OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY RADIOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE FORMER

P

LI

I

-

CI

L

-

I

111

Ir

LI

C

C

c

c

c

Ic

c

L

ORNL/RASA-90/8

OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY

RADIOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE FORMER BAKER BROTHERSJNC.

SITE, 2551-2555 HARLEAU PLACE, TOLEDO,OHIO

(BTOOOl)

MABAGEO BY MABAGEO BY MAUTIH MARIETTA ENBGY SYSTEM, INC. AWTIH MAftIETTA ENBGY SYSTEM, INC. FOR THE UNITE0 STATES FOR THE UNITE0 STATES OEPARTMENT OF EtdERGY OEPARTMENT OF EtdERGY

R. D. Foley L. M. Floyd

_-.

This report has been reproduced directly from the best available copy.

Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the Office of Scientific and Techni- cal Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37631; prices available from (615) 5766401. PTS 6266401.

Available to the public from the National Technical Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, 5285 Port Royal Rd., Springfield, VA 22161.

I 1

I I This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, com- pleteness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process dis- closed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily consti- tute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.

ORNLIRASA-9018

HEALTH AND SAFETY RESEARCH DIVISION

Waste Management Research and Development Programs (Activity No. EX 20 20 01 0; ADS3170000)

RADIOLOGICAL SURVIZY OF THE FORMER BAKER BROTHERSJNC. SITE, 2551-2555 ILmRLEAu PLACE,

TOLEDO, OHIO (BTOOOl)

R. D. Foley and L. M. Floyd

Date Published - March 1992

Investigation Team

R. E. Swaja - Measurement Applications and Development Manager W. D. Cottrell - Project Director

R. D. Foley - Field Survey Supervisor

Survey Team Members

A. C. Butler* D. A. Rose R. L. Coleman W. Winton R. A. Mathis A. Wall0 III?

M. E. Ward*

*Don Stone and Associates, Inc. TU. S. Department of Energy

Work performed by the MEASUREMENT APPLICATIONS AND DEVELOPMENT GROUP

Prepared by the OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY

Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37831-6285 managed by

MARTIN MARIETTA ENERGY SYSTEMS, INC. for the

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY under contract DE-ACOS-840R21400

CONTENTS

LISTOFFIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v

LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix

AF3STRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi

INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

SURVEY METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

SURVEYRESULTS.. ................................................ 3 Outdoor Survey Results ............................................. 4

Gamma Exposure Rate Measurements ................................ 4 Biased Soil Samples ............................................. 4 Systematic Roof Debris Samples .................................... 5 Auger Hole Soil Samples and Gamma Logging ......................... 5 Alpha and Beta-Gamma Activity Levels on the Roof ..................... 7

Indoor Survey Results .............................................. 7 Gamma Exposure Rate Measurements ................................ 7 Systematic Dust and Debris Samples ................................. 7 Alpha and Beta-Gamma Activity Levels ............................... 8 Air Samples .................................................... 8

SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDINGS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

. . . 111

LIST OF FIGURES

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

Site map of the former Baker Brothers, Inc., in 1938 at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Current site map of the REMS, Inc., and Rehkopf properties at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Northwestward view of Building Area No. 1 on the left, Building No. 14 on the right, and the entrance to Building Area No. 12A in between, at REMS, Inc., 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Eastward view of Building No. 14, showing contaminated site at sample location B2, at REMS, Inc., 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . .

Westward view of Building Area No. 6 on the left (with metal siding) and the entrance to Building Area No. 12A on the right at REMS, Inc., 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Southwestward view of Building Area No. 6 at REMS, Inc., 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Eastward view of Building Area No. 7 on the left and Building Area No. 12A on the right at Doug Beet Company, 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Westward view of Building No. 2, the former Power House, at Doug Beet Company, 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Westward view in Building Area No. 3, showing used motors, at Doug Beet Company, 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . : . . . . . .

Eastward view in Building Area No. 5, showing contaminated shelves on the east wall of the mezzanine at Doug Beet Company, 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Enlargement of the courtyard in the northwestern corner of the property at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Northeastward view from the doorway of Building Area No. 8, showing the pallet stack next to survey team members, at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pan A of Fig. 11, showing the southern entrance to Building Area No. 8 at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Pan B of Fig. 11, showing the southwestern section of this courtyard at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

V

15 Pan C of Fig. 11, showing the northwestern section this courtyard at 2551-2555 Har- leau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16 Pan D of Fig. 11, showing the northern section of this courtyard at 2551-2555 Har- leau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

17 Pan E of Fig. 11, showing the northeastern corner of this courtyard at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

18 Pan F of Fig. 11, showing the northeastern section and Building Area No. 8B at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

19 Pan G of Fig. 11, showing the eastern section and Building Area No. 8A at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . _ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

20 Pan H of Fig. 11, showing the southeastern section of this courtyard at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21 Northeastward view of the concrete wall and bunkers in this courtyard next to the railroad tracks at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . .

22 Gamma radiation levels @R/h) measured outdoors at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

23 Enlargement of the northwestern courtyard at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl), showing gamma radiation levels (@R/h) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

24 Gamma radiation levels &R/h) and debris sampling locations on the roof at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

25 Soil sampling locations at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . .

26 Enlargement of the northwestern courtyard at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl), showing the locations of biased soil samples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

27 Closeup of soil layers in biased sample hole Bll (Fig. 26) showing the 4-inch, greenish-yellow layer under the top soil (2 in. below surface) at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

28 Closeup of greenish-yellow soil removed from biased sample hole Bll (Fig. 26) at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

29 Gamma radiation levels &R/h) measured indoors at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

30 Air, smear, dust, and debris sampling locations on the first floor at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

25

26

27

2%

29

30

31

32

3.3

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

vi

31 Smear, dust, and debris sampling locations on the second floor at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

32 Gamma profile for auger hole 1 at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio . . . . .







39 Gamma profile for auger hole 10 at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio . . . .







46 Gamma profile for auger hole 17 at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio . . . . 56








41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

vii

LIST OF TABLES

1 DOE guidelines for protection against radiation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64

2 Average background radiation levels for the Ohio area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66

3 Concentrations of radionuclides in outdoor soil samples at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

4 Concentrations of radionuclides from roof and indoor dust and debris samples at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

5 Alpha and beta-gamma activity levels measured on the roof and indoors at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BT0001) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

ix

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Research for this project was sponsored by the Division of Facility and Site Decommis- sioning Projects, U.S. Department of Energy, under contract DE-AC05-840R21400 with Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc. The authors wish to acknowledge the support of A. Wall0 III of the U.S. Department of Energy. The authors also appreciate the contribu- tions of L. S. Corrill of the Publications Division; J. E Allred, D. A. Rose, D. A. Roberts, and T R. Stewart of the Measurement Applications and Development Group; and A. C. Butler, G. Cofer, and M. E. Ward, Don Stone and Associates, Inc., for participation in the collection, analyses, editing, and reporting of data for this survey.

xi

ABSTRACT

At the request of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), a team from Oak Ridge National Laboratory conducted investigative radiological surveys at the REMS, Inc., and the Doug Beet Company, 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl) in 1988. The purpose of the surveys was to determine whether the property was contaminated with radioactive residues, principally 238U, as a result of work contracted to the Manhattan Engi- neer District (MED). The survey included gamma scans; directly measured alpha, beta, and gamma radiation levels; transferable contamination levels; and soil, dust, debris, and air sampling for radionuclide analyses. The survey and sampling covered accessible portions of the exterior ground surface, roof, and interiors of buildings.

Results of the surveys demonstrated four general areas having radionuclide concentrations in excess of the DOE Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program criteria for 238U outdoors and as surface contamination on shelves in one building.

. . . x111

..- -.

I-

--

R A D IO L O G ICAL S U R V E Y O F TI-X E F O R M E R B A K E R B R O T H E R S J N C . S ITE , 2 5 5 1 - 2 5 5 5 H A R L E A U P L A C E ,

T O L E D O , O H IO ( B T O O O l)*

I N T R O D U C T IO N

U n d e r jur isdict ion o f th e A rmy Corps o f E n g i n e e r s in th e ear ly 1 9 4 O s , th e M a n h a tta n E n g i n e e r District ( M E D ) w a s es tab l i shed as th e l e a d a g e n c y in th e d e v e l o p m e n t o f nuc lea r e n e r g y fo r d e fe n s e re la ted projects. R a w m a ter ia ls c o n ta in ing u r a n i u m o res w e r e p rocured , s tored, a n d p rocessed in to var ious u r a n i u m ox ides, salts, a n d m e tals. Fabr icators w e r e con- t racted as n e e d e d to fo r m (rol l a n d m a c h i n e ) th e m e ta l in to var ious s h a p e s . A t c o n tract te r m i n a tio n , si tes u s e d by c o n tractors w e r e d e c o n ta m i n a te d acco rd ing to th e cr i ter ia a n d h e a l th gu ide l i nes th e n in u s e . T h e rad io log ica l cr i ter ia fo r re leas ing si tes to unrest r ic ted u s e w e r e genera l l y si te speci f ic a n d c lear ly d e fin e d . In s o m e instances, h o w e v e r , d o c u m e n ta tio n w a s lim ite d o r nonex is ten t a n d cond i t ions a t th e s e si tes w e r e u n k n o w n . There fore , it w a s necessary to reeva lua te th e current rad io log ica l cond i t ions a t th e s e si tes u n d e r th e U .S . D e p a r tm e n t o f E n e r g y ( D O E ) Former ly U t i l ized S ites R e m e d i a l A c tio n P r o g r a m ( F U S R A P ) .

Du r ing th e ear ly a n d m id -1940s B a k e r B rothers, Inc., in T o l e d o , O h io, m a c h i n e d u r a n i u m s lugs f rom ro l led stock u n d e r s u b c o n tract to th e M E D .’ This commerc ia l p roper ty cons is ted o f severa l bu i ld ings loca ted a t th e in tersect ion o f Ha r l eau P lace a n d P o s t S treet, as s h o w n in th e 1 9 3 8 si te m a p in Fig. 1 . T h e bu i ld ings w e r e e rec ted in th e 1 9 2 0 s o f br ick wi th a saw- too th roof c o n fig u r a tio n a n d concre te floors, wi th th e e x c e p tio n o f th e P o s t S treet Bu i ld ing . A rea N o . 1 in th is bu i l d ing n o w h a s a l u m i n u m sid ing, a n d A rea N o s . 3 A a n d 4 h a v e w o o d e n floors. A ll exter ior g r o u n d cover is e i ther aspha l t o r concrete , e x c e p t in th e dirt cour tyard nor th o f Bu i l d i ng A rea N o . 8 . T h e B a k e r B rothers assets w e r e e v e n tua l ly l iqu ida ted a n d th e mach ine ry a n d e q u i p m e n t so ld a t a u c tio n .

F igu re 2 s h o w s th e current layout o f th is site. Th ree o f th e bu i ld ings a t th is locat ion arc current ly o w n e d by R o m a n o ff In d u s tr ies a n d occup ied by e i ther th e D o u g B e e t C o m p a n y or th e R E M S , Inc., a d iv is ion o f S iemens-Al l is . T h e first bu i ld ing , cons is t ing o f A rea N o s . 1 , 3 , 3 A , 4 , 5 , a n d 6 , is loca ted a t 1 0 0 0 P o s t S treet. Th is bu i l d ing h a s 4 5 ,0 0 0 - ft2 a n d is u s e d fo r o ff ices a n d electr ic m o tor repairs . Bu i l d ings 3 a n d 6 w e r e c o m p l e te ly re fu rb ished fo l l ow ing a fire. A rea N o s . 1 ,3 , a n d 6 a re l e a s e d to R E M S , Inc.; th e rest o f th is bu i l d ing p lus th e o the r bu i ld ings a re al l l e a s e d to D o u g B e e t. Bu i l d i ng N o . 1 4 , a t 2 5 5 1 Ha r l eau P lace, h a s 8 0 0 0 - ft2 a n d is a two-story, u n o c c u p i e d structure fo rmer ly u s e d fo r o ffices. Bu i l d i ng N o . 2 is a two-story, lO ,O O O -ft2 electr ic m o tor s h o p fo rmer ly ca l led th e P o w e r H o u s e .

*The survey was pe r fo rmed by m e m b e r s of the Measu remen t Appl icat ions a n d Deve lopmen t G r o u p of the Heal th a n d S a fety Research Divis ion at O a k R idge Nat iona l Labora to ry u n d e r D O E contract D E - A C O S - 8 4 0 R 2 1 4 0 0 .

1

I ..-- -~_._- - - ~ .. - _ _ _

A fourth building, located at 2555 Harleau Place, is owned by John Rehkopf but leased to the same used motor brokerage, the Doug Beet Company. This building is 40,000-ft2 and consists of Area Nos. 7 through 12k Figures 3 through 10 and 12 through 21 are current photographs of the former Baker Brothers site, with various exterior and two interior views. Figure 11 is an enlargement of the courtyard in the northwest corner of the property.

Baker Brothers machined uranium metal rods into slugs for both Clinton Semi-Works and the Hanford Pile. The MED contract for this operation was temporary and supposedly discontinued when the Hanford facilities were installed. The uranium rods to be machined by Baker Brothers were first extruded by Revere Copper and Brass Corporation. The amount of material machined by Baker Brothers was somewhere between 90 and 300 tons.

According to an old Metallurgical Laboratory Health Division report which was issued following a visit to Baker Brothers on June 21, 1943, heavy fumes were produced by the four lathes used in machining the rods. 2 The pyrophoric uranium chips would spontaneously ignite in the lathe pans and scrap metal containers. An electrostatic precipitator was installed to control the fumes. The cooling system on each of the four lathes was increased to allow greater volumes of lubricant to flow over the turning operation. Containers of scrap metal and the turnings were periodically stored in the machining room and other areas of the plant for periods of several days to several weeks before shipment.

Because the Baker Brothers uranium metal fabrication was apparently related to Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) activities, verification of existing conditions was needed to determine whether the site met current radiological guidelines. The principal radionuclide of concern is 238U.

On June 5, 1989, the preliminary radiological survey at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio, was conducted by members of the Measurement Applications and Development Group of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) at the request of DOE. The survey and sampling at this site covered accessible portions of the plant indoors and outdoors, as indicated in Figs. 22 through 26 and 29 through 31. Figures 27 and 28 are photographs of soil in the northwest corner of the property. In June of 1990, the survey team returned for the subsurface drilling of auger samples. Interior emphasis was on the floors and overhead beams in all buildings. Exterior emphasis was on the ground surface and subsurface, as well as the roofs of buildings. The lOO,OOO-gallon underground cistern behind Building No. 7 was not surveyed. The purpose of this survey was to obtain sufficient radiological measurements for DOE Headquarters to determine whether the site should be designated for remedial action or elimated from FUSRAP

SURVEY METHODS

The radiological survey included: (1) a surface gamma scan in all accessible areas of the property outdoors and indoors, as well as sections of the roof on all buildings except Nos. 2 and 14; (2) direct gamma exposure measurements using a pressurized ionization chamber (PIC) at one meter above the surface; (3) collection and radionuclide analyses of indoor floor debris and overhead beam dust samples, as well as outdoor soil samples; (4) directly measured and removable alpha and beta-gamma activity levels indoors and outdoors; (5) outdoor auger

2

soil samples and gamma profiles of auger holes; and (6) air sampling in Building Area Nos. 1, 3, and 3A. The survey methods followed the basic plan outlined in a correspondence from W. D. Cottrell to A. J. Whitman.3

Using a portable NaI gamma scintillation meter (No. 3490-51SG), a gamma scan was performed indoors in the accessible areas of all buildings, as well as outdoors and on the roofs, indicated in Figs. 22, 24, and 29. The detectors were held approximately three inches above the surface, and ranges of measurements were recorded and then converted to ,uR/h. If the surface gamma levels were elevated outdoors, biased and auger soil samples were taken from the areas with the highest gamma radiation levels (Figs. 25 and 26). However, not all auger holes were drilled at elevated surface gamma locations. Because NaI scintillators are energy dependent, measurements of gamma radiation levels are normalized to PIC measurements to determine gamma exposure rates. PIC measuremnet locations are shown in Fig. 25. Systematic dust and debris samples were taken indoors and on the roof at various locations, irrespective of gamma radiation levels (Figs. 24, 30, and 31). The samples were analyzed for 226Ra, 232Th, and 2% content. Indoor air samples were also taken and counted for gross alpha levels (Fig. 30).

To define the extent of possible subsurface soil contamination, auger holes were drilled to depths of approximately 2 m. A plastic pipe was placed in each hole, and a NaI scintillation probe was lowered inside the pipe. The probe was encased in a lead shield with a horizontal row of collimating s!its on the side. This collimation allows measurement of gamma radiation intensities resulting from contamination within small fractions of the hole depth. Measurements were usually made at 15- or 30-cm intervals. If the gamma readings in the hole were elevated, a soil sample was scraped from the wall of the auger hole at the point showing the highest gamma radiation level. The auger hole loggings were used to select locations where further soil sampling would be useful. A split-spoon sampler was used to collect subsurface samples at known depths. In some auger holes, a combination of split-spoon sampling and side-wall scraping was used to collect samples.

Direct alpha, beta, and gamma radiation measurements were taken outdoors on the roof of Building Nos. 1, 3, 3A, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 9, and indoors in all buildings on various overhead beams, floors, walls, storage bins, and ledges. A beer-mug type scintillation probe (ZnS) with an ORNL meter was used to measure alpha activity levels, and a Geiger-Mueller pancake type probe with a Bicron meter was used for the beta-gamma dose rates. Smears from loo-cm2 areas were taken at some of the indoor and roof locations to establish removable alpha and beta-gamma activity levels. Smear sample locations are shown in Figs. 24, 30, and 31. Comprehensive descriptions of all survey methods and instrumentation have been presented in another report.4

SURVEY RESULTS

Applicable DOE guidelines are summarized in Table 1.5V6t7 The normal background radiation levels for the Ohio area are presented in Table 2.8 These data are provided for comparison with survey results presented in this section. All direct measurement results presented in this report are gross readings; background radiation levels have not been subtracted.

3

Similarly, background concentrations have not been subtracted from radionuclide concentrations measured in soil and dust/debris samples. Removable radioactivity levels (smears) are reported in disintegrations per minute (dpm) per 100 cm2 with background subtracted.

Outdoor Survey Results

Gamma Exposure Rate Measurements

Gamma radiation levels measured during a scan of the property surface outdoors are given in Fig. 22. Gamma exposure rates generally ranged from 6 to 13 pR/h on the ground surface. Several elevated areas were found. The highest value of 490 pR/h was discovered in the enclosed courtyard located in the northwest corner of the property. An enlargement of this area is provided in Fig. 23. Radiation levels in this courtyard range from 6 to 49OpR/h, with the extent of possible contamination indicated by crosshatching in Fig. 23. Multiple elevated spots were found. The courtyard was overgrown with vegetation as shown in Figs. 12 through 21. Biased soil samples B4 through B12 were collected in this area. The second area of elevated gamma levels was found on the northeast side of Building No. 14, with a maximum measurement of 130 ,uR/h. Biased soil sample B2 and auger samples A10 through A14, Al%, A19, A21, and A27 were all collected from this region. The third area of contamination was discovered in the southeast corner of the property, at the intersection of Harleau Place and Post Street. The gamma radiation in this area measured 32 pR/h in this spot. Biased soil sample B3 and auger samples A3 through A6 were taken from this area. The fourth elevated area was located on the fence line just east of Building Area No. 1, with radiation levels ranging from 15 to 18 pR/h. Auger samples A2 and A7 were taken from here.

The accessible roof areas of Building Nos. 1, 3 through 6, and 7 through 12A were surveyed (Fig. 24). Gamma levels on these roofs measured 6 to 18 pR/h. Slight elevations in gamma levels were found generally over all the concrete and asphalt areas of the plant; some of this can be attributed to naturally occurring radioactive substances present in bricks, concrete, granite, and other such materials used in paving and building construction.

Biased Soil Samples

Biased soil samples (B) were collected from various locations on the property outdoors for radionuclide analyses; laboratory results are provided in Table 3. Biased soil samples are taken from those regions exhibiting elevated levels of gamma radiation. Their locations are shown in Fig. 25 as Bl through B12. Concentrations of radium, thorium, and uranium in these samples ranged from 0.45 to < 11.65 pCi/g, from 0.35 to < 17.15 pCi/g, and from 2.91 to 160,000 pCi/g, respectively. Although no specific guideline for uranium concentration has been derived for this site, concentrations of 35 to 40 pCi/g have been applied at FUSRAP sites elsewhere (Table 1). However, radium and thorium values in most of the biased samples in Table 3 were near or below the background levels of these radionuclides found in the Ohio area (Table 2). These values correspond to the gamma levels measured in this parking area, shown in the PIC-10 area of Fig. 22. The location of Bl was selected and sampled because

4

of the slightly elevated gamma measurement found in this area. Sample Bl contained a high percentage of coal ash. The ratio of 238U to 226Ra in this sample indicates that these two radionuclides are in equilibrium and therefore are most likely a natural occurrence. Coal ash usually has slightly elevated levels of naturally occurring uranium, radium, and thorium which are concentrated during coal combustion. Nevertheless, several auger samples (A15 through Al7 and A28) were taken to determine the nature and depth of possible contamination.

Samples B4 through B12 were all taken from the courtyard in the northwest corner of the property. The courtyard contained several areas which had elevated levels of uranium-238, with sample BlOA having the highest value (38,000 pCi/g). Samples B5, B6A throu h B6B, and B7A through B7D were collected from the PIG3 area in the courtyard, with 253 U values peaking at 5500 pCi/g, 790 pCi/g, and 2100 pCi/g, respectively. In the corner of this courtyard near Building No. 8, sample B9A produced uranium levels of 1300 pCi/g. Figures 27 and 28 show closeups of greenish-yellow soil taken from Bll. The greenish-yellow color is typical for some uranium compounds. The uranium concentration in sample BllA was 11,000 pCi/g. Samples (B12A through B12C) were taken inside one of the concrete bunkers in this courtyard, which contained a maximum uranium concentration of 4100 pCi/g in B12A. Because the courtyard was completely enclosed and therefore excluded the drilling rig, no auger samples were taken from this area. However, hand sampling indicated the contamination was in the top few centimeters of soil.

The highest concentrations of uranium were found in sample B2, northwest of Building No. 14 in the PIC-11 area, with a value of 160,000 pCi/g. Several auger samples were collected in this area (A10 through A14, Al8 through A19, A21, and A27). Near the corner of Post Street and Harleau Place, the PIC-9 area had a uranium level of 360 pCi/g in sample B3A. Auger samples A3 through A6 were taken from this area.

Systematic Roof Debris Samples

Two roof debris samples were collected for radionuclide analyses; laboratory results are provided in Table 4. The sample locations are shown in Fig. 24 as D6 on Building Area No. 3 and as D7 on Building Area No. 8. Concentrations of radium, thorium, and uranium in these two samples ranged from 0.30 to 0.65 pCi/g, from 0.20 to 0.39 pCi/g, and from 1.09 to 1.31 pCi/g, respectively. Both samples were below DOE guidelines (Table l), as well as below normal soil background levels for the Ohio area (Table 2).

Auger Hole Soil Samples and Gamma Logging

Varying thicknesses of subsurface soil were sampled from depths of 0 to 225 cm in auger holes (A) drilled at 26 separate locations indicated in Fig. 25. The results of analyses of these samples are given in Table 3. Concentrations of radium, thorium, and uranium in these samples ranged from 0.49 to 4.46 pCi/g, 0.10 to 2.63 pCi/g, and 0.50 to 1600 pCi/g, respectively. The highest concentration of uranium (1600 pCi/g) found in the auger holes was located on northwest side of Building No. 14 (PIC-11 area) in sample AlOA between 0 and 15 cm. This auger hole was drilled to a depth of 180 cm; significantly elevated uranium concentrations were found down to 150 cm. Peak uranium concentrations were between

5

60 and 75 cm (220 pCi/g), 120 and 135 cm (680 pCi/g), and 135 and 150 cm (130 pCi/g). This area corresponds to the highest biased sample concentration of 238U, which measured 160,000 pCi/g in B2. Other auger samples collected in this PIC area were All through A14, Al8 through A19, A21, and A27. Of these samples, Al 1 through Al4 also had elevated spots of uranium-238 above the DOE guidelines (Table 1). Though not as concentrated as in AlO, these spot values ranged from 17.17 to 49.05 pCi/g for uranium (Table 3).

In the PIC-9 area at the southeast corner of the property, auger samples were taken from four holes (A3 through A6). Of these, samples A3A through A3C and sample A3E were all above previously used DOE guideline values for uranium. The peak value for this hole was 570 pCi/g; the hole was contaminated to a depth of 75 cm, with a value of 140 pCi/g at this depth. The other three holes had no significant concentrations of radionuclides. Two auger holes (A2 and A7) were drilled just east Building Area No. 1, one inside the fence and one just outside the fence. Both of these holes were contaminated with 238U, hole A2 producing a peak value of 180 pCi/g and hole A7, 140 pCi/g. Auger holes Al, A8, A9, Al5 through A17, A22 through A25, and A28 presented no significant concentrations of radionuclides. Of these holes, the maximum radionuclide concentration was in sample A15A with a value of 5.20 pCi/g for uranium.

Gamma logging was performed in 25 of the 27 auger holes to characterize and further define the extent of possible contamination. Number A20 was skipped over and never used. Two locations, A26 and A27, refused the auger near the surface. The logging technique used here is not radionuclide specific. However, logging data, in conjunction with soil analyses data, may be used to estimate regions of elevated radionuclide concentrations in auger holes when compared with background levels for the area. Following a comparison of these data, it appears that any shielded scintillator measurements of 1000 counts per minute (cpm) (or unshielded scintillator measurements of 6000 cpm) or greater generally indicate the presence of elevated concentrations of 226Ra and/or 232Th. Shielded scintillator data from the gamma profiles of the logged auger holes are graphically represented in Figs. 32 through 53.

Auger holes A2, A7, and A25 were logged with an unshielded probe. Of these three, measurements in hole A25, which was drilled to a depth of 0.6 m south of Building No. 2, were all below 6000 cpm (unshielded). Unshielded measurements in auger holes A2 and A7, which were taken just east of Building Area No. 1, were both elevated, recording 17,000 cpm at a depth of 0.15 m in A2 and 12,000 cpm at the same depth in A7. Gamma levels fell off to 7000 cpm and 7500 cpm at maximum depths of 0.9 m and 0.8 m, respectively for A2 and A7. Auger holes A10 and Al 1, in the PIC-11 area, produced the highest shielded measurements of 2614 cpm and 2777 cpm at the surface, respectively, falling to approximately 1000 cpm at or near 0.3 m and continuing to decline to the 700s at maximum depths of 1.4 m and 1.5 m, respectively. Other auger holes drilled in PIC-11 area (Al2 through A14, Al8 through A19, and A21) were all near or below 1000 cpm.

Of the four auger holes (A3 through A6) drilled in the PIC-9 area, only A3 had elevated gamma levels. Drilled near the southeast corner of the property, Hole A3 produced a maximum recording of 1740 cpm at a depth of 0.5 m, thereafter decreasing, with final levels in the 600s and 700s toward the bottom of the hole (1.2 m). Of the four auger holes (Al5 through Al7 and A28) in the PIC-10 area, only Al7 was elevated above 1000 cpm with any significance. The maximum level recorded in this hole was 1203 cpm at 0.15 m; gamma measurements declined sharply below this depth to the 5OOs, rising back to the 700s at the

6

bottom of the hole (1.7 m). The six remaining auger holes (Al, A8, A9, and A22 through A24), drilled in the PIC-6, PIC-7, and PIC-8 areas, were all near or below 1000 cpm. These findings support both the gamma scans and the soil data analyses for this property.

Alpha and Beta-Gamma Activity Levels on the Roof

Measurements of direct and removable radioactivity levels were taken from accessible roof areas (Building Area Nos. 4, 6, 7, and S), as shown in Fig. 24. The results of these measurements are given in Table 5. All direct alpha measurements on the accessible roof areas were well below the DOE average guideline of 5000 dpm/lOO cm2 for uranium alpha emitters (Table l).* All direct beta-gamma measurements were also below the DOE guideline of 0.20 mrad/h averaged over not more than 1 m2 (Table 1).

Nine smear samples were obtained from the same areas of the roof; their locations are indicated in Fig. 24 as circled numbers; results of analyses are given in Table 5. Smears taken from the roof showed all measurements of removable alpha contamination from a lOO-cm2 area were below the minimum detectable activity (MDA) of 10 dpm for alpha; both alpha and beta-gamma were well below the DOE guideline of 1000 dpm/lOO cm2 for removable uranium contamination (Table 1).

Indoor Survey Results

Gamma Exposure Rate Measurements

Gamma radiation levels measured on overhead beams, shelves, and during floor scans inside all buildings are given in Fig. 29. Gamma exposure rates generally ranged from 5 to 29 pR/b in Building Area Nos. 1 and 3 through 6, from 18 to 32 pR/‘h in Building 2, from 5 to 18 pR/h in Building Area Nos. 7 through 12A, and from 10 to 13 pR/h in Building 14. The highest radiation levels were generated by the firebrick and brick walls in Building Area Nos. 1 and 5, measuring 29 pR/h, and Building No. 2, measuring 32 pR/h (Fig. 29). The slight elevations in gamma levels are typical of the naturally occurring radioactive substances present in bricks, concrete, granite, and other such materials used in paving and building construction. Otherwise, none of the indoor gamma measurements were elevated above DOE guideline values (Table 1).

Systematic Dust and Debris Samples

Eleven dust and debris samples from overhead beams, mezzanines, and floors were systematically collected for radionuclide analyses; laboratory results are provided in Table 4. The sample locations are shown in Figs. 30 and 31, as Dl through D5, Dll through D15, and

*The instrument-specific minimum detectable activity (MDA) for directly measured and removable alpha radiation levels are 60 and 20 dpm/lOO cm’, respectively. For directly measured and removable beta-gamma radiation the respective MDKs are 0.01 mrad/h and 200 dpm/lOO cm*.

7

D20. Concentrations of radium, thorium, and uranium in these samples ranged from 0.22 to 0.80 pCi/g, from 0.22 to 0.49 pCi/g, and from 0.81 to 5400 pCi/g, respectively. The highest radionuclide concentrations were found in debris sample D2 in the mezzanine shelves of Building Area No. 5, with a uranium concentration of 5400 pCi/g. Other debris samples from this area (Dll through DlS) produced radionuclide levels near or below normal background levels for the Ohio area (Table 2) and well below DOE guidelines (Table 1).

Alpha and Beta-Gamma Activity Levels

Measurements of direct and removable radioactivity levels were taken near or in the same vicinity as the dust and debris samples, indicated as circled numbers in Figs. 30 and 31. The results of these measurements are given in Table 5. Of the 73 sample locations on both floor levels, only four (Nos. 28 through 30 and 48) produced any significant anomalies. All four were from the same shelves as debris sample D2. Sample location 28 had directly measurable alpha levels of 1900 dpmi100cm2 and direct beta-gamma levels of 2.25 mrad/h. Sample location 29 had direct alpha levels of 5400 dpm/100cm2 and direct beta-gamma levels of 0.03 mrad/h. Sample locations 30 and 48 had direct beta-gamma levels of 7 mrad/h and 2 to 5 mrad/h, res ectively. Only location 29 exceeded the DOE average residual value of 5000 dpm/lOO cm P for uranium alpha emitters (Table 1). Sample locations 28, 30, and 48 were in excess of the DOE surface dose rate limit of 0.20 mrad/h averaged over not more than 1 m2 (Table 1). With the exception of these four samples (28, 29, 30, and 48) all other direct alpha and beta-gamma measurements were below the DOE guidelines.

Seventy-three smear samples were obtained from the same areas, indicated in Figs. 30 and 31 as circled numbers. Analyses of these smears (Table 5 removable alpha and beta-gamma radiation from a loo-cm 1

showed all measurements of area were below the DOE

guideline value of 1000 dpm/lOO cm2 for removable uranium (Table l), with the exception of smear 48. This sample produced removable alpha levels of 1600 dpm/lOO cm’ and removable beta-gamma levels 2900 dpm/lOO cm2. Both were above DOE guidelines.

Air Samples

Six indoor air samples were collected in Building Area Nos. 1, 3, and 3A. The locations of the air sampling instruments are indicated in Fig. 30 as Zl through 26. Samples were taken 1.5 m above floor level (breathing zone) in each of these three building areas to measure airborne activity in their vicinities. Analysis of air samples for 238U exhibits concentrations less than the MDA.*

*The MDA for “*l-J is less than 3% of the guideline value of 1.0 E-13 pCi/ml, from the U.S. DOE Order 5400.5, April l!WO, via inhaled air, Y-Class.

SIGNIFICANCE OF FINDINGS

Survey results of soil, dust, and debris sample analyses and radiation measurements taken at 2551-2555 Harleau Place revealed radionuclide concentrations above DOE guideline values (Table 1) in several outdoor areas and one indoor location at this site. The primary contaminant of concern is 23s U. Outdoors, the gamma scans identified four areas of significant contamination, PIC areas 1 through 5, PIC-11 area, PIC-9 area, and a l-m2 spot at the fence on Post Street (Fig. 22). The maximum gamma radiation level was measured in the first of these four areas, the enclosed courtyard on the northwest corner of the property; the maximum gamma level was 490 pR/h, and the area contained several locations of significant 238U contamination. The second major area was the parking area northwest of Building No. 14 (PIC-1 l), with a high of 130 ,uRih; the third area was in the southeast corner of the property (PIC-9), with a maximum of 32 ~Rilr; and the fourth was a spot on the Post Street property line just east of Building Area No. 1, which measured 18 pR/h.

Soil sample analyses (Table 3) correspond to the gamma measurements taken on this property. Although no generic DOE guidelines exist for uranium (Table l), levels of 35 to 40 pCi/g or greater have been used at other sites. The PIC-11 area produced the highest concentrations of uranium on the entire property, which measured 160,000 pCi/g in biased sample B2; additionally, elevated uranium levels were found in auger holes AlO, All, and Al2 (Table 3). The maximum uranium concentration in the enclosed courtyard measured 38,000 pCi/g in biased sample BlOA; elevated uranium levels were found in most of the courtyard samples B4 through B12. The PIC-9 area rendered its maximum uranium concentrations in auger hole A3, with a level of 570 pCi/g; biased sample location B3 in this area contained uranium levels up to 360 pCi/g. The spot at the fence on the property line produced its maximum uranium value of 180 pCi/g in auger hole A2; auger hole A7 contained similar values of uranium. No contamination above guidelines was found on the accessible roof areas.

The indoor measurements were significantly elevated above DOE guideline values (Table 1) in only one area, located in some shelf bins on the mezzanine of Building Area No. 5 (Fig. 31). Residual alpha activity levels ranged from 1900 to 5400 dpm/cm2, and residual beta-gamma activity levels ranged from 2.25 to 7 mrad/h. Removable alpha and beta-gamma contamination was demonstrated in Smear 48, with an alpha level of 1600 dpm/cm2 and a beta-gamma level of 2900 dpm/cm 2. These activity levels are in excess of DOE guidelines for both residual and removable concentrations of uranium (Table 1). The dust and debris sample D2 taken from this area supported these findings, with 5400 pCi/g of uranium contamination. The shelf bins were in an isolated and unused area of the building. Because of the isolation and low use factor, any personnel exposure would be extremely low. Air samples taken in Building Area Nos. 1, 3, and 3A were all below MDA for alpha and beta levels of radioactivity.

In conclusion, several outdoor areas contained soil contaminated with uranium in excess of DOE guidelines. One small area indoors had debris and surface contamination in excess of these guidelines.

C

9

REFERENCES

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

J. J. Fiore, DOE Headquarters, Washington, D.C., correspondence to J. Romanoff, REMS, Inc., Toledo, Ohio, “Consent for Radiological Survey of Property, NE-23,” June 3, 1988.

J. J. Nickson, M.D., Metallurgical Laboratory, Health Division, Hamilton, Ohio, correspondence to C. X. Danials, Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D.C., June 29, 1943.

W. D. Cottrell, ORNL, correspondence to A. J. Whitman, DOE Headquarters, “Radiological Survey of Private Properties in Lodi, New Jersey,” August 15, 1984.

T E. Myrick, B. A. Berven, W. D. Cottrell, W. A. Goldsmith, and E E Haywood, Procedures Manual for the ORNL Radiological Survey Activities (RASA) Program, ORNL/lM-8600, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (April 1987).

U.S. Department of Energy, Guidelines for Residual Radioactive Material at Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program and Remote Surplus Facilities Management Program Sites, Rev. 2 (March 1987).

U.S. Department of Energy Order 5400.5, Chapter I\! “Residual Radioactive Materials”, April 1990.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NRC Guidelines for Decontamination at Facilities and Equipment Prior to Release for Unrestricted Use or Termination of Licenses f&r By-Product, Source, or Special Nuclear Material (May 1987).

T E. Myrick, B. A. Berven, and E E Haywood, State Background Radiation Levels: Results of Measurements Taken During 1975-I 979,ORNLtTM-7343, Oak Ridge National Laboratory (November 1981).

10

E 6 w

E; w

t= W

d t W

l- t-

%

\ zo

00

? \ !

Lo r-l z

--

c c d I

c-9 2

‘FS W

)l =M

- z -i”

JLJ- z

U

I f

%

i k$

i s

i iij

I)-

, I

ki E

i

X 'IS

Wl

lS3M

" "

" n

n

v) >c

><

><

SC

>:

>t

c c-4

z El I- u Z H --I VI H

I

33Vld fW

3lXv’H

I 1

I

I 10 :i-Tl

II

I- --....-

i A PI

5 73 -+ 2 .A!

: LJ Fi - Yi! -

c-9 d

Z

- d iL’

LIJ z

r w

w Z H -J

-J w

32 2 W

z : L L 0 k- ;?-I

02

cd

4

><

>:

>I

x >:

>c

t- cn

Z I t- L-3 Z H

I

cl Z x2 w

5 2 2

a 2 0 l- 2

1

33’ld f’W

3lWH

13

fig. 3. Northwestward view of Building Area No. 1 on the left, Building No. 14 on the right, and the entrance to Building Area No. 12A in between, at EMS, Inc., 25512555 Ha&au Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl).

14

Fig. 4. Eastward view of Building No. 14, showing contaminated site at sample location B2, at REMS, Inc., 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (B’lDOOl).

15

fig. 5. Westward view of Building Area No. 6 on the left (with metal siding) and the entrance to Building Area No. 12A on the right at REMS, Inc., 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOol).

16

Fig. 6. Southwestward view of Building Area No. 6 at REMS, Inc., 25512555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOMU).

17

Fig. 7. Eastward view of Building Area No. 7 on the left and Building Area No. 12A on the right at Doug Beet Company, 25512555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl).

18

.* z .* * XI n%m *.

Fig. 8. Westward view of Building No. 2, the former Power House, at Doug Beet Company, 25512555 Ha&au Place, ‘I&do, Ohio (B’IUlOl).

I-

+

1 9

fig . 9 . W e s tward v iew in B u i ld ing A r e a N o . 3 , s h o w i n g u s e d m o tors, a t D o u g B e e t C o m p a n y , 2 5 5 1 - 2 5 5 5 H a & a u P lace, T o l e d o , O h io ( B T O O O l).

20

fig. 10. Eastward view in Building Area No. 5, showing contaminated shelves on the east wall of the mezzanine at Doug Beet Company, 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BToool).

22

Fig. 12. Northeastward view from the doorway of Building Area No. 8, showing the pallet stack next to survey team members, at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl). The pallet stack was the pivot point for the panorama (Pan) views shown in the next eight photographs.

23

Fig. 13. Pan A of Fig. 11, showing the southern entrance to Building Area No. 8 at 2551-2555 Ha&au Place, Toledo, Ohio (B’lDOOl).

24

Fig. 14. Pan B of Fig. 11, showing the southwestern section of this courtyard at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (Bl’XXKIl).

-..-_. -._ -__ _-- . .-

25

Fig. 15. Pan C of Fig. 11, showing the north-tern section this courtyard at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (Bl’OOOl).

26

Fig. 16. Pan D of Fig. 11, showing the northern section of this courtyard at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl).

- _._.. - _._~___

27

fig. 17. Pan E of Fig. 11, showing the northeastern comer of this courtyard at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl).

28

Fig. 18. Pan F of Fig. 11, showing the northeastern section and Building Area No. 8B at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl).

C

29

Fig. 19. Pan G of Fig. 11, showing the eastern section and Building Area No. 8A at 25512555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl).

30

Fig. 20. Pan H of Fig. 11, showing the southeastern section of this courtyard at 25512555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl).

31

Fig. 21. Northeastward view of the concrete wall and bunkers in 1 urtyard next to the railroad tracks at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Tole Ii0 (BTOool).

y------

_----~ -

7 -..

m.

__Y -.-..

.;l_..l _a

.- I.

“-._ ”

.-” _

.--1.-’ ---

- I

w P

-.

>c

><

><

x >c

>c

3<

>c

><

3<

><

-7 - % ><

>:

>:

><

><

9 a. K

c-4 E

m

=! L1 E

; W

=: W

d k W

I t-

i

.Y f

a L z

c-9 co 2

0 --

/

c v,

t- L-cl E

l cl-

.m

J$Jw43U

O~

1

z Z b-4

4 W

3 c=2

W

5 aL L L 0 L cu

03

.--I

2:

zc

ZC

>E

><

.

d 3 zo 8

< I+

Y

>< A

+ z

-2 )< +! ;

2 ><

R

2 m

a4az L

Y

a<

z I t- (7 Z

a

n n

eza

EllW

H

H

33Vld

i-I t L II

_I-- ~.

..-_--___- .._^

__._. -___l_

--...

1 -l l l l l . .“... ~. . . . .~ _- i. -.-..*- .=._ _- ---.. .(-~) -- ___ --..- r --.--.. -.-__ .--_-_ ..--.-. I--. T _ - ._~. _ “----

33

’ <lo-470 ‘10-39

Y *

10-160 ^ Jo

CONCRETE --- -__- - -

Elevcxted Gamma

Fig. 23. Enlargement of the northwestern courtyard at 25512555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BToool), showing gamma radiation levels @R/h) _

><

><

x >c

><

><

x ><

><

a<

><

t

( . r

In

c-k In

a3 W

I

>< -7

ru ru

rL

33 ><

-- (

>c n

w al

z -

$3; -

Ln g y

>c 72 L -

z”

p )C d-I

0 T--i&

-7 -d

m

I

- :

r ‘w s /

0” W

IG-

7 I

A I

: d ZCLI

2 n.J

1,

1. *-

11 1

I %

RI z

[r I z

1 J$Jd3UO

3 x

1 >:

/ >c

F >:

x X

v,

-l--l >:

‘: ><

63 d

z 2

>: aQ

I

Z k

0 l- I

iii >:

z I-

s 8 i

>r x

I; u

I I

1 7

33Vld nv:

* ,

318v’H

I I J/i

v, H

III

z Z - Ii W

3 0 W

5 I?

ii 0 L cl-

cd

7-.

1 & -

35

2 STORY FRAME DWELLINGS

POST ST,

ri

L

THE TOLEDO EDISON CO, I

” ” I // //

LL?” c-l aI -J CL

I a W -I w aI I

Asphalt %Bl

I” ” ” ” J(

ISLINGTON ST,

I CONCRETE PAD

(11

Concrete

oA22 PIC-7~

f Y A n n n

I

L r, r ._--A- ~~-p!EY"" Brick "O'l km%? - '

0 Auger Samples / $3 PIC Measurement

hcvu7 // //// r--r------ Fig. 215 Soil sampling locations at 25512555 Harlcau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BJWOl). (Locations of 12 biased soil samples are shown as Bl-B12; 26 auger samples as Al through

A19, A17, A21 through 25, and A28; and 11 PIC measurements as PIC-1 through PIC-11.)

FEET 0 50 100 200

0 10 20 40 60 METERS

CO ---

Fin. 26.

Brick Wall

NCRETE PAD &//p3&samsament

p__-p- -/ / / /., , , , , , ,

Enlargement of the northwestern courtyard at 25512555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BToool), showing the locations of

NoI8

36

I ~ PIG-2 :>.

F

AC .*.

B4 %? da PIG-1

Ax / &Gop ~ v

bid soil samples and PIC measurements.

Fig. 27. Closeup of soil layers in biased sample hole Bll (Fig. 26), showing the Cinch, geenish-yellow layer under the top soil (2 in below surface) at 25X-2555 Harlem Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl).

38

Fig. 28. Closeup of greenish-yellow soil removed from biased sample hole Bll (Fig. 26) at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl).

39

1 & 2 STORY FRAME DWELLINGS 1 HE TOLEDO EDISON CO, I

POST ST, ” ” ” ” ” ”

1 ” ” ” ” ”

No,1 1 lo-16 ) No,3 al +J al

t

“i ,, , 6 f-l

8-12 8-12

W c--l aI -I CL

,‘I a W I CL CL I

3 Asphalt

AUTO PARKING Non3A

7-12

Q-12Gwc Storage Drrrrlr\ I 9-14 ,\““,~I,

Concrete

I Asphalt

n n n

_EcAs.mal-f-~-~-~-~-~-

-

><

SC

><

x

,:

Asphalt

I

I ri

I,

Concrete

J lo-15 19-13 l&71 ] \ CKXRN“/

0 10 20 40 60 METERS

7-12

--I-

--l 9-13 10-l

i

ISLINGTON ST,

-

7 CONCRETE PAD

Fig. 29. Gamma radiation levels @R/h) measured indoors at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl).

\ I- ><

><

><

><

><

><

x >c

>c

>c

>c

>< T \ - % 2:

>:

2:

>I

>I b

d 0

0 d

i5 VI

El W

E W

d t- W

I b-- -- 3 @

8

(u +J I z 8

1 5

1 2 a $

;Gl

co 7

@

d -

Z

” ”

n n

33Vld fW

3lWH

G

L-9

z I I- 17 Z u -J L4 H

z Z b-4

?I W

3 n W

z E & 0 I- v)

c-u

cd

T-4

><

>c

>c

>C

>C

>C n

- --~.--__--

--_.-. --.---.-

lll_. --.

-

b

-8 3 .3 3 B

2 b3 2

3 3 m

2 8

3 2 “d 2 0 ‘;:

2 5 E ef

8 j $

3 ii

i 2 9 G:

i 4 a a-

il 5 n

OA

a9- an 0-U p

‘3 N n

g -

-4

f” 9 3

38 P)in

-0 ‘c:

an 83 d-0 2%

u -z 8

2 eb

m-0 ’

8 $2

w Liz z

aTamuo3

/

33Vld L-W

llWH

42

Auger Hole Logging of BTOOOlAOl

1.2 1

n El wr ” a II \ i, II \

nn-l/-\ -’

Q =*- I/ \ rl II \ 2 0.6-r ,\/7 \-,

- n I I

0 I I

I I I I I I I I

I I I 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.7 1.8 2 0 0.150.3 0.5

DEPTH IN METERS

Fig. 32 Gamma profile for auger hole 1 at 2551-2555 Harkau place, medo, Ohio.

43

Auger Hole Logging of BTOOOlA03

2

1.8-

0

0 0 1.2 d ';

z 1 n i -E 06 > - - 0.4 b 0 4 0.2

!

0 I I I I I I I I I

0 0.15 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2

DEPTH IN METERS

Fig. 33. Gamma profile for auger hole 3 at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio.

44


0.8

E 5 0.6

z

s z 0.4

* clc

5 0.2

FJ

0

/

I I I I I I I

0 0.15 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.1 l.,

DEPTH IN METERS

Fig. 34. Gamma profile for auger hole 4 at 25512555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio.

I

ACTI

VITY

IN

10

00 c

pm

0 0

0 0

0 i4

k

b,

bo

0 0 L,

0 bl

0 b\

0 bo

0 ;o

I 1

I 1

t 0 w,

WE HO

0 0-

0a

“r z 0

R

46


0.8

E 5 0.6

0 0 0.15 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.1 1-a 3

DEPTH IN METERS


1 1

1 I

I 1

I I

I I

I 1

I I

f I

ACTI

VITY

IN

10

00 c

pm

0 . =:

I P-

l u:

trl

b ‘d

g c3

XE

I

* c m CD

w

0 r W

Z

Ef”

0’

OC

D

b 0 O”O

aQ

cm

V@

s UQ

48

1

E 0.8

5

z ; 0.4

E-c

7 - 0.2 b

2

0

Auger Hole Logging of BTOOOlAO9

0 0.15 0.3

DEPTH IN METERS 0.5 0.6 0.8


49

Auger Hole Logging of BTOOOlAlO

3

2.8

2.6

E 2.4 a 0 2.2

0 2 0 0 1.8

d 1.6

1.2 31’ h l ; 0.8 - 0.6 F u 0.4 4 0.2

0 I I I I I I I I I

0 0.15 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5

DEPTH IN METERS


50

Auger Hole Logging of BTOOOlAll

3

2.8 -

00.4- 4 0.2 -

0 I I I I I I I I

0 0.15 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4

DEPTH IN METERS


51

1


E 0.8

3 0

2 0.6

0 1 I I I I I I

0 0.15 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4

DEPTH IN METERS


52

1

& 0.8

5 0

5 0.6

z

b 0 :4

b

s - b 0.2

0

Auger Hole Logging of BTOOOlAl3

I I I I I I I I I

0 0.15 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5

DEPTH IN METERS

Fig. 42 Gamma profile for auger hole 13 at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Tbledo, Ohio.

53

C


1.4

1.2 E F 1

0 0 2 0.8

z - 0.6 * l+ H 0.4 t,

0

J

I I I I I I I I I 0 0.15 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4

DEPTH IN METERS

Fig. 43. Gamma profde for auger hole 14 at 2551~2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio.

54

1.2

E 1

5 0 0.8

5 z 0.6

;. b 0.4

7

E 0.2

4

0


\

I I I I I I I I I I

0 0.15 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.7

DEPTH IN METERS

Fig. 44. Gamma profile for auger hole 15 at 25512555 Harleau Place, Bledo, Ohio.

55


1

E 0.8

9 0

g 0.6 I z I *

0.4

b

s - 0.2 +J

2

0 I I I I I I I I I

0 0.15 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5

DEPTH IN METERS

Fig. 45. Gamma proftle for auger hole 16 at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio.

56

Auger Hole Logging of BTOOOlAl7

- 0.6-j

H 0.4 >

b w 1

0.2 4

0 0.15 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.1 7

DEPTH IN METERS


I I

I

@

“is

c&4

P’ Q

B w

I I

1 I

1 I

I 1

I I

I I

0 G

WI

u z-

m

2 &-

x z-

2 E-

s pj

%-

g r‘-

Y :-

@id

w cb

w ;n

ACTI

VITY

IN

10

00

cpm

0

0 0

0

0 i3

‘A

b,

bo

0 ’

I I

I

* G

tm

CD

‘)

0 r W

td

80

0’

P +r

rQ 0 cm

U

Q

m.

3 UQ

I I

t I

Y

0 0 . G

0 t&J

0 bl

0 b\

0 bo

0 ;o

w

. CI

CI

b CI

ih

I- Ll

AC

TIVI

TY

IN

1000

cp

m

0 0

0 0

0 ‘L

b\

ia

0 I

I I

I

tm

CD

e

0 r W

td

4O

O-

a b gO tm

U

Q

me

3 OQ

59

1


C

E 0.8

3

z

0

J

+ I / I I I / I I

0 0.15 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4

DEPTH IN METERS


60

1

E 0.8

5 0

0" 0.6


z ; 0.4

b

s - 0.2 b u 4

0

/

c I I I I I I I I I

0 0.15 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5

DEPTH IN METERS


61


0.8

E 5 0.6

0 0 1.5 0.15 0.3 0.6 1.2

DEPTH IN METERS

Fig. 51. Gamma profile for auger hole 23 at 25512555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio-

62

0.8

E 3 0.6.


z 0.4 -

;. b

5 0.2 - H

6 4

O- 0 0.15 0.3 0.5 0.6

DEPTH IN METERS

Fig. 52 Gamma profile for auger hole 24 at 2551-2555 Harleau Place, Toledo, Ohio.

63


1

0

5 0.6

z

* 0.4

clc

s - 0.2 b

2

0

/

A

S’/

I I I I I I I I I I

0 0.15 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.1 1.2 1.4 1.5 1.5 7

DEPTH IN METERS


64

Table 1. DOE guidelines for protection against radiationa

Mode of exposure Exposure conditions Guideline value

Gamma radiation Indoor gamma radiation level (above background)

T&al residual surface contaminationC

23gU > TJ, U-natural (alpho endrem)

Beta-Tamma emittersd Maximum Average Removable

=*Th, Th-natural (alpha emilfers) 90Sr (Obrera-g~~fnrna emirrer)

Maximum Average Removable

‘26Ra, 23oTh, tranuranics Maximum Average Removable

Beta-gamma dose rates Surface dose rate averaged over not more than 1 m2

Maximum dose rate in any 100.cm2 area

Radionuclide concentrations in soil (generic)

Maximum permissible concentration of the following radionu- elides in the soil above background levels averaged over 100-m* area

226Ra 23@Th u2Th

Derived concentrations 238~

20 /LR/~~

15,000 dpm/lOO cm* 5,000 dpm/lOO cm2 1,000 dpm/lOO cm*

3,000 dpm/lOO cm2 1,000 dpm/lOO cm2

200 dpm/lOO cm2

300 dpm/lOO cm2 100 dpm/lOO cm* 20 dpm/lOO cm’

0.20 mrad/h

1.00 mradih

5 pa/g averaged over the first 15 cm of soil below the surface; 15 pCi/g when averaged over 15.cm thick soil layers more than 15 cm below the surface.

Site specific’

65

Table 1. (continued)

Mode of exposure Exposure conditions Guideline value

Guideline for nonhomo geneous contamination (used in addition to the 100-m* guideline)’

Applicable to locations with an G, = Gi (100/A)” area ~25 m2 with significantly where elevated concentrations of radion- G, = guideline for “hot spot” uclides (“hot spots”) of area (A)

Gj = guideline averaged over a 100-m* area

aReferences 5 and 6. bThe 20 pR/h shall comply with the basic dose limit (100 mrem/yr) when an appropriate-use scenario is

considered. ‘DOE surface contamination guidelines are consistent with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission guidelines found

in Reference 7. dBeta-gamma emitters (radionuclides with decay modes other than alpha emission or spontaneous fission) except

%r, UBRa, ‘=Ra, =‘Ac, u31, 12q, ‘%I, l”I. ‘DOE guidelines for uranium are derived on a site-specific basis. Guidelines of 540 pCi/g have been applied

at various FUSRAP sites. Sources: J. L. Marley and R. E Carrier, Results ofthe Radiological Survey at 4 Elmhurst Avenue, Colonie, New York (AL219), ORNL/RASA-87/117, Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., Oak Ridge Natl. Lab., February 1988; B. A. Berven et al., Radiological Survey of the Former Keller Research Facility, Jersey Ci@ New Jersey, DOE:/EV-0005/29, ORNL-5734, Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., Oak Ridge Natl. Lab., February 1982.

‘DOE guidelines specify that every reasonable effort shall be made to identify and remove any source which has a concentration exceeding 30 times the guideline value, irrespective of area. Source: Adapted from Revised Guidelines for Residual Radioactive Material at FUSRAP and Remote SFMP Site, April 1981. Sources: Adapted from U.S. Department of Energy, DOE Order 5400.5, April 1990.

66

Table 2. Average background radiation levels for the Ohio areaa

Type of radiation measurement Radiation level or or sample radionuclide concentration

Gamma exposure at 1 m above PRh ground surface 8

Concentration of radionuclides in soil pCi/gb 2xRa 1.5 232Th 1.0 2WJ 1.4

aReference 8. %ese values represent an average of normal radionuclide

concentrations in this state.

67

Table 3. Concentrations of radionuclides in outdoor soil samples at 2551-2555 Harleau Place,

Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl)

Sam- plea

Depth (cm>

Radionuclide concentration (pCi/g)b

226Ra 232n 238U

Bl

B2d

5-25

o-15

B3A o-15 B3B 15-30

B4A B4B B4C

o-15 15-30 30-45f

B5 O-8’

B6A B6B

o-15 15-25

B7A o-15 B7B. 15-30 B7C 30-45 B7D 45-60

B8A B8B

B9A B9B

BlOA BlOB BlOC

BllA BllB

B12A B12Cg

o-15 15-30

o-15 15-30

o-15 15-30 30-45

o-15 15-30

o-15 30-45

Biased samples’

2.92kO.05 1.7420.08

e e

0.92kO.65 0.66~0.09 0.97 +0.09 0.56kO.12

1.3620.57 < 1.27 0.78 20.24 0.79 20.35 0.88+0.19 0.97 kO.29

< 1.55 <2.17

0.8250.30 <0.68 0.95kO.14 0.75 kO.21

0.8220.37 <0.97 0.66+0.09 0.64kO.13 0.46 kO.04 0.35 50.05 0.48kO.04 0.39 kO.04

0.65 k-o.07 0.5750.12 0.73 kO.02 0.65 20.03

1.06+0.14 0.82 20.24 0.92kO.23 0.69kO.28

<12 <17 0.8250.17 0.88kO.30 0.70+0.15 <0.37

< 1.43 ~2.16 0.73 kO.10 0.6620.17

<0.45 0.83 kO.39 0.91 kO.10 0.88kO.14

2.91& 1.58

160000 st 540

360 f 5 200 f 6

9900 2 80 1000 f 32 920 f 30

5500 rfr 210

790 + 58 130 + 6

2100 2 59 310 k 10

26 ~fr 0.84 43 + 3.20

160 + 7 27 -+ 1.28

1300 + 21 440 + 10

38000 f 1600 2400 & 25 1300 & 32

11000 & 180 320 + 13

4100 f 63 160 + 11

&I 53 n- 9 5 zd

E G

~~8ooooodooood cc rc, m

d c4 cc -3 d

r- \o yc

dddddddddddddd +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I tl

tl +I

+I 00 \o

* m

0

d \o

cc, + 60 0

cc, N P

--!@?PY?-?~TF9????

~~0000000~0000

zzg282 dddddd +I

+I +I

tl +I

+I %

%&~~

dddddd

mxK388

dddddd +I

+I tl

+I +I

+I fp~O

~'$ ~l-il4444

tl +I

+I +I

+I ;tl 2

\01 PO

OP

gggz:%tic;-;

mm

+ ri

+ c-4 m

\o

- d

c-1 cc ~~~O

”oOO

oooddddd +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I Inb\D+c-am

t--lA \4

'? '?

‘4 v# cc: vi

09 00000000

bcoO\rc,rn\N~T\I

99999999 00000000 +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I bbcclobb~+~ o\oqo\(o\rl\q\qc\l 0000000~

VJ~0Q~NG

YC-l %

-?“?‘I’??1 00~0000~ +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I +I

tl %

Z 8

E8%?$

wi&dtidddA

t-c cc, IA d m

d

f?4 m

99999999 00000000 +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I \c)rcb0\~0~~ '?=?'?'??Tlnl?\q 00000000

c4Nrc,C\INrnP4N 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 00000000 +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I +I

tt oo~v)brclr)b\o 0990\0\0\~oqQ

? 0-000000

<FsunwcL <c9unwc4oz

22222.2 22222222

%=?

t-i d d

+I +I

+I %

2Z T+ ti

A

xx3 ddd +I

+I +I

cc, 3 cc

\o\o\o ddd

$8S 6

6 6

+I +I

+I zE??E 4

74 6

SW

d5$

<mu

222

69

lhble 3. (continued)

Sampleat b Depth Radionuclide concentration (pCi/g)b

(cm> 226Ra 23?rh 238~

A5D A5E A5F A5G A5H

A6A A6B A6C A6D A6E A6F A6G A6H

A7A A7B A7C A7D A7E A7F

A8A A8B A8C A8D A8E A8F A8G A8H A81

A9A A9B A9C A9D A9E A9F

AlOA AlOB AlOC AlOD AlOE AlOF

45-60 0.83 20.02 60-75 0.59+0.01 75-90 0.5OkO.02 go- 105 0.61 kO.02

105-120 1.54kO.02

o-15 0.8420.02 15-30 0.88 kO.02 30-45 0.97kO.02 45-60 0.77 kO.02 60-75 0.68 20.02 75-90 0.5 120.02 90-105 0.65 kO.02

105-120 1.11+0.02

o-15 1.28a0.08 15-31) 1.35kO.06 30-45 1.24+0.09 45-60 1.45Iko.04 60-75 1.46~0.04 75-90 1.40+0.04

o-15 1.78kO.02 15-30 1.10+0.02 30-45 0.90+0.02 45-60 1.00+0.02 60-75 1.08kO.03 75-90 1.02+0.02 go-105 1.15+0.02

105-120 1.12kO.02 120-135 1.00+0.02

o-15 1.68+0.03 15-30 1.38kOo.03 30-45 1.24zkO.03 45-60 1.75 LO.03 60-75 1.33 50.03 75-90 1.47 k-o.03

o-15 3.59-to.15 15-30 1.93aO.08 30-45 1.57-0.04 45-60 0.94 20.05 60-75 1.16kO.09 75-90 1.01 kO.08

0.59kO.04 0.40+0.02 0.30+0.03 0.42kO.02 0.93 kO.03

0.56kO.03 0.59 kO.03 0.57+0.02 0.50+0.02 0.45 kO.02 0.36kO.02 0.35 ~~0.02 0.72kO.03

0.76kO.12 0.95 20.09 0.73 kO.12 0.95 kO.06 0.942Io.07 0.94kO.07

1.03~0.03 1.82kO.04 0.75 kO.04 0.84a0.03 0.85 kO.04 0.79+0.03 0.77 20.02 0.74kO.03 0.64 kO.02

0.6lkO.03 0.83 kO.03 0.80 f 0.03 0.96 + 0.04 0.92-eo.05 0.88 20.04

2.3OkO.23 1.5OkO.12 1.17+0.06 0.77kO.08 0.76kO.12 0.81 kO.11

1.882 0.64 0.81a 0.35 1.99& 0.71 1.07+ 0.73 1.58& 0.77

2.205 0.73 1.72+ 0.43 1.382 0.73 1.26+ 0.64 1.222 0.58 0.66& 0.61 0.86+ 0.62 1.702 0.75

140 2 8.19 110 Ifr 5.01

70 iz 5.52 42 f 2.18 13 f 2.06 6.51+ 1.56

2.16& 0.37 2.16+ 1.00 1.17+ 0.67 1.16+ 0.40 0.93+ 0.70 1.7Ok 0.37 1.14+ 0.40 1.512 0.78 l-18+ 0.58

2.082 0.82 1.31+- 0.83 1.88+ 1.65 1.77* 0.79 1.94k 0.83 1.24+ 0.54

1600 220 52 ?I 2.61 20 + 2.21 45 + 2.29

220 2 8.14 40 + 1.54

cn &S n- n %

“a E cz

8ZG2S2

d d 0; In’ 4 4

+I tl

+I +I

+I +I

%3?

a ++$gcc;c\i

\o 34

ggcgggg

dddddd +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I N-3VJO

IA* m

~-\obcnt-- dddddd

E%k3W

~ 6 d d

d d d

+I +I

+I +I

tl tl

xx2~~~ d44AiA

~otOu?~ufO

ONm

~Lc ‘?

q rp: cq P* r‘

cc! p: \9

Ty “: \c

~~M~000~T+tq00

tl +I

tl $j

2 2

2 A

+I +I $

&l cc:r/T+m

u v-i?4

$-$pupj&-q$GA

b *

r4 IA cc, c-2 cc, m

\o

a rc

c-c 0~-f000000000 dddddddddddd +I

+I +I

+I tl

tl tl

+I +I

+I ti

+I rcu+m

uYN-NO~m

m

~~~~cl~~mc3~l3lY~

~idAdddd3Add

OoO

~UUUo\ c4u~vl~um

&tiG

cjAo’d tl

tl +I

+I +I

tl +I

mc-co-rf-

Gz2

u+*p.Jp.i+‘;

cc t- u

b \o

m

cc, 9999999 0000000 +I

+I +I

tl tl

+I +I

U+Q~d-O

N 99\99o\r-tl ~~0~000

IA v-l M

IA

u N

rc, 0000000 ddddddd +I

$1 +I +I

+I +I

+I m

\DcAmoom

u Q

?~-joq~~o\l-i t+~O

v+~O~

OcocorJm

b~m~m

m~

FF?9”V”?97?%

00~~~~0000000 +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I G

c-4 cc 0

m

b r-

- tbj~~$

?9\4??r?b. ,rnN+ra--*

u m

fc

rc, 9999

23 &Fgggggs

oooodddddddd +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I m

co~t--o3mm

~~mco~

"~?P~~~=!~~~~ "~0000000000

oz ,l-Jk4kl 000000 T+T-l~~r(4 *4*<<*

l-4-d “.

? m

-c\lr; +I

+I +I

Ki ;3lsz

23 68 ddd +I

+I +I

%G

Z 44s

82~ ddd +I

+I +I

sg3 4

4 A

2w ciig

c2v2 F-II++ Q

bb

ismz

dddd +I

+I tl

+I teVG

%

GAc4c;r;

L%%

%

ddd

+I +I

+I C‘INrn cc: b.

\4 NdN

rc, (c, t-c 000 ddd tl

+I +I

w1$ ddd

Exsf ddd +I

+I tl

zii?s 4;dA

%c

c;$$

359

222

: d +I 2 4 g d +I 22 6 s d +I s d VI d d < vi 2

+I +I

+I +I

2cx32 ,466

gcgggg dddddd +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I 38

2FGG

dA;r;ddd

rclmuuuum

0000000 ddddddd +I

+I +I

+I +I

+I +I

gsgg8 ddddd +I

+I +I

+I +I

&#!;=GF

ddddd

23 G33 dddd +I

+I +I

+I m

r-l--r? \D+Q

\IA AA&r;

+ m

r-l

u 0000 dddd +I

+I +I

+I z%

w d-;&d

8$&s dddd +I

+I +I

+I rc,com

r- riooum

G

dA;d %

x~ci2~ & d d d d

d 4

Nrcirnrc 0000 dddd +I

+I +I

+I 33 wG

%

44pj-;

23 SW%

ddddd +I

+I +I

+I +I

g%2rG

A4G

;dr;

SW2

dddd +I

+I +I

+I O

d\oH FPO

d &-;A-;

~Ov-onO

~Ei d

rc u

I? m

d

l-4 dh6d4,dbi

dWiY)lYg\O

t-4

$zis ‘d&d

omu\o

I I

I I

I I

I a

I I

i I

I I

I I

I I

72

‘Ihble 3. (continued)

Samplea* b Depth b-4

Radionuclide concentration (pCi/g)b

226Ra 232n, =QJ

A23B 15-30 0.85 kO.02 0.27kO.02 1.88& 0.45 A23c 30-45 0.83 rtO.02 0.55 +0.04 3.05+ 0.99 A23D 45-60 0.6950.02 0.65kO.04 1.752 0.93 A23E 60-75 1.07?0.02 0.69kO.04 0.88+ 0.81 A23F 75-90 1.12+0.02 0.75 +0.03 1.442 0.79 A23G go-105 1.05 +0.02 0.7lrtO.03 1.57& 0.47

A24A A24B

A25C’ A25D

A27Ag

A28C’

o-15 1.05 +0.02 0.69kO.02 2.06& 0.67 15-30 1.79+0.02 1.15kO.03 3.642 0.94

30-45 45-60

0-15f

30-45

0.68_+0.02 1.31 kO.02

1.71 kO.02

1.99kO.03 1.2820.04 1.78+ 0.96

0.49kO.03 1.88+ 0.49 1.07&0.03 2.42+ 0.71

0.94~0.03 2.04& 0.76

Tocations of soil samples are shown on Fig. 25. bIndicated counting error is at the 95% confidence level (520). ‘Biased samples are taken from areas with elevated gamma exposure

rates. dBiased sample B2 and auger sample Al3 were taken from the same

location. eSample was not analyzed for this radionuclide. ‘Refusal at this depth. sPreceding sample(s) not taken due to soil conditions. hAuger samples are taken from holes drilled to further define the

depth and extent of radioactive material. Holes are drilled where the surface may or may not be contaminated.

‘Preceding samples were not analyzed.

C

73

Table 4. Concentrations of radionuclides from roof and indoor dust and debris samples at 2551-2555 Harleau

Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl)

Sampleb Depth (cm )

Radionuclide concentration (pCi/g)”

226Ra 232n TJ

Dl

D2

D3

D4

D5

D6

D7

Dll

D12

D13

D14

D15

D20

o-5

o-5

o-5

o-5

o-5

o-5

o-5

o-5

o-5

o-5

o-5

o-5

o-5

Systematic samples’

0.22 iI 0.03 0.22kO.03

d d

0.29a 0.02

d

d d

0.30 f 0.02

0.65& 0.03

d

d

0.80+ 0.02

0.382 0.03

0.48+ 0.02

0.60& 0.03

0.42kO.04

d

0.20~0.02

0.392 0.04

d

d

0.46kO.03

0.46kO.05

0.41+ 0.03

0.4920.05

1.05& 0.37

5400 + 1600

2.122 0.81

d

<5.4

1.09k 0.40

1.31-r- 0.87

d

<1.08

1.492 0.52

<1.65

0.752 0.39

0.81+ 0.97

aIndicated counting error is at the 95% confidence level (-e&). bLocations of dust and debris samples are shown on Figs. 24, 30, and 31. CSystematic samples are taken at locations irrespective of gamma exposure

rates. dSample could not be analyzed for this radionuclide.

74

Table 5. Alpha and beta-gamma activity levels measured on the roof and indoors at 2551-2555 Harleau

Place, Toledo, Ohio (BTOOOl)

Directly measured Removable contamination contaminationa

Smear Sampleb

AlphaC Beta-gammad (dpm/lOO cm’)

Alphae Beta-gammaf (mrad/h) (dpm/lOO cm*) (dpm/lOO cm2)

1 0 0.02 0 0

2 18 0.01 0 0

3 27 0.03 3 0

4 36 0.02 0 0

5 9 0.02 6 0

6 36 0.03 0 16

7 9 0.03 0 0

8 27 0.03 0 0

9 9 0.02 0 32

10 9 0.02 0 0

11 36 0.02 0 0

28 1900 2.25 3 16

29 5400 0.03 6 0

30 g 7 15 0

31 0 0.02 0 0

32 0 0.02 0 98

33 0 0.03 3 49

34 0 0.03 3 0

35 0 0.03 3 0

36 0 0.03 0 0

37 0 0.03 0 0

38 0 0.03 0 98

48 g 2-5 1600 2900

Second floor indoors

75

Table 5 (continued)


Smear Sampleb

AlphaC Beta-gammad Alphae Beta-gammaf (dpm/lOO cm2) (mrad/h) (dpm/lOO cm*) (dpm/lOO cm2)

65 45

92 18

12 0

13 36

14 9

15 0

16 27

17 36

18 18

19 18

20 36

21 0

22 27

39 18

40 9

41 36

42 9

43 18

44 18

45 0

46 27

47 0

48 0

49 0

50 0

0.04 0 0

0.02 0 0

First floor indoors

0.02 0 0

0.02 0 0

0.01 0 0

0.02 0 98

0.02 0 0

0.02 0 16

0.02 9 0

0.03 0 33

0.03 0 0

0.02 0 0

0.03 0 82

0.04 3 0

0.02 0 16

0.03 0 213

0.03 0 197

0.04 0 16

0.03 0 0

0.03 0 0

0.02 3 16

0.02 0 0

0.02 0 128

0.02 0 0

0.02 0 0

76

Table 5 (continued)


Smear Sampleb

AlphaC Beta-gammad Alphae Beta-gamma’ (dpm/lOO cm*) (mradh) (dpm/lOO cm*) (dpm/lOO cm*)

51 0 0.02 6 48

52 9 0.03 0 0

53 9 0.02 0 0

54 0 0.02 0 0

55 18 0.02 0 0

56 9 0.02 0 16

57 72 0.02 0 112

58 18 0.02 0 112

59 54 0.04 0 0

60 27 0.02 3 0

61 9 0.03 3 82

62 9 0.02 0 0

63 18 0.03 0 0

64 27 0.03 3 16

81 g 0.02 0 112

82 g 0.02 0 64

83 g 0.03 0 94

84 g 0.02 3 0

85 g 0.03 0 0

86 g 0.03 0 0

87 g 0.03 0 0

88 g 0.03 0 0

89 g 0.02 0 0

90 0 0.02 0 0

91 36 0.02 0 16

77

Table 5 (continued)


Smear AlphaC Beta-gammad Alphae Beta-gammaf Sampleb (dpm/lOO cm2) (mrad/h) (dpm/lOO cm*) (dpm/lOO cm*)

Roof data

35 171 0.04

36 9 0.03

37 36 0.03

38 36 0.03

39 261 0.05

40 135 0.03

41 36 0.02

42 27 0.02

43 9 0.02

64

0

0

0

0

0

48

33

0

aMeasurements of removable radioactivity are net disintegration rates. Background radiation levels have been subtracted.

bLocations of smear samples are shown on Figs. 24, 30, and 31. .CMinimum detectable activity (MDA) level = 25 dpm/lOO cm*. dMDA = 0.01 mrad/h. eMDA = 10 dpm/lOO cm2. ‘MDA = 200 dpm/lOO cm*. sMeasurement not taken.

C

1. B. A. Berven 2. R. F. Carrier

3-8. W . D. Cottrell 9. A. G. Croff

10-15. L. M . Floyd 16-21. R. D. Foley

22. M . W . Francis 23. S. V Kaye 24. P. Y. Lu

79

INTERNAL DISTRIEWTION

ORNLRASA-9018

25. F! T. Owen 26. I? S. Rohwer 27. R. E. Rodriguez

28-30. R. E. Swaja 31. J. K. W illiams 32. Central Research Library 33. BEIA Publications Office

34-35. Laboratory Records - RC 36. Y-12 Technical Library

37-42. MAD Records Center

EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION

43. J. D. Berger, Oak Ridge Associated Universities, E/SH Division, PO. Box 117, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0117

44. R. W . Doane, TMA/Eberline, Inc., 795A Oak Ridge Turnpike, Oak Ridge, TN 37831

45-48. J. J. Fiore, U.S. Department of Energy, Eastern Division of Facility and Site Decommissioning Projects, (EM-42) Washington, DC 20545

49-51. G. K. Hovey, Bechtel National, Inc., PO. Box 350, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0350

52-54. L KPrice, U.S. Department of Energy, Former Sites Restoration Division, DOE Field Office, Oak Ridge, PO. Box 2001, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-8723

55. C. D. Young, Roy F. Weston, Inc., 12800 M iddlebrook Road, Suite’207, Germantown, M D 20874

56. J. W . Wagoner, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, Division of Decontamination and Decommissioning, E M -423, Washington, DC 20545

57. A. Wall0 III, U.S. Department of Energy, Division of Environmental Guidance, EH-231, Washington, DC 20585

58-82. W . A. W illiams, U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, Division of Decontamination and Decommissioning, E M -423, Washington, DC 20545

83. Office of Assistant Manager, Energy Research and Development, U.S. Department of Energy, DOE Field Office, Oak Ridge, PO. Box 2001, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-8600

84-93. Office of Scientific and Technical Information, DOE, PO. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831

Date post:	12-Sep-2021
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	1 times
Download:	0 times

OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY RADIOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE FORMER

Documents