Re: Soil Sample Analysis

[Jim Williams <NARM@Worldnet.att.com>]

Denis J. Rinkacs, Jr. wrote:
> 
> Good Morning, Afternoon, or Evening,
> 
> I am reveiwing a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment Workplan
> and have the following questions concerning an uranium ore pit
> containing approximately 1930 pounds of carnotite and 1960 pounds
> of urananite in an untouched (i.e. not processed) form:
> 
> 1. How  could one pinpoint the pit's location knowing only compass
> direction and approximate feet from a reference point?  Note: ore
> buried in 1961 or 1962.  Ore was buried under approximately 4 to 5
> feet of soil.

	I would suggest that you use a combination of Ground Penetrating 
Radar (GPR), Magnetic Anomoly Detection (MAD) and a surface scan 
for gross gamma using a NaI detector (2" by 2" or larger). Once you 
compare and overlay the maps, the site boundary should be obvious. 
Downhole radiation surveys could be done, if needed, after the first 
three tests are done. Be aware that utilities (overhead power lines, 
sewer lines, water lines, etc.) and previous excavations in the area 
will all make your search more difficult. 

	Surface radiation scans by themselves may or may not locate the 
material. High background radiation levels or a high soil moisture 
content will make the surface scan data of less value.

> 2. If two samples (one of the ore and one of the soil beneath
> the ore)were to be taken once the pit was found....why would one
> sample for vanadium?

	I don't see the need unless you were attempting to define the 
material origin. The entire project should follow US NRC NUREG 5849 
which is very specific about sampling protocols. Failure to follow 5849 
will likely prevent you from releasing the site.

> 3. If elevated levels, in either of the two samples, for gross
> beta and gross alpha are obtained...why would one perform
> additional samples for tritium and carbon-14? 
	In certain forms, both H-3 and C-14 are mobile in the 
environment. Commercial radioactive waste disposal sites routinely 
monitor for C-14 and H-3 at the boundary as an indicator of potential 
isotope migration.

	If the material is known to be unprocessed ore, there is 
probably no need for the test in order to eventually release the site. 
However, it is a relatively inexpensive analysis and you will need the 
data anyway when you want to dispose of the waste.

	The presence of H-3 or C-14 in elevated levels will likely 
prevent you from classifying the material as NARM or exempt source 
material, therefore you will have to dispose of it as LLRW. The NARM vs 
LLRW designation will have a major influence on the disposal cost.

	Jim Williams
	NARM@Worldnet.att.com