ML080450276
| ML080450276 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Plum Brook File:National Aeronautics and Space Administration icon.png |
| Issue date: | 02/08/2008 |
| From: | Haag Environmental Co |
| To: | Peecook K NRC/FSME, US National Aeronautics & Space Admin (NASA), John H. Glenn Research Ctr at Lewis Field |
| References | |
| Download: ML080450276 (175) | |
Text
FIRST BOUNDING SAMPLING AND TESTING OBSERVATIONS The results from the two EMAs, resampled in the first bounding efforts, are illustrated by Figures 20 and 21. As shown, the area near location SMI-4 has sub-surface contamination, beneath 6 inches of lower-activity stream-bottom sediment cover. This EMA originally produced a peak Cs-137 value of 11.7 pCi/g (rounded to 12 on the diagram); the re-located EMA produced a peak value of 16 pCi/g. The highest values detected in this sampling round were somewhat parallel to streamflow. The highest observed values, from upstream to downstream, were as follows: 12, (12 and 16), and 13 pCi/g.
The area around the EMA at location SM6-6 had stream-bottom surface contamination that plunged under 6 inches of lower-activity cover to the west. This EMA originally produced a peak Cs-137 value of 20.6 pCi/g (rounded to 20 on the diagram); the re-located EMA produced a peak value of 6 pCi/g. The highest values were found parallel to streamflow. The highest observed values, from upstream to downstream, were as follows: 12, (20 and 6), and 12 pCi/g.
At the start of the first bounding effort for the EMA at SM6-6, some bounding samples were inadvertently obtained roughly 20 feet north of the actual location SM6-6. Two of the 7 samples obtained from that incorrect location were analyzed. Their results are reported in Appendix B as locations SM6-6 Bound 1 and SM6-6 Bound 2. Both locations produced Cs-137 values of about 7-8 pCi/g, spanning the top 18 inches of the stream bottom.
The observation that the first bounding approach failed to enclose an area in which all values were below 12 pCi/g led to execution of the second bounding approach.
309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 42 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
z Z
UJ (O
0- 0wfZ~
0 LU LL cm U)
Lc _
LU00 00 00 w
UL
- L4 z
0 00
FIGURE 21 - FIRST BOUNDING T E RUL 10 AR UAD V.UU
-MA I41 THE AREA AROUND LOCATION SM6-6 (SAMPLE SM 6-6 HAS LOCATIONS ARE IN
- GREEN, RESULTS ARE IN BLACK)
SURFACE CONTAMINATION THAT PLUNGES UNDER COVER TO THE WEST (NORTH IS TO TOP OF PAGE)
THE HIGHEST VALUES ARE PARALLEL TO STREAMFLOW 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 44 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
SECOND BOUNDING SAMPLING AND TESTING OBSERVATIONS The results produced by the second bounding effort for the two EMAs are illustrated in Figures 22 through 36. Within this group of illustrations, Figures 22-24 represent the evaluation of section A, in which a lognormal distribution was observed around a declining trend line.
Figures 25-34 represent the evaluation of upstream section B, in which a lognormal distribution was observed, with no trend up or down.
Figures 35 and 36 represent the evaluation of downstream section C, in which it was noted that two adjacent sample points indicated the presence of a discontinuous deposit with two peak Cs-137 values just over 6 pCi/g, and one adjacent peak value just over 3 pCi/g.
Using the approach described in the Methods section of this report, the representative peak value for Cs-137 in upstream section B was defined as 8.9 pCi/g, with no trend.
The representative Cs-137 value in stream section A was defined as ranging from a high of 6.3 pCi/g at the upstream end, to a low of 2.5 pCi/g at the downstream end. The representative Cs-137 value in section C was defined as an isolated occurrence measuring 3-6 pCi/g.
309StreamMouthReport 08FEB08 Page 45 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
FIGURE 22 - SECOND BOUNDING RESULTS AROUND EMA AT LOCATION SM6-6 12 inches 0
>12 pCi/g S>6, but <12 pCi/g
>3, but <6 pCi/g
<3 pCi/g
<MDA Stream Mouth Section A RDH 15Dec07 #309 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 46 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
STREAM MOUTH SECTION A RESULTS (pCi/g)
Histogram U10 o
0-U.
3 6
9 12 15 More Bin 2
6
.21,6,11 6
FIGURE 23 - HIGHEST SECOND BOUNDING RESULTS AROUND EMA AT LOCATION SM6-6 r
8 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 47 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
STREAM MOUTH SECTION A RESULTS (log pCilg) 0.1 Histogram
=g2 1o 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
1.2 More Bin 0
0.2 SM Section A Trend Analysis 1.4 oo.2 1:
0.4o !
0.2 0-0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Distance Downstream (feet) 0 FIGURE 24-EVALUATION OF HIGHEST SECOND BOUNDING RESULTS AROUND EMA AT LOCATION SM6-6 Trend Residual Histogram E 5
- u.
-0.75
-0.5
-0.25 0
0.25 0.5 0.75 More Bin 0.92 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 48 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
FIGURE 25 - SECOND BOUNDING RESULTS AROUND EMA AT LOCATION SM1-4 12 inches
>12 pCi/g
>6, but < 12 pCi/g
>3, but <6 pCi/g
<3 pCi/g
<MDA x
7 N
Stream Mouth Section B RDH 14Dec07 #309 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 49 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
FIGURE 26 - SECOND BOUNDING RESULTS FOR SECTIONS A + B COMBINED 12N
ý2 pC49
-4.bA 02 pC4'
'3, W -6pCd9
'3 pCWQ
ýMDA CI Stream Mouth Section A RDH 15Dec07 #309 12.0.
12 Cs
'4 W 12 pC.Vg
'3 PC40 Stream Mouth Section B RDH 14Dec07 #309 t 444 7
309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 50 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
STREAM MOUTH SECTION B RESULTS (pCilg) 0.0 7
0.0 9
SM-B Histogram (Results in pCi/g)
C 0*w I..
U-12916 5
0 3
6 9
12 15 More Bin 9
FIGURE 27 - HIGHEST SECOND BOUNDING RESULTS AROUND EMA AT LOCATION SMI1-4 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 51 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
STREAM MOUTH SECTION B RESULTS (log pCilg)
-1.5 10.8
-1.1 1
-1.
0.7 I
FIGURE 28 - FIRST STEP IN EVALUATING HIGHEST SECOND BOUNDING RESULTS AROUND EMA AT LOCATION SMI-4 (COVERT TO LOG) 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 52 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
FIGURE 29 - EVALUATION OF HIGHEST SECOND BOUNDING RESULTS AROUND EMA AT LOCATION SMI-4 SM-B Histogram (Results in pCilg) 5 001 1.
3 6
9 12 15 More Bin SM-B Histogram (log results)
U (Not a bell curve)
(A bell curve with outliers)
Maybe part of the pattern 777;ý Clearly not part of the pattern SM Section B Trend Analysis - Step I (6300 I200 0
43 O0
-,e..
.50..
../
0
-0
-100 Da2s00 Distance Downstream (feet) 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 53 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
Histogram (4 edited out, no trend)
Cu 10 10 0 0 u-0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
1.2 More Bin (Maybe a bell curve)
FIGURE 30 - CONTINUED EVALUATION OF HIGHEST SECOND BOUNDING RESULTS AROUND EMA AT LOCATION SMI-4 (EDIT OUT 4 POINTS)
No Trend Trend SM B Trend Analysis - Step 2 (edited) 1.4 S1.2 u~to /0
.6 0
0.2
-350
-300
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50 0
Distance Downstream (feet)
Histogram (4 edited out, trend removed)
C 4
ao "L
-0.2
-0.1 0
0.1 0.2 0.3 More Bin (Not a bell curve) 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 54 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
No Trend Trend C.,
SM B Trend Analysis -Step 3 (add 1 back)
FIGURE 31 - CONTINUED EVALUATION OF HIGHEST SECOND BOUNDING RESULTS AROUND EMA AT LOCATION SMI-4 (ADD 1 POINT BACK)
.~~~~~~
~ ~ ~
-400
-350
-300
-250
-200
-150
-100 Distance Downstream (feet)
-50 0
Histogram (1 back in, no trend removal) 10 0 0 lO 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
1.2 More Bin Histogram (1 back in, trend removed) c4 0*
uL
-0.2
-0.1 0
0.1 0.2 0.3 More Bin (Maybe a bell curve)
(Not a bell curve) 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 55 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
STREAM MOUTH SECTION B INTERPRETATIONS 0 4 points are not part of the Cs-137 deposit 0 The Cs-137 deposit has a uniform log = 0.95
- 1.2 oq9 "7*
- 0.8 00.6 0.4 0.2
-350
-300
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50 0
Distance Downstream (feet)
Histogram (4 edited out, no trend) co 10 10 S5 0*
L.
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
1.2 More Bin FIGURE 32 - FINAL EVALUATION OF HIGHEST SECOND BOUNDING RESULTS AROUND EMA AT LOCATION SM1-4 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 56 of 93
FIGURE 33 - ERROR BOUNDS FOR STREAM SECTION B STREAM MOUTH SECTION B RESULTS (log pCi/g)
-1.5 10.8
-1.1 10° 8.9 pCi/g 1o1.2~ 15.8 pCi/g I
SM rend Analysis - Step 2 (edited)
-1.
1 A
()
01 Y-
/
0.8 0.4 uI0.2 I
0 0.7
-350
-300 5
0
-200
-150
-1 Distance Downstream (feet) 100
-50 0
1 100-7 = 5. 0 pCi/g 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 57 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
FIGURE 34 - ERROR BOUNDS FOR STREAM SECTIONS B + A STREAM MOUTH SECTION A+B TRENDS COMBINED 100.4 = 2.5 pCi/g 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 58 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
FIGURE 35 - RESULTS FOR STREAM SECTION C 126 hest
<12 pCi/g
.>6, but <12 pCi/g
>3, but <6 pCi/g
<3 pCi/g O<MDA
\\z-Stream Mouth Section C RDH 15Dec07 #309 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 59 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
-:0-S.. -
0~"'-
FIGURE 36-COMBINED RESULTS FOR STREAM SECTION B, A, AND C cA, I
- Stv, Mouth Seto C RDH 150.c07 309
-:0 0~*-
S..-
4,-
S#.a= Mouth Sebon A RDH i6Oec07 SM00 0-*- -
0-4,~.
sýam Mo Sectin B RDH 140.W7? X 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 60 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
OBSERVATIONS RELATED TO DATA QUALITY INDICATORS (DQIs)
The performance of the measurement system, as expressed by the various DQLs, was evaluated for the laboratory alone, for the laboratory + soil processing, and for the laboratory + soil processing + sampling. Observations related strictly to the laboratory were included in the third edition of the PBRF Laboratory Quality Assurance Report.
The laboratory report identified no issues that would adversely affect the results employed in this Stream Mouth report.
DQI observations more specifically related to the Stream Mouth work are discussed below. In the Stream Mouth work, a total of 569 original field samples were tested.
Recounts were performed on 24 of those samples, or 1 in 24. QC duplicates were prepared, after processing, for 50 samples, or 1 in 11.
Precision - Laboratory recounts were performed on 24 samples. Four of the RPDs calculated for these 24 samples (one in 6) exceeded the criterion that the original and the duplicate should be within 20% of one another. In all of the cases where the RPD exceeded 20%, the original and the duplicate results were less than about 1 pCi/g. RPD comparison after log transformation yielded more values over the 20% limit, so this criterion was set aside as not useful.
QC duplicates, or "splits" were prepared, during sample processing, for 50 samples. Six of the RPDs calculated for these 50 samples (about one in 8) exceeded the criterion that the original and the duplicate should be within 20% of one another. In all of the cases where the RPD exceeded 20%, the original and the duplicate results were less than about 1 pCi/g. RPD comparison after log transformation yielded more values over the 20%
limit, so this criterion was set aside as not useful.
Four field duplicates, or "co-located" samples, were obtained at locations chosen by HaagEnviro. The selections included 3 locations sampled earlier during the bay investigation, and I location from the Stream Mouth investigation that had produced low core recoveries. The 3 samples that duplicated bay locations were labeled: SM-DUP-BY37, SM-DUP-BY43, and SM-DUP-BY44. Geoprobe sample location SM5-3 had low recovery and was re-sampled with the vibracore device. The vibracore duplicate was labeled SM5-5. Depths analyzed from the 3 co-located samples in the bay did not match the depths from those locations analyzed during the bay investigation. The depth intervals covered by the co-located vibracore sample on transect 5 were slightly different from the original Geoprobe sample intervals. However, when the corresponding layers from the two locations were compared, the RPD results were nearly within the 20% limit (20.5%).
All recounts, splits and co-located sample results are included in the spreadsheet file attached as Appendix B.
309StreamMouthReport 08FEB08 Page 61 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
Accuracy - The scatter of measurements about the "true" or "representative" result was estimated after the results had been transformed to log(results). The following two examples illustrate what this means in terms of the scatter of results.
On Figure 34, the best-fit line was placed at about 0.95. Transformed back to pCi/g, that gave a "representative" value of 8.9 pCi/g. One can observe that the upper error band above the best-fit line is at about 1.2. Transformed back to pCi/g, this would be 15.8 pCi/g. The lower error band below the best-fit line is at about 0.7. Transformed back to pCi/g, this would be 5 pCi/g. Thus, one might estimate that the error about a best-fit value of about 9 pCi/g is 7 pCi/g above 9, and 5 pCi/g below 9. Another way to express this is that one may expect some values to be as high as 177% of the representative value, and some values to be as low as 56% of the representative value.
On the right side of Figure 34, the best-fit line for section A was placed at about 0.4.
Transformed back to pCi/g, that gave a representative value of 2.5 pCi/g. One can observe that the upper error band above a best-fit value of 0.4 is at about 0.8.
Transformed back to pCi/g, this would be 6.3 pCi/g. The lower error band below the best-fit line is at about 0.1. Transformed back to pCi/g, this would be 1.25 pCi/g. Thus, one might estimate that the error about a best-fit value of about 2.5 pCi/g is about 4 pCi/g above 2.5, and about I pCi/g below 2.5. Another way to express this is that one may expect some values to be as much as 250% of the representative value, and some values to be as low as 50% of the representative value.
From these two examples one may observe that, in this lognormal distribution, one can expect some elevated measurements to be twice as high as the "representative" value.
One can also expect that some of the lowest measurements will be as little as half of the "representative" value.
Our DQI for accuracy is that values should lie within 80% to 120% of the "true" value, after log transformation. In the first example above, the "true" value was 0.95, the upper error limit was at 1.2, and the lower error limit was at 0.7. The upper value of 1.2 is only slightly more than 120% (1.2/0.95 = 1.26, or 126%). The lower value of 0.7 is slightly less than 80% (0.7/0.95 = 0.74, or 74%).
In the second example above, the "true" value was 0.4, the upper error limit was at 0.8, and the lower error limit was at 0.1. The upper value of 0.8 is substantially more than 120% (0.8/0.4 = 2.00, or 200%). The lower value of 0.1 is also substantially less than 80% (0.1/0.4 = 0.25, or 25%).
A third example can be drawn from the center of Figure 34. By inspection of the combined plots for sections A+B, it is reasonable to use 0.9 as the "true" value. The upper error limit appears to be at about 1.2, and the lower error limit appears to be at about 0.6. The upper value of 1.2 is slightly more than 120% (1.2/0.9 = 1.33, or 133%).
The lower value of 0.6 is also slightly less than 80% (0.6/0.9 = 0.66, or 66%).
309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 62 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
These examples are summarized in Figure 37. From this graph, it appears that the DQIs are likely to be achieved only when the representative value exceeds 9 pCi/g. From earlier observations, this means that we can achieve our accuracy target when the range of values is roughly 18 pCi/g (200% of representative) to 4.5 pCi/g (50% of representative).
FIG:URE 37 -
The sample variance for the ACCURACY ACHIEVED log-transformed results in section B was 0.02, which 200 was acceptably less than the 10 Upper Error Band L
2 1-0-Lower Error Band target of 0.4. The sample v a f o 100 Upper Bound Goal variance for the log-100 X
Lower Bound Goal transformed trend residuals
.o 50 in section A was 0.09, 0
which was acceptably less 0
2 4
6 8
10 than the target of 0.4.
"True" Value (pCilg)
As noted in the Methods section, when no trends were noted in a deposit, HaagEnviro considered accuracy acceptable if the standard deviation of the log-transformed results was less than half the following: the log of the regulatory threshold of 12 pCi/g (1.08),
minus the mean of the log-transformed results. This was based upon a simple formula for defining confidence intervals, taken from USEPA's SW-846, and the assumption that the mean plus two standard deviations represents at least a 95% confidence interval.
For the results in Stream Mouth section B, no trend was present. In that data set, the "representative" log-transformed value was 0.95, the standard deviation of the log-transformed results was 0.153, and the mean of the log-transformed results was 0.893.
To apply the test above to determine whether accuracy was sufficient, the following question was to be answered using the mean:
Is s(log transformed results) < (log(l 2pCi/g) - mean (log transformed results))
Is 0.153 < (1.08-0.893)/2 ?
Is 0.153 < 0.0935 ?
Using the "representative" best-fit value of 0.95, instead of the mean of 0.893, the question would be as follows:
Is 0.153 < (1.08-0.95)/2 ?
Is 0.153 < 0.065 ?
In both trials, the answer was no, so this test of accuracy suggests that the scatter about the "representative" log value of 0.95 may be too large to support a conclusion that the "representative" log value of 0.95 is less than the regulatory threshold log value of 1.08, at a 95% confidence level. The result might be more favorable if more than only the most elevated activities were included in the assessment.
309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 63 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
Completeness - Defining completeness is an assessment of whether we have a sufficient number of samples to support a determination that the "representative" value is less than the regulatory threshold. The preceding assessment of accuracy suggests that the number of samples obtained in section B (14 samples) is not sufficient to make that determination. The preceding discussion of sample variances supports the assumption underlying the sample-number calculation, that variance is less than 0.40. The other assumption underlying the sample-number calculation was that the "effect size" between the "representative" value and the regulatory threshold was a least Ilog(3 pCi/g) - log(12 pCi/g)l = 10.48-1.081 = 0.6. As the log of the "representative" value was taken to be 0.95 (not 0.48), this criterion was clearly not met. It is generally true that, the smaller the "effect size" is, the greater is the, number of samples needed to achieve the desired confidence in a decision. In the minimum samples task, it was noted that as many as 50 samples would be needed to support the decision that 8 pCi/g "representative" value was less than a 12 pCi/g regulatory threshold, with a confidence of 95%, and a power of 0.9.
For section B, a required number of 25 samples was obtained by re-running the minimum samples statistical analysis with the following values: standard deviation = 0.15, effect size = <0.6, power =0.9, alpha = 0.05, two-tailed.
Representativeness - The posting of field-screening results, in Appendix B, allowed HaagEnviro to observe the sample recoveries achieved. In the initial round of transect sampling, 11 Geoprobe samples (from 8 locations), out of 27 samples taken, produced a recovery of less than 50%. One low-recovery Geoprobe-sampled location (SM5-3) was re-sampled with the vibracore device (SM5-5). One vibracore sample, out of 47 taken, produced a recovery of less than 50% (SM8-7: 49%, a water filled gap of 16.5" was noted in the sample tube). Core photographs were examined for all of these samples, and no problems in using them were evident. In general, the low recoveries were related to peat, which is recovered much better by the vibracore sampler than by the GeoProbe sampler. Recoveries from the remaining Stream Mouth samples were acceptable.
Laboratory blanks tested during the stream mouth wetlands investigation all produced results that were either less than the MDA, or were rejected upon data review. Blank results are included in the spreadsheet provided in Appendix B. Review of cores and corresponding testing results suggested that carry-down generally did not occur to a significant extent. Two examples in which drag-down did occur are shown in Figure 38.
309StreamMouthReport 08FEB08 Page 64 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
FIGURE 38 -
SIGNIFICANT DRAGDOWN (LEFT), AND MINOR DRAGDOWN (RIGHT)
Comparability - The procedures discussed in this report were consistently followed, by a fairly consistent set of sampling team members. Hydrogeologist Bob Haag and Principal Scientist Ruth Haag were personally involved in some of the later sampling efforts, replacing Scientists Ben Patterson and Phil Weimer, as well as Environmental Technician Ryan Bloom. RP Technician Rich Dzvonar and D&D Technician Greg Struck were involved in all of the sampling efforts, and most of the sample processing work. The PBRF onsite laboratory analyst changed during the course of this work, but the procedures remained constant. Analytical oversight and data review continued to be provided by Assistant RSO Rod Case. Some minor adjustments were made along the way, such as eliminating the duct-taping of tube caps. When Hydrogeologist Bob Haag became personally involved in the last few rounds of sample processing, some of the PID testing of sample cuts was adjusted at his discretion.
OBSERVATIONS FROM PREPARING SAMPLES FOR ANALYSIS Screening for Radioactivity - Initial scanning for radioactivity produced no readings sufficiently above background to warrant concern or further inquiry. RP personnel therefore suspended scanning.
Screening for Organic Chemicals - During soil processing, some samples produced elevated readings on a HaagEnviro 11.7 eV PID. Often, readings taken in the opening of a freshly cut sample interval produced a response on the HaagEnviro PID that exceeded the meter's upper limit, which was 2000 ppm. Comparison readings with the NASA-provided PID were not similarly elevated. Both meters calibrated properly, using the same 100-ppm isobutylene gas. Both meters responded similarly to periodic checks in which the tip of a SharpieTM pen was placed in front of each meter's probe. In such checks, both meters responded with readings ranging up to nearly 100 ppm.
309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 65 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
With the NASA-provided 10.2 eV PID, the highest reading obtained was 40 ppm at the 42" depth in sample location SM6-4. The highest reading with the NASA 10.2 eV PID at any other sample location was 8 ppm, at the bottom of sample location SM6-3. With the HaagEnviro 11.7 eV PID, many readings caused the meter to "peg," exceeding the maximum reading of 2000 ppm. When the NASA-provided PID was outfitted with an 11.7 eV lamp, no similarly elevated readings were obtained with the NASA meter, which routinely read either 0.0 ppm, or a few ppm, up to a maximum of about 5 ppm in ambient air.
When Bob Haag periodically took the HaagEnviro PID outside the soil-processing trailer, outdoor ambient-air readings of approximately 200 ppm were obtained on occasion.
In the field, when Bob Haag took the HaagEnviro 11.7 eV PID through tall reeds to the stream's edge, the HaagEnviro PID produced readings up to 200 ppm, with background readings outside the reeds of approximately 40-50 ppm. As breezes passed, the meter readings spiked up to 100-200 ppm.
With the probe held at face level as Bob Haag walked next to the stream, the HaagEnviro PID readings dropped to 0.0 ppm. With the probe held a few inches off the ground at the stream's edge, the HaagEnviro PID "pegged" over 2000 ppm, just as it often did in the sample-processing trailer.
An air sample obtained by NASA Safety Officer Hank Bayes, from a sample cut that had produced an elevated reading with the HaagEnviro PID, produced a detection only for acetone, which was reportedly found at a level of 0.6 ppm.
The elevated-reading phenomenon first appeared during the processing of samples from the Flood Plain area, which is discussed in a separate report. Laboratory testing of Flood.
Plain samples for organic chemicals resulted in the following positive detections:
- Phenol, at a level of 2.9 ppm in soil (2,900 parts per billion, or ppb)
" Acetone, at an estimated level of 0.0052 ppm in soil (5.2 ppb)
A few unidentified SVOC compounds An "Unknown Aldol condensate," which the laboratory interpreted was created when the laboratory added acetone in the testing process, and this added acetone reacted with natural soil materials In response to the periodically elevated PID readings, ventilation in the soil-processing trailer was increased.
Peat Volume and Density Upon Drying for Testing - HaagEnviro's original estimate, before detailed volume and density reduction measurements were made, was that the 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 66 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
typical weight reduction due to sample processing would be 5 to 1. Reductions documented in this study were as follows:
- 1. Peat - length reduced from 12" to 5"; weight reduced from 1515g to 369g
- 2. Peat-length reduced from 12" to 4.5"; weight reduced from 1502g to 331g
- 3. Peat/Sand mixture - length reduced from 12" to 10.75"; weight reduced from 1120g to 1009g These results showed that processing reduced the peat weight by a factor of approximately 3 to 1. This suggested that the activity per unit weight of peat could be overstated by a factor of 3, compared with mineral soil types, such as sand, silt, or clay.
OBSERVATIONS ON OTHER RADIONUCLIDES Besides Cs-137, other radionuclides of interest are defined in FSSP Table A-7, and include the following:
60Cobalt (Co-60) 154Europium (Eu-I154) 3H (Tritium) 129odine (1-129) 90Strontium (Sr-90) 233Uranium and 234Uranium (U-233/234) 235Uranium and 236Uranium (U-235/236)
Of these radionuclides of interest, only the following were included in the PBRF laboratory reports:
137Cesium (Cs-137) 60Cobalt (Co-60)
S154Europium (Eu-I154) 235Uranium (U-235) 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 67 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
In the original transect and first bounding results, the following occurrences of Co-60 were reported:
SM1-2 54-66: 0.26 pCi/g (Cs-137 was 7.7 pCi/g, the most elevated in this pond)
SMI-4 6-18: 0.25 pCi/g (Cs-137 was 11.7 pCi/g)
SM1-4Bound3 6-18: 0.085 pCi/g (Cs-137 was 11.9 pCi/g)
SM1-4Bound3 18-30: 0.138 pCi/g (Cs-137 was 3.5 pCi/g)
SM1-4Bound5 18-30: 0.23 pCi/g (Cs-137 was 13.5 pCi/g)
SM1-4Bound4 6-18: 0.26 pCi/g (Cs-137 was 11.4 pCi/g)
SM6-6 30-42QC: 0.27 pCi/g (Cs-137 was 0.73 pCi/g, Co-60 was not in the duplicate)
In the grid-sampling results for Areas A, B, and C, only 1 detection of a non-Cs-137 radionuclide of interest was reported. That was a Co-60 value of 0.68 pCi/g, in the QC duplicate for sample SMG2 0-6. The corresponding value of Cs-137 was 2.81 pCi/g.
Co-60 was not detected in the original sample of this duplicate pair.
309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 68 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
INTERPRETATIONS The interpretations provided in this section are intended to respond to the topics listed under the heading "Characterization Plan Objectives".
MECHANISM OF CS-137 TRANSPORT The proposed mechanism of Cs-I 37 transport appeared to be confirmed by this work. It continued to appear that clays bearing Cs-137 from the PBRF were deposited in the Stream Mouth depositional environment. It continued to appear that higher-than-typical amounts of Cs-137 discharged in 1968 were transported downstream by the area's largest recorded flood, in 1969. Details of these interpretations follow.
Background Cs-137 - It was assumed that atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons during the time that the PBRF operated contributed a Cs-137 background, which was assumed to average 0.3 pCi/g over the top 6 inches of soil. This was based on soil testing by others on Star Island in nearby Old Woman Creek, where the upper 4 inches of soil showed apeak value of about 0.6 pCi/g, and an average of roughly 0.3 pCi/g or less; and the soil below a 6-inch depth contributed almost no activity. These estimates were based upon Figure 3 on page 58 of Volume 31 of the Journal of Environmental Quality (Jan.-
Feb. 2002). The NASA RSO for the PBRF decommissioning project indicated that values up to I pCi/g had appeared to represent background conditions in other parts of the PBRF work. In this investigation, it was interpreted that any Cs-137 values that exceeded I pCi/g were attributable to the PBRF. Below I pCi/g, this study lacked solid data for making the split between background and PBRF. For estimating purposes, a background value of 0.5 pCi/g was assumed in the section entitled, "ACCOUNTING FOR CS-137 KNOWN TO BE RELEASED."
It is important to recall that the practical quantitation limit (PQL) for this project's total measurement system (sampling + processing + laboratory) was estimated to be 3 pCi/g, meaning that all measurements in this study below 3 pCi/g are essentially the same.
Values less than 3 pCi/g may be considered as qualitative estimates at some risk, since values below this level were not consistently reproducible.
Another way to distinguish Cs-I 37 attributable to PBRF from background Cs-i 37 is to look for other radionuclides characteristic of PBRF. Among the other radionuclides listed in FSSP Table A-7, only Co-60 appears offsite. When Co-60 does appear, it is always in association with elevated levels of Cs-137. This is not consistent with the expected behavior of Co-60, which is expected to behave like calcium. There is no reason to expect Co-60 to adsorb to clay minerals, as is expected for Cs-137. Based on this assumption, a strong correlation between Cs-137 and Co-60 results would not be expected. However, in the results reported here, and in other results nearer the PBRF, it does appear that Co-60 and Cs-137 are positively correlated, and Co-60 activities are typically about 1.5% of Cs-137 activities (this ratio is based upon Pentolite Ditch results, evaluated elsewhere). Co-60 does not always appear when Cs-137 levels are elevated, but Co-60 only appears when Cs-i 37 levels are elevated. Thus, it is interpreted that the 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 69 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
mechanism of Co-60 migration is similar to that for Cs-137. If Cs-137 is adsorbing on clay minerals, this means that Co-60 is also adsorbing on clay minerals.
The presence of Co-60 is not a useful way to distinguish PBRF Cs-137 from background Cs-137. This is due to the observation that Co-60 only becomes reliably detectable by the project's total measurement system when Cs-I137 activities exceed I pCi/g.
Cs-137 Deposition Over Time - An underlying postulate of this work is that the peak Cs-137 levels were deposited downstream in 1969, Based upon this assumption, and drawing upon results obtained in the earlier Ponds report, Figure 39 provides an estimate of the activity deposited versus time. The solid line in the graph represents the actual testing results obtained, without correcting for nuclear decay. The dashed red line represents the Cs-137 activities at the time of deposition, correcting for decay using an Excel spreadsheet program supplied by NASA's Assistant RSO, Rod Case. This figure suggests that the activity in sediment being carried by floods peaked at 18.8 pCi/g in 1969, had dropped to less than 3 pCi/g by 1995, and was approaching a steady-state value just over I pCi/g by the year 2000.
Based on this rationale, it was interpreted that 2006 measurements of Cs-137 exceeding 3 pCi/g represented pond deposition during the 11 years between 1969 and 1980. During that time, it was interpreted that the activities in clay being deposited ranged from a high of 18.8 pCi/g, to a low of 5 pCi/g. Following 1990, it appears that values less than 3 pCi/g were deposited. Extending the interpretation cautiously below the PQL, it was estimated that Cs-137 activities of roughly I pCi/g continued to be transferred downstream in 2006/2007, where they continued to be widely distributed during flood events.
309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 70 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
FIGURE 39-INTERPRETED DEPOSITION RECORD IN A POND 2007 11.5
.1969 il s
u uis i s gi iii g ail ll 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 71 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
Location and Significance of Delta - In the Characterization Plan, it was assumed that the final resting place of clays bearing Cs-137 would be a delta, which would occur at the juncture of the stream and the bay. It was assumed that the delta would advance into the bay by laying down deposits of sand over silt, and silt over clay. It was expected that the Cs-137 would be trapped in the clay deposits, at the bottom of the delta sequence.
However, no delta was found in the bay. A delta did appear to be present in the middle of the Stream Mouth area, as shown by Figure 40. The delta deposits in the Stream Mouth appeared to be composed only of mixed silt and clay, deposited over peat. Sand was found in other locations, but did not appear to be part of the delta sequence.
The interpretation that the area marked in Figure.40 was a delta was reinforced by the observation that this was the primary area in which the stream channel frequently moved from east (1969 topographic map) to west (2005 airphoto).
Whereas locating the delta postulated in the Characterization Plan was useful in confirming the conceptual model, the expected sequence of deposits, with clay at the bottom, did not appear. Instead, it appeared that sand was mostly deposited in the stream channel further upstream, in the Flood Plain environment. The delta deposit was made only of silt, possibly gradational with clay. At the downstream end of the delta, in the vicinity of transects 3 and 5, this silt + clay deposit appeared to be roughly 2 feet thick. In transect 8 across the delta interval, in which land-derived materials interfingered with bay peat, the delta thickness appeared to increase to about 3 feet.: In transect 7, the bottom of the delta interval appeared to be occurring in the deepest interval tested, with Cs-I137 detected in some samples at 42-54". Based on Cs-137 detected in the bottom interval of samples SMG6, SMG8 and SMG14, it appears that the delta deposits are thicker than 54" from the SR-6 bridge on the South, to transect 7 on the North. Based upon the preceding interpretations, it appears that the sampling effort likely did not span the entire thickness of the delta between the bridge and transect 7, as shown by the dotted red line on Figure
- 40. Some deeper samples from this area were retained, available for analysis in the event that this situation should arise. It appears that the sampling effort did penetrate entirely through the delta materials of interest north of transect 7, and on toward the bay.
As shown by Figure 40, the most concentrated amounts of Cs-I137 in the Stream Mouth appear to have been deposited in the bottom of the stream channel, between U.S. 6 and the delta.
The delta represents the boundary between a normally standing-water environment (the bay), and a normally moving-water environment (the stream). However, depending upon the average and daily level of Lake Erie, the actual boundary between stream deposition and standing-water deposition may move upstream or downstream. Thus, temporary standing-water deposits may have been laid down upstream from the delta, and would then likely be eroded and redeposited downstream during periods of lower lake level.
In particular, it appears that such erosion and re-deposition occurred in the Stream Mouth, in the area labeled "SCOUR AREA" on Figure 13, where there was evidence of scouring in the channel (the water was deeper there). In this area, values of Cs-137 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 72 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
approaching 3 pCi/g were found at greater depths than was typical in most other locations (2.6 pCi/g at 42-56.5" below the stream bottom surface). Thus, it was interpreted that higher levels of Cs-137 were temporarily deposited here during periods of low streamflow or high lake level, then were scoured and re-deposited a short distance downstream during periods of greater streamflow or lower lake level. The downstream location for deposition appears to be where an EMA occurred at location SM6-6. The re-deposition of scoured Cs-137 was spread over part of section A, upstream from the delta.
Through the delta, represented by section C and the downstream values of 3.4 and 3.9 pCi/g, the scoured material was also redeposited, with lower Cs-137 activities (3-6 pCi/g).
The clays bearing low levels of Cs-137 appear to have been confined to a channel that extended all the way through the delta, and on out into the Bay. Through the delta and bay, the highest values of Cs-137 encountered appear to be in the range of 3-4 pCi/g.
309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 73 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
FIGURE 40 - DELTA DEFINITION Delta 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 74 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
ACCOUNTING FOR CS-137 KNOWN TO BE RELEASED Inputs to the mass balance for Cs-137 include the amount of Cs-137 per gram of sediment, and the size of areas in which Cs-I137 was found. The mass balance assessment is complicated by Cs-137 that is still moving, and by the consideration of radioactive decay.
Two previous reports in this series on Cs-137 in Plum Brook have attempted to assess the total amounts of Cs-137 found. One report assessed the amount of Cs-137 found in 3 ponds; the second report assessed the amount of Cs-137 that might be present in the eastern end of Sandusky Bay. The estimating methods used in each of those reports resulted in the appearance that the amount of Cs-137 found in those environments might have exceeded the total amount estimated to have been released from the PBRF. This could lead to either of the following conclusions:
- 2. The estimating methods over-estimated the amount of Cs-137 found Examining the first point more closely, HaagEnviro judged that the original estimate by Jack Crooks was reasonable, but possibly not comprehensive. Although the assessment of Cs-137 distribution focused upon events that occurred in 1968 and 1969, the Crooks calculation of Cs-I 37 released from the PBRF was not confined to those dates. The Crooks calculation considered water that was discharged during all of the fueling cycles, over the entire duration of the PBRF's operation. However, additional Cs-I137 may have been released when the level of radioactivity present was not detectable by the monitoring systems.
Other potential pathways of Cs-137 release to Plum Brook, such as water released through the sanitary system, may be evaluated as decommissioning continues. However, at the time of this writing, it is appropriate to maintain the working hypothesis that all of the Cs-137 released to Plum Brook came through the Water Effluent Monitoring System (WEMS).
Examining the second point more closely, HaagEnviro decided that the following three corrections should be made in the Cs-137 estimating process:
- 1. The magnitude of peat volume reductions should be taken as a factor of 3, not the previously employed factor of 5.
- 2. Rather than using an average of Cs-i 37 measurements, the "representative value",
as defined in this report, should be employed.
- 3. The effect of radioactive decay since deposition should be computed in more detail.
309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 75 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
Using these concepts, HaagEnviro prepared an estimate of PBRF Cs-137 found in the Stream Mouth as shown in the following table:
Representative Total Cs-Stream Cs-137 137 Mouth Affected Affected Dry Mass (g)
Activity
- Activity, Section Depth Area (ft2)
(pCi/g)
(mCi)
(ft)
B (highest 1
50 x 300 =
8.9-BKGND 4.9 layer) 15,000 578,850,000 50 x 300 =
B (rest) 1 15,000 578,850,000 4.5-BKGND 2.3 (5/14) x 6.3 to 2.5 A (highest 0.5 (50 x 300) =
(use 4.4-0.4 layer) 103,363,315 (ueN.4 5,357BKGND)
(5/14) x A (rest) 1 (50 x 300) =
4-BKGND 0.7 5,357 206,726,630 C (highest (2/14) x layer) 2,143 82,698,370 7-BKGND 0.5 (2/14) x C (rest) 1 (50 x 300) =
4-BKGND 0.3 2,143 82,698,370 Delta Channel 50 x 1000 2-BKGND 2.9 (highest 1
50,000 1,929,500,000 layer) 24.11 acres Rest of Delta 1
=
40,528,452,880 1-BKGND 20.3 1,050,232 Tributaries 1
14.09-BKGND 11.8
-613,760 23,684,998,400 7.82 +
Rest of Area 0.5 13.22 acres 1-BKGND 8.8
= 916,502 17,683,906,090
-I TOTAL=
53.0 mCi The areas used in the table are illustrated conversion factors were used:
by Figure 41. The following assumptions and Dry weight of soil = 85 pound per cubic foot (PCF)
Conversion to grams = 454 g/pound Conversion to milliCuries (mCi) = pCi/(10 9)
Conversion to Square Feet (SF) = 43,560 SF/acre 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 76 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
FIGURE 41 - AREAS FOR Cs-137 CALCULATION I
'I I
op V;
-r IT I
0-fl& It Smb 1:440D&MDam W(M i
UpWWDdaiYumukW$
Sm*Da 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 77 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
With these assumptions, the total Cs-137 activity found in the Stream Mouth area was 53 mCi. This value of 53 mCi is to be compared with the amount expected to remain from the original PBRF releases, which was roughly estimated as 2.5 mCi.
The amount of Cs-137 that should be expected was computed in more detail as shown by Figure 42.
The result of the more detailed computation is an expected residual radioactivity of 2.04 mCi (round to 2 mCi), a 20% reduction from the prior rough estimate.
With the preceding assumptions, the PBRF Cs-137 that may be located in the Stream Mouth depositional environment (53 mCi) was much larger than the amount accounted for in our release estimates (2 mCi). Even the amount found in the 3 most thoroughly-assessed Stream Mouth areas (9.1 mCi) was 4.5 times the amount attributed to the PBRF releases (2 mCi).
309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 78 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
At the time of this writing, HaagEnviro estimated the amount of presently-measurable Cs-137 activity from the PBRF at roughly 100 mCi, distributed approximately as follows:
37%
Excavated from Pentolite Ditch, placed near southern bank 9%
Stream Mouth Areas A-C 42%
Stream Mouth other areas 10%
In front of WEMS 1%:
Stream Meanders 1%:
Stream Backwaters Not estimated: Flood Plain Not estimated: Bay The estimating assumptions employed are detailed in Appendix C. In the calculation for the Stream Mouth, it should be noted that the largest contribution, by far, came from the assumption of a value of I pCi/g, to a depth of 6-12 inches, over the very large areas of the Delta, Tributaries, and Rest of Area.
IDENTIFY CS-137 DEPOSITS STILL IN TRANSIT It appeared that the surface of the Stream Mouth depositional environment was continuing to receive PBRF Cs-137 at low levels (<3 pCi/g, most likely nearer 1 pCi/g).
It appeared likely that most of this Cs-137 moved during flood events, when eroded from upstream deposits, and redistributed downstream. The most significant such flood events likely continued to cover the entire Stream Mouth area with water carrying clays with Cs-137.
The immediate downstream side of the bridge over U.S. Route 6 appeared to be a location in which clays bearing Cs-137 were deposited, then scoured out and redeposited.
As illustrated schematically in Figure 43 below, the scoured area of the stream bottom appeared to constitute less than a third of Area B, at its southern end. The depositional area for this scoured material appeared to be the upstream half of section A, marked US 6 BRIDGE FIGURE 43 - SOME
- s DEPOSITS IN TRANSIT
-1 FLOW >>
SCOURREDEPOSIT B
A "redeposit" on Figure 43. The schematic illustrates two buried deposits that would not be expected to move unless they were reached by scour. The deeper deposit, in the 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 79 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
downstream part of section A, was barely revealed in testing results. The deposit illustrated in section B was quite clearly defined by testing results.
The soils bearing Cs-I137 that are shown in the area marked "redeposit" would be available to move further downstream. Although this area contained the most elevated Cs-137 activity detected in the Stream Mouth (20.6 pCi/g), the "representative" value for this deposit, defined by the methods in this report, spanned a range of only 6.3 pCi/g (upstream) to 2.5 pCi/g (downstream).
LOCATE FINAL RESTING PLACES OF CS-137 NO LONGER IN TRANSIT Based upon data presented here, it was interpreted that clays bearing Cs-137 in 1969 were deposited at depths later covered to 30-42 inches below the 2006/2007 stream bottom, in Section A. Those deposits appeared to be beyond the reach of scouring from the stream in 2007.
It was interpreted that, some time after 1969, clays bearing Cs-137 were deposited at depths later covered to 6-18 inches below the 2006/2007 stream bottom in section B. It was considered that those section B deposits may have been contemporaneous with clays bearing Cs-137 in area C and further downstream in the delta, at depths later covered to 18 inches below the in-filled ground surface levels found in 2007. It was considered that these section B, C, and delta deposits may have been derived from deposits further upstream, possibly originating in the part of the Flood Plain that was dredged sometime between 1969 and 2005 (see Flood Plain report).
Subsequent delta deposition covered those deposits with materials of lower Cs-I137 activity. When the stream channel changed direction in the delta between 1969 and 2005, many of those deposits were removed from further potential erosion. As a result, low-level deposits of Cs-137 appeared to be trapped in buried parts of this channel that extended through the delta and on out into East Sandusky Bay. Peak Cs-I 37 activities in the now-buried channels appeared to be in the range of 3-6 pCi/g. It appeared likely that such buried deposits were scattered along the dashed blue line in Figure 44.
The preceding interpretations are summarized as follows:
- 1. 1969 Cs-137 deposition in section A, buried deeper than 30 inches below active stream bottom in 2007
- 2. 1969 Cs-137 deposition upstream in Flood Plain area
- 3. Post-1969 dredging of Flood Plain Cs-137, with re-deposition downstream in Stream Mouth sections B, C, delta, and bay
- 4. Post-1969 dredging re-deposits covered by materials of lesser Cs-137 activity; in 2007 buried deeper than 6 inches in active stream bottom, buried deeper than 18 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 80 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
inches in abandoned channel, and buried deeper than 54 inches in near-bay end of Stream Mouth
- 5. 2006/2007 scour from section B, with re-deposition in section A, responsible for highest Stream Mouth activity, found in upper 6 inches of stream bed Reinterpretation of Bay Results - In light of the Stream Mouth interpretations, it became reasonable to interpret that Cs-137 values equaling or exceeding 3 pCi/g, found in the Bay, were a continuation of the pattern described in the Stream Mouth. Re-examining the data from the Bay report led to the interpretation that the main part of Cs-137 deposition in the Bay followed a channel to the west, as shown in Figure 44. The values found continued to be well below 12 pCi/g, and the conclusions of the Bay report continued to be valid, except that it did appear that PBRF Cs-137 might actually be distinguishable from background Cs-137 in the bay. The original bay report had concluded that a distinction between background and PBRF Cs-137 could not be made.
The fact that the bay value marked 3.2 pCi/g in Figure 44 occurred in the upper 6 inches of a bay sample indicates that some of the material eroded from Stream Mouth section B may have been delivered to the Bay as recently as 2006/2007.
309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 81 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
CHARACTERISTICS OF CS-137 DEPOSITS THAT AFFECT REMOVAL Lognormal Distribution - The distribution of Cs-137 testing results affects the decision on whether or not sediments should be removed. A key issue is that lognormally distributed results cannot be directly compared to a Derived Concentration Guideline Limit (DGCL) value. This is because the assumption that underlies the DCGL calculation is a uniform distribution, not the lognormal distribution observed in the field.
The key problem to be solved to make a reasonable comparison is to determine what is the "representative" activity or concentration being delivered by a deposit that contains Cs-137 in a lognormal distribution. In evaluating the geologic patterns of Cs-137 deposition, a trend line fit to log-transformed results typically delivers a useful "representative" value or pattern. In evaluating the radiation dose delivered by a lognormal distribution, the "representative" activity should be considered the center of gravity of the distribution. This center of gravity isnot determined by the arithmetic mean of the measurements. It can be determined by finding the equation of the distribution's histogram curve, then finding the activity at which half the area under the curve lies to either side of that activity. An example follows.
After 4 values judged not part of the deposit were edited out, the following peak Cs-137 measurements, in pCi/g, were obtained in Section B of the Stream Mouth: 5, 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 9, 9, 11, and 16. A histogram of those peak deposit values follows:
Number X
FIGURE 45 - HISTOGRAM Of X
X X
Occurrences X X X X
X X
5 6 7 8 91011 1213141516 Activity (pCi/g)
If we fill out this histogram to create a continuous curve, we obtain the following:
Number FIGURE 46-HISTOGRAM Of x
x WITH CURVE Occurrences X X X
X 5 6 7 8 910111213141516 Activity (pCi/g) 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 82 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
Without the original observations, we have the following curve, which we can divide into equal areas to the left and right of the "center of gravity" of the area under the curve.
Number GURE 47 - HISTOGRAM Of C
ER OF GRAVITY Occurrences 5 6 7 8 91011 1213141516 Activity (pCi/g)
By this analysis, the "representative" activity in the Area B sediment layer with the highest Cs-137 activities would be slightly less than 10 pCi/g. Note that the "representative" value determined for this section, by fitting a line to the logs of the measurements, was 8.9 pCi/g (fairly close to 10, considering the simplicity of this example).
The direct exposure aspect of the DCGL calculation assumes that all of the soil in the area surrounding the maximally exposed individual has the same Cs-137 activity, as illustrated in Figure 48 for a DCGL of 12 pCi/g:
FIGURE 48 - DCGL CONCEPT However, when the Cs-137 distribution is lognormal, and not uniform, the same individual might walk over individual activity measurements as high as 16 pCi/g, but be exposed to an equivalent radioactivity of only 10 pCi/g, as illustrated by Figure 49.
309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 83 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
FIGURE 49 -
DISTRIBUTION CONCEPT One way in which this discrepancy might be overcome would be to take a dose approach to determining what sediment should be removed, rather than employing the DCGL concept. Another approach might be to compare the "representative" value, as defined in this report, to the DCGL. Yet another approach would be to use a Cs-137 input with a lognormal distribution in the RESRAD computer model, to define the input that delivers a dose of 25 mRemlyear. If any of these approaches were employed, it appears likely that the conclusion would be that removal of many sediment deposits would not be necessary in order to achieve the required dose <25 mRem/year.
Precision and Accuracy - It has been observed in prior studies in this series that the practical quantitation limit (PQL) for testing values in this project is 3 pCi/g. Below that value, the precision DQI of +20% cannot be reliably achieved. In such cases, the differences between one result and another are only approximations, and cannot be relied upon as meaningful. Based upon the graph provided in the current study as Figure 37, it appears that the accuracy DQIs of 80-120% can only be achieved when the measured values span the range at least as high a 4.5-18 pCi/g, with a "representative" value at least as high as 9 pCi/g.
Number of Samples Reiuired - As the "representative" value approaches the current remedial target of 12 pCi/g, the number of samples required to achieve 95% confidence, that the "representative" value is less than the target, increases. A trial calculation suggested that, when the variance of the log-transformed values is 0.15, the power of the statistical test is 1.0, and the "effect size" is 12-91 pCi/g, the number of samples required to achieve 95% confidence would be at least 25. These preliminary calculations employed.only the most elevated activity values at each sampling location. If all of the samples containing Cs-137 from PBRF were employed, then it is possible that there would be a sufficient number of samples to support the conclusion at the 95% confidence level.
309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 84 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
Ease of reaching the contaminated sediment with remediation equipment - Overland access to key parts of the Stream Mouth would be relatively straightforward. Overland access can be achieved from an Erie MetroParks parking area, illustrated in Figure 50. If fixed equipment could remain in that paved area, hoses could be extended roughly 200 feet to the stream, without significant impact to the vegetation.
Water access can be achieved from East Sandusky Bay, but water depths in the Stream Mouth become very shallow, such that boats can draw only a few inches in some places. For this reason, MetroParks FIGURE 50 -
canoes were used to PARKING REMEDIAL transport the AREA sampling equipment for this study. The nearest commercial boat access is roughly 2 miles to the west, and is the point at which HaagEnviro put in its pontoon boat for bay sampling.
Ease of removing only the contaminated sediment - The lateral limits of deposits that contain individual results that may exceed cleanup standards can be defined by the methods used in this study. As illustrated by Figure 51, the parts of the sediment that PUMP SUCTION I
HEAD REMEDIAL CONCEPT exceed those criteria often occur in layers that underlie materials that might not exceed the standards. Segregation of these layers would not likely be feasible. Once the key layers are removed, it is likely that the combined material removed would no longer 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 85 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
exceed the cleanup criteria, due to mixing of the layers, and due to mixing of the lognormally distributed Cs-bearing particles.
Removal of contaminated layers, in the Stream Mouth setting, would most likely be performed using land-based hydraulic dredging equipment, such as that illustrated in Figure 51. This approach would generate a slurry of water and sediment. The sediment slurry would then be processed to remove water, at a minimum.
water Spray Potentially, the so. (
processing could also C> <D C+
1 segregate the Cs--
Devic bearing soils from the balance of the material.
(Coarse Grovel)
E ase o f sep a ratin g 2W ar
_Yale C> D
]
<0 contaminated clay
[,d o
/
from other materials -
> <zd S-c>
4-I NASA has not studied segregation of clay particles from coarser materials on this project. However, I
Cyclone
- 2 Pump #Cycono Pump #2 others have performed[7-I such work, on other projects in the past. For Cleaned lFne* Material pI I I example, HaagEnviro (Fine Soend set up and operated a
[Silty Sed Silt)
Cloeaner tr ia l s y s te m o f th is ty p e C
(Fine Grov l,. *Cooria Sa in 1994,as illustrated by Figure 52. The primary function of the o
IL WAooI SlSTD system illustrated here SI WASHIN SYSTo.
S +o*
-PROCESS FLOW SCHEM5 was to segregate I52 contaminated clays FIGURE I
from other soil types, Fle r
I SCONCEPT and to concentrate those Pump #4 contaminated clays in a Coke h-a-a-dry cake, for disposal.
environmental0company 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 86 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck:,RSH app: RSH
Summary of Interpretations - Cs-137 from the PBRF was found in the Stream Mouth depositional environment, at levels that appeared unlikely to deliver a dose >25 mRem/year to the maximally exposed individual. In some cases, Co-60 from the PBRF was also present. The most elevated levels of Cs-137 detected were in transit, through a process of sediment erosion and re-deposition. The highest Cs-137 activity in transit was 20.6 pCi/g, but the "representative" value for this deposit was a range of only 2.5-6.3 pCi/g. Downstream from the most elevated deposit, the erosion and re-deposition process was seen to have moved levels of Cs-137 in the stream mouth and bay that peaked in the range of 2-4 pCi/g.
309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 87 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
APPENDIX A FIELD PROCEDURES 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 88 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
PROCEDURE FOR SAMPLING EQUIPMENT DECONTAMINATION This procedure describes the general method to be used for decontamination of sampling devices that are re-used, such as water level indicators or sampling pumps. The purpose of decontamination is to remove all solid and liquid residues from prior samples before taking a new sample.
PRIOR PROCEDURES REQUIRED
- None EQUIPMENT REQUIRED Metal wash tub Boot sprayer Distilled water
- Detergent Sample gloves
- Paper towels
- Trash bag
- Knife or scissors
- Plastic sheeting PROCEDURE
- 1. Don sample gloves, use knife or scissors to detach all sample string, and completely disassemble the sampling device.
- 2. Place device in tub, with a small amount of detergent and distilled water.
- 3. Scrub all parts with detergent and distilled water to remove visible solid residues.
- 4. Run detergent and water through interior of sampling equipment.
- 5. Remove equipment and rinse off detergent with distilled water.
- 6. Place equipment on clean plastic sheeting.
- 7. Dry equipment with paper towels, or allow to air dry.
- 8. Place all solid Waste (sampling gloves, paper towels, string, etc.) into trash bag, to return to PBRF. Discard water on ground.
309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 89 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
PROCEDURE FOR GEOPROBE DUAL-TUBE SAMPLING This procedure is for sampling soils using Geoprobe tools, and a manual or powered driving device.
PRIOR PROCEDURES REQUIRED
- Sampling Equipment Decontamination EQUIPMENT REQUIRED
- Clear 60" Geoprobe sampling tubes One red and one black sampling tube end caps 60" Geoprobe dual-tube sampler
- Geoprobe adapter from sampler to 1" drill rod
- Geoprobe drive cap
- 3' long by 1" diameter drill rods
- Manual driver, or hydraulic probe driver
- Tape measure
- Hacksaw
- Field notebook, Sharpie fine point marker
- Waterproof duct tape PROCEDURE For each 60-inch depth sampled, the following steps willbe performed.
- 1. Assemble sampler by inserting inner plastic tube inside outer steel tube
- 2. Drive sampler into sediment
- 3. Extract inner plastic tube, with sample inside
- 4. Cut off tube to length of recovered sample ends withodecontaminated hacksaw
- 5. Cap the top of the tube with a black cap, bottom with a red cap
- 6. Label tube with sample location and depth interval
- 7. Measure down 6" from top of sample and mark with Sharpie. Measure down 12" from that mark and make another mark. Continue making marks every 12" for the remaining core.
- 8. Tape the end caps to limit leakage
- 9. Record observations in field notebook 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 90 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
PROCEDURE FOR VIBRACORE SAMPLING Sampling of soft sediments from a depth of 0-10 feet may be accomplished with a vibracore setup, involving a large-diameter (3-inch) aluminum tube, top caps to create a sample-retaining suction, and a vibration-inducing driver. The sampling tube will be driven to refusal or a maximum depth of 10 feet (120 inches). Some stick-up above the ground or water surface is needed, to facilitate retrieval. Sample recovery will be determined as length of sample recovered divided by length driven.
PRIOR PROCEDURES REQUIRED Sampling Equipment Decontamination EQUIPMENT REQUIRED
- Clean, new aluminum sampling tubes, 3-inch diameter by 10-foot length
- Two end caps per sample
- Backpack-style gasoline-powered concrete consolidation vibrator
- Sharpie fine point marker
- Duct tape
- Tape measure Hacksaw PROCEDURE
- 1. Assemble sampler by clamping vibrator to top of tubing.
- 2. Vibrate sampler into soft sediment, until refusal or full depth is reached.
- 3. After driving to total depth, measure depth to top of sample, inside tube.
- 4. Place end cap on top of tubing, to create an airtight seal.
- 5. Pull tube out of ground.
- 6. Place a cap on bottom end of tube (if sampling in water, put bottom cap on while tube end is still under the water surface, to maintain suction).
- 7. Remove top cap, again measure distance to top of sample, to determine if sample loss occurred during tube extraction.
- 8. Cut tubing to length of sample with decontaminated hacksaw; replace top cap.
- 9. Label the tube with sample location, depth interval, and "TOP".
- 10. (In sample processing trailer) Measure down 6" from top of sample and mark with Sharpie. Measure down 12" from that mark and make another mark.
Continue making marks every 12" down to 54".
- 11. Tape the top and bottom caps to avoid leakage, if needed.
- 12. Record observations in field notebook.
309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 91 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
APPENDIX B LABORATORY RESULTS (Provided as a separate computer file named 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet_08FEB08.xls) 309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 92 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SMI-IA Depth Sample Result I I.,..1k.
1 11 ~4117I MDA ILab Uncertainty 2 Sigma I~1%2 (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA R.Case IHaag~ ote Recount I
E EIE*EE*
m I
I.
-SIj I
I'*M I' I 1H*Ih H1 H
H
-t~J M~I I
If I
1V.'1It!
III I
0.148 57.74 0.14
-0.046 NO 0.115 B<
0.168 40 0.229 0.173 OK 36-39 39-42 42-45 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 (This location was re-sampled with Geoprobe: see SMI-1 B)
= Vibracore
= Geoprobe DETECTIONS ARE COLOR-CODED AS FOLLOWS:
IN MID-CORE 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet Sil SMI-IA
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SMI-IB Depth I
Samples After j
Sample Result (Inches)
Processing (Cs-137)
MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCilg)
Flag 2 Sigma {%)
I(pCilg)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note Recount Note NoI (pCilg)
(PC'/g) I Flan 1 2 Sigma M I (PClg)
I 0-6 6-18 Jf-4z 42-45 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 18-30 30-42 42-58.5 0.218 0436
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA 0.123 55.47 0.154
- A 93.58 0.121 0.128
-0.026
-0.146 0.157 B<
0.182 B<
0.051 B<
NO NO 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet Sii SMI-IB3
Project 302 PBRF 08-Feb-08 Depth Sample Result STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 1.66 2.23 3.052 5.718 7.737 0.958
<MDA MDA (PCi/g) 0.17 0.105 0.09 0.076 0.121 0,159 0.149 0.042 Lab Uncertainty Flg 2Sima N 28.28 13.28 10.64 9.16 6.93 6.38 22.27 SMI-2 2 Sigma 0.328 0.226 0.247 0.294 0.434 0.544 0.215 (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA R.Case Haag NoteI i*:.*
I
- .=.Recount IQC Result
(+= good, - = bad)
Note
",,,v,,
0.655 OK M
1.329 1.315 1.893 2.196 2.682 3.177 5.163 5.471 7.034 0.594 B<
I o;..- 0 1 1
96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M2 SM1-2
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SMI-3 Depth Samples After inches Processing 0-6 6-18 22-27 27-30 30-33 33-36 36-39 39-42 42-45 18-30 Sample Result MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (DCilb)
Flag I2 Sigma (%) I(pCiIq)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
SR.Case Note I Haag Note Note II Recount (pCilg)
(PC!/g)
Flag 2 Siama M (pCi1g)
I 0.222 35.92 0.337 0.376
<MDA 0.386 0.268 B<
0.236 57.74 0.223
-0.073 NO 45-48 48-49 51-54 54-57 r7 an 30-42 42-49
<MDA
<MDA 0.234 B<
0.14 B<
l[-gUl 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheetSM-SM1-3
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SMI-4 Depth Sample Result MDA Lab Uncertainty ioCI/al I Flaa 1 2 Siama (%)
2 Sigma (oCiIal (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note Recount N
Haa No (DCiIq) 0.088 0.122 0.117 0.094 8.32 4.51 7.8 0.296 0.639 0.343 0.292 0.225 2.965 10.937 3.65 2.496 1.717 9.65 0.08 10.68 lOU-I03 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-77 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet S M1-4
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMI -4Relocate Depth I Original SM14 Result Relocate Result IDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (Pcilg) IFlag 12 Sigma (%)
(pCilg)
I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA 1+= innod - = hAdl Haag Note I Note I
I Recount QC Result (oCiIal fnCil )
3.517 11.698 15&661 4.11 3.333 0.122 0.141 0.086 0.138 0.138 5.51 11.85 15.21 17.02 0.989 0.407 0.372 0.334 14.531 2.84 1.89 1.461 15.014 14.835 3.429 2.253 12.6 0.541 2.882 2.4 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M-elce SM1-4Relocate
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMI-4Boundl Depth inrhou
[
Sample Result MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (DCi/aa Flaa 1 2 Siama (%I I(DCi/al)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+= ciood. - = bad)
R'Case [Haag Note Note II Recount (pCila) 5.278 3.418 0.091 0.129 0.094 9.64 9.47 12.24 0.538 0.524 0.431 4.684 4.625 2.893 0.203 B<
0.167 B<
0a098 IL W-/Z 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SI-Bud SM1-4B3oundl
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 Depth lin h@,k I Sample Result MDA Lab Uncertainty ftoCilal Flaa i 2 Siama (%)
SMI-4Bound2 2 Sigma ftDCi/al (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+= aood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note I Note I
I m
I Recount (ICi/Ca)
I 0.136 0.124 0.076 0.108 0.118 9.89 7.28 14.78 20.91 23.25 0.53 0.67 0.284 0.225 0,278 4.471 7.736 1.519 0.731 0.789 OZ- 00 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet S1-Bud SM1-4B3ound2
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 Depth Sample Result MDA Lab lrCila) I Flaci Uncertainty 2 Siama (%)
SMI-4Bound3 2 Sigma (o)CiI/)I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
= aood. - = bad)
SR.Case Haag Note Note II Recount (DCi/)
0.082 0.142 0.083 0.089 10.53 6.15 11.34 14.04 0.443 0.814 0.412 0.354 3.51 10.97 3.018 2.017 2.13 0.135 13.59 0.366 56-6u 60-62 62-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M 4Bu3 SM1-4Bound3
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMI-4Bound4 Depth finrh*@I Sample Result IMDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (oCi/aI I Flaa 1 2 Siama 1%W I aCilal (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+= aood. - = bad)
R.Case I Note I HaagNote Recount I Ci/al I
0.115 0,081 0.075 0.088 13.38 8.11 6.94 0.339 0.577 0.645 0.394 0.323 2.02 6.014 7.766 2.579 1.792 12.52 0.084 14.4 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheetSM14Bnd SM1-4Bound4
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMIl-4Bound5 Depth Sample Result MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (p~Ci/gq)
I Flag I 2 Sigma (%) I(p~Ci/a)I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+= good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note Recount Note H
N (pCil/)
0.081 0.127 0.143 0.084 0.144 12.1 10.43 6.04 12.96 14.48 0.377 0.463 0.909 0.362 0.363 2.559 3.678 12.45 2.273 1.948 Ibb-b9 I
69-7 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SM1-4Bound5
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMI1-4Bound6 Depth i-nh..%
Sample Result MDA I Lab I Uncertainty 2 Sigma (eh)IFlaa 2 Siama (%) I oCilal (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+= aood. - = bad)
R.Case Note I Haag Note INote I
Recount ln*..iln%
0.087 0.087 0.084 0.089 12.31 6.43 13.1 0.393 0.816 0.358 0.296 0.316 2.622 10.532 2.225 1.367 1.433 16.61 0.129 16.56 5bb.b-6u 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SM1-4Bound6
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RM B ck: PJW app: RDH 08-Feb-08 SMI-5 I
Depth Sample Result MDA Lab Uncertainty (oCi/la I Flaa 1 2 Siama t%)
2 Sigma (oCilalI (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.CaseI Note I Haag Note Note II Recount (nCi/l I
0.056 22.36 0.137 0.078 0.416 0.079 0.21
<MDA 0.053 37.14 0.093 B<
0.085 55.47 0.117
- A 75.59 OK 0.084 0.084
-0.018
-0.09 NO NO 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-94 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SM1-5
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 Depth Sample Result MDA (pCi0g) 0.082 ILab Uncertainty ma (%
18.86 SMI-6 2 Sigma 0.173 (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
+= good, - = bad) 0.652 R.Case Haag Note Recount Note (IDCila) m 0.833
<MDA 0.245 0.042 0.081 19.58 0.165 0.587 0.06 B<
0.134 62.72 0.078
- A 100 0.154 0.042
-0.043
-0.078 NO NO 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet S M1-6
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by: BAP/RMB ck:PJW app: RDH 08-Feb-08 SMI-7 Depth Iinr~h.=c Sample Result MDA Lab I UncertaintyI 2 Sigma (oCil)
I Flaa 2 Siama (%)
(oCil I
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
[R'Case Haag Note Note II Recount (pCila) 0.078 17.49 0.167 0.082 0.696 0.016 0.176
<MDA 0.078 46.77 OK 0.09 B<
0.059 B<
0.086 B<
<MDA
<MDA 51-54 54-5 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SM 1-7
Project-028BR STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 Depth Samples After Sample Result (inches)
Processing (Cs-137)
SM2-MilDA Lab Uncertainty (pCilg) IFlag 1 2 Sigma M%
1 S2 Sigma (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA R.Case IHaagNote Recount ioCilal I
(+ = 0ood. - = bad)
I Note I
(oCila)
I 7
0-6 6-18 0.496
<MDA 0~064 0.235
- A 93.81 0.184
-0.223 NO 0.062 B<
18-30 0.05 70.71 0.045 0.055
-0.031
-0.057 NO NO 39-42 42-45 4548 48-51 51-54 54-57 17-Rfl 30-47 0.064
- A 88.81 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet 2-SM2-1
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM2-2 Depth I
Samples After Sample Result MDA Processing (Cs-137)
(ocig 0-6 013 Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (Result -2 Sigma) - MDA R.Case Haag Note Recount Flaa 2 Siama (%I I (oCi/o)
I
(+ = oood. - = bad)
I Note (oCiIal 48.51 0.146 0.046 0.024
-0.01 OK NO 6-18 18-30 30-47 0.083
<MDA
<MDA 0.047 55.47 0.038 B<
0.063 B<
39-42 42-45 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 SZ7-An L
JI I 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M2 SM2-2
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM2-3 I
Depth I
Samples After (inches) I Processing 0-6 Sample Result MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 SigmaI (pCita)
Flacj 2 Sigma (%)
(pCilg)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note Nate Recount lnCilaI
- j (pCi1g)
I Flan 1 2 Slama M I (pCi/al I
0.316 45.08 0.343 0.227 0.101
-0.114 21-24 24-27 27-30 30-33 33-36 36-39 39-42 42-45 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 6-18 18-30 30-42 42-49.75 0,343 0.23 66.14 0.174 B<
0.04 B<
0.139 B<
NO
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M3 SM2-3
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM2-4
'inhes) I Pocessing.
0-6 Sample Result MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCilg)
Flag 2 Sigma (%)
/
(pCiul (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
+ = n 4n _ = 1 A R.Case, Haag Note Recount Inr~iln*
0.241 0.259 40.82 0.347 0.256 6-18 0.496 0.235 51.61 0.004 NO 24-27 27-30 30-33 33-36 36-39 39-42 42-45 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 18-30 0.462 0.304 59.65 0.27
-0.122 Reject 30-42 42-49.5
<MDA
<MDA 0.192 B<
0.195 B<
96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M-SM2-4
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM2-5 I
Depth I
Samples After Sample Result
( inches) I Processing (Cs-I37) 0-6 MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma InCil I Flan 2 Siama 1%1/ 1 ffCi/loI (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad I R.Case Haag Note Recount Note I
I (DciIa)
I 0.205 29.49 0.38 0.176 0.696
-0.038 6-18 0317 24-27 27-30 30-33 33-36 36-39 39-42 42-45 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 5;7-An 0.179 55.47 0.347 68.06 NO NO 18-30 0.60i 0.341
-0.187 30-42 42-48.5
<MDA
<MDA 0.461 B<
0.168 B<
90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB1-Mouth ResulItsSpread sheet M5 SM2-5
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 Depth Samples After Sample Result inches Processing (Cs-37) 0-6 SM2-6 MDA LabI Uncertainty 2 Sigma (PC!Ig)
Flag 2 Sigma (%)
(pCi/g)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+= nood. - = badfl R.Case I Recount Note I Haag Note iCiI
(+ = oood - = b d) 0.33 35.34 0.448 0.486 OK 6-18
<MDA 0.247 B<
21-24 24-27 27-30 30-33 33-36 36-39 39-42 42-45 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 r7 a*n 18-30 30-38.5 0.286
<MDA 0.246 72.84 0.209
-0.169 NO 0.177 B<
84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M6 SM2-6
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM3-1 Depth Sample Result (Cs-MDA Lab -TUncertainty 2 2 Sigma (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+=
R.Case HaagNote Recount inches 137)
(pCiIg)
Flag Sigma (%)
(pCilg) good, - = bad)
Haag (pCi)
<MDA 0.174 B<
<MDA 0.046 B<
<MDA 0.146 B<
24-27 27-30 30-33 33-36 36-39 39-42 42-45 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet 3-SM3-1
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM3-2 Depth ISamples After I Sample Result IVMDA ILab Uncertainty I2 Sigma (Result -2 Sigma) - MVDA IR.Case IRago e
coun ince Processing(s17 ICU lg 2SgaM I(~/g
+=go,-=bd agNt ia 0-6 0.222 34.3 0.353 0.451 13.5-18 18-21 21-24 6-18
<MDA 0.189 B<
24-27 27-30 30-33 018-33
<MDA 0.059 B<
60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet 32 SM3-2
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM3-3 Depth Sample Result Ii-r~h-I 1t'o_.4171 I
MDA Lab I Uncertainty 2 Sigma incilal I Flaa 2 Siama (%I (KDCi/a)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note Recount Note N
(pCialq) 0.11 20.24 17.61 0.183 0.138 0.601 0.591 0.773
<MDA 0.228
<MDA 0.044 0.062 B<
0.102 0.074 B<
50 0.114 0.012 787-90 990-93 93-96-9 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M-SM3-3
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM3-4 Depth Sample Result MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (p)Ci/I)
IFlan 2 Siqma (%) I(DCilgI) I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = qood, - = bad)
R.Case H
Recount QC Result Note ote (pCilg)
I (pCilg) 0.178 37.8 0.256 0.242 OK
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA 0.243 B<
0.228 B<
0.229 B<
0.23 B<
<MDA 0.487
<0.255
<0.264 I U-UI 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M-SM3-4
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM4-1 Depth Sample Result MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma tinche I
(Cs-I 37)
(DCici) IFlau 1 2 Sicima (%) IlrCi/Qq)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = qood, - = bad)
R.Case HaagNote Recount INote Haa Not (pCilg) 0.207 50 0.226 0.058 0.018 OK NO 0.063 71.39
-0.04 0.061 B<
Ji3-jb 36-39 39-42 42-45 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-Mouth Res ultsSpreadsheet M1 SM4-1
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 Depth Sample Result (Cs-137)
SM4-2 MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCila)
Flaq 2 Sigma (%)
(pCilg)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note Note II Recount (pCi/g)
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA 0.216 B<
0.061 B<
0.059 B<
36-39 39-42 42-45 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-M outh Res ultsSpreadsheet M2 SM4-2
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM4-3 Depth Sample Result MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (inchesI ICs-137 I (oCi/al I Flaa 1 2 Siama (%)
(oCila)
I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case HaagNote Recount Note II D lq I
0.049 25 2.32 0.49 0.A43 0.091 12.03 0.108 0.287 0.197 0.252 0.274 1.942 0.149
-0.091 OK 0.144 40 OK NO 0.252 60.91 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-62 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-M outh Res ultsSpreadsheet 43 SM4-3
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by: BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 Depth 1inr-ha-Sample Result (Cs-1371 SM5-1 MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (DCi/aI Flaa 2 Siama (%)
(DCiI/a)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R'Case Haag Note I Note I
I Recount (pCi/_q)
<MDA
<0M6
<MDA
<MDA 0.173 B<
0.051 75.59 0.046
-0.036 Reject 0.047 B<
0.126 B<
0 084 I
- .3f4z 42-45 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M-SM5-1
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM5-2 Depth Samples After inches Processing 0-6 Sample Result
-It.
MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (oCila)
Flaa 2 Siama (%) I(lCilal (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note Note Recount (fCilol I
0.171 41.7 0.224 0.141 OK 6-18
<MDA 0.139 B<
21-24 24-27 27-30 30-33 33-36 36-39 39-42 42-45 18-29.5
<MDA 0.152 B<
63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet 52 SM5-2
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 Depth I
Samples After Sample Result t,..
4 )7~
I IDA ILab SM5-3 Uncertainty 2 Sigma 11 a; 0/
1~_
f*Ir* -i %
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
+ =
- =KA R.Case I Haag Note Recount In
--i/
I I~f.
II WIa H
~u~
I I
I it H
M M -
I It I
ki Ii 18-21 21-24 24-27 27-28 30-33 33-36 36-39 39-42 42-45 0-6 6-18 18-28 0-839 0.421 50.24 1.3 0.209 25.93 0.422 0.339 0.294
-0.004 NO 0.752 0.311 0.197 36.51 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 (This location was re-sampled with vibracore: see SM5-5) 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M-SM5-3
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 Depth Sample Result IMDA Lab (p)Ciig)
IFlaq Uncertainty 2 Sigmna (%)I SM5-4 2 Sigma (p)CiIg)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = qood, - = bad)
I RCase I Haag Note I Recount (pCilfg) 0.122
<MDA
<MDA 0113 0.095 37.8 0.075 57.74 0.109 B<
0.058 B<
0.137 0.07 0.13 OK NO
-0.023 0.07 57.74 0.066
-0.023 NO
."-'0 75-78 78-80 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M-SM5-4
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app: RDH 08-Feb-08 SM5-5 Depth Sample Result IMDA Lab Uncertainty (nCiIal I Flan 1 2 Siamna (%)
2 Sigma locilal (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = oood. - = bad)
RtCase I Haag Note Recount (Dc i/o) 0.075 0.056 2.542 0.214
<MDA 18.77 10.99 39.22 0.159 0.29 0.084 0.603 2.196 0.06 0.07 0.294 B<
0.246 53.45 0.25
-0.029 NO 10-OI1 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M-SMV5-5
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by: BAP/RM B ck:PJW app: RDH 08-Feb-08 Depth Sample Result IMDA Lab Uncertainty (oCila)
IFlaa 12 Siama (%)
SM6-1 2 Sigma IDCila)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood, - = bad)
R.Case Recount Note Haag Note (pCiq) 0.096 0.052 33.01 0.453 0.086
<MDA 0.037 25 0.113 0,114 0.046 0.132 0.287
-0.005 0.045 53.45 0.045 B<
0.049
- A 99.14 NO 0.037
-0.049 NO 66-69 69-70J 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M-SM6-1
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM6-2 Depth Sample Result I^-
Aft,%
MDA LabI Uncertainty 2 Sigma (DCilqI)
IFlaa I 2 Siama (%)
(pCila)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
SR.CaseI Notase HaagNotei Note II Recount (pCilg)
I
([)Ci/a Flaci 2 Siama M (pCi/q)
I 0.107 25.21 0.503 0-46 0.049 23.09 0.066
- A 89.52 0.155 0.117 0.053 0.35 0.337
-0.059 OK NO L 2J 42-45 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M2 SM6-2
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 Depth
'inrhgl I
Sample Result MDA Lab SM6-3 Uncertainty 2 Sigma 2 Siama (%) I (DCiIa)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood, - = bad)
SR'Case Haag Note Recount (pCi/a)
I DC Fla I
Note I
I (PC!'g)
I 0.294
<MDA 0404
<MDA 0.053 22.79 0.085 37.64 0,119 B<
0.083 66.67 0.102 B<
0.127 0.111 0.372 0.098 OK OK
<0.080
<0.066 0.067
-0.049 NO 78-81 81-84]
84-855 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309P8-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M 3 SM6-3
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SMBI-4 0B-Feb-08 SM6-4 Depth Sample Result 1
1 19,I
-417%
I MDA Lab I Uncertainty 2 Sigma (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA R.Case Recount (CiIaI Flaa 2 Siama %)
(DCiIO)
= aood. - = bad)
NoteI I
(DCila) 0.055 22.5 0.134 0.105 0.401 0.146 OK 0.315
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA 0.064 33.33 0.112 B<
0.114 B<
0.083 B<
87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M4 SM6-4
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app: RDH 08-Feb-08 SM6-5 Depth Sample Result IMDA I Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma InCi/al Flaa 2 Siama 1%)
I iCilalI (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
RtCase I Haag Note Recount (oCi/a) 0.118 31.2 0.154 0.093 0.22 0.134 OK 0.283
<MDA 0O8
<MDA 0.056 32.88 0.112 B<
0.084
- A 75.59 0.082 B<
0.061
-0.065 NO vu-vo 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-103 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M-SMV6-5
Project 302 PBRF 08-Feb-08 Det Sample Result STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:RDH app:RSH 1.263 3.221 0.626
<MDA SM6-6 MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA R.Case Haag Note Recount
-QC Result Ci Flag 2 Sma %
p
)
C(+
= ood - = bad Note
_C Ci_
0.146 6.2 1.401 19.033 0.27 31.11 0.395 0.598 OK 1.258 0.157 16.28 0.532 2.532 2.963 0.221 42.89 0.269 0.136 OK 0.727 0.217
<0.249 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-Mouth Resu ltsSpread sheet M6 SM6-6
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SM6-6Relocate2 Depth I Original 5M6-6 Result Sample Result MDA I Lab I Uncertainty 2 Sigma In(iln Flan I 9 Snma I1 InCilgi i
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+= annd - : h~d*
R.Case i
NtHaag Note I Recount QC Result inCilni InCilal I
1+ = nood - = badl 0.177 0.094 9.2 0.589 1.263 1.664 0.313 17.54 0.296 0.152 5.328 1.274 0.025 1.755 3.221 0.136 48.51 OK
<MDA(0.296) 0.487 0.626 0.18 B<
0.125 B<
<0.194
<0.113
<MDA 1 57-60 1 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet 566eoae SM6-6Relocate2
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 E
m I
Depth linih*a*
Sample Result MVDA tocila)
SM6-6BoundA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma Flaa 12 Siama (%) I([iCi/a)I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+= aood. - = bad)
R'Case Haag Note I Note I
I iRecount (pCilq) 7.307 1.629 0.949 0.086 0.093 0.142 12 0.4 8.3 18.01 0.645 0.298 0.251 23754 6.569 1.189 0.577 0.121 26.26 0.205 B<
OK 10V0I 163-661 166-691 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-M outh Res ultsSpreadsheet 66Bud SM6-6B3oundA
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SM6-6BoundB Depth Sample Result MDA Lab I Uncertainty 2 Sigma inCli~al Flaa I2 Siama (%) I(oCila)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ =aood. - =bad)
R.CaseI Haag Note Note I
I Recount (pCi/q) 6.4 0.9 0.094 0.086 0.171 12.13 8.52 29.15 0.436 0.577 0.264 2.952 5.737 0.465 6.127 0.191 B<
0.12 0.128
- A 75.59 0.092
-0.099 NO f -uu 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M6Bud SM6-6BoundB
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SM6-6BoundC Depth Sample Result MDA Lab nCi/al I Flao Uncertainty 2 Sigma 2 Siama (%) IfoCi/la (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note Note I
Recount (DCila) 0.129 0.084 6.25 14.14 2.277 0.678 0-44 0.809 0.329 0.224 10.755 1.864 0,319 0.135 32.88 OK 0.183 B<
<0.174 0.114 66.67 0.093
-0.067 NO 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M6Bud SM6-6B3oundC
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 Depth Iinp-h~l=
Sample Result SM6-6BoundD MDA LabI Uncertainty 2 Sigma (oCi/a) I Flaa 2 Siama (%W (oCila)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R'Case Haag Note I Note I
I Recount (oCi/a) 0.094 0.105 8.48 27.74 0.744 0.638 0.207 0.149 0.115 6.359 0.432
-0.05
-0.123 0.452 0.158 57.74 0.16
- A 75.59 0.125 B<
NO NO 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M6Bud SM6-6BoundD
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SM6-6BoundE Depth Sample Result IJ--4'271 MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCi/g) I Flag 1 2 Sigma (%) I (pCi/g) I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+= oood. - = bad)
R.Casee Haag Note I Note I
I Recount Inlin I
3.619 0.083 0.078 10.4 15.57 1.748 0.311 Q.045-0.449 0.278 0.139 0.111 0.115 44.72 0.144 70.71 0.128 B<
1.392 0.057
-0.098 OK NO OZ-O0 65-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M6Bud SM6-6B3oundE
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SM6-6BoundF Depth I
Sample Result MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma InCilal IFlana 2 Siama (%) I ICi/alI (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case IHaagNote INote I
Igot Recount QC Result IoCi/a)
I (oCi/l) 0.139 0.14 6.2 0.842 2.437 0.32 0-08 14.54 0.139 48.51 0.132
- A 81.65 0.362 0.155 0.088 11.271 1.935 0.026
-0.112 NO 0.161 B<
72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M6Bnd SM6-6B3oundF
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP ck:RMB app:RDH 08-Feb-08 I Depth Sample Result Result-SM6-6Boundl MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCilq)
Flag 2 Sigma (%)
(pCig) I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+= aood. - = bad*
SR.Case I
Recount QC Result Haag Note I.Cil (OCila I
- m 7.813 0.143 0.106 0.132 8.46 0.681 8.6 0.711 6.768 6.996 1.996 2.564 16.72 0.436 0.094 0.094 0.173
- A 100
-0.173 NO 0.15 B<
0-0o/
57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309 PB-M outh ResulItsSpread sheet 566on SM6-6B3ound 1
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP ck:RMB app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM6-6Bound2 Depth Sample Result I MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
TR.Case Recount QC Result I NoteI I
(pCi/)
(pCi/g)I (DClIa)
Flag 2 Sigma (%) I (pCi/g)
I I
8.51 2.309 0.101 0.16 0.106 8.95 7.83 0.648 0.713 6.093 7.637 1.833 15.76 0.37 2.008 0.188 B<
0.2 B<
60-63 63-66 166-691 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet 66Bud SM6-6Bound2
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM6-7 Depth Sample Result (Cs-1371 M DA Lab (oCilal I Flaa Uncertainty 2 Sigmaj 2 Siama (%
(oCi/al I
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note Re(pCi/g)
NoteII gCqi
<MDA 0.303 00872 0.213 B<
0.12 41.63 0.061 51.64 0.092
- A 75.59 0.107
- A 75.59 0.127 0.064 0.066 0.077 0
0.056
-0.071
-0.082 NO NO NO u I'-u-,
84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M7 SM6-7
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 Depth Sample Result SM6-8 MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (oCiI0a Flao 1 2 Siama (%W (oCi/a)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R'Case Haag Note I Note I
I Recount (ocCi/a)
I 0.089 23.4 0.158 0.089 0.424
-0.045 0.09 66.14 NO 0.085 B<
0.302 B<
42-45 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M 8 SM6-8
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by: BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 Depth I
Sample Result SM6-9 MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (poCiq)
Flag 1 2 Sigma (%)
(pCi/g)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Note I Haag Note Note II Recount (pCi~g)
(Pci/g)
I 0.097 22.74 45.9 0.181 0.081 0.509 0.025 0.175
<MDA 0.069 0.074 B<
0.07 B<
0.087 B<
OK
<MDA
<MDA I L0,UUv 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M9 SM6-9
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by: BAP/RMB ck:PJW app: RDH 08-Feb-08 Depth
- inaeho, Sample Result MDA (pCilQ)
SM7-1 Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma Flaq 1 2 Siama (%)
I (pCi/q)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R'Case Haag Note o
Note I
I Recount (pCi/g) 0.09 21.43 24.16 0.152 0.156 0.46 0.397 0.641
<MDA 0.088 0.112 0.073 B<
0.075 65.36 0.092 B<
0.073
-0.036 NO
<MDA 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M-SM7-1
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM7-2 Depth 11 1,-h 1 Sample Result MDA Lab Uncertainty (oCilal I Flao 2 Siama (%)
2 Sigma (o)CiIa01 (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R'CaseI Haag Note Note II Recount IDCi/la) 0.098 24.97 0.388 0.266 0405 0.424 0.109 34.74 0.07 0.07 37.8 60.3 0.166 0.135 0.101 0.064 0.085 0.395 0.144 0.095
-0.029 OK OK NO NO
- 0.089 68.52
-0.05 S9-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-Mouth Res ultsSpreadsheet M-SM7-2
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM7-3 I
Depth Sample Result MDA I Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (oCila)
FIaa 2 Siama (%)
(I)Cila)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood, - = bad)
R.Case II Note I Haag Notei Note I
I Recount (pCi/q) 0.079 33.07 0.112 0.073 0.146
-0.043 Q. 105
<MDA 0.075 69.28 NO 0.077 B<
0.071 B<
0.234 B<
<MDA
<MDA 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet 73 SM7-3
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAPIRMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 Depth linrhAoi Sample Result MDA Lab (DCi/a)
Flaq SM7-4 Uncertainty 2 Sigma 2 Siama (%)
(pCil/q)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = qood, - = bad)
R.Case HaagNNote INote I HaNoeI l
I Recount (pCilg)
I 0.086 29.19 0.115 0.094 0.192 0.064 0.24
<MDA
<MDA 0.082 39.22 0.054 B<
0.036 B<
OK 42-45 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 57-59 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M 4 SM7-4
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app: RDH 08-Feb-08 SM7-5 I
Depth finr-ha.I Sample Result MDA Lab (oCilacI Flaa Uncertainty 2 Siama (%)
2 Sigma (DCi/a)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = qood, - = bad)
SR.Case I
Notase Haag Note I Note I
I Recount (pCilg)
I 3.872 0.056 0.103 0.062 19.25 8.37 14.74 0.161 0.345 0.164 0.039 0.608 3.424 0.865 OK 1.091 G.064 0.043 60.3
-0.018 NO 45-46 48-51 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-67 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-Mouth Res ultsSpreadsheet 75 SM7-5
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by: BAP/RM B ck: PJW app: RDH 08-Feb-08 Depth I
Sample Result I MDA Lab 1__pC!Sji LFlag SM7-6 Uncertainty 2 Sigma 2 Sigma (%) Ip I/
I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+= good, - = bad)
R.Case I INote Note I
I Recount (DCi/a)
(pcifl]
0.07 40.9 0.088 0.072 0.057
-0.021 OK NO 0._22
<MDA 0.071 59.31 0.063 B<
0.095 B<
0.061 B<
<MDA
<MDA 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M-SM7-6
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM8-1 Depth Sample Result Ih I
e..u4,7 MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCig)
Flag 1 2 Sigma (%)
I (pCilg)
I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note Note Recount (oCil I
0.08 0.151 16.39 25.75 0.787 0.197 0.204 0.161 0.905 0.432
<MDA 0.171 57.74 0.218 B<
0.29 B<
-0.053 NO
<MDA vu-vu 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-85 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M-SMV8-1
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by: BAP/RMB ck:PJW app: RDH 08-Feb-08 SMY8-2 Depth
'int-hoaI Sample Result IMDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma fDCi/al I Flaa 1 2 Siama i%) I ftoCi/al I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note o
Note I
Recount loCialI 0.056 0.083 20.85 25.47 0.55 0<284
<MDA 0.147 0.141 0.07 0.172 0.495 0.326
-0.051
-0.078 0.086 66.67 NO NO 0.19 60.3 0.344 B<
187-90, 90-91 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-Mouth Res ultsSpreadsheet M2 SM8-2
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM8-3 Depth Sample Result LMDA Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCi/ca)
IFlan 1 2 Siama (%) I(oCiq Iq (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = qood, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note I Note I
I Recount (pCi!/a) 0.079 15.36 38.94 0.189 0.105 0.94 0.27
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA 0.081 0.127 B<
0.066 B<
0.073 B<
0.084 OK
<0.078 O(-VU 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-103 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M 3 SM8-3
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 Depth.
Sample Result SM8-4 MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCi/g)
Flag 2 Sigma (%)
(pCil)I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+= god-
= bad)
SR'Case Haag Note Note II Recount (DCi) 0.082 0.083 19.33 20.87 0.767 0-176 GA58 0.175 0.162 0.105 0.103 0.638 0.522
-0.039
-0.048 0.11 59.27 NO NO 0.103 65.11 42-45 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-64 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M 4 SM8-4
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app: RDH 08-Feb-08 SM8-5 Deth Sample Result MDA Lab (oCil) 1 Flaa Uncertainty 2 Sigma 2 Siama (%
I tCila)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case IHaagNote Note Haa Not Recount (oCi/al 0.071 0.12 14.91 51.73 0.235 04-5 0.06 57.74 0.118 75.86 0.089 66.67 0.198 0.122 0.057 0.114 0.073 1.035
-0.007
-0.019
-0.082
-0.053 Reject NO NO NO 0409 196-991 199-1021 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M-SM8-5
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM8-6 Depth Sample Result MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (PC!/a) IFlag 1 2 Sigma M% I (PCi/g)I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case R"ag"°oe Recount Haag Note (pCilg)
I 1.122 0-146 0.046 0.077 0.116 16.72 16.27 72.11 0.153 0.185 0.106 0.071 0.703 0.86
-0.076
-0.015 Reject 0.128 0.072 55.47 NO
<MDA 0.138 B<
163-66 66-6 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M-SM8-6
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM8-7 Depth
-I Sample Result MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (oCila)
Flaa 1 2 Siama 1%)
(oCilal (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note o
Note II Recount (oCil I
0.08 18.58 0.121 0.051 12.7 9.02 0.169 0.249 0.325 0.65 1.541 3.044 OK 01-D4 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-67 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309P8-MouthResultsSpreadsheet 87 SM8-7
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by: BAP/RM B ck: PJW app: RDH 08-Feb-08 SM9-1 Depth Sample Result
. I
... I. - l MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (oCial)
I Flao i 2 Siama (%) I loCilal I
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = oood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note o
Note II Recount foCi/o I
0.059 0.052 25.61 26.73 0.127 0.106 0.306 0.236 0.394
<MDA 0.065 B<
0.082 66.38 0.075 B<
0.078
-0.042 NO
<MDA 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M-SM9-1
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by: BAP/RMB ck:PJW app: RDH 08-Feb-08 SM9-2 Depth Sample Result Dencpth I
(Cs;-1371 I
MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCilg)I Flag 1 2 SigmaM (%) (p
) Ig (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case IHaag Note Recount Note I
I (pCi/g) 0.084 26.32 0.067 17.79 0.051 40.78 0.14 0.15 0.064 0.159 0.192 0.305 0.614 0.042 0.387 0.956 OK OK 0.114 0.078 23.85 15.37 IU-t-uf 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-97 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M2 SM19-2
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by: BAP/RM B ck: PJW app: RDH 08-Feb-08 SM9-3 Depth Sample Result (MDA I LabI Uncertainty 1 2 Sigma (Result -2 Sigma) - MDA R.Case HaagNote Recount Iinches)
(Cs-137)
(pCi/g)
Flag 2 Sigma (%)
(pCilg)
(+ = oood, - = bad)
Note (DCilo) 0.051 27.22 0.102 0.219
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA 0.092 B<
0.047 B<
0.061 B<
0.05 B<
to-IU 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-91 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M-SMV9-3
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM9-4 Depth Sample Result IMDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = qood, - = bad)
SR'Case Haag Note Note II Recount (pCi/cg) 0.102 0.101 0.044 0.095 16.45 6.57 10.56 0.192 0.423 0.233 0.274 0.277 0.853 5.345 1.849 2.066 2.246 10.8 0.104 10.14 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M4 SMV9-4
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM9-5 Depth inehoal Sample Result MDA I Lab I Uncertainty 2 Sigma (oCi/aI Flaa 2 Siama (%)
(oCiial (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+= oood. - = bad'i R.Case Haag Note~
Recount IU*llUl
(+ = oood - = bad)
I 0.097 0.084 0.077 B<
23.53 0.168 0.123 0.441 0.182 31.5 OK 33-3b 36-39 39-42 42-45 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309 PB-Mouth Res ultsSpreadsheet M-SM9-5
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by: BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM9-6 Depth Sample Result fin.hpa I
tCR-1371 MDA I Lab I Uncertainty 2 Sigma (Result -2 Sigma)- MDA I R.Case Haag Note Recount (pCi/g)
I Flag I 2Sigma (%)
I (pCilg)
I
(+ =good, - = bad) l NoteI (PCg)
I 0.119 0.097 16.97 41.9 0.285 0.224 0.12 0.053 0.955 0.068
-0.018 0.056 57.74 NO
<MDA 0.101 B<
0.067 B<
<MDA U1I -t4 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-94 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M6 SM9-6
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM9-7 I
E Depth Sample Result I
id -
4 %'1%
MDA LabFUncertainty 2 Sigma I nCilal I Flan1 2 Sinma 1%I 1 mCi/IQ I
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+= aood. - = bad*
FR.Case Haag Note Recount QIC Result Roci/au I QoCilal I
(+ = aood - = bad)
I Note I
I 0.239 29.21 0.384 0.229 0.683 0.111 0.524
<MDA
<MDA 0.184 43.64 0.335 B<
0.283 B<
0.221
- A 81.65 OK 0.505
<0.204 O.O8
<0.295 0.147
-0.188 NO 84-871 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309 PB-Mouth ResulItsSpread sheet M7 SM9-7
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 0.049 37.8 042 0.088 63.25
<MDA 0.124 B<
<MDA 0.076 B<
0.064 44.72 0.071 0.068 OK 0.076
-0.044 NO 0.079 0.032 NO Why Reject?
66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet MDPB3 SM-DUP-BY37
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 Depth Depth Original Bay Result(s) I Sample Result (inches)
(inches) I (Cs-137)
I (Cs-137)
MDA (DCi/a)
SM-DUP-BY-43 Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (Result-2 Sigma)- MDA fR.Cae I Haag Note Recount Flea 2 Siama%1 iCi/al
(+ = aood. - = bad1 Not Ha Note 0.085 46.68 0.099 0.028
-0.108 0.108
- A 100 0.059 NO
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA 0.085 B<
0.121 B<
0.103 B<
63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 95-98 98-101 101-104 104-107 107-110 110-113 113-116 116-119
<MDA (0.221) 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet S-U-Y4 SM-DUP-BY-43
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 0.101 40.93
<MDA 0.067 B<
<MDA 0.114 B<
0.O96 0.078 66.67
<MDA 0.259 B<
0.126 0.08 0.063
-0.046 NO 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet S-U-Y4 SM-DUP-BY44
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app: RDH 08-Feb-08 SMV-TRIB-11 Depth finrhaa%
Sample Result IMDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (DCiIO)
I Flaa 1 2 Siama (%) I DtCi/al I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note o
Note Recount (oCila) 1.154 0.452 0.051 0.106 0.087 23.09 16.69 29.19 0.122 0.196 0.133 0.351 0.852 0.232
<MDA 0.062 B<
0.065 B<
<MDA U I.,- 0 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120
-J 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet MTI1 SM-TRIB-1
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RM B ck: PJW app: RDH 08-Feb-08 SM-TRIB-2 h
Sampie Result MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (inches)Det Smeesl(cs.1371 I oc,,o, la I2. =si,.,,%)l,oc,,,, I Recount (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note IRecounti)
Note II P /g I
-=
,r
*1 J
0.101 0.093 23.4 20.16 0.143 0.155 0.363 0.51 0.758
<MDA 0.053 B<
0.041 B<
<MDA 145-481 48-49 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet MTI2 SM-TRIB-2
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM-TRIB-3 Depth Sample Result MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigmaj (pCi/g)
Flag I 2 Sigma (%)
(pCitg) I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R'Case Haag Note I Note I
I Recount (pCilg) 0.084 28.37 17.03 0.13 0.206 0.24 0.876 OK 1.192
<MDA 0.11 0.078 B<
0.069 B<
0.059 B<
<MDA
<MDA 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet MRB3 SM-TRIB-3
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM-BOGERT-1 Depth I
Sample Result MDA I Lab I Uncertainty 2 Sigma inches) I (Cs-137)
(pCi/g)
Flag 2 Sigma (%)
I (pCi/g)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note Recount Note I
I (pCilg)
Note I
I (PC!/g) J 0.097 44.58 0.104 0.162 0.112 22.09 0.031 0.452 0.17 0.086 OK 0.066 29.76 0.1 OK 0.111 38.59 0.124 42z-4 4548 48-51 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-Mouth Res ultsSpreads heet MBGR-SM-BOGERT-I
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM-GB-1 Depth Sample Result (Cs-137)
MDA Lab Uncertainty 2Sigma (pCi/g) I Flag I 2 Sigma (%) I (pClqg)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.CaseI Haag Note Note I
Recount (pCilg) 0.227
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA 0.115 50.99 0.116
-0.004 Reject 0.219 B<
0.167 B<
0.322 B<
0.376 B<
93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SM-GB-1
Project 302 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:PJW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 SM-GB-2 Depth Sample Result MDA Lab In(*ilnl Flnn Uncertainty 2SigmaI 2 Sicama (%)
fI)Cila II (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = Qood, - = bad)
R'Case Haag Note o
Note I
I Recount (DCila)
ICs-1371 InCil I Fla (PC!la) 1 2 Slama (%) I ([)Ci/a)
I
<MDA
<MDA 0.369 B<
0.083 B<
0.055 63.25 0.089
- A 81.65 0.066
- A 89.44 0.073 0.047 0.06 0.04
-0.027
-0.076
-0.061 NO NO NO 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet MG2 SM-GB-2
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG1 (Section A)
Lab Number NmCOC I
I Number PB07-02928 SR53-1 Dpth Sample Result I
i., I I
- .4 ',t71 MDA I
Uncertainty 2 Sigma (oCilo)
Lab Flag 2Sioma 1%)
IoC i/o (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = oood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Note I Note IC (pCi/g) 0.101 18.4 0.303 1216 PB07-02929 SR53-1 PB07-02930 SR53-1 PB07-02931 SR53-1 PB07-02932 SR53-1 0.112 B<
0.141 B<
0.092 B<
0.165 B<
<0.103
<0.118
<0.129
<0.173 I oar-/z I 75.5-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SG SMG1
Project 309 PBRF 08-Feb-08 STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH SMG2 (Section A)
SMG2 (Section A]
SCOC Dph Sample Result PB07-02897 SR53-2 PB07-02898 SR53-2 8.88 PB07-02899 SR53-2 1.83 PB07-02900 SR53-2 0.578 PB07-02902 SR53-2 MDA LabFlag Uncertainty 2 Sigma (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA R.Case Haag Recount (pCilg) 2 Sigma (%)
(pCi/g)
(+ = good, - = bad)
Note Note (pCiou) 0.113 0.162 0.094 0.137 0.069 14.2 7.64 16.7 35.9 0.443 0.736 0.312 0.209 2.484 7.982 1.424 0.232 7.92 2.24 0.410
<0.141 I6O-o7I 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SG SMG2
Project 309 PBRF 08-Feb-08 SCOC Dph Sample Result La ubr Number (n)
(Cs-137)
PB07-02939 SR53-3 LA2.49 PB07-02940 SR53-3 1.15 PB07-02942 SR53-3 PB07-02943 SR53-3 STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH SMG3 (Section A)
MDA Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCilg) 2 Sigma (%)
(pCi/g) 0.206 7.16 1.06 0.094 14.30 0.364 0.189 21.7 0.252 0.130 0.384 B<
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA R.Case Haag RQc orn
(+ -- good, - = bad)Noe ot I
!n 12.434 2.032 2.55 0.709 0.931
<0.227
<0.154 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SG SMG3
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG4 (Section A)
L COC Dpth Sample Result MDA U
F Uncertainty 2 Sigma (Result -2 Sigma) - MDA R.Case Haag ecor Lab Number Nme h-C-"Lab Flag (ba)Recount Number (in.)
(Cs-137)
(pCi~g) 2 Sigma (%)
(pCilg)
= good, - = bad)
Not Note Cii PB07-02908 SR53-4 0.090 20.7 0.240 0.810 PB07-02909 SR53-4 PB07-02910 SR53-4 PB07-02911 SR53-4 PB07-02912 SR53-4 2.89 0.087 12.80 0.380 2.423 0.148 B<
0.150 B<
0.109 B<
72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SMG4
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG5 (Section A)
La NumerI COC Dpth Sampie Result PB07-02969 SR53-5 1 MDA (pCilg)
L Uncertainty 2 Sigma Lab Flag 2 Sigma (%)
(pCilg)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag QC or Note Note Recount I..I I
m (p
i/
)
PB07-02970 SR53-5 PB07-02971 SR53-5 PB07-02972 SR53-5 PB07-02973 SR53-5 5.82 1.10 0.137 0.143 0.135 29.8 9.17 25.8 0.209 0.566 0.287 0.352 5.111 0.678 OK 0.119 B<
0.126 B<
75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SMG5
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG6 (Section A)
Nummber (in.)
PB07-02913 SR53-6 t
Sample Result (Cs-137)
MDA ILabFlag Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCilg) 2 Sigma (%)
(pCilg)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag QC or Note Note Recount inCilol 0.139 0.131 6.32 0.814 0.371 10.547 2.138 PB07-02914 SR53-6 PB07-02915 SR53-6 PB07-02916 SR53-6 2.64 13.70 0.138 B<
0.073 40.8 0.097 0.068 OK 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SG SMG6
Project 309 PBRF 08-Feb-08 STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH SMG7 (Section A)
SLab Number COC Dph Sample Result Number (n)
(Cs-1 37)
PB07-02975 SR53-7 3.40 PB07-02976 SR53-7 1.04 PB07-02977 SR53-7 0.355 PB07-02978 SR53-7 MDA LabFlag Uncertainty 2Sigma (Result 2 Sigma) - MDA R.Case Haag RCeor (pCilg) 2 Sigma (%)
(pCilg)
(+ = good, - = bad)
Note Note Recounig) 0.110 0.083 0.098 0.154 0.138 18.1 11.6 22.7 48.5 0.336 0.407 0.238 0.172 1.384 2.910 0.704 0.029 OK OK ILy-Z 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SG SMG7
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG8 (Section A)
Lab Number NumObe P
ISNumber PB07-02980 SR53-8 Dpth Iample Result (in (Cs-1371
(
IMDA Lab Flag Uncertainty 2 Sigma 2 Sigma (%)
I 2Sigma I
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case I Haag Recount Note I Note (pCilg)
PB07-02982 SR53-8 PB07-02983 SR53-8 PB07-02984 SR53-8 PB07-02985 SR53-8 0.109 0.138 0.228 9.89 18.4 44.1 0.627 0.302 0.276 5.304 1.180 0.120 OK 0.204 B<
0.053 41.7 0.069 0.042 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SG SMG8
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG9 (Section A)
Lab Number COC CIDpth Sapl Reul Number Cs-I 37 PB07-02988 SR53-9 MDA Lab Flag Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCiIg)
I 2 Sigma (%)
(pCilg)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
= good, - = bad)
R.Case IHaag Recount INote Note (pCilg) 0.196 0.107 11.40 21.0 0.502 0.281 3.532 0.932 PB07-02989 SR53-9 PB07-02990 SR53-9 PB07-02991 SR53-9 PB07-02992 SR53-9 1.32 0.138 B<
0.116 B<
0.181 B<
75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SG SMG9
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 Lab Number NmCOC I
I Number PB07-02997 SR53-1 0 Sample Result SMG10 (Section A)
MDA LFl Uncertainty 2 Sigma oClo Lab ag 1 2 Siama (%) I(oCila (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = Qood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount Note Note (gCilq) 0.089 PB07-02998 SR53-1 0 PB07-02999 SR53-1 0 PB07-03000 SR53-1 0 PB07-03002 SR53-1 0 3.07 0.355 0.088 0.119 0.141 B<
0.099 B<
12.80 12.5 42.6 0.387 0.394 0.152 2.484 2.588 0.084 OK
<0.096 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M1 SMG 10
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMGI 1 (Section A) b r
coc Dpth Sample Result Ia Nube Number /(in.)
(Cs-137)
PB07-03004 SR53-111-"6 MDA Lab Flag Uncetainty 2 Sigma (DCiIa°m1 2 Siama(%
I
)
I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount Note Note (pCi/g) 0.131 0.111 16.20 0.324 0.165 1.505 0.174 PB07-03005 SR53-11 PB07-03006 SR53-11 PB07-03007 SR53-11 PB07-03008 SR53-11 0.450 36.5 OK 0.129 B<
0.123 B<
0.128 B<
75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResulItsSp read sheet M
1 SMGI11
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG12 (Section A)
Lab Number Number D
Sample Result PB07-03009 SR53-12 MDA,Uncertainty 2 Sigma (MoCia LabFlag 2 Sima (%) I (Cia)
I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = qood, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount Note Note I (pCilq) 0.074 0.167 16.4 45.5 0.250 0.178 1.176 0.046 PB07-03010 SR53-12 0.391 PB07-03011 SR53-12 PB07-03012 SR53-12 PB07-03013 SR53-12 0.098 B<
0.098 B<
0.084 B<
bt6/-by I 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309P8-MouthResultsSpreadsheet G2 SMG12
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 r COC Dpth Sample Result L'abNumberNumberCO (in.)
(Cs-I PB07-03014 SR53-13 SMG13 (Section A)
MDA L
Flag Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCi/g) 1 r
1 2Sigma(%)
I (PCg)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount Note Note I (pCi/g)
PB07-03015 SR53-13 PB07-03016 SR53-13 PB07-03017 SR53-13 PB07-03018 SR53-13 0.097 0.097 0.071 0.075 0.108 20.1 0.265 0.938 56.5-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet G3 SMG13
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG14 (Section A)
Lab Number COC j Dpth Sample Result L
N Number (in.?
(Cs-7 PB07-03022 SR53-14 MDA
.Lab Fla Uncertainty 1 2 Sigma (pCilg) g 2 Sigma (%)
(pCi/g)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount Note Note I (pCilg) I 0.086 0.096 8.11 19.8 0.622 0.266 6.422 0.968 PB07-03023 SR53-14 1.33 OK PB07-03024 SR53-14 PB07-03025 SR53-14 PB07-03026 SR53-14 0.088 B<
0.158 B<
0.094 13.6 0.387 2.289 6O9-7 I 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309P8-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M
4 SMG14
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG15 (Section B)
Lab Number COC Dt PB07-031561 SR53-16 11m=11 Sample Result I*-
I MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCilg) 2 Sigma (%)
(pCig)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+= good, -= bad)
R.Case Haag C (pCi/g)
PB07-03152 SR53-16 PB07-03153 SR53-16 3.64 0.157 0.105 0.147 5.67 12.5 17.1 1.070 0.470 0.337 15.273 3.065 1.446 1.93 PB07-03154 SR53-16 PB07-03155 SR53-16 0.083 B<
0.118 B<
IbJ-~bb 16669I 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M
5 SMG15
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG16 (Section B)
Lab ~
co NubrI Dpth Sample Result Lab Number Number (in.) I (Cs-1 37)
PB07-03156 SR53-1 7 MDA bFlg Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCilg)
La 1ag 2 Sigma (%)
(pCilg)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag C
il "f Note Note Q
(p g/t PB07-03157 SR53-17 PB07-03158 SR53-17 PB07-03159 SR53-17 PB07-03162 SR53-17 0.111 0.129 0.099 0.178 0.139 42.6 0.142 0.080 OK B<
I70-72I 74-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M
6 SMG16
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SLab Number COC Dt Number (n
PB07-03167 SR53-18 PB07-03168 SR53-18 PB07-03169 SR53-18 Sample Result SMG17 (Section B)
MDA bFla Uncertainty 2 Sigma (oCi)II La ag 1 2 Siama (%I I foCil/a (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag I QC (pCilg)
INote INote iIg 0.111 0.124 29.5 10.9 0.205 0.644 0.647 0.374 4.922 6.001 OK 0.102 9.04 42-451 45_4 8 50-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SG SMG17
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG18 (Section B)
Lab Number COC Number PB07-03170 SR53-19 PB07-03171 SR53-19 PB07-03172 SR53-19 PB07-03173 SR53-19 PB07-03174 SR53-19 Dpth Sample Result Dpth I I'_4 '27%
MDA Lab Flag (oCilal Uncertainty 2 Sigma (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA 2 Siama (%)
I(nCilo)
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag (pCilg)
Note I
Note IC 4.76 2.67 0.149 0.168 0.161 9.01 0.657 11.2 0.555 6.064 4.037 2.019 18.1 0.490 0.104 B<
0.127 B<
I57-60I I60-63I I63-66I I66-69I 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M
8 SMG18
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG19 (Section B)
PB70Dpth 7l7 RRsu-t Lab Number CO SmleRsl Number in.sI 7
PB07-03177 SR53-20 MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCilg)
Lab Flag 2 Sigma (%)
(pCiig)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount Note Note I
(pCilg) 0.113 48.5 0.126 0.021 OK PB07-03178 SR53-20 PB07-03179 SR53-20 PB07-03180 SR53-20 PB07-03182 SR53-20 0.119 B<
0.106 B<
0.139 B<
0.150 B<
<0.151 166-69 1 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SMG19
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG20 (Section B)
COC IDpth Sample Result I
Uncertainty 2 Sigma Lab Number MAmbeL l
2 Sigma (%)
(pCi/g)
Numbe1in.3 (Cs-337) 1 2
0.227 PBNumbe3 r532 0.102 24.4 0.227 (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount Note Note (pCilg)
PB07-03184 SR53-21 PB07-03185 SR53-21 PB07-03186 SR53-21 0.116 0.198 11.7 7.63 0.560 0.781 0.378 0.595 3.944 8.461 1.628 0.194 16.9 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M
O SMG20
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG21 (Section B)
Lab Number COC IDpth Sml e Reul Number (n.)
(Cs-I 37)
PB07-031 87 SR53-22 MDA Uncertainty I2 Sigma MDAilg)
Lab Flag 2
i (pCi/g) 2 igma(%
(pCilg)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case I Haag I Recount Note Note (pCilg)
PB07-03188 SR53-22 PB07-03189 SR53-22 PB07-03190 SR53-22 PB07-03191 SR53-22 0.099 0.110 0.104 0.101 10.4 7.19 14.7 16.5 0.542 0.909 0.391 0.339 0.301 4.359 10.481 2.115 1.580 1.123 0.106 19.4 0 I
I66-69I 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-Mouth Res ultsSpreadsheet M2 SMG21
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG22 (Section B)
Lab Number NmCOC Number PB07-03192 SR53-23 PB07-03193 SR53-23 PB07-03194 SR53-23 PB07-03205 SR53-23 PB07-03206 SR53-23 Depth Sample Result I:- %h I....... I MDA Lab Fla Uncertainty 2 Sigma (rCi/a) ag 2 Siama (%)
(rCIal i (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = badl R.Case Haag Recount Note Note I
(pCilg) 0.119 0.212 0.109 0.121 0.145 45.1 0.141 0.051 B<
157-601 I60-63I I63-66I I66-68I 73-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet G2 SMG22
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 COC Dpth Sample Result Lab Number COC IDpthI SapeRsl Number in.)
Cs-I 37 PB07-03208 SR53-24 SMG23 (Section B)
MDA Lab Fla Uncertainty 2 Sigma (Result-2 Sigma) - MDA R.Case Haag Recount (pCi/g) 1ag 2 Sigma (%)
I(DCiI(
= good, - = bad)
Note Note I (nriia)
PB07-03209 SR53-24 PB07-03210 SR53-24 PB07-03211 SR53-24 PB07-03212 SR53-24 0.097 0.116 0.232 0.103 19.5 10.8 5.87 15.2 0.275 0.612 1.10 0.378 0.329 1.018 4.722 15.468 1.959 1.406 0.105 17.6 I166-69 I 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M2 SMG23
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG24 (Section B)
L COC Dpth Sample Result MDA Fla Uncertainty 2 Sigma Lab Number Numbe Lab I 032 Number Jin.)
(Cs-I 37)
(ciln) 2 Sigma (%)
I (pCi0g)
PB07-032 13 R5-50.149 13.7 0.406 (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+=oood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount Note I
Note (oCila) 2.345 PB07-03214 SR53-25 PB07-03215 SR53-25 0.167 7.73 0.881 9.452 0.166 14.6 0.424 2.260 166-691I 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheetSM2 SMG24
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG25 (Section B)
SCOC
- Dpth, Sample Result IMIDA Uncertainty 2 Sigma Lab Number Number Lab Fag PB07-03216 SR53-26 0.154 17.7 0.331 (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = badl R.Case Haag Recount Note Note (ICilaI PB07-03217 SR53-26 PB07-03218 SR53-26 PB07-03219 SR53-26 6.94 0.305 0.243 0.125 10.00 0.729 0.144 1.345 5.968 0.036 47.1 0.099 B<
47-47 45-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-1 02 102-1 05 105-1 08 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M2 SMG25
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 Lab Num ber Number PB07-03220 SR53-27 Sample Result SMG26 (Section B)
MDA ILab Flag Uncertainty 2 Sigma (oCi/a) 1 2 Siama (%) I(Cila)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = oood, - = bad)
R.Case j Haag Recount Note I
Note (pCilg)
PB07-03222 SR53-27 PB07-03223 SR53-27 PB07-03224 SR53-27 0.101 0.115 0.118 0.106 0.110 14.00 8.52 7.92 36.5 0.151 0.455 0.793 0.784 0.313 0.159 2.600 7.889 8.290 1.187 OK PB07-03225 SR53-27 19.3 OK 166-691 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet G2 SMG26
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 I L Sample Result Lab Number C
(in)
D i
Cs-37)
PB07-03226 SR53-28 SMG27 (Section B)
.Fl Uncertainty 2 Sigma (oCi/l) ag 1 2 Siama (%)
(OCIl (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount Note I
Note I
(pCilg)
I PB07-03227 SR53-28 PB07-03228 SR53-28 PB07-03229 SR53-28 PB07-03230 SR53-28 0.118 0.176 0.099 0.162 0.185 25.0 10.1 15.0 19.4 28.0 0.257 0.687 0.366 0.339 0.293 0.645 5.627 1.935 1.229 0.562 j59-63j 67-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M2 SMG27
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG28 (Section B)
LabNumber COC O
Dpth Sample Result MDA bFl Uncertainty 2 Sigma Number (in.)
(Cs-I 37)
(pCilg) ag 2 Sigma (%)
(pCilg)
PB07-03231 SR53-29 0.160 41.5 0.197 (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount Note Note I (pCilg) 0.117 1.135 OK OK PB07-03232 SR53-29 0.105 19.3 0.300 133-361 I36-39I I39-421 46-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResuftsSpreadsheet M2 SMG28
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS byrsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG29 (Section C) 08-Feb-08 SMG29 (Sect o C) a N C
Dpth Sample Result Lab Number Number (in.)
(Cs-37 PB07-03439 SR53-30 MDA Lab OFl'Uncertainty 12 Sigma (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA R.Case Haag Recount (pCilg) 2 Sigma (%)
(pCi/g) I
(+ = good, - = bad)
Note Note I (pCIg)
PB07-03440 SR53-30 PB07-03442 SR53-30 PB07-03443 SR53-30 PB07-03444 SR53-30 0.080 0.129 0.129 0.097 29.5 0.148 B<
B<
B<
0.272
<0.061 0.091 L 63-66I I66-69I 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M2 SMG29
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG30 (Section C)
L COC Dpth Sample Result Lab Number Number j(in.)
I Cs-I 37 PB07-03445 SR53-31 MDA Uncertainty 2 Sigma (Result - 2 Sigma)- MDA R.Case Haag Recount (pCilg)
Lab Flag 2 Sigma (%)
(pCilg)
= good, - = bad)
Note Note (pCilg) 0.140 0.098 10.5 16.9 0.495 0.321 3.875 1.441 PB07-03446 SR53-31 PB07-03447 SR53-31 PB07-03448 SR53-31 PB07-03449 SR53-31 1.86 0.122 B<
0.140 B<
0.086 B<
I63-66I I66-69I 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M3 SMG30
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG31 (Section C)
Lab Number COC Dph Sample Result MD pig a
lg Uncertainty 2 Sigma (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA R.Case Haag Recou-nt]
La rNumber (Cs-I 37 MDA (pCi/g) Lab Flag 2 Sigma %
Ci)
+ = ood, - = bad)
Note Note Ci)
PB07-03450 SR53-32 l 0.126 37.5 0.168 0.151 OK PB07-03451 SR53-32 0.689 0.145 33.8 0.234 0.310 OK PB07-03453 SR53-32 PB07-03454 SR53-32 PB07-03455 SR53-32 0.125 B<
0.172 B<
0.073 B<
I166-691 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309P8-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M3 SMG31
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG32 (Section C)
Lab Number COC Dpth Sample Result MDA L
Fl Uncertainty I 2 Sigma I Number (in.),
(Cs-I 37)
(pCi/g) 2 Sigma(%)
(pClg)
PB07-03458 SR53 0.086 18.0 0.264 (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount Note I
Note I
(pCilg) 1.090 PB07-03459 SR53-33 PB07-03460 SR53-33 PB07-03462 SR53-33 0.078 0.084 0.081
<0.079 q3.Q"R)
Q 45.5-48 48-51 51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M
2 SMG32
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG33 (Section C)
Lab Number NmCOC I
I Number PB07-03474 SR53-34 Depth Sample Result MDA Lab Fla Uncertainty 2 Sigma (in.)
I (Cs-I 371 1 (Ciila ag1 2 Siuma 1%)
(eCi/aa (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = qood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount I Note I
Note I (pCi/g) I 0.087 0.096 28.6 28.0 0.167 0.188 0.327 0.383 PB07-03475 SR53-34 PB07-03476 SR53-34 PB07-03477 SR53-34 0.667 0.108 B<
0.124 B<
IOz
-VO00 1
66-69 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M3 SMG33
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 Lab Number' COC Dpth Sample Result a N Number (in.)
(Cs-1371 PB07-03480 SR53-35 SMG34 (Section C)
MDA TLab Flag.
Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCila) 2 Siama (%)
(pCIg)
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount Note I
Note I (pCilg) I PB07-03482 SR53-35 PB07-03483 SR53-35 PB07-03484 SR53-35 PB07-03485 SR53-35 0.829 0.094 0.119 0.121 0.124 0.114 32.0 25.3 0.160 0.211 0.242 0.499 OK L
75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M3 SMG34
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG35 (Section C)
COC Depth ]Sample Result IMDA(
Lb Flag Uncertainty 2 Sigma (Result -2 Sigma)- MDA Lab Number Number (in.)
(Cs-I37)
I pig,1 a
2 Sigma (%)
I (pCilg)
= good, - = bad)
PB07-03487 SR53-36 0.112 30.5 0.201 0.341
(+ R.Case Haag Recount I
Note I
Note (pCila)
PB07-03488 SR53-36 PB07-03489 SR53-36 PB07-03490 SR53-36 PB07-03491 SR53-36 0.569 6.21 1.64 0.081 0.099 0.177 27.7 9.30 20.4 0.159 0.611 0.337 0.329 5.500 1.126 OK OK 0.065 B<
lo"- I 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M3 SMG35
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG36 (Section C)
Lab Number NCuC I
I Number PB07-03492 SR37 Depth Sample Result MDA LUncertainty a2 Sigma (pCilf) 1 F
2 Sigma (%)
(pcila) I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = good, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount Note I
Note I (Pciun) 0.145 0.136 37.5 26.5 0.191 0.226 0.173 0.483 OK PB07-03493 SR53-37 PB07-03494 SR53-37 PB07-03495 SR53-37 PB07-03496 SR53-37 0.845 0.109 B<
0.137 B<
0.172 B<
I66-69I 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M3 SMG36
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 L
COC Depth Sample Result Lab Number Number (in.)
(Cs-137)
PB07-03543 SR53-38 0L SMG37 (Section C)
MDA Uncertainty 2 Sigma (o1i/)
Lab Flag 2 Siama (%) I(oClal (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount Note I
Note (oCi/a) I PB07-03544 SR53-38 PB07-03549 SR53-38 PB07-03550 SR53-38 PB07-03551 SR53-38 3.08 1.26 0.113 0.183 0.207 0.175 B<
0.150 B<
34.3 13.4 26.6 0.180 0.425 0.337 0.230 2.472 0.716 I *,-Qu I I60-631 I63-661 I66-691 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheetSM3 SMG37
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG38 (Section C)
LabNumer COG I Depth Sample Resul Lab Number Number _Win.)
(Cs-137)
PB07-03552 SR53-391 MDA Uncertainty 2 Sigma (nCi*-
I Lab Flag 1 2 Siama 1%1 1
iI (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount Note Note (DCi/a)
PB07-03553 SR53-39 PB07-03554 SR53-39 PB07-03555 SR53-39 PB07-03556 SR53-39 1.43 6.57 0.098 0.106 0.098 0.169 0.144 35.9 20.0 9.01 0.149 0.290 0.628 0.165 1.034 5.844 B<
B<
51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-966 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-1 02 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-1 20 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheetSM3 SMG38
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG39 (Section C)
Lab Number COC Number PB07-03557 SR53-40 PB07-03558 SR53-40 PB07-03559 SR53-40 PB07-03560 SR53-40 PB07-03562 SR53-40 I Depth ISampleResult I
Lb F Uncertainty 2 Sigma I
tin.) I (Cs-.137R MDA (pCilg) Lab Flag 1 2 Siama (%)I oCiloa I
(Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount Note Note (oCilo0 I
0.096 0.111 33.8 22.0 0.156 0.278 0.206 0.861 1.25 0.202 B<
0.188 B<
<0.172 0.192 B<
154-571 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 69-72 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet SMG39
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG40 (Section C) coc XDepth Sample Result Lab Number Numbe Cs-I37 PB07-03587 SR53-41 MDA Lab Flag Uncertainty 2 Sigma (pCilIq)
L 2 Siqma (%)
(oCila) I (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = qood, - = bad)
R.Case Haag Recount Note I
Note I
(pCilg) I 0.086 0.117 40.8 25.8 0.115 0.248 0.079 0.590 OK PB07-03588 SR53-41 PB07-03589 SR53-41 PB07-03590 SR53-41 PB07-03591 SR53-41 0.955 0.141 B<
0.180 B<
0.222 B<
51-54 54-57 57-60 60-63 63-66 66-69 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M4 SMG40
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG41 (Section C)
Lab Number COC Depth s
MDA Lab Fag Uncertainty 2 Sigma Number Depth S
lsu13g 2 Sigma (%)
PB07-03592 SR53-42 0.116 32.9 0.192 (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = oood, - = bad)
R.Case I Haag I Recount Note Note (DCiIl )
0.275 0.040 OK OK PB07-03593 SR53-42 PB07-03594 SR53-42 PB07-03595 SR53-42 PB07-03596 SR53-42 0.261 0.101 0.153 0.181 0.121 45.9 0.120 IaI-uuI 160-631 I63-661 I66-691 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M4 SMG41
Project 309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:rsh ck:RDH app:RSH 08-Feb-08 SMG42 (Section C)
I N
COC Depth Sample Result MDA Uncertainty 2 Sigma Lab Number Number (In.)
(Cs-137)
(pCIg) 2 Sma (%)
pi/)
PBO7-03597 SR53-43 0.102 33.3 0.167 (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA
(+ = aood. - = badt R.Case Haag Recount QC (PCIg)
Note Note (oCialI p I,
0.228 0.583 PB07-03598 SR53-43 PB07-03599 SR53-43 PB07-03600 SR53-43 PB07-03602 SR53-43 0.906 0.100 24.4 0.223 0.688
<0.087 0.089 B<
0.100 B<
0.193 B<
<0.103
<0.119
<0A145 D 4-0 f 57-601 60-631 63-661 66-691 72-75 75-78 78-81 81-84 84-87 87-90 90-93 93-96 96-99 99-102 102-105 105-108 108-111 111-114 114-117 117-120 309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet M4 SMG42
Project 3021309 PBRF STREAM MOUTH RESULTS by:BAP/RMB ck:pjW app:RDH 08-Feb-08 BLANKS Lab Number Date PB07-00154 23-Jan-07 PB07-00308 31-Jan-07 PB07-00359 6-Feb-07 PB07-00513 12-Feb-07 PB07-00567 15-Feb-07 PB07-00566 15-Feb-07 PB07-01665 30-May-07 PB07-01704 31-May-07 PB07-01722 4-Jun-07 PB07-01704 4-Jun-07 PB07-01766 5-Jun-07 PB07-01767 5-Jun-07 PB07-01844 12-Jun-07 PB07-02949 25-Sep-07 PB07-02979 26-Sep-07 PB07-03003 27-Sep-07 PB07-03175 10-Oct-07 PB07-03207 11-Oct-07 PB07-03233 11-Oct-07 PB07-03234 11 -Oct-07 PB07-03497 31-Oct-07 PB07-03498 31-Oct-07 PB07-03499 31-Oct-07 PB07-03563 6-Nov-07 PB07-03608 13-Nov-07 PB07-03609 13-Nov-07 Sample Result (Cs-1 37) 0,03
,.0037 0043
<MDA 0.037
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA
<MDA MDA Lab Uncertainty 2 Sigma (Result - 2 Sigma) - MDA R.Case Haag Note Recount (pCilg)
Flap 2 Sigma (%)
(pCig)
(+= good, - = bad)
Note (pCilg) 0.035 A
93.54 0.028
-0.033
- Reject 0.041
- A 97.6 0.036
-0.04 NO 0.033 57.74 0.031
-0.01 NO 0.029 60.3 0.026
-0.012 NO 0.029 B<
0.03 66.67 0.024
-0.017' NO 0.061 B<
0.066 B<
0.062 B<
0.063 B<
0.059 B<
0.055 B<
0.067 B<
0.034 B<
0.029 B<
0.028 B<
0.031 B<
0.034 B<
0.034 B<
0.033 B<
0.018 B<
0.014 B<
0.025 B<
0.019 B<
0.024 B<
0.025 B<
309PB-MouthResultsSpreadsheet Blanks
APPENDIX C ESTIMATION OF WATER-BORNE Cs-137 ACTIVITY BEYOND WEMS (Also provided as a separate computer file named 309mCicalc_08JAN08.xls) 08-Feb-08 BKGND=
0.5 I STREAM MOUTH AREA CF B highest 15000 B rest 15000 A highest 2678.5 A rest 5357 C highest 2143 C rest 2143 Delta chan 50000 Delta rest 1050232 Tribs 613760 Rest 458251 Estimation of Water-Borne Cs-1 37 Activity Beyond WEMS pCVg by: RDH ck:RSH app:RSH FIGURE FROM CONCEPT REPORT FIGURE 9-Cs-137 IN WATER (LINEAR)
PCF G/POUND G
85 454 578,850,O00 85 454 578,850,000 85 454 103,363,315 85 454 206.726,630 85 454 82,698,370 85 454 82,698,370 85 454 1,929,500,000 85 454 40,528,452,880 85 454 23,684,998,400 85 454 17,683,906,090 pCi/G pCi mCi 8.4 4862340000 4.9 4
2315400000 2.3 3.9 403116928.5 0.4 3.5 723543205 0.7 6.5 537539405 0,5 Subtotal SM(AB++C) 3.5 289444295 0.3 9.1 9%
1.5 2894250000 2.9 0.5 20264226440 20.3 0.5 11842499200 11.8 Subtotal SM Large Areas 0.5 8841953045 8.8 43.8 42%
Stream Mouth Total 53.0 51% SM 0.0 0% BY, FP I,
0.-37 1., P-I.lt C111119 W-1. At -d Of PBRF Old..
k o.t. t OTHER AREAS Bay and Flood Plain (No Estimate)
Pentolite AOC1 BC Highest 2200 85 454 84,898,000 249.5 21182051000 21.2 20% AOC1BC Rest 19400 85 454 748,646.000 5.5 4117553000 4.1 4% AOC1BC Pentolite AOC1A Highest 1958.4 85 454 75,574,656 124.5 9409044672 9.4 9% AOC1A Rest 17625.6 85 454 680,171,904 5.5 3740945472 3.7 4% ADC1A Year
% Cs-137 Released Ci (released) mCi (2007) 1 96ý4 14 0702 1965 3
01
.5 1 966 6
0'301 1967 4
0200 1968 55 2.75 1.13 1969 4
0.2 0.084 1970 0/
0 0
1971 14Y 0.7 0.31 5 mCi Total 2.041 mCi Total 100 %Total Stream ASSUMPTIONS:
Areas 1200 85 454 46,308,000 24.5 1134546000 1.1 1% Meanders
- 2. Pentolite AOC1A, B, C in blocks 20'20'6" deep; acthvities from MWH report on Survey Package A23000 101C5, Backwater and from MOTA drawing "PENTOLITE DITCH POSTING PLOT.DWG (1 OF 2)"
Areas 1250 85 454 48,237,500 24.5 1181818750 1.2 1% Backwaters
- 3. Representative activities forAOCl A, B, C by methods defined in SM report. otherwise assumed6pCi/g.
- 4. 30 Stream Meander areas, each measuring 40 CF, with representative activity of 25 pCi/g.
WEMS 675 85 454 26,048,250 399.5 10406275875 10.4 10% WEMS-front
- 5. One Stream Backwater area measuring 50'40'W6 with representative activity of 25 pCi/g.
- 6. 25 CY in front of WEMS with most elevated activity.
Total Accounted For 104.1 100%
104 mCi
- 7. Activities measured between 2004-2007, not adjusted for decay in 2008.
309StreamMouthReport_08FEB08 Page 93 of 93 by:BAP/RDH ck: RSH app: RSH