Radiological Verification Survey at B&T Metals, 425 West Town Street,

Columbus, Ohio

M. E. Murray V. P. Patania C. A. Johnson

This report hs ken rcpmduccd directly from the t f s i avail3ble copy.

Avaihble to DOE and DOE conmuxs from the Olficc of Scienlific and Technical inlormaliar. P.O. Boa 61.W Ridsee. lX 378331: priccsav&lable

from (6t5) 576-8101, TTS 6268401.

A v ~ i t b I e t o h e public lmm the Naliorul Technical Inlormalion Service. U.S. Dcpvtmenl 01 Commcrcc. 5285 Pon Royal Rd.. Springlield. VA 22161.

This rcpon was prep& as an account o f work sponsored by an agency o f thc Unircd Sutcs Govcmmcnr. X c i h c ~ thc Uniicd Sulcs Govcrnmcn~ nor any ;Igcncy, Lhcrcol. nor any of theu crnployccs, mikes my warmly. cxprcss, or implicd.or assumcs my legal l i i i l i l y or rcsps ib i l i ty lor thcxcuncy.

.cmplclcncss, ar usclulncss o f any inlorm~tion, appmlus, product or p m s s

disclosed. or rcprcwnu iha ilsusc would not inlringcprivalciy o w n d righ:htr. Rcrcrcme hcmin to m y sprritii cornmcrchi product, poccss,or wrvicc by Kadc~me.mdcmu)r, wnulxlurcr, ar o~hcnvisc, dacs no1 mccwr i l y consirilulc w imply its cnllorscmcn~,~ccommcnhrion, or favoring by ihc Unilcd Sulcs Govcmmcnt or any agcncy ihvsmf. The vicws and o p i n i m o l mlhs cxprcrscd hcrcin do not ncccssuily w3k n rcflccl rhosc o f thc Unilcd Shtes Govcmrncnl or any agcncy ihcrcol.

Lm S C I W C l 3 DIVISION Envimnmenlal Restoration and Was& Management Non-Defense Programs

(Activily No. EX 20 20 01 O. ADS1310AA)

Results of the Independent Radiological Verifiation Survey at B&T Metals, 425 West Town Street,

Columbus, Ohio (COO01 V) M. E. Murray. V. P. Patanla, and C. A. Johnson

Date lssued -June 1997

Imestigation Team R. D. Foley-MclrunmcM Applicarionr and Dcvdopmenl Manager

M. E. Murray-FUSRAP PmjoCl Dimtor M. E. Murray--&Irvey Ttam Leader

Survey Team Members

*Midwest Technical, Inc.

WCd@omdby tht Measurement Appliitjons and Development Group

-by& OAK RIDGE NATIONAL LABORATORY

Oak Ridge. T- 378316285 &by

LOCKHEED MARTIN ENERGY RESEARCH CORP. lord%?

U. S. D E P A R M E M OF ENERGY wda mDDact DE-AC05-960R22464

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................. LIST OF TABLES ................................................................... ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ........................................................... ABSTRACT ............ .;. ......................................................... INTRODUCTION .................................................................... VERIFICATION PROCEDURES ..................................................

OBJECTIVES .............................................................. SURVEY METHODS .........................................................

VERIFICATION SURVEY AND ANALYSIS ................................. ........................ LOCATIONS OF REMEDIATION ACTIVITIES

............. DIRECT AND REMOVABLE RADIOACTIW'TY LEVELS SOIL AND TAR SAMPLES .................................................

CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................... REFERENCES ........................................................................

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

1 Drawing of ihc buildings on the BBtT Metals pqmty, Columhs, Ohio ........................................................................... 8

2 Drawing showing the general location of materials surveyed and left in the BM: storage area in the main building of the B&T Metals Company.. ................................................................... 9

3 Drawing showing gamma mcasurtmtnts taken throughout the main building on the ppoperty of the B&T Mclals Company ............... 10

4 Drawing showing the nathwtst m n of the roof of the main building where the north, south, and center gutters lie wt to

5 Locations of smars taken inside on overhead structures, and soil samples taken both inside and outside rhe main building ............... 12

LEST OF TABLES

........................ 1 Applicable guidelines for protection against radiation 13

2 Background radiation levels and conanmhns of selected radionuclides in soil in the Columbus, Ohio, area .............................. 14

3 k e n d o n s of rPdionuclides in soil and &r marials at ...................................... BdtT Metals. Columbus. Ohio (C0001V) 15

4 Trai-d& alpha and beta levels in nonh roof guna a d ceiling ............ overhead s m m s at B&T Metals, Columbus, Ohio (C0001V) 16

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This project wos ~ponsorcd by the ,Office of Environmental Rcstors(i~n. U. S. Drputmcn~ of m. nndcr conuact DE-Am-960R22464 wilh LoJ;hcod Martin Emrgy Rcscarch.Cofp. T k authors wish to aclmowted~c the contributiom of D. A. Robem md D. A. Rose of the Mclrumcnt Appliuticm and Devclopnrm Grwp for pdciption in tht sample preparation and analyses and reporling of data for this survey. The survey3ng assinancc of lbc suff m UIC susury team is also gratefully ncbwkdgad.

ABSTRACT

In the mid-1940s. B&T Metals, 425 West Town Snect, Columbus, Ohio btcame one of the first wmmmhl f m to provide extrusion of uranium Vilers into rods in suppon of Manhattan Engineer Disuict (MED) operations. The U.S. Depamncnt of Energy conducted radiological surveys of these sites to evaluate ~ u m n t radiological dh as part of the 1974 Formerly Utilized Sites R e d a l Action Rogiam (FUSRAP).

In 1988 and 1989, a preliminary radiological sumy was conducted by ORNL on the commercial property of B&T Metals. Results of the s w e y indicated that limited and localized residual radioactive material found in the main building and in one area outdoors exceeded current DOE guidelines, and h e site was recommended for mndiation.

In the spring of 1996, a radiological verification s w e y of this property was conducted by ORNL, the independent verification conmctor, in conjunction with decontamination opratims conducted under the supervision of Bcchtcl National. Incorporated. The verification survey ixluded gamma xans of the main building and pam of the grounds, limited beta-gamma scans of ihc b r i n g and roof, limikd alpha scans of inside ovahead mcturcs, smear rampling, and the cdkction of samples for radionuclide analysis. This repon describes the result: jf the radiological verification survey of h e commercial property of B&T Metals, Columbus. Ohio.

Based on the results of the post r c d a l action survey and verification dam reported in this document, all radiological measurements fall k low the limits prescribed by DOE radiological guidelines established for his site. and the B&T Metals property successfully meets the DOE radiological guidelines for trnresuicted use.

Results of the Independent Radiological Verificaf ion Survey at B&T Metals, 425 West Town Street,

Columbus, Ohio (C0001V) '

INTRODUCTION

The E&T Metals Company in Columbus, Ohio was one of many companies performing work during the 1940s asmiared with he developmen1 of nuclear energy for defense-related projects for the Manhattan Engineer Disaict (MED) and the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC). As a result of these activities, equipment, buildings, and land at some of the sites became radiologically contaminated with small amounts of the material resulting in low levels of contamination on the pmpmies. In 1974, the Fonnerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action Program (FUSRAP) was established by the LI. S. Dcpanrnent of Energy (DOE) to identify and reevaluate the radiological status of these sites and assist in the assessment and cleanup activities.1

B&T Metals, located at 425 West Town Street on the southwest side of CoIumbus, Ohio, was one of the first commrcial firms to provide exmsion of uranium billets into rods in support of the MED operations. Measurements t a i n in March and April of 1943 contimed excessive amounts of airborne metals found in ihe main building near the rolling table. exmsion trough, and furnace. The exmsion and machining activities were relatively small scale and occulTed over a period of approximately !en months.

Tk buildings and property cover most of a city blmk and include throe buildings: he main building, a storage building, and an extrusion building (Fig. 1). The extrusion building did not exist ar the time of the MED-sponsored activities . The work performed for MED occumd in the northwest comer of the main building, the largest of these three structures. Reportedly, shavings from ihese activities may have been dumped outside in what is now a parking m a , west of be main building.1

In August 1988 and April 1989. preliminary mdiological surveys were conducted by membcrs of the Measurement Applications and Development (MAD) Group of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) on the commercial property at B&T Metals, Columbus, Ohio.3 The preliminary survey included surface gamma scans of the main building and most of the property outdoors. collection of dust and debris and soil samples,

* The survey was wormed by membtn of UK Mcarurcmcrlt Applicalions and Development Group

of the fma Hcallh Sciencci Research Division (now ihe Life Sciences Division) of Oak Ridge National Labontory under DOE fontran DE-ACOS-%OR22464.

1

d i m and transferable measurements of alpha and beta-gamma activity levets inside and M the roof, and air sampling inside the main building.

The survey rcpon, published in 1990, concluded that limited residual radioactive material was found in localized areas of the main building and in the drain system beneath the floor, and in one area outdoors east of the storage building (south of the substation, Fig. I), where shavings from the former MED operations were reponodly dumped. Although an examination of the "present-use conditions" for this site suggested that no significant radiation exposures would result, the property exceeded C - ~ ~ D O E guidelines, and was scheduted for r c d a l action.

Demntamination of ihe facility was wnducted by subcontractor p ~ e l under the dimtion of Bcchtel National, incorporated (BM), the project management contractor for FUSRAP.

The independent radiological verification survey detailed in this report was performed during the pcriod from April to June 1996 under the FUSRAP program by members of the Measurement Applications and Development Gmup at ORNL at the request of DOE. The DOE'S policy to assign an independent verification contractor (IVC) ensures the effectiveness of remedial actions p e r f o h within NSRAP and confms the site's compliance with DOE guidelines.

VERIFICATION PROCEDURES

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the v d ~ c a t i o n activities was to conCirm (1) that available documentation adequately and.accuratcly describts the post-remedial action of the facility that i s to be verified, and (2) that the remedial action reduced contaminarion levels to within authorized limits. Applicable DOE residual radioactivity guidelines for protection of the g e n d public arc summarized in Table 1.

SURVEY METHODS

Although spot checks were made in areas not directly in the contaminated area, most of rhe radiological verification survey of the site was concentrated in an area of appmximately 50 x 150 ft on tht fmt floor of the northwest coma of the main building, including the floors. ovtrhcad suucturcs, the roof, and rmf gutters. On the outside, the area at the west end of the main bui ldig swth of the substation, as well as the sewer -holes on the south side of the building (Fig. 1) were surveyed. The building was deteriorated, cluttered, and dirty. Soil and other samples wm taken outside on the west side of the building, inside from crumbling concrete ' hnches " in the floor, and from the

gutten on rhc roof. In some places the floor had badty deteriorated and the crumbling mncrcte had becn removed down to the soil. In another a m , a 3-4 in. layer of concrete !F covered the original floor. Materials (such as bricks, vats, and h m s ) left on si : but Y

moved out of the remediated northwest corner of the building (see Fig. 2). were also 7

checked for contamination. The survey covered -10-20 9 of the floor area in thc building, in addition to any areas of likely contamination inside and outside.

1 1 Thc verification survey of the site included: ( I ) a gamma scan of the floors in the

entire building at the surface and at one meter above the surface using Bicron microrcm detectors, and a gamma scan of a suspected contaminated area in the alley outside h e west end of the main building with the Field Inswment for Detection of tow-Energy X- Rays W L E R ) ; (2) beta-gamma x a n s of the floors and overhead srmcturts indoors in the nonhwest comer of the building. and outdoors of the m f and roof gutters, and two sewer manholes south of the building with "pancake" GM detectors; (3) limited alpha scans on overhead s m u r e s with a ZnS scintiilation probc; (4) selective smear sampling for nansfcrable alpha and kta-gamma activity on ovchead sin~cturcs and roof gutters; and (5) radionuclide analysis of soil samples taken outside on the west end of the main building and from under the concrete floor inside the building, and samples of the material from the roof gutters.

S w e y methods followed guidelines for a generic site as outlined in References 4 and 5. The northwest area of the main building was divided into a series of 6-m2 survey blocks, with the southwest comer of the building used as the origin (NOJXI), and the first block at N40,Eil (Fig. 2). Insaument calibrations were verified and background checked daily.

VERIFICATION SURVEY AND ANALYSIS

Cumnt guidelines for sites included within NSRAP are summarized in Table 1. Typical background Miation levels for the Columbus. Ohio area are presented in Table 2. These data are provided for comparison with the survey results presented in this section. Gamma measurments presented in this report are gross readings; background radiation levels have not been s u b m e d . Similarly, background concenuations have not been subuacttd from radionuclide conccnuations in soil.

Beta-gamma contamination levels were recorded in gross counts ptr minute (cpm), background adjusted and converted to disintegrations per minute (dpnJ100 cmz) using standard geomeay factors for beta-gamma pancake probJsicron ratemeter combination. Transferable radioactivity I m l s (smears) arc reported as net counts with background s u b m a d .

- 2,;: 2 $2 ;Fi S',

4 7 $: .$ g<

LOCATIONS OF REMEDIATION ACT'IVEIES $3 & ,> ,

The areas remediated involved (1) a soil arca west of the main building and south ot , .,,. . . . . , L I' i "*> . ..

thc substation. (2) the nonhwest corner of the main building and the rain gutters above this am, and (3) thnc outside man-holes Mar the building (see Fig. 1). - . . . .

.- . . .

The small area of soil just wesr of the building was identified during the initial i~;j survey in 1988 (Ref. 3) and again in April 1996 during tttc independent vaification ....., , . I;..

, . , . . survey. The 1996 survey was perfarmed using FlDLER instruments taking t i m d ,.:. - . . ~< . . measurements on a 2-rn g id . The extent of the contamination was defined by BM. a - - . .-..

1 :? The northwest comer of the building (-5000 ftz) required r e d a t i o n of the floors, 2

walls, overhead stnrcturts, outside rain gunen. some floor drains, and limired subsurface - soil. The extent of the affected drains and associated piping was identified as part of the L? . remediation. BNI investigated the drain system from all endpoints and determined the

!?. - scopeof possible contamination. The ORNt staff mncurrcd with the BNI assessment

.?, since their approach was msonable, and concluded that a more detailed analysis was .- .:., ?G ; unjustified. - -

'Ihrec manholes contained residual material: two on Walnut Sacet and one on Town +?

3.

Street. - DIRECT AND REMOVABLE RADIOACTWRY LEVELS

Gamma Radiation Levels

Gamma exposure rates m g c d from 6 to 9 at 1 m above B e flm while surface utposure rates ranged from 6 to 8 on the first and sccond flaon of the main buifding (Fig. 3). These values ere comparable to the typical range of background levels for the area of 7 to 9 pR/h (Table 2). Gamma levels ar accessible flwr and wall surfaces were slightly higher on c o n w with bricks. concrete, and orher materials that contain naturally occurring radioactivity.

Alpha and Beta-Gamma Measurements

Direct and transferabIc beta-gamma levels were measured over selected and accessible of the floor, walls. ceiling srmcturcs, beams and msscs, and rooftop Sutlers in the

nonhwest corner of the building. Two sewer manholes on the south side of the main building wtre also surveyed (Fig. 1). Alpha levels were measured at seleczed locations where beta-gammaIcvels were elevated.

Direct measurements. bera-gamma activity levels were measured on accessible overhead beams and trusses and on dry areas of tite floors in the northwest comer of the

building when contamination was found in the first s w e y . Direct beta-gamma activity levels measured on floors generally ranged from 1500 to 4800 dpmt100 cm2. Higher activity of up to MWX) d p d 1 0 0 ern2 was detected on contact with red brick wal': and conmete joints. Two spots of conramination were found on the floor where the area was badly deteriorated that measured from 2000 to 5700 d p d l 0 0 cm2 beta-gamma activity. Some activity above guidelines was found on the floor in spots during the initial survey by the verification team bu! were remediated and again surveyed and the area verified below guidetines.

Direc~ bem-gamma levels on the overhead structure surfaces generatly ranged from 1500 to MXXI dpdlOO cmz, and up to 9000 dpdlOO cm2 on the upper surfaces-of a

--

small (1 m x 8 em) section of an "I';bcam where individual spots of u p ; ~ 3450 d p d 1 0 0 em2 were detected. Generally, a l ~ h a levels on overhead srmctures ranacd fmm 45 to 900 .- . - d p d l O O cm2 when measured over selected locarions with elevated gamma levels, S-s were taken in artas with elevated measurements.

Spotty contamination was also found on some overhead structures. Small spots measuring up to 6000 dpdlOO cm2 beta-gamma, and to 1842 dpm/lM) crnz alpha activity werc found in scattered areas on beams. trusses, ledges, drains. drainpipes, window sills and olherwerhead smctures. A beta-gamma r a n of the floors under these bcams showed no tea-gamma measurements above guidelines.

Two manholes outside the south side of the main building (Fig. 1) were surveyed for beta-gamma activity. Several spots along he southern sides of the manholes were found that ranged from 1250 to 1500 d m 1 0 0 cmz above background. The third manhole. located on Town Street, was not surveyed by ORNL; however, ORNL slafrreviewed the BNI survey data ad found it toreasonably demonstrate compliance.

The gutters running east to west on the roof (Fig. 4) were surveyed for residual activity. Spots ranging frorn 240 to 320 dpdlOO cmz were measured on the center and south gutters. Samples werc taken of the tar-like material in the gutters and analyzed for radionuclide concentrations. ResuIts of the analysis are shown on Table 3.

The general scan range of the nonh gutter was 1500 to 4500 d p d 1 0 0 cm* bela- gamma, with spots ranging from 1500 to 279 d p d 1 0 0 cm? The nonh gutlas did no1 have the tar base, therefore no samples could bt t a k n at the elevated spots. Even though the direct measurements were less than the guidelines for fixed contamination, smears were taken frorn the nonh gutter at these spots to ensure the guidelines for transfemble contamination wcrcsatMd

Transferable measurements. Smcars were collecxed at selected locations in the north guner on the roof and from setected areas inside on overhead structures to ensure that remedial efforts left no residual transferable radioactivity above established guidelines.

The locations of the smears arc shown on Figs. 4 and 5. Results from the smear analyses indicate no removable beta-gamma or alpha activity above guidelines. Results of the s m u u analyses are presented on Table 4. With h e exception of one smear sample taken from an overhead m s s which measurcd 42 dpnJlO0 a n 2 alpha activity (sample VTI), all otha m c a w m e n t s wen less than the insmmnt-spocifc critical detection level (L3.'

SOIL AND TAR SAMPLES

Systematic and biased samples of soil and other material werc taken outdoors west of the main building between the substation and the storage building, and on the roof from the gutters. Samples were taken indoors under the concrete flmr where mnchts had formed in the crumbling concrete. Sample locations are shown on Figs. 4 and 5.

All samples werc analyzed to determine the concenmtions of ZgU, 226Ra. and BTh. Results of the radionuclide analysis arc shown in Tabie 3. The site specific guidelines for total uranium concenirations of 35 p r i g (- 17.5 pCig 'mu) have been applied at this site (Table 1).

Results of the analyses show that concentrations of m R a and DrIh were !ow, ranging from 0.13 to 2.3 pC$g both outside and inside the building and in the guncr material. All these values art comparable to background levels in the area, and welt below DOE guidelines.

Uranium conmaations were slighlly higher. Concenaatims of BaU ranged tram 1.8 to 7.0 pCllg in the gu tm material and from 0.85 to 6.5 pCi/g outside the building. and up to 29 p C i g in the material taken from inside the building (Table 3). Five biased samples (VB4 to VB8, fig. 5) w m collecrad from the small area (-25 mz) where subsurface contamination was found under drain pipes that wtrt m m v e d during the remediation. The average concentration was 14 pWg, which i s less than the alkowable guidelines. For an area of this size the allowable concentration is 70 p W g total uranium.

CONCLUSIONS

Rior to remedial efforts, uranium residuals exceeded current DOE radiological guidelines in somt spots in the main building and outside on the west end of the building. Decontamination of the facility was p u f o d under the direction of BM. Initially, spotty contamination on pans of the floor was identified by the ORNL verification team; thescrcsiduals were removed d the areas resurveyed by the ORNL team.

'The critical detection levels (LC ) for uansferable alpha and beta activity are 5 and 168 dpn/100 anz, respectively.

C-r *:!. ,.: - 8..

I.! j:. ;.. I;. - L.; ,I_

, . I - .

.d

L. " $,j ",

Lf- -- g; :::. 5 '.- Fi. C >:.

'I. :?

17- .. (3 !?, 6 g.

- ,e

. . @ 1; - ..'

Results of this independent radiological verification survey of the main buiiding at B&T metals in Columbus. Ohio conftrm that residual uranium contamination in the northwest corntr inside and on the m f of the building has been remediatad to levels meeting h e DOE guidelines for this site. While some spotty contamination was measured in scattered arcas, this contamination is imbedded in the concrete and metai, and because of the irregular shapes of beams, trusses and other structures, the average contamination per square meter meets the guidelines. The overall results of the dirtct scans and the removable smear analyses showed that duccr and transferable activity on the floors, overhead structures and roof are below appiicable guidelines. The rtsults of analysts of samples on the roof and outside on the west side of he building indicate that all ndionucIide concentration measurements are below the limits prescribed by DOE radiotogical guidelines.

Bascd on the resul~s of the post remedial action survey and verification data in this repon, this site has no residual contamination above the DOE radiological guidelines established for this site. Therefore it should be released without any radiological restricrions.

REFERENCES

1. U. S. Departcent of Energy, A Background Report for tk Formerly Urilized Manhartan Engincer DismmccIAtomic Energy Commission Sites Program. WWV-0097, Sepomber 1980. .

2. Personal communication, Vic Sharp, retired employee of B&T Metals, to J. t Quillen, Oak Ridge National Laboratory. August 22, 1988.

3. W. D. Coraell. J. L Quillen, and I. W. Crulckr, Resdfs of the Preliminary Radiological Swvey at BAT Mnafs, 425 Wesi Town Srreer, Columbur, Ohio (COW), ORNURASA-8911. Manin Marietta E m g y Systems, Inc., Oak Ridge Natl. Lab., Octokr 1990.

4. T. E. Myrick, B. A. Berven, w.D. Cottrtll, W. A.Goldsmith, and F. F. Haywmd, P r o c e h s Manual for the ORNL Radiological Survey Activities (RASA) Program, ORNUI'M-8600, Manin Marietta Energy Systcms. Inc.. Oak Ridge Narl. Lab., April 1987.

5. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Health Sciences Research Division, Mearurernenr Appiicmiorr~ and Deve topm Group Guidelines. OW6782. Martin Marietta Energy Systems, Inc., January 1995.

DWG 96.795 1

B&T Meulr 42.5 W. Tovn SL Columbus, Ohio

COOOlV

fig 1. Drrtwing of the W n g on the B&T M& prqxrty, Co~ut'nb~s, Ohio. ?he two amholes on he south side of the main building were also sweyed.

B&T Metals 425 W. Town Sl. Columbus. Ohio

CvOoolv

MAIN BUlLDlNC B&T METALS 24E J I ~ E IZE .$E-J?,OE--L--- ----L--

I

Fig. 3. Drawing showing gamma measurements taken throughout the main building on the property of the B&TMctals Company. The northwest corner of the building (remcdiatcd area) is marked off in &m grids.

Fig. 5. Locations of smears taken inside on overhead structures, and soil samples taken both inside and outside the main building. Results of analyses are shown on Tables 3 and 4. (Drawing not lo Kale)

Table 1. Applicable guidelines l o r protection againsi radiation gj (Limits for uncontroUed areas) g$

34 Guideline value +

Mode of exposure Exposure conditions 37 <,<

Gamma radiation Indoor gamma radiation level (above background)

20 w

Total residual surfaa ZaU. =TI. U-na%ural (alnha cnrir~ers) - . contarninationb or

Bern-gamma emittew Maximum Average Removable

Radionuclide con- centra~ons in soil (generic)

Maximum pemissible con- cenmtion of ihe following radionuclides in soil above

backgrwnd levels. averaged over a 100-m2 area

W h

Derived concenuatim Total uranium

'?' .y1 *-' &i

15 .W dpm/100 an2 . . .. . 5.000 dpmll00 an2 <. .~.

1.000 dpm/100 cmz ..~. 5 .t i; ..

5 pClg averaged over the first I5 cm of soil below the surface; IS pCiig when averaged over 15 an-thick soil layers > 15 cm below

tk surface

Guiddine lor n m Applicable to tocarions with GA = G.{lOO/A)~R , homogeneous wn- an area Q5 m2. with signifi- wherc tamidom (used in can~ly eltvatcd am-m GA = guideline fofhot addition to the of radionuclides rho1 spots") spot" of area ( A ) 1Wm2 guideline). Gi = guideline averaged

over a IWm2 area

Qe 20 CIR/h shall comply with ihc basic dore limit (100 nuen-&) whtll an appoopriatc-we scenario is P bDOE sllrfact ammiaation guidelines are carrislcm wi* NRC Cw'drL'nesfor Deconromim'on or

Facilirirs and Eqldpmmr Prior lo R e h for Uwcrvicred Usc or Tmniwiwn ~ l i c e n n s f o r 8pProduc1, SUUCC. or%cinl Nuclror M W , May 1987.

<Baa-gamma unim (rdiuclidcs wilh decay modes Mher ban alpha emirrion or spa~tanmus G m ) except WSr. 26Ra. 213% ~ A c , 13%. 1-1. 'XI, IIU.

dWE guidelines fm uranium arc & r i d on a sre-spcirc bad% The guidelint of35 pC'dg toarlal uranium har kta applied at lhir FUSRAPsitc S o w c c Mu. D. G., B u h B r o w Md B and T MrroLr Sires- Vrm'un Soil GuidcILus. Menw~MdmJrom AdIrr lo I. W. Waloncr (CCN 131598). Junc 27.1994. Aqmm National Labpratory, D&bn qf C v i d c h for U r m u m u ~ R c d d u a l R o d i w c r i ~ MarerioI in Soil or rkB&TMer& Gutpup Sife, Cdwrblrr. Ohio fDr41). 1995. * W E guidtlinw rpafiry that tvayravmHc effm shan kc made ta idauify and to ~ t m ~ v e my source bas a cmunmim macdiq U) limn ihc guidtline value. LrrPpstivcof arca (adapted im R&d

GvidcIinesfor Ruiduot -ti= Materiatu~ F U W ad Ranore SFMP Sdes, April 1987). SOWCCF: Adapad fmn US. DepamncntdEoagy, R&&ionRormion qftk PuMic and the

G v i r ~ ~ ~ l , W E OrdCT 54005. Api l1990,d US. Dtpanmentof EMgy, GuidcIinrsJor RrsiduoI R a d i a u r i ) ~ ~ Material a Fmmerty UliIhrd SiurRemc&IAcricn hgrm a d RcmoIe S q l u Fmilitics M-UKIU Program Siw. Rcv. Z March 1981; .od U. S. D e p m m ~ q f h r g y Radiologid Control M d , DOE N 5480.6 (DOYM-2ST), Junc 1W2

Table 2. Background radiation levels and concentrations of selected radionudidu in soil in the Columbus, Ohio, area-

Radiation level or radionuclide Type of radiation measurement concentration

or sample Range Average

Gamma exposure rate at 1 m 7-9 8 above ground surface ( W ) b

~SOWCC: T. E. Myrick, B. A. Btrven, and F. F. HaywoA, Slate Background Rodintion LtYCIr: Resulu qfMcrz1wmullls Token During 1975-1 979,ORNL/IU- 7343, Union Carbide Corp.. Oak Ridge Natl. Lab.. Novcmba i981.

bValucs obtajncd fran 2 W m s in the Columbus, Ohio, area CValues oMncd from 3 M o n s in the Columbus, Ohio, area.

Table 3. Concentrations of radionuclidrs in soil and other materials at B&T Metals, Columbus, Ohio (C0001V)

- ~

Sampie Grid nurnkp locarjon

D e ~ b (cm)

=*u P6Ra ='m

VS I 6E. mu& guttcr 2 . M 2.3 i1 2.2 E? VS2 16E, south gutter 4 .0 0.3QH1.10 <0.29 VS3 27E, south guacr 4 3 1 0.3QHI.2 0.4M0.20 VS4 9E, center gutter 7.0il 4.30 ~ 0 . 4 0 VSS 125E. m t e r yttcr 2.9il 0.90f0.5 d .60 VS6 2SE centa gutter 1. W . 7 029f0.06 c0.30

B h e d soil sample+ Ovrdoors

VBZA N8.6. E(4) 0-15 2.1 f l 1.7M. 1 1.0 f 0 . 1 VB2B 15-31 2.7 f 1 1.7f0.1 0.91f0.2 VBZC 31-46 2.2 f0.4 2.1f 0.1 1.0 f0.1

VMU N14Ja-8) 0.15 8.033 1.7M. 1 0.91f0.1

*Locations of soil and mmer material sarnda are shown on Fies. 4 and 5. Gutter - samp?a an all surface samfks.

Yndlcated counting emr is at the 95% wnlidence level (* 20). CSystematic samples an taken at lwations imnwaive of namma exposure rates. dB3ased samples-wee taken from anas with cl&atcd gamma exporiie ratu inside the

building and outdoors. *Samples talrtn fmm m h made in wncrctc floor (urder concretc pad), 12-18 in.

below floor level. jBNI split sample fmm same arca as sample VB3.

Table 4. Transferable alpha and beta levels in north roof gutter and ceiling overhead struciures at 3&T Metals,

Columbus, Ohio (C0001V)

Sample Grid Location Alphir Beta-gamma0 number location description (dpn/100 ma) (dpm/lOD anl)

Smears from mrth gut&

Smcar~ from overhead strucrwesd

VT? N445E18 ovahcadmm 42 1341 VT8 N52524 ovcmtaaIkam 101 1171 VT9 F449JE24 o*sbadh 101 L-61 VTlO ~n,~24 wtrbadrmpr 101 f-461 VTl l N46E5 omhadlbegn 101 [111 VTl2 NSZEZ

T z g = b o r 101 1291

aBrackds indicate lk value calculated is ks than the Lvalue of5 dpmllOO cmz alpha or 168 dpm/100 an1 beta.

blocations of smears from guner material are shown on Fig. 4. = Locatiom of smws from guner (lying in cast-wesl direction on the roo0 are measured

in metcrs cast of h e wcst wall. 4acations of smears from ceiling overhead smrctures are shown on Fig. 5.

INTERNAL DISTRIBUTION

1. K. I. Bmun 11-16. MAD Records Center 2. R. D. Foley 17. R. E Swajl

3-4. C. A. lohnsm 18. M. S. Uziel 5-7. M. E. Murray 19. J. K. Williams

8. P. T. Owen 20. Cenual Rcsurch Library 9. V. P. Patanis 21. Labontory Records-RC

10. R. E. Rodriguez 22. ORNL Technical Library, Y-I 2

EXTERNAL DISTRIBUTION

23. D. G. Adlcr. Formersites Restoration Div.. Oak Ridge Field Office. U.S. W E , P.O. Box 2001, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-8723

24. W. L. Beck, Oak Ridge Associated Universities, EJESD, 1299 Bethal Valley Rd., Oalc Ridge, TN 3783 1

25. George Bierman. Booz-Allen & Hamilton. Inc.. 12850 Middtebmok Road, Suite 2 10, Gemantown. MD 20874

26. James 1. Fiore. Director. Ofice of Eastem Area Rogntms, Offtce of E n v i m e n - tal Restoration, EM-24, U.S. Department of Encrgy, 19901 Gemantown Rd., Germantown, MD 20874- 1290

27. Albcn Johnson. Program Manager. Formerly Utilized Sites Remedial Action hogram, EM421. U.S. Depamnent of Energy, Cloverleaf Building, 19901 Germantown Rd. Getmantown, MD 20874-1290

28. N S R A P Document Cenicr. Sciencc Applicarions International Corporation. P.O. Box 2501. 301 Laboratoly Road. Oak Rig. TN 37831

. ~ . ,

29. S. K Oldham, Former Sites R-on Division, Oak Ridge Field Office, U.S. Depamnent of Energy, P.O. Box 2001. Oak Ridge, TN 37831-8723

30. L. K. hice. Dimtor, Former Sites Restoration Division. Oak Ridge Field Office, U.S. hpriment of Energy. P.O. Box 2001. Oak Ridge, TN 37831-8723

31. A. G. Toddings. NSRAP Projea Administrator. Bechtcl National, Inc., FLJSRAP Dcpanment, Oak Ridge Corporate Ctnkr. 151 Lafayette Drive, P.O. Box 350. Oak Ridge. TN 37831-0350

32-36. W. Alexander Williams. Designation and Certification Manager, Division of Off- Site Programs. Office of Eastern Area hograms. Office of Environmental Restoration. EM-421. U.S. Depanment of Energy, 19901 Germantom Rd.. Gemantown. MD 20874-1290

37-38. Office of Scidf ic and Technical Information. U.S. Depanment of Energy. P.O. Box 62 Oak Ridge. TN 37831