AW: Article: Radiation in Water Stumps Experts

["Franz Schoenhofer" <franz.schoenhofer@CHELLO.AT>]

Edmond,



Nice to hear from you again! I know about the US drinking water regulations,

but my comment was directed toward Berry's comment on the topic of the

elevated gross-alpha values for drinking water, which he attributed to the

presence of radon, but the methods for gross measurements I know would

eliminate any radon before the measurement. So radon cannot be the reason.



You and other RADSAFErs might be interested to know, that the European Union

has excluded radon and its daughter products explicitely for the

determination of the so-called "Indicative Dose" in the Drinking Water

Directive. But since member states are free to issue their own legislation,

Finland and Sweden have installed legislation (not recommendations!!!),

establishing a so-called "lower intervention level" for radon, which implies

that below this level no action is considered necessary. In Sweden it is 100

Bq/l, in Finland 300 Bq/l. The "upper intervention level" is defined as the

level above which action is regarded necessary to reduce the level. It is in

both countries 1000 Bq/l. Between lower and upper intervention level it has

to be carefully considered, whether remediation should be done, taking into

consideration costs, other possible harmful constituents of the drinking

water, consumption rates etc. I personally believe that this is a

responsible approach to this potential problem.



Best regards,



Franz





    -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----

    Von: Baratta, Edmond J [mailto:EBARATTA@ORA.FDA.GOV]

    Gesendet: Montag, 01. März 2004 15:10

    An: 'Franz Schoenhofer'; Barry E. Muller; John Jacobus

    Cc: radsafe; know_nukes

    Betreff: RE: Article: Radiation in Water Stumps Experts





    Franz:







    Presently the EPA doesn't have a limit for Radon-222.







    Ed







    Edmond J. Baratta



    Radiation Safety Officer



    Tel. No. 781-729-5700, ext 728



    FAX: 781-729-3593







    -----Original Message-----

    From: Franz Schoenhofer [mailto:franz.schoenhofer@CHELLO.AT]

    Sent: Tuesday, February 10, 2004 5:38 PM

    To: Barry E. Muller; John Jacobus

    Cc: radsafe; know_nukes

    Subject: AW: Article: Radiation in Water Stumps Experts











        -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----

        Von: owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu

[mailto:owner-radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu]Im Auftrag von Barry E. Muller

        Gesendet: Montag, 09. Februar 2004 17:31

        An: John Jacobus

        Cc: radsafe; know_nukes

        Betreff: Re: Article: Radiation in Water Stumps Experts



        Most likely Rn-222 which has (had?) a limit of 10,000 pCi/L in

groundwater.  Because of the short half-life of Rn-222 any changes in

secondary porosity (think folding and/or faulting) may increase flow rates

and allow water with higher levels of Rn-222 to get into the wells.  This

possible interpretation would be consistent with findings from my research

on Rn-222 from groundwater from the Ohio Shale (from 10-years ago) and

adjacent formations and other folk's work on the Marcellus Needmore shale in

New York state.



        --------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------------------------------



        Barry,



        The only method I know about the determination of "gross alpha" and

"gross beta" is the evaporation of a water sample and measuring it with some

gas-flow low-level proportional counter, assigning the counts per minute to

some more or less (rather more) undefined "activities", which are derived

from "standards" of some more or less (rather more) arbitrary selected

radionuclides (Sr-90+Y-90, K-40 or similar for betas and "natural uranium"

or similar for alphas). These undefined values are corrected for the source

thickness, adding the final uncertainty.



        One thing is for sure in this procedure: The radon (and tritium as

well as any other volatile compound) will be removed. So changes in "gross

whatsoever" cannot be attributed to radon and your explanation cannot be

accepted.



        As long as it is not known, what radionuclide causes enhanced

radioactivity, I would never release any information and especially not to

the press.



        The failures of these "gross" measurements have been discussed

extensively among scientists and I myself have banned any such measurements

from my laboratory 15 years ago, when I took over.



        Best regards,



        Franz