ML20196E398
| ML20196E398 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/31/1996 |
| From: | Robert Evans NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20196E288 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-99-238 NUDOCS 9906280238 | |
| Download: ML20196E398 (17) | |
Text
{
p TWD2.TWP8.[PFG [-/'
[aqt%/f;ff Robert Evans
/
' From:
To:
Date:
5/31/96 3:47pm
Subject:
Colorado Oil and Gas Corporation.
j Mr. Dane Finerfrock (I asked him to spell his name to be sure) of "the State of Utah called j
requesting information about a company called Colorado Oiland Gas Corporation. This i
company was reputed to have been in the business of upgrading raw ore. The company operated in the early 60's in Fry Canyon. The upgraded material was sold to a company in Mexican Hat, Utah (AZ Minerals operated in Mexican Hut atthough he was not sure if COGC sold the material to AZM). Currently, the land at Fry Canyon has tons of tailings on it, but no structures.
1 i explained to Mr. Finerfrock that the AEC did not always issue licenses to companies that i
mechanically upgraded ore. He thought that the ore was chemically upgraded (which would have required an AEC license).
Basically, Mr. Finerfrock wanted to know if the AEC had ever issued this company a license. Obviously, it is not on the terminated site list. Any information you have about
^
the company would be appreciated.
l CC:
LLH, TWD2.TWP8,MXM1 I
f.4 q {c ~ d6 : f N 6cr 1
/.
L(
4 4
$0$65S D E$f
O r
hfe.,
State 0 ataa J
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY Michael O. Leavitt 288 North 1460 West
~
p0 G" "
P.O. Bos 144870 4
i Dunne R. Nielson. Ph.D.
Salt IAe City, Utah 84114-4870 h
v^b (801) 338 6146 Voice
,8 E*" D""
ll Don A. Ostler. P.E.
(801) 5384016 Fax s
5 D""
k 5.:
3 (801) 136-4414 T.D D.
3 p%%g' June 4,1996
+
4 Om g g'W@
W Dave Naftz U.S. Geological Survey 1745 West 1700 South Salt Lake City, Utah 84104
Dear Mr. Naftz:
Subject:
Fry Canyon Project; BLM Fax to Steve Thiriot (Utah Div. Of Environmental Res and P.emediation) Received May 7,1996; May 15.1996 Conference Call; ponse Utah Department of Health Letter Dated May 18,1987 (Draft); Investigation Derived Waste (IDW) for Fry Canyon Project In conjunction with the BLM/DOF1USGS correspondence and conference call noted above, the Utah Division of Water Quality (DWQ) has reviewed the Utah Department of Health letter dated May 18,1987 (draft) which recommended a number of sampling sites associated with the Fry Canyon tailings area.
Consultations with the Utah Divisions of Radiation Control and Solid and Hazardous Waste indicate that these original recommendations for samplin CERCLA as "no further action" to be taken.g may no longer be pertinent. The site has been rated by Current Utah Underground Injection Control (UTC) and Ground Water Quality Protection rules require discharges to ground water to either be authorized by rule or permitted, with no endangerment of ground water allowed. Although authorization-by-rule may not require you to do background ground water sampling at this stage of your project, we recommend that the following parameters be included in any charactenzrtion effort at the s,te.
i Sites to be sampled 1.
Ground water seeps for water:
2.
Well serving Fry Canyon Hotel 3.
Any existing on-site or adjacent wells completed in the aquifer of interest 4.
Fry Creek upstream of the tailings area 5.
Fry Creek downstream of the tailings area The latter two samp'es are suggested because of the apparerit interaction between the creek and local ground water.
This would help confirm that any future activities on site do not cause any increased problems.
Since the actual chemical banier material has not been determined, a conservative approach to obtaining background data should be taken. Water samples from the above sites should be analyzed for the following parameters:
1.
Total metals for:
Antimon Arsenic, Barium, Beryllium, Cadmium, Chromium, Copper, y. Lead, Mercury, Nickel, Selenium, Silver, Thallium and Zine.
2.
Sulfate 8
. 3.
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) 4.
pH 5.
Any organics reasonably expected to be a constituent in the chemical barrier (s) to be tested.
J N
( ;
7 ann m. Q j
I
'R a
8 Dave Naftz June 4,.1996 f
Page 2 Appropriate sampling methods, containers, preservatives and chain of custody procedures should be followed, with guidelines available from this office, the State Lab, or from many qualified environmental I
consultants. Analyses should be done at a State-certified lab.
{
Also, as ou proceed with pr 'ect development I offer the following comments for your consideration
, in prder t at you don't do something that would be contrary to different Division rules. These comments come as a result of conversations with representatives of the different programs.
Tailings-drill cuttings may be disposed of on top of the existing tailings pile without a permit, and do not need to be sampled if this disposal option is chosen. Ground water produced from the uppermost aquifer during construction / sampling of wells may also be discharged on top of the existing tailmgs, pile without a permit, provided measures are taken to assure no surface run-off occurs (i.e., a pond is utilized in which 100% percolation / evaporation takes place, etc.).
We recommend that you do not plan to dispose (inject) the tailings-drill cuttings or waste ground water into a well.
If well disposal of these wastes is desired, and the intended receiving aquifer or any underlying aquifer has less than 10,000 mg/l TDS within a two mile radius, it will be necessary for the wastes to be analyzed for radioactivity, as well as those parameters noted above which are appropriate for the waste type. If the radioactivity of the cuttings or the ground water exceeds the concentrations listed in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Table 2, Column 2, or any other analyte present in the wastes may cause endangerment to the ground water or met the definition of a hazardous waste, the waste (s) will not be allowed to be placed in a well. AvaiDie data indicates that the radioactivity level of the ground water has exceeded a 10 CFR Part 20 value in the past.
If the referenced radioactivity levels are not exneded in the current investigation, there is no hazardous
- waste present, and there is no significant potential for ground water endangerment from other analytes, authorized-by-rule Class V well dis osal is an o tion. Authordation-b -rule to inject is obtained by submitting a completed injection we 1 inventory orm (copy attached) to is office Please call me at (801) 538-6146 if you have any questions.
Sincergly, p/4 Gerald L. Jackson, Environmental Scientist Ground Water Protection Section GU:wfm
' Enclosure Steve Thiriot, Div. Of Environmental Response and Remediation (W/o encl) cc:
Loren Morton, Div. Of Radiation Control (W/o encl)
Dennis Downs, Director, Div. Of Solid and Hazardous Waste (W/o encl)
Dan Jackson, EPA Region VIII (W/o encl)
SE Utah District Health Dept. (W/o encl)
Dave Ariotti, District Engineer (W/o encl)
M"" Mite"*" """"
\\
\\
h' i
Chemical Barrier Meeting Agenda Date:
June 5-6,1996 Locadon:
U.S. Geological Stuvey 1745 W 1700S Sah Luke City Confemnce Rm 1009 l
~
Wednesday, June 5 7
- 8:30 am introductions (USGS) 8:45 am Chemical banier mscarch/ funding goals (EPA) 9:00 am Summary of AFO chemical barrier technology (DOE-G/PG) 9:30 am Other chemical bairier technologies to consider (EPA /USGS) 9:45 nm Overview of workplan and schedule (USGS) 10:15 am Break 10:30 nm Pty Canyon site overview and conceptual hydrology (USGS) 10:45 am Anticipated regulatory issues (BIX/DEQ/ EPA) 11:30 am Update from DOI National Performance Review JLuMat Comm. (BLM) 11:45 pm Break forlunch 1:00 pm Reactive solute transport modeling--a potential method for evaluating banier performance (USGS) 1:30 pm 1997 Ccatainment Technology Conference (EPA /USGS) 1:45 pm Wrap up (all meeting panicipants) 2:00pm Depsn USGS office forHanksville
~
Thu ay, June 6 7
8:00 am epart Hanksville/
'vtr'o Fry Canyon site t
- b. -
9:30 am S1 Visit (B f
1:00 pm Lu Canyon Restaurant Tlwsday's Special = Fry burgers)
)
'1 Y 2:00 turn 3
f pm Arrive in Salt Lake 'ty Site visit logistics: A block of 15 rooms at the Whispering been reserved for the night of June 5. Call me (Dave Naftz (801) 975-3389) pefore Fric'ay May 17 m nserve your room (!pecify smoking or non smoking). Roorn rate is 540.22 with tax.
gC A 12-passenger van has been re served for the field trip / Ibis van is retunung to SLC. We
$g P
should have enough scadng for all participants, assuming that the DOE-GJPO will be driving thelt own v:hicle to remm to Grand Junction after the site visit.
A p
Suggestion for hotel in Salt Lake (near office and within lodging rate):
8 ShiloInn 1-800-222-2244
.~...
j
mym.,,o...n.,.,ozo
.., e z..,,. -
,>.,,,,,z,e;. 2
. Geology and Ore Deposits of the White Canyon Area San Juan and Garfielc Counties, Utah By ROBERT E. THADEN, ALBERT F. TRITES, Ja., and TOMMY L. FINNELL G !. 0 L O G I C A L SURVEY BULLETIN 1125 Prepared on behalf of the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission e!
\\M I
UNIGH Ca.<3IDE c" TION Mini"i & !?etnic Di.vicion Erp1rratinn Dev rtm:nt Library Grand Jmoti,n, Colorado h
Otl11 Di.AgfDX I U l WGUp1WI IULU i 0-l UD e
la IDMM e UfV44DlD4J" 01f 00U 0 41 U e 4F 4 b
INTRODUCTION 5
k 6
e
.9.,fs t
h[') ?}I_.
( -...
g l
5 1 i1
'.....I
?
</.]j g
1 in o
m t
g
/Ne.../L) g,g i M, s
j D
t, y,%
~ y.'
sJb4eg=<..
g 2
s 8 h Asb('
's$
,/ Y r
7 f(' g. gry% y"4 _p 1
s i t b
s g${Qf/: q :Qo '
\\4/
f
+-
f
,R,2 i
I-
$1
,:v,w,
0%
\\
N a
m
l bt:NI tlY;X0r0X 1010C0paer 'IUtu.
0- 'I-U D. I;1'IAM i d 'I U Z 4 3 'I O 4 4-*
01'I 00U DElUiB 4 i
4
{
V URANIUM DEPOSTIS 87 j
HISTORY OP XDTING The advent of new commercial uses and the consequent gmat de-mand for uranium have ushered in a profitable era of pmspeding and exploration in the White Canyon area. The profound difference between the economic value of the mineral resources of the area in 1925 when Gregory (1988) studied the area and today is indicated 7(
l clearly by the opening sentence of Gregory's chapter (1988, p.107) on
{
economic geology: "The San Jttan country is poorly supplied with l
)
minerals of economic interest."
Gold was known to be a constituent of the gravel along the Colorado l
River; it is reported by Gregory (1988) to have been discovered near the mouth of Trachyte Creek by Cass Hite in 1888. Gregory stated that between 1886 and 1889 claims were mined on 21 bars along the i,
Colorado River from the mouth of Red Canyon to Lees Ferry. Dur-ing the period 1889-1927 only sporadic work was done on the most pmmising claims.
Except for minor work in the gold properties during the depression vaars, the placers have not been worked.
ji Prospecting for copper in the White Canyon area is stated by l
Gregory (1988, p.107) to have begun possibly as early as 1880. Ac-t tivity was especially intense during 1906 and 1907 when it was stimu-(
lated by an unusually high price for copper.
Plans had been laid in 1907 for the crection of a copper processing plant near Fry's cabm, which pmsumably was in what is now called Fry Canyon. However, the plan did not materialize, and the area remained relatively inactive until 1916 when copper ore was shipped from the Blue Dike prospect (now called the Happy Jack mine) and the Dolly Varden claim (now
?
s called the Four Aces claim) to the mill for testing (Gregory,1988, J
?
p.107 ; Butler and others,1920, p. 621-622).
)
The properties in the area apparently mmained idle again until 1948, when their possible value as sources of uranium ores was recog-nized.
Two truckloads of copper ore from the Happy Jack mine were sent to the smelter in Garfield, Utah, in 1946. However, the ore was not acceptable at the mill because of its uranium content. Another truckload was sent from the mine to the U.S. Atomic Energy Commis-alon mill at Monticello, Utah, in 1948, but the ore was not accepted f;*
[
because of its copper content. In spite of the discouragements of
(
marketing the uranium ore, intensive prospecting was conducted h
throughout the area by a few companies and various local individuals j
from 1948 until 1951, and a large part of the rim exposures was staked.
h i
(;
The arst diamond-drilling exploratory progam in the area was con-f l
ducted by the Vanadium Corporation of America in deposits of the
(
Shinarump member of the Chinlo formation on Fry Point. The 4.i
[
Vanadium Corporation of America established a small mill at the di i
S_
r,
,,,U,. y,,,- m.....
,, b b,,,,,
. ~.... ~.,,
. m.......
Colorado River at the settlement of White Canyon and began receiving uranium ore from the Happy Jack mine in 1940. This mill received virtually all the production from the Happy Jack mine from 1940 until
- (
late 1958, when the mill was abandoned. A few shipments from the Hideout mine were received at the mill at White Canyon during 1949.
-jj Mining was begun at several other claims in 1951; among thesc claims were the Posey, Joe Bishop, Yellow John, Jomac, Jerry, and U~
the White Canyon No.1. All the om from these claims was shipped y
to the mill at Monticello.
- j, Little prospecting for uranium was done during 1952 and the early i
part of 1953. The U.S. Atomic Energy Commission began diamond
-[
drilling in the White Canyon area during the summer of 1951, and 1
exploratory drilling by private company under contract to the U.S.
Geological Survey started on Deer Flat in the fall of 1953.
Promising ore discoveries resulting from this exploration resulted in a new wave of prospecting during 1958 and 1954. Ground was claimed wherever possible behind the rims formed of the Shinarump member of the Chinle formation, and most of the area overlying the Shinarump member, both accessible and relatively inaccessible, is now claimed.
l Since 1954, private industry has taken more interest in diamond drill-i ing and other exploratory work throughout the area.
A buying station for the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission was erected on a site in White Canyon near the Happy Jack mine. This jO station received all the ore produced from the White Canyon area in i j,j 1955 and 1956.
PRODUCTION j
The first uranium ore produced from the arca was in 1940, when ore g
from the Happy Jack mine was shipped to the Vanadium Corporation a
of America mill in the settlement of White Canyon, Utah. In that year small amounts of ore were shipped to the mill at White Canyon from the North Point claim and the Hideout mine. However, receipts 4
j of ore shipments from all except the Happy Jack mine were soon dis-continued at that mill, and nearly all the production of the White Canyon area between 1940 and 1951 was from the Happy Jack. The
' i ore produced from the Happy Jack mine during this period was of small tonnage of regular shipments. Ore was shipped from the Posey yh mine to the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission mill at Monticello, Utah.
f, in 1950, but significant amounta did not come from the Posey until n'.
1951.
l'?
Following the intensive p ospecting in 1951, production soon was forthcoming from the Bell, Fry No. 4, Jerry, Joe Bishop, Jomac, 1
Scenic No. 4, Yellow Jolm, and the White Canyon No. I properties, in 1
addition to regular production from the Happy Jack and Posey mines ii,
acm o s. net as t u s e.w w ;av
.,.m
<<>wc
- '~"'"~r i
(
}
I URANIUM DEPOSITS 89 and sporadic production from the Hideout mine. The production from some of these properties was ahort lived; the Bell and the Jerry
.Q olaims have beenidlesince1951.
4 As a mault of exploration imm 1951 to 1954 by the U.S. Atomic 4
Energy Commission, U.S. Geological Survey, and private companies, 7
partly with financial assistance from the Defense Minerals Explora-f tion Administration, pmduction has begun (1954) at the Blue Lizard, y
Gonaway, Maybe, Gismo, and Spook mines, many of which have been p
making regular shipments. Increased tonnages of reserves have boca p
found by the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission at the Happy Jack mine and by the U.S. Geological Survey at the Hideout mine. A loan I,
by the Defense Minerals Exploration Administration enabled the
- [
owners of the Jomac mine to block out substantial macrves, and this a
mine continues to produce (1954).
j' With the establishment of the Government receiving station in
{
lower White Canyon and the resulting shorter haulage, it is probable 4-that production will increase in the future, pmvided the market re-1 mains favorable and new supplies of om continue to be found.
E Most of the production to date has come from the Happy Jack mine, 4
but there are now at least four other major producing mines. Copper F
is the principal bypmduct of the ores at present; it varies greatly in amount in the pres from the same mine as well as from different mines.
LOCATION AND GEOLOGIO SETTING Most of ths known uranium ore bodies an in the eastern, western, and southern parts of the White Oanyon area (pl.1). Access to th'e central part of the area, especially in the vicinity of Blue Canyon, has been difBeult, and the remoteness of that area may account for its L
apparent lack of deposita.
Nearly a'il the deposits are in the Shinarump member of the Chinle t
formation, but a few low-grade ore bodies, like the one at the Jerry claim., are in sandstone or conglomerate beds near the base of the mudstone sandstone unit. Some mines, such sa the Posey, Joe Bishop, and Gons.way, are relatively near the surface, beneath benches formed of the Shinarump; but many of the high-grade uraninite-sulfide de-d posits aria in beds of the Shinarump beneath 1,000 feet or more of J
overlying rocks, including the upper part of the Chinle formation, the Wingate sandstone, and part of the Kayent,a formation.
g f
i y
Practically all the uranium deposits occur in channels that have f
4 been cut. into beds of the Moenkopi formation and filled by sandstone,
[i" siltatone, claystone, and conglomerate of the Shinarump member.
4 Mont of these channels am within a bmad belt of Shinarump ranging W
in width from 8 to 15 miles. This belt extends across the area from beyond Deer Flat on the east to beyond the Colorado River on the j
r sfSVh)naEnmdlQ.}]lodq r+S*
NRC FR'Csnjn 4k G' k a <s< t G/ify.
"lSIhl*]
m Gu mn s,k
/ P'=,r
,gg ga Serql$ (Etf e y' I
l00 '300p r
le p,(ep Cnuv m kl Se t e + < f
- .pgdte yd y(
f O*U $ delo.,le n O' 0 00 I
w cn tr o u
St. e 4 n 1,, y (6 ' " VCP1st) pho (o j rsj)] d.
[. 8 w%
.,SF 1(w Y q (
-In" Le f+ ' l<kY+s ter
%'^10 Pt Gor n a 4 e u d swi.
,j
L*Ar<d Wlkr Sn' a ~,1e 4,u, d SNW 4 6
gg mye4ek cawar* W b att e Fwrks *
,n.awww (20s) 533-40'1%
9 sCro,py*we v%
fr v e
SWWL Ns
~
r
l e
- *'~ -.hh,,
n4 ed g
M
(
b N
)
k
_', l (.5SEs."-%'.a ' T '
,/' "
N4, 8
~..
- ' M'I,,,
g
- A n' "d
a e
d "j g 4
h,,
- 4 d'
_4
.,m..-
-y%.
? ~%,
g,
n (,
' ~
,,,..Y--
'p *,
g.c.,,
e
\\
.I l
s n
. _ ' ' ^ ~
~._~ : -
a
~
'~'
w-
. 4 4
'fy..
r
__g
, y :V.5.*
_7 p '- 3
. '~ '. O u.e.,
b,_
w.
igi 4
4
~-
-~) Y Y g,
, p s_
. ~ - -. - _ ' ' '. As) ",.
Go
...~,s,
.; x,
=*"--'n
~ -*
N 6
g.
e m* -
"FN MY
~
.f,W
~ *
- "e* ?
=~
.i
.v f
g f
.4g
- W e
i j'
9 I'*
4 49
,_/
~ ', s e _: f,h,gfp a
[ ( 2d,4 N
- [
- i
'1 i.g,., p.
,a,,
. n.n a,.
c.
s
. ?
E n
o
'A,I
'. - w f*.
'i;
.4-3,s
= ",'-
s.
g
.J g
. ~
, - w g-
_s-
- y'.
- d. k.
- >,hgK'ha MA
.,.N
48 e
' ** A
. '.., m..
i l. :j '."i; y,,U,o'y.. ;j. g
+
u......,
.j3 1.
s:.
,L.
5-
[;,.
t 4,,. e,.
c
- .i
'. 0
},
' V i '., l j
., $,I,
i m, H f p/',
. [U Y i
. ?.
., :t ;-.,,
w
.. ::. )
' ?[. <f k, :.
- t. C! '.
3 Y'.y' f;i z y ;,
l. ',,,,f,) ~$'
i-I I l
.y :Vf~,
, ? ? '<,
b ij$'.d*h q;
( f. f> % < yp i lel(;?'hl.,)[l f.[,{lf,I i',,
~
j a.
. y' 3
y M. li g.
-f
),
ie jNC ii $, ?)/.44:
f:
(. t;f ;
- * ' y4
..),
t-
- s r.,
'pp,* g e,
, y,:.
p
..?
kk;fj pfkf, s...c.
- O,
f-f L
o
- v..
s t.
..y
-s iI f ' s,.
>;s. ' e '..)
f 1
=.
i
}. -. u ~.
U. S. NUCLE AR MEGULATORY COMMISSION 'LABORATORY USE ONLY g NRC FORM 303(Rill) pin CONTROL NUMBER REQUEST FOR ANALYSIS pg()f REOlON lli LABORATORY LICENSE NO.
DOCKET No.
sassput toCATCN WCQ Te nsINehel LtreNrc GdeS
\\
SAMPLE SUBMITTED oAn sAMPtss suonstTED PRIORITY TYPE
- TOTAL
- ROUTINE URGENT ~
8I N SAMPLE COLLECTION INTERVAL MONT DAY YEAR TIME START g ff fg cor i
STOP g
lf
[%
swoomi aseoNem.
Nf(4-6de.M (8(7) gg,g Ag UE8 D
OTHER TYPE OF ANALYSIS (Specify)
TO M W ORND gj ECOss ALPHA (GA) 4[gg/ gfgg OROSS BETA (GB)
[g,g ( (j(qm GAMMA SPEC (GS) g,y4 g,2 gg TRITIUM (H3)
CAR 00N 14 (C14)
T(of 'unn Z 3 2.,
IOD6N612$ (If23) asMams FAY t
- m ce,,, _ via h cortecta alceh(-
/
V CdlfdN Sfl1klo f emdlusv1 N 4 8,. (o{o rn d o oQ # h&
Onsk fo nn $.
i
&mMA Gea,J
$0MAfhr Q.(oOJC Q
).sell lam WOA4A M NNC LAGeel
&O Mfot%tf*1NE' [C6MO dbh< SLA C^C C [# $W JN l
NOTE: SAMPLESWILLBE DISCARDED AFTER ANALYSIS UNLESS REASONS ARE NOTED IN REMA
- FOR URGENT USE ONLY - SI0 nature blocks th must be completed ty the inspectors aW+lste Sectkm Chief and by the j
j Chief. EfflueMs Radistlon Protection Section BEFORE submitting this form to the Region Ill LaboMory, a0 NATURE - APMtOPmATE NUCtF,AR MAftmALS SAfCrY 6CCrKW 0907 OATE 80eNATVRE-FUEL FAQLmES AND CONTAMHATEO StrES GLCTON NftCFURM 303l Rut (484 LABORATORY L
W E-Tu N
a
[
0 e
R
- c em C
m c-b-
na F
q t
O 3
e 3
a
- w
/
R c
a 4
M h
rv 4 =
g3 7
c.
c$
cI E
0 4
o B P e
D j
r Tm.
v M
(
R g
)
A L
Es i
u Mi s'
c c
j en
=
r L
s
/
e omS
/
jDa S n
f o
Mu i s
m s
ma e l
e r
e n S
s' y
c
/2i no yA w
0 m
2 2
S y
6 A
,MP
,L
,E
,o an h
4 a
n, D,4 e
N c
==.R P
2 y
avm m o
E s-a C-a 2
9 2
c t
o e
t o
O v
R m
=
m
%*** e D
- mS H
m E
.U vaa E
.S s
T N
>n L
y fC h
LE cc A
uo S
mm U
E
{
o
=
G L
=
A c
c A
mo o
T u
eu l
m O
r o
R m
m a
Y C
co o
O rm ua W
s ts W
s O
M o
E ca R
n I
ex c
=iM o.
1 m
t a
v c.
a m o u d' o
W nn e u s s m k w
u v ur e W
V i
4 A
ll MU
~
M
=
W t
=
W ER
[
k m
"N 5"
a 1
f m
=
7w
=
o 2
' 7JLf A
"k T WOO OZ ~N W n
W Fu e
l~ g -
~~
za-
)"
.. {
t' Attachment Sample Nat U(234, 235, 238)
Th(228 + 232)
Ra-226 (pCi/g)
Gateway Plant 497 i 46
< 1.0 241 i 23 Fry Canyon 57 i 12 1.2 i 0.1 28 i 6 Based on the gamma spectrum analyses, the ratio of U-235/U-238 (activity)'is about 0.05.
The soil samples were from the uranium ore.
Ra-226 is equal to U-238 due to the equilibrium of the decay chain.
I i
4
F
~
% hwCo Vkk [kuuts Cwes 9/5{%
1 i
CO G M weet 5 Colp l
'"-""==*=-***-h>c e
90 W e*W $
g from wwed em dida kg uhwNmam s
ym..,.,'
==W-e-s Webu=r-a-.
- Gmm'e
'-cau-i h
l
[.o44rLc. warm
_g._ g.g _ ~
_] --[_ _ l Q __ _. -..._ _
g h vere Ok Rs Lw-bekcy c uk sow.r r
M 4e um ge as ie-*
e.sgy.hM em.ma.egs- =.
. e mem..-www-ape
=-
e-as
.,m.mw
-La--w-e-4es-e-_
m, e
M G^ 77
~_
.e-*,
--.w ymm._e gq sm Nme.-aut-m..~.-._.
a,,,e.,,,,
dew 6
- " ' * ~ "
- a
..e~.-%
_...~-..._-
,4,4w, ew8-*
-m-was e.N-4
-_ww.
e.__.-
s
..w.-,,-.
=.4 M
wQ q a gy.
wa*aies==wwat eye.eu-.
e.
.---.s<.ameww.-empi--.e.m m.
+ * * *a-.4mm.==M
.-w.
e nem= g odsw.**p-1=*d-duumu==-'m>88'.
, - -g
,a==ma.wes-eww de a**u-n e g. M 4%q.-
e,e,w,m e-se<w 4-w4s.-s-**.dMe..
deeaam *Jeahem
- er-h*-e 4k
(
.-.-.._.m
_m_____
1^
1
(p.han Co. (M ah kOM N*
,aa ea H^s" "
If L YdeS
--b $. V 9kes.._ --
boo [4 3 I ~l 3_pp _/.gd - 15y Cinial my 3 ITS b i
-~
wb4-c, Aym (Aiung Astr 5,e Fr y c.y -
'I375 Mvh$ l -4
- g. g Roeki etwel(2/my/55 6**(<
3 23 f.
AIOsk< 5 l
fackf f, 2.
- 99. I o 3 f oi 86*fc3'S1 S
0SW-- ~~ ~
~~
PS M*203 f/f/zM* 6
. _. _ _ l C
Ash c-7_.._
_p.df_L It r/~_ _.
04 a,m se na_- t I - n fpT7-b*\\
Q fuky 3
...~
l G.X O
_HtLe
/- t i pt. M &
G agg- [D2 Md"1 Vf30/CC SCC - 3 c a
&**/< i 3 9 /3 6 7-J4 8 _
\\/cchig 't - J' 000k 234f7sj_gl Y ~ 'mr,-
Yi
}
$ - l '1'
,,,g.
$ 333 g3 sn n fed 8E() M.>= __0[M.79
\\/t c h s M lll S*f f
^
~7/l/g7 th]-g3n avtlf se f(_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Awg aus 8 M " [ p.g.s '3 3 8 F L
POL
'/r@
B+L-asn ah'k Q-
I i
.. - - -. - -. - ~.