P.1 

PICK-UP DATE: 3/15/2007 

BOX OF 30 

Step 2: FOR ASRC INTERNAL USE 

ONLY 

(PART B of B) 

EPA DOCKET ID: 102RQ-RN 

1) 102RQ-RN-5-16 

3) 102RQ-RN-5-18 

5) 102RQ-RN-5-20 

7) 102RQ-RN-5-22 

9) 102RQ-RN-5-24 

11) 102RQ-RN-5-26 

13) 102RQ-RN-5-28 

15) 102RQ-RN-5-30 

17) 102RQ-RN-6-1 

19) 102RQ-RN-6-3 

21) 102RQ-RN-6-5 

23) 102RQ-RN-6-7 

25) 102RQ-RN-6-9 

27) 102RQ-RN-6-11 

29) 102RQ-RN-6-13 

31) 102RQ-RN-6-15 

33) 102RQ-RN-6-17 

35) 102RQ-RN-6-19 

37) 102RQ-RN-6-21 

39) 102RQ-RN-6-23 

Step 3: FOR ASRC INTERNAL USE 

ONLY 

CD: 

QA: / 

2) 102RQ-RN-5-17 

4) 102RQ-RN-5-19 

6) 102RQ-RN-5-21 

8) 102RQ-RN-5-23 

10) 102RQ-RN-5-25 

12) 102RQ-RN-5-27 

14) <102RQ-RN-5-29N) 

16) 102RQ-RN-5-32 

18) 102RQ-RN-6-2 

20) 102RQ-RN-6-4 

22) 102RQ-RN-6-6 

24) 102RQ-RN-6-8 

26) 102RQ-RN-6-10 

28) 102RQ-RN-6-12 

30) 102RQ-RN-6-14 

32) 102RQ-RN-6-16 

34) 102RQ-RN-6-18 

36) 102RQ-RN-6-20 

38) 102RQ-RN-6-22 

40) 102RQ-RN-6-24 

Step 1: FOR ASRC INTERNAL USE ONLY 

Are there more documents for this Docket in another box? *YES (HO J 

"Fill out Continuation Sheet and go to Step 2 

Internal SFUND Box Number _36 OF _283 

Initials/Date: LDS / 3-15-2007_ 
Harold L. Back and Kevin N. Millar 

Environmental Meeauremente Laboratory 

U. S. Department of Energy 

R m York, Haw York 10014 

P.2 

laaa -KHJ-s-jf 

Data on tha radionuclide content of coal, bottom 

aah and fly aah ara reviewed. Eatlavatea are aadc of 

the quantitiea of varlooa radlonuclldea releaaed to 

the environaent froa coal comouatlon and the probable 

reaultant radiation doaea to the population. Factora 

that Influence theae doae eatlmateo, auch aa particle 

site, aolublllty and radon emanating power are 

dlacuaaed. 

Introduction 

1 

The combuatlon of coal raaulta ln the releaae of 

•mall quantitiea of radlonuclldea Into the atmosphere. 

Unlike nuclear power, theae releaaea reault entirely 

from a redistribution of already existing radlonuclldea 

rather than the creation of new radlonuclldea. Whether 

or not auch releaaea constitute a potential health 

haaard and whether the releaaea of radioactivity are 

comparable to or greater than those from a nuclear fuel 

cycle haa become a matter of some public and aclentlftc 

concern. Thia queatlon la particularly relevant *o a 

reault of recent government policy decisions to Increase the utilisation of coal relative to other fuela. 

We have made an extensive review of data on the 

radioactivity of coal and coal aahea and the releaaea 

of radlonuclldea from typical power plants, and have 

alao analysed the reaulta of a number of published 

assessments of potential health hazards.(1) In thia 

paper we eiaaaarlce some of our findings and dlacuaa 

some of our conclusions aa well aa some caveata with 

reapect to other published assessments, and preaent 

some additional data. 

Reference 1 contalna a comprehensive list of 

literature citations, and we refer the reader to that 

paper for more complete documentation on some of the 

results susnarlzed here. 

Radioactivity of U. S. Coala 

Measurements of uranium, thorium, and potassium ln 

coal have been reported ln the literature for almost 

1000 different samples obtained directly from the mines 

that provide moat of the coal uaed ln the U. S. today 

aa well aa from most of the proven reserves. Mean 

concentrations were found to be 1.7 ug/g for natural 

uranium, 4.5 ug/g for thorium and 1700 |j.g/g for 

potassium, equivelent to the mean radioactivity levela 

for U-238, Th-232, and K-40 shown ln Table 1. Although 

a few coals were found to have fairly high concentrations of radionuclides, over 95 percent of the samples 

had activities less than a factor of three times tha 

means. Contrary to some published reports, waetern U.S. 

coala are not, ln general, more radioactive than eastern U. S. coals, nor are lignites, although email 

pockets of uranlferoua coal do exlet ln some weetern 

atatea. 

TAMX 1 

RADIOACTIVITY OF U. S. COALS IN pCl/( 

Nuclide: 

Saaeloe collected 

froa eine* (see 

Reference I) 

Seaplee collected 

froa power pleats 

end enelyeed by 

DO. 

Other reported 

enelyeee of eeaplee 

froa power plente* 

Soil3-* 

(for co-spar lion) 

rente: 

# eeaplee: 

•un : 

renge: 

t eeaplee: 

Men: 

rente: 

* eeaplee: 

"

8

u 

O.M 

< 0.1-1J 

(910) 

o.sa 

0.11-1.8 

'<1*> 

O.M 

< 0.1*0.1 

(1») 

•HI : 1 0.70 

renfe: / 0.3-1.4 

Th 

0.J0 

< 0.1-5.J 

(»10> 

0.2* 

< 0.1-0.47 

(K) 

O.M 

0.17-2.J 

(10) 

0.70 

0.2 -1.3 

*% 

1 .* 

0.02-20 

(MJ) 

1 .* 

- 1 -J.J 

( U ) 

2.8 

0.73-S.6 

(10) 

10 

)-20 

*Veluee for alne eeaplee ere for coel ee alned, for power plente 

for elr-drled eeaplee. 

Since a large fraction of tha coal burned ln U.8. 

power planta la "cleaned" prior to uae to reduce aah 

and aulfur content, we have compared tha actlvltlea of 

tha mine aaaplaa with thoae of aaaples obtained 

directly from powef planta. Thaee reaulta ara alao 

given ln Table 1. Data for aamplae analysed by ua ara 

reported separately from other data ln tha literature, 

alnca some of tha latter ware ambiguous with respect 

to numbers of different saaplea, origins of tha 

aamplae and accuracy of analyaia. Our data, moat of 

which have not been prevloualy reported, were obtained 

by performing high resolution gaama-ray spectrometry 

on samples obtained from 14 different power planta, 

three of which burn lignite. 

Uranium-238 and thorium-232 have generally been 

found to be ln aecular equilibrium with their decay 

products ln coal. Our own analyses generally confirm 

thia. Thus, the data ln Table 1 for U-238 and Th-232 

alao repreaent the actlvltlea of thalr reapective decay products. In Reference 1, we referred to a preliminary raport from Mound Laboratory which suggested 

enhanced Pb-210 and Po-210 levela ln some coal aamples. 

In an updated report, however, this group reports 

aecular equilibrium does appear to exist for their 

samples.(2) 

Considering the relatively small number of 

samples from power planta aa oppoaed to mlnea, the 

agreement ln means and ranges of actlvltlea la excellent and tenda to support our prevloua coneluaion that 

the mean actlvltlea Inferred from the mine samples ara 

repreaentatlve of coal burned in actual power planta. 

For perapectlve, the activities of typical soils 

are alao given ln Table 1. (3) 
P.3 

When coal la burned ln power pienta, non-combustible trace elements are concentrated ln the aah. 

Baaed on a mean aah content in U. S. coals of 13.4 

percent, we would expect the apacifle activity of thia 

aah to average 7.S times that of tha coal, I.e., 4.3 

pCi/g for U-238 and each of Ita decay products, 3.7 

pCi/g for Th-232 and each of Its decay products, and 

10 pCi/g for K-40. Studies have shown, however, that 

some of the more volatile trace elementa ara preferentially recondanaed cat smaller particles. Thia results 

ln an enrichment of fly aah relative to bottom aah, 

and particularly on the smaller flyaah particles, 

which ara leas efficiently removed by the emission 

control equipment. Radlonuclldea which have been 

demonstrsted to exhibit thia enrichment are Pb-210 

and Po-210, ln particular, and to a leaaar extent 

U-238, U-234 and Ra-226. 

In Table 2 we simmerite available data on radlonuclldea ln aah samples obtained from U. S. power 

planta. Except for one eet of data by Coles et el., 

(4) these are all saaplee of contained rather than 

eecaplng aah. The Colee et al. data are for 4 different else fractlona of the same etack sample and 

illuatrate the progressive enrichment on smaller alted 

particles for certain radionuclides. Again we heve 

Hated our own data separately from thoae of the other 

investigators. Both sete of data clearly indicate the 

enrichment of Pb-210 ln fly aah relative to bottom 

aah. The enrichment of other uranium and radium nuclides is too small to ba aeen ln collected eah, 

particularly for thia email number of aamplae. Our 

u « u u_.L* ..ilkiuu e o _-.».._•.« «..,« i 4U U j oiiucunoui 

coal aahes obtained from 11 different power plants. 

Mo significant dlfferencee ln activity were observed 

between lignite and non-lignite aahee. 

Considering the relatively email m_aber of 

aamplea, the average actlvltlea shown ln Table 2 ara 

ln excellent agreement with thoae expected baaad on 

tha coal data. We thue conclude that the mean enriched aah actlvltlea derived from the coal min*. 

samples can ba used aa a baaia for estimating typical 

radionuclide emissions from coal-fired power plants. 

Radioactivity Emissions from Power Planta 

The amount of fly aah, and thua the amount of 

radioactivity released to the atmosphere, depends on 

the efficiency of the plant'a emission control equipment. Although the total amount of aah generated by 

the plant depends on tha type and amount of coal 

burned, a typical modern 1000 MWe plant operating 80 

percent of the time will consume about 2.3xl09 kg of 

coal per year and produce ebout 3x10s kg of aah per 

year. If thia plant juet meets the EPA particulate 

emission standard of 0.1 lb per 10 BTU lt will release 3.1 x IO6 kg/y of fly aah. Baaed on the Colea 

et ail. (4) data, as well ea other measurements reviewed in Reference 1, we have estimated fly aah escaping from such a plant will be enriched in Pb-210 

and Po-210 by about a factor of five over the concentration expected baaed on the aah content of the fuel, 

ln U-238 and U-234 by a factor of two, and ln Ra-226 

by a factor of 1.5. These values will of course vary 

TABU 2 

RADIOACTIVITY OF COAL ASUS COUICTRD fROM U. 8. ICWRR HANTS 

In pCl/ | 

TABU } 

[STU-KTED AKNUAL lADlONUCLlDt MISSIONS MOM COAL-MUD 

fOWER PLANTS* 

Nuclide: «e.. 226. JIO. 

SeKplce anelyeed bv CML: 

aeen: ] A.2 3.6 9.3 

Flyaeh rente: H.3-6.6 2.3-6.1 2-1 * 

• eeaplee: J (11) (11) (*> 

aeen 1 l. l 

Bolloa ash ren|t: p.6-8.6 

* eeaplee: J (10) 

Scrubber aeen 1 2.9 

•ludte t eeaplee J (1) 

4.0 2.2 

1.6-7.6 O.J-J 

(10) ()) 

2.1 10 

1.2-2.8 2-20 

(11) (I D 

I I 6.0 

1.1-2.8 0.6-20 

(10) (10) 

2.6 

(1) 

3.4 

(1) 

0 . ) 

(1) 

Other anelyee_:• 

riyeah 

Sleek 

Pl.* 

3.6 

(1) 

aeen: "1 2.4 2.6 4.3 3.4 14 

ran«e: ll .4-6.3 0.6-3.0 1.4-11 0.4-7.3 1.2-29 

« eeaplee J (27) (17) (3) (39) (33) 

sjasr. "I 2.3 1.7 2.0 1.9 6.3 

Bono. .. h ran*.: jl.5-2.6 0.6-2.3 0.6-3.6 1.3-2.2 6.2-6 

• eeaplee: J (3) (3) (4) (2) (2) 

3.4-12 3.3-3.9 4.3-17 2.8-3.3 7.0-7.4 

2J*U 

21°Th 

232__ Th 

Th 228. 

"V. 

210„ 

2l0P. 

*°R 

222_ 

Plyeeh (k»/y) 

Modern Plenl 

Plyeeh Annuel 

Activity Beleelane 

(eCl/e) (aci/y ) 

1972 rient 

9.0 

9.0 

4.3 

6.8 

3.7 

3.7 

3.7 

22.3 

22.3 

10 

. 

28 

28 

13 

21 

11 

11 

11 

70 

70 

31 

1300 

Tlyeeh Annuel 

Activity Sain lone 

IPC'/?) i!fm-iXm4.3 

4.3 • 

4.5 

4.3 

3.7 

3.7 

3.7 

9.0 

9.0 

10 

. . 

126 

126 

126 

126 

104 

104 

104 

232 

232 

280 

1300 

2.8»10 

**«t Mitr e net 1 for datalla. 

•Modern plant U • plant Mating EPA particulate calaalona aiandarda 

of 0.1 lb p«r 10* BTU, 1972 plant n on* releasing at a rata aquat to 

**an for al l U. S. planta operating In 1972. 
P.4 

I l UU1 ptdtl*. *.*• f...'...., .*..*. s . .- y^...m,, s st.^it.t y 5_w«^«.. 

for plants using scrubbers instead of electrostatic 

precipitators, since the former plants release 

smaller-*lie particles for tha same total mass release. v5) No enrichment Is expected for other radionuclides. The final assumed etean activities of escaping fly ash and the reeultant total annual releaae 

from a typical atodern plant for each long-lived radionuclide ere given ln Table 3. 

Por comparison, we considered a typical older 

power plant, i.e., one that releaaea at a rate equal 

to the average for ell power plants operating In the 

U. S. ln 1972. Such a plant, which would releaae 

2.8x10* kg of fly ash per year per 1000 MWe, might be 

considered e present-day worat case situation. Since, 

ea the mass of released aeh lncreaaee, the fraction 

made up by small particles decreases, the relative enrichment of volatile elements on escaplng^fly aah la 

much smaller. We heve assumed an enrichment of a 

factor of two for Pb-210 and Po-210, consistent with 

the measurements made on collected fly aah, and no 

significant enrichment for other nue1 idea. The fly 

aah activities and annual releasee for this plant are 

eleo given ln Table 3. 

The estimated annual emissions of Rn-222 given ln 

the Tablt- ausiuue that essentially all the available 

Rn-222 in the coal is released during pulverizing and 

combustion. 

Releases for actual plants may, ln a given year, 

devlete from the estimates of Teble 3 aa a reault of 

temporarily burning coal or releasing aah containing 

activities significantly greater or leaa than our assumptions. However, since most planta, particularly 

thoae ln populated areaa remote from coal mlnea, will 

burn coal from a variety of mlnea over their lifetime, 

we would expect the reaulta ln Table 3 to fairly reflect the long term average releeses to be expected 

from both older end newer U. S. power planta. 

Perturbations on Ambient Natural Radiation Levels 

The actual number of curies releaaed of each 

nuclide la not ln itself particularly significant. 

The important question Is how much do these releases 

increase ambient naturel beckground radiation levels 

ln sir end soil and thus potentially increaae the 

radiation exposure of the surrounding population. One 

important factor which Influences the extent of these 

perturbations is the height et which the effluents are 

released. We therefore calculated expected average 

annual ground-level activities resulting from the releases given ln Table 3, for both a 50 meter stack and 

a ISO meter stack (see Reference 1 for details). The 

results obtained for the distance of maximum concentration are given ln Table 4. Even for the older 

"dirtier" 1972 plant, releasing from a short stack, 

the calculated maximum ground-level activities are at 

most only a few times ambient natural background 

levela while for a modern plant releasing from tall 

stacka the calculated maximum actlvltlea are small 

fractions of ambient background levels. These maximum levels for the io meter stack occur at about 2 km 

from the plant but drop off quite rapidly aa shown in 

..-a,...*. . . .. — .... j - - . - _ _. . -.- j _., r _ 

to these levels. Conversely, the maximum for the tall 

stacka occurs at about 6 km and dropa off sera slowly. 

Background levels wera estimated by assuming a mean 

ambient air duat loading (resuspended soil) (6) of 100 

Ug/m3 end the average aoll activitiee given ln Tabla 1. 

Figure 1. Mean annual ground level airborne fly 

ash concentration versus distance from power plant 

for releaae rate of 1 kg/*-

at 10 

• IIJI I 

Distance From Stack (km) 

For short periods of time, of course, actual eu 

actlvltlea can be considerably higher than theee annual 

averages,depending on meteorological conditions. The 

annual average values may alao vary from year to year 

due to variations ln coal burned, annual average meteorology, and other factora. Clearly even large auch 

variationa will not reault ln significant perturbation 

of ambient radiation levels for modern planta, releasing from tall stacks. 

The lncreaaee ln concentretlon for Rn-222 have 

not been given ln Table 4 alnce ln ell caaea they are 

Insignificant relative to ambient levela. The amount 

of Rn-222 being released Is equivalent to that which 

le released from only about 0.1 km of soil surface^) 

Assuming a deposition velocity of 1.0 cm/e each, 

for both dry deposition and wet deposition, we can 

estimate the average long term deposition onto the 

ground from the elr concentrations given ln Table 4. 

(See Reference 1 for a discussion of the appropriateness of these deposition velocity estimetes.) The 

total depositions sfter 50 years of operation are 

given ln Table 5. Again, these represent valuea at 

the distance of peak air concentrations and the average deposition ln the environs of the plents would be 

about a factor of 70 less for releases from 50 meter 

stacka and a factor of 10 less for 150 meter stacka 

lf averaged out to e distance of 50 km. 

Aa an illustration of the net effect of these depositions on ambient soil activities ln fields where 
P.5 

ESTIMATED MAXIMUM MEAN ANNUAL CROUND LEVEL AIR ACTIVITY IN aCl/m RESULTINC 

FROM COAL-FIRED POWER PLANT EMISSIONS 

. 

Nuclide 

" V

 234u 

"°Th 

226„ Ra 

232 ^ 228 _ Th, Th, 

210 Pb 

210Po 

4

°K 

Ash (ug/m ) 

228Ra 

Modern 

SO meter 

a tack 

70 

35 

52 

29 

180 

180 

78 

7.8 

Plant 

150 meter 

a tack 

6 

3 

4 . 5 

2.5 

15 

IS 

6.7 

0.67 

1972 

50 meter 

a tack 

310 

310 

310 

250 

620 

620 

690 

69.4 

Plant 

150 meter 

atack 

27 

27 

27 

22 

54 

54 

60 

6.0 

• 

Natural 

Background 

70 

70 

70 

70 

14000 

3300 

1000 

100 

cropa might be grown, we have aeeuned that the activities given ln Table 5 ere mixed uniformly down to a 

depth of 30 cm due to periodic plowing and have compared the reaultant increase ln soil specific activity with the mean ambient eoll activities given in 

Table 1. The reaulta are shown ln Table 6. Even for 

the 1972 plant releasing from a ahort atack, the 

lncreaae over background la only about 3 percent. 

For modern plants, re leesing from tall atacke, lt la 

clear that the Increase ln soil specific ectlvlty 

would be negligible even for a much smaller penetration or mixing of the fly eah into the soil. 

TABLE 6 

INCREASE IN SOIL ACTIVITY IN fCl/ | TOR PLOWED FIELDS 

FROM SO YEARS CUMULATIVE DEPOSITION 

Nuclide 

"V

 2*u 

"°Th 

Re 

"V

 22V 

"V "S. 

*°R 

228 u 

Hodern Rlenc 

130 Meter 

Steck 

0.42 

0.21 

0.30 

0.18 

1.1 

0.49 

1972 Plent 

30 Nite r 

Steck 

22 

22 

22 

IS 

44 

49 

Neturet Soi l 

Becktround 

700 

700 

700 

700 

-I.00 0 

10,000 

ISTlftATED rUXLMJM DEPOSITION IN nCl/a FRUH SO YEARS OF 

POWER PIAJTT OPIRATION 

Modern Plant 

SO Meier IM Mtt r 

etecfc etach 

*0 aeter 1)0 Mlc r 

ate ch atack 

n

v 

'"TI . 

.'_6 

ks 

: 1: 

iii 

.'IU 

VL 

-U 

K 

2M 

r 

II. 

.' 10 

r12. 

K_ 

2.15 

LIS 

1 7 

v.. 

S i 

M 

0 11 

0.10 

0.1 -

o ua 

i> y> 

0.2: 

10 

10 

10 

8 

20 

22 

0.63 

0 8. 

0.85 

0.70 

1.7 

1.9 

Dose to Individuals 

The major potential pathways which might result 

ln Increesed radiation doses to humans from coal fired 

power plant emissions are inhalation of fly aah, Ingestion of food grown ln contaminated soil, or direct 

radiation exposure from the increased deposited radioactivity. We concluded in Reference 1 that the letter 

two pathways could be completely neglected end that 

the only potentially significant pathway la direct inhalation, and the only organ potentially at risk is 

the lung. 
P.6 

mfc.--n.ion ana oireti radiation Jose* are negligible since, as we have shown, the probable Increases 

ln soil specific activity are very email, even over 

the small area of maxlmiaa deposition. Even lf direct 

deposition on foliage Is considered, the available 

evidence indicates fly ash is vary Insoluble (1,7) and 

thus its activity la not likely to be incorporated into the vegetation, or into body tlaauaa and organa lf 

ingested. Also lt la unlikely any individual would 

obtain more than a small fraction of hla diet from 

crops grown ln the small area of maxlmiaa contamination, 

and even less likely he would do ao for tha extended 

period necessary to build up an increased body burden 

of naturally occurring radionuclides. 

The dose-equivalent to the lung from Inhalation of 

fly aeh particles can be estimated from the airborne 

activity levela given ln Table 4. These estimates, 

which ere deacrlbed ln more detail ln Reference I, are 

aummarlsed ln Table 7. They aaeime, conservatively, 

that all the airborne fly ash is respirable and insoluble, end ere for the maximum exposed individual, 

i.e., one who is exposed continuously at the levela 

given ln Table 4 for a sufficient period of time to 

build up equilibrium levela ln the lung. Even for the 

older 1972 plant with a 50 meter atack, the maximum 

doae equivalent le less than 10 percent of that from 

natural background. The dose equivalent for the older 

1972 plant Is additionally conservative ln thet, aa 

larger quantitiea of aah are releaaed, the relative 

fraction In the reaplrable range decreaaea. Even for 

planta with the moat efficient emission control 

aysteas, a considerable fraction of the releaaed fly 

aah la not reaplrable. (5, 7-9) 

TABLE 7 

ESTIMATES OF DOSE EQUIVALENT TO LUNG OF MAXIMUM EXPOSED 

INDIVIDUALS FROM INHALATION OF GOAL PLANT EMISSIONS 

Doae Equivalent (area/y) 

Type Fleet 

SO Mater 

8 tack 

150 Meter 

Stack 

Modern Plant 

1972 Plant 

1.6 

8.7 

0.14 

0.75 

(Natural Background)* ~ 100 

The dose-equivalents to other organa from Inhaled 

radionuclides are considerably smaller than thoae to 

the lung, alnce the insolubility of most of the fly 

aah results ln very little transfer of radionuclides 

from the lung to other organa or to aoft tissue. We 

thus conclude that the effluenta from even "dirty" 

coal-fired power planta releasing from short stacks 

will result ln negligible lncreaaee ln radiation exposure to the general population or to any individual. 

Radioactivity of Waste Materials 

Only a small fraction of the aah produced ln coal 

planta la released through the stack. The remainder 

la usually sluiced to holding ponds. About 20 percent 

Is currently sold for use aa land fill or in manufacturing building materials. The uae of acrubbara to 

remove sulfur from flue gases results ln an additional 

waate product ln the form of aludge. Aa shown in 

Table 2, theae waatea have radioactivities several 

times that of the average aoil. Becauae of the insolubility of tha aah, leaching of radionuclides Into 

ground water doea not appear to praaent a aarloua 

problem, although thara have been few atudlaa of longterm weathering effecta. The uee of eah ln building 

materials can reault ln potential lncreaaee ln direct 

external radiation exposure to occupants of the resultant buildings depending on the activity of the 

materials with which the aah la mixed. There have 

been only a few acattered measurements of the activity 

of building materials made with ash and alag and no 

systematic studies have been made of the potential 

increase ln population exposure. 

One aerloua concern haa been the potential release of Rn-222 from aah waate piles end ash products. 

We reported previously that radon did not appear to 

emanate slgnlflcently from fly esh and bottom aah. 

Since then, we have analysed a number of additional 

samples for radon emanation. Theae reeulta are summarl ted ln Table 8. Aa shown, the emanation from aah 

averagea leaa than 2 percent. Thie compares to about 

15 percent for the everage aoil (3) and 20 percent for 

uranium mill tailings. (10) Bituminous cosl eppeara 

to emanate at a rate comparable to aoil, however, the 

three lignite coal aamples we have evaluated emanated 

at much higher ratea. Unless long term weetherlng 

somehow modified the phyeical composition of the Impermeable glaaay fly aah partlclea, we would conclude 

that emanation of radon from aah does not constitute 

a algniflcant potential perturbation to ambient Rn-222 

levels. 

TABLE 8 

222 

Rn EMANATION* FROM COAL AND ASH SAMPLES 

Type of Sample 

bltualnoua coal 

lignite coal 

flyeeh 

bottom aah, alag 

scrubber sludge 

No. of 

Samples 

6 

3 

11 

10 

1 

Eaanatlon (*) 

Mean 

20 

S3 

< 2 

< 2 

m 

Ranae 

11-37 

t-4-63 

< 1-3 

< 1-5 

-

•Ratio of escape to production ratea. 

OsO-i] is — 

lo -
P.7 

Other sources of wastes from the coel fuel cycle, 

in particular coal mining refuae and coal cleaning 

realdues, have been reported to reeult ln contamination of streama and rivers and may constitute a more 

algniflcant potential problem area. (I) 

Diacuaalon 

The preceding diacuaalon Illustrates that lf one 

uses realistic, yet conservative, estimates of actlvltlea ln coal and fly aah, power plant releaae rates, 

atmospheric diffusion and aubaequent deposition, one 

concludes that the combustion of fossil fuels, even 

ln the less controlled "older" planta that releaae 

waate producta from ahort atacka, will not reault ln 

algniflcant perturbatlone on natural environmental 

radiation levela or algniflcant Increases ln doses to 

any Individual. One can alao aaa, however, that by 

compounding worat caaea or unrealistic assumptions, 

one arrlvea at fairly large estimates of dose. Unfortunately,numeroue recent publications containing 

auch estimates haa reaulted ln unnecessary public and 

preaa concern regarding thia topic. Thia la regrettable alnce lt tende to divert attention from the 

other potential health hacarda of coal combustion, 

some of which ere likely to be far more conaequential 

Another controversial, although not particularly 

relevent, question haa been the relative radiological 

impact of coal veraua nueleer power. We examined 

thia queation in Reference 1 and concluded that, when 

the entire fuel cycles are conaldared, the radiological Impact of coal la far smaller than that of 

nuclear. Meet noteworthy, however, la that routine 

releaaea from both cyclea produce negligible increases ln radiation exposure compared to background 

or other aourcee of exposure. The public haa been 

confused with widely differing published comparisons. 

Some of theee simpllstlcally compered the total 

actlvltlea (ln curlea) releaaed, a very misleading 

exercise, since, obviously, different radionuclides 

with different half-lives, radletiona, radiation 

anerglea, ecological transport propertiea, dose pathways to man, and biological effectlveneas are Involved. Others compared the effecta of emissions 

from power planta only, ignoring the fact that moat 

of the routine radiological impact of nuclear power 

derlvea from other parte of the fuel cycle. 

Although aome further reaearch on the long term 

fate of certain waate products might be beneficial, 

we feel that lt la clear that the radioactivity releaaed by the combustion of coal ln modern planta 

meeting EPA'a particulate emission standarda la not 

a matter of concern. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

10. 

Styron, C. E , Cesclla, V., Farmer, B. K., 

Hopklna, L. C., Jenklne, P. H., Phllllpe, C. A., 

and Roolnaon, B., "Assessment of the Radiological 

Impact of Coal Utilisation," Mound Laboratory 

Report MLM-2S14, Monsanto Reeearch Corp , Mound 

Facility, Mlamiaburg, Ohio (1979). 

"Sourcea and Effecta of Ionising Radiation," 

Report of the United NatIona Scientific Committee on the Iffecta of Ionising Radiation, 

United Nations, New York (1977). 

Colea, D. C , Ragalnl, R. C , and Ondov, J. M., 

"Behavior of Natural Radionuclides ln Weatern 

Coal-Fired Power Planta," Environ. Sci. Technol. 

12, 442 (1978). 

Ondov, J. M., Ragalnl, R. C , and Blerman, A. H., 

"Characterlsetlon of Trace Element Emissions from 

Coal-Fired Power Planta," ln Nuclear Methode ln 

Environmental and Energy Reaearch, USDOE Proceedings CONF-771072, U. S. Department of Energy 

(1978). 

"Natural Background Radiation ln the United 

States," NCRP Report No. 45, National Council 

on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 

Weshlngton, D. C. (1975). 

Parungu, F., Ackerman, E., Proulx, h., and 

Pueschel, R., "Nucleatlon Propertiea of Fly Aah 

ln a Coal-Fired Power Plant Plume," Atmos. 

Environ. ^2, 929 (1978). 

Hobbs, P. V., Hegg, D. A., Eltgrowth, M. W. and 

Radke, L. P., "Evaluation of Particles ln the 

Plumes of Coal-Fired Power Planta-1. Deductions from Field Measurements," Atmos. Environ. 

_12, 935 (1979). 

Ragalnl, R. C. and Ondov, J. M., "Trace Element 

Emissions from Western U. S. Coel-Fuel _>ower 

Planta," ln Proc. Int. Conf. Modern Trenda ln 

Activation Analyaia, Munich, Germany, I, 654 

U976). 

Swift, J. J., Hardin, J. M., and Calley, H. W., 

"Potential Radiological Impact of Airborne Releases snd Direct Gamma Radiation to Individuals 

Living Near Inactive Uranium Mill Tailings Piles," 

USEPA Report EPA-520/1-76-001, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Waahington, D. C. 

(1976). 

References 

1. Beck, H. L., Gogolak, C. V., Millar, K. M., and 

Lowder, W. M., "Perturbatlone on the Natural 

Radiation Environment due to the Utilisation of 

Coal aa an Energy Source," Proceedings of 

Symposium on the Natural Radiation EnvlronmentIII, CONF-780422, U. S. Department of Energy 

(1979).