert E. (June 1977), Plutonium Air Inhalation Dose (PAID) - A Code
for Calculating Organ Doses Due to the Inhalation and Ingestion of Radioactive
Aerosols. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Technical Note ORP/CSD-77-4.
The Anaconda Company (1976), Mining and Reclamation Plan at the Anaconda
Company's Jackpile-Paguate Uranium Mine, Valencia County, New Mexico. Dames
and Moore Job No. 4010-041-06 (December, 1976).
(U.S. EPA, 1973), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Part I-Fuel Supply -
Environmental Analysis of the Uranium Fuel Cycle, October 1973.
U.S. Public Health Service (1969), Evaluation of Radon-222 Near Uranium
Tailings Piles. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, DER-69-1.
U.S. Surgeon General (1970), Recommendations of action for radiation exposure
levels in dwellings constructed on or with uranium mill tailings. In: Hearings
on the Use of Uranium Mill Tailings for Construction Purposes(1971), p. 51-54.
Welford, G. A. and R. Baird, December 1967, Uranium Levels in Human Diet and
Biological Materials. Health Physics, Vol. 13, pp. 1321-1324.
47
-------
APPENDIX A
Ambient Outdoor Radon-222 Concentrations
48
-------
TABLE A-l. OLD LAGUNA-(#1)
Date/Time
On Off
6/15/76 to 6/30/76
(8 Samples)
Radon Concentration*
ttwo-slgma counting error term, pCj/1
6/15/76
1500
6/16/76
1340
6/18/76
0850
6/20/76
0935
6/22/76
0855
6/24/76
0855
6/26/76
0900
6/28/76
0900
Summary
6/16/76
1340
6/18/76
0850
6/20/76
0935
6/22/76
0855
6/24/76
0855
6/26/76
0855
6/28/76
0900
6/30/76
0930
0.37
0.23
0.59
1.3
0.26
(0.049
0.23
0.20
(0.090
0.84
± 0.12
± 0.06
± 0.16
± 0.18
± 0.10
± 0.019}**
± 0.10
± 0.10
± 0.028}**
± 0.16
Range: 0.20 ± 0.10 to 1.3+± 0.18
Average ± Two-Standard Error = 0.51 ± 0.28
* Eberline Instrument Corp. determination
** EMSL determination
+ The standard error is defined as the standard deviation of the
sample population divided by the square root of the number of samples
49
-------
TABLE A-2. LAGUNA-TRAINING BUILDING (#2)
Date/Time
On Off
6/8/76 to 6/26/76
(9 Samples)
Radon Concentration*
±two-sigma counting error term, pCi/1
6/8/76
1420
6/10/76
1406
6/12/76
1220
6/14/76
1011
6/16/76
0935
6/18/76
1240
6/20/76
1205
6/22/76
1215
6/24/76
1130
Summary
6/10/76
1404
6/12/76
1218
6/14/76
1010
6/16/76
0935
6/18/70
1240
6/20/76
1205
6/22/76
1215
6/24/76
1130
6/26/76
0830
1.5
0.85
Less
(0.090
0.50
0.14
0.32
(0.18
0.18
0.47
0.19
± 0.39
± 0.34
than 0.41
± 0.022)**
± 0.06
± 0.07
± 0.10
± 0.033)**
± 0.18
± 0.13
± 0.11
Range: 0.14 ± 0.07 to 1.5 +± 0.39
Average ± Two-Standard Error = 0.51 ± 0.29
* Eberline Instrument Corp. determination
** EMSL determination
+ The standard error is defined as the standard deviation of the
sample population divided by the square root of the number of samples
50
-------
TABLE A-3. IHS-LAGUNA HEALTH CENTER
Date/Time
On Off
6/15/76 to 6/30/76
(7 Samples)
Radon Concentration*
±two-sigma counting error term, pCi/1
6/15/76
1430
6/16/76
1400
6/18/76
1220
6/20/76
1155
6/22/76
1200
6/26/76
1130
6/28/76
1100
Summary
6/16/76
1300
6/18/76
1220
6/20/76
1155
6/22/76
1200
6/24/76
1115
6/28/76
1100
6/30/76
1010
0.64
0.59
0.24
1.6
0.22
0.44
(0.071
0.64
± 0.14
± 0.14
± 0.12
± 0.19
± 0.11
± 0.12
± 0.025}**
± 0.16
Range: 0.22 ± 0.11 to 1.6 +± 0.19
Average ± Two-Standard Error = 0.63 ± 0.36
* Eberline Instrument Corp. determination
** EMSL determination
+ The standard error is defined as the standard deviation of the
sample population divided by the square root of the number of samples
51
-------
TABLE A-4. BIBO-WELLHOUSE
Date/Time
On Off
Radon Concentration*
±two-s1gma counting error term, pCj/1
6/8/76
1207
6/10/76
1120
6/12/76
1131
6/14/76
1338
6/16/76
1021
6/18/76
1140
6/20/76
1110
6/22/76
1120
6/24/76
1030
6/26/76
1100
6/27/76
1030
6/28/76
1015
Summary
6/10/76
1120
6/12/76
1130
6/14/76
1337
6/16/76
1020
6/18/76
1140
6/20/76
1110
6/22/76
1120
6/24/76
1030
6/26/76
1100
6/27/76
1030
6/28/76
1015
6/30/76
1130
Less than 0.12
{0.041 ± 0.019)**
1.4 ± 0.29
Less than 0.38
1.1 ± 0.14
0.71 ± 0.17
0.50 H- 0.12
(0.18 ± 0.033)**
Less than 0.12
0.32 ± 0.10
(0.065 ± 0.020)**
0.28 ± 0.11
0.28 ± 0.14
0.37 ± 0.10
0.37 ± 0.13
6/8/76 to 6/30/76
(12 Samples)
Range: Less than 0.12 to l.| ± 0.29
Average ± Two-Standard Error s 0.50 ± 0.23
* Eberline Instrument Corp. determination
** EMSL determination
+ The standard error is defined as the standard deviation of the
sample population divided by the square root of the number of samples
52
-------
TABLE A-5. MESITA-INDUSTRIAL PLANT (#1)
Date/Time Radon Concentration*
On Off ±two-slgma counting error term, pCj/1
6/8/76
1533
6/10/76
1430
6/12/76
1420
6/14/76
1456
Summary
6/10/76
1430
6/12/76
1415
6/14/76
1455
6/15/76
1435
0.31 ±
0.89 ±
0.49 ±
0.18 ±
0.06
0.33
0.14
0.05
6/8/76 to 6/15/76 Range: 0.18 ± 0.05 to 0.8.9 ± 0.33
(4 Samples) Average ± Two-Standard Error = 0.47 ± 0.31
* Eberline Instrument Corp. determination
•*• The standard error is defined as the standard deviation of the
sample population divided by the square root of the number of samples
53
-------
TABLE A-6. MESITA-COMMUNITY BUILDING (#2)
Date/Time
On Off
Radon Concentration*
±two-sigma counting error term, pC1/1
6/15/76
1445
6/16/76
1425
6/20/76
1225
6/22/76
1235
6/24/76
1145
6/26/76
1210
Summary
6/16/76
1320
6/18/76
1320
6/22/76
1235
6/24/76
1145
6/26/76
1210
6/28/76
1120
1.7
0.32
Less
0.34
0.23
0.61
± 0.22
± 0.12
than 0.12
± 0.05
± 0.08
± 0.16
6/15/76 to 6/28/76
(6 Samples)
Range: Less than 0.12 to 14 ± 0.22
Average ± Two-Standard Error = 0.55 ± 0.47
* Eberline Instrument Corp. determination
+ The standard error is defined as the standard deviation of the
sample population divided by the square root of the number of samples
54
-------
TABLE A-7. MOQUINO-PRIVATE RESIDENCE
Date/Time
On Off
Radon Concentration*
±two-sigma counting error term, pCi/1
6/8/76
1242
6/10/76
1145
6/12/76
1155
6/14/76
1350
6/16/76
1038
6/18/76
1200
6/20/76
1125
6/22/76
1140
6/24/76
1045
6/26/76
1110
6/28/76
1030
Summary
6/10/76
1141
6/12/76
1151
6/14/76
1348
6/16/76
1037
6/18/76
1200
6/20/76
1125
6/22/76
1140
6/24/76
1045
6/26/76
1110
6/28/76
1030
6/30/76
1150
1.4 ± 0.14
Less than 0.30
Less than 0.35
(0.090 ± 0.024)**
1.1 ± 0.22
0.24 ± 0.08
0.19 ± 0.12
1.4 ± 0.23
Less than 0.12
0.23 ± 0.10
0.47 ± 0.14
Less than 0.12
6/8/76 to 6/30/76
(11 Samples}
Range: Less than 0.12 to 1.4+± 0.23
Average ± Two-Standard Error = 0.54 ± 0.31
* Eberline Instrument Corp. determination
** EMSL determination
+ The standard error is defined as the standard deviation of the
sample population divided by the square root of the number of samples
55
-------
TABLE A-8. PAGUATE-COMMUNITY BUILDING
Date/Time
On Off
Radon Concentration*
±two-sjgma counting error term, pCi/1
6/8/76
1125
6/10/76
1000
6/12/76
1102
6/14/76
1311
6/16/76
1055
6/18/76
1120
6/21/76
1100
6/22/76
mo
6/24/76
1010
6/26/76
1045
6/28/76
1000
Summary
6/10/76
1000
6/12/76
1100
6/14/76
1310
6/16/76
1055
6/18/76
1120
6/20/76
1050
6/22/76
1110
6/24/76
1010
6/26/76
1045
6/28/76
1000
6/30/76
mo
0.19
(0.11
0.57
0.29
0.74
0.18
0.36
(0.11
0.65
Less
(0.056
0.31
0.48
(0.12
0.73
+ 0.13
± 0.010)**
± 0.14
± o.n
± 0.06
± 0.10
+ 0.10
± 0.026)**
± 0.12
than 0.12
± 0.020)**
± 0.12
± 0.12
± 0.029)**
± 0.17
6/8/76 to 6/30/76
(11 Samples)
Range: Less than 0.12 to 0,74+± 0.06
Average ± Two-Standard Error = 0,42 ± 0.14
* Eberline Instrument Corp. Determination
** EMSL determination
+ The standard error is defined as the standard deviation of the
sample population divided by the square root of the number of samples
56
-------
TABLE A-9. OACKPILE MINE-COMPANY HOUSING AREA
Date/Time
On Off
6/8/76 to 6/30/76
(11 Samples)
Radon Concentration*
±two-si'gma counting error term, pCi/1
6/8/76
0915
6/10/76
1241
6/12/76
1025
6/14/76
1251
6/16/76
1201
6/18/76
0945
6/20/76
1030
6/22/76
1050
6/24/76
0945
6/26/76
1030
6/28/76
0945
Summary
6/10/76
1240
6/12/76
1025
6/14/76
1250
6/16/76
1200
6/18/76
0945
6/20/76
1030
6/22/76
1050
6/24/76
0945
6/26/76
1030
6/28/76
0945
6/30/76
1050
1.8 ± 0.35
1.6 ± 0.36
Less than 0.34
(0.31 ± 0.043)**
1.3 ± 0.17
0.53 ± 0.14
0.89 ± 0.18
1.5 ± 0.19
0.35 ± 0.10
(0.20 ± 0.035)**
1.4 ± 0.08
1.8 ± 0.23
1.1 ± 0.07
Range: 0.25 ± 0.10 to 1.84+± 0.23
Average ± Two-Standard Error = 1.1 ± 0.34
* Eberline Instrument Corp. determination
** EMSL determination
+ The standard error is defined as the standard deviation of the
sample population divided by the square root of the number of samples
57
-------
TABLE A-10. RAILROAD TRESTLE-BELOW JACKPILE HOUSING (#1)
Date/Time
On Off
Radon Concentration*
±two-sigma counting error term, pCj/1
6/8/76
1025
6/10/76
1310
6/12/76
0945
6/14/76
1236
6/16/76
1227
6/18/76
0930
6/20/76
1010
6/23/76
0935
6/24/76
0930
Summary
6/10/76
1304
6/12/76
0945
6/14/76
1235
6/16/76
1225
6/18/76
0930
6/20/76
1010
6/22/76
0935
6/24/76
0930
6/26/76
0930
2.1
1.6
Less
(0.14
0.29
0.41
0.82
(0.53
1.3
0.19
2.1
± 0.26
± 0.35
than 0.12
± 0.029)**
± 0.12
± 0.13
± 0.06
± 0.055)**
± 0.22
± 0.10
± 0.22
6/8/76 to 6/26/76
(9 Samples)
Range: Less than 0.12 to 2.1+± 0.26
Average ± Two-Standard Error = 0.99 ± 0.54
* Eberline Instrument Corp. determination
** EMSL determination
+ The standard error is defined as the standard deviation of the
sample population divided by the square root of the number of samples
58
-------
TABLE A-ll. (LOCATION #2)-ONE MILE SOUTH OF RR TRESTLE (#1)
Date/Time
On Off
6/8/76 to 6/30/76
(11 Samples)
Radon Concentration*
±two-sigma counting error .Jterm, pCi/1
6/8/76
1047
6/10/76
1320
6/12/76
1038
6/14/76
1036
6/16/76
1240
6/18/76
0915
6/20/76
1000
6/22/76
0920
6/24/76
0920
6/26/76
0940
6/28/76
0930
Summary
6/10/76
1319
6/12/76
1035
6/14/76
1035
6/16/76
1240
6/18/76
0915
6/20/76
1000
6/22/76
0920
6/24/76
0920
6/26/76
0940
6/28/76
0930
6/30/76
1040
2.6
1.2
0.62
1.6
0.44
0.59
2.0
0.46
2.7
0.84
(0.84
1.1
± 0.43
± 0.29
± 0.14
± 0.20
± 0.05
± 0.16
± 0.11
± 0.13
± 0.24
± 0.17
± 0.077)**
± 0.19
Range: 0.44 ± 0.05 to 2.7+± 0.24
Average ± Two-Standard Error = 1.3 ± 0.50
* Eberline Instrument Corp. determination
** EMSL determination
+ The standard error is defined as the standard deviation of the
sample population divided by the square root of the number of samples
59
-------
APPENDIX B
Composited Monthly Ambient Air Sampling Results in pCi/m3
60
-------
TABLE B-l. COMPOSITED MONTHLY AMBIENT AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/m3) AT JACKPILE HOUSING
PATF
cr>
MO/YP OM OFF ?
7^/1? 75/1P/04 7S/l?/?9 3.
( 1 .
7*/01 7S/l?/?9 76/01/23 4.
(?..
7f-/fl? 76/01/30 7^,/0?/?7 3.
(1.
76/03 7^/U?/?7 76/03/26 3.
( 1 .
7^/04 7*/03/26 7-S/04/30 2.
(1.
76/OS 76/0^/30 7ft/nS/?« 3.
(1.
7*/06 76/0/?5 4.
(2.
7A/07 76/07/0? 76/07/30 9.
(7.
7fr/riQ 76/07/30 7>V09/?4 1.
(4.
76/10 76/10/01 76/10/29 1.
(1 .
7 f> / 1 1 7 * / 1 0 / /> « 7 6 / ] 1 / ? 9 2.
(4.
7*«/l? 7*>/ll/?9 76/1P/10 3.
(I.
VO| LiMF WFI«-,HTFO AVFPAr,FS 2.
STO FRi5 'v-F/U.1 « T95(M-1) (6.
OOF-03
40F-04)
30F-03
OOF-04)
*OF-03
70F-04)
1 OF-03
qqp-04)
10F-03
OOF-04)
40F-D3
70F-04)
30F-03
OOF-04)
90F-04
70C--OS)
S7F-03
Slp-03)
90C-03
10F-04)
70F-03
^OF-04)
40^-03
POr-04)
74F-03
4SF-04)
1
(1
1
(1
1
(1
1
(1
S
(1
1
(1
)
(1
4
(7
?
(1
S
( \
]
(4
1
(?
1
(?.
235U
.10F-04
.40F-OS)
.90F-04
.90F-05)
.30F-04
.^OF-OS)
.30F-04
.60F-OS)
.20F-05
.20F-OS)
. 10F-04
./^OF-OS)
.70F-04
.90F-OS)
.t^OF-OR
.SOF-06)
.90F-05
.inF-05)
.qftF-QC,
, 1 OF-0^)
.20F-04
.90F-05)
.30F-04
.30F-OS)
.1PF-04
.P7F-05)
3
(1
4
( 1
T
(1
T
(1
?
d
3
(1
u
(?
Q
(7
1
(4
1
(1
?
(/,
3
(1
?
(6
23nu
.OOF
.40E
.20F
.90F
-03
-04)
-03
-04)
2
(7
4
(1
230TH
.ROF-03
.SOF.-05)
.20E-04
.20F-05)
.SOF-03 3.60F-04
.60F
.OOF
.40F
-04)
-03
-04)
.10F-03
.OOF
.40E
.70F
.20E
.OOF
.90F
.70F
,PJ6F
.64F
.OOF
.10F
.4 OF
.?OF
.30F
.BOF
.6HF
. ?AF
-04)
-03
-04)
-03
-04)
-04
-05)
-03
-03)
-03
-04)
-03
-04)
-03
-04)
-03
-04)
(B
1
(?.
?.
(6
4
(1
4
(9
1
(6
1
(4
1
(6
1
(2
2
(2
?
(2
. OOF.-06)
.40E-02
,?OF-04 )
.20E-04
.OOF-06)
.OOE-03
.SOF-04)
.20E-03
.60E-05)
.90E-03
.OOF-05)
.37F.-03
.41F-03)
.90F-03
.OOF-05)
.90E-03
.20E-04)
.50F-03
.90F-04)
B2r-o3
.22E-03)
232TH
5.40E-05
(l.OOE-OS)
B.OOE-06
(2.00E-06)
6.00F.-06
(1.00F.-06)
9.POF.-05
(l.BOF-05)
5.00E-06
(1 .OOE-06)
8.40E-05
(2.10F-05)
6.70F-05
( 1 .?OE-OS)
3.60E-OS
(B.30E-06)
2.73F-05
(3.71F-OS)
4.SOE-05
(9.POF-06)
5.60E-OS
U.10F-05)
3. OOF-OS
(1.10F-OS)
4.1BF-05
(1.77F-05)
2
2.
(1.
3.
(1.
3.
(1.
3.
(1.
2.
(1.
2.
(1.
5.
(1.
2.
(1.
1 .
(5.
' 1.
<9.
3.
(5.
2.
(1.
2.
(B.
26RA
20E-03
POE-04)
70E-03
60E-04)
90E-03.
60E-04)
30E-03
50E-04)
30E-03
30E-04)
60F-03
30E-04)
30E-03
90E-04)
20E-03
30F.-04)
22F-03
33E-03)
40E-03
80F-05)
80F-04
40E-05)
SOE-03
BOE-04)
44E-03
61E-04)
*Results corrected for blank filter content. Statistical considerations as discussed in Eadie and
Bernhardt (1976). Results shown are volume weighted arithmetic average with values in parenthesis
being the standard error at the 95 percent confidence level based on the t-distribution for (n-1)
degrees of freedom.
-------
TABLE B-2. COMPOSITED MONTHLY AMBIENT AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (In pCi/m3) AT PAGUATE
OH
OFF
»***fl>w~ww«««
75/1?/?9
76/0\/?3
21HU
?10TM
/in
2.10F-03 3.10F-OS
fl.lOF-04) (1.20F-05)
3.SOF-03 1.30F-04
04) U.90F-05)
03 5.OOF-OS
(7.?OF-nci)
3.30F-03
(1.70F-04)
1.POF-03
(7.00F.-05)
(1.OOE-04)
2.10E-03
1.10F-04
(2.40F-OS)
1 .40F.-03
(6.10E-PS)
2.40F-04
1.90E-03.
U.OOF-04)
3.OOE-03
(1.70F-04)
1.40E-03
(9.30E-05)
en
ro
7^/03 76/0?/?7 76/03/?6 6.r>0(r-04 3
(4.'*OF-05) (6
7f,/ri4 76/0'V?'* 76/04/30 7. JOF-04 ?
(4.40F-OS) (6
7 f. / 0 S 76/04/10 76/0^/Prt 6.40F-04 ?
(4.POF-05) (6
7«./06 76/OS/PR 76/0'e./?S 1.40F-03 S
(7 . 70C--OS ) (9
76/07 76/07/0? 76/07/10 fl.10F-04 3
(6.40F-05) (5
7£./OH 7^/07/30 7^/OR/?7 l.?OF-03 4
(6.60F-QS ) (R
7A/10 76/Ofl/?7 76/10/?S> 9.^0F-04 1
(6.10F-OS) (9
7^/11 7ft/10/?'l 76/ll/?Q I.IO^-OS 3
• (6.^0F-OS ) (ft
7f-/l? 7^/ll/?° 76/l?/10 1.70F-03 ^
(1.10^-04) (1
.90F-06)
.flOF-05
.70F-06)
.SOF-OS
.20F-06)
.30F-05
.50F-06)
.10F-05
.60F-06)
.70F-05
.60F-06)
.70F-05
.50F-06)
.60F-OS
.OOF-06)
.90F-OS
,60F-n5)
7
7
(4
=;
(4
1
(7
7
(6
1
(6
H
<6
q
(6
1
(1
.10F-04
.60F-05)
• OOF-04
.SOF-05)
.QOF-04
.10F-05)
.40F-03
.60F-05)
.90F-04
.10F-05)
,?OF-03
.AOF-OS)
.90F-04
.10F-05)
.QOF-04
.POF-05)
.POF-03
.10F-04)
rj
{ ^1
6
(3
9
(5
3
(3
1
(4
1
(6
7
(4
6
(4
1
(6
io^E-OS,
.flOE-04
.90E-OS)
.SOE-04
.10E-05)
.OOE-04
.OOE-OS)
.40E-03
.«OF-05)
.40F-03
.30E-OS)
./.DF-04
.40F-05)
.40E-04
.10E-OS)
.OOE-03
.40F-05)
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
1
2
B
1
1
1
2
1
5
9
5
1
1
1
6
1
5
1
*
•
•
•
•
*
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
90E-04
20E-05)
90F-05
40E-05)
10E-04
70E-05)
flOF-05
OOF-OS)
SOE-05
90E-06)
«OF-05
10F-OS)
40F.-04
90F-05)
40E-05
40F-05)
40E-OS
60F.-05)
(7
7
(7
7
(7
1
(1
1
(1
1
(9
4
(4
8
(7
4
19
.OOE-05)
.30E-04
.70E-05)
.SOE-04
.30F-05)
.60E-03
.OOE-04)
.80E-03
.OOE-04)
.40E-03
.40E-05)
.10F-04
.65E-03)
.40E-04
.IOE-05)
.80E-04
.SOE-05)
WFIGHTFO
FRP MFAN » T95(H-l)
4.71F-05
(l.SPF-OS)
1.19F-03 1.11E-03 1.16E-04 1.15E-03
*Results corrected for blank filter content. Statistical considerations as discussed in Eadie and
Bernhardt (1976). Results shown are volume weighted arithmetic average with values in parenthesis
being the standard error at the 95 percent confidence level based on the t-distribution for (n-1)
degrees of freedom.
-------
TABLE B-3. COMPOSITED MONTHLY AMBIENT AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/m3) AT BIBO
OM
OFF
23BU
P30TH
23PTH
cr>
co
7^/1? 75/1?,
7^/01 75/l?>
76/o? 76/oi>
7*/03 7f>/0?>
7^/04 7^/03-
7^/05 7^/0^>
7^/0^, 76/Oc,
7A/07 76/07/
7*/nq 76/0«>
7ie/10 76/QO;
7A/] 1 76/10,
76/1 ? 76/1 1 /
VOI.UMF WFir,HTF
<;TP Ff"71 - H.SOF-04
( 1 .?OF-04)
'?0 76/01/?j l.?OF-03
( 3.^0^-04)
'30 7/?7 3.30F-04
(?.«OF-05)
'?7 76/OT/?^ 2.10F-04
(2.1 OF-05)
'?*> 76/06/10 2.40F-04 f^.
(?. 1 OF-OS) ( 3.
'30 76/OS/?H l.70f-04 1.
( 1 .^OF-OS) ( 1 .
'PR 76/06/PS 2.00F-04 I.
(P.^O^-OS) (4.
'fl? 76/07/1 fS ?.40r~04 Q.
(2 .QOF-05 ) (S.
'0^> 76/OQ/(n 2.30F-04 *. .
(?.. 1 OF-O1^) (1.
'01 76/lo/?'> 2.15F-04 S.
(6.«9r-04) ( 1 .
'?'•) 7A/])/?y P.70F-04 «.
(2.40F-OS) (4.
'?Q 7i,/ip/10 6.00F-0 T''SOF~n4) (3.
— •• V ^
SOF-06
30F-06)
50F-06
80F-06)
20F-OS
40F-Q6 )
70F-06
90F-06 }
OOF-06
OOF-06)
4«5F-06
S^F-OS)
flOF-06
30F-06)
SOF-OS
10F-05)
*AF-06
I5F-06)
q
( ]
1
(3
3
(?
?
(?
2
(?
1
(1
?
(?
?
(?
?
(?
?
(H
?
(?
6
(5
3
( t
.40F-04
. POE-04)
.POF-03
.i.OF-04)
.10F-04
.«OF-05)
.1 OF-04
.POF-05)
.POF-04
.1 OF-05)
.60F-04
.QOF-05)
.70E-n4
.BOF-05)
.?OE-04
.90F-05)
.?OE-04
.10F-05)
.1SE-04
,?^p_04 )
.70F-04
.SOF-05)
.1 OF.-04
.70E-05)
.69F-04
,q?F-04)
7
(fl
q
( 1
3
(?
2
(1
1
(1
1
(?
2
(2
3
(5
1
(1
?
(3
1
(3
3
(3
,
( 1
•
,
•
.
•
.
•
•
•
•
.
•
«
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
.
10F-04
?OF-05)
flOF-04
90E-04)
30E-04
40E-05)
OOF-04
ROE-OS)
30E-04
40E-OS)
70E-OS
OOE-06)
90E-04
40E-05)
90F.-04
OOE-05)
OOF-04
60E-05)
1SE-04
19E-04)
POE-04
10F-05)
40E-04
90E-OS)
OPE-04
ft4f-04)
7
(?
\
(7
5
(1
7
(1
3
(6
4
(1
3
(7
5
(?
?
(R
5
(9
4
(1
1
(1
5
(?
.70F-OS
.70E-05)
.ROE-04
.90E-OS)
.JOE-OS
.OOF-05)
,?OE-OS
.IOE-OS)
.20E-OS
.90E-06)
.OOE-06
.OOE-06)
.70E-05.
.90E-06)
.90F-05
.OOE-05)
.30E-05
.OOF-06)
.05E-OS
.53F-05)
.60E-05
.50E-OS)
.60E-05
.10E-OS)
.SOE-05
.63E-05)
7
0
•4
(3
2
(4
7
(3
2
(4
2
(4
2
(5
2
(7
2
(4
2
(4
2
(4
1
(6
1
(5
.40E-05
.SOE-05)
.ROE-05
.70F-05)
.20E-04
.40E-05)
.70E-05
.60E-05)
.60E-04
.40E-05)
.10E-04
.80E-05)
.90E-04
.90E-05)
.30E-04
.OOE-05)
.20E-04
.60E-05)
.55E-04
.45F-04)
.POE-04
.20E-05)
.70E-04
.SOE-05)
.96E-04
.10E-05I
*Results corrected for blank filter content. Statistical considerations as discussed in Eadie and
Bernhardt (1976). Results shown are volume weighted arithmetic average with values in parenthesis
being the standard error at the 95 percent confidence level based on the t-distribution for (n-1)
degrees of freedom.
-------
TABLE B-4. COMPOSITED MONTHLY AMBIENT AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/m3) AT MESITA
en
MO/YR
75/1?
76/01
7A/0?
7^/03
7A/04
7^/OS
76/06
7A/07
76/Ofl
76/1 0
76/1 1
7*/l ?.
OM nrF
7S/12/0*. 75/l?/?.9
7S/1?/?Q 76/01/?3
76/01/30 76/0?/13
76/03/0? 76/03/?6
76/03/?* 76/04/30
76/0^/30 76/OS/?fl
76/0^/?R 76/06/PS
76/07/OP 76/07/30
76/07/30 76/00/?7
76/OtV?7 7*>/lO/2q
7f./lO/?Q 76/1 l/?.9
76/H/PP 76/l?/10
P.1MJ 235U 23HU 230TH
8.90F-05
(1.30F-05)
6.30F-04
(4.40r-0c>)
4 • OOF— 04
f 4 • 1 0^ — 0*5 )
2.?OF-04
(2.qnF-Oti)
2.40C-04
(2. 10F-OS)
1 .ROF-04
(?«ooF~-ns)
3»<«OF~04
(3.?OF-05)
1 .QOF-04
(?. .ROF-QS)
1 ."^OF-04
( 1 .HOF-OS)
?.. 1 0^-04
(2.00^-0^)
S.POF-04
(4.?or-o<5)
5.90F-04
•<5.*OF-ns)
4
(3
?
(7
1
(7
^
(4
o
(4
6
(3
1
(6
4
(S
9
(4
Q
(3
7
(1
2
(1
.40F-0*
.10F-06)
.flOF-05
.OOF-06)
.30F-05
.OOF-06)
. 30F-06
.60F-06)
.40F-06
.30F-06)
.60F-06
,q0F-06)
.70F-OS
.30F-06)
.80F-06
.20F-Q6)
.70F-06
.30F-06)
.20F-06
.70F-06)
.40F-05
. ?OF-0^>)
.?OF-05
.10F-OS)
R
(1
6
(^
u
(4
?
(?
?
(?
1
(?
3
(3
1
(?
1
(1
?
(?
^
(4
R
(5
.10F-05
.^OE-05)
.6^F-04
,/,OE-05)
.OOF-04
• 20F.-05)
.40E-04
.POF-05)
.50F-04
.60F-05)
.QOF-04
.30F-05)
.SOF-04
.30F.-05)
.70F-04
.70F-05)
.40E-04
.90F-05)
.10F-04
.20F-05)
.30F-04
.40F-05)
.IOE-04
.POF-05)
?.
(2.
2.
(2.
2.
(1.
2.
(2.
2.
(2.
3.
(9.
3.
(3.
5.
(5.
3.
(3.
2.
(3.
1.
(1.
1 .
(2.
IOE-04
30F-OS)
70E-04
40E-05)
60F-05
40F-05)
40F-04
40F-05)
60E^-04
10F-05)
90F-05
OOE-06)
60F-04
10E-05)
90E-05
OOE-05)
OOE-04
OOE-05)
40F-05
OOE-06)
70E-04
70F.-05)
c;nE-04
80E-05)
232TH
4.70E-05
(1.10E-05)
1. IOE-04
(l.SOF-05)
1 .20F.-05
(9. OOF-06)
7. OOE-05
(1.30E-05)
l.SOF-04
(l.SOF-OS)
2.SOE-05
(7. OOF-06)
1.40E-04
(1.90E-05)
l.SOE-04
(2.^0^-05)
1. OOE-04
(1.70E-05)
1.60F-05
(2. OOE-06)
5.10F-05
(9.90E-06)
1.80F-05
(1.30E-05)
1
(5
2
(5
3
(ft
2
(6
2
(5
2
(4
4
(6
1
(1
9
(4
2
(1
4
(5
1
(6
226RA
.70E-04
«20E-05)
.flOE-04 -
.BOE-05)
.flOE-04
.OOE-05)
.30E-04
.20E-05)
.90E-04
.20E-05)
.OOE-04
.90E-05)
.40E-04
.70E-05)
.60E-03
.20E-04J
.20E-05
.30E-05)
.29E-04
.3SE-03)
.10F-04
.70E-05)
.OOE-04
.90E-05)
Vnt.UMF WFIGHTFH AVFPAGFS
FOP MFAN »
04 l.?7F-OS ?>.qBE-04 1.78E-04 7.71E-OS 3.44E-04
U.J7F-04) (S.OQF-06) (1.1FF-04) (7.fl6E-05) (3.55E-05) (2.06E-04)
*Results corrected for blank filter content. Statistical considerations as discussed in Eadie and
Bernhardt (1976). Results shown are volume weighted arithmetic average with values in parenthesis
being the standard error at the 95 percent confidence level based on the t-distribution for (n-1)
degrees of freedom.
-------
TABLE B-5. COMPOSITED MONTHLY AMBIENT AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/m3) AT OLD LAGUNA
HA/YP
en
en
ON
OFF
?34I|
?3SU
23BU
?3nTH
232TH
2P6RA
7^/12
76/0?
76/03
76/04
76/05
7A/P6
76/07
76/Ofl
7*/1 0
76/1 1
76/1?
75/12/0* 75/12/2Q
76/01/30 76/02/27
7*/02/27 7*./03/2*>
76/03/26 76/04/30
76/04/30 76/05/2H
76/0^/20 76/06/2S
76/07/0? 76/07/30
76/OR/06 76/OR/27
76/0«t/?7 76/10/2°
76/1 0/?q 76/1 1 /29
76/11/2° 76/1P/10
5.40F-Q4
(3.90F-05)
/t .60F-Q4
(3.60F-05)
3. OOF-04
(2.60F-OS)
1 .POF-04
( 1. OOF-OS)
2. 70F-04
(2.70E-0^)
1 . 1 OF-04
( 1 .50F-OS)
4.6QF-OS
( 1 . ?OF-OS )
q t ^,Qc_Qt^
( 1 . SOF-OS )
1 . 1 4F-Q4
(4.^1^-04 1
3.c«0r-04
( 3. 1 OF-oS)
f) . 10r-04
(S.70F-OS)
(6.BOF-06)
1 .20F-05
(4.70E-06)
7 .goE-O*!
( 3 ,«OF-06)
5.BOF-06
(3 ,?OF-0':')
q .70F-06
(4.9nF-0*S)
6 . 30E-0^
(3.60F-06)
2 .ROF-0^
(3.20F-0'i)
4 .4QF-06
(3.30E-06)
4.B3F-06
(3.30F-OS)
9.20E-0*
(5 . 1 OF-0^)
?.60F-OB
(1 .20F-05)
5.40F-04
(4.00F-05)
4 .70F-04
(3.70E-05)
2.BOE-04
(2.60E-05)
1 .70E-04
(2. 10F-05)
2.ROE-04
(2.90F-05)
1 .OOF-04
(1 .70F-05)
4 .ROE-05
(1 .60E-05)
9.00E-05
( 1 .60F-05)
) .26F.-04
(6.73E-04)
4. 1 OF-04
(3.40E-05)
(S.40E-04
(5.90E-05)
2.20E-04
(1.90E-05)
3.10F-05
(2.00E-06)
2.40F.-05
(4.00F-06)
2.10E-05
(3.00E-06)
9.70E-OS
(1 .60E-05)
1 .10E-04
(l.SOE-05)
8.70E-05
(1 .POF-OS)
1. OOF-OS
(2.00E-06)
B.2qE-OS
(5.63E-05)
1 .10E-04
(l.SOE-05)
1 .40E-04
(2.70E-05)
8.60F-05
U.20E-OS)
9.00E-06
(l.OOE-06)
9.00E-06
(3.00E-0'S)
1 .10E-05
(2.00E-06)
3.40E-OS
(9.00E-06)
5.00E-05
(1.10E-05)
4.10E-05
(1.20E-OS)
l.OOE-06
(l.OOE-06)
1 .ORE-05
(2. 1BE-05)
1.10E-05
(ft.OOE-06)
l.SOE-05
(1.10F-05)
1.20F-04
(3.BOE-05)
3.30E-04
(S.90E-05)
2.90E-04
(5.10E-05)
2..30E-04
(5.50E-05)
9.20F-05
(4.40E-05)
8.30E-05
(4.60E-05)
4.10E-05
(4.70E-05)
4.40E-04
(7.00E-05)
6.22E-05
(1.71E-04)
9.60E-05
(4.60E-05)
5.90E-05
(5.80E-05)
|;MF WFIGHTFO
FPU "FA.vj «
P.S3F-04 Q.llF-OiS P.S6F-04 B.1PF-05 P.44E-05 1.6PE-04
(l.10F-n4) (4.3PF-06) (1.13E-04) (3.90E-OS) (1.69E-05) (S.llF-05)
*Results corrected for blank filter content. Statistical considerations as discussed in Eadie and
Bernhardt (1976). Results shown are volume weighted arithmetic average with values in parenthesis
being the standard error at the 95 percent confidence level based on the t-d1stribution for (n-1)
degrees of freedom.
-------
APPENDIX C
Composited Monthly Ambient Air Sampling Results in pCi/g
66
-------
TABLE C-l. COMPOSITED MONTHLY AMBIENT AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/g) AT JACKPILE HOUSING
MO/YP
ON
OFF
234IJ
238U
P12TH
226RA
7^/12
76/01
7A/02
7^/03
76/04
76/n
-------
TABLE C-2. COMPOSITED MONTHLY AMBIENT AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/g) AT PAGUATE
cr>
oo
I)6TF
OM OFF
?32TH
226RA
7S/1?
76/01
76/0?
76/03
76/04
76/05
76/06
76/07
7A/nei
76/10
76/1 1
76/1?
75/l?/06 7S/l?/?9
75/l?/2° 76/01/21
76/01/10 76/0?/?7
76/0?/?.7 76/03/P6
76/03/?* 76/04/30
76/04/30 76/OS/PP
76/OS/?« 76/06/?^
76/07/0? 76/07/30
76/07/30 76/OR/27
76/0^/^7 76/l1/?Q
76/10/2^ 76/11/P9
76/11/?4 76/l?/10
2.40F*01
(l.POF+00)
1.70F+01
(R.60F-01)
8,*OF+nO
(5.00F-01)
5.00F+00
(3.10F-01)
l.?OF*01
(7.POF-01)
1 •?OF*01
(7.60F-01 )
1 .60F+01
(R.70F-01)
1.70F+01
( 1 .TO^ + OO)
3.1 OF* 01
(1.70F*00)
7 ( of>F * 00
( 4 . 60F — 0 1 )
1 . ?OE*0 1
(7.POC--01)
?. 90^ + 01
(1.90^*00)
9.40F-01
(1 .30F-01 )
6.30E-01
(9.20F-0?)
3.SOF-01
(6.40F-0?)
?.?OF-01
(4.90F-02)
4.SOF-01
(1 .10F-01 )
4.40F-01
(1 .10F-01 )
6.00F-01
(1.1 OF-Ol )
6.40F-01
(1 .20F-01 )
1 .P.OF + 00
(?.?OF-Ql )
?..70F-01
(6.90F-0?)
4.00F-01
(q.qOF-02)
Q.70F-01
(P.70F-01)
?. 30^*01
(l.POF+00)
1 .60E*Ol
(R.40E-01 )
fl.40E+00
(4.QOF-01)
5.00E+00
(3.POE-01 )
1 .10F + 01
(7.30E-01)
1.10E+01
(7.70E-01 )
1 .^OE + Ol
(R.60E-01 )
1 «70E *0l
(1.30F+00)
3.00F+Q1
(1 .70F+00)
ft.40E + f)0
(^.iOE-Ol )
1 .10F*01
(6.90E-01)
3. OOF +01
<1.QOF*00)
2.70F+01
(1.1 OE*00)
1.00E*01
(3.70E-01)
9.60E*00
(4.30E-01 )
4.QOE+00
(2.90E-01)
1 .10F*01
(6.40E-01 )
1.70E»01
(9.30E-01)
3.40E»00
(3.40E-01)
2.ROE*Ol
(i.OOE+00)
3.70F*Ol
(1 .60E + 00)
C5.40E*00
(3.20E-01)
7.10E*00
(4.60E-01)
1 .70E»01
(1.10F+00)
1 .50E*00
(2.70E-01)
l.?OE*00
(1.30E-01)
1.70F*00
(l.flnE-01)
1.40E*00
(1.50E-01)
1.50E*00
(2.30E-01)
1.90E*00
(3.10E-01)
3.10E-01
(1.10E-01)
1.20E+00
(2.10E-01)
1 .50F*00
(3.30F-01)
1.10E*00
(1.40E-01 )
7.10E-01
(1.60E-01)
9.00E-01
(2.60E-01)
2.10F*01
(1.20E*00)
l.SOE+01
(8.30E-01)
9.50E*00
(6.SOE-01)
5.40E+00
(4.90E-01)
1.20E*01
(1.30E»00)
1.30E»01
(1.10E*00)
1.70E*01
(1.10E»00)
3.70E+01
(2.20E*00)
3.60E*01
(2.40E*00)
4.80E+00
(2.5RE*01)
9.20E+00
(7.90E-01)
R.10E+00
(1.60E+00)
S.OOE-01 l.?.6E*01 1.17E + 01 l.?5E + 00 1.27E*01
(1.66F-01) (4.35F+00) (5.3SE+00) (P.91E-01) (4.91E*00)
*Results corrected for blank filter content. Statistical considerations as discussed in Eadie and
Bernhardt (1976). Results shown are mass weighted arithmetic average with values in parenthesis
being the standard error at the 95 percent confidence level based on the t-distribution for (n-1)
degrees of freedom.
-------
KO/YP
TABLE C-3. COMPOSITED MONTHLY AMBIENT AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/g) AT BIBO
HAT17
OM OFF
P30TH
?3?TH
226RA
7S/1?
76/01
76/02
7^/03
7A/0&
76 /OS
7A/f16
76/07
76/09
76/1 0
7* /I 1
76/12
7S/1P/0*
7S/1?/2Q
76/01/30
76/OP/27
76/03/^
76/04/30
76/Oc;/?"
76/07/02
76/08/06
76/0
-------
TABLE C-4. COMPOSITED MONTHLY AMBIENT AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/g) AT MESITA
MO/YP
OATF
OM OFF
23SU
238U
230TH
232TH
226RA
7/03
7A/04
7^/OS
76/06
76/07
7^/OR
7^/10
76/11
7^/12
\/n| IIMF
sin FR°
7S/12/0^ 75/12/29
7ci/12/2c> 76/01/23
76/01/30 76/OP/13
7A/03/0? 76/03/26
76/03/P6 76/04/30
76/04/30 76/OS/28
7*/OS/2R 76/06/25
76/07/00 76/07/30
76/07/30 76/OR/27
76/OH/27 76/10/01
7^/10/2Q 76/11/29
7A/ll/2« 76/12/10
WFT^HTFD AVFPAGFS
vipAN « T95 (hj- 1 )
9
(1
6
(4
3
(3
2
(2
\
(\
2
(2
2
(2
2
(3
2
(2
1
(1
3
(3
1
'(1
2
(1
.OOF-01
,40F-ni )
.^OF+OO
.20F-0 1 )
.POF+00
.^np-oi )
.30r*oo
.^OF-01)
.70F+00
.70F-01 )
.30F+00
.SOF-Ol)
.70F+00
.40F-01 )
.tSOF*00
.70F-01 )
,OOF*Qn
. TOF-0 1 )
.70F+00
.sop-ni )
.90F+00
.10F-01)
.30F»01
.•>OF*00)
,«3F+00
.OflF*00)
4.
<3.
2.
(6.
1 .
(S.
P.
(4.
7.
(3.
ft.
(4.
1 .
(4.
6.
(6.
1 .
(S.
6.
(2.
1 .
t^.
4.
(2.
2.
(2.
50F-02
20F-02)
70F-01
70F-02)
10F-01
70F-02)
30F-02
60F-02)
10F-02
20F-02)
30F-0?
90F-02)
30F+00
80F-01)
40F-02
90F-02)
30F-01
50F-02)
ROF-02
70F-02)
ROF-01
30F-02)
70F-01
4flF-01)
24F-01
4 1F-01 )
R.20F-01
(1 .60E-01)
6.30F*00
(4.20F-01 )
3.20F*00
(3.40F-01)
2.40F+00
(2.POF-01)
1 .ROF*00
(1 .QOF-01 )
2.40E*00
(2. ROF-01 )
2.70F*00
(2.60F.-01 )
2t20E*00
(3.70E-01 )
] .ROE + 00
(2.40F-01 )
1 .60E+00
(1.60E-01)
3 .90F* 00
(3.30F-01 )
1.10F*01
(1.10P+nO)
2.76F*00
(1.03F»00)
2
(2
2
(2
2
(1
2
(2
1
(1
4
(1
2
(2
7
(6
3
(3
1
(2
1
(1
3
(5
1
(1
.10F*00
.30E-01)
.60F+00
.30F.-01)
.10E-01
.10E-01)
,40E*00
.40E-01)
.90E'*00
.60F-01)
.qOf-01
.10F-01)
.70E*00
.40F-01)
.70E*00
.60E-01)
,ROE*00
.ROE-01 )
.ROE-01
.10F-02)
.20E*00
.20E-01)
.20F+00
.90E-01)
.9RF+00
.0 ^E + 00)
4
(1
1
(1
1
(7
7
(1
1
(1
3
(9
1
(1
2
(3
1
(2
1
(1
3
(7
3
(2
7
(3
•flOE-01
.10E-01)
.OOE*00
.40E-01)
.OOE-01
.60E-02)
.OOE-01
•30E-01)
.10E+00
.20E-01)
.10E-01
.10E-02)
,OOE*00
.50E-01)
.OOE*00
.40F-01)
•30F*00
.20E-01)
.20E-01
.70E-02)
.80E-01
.30F-02)
.ROE-01
.90E-01)
.06E-01
.45E-01)
1.80E+00
(5.30E-01)
2.70E»00
(5.60E-01)
3.10E*00
(6.50E-01)
2.30E+00
(6.20E-01)
2.10E*00
(3.90E-01)
2.50E*00
(6.10E-01)
3.30E*00
(5.10E-01)
2. 10E*01
(1.70E*00)
1.20E*00
(5.50E-01)
2.40E*00
(4. OOE-01 )
3.10E*00
(4.30E-01)
, 2.40E+00
(1.50E*00)
3.40E*00
(2.17E*00)
*Results corrected for blank filter content. Statistical considerations as discussed in Eadie and
Bernhardt (1976). Results shown are mass weighted arithmetic average with values in parenthesis
being the standard error at the 95 percent confidence level based on the t-distribution for (n-1)
degrees of freedom.
-------
TABLE C-5. COMPOSITED MONTHLY AMBIENT AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/g) AT OLD LAGUNA
HATF
ON OFF
23PTH
226PA
7^/1? 75/12/04 7S/l?/29
7ft/f>? 7ft/0)/30 7^/02/27
7ft/n3 7ft/02/?7 7fV03/?ft
7ft/04 7ft/03/2ft 7ft/04/30
7ft/n5 76/04/30 7ft/05/2R
7A/nft 7ft/OS/?H 76/06/2^
7fr/f)7 7ft/07/0? 7^/07/30
7ft/flfl 7ft/QM/n^> 76/QR/?7
7ft/10 7ft/0«/27 7^/in/?9
7ft/ll 7ft/10/2cl 7ft/ll/?9
7ft/12 7ft/ll/2£y 7ft/l?/10
5
(3
3
(2
2
(2
1
(2
1
(1
2
(3
2
(6
6
(9
7
(1
5
(4
4
(4
.20F +
.70F-
.ftOF-f
.ROF-
.SOF +
.10F-
.QOF*
.OOF-
. 1 OF*
.OOF*
. 30F *
. 1 OF-
,^OF*
.ftOF-
. ?OF»
.40F-
. 1 ?F +
.43F*
,30F»
.10F +
. TOF +
. i OF*
00
01)
00
01)
00
01)
00
01 )
01
00 )
00
01)
00
0 1 )
00
0 1 )
00
01 )
01
00)
ol
00)
2.40F-01
(ft.ciOF-02)
R.70F-02
(3.70F-Q2)
ft.40F-02
(3. OOF-OP)
ft.20F-02
(3.40F-02)
3.ROF-01
(1 .ROF-01)
1 .30F-01
(7.40F-02)
1 .50F-Q1
(1.7nr_oi )
2.ROF-01
(2. inF-ol )
2.90F-01
(1.31 F*.QO)
1 .20F + 00
(7. 10F-01 )
1 .ROF + 00
(R.20F-01 )
5
n
3
(2
?
(2
1
(?
1
(1
2
(3
2
(R
q
(I
7
(?
5
(4
4
(4
.30F. + 00
.ftOF-01 )
.ftOF+00
.QOF-01)
.20F+QO
. lOF-nn
.R0f>00
.20F.-01)
. 10F+01
.OOF*00)
.OOF*00
.ftOF.-Ol)
.60F+00
.30F-01)
.70E+00
.OOF+00)
,ft9F+00
.49F+01 )
.70F+Q1
.ROF+00)
.SOF+Ol
.30F+00)
2
(1
2
(1
1
(3
2
(2
3
(5
2
(3
4
(9
6
(1
5
(9
1
(2
9
(1
.10F+00
.ROF-01)
.40E-0 1
.90E-02)
.90F-01
.ftOE-02)
.30F-01
.ROE-02)
.ftOF+00
.POF-01 )
.40E*00
.20E-01)
.ftOE*00
.40F-01)
.40F-01
.30E-01 )
404F*00
.33E+00)
.SOF+01
.10E*00)
.90E+00
.QOF*00)
R
(1
ft
(1
7
(2
1
(2
1
(3
I
(2
2
(6
6
(ft
ft
(2
1
(fl
1
(7
.30E-01
.20F-01 )
.90E-02
.OOE-02)
.40F-02
,?OE-02 )
.lOE-01
.OOE-02)
.30F+00
.SOF-02)
.20E+00
.30F.-01 )
.10E*00'
.40E-01 )
.40F-02
.40E-02 )
.52F-01
.^ftE*00 )
.50F»00
.30E-01 )
,10E*00
.70F-01 )
1.10F+00
(3.70E-01)
2.60E+00
(4.60E-01)
2.40E»00
(4.10E-01)
2.40E»00
(5.90E-01)
3.60E*00
(1.60E+00)
1.70E*00
(9.90F-01)
2.40E*00
(2.50E*00)
2.80E*01
(4.40E*00 )
3.R1E*00
(1.03E+01)
1.40E+01
(6.30E*00)
4 . 1 OE*00
(4 . 1 OE+00 )
WFIGHTFO
00 1.47F+00 4.40E-01 2.96E*00
(2.33F*00) (P.SOF-0?) (?.52F*nO) (l.?OE*00) (3.71E-01) (1.48E*00)
*Results corrected for blank filter content. Statistical considerations as discussed in Eadie and
Bernhardt (1976). Results shown are mass weighted arithmetic average with values in parenthesis
being the standard error at the 95 percent confidence level based on the t-distribution for (n-1)
degrees of freedom.
-------
APPENDIX D
Air Sampling Results for Locations
in the Vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit
Uranium Mine (in pCi/m3)
72
-------
TABLE D-l. AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/m3) AT JACKPILE HOUSING
OM nrF ?T4iJ ?3SU 2TRU ?TOJH
7S/1V/04 7S/l?/?9 3.0^-03 1.1F-0<* 3.0F.-03 ?.RF-«3 5.4F-OS 2.?F.-03
(1.40F-04) (1.40F-OS) (J.40F-04) (7.SOf_-05> (1.OOF-OS) (1.20F-04)
4.3F-fn l.^F-04 4.PF-01 4.PF-04 B.OF-0^ 3.7F-03
l.^F-0^ 1 . 3F-04 "'.SF-03 3.^F-04 ^.f)F-nf> 3.9F-03
(1.70^-04) (1.50F-QS) (l.^or;-04) (R.OOF-OM (l.OOF-06) ('1.60F-04)
3.1F-03 1.3F-04 3.0F.-03 1.4F-0? Q.PF-OS 3.3F-03
( l , c;of-04 ) (1.^0r-0c) (1.40F-04) (?,?OF~04) (l.»OF-05) (l.SQF-04)
7^/06/30 ?.1F-03 ^.?F-OS ?.1F-03 ?.?F_04 5.0F-06 P.3F-03
04) (l.?Or-OS) (I.OOF-04) (A.OOF-06) (l.OOF-OM (1.30F-04)
3 1.1F-04 3.4F-ni 4.0F-03 H.4F-05 ?.^F-03
04) (l.*)OF-OS) (1.70F-04) (l.SOF-04) (P.10F-OS) (1.30F-04)
00 (P.OOF-04) (I.OOF-OS) (?.00^-04) (Q.ie.OF-OS) (l.?OF-OS) (l.POF-0,4)
1^7777 7^/07/0> 7A/07/30 V.nr-Ob 4.5F-OS :).rJF-04 l.OF-OT 3. l ,r)F-o3 s.qp-os l.Qt-03 1 ,ot-"-o3 4.SF-05 1.4F.-03
(1.10r-n4) (1.10r_n^) (1.10F-04) (6.OOF-OS) (9.?OF-OM (9.RQF-OS)
1 1 ,^>F-04 ?.''F-03 i.QF-03 S.4.F-OS 3.RF-04
04) (4.40^-n'-O (4.POF-04) (?.?OF-04) (1.10F-OS) (5.40F-05)
(1.00^-04) (P.30F-OS) tl.ROC-04) (?.QOr-04) (1.10F-OS) (l.RQF-04)
*Results have been corrected for blank filter content. Values in parenthesis are the two-sigma
(95 percent confidence level) standard deviation based on counting errors. Statistical
considerations as discussed in Eadie and Bernhardt (1976). Blanks indicate no data.
-------
TABLE D-2. AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/m3) AT PAGUATE
OM
OFF
238U
231TH
7'S/01/? '*
YS 7<,/n7/30
7A/07/T) 7*>/Ofl/?7
7A/OR/P7 7^/10/01
7^/10/0)
(1
l.V-03
R.3F-05 P.OF.-01 2.4F-03 1.3F-04
U.POF-05) (l.OOr-04) (l.onE-04) (P.40F-05)
1.3F-04 T.3F-03 2.1E-03 2.5F-04
(7,
R,
70^-0^)
1F-04
9.AF-04
(6.30F-OS)
1.7F-Q3
(1.1nr-n<
(6.90F-OM
P.5F-OS
S.3F-OS
3.1P-05
4.7F-05
1.7F-OS
(«.OnF-06)
S.9F-OS
1.?p-01 1 .4F-fl3 P.4F-04
(7.00F-Q5) (ft.lOF-05) (P.60E-OS)
7.1F-04 6.WF-04 1.9F-04
(4.00E-OS) (P.pOE-OS.)
05) (3.9nF-05) (1.40F-OS)
^.^E-na 9.^F-04 1.1F-04
(4.10F-05) C5.10F-05) (1.7nF-05)
1.4F-03 3.0F-04 2.RF-05
(7.ftOF-o5) (3,nnF~05) (l.OOE-05)
7.QF-04 1.4F-03 S.ftF-05
(f.,10F-05) (4.ROF-05) (Q.QnF-Oft)
(ft.40F-n5) (fi.30F.-05) (l.TOE-05)
P.^F-04 7.4F-Q4 1.4F-04
-------
TABLE D-3. AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/tn3) AT BIBO
ON
OFF
226RA
1SP.P41
I^RP^I 75/12/29
( 1 .20F-04)
1 .2F-01
n.40F-04)
en
76/OS/2«
7<>/07/0? 7OF-05)
2.'iE-04
(4.40E-05)
2.1E-04
(4.ROF-05)
2.9F-04
(5.90E-05)
2.3F-04
(7.00E-05)
2.2E-04
(4.60E-05)
2.2E-04
(4.60F-05)
2.9E-04
{4.80F-05)
2.2E-04
(4.20E-05)
1.7F-04
(6.50F-05)
*Results have been corrected for blank filter content. Values in parenthesis are the two-sigma
(95 percent confidence level) standard deviation based on counting errors. Statistical
considerations as discussed in Eadie and Bernhardt (1976). Blanks indicate no data.
-------
TABLE D-4. AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/m3) AT MESITA
HATE
OM OFF
21flU
?30TH
21ZTH
?/?9
^ P a 0 1
7 <=> / 0 ? / 1 3
CT>
1
1SRP07
iqOPOQ 76/OS/?«
1^7701 7^/07/OQ 7F-04 l.SF-04
(2.10F-05) (l.SOE-OS)
3.9F-OS 2.SF-05
(9.nf>E-OM (7.00E-Oft)
3.6E-04 1 .4E-04
(3.IOF-OS) (1.90F-05)
5.9E-OS 1.5E-04
(5.00E-OS) (P.50E-05)
3.0E-04 l.OF-04
(3.nOF-05) (1.70E-05)
?.1£-04 2.4E-OS 1.6F-05
(?.?OF-05) (3.00E-06) (2
(P.30F-05)
3.SF-04
1 .7E-04
(?.7nF-OS
?.4F-OS S.3E-04 1.7E-n4 5.1E-05
(7.20F-OM (4.40E-n5) (1.70E-05) (Q.QOE-O^)
P.^F-OS S.1F.-04 l.SF-04 l.RF-OS
d.iOF-ns) (s.POE-05) (2.ftnp-n5) il.iOF-os)
1 .7E-OA
(5.20F-05)
P..RF-04
(5.HOE-05)
3.RE-04
(8.00E-05)
2.3E-04
(6.20F-OS)
P..9E-04
(5.POF-05)
2.0E-04
(4.9QE-05)
4.4E-04
(6.70E-05)
1 .6E-03
( 1 .20E-04)
9.PE-05
(4.30E-05)
3.2F-04
(5.30E-05)
1 .OF-04
(4.ROE-05)
4.1E-04
C5.70E-05)
1 .OE-04
(6.90E-05)
*Results have been corrected for blank filter content. Values in parenthesis are the two-sigma
(95 percent confidence level) standard deviation based on counting errors. Statistical
considerations as discussed in Eadie and Bernhardt (1976). Blanks indicate no data.
-------
TABLE D-5. AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/m3) AT OLD LAGUNA
ON OFF
7S/1P/0/.
7(S/0] /TO
23«5U
238U
?10TH
226RA
7A/04/TO
74/OS/P.8 76/0*/?5
74/07/n;- 76/07/lfl
1^7791
76/10/0!
7)
5.flF-05
(1.10E-OS)
4.1F-05
(l.POE-OS)
1 .OE-06
( 1 .OOF.-06)
1.2F-05
(5.20F-06)
1.1F-05
(6.00F-06)
(2.70F-05) (1.10F.-05)
1.2F-04
(3.80F-05)
3.3E-OA
(5.90F-05)
2.9F-OA
(5.10E-05)
2.3E-04
(5.50E-05)
9.P.E-05
(4.40E-OS)
8.1E-05
(4.ROE-05)
4.1E-05
(4.70E-05)
A.AE-04
(7.00E-05)
5.1E-05
(3.70F-05)
7.4E-05
(3.90F-05)
(4.(SOE-05)
5.9F-05
(5.80E-05)
*Results have been corrected for blank filter content. Values in parenthesis are the two-sigma
(95 percent confidence level) standard deviation based on counting errors. Statistical
considerations as discussed in Eadie and Bernhardt (1976). Blanks indicate no data.
-------
APPENDIX E
Air Sampling Results for Locations
in the Vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit
Uranium Mine (in pCi/g)
78
-------
TABLE E-l. AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/g) AT JACKPILE HOUSING
F ON
2 75/12/06
4 75/12/2"
* 7*1/01/30
7f,/02/27
OFF
P3SII
21PU
P10TH
232TH
VD
1^777* 7f>/07/02
l^QOP 7*S/07/1() 7*1/01/01
1^0^30 7*1/10/01 76/10/2Q
1 ^0^12 7*i/l n/2.3F + 01
(3.50F»00)
(2.00E+00)
4.P.F + 01
(5.70F+00)
7.3E»01
l.SE-01
(2.70F-02)
2.1F+00
(5.10F-01)
1 .5F*nO
(2.ROF-01)
1 .6E + 00
(3.70E-01)
i .iF + no
(1.20E*01)
(5.00F-01)
l.SF*00
(3.00F-01)
1 .AF*00
(2.QOF-01)
a.RF-01
<3.?OF-01)
8.2E*01
(3.70F+-00)
7.0E*01
<3.flOF*00)
6.5E+01
9.7E*01
(6.00E*00)
(S.RF + 01
(4.00E+00)
1.7E*01
{^•.SOF+00)
(3i20F*00)
9.9E*00
(1 ,40F*00)
7.3F*01
(5.40E+00)
^Results have been corrected for blank filter content. Values in parenthesis are the two-sigma
(95 percent confidence level) standard deviation based on counting errors. Statistical
considerations as discussed in Eadie and Bernhardt (1976). Blanks indicate no data.
-------
TABLE E-2. AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/g) AT PAGUATE
00
c;/>MP|.F ON
}RHP?fl 75/12/04
mB030 7S/12/29
m«o32 76/01/30
1SSP34 76/02/27
1SH036 76/01/26
^flp^q 76/04/30
l^qo^o 76/Oci/2M
1^77«0 76/07/0?
l^POO 76/07/30
I=;7q04 7f>/0«/27
1S9966 76/10/01
icgq^n 76/10/2°
I=;qq70 76/11/29
Off
7S/12/2Q
76/01/23
76/02/27
76/03/26
76/04/30
76/OS/2R
76/06/2^
76/07/30
76/03/27
76/10/01
76/ln/?q
?6/l 1/29
76/17/10
21411
2.4F+01
( 1 ,?OF + 00)
1.7F.+01
(R. 60^-01 )
a.°iF»oo
(S.OOF-01)
5. OF*OO
(3.10F-01)
1.2E+01
(7.POE-01 )
1 .?E*01
(7.60F-01)
1.6F*01
(8.70F-0 I )
1 . 7 F *• 0 1
( 1 . 10F" + 00)
3.1F+01
(1 .70^*00)
7.0F+00
(4,ftOF-0 I )
1 .^>F»01
(7. POF-nl )
2.0F*01
( l .qoF + no)
23SI/
q.4F-oi
(1.30F-01 )
6-3F-01
(9.20F-02)
3.5F-01
(6.AOF-02)
2.2F-01
(4.qOF-02)
4.5F-01
(1 .10F-01)
4.4F-01
(1 . in.F-oi)
6.0F-01
(1 .10F-01 )
6.4F-01
(1 .20F-01 )
1.2F+00
(2.20F-01 )
P.7F-01
(6.90F-0?)
4.0F-01
{ R.80F-02)
0.7F-01
(P.70F-01 )
23«U
?.3E*01
(1 .20F + 00)
1 .6f- »01
(R.40E-01 )
«.4E»QO
(4.qOF-01)
C>.OE»00
(3.20E-01 )
1 . IF + Ol
(7.30F-01)
1 .1E*01
(7.30F-01 )
1 .5F + 01
(0.60E-01 )
1 .7F + 01
(1 .30F*Ofl)
3. OF *01
(1 .70F+00)
6.4F+00
(4.40F-0 1 )
1 . IF*01
(6.QOF-01 )
3«OF.*01
( 1 .90F»00)
230TH
2.7E*ni
(l.inp*00)
1 .OE + 01
(3.70F-01)
9.6F+00
(A.30F-OD
4.9F+00
(2.90E-01)
1.1E*01
(6.40F-01)
1 .7F + 0]
(9.30E-01 )
3.4E+00
(3.40E-01)
2.RF+0 1
(1.00F*00)
3.7F*01
(1 .606+00)
S.4F+00
I3.20E-01)
7.1F+00
(A.60F-01)
1 .7E + 01
(1 .10F + 00)
232TH
1.5F+00
(2.70F-01)
1 .2F*00
(1.30F-OJ )
1 .7F.+00
(l.ROE-01)
1 .4E + 00
(1.50E-01)
1 ."SF + 00
(2.30E-01)
1 .9F.+00
(3.10F-01)
3.1F-01
(1.10E-01)
1 ,?F + 00
(2.10E-01 )
1 .SF + 00
(3.30F-01)
1 .1F+00
(1.40E-01 )
7.1F-01
(1.60F-01 )
9.0F-01
(2.60F-01)
22C.RA
2.1E*01
(1.20E+00)
1 ,5E*01
(8.30E-01)
9.5F*00
(IS.50E-01)
5.4E»00
(4.90E-01)
1 .2E*01
(1.30E»00)
1 .3E* 01
(1.30E+00)
1 ,7£*01
(1.10E+00)
3.7E*01
(2.20E+00)
3.6E+01
(2.40E+00>
2.0F>00
(7.20E-01)
6.4E+00
(6.00E-01)
9.2E+00
(7.90E-01)
9.1F.*00
(1.60E+00)
Resu1ts have been corrected for blank filter content. Values in parenthesis are the two-sigma
(95 percent confidence level) standard deviation based on counting errors. Statistical
considerations as discussed in Eadie and Bernhardt (1976). Blanks indicate no data.
-------
TABLE E-3. AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/g) AT BIBO
OFF
230TH
212TH
226RA
CO
(2
]c;qoA4 7S/12/29 76/0]/?;) 4
(1
icpp^ft 76/01/TO 7^/0?/?7 9
(^
1S°104P 76/0?/?7 7^/Ql/?fS 4
(4
l^RPSO 76/0~V?6 76/04/30 6
(S
iceman 7ft/0w30 7<,/oS/?fl 7
(R
It;o7fl? 76/OS/?8 76/06/?S 7
(6
1<=7794 76/07/0? 76/07/16 2
(2
1^7796 7ft/U«/06 7S/09/0"! 8
(7
1C77Q« 76/09/01 76/10/01 1
(1
1^9960 76/10/01 76/JO/P9 4
(4
1^996? 76/10/?9 76/11/29 7
(6
)qQQ*6 76/l]/?9 76/12/JO 1
(1
Of* + (1 1
.RF+00
.POF-oi )
.RF +00
.ROF-ol )
.OF+00
. TOF-ol )
.flF »00
.1 OF-01 )
.TF+00
.10F-01 )
.3F+01
.flOF + on >
. 1 F *00
. 1 OF-ftl )
• 6F +00
.70F-01 )
. ^F+on
. TO^-Ol )
. IF +00
. TOF-n] )
. ^F+Ol
.40F+00)
1.
c*.
LT
(7.
P.
(i.
9.
<<=:.
?.
(I.
ft.
(3.
7.
(6.
?.
(I.
R.
(2.
-___
6F-01
inp-o?)
6.SF-0?
pflF-02)
9F-01
10F-01)
7F-01
POF-Ol )
JF-01
lOF-on
^F-02
1 OF-02 )
6F-0?
60F-0?)
3F-01
10F-01 )
9F-ftl
70F-01 )
?
4
9
(^
4
(S
S
(5
7
(B
f,
(6
?.
(?
7
(7
1
( ]
4
(4
7
(6
1
(1
.OF*
.OF*
.2 OF
.1F +
.iOF
.7F +
.IOF
.4F*
.30F
.^F.+
.6 OF
.9F +
.40F
.1F +
.ftOF
.6E +
.^OF
.SF +
.ROF
.RF +
.SOF
.OF +
.C.OF
.SF *
.40F
01
+ 00)
01
+ 01)
00
-01)
00
-01)
00
-01)
00
-0 1 )
00
-on
01
+ 00 )
00
-01 )
00
-01 )
00
-01)
00
-01)
01
+ 00)
1
(1
3
9
(7
4
(4
3
(3
7
(7
7
(f>
3
(4
3
(5
2
(2
3
(5
4
(8
H
(9
.90F+00)
.20F*00)
,ftF+00
.20F-01)
.SF+00
.POF-01)
.?F + f)0
.40F-01)
.SF-01
.60F-02)
,4F. +00
.10F-01)
.9F+01
.90F+00)
,^F+QO
.70F-01)
.4F+no
."^OE-O 1 1
.3F+00
.60F-01)
,6r»00
.OOF-Ol )
. 3F + no
.40F-01 )
1 .RF + 00
(6.10F-01 )
1.5E*00
(2.80F-01 )
1 .6F + 00
(2.SOE-01)
fl. OF-01
(1.70E-01)
1.6F-0) .
(3.SOF-0?)
9.4F-01
(2. OOF-Ol)
5.8F+00
(?.OOE*00)
fl.OE-01
(2.70F.-01)
4.4F-01
(1.10F-01 )
1 .OF + 00
(3.10F.-01)
1 .?F + 00
(4. OOF-Ol )
4. OF-01
(2.70F-01)
1.8E+00
(8.00E-01
1.6E+00
(1.20F*00
6.6E+00
(l.30E*00
1 ,8E*00
(8.20E-01
6>.?E*00
(1,10F»00
9.2E*00
(2.10E»00
7.5F*00
(1.50F+00
2.2E+01
(6.80E*00
7.5E*00
(1.60E+00
?.3E*00
(4.60E-01
5.0E»00
(8.20E-01
5.8E+00
(1.10E*00
4 . 1E + 00
( 1 ,ftOE*00
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
*Results have been corrected for blank filter content. Values in parenthesis are the two-sigma
(95 percent confidence level) standard deviation based on counting errors. Statistical
considerations as discussed in Eadie and Bernhardt (1976). Blanks indicate no data.
-------
TABLE E-4. AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (In pCi/g) AT MESITA
OATF
00
ro
SAMPLF
1SR79R
1SRPOO
1 CRP02
1 c;RP04
1 ^RP06
1 ciRHOR
1 ^RQl 0
1 t;77R?
1^77fl6
1 ^77RR
] c;oqc;o
1 t;qqc^p
OM OFF
7S/12/04 7<5/i?/?Q
75/12/29 76/01/23
76/01/30 7*/0?/13
76/03/0? 76/03/2*
76/0^/26 76/04/30
76/04/30 76/Oc;/?H
76/OS/2R 74./Q6/2S
76/07/09 76/07/30
76/07/30 76/OR/27
76/OR/27 7^/m/Ol
76/1 n/PO 76/] 1 /?Q
76/ll/?0 76/1^/10
214IJ
9.0F-01
(1.40F-01 )
6.SF+00
(4.POF-01 )
3.2F+00
(3.30F-01 )
2.3F+00
(2.tiO(r-Ol )
1 .7F + 00
( 1 . 70^-ni )
2. 3E *00
(2.SOF-01 )
?. 7F »00
(2.40F-0 I )
2.SF+00
(3.70C--01)
2.0F*00
(2. TOF-ni )
1 .7F+00
(l.^O^-Ol )
3.9F*00
(3. 10^-01 )
1 .3F*01
( 1 .POF + 00)
?35U
4.5F-02
(3. 20F-02)
2.7F-01
(6.70F-02)
1 . K-01
(S.70F-02)
R.3F-0?
(4.60F-02)
7.1F-02
(3.20F-02)
R.3F-02
(4.90F-02)
1 .3^*00
(4.ROF-01 )
I_T 6.4F-0?
(«,.90F-02)
1 . 3F-OJ
(S.50F-02)
6.8F-02
(2.70F-0?)
1 .PF-01
(S.30F-02)
4. 7^-01
(P.40F-01 )
23«U
8.2E-01
(1 .60F-01 J
6.3F+00
(4.20F-01 )
3.2F+00
( 3.40F.-01 )
?.4F»00
(2.POF-01)
1 «ftF»00
< 1 .90F-01 )
?.4F. +00
(P.ftOF-01 )
?.7F. +00
(2.60F-01 )
2.26+00
(3.70F-01)
I .HE + 00
(P.40E-01 )
1 .6F+00
(1 .60K-01)
3.9F + 00
(3.30F.-01)
1 .1F + 01
(1 .10F+00)
230TH
2.1F+00
(2.30E-01)
2.6E+00
(2.30F-01)
2.1E-01
(1.10F-01)
2 .4F + 00
( 2 .40F.-0 1 )
1 »9F + OQ-
(1.60F-01)
^».9F-01
(1.10E-01)
2.7F+00
(2.40F.-01)
7.7F+00
(6.60F-01)
3.PF+00
(3.ROF-01)
1 .RF-01
(2.10E-02)
1 .2F + 00
(1.20F-01 )
3.PF+00
(5.90F-01 )
212TH
4.BE-01
(1.10E-01)
1.0F*00
(1.4QE-01)
l.OF-01
(7.60F-02)
7.0F-01
(1 .30F-01)
1.1F+00
(1.20F.-01)
3.1F-01
(9.10F-02)
1 .OF + 00
(l.SOE-01)
2. OF + 00
(3.40E-01 )
1.3F+00
(2.20E-01)
1 .2F-01
(1 .70E-02)
3.RE-0 1
(7.30F-02)
3. RF-01
(2.90F-01 )
226RA
1.8E+00
(5.30E-01)
2.7E+00
(5.60E-01)
3.1E+00
(6.50E-01)
2.3E+00
(6.20E-01)
2.1F+00
(3.90E-01)
2.5E+00
'(6.10E-01)
3.3F+00
(5.10F-01)
2.1E+01
(1 .70F + 00)
1.2E*00
(5.50E-01)
2.<4E + 00
(4.00E-01)
3.1F.+00
(A.30E-01)
2.4E+00
(l.SOF+00)
*Results have been corrected for blank filter content. Values in parenthesis are the two-sigma
(95 percent confidence level) standard deviation based on counting errors. Statistical
considerations as discussed in Eadie and Bernhardt (1976). Blanks indicate no data.
-------
TABLE E-5. AIR SAMPLING RESULTS* (in pCi/g) AT OLD LAGUNA
OATF
ON OFF
2341J
?3S'i
?3ftU
23?TH
326RA
1SR7P4 7S/12/OA
1SP7PR 76/01/30
1^R790 76/02/27
1S879? 76/03/26
1SP794 76/04/30
JSR796 76/05/2R
CO
£3 1CJ77R4 7^/07/02
1^7790 76/OR/Oft
1^7792 76/0«/?7
m9954 76/10/01
1599S6 76/10/2Q
1^995R 76/11/29
7S/12/29
76/0?/27
76/03/2*
76/04/30
76/QS/2*
76/06/25
76/07/30
76/0«/27
76/10/01
76/10/2^
76/1 1/29
76/1P/10
5.
(3.
3.
(2.
2.
(2.
1.
(2.
1.
(1.
2.
(3,
2.
(6.
6.
(9.
S.
(fl.
R.
(9.
5.
(^.
'4.
(4.
PF + 00
70C-01 )
*E + 00
ROF-01 )
5F+00
10F-01 )
9F + 00
opr-ol )
1F+01
00^+00 )
3E +00
10F-01 )
SF + 00
60F-01 )
PF + 00
40F-01 )
RF + 00
TOF-01 )
1F + 00
30F-01 )
3F + 01
^OF+no )
TF+01
1 OF + 00)
p.
(*.
«.
(•>.
*>.
(3.
*.
(1.
3.
(1.
1.
(7.
|_T
(I.
?.
( ? .
1 .
(1 .
3.
( 2 .
1 .
(7.
1.
(«.
4F-01
SOF-0?)
7F-02
70^-02)
4F-02
OOF.-02)
2F-02
4nr-o?)
RF-01
ROF-Ol )
3F-01
^•OF-02)
1 .SF.-O 1
70F-01 )
RF-01
10F-01 )
7F-() 1
SOF-01 )
RF-01
10F-01)
2F+00
l nF-o \ )
OF+00
20F-01 )
S.3E+00
(3.ROr_nl )
3.6E+00
(P.90F-01)
?.?K +00
(P.10F-01)
1 .PF+00
(2.20F-01 )
1 . 1 F + 0 1
(l .ooF + no)
2.0E+00
(3,60F-01 )
2 . 6 F * 0 0
(R.30F-01 )
S.7F+00
(1 .OOF + 00)
S.4F+QO
9.4F +00
( 1 . 10F+00)
S.7F+01
(4.ROF+00)
4.SF+01
C'.30F +00)
2
(1
2
(1
1
(3
2
(2
3
(5
2
(3
4
(9
f,
( ]
<=)
(9
4
(*
1
(?
9
(1
.1F+00
.ROE-01 )
,4F-n i
.90E-02)
.9F-01
.60F-02)
.3F-01
.ROF-02)
.6F+00
.QOF-01 )
.4F+00
.20F-01)
. fiF + 00
.40F-01)
.4F-01
.30F-01 )
.QF+no
.40F-01 )
.AF+00
. pOF-Ol )
.5K+01
.10F+00)
.9F+no
.QOF+00)
R.3F-01
(1 .20F-01 )
6.9F-Q2
(l.OOE-02)
7 t4E-02
(2.20E-02)
1.1E-01
(P.OOE-02)
l .^F + on
(3.SOE-02)
1 .2F + 00
(?.^OE-01 )
2.1F+00
(6.40F-01)
6.4F-02
(6.40E-0?)
R.7F-01
(3.30F-01 )
4.9F-01
(2.60F-01 )
1 .SF + OO
(R.30F-On
1 .1F + 00
(7.70F-01 )
1
(3
?
(4
2
(4
2
(5
3
(1
1
(9
2
(2
2
(4
3
(2
3
(2
1
<6
4
(4
.1E*00
.70F-01)
•6E+00
.60F-01)
.4F+00
.10F-01)
.4E+00
.90E-01)
.6E+00
.60F+00)
.7F+00
t<»OE-On
.4E+00
.SOE+00)
.RE+01
.40E+00)
.7E+00
.70E+00)
.9E+00
.OOE+00)
.4E+01
.30E+00)
.1F+00
.10E+00)
*Resu1ts have been corrected for blank filter content. Values in parenthesis are the two-sigma
(95 percent confidence level) standard deviation based on counting errors. Statistical
considerations as discussed in Eadie and Bernhardt (1976). Blanks indicate no data.
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Insmtctions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
Technical Note ORP/LV-79-2
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Ambient Airborne Radioactivity Measurements in the
Vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit Uranium Mine,
New Mexico
5. REPORT DATE
January 1979
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Gregory G. Eadie, C. William Fort and Mala L. Beard
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND AOORESS
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
Office of Radiation Programs - Las Vegas Facility
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND AOORESS
Same as above
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Final
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
16. ABSTRACT
This report discusses the results of several radiological surveys conducted in
the vicinity of the Jackpile Open Pit Uranium Mine in New Mexico. During June 1976,
ambient radon-222 concentrations were measured at eleven locations, seven of which
appear to have been at representative background radon levels - averaging 0.50 ±
0.033 pCi/1. The other four locations had average radon levels in excess of this
typical background level; however, the highest measured radon concentration was 2.7
pCi/1. The arithmetic average ambient radon progeny working level obtained indoors
at the Laguna Tribal Building appeared to be at a representative background level of
0.0049 ± 0.00045 WL. The arithmetic average ambient working levels obtained at the
Paguate Community Center and the Jackpile Housing were 0.035 ± 0.0038 and 0.015 ±
0.0025 WL, respectively. Ambient airborne particulate radioactivity concentrations
measured outdoors at Old Laguna appear to be at typical background levels; however,
other locations exhibited higher annual average concentrations for the naturally-
occurring radionuclides.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. COSATI Field/Croup
Radon
Natural radioactivity
Radiation
Surveys
Airborne radioactivity
Uranium Mining
Environmental Surveys
Radiation Surveys
1807
1808
0705
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Release to Public
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
Unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
93
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
Unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (Rev. 4-77) PREVIOUS EDITION is OBSOLETE
-------
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Radiation Programs
Us Vegas Facility
P.O. Box 15027
Us Vegas NV89114
Official Business
Penalty for Private Use
S300
Postage and /•" _ -\
Fees Paid
Environmental
Protection
Agency
EPA 335
>0 1
^aP
^T
US.MAJL I
L *
Third Class
Bulk
------- |