Toxicological Profile For Americium

TOXICOLOGICAL PROFILE FOR
AMERICIUM
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Public Health Service
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
April 2004
AMERICIUM ii
DISCLAIMER
The use of company or product name(s) is for identification only and does not imply endorsement by the
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.
AMERICIUM iii
UPDATE STATEMENT
A Toxicological Profile for Americium, Draft for Public Comment, was released in May 2001. This
edition supersedes any previously released draft or final profile.
Toxicological profiles are revised and republished as necessary. For information regarding the update
status of previously released profiles, contact ATSDR at:

Division of Toxicology/Toxicology Information Branch
1600 Clifton Road NE,
Mailstop F-32
Atlanta, Georgia 30333
Background Information
The toxicological profiles are developed by ATSDR pursuant to Section 104(i) (3) and (5) of the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA or
Superfund) for hazardous substances found at Department of Energy (DOE) waste sites.
CERCLA directs ATSDR to prepare toxicological profiles for hazardous substances most
commonly found at facilities on the CERCLA National Priorities List (NPL) and that pose the
most significant potential threat to human health, as determined by ATSDR and the EPA.
ATSDR and DOE entered into a Memorandum of Understanding on November 4, 1992 which
provided that ATSDR would prepare toxicological profiles for hazardous substances based upon
ATSDR’s or DOE’s identification of need. The current ATSDR priority list of hazardous
substances at DOE NPL sites was announced in the Federal Register on July 24, 1996 (61 FR
38451).
AMERICIUM vii
QUICK REFERENCE FOR HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS
Toxicological Profiles are a unique compilation of toxicological information on a given hazardous

substance. Each profile reflects a comprehensive and extensive evaluation, summary, and interpretation
of available toxicologic and epidemiologic information on a substance. Health care providers treating
patients potentially exposed to hazardous substances will find the following information helpful for fast
answers to often-asked questions.
Primary Chapters/Sections of Interest
Chapter 1: Public Health Statement: The Public Health Statement can be a useful tool for educating
patients about possible exposure to a hazardous substance. It explains a substance’s relevant
toxicologic properties in a nontechnical, question-and-answer format, and it includes a review of
the general health effects observed following exposure.
Chapter 2: Relevance to Public Health: The Relevance to Public Health Section evaluates, interprets,
and assesses the significance of toxicity data to human health.
Chapter 3: Health Effects: Specific health effects of a given hazardous compound are reported by type
of health effect (death, systemic, immunologic, reproductive), by route of exposure, and by length
of exposure (acute, intermediate, and chronic). In addition, both human and animal studies are
reported in this section.
NOTE: Not all health effects reported in this section are necessarily observed in the clinical
setting. Please refer to the Public Health Statement to identify general health effects
observed following exposure.
Pediatrics: Four new sections have been added to each Toxicological Profile to address child health
issues:
Section 1.6 How Can (Chemical X) Affect Children?
Section 1.7 How Can Families Reduce the Risk of Exposure to (Chemical X)?
Section 3.7 Children’s Susceptibility
Section 6.6 Exposures of Children
Other Sections of Interest:

Section 3.8 Biomarkers of Exposure and Effect
Section 3.11 Methods for Reducing Toxic Effects
ATSDR Information Center

Phone: 1-888-42-ATSDR or (404) 498-0110 Fax: (770) 488-4178
E-mail: atsdric@cdc.gov Internet: http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov
The following additional material can be ordered through the ATSDR Information Center:
Case Studies in Environmental Medicine: Taking an Exposure History—The importance of taking an

exposure history and how to conduct one are described, and an example of a thorough exposure
history is provided. Other case studies of interest include Reproductive and Developmental
AMERICIUM viii
Hazards; Skin Lesions and Environmental Exposures; Cholinesterase-Inhibiting Pesticide

Toxicity; and numerous chemical-specific case studies.
Managing Hazardous Materials Incidents is a three-volume set of recommendations for on-scene

(prehospital) and hospital medical management of patients exposed during a hazardous materials
incident. Volumes I and II are planning guides to assist first responders and hospital emergency
department personnel in planning for incidents that involve hazardous materials. Volume III—
Medical Management Guidelines for Acute Chemical Exposures—is a guide for health care
professionals treating patients exposed to hazardous materials.
Fact Sheets (ToxFAQs) provide answers to frequently asked questions about toxic substances.
Other Agencies and Organizations
The National Center for Environmental Health (NCEH) focuses on preventing or controlling disease,
injury, and disability related to the interactions between people and their environment outside the
workplace. Contact: NCEH, Mailstop F-29, 4770 Buford Highway, NE, Atlanta, GA 30341-
3724 • Phone: 770-488-7000 • FAX: 770-488-7015.
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) conducts research on occupational
diseases and injuries, responds to requests for assistance by investigating problems of health and
safety in the workplace, recommends standards to the Occupational Safety and Health
Administration (OSHA) and the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA), and trains
professionals in occupational safety and health. Contact: NIOSH, 200 Independence Avenue,
SW, Washington, DC 20201 • Phone: 800-356-4674 or NIOSH Technical Information Branch,
Robert A. Taft Laboratory, Mailstop C-19, 4676 Columbia Parkway, Cincinnati, OH 45226-1998
• Phone: 800-35-NIOSH.
The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) is the principal federal agency for
biomedical research on the effects of chemical, physical, and biologic environmental agents on
human health and well-being. Contact: NIEHS, PO Box 12233, 104 T.W. Alexander Drive,
Research Triangle Park, NC 27709 • Phone: 919-541-3212.
Radiation Emergency Assistance Center/Training Site (REAC/TS) provides support to the U.S.
Department of Energy, the World Health Organization, and the International Atomic Energy
Agency in the medical management of radiation accidents. A 24-hour emergency response
program at the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE), REAC/TS trains,
consults, or assists in the response to all kinds of radiation accidents. Contact: Oak Ridge
Institute for Science and Education, REAC/TS, PO Box 117, MS 39, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0117
• Phone 865-576-3131 • FAX 865-576-9522 • 24-Hour Emergency Phone 865-576-1005 (ask for
REAC/TS) • e-mail: cooleyp@orau.gov • website (including emergency medical guidance):
http://www.orau.gov/reacts/default.htm
Referrals
The Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics (AOEC) has developed a network of clinics
in the United States to provide expertise in occupational and environmental issues. Contact:
AOEC, 1010 Vermont Avenue, NW, #513, Washington, DC 20005 • Phone: 202-347-4976 •
FAX: 202-347-4950 • e-mail: AOEC@AOEC.ORG • Web Page: http://www.aoec.org/.
AMERICIUM ix
The American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (ACOEM) is an association of

physicians and other health care providers specializing in the field of occupational and
environmental medicine. Contact: ACOEM, 55 West Seegers Road, Arlington Heights, IL
60005 • Phone: 847-818-1800 • FAX: 847-818-9266.
AMERICIUM xi
CONTRIBUTORS
CHEMICAL MANAGER(S)/AUTHOR(S):
Sam Keith, M.S., C.H.P.

ATSDR, Division of Toxicology, Atlanta, GA
Lisa Ingerman, Ph.D.

Regina A. McCartney, M.S.
Lara L. Chappell, Ph.D.
David W. Wohlers, Ph.D.
Gloria W. Sage, Ph.D.
Gary L. Diamond, Ph.D.
Michael Neal, Ph.D.
Syracuse Research Corporation, North Syracuse, NY
THE PROFILE HAS UNDERGONE THE FOLLOWING ATSDR INTERNAL REVIEWS:
1. Health Effects Review. The Health Effects Review Committee examines the health effects
chapter of each profile for consistency and accuracy in interpreting health effects and classifying
end points.
2. Minimal Risk Level Review. The Minimal Risk Level Workgroup considers issues relevant to
substance-specific Minimal Risk Levels (MRLs), reviews the health effects database of each
profile, and makes recommendations for derivation of MRLs.
3. Data Needs Review. The Research Implementation Branch reviews data needs sections to assure
consistency across profiles and adherence to instructions in the Guidance.
AMERICIUM xiii
PEER REVIEW
A peer review panel was assembled for americium. The panel consisted of the following members:
1. Ronald Kathren, C.H.P., D.E.E., Emeritus Professor of Pharmaceutical Science, Washington

State University; President, The Kathren Group, Inc., Richland, WA,
2. Richard Leggett, Ph.D., Life Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Knoxville, TN,
3. Ray D. Lloyd, Ph.D., Research Professor of Radiology, University of Utah School of Medicine,
Salt Lake City, UT,
4. Neal Stradling, Ph.D., Biokinetics Studies Group, U.K. National Radiological Protection Board,
Chilton, Didcot, Oxon, United Kingdom,
5. Raymond Guilmette, Ph.D., Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM, and
6. Melvin Sikov, Ph.D., Scientist Emeritus, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA.
These experts collectively have knowledge of amercium's physical and chemical properties,
toxicokinetics, key health end points, mechanisms of action, human and animal exposure, and
quantification of risk to humans. All reviewers were selected in conformity with the conditions for peer
review specified in Section 104(I)(13) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act, as amended.
Scientists from the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) have reviewed the peer
reviewers' comments and determined which comments will be included in the profile. A listing of the
peer reviewers' comments not incorporated in the profile, with a brief explanation of the rationale for their
exclusion, exists as part of the administrative record for this compound. A list of databases reviewed and
a list of unpublished documents cited are also included in the administrative record.
The citation of the peer review panel should not be understood to imply its approval of the profile's final
content. The responsibility for the content of this profile lies with the ATSDR.
AMERICIUM xv
CONTENTS
DISCLAIMER ..............................................................................................................................................ii
UPDATE STATEMENT .............................................................................................................................iii
FOREWORD ................................................................................................................................................ v
QUICK REFERENCE FOR HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS....................................................................vii
CONTRIBUTORS.......................................................................................................................................xi
PEER REVIEW .........................................................................................................................................xiii
CONTENTS................................................................................................................................................ xv
LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................................xix
LIST OF TABLES.....................................................................................................................................xxi
1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT.......................................................................................................... 1

1.1 WHAT IS AMERICIUM?........................................................................................................... 2
1.2 WHAT HAPPENS TO AMERICIUM WHEN IT ENTERS THE ENVIRONMENT? ............. 3
1.3 HOW MIGHT I BE EXPOSED TO AMERICIUM?.................................................................. 4
1.4 HOW CAN AMERICIUM ENTER AND LEAVE MY BODY?............................................... 5
1.5 HOW CAN AMERICIUM AFFECT MY HEALTH? ................................................................ 5
1.6 HOW CAN AMERICIUM AFFECT CHILDREN? ................................................................... 6
1.7 HOW CAN FAMILIES REDUCE THE RISK OF EXPOSURE TO AMERICIUM? ............... 7
1.8 IS THERE A MEDICAL TEST TO DETERMINE WHETHER I HAVE BEEN
EXPOSED TO AMERICIUM? .................................................................................................. 8
1.9 WHAT RECOMMENDATIONS HAS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MADE TO
PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH? ................................................................................................ 8
1.10 WHERE CAN I GET MORE INFORMATION? ..................................................................... 10
2. RELEVANCE TO PUBLIC HEALTH ................................................................................................. 11

2.1 BACKGROUND AND ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURES TO AMERICIUM IN THE
UNITED STATES .................................................................................................................... 11
2.2 SUMMARY OF HEALTH EFFECTS...................................................................................... 12
2.3 MINIMAL RISK LEVELS (MRLs) ......................................................................................... 14
3. HEALTH EFFECTS.............................................................................................................................. 15
3.1 INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 15
3.2 DISCUSSION OF HEALTH EFFECTS BY ROUTE OF EXPOSURE .................................. 17
3.2.1 Inhalation Exposure .............................................................................................................. 19
3.2.1.1 Death ............................................................................................................................ 19
3.2.1.2 Systemic Effects ........................................................................................................... 19
3.2.1.3 Immunological and Lymphoreticular Effects............................................................... 23
3.2.1.4 Neurological Effects ..................................................................................................... 24
3.2.1.5 Reproductive Effects .................................................................................................... 24
3.2.1.6 Developmental Effects ................................................................................................. 24
3.2.1.7 Cancer........................................................................................................................... 24
3.2.2 Oral Exposure........................................................................................................................ 24
3.2.2.1 Death ............................................................................................................................ 25
AMERICIUM xvi

3.2.2.7 Cancer........................................................................................................................... 25
3.2.3 Dermal Exposure................................................................................................................... 25
3.2.3.1 Death ............................................................................................................................ 25
3.2.3.7 Cancer........................................................................................................................... 27
3.2.4 Other Routes of Exposure ..................................................................................................... 27
3.2.4.1 Death ............................................................................................................................ 27
3.2.4.7 Cancer........................................................................................................................... 30
3.3 GENOTOXICITY ..................................................................................................................... 31
3.4 TOXICOKINETICS.................................................................................................................. 32
3.4.1 Absorption............................................................................................................................. 32
3.4.1.1 Inhalation Exposure...................................................................................................... 32
3.4.1.2 Oral Exposure............................................................................................................... 38
3.4.1.3 Dermal Exposure .......................................................................................................... 43
3.4.1.4 Other Routes of Exposure ............................................................................................ 44
3.4.2 Distribution ........................................................................................................................... 44
3.4.2.2 Oral Exposure............................................................................................................... 49
3.4.2.3 Dermal Exposure .......................................................................................................... 49
3.4.3 Metabolism............................................................................................................................ 51
3.4.4 Elimination and Excretion..................................................................................................... 51
3.4.4.2 Oral Exposure............................................................................................................... 53
3.4.4.3 Dermal Exposure .......................................................................................................... 54
3.4.5 Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic (PBPK)/Pharmacodynamic (PD) Models ............. 55
3.5 MECHANISMS OF ACTION .................................................................................................. 79
3.5.1 Pharmacokinetic Mechanisms............................................................................................... 79
3.5.2 Mechanisms of Toxicity........................................................................................................ 83
3.5.3 Animal-to-Human Extrapolations ......................................................................................... 83
3.6 TOXICITIES MEDIATED THROUGH THE NEUROENDOCRINE AXIS .......................... 84
3.7 CHILDREN’S SUSCEPTIBILITY ........................................................................................... 85
3.8 BIOMARKERS OF EXPOSURE AND EFFECT .................................................................... 88
3.8.1 Biomarkers Used to Identify or Quantify Exposure to Americium ...................................... 89
3.8.2 Biomarkers Used to Characterize Effects Caused by Americium......................................... 90
3.9 INTERACTIONS WITH OTHER CHEMICALS .................................................................... 90
3.10 POPULATIONS THAT ARE UNUSUALLY SUSCEPTIBLE ............................................... 91
3.11 METHODS FOR REDUCING TOXIC EFFECTS................................................................... 91
3.11.1 Reducing Peak Absorption Following Exposure .............................................................. 92
3.11.2 Reducing Body Burden..................................................................................................... 92
AMERICIUM xvii
3.11.3 Interfering with the Mechanism of Action for Toxic Effects ........................................... 93
3.12 ADEQUACY OF THE DATABASE........................................................................................ 93
3.12.1 Existing Information on Health Effects of Americium..................................................... 93
3.12.2 Identification of Data Needs ............................................................................................. 95
3.12.3 Ongoing Studies.............................................................................................................. 101
4. CHEMICAL, PHYSICAL, and RADIOLOGICAL INFORMATION ............................................... 103

4.1 CHEMICAL IDENTITY......................................................................................................... 103
4.2 PHYSICAL, CHEMICAL, AND RADIOLOGICAL PROPERTIES..................................... 103
5. PRODUCTION, IMPORT/EXPORT, USE, AND DISPOSAL .......................................................... 113

5.1 PRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................... 113
5.2 IMPORT/EXPORT ................................................................................................................. 116
5.3 USE.......................................................................................................................................... 116
5.4 DISPOSAL .............................................................................................................................. 117
6. POTENTIAL FOR HUMAN EXPOSURE ......................................................................................... 121

6.1 OVERVIEW............................................................................................................................ 121
6.2 RELEASES TO THE ENVIRONMENT ................................................................................ 125
6.2.1 Air ....................................................................................................................................... 126
6.2.2 Water ................................................................................................................................... 128
6.2.3 Soil ...................................................................................................................................... 129
6.3 ENVIRONMENTAL FATE.................................................................................................... 130
6.3.1 Transport and Partitioning................................................................................................... 130
6.3.2 Transformation and Degradation ........................................................................................ 148
6.3.2.1 Air............................................................................................................................... 148
6.3.2.2 Water .......................................................................................................................... 148
6.3.2.3 Sediment and Soil....................................................................................................... 148
6.4 LEVELS MONITORED OR ESTIMATED IN THE ENVIRONMENT ............................... 149
6.4.1 Air ....................................................................................................................................... 149
6.4.2 Water ................................................................................................................................... 151
6.4.3 Sediment and Soil ............................................................................................................... 154
6.4.4 Other Environmental Media................................................................................................ 158
6.5 GENERAL POPULATION AND OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE ..................................... 170
6.6 EXPOSURES OF CHILDREN ............................................................................................... 176
6.7 POPULATIONS WITH POTENTIALLY HIGH EXPOSURES ........................................... 177
6.8 ADEQUACY OF THE DATABASE...................................................................................... 178
6.8.1 Identification of Data Needs ............................................................................................... 178
6.8.2 Ongoing Studies .................................................................................................................. 182
7. ANALYTICAL METHODS ............................................................................................................... 183

7.1 BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS................................................................................................. 183
7.1.1 Whole or Partial Body Measurements ................................................................................ 183
7.1.2 Assay of Excreta ................................................................................................................. 188
7.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLES............................................................................................ 190
7.2.1 Field Measurements of Americium..................................................................................... 190
7.2.2 Laboratory Analysis of Environmental Samples................................................................. 191
7.3 ADEQUACY OF THE DATABASE...................................................................................... 198
7.3.1 Identification of Data Needs ............................................................................................... 198
7.3.2 Ongoing Studies .................................................................................................................. 199
AMERICIUM xviii
8. REGULATIONS AND ADVISORIES ............................................................................................... 201
9. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 209
10. GLOSSARY ...................................................................................................................................... 259
APPENDIX A. ATSDR MINIMAL RISK LEVELS AND WORKSHEETS.........................................A-1

APPENDIX B. USER'S GUIDE.............................................................................................................. B-1
APPENDIX C. ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND SYMBOLS ................................................. C-1
APPENDIX D. OVERVIEW OF BASIC RADIATION PHYSICS, CHEMISTRY, AND
BIOLOGY ..........................................................................................................................................D-1
APPENDIX E. INDEX ............................................................................................................................ E-1
AMERICIUM xix
LIST OF FIGURES
3-1. Conceptual Representation of a Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic (PBPK) Model for a

Hypothetical Chemical Substance ...................................................................................................... 57
3-2. Compartment Model to Represent Particle Deposition and Time-Dependent Particle Transport in the
Respiratory Tract ................................................................................................................................ 60
3-3. The Human Respiratory Tract Model: Absorption into Blood.......................................................... 66
3-4. ICRP (1989) Model of Americium Biokinetics.................................................................................. 68
3-5. Leggett (1992) Model of Americium Biokinetics .............................................................................. 70
3-6. Mewhinney and Griffith (1983) Model of Deposition and Retention of Americium in the Human
Respiratory Tract ................................................................................................................................ 75
3-7. Durbin and Schmidt (1985) Model of Distribution and Excretion of Absorbed Americium in the
Human................................................................................................................................................. 78
3-8. Leggett (1992) Model of Deposition and Retention of Americium in the Human Respiratory
Tract.................................................................................................................................................... 80
3-9. Existing Information on Health Effects of Americium ...................................................................... 94
5-1. Production Table for 241Am .............................................................................................................. 115
6-1. Frequency of NPL Sites with Americium Contamination................................................................ 122

AMERICIUM xxi
LIST OF TABLES
3-1. Retention and Absorption Estimates in Animals Exposed to Americium Compounds by

Inhalation ............................................................................................................................................ 34
3-2. Absorption Estimates in Animals Exposed to Americium Compounds by Ingestion ........................ 40
3-3. Tissue Americium Levels from Human Autopsies............................................................................. 46
3-4. Reference Respiratory Values for a General Caucasian Population at Different Levels of
Activity ............................................................................................................................................... 61
3-5. Reference Values of Parameters for the Compartment Model to Represent Time-dependent
Particle Transport from the Human Respiratory Tract ....................................................................... 62
4-1. Principal Americium Isotopes .......................................................................................................... 105
4-2. Physical and Chemical Properties of Americium and Selected Americium Compounds ................ 107
4-3. Properties of Some Americium Ions................................................................................................. 109

241
4-4. Am Decay Scheme........................................................................................................................ 110
243
4-5. Am Decay Scheme........................................................................................................................ 111
6-1. Concentrations of 241Am in Soil and Sediment................................................................................. 132
6-2. Bioconcentration Factors for 241Am.................................................................................................. 145
6-3. Concentrations of 241Am in Water .................................................................................................... 153
6-4. Average Concentrations of 241Am in Food ....................................................................................... 159
6-5. Concentrations of 241Am in Fauna .................................................................................................... 162
6-6. Estimated Effective 241Am Dose from Food Raised on Land Impacted by Tidal Estuaries
along the Irish Sea............................................................................................................................. 172
7-1. Analytical Methods for Determining Americium in Biological Samples ........................................ 185
7-2. Analytical Methods for Determining Americium in Environmental Samples ................................. 192
8.1 Regulations and Guidelines Applicable to Americium...................................................................... 200

AMERICIUM 1
1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT
This public health statement tells you about americium and the effects of exposure.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) identifies the most serious hazardous waste sites in
the nation. These sites make up the National Priorities List (NPL) and are the sites targeted for
long-term federal cleanup activities. Americium has been found in at least 8 of the 1,636 current
or former NPL sites. However, the total number of NPL sites evaluated for americium is not
known. As more sites are evaluated, the sites at which americium is found may increase. This
information is important because exposure to americium may harm you and because these sites
may be sources of exposure.
When a substance is released from a large area, such as an industrial plant, or from a container,
such as a drum or bottle, it enters the environment. This release does not always lead to
exposure. You are normally exposed to a substance only when you come in contact with it. You
may be exposed by breathing, eating, or drinking the substance, or by skin contact. However,
since americium is radioactive, you can also be exposed to its radiation if you are near it.
External or internal exposure to radiation may occur from natural or man-made sources.
Naturally occurring sources of radiation are cosmic radiation from space or naturally occurring
radioactive materials in our body or in soil, air, water, or building materials. Man-made sources
of radiation are found in consumer products, industrial equipment, atom bomb fallout, and to a
smaller extent, from hospital waste and nuclear reactors.
If you are exposed to americium, many factors determine whether you’ll be harmed. These
factors include the dose (how much), the duration (how long), and how you come in contact with
it. You must also consider the other chemicals or radioactive materials you’re exposed to and
your age, sex, diet, family traits, lifestyle, and state of health.
AMERICIUM 2
1.1 WHAT IS AMERICIUM?
Americium (pronounced, 1am-c-0ris(h)-‘-cm) is a human-made, radioactive element. There are

no naturally occurring or stable isotopes of americium. Pure americium is a silvery metal.
There are two important isotopes of americium, americium 241 and americium 243, also written
as 241Am and 243Am, and read as americium two-forty-one and americium two-forty-three. Both
isotopes have the same chemical behavior in the environment.
Quantities of americium, as well as other radioactive elements, can be measured in units of mass
(grams), but are usually measured in terms of their radioactivity (curies or becquerels). Both the
curie (Ci) and the becquerel (Bq) tell us how much a radioactive material decays every second.
The becquerel is a new international unit and the curie is a traditional unit; both units are
currently used in the United States. A becquerel is the amount of radioactive material in which
1 atom transforms every second, and a curie is the amount of radioactive material in which
37 billion atoms transform every second.
Each radioactive isotope of an element, including americium, constantly gives off radiation,
which changes it into an isotope of a different element or a different isotope of the same element.
This newly formed nuclide may be stable or radioactive. This process is called radioactive
241
decay. Am and 243Am give off alpha particles (sometimes referred to as alpha radiation) and
change into neptunium 237 (237Np) and neptunium 239 (239Np), respectively. Neptunium is also
radioactive, so isotopes of this element also give off radiation and change into isotopes of other
elements. This process continues and eventually ends when stable isotopes of bismuth and lead
are formed.
Half-life is the term that is used to describe the rate of the decay process. Specifically, the half-
life is the time it takes for half of the atoms of a radionuclide to undergo radioactive decay and
change it into a different isotope. The half-life of 241Am is 432 years. The half-life of 243Am is
7,370 years.
AMERICIUM 3
Specific activity is a term that describes the relative rates of decay of the same mass of different
radioactive materials. If you have 1 gram of each isotope of americium side by side, the specific
activities would be 3.4 curies per gram for 241Am and 0.2 curies per gram for 243Am. Thus, for
the same mass, 241Am is about 17 times more radioactive (i.e., its specific activity would be
17 times higher) than that of 243Am. The higher the specific activity of a radioisotope, the faster
it is decaying.
The predominant commercial use of 241Am is in ionization-type smoke detectors. This

application relies on the alpha particles that are produced when the isotope decays as an
ionization source. A typical household smoke detector contains 0.9 microcuries (µCi; a µCi is
one millionth of a curie) or 33,000 Bq of 241Am, and 1 g of americium dioxide is sufficient to
241
make 5,000 smoke detectors. Am is also used for industrial gauging applications and in
medical diagnostic devices. There are research applications, but no commercial applications for
243
Am. This will change if the United States and Russia turn nuclear warheads into power
reactor fuel by making a mixed oxide fuel of uranium and plutonium. This fuel, called MOX,
will contain both 241Am and 243Am, and the plan is to use it to make electricity. Once used, the
spent nuclear fuel is to be sent for disposal.
For more information about the properties and uses of americium, see Chapters 4, 5, and 6.
1.2 WHAT HAPPENS TO AMERICIUM WHEN IT ENTERS THE ENVIRONMENT?
241
Am can be released to the environment from nuclear reactors, nuclear explosions, and
accidents, as well as from manufacturing products containing americium (such as smoke
241
detectors). Americium is a byproduct of plutonium production. Am is formed from the
radioactive decay of plutonium 241 (241 Pu), which itself is produced from uranium 238 (238U)
while it is inside an operating nuclear reactor. In the absence of clean-up procedures, radioactive
decay is the only way for decreasing the amount of americium in the environment. Because
241
Am has a long half-life, it will be present in the environment for a long time. Since 241Pu can
be released along with 241Am in the decay process, the amount of 241Am will slowly increase for
decades, even in the absence of additional 241Am releases, and then slowly decrease.
AMERICIUM 4
241
Am released to the atmosphere will be associated with particles and will settle to earth or be
241
washed from the air in precipitation (e.g., rain, snow). Am from atmospheric nuclear weapons
tests may remain in the atmosphere for decades before settling to earth. For example, 241Am
released in nuclear accidents, like the accident at Chernobyl, will stay in the lower atmosphere
and begin to settle to earth near the site from which it was released. Larger particles will settle
out more quickly and over a smaller area; smaller particles may remain in the atmosphere for
several months and travel far from where they were released. Precipitation removes particles
from the air more rapidly.
241
Am released into water from nuclear facilities will tend to stick to particles in the water or the
241
sediment. Am deposited on soil is so strongly attached to soil particles that it does not travel
very far into the ground. Ultimately, most americium ends up in soil or sediment.
While plants may take up 241Am from the soil, the amount taken up is small, especially in the
parts of the plant that are most often eaten (i.e., the fruit, grain, and seeds). While fish may take
up 241Am, the amount that builds up in the flesh is very small. Most of the 241Am found in
shellfish like shrimp or mussels is contained in the shell, rather than in the edible parts of the
animal. For more information about what happens to americium in the environment, see
Chapter 6.
1.3 HOW MIGHT I BE EXPOSED TO AMERICIUM?
You may be exposed to 241Am by breathing air, drinking water, or eating food containing 241Am;
however, the levels of 241Am in air, water, soil, and food are generally very low, and of little
health consequence.
People working at sites where nuclear waste is stored, in nuclear power plants, or in other
nuclear facilities that handle 241Am may be exposed to higher levels of americium than the
general population. People living near these sites also may be exposed to elevated levels of
americium. People who produce or handle 241Am in smoke detectors or other devices may be
AMERICIUM 5
exposed to higher levels. In the case of a nuclear accident, exposure could occur by breathing or
eating dust containing 241Am. Even at sites that contain measurable levels of radioactive
contamination, the amount of 241Am that is taken up into plant and animal tissue is so small that
it is of little concern. You can find more information on how you may be exposed to americium
in Chapter 6.
1.4 HOW CAN AMERICIUM ENTER AND LEAVE MY BODY?
Americium can enter your body from the air you breathe, the food you eat, or the water you
drink, or from contact with your skin. If you breathe in air that contains americium, some forms
of americium that dissolve easily in lung fluid stay in your lungs for hours or days. Other forms
that do not dissolve easily in lung fluid might stay in your lungs for months or years. Some
americium that enters your lungs may get into your blood. If you swallow americium, a very
small amount of what enters your digestive tract may also enter your blood. Most of the
americium entering your blood leaves your body in your urine and feces. Of the small amount
that stays in your body, most goes to your bones, where it can remain for many decades; a
smaller amount goes into your liver and other organs, where it may remain for a few years as the
body clears it.
1.5 HOW CAN AMERICIUM AFFECT MY HEALTH?
To protect the public from the harmful effects of toxic chemicals and to find ways to treat people
who have been harmed, scientists use many tests.
One way to see if a chemical will hurt people is to learn how the chemical is absorbed, used, and
released by the body. In the case of a radioactive chemical, it is also important to gather
information concerning the radiation dose and dose rate to the body. For some chemicals,
animal testing may be necessary. Animal testing may also be used to identify health effects such
as cancer or birth defects. Without laboratory animals, scientists would lose a basic method to
get information needed to make wise decisions to protect public health. Scientists have the
AMERICIUM 6
responsibility to treat research animals with care and compassion. Laws today protect the
welfare of research animals, and scientists must comply with strict animal care guidelines.
In the process of radioactive decay, americium releases alpha particles and gamma rays. Alpha
particles are relatively high energy particles, but travel only extremely short distances and do not
penetrate the skin. However, if americium is taken into the body and enters body tissues, alpha
particles may produce damage to nearby cells. Gamma rays can travel much greater distances
and can penetrate the entire body. Since alpha particles do not penetrate the skin and the gamma
rays released from americium sources are relatively low in energy, external exposure to
americium is not usually considered to be a danger to your health.
The radiation from americium is the primary cause of adverse health effects from absorbed
americium. Upon entering the body by any route of exposure, americium moves relatively
rapidly through the body and is deposited on the surfaces of the bones where it remains for a
long time. As americium undergoes radioactive decay in the bone, alpha particles collide with
nearby cell matter and give all of their energy to this cell matter. The gamma rays released by
decaying americium can travel much farther before hitting cellular material, and many of these
gamma rays leave the body without hitting or damaging any cell matter. The dose from this
alpha and gamma radiation can cause changes in the genetic material of these cells that could
result in health effects such as bone cancers. Exposure to extremely high levels of americium, as
has been reported in some animal studies, has resulted in damage to organs such as the lungs,
liver, kidneys, and thyroid. It is rare, however, that a person would be exposed to amounts of
americium large enough to cause harmful effects in these organs.
1.6 HOW CAN AMERICIUM AFFECT CHILDREN?
This section discusses potential health effects from exposures during the period from conception
to maturity at 18 years of age in humans.
Americium accumulates in human bones and remains there for a long time. Americium emits
radioactive alpha particles in the bone that can cause damage to the surrounding tissue. The
AMERICIUM 7
body normally repairs all of the damage, but if it fails, bone cancer could result after many years.
If americium exposure to children occurs, the exposure to the radiation from americium may be
for a longer period of time, causing a larger radiation dose over their lifetime and increasing the
likelihood of producing cancer. However, there are no published data showing that children are
more susceptible than adults to radiation-induced americium toxicity. A developing baby is
expected to have some americium in its body. It could be affected by this americium while in
the womb if the pregnant mother has high enough levels of americium in her blood.
1.7 HOW CAN FAMILIES REDUCE THE RISK OF EXPOSURE TO AMERICIUM?
If your doctor finds that you have been exposed to significant amounts of americium, ask
whether your children might also be exposed. Your doctor might need to ask your state health
department to investigate.
While discharges from nuclear waste sites, nuclear reactors, or plants that manufacture ionization
smoke detectors or gauges containing americium are regulated, it is possible that higher-than-
normal levels of americium may be in soil near a nuclear waste site, nuclear reactor, or plant that
manufactures ionization smoke detectors or gauges containing americium. If you live near any
of these types of nuclear or manufacturing sites, discourage your children from putting their
hands in their mouths and engaging in other hand-to-mouth activities.
Discharge water and air emissions from facilities that make americium smoke detectors or
gauges or produce plutonium for nuclear weapons may contain some americium. These
operations are strictly regulated, but you can check local health advisories before consuming fish
or other food from these waters. Nuclear reactors are not expected to discharge measurable
amounts of americium.
Ionization smoke detectors that contain americium are safe when installed; however, you should
not allow your children to play with these detectors. If the detectors are damaged or are no
longer being used, they should be promptly returned to the manufacturer for disposal.
AMERICIUM 8
1.8 IS THERE A MEDICAL TEST TO DETERMINE WHETHER I HAVE BEEN

EXPOSED TO AMERICIUM?
Physicians do not test for americium in their offices, but they can collect samples and send them
to special laboratories or request that you be sent to such a laboratory. If you are exposed to a
large dose of radiation from americium, your blood can be tested for signs of damage to the cell
chromosomes. If americium were to enter your body from contaminated air, food, or water, the
amount of americium (in Ci or Bq) can be estimated by measuring the radiation given off by the
americium present in samples of blood, urine, teeth, or tissue. If in the lungs, the amount of
americium can be estimated by measuring the americium gamma radiation that exits the body.
Radiation detector systems used for these purposes are at a limited number of locations. The
amount in your lungs and excretions fall sharply after exposure, so tests should be done as soon
as possible.
1.9 WHAT RECOMMENDATIONS HAS THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MADE TO

PROTECT HUMAN HEALTH?
The federal government develops regulations and recommendations to protect public health.
Regulations can be enforced by law. Federal agencies that develop regulations for toxic
substances include the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration (OSHA), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (USNRC).
Recommendations provide valuable guidelines to protect public health but cannot be enforced by
law. Federal organizations that develop recommendations for toxic substances include the
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), the National Institute for
Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), and FDA.
Regulations and recommendations can be expressed in not-to-exceed levels in air, water, soil, or
food that are usually based on levels that affect animals; then they are adjusted to help protect
people. Sometimes these not-to-exceed levels differ among federal organizations because of
AMERICIUM 9
different exposure times (an 8-hour workday or a 24-hour day), the use of different animal
studies, or other factors.
Recommendations and regulations are also periodically updated as more information becomes
available. For the most current information, check with the federal agency or organization that
provides it. Some regulations and recommendations for americium include the following:
The USNRC established radiation dose limits to the public and to workers. To ensure that these
limits are met, USNRC also set concentration limits for 241Am in air, water, and sewer discharge
that can be released from licensed facilities. This ensures that the annual radiation dose will not
exceed 0.1 rem (0.001 sievert) to the public, or 5 rem (0.05 sievert) to the worker or 50 rem
(0.5 sievert) to their bones. The concentration limits are 0.00000000000002 microcurie per
milliliter (2x10-14 µCi/mL) for air, 0.00000002 microcurie per milliliter (2x10-8 µCi/mL) for
water, and 0.0000002 microcurie per milliliter (2x10-7 µCi/mL) for releases to sewers. The
USNRC requires that intake of americium not exceed the specified annual limits on intake (ALI)
for inhalation or oral routes of exposure. The occupational exposure limits are 6x10-3 µCi (ALI)
for workers inhaling 241Am and 8x10-1 µCi (ALI) for ingestion of 241Am. The level of 241Am in
workplace air, specified as the derived air concentration (DAC), is not to exceed 3x10-12 µCi/mL
(which can be adjusted to account for work weeks shorter or longer than 40 hours). The FDA
has set a food contamination guideline of 2 Bq/kg per kilogram (5.4x10-5 µCi/kg) for 241Am to
protect 3-month-old children. This is the population group that would receive the highest
radiation dose from eating food that contains americium. The EPA has established a public
drinking water limit of 15 picocurie per liter (pCi/L). This is for the sum of all radioactive
241
materials that give off alpha radiation. Am and 243Am are examples, but drinking water
normally contains other alpha emitters, such as uranium, thorium, and radium.
More information on regulations and guidelines is available in Chapter 8.

AMERICIUM 10
1.10 WHERE CAN I GET MORE INFORMATION?
If you have any more questions or concerns, please contact your community or state health or
environmental quality department, your regional Nuclear Regulatory Commission office, or
contact ATSDR at the address and phone number below.
ATSDR can also tell you the location of occupational and environmental health clinics. These
clinics specialize in recognizing, evaluating, and treating illnesses resulting from exposure to
hazardous substances.
Toxicological profiles are also available on-line at www.atsdr.cdc.gov and on CD-ROM. You
may request a copy of the ATSDR ToxProfiles CD-ROM by calling the information and
technical assistance toll-free number at 1-888-42ATSDR (1-888-422-8737), by email at
atsdric@cdc.gov, or by writing to:

Division of Toxicology
1600 Clifton Road NE
Mailstop F-32
Atlanta, GA 30333
Fax: 1-770-488-4178
For-profit organizations may request a copy of final profiles from the following:
National Technical Information Service (NTIS)

5285 Port Royal Road
Springfield, VA 22161
Phone: 1-800-553-6847 or 1-703-605-6000
Web site: http://www.ntis.gov/
AMERICIUM 11
2. RELEVANCE TO PUBLIC HEALTH
2.1 BACKGROUND AND ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURES TO AMERICIUM IN THE

UNITED STATES
Americium is a human-made, radioactive, actinide element; it has no stable isotopes. The only isotope
used commercially is 241Am, several kilograms of which are produced annually. The only other
americium isotope produced in macroscopic quantity (10–100 g annually) is 243Am. Both 241Am and
243
Am can be formed when either 238U (the major uranium isotope used in nuclear power reactor fuel) or
238,239
Pu (primarily used in nuclear weapons) are exposed to neutrons, as occurs in a nuclear reactor or
nuclear explosion. Neutron activation of 238U to 239U followed by combinations of decay to 239Np and
239
Pu and neutron activation to higher masses of each produces a range of isotopes of these elements.
Similarly, neutron activation of 238,239Pu yields higher mass isotopes. Any 241Pu or 243Pu formed by these
processes will decay to 241Am and 243Am, respectively. The most common application of americium is in
ionization smoke detectors; a typical home smoke detector contains about 0.9 µCi (33.3 kBq) of
radioactivity. One gram of 241AmO2 provides enough active material for more than 5,000 smoke
detectors. Americium is also used in a wide range of industrial gauging applications.
Very low levels of 241Am may be found in environmental media worldwide, a legacy of atmospheric
nuclear weapons testing that predominantly took place between 1945 and 1963. In nuclear reactors,
241
Am has been detected in primary coolant water, stack aerosols, and waste water (Rosner et al. 1978).
Because 241Am is produced from the decay of 241Pu (half-life=14.4 years), releases of 241Pu result in
increased environmental levels of 241Am. The maximum concentration of 241Am following an accidental
release of 241Pu occurs 70–80 years post release (EPA 1976). Consequently, the impact of 241Am from
atmospheric nuclear weapons testing will reach its peak in about the year 2035, when its rate of
production from 241Pu decay equals its rate of decay. Environmental levels of 241Am will subsequently
decline. Exposure of the general population to 241Am via air, water, soil, and food is generally very low;
these ‘background’ levels are a result of fallout from past atmospheric nuclear weapons tests. Since 1973,
241
Am air concentrations have been <1 aCi/m3 (1 attocurie [aCi]=1x10-18 Ci) (0.037 µBq/m3) and are
expected to continue to decline, assuming no significant additional atmospheric nuclear testing after 1976
(Bennett 1979). Levels around nuclear power plants are indistinguishable from fallout background levels
241
(EPRI 1981). Am levels in surface seawater of the North Sea and North Atlantic Ocean stayed around
AMERICIUM 12
10 Bq/m3 (270 pCi/m3) between 1976 and 1988 (Pattenden and McKay 1994), but may be considerably
higher near discharges from nuclear facilities. In the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Total Diet
Studies in 1983–1986 and 1987–1992, the concentrations of radionuclides were sufficiently low as to
require no specific action or simple monitoring.
2.2 SUMMARY OF HEALTH EFFECTS
Americium exists only in the form of radioactive isotopes; there are no stable forms. Reports of adverse
health effects in animals that were administered massive doses of americium are most certainly the result
of the ionizing radiation, not the chemical toxicity of americium. The specific activity of 241Am is
approximately 17 times greater than that of 243Am. Its higher specific activity and greater abundance
make 241Am of greater health concern than 243Am. Both 241Am and 243Am release alpha particles and
gamma rays during decay. Alpha radiation is primarily an internal hazard, and the low energy, low
intensity gamma radiation is typically not the main health concern. The charged alpha particles generally
travel a straight path, interacting with or colliding into other atomic particles. A collision between an
atom and an alpha particle can result in a transfer of energy sufficient to “knock out” an electron from the
atom, producing an ionized or excited atomic state. Alpha particles have short ranges, and those from
americium isotopes are not able to penetrate the outer layers of skin; thus, they are not considered an
external hazard. Once americium enters the body via ingestion, inhalation, dermal transport, or a dermal
wound, however, the alpha particles that it emits present an internal hazard. The alpha energy induces
rapid physical changes to localized cell matter in its path and via chemical interactions with the water in
human cells. Radiation hydrolysis of water produces a cascade of rapid chemical reactions, forming
ionized and excited chemical species referred to as radiolysis products. These reactive species can
interact with biological molecules in ways that can damage cells. Cellular damage can result both directly
from radiation interactions and indirectly from the chemical reactions involving reactive species of
radiolysis products. The gamma rays emitted during the decay of 241Am are the only components of
external radiation exposure, but they represent a small component of the decay scheme and are
sufficiently low in energy and intensity so as to pose little hazard from external exposure. Internalized
gamma rays can travel greater distances than the heavier alpha particles, but deposit a lower amount of
energy with each interaction. Although the gamma rays emitted from the decaying americium atom are
of low energy and intensity, their activity and energy could contribute to both localized and more distant
cell damage.
AMERICIUM 13
Information regarding health effects in humans following exposure to americium is mainly limited to a
case report of an individual accidentally exposed to high levels of americium resulting in a significant
internal dose from americium that was absorbed via external wounds. Lymphopenia, thrombocytopenia,
and histological signs of bone marrow peritrabecular fibrosis, bone cell depletion, and bone marrow
atrophy were noted (Filipy et al. 1995; Priest et al. 1995). These data are supported by findings in
laboratory animals exposed to high doses of americium. Elevated hematopoietic activity, leukopenia,
decreased hematocrit and platelet levels, and increased cellularity in bone marrow were observed in
animals exposed to americium via inhalation (Buldakov et al. 1972; Thomas et al. 1972) or parenteral
injection (Dougherty 1970); these effects are likely due to the inability to support hematopoiesis and the
reduced colony-forming capacity. Degenerative changes in bone, liver, kidneys, and thyroid have also
been observed following inhalation (Moushatova et al. 1996; Thomas et al. 1972) or parenteral (Lloyd et
al. 1970; Taylor et al. 1991, 1993a) exposure to 241Am. Comparisons between single exposure and
repeated exposure studies suggest that the severity of the tissue damage increases with duration of
exposure. Although many of the animal studies employed parenteral injection as the route of exposure,
available inhalation data indicate similarity in targets of toxicity. The radiation dose resulting from
inhaling large quantities of 241Am can also produce respiratory insufficiency and pneumonia (Buldakov et
al. 1972; DOE 1978; Thomas et al. 1972). Experimental studies in animals demonstrate that internal
exposure to the radioactive isotope, 241Am, results in the development of cancer in the tissues that
sequester this element. Animal studies indicate increased risk of bone cancer in areas of bone containing
relatively high levels of americium. Increases in bone cancer have occurred in dogs receiving a single
inhalation exposure to 241AmO2 (Gillett et al. 1985) and in dogs (Jee et al. 1985; Lloyd et al. 1994a,
1994b), rats (Carter et al. 1951), and mice (Schoeters et al. 1991; Taylor et al. 1983; Van Den Heuvel et
al. 1995) receiving a single intraperitoneal or intravenous injection of 241Am. Studies of cancer risk
specifically associated with exposure of humans to radioactive americium isotopes were not located.
However, the EPA has determined that ionizing radiation is a Group A known carcinogen, and by
extension, all radionuclides, including americium, are considered to be known carcinogens.
Based on the outcome of accidental human exposures and experimental animal study data, as well as the
application of physiological model simulations, the toxic effects following exposure to americium
compounds can be predicted from the associated radiation dose. The potential for adverse health effects
occurs when americium enters the body via ingestion, inhalation, dermal absorption, or dermal
penetration where radiation from the americium compounds and their radioactive decay products inside
the body can cause localized cell damage. Because americium accumulates in the bone and remains there
for a long time, the ionizing properties of radiation from 241Am and 243Am can result in damage to the
AMERICIUM 14
hematopoietic system if the americium is deposited at a sufficient depth in the bone that its alpha particles
can reach the marrow. Although human studies have not correlated americium exposure with an increase
in cancer rate, one can calculate a theoretical risk based on dose and values from cancer risk tables. Risk
may be significant at high doses, but such high-level exposures are not likely among the general
population.
2.3 MINIMAL RISK LEVELS (MRLs)
Inhalation MRLs
No acute-, intermediate-, or chronic-duration inhalation MRLs were derived for americium due to the lack
of suitable human or animal data regarding health effects following inhalation exposure to americium.
Oral MRLs
No acute-, intermediate-, or chronic-duration oral MRLs were derived for americium due to the lack of
suitable human or animal data regarding health effects following oral exposure to americium.
AMERICIUM 15
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
3.1 INTRODUCTION
The primary purpose of this chapter is to provide public health officials, physicians, toxicologists, and
other interested individuals and groups with an overall perspective on the toxicology of americium. It
contains descriptions and evaluations of toxicological studies and epidemiological investigations and
provides conclusions, where possible, on the relevance of toxicity and toxicokinetic data to public health.
A glossary and list of acronyms, abbreviations, and symbols can be found at the end of this profile.
The potential for adverse health effects to humans exposed to americium is dependent on the amount of
americium isotopes (241Am and 243Am) present in the body as well as the radiation dose and dose rate that
each produce. Both 241Am and 243Am can be formed when either 238U (the major uranium isotope used in
nuclear power reactor fuel) or 238,239Pu (primarily used in nuclear weapons) are exposed to neutrons, as
occurs in a nuclear reactor or nuclear explosion. Neutron activation of 238U to 239U, followed by
combinations of decay to 239Np and 239Pu and neutron activation to higher masses of each, produces a
range of isotopes of these elements. Similarly, neutron activation of 238,239Pu yields higher mass isotopes.
Any 241Pu or 243Pu formed by these processes will decay to 241Am and 243Am, respectively. These can
also be neutron activated, producing other americium isotopes (e.g., 242,244,245Am). The isotopes, 242Am
and 243Am, are produced in lower abundance than 241Am (see Chapter 4 for decay schemes and other
more detailed information). These americium radionuclides may be released into the atmosphere in sites
that surround nuclear production facilities, store nuclear waste, or leak americium into the soil or
groundwater. The radiation dose from these radionuclides can be classified as either external (if the
source is outside the body) or internal (if the source is inside the body).
The external dose from americium radionuclides may be attributed to the gamma radiation. Alpha
particle decay emits alpha radiation, which cannot penetrate the outer layers of the skin, and a variety of
low energy gamma rays, which do penetrate the skin, although rarely in sufficient quantity to exceed a
regulatory limit. At very high doses of americium, there is increased risk for gamma radiation to cause
dermal and subdermal effects such as erythema, ulceration, or even tissue necrosis.
AMERICIUM 16
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Once radioactive americium is internalized, it is distributed and excreted at a rate of transfer that is
dependent on age. The internal radiation dose from americium is actually a measure of the amount of
energy that the alpha and gamma emissions deposit in tissue. The short-range alpha radiation produces a
localized dose, while the low energy gamma radiation contributes to a larger distribution of dose.
Molecular damage results from the direct ionization of atoms that are encountered by alpha and gamma
radiation and by interactions of resulting free radicals with nearby atoms. Tissue damage results when the
molecular damage is extensive and not sufficiently repaired in a timely manner.
In radiation biology, the term absorbed dose refers to the amount of energy deposited by radiation per
unit mass of tissue, expressed in units of rad or gray (Gy) (see Appendix D for a detailed description of
principles of ionizing radiation). The term dose equivalent (H) refers to the biologically significant dose,
which is determined by multiplying the absorbed dose (D) by a quality factor (Q) for the type and energy
of the radiations involved. Dose equivalent (H) is expressed as H=DxQ in units of rem or sievert (Sv).
The quality factor (Q) for alpha radiation emitted from 241Am is rated 20 because of the high stopping
power for charged particles. The dose equivalent (H) from internalized americium radionuclides is
estimated using the quantity of material entering the body (via ingestion or inhalation), the biokinetic
parameters for americium (retention, distribution, and excretion), the energies and intensities of the alpha
and gamma radiation emitted, and the parameters describing the profile of absorbed radiation energy
within the body. If, for example, a person ingests a given activity of 241Am (measured in curies [Ci] or
becquerels [Bq]), the tissues of the body will absorb some of the energy of the emitted alpha and gamma
radiation in a pattern reflecting the kinetics of distribution and elimination of the ingested 241Am, the rate
at which the radioactive isotope decays to a stable form, and the age of the person at the time of ingestion
(which affects both the biokinetics of the americium as well as the potential length of time over which the
tissues can be exposed to the radiation). Each tissue, therefore, can receive a different dose equivalent.
The total effective dose equivalent for the body will reflect the integration of the dose equivalents for the
various tissues using a weighting scheme for the relative sensitivities of tissues and organs.
The EPA has published a set of internal dose conversion factors for reference persons of various ages
(newborn; 1, 5, 10, or 15 years of age; and adult) in its Federal Guidance Report No. 13 supplemental CD
(EPA 2000). For example, the EPA has estimated that the dose equivalent following ingestion of 1 Bq of
241
Am is 2.1x10-7 Sv (assuming an integration time of 50 years for an adult following the initial
exposure). Age-specific dose coefficients for inhalation and ingestion of any of the radioactive isotopes
of americium by the general public can be found in ICRP publications 67 (ICRP 1993), 71 (ICRP 1995),
and 72 (ICRP 1996). Dose coefficients for inhalation, ingestion, and submersion in a cloud of americium
AMERICIUM 17
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
radionuclides can be found in U.S. EPA Federal Guidance Report No. 11 (EPA 1988). Dose coefficients
for external exposure to radioisotopes of americium in air, surface water, or soil contaminated to various
depths can be found in U.S. EPA Federal Guidance Report No. 12 (EPA 1993).
3.2 DISCUSSION OF HEALTH EFFECTS BY ROUTE OF EXPOSURE
To help public health professionals and others address the needs of persons living or working near
hazardous waste sites, the information in this section is organized first by route of exposure (inhalation,
oral, and dermal) and then by health effect (death, systemic, immunological, neurological, reproductive,
developmental, genotoxic, and carcinogenic effects). These data are discussed in terms of three exposure
periods: acute (14 days or less), intermediate (15–364 days), and chronic (365 days or more).
Levels of significant exposure for each route and duration are presented in tables and illustrated in
figures. The points in the figures showing no-observed-adverse-effect levels (NOAELs) or lowest-
observed-adverse-effect levels (LOAELs) reflect the actual doses (levels of exposure) used in the studies.
LOAELs have been classified into "less serious" or "serious" effects. "Serious" effects are those that
evoke failure in a biological system and can lead to morbidity or mortality (e.g., acute respiratory distress
or death). "Less serious" effects are those that are not expected to cause significant dysfunction or death,
or those whose significance to the organism is not entirely clear. ATSDR acknowledges that a
considerable amount of judgment may be required in establishing whether an end point should be
classified as a NOAEL, "less serious" LOAEL, or "serious" LOAEL, and that in some cases, there will be
insufficient data to decide whether the effect is indicative of significant dysfunction. However, the
Agency has established guidelines and policies that are used to classify these end points. ATSDR
believes that there is sufficient merit in this approach to warrant an attempt at distinguishing between
"less serious" and "serious" effects. The distinction between "less serious" effects and "serious" effects is
considered to be important because it helps the users of the profiles to identify levels of exposure at which
major health effects start to appear. LOAELs or NOAELs should also help in determining whether or not
the effects vary with dose and/or duration, and place into perspective the possible significance of these
effects to human health.
The significance of the exposure levels shown in the Levels of Significant Exposure (LSE) tables and
figures may differ depending on the user's perspective. Public health officials and others concerned with
appropriate actions to take at hazardous waste sites may want information on levels of exposure
AMERICIUM 18
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
associated with more subtle effects in humans or animals (LOAELs) or exposure levels below which no
adverse effects (NOAELs) have been observed. Estimates of levels posing minimal risk to humans
(Minimal Risk Levels or MRLs) may be of interest to health professionals and citizens alike.
A User's Guide has been provided at the end of this profile (see Appendix B). This guide should aid in
the interpretation of the tables and figures for Levels of Significant Exposure and the MRLs.
Americium is a human-made element that has no stable form; all isotopes of americium are radioactive
(see Section 4.1). Americium isotopes vary with respect to decay rates, decay chain isotopes produced,
and specific activity (see Section 4.2). Of particular interest is 241Am, a decay product of 241Pu.
Americium is produced in small quantities (see Section 5.1), and information regarding human exposure
is limited. Although this Toxicological Profile is not limited to health and pharmacokinetics data for any
particular radioisotope of americium, available studies primarily involve the isotope 241Am and, to a much
lesser extent, 243Am. Accidental occupational or environmental exposures to 241Am in humans are usually
associated with co-exposures to 241Pu (typically in a mixture with a range of plutonium isotopes of mass
from 238 up to 244) and other radioactive isotopes comprising the major sources of radiation associated
with nuclear fallout from nuclear explosions and releases from processing and fuel reprocessing plants
(see Chapter 6). Isolated accidental exposures to household products containing 241Am (e.g., ingestion of
241
Am-containing parts of smoke detectors) have been reported, but did not result in observed adverse
health effects. Available information on the health effects of americium is based entirely on effects
observed in humans and animals from radioactivity attributable, at least in part, to americium exposures.
The animal studies discussed below involve exposures to high doses of ionizing radiation from uptake of
241
Am. As with other substances, uptake and disposition of americium in the body (and, hence, the
potential for specific health effects from internalized americium) depend upon the chemical properties of
the particular americium compound to which one may be exposed, as well as the route of exposure (see
Section 3.4 for more information regarding uptake and disposition of americium). Based on available
toxicokinetic information and the emissions of americium, the major health concern is radiation damage
from internalized americium. Health effects may be deterministic in nature or stochastic with a lengthy
latency period, similar to those reported for other radionuclides with comparable half-lives and
distribution schemes. Inhalation, ingestion, or dermal absorption of americium compounds (or
compounds that generate americium via radioactive decay) in amounts large enough to pose a chemical
health risk would be expected to result in much more significant radiation toxicity.
AMERICIUM 19
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
3.2.1 Inhalation Exposure
Available information from human exposures indicates that airborne americium-containing particles are
deposited in the respiratory tract, cleared to some extent via mucociliary action, and swallowed or
expelled (Edvardsson and Lindgren 1976; Fry 1976; Newton et al. 1983; Sanders 1974; Toohey and
Essling 1980). Descriptions of human respiratory tract models that can be used for radiation protection
also include relevant information regarding biokinetics of inhaled particles (ICRP 1994b, 1995; NCRP
1997). Quantitative data for uptake fractions of americium compounds resulting in fast, medium, and
slow systemic absorption are summarized by ICRP (1996). Supporting animal studies include inhalation
exposure to aerosols of americium (Buldakov et al. 1972; DOE 1978; Gillett et al. 1985; Sanders and
Mahaffey 1983; Talbot et al. 1989; Thomas et al. 1972) or intratracheal instillation of americium
compounds (Moushatova et al. 1996). Estimates of tissue or organ body burden of americium are
provided in some study reports to demonstrate the target areas of internal deposition of americium.
3.2.1.1 Death
No reports were located regarding death in humans resulting from acute-, intermediate-, or chronic-
duration inhalation exposure to americium.
Death was noted within 6 months in an unspecified number of dogs following acute exposure to 241Am
aerosols (as americium nitrate) resulting in inhaled activity of 1.5 µCi/kg (55.5 kBq/kg) (Buldakov et al.
1972). Significant early mortality, attributed to radiation pneumonitis, was noted in rats following acute
inhalation of 241AmO2 particles (activity median aerodynamic diameter [AMAD] 0.75–1.39 µm) resulting
in an approximate initial lung burden of 1.3 µCi (48 kBq) and radiation dose to the lungs of 1,500 rad
(1.5 Gy) (Sanders and Mahaffey 1983).
3.2.1.2 Systemic Effects
No data were located regarding gastrointestinal, dermal, or ocular effects in humans or animals following
acute-, intermediate-, or chronic-duration inhalation exposure to americium.
AMERICIUM 20
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Respiratory Effects. No reports were located regarding respiratory effects in humans following
acute-, intermediate-, or chronic-duration inhalation exposure to americium. External measurements of
internally deposited 241Am in the lungs of a man exposed to americium in an occupational accident
determined an initial lung burden of 960 kBq (26 µCi) measured 3 days after the exposure that decreased
to 55 kBq (1.5 µCi) after 2 years (Breitenstein and Palmer 1989; Robinson et al. 1983). However, no
pathological changes to the lung attributed to radiation exposure were identified in the autopsy of this
man 11 years later (Filipy et al. 1995). Exposure was predominantly dermal via facial lacerations, but
included inhalation. Toohey and Kathren (1995) estimated that the man received a total lung dose of
1.7 Gy (170 rem) based on the Breitenstein and Palmer (1989) estimate of 1.3 Gy (130 rem) for the first
5.7 years plus a dose of 0.4 Gy (40 rem) for the remaining 5.7 years, based on estimated lung burden at
autopsy. See Section 3.2.3.2 for additional information regarding this case of accidental mixed exposure
to americium.
No reports were located regarding respiratory effects in animals following intermediate- or chronic-
duration inhalation exposure to americium. Respiratory insufficiency and pulmonary pneumonia were
reported in a group of five dogs following acute exposure to 241Am aerosols (as americium nitrate)
resulting in an inhaled activity of 1.5 µCi/kg (55.5 kBq/kg) (Buldakov et al. 1972). In another study,
gross and microscopic lung lesions, including pleural thickening, fibrosis, mineralization, and cell
proliferation, were noted in dogs sacrificed from 127 to 1,022 days following a 10-minute inhalation
exposure to aerosols of 241Am dioxide (relatively insoluble) that was generated by heating 241Am oxide to
600 ºC). Exposures resulted in estimated initial 241Am body burdens between 38 and 51 µCi (1.4 and
1.9 MBq). Increased respiratory frequency and decreased tidal volume were observed in two of the early
sacrifices (Thomas et al. 1972). Radiation pneumonitis was observed in rats exposed once (nose-only) to
241
AmO2 aerosols resulting in a lung tissue activity level of approximately 650 nCi (24 kBq), but not at
lung tissue activity level of 31 nCi (1.15 kBq) (DOE 1978).
Cardiovascular Effects. No reports were located regarding cardiovascular effects in humans

following acute-, intermediate-, or chronic-duration inhalation exposure to americium.
No reports were located regarding cardiovascular effects in animals following intermediate- or chronic-
duration inhalation exposure to americium. Various effects on the cardiovascular system, including shifts
in hemodynamics (blood pressure and flow), electrocardiographic changes, and myocardial ischemia were
resulting in inhaled activity of 1.5 µCi/kg (55.5 kBq/kg) (Buldakov et al. 1972).
AMERICIUM 21
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Hematological Effects. Persistent clinical lymphopenia and thrombocytopenia were observed in a

241
64-year-old man exposed to Am when an ion-exchange column containing about 100 g of 241Am
exploded in his face (Filipy et al. 1995). The explosion resulted in contact exposure predominantly via
lacerated skin and chemical burns on the face and neck areas as well as presumed inhalation exposure
introducing 241Am into the surrounding tissues and blood circulatory system (Ragan et al. 1983; Robinson
et al. 1983). The administration of chelating agents would have affected the blood concentration and
deposition, and may have reduced the potential duration and severity of symptoms.
No reports were located regarding hematological effects in animals following intermediate- or chronic-
duration inhalation exposure to americium. Leukopenia and elevated hematopoietic activity were
resulting in inhaled activity of 1.5 µCi/kg (55.5 kBq/kg) (Buldakov et al. 1972). Hematocrit, total white
blood cell counts, neutrophils, lymphocytes, and platelets were decreased from pre-exposure values in
dogs following a 10-minute inhalation exposure to aerosols of 241Am (presumed to be relatively insoluble,
having been generated by heating 241Am oxide to 600 ºC), resulting in estimated initial 241Am lung
burdens between 38 and 51 µCi (1.4 and 1.9 MBq) (Thomas et al. 1972). These values remained lower
than pre-exposure values in the dogs individually sacrificed 127, 256, and 512 days postexposure; the
only apparent recovery occurred in the platelet count of the dog sacrificed 1,022 days postexposure,
reaching near pre-exposure values approximately 900 days postexposure.
Musculoskeletal Effects. Information regarding musculoskeletal effects in humans is limited to the

findings of bone marrow peritrabecular fibrosis and decreased cellularity in bone samples taken from the
corpse of a 64-year-old man who had been exposed to 241Am when an ion-exchange column containing
about 100 g of 241Am exploded in his face (Priest et al. 1995). See Section 3.2.3.2 for additional
information regarding this accident.
No reports were located regarding musculoskeletal effects in animals following intermediate- or chronic-
duration inhalation exposure to americium. Pathologic findings in the bone, including fibrosis with focal
osteoid thickening, focal resorption, and cartilage degeneration, were observed in dogs (initial body
weights between 8.4 and 10.6 kg) sacrificed between 127 and 1,022 days following a 10-minute
inhalation exposure to aerosols of 241Am dioxide (presumed to be relatively insoluble, having been
generated by heating 241Am oxide to 600 ºC). Exposures resulted in estimated initial 241Am body burdens
between 38 and 51 µCi (1.4 and 1.9 MBq) (Thomas et al. 1972).
AMERICIUM 22
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Hepatic Effects. No reports were located regarding hepatic effects in humans following acute-,
intermediate-, or chronic-duration inhalation exposure to americium.
No reports were located regarding hepatic effects in animals following intermediate- or chronic-duration
inhalation exposure to americium. Changes were observed in the livers of male rats 30 days after a single
intratracheal instillation (0.2 mL) of 241Am (as americium nitrate), resulting in an internal activity of
0.05 µCi (1.8 kBq); the effects were predominantly hepatic parenchyma degeneration and focal necrosis
with the effect observed in areas where blood entered the organ (Moushatova et al. 1996). Liver lesions
(fatty changes in the centri-lobular region) were also observed in two beagle dogs 512 or 1,022 days
following a 10-minute inhalation exposure to aerosols of 241Am dioxide (presumed to be relatively
insoluble, having been generated by heating 241Am oxide to 600 ºC). Exposures resulted in estimated
initial 241Am body burdens between 38 and 51 µCi (1.4 and 1.9 MBq) (Thomas et al. 1972).
Renal Effects. No reports were located regarding renal effects in humans following acute-,
No reports were located regarding renal effects in animals following intermediate- or chronic-duration
inhalation exposure to americium. Kidney lesions (generalized glomerular mesangial thickening with
obliteration) were observed in two beagle dogs 512 or 1,022 days following a 10-minute inhalation
exposure to aerosols of 241Am dioxide (presumed to be relatively insoluble, having been generated by
heating 241Am oxide to 600 ºC). Exposures resulted in estimated initial 241Am body burdens between
38 and 51 µCi (1.4 and 1.9 MBq) (Thomas et al. 1972).
Endocrine Effects. No reports were located regarding endocrine effects in humans following acute-,
No reports were located regarding endocrine effects in animals following intermediate- or chronic-
duration inhalation exposure to americium. Thyroid gland lesions (gross atrophy, with fibrosis) were
observed in two beagle dogs 512 or 1,022 days following a 10-minute inhalation exposure to aerosols of
241
Am dioxide (presumed to be relatively insoluble, having been generated by heating 241Am oxide to
600 EC). Exposures resulted in estimated initial 241Am body burdens between 38 and 51 µCi (1.4 and
1.9 MBq). Estimated radiation doses to the dogs’ thyroids increased from 30 to 900 rad (0.3–9 Gy)
AMERICIUM 23
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
measured from day 127 through 1,022 days after exposure to 241Am dioxide aerosols (Thomas et al.
1972).
Body Weight Effects. No reports were located regarding body weight effects in humans following
acute-, intermediate-, or chronic-duration inhalation exposure to americium.
No reports were located regarding body weight effects in animals following intermediate- or chronic-
duration inhalation exposure to americium. One of four dogs lost approximately 15% of its body weight
during the time period of 365 days to sacrifice at 512 days following a 10-minute inhalation exposure to
aerosols of 241Am dioxide (presumed to be relatively insoluble, having been generated by heating 241Am
oxide to 600 EC). Exposure resulted in an estimated initial body burden of 38 µCi (1.4 MBq) (Thomas et
al. 1972).
Metabolic Effects. No reports were located regarding metabolic effects in humans following acute-,
No reports were located regarding metabolic effects in animals following intermediate- or chronic-
duration inhalation exposure to americium. Increased B-glucuronidase activity was reported in mice
receiving a single 30-minute nose-only exposure to aerosols of 241Am (as americium nitrate) that resulted
in a lung-averaged cumulative radiation dose of 2,000 rad (20 Gy) (Talbot et al. 1989).
3.2.1.3 Immunological and Lymphoreticular Effects
Lymphopenia was noted in a 64-year-old man exposed to 241Am when an ion-exchange column
containing about 100 g of 241Am exploded in his face (Filipy et al. 1995), but information regarding the
immunological consequences of this finding was not available (see Section 3.2.3.2 for additional
information regarding this accident).
Leukopenia was reported in a group of five dogs following acute exposure to 241Am aerosols (as
americium nitrate) resulting in inhaled activity of 1.5 µCi/kg (55.5 kBq/kg) (Buldakov et al. 1972). Total
white blood cell counts, neutrophils, and lymphocytes were decreased from pre-exposure values in dogs
following a 10-minute inhalation exposure to aerosols of 241Am dioxide (presumed to be relatively
insoluble, having been generated by heating 241Am oxide to 600 EC). Exposures resulted in estimated
AMERICIUM 24
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
initial 241Am body burdens between 38 and 51 µCi (1.4 and 1.9 MBq) (Thomas et al. 1972). These values
decreased in the dogs individually sacrificed 127, 256, and 512 days postexposure. However, no reports
were located regarding immunological consequences of reduced leukocyte counts in animals exposed to
americium.
No reports were located regarding the following health effects in humans or animals following acute-,
intermediate-, or chronic-duration inhalation exposure to americium:
3.2.1.4 Neurological Effects
3.2.1.5 Reproductive Effects
3.2.1.6 Developmental Effects
3.2.1.7 Cancer
No reports were located regarding cancer in humans following acute-, intermediate-, or chronic-duration
inhalation exposure to americium, and no signs of cancer were found during the autopsy of a heavily
exposed worker who died 11 years later of unrelated causes (see Section 3.2.3.2). However, EPA
considers all radionuclides to be known human carcinogens and has calculated cancer risk factors for
inhaled 241Am and 243Am (see Table 8-1 in Chapter 8 for additional information).
No reports were located regarding cancer in animals following intermediate- or chronic-duration

inhalation exposure to americium. Osteosarcomas developed in 4 of 15 dogs surviving more than
1,000 days following a single inhalation exposure to aerosols of 241AmO2 that resulted in initial lung
burdens of approximately 2–6 µCi (74–222 kBq) (Gillett et al. 1985). Among the four dogs that
developed osteosarcomas, the radiation doses to the skeleton, calculated to 1,000 days postexposure, were
96–410 rad (0.96–4.1 Gy).
3.2.2 Oral Exposure
intermediate-, or chronic-duration oral exposure to americium:
AMERICIUM 25
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
3.2.2.1 Death
3.2.2.7 Cancer
oral exposure to americium, and no signs of cancer were found during the autopsy of a heavily exposed
worker who died 11 years later of unrelated causes (see Section 3.2.3.2). EPA considers all radionuclides
to be known human carcinogens and has calculated cancer risk factors for ingested 241Am and 243Am (see
Table 8-1 in Chapter 8 for additional information).
3.2.3 Dermal Exposure
3.2.3.1 Death
No reports were located regarding death in humans or animals following acute-, intermediate-, or chronic-
duration dermal exposure to americium.
No data were located regarding respiratory effects, cardiovascular effects, gastrointestinal effects, hepatic
effects, renal effects, endocrine effects, dermal effects, ocular effects, body weight effects, or metabolic
effects in humans or animals following acute-, intermediate-, or chronic-duration dermal exposure to
americium.
AMERICIUM 26
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Information regarding systemic effects in humans following dermal exposure to americium derives
mainly from a single case in which a 64-year-old male (USTUR Case 0246) was exposed when an ion-
exchange column containing about 100 g of 241Am exploded in his face. Numerous studies relate various
aspects of this accident as well as subsequent treatment and follow-up (Breitenstein and Palmer 1989;
Filipy et al. 1995; Jech et al. 1983; McMurray 1983; Palmer et al. 1983; Robinson et al. 1983; Thompson
1983; Toohey and Kathren 1995). The explosion resulted in contact exposure through the intact and
lacerated skin and in presumed inhalation exposure, evident from external chest measurements of
radioactivity. The amount of activity initially deposited on the man and his clothing was estimated to be
1–5 Ci (37–185 GBq). Immediate treatment reduced contamination to approximately 6 mCi (222 MBq).
By the end of the first day after the accident, the activity had been reduced to 1 mCi (37 MBq). Intense,
long-term chelation therapy was employed to reduce body burden. Levels of 241Am in the victim’s blood
collected the day of the exposure was estimated initially at 6.4 µCi and decreased 10-fold 6 days later to
0.64 µCi following chelation therapy (Robinson et al. 1983).
Hematological Effects. Significant, but transient effects on erythropoiesis were indicated by a

decrease in erythrocyte concentration, hemoglobin concentration, and packed red cell volumes. Clinical
lymphopenia and thrombocytopenia persisted for 5 years post-exposure. The lymphopenia had rapid
onset and a slow recovery, although pre-exposure values were not attained by 11 years postexposure, at
which time, the man died of unrelated causes (Filipy et al. 1995). Histopathologic examination of bone at
autopsy revealed pathologic changes including peritrabecular fibrosis, bone cell depletion, and bone
marrow atrophy (Priest et al. 1995), but these changes could not be directly related to estimated radiation
dose or bone turnover rates as a result of dermal exposure.
Leukopenia was observed in a 64-year-old man following 241Am exposure (Filipy et al. 1995), but
information regarding the immunological consequences of this finding was not available.
intermediate-, or chronic-duration dermal exposure to americium:
AMERICIUM 27
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
3.2.3.7 Cancer
dermal exposure to americium, however, no signs of cancer were found during the autopsy of a heavily
exposed worker who died 11 years later of unrelated causes (see Section 3.2.3.2). EPA considers all
radionuclides to be known human carcinogens and has calculated cancer risk factors for external exposure
to 241Am and 243Am (see Table 8-1 in Chapter 8 for additional information).
3.2.4 Other Routes of Exposure
3.2.4.1 Death
No reports were located regarding death in humans resulting from acute-, intermediate-, or chronic-
duration exposure to americium by routes other than inhalation, oral, dermal, or external exposure.
Dose-related decreased long-term survival was observed in beagle dogs following single intravenous
injections of 241Am at average activity levels of 1.9–2,900 nCi/kg (0.07–107 kBq/kg) (Taylor et al. 1991,
1993a).
No data were located regarding systemic effects in humans following acute-, intermediate-, or chronic-
duration exposure to americium by routes other than inhalation, oral, dermal, or external exposure. No
data were located regarding respiratory effects, cardiovascular effects, gastrointestinal effects, renal
effects, dermal effects, ocular effects, or metabolic effects animals following exposure to americium by
routes other than inhalation, oral, dermal, or external exposure.
AMERICIUM 28
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Hematological Effects. A limited study reported dose-related depressions in white blood cell counts
in dogs that were administered single intravenous injections of 241Am at activity levels of 0.1–2.8 µCi/kg
(3.7–103.6 kBq/kg) (Dougherty 1970). Maximum depression in granular leukocytes and monocytes was
reached approximately 1 month post injection. Depression of lymphocytes occurred more slowly;
minimal values were reached 1 year or more post injection, with little indication for recovery in the dogs
receiving the two highest doses of 0.9 or 2.8 µCi/kg (33.3 or 103.6 kBq/kg). Depression of red blood
cells was observed only in groups of dogs injected with 241Am at activity levels of ≥0.9 µCi/kg
(33.3 kBq/kg).
Hepatic Effects. Degenerative liver changes, severe reduction in liver weight, and early death
(typically attributed to bone cancer) were observed in dogs following single intravenous injections of
241
Am citrate at activity levels of approximately 2.9 µCi/kg (107 kBq/kg) (Taylor et al. 1991). The
average radiation dose to the liver in these dogs was 590 rad (5.9 Gy). Degenerative liver changes and
early death were also reported in dogs administered single intravenous injections of 241Am at a similar
activity level (2.8 µCi/kg or 104 kBq/kg) (Lloyd et al. 1970; Taylor et al. 1993a).
Endocrine Effects. Thyroid weights were significantly lower in adult beagle dogs administered
single intravenous injections of 241Am citrate at activity levels ranging from approximately 0.3 to
2.75 µCi/kg (11–102 kBq/kg) than those of controls (Taylor et al. 1993a), resulting in thyroid doses of 8–
2,976 rad (0.08–29.76 Gy). Histologic examination revealed follicular hyperplasia and degenerative
cellular changes. Lower serum thyroxine levels were noted in the peripheral blood of dogs in the two
highest exposure groups.
A limited study reported dose-related depressions in white blood cell counts in dogs that were
administered single intravenous injections of 241Am citrate at activity levels of 0.1–2.8 µCi/kg (3.7–
103.6 kBq/kg) (Dougherty 1970). Maximum depression in granular leukocytes and monocytes was
reached approximately 1 month post injection. Depression of lymphocytes occurred more slowly;
minimal values were reached 1 year or more post injection.
AMERICIUM 29
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
No reports were located regarding neurological effects in humans or animals following acute-,
intermediate-, or chronic-duration exposure to americium by routes other than inhalation, oral, dermal, or
external exposure.
No reports were located regarding reproductive effects in humans following acute-, intermediate-, or
chronic-duration exposure to americium by routes other than inhalation, oral, dermal, or external
exposure.
Dose-related increased incidences of death were reported among 14- and 17-day-old fetuses of rats that
had been administered single intravenous injections of 241Am between 1 and 10 days prior to mating
(Moskalev et al. 1969). In this study, 241Am was administered at activity levels of 0.2–96 µCi/kg (7.4–
3,552 kBq/kg) that produced antenatal fetal tissue doses up to 200 rad (2 Gy). During gestation,
concentrations of 241Am were 9–15 times higher in placental tissues than in fetuses. The investigators
indicated that death may have been the result of placental changes.
No reports were located regarding developmental effects in humans following acute-, intermediate-, or
exposure.
Decreased fetal weight and increased fetal death were reported following single intravenous injection of
pregnant rats with 241Am (activity level 90 µCi/kg or 3,330 kBq/kg) on gestation day 9 (Rommereim and
Sikov 1986; Rommereim et al. 1985). The investigators indicated a tendency toward increased incidences
of fetuses with anomalous ribs, which they attributed to americium exposure at an early critical stage of
fetal development.
AMERICIUM 30
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
3.2.4.7 Cancer
No reports were located regarding carcinogenic effects in humans following acute-, intermediate-, or
exposure.
Increases in bone cancers occurred in animals administered a single intraperitoneal or intravenous

injection of 241Am and observed over their life span. Schoeters et al. (1991) reported bone tumor
induction in mice receiving injections of 22,000 or 58,000 Bq 241Am/kg (0.59 µCi or 1.57 µCi/kg) and
early mortality from non-neoplastic diseases in mice receiving larger activities of 190, 373, or 1,197 kBq
241
Am/kg (5.14, 10.1, or 32.4 µCi/kg). Mice administered 45,000, 90,000, or 213,000 Bq 241Am/kg (1.22,
2.43, or 5.76 µCi) (Van Den Heuvel et al. 1995) via intravenous injection, which produced respective
radiation doses to the femur of 2.3, 3.6, and 8.4 Gy (230, 360, and 840 rad), showed increased incidence
for osteosarcomas at 45,000 Bq/kg (0.8 kBq/mouse). Rats administered 0.03 µCi 241Am/g via injection
into the tail developed osteosarcomas (Carter et al. 1951). Young adult beagle dogs were administered a
single injection of graded activities of 0.016-3.0 µCi/kg 241Am (592–111,000 Bq/kg) that resulted in bone
sarcomas at low doses not expected to cause adverse effects. A 100% incidence of sarcomas was
observed in the dogs receiving higher activities (Jee et al. 1985). Companion experiments using bone-
seeking radionuclides in beagle dogs were conducted over 35 years (1952–1987) by Lloyd et al. (1994a,
1994b, 1995); several biological effects were observed during the lifespan of the animals. The initial
report, a comparative toxicity study for 241Am to 226Ra, both bone-seeking internal emitters, showed
similar ratios for relative effectiveness for bone cancer induction in dogs (Lloyd et al. 1994a) and mice
(Taylor et al. 1983) administered 241Am via intravenous injection. Lloyd et al. (1994b) reported skeletal
malignancies among beagles receiving graded activities of 0.07–104 kBq 241Am/kg (0.002–2.8 µCi/kg)
via a single intravenous injection as the first of the companion experiments. In the second part of the
experiment, Lloyd et al. (1995) conducted an analysis of all soft tissue tumors in the dogs treated by
intravenous injection. The authors reported both positive and negative associations between exposure and
tumor incidence, apparent in a variety of soft tissues, but the development of these tumors appeared to be
influenced by the competing risk of death from bone cancer or other severe radiation effects (Lloyd et al.
1995). Incidence of tumors in mice administered activities of 6, 17, or 29 kBq 241Am/kg (0.2, 0.5, or
0.8 µCi/kg) were higher for liver (adenomas and carcinomas) than for bone sarcomas (Ellender et al.
2000), supporting similar findings in earlier investigations. In a study of dogs administered single
intravenous injections of 241Am that ranged from 0.07 to 107 kBq Am/kg (from 0.002 to 2.9 µCi/kg), the
incidence of death was dose-related and was predominantly due to bone cancer (Taylor et al. 1991).
AMERICIUM 31
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
However, the incidence of liver tumors was higher than that of bone tumors in dogs exposed to lower
levels of 241Am. Moskalev et al. (1989) reported that injecting pregnant Wistar rats with 92.5 kBq
241
Am/kg (3.4 µCi/kg) as nitrate on gestation day 16 produced 4 osteosarcomas in 78 female and 52 male
offspring, compared with no cancers in the controls. In a communication by Lloyd et al. (2001), the
authors concluded that longevity of irradiated mammals exposed to low-level exposures of bone-seeking
radionuclides was independent of dose, except for radiation-induced malignancies or other radiation
effects.
3.3 GENOTOXICITY
No reports were located regarding genotoxic effects in humans following acute- or intermediate-duration
inhalation exposure to americium. Chromosomal aberrations (symmetrical translocations and dicentrics
and ring chromosomes) in lymphocyte preparations were elevated for an entire group of seven nuclear
fuel production workers who were exposed for 11–22 years to external gamma radiation, with an
additional internal exposure for six of these workers to alpha-emitting 241Am 5 years prior to the analysis
(Bauchinger et al. 1997). The total effective dose equivalent for the workers from exposure to external
gamma radiation and internal contamination with 241Am were: 393, 39, 207, 304, 202, 237, and 349 mSv
(whole body) (39.3, 3.9, 20.7, 30.4, 20.2, 23.7, and 34.9 rem). In five of the six cases that included
internal contamination, the committed effective dose equivalent from 241Am represented 5–25% of the
total dose, the main contribution coming from external exposure to gamma radiation. In the other worker,
internalized 241Am represented 66% of the total effective dose equivalent of 39 mSv (3.9 rem). Another
case involved a radiation worker and his wife, college-age daughter, and 10-year-old son who were
exposed for several years in their house to elevated levels of 241Am that resulted in body burdens of 6.5–
89 nCi (0.24–3.3 kBq) from a source used by the father for private experiments. Chromosomal
aberrations in isolated leukocytes were noted to be similar to those observed in other cases of accidental
or therapeutic exposure to external radiation sources (Kelly and Dagle 1974). The cytogenetic damage
observed was low and only grossly comparable to historical control values available to the authors. The
limited human data do not indicate a significant genotoxic response to inhaled americium.
No reports were located regarding genotoxic effects in animals following intermediate- or chronic-
duration inhalation exposure to americium. A single report regarding genotoxic effects following acute
inhalation exposure to americium indicated decreased numbers of pulmonary alveolar macrophages
(PAMs) (maximum decrease at day 21), increased numbers of micronuclei, and multinucleated cells in
AMERICIUM 32
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
mice receiving a single 30-minute nose-only exposure to 241Am (as americium nitrate) producing a
cumulative radiation dose of 2,000 rad (20 Gy) to lungs (Talbot et al. 1989). The initial alveolar
deposition was 32.4 nCi (1.2 kBq), but rapidly declined to about 8.1 nCi (300 Bq) by 21 days and to
approximately 2.7 nCi (100 Bq) by the end of the study (day 98). Following exposure to 241Am,
essentially all PAMs contained 241Am; significant amounts of 241Am were still observed at each sacrifice
time period between postexposure days 3 and 98.
No reports were located regarding genotoxic effects in humans or animals following acute-, intermediate-,
or chronic-duration oral or dermal exposure to americium.
3.4 TOXICOKINETICS
3.4.1 Absorption
3.4.1.1 Inhalation Exposure
Evidence for absorption of inhaled americium to blood of humans is provided by several cases of workers
who were accidentally exposed to airborne 241Am (Edvardsson and Lindgren 1976; Fry 1976; ICRP 1996;
Kathren et al. 2003; Newton et al. 1983; Sanders 1974; Toohey and Essling 1980). Although these cases
do not provide a complete quantitative description of the absorption of inhaled americium in humans, they
clearly demonstrate that inhaled americium oxides (e.g., AmO2) can be absorbed, as indicated by the
detection of 241Am radioactivity in regions of the body such as liver and bone, and excretion in urine.
In one case, an adult worker inhaled aerosols of plutonium and americium dioxides (239PuO2 and
241
AmO2) (Newton et al. 1983). Thoracic counts of radioactivity that were determined by an external
radiation detector starting 7 days after the exposure showed that 241Am was removed from the chest area
with biological half-times of 11 (80%) and 920 (20%)days. These estimates were assumed to reflect
clearance from the lung to systemic compartments. However, fecal excretion was estimated to be
approximately 50% of the estimated initial deposit of 241Am in the lung, suggesting that extensive
mechanical transport to the gastrointestinal tract, typical of inhaled large particles, may have occurred.
External counting also detected 241Am in the skull on day 913 post accident, suggesting that 241Am was
transferred to the skeleton.
AMERICIUM 33
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
In a second case, an adult worker inhaled mixed oxides of curium and americium dioxides (244CmO2 and
241
AmO2) (244Cm:241Am airborne ratio, 3:1), which resulted in the deposition of approximately 450 nCi
(16.6 kBq) of radioactivity in the lungs, or approximately 112 nCi (4.1 kBq) of 241Am (Sanders 1974).
Chest counts of the subject indicated that total radioactivity was retained in the lungs with a half-time
(i.e., decay-corrected) of 28 days; however, data on the elimination of each isotope from the lung were
not reported. Most of the elimination from the chest area was accounted for by recovery of radioactivity
in the feces, consistent with mechanical clearance of the deposited activity to the gastrointestinal tract.
Evidence for systemic absorption in this case was the detection of 241Am in urine; approximately 1.1 nCi
(41 Bq, 1% of the deposited activity) of 241Am was excreted in urine in 365 days, with a half-time of
35 days.
In a third case, two adults accidentally inhaled 241AmO2 (particle size not specified), which resulted in the
deposition of approximately 15 nCi (555 Bq) of activity in the lungs (Fry 1976). Chest activity measured
over a period of 200–1,500 days after the accident indicated that the retention half-time for 241Am in the
lungs was between 900 and 1,400 days. Activity measured over the chest, liver, and extremities (knees
and ankles, reflecting primarily bone activity) indicated that by 324 days after the accident, approximately
41% of the whole-body activity was in the lung, 47% was in the liver, and 12% was in bone. After
1,392 days, lung activity had decreased to 18%, liver activity was unchanged (47%), and bone activity
had increased to 35%.
In a more recent case, an adult male accidentally inhaled 241Am (believed to be in oxide form), which
resulted in an intake of approximately 6.3 kBq (170 nCi) of activity (Kathren et al. 2003). Results of
radioactivity measurements in the chest area between days 48 and 2,135 following the accident indicated
that 241Am was cleared from the lungs with half-times of 110 and 10,000 days.
Additional evidence for absorption of inhaled americium, and more quantitative estimates of the extent of
and rates of absorption, are provided by animal experiments. The lung deposition and absorption of
inhaled aerosols of americium nitrates and oxides have been studied in experimental animals; the results
of representative studies are provided in Table 3-1. In general, exposures were nose-only (although this
was not always specified in the reports) to relatively well-characterized aerosols of 241Am compounds. In
most studies, the actual exposure concentration of americium was not reported. Estimates of lung
retention half-times reflect the rate of loss of radioactivity from the lung following any initial (3–8 days)
loss of americium that may have been transferred to the gastrointestinal tract and excreted without
absorption. In some studies, absorption half-times to the blood were estimated. In either case, the
AMERICIUM 34
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Table 3-1. Retention and Absorption Estimates in Animals

Exposed to Americium Compounds by Inhalation
Aerosol Lung deposition Lung retention or

Animal Am Exposure AMAD (percent of absorption half-
model species Exposure concentrationa (µm±GSD) intake) lifeb
Stanley et al. 1982
241
Monkey, AmO2 Aerosol No data 1.5±1.6 67 nCi 47 days (89%)
adult (dust)c 21 ng 550 days (11%)
(retention)
Mewhinney and Muggenburg 1985
241
Monkey, AmO2 Aerosol, No data 1.4 75 µCi/kg 0.1 days (32%)
3–5 nose-only 23 µg/kg 160 days (68%)
years (retention)
Mewhinney et al. 1982

241
Dog, AmO2 Aerosol, No data 0.75±1.2 41% 9 days (89%)
adult nose-only, 60–250 nCi/kg 283 days (11%)
20 minutes 18–77 ng/kg (retention)
No data 1.5±1.07 39% 13 days (76%)
39–240 nCi/kg 171 days (24%)
12–74 ng/kg (retention)
No data 3.0±1.06 30% 13 days (69%)
30–190 nCi/kg 167 days (31%)
12–59 ng/kg (retention)
Stanley et al. 1982

241
Dog, AmO2 Aerosol No data 2.2±1.8 190 nCi 39 days (67%)
adult (dust)c 59 ng 5,000 days
(33%)
(retention)
Thomas et al. 1972
241
Dog, AmO2 Aerosol, 2.18 Ci/m3 0.8– 50% 20–30 days
adult nose only 673 mg/m3 1.0±1.5 2.1–3.1 µCi/kg (retention)
10 minutes 0.7–1.0 µg/kg
Craig et al. 1975

241
Dog, AmO2 Aerosol, 42–336 Ci/m3 1.40±1.69 No data ~60 days
adult nose-only 13–104 mg/m3 (retention)
AMERICIUM 35
3. HEALTH EFFECTS


Craig et al. 1979
241
Dog, AmO2 Aerosol, 0.66 mCi/m3 0.63±2.64 13% 20–30 days
adult nose-only 0.20 mg/m3 1,2 nCi 120 days
0.38 ng 400 days
(retention)
42 mCi/m3 1.25±1.77 30%
13 mg/m3 120 nCi
37 ng
340 mCi/m3 1.35±1.74 35%
105 mg/m3 1,150 nCi
355 ng
Stather et al. 1979
241
Hamster, AmO2 Aerosol No data 1.9±2.0 45 nCi/kg 11 days
adult 14 ng/kg 200 days
(retention)
Stanley et al. 1982

241
Rat, AmO2 Aerosol No data 2.3±1.7 7.8 nCi 95 days (89%)
adult (dust)c 2.4 ng/kg 2,800 days
(11%)
(retention)
Stradling et al. 1992, 1994

241
Rat, AmO2 Aerosol, No data 2.1±1.78 0.14 nCi/kg 2,000 days
adult (dust)d nose-only, 0.042 ng/kg >10,000 days
1-hour (absorption)
Stradling and Stather 1989

241
Rat, Am Aerosol, No data 0.3±2.5 75 nCi/kg 49 days
adult nitrate nose-only 23 ng/kg 315 days
1–2 hour (absorption)
241
AmO2 No data 1.4±2.0 26 nCi/kg 7,000 days
(dust)e 8.1 ng/kg 7,000 days
(absorption)
241
Am No data 3.8±1.6 0.51 nCi/kg 170 days
nitrate 0.16 ng/kg 1,200 days
(dust)f (absorption)
241
Am No data 1.8±2.4 0.11 nCi/kg 47 days
chloride 0.035 ng/kg 1,700 days
(dust)g (absorption)
AMERICIUM 36
3. HEALTH EFFECTS


Moody et al. 1991
241
Rat, Am Aerosol, No data 1.26±1.29 11 nCi/kg 14,000 days
adult (dust)h nose-only 3.6 ng/kg >17,000 days
(absorption)
0.21±1.61 89 nCi/kg 5,800 days
27.6 ng/kg 8,600 days
(absorption)
1.74±1.94 47 nCi/kg 4,600 days
14 ng/kg >14,000 days
(absorption)
241
Am 1.63±1.76 2.3 nCi/kg 170 days
(dust)i 0.7 ng/kg 290 days
380 days
(absorption)
a
Where only activity was reported, mass concentration of Am was calculated assuming a specific activity of 3.24 Ci/g.
b
Retention reflects total elimination from lung; absorption reflects transfer to blood
c
Powder collected from plutonium oxide milling operation
d
Dust from a weapons test site
e
Dust from ambient oxidation of Pu metal
f
Dust from corrosion of industrial process line equipment, mainly aged Pu/Am nitrate intimately mixed with corrosion
products
g
Dust from green salt formed in the electrorefining of Pu metal
h
Dust derived from ignition of Pu (900–1,000 EC)
i
Dust derived from air oxidation of molten Pu
Note: Footnotes d-i apply to americium in a Pu-bearing matrix where Am absorption kinetics may have been determined
by Pu dissolution.
AMAD = activity median aerodynamic diameter; GSD = geometric standard deviation
AMERICIUM 37
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
estimates were based on curve-fitting of the data on lung radioactivity-time profiles and other
assumptions. Thus, some of the differences in estimates undoubtedly reflect differences in particle size
(known to significantly affect deposition pattern within and mucociliary clearance from the respiratory
tract), solubility in biological fluids, curve-fitting method, duration of observations, and intra-study
variability; nevertheless, general trends are evident. Retention and systemic absorption can be described
with two or three rate functions that represent fast and slower processes for transfer of americium from
the lung (albeit with considerable differences in the rates reported in various studies, probably reflecting
differences in particle size distribution, animal species, and exposure scenarios). For example, in
monkeys exposed to aerosols of 241AmO2 (AMAD, 1.4 µm), retention half-times of 241Am were 0.1 days
(32% of the initial deposited) and 160 days (68%) (Mewhinney and Muggenburg 1985). Stanley et al.
(1982) also observed both fast and slower phases of lung retention in monkeys exposed to 241AmO2.
Mewhinney et al. (1982) found that in dogs exposed to aerosols of americium dioxide (AMAD 0.8–
3.5 µm), approximately 30–50% of the inhaled activity was deposited in the lung; for an AMAD of
0.8 µm, the estimated retention half-times were 9 and 290 days for 89% and 11% of the lung burden,
respectively. Within 8 days of exposure, 32% of the initial lung burden was detected in extra-respiratory
tissues, mainly the liver (21%) and skeleton (11%). The observations of rapid and slow phases of
retention of americium initially deposited in the respiratory tract are consistent with the results of other
studies of dogs exposed to 241AmO2 aerosols (Craig et al. 1975; Thomas et al. 1972). Studies in rodents
indicate that inhaled americium nitrates and chlorides are absorbed more rapidly than americium oxides
(Stather et al. 1979b; Stradling and Stather 1989; Stradling et al. 1994). Americium oxides in dusts from
weapon sites and industrial facilities were absorbed particularly slowly, with absorption half-times of 5–
25 years, although this may also vary depending on the process that leads to the production of the dust.
For example, americium oxides in dust formed during the ignition of plutonium were absorbed from the
lung with a half-time of 0.5–1 year, whereas americium oxides produced from the air oxidation of molten
Pu had absorption half-times exceeding 12 years (Moody et al. 1991). This may reflect differences in the
compounds produced (e.g., Pu-Am particles that are surface but not volume oxidized) or oxide species
formed under different conditions (e.g., temperature, etc.).
Information on the absorption of americium from the lung also can be derived from studies in which
americium compounds were instilled directly into the trachea. Although intratracheal instillation does not
precisely mimic inhalation exposure, rates of absorption of the deposited americium have been shown to
be comparable for both routes of exposure. For example, Stradling et al. (1992) estimated nearly identical
half-times for absorption of 241Am in rats that received either intratracheal instillations of 241Am oxide-
containing dust or inhalation exposure to aerosols of the same dust (fast phase approximately 2,000 days,
AMERICIUM 38
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
slower phase >10,000 days). Estimates of absorption half-times in rats that received intratracheal
instillations of 241AmO2 in various types of dusts from weapons or fuel facilities indicate a slow and fast
component to absorption, with the fast component ranging from 1 to 5 years, and rates of absorption
following intratracheal instillation of americium nitrate, citrate, or hydroxide are higher than after
instillation of americium oxides (Crawley et al. 1976; Müller et al. 1989; Stradling et al. 1989, 1992,
1994).
3.4.1.2 Oral Exposure
Human studies indicate that <0.1% of the ingested activity is absorbed into blood, which is consistent
with numerous observations that have been made in experimental animals. Infant uptake may be closer to
0.5% (ICRP, 1996). Absorption of americium contained in shellfish (molluscs) has been studied in
humans. Eight adult subjects (six males and two females) ingested molluscs (winkles), collected from
marine waters near the British Nuclear Fuels facility at Sellafield, Cumbria, that contained 241Am (Hunt et
al. 1986a, 1986b). The range in the ingested activity of 241Am was 18–76 Bq (0.49–2.1 nCi, 0.15–
0.63 ng). Serial 24-hour urine samples were collected from each subject for up to 10 days after they
ingested the molluscs. The fraction of the activity absorbed was estimated as the ratio of the observed
cumulative urinary excretion of 241Am to that of the excretion predicted to occur if absorption had been
complete. The latter was predicted using a kinetic model of excretion of absorbed americium described
by Takada et al. (1984). The reported geometric mean absorption for the eight subjects was
0.6x10-4 (geometric standard deviation [GSD], 0.1; range, 0.4x10-4–2.1x10-4), or 0.006% of the ingested
activity. Seven of the initial eight subjects and one new subject participated in a subsequent study (six
males and two females) in which the same protocol was implemented and the 241Am activity range was
10–25 Bq (0.27–0.68 nCi, 0.083–0.21 ng) (Hunt et al. 1990). The arithmetic mean absorption fraction
was 0.8x10-4 (range, 0.4x10-4–1.5x10-4) or 0.008% of the ingested activity. When the results of the two
studies were combined, the arithmetic mean absorption fraction was 0.9x10-4 (range, 0.3x10-4–2.5x10-4)
or 0.009% of the ingested activity; absorption fractions for males and females were similar. Three of the
initial eight subjects and three new subjects participated in a third study (five males and one female) in
which the same protocol was implemented; however, the subjects ingested cockles collected from
Ravenglass, Cumbria for a range of ingested activity of 15–17 Bq (0.41–0.46 nCi, 0.13–0.14 ng) (Hunt
1998). The arithmetic mean absorption fraction was 1.2x10-4 (range, 0.3x10-4–2.6x10-4) or 0.012% of the
ingested activity.
AMERICIUM 39
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Information on the absorption of ingested AmO2 is provided from accidental oral exposures. In one case,
a worker ingested a ceramic particle containing approximately 2.85 µCi (105 kBq, 0.88 µg Am) of
241
AmO2. During the first 8 days after the particle was ingested, approximately 4 pCi (0.15 Bq) or
0.00014% of the estimated activity was excreted in the urine (Smith et al. 1983). In a second case, a
worker swallowed two 2-mm (diameter) silver disks used in the manufacture of smoke detectors, which
contained approximately 4.22 µCi (156 kBq, 1.3 µg) of 241Am. The subject excreted the disks in feces on
days 16 and 24 post ingestion. Urinary 241Am excretion during this time was approximately 3 pCi
(0.11 Bq, 0.7 ng Am) or 0.0007% of the ingested activity (Rundo et al. 1977). The time lapse between
ingestion and fecal excretion of the disks was related to suspected delay in esophageal transit and
infrequent bowel movements by the subject.
Studies in nonhuman primates provide additional evidence that <0.1% of an ingested amount of
americium is absorbed. Ham et al. (1994) estimated the gastrointestinal absorption of americium in
marmosets by comparing the retention of 241Am in the liver and carcass after intraperitoneal injection of a
citrate solution containing 241Am (1.6 Bq, 43 pCi, 0.012 ng Am) or after gastric intubation with 241Am
mixed with potato powder (250 Bq, 6.7 nCi, 2.0 ng Am). The absorption fraction of 241Am mixed with
potato powder was estimated to be approximately 6x10-4 or 0.06% of the administered activity.
Gastrointestinal absorption of americium has also been estimated in pigs, guinea pigs, mice, and rats. The
results of representative studies are provided in Table 3-2. Whilst these studies differ in the methodology
used to estimate absorption, they reveal certain important trends. In general, the animal studies reveal a
relatively low absorption of ingested americium across species (<1% in adult animals). In the pig, guinea
pig, hamster, and rat, absorption is higher by a factor of 30–200 in neonatal animals compared with adults
and/or progressively decreases in magnitude with age after birth (to a factor of 4 at 30 days for the guinea
pig) (Bomford and Harrison 1986; David and Harrison 1984; Sullivan et al. 1985). Americium appears to
be absorbed to a similar extent when it is ingested as an aqueous solution of water soluble nitrates or
citrates or when it is incorporated into foods, such as molluscs, potato, or liver tissue (Bulman et al. 1993;
Ham et al. 1994; Harrison et al. 1988; Hisamatsu and Takizawa 1987; Stather et al. 1979a). Absorption
of relatively water insoluble oxides of americium is lower by a factor of 4–10 compared with the
absorption of americium citrate, whose absorption factor is a factor of 3–6 lower than that of americium
nitrate (Stather et al. 1979a; Sullivan 1980a, 1980b). Similarly, in rats, the absorption of americium from
surface dust from a weapons site was lower by a factor of 10–50 compared to americium oxide or nitrate
(Harrison et al. 1994; Sullivan 1980b). A species difference was noted; guinea pigs absorbed 5 times
more americium than rats. Other factors that appear to increase absorption in rats include fasting
AMERICIUM 40
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Table 3-2. Absorption Estimates in Animals Exposed to Americium Compounds

by Ingestion
Absorption Basis for estimate of

Animal model Dose and mediaa (percent of dose) absorption Reference
241
Marmoset, Am in potato 0.06 Absorption estimate based Ham et al.
adult powder, single gavage on comparisons with liver 1994
dose, 2.0 ng and carcass 241Am after an
intraperitoneal dose
241
Pig, Am citrate aqueous 0.16 Absorption estimate based Eisele et al.
adult solution, single gavage on maximum whole-body 1987
241
dose, 190 µg/kg Am (8 days), without
241
adjustment for excretion
Pig, Am citrate aqueous 0.06
miniature solution, single gavage
dose, 75 µg/kg
241
Pig, Am nitrate aqueous ~3 Absorption estimate based Sullivan and
neonate solution, single gavage on carcass 241Am (5 days), Gorham
dose without adjustment for 1983
excretion
241
Guinea pig, Am citrate aqueous % Age Absorption estimate based Bomford and
neonate–adult solution, single dose 1.1 0.5 d on comparisons with liver Harrison
applied to tongue, 0.55 1d and carcass 241Am after an 1986
0.6–0.9 µg/kg 0.19 5d intraperitoneal dose
0.17 10 d (neonates) or intravenous
0.06 15 d dose (adults), with
0.03 20 d adjustment for excretion
0.02 30 d
0.005 adult
Guinea pig and 241
Am in three surface GP Rat Absorption estimate based Harrison
rat, adult dust samples, single 0.002 0.0003 on comparisons with liver et al. 1994
dose applied to tongue 0.005 0.001 and carcass 241Am after an
(GP, 5–15 ng/kg) or — 0.001 intraperitoneal dose, with
fed (rat, 12–49 ng/kg) adjustment for excretion
241
Guinea pig, Am nitrate, aqueous 0.017–0.031 Absorption estimate based Sullivan
adult solution, single gavage on sum of liver, skeletal, 1980a
dose, 2–4.4 µg and urine 241Am
241
Hamster, Am nitrate, aqueous % Age Absorption estimate based David and
neonate– solution, single dose 4.5 1d on comparisons with liver Harrison
weaning applied to tongue, 1.70 4d and carcass 241Am after an 1984
1.6–2.5 ng 0.50 7d intraperitoneal dose, with
0.006 22 d adjustment for excretion
0.02 30 d
AMERICIUM 41
3. HEALTH EFFECTS

by Ingestion

Hamster, adult 241
Am nitrate, aqueous 0.054 Absorption estimate based Stather et al.
solution, single gavage on comparisons with liver 1979
dose, 2.8 ng/kg and carcass 241Am after an
241
intravenous dose, with
Am citrate aqueous 0.012 adjustment for excretion
solution, single gavage
dose, 2.6 ng/kg
241
Am dioxide, aged 0.0058
aqueous suspension,
single gavage dose,
19 ng/kg
241
Am in liver from 0.0034
exposed hamsters,
single dose, 2.9 ng/kg
Mouse, adult 241
Am nitrate, aqueous 0.0028 Absorption estimate based Hisamatsu
solution, single gavage on sum of 241Am in and
dose, 32 µg/kg carcass (excluding the Takizawa
241
gastrointestinal tract) and 1987
Am citrate, aqueous 0.015 liver
solution, single gavage
dose, 43 µg/kg
241
Am in liver from 0.0024–0.0026
exposed mice, single
gavage dose
Rat, adult 241
Am in wild molluscs 0.026–0.12 Absorption estimate based Harrison et
or 241Am nitrate (wild mussels) on comparisons with liver al. 1988
injected into mollusc and carcass 241Am after an
tissue, twice weekly for 0.016–0.040 intravenous dose, with
8 weeks (injected mussel) adjustment for excretion,
twice weekly for 8 weeks
Rat, adult 241
Am in potatoes 0.12–0.16 Absorption estimate based Bulman et
exposed to 241Am, or on comparisons with liver al. 1993
injected into potatoes, and carcass 241Am after an
single dose or daily for intravenous or
23 days intraperitoneal dose, with
adjustment for excretion
Rat, adult 241
Am nitrate, aqueous 0.063 Absorption estimate based Sullivan
solution, single gavage on sum of liver, skeletal, 1980a
dose, 5 µg/kg and urine 241Am
Rat, adult 241
Am oxide, aqueous 0.015
suspension, single
gavage dose, 33 µg/kg
AMERICIUM 42
3. HEALTH EFFECTS

by Ingestion

Rat, adult 241
Am nitrate, aqueous 0.017 (fed) Absorption estimate based Sullivan et
solution, single gavage 0.124 (fast) on sum of 241Am in al. 1986
dose, 12 µg/kg; fed or 1.19 (fast w/Fe3+) carcass (excluding the
fasted, with or without gastrointestinal tract) and
Fe3+ urine, Fe3+ gavage dose
before 241Am dose
241
Rat, neonate Am nitrate, aqueous 4.6 Absorption estimate based Sullivan
solution, single gavage on 241Am in carcass, 1980b
dose, 0.44 µg excluding the
gastrointestinal tract
241
Am oxide, aqueous 0.32 Absorption estimate based
solution, single gavage on 241Am in carcass,
dose, 0.59 µg excluding the
gastrointestinal tract
241
Rat, Am nitrate, gavage % Age Absorption estimate based Sullivan
neonate or adult single dose, 285 µg/kg 5.7 2d on 241Am in carcass, et al. 1985
(adult), 1,380 µg/kg 0.0062 adult excluding the
(neonate) gastrointestinal tract
241
Am citrate, aqueous % Age
solution, single gavage 5.9 2d
dose, 285 µg/kg 0.047 adult
(adult), 1,480 µg/kg
(neonate)
241
Rat, weanling Am nitrate, aqueous 4.8 (Fe deficient) Absorption estimate based Sullivan and
solution, single gavage 1.8 (Fe replete) on sum of 241Am in Ruemmler
dose, Fe deficient or carcass, excluding the 1988
replete, 7–9 µg/kg gastrointestinal tract and
urine
a
Where the chemical form and/or dose are not presented, these were not provided in the referenced report. Where
only activity was reported, mass concentration of americium was calculated assuming a specific activity of 3.24 Ci/g.
d = days; Fe = iron; GP = guinea pig

AMERICIUM 43
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
compared to the fed state and iron deficiency compared with the iron-replete state (Sullivan and
Ruemmler 1988; Sullivan et al. 1986). Concurrent oral exposure to Fe3+ and americium also appears to
increase the absorption of ingested americium; the latter effect may result from redox reactions in the
gastrointestinal tract catalyzed by Fe3+ (Sullivan et al. 1986). While the exact site and chemical species of
americium that is absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract is not known, chemical speciation models
applied to saliva and gastric fluid predict that the major species in saliva will be citrate and phosphate
complexes, whereas in gastric fluid, the major species will be Am3+ (Webb et al. 1998). Speciation
models for americium in the small intestine have not been reported; however, complexes with citrate,
lactate, and phosphate would be expected based on equilibrium constants for these weak acid complexes
and their abundance in intestinal fluid (Webb et al. 1998).
3.4.1.3 Dermal Exposure
Information on the dermal absorption of americium in humans or animals is extremely limited. Some
qualitative information is available from accidental exposures that included other routes of exposure. One
of the most well studied was an accident in which a worker received facial wounds from projectile glass
(and other debris) and nitric acid during an explosion of a vessel containing 241Am (Filipy et al. 1995;
McMurray 1983; Toohey and Kathren 1995). The subject also inhaled 241Am released to the air as dust
and nitric acid aerosols, which was evident from external chest measurements of radioactivity (Palmer et
al. 1983). Accurate estimates of dermal absorption of americium cannot be made from this case because
of the complex exposure scenario and because of the occurrence of acid and projectile wounds to the skin
that might have greatly affected the penetration of any americium that was deposited on the surface of the
skin. Nevertheless, it is possible to conclude from measurements of the dermal 241Am activity soon after
the accident and measurements of long-term excretion of 241Am that a substantial fraction of the initial
radioactivity deposited in the area of the wounds was absorbed. Quantitative measurements of internally
deposited 241Am in target organs were recorded from the third day following exposure to monitor rates of
radionuclide excretion and accretion by these organs that continued up to time of death 11 years later.
Based on measurements at day 3 postexposure, the organs that received the highest doses included the
skin, liver, lung, and bone with estimated organ burdens of 26,000, 1,400, 960, and 480 kBq, respectively
(Breitenstein and Palmer 1989; Robinson et al. 1983). The organ burdens of 241Am decreased under
DTPA chelation therapy until conclusion after 5 years where monitoring data show that the activity
decreased in the skin, entered systemic circulation, and deposited into the bone and liver. Dosimetric
evaluation for years 6–10 following exposure showed a decrease in the skin by 93 kBq (2.5 µCi) 241Am,
AMERICIUM 44
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
increased activities in the bone by about 67 kBq (1.8 µCi) and in the liver by about 7.4 kBq (0.2 µCi), and
30 kBq (0.8 µCi) excreted via urine and feces. Over the first 60 days after the accident, dermal 241Am
activity decreased from >5 mCi (185 MBq, 1.5 mg) to approximately 0.15 mCi, (5.5 MBq, 0.046 mg),
largely as a result of skin decontamination procedures, although normal epidermal sloughing would be an
expected contributor as well (Robinson et al. 1983). Cumulative urinary and fecal excretion of 241Am
over an observation period of 5 years was estimated to be 1 mCi (37 MBq, 20% of the initial deposited
activity), and peak body burden, excluding the skin, was estimated to have been approximately 0.08 mCi
(3 MBq, 1.6% of the estimated initial deposited activity). Thus, the combination of transdermal injection
and dermal absorption, under these extreme conditions of mechanical and chemical skin wounds, may
have been as high as 20%.
3.4.1.4 Other Routes of Exposure
Several cases of accidental exposure to americium as a result of wound penetrations have been reported
(Thompson 1983). These exposures have resulted in 241Am burdens in the liver and skeleton, indicating
absorption and distribution from the wound site (McInroy et al. 1989).
3.4.2 Distribution
The liver is the primary soft tissue site of initial accumulation of absorbed americium in humans.
Americium deposited in bone and skeletal muscle has longer retention half-times than americium in the
liver. Therefore, at long times after exposure (years), bone and skeletal muscle will contain a larger
fraction of the systemic americium burden than the liver (Filipy and Kathren 1996; Kathren 1994;
McInroy et al. 1995; Toohey and Kathren 1995). Information on the distribution of americium within the
human liver is not available; however, studies in dogs and rats have shown that within a few days after an
intravenous injection, hepatic 241Am is associated with lysosomes (Gruner et al. 1981; Lindenbaum and
Rosenthal 1972; Seidel et al. 1986; Sütterlin et al. 1984). Americium in the hepatic cytosol is bound to
ferritin and other unidentified proteins (DOE 1984; Stover et al. 1970). It is not known whether
americium reacts with metallothionein; however, since americium forms stable complexes with
polycarboxylate compounds such as DTPA (Lloyd et al. 1975a, 1975b), stable complexes with sulfhydryl
AMERICIUM 45
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
groups in proteins such as metallothionein would not be expected. However, binding of 241Am to an
unidentified low molecular weight protein fraction in a rat liver has been reported (DOE 1984).
The United States Transuranium and Uranium Registries (USTUR) collect data on the americium content
of human tissues obtained from autopsies. Recent data summaries reported from the USTUR show that
after occupational inhalation exposures, 241Am activity resides primarily in the respiratory tract, skeleton,
liver, and muscle (see Table 3-3). In three cases in which occupational exposures were believed to have
been primarily, if not exclusively by inhalation, the following average tissue distribution was observed at
autopsy 30 or more years after exposure: skeleton, 48%; respiratory tract, 35%; muscle, 10%; liver, 3%;
and other issues, 4% (McInroy et al. 1989). Analyses of larger sets of USTUR cases have shown that,
excluding the respiratory tract and other site of entry tissues (e.g., wound, gastrointestinal tract),
approximately 80–90% of the americium in the body is associated with the skeleton, liver, and muscle,
the skeletal:soft tissue burden ratio is approximately 3, and the highest soft-tissue concentrations are
observed in the liver (Filipy and Kathren 1996; Filipy et al. 1994; Kathren et al. 1988). Whole-body
counting of workers who were chronically exposed to plutonium and americium aerosols yielded a similar
distribution of 241Am between the skeleton and soft tissue. In a separate study of 20 former workers, the
geometric mean skeletal:liver burden ratio was 4.4 (GSD, 2.4; range, 1.2–17) (Badjin and Molokanov
1998). Further evidence that the skeleton and liver are the primary sites of accumulation of absorbed
americium is provided by inhalation studies conducted in monkeys (Stanley et al. 1982), dogs (Craig et al.
1975, 1979; Mewhinney et al. 1982; Thomas et al. 1972), and rats (Stradling et al. 1992, 1994).
Americium is also taken up by teeth. In rats, americium accumulates in the dental pulp of developing
teeth and eventually is incorporated into the mineralized dentin (Hammerström and Nilsson 1970b).
Information on the distribution of americium in blood after exposures to americium is available from an
accident victim who was exposed by inhalation, dermal deposition, and wound penetration as a result of
an explosion of a vessel containing 241Am, followed by aggressive chelation therapy (McMurray 1983).
The internal 241Am activity was sufficiently high in this case to provide reliable estimates of blood and
serum 241Am concentrations. Essentially all of the 241Am in blood was in the serum (Robinson et al.
1983). Studies in animals provide further evidence that americium is confined largely to the plasma
portion of blood. In baboons, dogs, and rats, >95% of americium in blood is associated with plasma. A
variety of human and animal studies (in vivo and in vitro) have shown that americium in plasma binds
extensively to proteins (80–90%), including albumin and transferrin (Boocock and Popplewell 1966;
Bruenger et al. 1969; Cohen and Wrenn 1973; Cooper and Gowing 1981; Durbin 1973; Popplewell and
Boocock 1967; Turner and Taylor 1968). When americium was incubated with human serum in vitro,
AMERICIUM 46
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Table 3-3. Tissue Americium Levels from Human Autopsies
Mean percent of Mean percent of systemic burden

Tissue body burden (excluding respiratory tract)
Based on three inhalation casesa

Respiratory tract 34.8b —
Liver 3.3 6.3
Skeleton 47.6 70.3

Muscle 10.0 16.1
Other 4.3 7.2
Tissue Soft tissue:liver concentration ratioc (number of mixed exposures)
Brain 0.08 (8)d
Heart 0.123 (6)
Kidneys 0.06 (38)

Muscle 0.056 (8)
Pancreas 0.03 (4)d

Spleen 0.06 (38)
Testes 0.029 (23)
Thyroid 0.03 (21)

a
McInroy et al. 1989
b
Estimates of the contribution of the respiratory region to the total body burden in the three individuals from whom
the mean value was calculated were 60.7, 23.7, and 14.7%. See McInroy et al. (1989) for additional statistical
information.
c
Filipy et al. 1994
d
Calculated from Filipy and Kathren 1996
AMERICIUM 47
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
<1% of the americium was ultrafilterable; however, essentially all of the americium could be rendered
ultrafilterable by the inclusion of 50 mM citrate in the serum incubate, suggesting reversible binding of
americium to serum proteins (Chipperfield and Taylor 1972). As noted above, bone is a primary site of
long-term accumulation of americium in the skeleton. One human case of inhaled americium oxide
resulted in an estimated deposition of 78 kBq (2,100 nCi) and a reported body burden of 34 kBq
(900 nCi) after 12 years; 79% was located in the bone (Fasiska et al. 1971). In another human case,
approximately 55% of an estimated lung deposition of 6.3 kBq (170 nCi) of 241Am was deposited in bone
(Kathren et al. 2003). In human autopsy samples of bone, 241Am is found primarily at the cortical and
trabecular bone surfaces (Priest et al. 1995; Schlenker et al. 1989).
Americium that is observed in the deeper regions of human bones is thought to result from burial of
historic surface deposits by newly accreted bone. Supporting evidence for accretion being a mode of
redistribution of americium in bone comes from studies of monkeys, rats, and dogs that received single
injections of 241Am (Durbin 1973; Herring et al. 1962; Lloyd et al. 1972; Nenot et al. 1972; Polig 1976;
Priest et al. 1983). In these studies, the initial deposition of 241Am occurred at bone surfaces, including
the periosteal and endosteal surfaces of trabecular bone and along the vascular channels of cortical bone,
with more pronounced deposition at surfaces that were undergoing resorption, and with subsequent
overlay of new bone (Priest et al. 1983). Because most americium in bone is associated primarily with
the bone surface, the americium concentration in bone (per g bone ash) tends to vary with the bone ash
content, as reflected by the variability in bone surface-to-volume ratio in a human who was
occupationally exposed to americium (Kathren et al. 1987, 1990; Stevens et al. 1977).
When residence times (time between exposure and autopsy) for the americium measured in autopsy cases
are taken into consideration, the measured skeletal burdens are consistent with elimination half-times of
approximately 50 years (McInroy et al. 1989, 1995). This value represents an average; however, in an
individual, exchanges between bone and soft tissue stores of americium may be more rapid during periods
of active bone metabolism such as infancy and childhood, pregnancy, and menopause (Lloyd et al. 1999).
Studies in animals provide evidence for this concept (Durbin 1973). After an intravenous injection of
americium citrate, skeletal tissue accumulated approximately 76% of the injected activity in neonatal dogs
and 29% in adult dogs (Stevens et al. 1977). Higher skeletal uptakes of injected americium have also
been observed in neonatal rats and mice, relative to adult animals (Hollins et al. 1973; Schoeters et al.
1990) and in young rats (3 months of age) compared to old rats (13 months of age) (Sontag 1983). On the
other hand, americium uptake into maternal bone of lactating rats was similar to that of non-lactating rats,
while concurrent calcium uptake into bone was lower in lactating rats (Hollins and Durakovic 1972).
AMERICIUM 48
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Thus, active mobilization of bone mineral, per se, may not always promote release of americium from
bone.
Information on the placental transfer of inhaled americium in humans is not available. Studies in animals
that received parenteral injections of americium show that absorbed americium is transferred to the fetus.
To some extent, therefore, this distribution pathway would be expected after inhalation exposure (Sikov
1987; Sikov and Kelman 1989; Stather et al. 1992). In baboons that received a single intravenous
injection of americium citrate during the 5th month of pregnancy, approximately 0.4% of the activity was
transferred to the fetus within 7 days post administration (Paquet et al. 1998). The fetal:maternal whole-
body 241Am concentration ratio was approximately 0.1 and the tissue distribution in the fetus was similar
to that observed in adult animals, with the skeleton and liver accounting for most of the 241Am activity in
the body. Transfer of injected americium to the fetus has also been quantified in mice and rats that
received intravenous injections of americium citrate during pregnancy (Sikov 1987). In both rats and
mice, the fetal skeleton and liver were the major sites of accumulation of americium (DOE 1986;
Hisamatsu and Takizawa 1983; Sasser et al. 1986; Schoeters et al. 1990; Van Den Heuvel et al. 1992;
Weiss et al. 1980). In rats that received an injection of 241Am citrate on days 18 or 19 of pregnancy, fetal
transfer was approximately 0.01% of the amount of americium administered to the dams. The
fetal:maternal 241Am concentration ratio in rats was approximately 0.02 (Hisamatsu and Takizawa 1983).
In mice that received an injection of 243Am citrate (0.01 µCi/mouse) on day 16 of pregnancy, fetal transfer
was approximately 0.04% of the administered maternal amount per gram of fetus; the ratio of 243Am
activity (µCi/g) in fetal tissue:maternal tissue exclusive of fetuses at the time of dissection was
0.029 (Weiss et al. 1980)
Information on the distribution of absorbed americium to mammary milk in humans is not available.
Numerous studies in animals have shown that transfer to milk occurs and that neonates can be exposed to
americium during lactation. These studies include experiments in which the animals were exposed by
intravenous injection or oral administration of americium; however, the implications are relevant to any
route of exposure, including inhalation. In rats that received an intravenous injection of americium citrate
during lactation, approximately 0.1% of the injected activity was transferred to the nursing pups (Sasser et
al. 1986). Oral and intravenous exposure to americium has resulted in the transfer of americium to
mammary milk of cows, goats, and sheep (McClellan et al. 1962; Sutton et al. 1979). In a study of sheep
that received americium chloride intravenously, the concentration of americium in mammary milk was 2–
3 times that of maternal plasma (McClellan et al. 1962).
AMERICIUM 49
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Although it has been demonstrated that americium can be absorbed through the gastrointestinal tract (see
Section 3.4.1.2), the systemic distribution by the oral exposure route has been moderately characterized
(ICRP, 1986, 1994a). However, it is reasonable to suggest that the distribution of americium absorbed
into the systemic circulation from the gastrointestinal tract would be similar to that absorbed after
inhalation (see Section 3.4.2.1). Studies in experimental animals support this; the major sites of
americium accumulation after ingestion of americium are the skeleton and liver. In pigs ingesting
americium citrate once, the distribution of the americium body burden 8 hours post ingestion, when the
highest total body burdens were observed, was as follows: bone, 56%; liver, 29%, and muscle, 5% (Eisele
et al. 1987). The skeleton and liver accounted for 40% (range, 8–67%) and 29% (range, 7–30%) of the
body burden of 241Am, respectively, 7 days following a single gavage administration of americium citrate
or nitrate to rats (Sullivan et al. 1985, 1986). Although it is possible that americium absorbed from the
gastrointestinal tract might be taken up preferentially by the liver because of the hepatic portal blood
flow, there is no evidence that a first pass effect substantially alters the overall tissue distribution of
absorbed americium. For example, in marmosets that received an intravenous injection of americium
citrate, the liver accounted for 27% of the total body burden of americium (excluding the gastrointestinal
tract); whereas after a single gavage administration of americium in potato powder, the liver accounted
for 31% of the body burden (oral:intravenous ratio of 1.14) (Ham et al. 1994). A similar comparison
made in hamsters resulted in an oral:intravenous ratio for the fractional liver burden of 0.9 (Stather et al.
1979a), and comparisons made in guinea pigs and rats resulted in ratios <1 (Bomford and Harrison 1986;
David and Harrison 1984; Harrison et al. 1994).
The tissue distribution of americium that is absorbed across the skin would be expected to be similar to
that from other routes. Evidence for this is provided from an accident in which a worker received facial
wounds from projectile debris and nitric acid during an explosion of a vessel containing 241Am
(McMurray 1983; Toohey and Kathren 1995). The subject also inhaled 241Am released to the air as dust
and nitric acid aerosols, which was evident from external chest measurements of radioactivity (Palmer et
al. 1983). However, since the peak tissue burdens (lung, liver, and bone) of 241Am, measured 3 days after
the accident, were collectively only 0.08 mCi, whereas the 5-year cumulative excretion of 241Am was
approximately 1 mCi, it is almost certain that the source of most of the absorbed 241Am was the skin
AMERICIUM 50
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
and/or skin wounds. The bone:liver ratio of 241Am 3 days after the exposure was approximately 3, and
was 17–23 at autopsy 11 years after the accident. This suggests that bone and liver would be the major
sites of accumulation of americium absorbed from the skin, as is the case for americium that is absorbed
by other routes. The bone:liver ratio at 3 days was probably strongly affected by the aggressive DTPA
therapy being employed at that time, since americium can be more easily removed from soft tissue
deposition sites than from bone. Autopsy results (Toohey and Kathren 1995) were used to refine the
estimates of organ burdens and doses and to facilitate a comparison with various models. Terminal
burdens and tissue doses were estimated for the skeleton (490±40 kBq [13±1 µCi as average of six
separate methods], 18 Gy [1,800 rad]), bone surface (490±40 kBq [13±1 µCi], 510 Gy [51,000 rad]), liver
(28 kBq [0.8 µCi], 8.1 Gy [810 rad]), lung (1.9 kBq [0.05 µCi], 1.6 Gy [160 rad]), and muscle (13.5 kBq
[0.36 µCi], 28 Gy [2,800 rad]). These USTUR measurements indicate that the long-term 241Am skeletal
burden was 95% of the total in skeleton plus liver. This compared favorably with estimates using newer
models (ICRP 1993; Leggett 1992), but less so when based on earlier models (ICRP 1979; ICRP 1986).
Another finding was that muscle was a major repository, based on the total radiation dose it received
being larger than that of the liver, whose terminal burden was actually twice as large.
Various cases have been reported of internal exposure to americium resulting from skin punctures with
materials also containing plutonium. Information on the distribution of americium in these cases has been
derived from the analysis of autopsy tissues. In most cases, the largest fraction of the 241Am activity
measured in the body was associated with tissues near the puncture wound. In one case, 18 years after a
puncture wound to the left hand resulting in the deposition of a splinter of plutonium metal, 80% of the
measured 241Am activity (a product of 241Pu decay) was associated with the left arm axillary lymph nodes
and left hand, 12% was measured in the skeleton, and 1% was measured in the liver (Popplewell and Ham
1989). The large amount of activity associated with the left arm lymph nodes and left hand reflects the
local accumulation of americium near the wound site. However, if such local accumulations are
subtracted from the total body activity, then most of the systemic americium measured after puncture
wound exposures has been associated with the skeleton (80–90%) while liver, muscle, and spleen account
for the remainder (5–10%), with skeletal:liver ratios of approximately 9:1 (Lagerquist et al. 1972b;
McInroy et al. 1989; Popplewell and Ham 1989). These observations are consistent with those made
from autopsy analyses after inhalation exposures (McInroy et al. 1989).
AMERICIUM 51
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
A large degree of variation is apparent in retention rates for americium in the liver among various animal
species (Durbin 1973), as indicated by measured or estimated liver clearance half-times of approximately
5–16 days in rats, 152 days in baboons, 1–10 years in dogs, and 10 years in Chinese hamsters. A liver
clearance half-time of 2 years has been estimated for humans (Griffith et al. 1983). Refer to Section 3.5.1
for information regarding toxicokinetic mechanisms that may play a role in interspecies differences in
liver retention of americium.
3.4.3 Metabolism
The metabolism of americium involves binding interactions with proteins and probably complex
formation with various inorganic anions, such as carbonate and phosphate, and carboxylic acids, such as
citrate and lactate (Durbin 1973; Taylor 1973; Webb et al. 1998). These types of interactions would be
expected for all routes of exposure.
3.4.4 Elimination and Excretion
Americium deposited in the nasopharyngeal or tracheal-bronchial regions of the respiratory tract will
undergo extensive mucociliary transport to the esophagus with subsequent ingestion and fecal excretion.
Evidence for this in humans is provided by cases of accidental inhalation exposure of americium oxides in
which a substantial fraction (>50%) of the estimated initially deposited activity was found to be excreted
in feces during the first days to weeks after the exposure (Edvardsson and Lindgren 1976; Newton et al.
1983; Sanders 1974). Once absorbed from the lung, americium is excreted in feces and urine. The
relative contribution of each in humans is difficult to assess from existing data because most data are
derived from accidental exposures, after which the victims were subjected to chelation therapy, which
would have increased the urinary excretion of americium. Following an accidental inhalation exposure in
which approximately 1.22 µCi (45.1 kBq) of 244Cm and 241Am (in the form of mixed oxides) were
deposited in the respiratory tract, the cumulative 1-year excretion of radioactivity was approximately
1,174 nCi (43.4 kBq, 96% of the deposited activity) in feces and 5.4 nCi (200 Bq, 0.4% of the deposited
activity) in urine (Sanders 1974). The equivalent fractions of 241Am, based on measurements of the
244
Cm:241Am ratios in feces and urine, were similar, 96% in feces and 0.4% urine. The subject received
AMERICIUM 52
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
14 treatments with the chelating agent, DTPA, which may have effectively increased rates of excretion of
americium.
Studies of excretion in animals after inhalation exposures also indicate a relatively large contribution of
fecal excretion to the total elimination of americium that deposits in the respiratory tract. In dogs that
inhaled an aerosol of AmO2, fecal and urinary excretion of americium during the first 10 days after
exposure were 30 and 0.7% of the initial body burden, respectively, and were 50 and 6% of the initial
burden, respectively, by 810 days postexposure (Craig et al. 1979). Mechanical clearance from the upper
respiratory tract to the gastrointestinal tract would be expected to make a substantial contribution to fecal
excretion during the first few weeks after exposure and may continue for longer periods. The observation
that fecal excretion continued to be the main route of excretion months after the exposure suggests two
possibilities: (1) mechanical clearance from the lower respiratory tract (e.g., lung) continues to contribute
to fecal excretion for longer periods of time (ICRP 1994b), and (2) absorbed americium is excreted in
feces, suggesting a role for biliary excretion (Durbin 1973).
Lung deposition patterns and the relative contributions of the fecal and urinary pathways vary with the
aerosol particle size. Evidence for this is provided by a study in which dogs inhaled AmO2 aerosols
having different size distributions. As the particle size AMAD increased from 0.8 µm (±1.2 GSD) to
3.5 µm (±1.06 GSD), the urine:fecal ratios of cumulative excretion (from days 8 to 730 after the
exposure) decreased from 4 to 0.3 (Mewhinney et al. 1982). These observations are consistent with an
effect of particle size on deposition patterns in the respiratory tract. Larger particles will be deposited in
the tracheo-bronchial airways and will be subjected to mucociliary transport to the esophagus where they
can enter the gastrointestinal tract. Therefore, the fraction of the deposited activity transferred to the
gastrointestinal tract and excreted in the feces would be expected to increase with increasing mean
particle size of the inhaled aerosol. The general trend of increased fecal excretion with increasing particle
size would be expected to occur in humans, although the exact relationship between particle size and
deposition patterns will vary across species because of species differences in airway geometry, breathing
patterns, and air flow rates in the respiratory tract (see Section 3.4.5).
Once absorbed into the general circulation, regardless of the route of exposure, americium is excreted in
both feces and urine. Evidence for this derives from a human accident case study and from experiments
in animals that received an intravenous or intramuscular injection of americium (see Section 3.4.4.4).
AMERICIUM 53
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Urinary excretion of ingested americium has been measured in humans who ingested shellfish (molluscs)
that had assimilated americium from their aquatic environment. In eight adult subjects (six males and
two females) who ingested molluscs (winkles) containing 241Am (activity range 10–25 Bq, 0.27–0.68 nCi,
0.083–0.21 ng), the mean cumulative urinary excretion during the 7 days after ingestion was
approximately 0.0005% and the estimated fraction of the absorbed activity excreted in the urine was
0.07% (Hunt et al. 1990). In a similar study of six subjects (five males and one female) who ingested
cockles collected from Ravenglass, Cumbria (activity range of 15–17 Bq, 0.41–0.46 nCi, 0.13–0.14 ng),
the mean cumulative urinary excretion during the 7 days post ingestion was approximately 0.0009% of
the ingested americium and the estimated portion of the absorbed activity excreted in the urine was 0.08%
(Hunt 1998). Three of these subjects had participated in the earlier study with winkles (Hunt et al. 1990);
urinary excretion during 3 days prior to ingestion of the cockles was used to correct for internalized
americium from prior exposures. Measured 241Am activity in the cockles was indistinguishable from the
cumulative activity measured in fecal samples collected from the subjects during the 7 days post
ingestion.
Additional information on the excretion of ingested americium derives from an accident in which a
worker ingested a ceramic particle containing 241AmO2 (Smith et al. 1983). Five days after the accident,
the particle, containing approximately 2.85 µCi (105 kBq) of 241Am (0.88 µg Am), was excreted in the
feces. Previous fecal samples and one subsequent fecal sample collected the day after the particle was
excreted had essentially no 241Am activity. During the first 8 days after the particle was ingested,
approximately 4 pCi (0.15 Bq, 0.00007% of the estimated activity) was excreted in the urine.
Studies in rats and guinea pigs have shown that urinary excretion is the major route of excretion of
americium absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract during the first week after exposure in these species.
In rats that were administered americium nitrate or citrate by gavage, 30–80% of the estimated absorbed
activity was excreted in urine during the first 7 days post administration (Sullivan 1980a; Sullivan et al.
1985). The wide range may reflect the uncertainty in the estimates of the relatively low fraction
absorption of the americium. The fraction of the absorbed activity that was excreted in urine was lower in
iron-deficient rats (35%) than in iron-replete rats (78%) (Sullivan et al. 1985). In guinea pigs, 35–50% of
the absorbed activity was excreted in urine during the first 7 days after a single gavage dose of americium
nitrate (Sullivan 1980a).
AMERICIUM 54
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
both feces and urine. Evidence for this derives from human accident case study and from experiments in
animals that received an intravenous or intramuscular injection of americium (see Section 3.4.4.4).
Information on the excretion of americium after dermal exposure in humans or animals is extremely
limited. Some qualitative information is available from an accidental exposure in which a worker
received facial wounds from projectile debris and nitric acid during an explosion of a vessel containing
241
Am (McMurray 1983). The subject also inhaled 241Am released to the air as dust and nitric acid
aerosols, which was evident from external chest measurements of internal radioactivity; thus, excretion
estimates reflect combined inhalation, dermal, and wound penetration exposures (Palmer et al. 1983).
Measurements of cumulative fecal and urinary excretion of 241Am during the first years after the accident,
and periodic measurements made from day 10 to 11 years post accident, indicated a fecal:urine excretion
ratio of approximately 0.2–0.3, although the ratio was approximately 1 on day 3 post accident
(Breitenstein and Palmer 1989; Robinson et al. 1983). The ratio was almost certainly affected, however,
by initial chelation with Ca-DTPA, followed by daily intravenous therapy with the chelating agent,
Zn-DTPA; these treatments would have increased the urinary excretion of americium (Breitenstein and
Palmer 1989). The above not withstanding, the observations made on this subject demonstrate that fecal
excretion was an important pathway of excretion in this subject long after mechanical clearance of
americium from the respiratory tract would have been complete. This is consistent with observations
made in nonhuman primates that show that americium is excreted into bile (see Section 3.4.4.4).
However, the extent to which the biliary excretion pathway in humans might resemble that of nonhuman
primates is not known.
both feces and urine. Evidence for this derives from experiments in animals that received an intravenous
or intramuscular injection of americium (see Section 3.4.4.4).
Measurements of fecal and urinary excretion of americium after an inhaled or ingested dose do not
provide all of the information needed to assess the relative importance of either route in the excretion of
AMERICIUM 55
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
absorbed americium. This is because inhaled americium is subject to mucociliary transport and ingestion,
and only a small fraction of ingested americium is absorbed. Studies in which animals were parenterally
administered americium have provided quantitative information on the routes of excretion of absorbed
americium. The relative contribution of the fecal and urinary pathways appears to vary with species and
time post administration; however, in general, the fecal pathway predominates. In monkeys, urinary
excretion of radioactivity following intravenously administered americium citrate was the major route of
excretion only during the first few weeks post administration, at which time, cumulative urinary and fecal
excretion accounted for 10 and 3% of the administered activity, respectively (Durbin 1973). Long-term
cumulative excretion (months to years), however, was primarily in feces, with 37% of the administered
activity excreted in feces and 20% excreted in urine. A similar pattern of urinary and fecal excretion over
time was evident in baboons (Cohen and Wrenn 1973; Durbin 1973; Guilmette et al. 1980). Similarly, in
rats, dogs, and hamsters, urinary excretion of radioactivity following intramuscularly or intravenously
injected americium citrate or chloride was the major route of excretion only during the first few days to
weeks, with a fecal:urine excretion ratio of approximately 0.11–0.15; however, over a 1–2-year period,
the fecal:urine ratio was approximately 5–9 (Durbin 1973; Stather et al. 1979a).
The large contribution of the fecal route to excretion of absorbed americium appears to be the result of
excretion of americium into the bile. In monkeys that received an intravenous injection of americium
citrate, 241Am was detected in gall bladder bile and its concentration increased as the relative rate of fecal
excretion increased over time post injection (Durbin 1973). Durbin (1973) estimated that at bile
production rates similar to humans, biliary excretion could have accounted for most, if not all, of the fecal
excretion of americium observed in the monkeys.
3.4.5 Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic (PBPK)/Pharmacodynamic (PD) Models
Physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models use mathematical descriptions of the uptake and
disposition of chemical substances to quantitatively describe the relationships among critical biological
processes (Krishnan et al. 1994). PBPK models are also called biologically based tissue dosimetry
models. PBPK models are increasingly used in risk assessments, primarily to predict the concentration of
potentially toxic moieties of a chemical that will be delivered to any given target tissue following various
combinations of route, dose level, and test species (Clewell and Andersen 1985). Physiologically based
pharmacodynamic (PBPD) models use mathematical descriptions of the dose-response function to
quantitatively describe the relationship between target tissue dose and toxic end points.
AMERICIUM 56
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
PBPK/PD models refine our understanding of complex quantitative dose behaviors by helping to
delineate and characterize the relationships between: (1) the external/exposure concentration and target
tissue dose of the toxic moiety, and (2) the target tissue dose and observed responses (Andersen et al.
1987; Andersen and Krishnan 1994). These models are biologically and mechanistically based and can
be used to extrapolate the pharmacokinetic behavior of chemical substances from high to low dose, from
route to route, between species, and between subpopulations within a species. The biological basis of
PBPK models results in more meaningful extrapolations than those generated with the more conventional
use of uncertainty factors.
The PBPK model for a chemical substance is developed in four interconnected steps: (1) model
representation, (2) model parametrization, (3) model simulation, and (4) model validation (Krishnan and
Andersen 1994). In the early 1990s, validated PBPK models were developed for a number of
toxicologically important chemical substances, both volatile and nonvolatile (Krishnan and Andersen
1994; Leung 1993). PBPK models for a particular substance require estimates of the chemical substance-
specific physicochemical parameters, and species-specific physiological and biological parameters. The
numerical estimates of these model parameters are incorporated within a set of differential and algebraic
equations that describe the pharmacokinetic processes. Solving these differential and algebraic equations
provides the predictions of tissue dose. Computers then provide process simulations based on these
solutions.
The structure and mathematical expressions used in PBPK models significantly simplify the true
complexities of biological systems. If the uptake and disposition of the chemical substance(s) is
adequately described, however, this simplification is desirable because data are often unavailable for
many biological processes. A simplified scheme reduces the magnitude of cumulative uncertainty. The
adequacy of the model is, therefore, of great importance, and model validation is essential to the use of
PBPK models in risk assessment.
PBPK models improve the pharmacokinetic extrapolations used in risk assessments that identify the
maximal (i.e., the safe) levels for human exposure to chemical substances (Andersen and Krishnan 1994).
Similar models have been developed for radionuclides. These models provide a scientifically sound
means to predict the target tissue dose of chemicals in humans who are exposed to environmental levels
(for example, levels that might occur at hazardous waste sites) based on the results of studies where doses
were higher or were administered in different species. Figure 3-1 shows a conceptualized representation
AMERICIUM 57
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Figure 3-1. Conceptual Representation of a Physiologically Based

Pharmacokinetic (PBPK) Model for a Hypothetical
Chemical Substance
In h a le d c h e m ic a l E x h a le d c h e m ic a l
In g e s tio n
Lungs
Liv e r
GI
V max Km T ra c t A
V R
E Fat T
N E
O R
U S lo w ly I
S p e rfu s e d A
tis s u e s L
R ic h ly
B p e rfu s e d
L tis s u e s B
O L
O Feces O
D O
K id n e y D
U r in e
S k in
C h e m ic a ls in a ir
c o n ta c tin g s k in
AMERICIUM 58
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
of a PBPK model. Figures 3-2 through 3-8 show models for radionuclides in general or specifically for
americium.
For radionuclides, the PBPK model is replaced with a set of sophisticated physiologically based
biokinetic (PBBK) models for inhalation, ingestion, and submersion. These were developed to
accomplish virtually the same end as the PBPK models above, while integrating additional parameters
(for radioactive decay, particle and photon transport, and compound-specific factors). Goals are to
facilitate interpreting chest monitoring and bioassay data, assessing risk, and calculating radiation doses
to a variety of tissues throughout the body. The standard for these models has been set by the ICRP and
their models receive international support and acceptance. ICRP periodically considers newer science in
a type of weight of evidence approach toward improving the state of knowledge and reducing
uncertainties associated with applying the model to any given radionuclide. ICRP publications also allow
for the use of situation- and individual-specific data to reduce the overall uncertainty in the results. Even
though there may be conflicting data for some parameters, such as absorption factors, one can use
conservative values and still reach conclusions on whether the dose is below recommended limits. One of
the strengths of the ICRP model is that it permits the use of experimentally determined material-specific
absorption parameter values rather than requiring the use of those provided for default types. If the
material of interest does not have absorption parameter values that correspond to those in the model (e.g.,
Type F, M, or S), the difference can have a profound effect on the assessment of intake and dose from
bioassay measurements. This has been discussed in National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB)
published reports on uranium (NRPB 2002).
The ICRP (1994b, 1995) developed a Human Respiratory Tract Model for Radiological Protection, which
contains respiratory tract deposition and clearance compartmental models for inhalation exposure that
may be applied to particulate aerosols of americium compounds. The ICRP (1986, 1989) has a biokinetic
model for human oral exposure that applies to americium. The National Council on Radiation Protection
and Measurements (NCRP) has also developed a respiratory tract model for inhaled radionuclides (NCRP
1997). At this time, the NCRP recommends the use of the ICRP model for calculating exposures for
radiation workers and the general public. Readers interested in this topic are referred to NCRP Report
No. 125; Deposition, Retention and Dosimetry of Inhaled Radioactive Substances (NCRP 1997). In the
appendix to the report, NCRP provides the animal testing clearance data and equations fitting the data that
supported the development of the human mode for americium.
AMERICIUM 59
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Human Respiratory Tract Model for Radiological Protection (ICRP 1994b)
Deposition. The ICRP (1994b) has developed a deposition model for behavior of aerosols and vapors in
the respiratory tract. It was developed to estimate the fractions of substances in breathing air that are
deposited in each anatomical region of the respiratory tract. ICRP (1994b) provides inhalation dose
coefficients that can be used to estimate radiation doses to organs and tissues throughout the body based
on a unit intake of radioactive material. The model applies to three levels of particle solubility, a wide
range of particle sizes (approximately 0.0005–100 µm in diameter), and parameter values that can be
adjusted for various segments of the population (e.g., sex, age, and level of physical exertion). This
model also allows one to evaluate the bounds of uncertainty in deposition estimates. Uncertainties arise
from natural biological variability among individuals and the need to interpret some experimental
evidence that remains inconclusive. It is applicable to particulate aerosols containing americium, but was
developed for a wide variety of radionuclides and their chemical forms.
The ICRP deposition model estimates the fraction of inhaled material initially retained in each
compartment (see Figure 3-2). The model was developed with five compartments: (1) the anterior nasal
passages (ET1); (2) all other extrathoracic airways (ET2) (posterior nasal passages, the naso- and
oropharynx, and the larynx); (3) the bronchi (BB); (4) the bronchioles (bb); and (5) the alveolar
interstitium (AI). Particles deposited in each of the regions may be removed and redistributed either
upward into the respiratory tract or to the lymphatic system and blood by different particle removal
mechanisms.
For extrathoracic deposition of particles, the model uses measured airway diameters and experimental
data, where deposition is related to particle size and airflow parameters, and scales deposition for women
and children from adult male data. Similar to the extrathoracic region, experimental data served as the
basis for lung (bronchi, bronchioles, and alveoli) aerosol transport and deposition. A theoretical model of
gas transport and particle deposition was used to interpret data and to predict deposition for compartments
and subpopulations other than adult males. Table 3-4 provides reference respiratory values for the
general Caucasian population during various intensities of physical exertion.
Respiratory Tract Clearance. This portion of the model identifies the principal clearance pathways
within the respiratory tract. The model was developed to predict the retention of various radioactive
materials. The compartmental model represents particle deposition and time-dependent particle transport
in the respiratory tract (see Figure 3-2) with reference values presented in Table 3-5. This table provides
clearance rates, which are expressed as a fraction per day and also as half-time (Part A), and deposition
AMERICIUM 60
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Figure 3-2. Compartment Model to Represent Particle Deposition and

Time-Dependent Particle Transport in the Respiratory Tract*
Sequestered in Tissue Surface Transport
Anterior
1
Nasal ET1 Environment
Extrathoracic 14 16
Naso-oro- 0.001 100

ET2 GI Tract 15
pharynx LNET ETSEQ 11
Larynx 13 12
0.03 10
0.01
BBSEQ BB2 BB1 Bronchi
9 8 7
0.03 2
0.01 Bronchioles
LNTH bbSEQ bb2 bb1
6 5 4
0.0001 0.001 0.02
0.00002
Al3 Al2 Al1 Alveolar
10 3 2 1 Interstitium
Thoracic
*Compartment numbers shown in lower right corners are used to define clearance pathways. The clearance rates,
half-lives, and fractions by compartment, as well as the compartment abbreviations are presented in Table 3-5.
Source: ICRP 1994b

AMERICIUM 61
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Table 3-4. Reference Respiratory Values for a General Caucasian Population at

Different Levels of Activitya
Breathing 10 years 15 years Adult

parameters: 3 months1 year 5 years Male Female Both Male Female Male Female
Resting (sleeping); Maximal workload 8%
Breathing parameters:
VT(L) 0.04 0.07 0.17 — — 0.3 0.500 0.417 0.625 0.444
3 -1
B(m h ) 0.09 0.15 0.24 — — 0.31 0.42 0.35 0.45 0.32
fR(min-1) 38 34 23 — — 17 14 14 12 12
Sitting awake; Maximal workload 12%

VT(L) N/A 0.1 0.21 — — 0.33 0.533 0.417 0.750 0.464
B(m3h-1) N/A 0.22 0.32 — — 0.38 0.48 0.40 0.54 0.39
fR(min-1) N/A 36 25 — — 19 15 16 12 14
Light exercise; Maximal workload 32%

VT(L) 0.07 0.13 0.24 — — 0.58 1.0 0.903 1.25 0.992
3 -1
B(m h ) 0.19 0.35 0.57 — — 1.12 1.38 1.30 1.5 1.25
-1
fR(min ) 48 46 39 — — 32 23 24 20 21
Heavy exercise; Maximal workload 64%

VT(L) N/A N/A N/A 0.841 0.667 — 1.352 1.127 1.923 1.364
3 -1
B(m h ) N/A N/A N/A 2.22 1.84 — 2.92 2.57 3.0 2.7
fR(min-1) N/A N/A N/A 44 46 — 36 38 26 33
a
See Annex B (ICRP 1994b) for data from which these reference values were derived.
B = ventilation rate; fR = respiration frequency; h = hour; L = liter; m = meter; min = minute; N/A = not applicable;
VT = tidal volume
AMERICIUM 62
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Table 3-5. Reference Values of Parameters for the Compartment Model to

Represent Time-dependent Particle Transport from the
Human Respiratory Tract
Part A
Clearance rates for insoluble particles
Pathway From To Rate (d-1) Half-timea
m1,4 AI1 bb1 0.02 35 days

m2,4 AI2 bb1 0.001 700 days
m3,4 AI3 bb1 1x10-4 7,000 days
m3,10 AI3 LNTH 2x10-5 No data
m4,7 bb1 BB1 2 8 hours
m5,7 bb2 BB1 0.03 23 days
m6,10 bbseq LNTH 0.01 70 days
m7,11 BB1 ET2 10 100 minutes
m8,11 BB2 ET2 0.03 23 days
m9,10 BBseq LNTH 0.01 70 days
m11,15 ET2 GI tract 100 10 minutes
m12,13 ETseq LNET 0.001 700 days
m14,16 ET1 Environment 1 17 hours
See next page for Part B

AMERICIUM 63
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Table 3-5. Reference Values of Parameters for the Compartment Model to

Represent Time-dependent Particle Transport from the Human Respiratory
Tract (continued)
Part B
Partition of deposit in each region between compartmentsb
Fraction of deposit in region

Region or deposition site Compartment assigned to compartmentc
ET2 ET2 0.9995

ETseq 0.0005
BB BB1 0.993-fs
BB2 fs
BBseq 0.007
Bb bb1 0.993-fs
bb2 fs
bbseq 0.007
AI AI1 0.3
AI2 0.6
AI3 0.1
a
The half-times are approximate since the reference values are specified for the particle transport rates and are rounded in units
-1
of days . A half-time is not given for the transport rate from Al3 to LNTH, since this rate was chosen to direct the required amount
of material to the lymph nodes. The clearance half-time of compartment Al3 is determined by the sum of the clearance rates.
b
See paragraph 181, Chapter 5 (ICRP 1994b) for default values used for relating fs to dae.
c
It is assumed that fs is size-dependent. For modeling purposes, fs is taken to be:
f s = 0.5 for d ae ≤ 2.5 ρ / χ µm and

ρ / χ − 2 .5)
f s = 0.5e 0.63( dae for d ae > 2.5 ρ / χ µm
where
fs = fraction subject to slow clearance
dae = aerodynamic particle diameter/(µm)
3
ρ = particle density (g/cm )
χ = particle shape factor
AI = alveolar-interstitial region; BB = bronchial region; bb = bronchiolar region; BBseq = compartment representing prolonged
retention in airway walls of small fraction of particles deposited in the bronchial region; bbseq = compartment representing
prolonged retention in airway walls of small fraction of particles deposited in the bronchiolar region; ET = extrathoracic region;
ETseq = compartment representing prolonged retention in airway tissue of small fraction of particles deposited in the nasal
passages; GI = gastrointestinal; LNET = lymphatics and lymph nodes that drain the extrathoracic region; LNTH = lymphatics and
lymph nodes that drain the thoracic region
Source: ICRP 1994b

AMERICIUM 64
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
fractions (Part B) for each compartment for insoluble particles. ICRP (1994b) also developed modifying
factors for some of the parameters, such as age, smoking, and disease status. Parameters of the clearance
model are based on human evidence for the most part, although particle retention in airway walls is based
on experimental data from animal experiments.
The clearance of particles from the respiratory tract is a dynamic process. The rate of clearance generally
changes with time from each region and by each route. Following deposition of large numbers of
particles (acute exposure), the mass flow of material between compartments decreases as particles are
cleared from the various regions. Physical and chemical properties of deposited material determine the
rate of dissolution, and as particles dissolve, absorption rates of material between the compartments tend
to change. By creating a model with compartments of different clearance rates within each region (e.g.,
BB1, BB2, BBseq), the ICRP model overcomes problems associated with time-dependent functions.
Each compartment clears to other compartments by constant rates for each pathway.
Particle transport from all regions is toward both the lymph nodes and the pharynx, and a majority of
deposited particles, if sufficiently large, end up being swallowed. In the front part of the nasal passages
(ET1), nose blowing, sneezing, and wiping remove most of the deposited particles. Particles remain here
for about a day. For particles with AMADs a few micrometers or greater, the ET1 compartment is
probably the largest deposition site. A majority of particles deposited at the back of the nasal passages
and in the larynx (ET2) are removed quickly by the fluids that cover the airways. In this region, particle
clearance is completed within 15 minutes.
Ciliary action removes deposited particles from both the bronchi and the bronchioles. Though it is
generally thought that mucociliary action rapidly transports most particles deposited here toward the
pharynx, a fraction of these particles is cleared more slowly. Evidence for this is found in human studies.
For humans, retention of particles deposited in the lungs (BB and bb) is apparently biphasic. The “slow”
action of the cilia may remove as much as half of the bronchi- and bronchiole-deposited particles. In
human bronchi and bronchiole regions, mucus moves more slowly when it is closer to the alveoli. For the
faster compartment, it has been estimated that it takes about 2 days for particles to travel from the
bronchioles to the bronchi and 10 days from the bronchi to the pharynx. The second (slower)
compartment is assumed to have approximately equal fractions deposited between BB2 and bb2, with
both fractions having clearance half-times estimated at 20 days. Particle size is a primary determinant of
the fraction deposited in this slow thoracic compartment. A small fraction of particles deposited in the
BB and bb regions is retained in the airway wall for even longer periods (BBseq and bbseq).
AMERICIUM 65
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
If particles reach and become deposited in the alveoli, they tend to stay imbedded in the fluid on the
alveolar surface or move into the lymph nodes. The one mechanism by which particles are physically
resuspended and removed from the AI region is coughing. For modeling purposes, the AI region is
divided into three subcompartments to represent different clearance rates, all of which are slow.
In the AI region, human lung clearance has been measured. The ICRP model uses three half-times to
represent clearance: about 30, 60, and 10% of the particles have half times that approximate 30, 700, and
7,000 days, respectively. Over time, AI particle transport falls, and some compounds have been found in
lungs 10–50 years after exposure.
Absorption into Blood. The ICRP model assumes that absorption into blood occurs at equivalent rates in
all parts of the respiratory tract, except in the anterior nasal passages (ET1), where no absorption occurs.
It is essentially a 2-stage process, as shown in Figure 3-3. First, there is a dissociation (dissolution) of
particles, and then the dissolved molecules or ions diffuse across capillary walls and are taken up by the
blood. Immediately following dissolution, rapid absorption is observed. For some elements, rapid
absorption does not occur because of binding to respiratory-tract components. In the absence of specific
data for specific compounds, the model uses the following default absorption rate values for those specific
compounds that are classified as Types F (fast), M (medium), S (slow), and V (instantaneous):
• For Type F, there is rapid 100% absorption within 10 minutes of the material deposited in the BB,
bb, and AI regions and 50% absorption of material deposited in ET2. Thus, for nose breathing,
there is rapid absorption of approximately 25% of the deposit in ET; for mouth breathing, the
value is 50%.
• For Type M, about 70% of the deposit in AI eventually reaches the blood. There is rapid
absorption of about 10% of the deposit in BB and bb and 5% of material deposited in ET2. Thus,
there is rapid absorption of approximately 2.5% of the deposit in ET for nose breathing and 5%
for mouth breathing.
• For Type S, 0.1% is absorbed within 10 minutes and 99.9% is absorbed within 7,000 days, so
there is little absorption from ET, BB, or bb, and about 10% of the deposit in AI eventually
reaches the blood.
• For Type V, complete absorption (100%) is considered to occur instantaneously (which is not
relevant to americium compounds).
ICRP (1995) considers the experimental data on americium nitrate, chloride, citrate, and hydroxide to
support classification of these compounds as either Type F or M. Americium oxides are classified as
AMERICIUM 66
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Figure 3-3. The Human Respiratory Tract Model: Absorption into Blood
Particulate Material
Dissolution
Dissociated Material
Bound Material
Uptake
Blood
Source: ICRP 1994b

AMERICIUM 67
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Type M. ICRP (1995) recommends assigning all americium aerosols to Type M in the absence of
specific information supporting an alternative classification. Substance specific values should be used
where feasible to reduce uncertainties in results.
ICRP (1989) Americium Biokinetic Model
Description of the model.
ICRP (1989) developed a compartmental model of the kinetics of ingested americium in humans that is
applicable to infants, children, adolescents, and adults. The model is a modification and expansion of a
similar model for plutonium, described by Leggett et al. (1984, 1985). The fraction of ingested
americium that is absorbed (uptake to blood) is assumed to vary with age and have values of 0.01 in
infants up to 12 months of age and 0.001 from 12 months of age through adulthood (ICRP 1986).
Absorbed americium enters the blood plasma where it distributes to the skeleton, liver, and other tissues
(Figure 3-4). Excretion pathways included in the model are plasma to urine and liver to feces. Transfer
rate coefficients between compartments are age-specific and, depending on the specific coefficient, values
can change at ages 3 months, 1 year, 5 years, 10 years, 15 years, and adult (>15 years). The model
assumes that, in adults, 50% of the americium that enters the body and is not excreted is transferred to the
liver and 30% is transferred to the skeleton. In newborns, 70% is assumed to be transferred to the
skeleton and 10% to the liver. Skeletal deposition is assumed to distribute into two pools: 50% goes to
the trabecular bone surface and 50% goes to the cortical bone surface. A first-order rate coefficient for
elimination of americium from liver to plasma is assumed to be 0.0019 day-1 (half-time, 365 days).
Bone is divided into trabecular and cortical components, with each further divided into surface bone, bone
volume, and bone cavity (marrow compartment). Deposition of americium is assumed to occur from
plasma directly to bone surfaces, whereas elimination from bone occurs by transfer from the bone surface
or volume to the marrow cavity, and then from the marrow cavity to plasma (Figure 3-4). Transfers of
americium within the cortical or trabecular bone compartments are modeled based on assumptions about
rates of bone formation and resorption, which are assumed to be vary with age, but are equal within a
given age group (Leggett et al. 1982). Movement of americium to the marrow compartment is
determined by the bone resorption rate, whereas movement from the bone surface to the bone volume is
assumed to occur by burial of surface deposits with new bone and is determined by the bone formation
rate. During growth, bone formation and resorption are assumed to occur at different sites within bone;
therefore, the rate of removal of americium from the bone surface is approximated by the sum of the bone
resorption rate (represented in the model by the movement of americium to the marrow compartment) and
AMERICIUM 68
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Figure 3-4. ICRP (1989) Model of Americium Biokinetics
Other
Soft
Tissue
SKELETON
LIVER
Cortical Cortical Cortical Reticulo-

Volume Surface Marrow Endothelial
Cells
B H
Trabecular Trabecular Trabecular L E
Subcellular
Volume Surface Marrow O P
Organelles
O A
D T
O
C
Urinary Cytoplasm Y
Tract and T
Tissue Membranes E
S
Urine Feces
AMERICIUM 69
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
the rate of bone formation, which results in burial of surface deposits (represented by movement of
americium from the bone surface to bone volume). In adults, the possibility of resorption and formation
of bone occurring at the same site is assumed; therefore, only a portion of the bone formation rate results
in burial of surface deposits and movement of americium from the bone surface to the bone volume.
Validation of the model.
The extent to which the ICRP model has been validated is not described in ICRP (1989).
Risk assessment.
The model has been used to establish the radiation dose (Sv) per unit of ingested 241Am activity (Bq) for
ages 3 months to 70 years (ICRP 1989).
Target tissues.
The model is designed to calculate the 241Am intake that would produce the maximum allowed
occupational radiation dose to all major organs, including the bone surfaces, bone marrow, and liver, but
the conversion factors for other tissues and organs are published in the same tables.
Species extrapolation.The model is based on both human and animal data. It is intended, however, for
applications to human dosimetry. Applications to other species would require consideration of species-
specific adjustments in model parameters.
Interroute extrapolation.
The model is designed to simulate oral exposures to americium. It can be applied to any other route of
exposure for which the transfer rate to blood is available.
Leggett (1992) Americium Biokinetic Model
Leggett (1992) proposed a model for the retention and excretion of americium in humans. The model is a
modification of a similar model for plutonium (Leggett et al. 1984, 1985) with the following changes
(Figure 3-5): (1) the liver is represented as a single pool rather than having distinct pools for hepatocytes
AMERICIUM 70
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Figure 3-5. Leggett (1992) Model of Americium Biokinetics
MASSIVE
Rapid Intermed Slow
SOFT
Turnover Turnover Turnover
TISSUES
SKELETON
Cortical Cortical Cortical

Volume Surface Cavities Gonads
B
Trabecular Trabecular Trabecular L Liver
Volume Surface Marrow
O
O
D
KIDNEY
GI Tract
Other Contents
Kidney
Tissue
Urinary
Urinary
Urine Bladder Feces
Path
Contents
AMERICIUM 71
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
and other cell types; (2) the gonads are represented by a separate compartment; (3) a kidney compartment
is included in place of the compartment for urinary tract tissue; (4) a compartment representing the
urinary bladder contents is included; and (5) other soft tissues are represented as having slow,
intermediate, and fast turnover pools.
The fraction of ingested americium that is absorbed (uptake from the small intestine to blood) is
represented by age-specific functions that yield the following values: decreasing from 0.05 to
0.0005 during the first 12 months, 0.0005 at 1–15 years of age, decreasing from 0.0005 to 0.0002 at 15–
18 years of age, and 0.0002 from age 18 years through adulthood. The model assumes that, in adults,
62% of the americium that enters the body and is not excreted is transferred to liver and 38% is
transferred to the skeleton (skeleton:liver deposition ratio, 3:5). In newborns, 88% is assumed to be
transferred to the skeleton and 12% to the liver (skeleton:liver deposition ratio, 7:1). The half-time for
elimination of americium from the liver is assumed to be 365 days, although the half-time for elimination
measured externally would be longer and would increase with increasing time after intake, due to
recycling of americium from tissues to blood to tissues.
Predictions based on the model have been compared to observed urinary or fecal excretion of americium
in humans. Model predictions agreed reasonably well with the empirical observations (Leggett 1992).
Risk assessment.
The Leggett (1992) model was developed to predict tissue doses and whole-body dose to people who may
be exposed to americium and for interpretation of bioassay data for americium. The model is considered
an updated version of the ICRP (1989) model for americium, which has been used to establish risk-based
limits of intake of 241Am (ICRP 1989). The Leggett (1992) and ICRP (1989) models predict similar long-
term average doses of americium to the liver and skeleton for an injection exposure and would be
expected to predict similar radiation risks and risk-based intake limits (Leggett 1992). Descriptions of
applications of the Leggett (1992) model in risk assessment have not been reported.
Target tissues.
The model is designed to calculate americium excretion and time courses for americium levels in the
liver, skeleton, and gonads. This output could be used to predict radiation doses to these tissues.
AMERICIUM 72
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Species extrapolation.
The model is designed for applications to human dosimetry and cannot be applied to other species without
modification.
The model is designed to simulate oral, inhalation, and parenteral (e.g., injection) exposures to americium
and cannot be applied to other routes of exposure without modification.
ICRP (1993) Americium Biokinetic Model
ICRP (1993) adopted the model of Leggett (1992) as its systemic biokinetic model for americium with
the following modifications: (1) the Leggett (1992) model addresses changes throughout life in the rate
of bone turnover, whereas the ICRP (1993) model assumes bone turnover rates to remain constant in
adults, and (2) assumptions regarding uptake and retention by gonadal tissues of children are more
cautious in the ICRP (1993) model compared to those used in the Leggett (1992) model.
The extent to which the ICRP model has been validated is not described in ICRP (1993).
Risk assessment.
The model has been used to establish the radiation dose (Sv) per unit of ingested 241Am activity (Bq) for
ages 3 months to 70 years (ICRP 1993).
Target tissues.
The model is designed to calculate the 241Am intake that would produce the maximum allowed
occupational radiation dose to all major organs, including the bone surfaces, bone marrow, and liver, but
the conversion factors for other tissues and organs are published in the same tables.
AMERICIUM 73
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
The model is based on both human and animal data. It is intended, however, for applications to human
dosimetry. Applications to other species would require consideration of species-specific adjustments in
model parameters.
The model is designed to simulate oral exposures to americium. It can be applied to any other route of
exposure for which the transfer rate to blood is available.
USTUR (1994) Americium Biokinetics Model
The USTUR proposed modifications to the ICRP americium model, based on post-mortem americium
measurements in human exposure cases (Kathren 1994). The major modifications are: (1) the initial
deposition fraction is assumed to be skeleton 45%, liver 25%, muscle 20%, and other tissues 10%; and
(2) the half-times for elimination of americium were assumed to be 2.5 years in liver, 10 years in muscle,
50 years in skeleton, and 10 years in other tissues.
Predictions based on the model have been compared to observed post-mortem tissue americium levels in
whole-body and tissue donations to the USTUR. Model predictions agreed reasonably well with the
empirical observations (Kathren 1995; USTUR 1997). They, however, depend heavily on the accuracy of
initial uptake and distribution data that, in certain cases, were difficult to reconstruct due to delays
between times of exposure and initial analysis.
Risk assessment.
The USTUR (Kathren 1994) model was developed to predict tissue doses and whole-body dose to people
who may be exposed to americium. The model has been used to verify annual limits on intake (ALIs) for
241
Am, and yielded similar, but lower limits than those estimated using the ICRP model (1989).
AMERICIUM 74
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Target tissues.
The model is designed to calculate americium excretion and time courses for americium levels in the
liver, skeleton, and gonads. This output could be used to predict radiation doses to these tissues.
The model is designed for application to human dosimetry and does not apply to other species.
The model is designed to simulate oral, inhalation, and parenteral (e.g., injection, wounds) exposures to
americium and cannot be applied to other routes of exposure without modification.
Mewhinney and Griffith (1983) Americium Biokinetics Model
Mewhinney and Griffith (1983) proposed a model for the absorption and tissue distribution of inhaled
americium dioxide in humans. The model is a modification of a model of the beagle dog (Mewhinney
and Griffith (1982) and formed part of the basis for the Leggett (1992) model. The model is similar to
other actinide models (ICRP 1989; Leggett 1992), but has several additional features in the respiratory
tract portion of the model (Figure 3-6) including: (1) dissolution of particles in the respiratory tract is
simulated with rate functions, rather than zero or first-order rate constants, that include various parameters
of particle size and surface area that affect dissolution rate (Mercer 1967); (2) the pulmonary region
includes three pools; a pool of deposited particulate; a pool of dissolved americium which can be rapidly
absorbed into the blood; and a pool of locally bound americium (transformed) which can be absorbed into
blood or mechanically cleared to the tracheobronchial region; and (3) absorption from the pulmonary
region of the respiratory tract includes a pathway for transfer to tracheobroncheal lymph nodes.
Excretion is assumed to be in feces, from either the intestine or from the liver to the intestine, and from
the blood to the urine (i.e., the kidney is represented as a distribution compartment). An absorption
fraction of 0.0005 is assumed for americium in the small intestine.
AMERICIUM 75
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Figure 3-6. Mewhinney and Griffith (1983) Model of Deposition and Retention of
Americium in the Human Respiratory Tract
RESPIRATORY TRACT
Nasopharyngeal
Tracheobronchial
G
I
B
Tracheo -
L
T Bronchial
Pulmonary O
R Lymph
O
A Nodes
D
C
T Pulmonary
Dissolved
Transformed
Pulmonary
AMERICIUM 76
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Predictions based on the model have been compared to observed time courses for lung, liver, and skeletal
americium burden in dogs that inhaled americium oxide (Mewhinney and Griffith 1983). Data on lung
retention for four humans who accidentally inhaled americium were also compared to model predictions.
The empirical observations fell within predicted retention patterns for particle sizes (AMAD) 0.5 and
1.8 µm (Mewhinney and Griffith 1983).
Risk assessment.
The Mewhinney and Griffith (1983) model was developed to predict lung retention and tissue
distributions of americium in people who may be exposed to americium. Descriptions of applications of
the model in risk assessment have not been reported.
Target tissues.
The model calculates americium burdens in lung, liver, skeleton, kidney, and body. This output could be
used to predict radiation doses to these tissues.
The model is designed for applications to human dosimetry; however, it predicts reasonably well the
retention of americium in beagle dogs as well (Mewhinney and Griffith 1982). The model cannot be
applied to other species without modification.
The model is designed to simulate inhalation exposures to americium; however, it could be applied to
ingestion exposures since the model simulates the absorption of americium from the gastrointestinal tract.
The model can be applied to other routes of exposure with modification.
Durbin and Schmidt (1985) Americium Biokinetics Model
Durbin and Schmidt (1985) proposed a model for tissue distribution and excretion of absorbed americium
in humans. A unique feature of this model is that transfers from plasma to tissues are assumed to be
AMERICIUM 77
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
instantaneous; therefore, a central plasma (and blood) compartment is not included in the model (see
Figure 3-7). Tissue compartments included in the model are slow and fast turnover bone compartments,
representing cortical and trabecular bone, respectively; liver; and slow and fast turnover for other soft
tissue compartments. Excretion pathways include urine and feces. Urinary excretion is represented as a
sum of the contributions from bone, liver, and other soft tissues. Fecal americium is assumed to be
excreted from the liver.
Predicted skeletal americium concentrations were compared to values observed in a USTUR case and the
predicted and observed values agreed reasonably well. However, the same USTUR case was used to
derive values for model parameters and, therefore, agreement with the observations would be expected.
No other validation results are described.
Risk assessment.
The model was developed to predict skeletal and soft tissue burdens of americium in people who may be
exposed to americium. Comparisons of ALIs derived from the model and the ICRP (1979) model are
presented. Descriptions of applications of the model in risk assessment have not been reported.
Target tissues.
The model calculates americium burdens in liver and skeleton. This output could be used to predict
radiation doses to these tissues.
The model is designed for applications to human dosimetry. The model cannot be applied to other
species without modification.
The model, as described in Durbin and Schmidt (1985), does not have an intake component, but it could
be linked to an oral or inhalation intake model or a wound model to simulate the biokinetics of americium
associated with such exposures.
AMERICIUM 78
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Figure 3-7. Durbin and Schmidt (1985) Model of Distribution and Excretion of
Absorbed Americium in the Human
Slow Fast
Urine Urine
Bone Bone
Fast
Urine Other Soft Liver Urine
Tissue
Feces
Slow
Other Soft
Tissue
AMERICIUM 79
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Other Models
Leggett (1992) also proposed a respiratory tract model. Deposition of americium particles, depending on
their size, are assumed to deposit in three compartments representing extrathoracic, fast-clearing thoracic,
and slow-clearing thoracic regions of the respiratory tract (Figure 3-8).
An early model to calculate doses to workers exposed to radionuclides by ingestion or inhalation was
developed by ICRP (1979). In 1996, ICRP recommended that a task group be set up to revise the model.
This task group developed a new model for the human alimentary tract (Métivier 2003) that has yet to be
endorsed by the ICRP.
A biokinetic model for radionuclide-contaminated wounds is under development by a scientific

committee established jointly by the U.S. National Council on Radiation Protection (USNCRP) and
ICRP, a draft of which was recently published (Guilmette and Durbin 2003).
3.5 MECHANISMS OF ACTION
3.5.1 Pharmacokinetic Mechanisms
Absorption. Inhaled particulate aerosols of americium will be deposited in the respiratory tract.
Amounts and patterns of deposition of particulates in the respiratory tract are affected by the size of the
inhaled particles, age-related factors, breathing route (e.g., nose breathing versus mouth breathing),
airway geometry, and airstream velocity within the respiratory tract (ICRP 1994b; James et al. 1994; Roy
et al. 1994). In general, large particles (>2.5 µm) preferentially deposit in the nasopharyngeal region
where high airstream velocities and airway geometry facilitate inertial impaction (Chan and Lippman
1980; James et al. 1994). In the tracheobronchial and alveolar regions, where airstream velocities are
lower, processes such as sedimentation and interception become important for deposition of smaller
particles (<2.4 µm). Airflow velocity and airway geometry change with age, giving rise to age-related
differences in particle deposition (James 1978; James et al. 1994; Phalen et al. 1985). Anatomical
features, as well as their use (nose versus mouth breathing), also affect the intake route (nose or mouth).
Deposition in the various regions of the respiratory tract in children may be higher or lower than in adults
depending on particle size; for submicron particles, fractional deposition in 2-year-old children has been
estimated to be 1.5 times greater than in adults (Xu and Yu 1986). Absorption of deposited americium is
AMERICIUM 80
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Figure 3-8. Leggett (1992) Model of Deposition and Retention of Americium in the
Human Respiratory Tract
RESPIRATORY
TRACT
Extra-
Thoracic
G
B I
L Fast-
O Thoracic T
O R
D A
Slow Thoracic C
T
S1
S2
S3
AmO2 Other americium

Pool To Half-time f Half-time f
Extra-thoracic Blood – 0.0 0.4 days 0.05
Gastrointestinal tract 0.4 days 1.0 0.4 days 0.95
Fast thoracic Blood – 0.0 0.2 days 0.25
Gastrointestinal tract 0.2 days 1.0 0.2 days 0.75
Slow thoracic
S1 (80%) (45%)
Blood 11 days 0.90 15 hours 0.80
Gastrointestinal tract 11 days 0.10 15 hours 0.20
S2 (17%) (45%)
Blood 0.5 years 0.0 25 days 0.80
Gastrointestinal tract 0.5 years 1.0 25 days 0.20
S3 (3%) (10%)
Blood 3 years 0.20 500 days 0.20
Gastrointestinal tract 3 years 0.80 500 days 0.80
GI = gastrointestinal tract
AMERICIUM 81
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
influenced by particle size and solubility as well as the pattern of regional deposition within the
respiratory tract. Larger particles (>2.5 µm) that are primarily deposited in the ciliated airways
(nasopharyngeal and tracheobronchial regions) can be transferred by mucociliary transport into the
esophagus and swallowed. Particles deposited in the alveolar region can be absorbed after extracellular
dissolution or ingestion by phagocytic cells. Americium-bearing pulmonary alveolar macrophages
(PAMs) can either migrate to the airways where mucociliary transport to the esophagus can occur or to
tracheobronchial lymph nodes (Taya and Mewhinney 1992; Taya et al. 1986, 1992). The relative
contributions of these two pathways to americium absorption have not been quantified. Studies in dogs
and monkeys have shown that americium is present in tracheobronchial lymph nodes within days after
inhalation of americium dioxide (Mewhinney et al. 1982; Stanley et al. 1982; Thomas et al. 1972). PAMs
isolated from dogs, monkeys, and rats demonstrated the presence of phagocytosed and dissolved
americium dioxide particles (Taya et al. 1992).
The site and mechanism of absorption of ingested americium are not known. Based on studies of
plutonium, it is likely that americium absorption occurs, at least to some extent, in the small intestine.
Studies of the absorption of plutonium in preparations of in situ isolated segments of small intestine of
immature miniature swine indicate that absorption of actinides can occur along the entire small intestine,
with the highest rates of absorption occurring in the duodenum (Sullivan and Gorham 1982).
Distribution. Once americium is in systemic circulation, the route of exposure is not expected to
affect its distribution. The mechanisms by which americium is taken up and retained in bone are only
partially understood. The distribution of americium in bone initially is confined to bone surfaces,
including endosteal and periosteal surfaces, and adjacent to vascular canals in cortical bone (Polig 1976;
Priest et al. 1983, 1995; Schlenker et al. 1989). Deposition appears to be favored at sites of active bone
resorption, and concentrations are highest in trabecular bone where there is a high surface to volume ratio
(Kathren et al. 1987; Priest et al. 1983). Surface deposits can eventually appear in somewhat deeper
regions of bone as a result of accretion of new bone and burial of older surface deposits (Polig 1976;
Priest et al. 1983). The observation that americium does not distribute more uniformly in bone has been
taken as evidence that it does not exchange readily with calcium or other minerals in the bone mineral
matrix and that the initial interactions with bone may be with organic components of bone (Bruenger et al.
1973; Priest et al. 1983); however, experimental evidence for this is equivocal. While americium has
been shown to bind to the glycoprotein fraction of bovine cortical bone, even in the presence of an excess
mass of bone mineral (Chipperfield and Taylor 1972), it also binds to bone mineral and bone calcium
hydroxyapatite (Guilmette et al. 1998).
AMERICIUM 82
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
The highest concentrations of americium in soft tissues occur in the liver (Filipy and Kathren 1996). The
mechanisms of accumulation and retention of americium in liver have not been characterized. In rats and
hamsters, americium appears to initially and extensively associate with lysosomes (Gruner et al. 1981;
Seidel et al. 1986; Sütterlin et al. 1984). Agents that disrupt microtubules and lysosome formation and
processing, such as colchicine and vinblastine, have been shown to decrease liver uptake of americium in
rats (Seidel 1984, 1985). The effect is thought to involve disruption of hepatic microtubule formation,
which is critical to the formation and intracellular processing of lysosomes, the initial site of accumulation
of americium in the liver. The major bound form of americium in dog liver cytosol was shown to be a
ferritin complex (Stover et al. 1970). Substantial species differences in liver retention of americium have
been observed. Most notable is the Chinese hamster for which liver retention half-times of 3,400 days
have been estimated, compared to 5–16 days in rat liver (Durbin 1973; McKay et al. 1972). Elimination
of americium from liver is relatively slow in dogs (1–10 years) compared with rats and mice (Durbin
1973; Lindenbaum and Rosenthal 1972). Mechanisms involved in the species differences in retention of
americium in the liver have not been elucidated, although it has been proposed that animals with shorter
retention times might be capable of excreting lysosomes in the bile (Sütterlin et al. 1984). The relatively
slow elimination of americium from the hamster liver does not appear to be related to the initial tissue
distribution, as the degree of association of americium with the lysosomal fraction of livers from rats and
hamsters is similar (Sütterlin et al. 1984).
The placental transfer of 241Am to the fetus has been studied in several animal models and in the in situ
perfused guinea pig placenta (Sikov 1987). After injections of 241Am in mice and rats, a small fraction
(<0.1%) of the maternal dose is transferred to the fetus (Hisamatsu and Takizawa 1983; Sikov 1987;
Stather et al. 1992; Van Den Heuvel 1992; Weiss et al. 1980). Placental concentrations generally exceed
those of the fetus, and concentrations in the embryo/fetal membranes are higher than in the fetus (Sikov
1987). Mechanisms of transport across the placenta have not been elucidated.
Metabolism. As noted in Section 3.4.3, the metabolism of americium consists of binding interactions
with proteins and probably complex formation with various inorganic anions, such as carbonate and
phosphate, and carboxylic acids, such as citrate and lactate (Durbin 1973; Taylor 1973; Webb et al. 1998).
Experiments have not been conducted to determine whether americium binds to metallothionein, but such
binding is not likely.
AMERICIUM 83
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Excretion. Although fecal excretion appears to be a major route of excretion of absorbed americium,
the mechanisms by which americium is transferred to feces have not been characterized in humans.
Injection studies in animals suggest a contribution of biliary excretion to the fecal excretion of absorbed
americium (Durbin 1973). Similarly, the mechanisms by which americium is excreted in urine have not
been elucidated. Renal plasma clearance has been measured in rats, dogs, and monkeys; in all three
species, the renal clearance was <10% of the glomerular filtration rate (Durbin 1973; Lloyd et al. 1970;
Taylor et al. 1961; Turner and Taylor 1968). However, simultaneous measurements of the renal plasma
clearance of ultrafilterable americium and glomerular filtration rate are not available; thus, the relative
contributions of filtration, tubular secretion, and tubular reabsorption to urinary excretion of americium
cannot be ascertained with the available information. Studies of human urine incubated with 241Am or
urine collected from rats that were exposed to americium indicate that the major form of americium in
urine appears to be a low molecular weight complex (1,000–10,000 daltons) with citrate (Stradling et al.
1976). This would be consistent with citrate complexes occurring in plasma from which they could enter
the urine by glomerular filtration.
3.5.2 Mechanisms of Toxicity
Americium toxicity results primarily from the damage done by the alpha particle emitted during
radioactive decay. This alpha particle has very limited penetration in tissue, and hence, the cellular
damage (including damage to genomic material) occurs only in the immediate vicinity of the sequestered
americium. Alpha particles deposit all of their energy in a short distance of travel. The large charge and
mass of the alpha particle account for the strong interaction with surrounding cells. The transferred
energy ionizes localized cell matter in its path directly and via hydrolysis of water (approximately 70%)
in human cells. Radiation interaction with water produces ionized and excited water molecules referred
to as radiolysis products. These reactive water species have sufficiently long half-times that they can
diffuse away from the interaction site and interact with biological molecules, which can increase the
resulting cellular damage. Thus, cellular damage can result both directly from radiation itself and
indirectly from the chemical reactions involving reactive species of radiolysis products.
3.5.3 Animal-to-Human Extrapolations
Significant interspecies differences are apparent regarding liver retention rates of absorbed americium
(Durbin 1973; Griffith et al. 1983) (see Sections 3.4.2.4 and 3.5.1 for more detailed information).
AMERICIUM 84
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Interspecies differences are also apparent in skeletal distribution of absorbed americium (Lynch et al.
1989). However, no data were located to indicate significant interspecies differences in health effects
associated with exposure to americium.
3.6 TOXICITIES MEDIATED THROUGH THE NEUROENDOCRINE AXIS
Recently, attention has focused on the potential hazardous effects of certain chemicals on the endocrine
system because of the ability of these chemicals to mimic or block endogenous hormones. Chemicals
with this type of activity are most commonly referred to as endocrine disruptors. However, appropriate
terminology to describe such effects remains controversial. The terminology endocrine disruptors,
initially used by Colborn and Clement (1992), was also used in 1996 when Congress mandated the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop a screening program for “...certain substances
[which] may have an effect produced by a naturally occurring estrogen, or other such endocrine
effect[s]...”. To meet this mandate, EPA convened a panel called the Endocrine Disruptors Screening and
Testing Advisory Committee (EDSTAC), which in 1998 completed its deliberations and made
recommendations to EPA concerning endocrine disruptors. In 1999, the National Academy of Sciences
released a report that referred to these same types of chemicals as hormonally active agents. The
terminology endocrine modulators has also been used to convey the fact that effects caused by such
chemicals may not necessarily be adverse. Many scientists agree that chemicals with the ability to disrupt
or modulate the endocrine system are a potential threat to the health of humans, aquatic animals, and
wildlife. However, others think that endocrine-active chemicals do not pose a significant health risk,
particularly in view of the fact that hormone mimics exist in the natural environment. Examples of
natural hormone mimics are the isoflavinoid phytoestrogens (Adlercreutz 1995; Livingston 1978; Mayr et
al. 1992). These chemicals are derived from plants and are similar in structure and action to endogenous
estrogen. Although the public health significance and descriptive terminology of substances capable of
affecting the endocrine system remains controversial, scientists agree that these chemicals may affect the
synthesis, secretion, transport, binding, action, or elimination of natural hormones in the body responsible
for maintaining homeostasis, reproduction, development, and/or behavior (EPA 1997a). Stated
differently, such compounds may cause toxicities that are mediated through the neuroendocrine axis. As
a result, these chemicals may play a role in altering, for example, metabolic, sexual, immune, and
neurobehavioral function. Such chemicals are also thought to be involved in inducing breast, testicular,
and prostate cancers, as well as endometriosis (Berger 1994; Giwercman et al. 1993; Hoel et al. 1992).
AMERICIUM 85
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
No studies were located regarding endocrine disruptive effects in humans or animals resulting from
exposure to americium.
3.7 CHILDREN’S SUSCEPTIBILITY
This section discusses potential health effects from exposures during the period from conception to
maturity at 18 years of age in humans, when all biological systems will have fully developed. Potential
effects on offspring resulting from exposures of parental germ cells are considered, as well as any indirect
effects on the fetus and neonate resulting from maternal exposure during gestation and lactation.
Relevant animal and in vitro models are also discussed.
Children are not small adults. They differ from adults in their exposures and may differ in their
susceptibility to hazardous chemicals. Children’s unique physiology and behavior can influence the
extent of their exposure. Exposures of children are discussed in Section 6.6 Exposures of Children.
Children sometimes differ from adults in their susceptibility to hazardous chemicals, but whether there is
a difference depends on the chemical (Guzelian et al. 1992; NRC 1993). Children may be more or less
susceptible than adults to health effects, and the relationship may change with developmental age
(Guzelian et al. 1992; NRC 1993). Vulnerability often depends on developmental stage. There are
critical periods of structural and functional development during both prenatal and postnatal life and a
particular structure or function will be most sensitive to disruption during its critical period(s). Damage
may not be evident until a later stage of development. There are often differences in pharmacokinetics
and metabolism between children and adults. For example, absorption may be different in neonates
because of the immaturity of their gastrointestinal tract and their larger skin surface area in proportion to
body weight (Morselli et al. 1980; NRC 1993); the gastrointestinal absorption of lead is greatest in infants
and young children (Ziegler et al. 1978). Distribution of xenobiotics may be different; for example,
infants have a larger proportion of their bodies as extracellular water and their brains and livers are
proportionately larger (Altman and Dittmer 1974; Fomon 1966; Fomon et al. 1982; Owen and Brozek
1966; Widdowson and Dickerson 1964). The infant also has an immature blood-brain barrier (Adinolfi
1985; Johanson 1980) and probably an immature blood-testis barrier (Setchell and Waites 1975). Many
xenobiotic metabolizing enzymes have distinctive developmental patterns. At various stages of growth
and development, levels of particular enzymes may be higher or lower than those of adults, and
sometimes unique enzymes may exist at particular developmental stages (Komori et al. 1990; Leeder and
AMERICIUM 86
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Kearns 1997; NRC 1993; Vieira et al. 1996). Whether differences in xenobiotic metabolism make the
child more or less susceptible also depends on whether the relevant enzymes are involved in activation of
the parent compound to its toxic form or in detoxification. There may also be differences in excretion,
particularly in newborns who all have a low glomerular filtration rate and have not developed efficient
tubular secretion and resorption capacities (Altman and Dittmer 1974; NRC 1993; West et al. 1948).
Children and adults may differ in their capacity to repair damage from chemical insults. Children also
have a longer remaining lifetime in which to express damage from chemicals; this potential is particularly
relevant to cancer.
Certain characteristics of the developing human may increase exposure or susceptibility, whereas others
may decrease susceptibility to the same chemical. For example, although infants breathe more air per
kilogram of body weight than adults breathe, this difference might be somewhat counterbalanced by their
alveoli being less developed, which results in a disproportionately smaller surface area for alveolar
absorption (NRC 1993).
No studies were located in which comparisons were made between the sensitivity of children and adults
to the toxicity of americium. Some studies indicate that radiation effects may be greater per unit dose in
children than in adults. However, study of bone cancer induction from injected 239Pu or 226Ra in dogs
suggests that, on a per Gy basis, dogs exposed at 3 months of age were less sensitive than dogs exposed at
1.5 years of age (Lloyd et al. 1999). Both plutonium and radium are alpha-emitters that accumulate in
bone, as does americium. No direct evidence was located to indicate that the pharmacokinetics of
americium in children may be different from that in adults. Based on dosimetric considerations related to
differences in the parameters of available models, as well as studies in animals, it seems likely that
children may be more susceptible to americium toxicity than adults by virtue of age-related differences in
pharmacokinetics or radiosensitivity. Therefore, a potential for increased risk of effects to the bones of
children is attributed to the uptake and long-term biological storage of 241Am in the bone during critical
periods of growth, which may result in genetic damage and an increased risk for cancer. Differences in
airway geometry and airflow rates between children and adults would be expected to result in higher
fractional deposition of inhaled submicron particles in children than in adults (Xu and Yu 1986) (see
Section 3.5.1). Thus, children who are exposed to americium aerosols may receive a higher dose to the
lung and greater absorption than would similarly exposed adults (ICRP 1995).
Studies of experimental animals indicate that absorption of ingested americium may be as much as
200 times greater in neonates than in adults (Bomford and Harrison 1986; David and Harrison 1984;
AMERICIUM 87
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Sullivan et al. 1985) (see Section 3.4.1.2 and Table 3-2). Thus, infants exposed to levels of americium in
food or water similar as adults, or who ingest similar amounts of americium subsequent to an inhalation
exposure, may absorb more americium and acquire a higher internal burden of americium. The ICRP
(1989, 1994b, 1995) assumes age-related differences in intestinal absorption of americium swallowed
following clearance from the lungs. The fractional absorption value employed for a 3-month-old infant is
a factor of 10 higher than for an adult.
Absorption of americium is greater in iron-deficient animals than in iron-replete adult animals (Sullivan
and Ruemmler 1988; Sullivan et al. 1986) (see Section 3.4.1.2). Concurrent oral exposure to Fe3+ and
americium also appears to increase the absorption of ingested americium; the latter effect may result from
redox reactions in the gastrointestinal tract catalyzed by Fe3+ (Sullivan et al. 1986). These differences are
accounted for in the discussions and dosimetric/metabolic models of the ICRP (1989, 1993) and the NEA
(1988).
As inherent in these ICRP (1989, 1993) models, deposition of americium in bone occurs predominantly at
bone surfaces that are actively undergoing resorption; therefore, exchanges between bone and soft tissue
stores of americium would be expected to be more rapid during periods of active bone metabolism such
as infancy and childhood, pregnancy, and menopause. Higher skeletal accumulation of americium has
been observed in neonatal animals that received americium intravenously than in similarly exposed adult
animals (Hollins et al. 1973; Schoeters et al. 1990; Stevens et al. 1977) and in young rats (3 months of
age) compared to old rats (13 months of age) (Sontag 1983). This suggests the possibility that infants and
children may accumulate higher concentrations of americium in bone than similarly exposed adults. On
the other hand, americium uptake into maternal bone of lactating rats was similar to that of nonlactating
rats, while concurrent calcium uptake into bone was lower in lactating rats (Hollins and Durakovic 1972).
Thus, active mobilization of bone mineral, per se, may not always promote release of americium from
bone (see Section 3.4.2.1). Studies of other bone-seeking radionuclides indicate that vulnerability may be
higher in adolescence and early adulthood than during earlier development or later adulthood (Carnes et
al. 1997; Lloyd et al. 1999).
Information on the transplacental transfer of americium in humans is not available directly, but the
information from experiments with americium and other actinides has been used to derive biokinetic
models and perform dosimetric models for the human (NCRP 1998; Sikov and Kelman 1989; USNRC
1996). Studies in animals that received parenteral injections of americium have shown that absorbed
americium is partially transferred to the fetus (Hisamatsu and Takizawa 1983; Paquet et al. 1998; Sasser
AMERICIUM 88
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
et al. 1986; Schoeters et al. 1990; Weiss et al. 1980) (see Section 3.4.2.1). Limited reports indicate that
relatively large doses of 241Am may induce fetal death and teratogenic effects in rodents (Moskalev et al.
1969; Rommerein and Sikov 1986).
Information on the distribution of absorbed americium to mammary milk in humans is not available;
however, maternal (oral or intravenous) exposures of animals, including cows and goats, have shown that
transfer to milk occurs and that neonates can be exposed to americium during lactation (McClellan et al.
1962; Sasser et al. 1986; Sutton et al. 1979) (see Section 3.4.2.1). Thus, it is possible that children who
breast feed from mothers who have been exposed to americium, or who ingest milk from cows or other
livestock that have been exposed to americium, may also be exposed to americium.
Bone serves as a long-term reservoir of americium in the body. The kinetics of bone formation and
remodeling appear to be important factors in the overall biokinetics of americium in experimental animals
(ICRP 1989, 1993). Quantitative evidence for their effects in humans has not been characterized, but
exchanges between bone and soft tissue stores of americium would be expected to be more rapid during
periods of active bone metabolism such as infancy and childhood, pregnancy, and menopause (see
Section 3.4.2.1). Thus, it is possible that, in humans, some of the maternal bone americium stores may be
transferred to the fetus during gestation and may be incorporated into fetal bone during the development
of the fetal skeleton. However, the finding of similar americium uptake in maternal bone of lactating and
nonlactating rats (Hollins and Durakovic 1972) may be an indication that active bone metabolism is not
necessarily a major source of americium release from bone at this maternal stage.
3.8 BIOMARKERS OF EXPOSURE AND EFFECT
Biomarkers are broadly defined as indicators signaling events in biologic systems or samples. They have
been classified as markers of exposure, markers of effect, and markers of susceptibility (NAS/NRC
1989).
Due to a nascent understanding of the use and interpretation of biomarkers, implementation of biomarkers
as tools of exposure in the general population is very limited. A biomarker of exposure is a xenobiotic
substance or its metabolite(s) or the product of an interaction between a xenobiotic agent and some target
molecule(s) or cell(s) that is measured within a compartment of an organism (NAS/NRC 1989). The
preferred biomarkers of exposure are generally the substance itself or substance-specific metabolites in
AMERICIUM 89
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
readily obtainable body fluid(s), or excreta. However, several factors can confound the use and
interpretation of biomarkers of exposure. The body burden of a substance may be the result of exposures
from more than one source. The substance being measured may be a metabolite of another xenobiotic
substance (e.g., high urinary levels of phenol can result from exposure to several different aromatic
compounds). Depending on the properties of the substance (e.g., biological half-life) and environmental
conditions (e.g., duration and route of exposure), the substance and all of its metabolites may have left the
body by the time samples can be taken. It may be difficult to identify individuals exposed to hazardous
substances that are commonly found in body tissues and fluids (e.g., essential mineral nutrients such as
copper, zinc, and selenium). Biomarkers of exposure to americium are discussed in Section 3.8.1.
Biomarkers of effect are defined as any measurable biochemical, physiologic, or other alteration within an
organism that, depending on magnitude, can be recognized as an established or potential health
impairment or disease (NAS/NRC 1989). This definition encompasses biochemical or cellular signals of
tissue dysfunction (e.g., increased liver enzyme activity or pathologic changes in female genital epithelial
cells), as well as physiologic signs of dysfunction such as increased blood pressure or decreased lung
capacity. Note that these markers are not often substance specific. They also may not be directly
adverse, but can indicate potential health impairment (e.g., DNA adducts). Biomarkers of effects caused
by americium are discussed in Section 3.8.2.
A biomarker of susceptibility is an indicator of an inherent or acquired limitation of an organism's ability

to respond to the challenge of exposure to a specific xenobiotic substance. It can be an intrinsic genetic or
other characteristic or a preexisting disease that results in an increase in absorbed dose, a decrease in the
biologically effective dose, or a target tissue response. If biomarkers of susceptibility exist, they are
discussed in Section 3.10 “Populations That Are Unusually Susceptible”.
3.8.1 Biomarkers Used to Identify or Quantify Exposure to Americium
Biomarkers or tests to identify or quantify exposure to americium are available only at a limited number
of government or nuclear facilities, or through contractors engaged in this type work. Americium is a
radioactive element. Internalized americium can be quantified through the use of in vivo radiation
counters that measure the gamma emissions specific to each isotope of americium (Graham and Kirkman
1983; Palmer and Rhoads 1989; Palmer et al. 1983). Americium within the body can be inferred from
radioassays of urine, feces, or tissue samples by gross alpha analysis, alpha spectroscopy, gamma-ray
AMERICIUM 90
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
spectroscopy, mass spectrometry, and liquid scintillation techniques (Alvarez and Navarro 1996; Dacheux
and Aupiais 1997; DOE 1997b; Guilmette 1986; McInroy et al. 1985). Americium radioactivity can be
measured in the teeth of rats, where it accumulates in the dental pulp of developing teeth and eventually is
incorporated into the mineralized dentin (Hammerström and Nilsson 1970b), so it may be feasible to
analyze human teeth for americium.
3.8.2 Biomarkers Used to Characterize Effects Caused by Americium
Although a sufficiently high dose of americium may produce chromosomal aberrations in lymphocytes
(Bauchinger et al. 1997; Kelly and Dagle 1974), these effects are not specific to americium or to ionizing
radiation in general.
3.9 INTERACTIONS WITH OTHER CHEMICALS
Ethanol may enhance the fecal excretion of absorbed americium. In baboons that received repeated oral
doses of ethanol (1 mL ethanol/kg body weight), 3–6 months after receiving americium citrate
intravenously, fecal excretion was approximately 2.5 times that of baboons that received water in place of
the ethanol dose (Cohen et al. 1978). Long-term ethanol consumption accelerated the elimination of
americium from the livers of beagle dogs that had been administered single intravenous injections of
241
Am (Taylor et al. 1992). The risk of americium-induced liver tumors, however, was 2–3 times higher
in the ethanol-treated dogs than in similarly 241Am-injected dogs not consuming ethanol.
Colchicine (a drug used in treatment of gout) and vinblastine (a cancer chemotherapy agent) may
decrease liver uptake of americium. In rats that received an intraperitoneal injection of either colchicine
and vinblastine prior to an intravenous or intramuscular injection of americium citrate, liver uptake of
americium was lower, relative to controls, and kidney and skeletal americium uptakes were higher (Seidel
1984, 1985). The effect is thought to involve disruption of hepatic microtubule formation, which is
critical to the formation and intracellular processing of lysosomes, the initial site of accumulation of
americium in the liver.
AMERICIUM 91
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
3.10 POPULATIONS THAT ARE UNUSUALLY SUSCEPTIBLE
A susceptible population will exhibit a different or enhanced response to americium than will most
persons exposed to the same level of americium in the environment. Reasons may include genetic
makeup, age, health and nutritional status, and exposure to other toxic substances (e.g., cigarette smoke).
These parameters result in reduced detoxification or excretion of 241Am, or compromised function of
organs affected by 241Am. Populations who are at greater risk due to their unusually high exposure to
241
Am are discussed in Section 6.7, Populations With Potentially High Exposures.
As discussed in Section 3.7, theoretical pharmacokinetics consideration suggests that children may be at
greater risk from the effects of exposure to americium. Furthermore, some studies indicate that children
may be more susceptible than adults to radiation-induced adverse effects. A study of bone cancer
induction from injected 239Pu or 226Ra in dogs suggests that, on a per Gy basis, dogs exposed as young
adults (1.5 years of age) were more susceptible than either juveniles exposed at 3 months of age or older
adults (5 years of age) (Lloyd et al. 1999). Both plutonium and radium are alpha-emitters that accumulate
in bone, as does alpha-emitting americium.
3.11 METHODS FOR REDUCING TOXIC EFFECTS
This section will describe clinical practice and research concerning methods for reducing toxic effects of
exposure to americium. However, because some of the treatments discussed may be experimental and
unproven, this section should not be used as a guide for treatment of exposures to americium. When
specific exposures have occurred, the Radiological Emergency Assessment Center/Training Site, poison
control centers and medical toxicologists should be consulted for medical advice. The following texts
provide specific information about treatment following exposures to americium:
Ellenhorn MJ, Schonwald S, Ordog G, et al., eds. 1997. Medical toxicology: Diagnosis and Treatment of
Human Poisoning. 2nd Baltimore (Williams & Wilkins), 1682-1723.
Haddad LM, Shannon MW, Winchester JF, eds. 1998. Clinical Management of Poisoning and Drug
Overdose. 3rd edition. Philadelphia (W.B. Saunders), 413-425.
Viccellio P, ed. 1998. Emergency Toxicology. 2nd edition. Philadelphia (Lippincott-Raven), 991-996.
AMERICIUM 92
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
3.11.1 Reducing Peak Absorption Following Exposure
Topical applications of saline containing DTPA, tartaric acid, or citric acid (e.g., Schubert’s solution)
have been used to remove americium from the skin and wounds after accidental dermal exposures
(Breitenstein 1983). These agents form stable, water-soluble complexes with americium. Based on
experiments with laboratory animals, it appears that aerosols of DTPA may reduce the absorption of
soluble forms of inhaled americium compounds (Stradling et al. 2000). Postexposure treatments that are
effective in reducing toxic effects of radionuclides such as americium typically concentrate on
decorporation (removal of americium from the body following absorption) and are discussed in
Section 3.11.2.
3.11.2 Reducing Body Burden
Calcium or zinc complexes of polycarboxylate compounds such as DTPA or ethylenediaminetetratacetic

acid (EDTA) have been used as chelating agents to accelerate the urinary excretion of americium in
humans who were accidentally exposed to americium (Breitenstein 1983; Doerfel and Oliveira 1989;
Durbin 1973; Fasiska et al. 1971). Extended chelation therapy was considered to have been a primary
factor in the long-term survival of a man who had been accidentally exposed to a massive amount of
241
Am (Breitenstein and Palmer 1989; Filipy et al. 1995; Toohey and Kathren 1995). Immediate and
continued DTPA treatment of rats that had been exposed to 241AmO2 by inhalation resulted in the near-
total blockage of 241Am translocation to liver and bone (Guilmette et al. 1988). Continuous subcutaneous
infusion of DTPA was more effective in blocking the uptake than were periodic intravenous injections.
Dogs receiving DTPA treatments following single intravenous injections of 241Am at activity levels of
approximately 11 kBq/kg (297 nCi/kg) exhibited greater longevity and lower rates of bone cancer than
241
Am-treated dogs not given subsequent DTPA treatment (Lloyd et al. 1998). DTPA and EDTA form
relatively stable complexes with americium in the extracellular fluid that can be excreted in the urine
(Durbin 1973; Taylor 1973). The calcium and zinc complexes are used to decrease the risk of calcium
and zinc depletion. Both DTPA and EDTA appear to affect primarily the americium in soft tissues,
which exchanges more rapidly with americium in plasma than does americium in bone. As a result,
treatments with DTPA or EDTA may have only a marginal effect on bone americium levels (Durbin
1973). In a study in rats, DTPA treatment, administered beginning 1.5 hours following intravenously
administered 241Am citrate, decreased bone 241Am levels in trabecular bone at locations where bone
resorption and remodeling occurred, but had little effect on americium levels in cortical bone (Polig
AMERICIUM 93
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
1976). This effect may have resulted from accelerated excretion and, therefore, diminished redeposition
of americium released during bone resorption.
Hydroxypyridonate ligands such as octadentate 3,4,3-LI(1,2-HOPO) and hexadentate TREN-Me-

3,2-HOPO) have been shown to be highly effective chelating agents in laboratory animals (Durbin et al.
1994; Stradling et al. 2000). Recent in vitro studies have indicated that octadentate 3,4,3-LI(1,2-HOPO)
may be effective in decorporation of americium from bone tissues (Guilmette et al. 2003).
3.11.3 Interfering with the Mechanism of Action for Toxic Effects
No data were located regarding reduction of the toxic effects of radioactive americium through interfering
with mechanisms of action.
3.12 ADEQUACY OF THE DATABASE
Section 104(i)(5) of CERCLA, as amended, directs the Administrator of ATSDR (in consultation with the
Administrator of EPA and agencies and programs of the Public Health Service) to assess whether
adequate information on the health effects of americium is available. Where adequate information is not
available, ATSDR, in conjunction with the National Toxicology Program (NTP), is required to assure the
initiation of a program of research designed to determine the health effects (and techniques for developing
methods to determine such health effects) of americium.
The following categories of possible data needs have been identified by a joint team of scientists from
ATSDR, NTP, and EPA. They are defined as substance-specific informational needs that if met would
reduce the uncertainties of human health assessment. This definition should not be interpreted to mean
that all data needs discussed in this section must be filled. In the future, the identified data needs will be
evaluated and prioritized, and a substance-specific research agenda will be proposed.
3.12.1 Existing Information on Health Effects of Americium
The existing data on health effects of inhalation, oral, and dermal exposure of humans and animals to
americium are summarized in Figure 3-9. The purpose of this figure is to illustrate the existing
AMERICIUM 94
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Figure 3-9. Existing Information on Health Effects of Americium
Systemic
ti c
ore
ph
ym
L al
ate
g ic/ ic ti ve
ent
i lo uc opm oxi c
ed ic no olo
g
od r
a th u te e rm
ro n
m u u r pr v el n ot n ce
e c t e e
D A In Ch Im N R De Ge Ca
Inhalation
Oral
Dermal
External
Human
Systemic
ti c
ore
ph
L ym l
te ic/ ti ve enta
e dia g i
olo olog odu
c c pm toxi
c
h ic n lo r
e a t u te
t e rm
ro n
m u u r pr ve n o n ce
c e e e e a
D A In Ch Im N R D G C
Inhalation
Oral
Dermal
External
Animal
Existing Studies
AMERICIUM 95
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
information concerning the health effects of americium. Each dot in the figure indicates that one or more
studies provide information associated with that particular effect. The dot does not necessarily imply
anything about the quality of the study or studies, nor should missing information in this figure be
interpreted as a “data need”. A data need, as defined in ATSDR’s Decision Guide for Identifying
Substance-Specific Data Needs Related to Toxicological Profiles (Agency for Toxic Substances and
Disease Registry 1989), is substance-specific information necessary to conduct comprehensive public
health assessments. Generally, ATSDR defines a data gap more broadly as any substance-specific
information missing from the scientific literature.
Information regarding health effects following exposure to americium is mainly limited to reports of acute
exposure. Accidental occupational overexposure of a 64-year-old man resulted in signs of hematological
and bone marrow damage. Animal studies indicate that overexposure to americium can result in
compromised hematological and immunological systems, as well as degenerative changes in the bone,
liver, kidneys, and thyroid, and bone and liver cancer in long-term surviving animals. Although most
studies employed parenteral injection as the route of exposure, available inhalation data indicate similarity
in targets of toxicity. Data regarding health effects related to oral or dermal exposure are lacking for both
humans and animals. Levels of radioactivity from americium employed in animal studies are much
higher than those likely to be environmentally experienced by humans. Therefore, americium does not
likely pose an immediate health concern to humans.
3.12.2 Identification of Data Needs
Acute-Duration Exposure. Human data regarding acute adverse health effects resulting from
exposure to americium are limited to the accidental occupational overexposure (inhalation, dermal,
subcutaneous) of a 64-year-old man in whom possible hematological and bone marrow changes may have
been elicited (Filipy et al. 1995; Priest et al. 1995). Overexposure of animals to americium by the
inhalation exposure route resulted in compromised respiratory function and radiation pneumonitis
(Buldakov et al. 1972; DOE 1978; Thomas et al. 1972), persistent depressed blood values (Buldakov et
al. 1972; Thomas et al. 1972), degenerative changes in bone, liver and kidney lesions, and gross atrophy
and fibrosis of the thyroid gland (Thomas et al. 1972). Following acute inhalation exposure to
americium, 4 of 15 dogs surviving more than 1,000 days developed osteosarcomas (Gillett et al. 1985).
With the exception of the respiratory effects following inhalation exposure, the other targets of toxicity
were likewise identified in animals administered single parenteral injections of americium at relatively
AMERICIUM 96
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
high levels of radioactivity (Carter et al. 1951; Dougherty 1970; Jee et al. 1985; Lloyd et al. 1970, 1994a,
1994b; Schoeters et al. 1991; Taylor et al. 1983, 1991, 1993a; Van Den Heuvel et al. 1995). Acute-
duration inhalation and oral MRLs were not derived for radioactive americium due to a lack of human or
animal data. To generate appropriate data for deriving acute-duration inhalation and oral MRLs for
radioactive americium, at least one comprehensive acute inhalation study and one acute oral toxicity
study of at least one animal species exposed to several dose levels would be needed. Such studies could
be designed to also generate data regarding potential age-related differences in toxicity. However, since
americium is not found naturally, and is produced and used in small quantities, the risk of overexposure to
americium in humans should be low. Thus, additional studies may not be presently needed.
Intermediate-Duration Exposure. A single report indicated the potential for cytogenetic damage in
a radiation worker and his family members following exposure to an americium source used by the father
for private experiments at home for several years. No additional human or animal data were located.
Intermediate-duration inhalation and oral MRLs were not derived for americium due to the lack of human
or animal data. To generate appropriate data for deriving intermediate-duration inhalation and oral MRLs
for americium, at least one comprehensive intermediate-duration inhalation and one intermediate-duration
oral toxicity study of at least one animal species exposed to several dose levels would be needed. Such
studies could be designed to also generate data regarding potential age-related differences in toxicity.
However, since americium is not found naturally, and is produced and used in small quantities, the risk of
overexposure to americium in humans should be low. Thus, additional studies may not be presently
needed.
Chronic-Duration Exposure and Cancer. No data were located regarding chronic-duration

exposure of humans or animals to americium. Chronic-duration inhalation and oral MRLs were not
derived for americium due to the lack of human or animal data. To generate appropriate data for deriving
chronic-duration inhalation and oral MRLs for americium, at least one comprehensive chronic-duration
inhalation and one chronic-duration oral toxicity study of at least one animal species exposed to several
dose levels would be needed. Such studies could be designed to also generate data regarding potential
age-related differences in toxicity. However, since americium is not found naturally, and is produced and
used in small quantities, the risk of overexposure to americium in humans should be low. Thus,
additional studies may not be presently needed.
Genotoxicity. Chromosomal aberrations have been reported in lymphocytes following exposure to

241
Am (Bauchinger et al. 1997; Kelly and Dagle 1974). A single animal study reported increased
AMERICIUM 97
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
numbers of micronucleated and multinucleated pulmonary alveolar macrophages in lung lavage of mice
that had been exposed to 241Am by inhalation (Talbot et al. 1989). External and internal exposure to
radioactivity is a genotoxicity concern. External exposure to gamma-emitting americium would be
expected to result in genotoxic effects similar to those observed following external exposure to any other
gamma-emitting radionuclide (see ATSDR 1999 for more information on ionizing radiation).
Internalized americium could cause damage to nearby cellular components that might be encountered by
high energy alpha particles emitted from americium. Additional genotoxicity studies could be designed
to assess the potential for genotoxicity from internalized americium, with special emphasis on blood-
forming cells.
Reproductive Toxicity. No reports were located regarding reproductive effects in humans or

animals following inhalation, oral, or dermal exposure to americium. In a limited study, increased
incidences of fetal death were observed following single intravenous injections of 241Am, administered to
female rats prior to mating (Moskalev et al. 1969). Concentrations of 241Am were much higher in
placental tissues than in fetuses, and the investigators indicated that death may have been the result of
placental changes. Animal studies could be designed to assess the potential for the reproductive toxicity
of americium.
Developmental Toxicity. Data concerning developmental effects related to exposure to americium

are restricted to a single report of decreased fetal weight, increased fetal death, and a tendency toward
increased incidences of fetuses with anomalous ribs following exposure of pregnant rats with single
intravenous injections of 241Am (Rommerein and Sikov 1986). Animal studies could be designed to
further assess the potential for the developmental toxicity of americium.
Immunotoxicity. Information regarding the immunotoxicity of americium is limited to a report of

lymphopenia in a man following accidental overexposure when a glass column containing 241Am blew up
in his face (Filipy et al. 1995) and reports of depressed white blood cell counts in dogs exposed to 241Am
by inhalation (Buldakov et al. 1972; Thomas et al. 1972) or intravenous injection (Dougherty 1970).
Additional animal studies could be designed to assess dose-response relationships.
Neurotoxicity. No data were located regarding neurotoxicity in humans or animals following

exposure to americium. Neurotoxic effects, noted in humans suffering from acute radiation syndrome due
to ionizing radiation exposure, are well-characterized (see ATSDR 1999 for detailed information on the
effects of ionizing radiation). External overexposure to any gamma-emitting source could result in
AMERICIUM 98
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
neurotoxic effects. However, it is extremely unlikely that an americium source capable of producing such
an overexposure would be encountered. Studies concerning the potential of americium to induce
neurotoxicity do not appear to be needed at present.
Epidemiological and Human Dosimetry Studies. Epidemiological studies of radiation dose

typically involve estimates of exposure that are based on whole-body measurements of internally-
deposited americium. A need remains for epidemiological data that can provide quantitative human dose-
response information while supplying additional information on the health effects of exposure to ionizing
radiation and americium; in particular, for cases of known internal exposure.
Biomarkers of Exposure and Effect.
Exposure. Americium may be detected during in vivo counting as well as in samples of urine, blood,
feces, or body tissues. Due to the relatively long biological half-time of americium in skeleton, short-
term exposures cannot be readily distinguished from longer-term ones. An increased understanding of the
biokinetics and health effects of internalized americium can be achieved through continued monitoring of
individuals following known overexposure to americium.
Effect. Chromosomal aberrations have been reported in lymphocytes following exposure to 241Am
(Bauchinger et al. 1997; Kelly and Dagle 1974). Additionally, high radiation doses from internally
deposited americium can cause bone marrow changes and altered blood values (Filipy et al. 1995; Priest
et al. 1995). However, none of these effects are specific to americium.
Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, and Excretion. Inhaled americium can be absorbed and
transferred to the blood (Edvardsson and Lindgren 1976; Fry 1976; Newton et al. 1983; Sanders 1974;
Toohey and Essling 1980). Limited information indicates that americium is rather poorly absorbed via
the gastrointestinal tract (Hunt 1998; Hunt et al. 1986a, 1986b). Once americium reaches the blood, it is
distributed throughout the body, accumulating mainly in the skeleton, liver, and muscle (Filipy and
Kathren 1996; Filipy et al. 1994; Kathren et al. 1988; McInroy et al. 1989). Animal studies indicate that
americium can pass through the placental barrier of a pregnant mother to a developing fetus (DOE 1986;
Hisamatsu and Takizawa 1983; Paquet et al. 1998; Sasser et al. 1986; Schoeters et al. 1990; Sikov 1987;
Van Den Heuvel et al. 1992; Weiss et al. 1980), and also can be distributed to the breast milk of lactating
mothers (McClellan et al. 1962; Sasser et al. 1986; Sutton et al. 1979). The metabolism of americium
consists of binding interactions with proteins and probably complex formation with various inorganic
anions, such as carbonate and phosphate, and carboxylic acids, such as citrate and lactate (Durbin 1973;
AMERICIUM 99
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
Taylor 1973; Webb et al. 1998). Americium is slowly eliminated from soft tissues and bone, but may
remain in the skeleton for much longer periods. Once absorbed into the general circulation, americium is
excreted in both feces and urine (Cohen and Wrenn 1973; Durbin 1973; Guilmette et al. 1980; Stather et
al. 1979a). Additional quantitative toxicokinetic studies could be designed to further assess absorption
following inhalation, oral, and dermal exposure, as well as age-related differences in the toxicokinetics of
americium. However, the predominant data need for americium, and other sources of internal radiation
exposure, is the validation (through biokinetic studies) and refinement of the models that describe internal
distribution from which the radiation dose derives.
Comparative Toxicokinetics. Toxicokinetic properties of americium are generally similar in

humans and animals. Inhaled americium, in relatively soluble forms, is readily absorbed in the
respiratory system of humans and animals. Ingested americium is not absorbed to any great extent in
humans or animals. Distribution patterns are generally similar; americium is found in highest
concentrations in the skeleton, liver, and muscle of humans and animals. Although studies were not
located regarding transfer of americium from mother to developing fetus, studies in animals suggest that
americium could be incorporated by a fetus following inhalation exposure of the pregnant mother.
Methods for Reducing Toxic Effects. Topical applications of saline containing DTPA, tartaric
acid, or citric acid (e.g., Schubert’s solution) have been used to remove americium from the skin and
wounds after accidental dermal exposures. These agents form stable, water soluble complexes with
americium. Calcium or zinc complexes of DTPA have been used as chelating agents to accelerate the
urinary excretion of americium. Hydroxypyridonate ligands such as octadentate 3,4,3-LI(1,2-HOPO) and
hexadentate TREN-Me-3,2-HOPO) have been shown to be highly effective chelating agents in laboratory
animals (Durbin et al. 1994; Stradling et al. 2000). Recent in vitro studies have indicated that octadentate
3,4,3-LI(1,2-HOPO) may be effective in decorporation of americium from bone tissues (Guilmette et al.
2000).
Children’s Susceptibility. Some studies suggest that children, especially neonates, may be more
susceptible than adults to radiation-induced adverse effects.. However, animal studies indicate that
juvenile dogs are less susceptible than adults to americium-induced bone cancer (Lloyd et al. 1999). No
direct evidence was located to indicate that the pharmacokinetics of americium in children may be
different from that in adults. Based on dosimetric considerations related to differences in the parameters
of available models, as well as studies in animals, it seems likely that children may be more susceptible to
the radiological effects of americium than are adults by virtue of age-related differences in
AMERICIUM 100
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
pharmacokinetics. Absorption of ingested americium may be as much as 200 times greater in neonatal
animals than in adults (Bomford and Harrison 1986; David and Harrison 1984; Sullivan et al. 1985).
As inherent in ICRP (1989, 1993) models, deposition of americium in bone occurs predominantly at bone
surfaces that are actively undergoing resorption; therefore, exchanges between bone and soft tissue stores
of americium would be expected to be more rapid during periods of active bone metabolism such as
infancy and childhood, pregnancy, and menopause. Higher skeletal accumulation of americium has been
observed in neonatal animals that received americium intravenously than in similarly exposed adult
animals (Hollins et al. 1973; Schoeters et al. 1990; Stevens et al. 1977) and in young rats (3 months of
age) compared to old rats (13 months of age) (Sontag 1983). This suggests the possibility that infants and
children may accumulate higher concentrations of americium in bone than similarly exposed adults.
Studies of other bone-seeking radionuclides provide further support for increased vulnerability during
periods of rapid bone growth such as adolescence (Carnes et al. 1997; Lloyd et al. 1999).
Information on the transplacental transfer of americium in humans is not available. Studies in animals
that received parenteral injections of americium have shown that absorbed americium is transferred to the
fetus (Hisamatsu and Takizawa 1983; Paquet et al. 1998; Sasser et al. 1986; Schoeters et al. 1990; Weiss
et al. 1980).
Information on the distribution of absorbed americium to mammary milk in humans is not available;
however, maternal (oral or intravenous) exposures of animals, including cows and goats, have shown that
transfer to milk occurs and that neonates can be exposed to americium during lactation (McClellan et al.
1962; Sasser et al. 1986; Sutton et al. 1979).
Exchanges between bone and soft tissue stores of americium would be expected to be more rapid during
periods of active bone metabolism such as infancy and childhood, pregnancy, and menopause. Thus, it is
possible that, in humans, some of the maternal bone americium stores may be transferred to the fetus
during gestation and may be incorporated into fetal bone during the development of the fetal skeleton.
Child health data needs relating to exposure are discussed in 6.8.1 Identification of Data Needs:
Exposures of Children.
AMERICIUM 101
3. HEALTH EFFECTS
3.12.3 Ongoing Studies
No ongoing studies examining adverse health effects in mammalian species exposed to americium were
identified in the Federal Research in Progress database (FEDRIP 2004) or are currently listed by the
Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) for the Department of Energy (DOE).
AMERICIUM 103
4. CHEMICAL, PHYSICAL, and RADIOLOGICAL INFORMATION
4.1 CHEMICAL IDENTITY
Americium is a human-made actinide element (atomic number 95) and has no stable isotopes. It was
discovered by Glen Seaborg, Leon Morgan, Ralph James, and Albert Ghiorso in 1944 and isolated by
B.B. Cunningham as the isotope 241Am in Am(OH)3 in the fall of 1945. It was named after the Americas
(Seaborg 1991; Seaborg and Loveland 1990). Actinides are the 15 elements starting with actinium,
atomic number 89, and extending to lawrencium, atomic number 103. All of the isotopes of these
elements are radioactive. Of the 15 americium isotopes and isomers currently identified, the longest-lived
is 243Am.
4.2 PHYSICAL, CHEMICAL, AND RADIOLOGICAL PROPERTIES
Americium is a silvery, ductile, very maleable, non-magnetic metal. Americium melts at 1,176 ºC, boils
at 2,011 ºC, and has an electron configuration of 5f77s2. The Chemical Abstract Service (CAS) registry
numbers, decay modes, half-lives, and specific activities of the four principal americium isotopes and
isomers, 241Am,242mAm, 242Am, and 243Am, are presented in Table 4-1. 241
Am and 243Am decay by alpha
emission forming neptunium (atomic number 93), 237Np (t½=2.14x106 years) and 239Np (t½=2.355 days) as
239
the respective products. Np subsequently decays to 239Pu (t½=2.411x104 years), and then to 235U, which
is also a naturally-occurring isotope of uranium. The decay of 241Am to 237Np is accompanied by a
242m
predominant gamma ray photon of 59.54 keV. Am is an isomer (long-lived excited state of the
242
nucleus) of Am and has a half-life of 141 years; 95.5% of 242mAm undergoes an isomeric transition to
242
Am (t½=16.02 hours) with the emission of a 48.6 keV gamma ray, and 0.5% decays by alpha emission
to 238Np. 242
Am primarily (87%) undergoes beta decay to curium 242 (atomic number 96)
(t½=162.8 days), which decays to 238Pu (t½=87.74 years) and then to 234U (t½=2.45x105 years) (another
naturally-occurring uranium isotope); 17% undergoes electron capture to 242Pu (t½=3.76x105 years).
241
Am has a high specific activity of 3.428 Ci/g (0.1268 TBq/g), emitting ~7x109 alpha particles/mg/
243
minute. Am has a specific alpha activity about 17 times lower than 241Am and is therefore more
attractive for chemical investigations of the element (ICRP 1983; Lide 1998; O’Neil 2001; Seaborg
1991).
AMERICIUM 104
4. CHEMICAL, PHYSICAL, AND RADIOLOGICAL INFORMATION
Table 4-1. Principal Americium Isotopes
Particle energy
CAS Decay mode/ Specific Gamma

Registry percent Decay mode Energy Intensity Half-life activityb energy
Isotopea No. (product) energy(MeV) (MeV) (percent) (years) (Ci/g) (keV)
241
Am 14596-10-2 " (23973Np) 5.637 5.4431 12.8 432.2 3.43 26.34
c
86954-36-1 5.4857 85.2 33.192
5.3884 1.4 59.536
Others <1
242m
Am 13981-54-9 I.T./95.5 0.048 141 10.5 48.63
(242Am)
238
" /0.5( 93Np) 5.62 5.141 0.026 86.48
5.2070 0.4 109.44
163.04
242
Am 13981-54-9 $-/83 (24926Cm) 0.665 0.63 46 16.02 808,000 42.2
hours
EC/17 (24924Pu) 0.750 0.67 37 44.53

243
Am 14993-75-0 " (23993Np) 5.438 5.1798 1.1 7,370 0.199 43.54
5.2343 11 74.67
5.2766 88 86.57
Others <1 117.70
141.97
a
An m after the atomic mass indicates one of multiple isomers of a given atomic mass.
b
LANL 1999 (1 Ci=0.037 TBq)
c
CAS Registry Number for 241Am3+ ion
Source: Baum 2002; DOE 1997b; ICRP 1983; LBL 2000; Lide 1998
AMERICIUM 105
The known oxidation states of americium are +2, +3, +4, +5, and +6. However, the stable oxidation
states are +3 and +4; the common oxidation state is +3, in which state, the behavior of americium and
other actinides is similar to the lanthanides. The trivalent state is the only state of importance in
biological systems. The +2 oxidation state is very unstable and has only been produced in solid
compounds. The stability of the americium oxidation states higher than +3 is less than that of uranium,
neptunium, and plutonium (Cotton and Wilkinson 1980; Nenot and Stather 1979; Seaborg 1991). Am+3
hydrolyzes and forms weak complexes with serum proteins and other ligands. The physical and chemical
properties of americium and selected americium compounds are shown in Table 4-2. Properties of some
americium ions are shown in Table 4-3. The decay schemes for 241Am and 243Am are shown in
Tables 4-4 and 4-5.
AMERICIUM 106
Table 4-2. Physical and Chemical Properties of Americium and

Selected Americium Compounds
Value
Americium(III) Americium(III)
Property Americium Americium(II) oxide oxide chloride
Atomic/molecular weighta 243 275 534 349
Chemical formula Am AmO2 Am2O3 AmCl3
Synonyms No data No data No data No data
b
Chemical Abstracts 7440-35-9 12005-67-3 12254-64-7 13464-46-5
Service Registry No.
Color Silvery Black Tan Pink
Physical form Solid metal Cubic crystals Hexagonal Hexagonal
crystals crystals
Odor No data No data No data No data
Melting point, EC 1,176 >1,000 (decomposes) No data 500
Boiling point, EC 2,011 Not relevant No data No data
Autoignition temperature No data Not relevant Not relevant Not relevant
Solubility:
Water Insoluble No data No data Soluble
Other solvents Soluble in acid Soluble in acid Soluble in acid No data
Density, g/cm3 12 11.68 11.77 5.87
Partition coefficients No data No data No data No data
Vapor pressure No data No data No data No data
Refractive index No data No data No data No data
AMERICIUM 107
Table 4-2. Physical and Chemical Properties of Americium and

Selected Americium Compounds
Value
Property Americium(III) fluoride Americium nitrate Americium citrate
Atomic/molecular weighta 300 429 432
Chemical formula AmF3 Am(NO3)3 AmC6H5O7
Synonyms No data Americium trinitrate No data
Chemical Abstracts Service 13708-80-0 25933-53-3 11078-88-9
Registry No.
Color Pink No data No data
Physical form Hexagonal crystals No data No data
Odor No data No data No data
Melting point, EC 1,393 No data No data
Boiling point, EC No data No data No data
Autoignition temperature Not relevant Not relevant Not relevant
Solubility:
Water No data No data No data
Other solvents No data No data No data
Density, g/cm3 9.53 No data No data
Partition coefficients No data No data No data
Vapor pressure No data No data No data
Refractive index No data No data No data
a
Calculated for 243Am
b
This is also a generic CAS Registry Number for americium (unspecified form).
Source: Chemical Abstract Service 2000; Lide 1994, 1998, 2000

AMERICIUM 108
Table 4-3. Properties of Some Americium Ions
Ion Color Stability

Am3+ Pink or yellow Stable; difficult to oxidize
4+
Am Color unknown Occurs in solution only as complex
fluoride and carbonate ions
AmO2+ Yellow Disproportionates in strong acid;
reduces fairly rapidly under action of
own alpha emissions (241Am) at low
acidification
AmO22+ Rum colored Easily reduced; reduces fairly rapidly
under the action of its own alpha
radiation (241Am)
Source: Seaborg 1991

AMERICIUM 109
241
Table 4-4. Am Decay Schemea
Energies and intensities of emitted radiation

Alpha (α) Beta (β) max Gamma (γ)
Nuclide Half-life keV % MeV % keV %
241
Am 432.2 years 5,485 84.5 13.9 42
↓ 5,443 13.0 59.5 35.9
26.3 2.4
237
Np 2.144x106 4,788 47 13.3 58
↓ years 4,771 25 29.4 15
4,766 8 86.5 12.4
4,639 6.2 8.2 9
4,664 3.3 95.9 2.7
233
Pa 26.97 days 232 40 13.6 56
↓ 156 27.7 312.2 38.6
260 17 98.4 17.7
174 16.4 94.7 10.9
572 4 111.0 8.2
233
U 1.592x105 4,824 84.4 13.0 6.0
↓ years 4,784 13.2
229
Th 7,340 years 4,845 56.2 12.3 79
↓ 4,901 10.2 88.5 24.7
4,815 9.3 85.4 15.0
5,053 6.6 100.0 11.3
4,968 6.0 11.1 8
225
Ra 14.9 days 331 69.5 40.0 30.0
↓ 371 30.5 12.7 15.2
225
Ac 10.0 days 5,830 50.7 12.0 20.9
↓ 5,792 18.1 10.6 9.3
5,791 8.6
5,732 8.0
5,637 4.4
221
Fr 4.9 minutes 6,341 83.4 218.2 11.6
↓ 6,126 15.1 11.4 2.2
217
At ↓ 0.323 seconds 7,066 99.9 258.5 0.056
213
Bi 45.59 minutes 5,869 1.94 1422 65.9 440.5 26.1
97.84% ↓ 2.16% 982 31.0 79.3 2.0
213
Po 3.65 micro- 8,376 100.0 778.8 0.005
↓ seconds
209
Tl 2.2 minutes 660 98.8 1567.1 99.8
↓ 465.1 96.9
117.2 84.3
75.0 10.7
10.6 9.4
209
Pb ↓ 3.253 hours 0.644 100
209
Bi stable
a
Minimum intensity 2%, up to five energies, with at least one entry per radiation type (DOE 2003)
AMERICIUM 110
243

243
Am 7,370 years 5,275 87.4 74.7 68.2
↓ 5,233 11.0 13.9 21.4
5,181 1.1 43.5 5.9
239
Np 2.3565 days 436.5 45 14.3 63
↓ 330.4 40.5 106.1 27.2
391.9 11 103.8 22.5
714.1 2.0 277.6 14.4
99.6 14.0
239
Pu 24,110 years 5,157 73.3 13.6 4.9
↓ 5,144 15.1
5,106 11.5
235
U 703,800,000 4,398 55 185.7 57.2
↓ years 4,366 17.0 13.0 36
4,215 5.7 143.8 11.0
4,596 5.0 93.4 5.8
4,325 4.4 163.3 5.1
231
Th 25.52 hours 288.1 40 13.3 72
↓ 305.3 33 25.6 14.1
206.0 12.8 84.2 6.6
287.2 12
142.2 2.8
231
Pa 32,760 years 5,014 25.4 12.7 36
↓ 4,951 22.8 27.4 10.3
5,028 20.0 300.0 2.5
5,059 11.0 302.6 2.2
4,736 8.4
227
Ac 21.772 years 4,953 0.658 44.8 53 12.0 0.088
↓ 35.5 35
98+% 1.4% 20.3 10
227
Th 18.68 days 6,038 24.2 12.3 40
↓ 5,978 23.5 236.0 12.9
5,757 20.4 50.1 8.4
5,709 8.3 256.2 7.0
5,713 4.9 329.8 2.9
223
Fr 22.00 minutes 1,099.,0 70 50.1 34
↓ 1,069.4 15.0 12.3 30
914.3 10.1 79.7 8.7
234.8 3.0
49.8 2.8
223
Ra 11.43 days 5,716 51.6 83.8 25.4
↓ 5,607 25.2 11.7 25
5,747 9.0 81.1 15.3
5,540 9.0 269.5 13.9
5,434 2.2 94.9 11.5
AMERICIUM 111
243

219
Rn 3.96 seconds 6,819 79.4 271.2 10.8
↓ 6,553 12.9 401.8 6.6
6,425 7.5
215
Po ↓ 1.781 milli- 7,386 100.0
seconds
211
Pb 36.1 minutes 1379 91.3 404.9 3.8
↓ 547 6.3 832.0 3.5
211
Bi 2.14 minutes 6,623 83.5 351.1 12.9
↓ 6,278 16.2
207
Tl ↓ 4.77 minutes 1427 99.7 897.8 0.26
207
Pb stable
a
Minimum intensity 2%, up to five energies, with at least one entry per radiation type (DOE 2003)
AMERICIUM 113
5. PRODUCTION, IMPORT/EXPORT, USE, AND DISPOSAL
5.1 PRODUCTION
Americium does not occur in nature. Although the amount of 241Am produced is believed to be several
kilograms a year, the only isotope produced for commercial use is 241Am. No production figures were
available in the published literature. The amount of 243Am available ranges from 10 to 100 g (Seaborg
and Loveland 1990).
241
Am and 243Am can be made from 239U or 239Pu by neutron activation involving an operating nuclear
reactor or nuclear bomb detonation. In this process, neutron activation of 238U can produce uranium
isotopes up to at least 241U, and each of these beta decays to a neptunium isotope of the same mass.
Neutron activation of neptunium can produce isotopes starting with 239Np up through at least 244Np, and
each of these isotopes beta decays to a plutonium isotope of the same mass. Neutron activation of
plutonium isotopes starting with 239Pu can produce isotopes through at least 246Pu, and of these, 241Pu,
243
Pu, 245Pu, and 246Pu beta decay to americium isotopes of the same mass. 241
Am can be produced more
directly through alpha bombardment of 238U to 241Pu (238U [α,n] 241Pu), and its subsequent beta decay.
Each of these americium isotopes can also be neutron activated to isotopes up through at least 246Am. The
amount of any product is a function of the starting mass of either 238U or 239Pu and the neutron fluence
over the activation period balanced by the natural radioactive decay of the isotopes being formed. For
example, an atom of 239Pu will naturally decay to 235U, unless it is first neutron activated to 240Pu. 240
Pu
will alpha decay to 236U, unless first activated to 241Pu. 241
Pu will beta decay to 241Am, unless first neutron
activated to 242Pu. These processes can be managed through focused radiochemical separation or by the
addition of special processing (proton bombardment) to help direct the effort toward a particular isotopic
product (Parrington et al. 1996). In general, lower mass isotopes are preferentially produced in the
relatively low fluxes available inside nuclear reactors, while higher masses are more feasibly produced in
extreme flux conditions present inside a nuclear detonation. These processes are summarized in
Figure 5-1.
The relative activities of americium isotopes for a typical pressurized-water reactor (PWR) fuel assembly
are 1,500, 7.2, and 20 Ci (56, 0.27, and 0.74 TBq) for 241Am, 242Am, and 243Am, respectively (DOE
AMERICIUM 114
Figure 5-1. Production Table for 241Am
241Am 242Am 243Am 244Am 245Am 246Am

Americium
Plutonium 237
Pu 238
Pu 239
Pu 240
Pu 241
Pu 242
Pu 243
Pu 244
Pu 245
Pu 246
Pu
Neptunium 237Np 238Np 239Np 240Np 241Np 242Np 243Np 244Np
Uranium 235U 236U 237U 238U 239U 240U 242U
Legend: Neutron activation (n,ƒÁ) reaction more significant to Am-241,243 formation

Neutron activation (n,ƒÁ) reaction less significant to Am-241,243 formation
Neutron activation (n, 2n reaction)
Beta decay (significant to Am-241,243 formation)
Alpha decay
*developed from Parrington et al. (1996)

AMERICIUM 115
2002a). The respective activity ratios for a typical boiling water reactor (BWR) are 370, 2.1, and 4.8 Ci
(14, 0.078, and 0.18 TBq). There are 78 PWRs and 40 BWRs in the United States, several of which have
ceased operation. Total projected inventories of these three radionuclides for all reactors are 2.2x108,
1.6x106, and 1.9x106 Ci (8.1x106, 5.9x104, and 7.0x104 TBq), respectively. The post-irradiation
americium content of typical PWR and BWR fuel assemblies are 600 g (0.09%) and 220 g (0.07%),
respectively.
The ratio of plutonium isotopes to 241Am is often reported in monitoring studies as it is an important tool
243
in dose assessment by enabling a determination of plutonium concentrations. Am is produced directly
241 241 241
by the capture of two neutrons by Am. The parent of Am is Pu, which constitutes about 12% of
the 1% content of a typical spent fuel rod from a nuclear reactor, and has a half-life of 14.4 years.
Separation of 241Am from its parent, 241Pu, and the other isotopes present can be effected by precipitation,
ion exchange, or solvent extraction.
Americium metal has been obtained by heating americium oxide, Am2O3, with lanthanum at 1,200 EC;
americium, which is more volatile than other actinides, volatilizes and can readily be separated from other
actinides. AmO2 can be obtained by igniting most trivalent americium compounds (Budavari 1996;
Cotton and Wilkinson 1980; UIC 1997).
5.2 IMPORT/EXPORT
No U.S. import or export information is available for americium.
5.3 USE
241
Am has a long half-life and a predominant gamma ray energy of 59.5 keV, which makes it useful for a
wide range of industrial gauging applications and for diagnosing certain thyroid disorders (Seaborg 1991).
The most common application of americium is in ionization smoke detectors, and most of the several
kilograms of americium produced each year are used for this purpose. Smoke detectors today typically
contain approximately 1 µCi (37 kBq) of 241Am (EPA 2004b). One gram of americium dioxide, AmO2,
provides enough active material for more than 5,000 smoke detectors. In the 1980s, annual sales of
smoke detectors approached 12 million units. A mixture of 241Am and beryllium known as 241Am-Be is
used as a neutron source in non-destructive testing of machinery and equipment, and as a thickness gauge
AMERICIUM 116
241
in the glass industry (UIC 1997). Am is used worldwide to measure the rate of production by oil wells
(Seaborg 1991). No commercial uses for other americium isotopes were found. However, 243Am can be
used as a target material for the production of transcurium elements in high neutron flux reactors
243
(Budavari 1996). Am is also the preferred isotope for investigating the chemical properties of
americium, because its lower specific activity and gamma emissions relative to 241Am, which produce a
lower radiation field for researchers and a lower radiation dose to experimental animals.
5.4 DISPOSAL
Radioactive wastes are categorized according to their origin, the type of waste present, and their level of
activity. The first distinction is between defense waste and commercial waste. The former was generated
during and after World War II, principally at DOE’s facilities at Hanford, Washington; Savannah River,
South Carolina; and Idaho Falls, Idaho where plutonium and other isotopes were separated from
production reactor or nuclear-powered naval vessel spent fuel. Commercial waste is produced by nuclear
power plants, except for the long defunct commercial reprocessing facility at West Valley, New York.
Nuclear waste is classified as transuranic waste (TRU), high-level waste (HLW), spent nuclear fuel
(SNF), uranium and thorium mill tailings (UMT), and low-level waste (LLW). LLW is further
differentiated into four classes, A, B, C, and greater than class C, according to increasing level of activity
(listed in Tables 1 and 2 of 10 CFR 61.55 for long and short half-life radionuclides, respectively), with
specific disposal requirements (USNRC 2004a). SNF, HLW, TRU, and greater than class C (GTCC)
waste are not generally suitable for near-surface disposal (EPA 2004d). Class C waste would include
much of the operating and decommissioning waste from nuclear power plants, typical radioactive material
licensee facilities, and sealed radioisotope sources. LLW (less GTCC) is currently accepted at three sites
(Barnwell, South Carolina; Envirocare, Utah; and Richland, Washington). Defense TRU is currently
being buried at the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) 2,150 feet below ground in a geologically inactive
salt deposit near Carlsbad, New Mexico (EPA 2004e). GTCC, HLW, and SNF are destined for disposal
at a HLW site, which is likely to be at Yucca Mountain, Nevada (USNRC 2004b). Yucca’s 25-foot
diameter main access tunnel and test disposal drifts have been bored, and research is underway to test and
reduce uncertainties associated with various modeling parameters used to provide assurance that isolation
of the waste from the biosphere for 10,000 years will be feasible (DOE 2004). If LLW also contains
hazardous material (i.e., toxic, corrosive, inflammable, or oxidizing), it is termed low level mixed waste
(LLMW). EPA is considering the feasibility of disposing of some LLMW in RCRA-C landfills, and the
EPA public comment period ended in April, 2004. Large volumes of mixed chemical and radioactive
AMERICIUM 117
liquid waste at the Hanford Reservation are slated for disposal at the future HLW repository; however,
Hanford is considering managing the waste in a way that destroys the volatile organics and PCBs,
separating the resulting waste into low and high level component streams, vitrifying each, disposing of
the low activity waste on site in a virtual LLW facility, and holding the vitrified HLW until Yucca or the
selected facility opens. UMT waste does not concern americium (DOE 1999a; Murray 1994).
TRU contains radionuclides, like 241Am and 243Am, which follow uranium in the periodic table and have
half-lives >20 years. If its level of activity is less than 100 nanocuries (nCi) (3.7 kBq) of alpha-emitters
per gram of waste material (up from 10 nCi/g in 1982), the waste can be disposed of by shallow burial.
Wastes with TRU concentrations >100 nCi/g go to WIPP. TRU generally has low levels of radioactivity,
generates very little heat, contains volatile organics, and is grouped as contact handled (CH) with surface
radiation levels not exceeding 200 mrem per hour, or remote handled (RH) waste with surface levels
above 200 but not exceeding 1,000 mrem per hour (EPA 2004d).
HLW includes spent fuel that is contained in fuel rods that have been used in a nuclear reactor and fuel
reprocessing liquids, concentrates, and solids. These fuel rods will contain some level of transuranic
elements. After removal, these rods are placed in pools adjacent to the commercial nuclear power plants
and DOE facilities where they were produced. It was originally intended that the fuel rods remain in
these pools for only about 6 months to allow for a reduction in radioactivity and temperature, and then be
transferred to a reprocessing or storage facility. There is no commercial reprocessing facility or
permanent disposal facility for HLW operating in the United States. The USNRC has issued standards
for the disposal of HLW (10 CFR 61), and the DOE is pursuing the establishment of an HLW facility.
Efforts to establish an HLW facility, which began over 2 decades ago, have experienced many delays.
However, in July 2002, the U.S. Congress and the President selected Yucca Mountain, Nevada as the
nation’s first long-term repository for HLW. The underground tunnel system and several of its
operational facilities have been completed through 2004. The facility is projected to begin operation
(accept HLW) in 2010, and efforts are underway to consider establishing a nearby interim storage facility
should that date need to be extended beyond the capacity of utilities to provide onsite storage of their SNF
(DOE 2002b, 2004).
LLW is officially defined as radioactive waste other than those previously defined. These wastes come
from reactors and institutions such as hospitals, universities, and research centers. Most LLW contains
very little or low concentrations of primarily short-lived radioactivity and essentially no transuranic
elements. It requires little or no shielding or special handling, and may be disposed of by shallow burial.
AMERICIUM 118
However, some LLW contains sufficient quantities of radioactivity as to require special treatment.
USNRC regulations for LLW disposal (10 CFR 61) permit shallow land burial, and the three states with
licensed LLW disposal facilities (South Carolin, Utah, and Washington), as USNRC agreement states,
have enacted more stringent regulations (Eisenbud 1987; Murray 1994; USNRC 2004c). The EPA is
developing cleanup regulations as well as general environmental standards for LLW disposal that would
apply to DOE facilities (EPA 2001d). The standards will facilitate planning and reduce costs for cleanup
and disposal. There are currently 23 DOE and commercial LLW disposal sites in the United States (EPA
2001d). While some LLW facilities are closed, they are continuously monitored to detect releases of
radioactivity into the environment. The Manifest Information Management System (MIMS), maintained
by the Idaho National Environmental and Engineering Laboratory (INEEL), contains information on low-
level radioactive waste shipments received at commercial low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities at
Barnwell, South Carolina (January 1, 1986–present); Beaty, Nevada (April 1, 1986–December 31, 1992);
Richland, Washington (January 1, 1986–present); and Envirocare, Utah (January 1, 1998–December 31,
1999). In 1999, 3.67 Ci (136 GBq) of 241Am and <0.01 Ci (<0.4 GBq) of 243Am LLW was received at
these facilities from academic, industrial, government, and utility generators throughout the United States
(INEEL 2000).
The USNRC and EPA each have responsibilities for regulating the cleanup of radioactivity and
decommissioning of USNRC licensed sites. USNRC and EPA reached an agreement in 2002, in response
to Congressional mandate, to preclude double regulation of these efforts. The agreement provides that
EPA will defer exercise of authority under Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) for the majority of facilities decommissioned under USNRC authority. It also
contains provisions for joint consultation when certain EPA parameters are exceeded, including
groundwater exceeding EPA-permitted levels, USNRC contemplation of restricted release or alternate
release criteria, and residual soil radioactivity concentrations exceeding those in the agreement (USNRC
2002).
At present, DOE stores most of its spent fuel and HLW at three primary locations: the Hanford site in
Washington, the INEEL in Idaho, and the Savannah River Site in South Carolina, representing 86% of the
volume and 98% of the metal mass. Some HLW/SNF is also stored at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in
Tennessee, the West Valley site in New York, and the dry storage facility at Fort St. Vrain in Colorado
(DOE 2002c). Much smaller amounts of spent nuclear fuel stored at other sites were to be shipped to the
three prime sites for storage and preparation for ultimate disposal (DOE 1999a). The DOE National
Spent Fuel Program maintains a spent nuclear fuel database that lists the total volume, mass, and metric
AMERICIUM 119
tons of heavy metal (MTHM) of 16 DOE categories of spent nuclear fuel stored in each of the three
locations. The categories having the highest 241Am activities per spent nuclear fuel canister (decayed to
2030) are ‘uranium metal’, ‘mixed oxides’, and ‘plutonium/uranium carbide, nongraphite’. The 241Am
solid waste stored on the Hanford site in 1998 included 2.3 Ci (85 GBq) as LLW and 11 Ci (410 GBq) as
TRU (Hanford 1999). Between 1945 and 1970, the Farallon Islands Nuclear Waste Dump Site
(FINWDS), approximately 30 miles west of San Francisco, received at least 500 TBq (14,000 Ci) of
reportedly low-level nuclear waste, concrete-encapsulated in at least 47,500 55-gallon, 16-gauge steel
drums (life-expectancy ~30 years in sea water) (Suchanek et al. 1996). These were deposited at three
sites 100, 900, and 1,800 m deep.
According to EPA (2004a), smoke detectors (with the batteries removed) can be disposed of in the trash.
However, EPA also notes that state and local practices for the safe disposal of smoke detectors vary.
Some state radiation control programs conduct annual collection programs for smoke detectors, while
other state and local governments recommend that the smoke detector be returned to the supplier (EPA
2004b).
AMERICIUM 121
6. POTENTIAL FOR HUMAN EXPOSURE
6.1 OVERVIEW
Americium has been identified in at least 8 of the 1,636 hazardous waste sites that have been proposed for
inclusion on the EPA National Priorities List (NPL) (HazDat 2004). However, the number of sites
evaluated for americium is not known. The frequency of these sites can be seen in Figure 6-1. Of these
sites, all are located within the United States.
Americium is a human-made element. In the environment, 241Am is present as a result of basically three
sources: fallout from nuclear explosions, releases from nuclear reactors and reprocessing plants, and
production and disposal of smoke detectors by producers and consumers. The majority of the americium
present in the environment was the result of atmospheric nuclear weapons testing during the 1950s and
1960s (EPA 2004c). Additionally, there are accidental releases such as the Chernobyl accident, the burn-
up of a satellite powered by the aerospace reactor SNAP 9A, and the crash of a B-52 aircraft carrying
nuclear weapons in Thule, Greenland. Today, 241Am along with 90Sr, 137Cs, 238Pu, 239Pu, and 240Pu, are the
isotopes that produce the majority of radiation associated with nuclear fallout (DOE 1997a). Low levels
of 241Am may be found in environmental media worldwide from atmospheric nuclear weapons tests; these
levels are referred to as fallout background levels. In nuclear reactors, 241Am has been detected in
primary coolant water, stack aerosols, and waste water (Rosner et al. 1978). Because 241Am is produced
from the decay of 241Pu (half-life=14.4 years), releases of 241Pu will result in an ingrowth of 241Am;
clearly, releases of 241Pu and 241Am must be considered collectively. The maximum quantity of 241Am
following an accidental release of 241Pu occurs in 70–80 years following the production of the 241Pu (EPA
1976). Consequently, the impact of 241Am from atmospheric nuclear weapons testing will reach its peak
in about the year 2035 and then, based on this model, levels will decline according to its combined rate of
formation and decay. It should be noted that when the 241Am level reaches its peak, there will still be
241 241
Pu remaining. Am is used commercially as an ionization source in smoke detectors and it may be
241
released into the environment from its production, use, and disposal. Am is the only americium isotope
that is used commercially.
Americium released to the atmosphere will be associated with particulate matter and will be deposited on
land or surface water by dry or wet deposition (Essien et al. 1985). Dry deposition results from
AMERICIUM 122
Figure 6-1. Frequency of NPL Sites with Americium Contamination
Frequency of
NPL Sites
<= 1
1-2
Derived from HazDat 2004

AMERICIUM 123
gravitational settling and impaction on surfaces. Wet deposition returns americium to earth in
precipitation. Radionuclides resulting from atmospheric weapons tests are often injected into the lower
stratosphere, while other atmospheric releases are into the troposphere. The residence time of particles in
the atmosphere will depend on their aerodynamic size, as well as the altitude, latitude, season, and
hemisphere because of atmospheric circulatory patterns. For example, residence half-times of particles in
the lower stratosphere range from 3 to 12 months in polar regions and from 8 to 24 months in equatorial
regions, with removal being highest in the spring and lowest in the fall. Half-times for particles in the
troposphere are about 1 month. Larger particles will remain in the atmosphere for shorter periods of time
and are deposited closer to their emission source, while smaller particles remain in the air for longer
periods of time and are deposited farther from their source. In the absence of actual measurements, the
deposition of 241Am in a region can be estimated by using the relationship between air concentration and
deposition quantities for other isotopes that are attached to particulate matter in air. Using this
methodology, the annual deposition of 241Am in New York was estimated to have reached a maximum of
0.010 mCi/km2 (0.37 MBq/km2) in 1964 (Bennett 1979). The cumulative 241Am deposition in the
year 2000 is estimated to be 0.058 mCi/km2 (2.1 MBq/km2). If the ingrowth from 241Pu decay is included,
the cumulative 241Am deposited by the year 2000 would be 0.80 mCi/km2 (30 MBq/km2). Americium
may also be injected into the atmosphere from water surfaces by the action of bubbles scavenging the
water column and wave action (McKay et al. 1994; Walker et al. 1986). Similarly, 241Am-contaminated
soil may be released into air by wind action.
Americium released to water in effluent, runoff, or atmospheric deposition adsorbs to particulate matter
and is rapidly depleted from the water column and deposited in surface sediment (Murray and Avogadro
1979). Adsorption is very high with distribution coefficients between the particulate-associated phase and
the dissolved phase in sediment and water of the order of 105–106 (Davis et al. 1997; NRC 1981;
Pattenden and McKay 1994). Aquatic organisms can bioaccumulate americium via intake from the water
or ingestion of sediment or organisms lower on the food scale. In crustacean zooplankton, crustaceans,
and molluscs, americium is accumulated from water by passive absorption onto exoskeletons (Fisher et al.
1983). Ingested in suspended diatoms or other food, americium largely passes through the gut and is
eliminated. Biogenic debris from these animals, such as fecal pellets and discarded molts, facilitates
vertical transport of 241Am into the depths and sediment.
If land deposition occurs, americium will sorb to the soil, leach into the subsurface soil, and redistribute
by the action of wind, water, or biotic transport. Small mammals inhabiting areas containing radioactive
contamination or radioactive waste sites may become contaminated with americium by consuming
AMERICIUM 124
contaminated soil or plants and disturb 241Am-contaminated soil through their burrowing and excavating
activities. In addition, small mammals may be consumed by animals higher in the food chain such as
hawks and coyotes, which would add to the dispersal of americium from disposal areas. Since fallout
241
Am is accompanied by its precursor, 241Pu, which also leaches into the ground, the amount of 241Am at
a depth is a function of the leaching of both the americium and plutonium as well as the decay of these
isotopes. Fallout 241Am is predominantly retained to the upper few centimeters of soil where it is
associated with organic matter and bound to manganese and iron oxides (Bennett 1976; Bunzl et al. 1995;
Vyas and Mistry 1980). However, transuranic radionuclides, including americium, have been found to
migrate in groundwater, and have traveled underground from 80 to over 3,000 meters at several national
laboratories. Colloidal materials can be mobile in groundwater systems for great distances and are
capable of binding and transporting radionuclide contaminants, including americium, in subsurface
systems (McCarthy et al. 1998a, 1998b; Penrose et al. 1990).
241
Americium may be taken up from the soil by plants and translocated to other parts of the plants. Am-
241
contaminated dust may also be deposited on the above-ground parts of the plant. Uptake of Am from
soil is low (Bennett 1979; EPA 1979; Nisbet and Shaw 1994; Romney et al. 1981; Schultz et al. 1976;
Zach 1985). Uptake from soil is a function of the chemical species, soil chemistry, plant species, and
environmental conditions. Concentration ratios of 241Am in plants to that in soil range over about 2 orders
of magnitude depending on crop and soil type. Uptake is higher under acidic conditions and lower in soil
with high fractions of organic matter that play an important role in complexing americium, making it less
available for uptake. Translocation of transuranic elements taken up through the roots into seeds and fruit
is generally very low (Bennett 1979; Schreckhise and Cline 1980). Concentration ratios in seed, grain,
and fruit range from 10-6 to 10-4, about a factor of 10 lower than in foliage. Animals can accumulate
americium by eating contaminated plants as well as by ingesting soil or other animals and by breathing
air. Biological uptake in aquatic organisms may depend on factors such as temperature, time after intake,
season of the year, and water quality. The bioconcentration of 241Am in fish is low, especially to the
edible parts of the fish (DOE 1996). In a study performed in a nuclear waste pond where the levels of
241
Am were about 3 orders of magnitude above background levels, concentrations in fish filet were rarely
>10 times that of controls (Emery et al. 1981). In marine organisms consumed by humans, uptake is
generally highest in mussels where the target organs are mainly the digestive gland, gill, and exoskeleton
(Chassard-Bouchaud 1996; Fisher et al. 1996; Hamilton and Clifton 1980). Transfer coefficients have
been reported for many of these processes. Available evidence suggests that americium is not
biomagnified up the food chain to humans (Bulman 1978; Jaakkola et al. 1977). More recent reports on
the biomagnification of americium have not been located.
AMERICIUM 125
Exposures of the general population to 241Am via air, water, soil, and food are generally very low; these
‘background’ levels are a result of fallout from past atmospheric nuclear weapons tests. Since 1973,
241
Am air concentrations have been <10-18 Ci/m3 (0.037 µBq/m3) and are continuing to decline (Bennett
1979). The United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) (2000)
reported that deposition and air concentrations of radionuclides from fallout dropped rapidly once
atmospheric testing ceased in 1980. Inhalation exposures for even long-lived transuranic radionuclides
became insignificant after 1985. Levels around nuclear power plants are indistinguishable from fallout
241
background (EPRI 1981). Am levels in surface seawater of the North Sea and North Atlantic Ocean
stayed around 10 Bq/m (270 pCi/m3) between 1976 and 1988 (Pattenden and McKay 1994), but may be
3
241
considerably higher near discharges from nuclear facilities. Am in soil resulting from cumulative
deposition and ingrowth in the New York region should reach a maximum of 0.88 mCi/km2
(33 MBq/km2) in the year 2035. In the FDA Total Diet Studies in 1983–1986 and 1987–1992, the
concentrations of radionuclides were sufficiently low as to require no specific action or simple
monitoring.
The general population may be exposed to elevated levels of 241Am from nuclear accidents or from
residing in areas in the proximity of hazardous waste sites where this radionuclide is present. Exposure is
generally through the inhalation and ingestion of dust from these sites. Workers involved in producing
ionization smoke detectors or other devices containing 241Am, workers at nuclear reactors or Department
of Energy (DOE) facilities, and workers who use americium-containing devices (neutron backscatter
sources for checking roof leaks and road undermining, and well logging equipment) may also be exposed
to higher levels of 241Am. In the environment and most occupational situations, americium is usually
encountered in combination with plutonium and curium; exposure to americium alone is unlikely.
Elevated levels of 241Am have been identified in at least 8 of the 1,636 current or former EPA NPL
hazardous waste sites (HazDat 2004). However, the number of sites evaluated for americium is not
known. The distribution of these sites within the United States is shown in Figure 6-1.
6.2 RELEASES TO THE ENVIRONMENT
Throughout this chapter, the units used to express concentration or intake of 241Am are the same units
reported by the authors, which may be followed by converted units in parenthesis. Concentrations of
241
Am are generally expressed in terms of activity, either in the conventional unit, the curie (Ci) or the SI
AMERICIUM 126
unit, the becquerel (Bq), where 1 Ci=3.7x1010 Bq=0.037 TBq or 1 Bq=2.7x10-11 Ci=27 pCi. Activities
may be converted into mass units using the specific activity, 3.43 Ci/g. It should be remembered that
since 241Pu (half-life=14.4 years) decays into 241Am, over time, inventories of 241Am will be augmented by
releases of 241Pu. The ratio of americium to plutonium isotopes is often used to characterize the nature of
a radionuclide source.
6.2.1 Air
241
Am has been detected in air at 3 of the 1,636 current or former NPL hazardous waste sites where it was
detected in some environmental media (HazDat 2004).
241
Am is released into the atmosphere primarily by nuclear reactor operations, nuclear accidents, and
nuclear weapons testing, but previous releases from plutonium production reactors have ended since they
are no longer operational. The 241Am released is augmented by the decay of 241Pu released during these
events. The amount of 241Am released is often estimated by the amount deposited on earth. In 1982,
UNSCEAR estimated that the integrated deposition density of 241Am in the north temperate zone of the
earth was 25 Bq/m2 (0.68 nCi/m2) (Suchanek et al. 1996). Since then, the effective deposition of 241Am
has grown by 1 Bq/m2 (0.03 nCi/m2) per year because of the radioactive decay of 730 Bq/m2 (20 nCi/m2)
of deposited 241Pu (to approximately 45 Bq/m2 [1.2 nCi/m2]).
In atmospheric nuclear weapons tests, radionuclides are often injected into the stratosphere. The amount
of 241Am present in the atmosphere from nuclear weapons testing depends on the amount of unfissioned
241
Am and 241Pu, as well as lower isotopes of plutonium neutron activated to 241Pu during detonation and
injected into the atmosphere, and the transport and residence time of both 241Am and its precursor in the
various atmospheric compartments (e.g., stratosphere and troposphere). For a particular weapon’s test,
this will depend on such factors as the amount of plutonium and americium in the weapon, detonation
yield, altitude and latitude of the detonation, and season. High-yield U.S. tests were characterized by very
high ratios of 241Pu/239,240Pu, and these would produce relatively large quantities of 241Am (Roos et al.
1994). At this time, the legacy of past atmosphere nuclear weapons tests is a fairly uniform low level
radiation background. The peak global activity of 241Am resulting from nuclear weapons testing between
1951 and 1978 and receiving global distribution is estimated to be 130 kCi (4,800 TBq), taking into
account the simultaneous production of 241Am from 241Pu and its decay (Bennett 1979). At the same
time, it should be realized that the detonation of uranium bombs can produce some americium.
AMERICIUM 127
The reactor accident at Chernobyl in April 1986 released radionuclides into the atmosphere, mostly
between April 26 and May 6. Estimates of quantities released are based on observations of deposition
within 30 km of the reactor. Releases in this area were predominantly highly irradiated fuel particles. It
is estimated that the discharge of 241Pu through May 6, 1986 was 5,200 TBq (140 kCi), which amounted
to 3% of the reactor content of this radionuclide (Askbrant et al. 1996; Pattenden and McKay 1994). The
material was released mainly in the lower troposphere.
Subsequent to the primary events releasing radionuclides into the atmosphere, radionuclides can enter the
atmosphere from resuspension of soil particles and forest fires (Lujaniene et al. 1999). Resuspension
studies performed with 241Am indicate that the activity to mass ratio is greatest for particles <45 µm in
diameter (Cooper et al. 1994). Therefore, the fine, resuspended soil released into the air would have a
higher concentration of 241Am than the remaining surface soil. This enhancement factor for resuspended
soil in the inhalable fraction (<7 µm) ranged from 5.4 to 32.5 at six sites at Taranaki, a weapons testing
range at Maralinga, South Australia (Cooper et al. 1994). Another potential source of release is from
windblown soil from LLW disposal sites. While low-level radioactive waste is required to be buried in a
manner protective of near-term release, biotic transport by plants and small mammals may transport
americium to the soil surface where it is accessible to wind. In order to predict the impact of biotic
transport, a model was applied to six composite waste streams containing isotopic concentrations for the
western United States prepared by the USNRC to which current and past LLW disposal conditions
applied. The containers and wastes were assumed to decompose with a 35-year half-life and active biotic
transport was assumed to occur for 100 years following site closure and before institutional control of the
site was lost. After 100 years, the activity at the soil surface (assumed to be uniformly mixed in the upper
0.5 m of the entire burial ground) was estimated to be 8.7x103 and 2.8x105 pCi/m2 (0.32 and 10 kBq/m2)
for 243Am and 241Am, respectively (Kennedy et al. 1985).
241
Am is released to the atmosphere at DOE facilities. Air sampling data were used to estimate effluent
release from the Savannah River Site (SRS) from the plant’s start-up in 1954 through 1989 (DOE 1991a).
From this monitoring, it was estimated that 5.49 mCi (200 MBq) of 241Am was released to the atmosphere
between 1977 and 1989. The SRS was a major U.S. nuclear production facility and included five nuclear
reactors, a fuel and target fabrication plant, a naval fuel materials facility, two chemical separation plants,
a heavy water production plant, and a laboratory. Between 1977 and 1996, the total reported release from
the SRS of 241Am to the atmosphere was 0.0061 Ci (230 MBq). Prior to 1977, no specific anaylsis for
241
Am was done (DOE 1998). In 1999, the total reported releases to atmosphere from the SRS were
AMERICIUM 128
3.86x10-5 and 4.28x10-6 Ci (1.43 and 0.158 MBq) for 241Am and 243Am, respectively (DOE 1999b).
241
Am has been identified in air at the Hanford Site, Washington; Idaho National Engineering and
Environmental Laboratory (INEEL), Idaho; and Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico. A
maximum concentration of 13 MBq/L (350 µCi/L) was measured in 1991 in air at a point source (stack)
at Hanford (HazDat 2004). In 1994, atmospheric discharges of 241Am from four areas at the Hanford Site
ranged from 0.067 to 66 µCi (2.5–2,400 kBq) (PNL 2000).
6.2.2 Water
241
Am has been detected in surface water samples at 2 and in groundwater at 1 of 1,636 NPL hazardous
waste sites where americium has been identified in some environmental component (HazDat 2004).
Americium is released into surface water primarily from plutonium production reactors, nuclear fuel
reprocessing facilities, or nuclear accidents. It may also be released from radioactive waste storage
facilities. Since 241Pu decays into 241Am, 241Am is also released as a result of 241Pu releases. Water
sampling data were used to estimate effluent releases from the SRS from the plant’s startup in
1954 through 1989 (DOE 1991a). From this monitoring, it was estimated that 290 mCi (11 GBq) of
241
Am was released into seepage basins between 1977 and 1989; however, no 241Am was released directly
into streams. In 1999, 1.34x10-5Ci (0.496 MBq) of 241Am was released from the SRS into surface waters
(DOE 1999b).
Radionuclides have been released since 1952 at Sellafield, United Kingdom on the Irish Sea by the
British Nuclear Fuels Limited (BNFL) reprocessing plant and, before that, by two plutonium-producing
nuclear reactors. In 1988, the estimated environmental inventory of 241Am from all previous operations
totaled 859 TBq (23.2 kCi), consisting of 537 TBq (14.5 kCi) actually released plus 322 TBq (8.7 kCi)
produced from the decay of 241Pu that was also released. Annual discharges of 241Am from Sellafield
ranged from 4.5 to 120 TBq/year (120–3,200 Ci/year) between 1964 and 1989, while those for 241Pu
ranged from 1 to 2,800 TBq/year (27–76,000 Ci/year) between 1952 and 1989; maximum annual
discharges occurred in 1973 for 241Pu and 1974 for 241Am (Pattenden and McKay 1994). The annual
liquid effluent discharges from a typical U.K. Magnox Station contained 34.3–121 Bq/L (0.926–
3.27 nCi/L) of 241Am for the years 1991–1995 (Ware et al. 1998). These discharges are from the final
monitoring and delay tank. (Magnox, an alloy of magnesium oxide and aluminum, has been used as a
protective covering or cladding material for fuel elements in British nuclear reactors. The name
AMERICIUM 129
"Magnox" is widely used to refer to the early gas cooled because it provides a simple way to uniquely
identify the group.)
241
Am was identified in surface water at Oak Ridge, Tennessee and Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant,
Kentucky, as well as in groundwater as an unspecified form at the Hanford, Washington and Rocky Flats,
Colorado NPL sites (HazDat 2004). The distribution of NPL sites is shown in Figure 6-1.
6.2.3 Soil
241
Am was detected in soil and sediment at 5 and 2 of the 1,636 NPL hazardous waste sites, respectively,
where it was detected in some environmental media (HazDat 2004).
As a manufactured element, americium is not naturally present in the environment. Contamination of the
soil can occur either from deposition of americium or precursor plutonium originally discharged into the
atmosphere, or from waste products discharged directly into or on the ground. Except for the reentry into
the atmosphere of the SNAP 9A satellite and the French atmospheric tests in the Mururoa Atoll between
1966 and 1974 that occurred in the southern hemisphere, the main events resulting in the deposition of
artificial radionuclides occurred in the northern hemisphere. As a consequence, there is a progressive
decline in the levels of artificial radioactivity from northern to southern latitudes. Recent studies of the
multi-isotopic radioactive content in ice layers in Antarctica have determined that 0.21 Bq/m2
(5.7 pCi/m2) of 241Am was deposited in fallout between 1969 and 1993 (Baeza et al. 1999). Therefore, the
mean annual fallout in Antarctica is about 8.3 mBq/m2 (0.22 pCi/m2).
The USNRC has projected the activities and volumes of low level radioactive waste from all sources
buried at commercial nuclear waste burial sites to the year 2000 using information from the INEEL waste
retrieval project and assuming that the waste disposal practices then used would continue into the future.
The estimated 20-year decayed 241Am and 243Am concentrations were 380 and 230 pCi/m3 (14 and
8.5 Bq/m3), respectively (Kennedy et al. 1985).
The largest releases of 241Am to soil in the United States occur at DOE facilities. The 241Am inventory in
surface soil at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) estimated as part of the DOE’s Radionuclide Inventory and
Distribution Program between 1981 and 1986 was 150 Ci (5,600 GBq) (DOE 1991b). The highest
concentration of 241Am was found in the Yucca Flats area. The United States began testing nuclear
AMERICIUM 130
weapons at the NTS in January 1951. Since then, the NTS has become the primary site for testing nuclear
weapons and studying the effect of these weapons on structures and military equipment; >600 nuclear
explosions have taken place at this site. At Rocky Flats, 241Am contamination in soil was largely formed
from 241Pu in the storage tanks or in the ground (Litaor et al. 1996). Waste oil stored in the tanks was
from processing weapons-grade plutonium, which contained 0.58% 241Pu and <10-4% 241Am. Between
1978 and 1981, 48 and 179 kCi (1,800 and 6,600 TBq) of 241Am and 241Pu, respectively, were disposed in
the Subsurface Disposal Area of INEEL (Arthur and Janke 1986). No estimates are available of the
quantities of these isotopes disposed of between 1952 and 1971 at the Radioactive Waste Disposal
241
Complex of INEEL. Am is present at plutonium facilities and at plutonium reclamation facilities
241
where Am is routinely separated from plutonium. The Hanford plant was the site of a 1976 column
explosion, which resulted in extensive contamination and worker exposure (PNL 2000).
6.3 ENVIRONMENTAL FATE
6.3.1 Transport and Partitioning
Atmospheric Transport. In the atmosphere, americium is associated with particulate matter and the
transport of americium in air will therefore be governed by that of its host particles (Bennett 1979).
Radionuclides resulting from atmospheric weapons tests are often injected into the lower stratosphere,
while other atmospheric releases are into the troposphere. The residence time of particles in the
atmosphere will depend on the aerodynamic particle size, altitude, latitude, season, and hemisphere
because of atmospheric circulatory patterns. For example, residence half-lives of particles in the lower
stratosphere range from 3 to 12 months in polar regions and from 8 to 24 months in equatorial regions,
with removal being highest in the spring and lowest in the fall. Half-lives for particles in the troposphere
are about 1 month. Larger particles will remain in the atmosphere for short periods of time and are
deposited closer to their emission source, while small particles remain in the air for longer periods of time
and are deposited further from their source. There are three deposition mechanisms: rain-out caused by
droplet formation on aerosols within clouds, wash-out by falling precipitation, and dry deposition of
particles onto the ground. Rain-out is the most important deposition process for americium, wash-out
occurs relatively slowly and is dependent on the solubility of the pollutant in rainwater, and dry
deposition makes an important contribution in areas of low rainfall. Therefore, deposition of 241Am-
containing particulate matter will depend on location, season, and meteorological conditions. In the
absence of actual measurements, the deposition of 241Am in a region can be estimated by using the
relationship between air concentration and deposition quantities for other isotopes that are attached to
AMERICIUM 131
particulate matter in air. In this way, using the average annual air concentration to annual deposition rate
for strontium 90 (90Sr), the deposition rate of 241Am in the New York area was estimated to reach a
maximum of 10 µCi/km2 (37 kBq/km2) in 1964 and decline thereafter to 0.06 µCi/km2 (2.2 kBq/km2) by
1981 (Bennett 1979). This would be expected to result in cumulative 241Am deposit of 58 µCi/km2
(2.1 MBq/km2) in the New York region in 2000, assuming no additional atmospheric nuclear testing after
1976. If the ingrowth from 241Pu decay is included, the cumulative 241Am deposit in the year 2000 would
be 800 µCi/km2 (30 MBq/km2).
Sea-air Transport. Sea-air transport may occur as a result of bubble scavenging in the water column
coupled with ejection into the air when bubbles burst on the water surface. Laboratory and field studies
of this process showed respective 241Am enrichments in aerosols of 92–580 and 20–40 over that in the
bulk seawater (Belot et al. 1982; McKay et al. 1994; Walker et al. 1986). In extensive field studies,
Mackay et al. (1994) found clear evidence of localized temporal and spatial variability in the enrichment
of americium in sea spray over that in adjacent surf-zone seawater. While the enrichment is typically
between 50 and 80, it ranges from 4 to 400. The aerosols produced by the sea spray are deposited nearby.
Coastal strips in Cumbria, England have elevated levels of 241Am from sea spray (Pattenden and McKay
1994; Walker et al. 1986). The water in this region of the Irish Sea receives effluent from the BNFL
Sellafeld reprocessing plant. Studies of coastal soils in Northern Scotland are also believed to obtain their
241
Am contamination from the sea, albeit by a different mechanism. The activity level decreases with
distance from the sea and is indistinguishable from background levels more than a few hundred meters
inland. The actinide levels in these soils are in excess of those due to past nuclear explosions. The
influence of sea spray was ruled out because of the much lower actinide concentrations in the Scottish
water compared with that in the Irish Sea. In Northern Scotland, a stable foam or spume is formed along
the coast that collects in rocky inlets. It is thought that this spume, which is rich in particulate matter and
actinides, builds up in inlets, both overflowing onto the surrounding land and blowing inland on onshore
wind (Pattenden and McKay 1994).
Leaching in Soil. After being deposited on soil, 241Am may then leach into the soil. Since fallout of
241
Am is accompanied by its precursor, 241Pu, which also leaches into the ground, in addition to being
mobilized by colloidal action, the amount of 241Am at a depth is a function of the leaching of both
americium and plutonium, the colloidal movement of plutonium, and the decay of these isotopes. A
depth profile of fallout americium was performed on samples at a representative site in North Eastham,
Massachusetts in 1972 (see Table 6-1). Sixty-two percent of the activity resided in the upper 2 cm of soil
and an additional 21% in the 2–4 cm depth (Bennett 1976). A comparison of modeling and experimental
AMERICIUM 132
Table 6-1. Concentrations of 241Am in Soil and Sediment
Site/sample type Depth, Number of

(year) cm samples Concentration Unitsa Type Reference
b
Bikini Atoll (not specified) , U.S. Nuclear Test Site from 1946 to 1958, including BRAVO Robison
explosion on 3/1/54 et al. 1997b
Interior of 0–5 157 0.26 (0.30) Bq/g d.w. Median
island (mean)
5–10 151 0.19 (0.27) Bq/g d.w. Median
(mean)
10–15 127 0.081 (0.18) Bq/g d.w. Median
(mean)
15–25 80 0.026 (0.11) Bq/g d.w. Median
(mean)
25–40 59 0.012 (0.051) Bq/g d.w. Median
(mean)
40–60 23 0.017 (0.035) Bq/g d.w. Median
(mean)
0–40 53 0.11 (0.14) Bq/g d.w. Median
(mean)
Village area 0–5 63 0.11 (0.22) Bq/g d.w. Median
(mean)
5–10 62 0.13 (0.20) Bq/g d.w. Median
(mean)
10–15 63 0.12 (0.19) Bq/g d.w. Median
(mean)
15–25 59 0.064 (0.15) Bq/g d.w. Median
(mean)
25–40 52 0.059 (0.13) Bq/g d.w. Median
(mean)
40–60 20 0.012 (0.11) Bq/g d.w. Median
(mean)
0–40 51 0.13 (0.17) Bq/g d.w. Median
(mean)
Northern Marshall Islands Radiological Survey (NMIRS)c, site of U.S. atmospheric Robison
weapons testing from 1946 to 1958, including BRAVO explosion on 3/1/54 et al. 1997a
16 Atolls/islands 0–5 182 0.49–569 Bq/g d.w. Range of
means
5–10 182 0.26–435 Bq/g d.w. Range of
means
AMERICIUM 133

10–15 182 0.47–207 Bq/g d.w. Range of
means
15–25 182 0.15–48 Bq/g d.w. Range of
means
25–40 182 0.038–21 Bq/g d.w. Range of
means
Nuclear Weapons Testing Range, Maralinga, South Australia, site of 12 hydronuclear Cooper et
experiments at Taranaki in 1960, 1961, and 1963 (Vixen B Trials) in which 22.2 kg of al. 1994
plutonium was dispersed, having been ejected 2,500 feet vertically into the atmosphere.
Taranaki, 0–1 1 0.227–4.40 Bq/g d.w. Range
5 sites
1–2 1 0.026–0.799 Bq/g d.w. Range
2–3 1 0.005–0.099 Bq/g d.w. Range
3–4 1 0.009–0.022 Bq/g d.w. Range
4–5 1 0.004–0.019 Bq/g d.w. Range
Lake Michigan, site 7 km from Grandhaven, Michigan, water depth 67 m (cores and Alberts et
sediment trap at 60 m) al. 1989
Core 0–1 NS 651±118 µBq/g Mean±SD
d.w.
1–2 NS 1,147±111 µBq/g Mean±SD
d.w.
d.w.
d.w.
4–5 NS 363±67 µBq/g Mean±SD
d.w.
Suspended NS 555±107 µBq/g Mean±SD
sediment, 60 m d.w.
Cruise of RV Scotia, Orkney Islands, and northeast Scottish coast Pattenden

and McKay
1994
Bottom Surface NS 0.44–21 mBq/g Range
sediment d.w.
AMERICIUM 134

d
Savannah River Estuary sediment DOE 1980
Tidal 0–5 NS 426±150 µBq/g Mean±SD
freshwater d.w.
d.w.
d.w.
d.w.
50–70 NS 8.5±8.5 µBq/g Mean±SD
d.w.
Mouth of 0–5 NS 411±63 µBq/g Mean±SD
estuary d.w.
d.w.
d.w.
Soil in northeastern United States from 1970 to 1974, undisturbed soil unless otherwise Bennett
indicatede 1979
Brookhaven, 0–5 1 16f mBq/km2
New York
North 0–30 1 17f mBq/km2
Eastham,
Massachusetts
0–30 2 18f mBq/km2 Mean
f 2
North Eastham, 0–25 5 19 mBq/km Mean
Massachusetts-
cultivated soil
North Eastham, Massachusetts, background falloute Bennett

1979
0–2 NS 8.1±2 mBq/km2 Mean±SD
2–4 NS 2.7±0.3 mBq/km2 Mean±SD
2
4–6 NS 1.1±0.2 mBq/km Mean±SD
2
2
10–12 NS 0.1±0.07 mBq/km2 Mean±SD
AMERICIUM 135

2
2
0–30 NS 19±2 mBq/km Mean±SD
a
conversion: 1 Bq=2.7x10-11 Ci=27 pCi
b
Continuous monitoring program 1975–1993; decay corrected to 1999
c
Decay corrected to 1996
d
Concentration units converted from fCi/g
e
Concentration units converted from mCi/km2
f
Decay corrected to sampling date
d.w. = dry weight; NMIRS = Northern Marshall Islands Radiological Survey; NS = not specified; SD = standard
deviation
AMERICIUM 136
results indicates that americium is slightly less mobile than plutonium in this soil. Leaching studies of
surface-deposited 241Am in three Indian soils of widely differing characteristics, namely laterite, medium
black, and alluvial, were conducted in soil columns using simulated rain corresponding to the mean
annual precipitation (Vyas and Mistry 1980). It was found that 98% of the americium was retained in
upper 2 cm of soil; amending the soil with organic matter only slightly reduced its mobility. The greatest
retention was obtained with the medium black and laterite soils, where >99% of the 241Am was found in
the upper 1 cm. In 1990, Bunzl et al. (1994) investigated the residence time, and consequently the
migration rates, of fallout 241Am in a typical undisturbed grassland soil (Alfisol) in Germany. Since
241
Am is present from its own deposition and also due to ingrowth from 241Pu, the residence time of
plutonium also had to be determined and a compartment model had to be employed. The residence half-
time in a particular zone and mean migration rates of americium at various soil depths were (depth,
residence half-time, mean migration rate): 0–2 cm, 8 years, 0.3 cm/year; 2–5 cm, 8 years, 0.4 cm/year; 5–
10 cm, 10 years, 0.50 cm/year; 10–15 cm, 10 years, 0.5 cm/year; 15–20 cm, 4 years, 1 cm/year; and 20–
30 cm, 9 years, 1 cm/year. The migration rates were similar to, but somewhat greater than, those of
plutonium. After a period of 30 years, the 241Am concentration on the surface layer was significantly
diminished as a result of the migration. Stability constants for Am(III) indicate strong complexation with
soil organic matter, and this could explain its increased mobility with depth. In another study, Bunzl et al.
(1995) investigated the association of 241Am from global fallout with various soil components in six
successive layers of undisturbed grassland in Germany from 0 to 30 cm using a sequential extraction
procedure. In this way, the fractions that were readily exchangeable, bound to iron and manganese
oxides, bound to organic matter, and bound to mineral (residual fraction) were identified. The association
of a chemical with soil components controls their availability for plant uptake and transport. The
americium was mainly deposited on the soil surface 30–40 years ago as a result of atmospheric nuclear
weapon tests. The total deposition (i.e., sum over all layers) of 241Am was 18±2 Bq/m2 (490±50 pCi/m2).
On a Bq/kg basis, the data show that the highest activity was contained in the 2–5 cm layer, slightly less
was present in the 5–10 cm layer, and activity declined markedly below 10 cm. On a Bq/m2-cm thickness
basis, the maximum activity was in the 5–10 cm layer. The attachment of americium to soil component
varied considerably with soil layer. The largest amount of 241Am was attached to organic matter, 18–
74%, depending on the soil layer. A substantial fraction, 12–64%, was bound to oxides. In the 5–10 cm
layer, the 241Am in the readily exchangeable fraction was a minimum, 1.5%, while that attached to soil
minerals was a maximum, 68%. In contrast, very little 241Am (<0.5%) was bound to mineral in the
surface (0–2 cm) layer and the deepest soil layers (15–20 and 20–30 cm). Compared with plutonium,
much more americium is contained in the exchangeable fraction, a result that has been ascribed to
americium’s greater hydrolyzability. Americium has also been shown to be largely associated with the
AMERICIUM 137
high molecular weight organic factions of dissolved organic matter in the soil solution of two grassland
soils, a soddy podzolic soil and a peat soil, in the vicinity of the nuclear reactor at Chernobyl. The
distribution coefficients for 241Am in these soils were (soil type [depth], Kd in mL/g): soddy podzolic—
sod layer (0–2 cm), 1,220; soddy podzolic—mineral layer (2–5 cm), 810; peat (0–2 cm), 2,760; and peat
(2–5 cm), 4,550 (Bunzl et al. 1998). While it was similarly shown that the concentration of 241Am was 2–
3 times higher in organic matter than in whole sediment from Lake Michigan, organic matter was a very
minor constituent of the sediment (<0.5%), so organic matter was associated with a smaller percentage of
americium despite its higher concentration (Alberts et al. 1989). The bulk of the 241Am in Lake Michigan
was found in the hydrous oxides fraction of both the sediment core samples and the suspended particulate
matter.
While laboratory studies predicted very little movement of actinides in subsurface environments, these
radionuclides have been found to migrate in groundwater, and have traveled underground from 80 to over
3,000 meters at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), New Mexico and Oak Ridge National
Laboratories (ORNL), Tennessee. Colloidal materials, which can be mobile in underground systems over
large distances, can bind and transport radionuclide contaminants in subsurface systems (McCarthy et al.
1998a, 1998b; Penrose et al. 1990).
Sorption to Sediment and Particles in Water. When discharged into water, americium rapidly sorbs onto
particulate matter in the water column, settles, and adsorbs to bottom sediment (Murray and Avogadro
1979). The distribution coefficient, Kd, of americium between the particulate-associated phase and the
dissolved phase is 2.0x106 (Pattenden and McKay 1994). The sediment-water distribution coefficient, Kd,
was also 2.0x106 for intertidal sediment from the Ravenglass estuary near Sellafield, United Kingdom, in
agreement with other investigators (Davis et al. 1997). Equilibrium was established in 30 minutes.
Adsorption is greatest for fine-grained particles. A large fraction of the heavier sediment particles will
settle out quickly and remain close to the source. Finer particles (and soluble species) will remain
suspended for longer periods and be dispersed by currents and tides. The distribution in sediment will be
site specific, being largely determined by hydrology and the nature of the underlying sediment. Being a
particle-reactive nuclide, like plutonium, americium’s distribution in sediment after release will mirror
that of plutonium, although its loss from the water column appears to be more rapid. The distribution of
americium released from the BNFL reprocessing plant at Sellafield, United Kingdom near the Irish Sea
changed very little between 1978 and 1988 (McCartney et al. 1994). Americium in the effluent was
entirely as Am(III). In their study of actinide activity in waters entering the northern North Sea, Murray
et al. (1978) noted that the activity level of 241Am relative to 238,239,240Pu near the northwest coast of
AMERICIUM 138
Scotland was very low, 0.06. Assuming that the contamination was derived from discharges into the Irish
Sea 2–2.5 years earlier and 300–500 km to the south where Am-to-Pu alpha activity ratios varied from
0.9 to 2.56, there was a decrease of about 1.7 in the ratio from the point of discharge in spite of the
increase in 241Am due to the decay of 241Pu. Similar results have been observed during the transport of
actinides discharged from the nuclear fuel reprocessing plant at La Hague, France and in the case of
fallout into Mediterranean waters (Murray et al. 1979). These observations have been ascribed to
americium’s greater adsorption to suspended particulate matter, which then settle out; americium
consequently disappears more rapidly from surface water than plutonium. Support for this conclusion
was found in another study where the percentage activities associated with suspended materials were
36±8 and 80±7 for plutonium and americium, respectively, <10 km from the point of discharge.
Therefore, twice as much americium was associated with suspended matter than plutonium. At a distance
of 100 km from the point of discharge, this fraction was still >50%. Core profiles of sediment in the
northeast Irish field reveal major subsurface peaks of Sellafield-derived 241Am in both the solid phase and
interstitial water (Malcolm et al. 1990b). These peaks were not related to the distribution of organic
carbon or iron or magnesium oxides in the sediment or composition of the interstitial water, but rather
resembled the discharge of 241Am and plutonium. Studies of radionuclide concentrations in sediment
cores from the Ravenglass salt marsh in West Cumbria, United Kingdom, suggest that the concentration
profile of 241Am in sediment bear a qualitative resemblance to the Sellafield discharge patterns and to
other cores from the eastern Irish Sea coastline. A maximum concentration of 29,300 Bq/kg
(0.792 µCi/kg) dry weight was found in the sediment core at 8.9 cm. This maximum concentration for
241
Am is in the correct section of the sediment core to correlate with discharges in 1974 based on a
sedimentation rate of 4 mm/year (Morris et al. 2000).
Davis et al. (1997) investigated how various environmental factors influenced Kd. The presence of CO2
gas had a marked effect, increasing the amount of americium leached from sediment by a factor of 40.
The increase is attributable to the presence of stable americium-carbonate complexes in seawater and, to a
lesser extent, the accompanying decrease in pH to 5.5 as a result of purging with CO2. Experiments on
the effect of pH on Kd suggested that desorption of americium from sediment at low salinity is due to low
pH rather than to a drop in ionic strength. Therefore, the effect of low salinity and low pH in an estuary at
low tide and when fresh water is backed up by the incoming tide is the remobilization of 241Am.
Resorption to sediment entering the estuary from rivers will result in the redistribution of activity.
The disposal of large quantities of radionuclides in Arctic seas has raised concern about the behavior of
these chemicals in these waters. Fisher et al. (1999) found that the mean (range) Kd of americium in Kara
AMERICIUM 139
Sea sediment was 1x106 (1x105–3x106) mL/g, which is in accord with that for temperate coastal sediment,
2x106 (1x105–2x107) mL/g. The mean Kd values for americium in two areas in the Kara Sea, an Arctic
bay where radionuclides have been dumped, were 4.3x104 and 35x104 for ambient water column samples
and 57x104 and 16x104 for bottom sediment samples (Carroll and Harms 1999; Carroll et al. 1999). The
mean sediment water distribution function recommended by the International Atomic Energy Agency
(IAEA) is 2x106 (range 2x105–2x107). Therefore, use of the IAEA value in risk assessment modeling
would underestimate the americium concentration in seawater. Carroll et al. (1999) stressed that for
particle-reactive elements like americium, it is important to use site-specific information for Kd.
Extensive adsorption determinations of 241Am were obtained in freshwater, estuarine, and marine
sediment-water systems (NRC 1981). The Kd values for sorption range from 104 to 106 mL/g, accounting
for upward of 95% removal of americium to the solid phase. There were no apparent trends in Kd with
salinity. There was an increase in Kd with increasing pH that is typical of hydrolyzable metal ions. The
Kd declined with increasing sediment concentration. The mean sediment-water distribution coefficients
obtained were (sample type, Kd with standard deviation [SD]x10-4): Lake Michigan—three sites,
54.8 (37.3); Clinch River, Tennessee, 73.3 (36.4); Hudson River estuary—three sites, 6.76 (2.43)–
29.6 (8.8); Lake Washington, Washington, 18.0 (4.3); Lake Nitinat, Washington—anoxic marine,
25.4 (3.1); Washington Continental Shelf, 10.3 (1.8); Sinclair Inlet, Puget Sound, Washington,
45.4 (12.0); Saanich Inlet, British Columbia—anoxic fjord, 37.1 (8.4); and Skagit Bay, Puget Sound,
Washington—estuary—two sites, 26.8 (7.4) and 38.0 (10.6). Sediment-water distribution coefficients for
241
Am in various environments obtained from the literature include (site, Kd in mL/g): Lake Michigan,
>50x104; Hanford, U-Pond, 1.9x104 and 8.7x104; and Rocky Flats, Pond A, 0.65x104 (NRC 1981).
Laboratory measurements yielded Kd values of 5,000 and 400 in Dutch subsoil and river sand,
respectively (NRC 1981).
Despite its high absorptivity, americium has migrated into groundwater and traveled underground at
several national laboratories; the mobile forms were colloids and anionic complexes (McCarthy et al.
1998a, 1998b; Penrose et al. 1990; Toran 1994). Artinger et al. (1998) found that increasing
concentrations of humic substances reduced americium adsorption on sandy aquifer material, confirming
the involvement of colloid-sorbed americium in its subsurface transport. The leachability of
radionuclides in waste was assessed in soil column experiments in Carjo loam soil (B horizon) collected
in the vicinity of the low level radioactive burial site at Los Alamos. In the case of 241Am, 90% was
retained in the silica sand layer placed on top of the soil column, 5% was in the upper 5 cm of the column,
and the remainder was distributed at greater depths. In batch experiments, 40 and 49% of soluble 241Am
AMERICIUM 140
in waste, 0.3% of the total 241Am present, sorbed to Puyo sandy loam and Carjo loam, respectively
(Fowler et al. 1981). While americium should strongly adsorb to silicates and mineral oxides of the
highly weathered shale saprolite in the unlined disposal trenches used for transuranic waste (TRU) at Oak
Ridge National Laboratory, rapid migration in groundwater with little retardation over distances of
80 meters has been observed (McCarthy et al. 1998a, 1998b). This occurred when seasonal fluctuations
in the water table permitted groundwater to contact TRU in the trenches. As a result of laboratory studies,
the mobilization and transport of americium has been demonstrated to result from complexation of the
actinide by natural organic matter. Storm events aid the mobilization by providing the physical
connection between the TRU and groundwater and increasing the amount of organic matter in the soil
solution and groundwater.
In the absence of natural organic matter, the adsorption coefficient on the site-specific saprolite was
8,900. A similar situation was documented in Los Alamos where nuclear wastes infiltrated a small
aquifer. While the movement of 241Am was predicted to be limited to a few meters, the actinide was
detectable in monitoring wells as far as 3,390 m downgradient from the discharge (Penrose et al. 1990).
Further investigation indicated that the mobile americium was tightly bound to colloidal material between
25 and 450 nm in dimension. The distributions of 241Am activity with colloid particle size (<450 nm) in
the well water were (particle size, percent): 25–450 nm, 28%; 5–25 nm, 0.75%; 2–5 nm, 26%; and <2 nm
(filtrate), 43%. The unbound americium fraction appeared to be a stable anionic complex of unknown
composition. At other sites at Los Alamos, contaminated plumes traveled 30 m in <30 years and 40 m in
<20 years (Nyhan et al. 1985; Toran 1994). Migration appeared to be related to the water content of the
tuff (a rock composed of the finer kinds of volcanic detritus usually fused together by heat) bed
underlying the disposal site, and not simply to fractures in the rock (Nyhan et al. 1985). Investigation of
the possible mobility of 241Am in soils around Rocky Flats contaminated by leaking drums under
simulated conditions of extreme rain events found that 90% of 241Am activity resided in the upper 12 cm
of soil, below which it rapidly decreased; 241Am activity in interstitial water never exceeded 0.4 Bq/L
(11 pCi/L) at the deepest sampling layers even in a 100-year rain event (Litaor et al. 1996). However,
evidence was found, in line with other investigators, that actinides may move to greater depths in
macropores possibly formed by decaying root channels or other biological processes.
The behavior of colloidal americium was studied in an oligotrophic soft water lake used as the source of
241
cooling water for a nuclear power plant in Wales (Orlandini et al. 1990). Am concentrations in the
dissolved fraction (≤450 nm) were 5.8–18.2 fCi/L (210–673 µBq/L). Most of the americium was
distributed in two size ranges, filterable particles (≥450 nm) that contained ~37% of the activity and
AMERICIUM 141
medium-sized colloids (5–100 nm) that contained ~54% of the activity; only a small fraction (~7%) of
americium was ‘dissolved’ or in true solution, size <1.5 nm (3,000 molecular weight [MW]), where the
americium would occur as free ions. The Kd of americium to filterable particles (≥450 nm), the minimum
particle size that would settle by gravity, was found to be 470,000; the Kd of americium to colloidal
particles was estimated to be about a factor of 20 higher. Lower Kd values obtained for 241Am in dialysis
experiments, which restrict the size of particles, compared to those obtained in shaking sorption
experiments is a further indication that chemical species affects sorption (NRC 1981).
Distribution of 241Am in a dialysis system containing sediment, phytoplankton, and detrital matter
established that a substantial amount of americium accumulated in all three phases both in fresh and
marine waters (NRC 1981). The adsorption process was not reversible, and the longer the americium was
adsorbed, the more difficult the chemical was to desorb. Appreciable amounts of americium have been
shown to adsorb to bacterial cells such as those found in the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico
(Francis et al. 1998). There is a potential that americium attached to biocolloids may facilitate its
transport from the waste site.
Biotic Transport. Biotic transport can be defined as the actions of plants and animals that result in the
transport of a radioactive material or other substance from a waste site to locations where it can enter
pathways that may result in exposure to humans. Small mammals inhabiting areas containing radioactive
contamination or radioactive waste sites may become contaminated with americium by consuming
contaminated soil or plants and may disturb americium-contaminated soil through their burrowing and
excavating activities. These animals may therefore affect the distribution of americium within the waste
site or transport americium to previously uncontaminated areas. In addition, small mammals may be
consumed by animals higher in the food chain, such as hawks and coyotes, which would add to the
dispersal of americium from disposal areas. However, results of studies of numerous species of wildlife
that inhabit the waste disposal area at INEEL indicate that wildlife do not contribute significantly to the
spread of radionuclides to the surrounding environment (Arthur and Janke 1986). What may be more
significant is the contribution of biotic intrusion on the soil covering the waste areas and the effect on
moisture infiltration rates. A study was conducted of the dispersal of radioactive isotopes by deer mice at
the Subsurface Disposal Area (SDA) at INEEL in southwest Idaho (Arthur et al. 1987). These animals,
which make up 69% of the small mammal biomass at the SDA, contained significantly higher levels of
241
Am than in control areas; the isotope accumulated primarily in the pelt and lung tissue, but also the
gastrointestinal tract. Of the 22.8 µCi (0.844 MBq) radionuclide inventory estimated to be contained in
deer mice inhabiting the SDA during a 1-year period, about 8.4 µCi (0.31 MBq) was estimated to have
AMERICIUM 142
been transported off site, of which about 1% was the transuranic radionuclides 238Pu, 239+240Pu, and 241Am.
These transuranic radionuclides also make up about 1% of the 28.8 µCi (1.07 MBq) inventory present in
deer mice feces. It was estimated that during 1978–1979, deer mice excavated 12,450 kg of contaminated
soil to the surface, which could be further dispersed by wind. Evidence of burrowing activity by
earthworms and ants were also found at Rocky Flats, Colorado and other sites (Litaor et al. 1994).
Models have been developed to estimate the amount of radioactivity transported to the surface as a result
of burrowing activity by animals and plant uptake at a generic LLW disposal site in an arid region
(Kennedy et al. 1985). It was found that for 243Am, plants were about 200 times more effective at
transporting waste to the surface than burrowing animals. These results indicate that long-term biotic
transport may affect the integrity of land burial, redistributing radionuclides such that they become a
source of human exposure. Biotic transport will be affected by the oxygenation of soil, as waterlogged
and anaerobic soils are less likely to be disturbed by earthworms and other burrowing animals (Livens
and Hursthouse 1993).
Uptake by Plants. The uptake of chemicals by plants and their ingestion and bioaccumulation by animals
is one mechanism by which a chemical present in soil, air, and water enters into the food chain of
humans. Plants may become contaminated with americium as a result of uptake via the root and
deposition on the upper part of the plant. Direct deposition occurs during the deposition period, but
surface contamination may also occur from resuspension of or direct contact with contaminated soil.
Surface deposits may be reduced by weathering or by washing or processing, thereby reducing the
amount of americium consumed by humans. Some studies indicate that foliar uptake and subsequent
translocation, which is affected by rainfall and size of the deposited particles, may rival the soil-root
pathway in magnitude (Cataldo et al. 1980). Translocation of transuranic elements taken up through the
roots into seeds and fruit is generally very low (Bennett 1979). Uptake in seeds is significantly lower
than for other above ground plant parts, and legumes accumulate about 10 times more than grasses
(Schreckhise and Cline 1980).
Plant uptake from soil depends on factors such as the form and availability of the chemical, soil
chemistry, plant species, and environmental conditions. Various studies indicate that 241Am uptake by
plants is on the order of 10-2 to 10-6, about an order of magnitude greater than 239Pu under the same
conditions (Bennett 1979; EPA 1979; Romney et al. 1981; Schultz et al. 1976; Zach 1985). Uptake is
somewhat greater under acidic conditions and greater to the leaves than to the grain or fruit. Plant uptake
experiments with potatoes, peas, and corn were performed using ‘fallout background’ soil in North
Eastham, Massachusetts. The 241Am in the plant was compared with the average activity in the upper
AMERICIUM 143
30 cm of dried soil, 0.0033 Bq/g (89 fCi/g). The concentration ratios (CRs) (activity per unit wet weight
of plant/activity per unit dry weight of soil), also referred to as the transfer coefficient, were 1.7x10-3 for
husked corn plus cob, 1.0x10-3 for peeled potatoes, and <1.6x10-3 for shelled peas (Bennett 1979). Flours
that were milled from crops of wheat, rye, barley, and oats grown on German soil where radionuclides
resulted exclusively from global fallout contained #5.2, 11, 31, and 70 µBq/kg (1.9 fCi/kg) of 241Am,
respectively (Bunzl and Kracke 1987). The respective soil to plant transfer factors were #0.86x10-4,
1.5x104, 4.7x10-4, and 37x10-4. The concentration of 241Am in the bran was a factor of 10–38 higher than
in the flour for wheat, rye, and oats. Romney et al. (1981) studied 241Am uptake in crops of peas,
soybeans, tomatoes, and wheat grown in seven soils representative of major food production areas of the
United States. The CRs in the foliage ranged from 10-5 to 10-2 and the CRs in the seed, grain, and fruit
parts ranged from 10-6 to 10-4, about a factor of 10 lower than in the foliage. Uptake varied among the
difference soils by a factor of about 100. However, Schulz et al. (1976) obtained less of a variation in
uptake of 241Am by wheat in three California soils. The CRs were 6.3x10-6, 16.4x10-6, and 6.1x10-6 in
Aiken (a slightly acidic forest soil), Yolo (an agricultural soil), and Panoche (a calcareous soil) soil,
respectively. The CRs for 239, 240Pu were approximately the same. Nisbet and Shaw (1994) obtained CRs
ranging from 0.04x10-4 to 4x10-4 for 241Am for carrots, cabbage, and barley grown in artificially-
contaminated peat, loam, and sand soils; the CRs were in the order carrot > cabbage > barley. The CRs
therefore ranged over 2 orders of magnitude with crop and soil type. Uptake was lowest in peat soil
where the organic matter plays an important role in complexing the ions, making them less available for
uptake. The CR remained unchanged for plants grown ≥3 years after contamination of the soil. The soil-
plant transfer appears to be related to the concentration of 241Am in the soil solution, rather than the bulk
soil. While Livens et al. (1994) obtained plant-soil CRs for 241Am in the range of 10-5–10-6, the plant-soil
solution CR obtained was much higher, 210–640 L/kg (Bennett 1979). The concentration ratio for 241Am
in composite vegatation samples (grasses and herbaceous species) collected in Lady Wood, a coniferous
wood located 500 meters northeast of BNFL Sellafield, Cumbria, United Kingdom, ranged from 0.02 to
0.32 (Copplestone et al. 1999). Amendment of soil with lime and organic matter decreases uptake
(Adriano 1979; Hoyt and Adriano 1979). This is thought to reduce the solubility or increase americium
binding, thereby reducing its availability.
The uptake of radionuclides into plants from soil at contaminated sites at DOE facilities and elsewhere
has been the impetus for several studies. Such concerns led to experiments conducted in May 1996 at the
Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL), New Mexico using stream channel sediment from Los Alamos
Canyon (LAC). This stream received various amounts of untreated radioactive waste in the 1940s
(Fresquez et al. 1998b). Pinto beans, sweet corn, and zucchini were grown in this contaminated soil as
AMERICIUM 144
well as in soil from seven regional background locations (RBG) between 32 and 96 km around the LANL.
The radionuclide content of this latter soil is reflective of global fallout. The 241Am levels in LAC and
RBG soils were 0.708 and 0.005 pCi/g dry weight (0.0262 and 0.0002 Bq/g), respectively. The mean
241
Am concentrations (dry weight basis) in edible tissue of crops grown on LAC soil and RBG soil were
(crop, LAC level [pCi/g (µBq/g)], RBG level [pCi/g (µBq/g)]): beans, 21.5x10-5 (7.96), 7.0x10-5 (2.6);
corn, 27.8x10-5 (10.3), 4.1x10-5 (1.5); and zucchini, 182.5x10-5 (67.5), 27.1x10-5 (10.0). The CRs (activity
of 241Am in dry plant tissue to that in dry soil) in the edible LAC crop tissues were (crop, concentration
ratio): LAC beans, 3.04x10-4; LAC corn, 3.93x10-4; and LAC zucchini, 25.78x10-4. These ratios are much
lower than those in composite nonedible crop tissue, which ranged from 48x10-4 to 740x10-4. The mean
concentration (dry weight) of 241Am found for pinon pine nuts collected around LANL was 9.8x10-5 pCi/g
(3.6 µBq/g) with a mean concentration ratio to soil of 0.0193 (dry basis) (Fresquez et al. 2000). A garden
plot was established on a portion of a drained contaminated pond at the Savannah River Site (SRS)
having a mean 241Am concentration of 1.60±0.59 Bq/kg (43.2±15.9 pCi/kg) in soil (0–15 cm). Geometric
mean concentration ratios of 241Am (Bq/kg dry plant/Bq/kg dry soil) in the various crops were: corn
kernel, 0.0011; corn husk, 0.0016; bush beans, 0.0072; turnip green, 0.0528; and turnip tuber, 0.0053
(Whicker et al. 1999). Uptake for americium was similar to that of curium, but was much higher than for
plutonium, thorium, and uranium. Based on the conditions of the study, it was thought that root uptake
was the primary mechanism of plant contamination. The concentration ratios for americium are about an
order of magnitude higher than a similar study in Tennessee. Since it has been demonstrated that liming
decreased uptake, the high uptakes in the SRS study have been ascribed to the acidity of the soil (pH
3.8-4.5 vs. 7–7.5). SRS served as a primary source of reactor-produced nuclear materials, primarily
plutonium and tritium, for nearly 4 decades. The CR for 241Am in barley grown on contaminated soil at
the Nevada Test Site was of the order of 10-4 for vegetative growth and 25–100 times lower for the grain
(Schulz et al. 1976). Similar CRs (3x10-4–7x10-4) were obtained for green and root vegetables on land
reclaimed from the sea that was contaminated with Sellafield discharges (Green and Wilkins 1995); an
earlier study with potatoes, obtained CRs about an order of magnitude less (Popplewell et al. 1984).
Bioconcentration in Aquatic Organisms. Transuranic elements are generally associated with the gut or
external surfaces of aquatic organisms. Bioconcentration factors (BCFs) for 241Am measured at a pond at
Savannah River, Georgia for fish and other plants and animals are presented in Table 6-2. In a study
performed at a nuclear waste pond at Hanford, the maximum concentration of actinides, including 241Am,
that would accumulate in the whole fish and fish fillet were measured. In this waste pond, the sediment
concentration of 241Am was about 150 pCi/g (5.5 Bq/g), approximately 3 orders of magnitude above
background levels (Emery et al. 1981). Both the bluegill and largemouth bass were studied. The
AMERICIUM 145
Table 6-2. Bioconcentration Factors for 241Am
Bioconcentration factora
Species Value Mean Number of samples Site
Large-mouth bass, muscle 2,500 1 SRS
Fish muscle 50 Literature valueb
Fish muscle 25 USNRCc
Bullhead catfish, bone 4,200 1 SRS
Macroinvertebrates, larvae 78,000–240,000 2 SRS
Macrophyte, rooted vascular 1,400–21,000 3 SRS
Macrophyte, floating vascular 75,000 1 SRS
Turtle, muscle 5,600 1 SRS
American coot, muscle 650 1 SRS
Bahia grass 0.03–0.12 0.067 6 SRS
2.3x10-7–0.005 Literature valueb
2.5x10-4 USNRCc
Pine tree leaves 0.0052–0.021 0.013 2 SRS
0.0001–0.1 Literature valueb

a
The bioconcentration factor is the concentration in organism dry weight/concentration in medium (i.e., water, soil as
appropriate).
b
Values obtained from various literature sources cited in DOE 1996
c
USNRC values cited in DOE 1996
USNRC = U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission; SRS = Savannah River Site
Source: DOE 1996

AMERICIUM 146
concentration of 241Am in the water was about 0.2 fCi/mL (7 µBq/mL). The results from the Hanford
study indicate that both short- and long-term uptake of americium were low; that uptake was similar for
short-term (5 days) and long-term (430 days), experiments; and that direct sediment-to-fish transfer was
the primary route for americium uptake. In both species of fish, there were only a few cases where fillet
concentrations were >10 times those in controls. The maximum concentration of 241Am obtained in bass
and bluegill were 0.030 and 0.028 pCi/g (1.1 and 1.0 mBq/mL) dry weight in fillet and 0.067 and
2.0 pCi/g dry weight (2.5 and 74 mBq/mL) in whole fish (Emery et al. 1981).
In marine organisms, the target organs and tissues of americium bioaccumulation are mainly the digestive
gland, gill, and exoskeleton (Chassard-Bouchaud 1996). Uptake in mussels appears to be primarily from
seawater rather than ingested sediment (Hamilton and Clifton 1980). Americium taken up by mussels
from water was primarily associated with the shell, while that obtained from food was bound to soft tissue
(Fisher et al. 1996). Absorption efficiencies from ingested food in mussels were also critical in
determining bioaccumulation. Clifton et al. (1983) studied the depuration profiles in mussel populations
chronically exposed to radioactive waste discharges from the BNFL reprocessing plant at Sellafield,
Cumbria, into the northeast Irish Sea. Apart from clearance from the digestive tract (half-life of
0.9 hours), the half-time of 241Am is 303 days. Essentially all of the 241Am taken up by a euphausiid, a
shrimp-like zooplankton, was by passive adsorption onto exoskeletons, so that negligible americium was
retained by the animal after molting (Fisher et al. 1983). Wet weight concentration factors were of the
order of 100 after a week of exposure, with the BCFs varying linearly with the surface area-to-weight
ratio of the organism. Americium was also taken up by feeding on suspensions of diatoms, but there was
negligible assimilation and most americium passed through the gut and was defecated.
Uptake and retention of americium by benthic organisms is quite variable (Fowler and Carvalho 1985).
In general, filter feeders such as tunicates can clear particles containing 241Am from seawater by filtration
through the granchial basket and accumulate small amounts in internal tissue. Mucous feeding guilds of
suspension-feeders like crinoids do not efficiently trap americium; uptake appears to occur by
complexation or adsorption of dissolved americium to the body wall. Echinoderms and some large
crustaceans assimilated americium with their ingested prey, although large differences in half-times and
assimilation efficiencies in different groups suggest different feeding-digestion physiologies. Uptake in
benthic marine isopods, is to a great extent, by surface adsorption to the exoskeleton and to a lesser extent
through the gut, digestive gland, muscle, and haemolymph (Carvalho and Fowler 1985). The half-time in
the long-lived compartment was 261 days. Elimination from the internal tissue was more rapid than from
the exoskeleton. The fraction assimilated into tissue from food was <5%. The transfer of 241Am from
AMERICIUM 147
marine sediments contaminated by nuclear tests to benthic polychaetes was <1% (dry weight) (Hamilton
et al. 1991).
The biological uptake in aquatic organisms may depend on factors such as temperature, time after intake,
season of the year, and water quality. In the brittle star (Ophiothrix fragilis), a species that dominates
Arctic benthic communities, the initial uptake was 3 times greater at 12 EC than at 2 EC, but depuration
was not temperature dependent (Hutchins et al. 1996a). After 14 days, the BCF was 48 at 2 EC and 53 at
12 EC. In the sea star (Asteruas forbesi), another Arctic organism, temperature greatly enhanced the
retention of americium ingested in food (Hutchins et al. 1996b). The biological half-time of americium
ingested in food was 31 days at 12 EC and essentially infinite at 2 EC. Experiments performed on the
freshwater snail (Lymnaea stagnalis) found higher 241Am uptakes from mesotrophic pond water at acid
pH 5.0 than at pH 8.0 (Thiels et al. 1984). In summer, the BCF in the freshwater snail was more than
twice as high in acidic media as in alkaline media. In addition, uptake was a function of season, being
greater in August than in December. This has been ascribed to changes in metabolic rate with changing
photoperiods. Uptake of 241Am by two freshwater benthic invertebrates, Hyallella and Tubifex, from
water was two orders of magnitude higher than from detritus or sand, suggesting that soluble 241Am is the
principal route of uptake and that desorption from particulate matter must occur before the substance is
available for uptake (Sibley and Stohr 1990). No uptake was observed from labeled National Bureau of
Standards (NBS) standard sediment.
Mahon (1982) measured BCFs of 1,576 and 459 in algae and plankton, respectively. Horikoshi et al.
(1981) determined BCFs in several species of bacteria that ranged from 2,794 to 354,000; however,
bioconcentration by the bacteria represented adsorption onto the cell surfaces of the bacteria rather than
true biological uptake.
Biomagnification in the Food Chain. The available evidence suggests that the transport of americium
up the food chain to man is slight (Bulman 1978). Americium in the food chain, lichen-reindeer-man,
was studied by determining the concentrations 241Am in lichen and reindeer liver in Finnish Lapland
(Jaakkola et al. 1977). During 1963–1974, 241Am in lichen ranged from 1 to 40 pCi/kg
(0.037-1.48 Bq/kg) dry weight. Levels in six reindeer livers in 1974–1976 contained 0.3–5.4 pCi/kg
(0.01-0.20 Bq/kg) fresh weight.
AMERICIUM 148
6.3.2 Transformation and Degradation
Americium isotopes are transformed by radioactive decay. However, the half-lives of the principal
americium isotopes, 241Am and 243Am, are very long, 432.2 and 7,370 years, respectively (Baum et al.
241
2002), and there is only a small amount of transformation over a human lifetime. Am is formed by the
241
decay of Pu (half-life of 14.4 years) (Baum et al. 2002) and this can lead to a significant transformation
of that isotope to 241Am in humans, especially for 241Pu that is fixed in the bone.
6.3.2.1 Air
There is limited information available regarding the abiotic transformation of americium in the
atmosphere. Oxidation is the most common reaction that occurs in the atmosphere. This would not be
expected for americium compounds, which are generally present in the +3 oxidation state under
environmental conditions.
6.3.2.2 Water
The principal abiotic processes affecting americium in water are precipitation and complex formation. In
natural waters, americium solubility is limited by the formation of hydroxyl-carbonate (AmOHCO3)
precipitates. Solubility is unaffected by redox condition. Increased solubility at higher temperatures may
be relevant in the environment of radionuclide repositories. In environmental waters, americium occurs
in the +3 oxidation state; oxidation-reduction reactions are not significant (Toran 1994).
6.3.2.3 Sediment and Soil
Americium will occur in soil in the trivalent state. The transformations that may occur would involve
complexation with inorganic and organic ligands (see Section 6.3.1) and precipitation reactions with
anions and other substances present in the soil solution. The 241Am occurring as an ingrowth progeny of
241
Pu and trapped in a plutonium matrix will exhibit solubility and biokinetic characteristics of plutonium,
rather than americium.
AMERICIUM 149
6.4 LEVELS MONITORED OR ESTIMATED IN THE ENVIRONMENT
In 1973, the EPA established The Environmental Radiation Monitoring System (ERAMS), a nationwide
network for obtaining data in environmental samples. ERAMS consists of a network of sampling stations
that provide air, surface and drinking water, and milk samples that the EPA uses to obtain environmental
concentrations of radioactive material. The objective of this system is to identify trends in the
accumulation of long-lived radionuclides in the environment (EPA 2000b). Sampling locations for
ERAMS are located near primary population centers to provide optimal population coverage. ERAMS
does not analyze samples for americium, but does measure concentrations of 238,239/240Pu in air, from
which it may be possible to infer levels of 241 Pu and 241 Am. The most recent ERAMS report containing
plutonium data is that covering January–December 1998 composites (EPA 2000b).
6.4.1 Air
The annual average 241Am concentration in surface air in the mid-latitudes resulting from nuclear testing
between 1951 and 1978 was estimated using the atmospheric transport model and the amount of 241Am
that would have been produced as a result of the testing. The results show a rapid increase in 241Am
surface air concentrations, which reached a maximum of 23 aCi/m3 (1 aCi=10-18 Ci) (0.85 µBq/m3) in
1963–1964. Since 1973, levels have been <1 aCi/m3 (0.037 µBq/m3) and are continuing to decline,
assuming no additional atmospheric nuclear testing (Bennett 1979). Measurement of these low 1973
levels would have required large sample volumes and exceedingly long sampling periods at common
sampling rates. Integral concentration over the entire fallout period is estimated to be 0.12 fCi-year/m3
(4.4 µBq-year/m3). Confirmation for these concentration estimates comes from two sources: comparison
with plutonium fallout and cumulative deposits of 241Am activity in soil, which is a reflection of integral
air concentrations. UNSCEAR (2000) reported that deposition and air concentrations of radionuclides
from fallout dropped rapidly once atmospheric testing ceased in 1980. Inhalation exposures for even
long-lived transuranic radionuclides became insignificant after 1985.
The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI 1981) conducted a survey of transuranic radionuclides in the
terrestrial environs of nuclear power plants in the United States in 1978–1979. The plants included two
pressurized water reactors (PWRs) and two boiling water reactors (BWRs) that were of modern design
and had been in operation at least 3 years. The 241Am air concentrations around all of the power plants
were extremely low and indistinguishable from fallout background.
AMERICIUM 150
Selected radionuclide levels in air were measured at Bragin, 55 km north of Chernobyl for 18 days from
April 28, 1986, 2 days after the start of releases from the Chernobyl accident, until May 15. The mean
activity concentration of 241Am during this period was 40 µBq/m3 (1.1 fCi/m3) and the mean total
radionuclide activity was 20 Bq/m3 (0.54 nCi/m3) (Knatko et al. 1993). Debris from the Chernobyl
accident arrived in Denmark 1.5 days after the explosion. Air samples collected at Roskilde, Denmark on
April 27–28, contained a mean air concentration of 241Am of 5.2 µBq/m3 (0.14 fCi/m3). In May 1986, the
mean concentration was 11 µBq/m3 (0.30 fCi/m3) (Aarkrog 1988). Whereas debris from nuclear weapons
testing is injected into the stratosphere, debris from Chernobyl was injected into the troposphere. As the
mean residence time in the troposphere is 20–40 days, it would appear that the fallout would have
decreased to very low levels by the end of 1986. However, from the levels of other radioactive elements,
this was not the case. Sequential extraction studies were performed on aerosols collected in Lithuania
after dust storms in September 1992 carried radioactive aerosols to the region from contaminated areas of
the Ukraine and Belarus. The fraction distribution of 241Am in the aerosol samples was approximately
(fraction, percent): organically-bound, 18%; oxide-bound, 10%; acid-soluble, 36%; and residual, 32%
(Lujaniene et al. 1999). Little americium was found in the more readily extractable ‘exchangeable and
water soluble’ and ‘specifically adsorbed’ fractions.
The accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear reactor in March 1979 resulted in contamination of the
containment and auxiliary buildings. An aerosol sample from the auxiliary building obtained by filtering
about 1.4x109 cm3 of air through a fiberglass filter for 8 days contained an estimated total transuranic
actinide radioactivity of 13 Bq (350 pCi), for an average concentration of 0.0093 Bq/m3 (0.25 pCi/m3)
(assuming no oversampling in the confined space) of which 241Am was the major contributor (Kanapilly
et al. 1983).
Air monitoring of 241Am was started at Hanford in 1993 to estimate regional background concentrations
of the radionuclide before large-scale remediation work commenced (PNL 2000). Maximum and mean
onsite levels of 241Am were 0.50 and 0.46 aCi/m3 (0.019 and 0.017 µBq/m3) in 1994 compared with
0.90 and 0.41 aCi/m3 (0.033 and 0.015 µBq/m3) in 1993. Concentrations were not measurable at
perimeter sites or at distant community-operated surveillance stations in 1994 (PNL 1995).
Annual average 241Am air concentrations of 2.9x10-5, 1.4x10-5, and 0.55x10-5 pCi/m3 (1.1, 0.52, and
0.20 µBq/m3) at the 100-K Area, and 2.5x10-5, 1.6x10-5, and 0.32x10-5 pCi/m3 (0.93, 0.59, and
0.12 µBq/m3) at the 200-East Area of the Hanford site were measured in 1999, 2000, and 2001,
AMERICIUM 151
respectively. No data were reported for 241Am levels measured at distant community sites. Average gross
alpha concentrations in air on the Hanford Site in 1999, 2000, and 2001 were comparable to levels
measured at distance stations. These data indicate that the onsite levels were likely to be due to natural
241
sources and worldwide radioactive fallout (PNNL 2000, 2001, 2002). Am was detected in 15 quarterly
air samples measured at distant sites, boundary sites, and the INEEL site in 2002. Concentrations ranged
from 1.6x10-12 to 8.4x10-12 pCi/mL of air (5.9x10-8–31x10-8 µBq/mL). 241
Am was not detected in the
other 16 samples. Concentrations were within historical measurements and were below regulatory
standards (DOE 2003b).
In an attempt to obtain background 241Am concentrations around the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP)
in southeastern New Mexico, a plant developed for demonstrating the safe disposal of transuranic waste,
high volume samples were obtained continuously over a 14-day period between February 23 and
May 6, 1996 1 km from the facility. Samplers concurrently obtained total suspended solids (TSP) and
particles >10 µm (PM10) at a 5-m level elevation and PM10 at a 2-m level. The activities of 241Am were
8±2, 6±2, and 11±1 nBq/m3 (0.2±0.05, 0.16±0.054, and 0.31±0.03 aCi/m3) in the PM10-2 m, PM10-5 m,
and TSP-5 m samples, respectively (Lee et al. 1998). Approximately 50% of the 241Am activity
concentration was in the PM10 fraction. Using values for the 239,240Pu concentrations measured at the site
and those obtained in the early 1980s and estimated mean residence times for Pu in the troposphere and
stratosphere, it is likely that the observed 241Am levels reflect resuspension of dust contamination at the
WIPP site and not background 241Am levels. Present background levels result from past atmospheric
nuclear testing and would be fairly uniform throughout the northern hemisphere.
6.4.2 Water
241
Am may enter surface water from nuclear power plants sited on the shores. A region of possible
concentration is the Great Lakes where 35 nuclear facilities are located in the lakes basin. A sample of
water from Lake Ontario collected in 1985 and filtered through a 0.45-µm Millipore filter contained
0.3 mBq 241Am/L (8 fCi/L) (Platford and Joshi 1986). A few water samples from the Savannah River,
which received runoff and discharges from the DOE Savannah River Plant, contained 0.05 fCi 241Am/L
(2 µBq/L), about the same levels as other American rivers (DOE 1980).
In some surface waters that have been contaminated by waste discharge, the concentrations of americium
may be higher than background levels. For example, at times, measurable levels of 241Am have been
AMERICIUM 152
detected in the creek where waste water is discharged from Argonne National Laboratory’s treatment
plant. However, this creek is not used for drinking water and no 241Am has been detected in the Des
Plains River into which it empties (ANL 1999). While 241Am is associated with waste from the Hanford
site operations, concentrations in groundwater were considered low (no value was given) and were not
discussed in the PNNL (2002) report. The 1995–1996 levels of 241Am in rivers and lakes in the exclusion
zone of the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant ranged from 20 to 200 µBq/L (0.5–5 fCi/L) with 70% of the
radioactivity being contained in the particulate phase (Matsunaga et al. 1998). The particles appear to
have originated from the erosion of surface soil in the area.
The concentration of 241Am in filtered seawater is very variable. Some 241Am levels (filtered through a
0.22 µm filter) are (site, date, and concentration): Arctic Ocean, 7/81, 1.77 µBq/L (0.048 fCi/L); English
Chanel, 4/85, 4.96 µBq/L (0.13 fCi/L); and Eastern Irish Sea, 4/84, 4,840 µBq/L (131 fCi/L) (Lovett et al.
241
1990). Am concentrations in filtered seawater in the North Channel of the Irish Sea were about
200 and 120 mBq/m3 (5.4 and 3.2 pCi/m3) in 1979 and 1986, respectively (Pattenden and McKay 1994).
Because of the higher sediment load, near shore water generally has a larger fraction of americium bound
to particles, and therefore, seawater from the northern coast of Scotland (which is impacted by the United
Kingdom Atomic Energy Agency [UKAEA] Technology Dounreay Establishment, a nuclear research and
development facility at Dounreay, Scotland) shows a large variation in near-shore concentrations (see
Table 6-3). Levels were much higher in the immediate vicinity of Dounreay than elsewhere along the
coast. The 1984 level was unusually high because the monthly discharge from the plant before the
sampling was 40 times the mean monthly level. Time series measurements on seaweeds and winkles
show that the americium levels peaked in the early 1980s and then declined by 1989, when levels were
the lowest they had been in 12 years. In comparison, offshore 241Am levels in surface seawater of the
North Sea and North Atlantic Ocean has remained relatively constant, at around 10 Bq/m3 (270 pCi/m3),
between 1976 and 1988 (Pattenden and McKay 1994). Nearshore levels of 241Am were much greater than
offshore concentrations, and the activity in the dissolved and particle-associated fractions were broadly
similar.
Mururoa and Fangataufa Atolls were used from 1975 to 1996 for underground testing of nuclear weapons.
Of the nine sites at Mururoa sampled for underground water, two, Aristee and Ceto, had measurable
241
Am concentrations, 0.064 and 0.104 mBq/L (1.7 and 2.8 fCi/L), respectively. The remaining seven
sites at Mururoa and the two sites at Fangautaufa had 241Am had concentrations below the detection limit
(<0.002–<0.008 mBq/L [<0.05–<0.2 fCi/L]). At Aristee and Ceto, the 241Am concentrations in the
particle fraction of groundwater samples were 0.037 and 0.114 mBq/L (1.0 and 3.08 fCi/L) of filtered
AMERICIUM 153
Table 6-3. Concentrations of 241Am in Water
Concentration
Number of
Site/sample type Year samples (mBq/m3) (pCi/m3) Type
Dounreay, Scotland (north coast) near U.K. AEA Technology Dounreay Establishment R&D (nuclear
reactor, reprocessing)
Filtered seawater 1984 13 6,058±9,912 164±268 Mean±SD
(0.45 µm)
1985 16 36±18 0.97±0.49 Mean±SD
1986 14 47±62 1.3±1.7 Mean±SD
1987 30 15±17 0.41±0.46 Mean±SD
Unfiltered 1986 14 110±147 3.0±4.0 Mean±SD

seawater
1987 30 35±65 0.95±1.8 Mean±SD
Scotland mainland and some island coasts (near shore)

Filtered seawater 1982 NR 1.9–140 0.051–3.78 Range
(13 sites)
Cruise of RV Scotia, Orkney Islands, and northeast Scottish coast

Near surface 1982 NR 6–270 0.2–7.3 Range
unfiltered
seawater
30–40 m NR 220–650 5.9–17.6 Range

unfiltered
seawater
NR = not reported; R&D = Research and Development; SD = standard deviation; U.K. AEA = United Kingdom
Atomic Energy Agency
Source: Pattenden and McKay 1994

AMERICIUM 154
water, respectively, and at the remaining seven sites at Mururoa, the 241Am concentrations were below the
detection limit (<0.003–<0.001 mBq/L [0.08–0.03 fCi/L]. At the two Fangatufa Atoll sites, 241Am
concentrations were 0.016 and 0.006 mBq/L (0.43 and 0.16 fCi/L) of filtered water (Mulsow et al. 1999).
The concentration of 241Am in New York City tap water in 1974 was estimated to be 0.03 fCi/L (1 µBq/L)
based on the average 241Am/239,240Pu ratio of 0.10 obtained in 1975–1976 and the 1974 239,240Pu
concentration (Bennett 1979).
6.4.3 Sediment and Soil
Soil may become contaminated with 241Am from the deposition of the element released to the atmosphere
from nuclear weapons’ testing and nuclear reactors, or secondarily, from the resuspension of
241
contaminated soil. Am levels may then increase due to ingrowth from the decay of 241Pu (half-life
14.4 years). Soil surveillance provides baseline information with which unplanned releases can be
compared, and long-term contamination trends can be determined. It also provides information about
direct exposure to humans (inhalation of dust, ingestion of dirt) as well as potential sources of exposure
(contamination of groundwater, uptake into plants and animals). The concentrations of 241Am in soil
samples from the northeastern United States from 1970 to 1974 are shown in Table 6-1. The areal
activity at the sampling date ranged from 0.37 to 0.49 mCi/km2 (14–18 MBq/km2), which compares well
with that calculated from estimated values obtained from releases from nuclear weapons testing combined
241
with an atmospheric transport model (Bennett 1979). Am in soil resulting from cumulative deposition
in the New York region was estimated as being fairly constant since about 1969 at about 0.060 mCi/km2
(2 MBq/km2), whereas 241Pu peaked at about 20.1 mCi/km2 (744 MBq/km2) in 1965. The decay of 241Pu
adds to the cumulative deposits of 241Am in soil, bringing the total 241Am to about 0.8 mCi/km2
(30 MBq/km2). The 241Am inventory should reach a maximum of 0.88 mCi/km2 (33 MBq/km2) in 2035.
The radioactive decay of 241Am will then exceed its ingrowth, and the cumulative deposits of 241Am will
then slowly be depleted.
Nuclear Power Plants. EPRI (1981) conducted a survey of transuranic radionuclides in the terrestrial
environs of nuclear power plants in 1978–1979. The plants included two PWRs and two BWRs that were
of modern design and had been in operation at least 3 years. The 241Am levels in soil samples collected
around all of the power plants were indistinguishable from fallout background.
AMERICIUM 155
A survey of Big Trees Park was conducted in 1998 after soil samples taken in the park in 1993 and 1995
revealed higher-than-expected concentrations of plutonium (LLNL 1999). Big Trees Park is a public park
in the city of Livermore, California located about one-half mile from Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory (LLNL). The pattern of 241Am distribution was the same as that for plutonium with levels
significantly higher inside ornamental tree wells than outside the wells or at depths. Activity levels were
well below EPA’s residential preliminary remediation goal of 2.5 pCi/g (93 mBq/g), which may have
necessitated cleanup. The source of the contamination was most likely sewage sludge from LLNL that
was applied to the ornamental trees in the park.
Great Britain. In 1993, the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, and Food (MAFF) in the United Kingdom
systematically surveyed the concentrations of 241Am in soil and grass samples near 18 nuclear sites in
241
England and Wales (Sanchez et al. 1996). Am was detected in most soil samples; the range was 0.03–
0.40 Bq/kg (0.8–11 pCi/kg) soil; three samples were below the detection limit. Sanchez et al. (1998)
measured the 241Am activity in root mat samples from tide washed pastures in 17 estuaries spanning the
eastern seaboard of the Irish Sea from Solway in northwest England to David’s Head in southern Wales.
Fourteen of the pastures had detectable levels of 241Am with median levels of 64–5,570 Bq/kg (1.7–
241
150 nCi/kg) dry weight and individual samples of 14–10,230 Bq/kg (0.38–276 nCi/kg) dry weight. Am
accumulations in soils (to 10–15 cm depth) near Greeny Geo, Scotland ranged from 2,000 to
11,400 Bq/m2 (54–308 nCi/m2) (Pattenden and McKay 1994). This coastal area is contaminated by foam
or spume that forms in seawater in rocky inlets and blows over the land. The seawater in the area
receives discharges from the BNFL Sellafield facility. Sediment from two Harbors on the Isle of Mann,
which is impacted by the reprocessing plant at Sellafield in the United Kingdom, contained 241Am ranging
from <2.0 to 8.1 Bq/kg (<50–220 pCi/kg) dry weight during 1990–1993 (McKenna and Longworth
1995). Nearshore sediment core samples taken at several sites off the northern coast of Scotland (see
Table 6-1) had fairly constant 241Am levels with depth showing that mixing had occurred to a depth of
241
74 cm (Pattenden and McKay 1994). Am concentrations found in a sand dune ecosystem near the
British Nuclear Fuels reprocessing plant at Sellafield, Cumbria United Kingdom, were 183–250 Bq/kg
(4.95–6.76 nCi/kg) (Copplestone et al. 2001).
Los Alamos National Laboratory. Soil surveillance is conducted at national laboratories to monitor the
levels of radionuclides and ascertain their possible migration. Data from such a program at the LANL in
1974–1996 was evaluated to ascertain whether there were changes in radionuclide concentrations during
that period and whether changes could be ascribed to air emissions and fugitive dust (Fresquez et al.
1998a). Surface samples (0–5 cm) were obtained on-site and from perimeter and background sites.
AMERICIUM 156
Americium levels at LANL sites were significantly higher than at background sites. The mean 1974–
1996 concentrations of 241Am in soil at LANL and background sites were 0.011±0.006 and
0.006±0.002 pCi/g (0.41±0.22 and 0.22±0.07 mBq/g) dry weight, respectively. Sediment 2.1 km
downstream of a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) outfall in Mortandad
Canyon, Los Alamos County, New Mexico in 1994 contained high levels, 8.93 pCi/g (330 Bq/g) dry
weight, of 241Am. However, the 241Am concentrations in sediment upstream of the outfall and 4.0 km
downstream below a sediment trap were below upper limits of regional background levels, 0.023 pCi/g
(0.85 Bq/g) dry weight. (Bennett et al. 1996).
Brookhaven National Laboratory. Sediment samples were analyzed from the Peconic River system on
Long Island, NY, downstream of Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL). Near the sewage treatment
plant closest to BNL, respective mean concentrations (dry weight) of 241Am from three locations at four
depth intervals (0.00-0.06, 0.06-0.15, 0.15-0.24, and 0.24-0.37 m) were 31, 24, 5.6, and 1.7 Bq/kg (0.83,
0.64, 0.15, and 0.045 nCi/kg). At one location at the BNL property boundary mean concentrations of
241
Am were 18, 2.8, 0.29, and 0.28 Bq/kg (0.49, 0.076, 0.0078, and 0.0076 pCi/kg), respectively, for the
same depth intervals. Sediment samples from a control river, Connetquot River, were 1.4 and 0.74 Bq/kg
(0.038 and 0.020 nCi/kg) (0.00-0.06 m) and 0.30 and 0.081 Bq/kg (0.0081 and 0.00022 nCi/kg)
(0.06-0.15 m) in two locations (Rapiejko et al. 2001).
Rocky Flats. Rocky Flats (RF), near Golden, Colorado, was contaminated with 241Am as a result of past
waste storage practices, which resulted in drums leaking contaminated oil (Litaor et al. 1994). Sampling
was performed in four regions of expected actinide activity (26 pits) east of RF. Activity decreased with
increasing distance east of the former storage site and was predominantly confined to the upper 12 inches
of soil. The mean 241Am activities in the upper 3 inches of soil in the four regions were 1,653, 47.4, 2.9,
and 3.7 Bq/kg (44.6, 1.28, 0.078, and 0.100 nCi/kg). In the region with the highest activity, the mean
concentrations were 1,653, 1,063, 758, 595, 122, and 2.6 Bq/kg (44.6, 28.7, 20.5, 16.1, 3.3, and
0.070 nCi/kg) at depths of 0–3, 3–6, 6–9, 9–12, 12–18, and 36–48 inches, respectively, indicating
significant retention near the surface (Litaor et al. 1994). Soil sampled at 118 plots around RF contained
241
Am ranging from 0.18 to 9,990 Bq/kg (0.0049–270 nCi/kg) with a mean and SD of 321 and
1,143 Bq/kg (8.67 and 30.9 nCi/kg), respectively (Litaor 1995). The distribution pattern reflects wind
dispersion consistent with the prevailing winds at RF.
241
Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory. Am contamination occurred outside the
Subsurface Disposal Area (SDA) to a distance of 2,500 meters at the INEEL. Maximum concentrations
AMERICIUM 157
of 241Am, 2,048 nCi/m2 (75.8 kBq/m2) in the 0–4 cm surface layer, near the perimeter of the SDA, were
thought to be due to flooding and to localized drainage of water, while low concentrations away from the
SDA perimeter area resulted from wind transport (Markham et al. 1978). With the exception of samples
collected from the Waste Experimental Reduction Facility, soil samples collected in 2002 from within the
INEEL ranged from not detected to 0.889 pCi/ g (dry weight) and were within the background range for
the INEEL and surrounding areas. These levels were attributable to past fallout. Soil samples collected
from the perimeter and off-site around INEEL ranged from approximately 0.001 to 0.015 pCi/g (dry
weight). There were no significant differences in 241Am concentrations between boundary and distant
samples, indicating that INEEL inputs did not contribute significantly to these concentrations (DOE
2003b).
241
Superfund National Priorities List (NPL) Sites. Am has been detected in soil at 5 of the 1,636 NPL
hazardous waste sites where americium has been identified in some environmental compartment (HazDat
2004); it was found in sediment at two of these sites. The distribution of Superfund NPL sites is shown in
Figure 6-1.
241
Chernobyl. Am, in five samples of surface soil collected 1.5–15 km from the Chernobyl accident in
July 1987, was predominantly in the 0.005–0.25 mm size fraction of soil, which comprised 65% of the
mass (Berezhnoi et al. 1991).
Bikini Atoll. Bikini Atoll was the site of 23 nuclear detonations between 1946 and 1958. Surface soil
collected at 20 sites on Bikini Atoll in 1972 contained 1.2–45 pCi/g (0.044–1.7 Bq/g) of 241Am (Nevissi et
al. 1976). This level will increase for several decades as a result of ingrowth from 241Pu before it begins
to decrease, unless weathering causes the americium and plutonium to spread away from the surface and
cause the concentration to decrease.
More recent mean surface soil (0–5 cm) 241Am concentrations were 0.30 and 0.22 Bq/g (8 and 5.9 pCi/g)
for the interior of the island and the village area, respectively (Robison et al. 1997b). This indicates either
that soil samples were collected at too great a depth (adding uncontaminated soil from deeper layers) or
that weathering of surface media carried contamination into deeper layers (results in decreased
concentrations for the samples). Concentrations of 241Am in sediment from the surface of the lagoon floor
ranged from 0.010 to >12 Bq/g from (0.27 to >320 pCi/g) with 1.1 and 0.60 Bg/g (30 and 16 pCi/g) being
the average concentrations associated with fine and coarse sediments, respectively. The highest 241Am
concentrations were found in surface sediments (0–2 cm) in the northwestern area of the lagoon, which
AMERICIUM 158
was adjacent to the locations of the largest explosions. The 241Am concentrations were reported to
decrease from north to south and from east to west (Robison and Noshkin 1999).
Alaska. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) conducted a study in the
Beaufort Sea in northwestern Alaska during the summer of 1993 to ascertain the levels of radionuclide
241
activity in the U.S. Arctic (DOE 1997). Am was present in sediment at detectable levels at 8 of the
13 sites sampled, ranging from 0.06 to 0.12 Bq/kg (1.6–3.2 pCi/kg). From the average ratio of
241
Am:239+240Pu, it was concluded that the americium originated from global fallout.
241
The Great Lakes. In 1976, sediment at several sites was sampled in Lakes Erie and Ontario. Am was
detected at only one site in Lake Erie, a site influenced by the Nuclear Fuels Reprocessing plant at West
Valley, New York (U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration 1977). Levels of 241Am
increased with depth at concentrations of 3.4, 7.9, 11.1, and 11.8 Bq/kg (92, 210, 300, and 319 pCi/kg)
dry weight at 0–2, 2–4, 4-6, and 6–8 cm, respectively.
241
Arctic. Am concentrations were measured in the surface marine sediments collected in the
Spitsbergen-Bear Island region, located between the Arctic Ocean, Barents, Greenland, and Norwegian
Seas, an area important to Norwegian fisheries. Highest concentrations (dry weight) were found in the
Spitsbergen area, ranging from 0.37 to 0.85 Bq/kg (10–23 pCi/kg). Lower levels were found in the
deeper parts of the Norwegian Sea, ranging from 0.30 to 0.007 Bq/kg (8.1–0.2 pCi/kg) (Heldal et al.
2002).
6.4.4 Other Environmental Media
Concentrations of 241Am have been determined in various foods (Table 6-4) and biota (Table 6-5), some
of which may be eaten by humans. Levels in food items and animals include those from diet studies as
well as from areas contaminated by nuclear weapons testing and fuel reprocessing. The highest levels
were in clams, crabs, and lobsters (up to 0.46 Bq/kg [12 pCi/kg]). In studies at DOE facilities and in the
vicinity of the BNFL reprocessing plant at Sellafield and the Ravenglass Estuary, where pastures are
subject to tidal inundations with seawater receiving discharges from the plant, results clearly show the
effect on animals from feeding on contaminated pasture land (Arthur and Janke 1986; Bradford and
Curtis 1984; DOE 1979c; Janke and Arthur 1985).
AMERICIUM 159
Table 6-4. Average Concentrations of 241Am in Food
Concentrationa
Local Food mBq/kg fCi/kg Reference
Bikini Atollb, U.S. Nuclear Test Site from 1946 to 1958, including BRAVO Robison et al.
explosion on 3/1/54 1997b
Reef fish 6.5 180
Tuna 1.3 35
Mahi mahi 1.3 35
Marine crabs 26 700
Lobster 26 700
Clams 460 12,000
Coconut crabs 28 760
Land crabs 28 760
Octopus 6.5 180
Turtle 6.5 180
Chicken, muscle 6.0 160
Pork, muscle 6.0 160
Eggs, chicken 6.0 160
Pandanus fruit (n=69) 3.8 100
Breadfruit (n=41) 1.2 32
Coconut juice, drinking 8.5 230

(n=747)
Coconut meat, drinking 3.6 97

(n=812)
Copra meat (n=188) 1.1 30
Papaya (n=93) 0.36 9.7
Squash (n=53) 3.0 81
Pumpkin 3.0 81
Banana (n=39) 0.36 9.7
Citrus 0.36 9.7
Rain water 0.0037 0.10
Well water 0.044 1.2

AMERICIUM 160
Concentrationa
Northern Marshall Islands Radiological Survey (NMIRS)c, fallout from U.S. Robison et al.
atmospheric weapons testing from 1946 to 1958, including BRAVO explosion on 1997a
3/1/54
Reef fish, muscle; <0.23–1.4 <6.2–38

11 atolls/islands
Pelagic fish, muscle; <0.14–0.27 <3.8–7.3

9 atolls/islands
Clams, soft parts; <1.4–46 <38–1,200

10 atolls/islands
Pork; 6 atolls/islands <0.11–2.8 <3.0–76
Chicken; 4 atolls/islands 1.2–4.1 32–110
Coconut crab; 4.3–28 120–760

2 atolls/islands
Drinking coconut meat; <1.3 <35

5 atolls/islands
Copra meat; <0.42–7.4 <11–200

10 atolls/islands
Pandanus; <0.23–8.5 <6.2–230

12 atolls/islands
Breadfruit; 7 atolls/islands 0.26–8.2 7.0–220
Total Diet Study—New York, 1974d Bennett 1979
Shellfish 0.48±0.15 13±4
Whole grain products 0.074±0.044 2.0±1.2
Bakery products 0.063±0.02 1.7±0.6
Fresh vegetables 0.048±0.015 1.3±0.4
Fresh fruit 0.041±0.015 1.1±0.4
Root vegetables 0.030±0.007 0.80±0.19
Dry beans 0.022±0.012 0.60±0.34
Poultry 0.019±0.011 0.52±0.31
Potatoes (peeled) 0.013±0.002 0.36±0.06
Flour 0.013±0.007 0.36±0.18
Fruit juice 0.011±0.006 0.29±0.16

AMERICIUM 161
Concentrationa
Meat 0.010±0.006 0.28±0.17
Rice 0.010±0.012 0.27±0.34
Milk 0.0093±0.0004 0.25±0.01
Fresh fish 0.0089±0.0030 0.24±0.08
Eggs 0.0059±0.002 0.16±0.06
Macaroni 0.0059±0.009 0.16±0.25
Canned fruit 0.0026±0.0033 0.07±0.09
Near Sellafield, England, 1994 Fulker et al. 1998
Honey 0.0007 0.02
Blackberry 0.043 1.2
Pheasant 0.029 0.78
Mushrooms 0.0065 0.18

a
Concentrations on a wet or fresh weight basis. Concentrations originally expressed in mBq/kg unless otherwise
indicated.
b
Terrestrial food is from a continuous monitoring program in 1975–1993; marine food is from a 1988 report.
c
Decay correction to 1996.
d
Concentrations originally expressed as pCi/kg.
AMERICIUM 162
Table 6-5. Concentrations of 241Am in Fauna
Species Sample Location Concentration Unitsa Type Reference

Fish
Farallon Islands Nuclear Waste Disposal Site (FINWDS) and Point Arena (reference site), Suchanek
1986–1987 et al. 1996
Dover sole Flesh FINWDS 1,630±2,360 mBq/kg Mean±SD
(n=3) w.w.
Point Arena 126±88
(n=6)
Sablefish Flesh FINWDS 2,850 mBq/kg Mean±SD
(n=1) w.w.
Point Arena 1,000±1,400
(n=5)
Thornyheads Flesh FINWDS 186±35 mBq/kg Mean±SD

(n=2) w.w.
Point Arena 299±157
(n=3)
Vicinity of Los Alamos National Laboratory, 1997, Bottom-feeding fish (n=10/site) Fresquez
et al. 1999
Fish (2 sites) Muscle+bone Reservoirs 1.7 (19.8) 10-5 pCi/g Mean (SD)
d.w.
Fish (4 sites) Muscle+bone Rio Grande 84.1 (54.6) 10-5 pCi/g Mean (SD)
d.w.
Fish (5 sites) Viscera Rio Grande 31.2–198.0 10-5 pCi/g Range of
d.w. means
Fish from Irish ports possibly impacted by Sellafield, 1988–1997 Ryan et al.
1999
Plaice Edible 0.4–144 mBq/kg Range of
portion w.w. means
Whiting Edible 0.42–2.8 mBq/kg Range of
portion w.w. means
Cod Edible 0.62–26 mBq/kg Range of
portion w.w. means
Crustacea
Fish ports possibly impacted by Sellafield, 1988–1997 Ryan et al.
1999
Prawns Edible 12–138 mBq/kg Range of
portion w.w. means
North Eastern Irish Sea, Sellafield coastal area, U.K., commercially caught crabs and Swift and
European lobsters, 1997 Nicholson
2001
crab (n=34) Edible 1.7(0.8) Bq/kg Mean(SD)
portion w.w.
lobster Edible 8.3(11.3) Bq/kg Mean(SD)
(n=35) portion w.w.
AMERICIUM 163

Bivalves
Farallon Islands Nuclear Waste Dump Site (FINWDS) and Point Arena (reference site), Suchanek
1986–1987 et al. 1996
Mussels Flesh FINWDS 6 mBq/kg Mean
(n=1) w.w.
Mussels Flesh Point Arena 126±88 Bq/kg d.w. Mean±SD
(n=2)
U.S. Mussels Watch, 1976–1978 (East Coast: Maine-Virginia; East/Gulf Coast: Virginia- EPA 1984
Texas; West Coast: Washington-California)
Mussels and Flesh East coast 0.43–0.65 Bq/kg d.w. Range of
oysters (0.03–1.7) means
(range)
Mussels and Flesh East/Gulf 0.32–0.60 Bq/kg d.w. Range of
oysters coasts (0.03–1.95) means
(range)
Mussels and Flesh West coast 0.49 Bq/kg d.w. Range of
oysters (0.14–18.5) means
(range)
Carlinford, Ireland (port city), impact from Sellafield Reprocessing Plant, 1991–1997 Ryan et al.
1999
Mussels Edible <11–109 (69) mBq/kg Range of
portion w.w. means
(median)
Oysters Edible 14–27 mBq/kg Range of
portion w.w. means
Irish Sea, site impacted by Windscale Reprocessing Plant and reference sites, 1977 EPA 1984
Mussels Flesh Isle of Man 550 (55) Bq/kg d.w. Mean (SD)
Mussels Flesh Ravenglass 63.9x103 Bq/kg d.w. Mean (SD)

estuary (6,390)
Mussels Flesh Ebro 0.52–0.88 Bq/kg d.w. Range of
(2 sites) estuary, means
Spain
Sea
mammals
North Rona and Isle of May, Scotland, Possible impact from Sellafield and Chernobyl, Anderson et
1987 al. 1990
Grey seals Milk <0.2–<0.3 Bq/L Range
(n=8)
Grey seals Liver <0.3 Bq/kg f.w. Range

(n=2)
Grey seals Muscle <0.3 Bq/kg f.w. Range

(n=3)
AMERICIUM 164

Mammals
Halla, Finland, reindeer graze on lichen impacted by Chernobyl fallout Paatero
and
Jaakkola
1998
Reindeer Meat 0.014 (0.003) Bq/kg d.w. Mean (SD)
Reindeer Liver 0.013 (0.004) Bq/kg d.w. Mean (SD)
Reindeer Kidney 0.0043 Bq/kg d.w. Mean (SD)

(0.0010)
Material Disposal Area G, Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico, mule deer and Ferenbaugh
Rocky Mountain elk, 1991–1998 et al 2002
Deer (n=11) Muscle 0.28 (0.22) mBq/kg Mean (SD)
w.w.
Elk (n=21) Muscle 0.47 (0.34) mBq/kg Mean (SD)
w.w.
Nevada Test Site: Area 13 (outer compound) and near Area 13, but outside the area, DOE 1979
1973–1976
Cattle Muscle Area 13 0.020–0.17 pCi/kg Range
(11 animals) w.w.
Cattle Muscle Near Areas <0.05–<0.11 pCi/kg Range

(4 animals) 13 w.w.
Fox (adult) Muscle Area 13 25.0 pCi/kg

w.w.
Fox (adult) Muscle Area 13 17.0 pCi/kg
w.w.
Coyote Muscle Area 13 4.7 pCi/kg
w.w.
Vicinity of Sellafield and the Ravenglass Estuary, England, 1977–1982 Bradford
and Curtis
1984
Cattle Liver Sellafield 0.23 Bq/kg f.w.
(n=1) Range
Ravenglass 0.037–0.48
(n=3)
Control 0.003, 0.005
(n=2)
Cattle Meat Ravenglass 0.002, 0.012 Bq/kg f.w.

(n=2)
Control 0.008
(n=1)
AMERICIUM 165

Cattle Lung Ravenglass 0.05–0.085 Bq/kg f.w. Range
(n=3)
Control 0.003, 0.002
(n=2)
Cattle Bone Ravenglass 0.25–0.29 Bq/kg f.w. Range

(n=3)
Control 0.013, 0.018
(n=2)
Sheep Meat Ravenglass 0.040–0.064 Bq/kg f.w. Range

(n=3)
Control 0.0038
(n=1)
Sheep Liver Ravenglass 2.6–6.6 Bq/kg f.w. Range

(n=3)
Control 0.006–0.0012
(n=2)
Sheep Lung Ravenglass 0.018–0.24 Bq/kg f.w. Range

(n=3)
Control 0.017
(n=1)
Sheep Bone Ravenglass 0.79–1.7 Bq/kg f.w. Range

(n=3)
Control 0.006
(n=1)
Idaho National Engineering Laboratory–Subsurface Disposal Area (SDA) and control Arthur and
area, 1978–1979 Janke
1986;
Janke and
Arthur 1985
Coyote Feces SDA (n=24) 0.4±0.9 pCi/kg Mean±SD
Control 0.003±0.002 w.w.
(n=12)
Cottontail Carcass SDA (n=10) 0.010±0.009 pCi/kg Mean±SD

rabbit Control 0.001±0.001 w.w.
(n=5)
Cottontail Hide SDA (n=10) 0.029±0.046 pCi/kg Mean±SD

rabbit Control 0.002±0.001 w.w.
(n=5)
Deer mice Carcass SDA (n=21) 0.010±0.02 pCi/kg Mean±SD

Control 0.003±0.002 w.w.
(n=5)
AMERICIUM 166

Deer mice Hide SDA (n=21) 0.27±0.83 pCi/kg Mean±SD
Control 0.039±0.050 w.w.
(n=5)
Invertebrates
Idaho National Engineering Laboratory, Subsurface Disposal Area (SDA) and control Arthur and
area, 1978–1979 Janke 1986
Invertebrates Composite SDA (n=3) 0.022±0.020 pCi/kg Mean±SD
Control <0.004 w.w.
(n=1)
a
conversion: 1 Ci=3.7x1010 Bq=0.037 TBq or 1 Bq=2.7x10-11 Ci=27 pCi
d.w. = dry weight; FINWDS = Farallon Islands Nuclear Waste Dump Site; f.w. = fat weight basis; n = number of
samples; SD = standard deviation; SDA = subsurface disposal area; w.w. = wet weight
AMERICIUM 167
As part of the U.S. Mussel Watch program, monthly samples of mussels were collected from Bodega
Head, California and Narragansett Bay, Rhode Island in 1977 and 1978 (Goldberg 1986). The mean
concentration of 241Am in samples ranged from 4.2 to 11.6 Bq/kg (0.11–0.31 nCi/kg) dry weight at
Bodega Head and from 0.2 to 0.7 Bq/kg (0.005–0.02 nCi/kg) dry weight at Narragansett Bay. No
seasonal pattern was evident. The ratio of 241Am to 239+240Pu ranged from 1.3 to 5.3 on the west coast site
and from 0.2 to 1.0 on the east coast. A surveillance program of U.S. coastal waters involving somewhat
over 100 sites was another component of the Mussel Watch program. The flesh of both oysters and
mussels, collected from the three major coastlines of the United States in 1976, 1977, and 1978, was
analyzed (EPA 1984). The results are included in Table 6-5. The levels of 241Am were higher on the
west coast, which was ascribed to seasonal upwelling of the 241Pu- and 241Am-rich mid-depth north
Pacific Ocean waters (affected by nuclear weapons test fallout), rather than from releases from the low-
level nuclear waste site off the Farallon Islands. Another factor is the association of 241Am with fine
particles and the greater exposure of west coast bivalves to open ocean fine particles than east coast
bivalves. Paradoxically, americium does not show the same seasonal fluctuations associated with
upwelling as plutonium; this may be due to americium’s greater adsorptivity and associated removal from
the water column, or its slower uptake in bivalves. The NOAA conducted a study in the Beaufort Sea in
northwestern Alaska during the summer of 1993 to ascertain the levels of radionuclide activity in the U.S.
Arctic (DOE 1997a). As part of this study, 241Am was determined in ashed samples of a variety of biota,
including fish, invertebrates, crustaceans, whales, seal, and ducks, collected mostly in the coastal waters
241
off Barrows, Alaska and analyzed by high-resolution gamma spectroscopy. Am was not detectable in
any of the samples (detection limits ≤0.6–≤80 mBq/kg [<20–<2,000 fCi/kg]).
Fish and mussels were sampled near the Farallon Islands Nuclear Waste Dump Site (FINWDS),
approximately 30 miles west of San Francisco and a reference site (see Table 6-5) (Suchanek et al. 1996).
While many of the drums have been breached or are nearing their expected lifetime, no statistical
difference was found between the levels of 241Am in the FINWDS fish and those from the reference site.
A simple explanation is the fact that the fish species tested are quite mobile. However, 241Am levels
found in fish samples, 1.0 and 1.5 Bq/kg (27 and 41 pCi/kg), were higher than comparable fish muscle
reported from relatively contaminated sites such as the Pacific Testing Grounds in Micronesia and in the
Irish Sea near the Windscale Nuclear Plant at Sellafield, none of which exceeded 0.74 Bq/kg (20 pCi/kg).
241
Am concentrations were determined in fish and shellfish collected in 1990 from fish markets in the
vicinity of the Vandellós I nuclear power plant (NPP) on the Spanish Mediterranean coast. The
Vandellós I NPP was decommissioned after 1989. Mean 241Am concentrations (dry weight) for large
prawn, mollusc, red mullet, and hake collected near the Vandellós I NPP for were 62, 25, 54, and
AMERICIUM 168
6.0 mBq/kg (1.7, 0.68, 1.5, and 0.16 pCi/kg), respectively. At other locations along the Catalan coast,
mean 241Am concentrations were 5.2, 10, 3.0, and 5.2 mBq/kg (0.14, 0.27, 0.081, and 0.14 pCi/kg),
respectively, for the same species (Sanchez-Cabeza and Molero 2000). As part of the Environmental
Surveillance Program (at LANL), bottom-feeding fish were collected from reservoirs upstream and
downstream from LANL in September 1997, as well as from five sites on the Rio Grande River starting at
one site about 1 mile upstream of any stream crossing LANL land and analyzed for 241Am and other
radionuclides (Fresquez et al. 1999). The concentration of 241Am in muscle + bone in fish collected in the
reservoirs was significantly lower than that collected in the river (see Table 6-5). Mussel samples
collected from two sites in the Irish Sea where the Windscale nuclear reprocessing plant is located show
the influence of low levels of radionuclides from the nuclear fuel cycle (Table 6-5). The 241Am found in
the mussels were orders of magnitude higher than those on the U.S. coast. The Isle of Mann site is in the
middle of the Irish Sea about 50 km from Windscale and the Ravenglass estuary site is 16 km to the south
of the plant. The 241Am input into the Irish Sea from fallout is dwarfed by the contribution by the
Sellafield reprocessing facility in England. Observations from surveys of 241Am in edible parts of fish
and shellfish sampled from commercial landings at major Irish shipping ports between 1988 and 1997
(Table 6-5) indicate that activity levels in fish landed at northeast Irish ports have remained low, generally
a fraction of a mBq/kg wet weight, while those in mussel, prawns, and oysters are much higher and have
fluctuated in activity (up to 180 mBq/kg [4.9 pCi/kg] wet weight in prawns) over time (Ryan et al. 1999).
Concentrations of 241Am in the edible portions of molluscs (Adamussium colbecki) and fish (Trematomus
bernacchii) collected during the years 1987–1996 from Terra Nova Bay (Ross Sea) in Antarctic were
reported to be 0.0087 and 0.0006 Bq/kg (0.24 and 0.02 pCi/kg), dry weight, respectively (Marzano et al.
2000).
Enewetak and Bikini Atolls were used for nuclear weapons testing by the United States between 1946 and
1958. Log mean normal concentrations (wet weight) of 241Am found in fish muscle and invertebrate flesh
collected since 1976 and decay corrected from collection date to October 1998 were determined. At
Enewetak Atoll, concentrations of 241Am in reef fish, pelagic fish, mollusks, and crustaceans were 0.0050,
0.0024, 0.0010, and <0.1 Bq/kg (0.14, 0.064, 0.027, and <2.7 pCi/kg), respectively. At Bikini Atoll,
241
Am concentrations in reef fish, pelagic fish, mollusks, and crustaceans were 0.0072, 0.0018, 0.32, and
241
<0.1 Bq/kg (0.19, 0.049, 8.6, and <2.7 pCi/kg), respectively. Am concentrations were higher in the
surface sediments at Bikini Atoll, ranging from 10 to >12,000 Bq/kg (0.27–>320 nCi/kg) as compared to
Enewetak Atoll, ranging from <1 to 1,300 Bq/kg (0.027–35 nCi/kg). The authors noted that it is difficult
to conclude that there is a difference in the mean concentrations of radionuclides in the muscles of fish
from Bikini Atoll as compared to Enewetak Atoll, and that this supports earlier studies that found that at
AMERICIUM 169
Bikini and Enewetak Atolls, the transuranics in some fish may be unrelated to the environmental
concentrations (Robison and Noshkin 1999).
Fish samples were analyzed from the Peconic River system on Long Island, New York, downstream of
BNL. Near the sewage treatment plant closest to BNL, mean concentrations of 241Am were 0.070 and
0.019 Bq/kg (1.9 and 0.51 pCi/kg) in bullhead catfish and chain pickerel (whole fish), respectively. A
mean 241Am concentration in bullhead catfish from a control river, Connetquot River, was <0.02 Bq/kg
(<0.54 pCi/kg). In ponds farther downstream of BNL and the sewage treatment plant 241Am
concentrations were <0.03 Bq/kg (<0.8 pCi/kg) for all fish and <0.07 Bq/kg (<2 pCi/kg) for mussel flesh
(Rapiejko et al. 2001).
Fifteen cattle grazing for 1,064 days on a site at the Nellis Bombing and Gunnery Range, Nevada, where
a nuclear device was explosively destroyed 16 years previously, had 241Am levels ranging from 0.74 to
590 mBq/kg (0.02–16 pCi/kg) wet weight, 4.4 mBq/kg (0.10 pCi/kg) geometric mean in muscle (Gilbert
et al. 1989). Levels in liver and kidney were much higher, 72 and 11 mBq/kg (1.9 and 0.30 pCi/kg),
geometric mean, respectively.
In 1993, the MAFF, United Kingdom systematically surveyed the concentrations of 241Am in grass
241
samples near 18 nuclear sites in England and Wales (Sanchez et al. 1996). Am levels in vegetation
samples were <0.10 Bq/kg (<2.7 pCi/kg). Sanchez et al. (1998) measured the 241Am activity in vegetation
from tide-washed pastures in 17 estuaries spanning the eastern seaboard of the Irish Sea from Solway in
northwest England to David’s Head in southern Wales. In 11 of the pastures, the median level of 241Am
in vegetation ranged from 14 to 575 Bq/kg (0.38–15.5 nCi/kg) dry weight; the others were <1 Bq/kg
241
(<30 pCi/kg) dry weight. Am levels in individual samples in the 11 pastures were 13–1,260 Bq/kg
(0.35–34 nCi/kg) dry weight.
Brauning et al. (1986) reported radioactivity levels in municipal sludge. Sludge from Stickney, Illinois
that was used as an organic fertilizer contained 3.3 and 1.5 fCi/g (14 and 575 Bq/kg) dry weight of 241Am
in 1974 and 1975, respectively. Potential sources in this case were thought to be from background
concentrations and fallout from nuclear weapons testing. In Texas, 241Am was present in sludge samples
in 1983 and 1986 from a facility that received sanitary waste from the Gulf Nuclear, Inc. facility.
Potential sources of radionuclides in the sludge were industrial wastes. Two incidents of contaminated
sludge from companies producing foils for smoke detectors occurred in New York State. One of the
receiving facilities that incinerated its sludge had 180–750 pCi/g (6.7–28 Bq/g) of 241Am in dried
AMERICIUM 170
incinerator ash between April 17, and May 7, 1984, after which it dropped to 13 pCi/g (0.48 Bq/g),
corresponding to a sludge concentration of 5.2 pCi/g (0.19 Bq/g). During the latter half of 1984 and
1985, the 241Am concentrations in sludge were 3.5 and 2.5 pCi/g (130 and 93 mBq/g), respectively. In the
second incident, 241Am in sludge was as high as 120 pCi/g (4,400 mBq/g) in 1984, but dropped to an
average of 24.8 pCi/g (920 mBq/g) in the latter half of 1985. This facility placed its sludge in landfills
(Brauning et al. 1986).
6.5 GENERAL POPULATION AND OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE
Americium in the environment may be transferred to humans by inhalation and ingestion of food and, in
the case of children, ingestion of soil; in general, intake of americium should be small. Much of the
241
Am so taken is found in the lungs, skeleton, and liver. In addition to the 241Am taken up, additional
241
Am is produced by the decay of 241Pu that has been inhaled or ingested and absorbed. No data on the
body burden of 241Am in the general population were found. However, the body burden from fallout was
estimated from the concentration of 241Am in air and estimates of intake by ingestion. The modeling
study indicated that most of the 241Am body burden, 89% in 1978, was due to ingrowth from 241Pu. The
model also estimated that the contribution of ingestion to the 241Am body burden was <1% of that due to
inhalation. The total skeletal burden for 1970–1974 in New York was estimated from ashed skeletal
samples to be 0.27 pCi (10 mBq) (Bennett 1979). UNSCEAR (2000) reported that inhalation exposures
for even long-lived transuranic radionuclides became insignificant after 1985.
Ash from a 1974 90Sr total diet study in New York consisting of representational foods from 19 separate
categories was analyzed for 241Am to ascertain the dietary intake of the radionuclide from fallout (Bennett
1979). It was estimated that over 95% of the 241Am transfer to food was from cumulative deposits in soil,
rather than from direct deposition. The highest concentrations of 241Am in food occurred in shellfish,
followed by grain products and fresh fruits and vegetables. The lowest concentrations were in meat, milk,
eggs, fish, and processed foods. The same patterns of concentrations were obtained for 239,240Pu. The
activity levels of 241Am in foods from New York from a total diet study, and in areas near nuclear
weapons test sites and a fuel reprocessing facility are shown in Table 6-4. Using dietary consumption
estimates and the activity levels in the food items and tap water, the 241Am ingestion intake for a New
Yorker was 0.40±0.05 pCi/year (15±2 mBq/year) in 1974. The concentration of 241Am in tap water was
estimated at 30±3 aCi/kg (1±0.1 µBq/kg) with 1,200 kg of water being consumed in a year. The food
samples obtained in 1974 occurred at a time when direct deposition from fallout was very low and the
AMERICIUM 171
concentration of 241Am in food was largely a result of uptake from soil derived from cumulative deposits.
Direct deposition from fallout was greatest in 1963–1964. Additionally, direct deposition is a much less
significant means of plants acquiring activity than root uptake. The 241Am intake in diet from fallout will
continue to increase due to ingrowth from 241Pu until the cumulative deposit reaches its projected
maximum of 0.88 mCi/km2 (33 MBq/km2) in the year 2035, at which time, the dietary intake of 241Am
will have reached a maximum of 0.7 pCi/year (26 mBq/year) (Bennett 1979).
As part of its Radionuclides in Food Program, the FDA determined concentrations of radionuclides in
their Total Diet Study of food originating from the vicinity of nuclear reactors including raw vegetables,
food crops (primarily fruits), fish, and milk. While not specifically analyzed for, 241Am concentrations of
radionuclides in both of these surveys in 1983–1986 and 1987–1992 were sufficiently low as to require
no specific action or simple monitoring. Imported foods were extensively monitored starting in May
1986 for contamination resulting from the Chernobyl accident. While 241Am was identified in samples of
imported food that probably originated from Chernobyl, the vast majority of samples were below FDA’s
level of concern with only one oregano and three cheese shipments being detained (Cunningham et al.
1989, 1994). FDA has since published guidelines for radionuclide concentrations, including isotopes of
americium and plutonium, in food (FDA 1998).
A study in the Ravenglass estuary, where tidal action inundates pasture land with water that receives
discharges from the BNF reprocessing plan in Sellafield, concluded that consumption of a diet consisting
of locally produced food would result in dose levels far below recommended limits (Bradford and Curtis
1984). Sanchez et al. (1998) measured the 241Am activity in vegetation from tide washed pastures in
17 estuaries spanning the eastern seaboard of the Irish Sea from Solway in northwest England to David’s
Head in southern Wales. From the mean and median 241Am activity in grass and appropriately reduced
transfer factors, they predicted the activity in animal products, namely milk, beef, beef liver, lamb, and
lamb liver. From this, they estimated the committed effective dose for a 1-year-old child, a 10-year-old
child, and an adult from eating these foods. Assuming that the land above the high water mark was to be
reclaimed for growing vegetables, the authors calculated estimates of dose derived from consumption of
potatoes, which were determined to be the critical vegetable group in terms of radionuclide
contamination. The results are shown in Table 6-6, in which the relative doses for the various foods are
beef liver>potatoes>lamb liver>beef>milk>lamb.
Using transfer factors derived for uptake into plants and animals, Friberg and Vesanen (1999) have listed
critical activity levels for combined α-emitting isotopes of Pu, Am, and Cm and other nuclides deposited
AMERICIUM 172
Table 6-6. Estimated Effective 241Am Dose from Food Raised on Land Impacted
by Tidal Estuaries along the Irish Sea
241
Am Committed effective dose (µSv) from
Food item Transfer factors concentrationa 241
Amb
Mean Median Mean Median Adult 10-year old 1-year old
Milk 1.0x10-7 1.0x10-7 6.3x10-4 2.5x10-4 0.01 0.02 0.03

Beef 1.0x10-5 1.0x10-5 0.06 0.02 0.2 0.2 0.07
Beef liver 2.0x10-3 2.0x10-3 12.61 4.94 14.6 8.3 4.9
Lamb 4.0x10-5 4.0x10-5 0.03 0.01 0.05 0.03 0.01
Lamb liver 3.0x10-3 3.0x10-3 2.18 0.86 2.5 1.4 0.8
Potatoes 3.3 3.1 1.2
a
Food concentrations were estimated from measured 241Am levels in grass (485 Bq/kg dry weight mean,
190 Bq/kg dry weight median), by applying grass-to-food transfer factors. Units are Bq/L for milk and Bq/kg fresh
weight for other food items.
b
The average consumption rates for the animal products were obtained from Byrom et al. (1995) and the dose
coefficients were taken from SEPA (2000) (conversion: 1 Sv=100 rem).
Source: Sanchez et al. 1998

AMERICIUM 173
on soil and pasture vegetation from a nuclear accident required to exceed the action level for foodstuffs
recommended by the IAEA. Critical activity levels for the α-emitting isotopes of Pu, Am, and Cm were
determined to be 8 kBq/kg (0.2 µCi/kg) for soil top-layer and 3.5 kBq/kg (0.095 µCi/kg) for pasture
vegetation. The lowest detection limit required for the α-emitting isotopes of Pu, Am, and Cm was
determined to be 2 kBq/kg (0.05 µCi/kg). Detection limits for the α-emitting isotopes of Pu, Am, and Cm
achieved with thorough radioanalytical procedures have been reported as low as 0.07 Bg/kg (2 pCi/kg) in
soil (Friberg and Vesanen 1999).
The consumption of fish exposed to actinide contamination is a potential source of 241Am exposure. This
potential source of exposure has been evaluated by measuring the concentration of 241Am in bass and
bluegill living in a nuclear waste pond on the Hanford site where the levels of 241Am in sediments are
approximately 3 orders of magnitude above background levels. Assuming that actinide behavior in the
body is similar to that defined by the International Commission on Radiation Protection (ICRP) for
Standard Man, the maximum levels occurring in fish fillets after 1 year in the waste pond (see Table 6-5)
would not be sufficient to produce a significant radiation dose to a human eating 1 pound of fish fillets
every day for 70 years (Emery et al. 1981). Similarly, the consumption of fish from the Farallon Islands
Nuclear Waste Dump Site off of San Francisco is expected to add ~1.5% to the typical annual dose to the
whole body effective dose equivalent value to pooled radionuclide concentrations committed to age 70
(Suchanek et al. 1996). This increase is derived largely from the ingestion of 241Am.
Lichens are very efficient collectors of deposited radionuclides. Since caribou and reindeer depend on
lichens for food during the winter season, the lichen-reindeer/caribou-human pathway can lead to elevated
exposures to indigenous Inuit and Sami populations who eat large quantities of meat and organs from
caribou and reindeer. Reindeer tissue samples were analyzed for transuranium elements in Finland
following the Chernobyl accident in 1986. Paatero and Jaakkola (1998) established that americium was
transferred from lichen to reindeer via the gastrointestinal tract and not inhalation, and obtained a
gastrointestinal-tract absorption coefficient of 0.00075 for 241Am. This gastrointestinal-tract absorption
coefficient is similar to that estimated for humans (0.0006–0.0008, see Section 3.3.1.2). Concentrations
of 241Am in reindeer resulting from Chernobyl fallout appear in Table 6-5. Global fallout of plutonium,
which correlates with that of americium, was considerably higher than Chernobyl fallout, ca. 70 Bq/m2
(2 pCi/m2) compared to 1.5 Bq/m2 (0.04 pCi/m2) (Paatero and Jaakkola 1998). Based on 241Am
concentrations in reindeer in Finnish Lapland, estimated 241Am intake is 2 pCi/year (74 mBq/year) for
men and 1 pCi/year (37 mBq/year) for women (Jaakkola et al. 1977).
AMERICIUM 174
A modeling study for estimating exposure to man from dumping of radioactive waste in the Arctic Seas
concluded that ingestion of molluscs was the dominant pathway for 241Am, and that 241Am along with
239
Pu would dominate the collective dose at longer time scales (Nielsen et al. 1997). Another modeling
study dealing with the effect of long-term release of 241Am into an estuarine coastal sea ecosystem found
that the greatest intake by man is from eating marine food items such as seaweed, molluscs, crustaceans,
and fish (Murray and Avogadro 1979). Another important route of exposure is the inhalation of
contaminated airborne coastal sediment. Ingestion of sediment by children and the contamination of
crops by airborne sediment were estimated to be of minor importance. Radiation from contaminated mud
flats and direct exposure from water were considered to be of little consequence. A survey of 241Am and
plutonium in fish and shellfish in Ireland between 1988 and 1997 estimated that the mean doses from
241
Am for the typical and heavy Irish consumer were 0.024 and 0.104 µSv/year (2.4 and 10.4 µrem/year),
respectively (Ryan et al. 1999). Americium contributes somewhat over a quarter of the combined
plutonium-americium dose. In 1988, this combined dose was roughly 10% of that which the typical Irish
seafood consumer obtained from 137Cs; in 1997, this percentage had increased to 48%.
Both the general population and workers may be exposed to 241Am from the production, distribution, and
use of ionization chamber smoke detectors. The USNRC investigated exposure relating to this device.
Their 1979 report concluded that the sum of doses to the population resulting from production,
distribution, use, and disposal of 14 million smoke detectors containing 3 µCi (100 kBq) of 241Am each
(over 3 times that presently used) that were distributed in 1978 would result in a collective total body dose
of 1,100 person-rem (11 person-Sv)—much lower than that which could potentially result in one cancer
death (USNRC 1979). The risks reported in the 1979 report may be overestimates for current times, since
radiation risk coefficients have changed and the amount of americium used per unit has been reduced.
More recent information also indicates that exposure to 241Am in a home smoke detector is negligible
(<0.01 mrem/year [<1x10-7 Sv/year]). Smoke detectors today typically contain approximately 1 µCi
(37 kBq) of 241Am (EPA 2004b). Exposure to 241Am could result from improper disposal of smoke
detectors; for example, if a detector was broken and then disposed of in a municipal landfill or
incinerated. The 241Am from the broken detector could be consumed by a child, but uptake would be
negligible based on human study results (Rundo et al. 1977).
Occupational exposure to 241Am may occur to workers manufacturing the 241Am-containing foil used in
ionization-type smoke detectors or assembling the device. Two manufacturers of the 241Am foils were
surveyed in 1977 (USNRC 1979). One reported an external population dose of 0.8 person-rem per curie
(0.2 person-pSv/Bq) of 241Am processed for the 150 workers involved and the 16.6 Ci (0.614 TBq) of
AMERICIUM 175
241
Am they processed. The maximum dose for an individual was approximately 0.8 rem (8 mSv). The
second manufacturer reported 0.2 person-rem per curie (0.05 person-pSv/Bq) of 241Am processed. It
should be noted that manufacturers of ionization chamber smoke detectors must be licensed by the
USNRC or an agreement state, and that certain work practices are required to minimize exposure.
Workers wear shoe covers, lab coats, and gloves, and wipe tests are performed weekly. During the
manufacture of the smoke detector units, one manufacturer reported the yearly external doses among
badged workers in 1978: 40% had no measurable dose, 40% had <100 mrem (<1 mSv), 15% had doses
between 250 and 500 mrem (2.5 and 5.0 mSv), 4% had doses between 500 and 750 mrem (5.0 and
7.5 mSv), and one individual had a dose between 750 and 1,000 mrem (7.5 and 10 mSv). The total
occupational dose in the ionization chamber smoke detector industry in 1978 was estimated to range from
15 to 48 person-rem. The external doses to people involved in the distribution and retail sale of smoke
detectors would be much less. The hand dose to installers is estimated to be 0.6 µrem (6 nSv) per unit
installed. An individual having one detector in the hallway and one in the bedroom would have an annual
dose of 9.3 µrem (93 nSv).
Workers at plutonium reprocessing facilities, nuclear reactors, or transuranium and low level waste
storage facilities, or those engaged in the production or processing of 243Am or 241Am may be
occupationally exposed to americium. In addition, workers at sites where nuclear testing was conducted
may also be exposed to americium. Workers in nuclear power stations may be exposed to airborne
radionuclides. The USNRC publishes annual reports on occupational radiation exposure at USNRC-
licensed facilities. Monthly cumulative 24-hour air filter samples were obtained from five different
working areas of a BWR in India during normal operation and during refueling in order to measure the
concentrations of transuranic radionuclides, including americium, in air. The average air 241Am
concentrations during normal operation were (work area, concentration in mBq/m3 [fCi/m3]): reactor
building—103 feet elevation, 0.95 (26); reactor building—143 feet elevation, 0.22 (5.9); reactor
building—200 feet elevation, 0.25 (6.8); turbine building—133 feet elevation, 0.07 (1.9); and radwaste
building—2.50 (68) (Hedge and Bhat 1983). During refueling, the respective concentrations were: 1.64,
1.33, 0.78, 0.19, and 6.34 mBq/m3 (44.3, 35.9, 21, 5.1, and 171 fCi/m3). The derived air concentration
recommended by the ICRP for occupational exposure is 80.0 mBq/m3 (2,200 fCi/m3) (Hedge and Bhat
1983). In 1997, the French radiation protection office conducted monitoring (24-hour urine
analysis/whole body activity measurements) of workers in the non-nuclear energy field (i.e., nuclear
medicine, research laboratories, and non-nuclear industries) to ascertain the occupational intake of
241
radionuclides (De Vathaire et al. 1998). Am was not detected in samples from any of the 37 workers
who worked with the radionuclide.
AMERICIUM 176
The U.S. Transuranium and Uranium Registries (USTUR) include The National Human Radiobiology
Tissue Repository, which contains postmortem tissue from persons (primarily workers) with documented
intakes of uranium or transuranic elements, such as americium. The USTUR publishes annual reports
detailing cases of accidental exposure and tissue levels of the different radioactive isotopes. These reports
and other information are available over the internet at http://www.tricity.wsu.edu/ustur/. Exposure is
generally by inhalation, but entry into the body may also occur through wounds. Americium is largely
retained in the lung, skeleton, and liver, but after long term exposure, significant amounts of 241Am are
found in the muscle, respiratory tract, and other soft tissue (Filipy et al. 1994; McInroy et al. 1989). In
25 USTUR cases involving the registry of individuals who typically had ≥20 years of employment in
facilities where 241Am was processed and who were likely to have had chronic, low-level inhalation
exposure to the actinide, the 241Am organ content of the liver and skeleton ranged from 0.01 to 554 Bq
(0.26 Bq, median) (0.3–15,000 pCi, 7.0 pCi, median) and from 0.04 to 6,623 Bq (0.99 Bq, median) (1–
179,000 pCi, 27 pCi, median), respectively (Kathren et al. 1988). Seventy-five percent of the combined
activity in the liver and skeleton resided in the skeleton (see Section 3.4). Measurements of 241Am were
performed on the skulls of 66 residents of the Caithness area of Scotland near the Dounreay Nuclear
Establishment between October 1990 and December 1991. No 241Am was detected in any of these
subjects (Ham et al. 2003).
6.6 EXPOSURES OF CHILDREN
This section focuses on exposures from conception to maturity at 18 years in humans. Differences from
adults in susceptibility to hazardous substances are discussed in 3.7 Children’s Susceptibility.
Children are not small adults. A child’s exposure may differ from an adult’s exposure in many ways.
Children drink more fluids, eat more food, breathe more air per kilogram of body weight, and have a
larger skin surface in proportion to their body volume. A child’s diet often differs from that of adults.
The developing human’s source of nutrition changes with age: from placental nourishment to breast milk
or formula to the diet of older children who eat more of certain types of foods than adults. A child’s
behavior and lifestyle also influence exposure. Children crawl on the floor, put things in their mouths,
sometimes eat inappropriate things (such as dirt or paint chips), and spend more time outdoors. Children
also are closer to the ground, and they do not use the judgment of adults to avoid hazards (NRC 1993).
AMERICIUM 177
Specific information on the exposure of children to americium is not available. As for adults in the
general population, small exposures to 241Am occur from normal ingestion of food and drinking water and
inhaling air. While the potential for americium exposure is greater for children who consume foods
grown in areas with elevated levels of americium in the soil, the uptake of americium into plants and
animals is very low. Children may be exposed to a substance brought into the home on parents’ work
clothes, skin, hair, tools, or other objects from the workplace; however, with one exception, no instances
of americium exposure in children by this route were found in the literature. In this case, a man who did
some experiments using an americium source brought home a secondary source and stored it in a dresser
drawer (Kelly and Dagle 1974). No information was located on americium levels in amniotic fluid,
meconium, cord blood, neonatal blood, or breast milk, or other potential measurements relating to fetal or
childhood body burdens.
241
Am may also find its way into municipal landfills because of improper disposal of smoke detectors or
rubble of buildings containing smoke detectors. Smoke detectors may be broken, exposing the 241Am
ionization source. Young children might get access to the 241Am and ingest it, although a human study
indicates that uptake from ingesting the americium source from a smoke detector is insignificant (Rundo
et al. 1977). At hazardous waste sites, americium that is found in excess of fallout background levels is
most likely to be in soil and presents a special hazard for young children. Hand-to-mouth activity and
inadvertent or intentional (pica) eating of contaminated dirt will result in oral exposure to americium.
6.7 POPULATIONS WITH POTENTIALLY HIGH EXPOSURES
Occupational exposures and general population exposures to potentially high levels of 241Am and other
radionuclides might occur to people occupying land like the southern Solway and Dee marshes, areas
tidally inundated by water contaminated by the BNFL nuclear fuel reprocessing plant at Sellafield, United
Kingdom plant in England (Rose et al. 1996). Modeling studies of human populations exposed to 241Am
in such coastal environments show that the highest levels of 241Am would occur in sediment and marine
organisms, especially molluscs and seaweed (Murray and Avogadro 1979). These human populations
include farm workers and turf cutters and recreational users such as birdwatchers, hikers, fishermen, and
bird shooters, as well as those who consume contaminated marsh produce, molluscs, and seaweed.
Exposure routes would be ingestion and inhalation of dust. Even so, the dose rates that would be received
by these pathways are very low (Murray and Avogadro 1979).
AMERICIUM 178
Populations with potentially high exposure to 241Am from commercial devices such as ionization chamber
smoke detectors might include production workers and firemen attending to fires in production facilities,
or warehouses where a large number of sources or devices are housed.
Physical, Chemical, and Radiological Properties. Data on the physical and chemical properties
of americium and americium compounds are available in the literature (Cotton and Wilkinson 1980; Lide
1994, 1998; Nenot and Stather 1980; Seaborg 1991). Data are also available on the radiological
properties of americium isotopes (Baum et al. 2002; DOE 2003a; ICRP 1983; Lide 1998).
Production, Import/Export, Use, Release, and Disposal. Data regarding the past and present
241 243
production and import/export volumes for Am and Am are not available. The limited commercial
241
use of Am provides a good estimate of probable production volumes. The uses of americium are
known (Budavari 1996; Seaborg 1991; UIC 1997; USNRC 1979). However, information on the
production, import/export volumes, and the amounts of 241Am used in various devices would be useful for
estimating exposure. Estimates of the amounts of 241Am released as a result of nuclear tests and accidents
are available (Bennett 1979; Suchanek et al. 1996). The disposal of americium is governed by the
AMERICIUM 179
USNRC regulations (10 CFR 61). The Manifest Information Management System (MIMS), maintained
by the INEEL, contains information on low-level radioactive waste shipments received at commercial
low-level radioactive waste disposal facilities and the WIPP transuranic waste facility (INEEL 2000).
The DOE stores most of its spent fuel at three primary locations: the Hanford site, Washington, the
INEEL, Idaho, and the Savannah River Site, South Carolina. The DOE National Spent Fuel Program
maintains a database of spent nuclear fuel stored in each of the three locations (DOE 1999a). Information
concerning the americium content of civilian nuclear power plants and naval nuclear propulsion plant
spent fuel now in storage and awaiting disposition would be useful for estimating the amount of
americium stored in the country.
Environmental Fate. The environmental fate of americium has been extensively studied in relation
to its introduction into the Irish Sea from the BNFL nuclear fuel reprocessing plant at Sellafield, United
Kingdom (Belot et al. 1982; Bennett 1976; Bunzl et al. 1994, 1995; Malcolm et al. 1990b; McCartney
et al. 1994; McKay et al. 1994; Murray et al. 1978, 1979; Pattenden and McKay 1994; Walker et al.
1986).
Other studies have investigated transport in soil and at DOE waste disposal sites (Fowler et al. 1981;
McCarthy et al. 1998a, 1998b; Penrose et al. 1990). As a result of these studies, the environmental fate of
americium is reasonably well understood. However, DOE has begun using the RESRAD Biota computer
program, and it would be useful to validate uncertainties in associated input parameter values used in the
model.
Bioavailability from Environmental Media. The absorption and distribution of americium as a

result of inhalation and ingestion exposures have been discussed in Sections 3.3.1 and 3.3.2. EPA lists
identical uptake factors for inhaled and ingested americium (as well as all of the other transuranics other
than plutonium) regardless of compound solubility, indicating that the knowledge base for americium is
not sufficiently developed to quantify the differences that are recognized for most other elements, and
additional studies would be helpful.
Food Chain Bioaccumulation. Information about the levels of americium in aquatic and terrestrial
organisms and its bioaccumulation in these organisms is available (DOE 1996; Fresquez et al. 1999;
Suchanek et al. 1996). Data are also available on the uptake of americium in plants (Bennett 1979;
Cataldo et al. 1980; EPA 1979; Romney et al. 1981; Schreckhise and Cline 1980; Schulz et al. 1976; Zach
AMERICIUM 180
1985) and levels in food (Bennett 1979; Cunningham et al. 1989, 1994; Robison et al. 1997a, 1997b).
These data indicate that americium does not biomagnify in the food chain (Bennett 1979; Bulman 1978).
Exposure Levels in Environmental Media. Monitoring data for the levels of americium in
contaminated media at hazardous waste sites would be useful. These data can then be used to estimate
the intake and body burden of americium and assess the potential risk of adverse health effects in
populations living in the vicinity of these sites.
Information is available on the levels of 241Am in soil and sediment in areas affected only by global
fallout, at DOE installations and other nuclear facilities, and at sites of nuclear explosions and accidents
(Alberts et al. 1989; Bennett 1979; Cooper et al. 1994; DOE 1980; Pattenden and McKay 1994; Robison
241
et al. 1997a, 1997b; Sanchez et al. 1996). Am levels in soil around nuclear power plants in the United
States were indistinguishable from fallout background (EPRI 1981).
For the Radionuclides in Food Program, the FDA determined concentrations of radionuclide activity in
their Total Diet Study. Levels of 241Am in both the 1983–1986 and 1987–1992 studies were sufficiently
low as to require no specific action or simple monitoring (Cunningham et al. 1989, 1994).
The FDA (1998) has published derived intervention levels for 241Am in food at which action should be
considered. Dietary values are 2.0 Bq/kg for 3-month-old children, increasing to 17 Bq/kg for 1-year-old
children, and then decreasing to 8.8 Bq/kg for adults. Since 1973, background fallout levels of 241Am in
air have been <1 aCi/m3 (1 aCi=10-18 Ci) (0.037 µBq/m3) and are continuing to decline (Bennett 1979).
Levels in tap water are sufficiently low that levels must be estimated (Bennett 1979).
UNSCEAR (2000) reported that deposition and air concentrations of radionuclides from fallout dropped
rapidly once atmospheric testing ceased in 1980. Inhalation exposures for even long-lived transuranic
radionuclides became insignificant after 1985.
Exposure Levels in Humans. Although some data on the levels of americium in human tissues
exposed to natural background levels (food, water, and air) are available, few measurements have been
made on the americium content in human tissues. The principal source of information about
occupationally exposed individuals is the USTUR database, established to document levels and
distribution of uranium and transuranium isotopes in human tissues for occupationally exposed workers
(USTUR 1999). Several major database files are available. The Radiochemical file contains information
about radiochemical analysis of tissue donations from occupationally exposed individuals. The Health
AMERICIUM 181
Physics file contains bioassay and other health physics data. These two databases are regularly updated.
The Medical file contains abstracted personal, medical, and clinical data; the Pathology file contains
autopsy and pathology information; and the Skeletal Estimate file contains estimated actinide
concentrations for unanalyzed half skeletons from donors (USTUR 1999). The DOE has developed the
Comprehensive Epidemiologic Data Resource (CEDR) Program to provide public access to health and
exposure data concerning DOE installations. In addition, studies relating to populations residing near
DOE installations, and other studies of radiation exposures and health effects, such as atomic bomb
survivors, are included in CEDR (CEDR 2000). Additional research is needed to reassess the magnitude
of any health risks associated with exposure to americium from smoke detector damage under realistic
scenarios.
Exposures of Children. Children will be exposed to americium in the same manner as adults in the
general population (i.e., ingestion of food and water and inhalation of air). Americium is potentially
found at hazardous waste sites at elevated levels. Since children may have oral exposure to soil through
hand-to-mouth activity, bioavailability studies of americium in soil via the oral route may be useful to
assess the risk of this type of exposure.
Child health data needs relating to susceptibility are discussed in 3.13.2 Identification of Data Needs:
Children’s Susceptibility.
Exposure Registries. Americium is not currently one of the chemicals for which a subregistry has
been established in the National Exposure Registry. Americium will be considered in the future when
chemical selection is made for subregistries to be established. The information that is amassed in the
National Exposure Registry facilitates the epidemiological research needed to assess adverse health
outcomes that may be related to the exposure to americium.
Other exposure registries are available for americium. The USTUR established a database to document
levels and distribution of uranium and transuranium isotopes in human tissues for occupationally exposed
workers who donate their bodies to science (USTUR 1999). The DOE has developed the CEDR Program
to provide public access to health and exposure data concerning DOE installations. In addition, studies
relating to populations residing near DOE installations, as well as other studies of radiation exposures and
health effects, such as atomic bomb survivors, are included in CEDR (CEDR 2000).
AMERICIUM 182
The Federal Research in Progress database lists ongoing studies about environmental effects of
americium (FEDRIP 2004). The one current study listed in the FEDRIP database was R.D. Lloyd of the
University of Utah at Salt Lake City, studying the consequences of exposure to a bone-seeking
radionuclide, 239Pu. These studies will provide new knowledge on the biological behavior of plutonium
and other bone-seeking radionuclides, including americium, and improve the capability to predict the
risks of exposure. This research is supported by the National Cancer Institute. The International Science
and Technology Center (ISTC), headquartered in Moscow, which began operations on March 3, 1994,
also is active in research concerning transuranic elements.
AMERICIUM 183
7. ANALYTICAL METHODS
The purpose of this chapter is to describe the analytical methods that are available for detecting,
measuring, and/or monitoring americium, its metabolites, and other biomarkers of exposure and effect to
americium. The intent is not to provide an exhaustive list of analytical methods. Rather, the intention is
to identify well-established methods that are used as the standard methods of analysis. Many of the
analytical methods used for environmental samples are the methods approved by federal agencies and
organizations such as EPA and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Other
methods presented in this chapter are those that are approved by groups such as the Association of
Official Analytical Chemists (AOAC) and the American Public Health Association (APHA).
Additionally, analytical methods are included that modify previously used methods to obtain lower
detection limits and/or to improve accuracy and precision.
7.1 BIOLOGICAL MATERIALS
Entry of americium into the human body can occur through ingestion, inhalation, or penetration through
skin or via wounds. The quantities of americium within the body can be assessed from the use of
bioassays, which include in vivo measurements and/or in vitro measurements. In vivo measurements can
be obtained through techniques that directly quantify internally deposited americium (using, for example,
a whole body counter). Conversely, in vitro measurements provide an estimate of internally deposited
americium, utilizing techniques that measure americium in body fluids, feces, urine, or tissue obtain
through an autopsy. Examples of these analytical techniques are given in NCRP Report No. 87 (1987)
and are also listed in Table 7-1. The ultimate aim of making such measurements is to estimate intake and
radiation dose. In-vitro measurements provide an assessment of intake and dose only when the data are
interpolated using appropriate biokinetic models, taking account of pattern of exposure, chemical form,
and other parameters.
7.1.1 Whole or Partial Body Measurements
In vivo measurement techniques are the most direct and widely used approach for assessing the content of
many radioisotopes, including americium, within the body. The in vivo measurement of americium
within the body is performed with various radiation detectors and associated electronic devices, which are
AMERICIUM 184
Table 7-1. Analytical Methods for Determining Americium

in Biological Samples
Sample Analytical
matrix Sample preparation method Detection limita Accuracy Reference
Urine None Gamma-ray 0.08 nCi/ No data Ide et al.
spectroscopy 200 cm3 1985
(phoswich
detector)
Urine Co-precipitation with α-spectroscopy 0.08 pCi/ No data Ide et al.
oxalate 80 cm3 1985
Urine None Gamma-ray 0.04 pCi/cm3 95% at Guilmette
spectroscopy 0.04 pCi/cm3 1986
Urine Sample wet ashed, α-liquid 0.7 pCi/ 95% at Guilmette
treated with HNO3 scintillation 125 cm3 0.01– and Bay
and H2O2 1,000 nCi 1981
Urine Sample wet ashed, Liquid 14 pCi/100 cm3 96% at Ham et al.
purified by solvent scintillation 20,000 dpm 1977
extraction spike
Urine Sample with 241Am α-liquid 0.02 pCi/L 96% at Hafez and
spike co-precipitated scintillation 20 dpm spike Hafez 1992
with CaHPO4 then
with oxalate,
purification by
diglycol succinate
column
Urine Sample cleaned-up Biphasic liquid 1 pCi/200 cm3 84% Bomben et
by co-precipitation, scintillation al. 1994
treated with HNO3
and H2O2, wet ashed
Urine Spiked sample α-spectroscopy 0.016 pCi/ 95% at Goldstein et
clean-up by co- 800 cm3 0.1–100 pCi/ al. 1997
precipitation, purified sample
by TRU-spec column
and electro-
deposition
Soft Sample wet ashed, α-spectroscopy No data 98% McInroy et al.
tissue spiked with 243Am, 1985
purified by anion
exchange, solvent
extraction, and
electrodeposition
Soft Spiked sample wet α-spectroscopy No data 53% Qu et al.
tissue ashed, treated with 1998
HNO3/H2O2, purified
by A-CU column,
anion exchange,
TRU-spec column,
and electro-
deposition
Soft Sample wet ashed, Liquid 1.3 pCi/ 96% at Ham et al.
tissue purified by solvent scintillation 100 cm3 20,000 dpm 1977
extraction spike
AMERICIUM 185
Table 7-1. Analytical Methods for Determining Americium

in Biological Samples
Sample Analytical
Soft Sample wet ashed, α-liquid 0.7 pCi/g 99% at Guilmette
tissue purified by solvent scintillation 3,000 dpm and Bay
extraction spike 1981
Bone Sample wet ashed, α-liquid 0.7 pCi/g 99% at Guilmette
purified by solvent scintillation 3,000 dpm and Bay
Bone Sample wet ashed, α-spectroscopy No data 98% McInroy et al.
spiked with 243Am, 1985
and purified by anion
exchange resin
column, solvent
extraction, and
electrodeposition
Feces Sample wet ashed, Liquid 13 pCi/g 91% at Ham et al.
purified by solvent scintillation 20,000 dpm 1977
extraction spike
Feces Sample wet ashed, α-liquid 1.3 pCi/sample 96% at Guilmette
purified by solvent scintillation 3,000 dpm and Bay
Feces None Phoswich 0.02–0.09 nCi/ No data Kramer et al.
detector 200g 1989
Teeth Sample dissolved in α-spectroscopy 2.7 fCi/sample 98% Culot et al.
HNO3, purified by 1997
TRU-spec column
and electrode
position
Whole Animal placed, Gamma-ray No data No data Lloyd et al.
organs backbone down, in spectroscopy 1970
and lucite box, and
tissues positioned 33 cm
from NaI(Tl) crystal;
livers and other
tissues were
counted between
two NaI(Tl) crystals
a
1 Ci=3.7x1010 Bq=0.037 TBq or 1 Bq=2.7x10-11 Ci=27 pCi; 1 Ci=2.2x1012 dpm
TRU = transuranic
AMERICIUM 186
collectively known as whole body counters. These radiation detectors commonly utilize hyperpure
germanium to detect the 59.5 keV gamma-ray that 241Am promptly emits in 35.9% of its alpha decays to
237
Np (DOE 1979b, 2003a; Palmer et al. 1983).
Because the attenuation half thicknesses for the 59.5 keV gamma-ray are 3.5 cm for soft tissues and
1.3 cm for bone, 241Am that has been deposited into specific organs or tissues, such as the lungs, liver,
bones (e.g., skull or knee cap), or lymph nodes, can be detected and quantified using whole body or
partial body counting techniques that appropriately account for attenuation by internal organs (Graham
and Kirkman 1983; Palmer and Rhoads 1989; Palmer et al. 1983). Many configurations of the whole
body counter have been utilized, ranging from the more common single-detector chest detectors to
multiple-detector arrays (e.g., four HPGE detectors, two each of front and back over the lungs or
abdomen) or linear whole body scanners that can be utilized to assess the regional distributions of 241Am
over the entire length of the body (Palmer et al. 1983; Toohey and Essling 1980). Where appropriate,
shielding of the room that houses the whole body counter and/or the detector is often used to increase the
detection sensitivity of the equipment by minimizing background radiation. Also, in vitro measurements
of americium (see Section 7.1.2) are often used in conjunction with whole body counting when
monitoring individuals working with americium.
Calibration of whole body counters is performed so that the operator can obtain a more accurate and
unbiased estimate of internalized americium activity. The equipment calibration is achieved through the
use of tissue-equivalent phantoms that are constructed to mimic the shape and density of the anatomical
structure (e.g., the human torso), using tissue equivalent materials such as polystyrene or epoxides. In
some phantoms, a human rib cage is added to account for the attenuation of gamma-rays by bone in the
whole body counts (DOE 1979b). Americium standards are inserted or molded into the phantom at
locations where this radionuclide is expected to accumulate, such as in the lung, liver, or bone.
Comparisons of the activity obtained from the phantom to the known activity of the americium standards
are used to determine the efficiency of the counting technique and, thus, provide the basis for calibrating
the technique. Calibration of whole body counters can be further refined by obtaining actual anatomical
measurements of the individual to be measured. For example, chest wall thickness measurements using
ultrasound techniques are used to account for the variability in attenuation that result from individual
differences in the chest wall thickness and improving the calibration of chest counts of americium (DOE
1979b). Another approach to refining the calibration of whole body counters is the comparison of
external measurements to the actual americium content in organs and bone of cadavers (Palmer et al.
1985). These refinements in calibration phantoms can lead to more accurate and less biased assessments
AMERICIUM 187
of the total body or organ burden of americium. The calibration may include an assessment of the
detection limit for the system or for the specific analytical protocol being used.
In assessing initial exposure, whole body counting techniques measure the amounts of americium that
have been retained within organs or tissues. In cases of accidental ingestion, some of the americium may
have been excreted in the urine or feces before exposure is assessed. In particular, soluble forms of
americium are thought to be readily excreted through the urine. Long-term assessment of americium
burden within an individual can be complicated by the mobilization of americium from the original site of
deposition (e.g., the lung) to other sites within the body, such as the liver or bone (Fry 1976). This can
lead to either overestimates or underestimates of the overall total body burden of americium, depending
on the regions in which the americium counts are obtained relative to the shift in radionuclide
distribution, and if local concentrations have been augmented by mobilization of americium from other
tissues. Overestimates can also occur in cases where external contamination in the vicinity of a detector
contributes to the collected spectrum. Showering immediately before monitoring to remove potential
contamination should help reduce variability in temporal results and minimize the potential for obtaining
false positive results. Additionally, the retention (biological half-life) of americium within the body can
vary greatly between individuals (Fry 1976). Direct comparisons of americium body burdens and
clearance rates between laboratories can be complicated by the differing whole body measurement
techniques, calibration methods, and methods used to account for normal background radiation counts
that are utilized within the different laboratories (DOE 1979b). These variations are largely resolved by
performing periodic internal monitoring and adjusting the model parameters to account for the
individual’s actual distributed retention.
7.1.2 Assay of Excreta
In vitro analyses of americium are routinely performed in situations where in vivo analyses cannot be
obtained, where in vivo measurements will not provide the information needed, or in support of an in vivo
monitoring program. Urine is the preferred sample for in vitro analyses of americium, although other
sample types, such as feces, tissue, bone, or blood, can also be used on a more limited basis. Urine
provides for an analysis of soluble or transportable americium, fecal analysis can be used to measure
gastrointestinal clearance of ingested material plus bile-related systemic clearance, and tissue is used to
assess whole or regional body burdens of americium (Guilmette and Bay 1981; Ide 1986; Ide et al. 1985;
McInroy et al. 1985).
AMERICIUM 188
There are a number of methods that have the selectivity, and/or sensitivity, to measure americium in
biological matrices including spectrophotometry, fluorimetry, mass spectrometry (MS), and radioassays
(Dacheux and Aupias 1998; Hafez and Hafez 1992; Poupard and Jouniaux 1990; Thouvenot et al. 1993).
Of these methods, radioassays (e.g., gross alpha analysis, alpha spectroscopy, gamma-ray spectroscopy,
liquid scintillation techniques) are preferred because of their ease of use, detection sensitivity, and
rapidity of analysis (Alvarez and Navarro 1996; Dacheux and Aupiais 1997; Guilmette 1986). These
methods typically involve a preliminary concentration step and wet/dry ashing of the sample that is often
followed by an oxidation of the radionuclides in the sample residue. To remove the possible interferences
of other elements and alpha-emitters, ion exchange, co-precipitation, and adsorption techniques are
applied to the purified sample before alpha or liquid scintillation techniques are applied (see Table 7-1).
Radioassays can also be applied to the measurement of americium in fecal samples, as well as tissue and
bone samples obtained from autopsy, using methods that are similar to those described for urinalysis,
except for some additional purification and extraction steps that are required to remove interfering
materials such as iron (Guilmette and Bay 1981; Hafez and Hafez 1992; Ham et al. 1977; Qu et al. 1998).
Of the radioassays that are commonly used to quantify americium, α-spectroscopy is used when isotopic
analyses of americium must be conducted (e.g., to obtain distinct results for 241Am and 243Am). 243
Am is
often added as a tracer to estimate the recovery (efficiency of the radiochemical sample preparation
method for removing americium from a biological matrix). The α-spectroscopy technique differentiates
between the two americium isotopes based on the difference in the energies of the alpha particles that are
emitted from 241Am and 243Am, and then quantifies the amounts present in the sample by considering the
system’s response to each, its detection efficiency, and the frequency with which the individual alpha
particles are emitted. If 243Am is to be analyzed in a sample, 241Am can be used as a tracer. If a sample
needs to be monitored for both 241Am and 243Am, the sample is split prior to adding the tracer and two
analyses are performed (PNNL 2003). Mass spectrometric techniques, especially those using double
focusing magnet spectrometers, are also capable of isotopic quantification of americium (Dacheux and
Aupiais 1998; Poupard and Jouniaux 1990). These techniques are more rapid than the α-spectroscopy
detection method, but the costs have been much higher. The cost of mass spectrometers, however, has
decreased in recent years, making the cost of analyzing samples by mass spectrometry and α-spectroscopy
more comparable. The breakeven point will depend on the sample throughput rate. Higher sensitivity
can also be achieved with α-spectroscopy by resorting to long sampling times, sometimes referred to as
time-averaging.
AMERICIUM 189
Accuracy and bias of in vivo and in vitro measurements of americium are determined through the use of
standard, certified radioactive sources with known concentrations of americium. The primary source of
certified americium standards is the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Secondary
and tertiary level laboratories can also prepare, certify, and sell such sources, and the Health Physics
Society is developing an accreditation program for providers who wish their products to be recognized as
NIST-traceable (HPS 2004). Standard solutions are available for 241Am (SRM 4322, 40 Bq/g [1.1 nCi/g])
and 243Am (SRM 4332, 40 Bq/g [1.1 nCi/g]). Standard Reference Materials for human lung (SRM 4351)
and human liver (SRM 4352) are also available from NIST.
7.2 ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLES
There are two common approaches for measuring americium in the environment. Americium can either
be measured directly in the field (in situ) using portable survey instruments or be quantified from samples
that were procured from the field and returned to the laboratory.
7.2.1 Field Measurements of Americium
In situ measurement techniques are extremely useful for the rapid characterization of radionuclide
contamination in the environment, such as surface soils, sediments, and vegetation, or when monitoring
personnel for internal exposure from or external contamination with americium. Information regarding
field measurement methods, minimum detectable concentrations, and soil-to-plant concentration factors is
available for various radionuclides, including americium (MARSSIM 2000; NRC 1992, 1998b). The
measurement of radionuclides in the environment is conducted with portable survey instruments that are
equipped with α-scintillators or gamma-ray spectrometers. The use of gamma-ray spectrometers is
preferred for measuring americium in the field, especially in the presence of plutonium isotopes. The
reason is that the low-energy 241Am gamma-ray photons are more penetrating than lower energy x-rays
from 238,239Pu for which it is a surrogate radionucide. This makes measurements less affected by surface
type and texture and by the presence of vegetation and surrounding soil (Byrne and Komosa 1993). This
provides the advantage for assessing the level of americium both on and below the surface (e.g., up to
3-cm depth in some soils). These gamma-ray spectrometers are equipped with either a thin phoswich
type detector or a high purity germanium detector that is able to distinguish the 59.5 keV gamma-ray
emitted from 241Am from most environmental gamma-rays emitted from other radionuclides (Fong and
Alvarez 1997). Another advantage of these spectrometers is the ability to discriminate the 59.5 keV
AMERICIUM 190
photons of 241Am from the much lower energy photons emitted from 239Pu and 240Pu, which are usually
associated with americium. Minimum detectable activities (MDAs) of 0.4 Bq/g (10 pCi/g) for 241Am are
routinely achieved, with MDAs as low as 0.04 Bq/g (1 pCi/g) obtained with longer counting times
(-30 days).
One of the limitations of the portable field survey instruments in the measurement of americium is that
their quantitative accuracy depends on how well the lateral and vertical distribution of americium in the
soil compares with the calibration parameters used. These methods can provide a rapid assessment of
americium levels on or below surfaces in a particular environment; however, laboratory-based analyses of
samples procured from these environmental surfaces must be performed in order to ensure accurate
quantification of americium (and other radionuclides). This is due, in part, to the strong self absorption of
the 59.5 keV gamma-ray by environmental media, such as soil. Consequently, uncertainty in the depth
distribution of americium and density of the environmental media may contribute to a >30% error in the
field survey measurements. Refinements in calibration strategies are currently being developed to
improve both the precision and the accuracy (10%) of gamma-ray spectroscopy measurements of
americium within contaminated soils (Fong and Alvarez 1997).
7.2.2 Laboratory Analysis of Environmental Samples
Analytical methods for quantifying americium in environmental samples are summarized in Table 7-2.
The methods that are commonly used in the analysis of americium based on activity are gross α analysis,
α-spectroscopy, and gamma-ray spectroscopy. MS detection techniques are used to measure the mass of
americium in environmental samples. The mass-activity conversion factor for 241Am is 0.29 µCi/µg
(11 kBq/µg) or 3.43 µg/µCi (0.091 µg/kBq) (Harvey et al. 1993).
The analysis of americium in air is based on the quantification of americium within particulates that
become trapped on cellulose or glass fiber filters after a calibrated amount of air is pulled through the
filters. The analysis for americium on a glass fiber filter is straight forward using gamma spectroscopy,
but can be a rather complex procedure involving many solvent extraction and column purification steps,
followed by electrodeposition and α-spectroscopy. The extensive purification is required to prevent
impurities within the sample from absorbing or reducing the energy of emitted alpha particles, termed
self-absorption. Alpha-emitting contaminants must also be removed (e.g., 238Pu) from the samples to
AMERICIUM 191
Table 7-2. Analytical Methods for Determining Americium in

Environmental Samples
Sample Analytical
Air Sample collection on Biphasic liquid 1 pCi 95% Bomben
cellulose filter, dry ashed, scintillation et al. 1994
solvent extracted
Air Filter wet ashed in α-spectroscopy No data No data Knab 1979
HNO3/HF, purified with
cation and anion
exchange columns and
electrodeposition
Air Cellulose filter dry ashed, α-spectroscopy 0.023 pCi/sample 102% Goldstein
dissolved in HNO3/HF, et al. 1997
H2O2/HClO4, purified with
anion exchange, TRU-
spec columns followed by
electrodeposition.
Water Sample fusion with Scintillation No data 99.5% Sill and
pyrosulfate, precipitated counter Williams
with barium sulfate 1969
Water Wet ashed, purified by Biphasic liquid 1 pCi/sample 95% Bomben
solvent extraction scintillation et al. 1994
Water Treated with HNO3/H2O2, α-spectroscopy 0.026 pCi/L 101% Goldstein
HF/HCl, anion exchange, et al. 1997
TRU-spec column,
electrodeposition
Water Solvent extracted PERALS 0.007 pCi/L 104% Dacheux
and Aupiais
1998
Sea water Co-precipitation with iron α-spectroscopy No data 64–79% Lovette
hydroxide, purified by et al. 1990
anion exchange, co-
precipitation with BiPO4,
cation exchange, electro-
deposition
Sediments Sample fusion with KF Scintillation No data No data Sill and
and pyrosulfate, co- counter Williams
precipitate with BaSO4 1969
Sediments Sample leached with α-spectroscopy No data 95–99% Guogang
HNO3/HF, filtered, purified et al. 1998
by KL-HDEHP resin
columns, solvent
extracted, and electro-
deposition
Sediments None Gamma-ray 0.02–0.06 pCi/g 108–118% Joshi 1989
spectroscopy
Soil Sample fusion with KF Scintillation No data No data Sill and
and pyrosulfate, co- counter Williams
precipitate with BaSO4 1969
AMERICIUM 192

Sample Analytical
Soil Wet ash in HNO3/HF, α-spectroscopy No data No data Knab 1979
purified with cation and
anion exchange columns,
electrodeposition
Soil Dry ash, digest in α-spectroscopy 27 pCi/g 75–92% Sanchez
HNO3/HCl, anion and
exchange, Ca-oxalate and Singleton
Fe (OH)2 coprecipitation, 1996
anion exchange, electro-
deposition
Soil Sample leached with α-spectroscopy No data 95–99% Guogang
HNO3/HF, filtered, purified et al. 1998
by KL-HDEHP resin
columns, solvent
extracted, and electro-
deposition
Soil None Gamma-ray 0.02–0.06 pCi/g 108–118% Joshi 1989
spectroscopy
Vegetation Ashed, HNO3/HF, α-spectroscopy 0.011 pCi/g No data Bunzl and
(grasses) precipitation with oxalate Kracke
and La, anion exchange, 1990
solvent extraction
Vegetation Ashed, digested with α-spectroscopy 0.3 fCi/g 73–109% Cooper
HNO3-H2O2, oxalate and et al. 1993
Fe precipitations, anion
exchange, solvent
extraction, electro-
deposition
Vegetation Ashed, digested with α-spectroscopy 27 pCi/g 75–92% Sanchez
HNO3-HCl, anion and
exchange, Ca-oxalate and Singleton
Fe precipitations, anion 1996
exchange, electro-
deposition
Lichen, Ashed, leached with HCl, α-spectroscopy 0.9 fCi/g No data Jia et al.
moss Microthene-TNOA and 1997
KL-HDEHP column
extractions, solvent
deposition
AMERICIUM 193

Sample Analytical
Biota Ashed, digested with α-spectroscopy 0.3 fCi/g 98–100% Cooper
HNO3-H2O2, oxalate, and 480% et al. 1993
Fe precipitations, anion (shrimp)
exchange, solvent
deposition
a
1 Bq=2.7x10-11 Ci=27 pCi; 27 fCi=1 mBq
KL-HDEHP = 50% di(2-ethylhexyl) phosphoric acid, 60–100 mesh resin; PERALS = Photon/electron rejecting alpha
liquid scintillation; TNOA = tri-n-octylamine; TRU = transuranic
AMERICIUM 194
prevent these materials from interfering with the α-spectroscopy measurements of 241Am and 243Am
(ASTM 1997; Lovette et al. 1990). Initially, the filter media is dissolved with HNO3 and H2O2, the
residue is wet ashed with HNO3 and then purified using anion exchange chromatography, the solvent is
extracted with 50% bis-(2-ethylhexyl) phosphoric acid (HDEHP) in toluene, the sample is again passed
243
through an anion exchange column, and then the sample is oxidized with HNO3 and H2O2. Am is
241
commonly used as a surrogate for quantifying the chemical recovery of Am during sample preparation,
241
so quantification of Am in a sample involves α-spectrometric analysis of both isotopes. Preparation of
the purified filter sample for α-spectroscopy requires electrodeposition of the americium from a sulfate
solution onto a stainless steel or platinum disc from which alpha counts are obtained during the α-
spectroscopy analysis (DOE 1997b). The accuracy of this method of analysis for americium can vary
between 85 and 102% and the MDA often ranges between 0.032 and 0.023 pCi/sample (1.2 and
0.85 mBq/sample) (Goldstein et al. 1997).
For the analysis of americium in water, there is a broad array of available sample preparation and
detection methodologies (see Table 7-2). Many of the common and standardized analytical
methodologies typically include the minimization of sample volume, purification through co-
precipitation, anion exchange column chromatography, and solvent extraction techniques followed by
radiochemical detection of americium in the purified sample. Gross alpha analysis or liquid scintillation
are common detection techniques that are utilized to quantify americium in these methods. However, if
lower detection sensitivity or isotopic determination is required, then α-spectroscopy is the preferred
method to quantify 241Am (Dacheux and Aupiais 1997; DOE 1997b; Goldstein et al. 1997; Harvey et al.
1993; Sill and Williams 1969). These detection methods can provide measurements of total americium
activity within a sample, especially when appropriate steps have been taken to purify the sample of
interfering materials or minimize the influence of other radionuclides on radiochemical activity (Dazhu et
al. 1991). The presence of alpha emitting radionuclides in the sample can contribute to the alpha counts
measured in radiochemical detection methods and, thus, affect the accuracy of the assay for determining
the quantity of americium within a sample.
There are methods available to quantify the total mass of americium in environmental samples. Mass
spectrometric methods provide total mass measurements of americium isotopes (Dacheux and Aupiais
1997, 1998; Halverson 1984; Harvey et al. 1993); however, these detection methods have not gained the
same popularity as is found for the radiochemical detection methods. This may relate to the higher
purchase price of an MS system, the increased knowledge required to operate the equipment, and the
selection by EPA of α-spectroscopy for use in its standard analytical methods. Fluorimetric methods,
AMERICIUM 195
which are commonly used to determine the total mass of uranium and curium in environmental samples,
have limited utility to quantify americium, due to the low quantum yield of fluorescence for americium
(Thouvenot et al. 1993).
Several rapid analysis techniques involving gamma spectroscopy or spectrometry have been developed
that require either no or minimal sample preparation that can, under optimized conditions, provide the
required selectivity and sensitivity to quantify americium in environmental samples, such as soils and
sediments (Byrne and Komosa 1993; Cutshall et al. 1983; Guilmette 1986; Joshi 1989). These techniques
utilize either an intrinsic germanium detector or a phoswich-based cesium-sodium iodide low energy
photon detector that detects the gamma-rays emitted from 241Am in a neat (undiluted) or ashed
environmental or biological sample. On average, these methods have a minimum significant measurable
activity (MSMA) of approximately 1 pCi/sample (0.037 Bq/sample). To achieve this low MSMA, the
counting efficiency of the detector must be standardized against the sample size and composition in order
to assure the desired accuracy of the assay (Cutshall et al. 1983; Joshi 1989). Using a germanium detector
with its vastly superior energy resolution facilitates the identification of multiple isotopes in the same
sample without photopeak interference. It is the detector of choice for analyzing samples (and performing
internal monitoring on individuals) by gamma spectroscopy. The disadvantages of using germanium are
its greater purchase price and requirement to be cooled with liquid nitrogen or by electrocryogenic means
whenever it is in use. One limitation of the phoswich assays is the need to know the isotopic composition
of the sample since the x-rays that accompany the decay of other radionuclides may also be counted by
the phoswich detector, which is typically calibrated with a wide energy window that focuses on the 59.5
keV photon, but also detects higher energy x-rays and Compton scattered photons.
Several methods have been described in the Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation
Manual (MARSSIM 2000) for the survey and investigation of sites contaminated with radioactive
materials. At the high end of the survey instruments, costing over $1,000,000 in 1995, is an inductively
coupled plasma-mass spectrometer (ICP-MS) with a laser added to the front end to vaporize small
portions of a surface or a volumetric material to be analyzed (laser ablation), thereby avoiding physical
sample collection. Prices in 2002 were a factor of two or three lower for an inductively coupled plasma
double focusing magnet mass spectrometer capable of very accurate americium isotopic measurements.
The quantity of americium in soil, sediments, vegetation, and biota is determined using methods similar
to those described above. For example, in a standardized method developed by DOE (1997b), soil
samples are dissolved with a series of acid treatments (e.g., HNO3, HF) and initially purified through co-
AMERICIUM 196
precipitation using calcium oxalate followed by co-precipitation with an Fe carrier. A final purification of
the sample is achieved by passing the sample through a series of anion exchange columns (e.g., HNO3,
HCl, and NH4SCN), followed by electrodeposition of the americium (chloride form) onto a platinum disc
in preparation for α-spectroscopy analysis.
In another standardized method developed for the analysis of americium in soil (ASTM 1997), a different
approach is taken towards purifying the dissolved soil sample that relies on a series of co-precipitations
and solvent extractions to prepare the soil sample for α-spectroscopy analysis. After the soil has been
dissolved, the sample is initially purified by co-precipitation with barium sulfate, followed by solvent
extraction of the redissolved precipitate with 15% HDEHP in n-hexane. The extracted trivalent actinides
and lanthanides are stripped from the organic phase using nitric acid containing sodium bromate. The
subsequent solution containing the trivalent actinides and lanthanides is extracted again with 15%
HDEHP in n-hexane to remove plutonium, thorium, and tetravalent curium. The aqueous phase is further
purified through co-precipitation with a lanthanum carrier to isolate the rare earth fluorides followed by a
treatment using silver nitrate and ammonium persulfate/ammonium fluoride to precipitate all remaining
rare earth fluorides, except for hexavalent americium fluoride. The hexavalent americium is reduced back
to the trivalent state using hydrogen peroxide and then reprecipitated with a neodymium carrier in
preparation for α-spectroscopy analysis. Both the DOE and the American Society for Testing and
Materials (ASTM) methods of analysis provide good precision (<6% standard derivation) with no
statistically significant bias (at the 5% level) observed. Analysis of americium in sediments, vegetation,
and biota can also be performed using variations of the abovementioned methods or other methods, as
exemplified in Table 7-2.
The detection limits, accuracy, and precision of any analytical methodology, as well as the composition of
the sample medium, are important parameters in determining the appropriateness of a method to quantify
a specific analyte at the desired level of sensitivity within a particular matrix. The lower limit of
detection (LLD) has been adopted to refer to the intrinsic detection capability of a measurement
procedure (sampling through data reduction and reporting) to aid in determining which method is best
suited for the required sample quantification (NRC 1984). Several factors influence the LLD, including
background counting rates, size or concentration of sample, detector sensitivity, recovery of desired
analyte during sample isolation and purification, level of interfering contaminants, and, particularly,
counting time. Because of these variables, the LLDs between laboratories and for samples in the same
laboratory, utilizing the same or similar measurement procedures, will vary.
AMERICIUM 197
The accuracy of a measurement technique in determining the quantity of a particular analyte in

environmental samples is greatly dependent on the reliability of the calibrating technique. Thus, the
availability of standard, certified radiation sources with known concentrations of americium are required
in order to ensure the reliability of the calibration methods and the accuracy of americium measurements
in environmental samples. The primary source of certified americium standards is the NIST. Standard
solutions of 241Am (SRM 4322, 40 Bq/g [1.1 nCi/g]) and 243Am (SRM 4332, 40 Bq/g [1.1 nCi/g]) are
available. Standard reference materials are also available from NIST and the International Atomic
Energy Agency (IAEA) for a number of environmental matrices; for example, soils and sediments (Rocky
Flats Soil [SRM 4353], river sediment [SRM 4350B], and Peruvian soil [SRM 4355] and sediments
[IAEA 367, IAEA 135]).
Methods for Determining Biomarkers of Exposure and Effect. Analytical methods with
satisfactory sensitivity and precision are available to determine the levels of americium in human tissues
and body fluids.
AMERICIUM 198
Methods for Determining Parent Compounds and Degradation Products in Environmental

Media. Analytical methods with the required sensitivity and accuracy are available for quantification
of americium, both total and isotopic, in environmental matrices (see Table 7-2).
Whether in the environment or in the human body, americium will undergo radioactive decay to form a
series of radioactive nuclides that end in a stable isotope of lead (for 243Am) or bismuth (for 241Am) (see
Chapter 4). The decay series proceeds slowly due to the long half-lives of some of the intermediate decay
series isotopes. Therefore, more sensitive analytical methods for accurately measuring very low levels of
these radionuclides would be useful. Practically speaking, since 239Pu (for 243Am) and 237Np (for 241Am)
have such extremely long half-lives, 2.41x104 and 2.14x106 years, respectively, few decay products need
to be considered since they would only begin to achieve measurable levels in the distant future.
The Federal Research in Progress (FEDRIP 2004) database did not list any current studies involving
developments in analytical techniques related to americium.
AMERICIUM 199
8. REGULATIONS AND ADVISORIES
The international, national, and state regulations and guidelines regarding americium in air, water, and
other media are summarized in Table 8-1.
The USNRC maintains a database of information regarding licensees authorized to possess americium
isotopes (241Am through 244Am) within the 18 non-Agreement States (states not committed to self-
regulation). This database includes more than 2,000 records of licensees and site possession limits in the
microcurie to curie range. The isotope, 241Am, accounts for most of the licenses. Such records for
USNRC Agreement States are maintained by the individual state radioactive material regulatory
organizations. The USNRC and EPA each have responsibilities for regulating the cleanup of
radioactivity and decommissioning of USNRC licensed sites. USNRC and EPA reached an agreement in
2002, in response to Congressional mandate, to preclude double regulation of these efforts. The
agreement provides that EPA will defer exercise of authority under CERCLA for the majority of facilities
decommissioned under USNRC authority. It also contains provisions for joint consultation when certain
EPA parameters are exceeded, including groundwater exceeding EPA-permitted levels, USNRC
contemplation of restricted release or alternate release criteria, and residual soil radioactivity
concentrations exceeding those in the agreement (USNRC 2002).
No inhalation or oral MRLs were derived for americium or americium compounds.
The EPA IRIS database has withdrawn its cancer classification for radionuclides, but the EPA Office of
Air and Radiation believes that all radionuclides, including the americium isotopes, should be considered
to be known carcinogens, and has assigned them to Group A. Carcinogenic toxicity values for 241Am are
listed in EPA’s Federal Radiation Guidance Report No. 13 (EPA 2000a). Lifetime excess total cancer
risk per unit intake are included for inhalation (Table 2.1), drinking water ingestion (Table 2.2), and
submersion, ground plane exposure, and soil intake (Table 2.3). Media-specific usage rates (Table 3.1)
provide a means of adjusting the values to be compatible with specific population groups (e.g., tap water
intakes range from a low of 0.188 L/day for a newborn female to a high of 1.643 L/day for a 50-year-old
male, with a societal average of 1.11 L/day). The EPA has not derived reference concentrations (RfCs) or
reference doses (RfDs) for americium (IRIS 2002), but has derived a maximum contaminant level (MCL)
of 15 pCi/L for total alpha-emitters (including americium), less uranium and radon (EPA 2000c).
AMERICIUM 200
Table 8-1. Regulations and Guidelines Applicable to Americium
Agency Description Information Reference

INTERNATIONAL
Guidelines:
IARC No data
NATIONAL
Guidelines:
a. Air
ACGIH Effective dose ACGIH 2002
Any single year 50 mSv
Averaged over 5 years 20 mSv
Annual equivalent dose to
Lens of the eye 150 mSv
Skin 500 mSv
Hands and feet 500 mSv
Embryo-fetus exposures once the
pregnancy is known
Monthly equivalent dose 0.5 mSv
Dose to the surface of women’s 2 mSv for the remainder of
abdomen (lower trunk) the pregnancy
Intake of radionuclide 1/20 ALI
NIOSH REL (10-hour TWA) No data
NATIONAL
Regulations:
EPA Concentration levels for EPA 2001a
environmental compliance 40CFR61,
241 -15 3
Am 1.9x10 Ci/m Appendix E
242 -11 3
Am 1.5x10 Ci/m
243
Am 1.8x10-15 Ci/m3
OSHA PEL (8-hour TWA) No data
USNRC Occupational values—inhalation ALI(µCi) DAC(µCi/mL) USNRC 2001a
241 -3 -12
Am 6x10 3x10 10CFR20,
242
8x101 -8
Am 4x10 Appendix B
243 -3
Am 6x10 3x10-12
Effluent concentrations—air USNRC 2001a
241
Am 2x10-14 µCi/mL 10CFR20,
242
Am 1x10-10 µCi/mL Appendix B
243 -14
Am 2x10 µCi/mL
b. Water
USNRC Effluent concentrations—water USNRC 2001a
241 -8
Am 2x10 µCi/mL 10CFR20,
242
Am 5x10-5 µCi/mL Appendix B
243 -8
Am 2x10 µCi/mL
EPA Drinking water EPA 2000c
Gross alpha activity, less U, Rn 15 pCi/L
c. Food
FDA Derived intervention levela (DIL; 2.0 FDA 1998
Bq/kg food) for 241Am in accidentally-
contaminated human food
AMERICIUM 201

NATIONAL (cont.)
c. Food
Sources of radiation used for 10 Gy maximum allowed dose FDA 2000
inspection of food; sealed units to food 21CFR179.21
241
producing radiation— Am
DOT Activity values for radionuclides in DOT 2001
transport 40CFR173.435
241
Am, 242Am, and 243Am
A1 5.41x101 Ci
-3
A2 5.41x10 Ci
EPA Annual possession quantities for EPA 2001a
environmental compliance 40CFR61,
241
Am Appendix E
-6
Gaseous form 2.3x10 Ci/year
Liquid/powder forms 2.3x10-3 Ci/year
0
Solid form 2.3x10 Ci/year
242
Am
-2
Liquid/powder forms 1.8x101 Ci/year
4
243
Am
-6
Liquid/powder forms 2.3x10-3 Ci/year
0
Radioactive waste—release limits for EPA 2001b
b
containment requirements 40CFR191, Appendix
241 243 2
Am or Am 1x10 Ci A
Reportable quantity EPA 2001c
241
Am 1x10-2 Ci 40CFR302.4,
242
Am 1x102 Ci Appendix B
243 -2
Am 1x10 Ci
Carcinogenicity—slope factorsc EPA 2002
Ingestion—lifetime excess total
cancer risk/pCi
Water
241 -10
Am 1.04x10
243
Am 1.03x10-10
Food
241
Am 1.34x10-10
243 -10
Am 1.34x10
Soil
241
Am 2.17x10-10
243
Am 2.17x10-10
Carcinogenicity—slope factorsc EPA 2002
Inhalation—lifetime excess total
cancer risk/pCi
241 -8
Am 2.81x10
243
Am 2.70x10-8
External exposure—risk/year per
pCi/g in soil
241
Am 2.76x10-8
243 -8
Am 9.47x10
AMERICIUM 202

NATIONAL (cont.)
USNRC Activity values for radionuclides in USNRC 2001b
transport 10CFR71,
241
Am, 242Am, and 243Am Table A-1
1
A1 5.41x10 Ci
-3
A2 5.41x10 Ci
Specific activity
241
Am 3.4 Ci/g
242
Am 1.0x101 Ci/g
243 -1
Am 2.0x10 Ci/g
Byproduct material for in vitro clinical ≤0.005 µCi USNRC 2001c
241
or laboratory testing— Am 10CFR31.11
Calibration or reference sources; ≤5 µCi USNRC 2001d
shall not possess at any one time, at 10CFR31.8
any one location of storage or use of
241
Am
Exemption for low-level materials; Aggregate radioactivity USNRC 2001e
contains only Americium in special ≤20 Ci 10CFR71.10
form
Export of byproduct material ≤1 Ci/shipment or USNRC 2001f
≤100 Ci/year 10CFR110.23
General applicability to domestic USNRC 2001g
licensing of byproduct material; 10CFR30,
quantity of licensed material requiring Appendix B
labeling
241 -2
Am 1x10 µCi
Ionizing radiation measuring 0.05 µCi USNRC 2001g
instruments containing, for purposes 10CFR30.15(a)(9)
of internal calibration or
standardization, one or more sources
of byproduct material; exempt
241
quantities of Am
Occupational values—oral ingestion USNRC 2001a
(ALI) 10CFR20,
241
Am 8x10-1 µCi Appendix B
242 3
Am 4x10 µCi
243
Am 8x10-1 µCi
USNRC Quantity of radioactive material USNRC 2001h
requiring need for an emergency plan 10CFR30.72,
for responding to a release—241Am, Schedule C
242
Am, and 243Am
Release fraction 0.001%
Quantity 2 Ci
Standards for protection against USNRC 2001i
radiation—quantity of licensed 10CFR20,
material requiring labeling Appendix C
241 -3
Am 1x10 µCi
242 1
Am 1x10 µCi
243 -3
Am 1x10 µCi
AMERICIUM 203

d
STATE
a. Air
Illinois Concentrations in air above natural BNA 2001
background
241 -13
Am S 2x10 µCi/mL
I 4x10-12 µCi/mL
242m -13
Am S 2x10 µCi/mL
I 9x10-12 µCi/mL
242 -9
Am S 1x10 µCi/mL
I 2x10-9 µCi/mL
243 -13
Am S 2x10 µCi/mL
I 4x10-12 µCi/mL
244 -7
Am S 1x10 µCi/mL
I 8x10-7 µCi/mL
New Jersey Maximum permissible average BNA 2001
concentrations in air
Occupational (40-hour week)
241 -12
Am S 6x10 µCi/mL
-10
I 1x10 µCi/mL
242m
Am S 6x10-12 µCi/mL
-10
I 3x10 µCi/mL
242
Am S 4x10-8 µCi/mL
-8
I 5x10 µCi/mL
243
-10
I 1x10 µCi/mL
244
Am S 4x10-6 µCi/mL
-5
I 2x10 µCi/mL
concentrations in air
Non-occupational
241
-12
I 4x10 µCi/mL
242m
-12
I 9x10 µCi/mL
242
Am S 1x10-9 µCi/mL
-9
I 2x10 µCi/mL
243
-12
I 4x10 µCi/mL
244 -7
Am S 1x10 µCi/mL
I 8x10-7 µCi/mL
b. Water
Colorado Standards applicable to surface 15 pCi/L BNA 2001
waters—241Am
Groundwater levels of radioactive 15 pCi/L CO Dept of Public
materials shall not exceed this Health and Environ
amount—Am 1999
AMERICIUM 204

STATE (cont.)
concentrations in water
Occupational (40-hour week)
241 -4
Am S 1x10 µCi/mL
-4
I 8x10 µCi/mL
242m
Am S 1x10-4 µCi/mL
-3
I 3x10 µCi/mL
242
Am S 4x10-3 µCi/mL
-3
I 4x10 µCi/mL
243
Am S 1x10-4 µCi/mL
-4
I 8x10 µCi/mL
244
Am S 1x10-1 µCi/mL
-1
I 1x10 µCi/mL
Maximum permissible average BNA 2001
concentrations in water
Non-occupational
241 -6
Am S 4x10 µCi/mL
-5
I 2x10 µCi/mL
242m
Am S 4x10-6 µCi/mL
-5
I 9x10 µCi/mL
242
Am S 1x10-4 µCi/mL
-4
I 1x10 µCi/mL
243
Am S 4x10-6 µCi/mL
-5
I 3x10 µCi/mL
244
Am S 5x10-3 µCi/mL
-3
I 5x10 µCi/mL
c. Food No data
d. Other
Arkansas Determination of A1and A2 quantities BNA 2001
for transportation
241
Am
A1 8 Ci
A2 0.008 Ci
Specific activity 3.2 Ci/g
243
Am
A1 8 Ci
A2 0.008 Ci
-1
Specific activity 1.9x10 Ci/g
Standards for protection against 0.01 µCi BNA 2001
241
radiation— Am
California Ionizing radiation measuring <0.05 µCi BNA 2001
instruments containing, for purposes
of internal calibration or
standardization, one or more source
of radioactive material; 241Am is
considered an exempt quantity
Colorado Determination of A1and A2 for BNA 2001
transportation
241 242m 243
Am, Am, and Am 54.1 Ci
A1 5.41x10-3 Ci
A2
AMERICIUM 205

STATE (cont.)
Florida Quantity of radioactive material BNA 2001
requiring need for an emergency plan
for responding to a release
241
Am, 242Am, and 243Am
Release fraction 0.001%
Quantity 2 Ci
Georgia Packages transported between Not to exceed 20 Ci BNA 2001
locations within the U.S. which
contain only Am or Pu in special form
with an aggregate radioactivity
Mississippi Packages transported between Not to exceed 20 Ci BNA 2001
locations within the U.S. which
contain only Am or Pu in special form
with an aggregate radioactivity
a
The FDA-recommended Derived Intervention Level (DIL) for radionuclides of 241Am, is defined as the DIL for the most
sensitive age group (3 months) that was calculated from the most limiting Protective Action Goal (PAG; 50 mSv
committed dose equivalent to the bone).
b
Release limit per 1,000 metric tons of heavy metal (MTHM) or other unit of waste.
c
Radionuclide slope factors are calculated by EPA’s Office of Radiation and Indoor Air (ORIA) to assist HEAST users with
risk-related evaluations and decision-making at various stages of the remediation process. Ingestion and inhalation slope
factors are central estimates in a linear model of the age-averaged, lifetime attributable radiation cancer incidence (fatal
and nonfatal cancer) risk per unit of activity inhaled or ingested, expressed as risk/picocurie (pCi). External exposure
slope factors are central estimates of the lifetime attributable radiation cancer incidence risk for each year of exposure to
external radiation from photon-emitting radionuclides distributed uniformly in a thick layer of soil, and are expressed as
risk/year per pCi/gram of soil.
d
The states included in this section are only those that were available from the BNA database.
ACGIH = American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists; ALI = annual limits on intake; BNA = Bureau of
National Affairs; CFR = Code of Federal Regulations; DAC = derived air concentration; DIL = Derived Intervention Level;
DOE = Department of Energy; DOT = Department of Transportation; EPA = Environmental Protection Agency;
FDA = Food and Drug Administration; I = insoluble; IARC = International Agency for Research on Cancer;
mSv = millisievert; NIOSH = National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; OSHA = Occupational Safety and
Health Administration; PAG = protective action goal; PEL = permissible exposure limit; S = soluble; REL = recommended
exposure limit; TLV = threshold limit value; TWA = time-weighted average; USNRC = U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission
AMERICIUM 207
9. REFERENCES
*Aarkrog A. 1988. Studies of Chernobyl debris in Denmark. Environ Int 14:149-155.
ACGIH. 2000. Threshold limit values for chemical substances and physical agents and biological
exposure indices. American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, Cincinnati, OH.
*Adinolfi M. 1985. The development of the human blood-CSF-brain barrier. Dev Med Child Neurol
27:532-537.
*Adlercreutz H. 1995. Phytoestrogens: Epidemiology and a possible role in cancer protection. Environ
Health Perspect 103(Suppl. 7):103-112.
*Adraino DC. 1979. Factors affecting the availability of americium-241 to the rice plant. J Agric Food
Chem 27(6):1369-1375.
Adriano DC, Delaney MS, Hoyt GD, et al. 1977. Availability to plants and soil extraction of americium-
241 as influenced by chelating agent, lime, and soil type. Environ Exp Bot 17:69-77.
Agarande M, Benzoubir S, Bouisset P, et al. 2001. Determination of 241Am in sediments by isotope

dilution high resolution inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ID HR ICP- MS). Appl Radiat
Isot 55:161-165.
*Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. 1989. Decision guide for identifying substance-
specific data needs related to toxicological profiles; Notice. Federal Register 54(174):37618-37634.
Ahier BA, Tracy BL. 1995. Radionuclides in the Great Lakes basin. Environ Health Perspect
103(Suppl. 9):89-101.
*Alberts JJ, Wahlgren MA, Orlandini KA, et al. 1989. The distributions of 239,240Pu, 238Pu, 241Am and
137
Cs among chemically-defined components of sediments, settling particulates and net plankton of Lake
Michigan. J Environ Radioact 9(2):89-104.
*Altman PL, Dittmer DS. 1974. In: Biological handbooks: Biology data book. Vol. III. 2nd ed.
Bethesda, MD: Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology, 1987-2008, 2041.
*Alvarez A, Navarro N. 1996. Methods for actinides and Sr-90 determination in urine samples. Appl
Radiat Isot 47:869-873.
*Andersen ME, Krishnan K. 1994. Relating in vitro to in vivo exposures with physiologically based
tissue dosimetry and tissue response models. In: Salem H, ed. Animal test alternatives: Refinement,
reduction, replacement. New York: Marcel Dekker, Inc., 9-25.
*Andersen ME, Clewell HJ III, Gargas ML, et al. 1987. Physiologically based pharmacokinetics and the
risk assessment process for methylene chloride. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 87:185-205.
*Cited in text
AMERICIUM 208
9. REFERENCES
Anderson AL, Campbell GW, Griffith RV. 1979. In vivo measurement of actinides in the human lung.
NTIS UCRL-83548.
*Anderson SS, Livens FR, Singleton DL. 1990. Radionuclides in grey seals. Mar Pollut Bull 21(7):343-
345.
*ANL. 1999. Environmental monitoring at Argonne National Laboratory. Argonne National

Laboratory. http://www.anl.gov/OPA/env/EMfacts.html. August 31, 1999.
Antwerp University. 1990. Study of murine stroma in fetal and postnatal haemopoietic organs and after
radiocontamination with 241-americium utero and as adults. Wilrijk, Belgium: Department of Biology,
Antwerp University. NTIS/DE92001322.
*Arthur WJ, Janke DH. 1986. Radionuclide concentrations in wildlife occurring at a solid radioactive
waste disposal area. Northwest Sci 60(3):154-165.
*Arthur WJ, Markham OD, Groves CR, et al. 1987. Radionuclide export by deer mice at a solid
radioactive waste disposal area in southeastern Idaho. Health Phys 52(1):45-53.
*Artinger R, Kienzler B, Schüler W, et al. 1998. Effects of humic substances on the 241Am migration in
a sandy aquifer: Column experiments with Gorleben groundwater/sediment systems. J Contam Hydrol
35:261-275.
*Askbrant S, Melin J, Sandalls J, et al. 1996. Mobility of radionuclides in undisturbed and cultivated
soils in Ukraine, Belarus and Russia six years after the Chernobyl fallout. J Environ Radioact 31(3):287-
312.
Assinder DJ, Yamamoto M, Kim CK, et al. 1993. Radioisotopes of thirteen elements in intertidal coastal
and estuarine sediments in the Irish Sea. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 170(2):333-346.
*ASTM. 1997. American Society for Testing of Materials. Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol.
12.01. Philadelphia, PA: ASTM, 626-629.
Atherton DR, Lloyd RD. 1972. The distribution and retention of 249Cf in beagle soft tissue. Health Phys
22:675-677.
Atomic Energy of Canada. 1992. Proceedings of the fetal dosimetry workshop held in Chalk River, ON
(Canada), 25-26 June 1991. Chalk River, Ontario: Chalk River Nuclear Labs, Atomic Energy of Canada.
NTIS/DE94-622280. AECL-10578.
Atomic Energy Control Board. 1989. Literature review of the studies on uptake, retention and
distribution of radionuclides by the foetus. Ottawa, Ontario: Atomic Energy Control Board.
NTIS/DE92620289.
*Badjin VI, Molokanov AA. 1998. Application of the recent ICRP models for estimating the intake of
241
Pu from 241Am whole-body counter measurements. Radiat Prot Dosim 79(1-4):141-144.
*Baeza A, del Río M, Miró C, et al. 1999. Recent evolution of the multi-isotopic radioactive content in
ice of Livingston Island, Antarctica. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 63:139-149.
AMERICIUM 209
9. REFERENCES
Bates JK, Bradley JP, Teetsov A, et al. 1992. Colloid formation during waste form reaction:
Implications for nuclear waste disposal. Science 256:649-651.
Battelle Pacific Northwest Labs. 1975. Effect of physico-chemical properties on metabolism of

transuranium oxide aerosols inhaled by beagle dogs. Richland, WA: Battelle Pacific Northwest Labs.
BNWLSA5430.
*Bauchinger M, Schmid E, Braselmann H. 1997. Cytogenetic evaluation of occupational exposure to

external gamma-rays and internal 241Am contamination. Mutat Res 395:173-178.
*Baum EM, Knox HD, Miller TR. 2002. Nuclides and isotopes: Chart of the nuclides. Knolls Atomic
Power Laboratory.
Becker JS, Dietze H-J. 1999. Application of double-focusing sector field ICP mass spectrometry with
shielded torch using different rebulizers for ultratrace and precise isotope analysis of long-lived
radionuclides. J Anal Atom Spectrom 14(9):1493-1500
*Belot Y, Caput C, Gauthier D. 1982. Transfer of americium from sea water to atmosphere by bubble
bursting. Atmos Environ 16(6):1463-1466.
*Bennett BG. 1976. Transuranic element pathways to man. U.S. Energy Research and Development
Administration. IAEA-SM-199/40.
*Bennett BG. 1979. Environmental aspects of americium. Doctor of Philosophy Thesis, New York
University.
*Bennett K, Biggs J, Fresquez P. 1996. Radionuclide contaminant analysis of small mammals, plants
and sediments within Mortandad Canyon, 1994. Los Alamos, NM: Los Alamos National Laboratory.
LA-13104-MS UC-908 UC-902 contract no. W-7504-ENG-36 DE-96-007-463.
Bensted JPM, Chir B, Taylor DM, et al. 1965. The carcinogenic effects of americium 241 and plutonium
239 in the rat. Br J Radiol 38:920-925.
*Berezhnoi VI, Valetova NK, Dunaev GE, et al. 1991. Some data on transuranium element distribution
in particle size fractions of Chernobyl soils. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 150(2):445-454.
*Berger GS. 1994. Epidemiology of endometriosis. In: Berger GS, ed. Endometriosis: Advanced
management and surgical techniques. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
Berry JR, McMurray BJ, Jech JJ, et al. 1983. 1976 Hanford americium exposure incident:
Decontamination and treatment facility. Health Phys 45(4):883-892.
Bertelli L, Puerta A, Wrenn ME, et al. 1998. Specific absorption parameters for uranium octoxide and
dioxide: Comparison of values derived from human data and those predicted from animal studies. Radiat
Prot Dosim 79(1-4):87-90.
Bertsche U. 1978. The response of diploid yeast to radiations at different LET I. Potentially lethal and
lethal damage to reproductive capacity. Radiat Res 76:349-367.
Bertsche U. 1985. Micronucleus induction in mammalian cell cultures treated with ionizing radiations.
Radiat Environ Biophys 24:27-44.
AMERICIUM 210
9. REFERENCES
Bidoglio G. 1982. Characterization of Am/III/ complexes with bicarbonate ions at groundwater

concentration levels. Radiochem Radioanal Lett 53(1):45-60.
Bierkens J, Vangenechten JHD, Van Puymbroeck S, et al. 1986. Effect of Al and humic acids on the
241
Am adsorption on the exoskeleton of the crayfish Astacus leptodactylus eschscholtz. Health Phys
50(2):277-280.
Bistline RW, Watters RL, Lebel JL. 1972. A study of translocation dynamics of plutonium and
americium from simulated wounds in beagle dogs. Health Phys 22:829-831.
*BNA. 2001. Environment and Safety Library on the Web States and Territories. Bureau of National
Affairs, Inc. Washington, D.C.: http://www.esweb.bna.com/. May 08, 2001.
*Bomben AM, Equillor HE, Oliveira AA. 1994. Simultaneous biphasic liquid scintillation determination
of americium and plutonium. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 177(1):27-37.
*Bomford JA, Harrison JD. 1986. The absorption of ingested Pu and Am in newborn guinea pigs.
Health Phys 51(6):804-808.
*Boocock G, Popplewell DS. 1966. In vitro distribution of americium in human blood serum proteins.
Nature 210:1283-1284.
*Bradford WR, Curtis EJC. 1984. Radioactivity in environmental samples taken in the Sellafield and
Ravenglass areas of West Columbia, 1977-1982. Sci Total Environ 35:267-283.
Bradley SB, Clapham P. 1998. Contemporary flux of radionuclides to contaminated saltmarshes in the
Esk Estuary, Cumbria. Water Air Soil Pollut 107:175-184.
*Brauning S, Cornaby B, McGinnis J, et al. 1986. Radioactivity levels in municipal sludge. Biocycle
27(5):48-51.
*Breitenstein BD. 1983. 1976 Hanford americium exposure incident: Medical management and
chelation therapy. Health Phys 45(4):855-866.
*Breitenstein BD, Palmer HE. 1989. Life follow-up of the 1976 americium accident victim. Radiat Prot
Dosim 26(1/4):317-322.
Breitenstein BD, Newton CE, Norris HT. 1985. Part I: Introduction and history of the case. Health
Phys 49(4):565-567.
Breuer F, Clemente GF, Strambi E, et al. 1980. A case of internal contamination with plutonium oxide.
In: International Radiation Protection Society. Radiation protection: A systemic approach to safety:
Proceedings of the 5th congress of the International Radiation Protection Society, Jerusalem, March 1980.
New York: Pergamon Press, 607-610.
Brown WR. 1983. 1976 Hanford americium exposure incident: Psychological aspects. Health Phys
45(4):867-871.
AMERICIUM 211
9. REFERENCES
*Bruenger FW, Grube BJ, Atherton DR, et al. 1973. Binding of 241Am by bone protein. In: Research in
radiobiology: Annual report of work in progress in the Internal Irradiation Program. Utah: Radiobiology
Division of the Department of Anatomy University of Utah College of Medicine, 151-167. Contract No.
AT(11-1)-119.
Bruenger FW, Kuswik-Rabiega G, Miller SC. 1992. Decorporation of aged americium deposits by oral
administration of lipophilic polyamino carboxylic acids. J Med Chem 35:112-118.
*Bruenger FW, Stevens W, Stover BJ. 1969. Americium-241 in the blood: In vivo and in vitro
observations. Radiat Res 37:349-360.
Bruenger FW, Stover BJ, Stevens W, et al. 1967. Interactions between Am III and serum constituents.
In: Research in radiobiology: Annual report of work in progress in the Internal Irradiation Program.
Utah: Radiobiology Division of the Department of Anatomy, University of Utah College of Medicine,
196. Contract No. AT(11-1)-119.
*Budavari S, ed. 1996. The Merck index- An encyclopedia of chemical, drugs, and biologicals. 12th ed.
Whitehouse Station, NJ: Merck and Co., Inc., 413.
*Buldakov LA, Kalmykova ZI, Nifatov AP, et al. 1972. Metabolism and biological effects of inhaled
241
Am and 239Pu in dogs. Health Phys 22:873-874.
*Bulman RA. 1978. The movement of plutonium, americium, and curium through the food chain.
Naturwissenschaften 65:137-143.
*Bulman RA, Johnson TE, Ham GJ, et al. 1993. Speciation of plutonium in potato and the
gastrointestinal transfer of plutonium and americium from potato. Sci Total Environ 129:267-289.
*Bunzl K, Kracke W. 1987. Soil to plant transfer of 239+240Pu, 238Pu, 241Am, 137Cs and 90Sr from global
fallout in flour and bran from wheat, rye, barley and oats, as obtained by field measurements. Sci Total
Environ 63:111-124.
*Bunzl K, Kracke W. 1990. Simultaneous determination of 238Pu, 239+240Pu, 241Pu, 241Am, 242Cm, 244Cm,
89
Sr, and 90Sr in vegetation samples, and application to Chernobyl-fallout contaminated grass. J
Radioanal Nucl Chem 138(1):83-91.
*Bunzl K, Flessa H, Kracke W, et al. 1995. Association of fallout 239+240Pu and 241Am with various soil
components in successive layers of a grassland soil. Environ Sci Technol 29:2513-2518.
*Bunzl K, Förster H, Kracke W, et al. 1994. Residence times of fallout 239+240Pu, 238Pu, 241Am and 137Cs
in the upper horizons of an undisturbed grassland soil. J Environ Radioact 22:11-27.
Bunzl K, Henrichs K, Kracke W. 1987. Fallout 241Am in human livers from the federal republic of
Germany. Health Phys 53(5):533-536.
*Bunzl K, Kracke W, Agapkina GI, et al. 1998. Association of Chernobyl-derived 239+240Pu, 241Am, 90Sr
and 137Cs with different molecular size fractions of organic matter in the soil solution of two grassland
soils. Radiat Environ Biophys 37:195-200.
AMERICIUM 212
9. REFERENCES
Burns PA, Cooper MB, Lokan KH, et al. 1995. Characteristics of plutonium and americium
contamination at the former U.K. atomic weapons test ranges at Maralinga and Emu. Appl Radiat Isot
46(11):1099-1107.
Burton PJ. 1986. Laboratory studies on the remobilisation of actinides from Ravenglass estuary
sediment. Sci Total Environ 52:123-145.
*Byrne AR, Komosa A. 1993. Possibilities for determination of 241Am in environmental samples by
gamma counting, with and without radiochemistry. Sci Total Environ 130/131:197-206.
*Byrom J, Robinson C, Simmonds JR, et al. 1995. Food consumption rates for use in generalized
radiological dose assessments. J Radiol Prot 15:(4) 335-341.
Caper SG, Cunningham WC. 2000. Element and radionuclide concentration in food: FDA total diet
study 1991-1996. J AOAC Int 83(1):157-177.
*Carnes BA, Groer PG, Kotek TJ. 1997. Radium dial workers: Issues concerning dose response and
modeling. Radiat Res 147:707-714.
Carpenter R, Beasley TM, Zahnle D, et al. 1987. Cycling of fallout (Pu, 241Am, 137Cs) and natural (U,
Th, 210Pb) radionuclides in Washington continental slope sediments. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 51:1897-
1921.
*Carroll J, Harms IH. 1999. Uncertainty analysis of partition coefficients in a radionuclide transport
model. Water Res 33(11):2617-2626.
*Carroll J, Boisson F, Teyssie J-L, et al. 1999. Distribution coefficients (Kd's) for use in risk assessment
models of the Kara Sea. Appl Radiat Isot 51:121-129.
*Carter RE, Busch E, Johnson O. 1951. The relative physiological and toxicological properties of
americium and plutonium. GRAI 14(NTIS/DEC95013620).
*Carvalho FP, Fowler SW. 1985. Biokinetics of plutonium, americium and californium in the marine
isopod Cirolana borealis, with observations on its feeding and molting behavior. Mar Biol 89:173-181.
Casas M, Garcias F, Serra L, et al. 1992. Analysis for metal elements and radioactive isotopes in fly ash
produced in lignite combustion at a thermal power plant. J Environ Sci Health Part A 27(2):419-432.
*Cataldo DA, Garland TR, Wildung RE, et al. 1980. Foliar absorption of transuranic elements:
Influence of physicochemical form and environmental factors. J Environ Qual 9(3):364-369.
Cataldo DA, Garland TR, Wildung RE. 1981. Foliar retention and leachability of submicron plutonium
and americium particles. J Environ Qual 10(1):31-37.
*CEDR. 2000. Comprehensive epidemiological data resource. http://cedr.lbl.edu. December 12, 2000.
*Chan TL, Lippman M. 1980. Experimental measurements and empirical modeling of the regional
deposition of inhaled particles in humans. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 47:399-408.
*Chassard-Bouchaud C. 1996. Analytical microscopy and environment. Current developments using

bioindicators of pollution by stable and radioactive elements. Cell Mol Biol 42(3):361-383.
AMERICIUM 213
9. REFERENCES
*Chemical Abstract Service. 2000. Chemical Abstract Service Registry File Data Bank. December,
2000.
Chipperfield AR, Taylor DM. 1968. Binding of plutonium and americium to bone glycoproteins. Nature
219:609-610.
*Chipperfield AR, Taylor DM. 1972. The binding of thorium(IV), plutonium(IV), americium(III) and
curium(III) to the constituents of bovine cortical bone in vitro. Radiat Res 51:15-30.
*Clewell HJ III, Andersen ME. 1985. Risk assessment extrapolations and physiological modeling.
Toxicol Ind Health 1(4):111-131.
*Clifton RJ, Stevens HE, Hamilton EI. 1983. Concentration and depuration of some radionuclides
present in a chronically exposed population of mussels (mytilus edulis). Mar Ecol Prog Ser 11(3):245-
256.
Clifton RJ, Stevens HE, Hamilton EI. 1989. Uptake and depuration of 241Am, 239+240Pu, 238Pu, 137Cs and
106
Ru by Mytilus edulis under natural stress. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 54:91-98.
*CO Department of Public & Environmental Health. 1999. Colorado Department of Public Health &
Environment. Regulations. http://www.cdphe.state.co.us/cdphehom.asp. June 1, 2000.
*Cohen N, Wrenn ME. 1973. Metabolic characteristics of 241Am in the adult baboon. Radiat Res
55:129-143.
*Cohen N, Antonelli R, Lo Sasso T, et al. 1978. Effect of ethanol on the retention of americium-241 in
the baboon liver. J Toxicol Environ Health 4:825-833.
Cohen N, Sasso TL, Wrenn ME. 1979. Metabolism of americium-241 in man: An unusual case of
internal contamination of a child and his father. Science 206:64-66.
*Colborn T, Clement C. 1992. Chemically-induced alterations in sexual and functional development:

The Wildlife/Human Connection. In: Advances in modern environmental toxicology. Volume XXI.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton Scientific Publishing Co.
*Cooper EL, Milintawisamai M, Panyatipsakul Y. 1993. Implementation of a radiochemical procedure

for the analysis of isotopes of Pu, Am and Cm in food and environmental samples. Sci Total Environ
130/131:177-186.
*Cooper JR, Gowing HS. 1981. The binding of americium and curium to human serum proteins. Int J
Radiat Biol 40(5):569-572.
*Cooper MB, Burns PA, Tracy BL, et al. 1994. Characterization of plutonium contamination at the
former nuclear weapons testing range at Maralinga in South Australia. J Radioanal Nucl Chem
177(1):161-184.
*Copplestone D, Johnson MS, Jones SR, et al. 1999. Radionuclide behaviour and transport in a
coniferous woodland ecosystem: vegetation, invertebrates and wood mice, Apodemus slyvaticus. Sci
Total Environ 239:95-109.
AMERICIUM 214
9. REFERENCES
*Copplestone D, Johnson MS, Jones SR. 2001. Behaviour and transport of radionuclides in soil and
vegetation of a sand dune ecosystem. J Environ Radioact 55:93-108.
*Cotton FA, Wilkinson G. 1980. The actinide elements: General remarks. In: Advanced inorganic
chemistry: A comprehensive text. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons, 1005-1042.
*Craig DK, Park JF, Powers GJ, et al. 1979. The disposition of americium-241 oxide following
inhalation by beagles. Radiat Res 78:455-473.
*Craig DK, Park JF, Ryan JL. 1975. Effects of physico-chemical properties on metabolism of
transuranium oxide aerosols inhaled by beagle dogs. Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories. NTIS No.
BNWLSA5430.
*Crawley FEH, Goddard EA. 1976. The translocation of 241-americium and 242-curium from the
respiratory system of the rat. Health Phys 30:191-197.
*Culot JP, Blommaert W, Hurtgen C, et al. 1997. Radioactivity of the teeth in the follow-up of old
contamination cases. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 226(1-2):139-143.
*Cunningham WC, Anderson DL, Baratta EJ. 1994. Radionuclides in domestic and imported foods in
the United States, 1987-1992. J Assoc Off Anal Chem Int 77(6):1422-1427.
*Cunningham WC, Stroube WB, Baratta EJ. 1989. Chemical contaminants monitoring: Radionuclides
in domestic and imported foods in the United States, 1983-1986. J Assoc Off Anal Chem 72(1):15-18.
210
*Cutshall NH, Larsen IL, Olsen CR. 1983. Direct analysis of Pb in sediment samples: Self
absorption corrections. Nucl Instrum Methods 206:309.
*Dacheux N, Aupiais J. 1997. Determination of uranium, thorium, plutonium, americium, and curium
ultratraces by photon electron rejection α liquid scintillation. Anal Chem 69:2275-2282.
*Dacheux N, Aupiais J. 1998. Determination of low concentrations of americium and curium by

photon/electron rejecting alpha liquid scintillation. Anal Chim Acta 363:279-294.
Dasher D, Hanson W, Read S, et al. 2002. An assessment of the reported leakage of anthropogenic
radionuclides from the underground nuclear test sites at Amchitka Island, Alaska, USA to the surface
environment. J Environ Radioact 60:165-187.
Datta S. 1982. Organ dose from inhaled radionuclides taking lull period into account. Radiat Prot
Dosim 2(1):47-51.
*David AJ, Harrison JD. 1984. The absorption of ingested neptunium, plutonium and americium in
newborn hamsters. Int J Radiat Biol 46(3):279-286.
Davies CP, Hodgson A, Stradling GN, et al. 1992. Studies on the nasal clearance of 238Pu and 241Am
nitrates. J Aerosol Sci 23(Suppl. 1):S511-S514.
*Davis A, DeCurnou P, Eary LE. 1997. Discriminating between sources of arsenic in the sediments of a
tidal waterway, Tacoma, Washington. Environ Sci Technol 31:185-191.
AMERICIUM 215
9. REFERENCES
Davis WS, Denbow TJ, Lathrop JE. 1987. Aquatic sediments. J Water Pollut Control Fed 59(6):586-
597.
*Dazhu Y, Yongjun Z, Mobius S. 1991. Rapid method for alpha counting with extractive scintillator and
pulse shape analysis. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 147(1):177-189.
*DeVathaire CC, Crescini D, Remenieras J, et al. 1998. Monitoring of workers occupationally exposed
to radionuclides in France: Results from February to August 1997 in the non-nuclear energy field. Rad
Prot Dos 79(1-4):145-148.
Diamond ML, Mackay D, Cornett RJ, et al. 1990. A model of the exchange of inorganic chemicals
between water and sediments. Environ Sci Technol 24(5):713-722.
Directorate of Fisheries Research. 1990. Determination of alpha-emitting nuclides of plutonium,

americium and curium in environmental materials: Pt. 1. Sea water. Lowestoft, England: Directorate of
Fisheries Research. NTIS/DE92614732.
*DOE. 1978. Toxicity of inhaled americium-241 dioxide. In: Pacific Northwest Laboratory Annual
Report to the DOE Assistant Secretary of the Environment, 1977. U.S. Department of Energy. PNL-
2500-Pt.1 US DOE, 3.34-3.35.
DOE. 1979a. Biotransport of transuranium radionuclides in dairy animals: A data summary.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. NTIS/EMSL-LV-0539-35.
*DOE. 1979b. In vivo measurement of actinides in the human lung. Washington, DC: U.S. Department
of Energy. NTIS/UCRL-83548.
*DOE. 1979c. Summary report of the grazing studies conducted on a plutonium-contaminated range in
area 13 of the Nevada test site. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. NTIS/EMSL-LV-0539-
24.
*DOE. 1980. Transuranic elements in the environment. Office of Health and Environmental Research.
U.S. Department of Energy. QH545.T74T73. 574.5222. 80-607069. ISBN 0-87079-119-2.
DOE. 1981. Lung-clearance classification of exp 241Am and exp 238-240Pu in dust collected near the sites
of Hanford incidents 2827 and 2828. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.
NTIS/DE81028258.
*DOE. 1984. Pacific Northwest Laboratory annual report for 1983 to the DOE Office of Energy
Research, Fetal and juvenile radiotoxicity. U.S. Department of Energy. PNL-5000 Part 1, Springfield,
VA: NTIS, 45-51.
DOE. 1985a. Environmental impact of a teratogenic actinide: A case study of americium-241.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. NTIS/DE86001795.
DOE. 1985b. Factors affecting the assessment of lung depositions of transuranics. Washington, DC:
U.S. Department of Energy. NTIS/DE86004866.
*DOE. 1986. Pacific Northwest Laboratory Annual Report for 1985 to the DOE Office of Energy
Research, Part 1-Biomedical sciences: Fetal and juvenile radiotoxicity. Richland, WA: US Department
of Energy. Contract DE-AC06-76RLO 1830.
AMERICIUM 216
9. REFERENCES
DOE. 1988. Pacific Northwest Laboratory Annual Report for 1987 to the DOE Office of Energy
Research, Part 1-Biomedical sciences: Fetal and Juvenile Radiotoxicity. Richland, WA: US Department
of Energy. Contract DE-AC06-76RLO 1830.
DOE. 1990. Radiation induced mesotheliomas in rats. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.
NTIS/DE91017485.
*DOE. 1991a. Radioactive releases at the Savannah River site, 1954-1989. An environmental protection
department summary. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. NTIS/DE92009983.
*DOE. 1991b. Radionuclides in surface soil at the Nevada test site. Washington, DC: U.S. Department
of Energy. NTIS/DE91018825.
DOE. 1995a. Assays and screening of alpha contaminated soils using low-resolution alpha spectroscopy
of thick soil samples. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. NTIS/DE95008969.
DOE. 1995b. Separation and analysis of actinides by extraction chromatography coupled with alpha
liquid scintillation spectrometry. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. NTIS/DE96060013.
DOE. 1995c. Solubility-limited concentrations and aqueous speciation of U, Pu, Np, Am and Tc:
Comparison between results of Bruno and Sellin (1992) and calculations using GEMBOCHS (version
R16). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy. NTIS/DE95015124.
*DOE. 1996. Radiological bioconcentration factors for aquatic, terrestrial, and wetland ecosystems at
the Savannah River Site (U). Savannah River Site. U.S. Department of Energy. WSRC-TR-96-0231.
DE-AC09-89SR18035.
*DOE. 1997a. Evaluation of the anthropogenic radionuclide concentrations in sediments and fauna
collected in the Beaufort Sea and Northern Alaska. Los Alamos National Laboratory. U.S. Department
of Energy. LA-13302-MS. UC-721. Contract W-7405-ENG-36. DE-97007-298.
*DOE. 1997b. EML Procedures Manual, 28th Edition, HASL-300, Environmental Measurements
Laboratory. U.S. Department of Energy. Sections 4.52, 4.54 (Am-01-RC, Am-02-RC, Am-04-RC, Am-
06-RC, Pu-12-RC) 4,56 (Se-03), pp. 5.2-9, 5.4-2.
DOE. 1998. Assessment of radionuclides in the Savannah River Site, Environmental Summary. Oak
Ridge TN: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Scientific and Technical Information. DE-AC09-
96SR18500,
*DOE. 1999a. Inventory and characteristics of spent nuclear fuel high level radioactive waste and other
materials. U.S. Department of Energy. 0.80 ICSNF.pdf
http://www.ymp.gov/deisdoc/Volume%20II/Appendix_A.pdf. August, 1999.
*DOE. 1999b. Savannah River site environmental data for 1999. Oak Ridge, TN: U.S. Department of
Energy, Office of Scientific and Technical Information. DE-AC09-96SR18500.
*DOE. 2000. Radiation standards-inhaled air DAC for lung retention. U.S. Department of Energy.
10CFR835. http://www.nrc.gov. March 14, 2001.
AMERICIUM 217
9. REFERENCES
*DOE. 2002a. Appendix A Inventory and characteristics of spent nuclear fuel, high level radioactive
waste, and other materials. U.S. Department of Energy.
http://www.ymp.gov:80/documents/feis_a/web_pdf/vol_2/eis_a_bm.pdf. November 13, 2002.
*DOE. 2002b. Statement by the Press Secretary. U.S. Department of Energy.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/07/20020723-2.html. March 27, 2003.
*DOE. 2002c. National Spent Nuclear Fuel Program. U.S. Department of Energy.
http://nsnfp.inel.gov/snfdata.asp. March 28, 2003.
*DOE. 2003a. National Nuclear Data Center, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, NY. U.S.
Department of Energy. http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/. April 04, 2003.
*DOE. 2003b. INEEL Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2002, ISSN 1089-5469,
September 2003. U.S. Department of Energy. http://www.nndc.bnl.gov/. April 04, 2003.
*DOE. 2004. Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. U.S. Department of Energy.
http://www.ocrwm.doe.gov/. April 23, 2004.
*Doerfel H, Oliveira CAN. 1989. In vivo measurement of 241Am organ burdens: Techniques and results
of measurements after an incident in an industrial research institute. Radiat Prot Dosim 26(1/4):189-193.
*DOT. 2001. U.S. Department of Transportation. 40CFR173.435. Activity values for radionuclides.
http://www.dot.gov. March 14, 2001.
*Dougherty JH. 1970. Preliminary report on hematological effects of 241Am in the beagle. In: Research
in radiobiology: Annual report of work in progress in the Internal Irradiation Program. Utah:
Radiobiology Division of the Department of Anatomy, University of Utah College of Medicine, 354-362.
Contract No. At(11-1)-119.
241
Dougherty JH. 1972a. Am toxicity to leukocytes of beagles for the first year post-injection. Radiat
Res 51(2):504-505.
Dougherty JH. 1972b. Toxicity to blood cells of 241Am compared to other transuranium nuclides. In:
Research in radiobiology: Annual report of work in progress in the Internal Irradiation Program. Utah:
Radiobiology Division of the Department of Anatomy University of Utah College of Medicine, 272-281.
Durakovic AB, Hollins JG, Storr MC. 1973. The influence of age and sex on the metabolism of
americium by rats. Health Phys 24:541-546.
Durand JP, Milcent MC, Goudard F, et al. 1994. Chemical behavior of three radionuclides (cesium,
americium and technetium) and their uptake at the cystosolic level in aquatic organisms. Biochem Mol
Biol Int 33(3):521-534.
*Durbin PJ. 1973. Metabolism and biological effects of the transplutonium elements. In: Hodge HC,
Stannard JN, Hursh JB, eds. Uranium, plutonium, transplutonic elements. New York: Springer-Verlag,
739-896.
*Durbin PW, Schmidt CT. 1985. Part V: Implications for metabolic modeling. Health Phys 49(4):623-
661.
AMERICIUM 218
9. REFERENCES
*Durbin PW, Kullgren B, Xu J, et al. 1994. In vivo chelation of Am(III), Pu(IV), Np(V) and U(VI) in
mice by tren-(Me-3,2-HOPO). Radiat Prot Dosim 53(1-4):305-309.
Durbin PW, Schmidt CT, McInroy JF, et al. 1985. Estimation of initial distribution of americium in
adult male human skeleton. Health Phys 49(1):162.
*Edvardsson KA, Lindgren L. 1976. Elimination of americium-241 after a case of accidental inhalation.
In: Diagnosis and treatment of incorporated radionuclides. Vienna: International Atomic Energy
Agency 497-502.
EFDB. 2000. Americium. Environmental Fate Exposure Database. Syracuse Research Corporation.
Eisele GR, Erickson BH. 1985. Gonadal retention and localization of 241Am in orally exposed swine.
Health Phys 49(6):1276-1279.
*Eisele GR, Bernard SR, Nestor CW. 1987. Gastrointestinal absorption of americium-241 by orally
exposed swine: Comparison of experimental results with predictions of metabolic models. Radiat Res
112:62-73.
*Eisenbud M. 1987. Environmental Radioactivity. 3rd ed. New York: Academic Press, Inc.
*Eisenbud M, Gesell T. 1997. Radioactive waste management. In: Environmental Radioactivity. 4th
Ed. New York: Academic Press, Inc, 334-377.
Ellender M, Haines JW, Harrison JD. 1995. The distribution and retention of plutonium, americium and
uranium in CBA/H mice. Hum Exp Toxicol 14:38-48.
*Ellender M, Harrison JD, Pottinger H, et al. 2001. Induction of osteosarcoma and acute myeloid
leukaemia in CBA/H mice by the alpha-emitting nuclides, uranium-233, plutonium-239 and americium-
241. Int J Radiat Biol 77(1):41-52.
*Ellenhorn MJ, Schonwald S, Ordog G, et al., eds. 1997. Medical toxicology: Diagnosis and treatment
of human poisoning. 2nd edition. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins 1682-1723.
*Emery RM, Klopfer DC, Baker DA, et al. 1981. Potential radiation dose from eating fish exposed to
actinide contamination. Health Phys 40:493-510.
EMMI. 2000. EPA Environmental Monitoring Methods Index, Detail Analyte. Regulatory Names,
Synonyms & Comments.
*EPA. 1976. Americium - Its behavior in soil and plant systems. Las Vegas, NV: Office of Research
and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA600/3-76-005. PB250797.
*EPA. 1979. Plutonium-239 and americium-241 uptake by plants from soil. Las Vegas, NV:
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA600/3-
79-026. PB298-241.
*EPA. 1984. U.S. “Mussel watch” program: Transuranic element data from Woods Hole
Oceanographic Institution 1976-1983. Narragansett, RI: Environmental Research Laboratory, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. WHOI-84-28. CRC-84-5.
AMERICIUM 219
9. REFERENCES
*EPA. 1988. Limiting values of radionuclide intake and air concentration and dose conversion factors
for inhalation, submersion, and ingestion. Federal Guidance Report No. 11. Washington, DC: Office of
Radiation Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA-520/1-88-020.
*EPA. 1993. External exposure to radionuclides in air, water, and soil. Federal Guidance Report No. 12.
Washington, DC: Office of Radiation Program, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA-402-R-93-
081.
EPA. 1997a. Special report on environmental endocrine disruption: An effects assessment and analysis.
Washington, DC: Risk Assessment Forum, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA/630/R-96/012.
EPA. 1997b. Health effects assessment summary tables. Washington, DC: Office of Emergency and
Remedial Response, Office of Research and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. EPA
540/R-97-036. PB97-921199.
*EPA. 1997c. Radiation data report 91, July to September 1997, National Environmental Radiation
Ambient Monitoring System (ERAMS), National Air and Radiation Environmental Laboratory
(NAREL), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/narel/erd91.pdf. May, 2000.
EPA. 1999. Compliance procedures methods for determining compliance with subpart 1. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. 40 CFR 61 Appendix E.
*EPA. 2000a. Cancer risk coefficients for environmental exposure to radionuclides. Federal Guidance
Report No. 13. Washington, DC.: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
*EPA. 2000b. Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System (ERAMS). Environmental

Radiation Data (ERD). U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
http://www.epa.gov/narel/erams/erdonline.html.
*EPA. 2000c. National primary drinking water regulations; Radionuclides; Final rule. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency. 65FR76707-76753. http://www.epa.gov/safewater/rads/radfr.html.
December 7, 2000.
*EPA. 2001a. Concentration levels for environmental compliance. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency. 40 CFR 61. http://www.epa.gov/epahome/lawreg.htm. March 13, 2001.
*EPA. 2001b. Radioactive waste-release limits for containment requirements. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. 40 CFR 191. http://www.epa.gov/epahome/cfr40.htm. March 13, 2001.
*EPA. 2001c. Reportable quantities. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 40 CFR 302.4.
http://www.epa.gov/epahome/lawreg.htm. March 13, 2001.
*EPA. 2001d. Radioactive waste disposal: An environmental perspective. Low-level radioactive waste.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/radiation/radwaste/llw.htm. March 13, 2001.
*EPA. 2002. Radionuclide carcinogenicity slope factors. Washington DC: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. http://www.epa.gov/radiation/heast/docs/heast2_table_4-d2_0401.pdf.
*EPA. 2004a. Disposal guide for miscellaneous products. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
http://www.epa.gov/grtlakes/seahome/housewaste/src/dspmisc.htm. March 10, 2004.
AMERICIUM 220
9. REFERENCES
*EPA. 2004b. Smoke detectors and radiation. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
http://www.epa.gov/radiation/sources/smoke_alarm.htm. January 05, 2004.
*EPA. 2004c. Radiation information: Americium. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

http://www.epa.gov/radiation/radionuclides/americium.htm. March 11, 2004.
*EPA. 2004d. Environmental radiation protection standards for management and disposal of spent
nuclear fuel, high-level and transuranic radioactive wastes. 40CFR191.
http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-
idx?c=ecfr&sid=f0242edb1ed2350025a9f6ea903537a9&rgn=div5&view=text&node=40:22.0.1.1.2&idno
=40. April 23, 2004.
*EPA. 2004e. Criteria for the certification and recertification of the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant’s
compliance with the 40CFR191 disposal regulations. Environmental Protection Agency. 40CFR194.
idx?c=ecfr&sid=f0242edb1ed2350025a9f6ea903537a9&rgn=div5&view=text&node=40:22.0.1.1.4&idno
=40. April 23, 2004.
*EPRI. 1981. Transuranium and other long-lived radionuclides in the terrestrial environs of nuclear
power plants. Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories. EA-2045. Research Project 1059. Illinois State
Library.
Espinosa A, Aragon A, Stradling N, et al. 1998. Assessment of doses to adult members of the public in
Palomares from inhalation of plutonium and americium. Radiat Prot Dosim 79(1-4):161-164.
*Essien IO, Sandoval DN, Kuroda PK. 1985. Deposition of excess amount of natural uranium from the
atmosphere. Health Phys 48(3):325-331.
Essington EH, Fowler EB, Polzer WL. 1981. The interactions of low-level, liquid radioactive wastes
with soils: 2. Differences in radionuclide distribution among four surface soils. Soil Sci 132(1):13-18.
Ethington EF, Niswonger KR. 2000. Alpha spectrometry measurement reproducibility study for
uranium, plutonium, and americium in water at Rocky Flats Environmental Technology Site. Health
Phys 79:S38-S40.
241
*Fasiska BC, Bohning DE, Brodsky A, et al. 1971. Urinary excretion of Am under DTPA therapy.
Health Phys 21:523-529.
*FDA. 1998. Accidental radioactive contamination of human food and animal feed: Recommendations
for state and local agencies. U.S. Food and Drug Administration.
*FDA. 2000. Sources of radiation used for inspection of food-sealed units producing radiation. Food
and Drug Administration. http://www.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/cfrassemble.cgi. March 14, 2001.
*FEDRIP. 2004. Federal Research In Progress Database. National Technical Information Service,
Springfield, VA.
*Ferenbaugh JK, Fresquez PR, Ebinger MH, et al. 2002. Radionuclides in soil and water near a low-
level disposal site and potential ecological and human health impacts. Environ Monit Assess 74:243-254.
AMERICIUM 221
9. REFERENCES
Filipy RE, Kathren RL. 1994. Changes in soft tissue concentrations of plutonium and americium with
time after human occupational exposure. Health Phys 66(6)(Suppl.):S73.
*Filipy RE, Kathren RL. 1996. Changes in soft tissue concentrations of plutonium and americium with
time after human occupational exposure. Health Phys 70(2):153-159.
Filipy RE, Hall CA, Kathren RL, et al. 1993. Relationships of soft tissue concentrations of plutonium
and americium in occupationally-exposed humans. Health Phys 64(6)(Suppl.):S54.
*Filipy RE, Kathren RL, McInroy JF. 1992. Relative concentrations of plutonium and americium in the
liver, testes, and thyroid gland. Health Phys 62(6)(Suppl.):S17.
*Filipy RE, Kathren RL, McInroy JF, et al. 1994. Soft tissue concentrations of plutonium and americium
in occupationally-exposed humans. Health Phys 67(5):477-485.
*Filipy RE, Khokhryakov VF, Suslova KG, et al. 1996. Comparisons of biokinetic models for actinide
elements with observed tissue analysis data from occupationally-exposed humans of two countries.
Health Phys 70(6)(Suppl.):S82.
Filipy RE, Khokhryakov VF, Suslova KG, et al. 1998. Analysis for actinides in tissue samples from
plutonium workers of two countries. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 234(1-2):171-174.
241
*Filipy RE, Toohey RE, Kathren RL, et al. 1995. Deterministic effects of Am exposure in the
Hanford americium accident case. Health Phys 69(3):338-345.
*Fisher NS, Bjerregaard P, Fowler SW. 1983. Interactions of marine plankton with transuranic elements:
3. Biokinetics of americium in euphausiids. Mar Biol 75:261-268.
*Fisher NS, Fowler SW, Boisson F, et al. 1999. Radionuclide bioconcentration factors and sediment
partition coefficients in arctic seas subject to contamination form dumped nuclear wastes. Environ Sci
Technol 33(12):1979-1982.
*Fisher NS, Teyssié J-L, Fowler SW, et al. 1996. Accumulation and retention of metals in mussels from
food and water: A comparison under field and laboratory conditions. Environ Sci Technol 30(11):3232-
3242.
*Fomon SJ. 1966. Body composition of the infant: Part I: The male “reference infant”. In: Falkner F,
ed. Human development. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders, 239-246.
*Fomon SJ, Haschke F, Ziegler EE, et al. 1982. Body composition of reference children from birth to
age 10 years. Am J Clin Nutr 35:1169-1175.
*Fong SH, Alvarez JL. 1997. Data quality objectives for surface-soil cleanup operation using in situ
gamma spectrometry for concentration measurements. Health Phys 72:286-295.
*Fowler EB, Essington EH, Polzer WL. 1981. The interactions of low-level, liquid wastes with soils: 1.
Behavior of radionuclides in soil-waste systems. Soil Sci 132(1):2-12.
*Fowler SW, Carvalho FP. 1985. Americium biokinetics in benthic organisms as a function of feeding
mode. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 35:826-834.
AMERICIUM 222
9. REFERENCES
*Francis AJ, Gillow JB, Dodge CJ, et al. 1998. Role of bacteria as biocolloids in the transport of
actinides from a deep underground radioactive waste repository. Radiochim Acta 82:347-354.
*Fresquez PR, Armstrong DR, Mullen MA. 1998a. Radionuclides in soils collected from within and
around Los Alamos National Laboratory: 1974-1996. J Environ Sci Health Part A A33(2):263-278.
*Fresquez PR, Armstrong DR, Mullen MA, et al. 1998b. The uptake of radionuclides by beans, squash,
and corn growing in contaminated alluvial soils at Los Alamos National Laboratory. J Environ Sci
Health B 33(1):99-122.
*Fresquez PR, Kraig DH, Mullen MA, et al. 1999. Radionuclides and trace elements in fish collected
upstream and downstream of Los Alamos National Laboratory and the doses to humans from the
consumption of muscle and bone. J Environ Sci Health B B34(5):885-899.
*Fresquez PR, Biggs JR, Bennett KD. 1999. Radionuclides in deer and elk from Los Alamos National
Laboratory and the doses to humans from the ingestion of muscle and bone. J Environ Sci Health B
B34(5):901-915.
*Fresquez PR, Huchton JD, Mullen MA, et al. 2000. Radionuclides in pinon pine (Pinus edulis) nuts
from Los Alamos National Laboratory lands and the dose from consumption. J Environ Sci Health B
B35(5):611-622.
*Friberg I, Vesanen R. 1999. Detection limits for 90Sr, Pu, Am and Cm in soil and pasture vegetation
shortly after a nuclear accident. Appl Radiat Isot 51:229-237.
*Fry FA. 1976. Long-term retention of americium-241 following accidental inhalation. Health Phys
31:13-20.
*Fulker MJ, Jackson D, Leonard DRP, et al. 1998. Dose due to man-made radionuclides in terrestrial
wild foods near Sellafield. J Radiol Prot 18(1):3-13.
*Gilbert RO, Engel DW, Anspaugh LR. 1989. Transfer of aged 239+240Pu, 238Pu, 241Am, and 137Cs to
cattle grazing a contaminated arid environment. Sci Total Environ 85:53-62.
*Gillett NA, Hahn FF, Mewhinney JA, et al. 1985. Osteosarcoma development following single
inhalation exposure to americium-241 in beagle dogs. Radiat Res 104:83-93.
*Giwercman A, Carlsen E, Keiding N, et al. 1993. Evidence for increasing incidence of abnormalities of
the human testis: A review. Environ Health Perspect Suppl 101(2):65-71.
*Goldberg ED. 1986. The mussel watch concept. Environ Monit Assess 7:91-103.
*Goldstein SJ, Hensley CA, Armenta CE, et al. 1997. Environmental and human monitoring of
americium-241 utilizing extraction chromatography and α-spectroscopy. Anal Chem 69:809-812.
241
*Graham SG, Kirkman SJ. 1983. Identification of Am in the axillary lymph nodes with an intrinsic
germanium detector. Health Phys 44:343-352.
*Green N, Wilkins BT. 1995. Transfer of radionuclides to vegetable and other crops grown on land
reclaimed from the sea. Sci Total Environ 173/174:385-392.
AMERICIUM 223
9. REFERENCES
*Griffith WC, Mewhinney JA, Muggenburg BA, et al. 1983. Bioassay model for estimation body
burdens of 241Am from excretion analyses. Health Phys 44(Suppl. 1):545-554.
*Gruner R, Seidel A, Winter R. 1981. The initial early distribution of monomeric 239Pu and 241Am in rat
liver as determined by triton WR 1339 injection. Radiat Res 85:367-379.
Gualdrini G, Battisti P, Biagini R, et al. 2000. Development and characterization of a head calibration
phantom for in vivo measurements of actinides. Appl Radiat Isot 53:387
*Guilmette RA. 1986. A low energy photon detector for the radio assay of Pu and Am in biological
samples. Health Phys 51:797-803.
*Guilmette RA, Bay AS. 1981. Radio assays of americium or curium in biological material by isoctyl
acid phosphate solvent extraction and α liquid scintillation counting. Anal Chem 53:2351-2354.
*Guilmette RA, Durbin PW. 2003. Scientific basis for development of biokinetic models for
radiocontaminated wounds. Radiat Prot Dosim 105(1-4):213-218.
Guilmette RA, Eidson AF. 1992. Using animal dosimetry models to interpret human bioassay data for
actinide exposures. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 156(2):425-449.
*Guilmette RA, Muggenburg BA. 1988. Reducing the radiation dose from inhaled americium-241 using
continuously administered DTPA therapy. Int J Radiat Biol 53(2):261-271.
*Guilmette RA, Cohen N, Wrenn ME. 1980. Distribution and retention of 241Am in the baboon. Radiat
Res 81:100-119.
Guilmette RA, Lindhorst PS, Hanlon LL. 1992. Interaction of plutonium and americium with bone
mineral in vitro. Health Phys 62(6)(Suppl.):S16-S17.
*Guilmette RA, Lindhorst PS, Hanlon LL. 1998. Interaction of Pu and Am with bone mineral in vitro.
Radiat Prot Dosim 79(1-4):453-458.
*Guilmette RA, Hakim R, Durbin PW, et al. 2003. Competitive binding of Pu and Am with bone
mineral and novel chelating agents. Radiat Prot Dosim 105(1-4):527-534.
*Guilmette RA, Muggenburg BA, Cuddihy RG. 1988. Systemic absorption of americium from the nasal
airways of dogs exposed intranasally to americium-241 nitrate and oxide aerosols. Health Phys 54(Suppl.
1):S27.
Gulin SB, Polikarpov GG, Egorov VN, et al. 2002. Radioactive contamination of the North-western
Black Sea sediments. Estuaries 54:541-549.
*Guogang J, Testa C, Desideri D, et al. 1998. Sequential separation and determination of plutonium,
americium-241 and strontium-90 in soils and sediments. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 230(1-2):21-27.
*Guzelian PS, Henry CJ, Olin SS, eds. 1992. Similarities and differences between children and adults:
Implications for risk assessment. Washington, DC: International Life Sciences Institute Press.
*Haddad LM, Shannon MW, Winchester JF, eds. 1998. Clinical management of poisoning and drug
overdose. 3rd edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 413-425.
AMERICIUM 224
9. REFERENCES
*Hafez MB, Hafez N. 1992. Quantitative determination of americium in biological materials. J

*Halverson J. 1984. A review of application of mass spectrometry to low-level radionuclide metrology.

Nucl Instrum Methods Phys Res 223:349-355.
*Ham GJ, Harrison JD, Popplewell DS, et al. 1994. The gastrointestinal absorption of neptunium,
plutonium and americium in a primate (C. jacchus). Sci Total Environ 145:1-6.
*Ham GJ, Hodgson SA, Youngman MJ, etal. 2003. Review of autopsy, in vivo and bioassay
measurements on members of the public in the UK. NRPB-W42.
http://www.nrpb.org/publications/w_series_reports/2003/nrpb_w42.htm. January 07, 2004.
*Ham GJ, Stradling GN, Breadmore SE. 1977. Determination of americium and curium in biological
samples of extraction and liquid scintillation. Anal Chem 49:1268-1270.
*Hamilton EI, Clifton RJ. 1980. Concentration and distribution of the transuranium radionuclides
239+240
Pu, 238Pu and 241Am in Mytilus edulis, Fucus vesiculosus and surface sediment of Esk estuary. Mar
Ecol Prog Ser 3:267-277.
*Hamilton TF, Fowler SW, LaRosa J, et al. 1991. Comparative study of plutonium and americium
bioaccumulation from two marine sediments contaminated in the natural environment. J Environ
Radioact 14:211-223.
Hammarström L, Nilsson A. 1970a. Radiopathology of americium 241: I. Distribution of americium in

adult mice. Acta Radiol 9:433-442.
*Hammarström L, Nilsson A. 1970b. Radiopathology of americium 241: II. Uptake in the developing
teeth of rats. Acta Radiol 9:609-617.
Hammond SE, Lagerquist CR, Mann JR. 1968. Americium and plutonium urine excretion following
acute inhalation exposure to high-fired oxides. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J 29(2):169-172.
Hampton JC. 1983. 1976 Hanford americium exposure incident: Histologic and autoradiographic
observations on skin. Health Phys 45(4):933-935.
*Hanford. 1999. Hanford site environmental report for calendar year 1998. Sec. 2.5 Waste management.
PNNL-12088, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA.
http://www.hanford.gov/docs/annualrp98/sec2.5. December 12, 2000.
Harley NH, Pasternack BS. 1979. Potential carcinogenic effects of actinides in the environment. Health
Phys 37:291-300.
Harrison JD. 1991. The gastrointestinal absorption of the actinide elements. Sci Total Environ 100:43-
60.
Harrison JD, David AJ, Stather JW. 1980. The wound clearance and distribution of plutonium,
americium and curium in rodents. Int J Radiat Biol 37(5):505-512.
AMERICIUM 225
9. REFERENCES
Harrison JD, Hodgson A, Haines JW, et al. 1993. The biokinetics of plutonium-239 and americium-241
in the rat after subcutaneous deposition of contaminated particles from the former nuclear weapons site at
Maralinga: Implications for human exposure. Hum Exp Toxicol 12:313-321.
*Harrison JD, Naylor GPL, Stather JW. 1994. The gastrointestinal absorption of plutonium and
americium in rats and guinea pigs after ingestion of dusts from the former nuclear weapons site at
Maralinga: Implications for human exposure. Sci Total Environ 143:211-220.
*Harrison JD, Smith H, David AF. 1988. Plutonium and americium uptake in rats fed with Cumbrian
shellfish - implications for estimates of dose to man. Sci Total Environ 68:187-196.
Harrison JD, Smith H, Stather JW. 1987. Comments on the paper "Transfer of environmental plutonium
and americium across the human gut". Sci Total Environ 64(3):325-332.
*Harvey BR, Lovett MB, Blowers P. 1993. Quantifying the alpha-spectrometric analysis of plutonium
and americium nuclides down to the 10µ Bq level. Appl Radiat Isot 44(6):957-966.
*HazDat. 2004. HazDat database. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR),
Atlanta, GA. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/hazdat.html. March 03, 2004.
*Hegde AG, Bhat IS. 1983. Occupational exposure to airborne alpha emitters in a BWR atomic power
station. Bull Radiat Prot 6(2):25-28.
Heid KR, Robinson B. 1985. Part II: Estimate of the initial systemic burden. Health Phys 49(4):569-
575.
*Heldal HE, Varskog P, Foyn L. 2002. Distribution of selected anthropogenic radionuclides (137Cs,
238
Pu, 239,240 Pu and 241 Am) in marine sediments with emphasis on the Spitsbergen-Bear Island area. Sci
Total Environ 293:233-245.
*Herring GM, Vaughn J, Williamson M. 1962. Preliminary report on the site of localization and possible
binding agent for yttrium, americium and plutonium in cortical bone. Health Phys 8:717-724.
*Hisamatsu S, Takizawa Y. 1983. Placental transfer and distribution of 241Am in the rat. Radiat Res
94:81-88.
*Hisamatsu S, Takizawa Y. 1987. Effect of gavaged chemical form of 241Am on its retention in mice.
Radiat Res 111:334-339.
Hodgson A, Shutt Al, Etherington G, et al. 2003. Comparison of predicted with observed biokinetics of
inhaled plutonium nitrate and gandolinium oxide in humans. Radiat Prot Dosim 105(1-4):91-94.
*Hoel DG, Davis DL, Miller AB, et al. 1992. Trends in cancer mortality in 15 industrialized countries,
1969-1986. J Natl Cancer Inst 84(5):313-320.
*Hollins JG, Durakovic AB. 1972. The metabolism of americium in lactating rats. Health Phys 22:627-
631.
*Hollins JG, Durakovic A, Storr MC. 1973. The retention of americium and calcium by the skeleton of
growing and mature female rats. Calcif Tissue Res 12:239-246.
AMERICIUM 226
9. REFERENCES
Holm E, Persson RBR. 1975. Fall-out plutonium in Swedish reindeer lichens. Health Phys 29(2):43-51.
*Horikoshi T, Nakajima A, Sakaguchi T. 1981. Studies on the accumulation of heavy metal elements in
biological systems. XIX. Accumulation of uranium by microorganisms. Eur J Appl Microbiol
Biotechnol 12:90-96.
Horwitz EP, Dietz ML, Fisher DE. 1991. Separation and preconcentration of strontium from biological,
environmental, and nuclear waste samples by extraction chromatography using a crown ether. Anal
Chem 63:522-525
*Hoyt GD, Adriano DC. 1979. Americium-241 uptake by bahiagrass as influenced by soil type, lime,
and organic matter. J Environ Qual 8(3):392-396.
*HPS. 2004. Health Physics Society Laboratory Accreditation Program. Health Physics Society.
http://hps.org/aboutthesociety/labaccreditation.html. April 20, 2004.
Hunt DC, Crites TR, Lagerquist CR. 1981. Radiation and rocky flats in perspective. Colo Med
78(4):111-114.
*Hunt GJ. 1998. Transfer across the human gut of environmental plutonium, americium, cobalt, caesium
and technetium: Studies with cockles (Cerastoderma edule) from the Irish Sea. J Radiol Prot 18(2):101-
109.
*Hunt GJ, Leonard DRP, Lovett MB. 1986a. Transfer of environmental plutonium and americium
across the human gut. Lancet 1(8478):439-440.
*Hunt GJ, Leonard DRP, Lovett MB. 1986b. Transfer of environmental plutonium and americium
across the human gut. Sci Total Environ 53:89-109.
Hunt GJ, Leonard DRP, Lovett MB. 1987. Response to the letter by J.D. Harrison, H. Smith and J.W.
Stather commenting on the "Transfer of environmental plutonium and americium across the human gut".
Sci Total Environ 64(3):330-339.
*Hunt GJ, Leonard DRP, Lovett MB. 1990. Transfer of environmental plutonium and americium across
the human gut: A second study. Sci Total Environ 90:273-282.
*Hutchins DA, Stupakoff I, Fisher NS. 1996a. Temperature effects on accumulation and retention of
radionuclides in the sea star, Asterias forbesi: Implications for contaminated northern waters. Mar Biol
125:701-706.
*Hutchins DA, Teyssie J-L, Boisson F, et al. 1996b. Temperature effects on uptake and retention of
contaminant radionuclides and trace metals by the brittle star Ophiothrix fragilis. Mar Environ Res
41(4):363-378.
*IARC. 1989. Tumour development following internal exposures to radionuclides during perinatal
period. Richland, WA: International Agency for Research on Cancer.
IARC. 1990. Chromium and chromium compounds. International Agency for Research on Cancer.
IARC Monogr Eval Carcinog Risks Hum 49:49-256.
AMERICIUM 227
9. REFERENCES
*IARC. 2002. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization.
http://193.51.164.11/cgi/iHound/Chem/Chem.cgi. December 4, 2002.
ICRP. 1960. International Commission of Radiological Protection. Report of Committee II on

permissible dose for internal radiation. Health Phys 3:146.
*ICRP. 1979. Limits for Intakes of Radionuclides by Workers. International Commission of

Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 30. New York: Pergamon Press.
*ICRP. 1983. Radionuclide transformations: Energy and intensity of emissions. International

Commission of Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 38. New York: Pergamon Press.
*ICRP. 1986. The metabolism of plutonium and related elements. International Commission of
*ICRP. 1989. Age-dependent doses to members of the public from intake of radionuclides: Part 1.
International Commission on Radiological Protection. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 67-68, 75-89.
ICRP. 1990. Age-dependent doses to members of the public from intake of radionuclides: Part 1. The
International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication 56. New York, NY: Pergamon
Press. http://www.elsevier.com/inca/publications. December 12, 2000.
*ICRP. 1993. Age-dependent doses to members of the public from intake of radionuclides: Part 2,
ingestion dose coefficients. The International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP publication
67. New York, NY: Pergamon Press.
ICRP. 1994a. Age-dependent doses to members of the public from intake of radionuclides: Part 2,
67. New York, NY: Pergamon Press. http://www.elsevier.com/inca/publications/store/. March 12,
2001.
*ICRP. 1994b. Human respiratory tract model for radiological protection. International Commission of
*ICRP. 1995. Age-dependent doses to members of the public from intake of radionuclides: Part 4
71. New York, NY: Pergamon Press.
*ICRP. 1996. Age-dependent doses to members of the public from intake of radionuclides: Part 5.
Compilation of ingestion and inhalation dose coefficients. The International Commission on Radiological
Protection. ICRP Publication 72. New York, NY: Pergamon Press.
*Ide HM. 1986. Americium and plutonium in fecal samples a screening procedure. In: Health and
environmental chemistry: Analytical techniques, data management, and quality assurance. Gautier MA,
Gladney ES, eds. Los Alamos, NM: Los Alamos National Laboratory. Report LA-10300-M.
*Ide HM, Moss WD, Gautier MA. 1985. Rapid screening methods for the analysis of Pu or Am in urine.
Iliakis G. 1984. The mutagenicity of alpha particles in ehrlich ascites tumor cells. Radiat Res 99:52-58.
AMERICIUM 228
9. REFERENCES
*INEEL. 2000. Isotope report. National Low-Level Waste Management Program. Manifest
Information Management System. Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory.
http://mims.inel.gov/. June 12, 2000.
*IRIS. 2002. Americium. Integrated Risk Information System. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
http://www.epa.gov/iris/subst/index.htm. December 4, 2002.
*Jaakkola T, Hakanen M, Keinonen M, et al. 1977. Plutonium and americium in the food chain lichen-
reindeer-man. Springfield, VA: U.S. Department of Commerce.
Jacob P, Paretzke HG, Rosenbaum H, et al. 1988. Organ doses from radionuclides on the ground: Part I.
Simple time dependences. Health Phys 54(6):617-633.
*James AC. 1978. Lung deposition of sub-micron aerosols calculated as a function of age and breathing
rate. In: National Radiological Protection Board annual Research and Development Report. National
Radiological Protection Board. Harwell, United Kingdom,71-75.
*James AC, Stahlhofen W, Rudolf G, et al. 1994. Deposition of inhaled particles. In: ICRP Publication
66. Oxford: Pergamon Press, 231-299.
*Janke DH, Arthur WJ. 1985. Radionuclide transport by cottontail rabbits at a radioactive waste disposal
area. Northwest Sci 59(3):221-229.
Jeanmaire L, Ballada J. 1971. Etude de deux cas de contamination par Am-241. In: Proceedings,
radiation protection problems relating to transuranium elements. EUR 4612. Luxembourg: Directorate
General for Dissemination of Information, 531-546.
*Jech JJ, Berry JR, Breitenstein BD. 1983. 1976 Hanford americium exposure incident: External
decontamination procedures. Health Phys 45(4):873-881.
*Jee WSS, Dell RB, Parks NJ, et al. 1985. Toxicity of plutonium and americium: Relationship of bone
composition to location of 226Ra, 239Pu and 241Am induced bone sarcomas. EUR 9250:155-174.
Jefferies SJ, Gunston KJ. 1986. Further work concerning a case of Am contamination in the lateral
axillary lymph nodes. Health Phys 50(6):839-842.
*Jia G, Desideri D, Guerra F, et al. 1997. Determination of plutonium and americium in moss and lichen
samples. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 220(1):15-19.
*Johanson CE. 1980. Permeability and vascularity of the developing brain: Cerebellum vs cerebral
cortex. Brain Res 190:3-16.
Johnson LJ, Watters RL, Lagerquist CR, et al. 1970. Relative distribution of plutonium and americium
following experimental PuO2 implants. Health Phys 19:743-749.
Johnson MS, Copplestone D, Fox WM, et al. 2001. Annual cycle of radionuclide contamination on tide-
washed pasture in the Mersey Estuary, NW England. Estuaries 24(2):198-203.
Jones CW, Lloyd RD, Mays CW. 1980. Salicylic acid failed to increase the efficacy of Ca-DTPA in the
decorporation of plutonium and americium. Radiat Res 84:149-151.
AMERICIUM 229
9. REFERENCES
*Joshi SR. 1989. Determination of 241Am in sediments by direct counting of low-energy photons. Appl
Radiat Isot 40(8):691-699.
Juel K. 1994. High mortality in the Thule cohort: An unhealthy worker effect. Int J Epidemiol
23(6):1174-1178.
Kalkwarf DR, Thomas VW, Nielson KK, et al. 1983. 1976 Hanford americium exposure incident:
Urinary excretion of trace metals during DTPA treatments. Health Phys 45(4):937-947.
*Kanapilly GM, Stanley JA, Newton GJ, et al. 1983. Characterization of an aerosol sample from the
auxiliary building of the Three Mile Island reactor. Health Phys 45(5):981-989.
Kargacin B, Volf V. 1989. Influence of nutritional factors on 239Np and 233Pa retention in weanling rats.
Hum Toxicol 8:425-429.
*Kathren RL. 1994. Toward improved biokinetic models for actinides: The United States Transuranium
and Uranium Registries, a twenty-five year report. Rad Prot Dos 53(1-4):219-227.
*Kathren RL. 1995. The United States Transuranium and Uranium Registries: 1968-1993. Rad Prot
Dos 60(4):349-354.
*Kathren RL, Lynch TP, Traub RJ. 2003. Six-year follow-up of an acute 241Am inhalation intake.
Health Phys 84(5):576-581.
*Kathren RL, McInroy JF, Reichert MM, et al. 1988. Partitioning of 238Pu, 239Pu and 241Am in skeleton
and liver of U.S. Transuranium Registry autopsy cases. Health Phys 54(2):181-188.
*Kathren RL, McInroy JF, Swint MJ. 1987. Actinide distribution in the human skeleton. Health Phys
52(2):179-192.
*Kathren RL, Strom DJ, McInroy JF, et al. 1990. Distribution of plutonium and americium in the lungs
and lymph nodes of United States Transuranium Registry registrants and relationship to smoking status.
Health Phys 58(Suppl. 1):S48.
Kathren RL, Strom DJ, Sanders CL, et al. 1993. Distribution of plutonium and americium in human
lungs and lymph nodes and relationship to smoking status. Radiat Prot Dosim 48(4):307-315.
Keith-Roach MJ, Day JP, Fifield K, et al. 2000. Seasonal variations in interstitial water transuranium
element concentrations. Environ Sci Technol 34:4273-4277
*Kelly S, Dagle A. 1974. Cytogenetic damage in americium poisoning. NY State J Med 74(9):1597-
1598.
Kelman BJ, Sikov MR. 1984. Transplacental movements of americium-241 in the guinea pig and early
distribution kinetics in the dam. Teratology 29(2):40A.
*Kennedy WE, Cadwell LL, McKenzie DH. 1985. Biotic transport of radionuclides from a low-level
radioactive waste site. Health Phys 49(1):11-24.
AMERICIUM 230
9. REFERENCES
Khokhryakov VF, Suslova KG, Filipy RE, et al. 2000. Metabolism and dosimetry of actinide elements
in occupationally-exposed personnel of Russia and the United States: A summary progress report.
Health Phys 79:S38-S40.
*Knab D. 1979. Determination of americium in small environmental samples. Anal Chem 51(7):1905-
1907.
*Knatko VA, Mayall A, Drugachenok MA, et al. 1993. Radiation doses in southern Byelorussia from
the inhalation of specific radionuclides following the Chernobyl accident. Radiat Prot Dosim 48(2):179-
183.
Kocher DC, Eckerman KF. 1981. Electron dose-rate conversion factors for external exposure of the skin.
*Komori M, Nishio K, Kitada M, et al. 1990. Fetus-specific expression of a form of cytochrome P-450
in human livers. Biochemistry 29:4430-4433.
*Kramer GH, Diebert T, Leon JW. 1989. Calibration of a double phoswich detector assembly for
estimation of homogeneously or in homogeneously distributed 241Am and/or 239Pu in untreated fecal
samples. Health Phys 56(3):361-365.
*Krishnan K, Andersen ME. 1994. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic modeling in toxicology. In:
Hayes AW, ed. Principles and methods of toxicology. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Raven Press, Ltd., 149-
188.
*Krishnan K, Andersen ME, Clewell HJ III, et al. 1994. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic
modeling of chemical mixtures. In: Yang RSH, ed. Toxicology of chemical mixtures: Case studies,
mechanisms, and novel approaches. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 399-437.
*Labéjof L, Berry J-P, Duchambon P, et al. 1998. Apoptosis of rat kidney cells after 241-Americium
administration. Anticancer Res 18:2409-2414.
LaFuma J, Nenot JC, Morin M, et al. 1974. Respiratory carcinogenesis in rats after inhalation of
radioactive aerosols of actinides and lanthanides in various physicochemical forms. In: Karbe E, Park
JF, eds. Experimental lung cancer: Carcinogenesis and bioassays, international symposium. New York:
Springer, 443-453.
Lagerquist CR, Hammond SE, Bokowski DL, et al. 1972a. Distribution of plutonium and americium in
occupationally exposed humans as found from autopsy samples. Health Phys 23(3):418.
Lagerquist CR, Hammond SE, Bokowski DL, et al. 1973. Distribution of plutonium and americium in
occupationally exposed humans as found from autopsy samples. Health Phys 25:581-584.
*Lagerquist CR, Hammond SE, Hylton DB. 1972b. Distribution of plutonium and americium in the
body 5 years after an exposure via contaminated punctured wound. Health Phys 22:921-924.
LANL. 1999. Common isotopes. Los Alamos National Laboratory.

http://pearl1.lanl.gov/periodic/commonis.html. February 9, 2000.
AMERICIUM 231
9. REFERENCES
*LBL. 2000. The Evaluated Nuclear Structure Data File (ENSDF), The National Nuclear Data Center
(NNDC). Isotope Explorer version 3.0 b1. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. http://ie.lbl.gov.
December 13, 2000.
Lee SC, Orlandini KA, Webb J, et al. 1998. Measurement of baseline atmospheric plutonium-239, 240
and americium-241 in the vicinity of the waste isolation pilot plant. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 234(1-
2):267-272.
Lee SY, Tamura T, Larsen IL, et al. 1987. Characteristics of radionuclide-contaminated soils from the
Sedan crater area at the Nevada test site. Soil Sci 144(2):113-121.
*Leeder JS, Kearns GL. 1997. Pharmacogenetics in pediatrics: Implications for practice. Pediatr Clin
North Am 44(1):55-77.
Lefuma J, Chameaud J, Perraud R, et al. 1976. [An experimental study on a comparison between the
toxic effects of radon-222 and its daughters on the lungs, and those exerted by alpha-emitters of the
actinium series.] Occup Saf Health Ser 32:43-53. (French).
*Leggett RW. 1985. A model of the retention, translocation and excretion of systemic Pu. Health Phys
49(6):1115-1137.
*Leggett RW. 1992. A retention-excretion model for americium in humans. Health Phys 62(4):288-310.
*Leggett RW, Eckerman KF, Dunning DE, et al. 1984. On estimating dose rates to organs as a function
of age following internal exposure to radionuclides. Oak Ridge, TN: U.S. Department of Energy.
ORNL/TM8265.
*Leggett RW, Eckerman KF, Williams LR. 1982. Strontium-90 in bone: A case study in age-dependent
dosimetric modeling. Health Phys 43:307-322.
Leggett RW, Eckerman KF, Williams LR. 1993. An elementary method for implementing complex
biokinetic models. Health Phys 64(3):260-271.
*Leung H-W. 1993. Physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modeling. In: Ballentine B, Marro T,

Turner P, eds. General and applied toxicology. Vol. 1. New York, NY: Stockton Press, 153-164.
*Lide DR, ed. 1994. CRC Handbook of chemistry and physics: A ready-reference book of chemical and
physical data. 75th ed. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press.
*Lide DR, ed. 1998. CRC Handbook of chemistry and physics: A ready-reference book of chemical and
physical data. 79th ed. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press.
Lide DR, ed. 2000. CRC Handbook of chemistry and physics: A ready-reference book of chemical and
physical data. 81st ed. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press, 4-40.
*Lindenbaum A, Rosenthal MW. 1972. Deposition patterns and toxicity of plutonium and americium in
liver. Health Phys 22:597-605.
*Litaor MI. 1995. Spatial analysis of plutonium-239 + 240 and americium-241 in soils around Rocky
Flats, Colorado. J Environ Qual 24:506-516.
AMERICIUM 232
9. REFERENCES
*Litaor MI, Barth GR, Zika EM. 1996. Fate and transport of plutonium-239+240 and americium-241 in
the soil of Rocky Flats, Colorado. J Environ Qual 25:671-683.
*Litaor MI, Thompson ML, Barth GR, et al. 1994. Heavy metals in the environment: Plutonium-239 +
240 and americium-241 in soils east of Rocky Flats, Colorado. J Environ Qual 23:1231-1239.
*Livens FR, Hursthouse AS. 1993. Soil and sediment chemistry of the transuranic elements. Anal Proc
30:196-198.
*Livens FR, Horrill AD, Singleton DL. 1994. The relationship between concentrations of plutonium and
americium in soil interstitial waters and their uptake by plants. Sci Total Environ 155:151-159.
*Livingston, AL. 1978. Forage plant estrogens. J Toxicol Environ Health 4:301-324.
*LLNL. 1999. Livermore Big Trees Park: 1998 summary results. Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory. University of California, Livermore, California 94551. UCRL-ID-134581.
Lloyd RD, Mays CW. 1975. Determining liver retention of transuranium elements in living beagles.
Lloyd RD, Taylor GN. 1982. Low placental transfer of 241Am in a beagle long after 241Am injection. In:
Research in radiobiology: Annual report of work in progress in the Internal Irradiation Program. Utah:
Radiobiology Division Department of Pharmacology University of Utah College of Medicine, 116-120.
Contract No. DE-AC02-76EV-00119.
Lloyd RD, Atherton DR, Mays CW, et al. 1974. The early excretion, retention and distribution of
injected curium citrate in beagles. Health Phys 27:61-67.
Lloyd RD, Bruenger FW, Mays CW, et al. 1984a. Removal of Pu and Am from beagles and mice by
3,4,3-LICAM(C) or 3,4,3-LICAM(S). Radiat Res 99:106-128.
*Lloyd RD, Jee WSS, Atherton DR, et al. 1972. Americium in beagles: biological effects and skeletal
distribution. In: Stover BJ, Jee WSS, eds. Radiobiology of Plutonium. Salt Lake City: J.W. Press, 141-
148.
Lloyd RD, Jones CW, Mays CW, et al. 1985a. Effect of Zn-DTPA therapy on the maternal transfer of
241
Am or 237Pu to young mice. Health Phys 49(3):405-410.
Lloyd RD, Mays CW, Jones CW, et al. 1984b. Retention and dosimetry of injected 241Am in beagles.
Radiat Res 100:564-575.
*Lloyd RD, Mays CW, Jones CW, et al. 1985b. Effect of age on the efficacy of Zn-
diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid therapy for removal of Am and Pu from beagles. Radiat Res 101:451-
459.
*Lloyd RD, Mays CW, Taylor GN, et al. 1970. Americium-241 studies in beagles. Health Phys 18:149-
156.
*Lloyd RD, McFarland SS, Taylor GN, et al. 1975a. Decorporation of 241Am in beagles by DTPA.
Radiat Res 62:97-106.
AMERICIUM 233
9. REFERENCES
*Lloyd RD, Miller SC, Taylor GN, et al. 1994a. Relative effectiveness of 239Pu and some other internal
emitters for bone cancer induction in beagles. Health Phys 67:346-353.
Lloyd RD, Miller SC, Taylor GN, et al. 1997. Comparison of internal emitter radiobiology in animals
and humans. Health Phys 72(1):100-110.
*Lloyd RD, Miller SC, Taylor GN. 2001. Does longevity in beagles injected with bone-seeking
radionuclides depend upon radiation dose in the absence of known radiation effects? Health Phys
81(4):456-459.
*Lloyd RD, Taylor GN, Angus W, et al. 1994b. Skeletal malignancies among beagles injected with
241
Am. Health Phys 66(2):172-177.
*Lloyd RD, Taylor GN, Angus W, et al. 1995. Soft tissue tumors in beagles injected with 241Am citrate.
Health Phys 68(2):225-233.
*Lloyd RD, Taylor GN, Jee WSS, et al. 1999. Relative radiosensitivity of bone tumor induction among
beagles as a function of age at injection of 239Pu or 226RA. Health Phys 76(1):50-56.
*Lloyd RD, Taylor GN, Mays CW, et al. 1975b. DTPA therapy of 241Am from a simulated wound site.
241
*Lloyd RD, Taylor GN, Mays CW. 1998. Am removal by DTPA vs. occurrence of skeletal
malignancy. Health Phys 75(6):640-645.
Lo Sasso TJ. 1974. Measurement of 241Am kinetics in man. Master of Science Thesis, New York
University, New York, NY.
Lo Sasso T, Cohen N, Wrenn ME. 1981. Distribution and retention of 243,244Cm in the adult baboon.
*Lovett MB, Boggis SJ, Blowers P. 1990. Aquatic environment protection: Analytical methods.
Lowestoft: Directorate of Fisheries Research.
Lücke-Huhle C, Pech M, Herrlich P. 1986. Selective gene amplification in mammalian cells after
exposure to 60Co γ rays 241Am α particles, or UV light. Radiat Res 106:345-355.
*Lujaniene G, Lujanas V, Jankunaite D, et al. 1999. Speciation of radionuclides of the Chernobyl origin
in aerosol and soil samples. J Environ Radioact 49:107-114.
Lynch TP, Kathren RL, Dagle GE, et al. 1989. Comparative skeletal distribution of Am and Pu in man,
monkey, and baboon. Health Phys 57(Suppl. 1):81-88.
*Lynch TP, Kathren RL, Dagle GE, et al. 1989. Comparative skeletal distribution of Am and Pu in man,
monkey, and baboon. Health Phys 57(1):81-88.
Lynch TP, Kathren RL, McInroy JF. 1988. Macrodistribution of plutonium and americium in four
human skeletons. J Radiol Prot 8(2):67-76.
Macdonald RW, Bewers JM. 1996. Contaminants in the arctic marine environment: Priorities for
protection. ICES J Mar Sci 53:537-563.
AMERICIUM 234
9. REFERENCES
*Mahon DC. 1982. Uptake and translocation of naturally-occurring radionuclides of the uranium series.
Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 29(6):697-703.
*Malcolm SJ, Kershaw PJ, Cromar NJ, et al. 1990a. Iron and manganese geochemistry and the
distribution of 239,240Pu and 241Am in the sediments of the north east Irish Sea. Sci Total Environ 95:69-
87.
*Malcolm SJ, Kershaw PJ, Lovett MB, et al. 1990b. The interstitial water chemistry of 239,240Pu and
241
Am in the sediments of the north-east Irish Sea. Geochemica et Cosmochimica Acta 54:29-35.
*MARSSIM. 2000. Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual. NUREG-1575, Rev
1, Nuclear Regulatory Commission; EPA 402-R-97-016, Rev 1, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency;
DOE/EH-0624, Rev 1, Department of Energy.
*Markham OD, Puphal KW, Filer TD. 1978. Plutonium and americium contamination near a transuranic
storage area in southeastern Idaho. J Environ Qual 7(3):422-428.
*Marzano FN, Fiori F, Jia G, et al. 2000. Anthropogenic radionuclides bioaccumulation in Antarctic
marine fauna and its ecological relevance. Polar Biol 23:753-758
*Matsunaga T, Ueno T, Amano H, et al. 1998. Characteristics of Chernobyl-derived radionuclides in

particulate form in surface waters in the exclusion zone around the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. J
Contam Hydrol 35:101-113.
*Mayr U, Butsch A, Schneider S. 1992. Validation of two in vitro test systems for estrogenic activities
with zearalenone, phytoestrogens and cereal extracts. Toxicology 74:135-149.
Mays CW, Lloyd RD, Atherton DR. 1974. Transuranium elements in gonadal tissue. In: Research in
radiobiology: Annual report of work in progress in the Internal Irradiation Program. Utah: Radiobiology
Division of the Department of Anatomy University of Utah College of Medicine, 308-309. Contract No.
AT(11-1)-119.
Mays CW, Lloyd RD, Taylor GN, et al. 1987. Cancer incidence and lifespan vs. α-particle dose in
beagles. Health Phys 52(5):617-624.
*McCarthy JF, Czerwinski KR, Sanford WE, et al. 1998a. Mobilization of transuranic radionuclides
from disposal trenches by natural organic matter. J Contam Hydrol 30:49-77.
*McCarthy JF, Sanford WE, Stafford PL. 1998b. Lanthanide field tracers demonstrate enhanced
transport of transuranic radionuclides by natural organic matter. Environ Sci Technol 32(24):3901-3906.
*McCartney M, Kershaw PJ, Woodhead DS, et al. 1994. Artificial radionuclides in the surface
sediments of the Irish Sea, 1968-1988. Sci Total Environ 141:103-138.
*McClellan RO, Casey HW, Bustad LK. 1962. Transfer of some transuranic elements to milk. Health
Phys 8:689-694.
McDonald P, Baxter MS, Fowler SW. 1993. Distribution of radionuclides in mussels, winkles and
prawns. Part 2. Study of organisms under laboratory conditions using alpha-autoradiography. J Environ
AMERICIUM 235
9. REFERENCES
McDonald P, Cook GT, Baxter MS, et al. 1992. The terrestrial distribution of artificial radioactivity in
south-west Scotland. Sci Total Environ 111:59-82.
McDonald P, Vives i Batlle J, Bousher A, et al. 2001. The availability of plutonium and americium in
Irish Sea sediments for re-dissolution. Sci Total Environ 267:109-123.
*McInroy JF, Boyd HA, Eutsler BC, Romero D. 1985. The US Transuranium Registry report on the
241
Am content of a whole body. Part IV: Preparation and analysis of the tissue and bones. Health Phys
49:587-621.
McInroy JF, Kathren RL, Swint MJ, et al. 1988. Tissue 241Am content in a U.S. Transuranium Registry
autopsy case eleven years after exposure from a glove box explosion. Health Phys 54(Suppl. 1):S26.
*McInroy JF, Kathren RL, Swint MJ. 1989. Distribution of plutonium and americium in whole bodies
donated to the United States Transuranium Registry. Radiat Prot Dosim 26(1/4):151-158.
*McInroy JF, Kathren RL, Toohey RE, et al. 1995. Postmortem tissue contents of 241Am in a person
with a massive acute exposure. Health Phys 69(3):318-323.
*McKay LR, Brooks AL, McClellan RO. 1972. The retention, distribution, dose and cytogenetic effects
of 241Am citrate in the Chinese hamster. Health Phys 22:633-640.
McKay WA, Pattenden NJ. 1989. Radionuclides in shoreline waters of the northeast Irish Sea. Sci Total
Environ 84:159-167.
*McKay WA, Garland JA, Livesley D, et al. 1994. The characteristics of the shore-line sea spray aerosol
and the landward transfer of radionuclides discharged to coastal sea water. Atmos Environ 28(21):3299-
3309.
*McKenna P, Longworth RD. 1995. Residual Chernobyl fallout and Sellafield pollutants found on the
Isle of Man. Sci Total Environ 173/174:7-14.
*McMurray BJ. 1983. 1976 Hanford americium exposure incident: Accident description. Health Phys
45(4):847-853.
*Métivier H. 2003. A new model for the human alimentary tract: The work of a committee 2 task group.
Radiat Prot Dosim 105(1-4):43-48.
Mellado J, Llaurado M, Rauret G. 2002. Determination of actinides and strontium in fish samples by
extraction chromatography. Anal Chim Acta 458:367-374.
*Mercer TT. 1967. On the role of particle size in the dissolution of lung burdens. Health Phys 13:1211-
1221.
*Mewhinney JA, Griffith WC. 1982. Models of Am metabolism in beagles and humans. Health Phys
42(5):629-644.
*Mewhinney JA, Griffith WC. 1983. A tissue distribution model for assessment of human inhalation
exposures to 241AmO2. Health Phys 44(Suppl. 1):537-544.
AMERICIUM 236
9. REFERENCES
Mewhinney JA, Muggenburg BA. 1977. Patterns of dose after inhalation of monodisperse or
polydisperse aerosols. In: Boecker BB, Hobbs CH, Martinez BS, eds. Inhalation Toxicology Research
Institute annual report: Lovelace Biomedical and Environmental Research Institute. Albuquerque, NM:
Inhalation Toxicology Research Institute, 44-47.
*Mewhinney JA, Muggenburg BA. 1985. Comparison of retention of 241Am in immature, young adult,
and aged dogs and in monkeys after inhalation of 241AmO2. In: Medinsky MA, Muggenburg BA, eds.
Inhalation Toxicology Research Institute annual report: Lovelace Biomedical and Environmental
Research Institute. Albuquerque, NM: Inhalation Toxicology Research Institute, 348-353.
Mewhinney JA, Griffith WC, Muggenburg BA. 1979. Comparison of metabolic models used to describe
the fate of inhaled 241AmO2 based on inhalation studies in the beagle dog. Health Phys 37(6):830.
Mewhinney JA, Griffith WC, Muggenburg BA. 1980. Proposed retention model for human inhalation
exposure to 241AmO2. In: International Radiation Protection Society, ed. Radiation protection: A
systemic approach to safety: Proceedings of the 5th Congress of the International Radiation Protection
Society, Jerusalem, March 1980. New York: Pergamon Press, 615-618.
*Mewhinney JA, Griffith WC, Muggenburg BA. 1982. The influence of aerosol size on retention and
translocation of 241Am following inhalation of 241AmO2 by beagles. Health Phys 42(5):611-627.
Mewhinney JA, Hobbs CH, Mo T, et al. 1976a. Radiation dose pattern following inhalation of
monodisperse and polydisperse aerosols of 241AmO2 in beagle dogs I. In: Boecker BB, Jones RK,
Barnett NJ, eds. Inhalation toxicology research institute annual report: Lovelace Biomedical and
Environmental Research Institute. Albuquerque, NM: Inhalation Toxicology Research Institute, 93-95.
Mewhinney JA, Hobbs CH, Mo T. 1976b. Toxicity of inhaled polydisperse or monodisperse aerosols of
241
AmO2 in Syrian hamsters III. In: Boecker BB, Jones RK, Barnett NJ, eds. Inhalation Toxicology
Research Institute annual report: Lovelace Biomedical and Environmental Research Institute.
Albuquerque, NM: Inhalation Toxicology Research Institute, 251-258.
Michel H, Barci-Funel G, Dalmasso J, et al. 2002. Plutonium and americium inventories in atmospheric
fallout and sediment cores from Blelham Tarn, Cumbria (UK) J Environ Radioact 59:127-137.
Mietelski JW, Gaca P, Jasińska M. 2000. Plutonium and other alpha-emitters in bones of wild,
herbivorous animals, from north-eastern Poland. Appl Radiat Isot 53:251-257.
Miettinen JK, Mussalo H, Hakanen M, et al. 1980. Distribution of plutonium and americium in human
and animal tissues after chronic exposures. In: International Radiation Protection Society, ed. Radiation
protection: A systemic approach to safety: Proceedings of the 5th congress of the International Radiation
Protection Society, Jerusalem, March 1980. New York: Pergamon Press, 1049-1052.
Miller SC, Bruenger FW, Kuswik-Rabiega G, et al. 1992. Decorporation of plutonium by oral
administration of a partially lipophilic polyaminocarboxylic acid. Health Phys 63(2):83-85.
Miller SC, Bruenger FW, Kuswik-Rabiega G, et al. 1993. Duration and dose-related effects of an orally
administered, partially lipophilic polyaminocarboxylic acid on the decorporation of plutonium and
americium. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 267(1):548-554.
Moody JC, Stradling GN, Britcher AR. 1994. Biokinetics of three industrial plutonium nitrate materials:
Implications for human exposure. Radiat Prot Dosim 53(1-4):169-172.
AMERICIUM 237
9. REFERENCES
*Moody JC, Stradling GN, Gray SA. 1991. The biokinetics of four 239Pu/241Am dioxide bearing dusts in
the rat after inhalation: The implications for occupational exposure. J Aerosol Sci 22(Suppl. 1):S805-
S808.
Moreno J, Vajda N, Danesi PR, et al. 1997. Combined procedure for the determination of 90Sr, 241Am,
and Pu radionuclides in soil samples. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 226(1-2):279-284.
Morgan KZ. 1976. Release of radioactive materials from reactors. In: Nuclear Power Safety. New
York, NY: Pergamon Press.
Morgan A, Holmes A, Pratley FW. 1990. Solubility in the rat lung of actinides associated with estuarine
silt from West Cumbria. J Radiol Prot 10(2):135-142.
*Morris K, Butterworth JC, Livens FR. 2000. Evidence for the remobilization of Sellafield waste
radionuclides in an intertidal salt marsh, West Cumbria, U.K. Estuarine Coastal Shelf Sci 51:613-625.
*Morselli PL, Franco-Morselli R, Bossi L. 1980. Clinical pharmacokinetics in newborns and infants:
Age-related differences and therapeutic implications. Clin Pharmacokin 5:485-527.
*Moskalev JI, Buldakov LA, Lyaginskaya AM, et al. 1969. Experimental study of radionuclide transfer
through the placenta and their biological action on the fetus. In: Radiation biology of the fetal and
juvenile Mammal. Richland, WA: Hanford Biology Symposium, 153-160.
Moskalev YI, Levdik TI, Lyubchanskii ER, et al. 1975. Metabolism and biological effects in rodents of
plutonium and other actinide elements. In: Nygaard OF et al., ed. Radiation research: Biomedical,
chemical, and physical perspectives. New York, NY: Academic Press, 1214-1232.
*Moskalev YI, Lyaginskaya AM, Zalikin GA, et al. 1989. Carcinogenic effects in rat progeny exposed
perinatally to radionuclides. In: Napalkov NP, Rice JM, Tomatis L, et al., ed. Perinatal and
multigeneration carcinogenesis. IARC scientific publications 96. Lyon, France: International Agency
for Research on Cancer, 421-427.
*Moushatova P, Shopova V, Kilyovska M, Salovski P. 1996. Morphometric investigations of a liver of

experimental animals treated with Americium 241. Scientific Works of the Medical University of Pleven,
27-29.
*Müller HL, Taya A, Drosselmeyer E, et al. 1989. Cellular aspects of retention and transport of inhaled
soluble and insoluble actinide compounds in the rat lung. Sci Total Environ 83:239-251.
Muggenburg BA, Mewhinney JA, Hahn FF, et al. 1979. Toxicity of inhaled alpha-emitting
radionuclides - status report. In: Henderson RF, Diel JH, Martinez BS, eds. Inhalation toxicology
research institute annual report: Lovelace Biomedical and Environmental Research Institute.
Albuquerque, NM: Inhalation Toxicology Research Institute, 117-121.
*Mulsow S, Coquery M, Dovlete C. 1999. Radionuclide concentrations in underground waters of

Mururoa and Fangataufa Atolls. Sci Total Environ 237/238:287-300.
*Murray CN, Avogadro A. 1979. Effect of a long-term release of plutonium and americium into an
estuarine-coastal sea ecosystem. I. Development of an assessment methodology. Health Phys 36:573-
585.
AMERICIUM 238
9. REFERENCES
*Murray CN, Kautsky H, Eicke HF. 1979. Transfer of actinides from the English Channel into the
southern North Sea. Nature 278:617-620.
*Murray CN, Kautsky H, Hoppenheit M, et al. 1978. Actinide activities in water entering the northern
North Sea. Nature 276:225-230.
*Murray RL. 1994. Understanding Radioactive Waste. Fourth ed. Columbus-Richland: Battelle Press.
Nabors CJ, Berliner DL, Stevens W. 1967. Preliminary comparison of the effects of 241Am and 239Pu on
serum enzymes. In: Research in radiobiology: Annual report of work in progress in the Internal
Irradiation Program. Utah: Radiobiology Division of the Department of Anatomy, University of Utah
College of Medicine, 207-217. Contract No. AT(11-1)-119.
Nabors CJ, Hinkley JS, Fowkes KL. 1974. Steroid 11 β-hydroxydehydrogenase activity in beagles
bearing 241Am. In: Research in radiobiology: Annual report of work in progress in the Internal
Irradiation Program. Utah: Radiobiology Division of the Department of Anatomy University of Utah
College of Medicine, 326. Contract No. AT(11-1)-119.
*NAS/NRC. 1989. Report of the oversight committee. In: Biologic markers in reproductive toxicology.
Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, National Academy Press.
National Radiological Protection Board. 1982. Gut uptake factors for plutonium, americium and curium.
Hartwell, England: National Radiological Protection Board. DE83702055.
Naylor GPL, Haines JW, Whysall K, et al. 1993. Measurements of the gastrointestinal absorption and
tissue distribution of plutonium, americium and polonium in experimental animals. Sci Total Environ
130:429-435.
*NCRP. 1987. Use of bioassay procedures for assessment of internal radionuclide deposition. Bethesda,
MD: National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Report No. 87.
*NCRP. 1997. Deposition, retention and dosimetry of inhaled radioactive substances. National Council
on Radiation Protection and Measures. Bethesda, MD. Report No. 125. http://www.ncrp.com.
December 13, 2000.
*NCRP. 1998. Radionuclide exposure of the embryo/fetus. Bethesda, MD: National Council on
Radiation Protection and Measurements. NCRP REPORT No. 128.
*NEA. 1988. Gastrointestinal absorption of selected radionuclides. Paris: Nuclear Energy Agency.
Nechev H, Sulovski P, Shopova Y, et al. 1982. Particularities in the metabolism of americium-241 after
intratracheal application and in combination with external irradiation. Sci Works Higher Med Inst-Pleven
4(1):37-43.
*Nenot JC, Stather JW. 1980. The toxicity of plutonium, americium, and curium: Plutonium recycling
in light water reactors. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
*Nenot JC, Masse R, Morin M, et al. 1972. An experimental comparative study of the behavior of 237Np,
238
Pu, 239Pu, 241Am and 242Cm in bone. Health Phys 22:657-665.
AMERICIUM 239
9. REFERENCES
Nénot JC, Morin M, Lafuma J. 1971. Étude expérimentale de la décontamination du squelette apres
inhalation de nitrate d'américium. Health Phys 21:395-400.
Nevissi AE. 1992. Measurement of actinides and long-lived radionuclides in large coral samples. J
*Nevissi A, Schell WR, Nelson VA. 1976. Plutonium and americium in soils of bikini atoll.
International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna. STI/PUB/410 ISBN 92-0-020076-1.
*Newton D, Taylor BT, Eakins JD. 1983. Differential clearance of plutonium and americium oxides
from the human lung. Health Phys 44(Suppl. 1):431-439.
*Nielson SP, Iosjpe M, Strand P. 1997. Collective doses to man from dumping of radioactive waste in
the Arctic Seas. Sci Total Environ 202:135-146.
Nielsen SP, Bengtson P, Bojanowsky R, et al. 1999. The radiological exposure of man from
radioactivity in the Baltic Sea. Sci Total Environ 237/238:133-141.
Nies H, Harms IH, Karcher MJ, et al. 1999. Anthropogenic radioactivity in the Arctic Ocean - Sci Total
Environ 237/238:181-191.
Nifatov AP, Buldakov LA, Matveev VI. 1972. Some late effects after a single inhalation of 239Pu and
241
Am in dogs. Health Phys 22:875.
NIOSH. 2000. NIOSH pocket guide to chemical hazards (NPG). Washington, DC: National Institute
for Occupational Safety and Health. http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/npg/npgd0000.html. September 15, 2000.
*Nisbet AF, Shaw S. 1994. Summary of a 5-year lysimeter study on the time-dependent transfer of
137
Cs, 90Sr, 239,240Pu and 241Am to crops from three contrasting soil types: 1. Transfer to the edible
portion. J Environ Radioact 23:1-17.
Northcutt AR, Binney SE. 1988. In vivo counting of 241Am in human lungs and tracheobronchial lymph
nodes. Health Phys 54(1):73-81.
Noáke D, Roedler HD, Doerfel H, et al. 1989. Interpreting measurements after 241Am incorporation in
terms of standard and adapted metabolic data. Radiat Prot Dosim 26(1/4):279-282.
*NRC. 1981. Distribution coefficients for radionuclides in aquatic environments. National Research
Council, Washington DC: National Academy Press.
*NRC. 1993. Pesticides in the diets of infants and children. National Research Council. Washington,
DC: National Academy Press.
*NRPB. 2002. Industrial uranium compounds: exposure limits assessment of intake and toxicity after
inhalation. Report NRPB-W22, Chilton. National Radiological Protection Board.
*Nyhan JW, Drennon BJ, Abeele WV, et al. 1985. Distribution of plutonium and americium beneath a
33-yr old liquid waste disposal site. J Environ Qual 14(4):501-509.
Okabayashi H. 1980. Differential movement of plutonium and americium in lungs of rats following the
inhalation of submicron plutonium nitrate aerosol. J Radiat Res 21:111-117.
AMERICIUM 240
9. REFERENCES
*O’Neil MJ, ed. 2001. The Merck Index- An encyclopedia of chemicals, drugs, and biologicals. 13th
ed. Whitehouse Station, NJ: Merck and Co., Inc., 69.
*Orlandini KA, Penrose WR, Harvey BR, et al. 1990. Colloidal behavior of actinides in an oligotrophic
lake. Environ Sci Technol 24(5):706-712.
Ovcharenko EP. 1972. An experimental evaluation of the effects of transuranic elements on reproductive
ability. Health Phys 22:641.
*Owen GM, Brozek J. 1966. Influence of age, sex and nutrition on body composition during childhood
and adolescence. In: Falkner F, ed. Human development. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders, 222-238.
*Paatero J, Jaakkola T. 1998. Transfer of plutonium, americium and curium from fallout into reindeer
after the Chernobyl accident. Boreal Environment Research 3:181-189.
*Palmer HE, Rhoads MC. 1989. Determining the ratio of 239Pu to 241Am in wounds by measuring the Lγ
x-rays with a Si(Li) detector. Health Phys 56:249-252.
Palmer HE, Rieksts GA, Icayan EE. 1979. In vivo measurement of americium-241 in the Hanford
americium accident. Health Phys 37(6):809.
*Palmer HE, Rieksts GA, Icayan EE. 1983. 1976 Hanford americium exposure incident: In vivo
measurements. Health Phys 45(4):893-910.
*Palmer HE, Spitz HB, Rieksts GA. 1985. Part III: Gamma-ray measurements. Health Phys 49(4):577-
586.
Paquet F, Durand J-P, Goudard F, et al. 1993. Distribution of [241Am] in hepato-pancreatic nuclear
proteins of the lobster (Homarus gammarus). Biochem Mol Biol Int 29(4):635-644.
*Paquet F, Poncy J-L, Ham GJ, et al. 1998. Transfer of polonium, neptunium, plutonium and americium
to the primate fetus. Radiat Prot Dosim 79(1-4):303-306.
*Parrington, JR, Knox, HD, Breneman SL, et al., eds. 1996. Nuclides and isotopes. 15th Edition.
General Electric Company and KAPL, Inc, 3-15, 44-49.
Paschoa AS, Arruda Neto JDT. 1992. Electrofission and photofission as tools to measure actinides in
environmental and biological samples. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 156(2):297-311.
*Pattenden NJ, McKay WA. 1994. Studies of artificial radioactivity in the coastal environment of
northern Scotland: A review. J Environ Radioact 24:1-51.
Paull B, Foulkes M, Jones P. 1994. Determination of alkaline earth metals in offshore oil-well brines
using high-performance chelation ion chromatography. Anal Proc 31:209-211.
*Penrose WR, Polzer WL, Essington EH, et al. 1990. Mobility of plutonium and americium through a
shallow aquifer in a semiarid region. Environ Sci Technol 24(2):228-234.
Petersen GR, Gilbert ES, Buchanan JA, et al. 1990. A case-cohort study of lung cancer, ionizing
radiation, and tobacco smoking among males at the Hanford site. Health Phys 58(1):3-11.
AMERICIUM 241
9. REFERENCES
*Phalen RF, Oldham HJ, Beaucage CB, et al. 1985. Postnatal enlargement of human tracheobronchial
airways and implications for particle deposition. Anat Rec 212:368-380.
Pilon F, Lorthioir S, Birolleau J-C, et al. 1996. Determination of trace elements in radioactive and toxic
materials by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. J Anal Atom Spectrom 11:759-763.
Piltingsrud HV, Farr RL. 1978. A beta-alpha-gamma x-radiation (bag-x) detection probe for use with a
plutonium-americium survey instrument. Health Phys 34:177-184.
*Platford RF, Joshi SR. 1986. The chemistry of uranium and related radionuclides in Lake Ontario
waters. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 106(6):333-343.
*PNL. 2000. Hanford site environmental report for calendar year 1994. Air surveillance, airborne
radionuclide concentrations in the Hanford Environs, 1994 compared to values from the previous 5 years.
Facility Effluent Monitoring. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. http://www.pnl.gov/. December
12, 2000.
*PNL. 1995. Hanford site environmental report for calendar year 1994. Air surveillance, airborne
radionuclide concentrations in the Hanford Environs, 1994 compared to values from the previous 5 years.
Facility Effluent Monitoring. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, June 1995.
http://www.pnl.gov/env/env_home.html. January 22, 2004.
*PNNL. 2000. 1999 Hanford site environmental report September 1999 PNNL-13230. Pacific
Northwest National Laboratory. http://hanford-site.pnl.gov/envreport/. January 22, 2004.
*PNNL. 2001. Hanford site environmental report for calendar year 2000 PNNL-13487, September 2001.
Pacific Northwest National .Laboratory. http://hanford-site.pnl.gov/envreport/. January 22, 2004.
*PNNL. 2002. Hanford site environmental report for calendar year 2001 PNNL-13910, September,
2002. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. http:/;/Hanford-site.pnl.gov/envreport/. January 22, 2004.
*PNNL. 2003. Methods and models of the Hanford Internal Dosimetry Program. PNNL-MA-860
Richland, Washington. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.
http://www.pnl.gov/eshs/pub/pnn1860.html. March 09, 2004.
241
*Polig E. 1976. Topographic analysis of the micro distribution of Am in the rat femur as influenced
by DTPA treatment. Radiat Res 67:128-141.
*Popplewell DS, Boocock G. 1967. Distribution of some actinides in blood serum proteins. In:
Kornberg HA, Norwood WD, eds. Diagnosis and treatment of deposited radionuclides. Amsterdam:
Excerpta Medica Foundation, 45-55.
*Popplewell DS, Ham GJ. 1989. Distribution of plutonium and americium in tissues from a human
autopsy case. J Radiol Prot 9(3):159-164.
*Popplewell DS, Ham GJ, Johnson TE, et al. 1984. The uptake of plutonium-238, 239, 240, americium-
241, strontium-90 and caesium-137 into potatoes. Sci Total Environ 38:173-181.
*Poupard D, Jouniaux B. 1990. Determination of picogram quantities of americium and curium by

thermal ionization mass spectrometry (TIMS). Radiochim Acta 41(1):25-28.
AMERICIUM 242
9. REFERENCES
Priest ND, Birchall A. 1984. The calculation of bone doses from alpha-emitting bone surface seeking
radionuclides for radiological protection purposes. Radiat Environ Biophys 23:149-153.
*Priest ND, Freemont A, Humphreys JAH, et al. 1995. Histopathology and 241Am micro distribution in
skeletal USTUR case 246. Health Phys 69(3):330-337.
*Priest ND, Howells G, Green D, et al. 1983. Pattern of uptake of americium-241 by the rat skeleton and
its subsequent redistribution and retention: Implications for human dosimetry and toxicology. Hum
Toxicol 2:101-120.
*Qu H, Stuit D, Glover SE, et al. 1998. Preconcentration of plutonium and americium using the actinide-
CUtm resin for human tissue analysis. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 234(1-2):175-181.
Raabe OG. 1984. Comparison of the carcinogenicity of radium and bone-seeking actinides. Health Phys
46(6):1241-1258.
Raabe OG. 1996. Relative biological effectiveness for induction of cancer by protracted alpha versus
beta internal irradiation. Health Phys 70(6):S8.
*Ragan HA, Mahaffey JA, Breitenstein BD. 1983. 1976 Hanford americium exposure incident:
Hematologic effects. Health Phys 45(4):923-932.
Ramounet B. 1997. Biokinetics of Pu and Am after inhalation of industrial (U, Pu)O2 and PuO2 in the
rat: Preliminary results. Radiat Prot Dosim 79(1-4):53-56.
Ramounet B, Matton S, Guezingar-Liebard F, et al. 2000. Comparative biokinetics of plutonium and

americium after inhalation of PuO2 and mixed oxides (U, Pu) O2 in rat. Int J Radiat Biol 76(2):215-222.
*Rapiejko A, Rosson R, Lahr J et al. 2001. Radionuclides in Peconic River fish, mussels, and sediments.
Health Phys 81(6):698-703.
Riches AC, Herceg Z, Bryant PE, et al. 1997. Radiation-induced transformation of SV40-immortalized
human thyroid epithelial cells by single exposure to plutonium α-particles in vitro. Int J Radiat Biol
72(5):515-521.
Ristic M, Degetto S, Ast T, et al. 2002. Sample preparation for the determination of 241Am in sediments
utilizing-γ-spectrometry. J Environ Radioact 59:179-189
Robertson DE, Thomas CW, Perkins RW, et al. 1981. Transuranium and other long-lived radionuclides
in the terrestrial environs of nuclear power plants. Electric Power Research Institute, Environmental
Physics and Chemistry Program, Energy Analysis and Environment Division, Palo Alto, CA. EA-2045.
NTIS/DE82003074.
*Robinson B, Heid KR, Aldridge TL, et al. 1983. 1976 Hanford americium exposure incident: Organ
burden and radiation dose estimates. Health Phys 45(4):911-921.
*Robison WL, Noshkin VE, Conrado CL, et al. 1997a. The northern Marshall Island radiological
survey: Data and dose assessment. Health Phys 73(1):37-48.
AMERICIUM 243
9. REFERENCES
*Robison WL, Bogen KT, Conrado CL. 1997b. An updated dose assessment for resettlement options at
Bikini Atoll-a U.S. nuclear test site. Health Phys 73(1):100-114.
*Robison WL, Noshkin VE. 1999. Radionuclide characterization and associated dose from long-lived
radionuclides in close-in fallout delivered to the marine environment at Bikini and Enewetak Atolls. Sci
Total Environ 237/238:311-327.
Robison WL, Noshkin VE, Hamilton TF, et al. 2001. An assessment of the current day impact of various
materials associated with the U.S. Nuclear Test Program in the Marshall Islands. U.S. Department of
Energy. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. UCRL-LR-143980.
Robredo LM, Navarro T, Sierra I. 2000. Indirect monitoring of internal exposure in the
decommissioning of a nuclear power plant in Spain. Appl Radiat Isot 53:343-350.
*Rommereim DN, Sikov MR. 1986. Relative embryotoxicity of 239Pu and 241Am in rats. Teratology
33(3):93C-94C.
*Rommereim DN, Buschbom RL, Sikov MR. 1985. Comparison of embryotoxic effects of
intravenously administered 239Pu and 241Am in rats. Health Phys 49:122-123.
*Romney EM, Wallace A, Schulz RK, et al. 1981. Plant uptake of 237Np, 239,240Pu, 241Am, and 244Cm
from soils representing major food production areas of the United States. Soil Sci 132(1):40-59.
Roos P, Holm E, Persson RBR, et al. 1994. Deposition of 210Pb, 137Cs, 239+240Pu, 238Pu, and 241Am in the
Antarctic Peninsula area. J Environ Radioact 24:235-251.
*Rose CL, McKay WA, Leonard DRP, et al. 1996. Radioactivity in two tide-washed marsh areas in the
eastern Irish Sea: A radiological assessment. Sci Total Environ 191:1-13.
Rosen JC, Cohen N, Wrenn ME. 1972. Short term metabolism of 241Am in the adult baboon. Health
Phys 22:621-626.
*Rosner G, Hötzl H, Winkler R. 1978. Measurements of transuranium nuclides in the environment at the
Institute for Radiation Protection of the Gesellschaft für Strahlen- und Umweltforschung mbH, Munich.
Environ Int 1:85-88.
*Rundo J, Fairman WD, Essling M, et al. 1977. Ingestion of 241Am sources intended for domestic smoke
detectors: Report of a case. Health Phys 33:561-566.
Russell JJ, Lindenbaum A, Grahn D. 1979. The micro distribution, retention, and autoradiography of
241
Am-citrate in mouse testis. Health Phys 37(6):831-832.
*Ryan TP, Dowdall AM, Long S, et al. 1999. Plutonium and americium in fish, shellfish and seaweed in
the Irish environment and their contribution to dose. J Environ Radioact 44:349-369.
Ryan TP. 2002. Transuranic biokinetic parameters for marine invertebrates - a review. Environ Int
28:83-96.
Sanada Y, Matsunaga T, Yanase N, et al. 2002. Accumulation and potential dissolution of Chernobyl-
derived radionuclides in river bottom sediment. Appl Radiat Isot 56:751-760
AMERICIUM 244
9. REFERENCES
*Sanchez AL, Horrill AD, Howard BJ, et al. 1998. Anthropogenic radionuclides in tide-washed pastures
bordering the Irish Sea coast of England and Wales. Water Air Soil Pollut 106:403-424.
*Sanchez AL, Horrill AD, Singleton DL, et al. 1996. Radionuclides around nuclear sites in England and
Wales. Sci Total Environ 181:51-63.
*Sanchez-Cabeza JA, Molero J. 2000. Plutonium, americium and radiocaesium in the marine
environment close to the Vandéllos I nuclear power plant before decommissioning. J Environ Radioact
51:211-228.
Sanders CL. 1972. Deposition patterns and the toxicity of transuranium elements in lung. Health Phys
22:607-615.
Sanders CL, Mahaffey JA. 1978. Toxicology of inhaled transuranic oxides in rodents. Pharmacologist
20(3):175.
*Sanders CL, Mahaffey JA. 1983. Inhalation carcinogenesis of high-fired 241AmO2 in rats. Radiat Res
94:66-80.
*Sanders SM. 1974. Excretion of 241Am and 244Cm following two cases of accidental inhalation. Health
Phys 27:359-365.
*Sasser LB, Mahlum DD, Rommereim RL. 1986. Influence of pregnancy and lactation on maternal
deposition and perinatal uptake of 241Am in the rat. Health Phys 50(5):595-604.
Schell WR, Berg MT, Myttenaere C, et al. 1994. A review of the deposition and uptake of stable and
radioactive elements in forests and other natural ecosystems for use in predictive modeling. Sci Total
Environ 157:153-161.
*Schlenker RA, Oltman BG, Kathren RL. 1989. Bone surface deposition of 241Am in a person with
occupational exposure. Radiat Prot Dosim 26(1/4):195-199.
Schmidt CT, Durbin P. 1985. A five-compartment model for the kinetic distribution of americium in
man. Health Phys 49(1):161.
Schoeters GER, Vanderborght OLJ. 1983. Relative effectiveness of 241Am vs 226Ra approached by
haemopoietic stem cell studies in various bone marrow sites of contaminated mice. Health Phys
44(Suppl. 1):555-570.
*Schoeters GER, Maisin JR, Vanderborght OLJ. 1991. Toxicity of 241Am in male C57BL mice:
Relative risk versus 226Ra. Radiat Res 126:198-205.
Schoeters G, Van Den Heuvel R, Hurtgen C, et al. 1987. 241Am distribution in foetal haemopoietic
organs of balb/c mice. In: Age-related factors in radionuclide metabolism and dosimetry. Netherlands:
Kluwer Academic Publishers, 193-200.
*Schoeters G, Van Den Heuvel R, Leppens H, et al. 1990. Distribution of 241Am in offspring from
BALB/c mice injected with 241Am and 14 days of gestation: Relation to calcium and iron metabolism and
comparison with distribution of 241Am after injection of adults. Int J Radiat Biol 58(2):371-382.
AMERICIUM 245
9. REFERENCES
*Schoeters G, Van Den Heuvel R, Vanderborght O. 1985. The study of damage to bone marrow cells as
a biological dosimeter after contamination with osteotropic α emitters. EUR 9250:51-61.
Schoeters GER, Vanderborght O, Maisin JR. 1986. Relative sensitivity of 241Am verses 226Ra in life span
shortening and cancer induction in C57BL mice, comparison with other larger scale mouse experiments
with 226Ra and with 241Am. Cancer Lett 30:S21.
Schoeters GER, Vander Plaetse F, Van Den Heuvel RL. 1992. High radiosensitivity of the
mineralization capacity of adult murine bone marrow in vitro to continuous α-irradiation compared to
acute X-irradiation. Int J Radiat Biol 61(5):675-683.
*Schreckhise RG, Cline JF. 1980. Comparative uptake and distribution of plutonium, americium, curium
and neptunium in four plant species. Health Phys 38:817-824.
*Schulz RK, Tompkins GA, Leventhal L, et al. 1976. Uptake of plutonium and americium by barley
from two contaminated Nevada test site soils. J Environ Qual 5(4):406-410.
*Seaborg, GT. 1991. Actinides and transactinides. Fourth ed., Vol. 1. Encyclopedia of chemical
technology, 412-445
*Seaborg GT, Loveland WD. 1990. The elements beyond uranium. New York: John Wiley & Sons,
Inc.
Seidel A. 1973a. Distribution of 241Am in the rat as influenced by dose and the pH of the injected
solution. Int J Appl Radiat Isot 24:362-363.
Seidel A. 1973b. Retention of 241Am by some endocrine organs of the rat and its response to DPTA-
treatment. Int J Radiat Biol 23(4):415-416.
Seidel A. 1977. The deposition of 241Am and 252Cf in the skeleton of Chinese hamster, Syrian hamster
and the rat. Health Phys 33:83-86.
*Seidel A. 1984. Influence of the antimicrotubular agents, colchicine and vinblastin on the uptake of
americium by rat liver, kidneys, and skeleton. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 76:113-117.
*Seidel A. 1985. Colchicine reduces uptake of 239Pu and 241Am by rat liver but not their elimination. Int
J Nucl Med Biol 12(4):339-340.
*Seidel A, Wiener M, Krüger E, et al. 1986. Studies on the lysosomal binding of 141Ce, 239Np, 239Pu and
241
Am in rat and Syrian hamster liver using carrier-free electrophoresis. Int J Rad Appl Instrum
B13(5):515-518.
Sekimoto H, Nakamura H, Takagi N. 1996. Toxicity of radioactive wastes discharged from nuclear
energy center in the future equilibrium state. Ann Nucl Energy 23(8):663-668.
Sekine K, Imai T, Kasai A. 1987. Liquid-liquid extraction separation and sequential determination of
plutonium and americium in environmental samples by alpha-spectrometry. Talanta 34(6):567-570.
*Setchell BP, Waites GMH. 1975. The blood-testis barrier. In: Creep RO, Astwood EB, Geiger SR,
eds. Handbook of physiology: Endocrinology V. Washington, DC: American Physiological Society.
AMERICIUM 246
9. REFERENCES
*SEPA. 2000. Radioactivity in food and the environment, 1999 (RIFE-5). Scottish Environment
Protection Agency, 33
Shiraishi K, Yamamoto M. 1996. Internal dose from ingestion for Japanese adult males. Health Phys
71(5):700-704.
*Sibley TH, Stohr JS. 1990. Accumulation of Am-241 and Cm-244 from water and sediments by
Hyalella sp. and Tubifex sp. Bull Environ Contam Toxicol 44:165-172.
*Sikov MR. 1987. Placental transfer of the actinides and related heavy elements. In: Age-related
factors in radionuclide metabolism and dosimetry. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 303-314.
Sikov MR. 1992. Hazards and risks from prenatal irradiation: Emphasis on internal radionuclide
exposures. Radiat Prot Dosim 41(2-4):265-272.
*Sikov MR, Kelman BJ. 1989. Factors affecting the placental transfer of actinides. Health Phys
57(Suppl. 1):109-114.
*Sikov MR, Mahlum DD. 1968. Cross-placental transfer of selected actinides in the rat. Health Phys
14:205-208.
Sikov MR, Rommereim DN. 1986. Evaluation of the embryotoxicity of uranium in rats. Teratology
33(3):41C.
Silk TJ, Phipps AW, Bailey MR. 1997. Effects on dose coefficients for workers of recent changes in
internal dosimetry. Radiat Prot Dosim 71(1):7-21.
*Sill CW, Williams RL. 1969. Radiochemical determination of uranium and the transuranium elements
in process solutions and environmental samples. Anal Chem 41:1624-1632.
Sjoblom K-L, Salo A, Bewers JM, et al. 1999. International Arctic Seas assessment project. Sci Total
Environ 237/238:153-166.
*Smith LR, Sullivan PA, Laferriere J, et al. 1983. Intake and subsequent fate of a ceramic particle
containing 2.85 µCi 241Am: A case study. Health Phys 44(4):329-334.
Sokolik GA, Ivanova TG, Leinova SL, et al. 2001. Migration ability of radionuclides in soil-vegetation
cover of Belarus after Chernobyl accident. Environ Int 26:183-187.
*Sontag W. 1983. The early distribution of 239Pu, 241Am, and 233U in the soft tissues and skeletons of old
rats. A comparative study. Hum Toxicol 2:91-100.
Sontag W. 1984. Long-term behaviour of 239Pu, 241Am and 233U in different bones of one-year-old rats:
Macrodistribution and macrodosimetry. Hum Toxicol 3:469-483.
Sontag W. 1986. Multicompartment kinetic models for the metabolism of americium, plutonium and
uranium in rats. Hum Toxicol 5:163-173.
Stanley JA, Edison AF, Mewhinney JA, et al. 1978. Inhalation toxicology of industrial plutonium and
uranium oxide aerosols: II. Deposition, retention and dosimetry. Health Phys 35(6):888.
AMERICIUM 247
9. REFERENCES
*Stanley JA, Edison AF, Mewhinney JA. 1982. Distribution, retention and dosimetry of plutonium and
americium in the rat, dog and monkey after inhalation of an industrial-mixed uranium and plutonium
oxide aerosol. Health Phys 43(4):521-530.
Stather JW, Adams N, Gray SA, et al. 1987. Comparative studies on the transfer of radionuclides to the
fetus in the rat - implications for human dosimetry. In: Age-related factors in radionuclide metabolism
and dosimetry. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 371-377.
Stather JW, Dionian J, Brown J, et al. 1988. The risk of leukemia in sea scale from radiation exposure.
Health Phys 55(2):471-481.
*Stather JW, Harrison JD, Kendall GM. 1992. Radiation doses to the embryo and fetus following
intakes of radionuclides by the mother. Radiat Prot Dosim 41(2/4):111-118.
*Stather JW, Harrison JD, Rodwell P, et al. 1979a. The gastrointestinal absorption of plutonium and
americium in the hamster. Phys Med Biol 24(2):396-407.
*Stather JW, James AC, Brightwell J, et al. 1979b. The clearance of Pu and Am from the respiratory
system of rodents after the inhalation of oxide aerosols of these actinides either alone or in combination
with other metals. In: Biological implications of radionuclides released from nuclear industries:
Proceedings of an international symposium on biological implications of radionuclides released from
nuclear industries. Proceedings series-International Atomic Energy Agency: Viena, 3-25.
*Stevens W, Atherton DR, Bruenger FW, et al. 1977. Deposition of 239Pu, 233U and 241Am in the gonads
of beagles and rats. In: Research in radiobiology. Annual report of work in progress in the Internal
Irradiation Program. Utah: Radiobiology Division of the Department of Anatomy University of Utah
College of Medicine, 223-227. Contract No. EY-76-C-02-0119.
Stevens W, Bruenger FW, Atherton DR, et al. 1978. The retention and distribution of 241Am and 65Zn,
given as DTPA chelates in rats and of [14C]DPTA in rats and beagles. Radiat Res 75:397-409.
Stevens W, Bruenger FW, Bates D, et al. 1976. Retention and distribution of 241Amlll in neonatal
beagles. In: Research in radiobiology: Annual report of work in progress in the Internal Irradiation
Program. Utah: Radiobiology Division of the Department of Anatomy University of Utah College of
Medicine, 167-171. Contract No. E(11-1)-119.
Stevens W, Stover BJ, Bruenger FW, et al. 1969. Some observations on the deposition of americium-
241 in the thyroid gland of the beagle. Radiat Res 39:201-206.
*Stover BJ, Bruenger FW, Stevens W. 1970. Association of americium with ferritin in the canine liver.
Stradling GN, Moody JC. 1995. Use of animal studies for assessing intakes of inhaled actinide-bearing
dusts. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 197(2):309-329.
*Stradling GN, Stather JW. 1989. The use of animal experiments for assessing annual limits on intake
and interpreting chest-monitoring data for workers exposed to industrial actinide-bearing dusts. Health
Phys 37(Suppl. 1):221-228.
AMERICIUM 248
9. REFERENCES
Stradling GN, Gray SA, Ellender M, et al. 1992. The efficacies of 3,4,3-LIHOPO and DTPA for
enhancing the excretion of plutonium and americium from the rat: Comparison with other siderophore
analogues. Int J Radiat Biol 62(4):487-497.
Stradling GN, Ham GJ, Smith H, et al. 1978. The mobility of americium dioxide in the rat. Radiat Res
76:549-560.
*Stradling GN, Hengé-Napoli M-H, Paquet F, et al. 2000. Optimum treatment regimens with animals.
Radiat Prot Dosim 87(1):29-40.
Stradling GN, Hodgson SA, Hodgson A, et al. 1998. Dose coefficients and assessment of intake after
inhalation of contaminated dusts from Palomares. Radiat Prot Dosim 79(1/4):179-182.
Stradling GN, Pellow PG, Hodgson A, et al. 1997. Assessment of intake of a complex radionuclide
bearing dust formed at a nuclear power plant. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 226(1-2):7-14.
*Stradling GN, Popplewell DS, Ham GJ. 1976. The chemical form of americium and curium in urine.
Stradling GN, Stather JW, Gray SA, et al. 1987. Studies on the metabolic behavior of industrial actinide-
bearing aerosols after deposition in the rat lung: An experimental basis for interpreting chest monitoring
data and assessing limits on intake for workers. Hum Toxicol 6:365-375.
*Stradling GN, Stather JW, Gray SA, et al. 1989. Assessment of intake of an actinide-bearing dust
formed from the pond storage of spent magnox fuel. Radiat Prot Dosim 26(1/4):201-206.
239 241
*Stradling GN, Stather JW, Gray SA, et al. 1992. Radiological implications of inhaled Pu and Am
in dusts at the former nuclear test site in Maralinga. Health Phys 63(6):641-650.
*Stradling GN, Stather JW, Gray SA, et al. 1994. Biokinetics of inhaled plutonium-239 and americium-
241 present in contaminated dusts at Maralinga. Ann Occup Hyg 38(Suppl. 1):257-263.
*Suchanek TH, Lagunas-Solar MC, Raabe OG, et al. 1996. Radionuclides in fishes and mussels from
the Farallon Islands nuclear waste dump site, California. Health Phys 71(2):167-178.
*Sullivan MF. 1980a. Absorption of actinide elements from the gastrointestinal tract of neonatal
animals. Health Phys 38:173-185.
*Sullivan MF. 1980b. Absorption of actinide elements from the gastrointestinal tract of rats, guinea pigs
and dogs. Health Phys 38:159-171.
*Sullivan MF, Gorham LS. 1982. Further studies on the absorption of actinide elements from the
gastrointestinal tract of neonatal animals. Health Phys 43(4):509-519.
Sullivan MF, Gorham LS. 1983. Can information on the gastrointestinal absorption of actinide elements
by neonatal rats, guinea pigs, dogs and swine be extrapolated to man? Health Phys 44(Suppl. 1):411-417.
*Sullivan MF, Ruemmler PS. 1988. Absorption of 233U, 237Np, 238Pu, 241Am and 244Cm from the
gastrointestinal tracts of rats fed an iron-deficient diet. Health Phys 54(3):311-316.
AMERICIUM 249
9. REFERENCES
*Sullivan MF, Miller BM, Ruemmler PS, et al. 1985. Further studies on the influence of chemical form
and dose on absorptions of Np, Pu, Am and Cm from the gastrointestinal tracts of adult and neonatal
rodents. Health Phys 48(1):61-73.
*Sullivan MF, Ruemmler PS, Ryan JL, et al. 1986. Influence of oxidizing of reducing agents on
gastrointestinal absorption of U, Pu, Am, Cm, and Pm by rats. Health Phys 50(2):223-232.
*Sütterlin U, Thies W-G, Haffner H, et al. 1984. Comparative studies on the lysosomal association of
monomeric 239Pu and 241Am in rat and Chinese hamster liver: Analysis with sucrose, metrizamide, and
percoll density gradients of subcellular binding as dependent on time. Radiat Res 98:293-306.
*Sutton WW, Patzer RG, Potter GD. 1979. Biotransport of transuranium radionuclides. Environmental
Monitoring Systems Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas, NV. NTIS No.
EMSLLVO53935.
Svoboda V, Kotasková Z. 1983. Radiosensitivity and proliferative activity of vertebral CFU-S surviving
in mice injected with oncogenic activities of 239Pu or 241Am. J Hyg Epidemiol Microbiol Immunol
27(3):329-335.
*Swift DJ, Nicholson MD. 2001. Variability in the edible fraction content of 60Co, 99Tc, 110mAG, 137Cs
and 241Am between individual crabs and lobsters from Sellafield (north eastern Irish Sea). J Environ
*Takada K, Fikada H, Hattori T, Akaishi J. 1984. Equation for the urinary excretion of americium
following a single uptake. Proceedings of the 6th International Congress of the International.
Fachverband für Strahlenschutz E.V., Julich. Radiation Protection Association, Berlin, 1:477-480..
*Talbot RJ, Nicholls L, Morgan A, et al. 1989. Effect of inhaled α-emitting nuclides on mouse alveolar
macrophages. Radiat Res 119:271-285.
Taya A, Mewhinney JA. 1987. Toxicity and dissolution of 241AmO2 particles in cultured canine alveolar
macrophages. Health Phys 52(Suppl. 1):S27.
*Taya A, Mewhinney JA. 1992. Cytotoxicity, uptake and dissolution of 241AmO2 particles in dog
alveolar macrophages in vitro. Int J Radiat Biol 62(1):81-88.
*Taya A, Carmack DB, Muggenburg BA, et al. 1992. An interspecies comparison of the phagocytosis
and dissolution of 241AmO2 particles by rat, dog and monkey alveolar macrophages in vitro. Int J Radiat
Biol 62(1):89-95.
*Taya A, Hotz G, Seidel A. 1986. Biochemical and electron microscopic studies on binding and
transport of americium and plutonium hydroxide polymers in bovine alveolar macrophages and rat lungs.
J Aerosol Sci 17(3):370-375.
Taylor DM. 1972. Interactions between transuranium elements and the components of cells and tissues.
*Taylor DM. 1973. Chemical and physical properties of the transplutonium elements. In: Hodge HC,
Stannard JN, Hursh JB, eds. Uranium, plutonium, transplutonic elements. New York: Springer-Verlag,
717-738.
AMERICIUM 250
9. REFERENCES
Taylor DM. 1986. Gut transfer of environmental plutonium and americium. Lancet 1(8481):611.
Taylor DM. 1989. The biodistribution and toxicity of plutonium, americium and neptunium. Sci Total
Environ 83:217-225.
Taylor DM, Danpure CJ. 1969. Lysosomal uptake of actinide elements. Biochem J 115(5):53.
Taylor DM, Path MRC, Planas-Bohne F, et al. 1985. The retention of metallic radionuclides in
experimental abscesses in rats. Br J Radiol 58:655-659.
*Taylor DM, Sowby FD, Kember NF, et al. 1961. The metabolism of americium and plutonium in the
rat. Phys Med Biol 6:73-86.
Taylor GN, Jee WSS, Dockum N, et al. 1969. Microscopic distribution of americium-241 in the beagle
thyroid gland. Health Phys 17:723-725.
Taylor GN, Jones CW, Gardner PA, et al. 1981. Two new rodent models for actinide toxicity studies.
241
*Taylor GN, Lloyd RD, Bruenger FW, et al. 1993a. Am-induced thyroid lesions in the beagle. Health
Phys 64(6):653-660.
*Taylor GN, Lloyd RD, Mays CW, et al. 1991. Plutonium- or americium-induced liver tumors and
lesions in beagles. Health Phys 61(3):337-347.
*Taylor GN, Lloyd RD, Mays CW, et al. 1992. Promotion of radiation-induced liver neoplasia by
ethanol. Health Phys 62(2):178-182.
Taylor GN, Lloyd RD, Mays CW, et al. 1993b. Liver cancer induction by 239Pu, 241
Am, and Thorotrast
in the grasshopper mouse, Onychomys leukogaster. Health Phys 64(2):141-146.
*Taylor GN, Mays CW, Lloyd RD, et al. 1983. Comparative toxicity of 226Ra 239Pu 241Am 249Cf and
252
Cf in C57BL/Do black and albino mice. Radiat Res 95:584-601.
Terzaghi-Howe M, Ford JR, Turner JE, et al. 1996. Influence of cell position relative to planar alpha-
particle sources on survival and preneoplastic transformation of primary rat tracheal epithelial cells.
Radiat Res 145:432-441.
*Thiels GM, Murray CN, Vanderborght OLJ, et al. 1984. The effect of water acidity and seasonal
variability on the distribution of 241Am in the freshwater snail Lymnaea stagnalis L. Health Phys
47(3):485-487.
Thind KS. 2001. Monitoring methods and dose assessment for internal exposures involving mixed
fission and activation products containing actinides. Health Phys 80(1):47-53.
Thomas RG. 1970. Estimation of 241Am body burdens by analysis of whole-body scanning, excreta, and
body weight data. Health Phys 19:751-755.
*Thomas RG, McClellan RO, Thomas RL, et al. 1972. Metabolism, dosimetry and biological effects of
inhaled 241Am in beagle dogs. Health Phys 22:863-871.
AMERICIUM 251
9. REFERENCES
*Thompson RC. 1983. 1976 Hanford americium exposure incident: Overview and perspective. Health
Phys 45(4):837-845.
*Thouvenot P, Hubert S, Moulin C, et al. 1993. Americium trace determination in aqueous and solid
matrices by time-resolved laser-induced fluorescence. Radiochim Acta 61:15-21.
Tompkins JA, Pearson MW. 2001. Transuranic sealed source recovery project. Health Phys 81:S59-
S61.
*Toohey RE, Essling MA. 1980. Measurements of 241Am in vivo at long times after inhalation. Health
Phys 38:139-145.
*Toohey RE, Kathren RL. 1995. Overview and dosimetry of the Hanford americium accident case.
Health Phys 69(3):310-317.
*Toran L. 1994. Radionuclide contamination in groundwater: Is there a problem? In: Environmental

science pollution control series. New York, NY: M. Dekker, 437-455.
Truscott JB, Jones P, Fairman BE. 2001a. Determination of actinide elements at femtogram per gram
levels in environmental samples by on-line solid phase extraction and sector-field-inductively coupled
plasma-mass spectrometry. Anal Chim Acta 433:245-253
Truscott JB, Jones P, Fairman BE, et al. 2001b. Determination of actinides in environmental and
biological samples using high-performance chelation ion chromatography coupled to sector-field
inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr A 928:91-98.
*Turner GA, Taylor DM. 1968. The transport of plutonium, americium and curium in the blood of rats.
Phys Med Biol 13(4):535-546.
*UIC. 1997. Most smoke detectors contain an artificially produced radioisotope: americium-241.
Americium-241 is made in nuclear reactors, and is a decay product of plutonium-241. Uranium
Information Center. Nuclear Issues Briefing Paper 35. http://www.uic.com.au/nip35.htm. January 27,
2000.
*UNSCEAR. 2000. Sources and effects of ionizing radiation. UNSCEAR 200 report. Volume 1.
United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation.
http://www.unscear.org/reports/2000_1.html. February 17, 2004.
*U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration. 1977. Plutonium and americium
concentration along fresh-water food chains of the Great Lakes, U.S.A. Woods Hole, MA: U.S. Energy
Research and Development Administration. COO-3568-18.
*USNRC. 1979. Environmental assessment of ionization chamber smoke detectors containing Am-241.
Washington, DC: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NRC-02-78-045. NUREG/CR-1156.
http://www.nrc.gov/. December 13, 2000.
*USNRC. 1984. Lower limit of detection definition and elaboration of a purposed position for
radiological effluent and environmental measurements. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S.
Report NUREG/CR-4007.
AMERICIUM 252
9. REFERENCES
*USNRC. 1992. Residual radioactive contamination form decommissioning: Technical basis for
translating contamination levels to annual total effective dose equivalent. Washington, DC: Office of
Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NUREG/CR-5512.
*USNRC. 1996. Contribution of maternal radionuclide burdens to prenatal radiation doses.

Washington, DC: Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, U.S. National Regulatory Commission.
NUREG/CR-5631.
USNRC. 1998a. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 10CFR20 Subpart O.
*USNRC. 1998b. Minimum detectable concentrations with typical radiation survey instruments for
various contaminants and field conditions. Washington, DC: Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. NUREG/CR-1507.
*USNRC. 2001a. Radiation standards for occupational values, effluent concentrations, and releases to
sewers. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 10CFR20. http://www.nrc.gov. March 13, 2001.
*USNRC. 2001b. Activity values for radionuclides. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 10CFR71.
http://www.nrc.gov. March 13, 2001.
*USNRC. 2001c. Byproduct material for in vitro clinical or laboratory testing. U.S.Nuclear Regulatory
Commission. 10CFR 31.11. http://www.nrc.gov. March 13, 2001.
*USNRC. 2001d. Calibration or reference sources-shall not possess at any one time, at any one location
of storage or use of 241Am. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 10CFR 31.8. http://www.nrc.gov.
March 13, 2001.
*USNRC. 2001e. Exemption for low-level materials- contains only Americium in special form. U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 10CFR71.10. http://www.nrc.gov. March 13, 2001.
*USNRC. 2001f. Export of byproduct material. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 10CFR110.23.
http://www.nrc.gov. March 13, 2001.
*USNRC. 2001g. General applicability to domestic licensing of byproduct material-quantity of licensed

material requiring labeling. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 10CFR30. http://www.nrc.gov.
March 13, 2001.
*USNRC. 2001h. Quantity of radioactive material requiring need for an emergency plan for responding
to a release. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 10CFR30.72. http://www.nrc.gov. March 13, 2001.
*USNRC. 2001i. Standards for protection against radiation-quantity of licensed material requiring
labeling. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 10CFR20. http://www.nrc.gov. March 13, 2001.
*USNRC. 2002. NRC News. NRC announces meeting on memorandum of understanding with EPA on
cleanup of radioactiviely contaminated sites. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/news/2002/02-124.pdf. March 27, 2002.
*USNRC. 2004a. Licensing requirements for land disposal of radioactive waste. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 10CFR61. http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-
idx?c=ecfr&sid=284debaea3834014f52af4f28a1a6fa9&rgn=div5&view=text&node=10:2.0.1.1.7&idno=
10. April 23, 2004.
AMERICIUM 253
9. REFERENCES
*USNRC. 2004b. Disposal of high-level radioactive wastes in a geological repository at Yucca

Mountain, Nevada. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 10CFR63.
idx?c=ecfr&sid=284debaea3834014f52af4f28a1a6fa9&rgn=div5&view=text&node=10:2.0.1.1.9&idno=
10. April 23, 2004.
USNRC. 2004c. Agreement state program. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

http://www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/state-tribal/agreement-states.html. April 27, 2004.
*USTUR. 1997. Acute accidental inhalation exposure to 241Am: Preliminary evaluation. In: Kathren,
RL, Erhart SM, eds. Annual report. October 1, 1995-September 30, 1996. Richland, WA: United States
Transuranium and Uranium Registries. USTUR007297.
*USTUR. 1999. United States Transuranium and Uranium Registries.

http://www.tricity.wsu.edu/ustur/database.html. October 12, 2000.
Van Den Heuvel RL. 1990. Bone marrow from Balb/c mice radio contaminated with 241Am in utero
shows a deficient in vitro haemopoiesis. Int J Radiat Biol 57(1):103-115.
*Van Den Heuvel R, Gerber GB, Leppens H, et al. 1995. Long-term effects on tumor incidence and
survival from 241Am exposure of the BALB/c mouse in utero and during adulthood. Int J Radiat Biol
68(6):679-686.
Van Den Heuvel RL, Schoeters GER, Vanderborght OLJ. 1984. Effect of 241-Am on bone fibroblasts.
Van Den Heuvel R, Schoeters G, Vanderborght O. 1987. Radiosensitivity to 241Am of bone marrow
stromal cells in offspring of contaminated mice. In: Age-related factors in radionuclide metabolism and
dosimetry. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 201-208.
*Van Den Heuvel R, Vander Plaetse F, Schoeters G. 1992. 241-Am distribution and retention in
pregnant mice, in their offspring and in non-pregnant mice: Comparison between continuous Am
administration and single injection. Radiat Prot Dosim 41(2/4):137-142.
Vasilik DG, Aikin IC, Coop KL, et al. 1984. In vivo assessment of lung burdens at the Los Alamos
National Laboratory. GRAI 18:26p.
*Vicceellio P, ed. 1998. Emergency toxicology. 2nd edition. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 991-996.
*Vieira I, Sonnier M, Cresteil T. 1996. Developmental expression of CYP2E1 in the human liver:
Hypermethylation control of gene expression during the neonatal period. Eur J Biochem 238:476-483.
*Virginia Department of Health. 2000. Environmental Radiation Ambient Monitoring System

(ERAMS). http://www.vdh.state.va.us. December 13, 2000.
von Zallinger C, Tempel K. 1998. Transplacental transfer of radionuclides. A review. J Vet Med Sci
A45:581-590.
*Vyas BN, Mistry KB. 1980. Studies on the mobility of plutonium-239 and americium-241 in three
major Indian soils. J Nucl Agric Biol 9:85-88.
AMERICIUM 254
9. REFERENCES
Walker MI, McKay WA. 1991. Radionuclide distributions in seawater around the Sellafield pipeline.
Estuarine Coastal Shelf Sci 32(4):385-394.
*Walker MI, McKay WA, Pattenden NJ, et al. 1986. Actinide enrichment in marine aerosols. Nature
323:141-143.
Walker RB, Gessel SP, Held EE. 1997. The ecosystem study on Rongelap Atoll. Health Phys
73(1):223-233.
*Ware AR, Odell KJ, Martin JP. 1998. Analysis of radioactive metal ions in environmental and liquid
effluent samples. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 228(1-2):5-13.
Warren S. 1975. Skeletal and tissue lesions resulting from exposure to radium and fission products. Ann
Clin Lab Sci 5(2):75-81.
Warwick PE, Croudace IW, Oh J-S. 2001. Radiochemical determination of 241Am and PU(α) in
environmental materials. Anal Chem 73:3410-3416.
Watson WS, Sumner DJ. 1996. The measurement of radioactivity in people living near the Dounreay
Nuclear Establishment, Caithness, Scotland. Int J Radiat Biol 70(2):117-130.
*Webb LM, Taylor DM, Williams DR. 1998. Computer modeling of the chemical speciation of
lanthanide and actinide elements in the human gastrointestinal tract: Mouth and stomach. Radiat Prot
Dosim 79(1/4):219-222.
Weiner RE, McInroy JF, Wegst AV. 1985. Determination of environmental levels of Pu, Am, U and Th
in human fetal tissue. Health Phys 49(1):141.
Weiss JF, Walburg HE, McDowell WJ. 1978. Cross placental transfer of americium and plutonium in
mice. Health Phys 35:895-896.
*Weiss JF, Walburg HE, McDowell WJ. 1980. Placental transfer of americium and plutonium in mice.
*West JR, Smith HW, Chasis H. 1948. Glomerular filtration rate, effective renal blood flow, and
maximal tubular excretory capacity in infancy. J Pediatr 32:10-18.
*Whicker FW, Hinton TG, Orlandini KA, et al. 1999. Uptake of natural and anthropogenic actinides in
vegetable crops grown on a contaminated lake bed. J Environ Radioact 45:1-12.
*Widdowson EM, Dickerson JWT. 1964. Chemical composition of the body. In: Comar CL, Bronner
F, eds. Mineral metabolism: An advanced treatise. Volume II: The Elements Part A. New York:
Academic Press.
Withers EH, Page DL, Hollifield J, et al. 1975. Carcinoma of the thyroid with description of a new
scanning technic. Am J Surg 130(4):395-398.
Wuu J-L, Yuan M-C, Su S-H, et al. 2002. The alpha and beta emitter measurement system in INER.
Appl Radiat Isot 56:261-264.
AMERICIUM 255
9. REFERENCES
*Xu GB, Yu CP. 1986. Effects of age on deposition of inhaled particles in the human lung. Aerosol Sci
Technol 5:349-357.
Yamamoto M, Komura K, Sakanoue M, et al. 1985. Pu isotopes, 241Am and 137Cs in soils from the
atomic bombed areas in Nagasaki and Hiroshima. J Radiat Res 26:211-223.
*Zach R. 1985. Contribution of inhalation by food animals to man's ingestion dose. Health Phys
49(5):737-745.
*Ziegler EE, Edwards BB, Jensen RL, et al. 1978. Absorption and retention of lead by infants. Pediatr
Res 12:29-34.
AMERICIUM 257
10. GLOSSARY
Some terms in this glossary are generic and may not be used in this profile.
Absorbed Dose, Chemical—The amount of a substance that is either absorbed into the body or placed in
contact with the skin. For oral or inhalation routes, this is normally the product of the intake quantity and
the uptake fraction divided by the body weight and, if appropriate, the time, expressed as mg/kg for a
single intake or mg/kg/day for multiple intakes. For dermal exposure, this is the amount of material
applied to the skin, and is normally divided by the body mass and expressed as mg/kg.
Absorbed Dose, Radiation—The mean energy imparted to the irradiated medium, per unit mass, by
ionizing radiation. Units: rad (rad), gray (Gy).
Absorbed Fraction—A term used in internal dosimetry. It is that fraction of the photon energy (emitted
within a specified volume of material) which is absorbed by the volume. The absorbed fraction depends
on the source distribution, the photon energy, and the size, shape and composition of the volume.
Absorption—The process by which a chemical penetrates the exchange boundaries of an organism after
contact, or the process by which radiation imparts some or all of its energy to any material through which
it passes.
Absorption Coefficient—Fractional absorption of the energy of an unscattered beam of x- or gamma-

radiation per unit thickness (linear absorption coefficient), per unit mass (mass absorption coefficient), or
per atom (atomic absorption coefficient) of absorber, due to transfer of energy to the absorber. The total
absorption coefficient is the sum of individual energy absorption processes (see Compton Effect,
Photoelectric Effect, and Pair Production).
Absorption Coefficient, Linear—A factor expressing the fraction of a beam of x- or gamma radiation
absorbed in a unit thickness of material. In the expression I=Ioe-µx, Io is the initial intensity, I the intensity
of the beam after passage through a thickness of the material x, and µ is the linear absorption coefficient.
Absorption Coefficient, Mass—The linear absorption coefficient per cm divided by the density of the
absorber in grams per cubic centimeter. It is frequently expressed as µ/ρ, where µ is the linear absorption
coefficient and ρ the absorber density.
Absorption Ratio, Differential—Ratio of concentration of a nuclide in a given organ or tissue to the

concentration that would be obtained if the same administered quantity of this nuclide were uniformly
distributed throughout the body.
Activation—The process of making a material radioactive by bombardment with neutrons or protons.
Activity—The number of radioactive nuclear transformations occurring in a material per unit time (see
Curie, Becquerel). The term for activity per unit mass is specific activity.
Activity Median Aerodynamic Diameter (AMAD)—The diameter of a unit-density sphere with the
same terminal settling velocity in air as that of the aerosol particle whose activity is the median for the
entire size distribution of the aerosol.
AMERICIUM 258
10. GLOSSARY
Acute Exposure, Chemical—Exposure to a chemical for a duration of 14 days or less, as specified in the
Toxicological Profiles.
Acute Exposure, Radiation—The absorption of a relatively large amount of radiation (or intake of a
radioactive material) over a short period of time.
Acute Radiation Syndrome—The symptoms which taken together characterize a person suffering from
the effects of intense radiation. The effects occur within hours or days.
Ad libitum—Available in excess and freely accessible.
Adsorption Coefficient (Koc)—The ratio of the amount of a chemical adsorbed per unit surface area or
per unit weight of organic carbon of a specific particle size in the soil or sediment to the concentration of
the chemical in solution at equilibrium.
Adsorption Ratio (Kd)—See Distribution Coefficient
Alpha Particle—A positively charged particle ejected spontaneously from the nuclei of some radioactive
elements. It is identical to a helium nucleus, i.e., 2 neutrons and two protons, with a mass number of 4
and an electrostatic charge of +2.
Alpha Track—The track of ionized atoms (pattern of ionization) left in a medium by an alpha particle
that has traveled through the medium.
Annihilation (Positron-Electron)—An interaction between a positive and a negative electron in which

they both disappear; their rest mass, being converted into electromagnetic radiation (called annihilation
radiation) with two 0.51 MeV gamma photons emitted at an angle of 180E to each other.
Annual Limit on Intake (ALI)—The derived limit for the amount of radioactive material taken into the
body of an adult worker by inhalation or ingestion in a year. It is the smaller value of intake of a given
radionuclide in a year by the reference man that would result in a committed effective dose equivalent of
5 rem or a committed dose equivalent of 50 rem to any organ or tissue.
Atom—The smallest particle of an element that cannot be divided or broken up by chemical means. It
consists of a central core called the nucleus, which contains protons and neutrons and an outer shell of
electrons.
Atomic Mass (u)—The mass of a neutral atom of a nuclide, usually expressed in terms of "atomic mass
units." The "atomic mass unit" is one-twelfth the mass of one neutral atom of carbon-12; equivalent to
1.6604x10-24 g.
Atomic Mass Number—See Mass Number.
Atomic Number—The number of protons in the nucleus of an atom. The "effective atomic number" is
calculated from the composition and atomic numbers of a compound or mixture. An element of this
atomic number would interact with photons in the same way as the compound or mixture. (Symbol: Z).
Atomic Weight—The weighted mean of the masses of the neutral isotopes of an element expressed in
atomic mass units.
AMERICIUM 259
10. GLOSSARY
Attenuation—A process by which a beam from a source of radiation is reduced in intensity by

absorption and scattering when passing through some material.
Attenuation Coefficient—The fractional reduction in the intensity of a beam of radiation as it passes

through an absorbing medium. It may be expressed as reduction per unit distance, per unit mass
thickness, or per atom, and is called the linear, mass, or atomic attenuation coefficient, respectively.
Auger Effect—The emission of an electron from the extranuclear portion of an excited atom when the
atom undergoes a transition to a less excited state.
Background Radiation—The amount of radiation to which a member of the general population is

exposed from natural sources, such as terrestrial radiation from naturally occurring radionuclides in the
soil, cosmic radiation originating from outer space, and naturally occurring radionuclides deposited in the
human body.
Becquerel (Bq)—International System of Units unit of activity and equals that quantity of radioactive
material in which one transformation (disintegration) occurs per second (see Units).
Terabecquerel (TBq)—One trillion becquerel.
Gigabecquerel (GBq)—One billion becquerel.
Megabecquerel (MBq)—One million becquerel.
Kilobecquerel (kBq))—One thousand becquerel.
Millibecquerel (mBq)—One-thousandth of a becquerel.
Microbecquerel (µBq)—One-millionth of a becquerel.
Beta Particle—An electron that is emitted from the nucleus of an atom during one type of radioactive
transformation. A beta particle has a mass and charge equal in magnitude to that of the electron. The
charge may be either +1 or -1. Beta particles with +1 charges are called positrons (symbolized β+), and
beta particles with -1 charges are called negatrons (symbolized β-).
Bioconcentration Factor (BCF)—The quotient of the concentration of a chemical in aquatic organisms

at a specific time or during a discrete time period of exposure divided by the concentration in the
surrounding water at the same time or during the same period.
Biologic Effectiveness of Radiation—See Relative Biological Effectiveness.
Biological Half-time—The time required for a biological system, such as that of a human, to eliminate by
natural process half of the amount of a substance (such as a chemical substance, either stable or
radioactive) that has entered it.
Biomagnification—The progressive increase in the concentration of a bioaccumulated chemical in

organisms as that chemical is passed from the bottom to the top of the food web.
Biomarkers—Broadly defined as indicators signaling events in biologic systems or samples. They have
been classified as markers of exposure, markers of effect, and markers of susceptibility.
Body Burden, Chemical—The total amount of a chemical found in an animal or human body.
Body Burden, Radioactivity—The amount of radioactive material found in an animal or human body.
Bone Seeker—Any compound or ion which migrates in the body and preferentially deposits into bone.
AMERICIUM 260
10. GLOSSARY
Branching—The occurrence of two or more modes by which a radionuclide can undergo radioactive
decay. For example, 214Bi can undergo alpha or beta minus decay, 64Cu can undergo beta minus, beta
plus, or electron capture decay. An individual atom of a nuclide exhibiting branching disintegrates by one
mode only. The fraction disintegrating by a particular mode is the "branching fraction" for that mode.
The "branching ratio" is the ratio of two specified branching fractions (also called multiple
disintegration).
Bremsstrahlung—X rays that are produced when a charged particle accelerates (speeds up, slows down,
or changes direction) in the strong field of a nucleus.
Buildup Factor—The ratio of the radiation intensity, including both primary and scattered radiation, to
the intensity of the primary (unscattered) radiation.
Cancer Effect Level (CEL)—The lowest dose of chemical or radiation in a study, or group of studies,
that produces significant increases in the incidence of cancer (or tumors) between the exposed population
and its appropriate control.
Capture, Electron—A mode of radioactive decay involving the capture of an orbital electron by its
nucleus. Capture from a particular electron shell, e.g., K or L shells, is designated as "K-electron capture"
or "L-electron capture."
Capture, K-Electron—Electron capture from the K shell by the nucleus of the atom. Also loosely used
to designate any orbital electron capture process.
Carcinogen—A chemical or radiation that is capable of inducing cancer.
Carcinoma—Malignant neoplasm composed of epithelial cells, regardless of their derivation.
Case-Control Study—A type of epidemiological study which examines the relationship between a
particular outcome (disease or condition) and a variety of potential causative agents (such as toxic
chemicals). In a case-controlled study, a group of people with a specified and well-defined outcome is
identified and compared to a similar group of people without outcome.
Case Report—Describes a single individual with a particular disease or exposure. These may suggest
some potential topics for scientific research but are not actual research studies.
Cataract—A clouding of the crystalline lens of the eye which obstructs the passage of light.
Ceiling Value—A concentration of a substance that should not be exceeded, even temporarily.
Charged Particle—A nuclear particle, atom, or molecule carrying a positive or negative charge.
Chronic Exposure—A long-term, continuous exposure to a chemical or radioactive material. For

example, exposure to a chemical for 365 days or more, as specified in the Toxicological Profiles.
Cohort Study—A type of epidemiological study of a specific group or groups of people who have had a
common insult (e.g., exposure to an agent suspected of causing disease or a common disease) and are
followed forward from exposure to outcome. At least one exposed group is compared to one unexposed
group.
AMERICIUM 261
10. GLOSSARY
Collective Dose—The sum of the individual doses received in a given period of time by a specified
population from exposure to a specified source of radiation. Collective dose is expressed in units such as
man-rem and person-sievert.
Committed Dose Equivalent (HT,50)—The dose equivalent to organs or tissues of reference (T) that will
be received from an intake of radioactive material by an individual during the 50 years following the
intake.
Committed Effective Dose Equivalent (HE,50)—The sum of the products of the weighting factors
applicable to each of the body organs or tissues that are irradiated and the committed dose equivalent to
those organs or tissues.
Compton Effect—An attenuation process observed for x- or gamma radiation in which an incident
photon interacts with an orbital electron of an atom to produce a recoil electron and a scattered photon
whose energy is less than the incident photon.
Containment—The confinement of a chemical or radioactive substance in such a way that it is prevented

from being dispersed from its container or into the environment, or is released only at a specified rate.
Contamination—Deposition of a stable or radioactive substance in any place where it is not desired.
Cosmic Rays—High-energy particulate and electromagnetic radiations that originate outside the earth's
atmosphere and interact with the atmosphere to produce a shower of secondary cosmic rays.
Count (Radiation Measurements)—The external indication of a radiation-measuring device designed to

enumerate ionizing events. It refers to a single detected event. The term “count rate” refers to the total
number registered in a given period of time. The term is sometimes erroneously used to designate a
disintegration, ionizing event, or voltage pulse.
Counter, Gas-flow Proportional (GPC)—An instrument for detecting beta particle radiation. Beta
particles are detected by ionization of the counter gas which results in an electrical impulse at an anode
wire.
Counter, Geiger-Mueller (GM counter)—Highly sensitive, gas-filled radiation-measuring device that

detects (counts) individual photons or particulate radiation.
Counter, Scintillation—The combination of a crystal or phosphor, photomultiplier tube, and associated

circuits for counting light emissions produced in the phosphors by ionizing radiation. Scintillation
counters generally are more sensitive than GM counters for gamma radiation.
Counting, Cerenkov—Relatively energetic β-particles pass through a transparent medium of high

refractive index and a highly-directional, bluish-white light ("Cerenkov" light) is emitted. This light is
detected using liquid scintillation counting equipment.
Cross-sectional Study—A type of epidemiological study of a group or groups which examines the
relationship between exposure and outcome to a chemical or to chemicals at one point in time.
AMERICIUM 262
10. GLOSSARY
Curie (Ci)—A unit of radioactivity. One curie equals that quantity of radioactive material in which there
are 3.7x1010 nuclear transformations per second. The activity of 1 gram of radium is approximately 1 Ci.
Attocurie (aCi)—One-thousandth of a femtocurie (3.7x10-8 disintegrations per second).

Femtocurie (fCi)—One-billionth of a microcurie (3.7x10-5 disintegrations per second).
Megacurie (MCi)—One million curies (3.7x1016 disintegrations per second).
Microcurie (µCi)—One-millionth of a curie (3.7x104 disintegrations per second).
Millicurie (mCi)—One-thousandth of a curie (3.7x107 disintegrations per second).
Nanocurie (nCi)—One-billionth of a curie (3.7x101 disintegrations per second).
Picocurie (pCi)—One-millionth of a microcurie (3.7x10-2 disintegrations per second).
Daughter Products—See Progeny and Decay Product
Decay Chain or Decay Series—A sequence of radioactive decays (transformations) beginning with one
nucleus. The initial nucleus, the parent, decays into a daughter or progeny nucleus that differs from the
first by whatever particles were emitted during the decay. If further decays take place, the subsequent
nuclei are also usually called daughters or progeny. Sometimes, to distinguish the sequence, the daughter
of the first daughter is called the granddaughter, etc.
Decay Constant (λ)—The fraction of the number of atoms of a radioactive nuclide which decay in unit
time (see Disintegration Constant).
Decay Product, Daughter Product, Progeny—A new nuclide formed as a result of radioactive decay.
A nuclide resulting from the radioactive transformation of a radionuclide, formed either directly or as the
result of successive transformations in a radioactive series. A decay product (daughter product or
progeny) may be either radioactive or stable.
Decay, Radioactive—Transformation of the nucleus of an unstable nuclide by spontaneous emission of

radiation, such as charged particles and/or photons (see Disintegration).
Delta Ray—An electron removed from an atom of a medium that is irradiated, or through which
radiation passes, during the process of ionization (also called secondary electron). Delta rays cause a
track of ionizations along their path.
Derived Air Concentration (DAC)—The concentration of radioactive material in air that, if breathed by
the reference man for a working year of 2000 hours under conditions of light work (at a rate of 1.2 liters
of air per hour), would result in an intake of one ALI (see Annual Limit on Intake).
Deterministic Effect—A health effect, the severity of which varies with the dose and for which a
threshold is believed to exist (also called a non-stochastic effect).
Developmental Toxicity—The occurrence of adverse effects on the developing organism that may result
from exposure to a chemical or radiation prior to conception (either parent), during prenatal development,
or postnatally to the time of sexual maturation. Adverse developmental effects may be detected at any
point in the life span of the organism.
Disintegration Constant—Synonymous with decay constant. The fraction of the number of atoms of a
radioactive material that decays per unit time (see Decay Constant.)
AMERICIUM 263
10. GLOSSARY
Disintegration, Nuclear—A spontaneous nuclear transformation (radioactivity) characterized by the

emission of energy and mass from the nucleus. When large numbers of nuclei are involved, the process is
characterized by a definite half-life (see Transformation, Nuclear).
Distribution Coefficient (Kd)—Describes the distribution of a chemical between the solid and aqueous
phase at thermodynamic equilibrium, is given as follows:
[C]s
Kd =
[C] w , Units = (L solution)/(kg solid),
where [C]s is the concentration of the chemical associated with the solid phase in units of (mg)/(kg solid),
and [C]w is the concentration of the chemical in the aqueous phase in units of (mg)/(L solution). As the
magnitude of Kd decreases, the potential mobility of the chemical to groundwater systems increases and
vice versa.
Dose—A general term denoting the quantity of a substance, radiation, or energy absorbed. For special
purposes it must be appropriately qualified. If unqualified, it refers to radiation absorbed dose.
Absorbed Dose—The energy imparted to matter by ionizing radiation per unit mass of irradiated
material at the place of interest. The unit of absorbed dose is the rad. One rad equals 100 ergs
per gram. In SI units, the absorbed dose is the gray which is 1 J/kg (see Rad).
Cumulative Dose (Radiation)—The total dose resulting from repeated or continuous exposures
to radiation.
Dose Assessment—An estimate of the radiation dose to an individual or a population group usually by
means of predictive modeling techniques, sometimes supplemented by the results of measurement.
Dose Equivalent (DE)—A quantity used in radiation safety practice to account for the relative biological
effectiveness of the several types of radiation. It expresses all radiations on a common scale for
calculating the effective absorbed dose. The NRC defines it as the product of the absorbed dose, the
quality factor, and all other modifying factors at the location of interest. ICRP has changed its definition
to be the product of the absorbed dose and the radiation weighting factor. (The unit of dose equivalent is
the rem. In SI units, the dose equivalent is the sievert, which equals 100 rem.)
Dose, Fractionation—A method of administering therapeutic radiation in which relatively small doses
are given daily or at longer intervals.
Dose, Protraction—A method of administering therapeutic radiation by delivering it continuously over a

relatively long period at a low dose rate.
Dose, Radiation—The amount of energy imparted to matter by ionizing radiation per unit mass of the
matter, usually expressed as the unit rad, or in SI units, the gray. 100 rad'1 gray (Gy) (see Absorbed
Dose).
Committed Dose Equivalent (HT,50)—The dose equivalent to organs or tissues of reference (T)
that will be received from an intake of radioactive material by an individual during the 50 years
following the intake.
AMERICIUM 264
10. GLOSSARY
Committed Effective Dose Equivalent (HE,50)—The sum of the products of the weighting
factors applicable to each of the body organs or tissues that are irradiated and the committed dose
equivalent to those organs or tissues.
Effective Dose —A dose value that attempts to normalize the detriment to the body (for cancer
mortality and morbidity, hereditary effects, and years of life lost) from a non-uniform exposure to
that of a uniform whole body exposure. Effective dose is calculated as the sum of products of the
equivalent dose and the tissue weighting factor (wT) for each tissue exposed. (E = ∑DT,R wR wT)).
Effective Dose Equivalent (HE)—This dose type is limited to internal exposures and is the sum
of the products of the dose equivalent to the organ or tissue (HT) and the weighting factors (wT)
applicable to each of the body organs or tissues that are irradiated. (HE = ∑wT HT).
Equivalent Dose—A dose quantity that places the biological effect of all radiation types on a
common scale for calculating tissue damage. Alpha particles, for example, are considered to
cause 20 times more damage than gamma rays. Equivalent dose is calculated as the sum of
products of the average absorbed dose (in gray) in an organ or tissue (DT,R) from each type of
radiation and the radiation weighting factor (wR) for that radiation (∑DT,R wR).
External Dose—That portion of the dose equivalent received from radiation sources outside the
body.
Internal Dose—That portion of the dose equivalent received from radioactive material taken into
the body.
Limit—A permissible upper bound on the radiation dose.
Maximum Permissible Dose (MPD)—The greatest dose equivalent that a person or specified
part thereof shall be allowed to receive in a given period of time.
Median Lethal Dose (MLD)—Dose of radiation required to kill, within a specified period
(usually 30 days), 50% of the individuals in a large group of animals or organisms. Also called
the LD50, or LD50/30 if for 30 days.
Threshold Dose—The minimum absorbed dose that will produce a detectable degree of any
given effect.
Tissue Dose—Absorbed dose received by tissue in the region of interest, expressed in rad (see
Dose, Gray, and Rad).
Dose Rate—The amount of radiation dose delivered per unit time. Generically, the rate at which
radiation dose is delivered to any material or tissue.
Dose-Response Relationship—The quantitative relationship between the amount of exposure to a

toxicant and the incidence of the adverse effects.
Dosimetry—Quantification of radiation doses to cells, tissues, organs, individuals or populations

resulting from radiation exposures.
Early Effects (of radiation exposure)—Effects that appear within 60 days of an acute exposure.
AMERICIUM 265
10. GLOSSARY
Electron—A stable elementary particle having an electric charge equal to ±1.60210x10-19 C (Coulombs)
and a rest mass equal to 9.1091x10-31 kg. A positron is a positively charged "electron" (see Positron).
Electron Volt—A unit of energy equivalent to the energy gained by an electron in passing through a
potential difference of one volt. Larger multiple units of the electron volt are frequently used: keV for
thousand or kilo electron volts; MeV for million or mega electron volts (eV). 1 eV=1.6x10-12 erg.
Embryotoxicity and Fetotoxicity—Any toxic effect on the conceptus as a result of prenatal exposure to
a chemical; the distinguishing feature between the two terms is the stage of development during which the
insult occurred. The terms, as used here, include malformations and variations, altered growth, and in
utero death.
Energy—Capacity for doing work. Gravitationally, "potential energy" is the energy inherent in a mass
because of its spatial relation to other masses. Chemically or radiologically, “potential energy” is the
energy released when a chemical reaction or radiological transformation goes to completion. "Kinetic
energy" is the energy possessed by a mass because of its motion (SI unit: joules):
Binding Energy (Electron)—The amount of energy that must be expended to remove an

electron from an atom.
Binding Energy (Nuclear)—The energy represented by the difference in mass between the sum
of the component parts and the actual mass of the nucleus. It represents the amount of energy
that must be expended to break a nucleus into its component neutrons and protons.
Excitation Energy—The energy required to change a system from its ground state to an excited
state. Each different excited state has a different excitation energy.
Ionizing Energy—The energy required to knock an electron out of an atom. The average energy
lost by electrons or beta particles in producing an ion pair in air or in soft tissue is about 34 eV.
Radiant Energy—The energy of electromagnetic radiation, such as radio waves, visible light, x
and gamma rays.
Enrichment, Isotopic—An isotopic separation process by which the relative abundances of the isotopes
of a given element are altered, thus producing a form of the element that has been enriched in one or more
isotopes and depleted in others. In uranium enrichment, the percentage of uranium-235 in natural
uranium can be increased from 0.7% to >90% in a gaseous diffusion process based on the different
thermal velocities of the constituents of natural uranium (234U, 235U, 238U) in the molecular form UF6.
EPA Health Advisory—An estimate of acceptable drinking water levels for a chemical substance based
on health effects information. A health advisory is not a legally enforceable federal standard, but serves
as technical guidance to assist federal, state, and local officials.
Epidemiology—Refers to the investigation of factors that determine the frequency and distribution of
disease or other health-related conditions within a defined human population during a specified period.
Equilibrium, Radioactive—In a radioactive series, the state which prevails when the ratios between the
activities of two or more successive members of the series remains constant.
Secular Equilibrium—If a parent element has a very much longer half-life than the daughters
(so there is not appreciable change in its amount in the time interval required for later products to
AMERICIUM 266
10. GLOSSARY
attain equilibrium) then, after equilibrium is reached, equal numbers of atoms of all members of
the series disintegrate in unit time. This condition is never exactly attained, but is essentially
established in such a case as 226Ra and its transformation series to stable 206Pb. The half-life of
226
Ra is about 1,600 years; of 222Rn, approximately 3.82 days, and of each of the subsequent
members, a few minutes. After about a month, essentially the equilibrium amount of radon is
present; then (and for a long time) all members of the series disintegrate the same number of
atoms per unit time. At this time, the activity of the daughter is equal to the activity of the parent.
Transient Equilibrium—If the half-life of the parent is short enough so the quantity present
decreases appreciably during the period under consideration, but is still longer than that of
successive members of the series, a stage of equilibrium will be reached after which all members
of the series decrease in activity exponentially with the period of the parent. At this time, the
ratio of the parent activity to the daughter activity is constant.
Equilibrium, Electron—The condition in a radiation field where the energy of the electrons entering a
volume equals the energy of the electrons leaving that volume.
Excitation—The addition of energy to a system, thereby transferring it from its ground state to an excited
state. Excitation of a nucleus, an atom, or a molecule can result from absorption of photons or from
inelastic collisions with other particles. The excited state of an atom is an unstable or metastable state and
will return to ground state by radiation of the excess energy.
Exposure (Chemical)—Contact of an organism with a chemical or physical agent. Exposure is

quantified as the amount of the agent available at the exchange boundaries of the organism (e.g., skin,
lungs, gut) and available for absorption.
Exposure (Radiation)—Subjection to ionizing radiation or to a radioactive material. For example,

exposure in air is a measure of the ionization produced in air by x or gamma radiation; the sum of the
electric charges on all ions of one sign produced in air when all electrons liberated by photons in a
volume of air are completely stopped in air (dQ), divided by the mass of the air in the volume (dm). The
unit of exposure in air is the roentgen, or coulomb per kilogram (SI units). One roentgen is equal to
2.58x10-4 coulomb per kilogram (C/kg).
Fission, Nuclear—A nuclear transformation characterized by the splitting of a nucleus into at least two
other nuclei with emission of several neutrons, accompanied by the release of a relatively large amount of
energy.
Gamma Ray, Penetrating—Short wavelength electromagnetic radiation of nuclear origin.
Genetic Effect of Radiation—Inheritable change, chiefly mutations, produced by the absorption of

ionizing radiation by germ cells. Genetic effects have not been observed in any human population
exposed at any dose level.
Genotoxicity—A specific adverse effect on the genome of living cells that, upon the duplication of
affected cells, can be expressed as a mutagenic, clastogenic or carcinogenic event because of specific
alteration of the molecular structure of the genome.
Gray (Gy)—SI unit of absorbed dose, 1 J/kg. One gray equals 100 rad (see Units).
Half-life, Effective—See Half-time, Effective.

AMERICIUM 267
10. GLOSSARY
Half-life, Radioactive—Time required for a radioactive substance to lose 50% of its activity by decay.
Each radio-nuclide has a unique physical half-life. Known also as physical half-time and symbolized as
Tr or Trad.
Half-time, Biological—Time required for an organ, tissue, or the whole body to eliminate one-half of any
absorbed substance by regular processes of elimination. This is the same for both stable and radioactive
isotopes of a particular element, and is sometimes referred to as half-time, symbolized as tbiol or Tb.
Half-time, Effective—Time required for a radioactive element in an organ, tissue, or the whole body to
be diminished 50% as a result of the combined action of radioactive decay and biological elimination,
symbolized as Te or Teff.
Biological half-time × Radioactive half-life

Effective half-time =
Biological half-time + Radioactive half-life
Immediately Dangerous to Life or Health (IDLH)—The maximum environmental concentration of a

contaminant from which one could escape within 30 minutes without any escape-impairing symptoms or
irreversible health effects.
Immunologic Toxicity—The occurrence of adverse effects on the immune system that may result from
exposure to environmental agents such as chemicals.
Immunological Effects—Functional changes in the immune response.
In Vitro—Isolated from the living organism and artificially maintained, as in a test tube. Literally, “in
glass.”
In Vivo—Occurring within the living organism. Literally, “in life.”
Intensity—Amount of energy per unit time passing through a unit area perpendicular to the line of
propagation at the point in question.
Intermediate Exposure—Exposure to a chemical for a duration of 15–364 days, as specified in the

Toxicological Profiles.
Internal Conversion—Process in which a gamma ray knocks an electron out of the same atom from
which the gamma ray was emitted. The ratio of the number of internal conversion electrons to the
number of gamma quanta emitted in the de-excitation of the nucleus is called the "conversion ratio."
Ion—Atomic particle, atom or chemical radical bearing a net electrical charge, either negative or positive.
Ion Pair—Two particles of opposite charge, usually referring to the electron and positive atomic or
molecular residue resulting after the interaction of ionizing radiation with the orbital electrons of atoms.
Ionization—The process by which a neutral atom or molecule acquires a positive or negative charge.
Primary Ionization—(1) In collision theory: the ionization produced by the primary particles as
contrasted to the "total ionization" which includes the "secondary ionization" produced by delta
rays. (2) In counter tubes: the total ionization produced by incident radiation without gas
amplification.
AMERICIUM 268
10. GLOSSARY
Specific Ionization—Number of ion pairs per unit length of path of ionizing radiation in a
medium; e.g., per centimeter of air or per micrometer of tissue.
Total Ionization—The total electric charge of one sign on the ions produced by radiation in the
process of losing its kinetic energy. For a given gas, the total ionization is closely proportional to
the initial ionization and is nearly independent of the nature of the ionizing radiation. It is
frequently used as a measure of absorption of radiation energy.
Ionization Density—Number of ion pairs per unit volume.
Ionization Path (Track)—The trail of ion pairs produced by an ionizing particle in its passage through
matter.
Ionizing Radiation—Any radiation capable of knocking electrons out of atoms and producing ions.
Examples: alpha, beta, gamma and x rays, and neutrons.
Isobars—Nuclides having the same mass number but different atomic numbers.
Isomers—Nuclides having the same number of neutrons and protons but capable of existing, for a
measurable time, in different quantum states with different energies and radioactive properties.
Commonly the isomer of higher energy decays to one with lower energy by the process of isomeric
transition.
Isotopes—Nuclides having the same number of protons in their nuclei, and hence the same atomic
number, but differing in the number of neutrons, and therefore in the mass number. Identical chemical
properties exist in isotopes of a particular element. The term should not be used as a synonym for nuclide
because isotopes refer specifically to different nuclei of the same element.
Stable Isotope—A nonradioactive isotope of an element.
Joule—The S.I. unit for work and energy. It is equal to the work done by raising a mass of one newton
through a distance of one meter (J = Nm), which corresponds to about 0.7 ft-pound.
Kerma (k)—A measure of the kinetic energy transferred from gamma rays or neutrons to a unit mass of
absorbing medium in the initial collision between the radiation and the absorber atoms. The SI unit is
J/kg. The special name of this unit is the rad (traditional system of units) or Gray (SI).
Labeled Compound—A compound containing one or more radioactive atoms intentionally added to its
structure. By observations of radioactivity or isotopic composition, this compound or its fragments may
be followed through physical, chemical, or biological processes.
Late Effects (of radiation exposure)—Effects which appear 60 days or more following an acute
exposure.
LD50/30—The dose of a chemical or radiation expected to cause 50% mortality in those exposed within
30 days. For radiation, this is about 350 rad (3.5 gray) received by humans over a short period of time.
Lethal Concentration(Lo) (LCLo)—The lowest concentration of a chemical in air that has been reported
to have caused death in humans or animals.
AMERICIUM 269
10. GLOSSARY
Lethal Concentration(50) (LC50)—A calculated concentration of a chemical in air to which exposure for
a specific length of time is expected to cause death in 50% of a defined experimental animal population
within a specified time, usually 30 days.
Lethal Dose(Lo) (LDLo)—The lowest dose of a chemical introduced by a route other than inhalation that is
expected to have caused death in humans or animals within a specified time, usually 30 days.
Lethal Dose(50) (LD50)—The dose of a chemical which has been calculated to cause death in 50% of a
defined experimental animal population.
Lethal Time(50) (LT50)—A calculated period of time within which a specific concentration of a chemical
is expected to cause death in 50% of a defined experimental animal population.
Linear Energy Transfer (LET)—A measure of the energy that a charged particle transfers to a material
per unit path length.
Average LET—The energy of a charged particle divided by the length of the path over which it
deposits all its energy in a material. This is averaged over a number of particles.
High-LET—Energy transfer characteristic of heavy charged particles such as protons and alpha
particles where the distance between ionizing events is small on the scale of a cellular nucleus.
Low-LET—Energy transfer characteristic of light charged particles such as electrons produced

by x and gamma rays where the distance between ionizing events is large on the scale of a
cellular nucleus.
Lowest-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level (LOAEL)—The lowest dose of chemical in a study, or group

of studies, that produces statistically or biologically significant increases in frequency or severity of
adverse effects between the exposed population and its appropriate control.
Lung Clearance Class (fast, F; medium, M; slow, S)—A classification scheme for inhaled material
according to its rate of clearance from the pulmonary region of the lungs to the blood and the
gastrointestinal tract.
Lymphoreticular Effects—Represent morphological effects involving lymphatic tissues such as the

lymph nodes, spleen, and thymus.
Malformations—Permanent structural changes that may adversely affect survival, development, or

function.
Mass Numbers (A)—The number of nucleons (protons and neutrons) in the nucleus of an atom.
Minimal Risk Level—An estimate of daily human exposure to a substance that is likely to be without an
appreciable risk of adverse noncancerous effects over a specified duration of exposure.
Morbidity—State of being diseased; morbidity rate is the incidence or prevalence of disease in a specific
population.
Mutagen—A substance that causes changes (mutations) in the genetic material in a cell. Mutations can
lead to birth defects, miscarriages, or cancer.
AMERICIUM 270
10. GLOSSARY
Necropsy—The gross examination of the organs and tissues of a dead body to determine the cause of
death or pathological conditions.
Neurotoxicity—The occurrence of adverse effects on the nervous system following exposure to a

substance.
Neutrino (ν)—A neutral particle of infinitesimally small rest mass emitted during beta plus or beta minus
decay. This particle accounts for conservation of energy in beta plus and beta minus decays. It plays no
role in damage from radiation.
No-Observed-Adverse-Effect Level (NOAEL)—The dose of a substance at which there were no

statistically or biologically significant increases in frequency or severity of adverse effects seen between
the exposed population and its appropriate control. Effects may be produced at this dose, but they are not
considered to be adverse.
Nuclear Reactor—A power plant that heats the medium (typically water) by using the energy released
from the nuclear fission of uranium or plutonium isotopes instead of burning coal, oil, or natural gas. All
of these sources of energy simply heat water and use the steam which is produced to turn turbines that
make electricity or propel a ship.
Nucleon—Common name for a constituent particle of the nucleus. Applied to a proton or neutron.
Nuclide—A species of atom characterized by the constitution of its nucleus. The nuclear constitution is
specified by the number of protons (Z), number of neutrons (N), and energy content; or, alternatively, by
the atomic number (Z), mass number A(N+Z), and atomic mass. To be regarded as a distinct nuclide, the
atom must be capable of existing for a measurable time. Thus, nuclear isomers are separate nuclides,
whereas promptly decaying excited nuclear states and unstable intermediates in nuclear reactions are not
so considered.
Octanol-Water Partition Coefficient (Kow)—The equilibrium ratio of the concentrations of a chemical

in n-octanol and water, in dilute solution.
Odds Ratio (OR)—A means of measuring the association between an exposure (such as toxic substances
and a disease or condition) which represents the best estimate of relative risk (risk as a ratio of the
incidence among subjects exposed to a particular risk factor divided by the incidence among subjects who
were not exposed to the risk factor). An odds ratio of greater than 1 is considered to indicate greater risk
of disease in the exposed group compared to the unexposed.
Pair Production—An absorption process for x- and gamma radiation in which the incident photon is
absorbed in the vicinity of the nucleus of the absorbing atom, with subsequent production of an electron
and positron pair (see annihilation). This reaction can only occur for incident photon energies exceeding
1.02 MeV.
Parent—Any radionuclide nuclide which, upon disintegration, yields a new nuclide (termed the progeny
or daughter), either directly or as a later member of a radioactive series.
Permissible Exposure Limit (PEL)—A maximum allowable atmospheric level of a substance in

workplace air averaged over an 8-hour shift.
Pharmacokinetic Model—A set of equations that can be used to describe the time course of a parent
chemical or metabolite in an animal system. There are two types of pharmacokinetic models: data-based
AMERICIUM 271
10. GLOSSARY
and physiologically-based. A data-based model divides the animal system into a series of compartments
which, in general, do not represent real, identifiable anatomic regions of the body whereas the
physiologically-based model compartments represent real anatomic regions of the body.
Pharmacokinetics—The dynamic behavior of a material in the body, used to predict the fate
(disposition) of an exogenous substance in an organism. Utilizing computational techniques, it provides
the means of studying the absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion of chemicals by the body.
Physiologically Based Pharmacodynamic (PBPD) Model—A type of physiologically-based dose-

response model which quantitatively describes the relationship between target tissue dose and toxic end
points. These models advance the importance of physiologically based models in that they clearly
describe the biological effect (response) produced by the system following exposure to an exogenous
substance.
Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic (PBPK) Model—A model comprising a series of

compartments representing organs or tissue groups with realistic weights and blood flows. These models
require a variety of physiological information: tissue volumes, blood flow rates to tissues, cardiac output,
alveolar ventilation rates and, possibly membrane permeabilities. The models also utilize biochemical
information such as air/blood partition coefficients, and metabolic parameters. PBPK models are also
called biologically based tissue dosimetry models.
Photoelectric Effect—An attenuation process observed for x and gamma radiation in which an incident
photon interacts with a tightly bound inner orbital electron of an atom delivering all of its energy to knock
the electron out of the atom. The incident photon disappears in the process.
Photon—A quantum of electromagnetic energy (E) whose value is the product of its frequency (ν) in
hertz and Planck's constant (h). The equation is: E = hν.
Population dose—See Collective dose.
Positron—A positively charged electron.
Potential, Ionization—The energy expressed as electron volts (eV) necessary to separate one electron
from an atom, resulting in the formation of an ion pair.
Power, Stopping—A measure of the ability of a material to absorb energy from an ionizing particle
passing through it; the greater the stopping power, the greater the energy absorbing ability (see Linear
Energy Transfer).
AMERICIUM 272
10. GLOSSARY
Prefix—A modifier that allows units of measure to be expressed as submultiples or multiples of the
primary unit (e.g., 10-3 curie is 1 mCi and 103 becquerels is 1 kBq).
Factor Prefix Symbol Factor Prefix Symbol

10-18 atto a 103 kilo k
10-15 femto f 106 mega M
10-12 pico p 109 giga G
10-9 nano n 1012 tera T
10-6 micro µ 1015 peta P
10-3 milli m 1018 exa E
10-2 centi c
Progeny—The decay product or daughter products resulting after a radioactive decay or a series of
radioactive decays. The progeny can also be radioactive, and the chain continues until a stable nuclide is
formed.
Proton—Elementary nuclear particle with a positive electric charge equal numerically to the charge of
the electron and a rest mass of 1.007 mass units.
Quality—A term describing the distribution of the energy deposited by a particle along its track;
radiations that produce different densities of ionization per unit intensity are said to have different
"qualities."
Quality Factor (Q)—The linear-energy-transfer-dependent factor by which absorbed doses are

multiplied to obtain (for radiation protection purposes) a quantity that expresses - on a common scale for
all ionizing radiation - the approximate biological effectiveness of the absorbed dose.
Type of radiation Quality factor

X, gamma, or beta 1
Alpha particles 20
Neutrons of unknown energy 10
High energy protons 10
Rad—The traditional unit of absorbed dose equal to 100 ergs per gram, or 0.01 joule per kilogram (0.01
Gy) in any medium (see Absorbed Dose).
Radiation—The emission and propagation of energy through space or through a material medium in the
form of waves (e.g., the emission and propagation of electromagnetic waves, or of sound and elastic
waves). The term radiation or radiant energy, when unqualified, usually refers to electromagnetic
radiation. Such radiation commonly is classified according to frequency, as microwaves, infrared, visible
(light), ultraviolet, and x and gamma rays (see Photon.) and, by extension, corpuscular emission, such as
alpha and beta radiation, neutrons, or rays of mixed or unknown type, as cosmic radiation.
Radiation, Annihilation—Photons produced when an electron and a positron unite and cease to
exist. The annihilation of a positron-electron pair results in the production of two photons, each
of 0.51 MeV energy.
Radiation, Background—See Background Radiation.

AMERICIUM 273
10. GLOSSARY
Radiation, Characteristic (Discrete)—Radiation originating from an excited atom after removal

of an electron from an atom. The wavelength of the emitted radiation is specific, depending only
on the element and particular energy levels involved.
Radiation, External—Radiation from a source outside the body.
Radiation, Internal—Radiation from a source within the body (as a result of deposition of
radionuclides in body tissues).
Radiation, Ionizing—Any electromagnetic or particulate radiation capable of producing ions,

directly or indirectly, in its passage through matter (see Radiation).
Radiation, Monoenergetic—Radiation of a given type in which all particles or photons originate

with and have the same energy.
Radiation, Scattered—Radiation which during its passage through a substance, has been
deviated in direction. It may also have been modified by a decrease in energy.
Radiation, Secondary—A particle or ray that is produced when the primary radiation interacts
with a material, and which has sufficient energy to produce its own ionization, such as
bremsstrahlung or electrons knocked from atomic orbitals with enough energy to then produce
ionization (see Delta Rays).
Radiation Weighting Factor (also called Quality Factor)—In radiation protection, a factor (1 for x-
rays, gamma rays, beta particles; 20 for alpha particles) weighting the absorbed dose of radiation of a
specific type and energy for its effect on tissue.
Radioactive Material—Material containing radioactive atoms.
Radioactivity—Spontaneous nuclear transformations that result in the formation of new elements. These
transformations are accomplished by emission of alpha or beta particles from the nucleus or by the
capture of an orbital electron. Each of these reactions may or may not be accompanied by a gamma
photon.
Radioactivity, Artificial—Man-made radioactivity produced by particle bombardment or

nuclear fission, as opposed to naturally occurring radioactivity.
Radioactivity, Induced—Radioactivity produced in a substance after bombardment with

neutrons or other particles. The resulting activity is "natural radioactivity" if formed by nuclear
reactions occurring in nature and "artificial radioactivity" if the reactions are caused by man.
Radioactivity, Natural—The property of radioactivity exhibited by more than 50 naturally

occurring radionuclides.
Radioisotope—An unstable or radioactive isotope of an element that decays or disintegrates

spontaneously, emitting radiation.
Radionuclide—Any radioactive isotope of any element. Approximately 5,000 natural and artificial
radioisotopes have been identified.
AMERICIUM 274
10. GLOSSARY
Radiosensitivity—Relative susceptibility of cells, tissues, organs, organisms, or any living substance to

the injurious action of radiation. Radiosensitivity and its antonym, radioresistance, are used
comparatively, rather than absolutely.
Reference Dose (RfD)—An estimate of the daily exposure of the human population to a potential hazard
that is likely to be without risk of deleterious effects during a lifetime. The RfD is operationally derived
from the NOAEL (from animal and human studies) by a consistent application of uncertainty factors that
reflect various types of data used to estimate RfDs and an additional modifying factor, which is based on
a professional judgment of the entire database on the chemical. The RfDs are not applicable to non-
threshold effects such as cancer.
Relative Biological Effectiveness (RBE)—The RBE is a factor used to compare the biological
effectiveness of absorbed radiation doses (i.e., rad) due to different types of ionizing radiation. More
specifically, it is the experimentally determined ratio of an absorbed dose of a radiation in question to the
absorbed dose of a reference radiation (typically 60Co gamma rays or 200 kVp x rays) required to produce
an identical biological effect in a particular experimental organism or tissue (see Quality Factor).
Rem—The traditional unit of dose equivalent that is used in the regulatory, administrative, and
engineering design aspects of radiation safety practice. The dose equivalent in rem is numerically equal
to the absorbed dose in rad multiplied by the quality factor (1 rem is equal to 0.01 sievert).
Reportable Quantity (RQ)—The quantity of a hazardous substance that is considered reportable under
CERCLA. Reportable quantities are (1) 1 pound or greater or (2) for selected substances, an amount
established by regulation either under CERCLA or under Sect. 311 of the Clean Water Act. Quantities
are measured over a 24-hour period.
Reproductive Toxicity—The occurrence of adverse effects on the reproductive system that may result
from exposure to a chemical. The toxicity may be directed to the reproductive organs and/or the related
endocrine system. The manifestation of such toxicity may be noted as alterations in sexual behavior,
fertility, pregnancy outcomes, or modifications in other functions that are dependent on the integrity of
this system.
Roentgen (R)—A unit of exposure (in air) to ionizing radiation. It is the amount of x or gamma rays
required to produce ions carrying 1 electrostatic unit of electrical charge in 1 cubic centimeter of dry air
under standard conditions. Named after William Roentgen, a German scientist who discovered x rays in
1895.
Retrospective Study—A type of cohort study based on a group of persons known to have been exposed
at some time in the past. Data are collected from routinely recorded events, up to the time the study is
undertaken. Retrospective studies are limited to causal factors that can be ascertained from existing
records and/or examining survivors of the cohort.
Self-Absorption—Absorption of radiation (emitted by radioactive atoms) by the material in which the

atoms are located; in particular, the absorption of radiation within a sample being assayed.
Short-Term Exposure Limit (STEL)—The maximum concentration to which workers can be exposed
for up to 15 minutes continually. No more than four excursions are allowed per day, and there must be at
least 60 minutes between exposure periods. The daily TLV-TWA may not be exceeded.
AMERICIUM 275
10. GLOSSARY
SI Units—The International System of Units as defined by the General Conference of Weights and
Measures in 1960. These units are generally based on the meter/kilogram/second units, with special
quantities for radiation including the becquerel, gray, and sievert.
Sickness, Acute Radiation (Syndrome)—The complex symptoms and signs characterizing the condition
resulting from excessive exposure of the whole body (or large part) to ionizing radiation. The earliest of
these symptoms are nausea, fatigue, vomiting, and diarrhea, and may be followed by loss of hair
(epilation), hemorrhage, inflammation of the mouth and throat, and general loss of energy. In severe
cases, where the radiation dose is relatively high (over several hundred rad or several gray), death may
occur within two to four weeks. Those who survive six weeks after exposure of a single high dose of
radiation may generally be expected to recover.
Sievert (Sv)—The SI unit of any of the quantities expressed as dose equivalent. The dose equivalent in
sieverts is equal to the absorbed dose, in gray, multiplied by the quality factor (1 sievert equals 100 rem).
The sievert is also the SI unit for effective dose equivalent, which is the sum of the products of the dose
equivalent to each organ or tissue and its corresponding tissue weighting factor.
Specific-Activity—Radioactivity per unit mass of a radionuclide, expressed, for example, as Ci/gram or

Bq/kilogram.
Specific Energy—The actual energy per unit mass deposited per unit volume in a small target, such as
the cell or cell nucleus, as the result of one or more energy-depositing events. This is a stochastic
quantity as opposed to the average value over a large number of instance (i.e., the absorbed dose).
Standardized Mortality Ratio (SMR)—A ratio of the observed number of deaths and the expected
number of deaths in a specific standard population.
Stochastic Effect—A health effect that occurs randomly and for which the probability of the effect
occurring, rather than its severity, is assumed to be a linear function of dose without a threshold (also
called a nondeterministic effect).
Stopping Power—The average rate of energy loss of a charged particle per unit thickness of a material or
per unit mass of material traversed.
Surface-seeking Radionuclide—A bone-seeking internal emitter that deposits and remains on the bone
surface for a long period of time, although it may eventually diffuse into the bone mineral. This contrasts
with a volume seeker, which deposits more uniformly throughout the bone volume.
Target Organ Toxicity—This term covers a broad range of adverse effects on target organs or
physiological systems (e.g., renal, cardiovascular) extending from those arising through a single limited
exposure to those assumed over a lifetime of exposure to a chemical.
Target Theory (Hit Theory)—A theory explaining some biological effects of radiation on the basis that
ionization, occurring in a discrete volume (the target) within the cell, directly causes a lesion which
subsequently results in a physiological response to the damage at that location. One, two, or more "hits"
(ionizing events within the target) may be necessary to elicit the response.
Teratogen—A chemical that causes birth defects.

AMERICIUM 276
10. GLOSSARY
Threshold Limit Value (TLV)—The maximum concentration of a substance to which most workers can
be exposed without adverse effect. TLV is a term used exclusively by the ACGIH. Other terms used to
express similar concepts are the MAC (Maximum Allowable Concentration) and PEL (Permissible
Exposure Limits).
Time-Weighted Average (TWA)—An allowable exposure concentration averaged over a normal 8-hour
workday or 40-hour workweek.
Tissue Weighting Factor (Wt)—Organ- or tissue-specific factor by which the equivalent dose is
multiplied to give the portion of the effective dose for that organ or tissue. Recommended values of
tissue weighting factors are:
Tissue Weighting Factors for Calculating Effective Dose

Equivalent and Effective Dose for Selected Tissues
Tissue weighting factor

Tissue NCRP115/ICRP60 USNRC/ICRP26
Bladder 0.05 –
Bone marrow 0.12 0.12
Bone surface 0.01 0.03
Breast 0.05 0.15
Colon 0.12 –
Esophagus 0.05 –
Gonads 0.20 0.25
Liver 0.05 –
Lung 0.12 0.12
Skin 0.01 –
Stomach 0.12 –
Thyroid 0.05 0.03
Remainder 0.05 0.30
Total 1.00 1.00
ICRP60 = International Commission on Radiological Protection, 1990 Recommendations of the ICRP
NCRP115 = National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. 1993. Risk Estimates for Radiation Protection,
Report 115. Bethesda, Maryland
USNRC = Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20
Toxic Dose (TD50)—A calculated dose of a chemical, introduced by a route other than inhalation, which
is expected to cause a specific toxic effect in 50% of a defined experimental animal population.
Toxicokinetic—The absorption, distribution and elimination of toxic compounds in the living organism.
Toxicosis—A diseased condition resulting from poisoning.
Transformation, Nuclear—The process of radioactive decay by which a nuclide is transformed into a

different nuclide by absorbing or emitting particulate or electromagnetic radiation.
Transition, Isomeric—The process by which a nuclide decays to an isomeric nuclide (i.e., one of the
same mass number and atomic number) of lower quantum energy. Isomeric transitions (often abbreviated
I.T.) proceed by gamma ray and internal conversion electron emission.
AMERICIUM 277
10. GLOSSARY
Tritium—The hydrogen isotope with one proton and two neutrons in the nucleus (Symbol: 3H). It is
radioactive and has a physical half-life of 12.3 years.
Unattached Fraction—That fraction of the radon daughters, usually 218Po and 214Po, which has not yet
attached to a dust particle or to water vapor. As a free atom, it has a high probability of being exhaled and
not retained within the lung. It is the attached fraction which is primarily retained.
Uncertainty Factor (UF)—A factor used in operationally deriving the RfD from experimental data. UFs
are intended to account for (1) the variation in sensitivity among the members of the human population,
(2) the uncertainty in extrapolating animal data to the case of human, (3) the uncertainty in extrapolating
from data obtained in a study that is of less than lifetime exposure, and (4) the uncertainty in using
LOAEL data rather than NOAEL data. Usually each of these factors is set equal to 10.
Units, Prefixes—Many units of measure are expressed as submultiples or multiples of the primary unit
(e.g., 10-3 curie is 1 mCi and 103 becquerel is 1 kBq).
Factor Prefix Symbol Factor Prefix Symbol

10-18 atto A 103 kilo k
10-15 femto F 106 mega M
10-12 pico p 109 giga G
10-9 nano N 1012 tera T
10-6 micro Μ 1015 peta P
10-3 milli M 1018 exa E
10-2 centi C
Units, Radiological—
Units Equivalents
Becquerel* (Bq) 1 disintegration per second = 2.7x10-11 Ci

Curie (Ci) 3.7x1010 disintegrations per second = 3.7x1010 Bq
Gray* (Gy) 1 J/kg = 100 rad
Rad (rad) 100 erg/g = 0.01 Gy
Rem (rem) 0.01 sievert
Sievert* (Sv) 100 rem
*International Units, designated (SI)
Working Level (WL)—Any combination of short-lived radon daughters in 1 liter of air that will result in
the ultimate emission of 1.3x105 MeV of potential alpha energy.
Working Level Month (WLM)—A unit of exposure to radon daughters corresponding to the product of
the radon daughter concentration in Working Level (WL) and the exposure time in nominal months
(1 nominal month = 170 hours). Inhalation of air with a concentration of 1 WL of radon daughters for
170 working hours results in an exposure of 1 WLM.
X rays—Penetrating electromagnetic radiations whose wave lengths are very much shorter than those of
visible light. They are usually produced by bombarding a metallic target with fast electrons in a high
AMERICIUM 278
10. GLOSSARY
vacuum. X rays (called characteristic x rays) are also produced when an orbital electron falls from a high
energy level to a low energy level.
Zero-Threshold Linear Hypothesis (or No-Threshold Linear Hypothesis)—The assumption that a

dose-response curve derived from data in the high dose and high dose-rate ranges may be extrapolated
through the low dose and low dose range to zero, implying that, theoretically, any amount of radiation
will cause some damage.
AMERICIUM A-1
APPENDIX A. ATSDR MINIMAL RISK LEVELS AND WORKSHEETS
The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) [42 U.S.C.
9601 et seq.], as amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) [Pub. L. 99–
499], requires that the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) develop jointly with
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), in order of priority, a list of hazardous substances most
commonly found at facilities on the CERCLA National Priorities List (NPL); prepare toxicological
profiles for each substance included on the priority list of hazardous substances; and assure the initiation
of a research program to fill identified data needs associated with the substances.
The toxicological profiles include an examination, summary, and interpretation of available toxicological
information and epidemiologic evaluations of a hazardous substance. During the development of
toxicological profiles, Minimal Risk Levels (MRLs) are derived when reliable and sufficient data exist to
identify the target organ(s) of effect or the most sensitive health effect(s) for a specific duration for a
given route of exposure. An MRL is an estimate of the daily human exposure to a hazardous substance
that is likely to be without appreciable risk of adverse noncancer health effects over a specified duration
of exposure. MRLs are based on noncancer health effects only and are not based on a consideration of
cancer effects. These substance-specific estimates, which are intended to serve as screening levels, are
used by ATSDR health assessors to identify contaminants and potential health effects that may be of
concern at hazardous waste sites. It is important to note that MRLs are not intended to define clean-up or
action levels.
MRLs are derived for hazardous substances using the no-observed-adverse-effect level/uncertainty factor
approach. They are below levels that might cause adverse health effects in the people most sensitive to
such chemical-induced effects. MRLs are derived for acute (1–14 days), intermediate (15–364 days), and
chronic (365 days and longer) durations and for the oral and inhalation routes of exposure. Currently,
MRLs for the dermal route of exposure are not derived because ATSDR has not yet identified a method
suitable for this route of exposure. MRLs are generally based on the most sensitive chemical-induced end
point considered to be of relevance to humans. Serious health effects (such as irreparable damage to the
liver or kidneys, or birth defects) are not used as a basis for establishing MRLs. Exposure to a level
above the MRL does not mean that adverse health effects will occur.
AMERICIUM A-2
APPENDIX A
MRLs are intended only to serve as a screening tool to help public health professionals decide where to
look more closely. They may also be viewed as a mechanism to identify those hazardous waste sites that
are not expected to cause adverse health effects. Most MRLs contain a degree of uncertainty because of
the lack of precise toxicological information on the people who might be most sensitive (e.g., infants,
elderly, nutritionally or immunologically compromised) to the effects of hazardous substances. ATSDR
uses a conservative (i.e., protective) approach to address this uncertainty consistent with the public health
principle of prevention. Although human data are preferred, MRLs often must be based on animal studies
because relevant human studies are lacking. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, ATSDR assumes
that humans are more sensitive to the effects of hazardous substance than animals and that certain persons
may be particularly sensitive. Thus, the resulting MRL may be as much as 100-fold below levels that
have been shown to be nontoxic in laboratory animals.
Proposed MRLs undergo a rigorous review process: Health Effects/MRL Workgroup reviews within the
Division of Toxicology, expert panel peer reviews, and agency-wide MRL Workgroup reviews, with
participation from other federal agencies and comments from the public. They are subject to change as
new information becomes available concomitant with updating the toxicological profiles. Thus, MRLs in
the most recent toxicological profiles supersede previously published levels. For additional information
regarding MRLs, please contact the Division of Toxicology, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease
Registry, 1600 Clifton Road NE, Mailstop F-32, Atlanta, Georgia 30333.
AMERICIUM B-1
APPENDIX B. USER'S GUIDE
Chapter 1
Public Health Statement
This chapter of the profile is a health effects summary written in non-technical language. Its intended
audience is the general public, especially people living in the vicinity of a hazardous waste site or
chemical release. If the Public Health Statement were removed from the rest of the document, it would
still communicate to the lay public essential information about the chemical.
The major headings in the Public Health Statement are useful to find specific topics of concern. The
topics are written in a question and answer format. The answer to each question includes a sentence that
will direct the reader to chapters in the profile that will provide more information on the given topic.
Chapter 2
Relevance to Public Health
This chapter provides a health effects summary based on evaluations of existing toxicologic,
epidemiologic, and toxicokinetic information. This summary is designed to present interpretive, weight-
of-evidence discussions for human health end points by addressing the following questions.
1. What effects are known to occur in humans?
2. What effects observed in animals are likely to be of concern to humans?
3. What exposure conditions are likely to be of concern to humans, especially around hazardous
waste sites?
The chapter covers end points in the same order that they appear within the Discussion of Health Effects
by Route of Exposure section, by route (inhalation, oral, and dermal) and within route by effect. Human
data are presented first, then animal data. Both are organized by duration (acute, intermediate, chronic).
In vitro data and data from parenteral routes (intramuscular, intravenous, subcutaneous, etc.) are also
considered in this chapter.
The carcinogenic potential of the profiled substance is qualitatively evaluated, when appropriate, using
existing toxicokinetic, genotoxic, and carcinogenic data. ATSDR does not currently assess cancer
potency or perform cancer risk assessments. Minimal Risk Levels (MRLs) for noncancer end points (if
derived) and the end points from which they were derived are indicated and discussed.
Limitations to existing scientific literature that prevent a satisfactory evaluation of the relevance to public
health are identified in the Chapter 3 Data Needs section.
Interpretation of Minimal Risk Levels
Where sufficient toxicologic information is available, ATSDR has derived MRLs for inhalation and oral
routes of entry at each duration of exposure (acute, intermediate, and chronic). These MRLs are not
AMERICIUM B-2
APPENDIX B
meant to support regulatory action, but to acquaint health professionals with exposure levels at which
adverse health effects are not expected to occur in humans.
MRLs should help physicians and public health officials determine the safety of a community living near
a chemical emission, given the concentration of a contaminant in air or the estimated daily dose in water.
MRLs are based largely on toxicological studies in animals and on reports of human occupational
exposure.
MRL users should be familiar with the toxicologic information on which the number is based. Chapter 2,
"Relevance to Public Health," contains basic information known about the substance. Other sections such
as Chapter 3 Section 3.10, "Interactions with Other Substances,” and Section 3.11, "Populations that are
Unusually Susceptible" provide important supplemental information.
MRL users should also understand the MRL derivation methodology. MRLs are derived using a
modified version of the risk assessment methodology that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
provides (Barnes and Dourson 1988) to determine reference doses (RfDs) for lifetime exposure.
To derive an MRL, ATSDR generally selects the most sensitive end point which, in its best judgement,
represents the most sensitive human health effect for a given exposure route and duration. ATSDR
cannot make this judgement or derive an MRL unless information (quantitative or qualitative) is available
for all potential systemic, neurological, and developmental effects. If this information and reliable
quantitative data on the chosen end point are available, ATSDR derives an MRL using the most sensitive
species (when information from multiple species is available) with the highest no-observed-adverse-effect
level (NOAEL) that does not exceed any adverse effect levels. When a NOAEL is not available, a
lowest-observed-adverse-effect level (LOAEL) can be used to derive an MRL, and an uncertainty factor
(UF) of 10 must be employed. Additional uncertainty factors of 10 must be used both for human
variability to protect sensitive subpopulations (people who are most susceptible to the health effects
caused by the substance) and for interspecies variability (extrapolation from animals to humans). In
deriving an MRL, these individual uncertainty factors are multiplied together. The product is then
divided into the inhalation concentration or oral dosage selected from the study. Uncertainty factors used
in developing a substance-specific MRL are provided in the footnotes of the levels of significant exposure
(LSE) Tables.
Chapter 3
Health Effects
Tables and Figures for Levels of Significant Exposure (LSE)
Tables and figures are used to summarize health effects and illustrate graphically levels of exposure
associated with those effects. These levels cover health effects observed at increasing dose
concentrations and durations, differences in response by species, MRLs to humans for noncancer end
points, and EPA's estimated range associated with an upper- bound individual lifetime cancer risk of 1 in
10,000 to 1 in 10,000,000. Use the LSE tables and figures for a quick review of the health effects and to
locate data for a specific exposure scenario. The LSE tables and figures should always be used in
conjunction with the text. All entries in these tables and figures represent studies that provide reliable,
quantitative estimates of NOAELs, LOAELs, or Cancer Effect Levels (CELs).
The legends presented below demonstrate the application of these tables and figures. Representative
examples of LSE Table 3-1 and Figure 3-1 are shown. The numbers in the left column of the legends
correspond to the numbers in the example table and figure.
AMERICIUM B-3
APPENDIX B
LEGEND
See Sample LSE Table 3-1 (page B-6)
(1) Route of Exposure. One of the first considerations when reviewing the toxicity of a substance
using these tables and figures should be the relevant and appropriate route of exposure. Typically
when sufficient data exists, three LSE tables and two LSE figures are presented in the document.
The three LSE tables present data on the three principal routes of exposure, i.e., inhalation, oral,
and dermal (LSE Table 3-1, 3-2, and 3-3, respectively). LSE figures are limited to the inhalation
(LSE Figure 3-1) and oral (LSE Figure 3-2) routes. Not all substances will have data on each
route of exposure and will not, therefore, have all five of the tables and figures.
(2) Exposure Period. Three exposure periods—acute (less than 15 days), intermediate (15–
364 days), and chronic (365 days or more)—are presented within each relevant route of exposure.
In this example, an inhalation study of intermediate exposure duration is reported. For quick
reference to health effects occurring from a known length of exposure, locate the applicable
exposure period within the LSE table and figure.
(3) Health Effect. The major categories of health effects included in LSE tables and figures are
death, systemic, immunological, neurological, developmental, reproductive, and cancer.
NOAELs and LOAELs can be reported in the tables and figures for all effects but cancer.
Systemic effects are further defined in the "System" column of the LSE table (see key number
18).
(4) Key to Figure. Each key number in the LSE table links study information to one or more data
points using the same key number in the corresponding LSE figure. In this example, the study
represented by key number 18 has been used to derive a NOAEL and a Less Serious LOAEL
(also see the two "18r" data points in sample Figure 3-1).
(5) Species. The test species, whether animal or human, are identified in this column. Chapter 2,
"Relevance to Public Health," covers the relevance of animal data to human toxicity and
Section 3.5, "Toxicokinetics," contains any available information on comparative toxicokinetics.
Although NOAELs and LOAELs are species specific, the levels are extrapolated to equivalent
human doses to derive an MRL.
(6) Exposure Frequency/Duration. The duration of the study and the weekly and daily exposure
regimen are provided in this column. This permits comparison of NOAELs and LOAELs from
different studies. In this case (key number 18), rats were exposed to “Chemical x” via inhalation
for 6 hours/day, 5 days/week, for 13 weeks. For a more complete review of the dosing regimen
refer to the appropriate sections of the text or the original reference paper (i.e., Nitschke et al.
1981).
(7) System. This column further defines the systemic effects. These systems include respiratory,
cardiovascular, gastrointestinal, hematological, musculoskeletal, hepatic, renal, and
dermal/ocular. "Other" refers to any systemic effect (e.g., a decrease in body weight) not covered
in these systems. In the example of key number 18, one systemic effect (respiratory) was
investigated.
(8) NOAEL. A NOAEL is the highest exposure level at which no harmful effects were seen in the
organ system studied. Key number 18 reports a NOAEL of 3 ppm for the respiratory system,
AMERICIUM B-4
APPENDIX B
which was used to derive an intermediate exposure, inhalation MRL of 0.005 ppm (see
footnote "b").
(9) LOAEL. A LOAEL is the lowest dose used in the study that caused a harmful health effect.
LOAELs have been classified into "Less Serious" and "Serious" effects. These distinctions help
readers identify the levels of exposure at which adverse health effects first appear and the
gradation of effects with increasing dose. A brief description of the specific end point used to
quantify the adverse effect accompanies the LOAEL. The respiratory effect reported in key
number 18 (hyperplasia) is a Less Serious LOAEL of 10 ppm. MRLs are not derived from
Serious LOAELs.
(10) Reference. The complete reference citation is given in Chapter 9 of the profile.
(11) CEL. A CEL is the lowest exposure level associated with the onset of carcinogenesis in
experimental or epidemiologic studies. CELs are always considered serious effects. The LSE
tables and figures do not contain NOAELs for cancer, but the text may report doses not causing
measurable cancer increases.
(12) Footnotes. Explanations of abbreviations or reference notes for data in the LSE tables are found
in the footnotes. Footnote "b" indicates that the NOAEL of 3 ppm in key number 18 was used to
derive an MRL of 0.005 ppm.
LEGEND
See Sample Figure 3-1 (page B-7)
LSE figures graphically illustrate the data presented in the corresponding LSE tables. Figures help the
reader quickly compare health effects according to exposure concentrations for particular exposure
periods.
(13) Exposure Period. The same exposure periods appear as in the LSE table. In this example, health
effects observed within the acute and intermediate exposure periods are illustrated.
(14) Health Effect. These are the categories of health effects for which reliable quantitative data
exists. The same health effects appear in the LSE table.
(15) Levels of Exposure. Concentrations or doses for each health effect in the LSE tables are
graphically displayed in the LSE figures. Exposure concentration or dose is measured on the log
scale "y" axis. Inhalation exposure is reported in mg/m3 or ppm and oral exposure is reported in
mg/kg/day.
(16) NOAEL. In this example, the open circle designated 18r identifies a NOAEL critical end point in
the rat upon which an intermediate inhalation exposure MRL is based. The key number 18
corresponds to the entry in the LSE table. The dashed descending arrow indicates the
extrapolation from the exposure level of 3 ppm (see entry 18 in the Table) to the MRL of
0.005 ppm (see footnote "b" in the LSE table).
(17) CEL. Key number 38r is one of three studies for which CELs were derived. The diamond
symbol refers to a CEL for the test species-mouse. The number 38 corresponds to the entry in the
LSE table.
AMERICIUM B-5
APPENDIX B
(18) Estimated Upper-Bound Human Cancer Risk Levels. This is the range associated with the upper-
bound for lifetime cancer risk of 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 10,000,000. These risk levels are derived
from the EPA's Human Health Assessment Group's upper-bound estimates of the slope of the
cancer dose response curve at low dose levels (q1*).
(19) Key to LSE Figure. The Key explains the abbreviations and symbols used in the figure.
AMERICIUM
SAMPLE
1 → TABLE 3-1. Levels of Significant Exposure to [Chemical x] – Inhalation
LOAEL (effect)
Exposure
Less serious (ppm) Serious (ppm)
frequency/ NOAEL
a
Key to figure Species duration System (ppm) Reference
2 → INTERMEDIATE EXPOSURE
5 6 7 8 9 10
3 → Systemic ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
b
18 Rat 13 wk Resp 3 10 (hyperplasia)
4 → 5 d/wk Nitschke et al. 1981
APPENDIX B
6 hr/d
CHRONIC EXPOSURE
Cancer 11
38 Rat 18 mo 20 (CEL, multiple organs) Wong et al. 1982

5 d/wk
7 hr/d
39 Rat 89-104 wk 10 (CEL, lung tumors, nasal NTP 1982

5 d/wk tumors)
6 hr/d
40 Mouse 79-103 wk 10 (CEL, lung tumors, NTP 1982

5 d/wk hemangiosarcomas)
6 hr/d
12 → a The number corresponds to entries in Figure 3-1.

b Used to derive an intermediate inhalation Minimal Risk Level (MRL) of 5x10-3 ppm; dose adjusted for intermittent exposure and divided
by an uncertainty factor of 100 (10 for extrapolation from animal to humans, 10 for human variability).
B-6
AMERICIUM B-7
APPENDIX B
AMERICIUM C-1
APPENDIX C. ACRONYMS, ABBREVIATIONS, AND SYMBOLS
Some terms are generic and may not be used in this profile.
ACGIH American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists

ACOEM American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine
ADI acceptable daily intake
ADME absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion
AED atomic emission detection
AFID alkali flame ionization detector
AFOSH Air Force Office of Safety and Health
ALI annual limit on intake
ALT alanine aminotransferase
AML acute myeloid leukemia
AOAC Association of Official Analytical Chemists
AOEC Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics
AP alkaline phosphatase
APHA American Public Health Association
AST aspartate aminotransferase
atm atmosphere
ATSDR Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
AWQC Ambient Water Quality Criteria
BAT best available technology
BCF bioconcentration factor
BEI Biological Exposure Index
BMD benchmark dose
BMR benchmark response
BSC Board of Scientific Counselors
C centigrade
CAA Clean Air Act
CAG Cancer Assessment Group of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
CAS Chemical Abstract Services
CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
CEL cancer effect level
CELDS Computer-Environmental Legislative Data System
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
CFR Code of Federal Regulations
Ci curie
CI confidence interval
CL ceiling limit value
CLP Contract Laboratory Program
cm centimeter
CML chronic myeloid leukemia
CPSC Consumer Products Safety Commission
CWA Clean Water Act
DAC derived air concentration
DHEW Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
DHHS Department of Health and Human Services
AMERICIUM C-2
APPENDIX C
DNA deoxyribonucleic acid

DOD Department of Defense
DOE Department of Energy
DOL Department of Labor
DOT Department of Transportation
DOT/UN/ Department of Transportation/United Nations/
NA/IMCO North America/International Maritime Dangerous Goods Code
DWEL drinking water exposure level
ECD electron capture detection
ECG/EKG electrocardiogram
EEG electroencephalogram
EEGL Emergency Exposure Guidance Level
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
F Fahrenheit
F1 first-filial generation
FAO Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations
FDA Food and Drug Administration
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
FPD flame photometric detection
fpm feet per minute
FR Federal Register
FSH follicle stimulating hormone
g gram
GC gas chromatography
gd gestational day
GLC gas liquid chromatography
GPC gel permeation chromatography
HPLC high-performance liquid chromatography
HRGC high resolution gas chromatography
HSDB Hazardous Substance Data Bank
IARC International Agency for Research on Cancer
IDLH immediately dangerous to life and health
ILO International Labor Organization
IRIS Integrated Risk Information System
Kd adsorption ratio
kg kilogram
kkg metric ton
Koc organic carbon partition coefficient
Kow octanol-water partition coefficient
L liter
LC liquid chromatography
LC50 lethal concentration, 50% kill
LCLo lethal concentration, low
LD50 lethal dose, 50% kill
LDLo lethal dose, low
LDH lactic dehydrogenase
LH luteinizing hormone
LOAEL lowest-observed-adverse-effect level
LSE Levels of Significant Exposure
LT50 lethal time, 50% kill
AMERICIUM C-3
APPENDIX C
m meter
MA trans,trans-muconic acid
MAL maximum allowable level
mCi millicurie
MCL maximum contaminant level
MCLG maximum contaminant level goal
MF modifying factor
MFO mixed function oxidase
mg milligram
mL milliliter
mm millimeter
mmHg millimeters of mercury
mmol millimole
mppcf millions of particles per cubic foot
MRL Minimal Risk Level
MS mass spectrometry
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standard
NAS National Academy of Science
NATICH National Air Toxics Information Clearinghouse
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organization
NCE normochromatic erythrocytes
NCEH National Center for Environmental Health
NCI National Cancer Institute
ND not detected
NFPA National Fire Protection Association
ng nanogram
NHANES National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey
NIEHS National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences
NIOSH National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health
NIOSHTIC NIOSH's Computerized Information Retrieval System
NLM National Library of Medicine
nm nanometer
nmol nanomole
NOAEL no-observed-adverse-effect level
NOES National Occupational Exposure Survey
NOHS National Occupational Hazard Survey
NPD nitrogen phosphorus detection
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPL National Priorities List
NR not reported
NRC National Research Council
NS not specified
NSPS New Source Performance Standards
NTIS National Technical Information Service
NTP National Toxicology Program
ODW Office of Drinking Water, EPA
OERR Office of Emergency and Remedial Response, EPA
OHM/TADS Oil and Hazardous Materials/Technical Assistance Data System
OPP Office of Pesticide Programs, EPA
OPPT Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, EPA
OPPTS Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, EPA
AMERICIUM C-4
APPENDIX C
OR odds ratio
OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration
OSW Office of Solid Waste, EPA
OTS Office of Toxic Substances
OW Office of Water
OWRS Office of Water Regulations and Standards, EPA
PAH polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon
PBPD physiologically based pharmacodynamic
PBPK physiologically based pharmacokinetic
PCE polychromatic erythrocytes
PEL permissible exposure limit
pg picogram
PHS Public Health Service
PID photo ionization detector
pmol picomole
PMR proportionate mortality ratio
ppb parts per billion
ppm parts per million
ppt parts per trillion
PSNS pretreatment standards for new sources
RBC red blood cell
REL recommended exposure level/limit
RfC reference concentration
RfD reference dose
RNA ribonucleic acid
RQ reportable quantity
RTECS Registry of Toxic Effects of Chemical Substances
SARA Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act
SCE sister chromatid exchange
SGOT serum glutamic oxaloacetic transaminase
SGPT serum glutamic pyruvic transaminase
SIC standard industrial classification
SIM selected ion monitoring
SMCL secondary maximum contaminant level
SMR standardized mortality ratio
SNARL suggested no adverse response level
SPEGL Short-Term Public Emergency Guidance Level
STEL short term exposure limit
STORET Storage and Retrieval
TD50 toxic dose, 50% specific toxic effect
TLV threshold limit value
TOC total organic carbon
TPQ threshold planning quantity
TRI Toxics Release Inventory
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
TWA time-weighted average
UF uncertainty factor
U.S. United States
USDA United States Department of Agriculture
USGS United States Geological Survey
USNRC United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
AMERICIUM C-5
APPENDIX C
VOC volatile organic compound

WBC white blood cell
WHO World Health Organization
> greater than

≥ greater than or equal to
= equal to
< less than
≤ less than or equal to
% percent
α alpha
β beta
γ gamma
δ delta
µm micrometer
µg microgram
q1* cancer slope factor
– negative
+ positive
(+) weakly positive result
(–) weakly negative result
AMERICIUM D-1
APPENDIX D. OVERVIEW OF BASIC RADIATION PHYSICS, CHEMISTRY,

AND BIOLOGY
Understanding the basic concepts in radiation physics, chemistry, and biology is important to the
evaluation and interpretation of radiation-induced adverse health effects and to the derivation of radiation
protection principles. This appendix presents a brief overview of the areas of radiation physics,
chemistry, and biology and is based to a large extent on the reviews of Mettler and Moseley (1985),
Hobbs and McClellan (1986), Eichholz (1982), Hendee (1973), Cember (1996), and Early et al. (1979).
D.1 RADIONUCLIDES AND RADIOACTIVITY
The substances we call elements are composed of atoms. Atoms in turn are made up of neutrons, protons
and electrons: neutrons and protons in the nucleus and electrons in a cloud of orbits around the nucleus.
Nuclide is the general term referring to any nucleus along with its orbital electrons. The nuclide is
characterized by the composition of its nucleus and hence by the number of protons and neutrons in the
nucleus. All atoms of an element have the same number of protons (this is given by the atomic number)
but may have different numbers of neutrons (this is reflected by the atomic mass numbers or atomic
weight of the element). Atoms with different atomic mass but the same atomic numbers are referred to as
isotopes of an element.
The numerical combination of protons and neutrons in most nuclides is such that the nucleus is quantum
mechanically stable and the atom is said to be stable, i.e., not radioactive; however, if there are too few or
too many neutrons, the nucleus is unstable and the atom is said to be radioactive. Unstable nuclides
undergo radioactive transformation, a process in which a neutron or proton converts into the other and a
beta particle is emitted, or else an alpha particle is emitted. Each type of decay is typically accompanied
by the emission of gamma rays. These unstable atoms are called radionuclides; their emissions are called
ionizing radiation; and the whole property is called radioactivity. Transformation or decay results in the
formation of new nuclides some of which may themselves be radionuclides, while others are stable
nuclides. This series of transformations is called the decay chain of the radionuclide. The first
radionuclide in the chain is called the parent; the subsequent products of the transformation are called
progeny, daughters, or decay products.
In general there are two classifications of radioactivity and radionuclides: natural and artificial (man-
made). Naturally-occurring radioactive materials (NORMs) exist in nature and no additional energy is
necessary to place them in an unstable state. Natural radioactivity is the property of some naturally
occurring, usually heavy elements, that are heavier than lead. Radionuclides, such as radium and
uranium, primarily emit alpha particles. Some lighter elements such as carbon-14 and tritium (hydrogen-
3) primarily emit beta particles as they transform to a more stable atom. Natural radioactive atoms
heavier than lead cannot attain a stable nucleus heavier than lead. Everyone is exposed to background
radiation from naturally-occurring radionuclides throughout life. This background radiation is the major
source of radiation exposure to man and arises from several sources. The natural background exposures
are frequently used as a standard of comparison for exposures to various artificial sources of ionizing
radiation.
Artificial radioactive atoms are produced either as a by-product of fission of uranium or plutonium atoms
in a nuclear reactor or by bombarding stable atoms with particles, such as neutrons or protons, directed at
the stable atoms with high velocity. These artificially produced radioactive elements usually decay by
AMERICIUM D-2
APPENDIX D
emission of particles, such as positive or negative beta particles and one or more high energy photons
(gamma rays). Unstable (radioactive) atoms of any element can be produced.
Both naturally occurring and artificial radioisotopes find application in medicine, industrial products, and
consumer products. Some specific radioisotopes, called fall-out, are still found in the environment as a
result of nuclear weapons use or testing.
D.2 RADIOACTIVE DECAY
D.2.1 Principles of Radioactive Decay
The stability of an atom is the result of the balance of the forces of the various components of the nucleus.
An atom that is unstable (radionuclide) will release energy (decay) in various ways and transform to
stable atoms or to other radioactive species called daughters, often with the release of ionizing radiation.
If there are either too many or too few neutrons for a given number of protons, the resulting nucleus may
undergo transformation. For some elements, a chain of daughter decay products may be produced until
stable atoms are formed. Radionuclides can be characterized by the type and energy of the radiation
emitted, the rate of decay, and the mode of decay. The mode of decay indicates how a parent compound
undergoes transformation. Radiations considered here are primarily of nuclear origin, i.e., they arise from
nuclear excitation, usually caused by the capture of charged or uncharged nucleons by a nucleus, or by the
radioactive decay or transformation of an unstable nuclide. The type of radiation may be categorized as
charged or uncharged particles, protons, and fission products) or electromagnetic radiation (gamma rays
and x rays). Table D-1 summarizes the basic characteristics of the more common types of radiation
encountered.
D.2.2 Half-Life and Activity
For any given radionuclide, the rate of decay is a first-order process that is constant, regardless of the
radioactive atoms present and is characteristic for each radionuclide. The process of decay is a series of
random events; temperature, pressure, or chemical combinations do not effect the rate of decay. While it
may not be possible to predict exactly which atom is going to undergo transformation at any given time, it
is possible to predict, on average, the fraction of the radioactive atoms that will transform during any
interval of time.
The activity is a measure of the quantity of radioactive material. For these radioactive materials it is
customary to describe the activity as the number of disintegrations (transformations) per unit time. The
unit of activity is the curie (Ci), which was originally related to the activity of one gram of radium, but is
now defined as that quantity of radioactive material in which there are:
1 curie (Ci) = 3.7x1010 disintegrations (transformations)/second (dps) or 2.22x1012 disintegrations

(transformations)/minute (dpm).
The SI unit of activity is the becquerel (Bq); 1 Bq = that quantity of radioactive material in which there is
1 transformation/second. Since activity is proportional to the number of atoms of the radioactive
material, the quantity of any radioactive material is usually expressed in curies, regardless of its purity or
concentration. The transformation of radioactive nuclei is a random process, and the number of
transformations is directly proportional to the number of radioactive atoms present. For any pure
radioactive substance, the rate of decay is usually described by its radiological half-life, TR, i.e., the time
it takes for a specified source material to decay to half its initial activity. The specific activity is the
activity of a radionuclide per mass of that radionuclide. If properly qualified, it can refer to activity per
AMERICIUM D-3
APPENDIX D
unit mass of related materials, such as the element itself or a chemical compound labeled with the
radionuclide. The higher the specific activity of a radioisotope, the faster it is decaying.
The activity of a radionuclide at time t may be calculated by:
A = Aoe-0.693t/Trad
where A is the activity in dps or curies or becquerels, Ao is the activity at time zero, t is the time at which
measured, and Trad is the radiological half-life of the radionuclide (Trad and t must be in the same units of
time). The time when the activity of a sample of radioactivity becomes one-half its original value is the
radioactive half-life and is expressed in any suitable unit of time.
Table D-1. Characteristics of Nuclear Radiations
Typical Path lengthb

Radiation Rest massa Charge energy range Air Solid Comments
Alpha (α) 4.00 amu +2 4–10 MeV 5–10 cm 25–80 µm Identical to ionized
He nucleus
Negatron (β–) 5.48x10-4 amu; –1 0–4 MeV 0–10 m 0–1 cm Identical to electron
0.51 MeV
Positron (β+) 5.48x10-4 amu; +1 0-4 MeV 0–10 m 0–1 cm Identical to electron
0.51 MeV except for sign of
charge
Neutron 1.0086 amu; 0 0–15 MeV b b Free half-life: 16
939.55 MeV min
X ray (e.m. – 0 5 keV–100 keV b b Photon from
photon) transition of an
electron between
atomic orbits
Gamma (p) – 0 10 keV–3 MeV b b Photon from
(e.m. photon) nuclear
transformation
a
The rest mass (in amu) has an energy equivalent in MeV that is obtained using the equation E=mc2, where 1 amu = 932 MeV.
b
Path lengths are not applicable to x- and gamma rays since their intensities decrease exponentially; path lengths in solid tissue
are variable, depending on particle energy, electron density of material, and other factors.
amu = atomic mass unit; e.m. = electromagnetic; MeV = Megaelectron Volts
The specific activity is a measure of activity, and is defined as the activity of a radionuclide per mass of
that radionuclide. This activity is usually expressed in curies per gram and may be calculated by
curies/gram = 1.3x108 / (Trad) (atomic weight) or
[3.577 x 105 x mass(g)] / [Trad x atomic weight]
where Trad is the radiological half-life in days.
In the case of radioactive materials contained in living organisms, an additional consideration is made for
the reduction in observed activity due to regular processes of elimination of the respective chemical or
biochemical substance from the organism. This introduces a rate constant called the biological half-life
AMERICIUM D-4
APPENDIX D
(Tbiol) which is the time required for biological processes to eliminate one-half of the activity. This time
is virtually the same for both stable and radioactive isotopes of any given element.
Under such conditions the time required for a radioactive element to be halved as a result of the combined
action of radioactive decay and biological elimination is the effective clearance half-time:
Teff = (Tbiol x Trad) / (Tbiol + Trad).
Table D-2 presents representative effective half-lives of particular interest.
Table D-2. Half-Lives of Some Radionuclides in Adult Body Organs
Half-lifea
Radionuclide Critical organ Physical Biological Effective
Uranium 238 Kidney 4,460,000,000 y 4d 4d
Hydrogen 3b Whole body 12.3 y 10 d 10 d
(Tritium)
Iodine 131 Thyroid 8d 80 d 7.3 d
Strontium 90 Bone 28 y 50 y 18 y
Plutonium 239 Bone surface 24,400 y 50 y 50 y
Lung 24,400 y 500 d 474 d
Cobalt 60 Whole body 5.3 y 99.5 d 95 d
Iron 55 Spleen 2.7 y 600 d 388 d
Iron 59 Spleen 45.1 d 600 d 42 d
Manganese 54 Liver 303 d 25 d 23 d
Cesium 137 Whole body 30 y 70 d 70 d
a
d = days, y = years
b
Mixed in body water as tritiated water
D.2.3 Interaction of Radiation with Matter
Both ionizing and nonionizing radiation will interact with materials; that is, radiation will lose kinetic
energy to any solid, liquid or gas through which it passes by a variety of mechanisms. The transfer of
energy to a medium by either electromagnetic or particulate radiation may be sufficient to cause
formation of ions. This process is called ionization. Compared to other types of radiation that may be
absorbed, such as ultraviolet radiation, ionizing radiation deposits a relatively large amount of energy into
a small volume.
The method by which incident radiation interacts with the medium to cause ionization may be direct or
indirect. Electromagnetic radiations (x rays and gamma photons) are indirectly ionizing; that is, they give
up their energy in various interactions with cellular molecules, and the energy is then utilized to produce a
fast-moving charged particle such as an electron. It is the electron that then may react with a target
molecule. This particle is called a “primary ionizing particle. Charged particles, in contrast, strike the
tissue or medium and directly react with target molecules, such as oxygen or water. These particulate
radiations are directly ionizing radiations. Examples of directly ionizing particles include alpha and beta
particles. Indirectly ionizing radiations are always more penetrating than directly ionizing particulate
radiations.
AMERICIUM D-5
APPENDIX D
Mass, charge, and velocity of a particle, as well as the electron density of the material with which it
interacts, all affect the rate at which ionization occurs. The higher the charge of the particle and the lower
the velocity, the greater the propensity to cause ionization. Heavy, highly charged particles, such as alpha
particles, lose energy rapidly with distance and, therefore, do not penetrate deeply. The result of these
interaction processes is a gradual slowing down of any incident particle until it is brought to rest or
"stopped" at the end of its range.
D.2.4 Characteristics of Emitted Radiation
D.2.4.1 Alpha Emission. In alpha emission, an alpha particle consisting of two protons and two
neutrons is emitted with a resulting decrease in the atomic mass number by four and reduction of the
atomic number of two, thereby changing the parent to a different element. The alpha particle is identical
to a helium nucleus consisting of two neutrons and two protons. It results from the radioactive decay of
some heavy elements such as uranium, plutonium, radium, thorium, and radon. The alpha particles
emitted by a given radionuclide have the same energy and intensity combination. Most of the alpha
particles that are likely to be found have energies in the range of about 4 to 8 MeV, depending on the
isotope from which they came.
The alpha particle has an electrical charge of +2. Because of this double positive charge and their size,
alpha particles have great ionizing power and, thus, lose their kinetic energy quickly. This results in very
little penetrating power. In fact, an alpha particle cannot penetrate a sheet of paper. The range of an
alpha particle (the distance the charged particle travels from the point of origin to its resting point) is
about 4 cm in air, which decreases considerably to a few micrometers in tissue. These properties cause
alpha emitters to be hazardous only if there is internal contamination (i.e., if the radionuclide is inside the
body).
D.2.4.2 Beta Emission. A beta particle (&) is a high-velocity electron ejected from a disintegrating
nucleus. The particle may be either a negatively charged electron, termed a negatron (&-) or a positively
charged electron, termed a positron (&+). Although the precise definition of "beta emission" refers to
both &- and &+, common usage of the term generally applies only to the negative particle, as distinguished
from the positron emission, which refers to the &+ particle.
D.2.4.2.1 Beta Negative Emission. Beta particle (&-) emission is another process by which a
radionuclide, with a neutron excess achieves stability. Beta particle emission decreases the number of
neutrons by one and increases the number of protons by one, while the atomic mass number remains
unchanged.1 This transformation results in the formation of a different element. The energy spectrum of
beta particle emission ranges from a certain maximum down to zero with the mean energy of the
spectrum being about one-third of the maximum. The range of betas is much less in tissue than in air.
Beta negative emitting radionuclides can cause injury to the skin and superficial body tissues, but mostly
present an internal contamination hazard.
D.2.4.2.2 Positron Emission. In cases in which there are too many protons in the nucleus, positron
emission may occur. In this case a proton may be thought of as being converted into a neutron, and a
positron (&+) is emitted.1 This increases the number of neutrons by one, decreases the number of protons
by one, and again leaves the atomic mass number unchanged. The gamma radiation resulting from the
annihilation (see glossary) of the positron makes all positron emitting isotopes more of an external
radiation hazard than pure & emitters of equal energy.
1
Neutrinos also accompany negative beta particles and positron emissions
AMERICIUM D-6
APPENDIX D
D.2.4.2.3 Gamma Emission. Radioactive decay by alpha, beta, or positron emission, or electron
capture often leaves some of the energy resulting from these changes in the nucleus. As a result, the
nucleus is raised to an excited level. None of these excited nuclei can remain in this high-energy state.
Nuclei release this energy returning to ground state or to the lowest possible stable energy level. The
energy released is in the form of gamma radiation (high energy photons) and has an energy equal to the
change in the energy state of the nucleus. Gamma and x rays behave similarly but differ in their origin;
gamma emissions originate in the nucleus while x rays originate in the orbital electron structure or from
rapidly changing the velocity of an electron (e.g., as occurs when shielding high energy beta particles or
stopping the electron beam in an x ray tube).
D.3 ESTIMATION OF ENERGY DEPOSITION IN HUMAN TISSUES
Two forms of potential radiation exposures can result: internal and external. The term exposure denotes
physical interaction of the radiation emitted from the radioactive material with cells and tissues of the
human body. An exposure can be "acute" or "chronic" depending on how long an individual or organ is
exposed to the radiation. Internal exposures occur when radionuclides, which have entered the body (e.g.,
through the inhalation, ingestion, or dermal pathways), undergo radioactive decay resulting in the
deposition of energy to internal organs. External exposures occur when radiation enters the body directly
from sources located outside the body, such as radiation emitters from radionuclides on ground surfaces,
dissolved in water, or dispersed in the air. In general, external exposures are from material emitting
gamma radiation, which readily penetrate the skin and internal organs. Beta and alpha radiation from
external sources are far less penetrating and deposit their energy primarily on the skin's outer layer.
Consequently, their contribution to the absorbed dose of the total body dose, compared to that deposited
by gamma rays, may be negligible.
Characterizing the radiation dose to persons as a result of exposure to radiation is a complex issue. It is
difficult to: (1) measure internally the amount of energy actually transferred to an organic material and to
correlate any observed effects with this energy deposition; and (2) account for and predict secondary
processes, such as collision effects or biologically triggered effects, that are an indirect consequence of
the primary interaction event.
D.3.1 Dose/Exposure Units
D.3.1.1 Roentgen. The roentgen (R) is a unit of x or gamma-ray exposure and is a measured by the
amount of ionization caused in air by gamma or x radiation. One roentgen produces 2.58x10-4 coulomb
per kilogram of air. In the case of gamma radiation, over the commonly encountered range of photon
energy, the energy deposition in tissue for a dose of 1 R is about 0.0096 joules (J) /kg of tissue.
D.3.1.2 Absorbed Dose and Absorbed Dose Rate. The absorbed dose is defined as the energy
imparted by radiation to a unit mass of the tissue or organ. The unit of absorbed dose is the rad; 1 rad =
100 erg/gram = 0.01 J/kg in any medium. An exposure of 1 R results in a dose to soft tissue of
approximately 0.01 J/kg. The SI unit is the gray which is equivalent to 100 rad or 1 J/kg. Internal and
external exposures from radiation sources are not usually instantaneous but are distributed over extended
periods of time. The resulting rate of change of the absorbed dose to a small volume of mass is referred
to as the absorbed dose rate in units of rad/unit time.
D.3.1.3 Working Levels and Working Level Months. Working level (WL) is a measure of the
atmospheric concentration of radon and its short-lived progeny. One WL is defined as any combination
of short-lived radon daughters (through polonium-214), per liter of air, that will result in the emission of
1.3x105 MeV of alpha energy. An activity concentration of 100 pCi radon-222/L of air, in equilibrium
with its daughters, corresponds approximately to a potential alpha-energy concentration of 1 WL. The
AMERICIUM D-7
APPENDIX D
WL unit can also be used for thoron daughters. In this case, 1.3x105 MeV of alpha energy (1 WL) is
released by the thoron daughters in equilibrium with 7.5 pCi thoron/L. The potential alpha energy
exposure of miners is commonly expressed in the unit Working Level Month (WLM). One WLM
corresponds to exposure to a concentration of 1 WL for the reference period of 170 hours, or more
generally
WLM = concentration (WL) x exposure time (months) (one “month” = 170 working hours).
D.3.2 Dosimetry Models
Dosimetry models are used to estimate the dose from internally deposited to radioactive substances. The
models for internal dosimetry consider the amount of radionuclides entering the body, the factors
affecting their movement or transport through the body, distribution and retention of radionuclides in the
body, and the energy deposited in organs and tissues from the radiation that is emitted during spontaneous
decay processes. The dose pattern for radioactive materials in the body may be strongly influenced by the
route of entry of the material. For industrial workers, inhalation of radioactive particles with pulmonary
deposition and puncture wounds with subcutaneous deposition have been the most frequent. The general
population has been exposed via ingestion and inhalation of low levels of naturally occurring
radionuclides as well as radionuclides from nuclear weapons testing.
The models for external dosimetry consider only the photon doses (and neutron doses, where applicable)
to organs of individuals who are immersed in air or are exposed to a contaminated object.
D.3.2.1 Ingestion. Ingestion of radioactive materials is most likely to occur from contaminated
foodstuffs or water or eventual ingestion of inhaled compounds initially deposited in the lung. Ingestion
of radioactive material may result in toxic effects as a result of either absorption of the radionuclide or
irradiation of the gastrointestinal tract during passage through the tract, or a combination of both. The
fraction of a radioactive material absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract is variable, depending on the
specific element, the physical and chemical form of the material ingested, and the diet, as well as some
other metabolic and physiological factors. The absorption of some elements is influenced by age, usually
with higher absorption in the very young.
D.3.2.2 Inhalation. The inhalation route of exposure has long been recognized as being a major
portal of entry for both nonradioactive and radioactive materials. The deposition of particles within the
lung is largely dependent upon the size of the particles being inhaled. After the particle is deposited, the
retention will depend upon the physical and chemical properties of the dust and the physiological status of
the lung. The retention of the particle in the lung depends on the location of deposition, in addition to the
physical and chemical properties of the particles. The converse of pulmonary retention is pulmonary
clearance. There are three distinct mechanisms of clearance which operate simultaneously. Ciliary
clearance acts only in the upper respiratory tract. The second and third mechanisms act mainly in the
deep respiratory tract. These are phagocytosis and absorption. Phagocytosis is the engulfing of foreign
bodies by alveolar macrophages and their subsequent removal either up the ciliary "escalator" or by
entrance into the lymphatic system. Some inhaled soluble particles are absorbed into the blood and
translocated to other organs and tissues.
D.3.3 Internal Emitters
An internal emitter is a radionuclide that is inside the body. The absorbed dose from internally deposited
radionuclide depends on the energy absorbed per unit mass by the irradiated tissue. For a radionuclide
distributed uniformly throughout an infinitely large medium, the concentration of absorbed energy must
be equal to the concentration of energy emitted by the radionuclide. An infinitely large medium may be
AMERICIUM D-8
APPENDIX D
approximated by a tissue mass whose dimensions exceed the range of the particle. All alpha and most
beta radiation will be absorbed in the organ (or tissue) of reference. Gamma-emitting radionuclide
emissions are penetrating radiation, and a substantial fraction of gamma energy may be absorbed in
tissue. The dose to an organ or tissue is a function of the effective retention half-time, the energy released
in the tissue, the amount of radioactivity initially introduced, and the mass of the organ or tissue.
D.4 BIOLOGICAL EFFECTS OF RADIATION
When biological material is exposed to ionizing radiation, a chain of cellular events occurs as the ionizing
particle passes through the biological material. A number of theories have been proposed to describe the
interaction of radiation with biologically important molecules in cells and to explain the resulting damage
to biological systems from those interactions. Many factors may modify the response of a living
organism to a given dose of radiation. Factors related to the exposure include the dose rate, the energy of
the radiation, and the temporal pattern of the exposure. Biological considerations include factors such as
species, age, sex, and the portion of the body exposed. Several excellent reviews of the biological effects
of radiation have been published, and the reader is referred to these for a more in-depth discussion
(Brodsky 1996; Hobbs and McClellan 1986; ICRP 1984; Mettler and Moseley 1985; Rubin and Casarett
1968).
D.4.1 Radiation Effects at the Cellular Level
According to Mettler and Moseley (1985), at acute doses up to 10 rad (100 mGy), single strand breaks in
DNA may be produced. These single strand breaks may be repaired rapidly. With doses in the range of
50–500 rad (0.5–5 Gy), irreparable double-stranded DNA breaks are likely, resulting in cellular
reproductive death after one or more divisions of the irradiated parent cell. At large doses of radiation,
usually greater than 500 rad (5 Gy), direct cell death before division (interphase death) may occur from
the direct interaction of free-radicals with essential cellular macromolecules. Morphological changes at
the cellular level, the severity of which are dose-dependent, may also be observed.
The sensitivity of various cell types varies. According to the Bergonie-Tribondeau law, the sensitivity of
cell lines is directly proportional to their mitotic rate and inversely proportional to the degree of
differentiation (Mettler and Moseley 1985). Rubin and Casarett (1968) devised a classification system
that categorized cells according to type, function, and mitotic activity. The categories range from the
most sensitive type, "vegetative intermitotic cells", found in the stem cells of the bone marrow and the
gastrointestinal tract, to the least sensitive cell type, "fixed postmitotic cells," found in striated muscles or
long-lived neural tissues.
Cellular changes may result in cell death, which if extensive, may produce irreversible damage to an
organ or tissue or may result in the death of the individual. If the cell recovers, altered metabolism and
function may still occur, which may be repaired or may result in the manifestation of clinical symptoms.
These changes may also be expressed at a later time as tumors or cellular mutations, which may result in
abnormal tissue.
D.4.2 Radiation Effects at the Organ Level
In most organs and tissues the injury and the underlying mechanism for that injury are complex and may
involve a combination of events. The extent and severity of this tissue injury are dependent upon the
radiosensitivity of the various cell types in that organ system. Rubin and Casarett (1968) describe and
schematically display the events following radiation in several organ system types. These include: a
rapid renewal system, such as the gastrointestinal mucosa; a slow renewal system, such as the pulmonary
epithelium; and a nonrenewal system, such as neural or muscle tissue. In the rapid renewal system, organ
AMERICIUM D-9
APPENDIX D
injury results from the direct destruction of highly radiosensitive cells, such as the stem cells in the bone
marrow. Injury may also result from constriction of the microcirculation and from edema and
inflammation of the basement membrane, designated as the histohematic barrier, which may progress to
fibrosis. In slow renewal and nonrenewal systems, the radiation may have little effect on the parenchymal
cells, but ultimate parenchymal atrophy and death over several months result from fibrosis and occlusion
of the microcirculation.
D.4.3 Low Level Radiation Effects
Cancer is the major latent harmful effect produced by ionizing radiation and the one that most people
exposed to radiation are concerned about. The ability of alpha, beta, and gamma radiation to produce
cancer in virtually every tissue and organ in laboratory animals has been well-demonstrated. The
development of cancer is not an immediate effect. Radiation-induced leukemia has the shortest latent
period at about 2 years, while other radiation induced cancers, such as osteosarcoma, have latent periods
greater than 20 years. The mechanism by which cancer is induced in living cells is complex and is a topic
of intense study. Exposure to ionizing radiation can produce cancer at any site within the body; however,
some sites appear to be more common than others, such as the breast, lung, stomach, and thyroid.
DNA is the major target molecule during exposure to ionizing radiation. Other macromolecules, such as
lipids and proteins, are also at risk of damage when exposed to ionizing radiation. The genotoxicity of
ionizing radiation is an area of intense study, as damage to the DNA is ultimately responsible for many of
the adverse toxicological effects ascribed to ionizing radiation, including cancer. Damage to genetic
material is basic to developmental or teratogenic effects, as well. However, for effects other than cancer,
there is little evidence of human effects at low levels of exposure.
D.5 UNITS IN RADIATION PROTECTION AND REGULATION
D.5.1 Dose Equivalent (or Equivalent Dose)
Dose equivalent (as measured in rem or sievert) is a special radiation protection quantity that is used for
administrative and radiation safety purposes to express the absorbed dose in a manner which considers the
difference in biological effectiveness of various kinds of ionizing radiation. ICRP (1990) changed this
term to equivalent dose, but it has not yet been adopted by the USNRC or DOE.
The USNRC defines the dose equivalent, H, as the product of the absorbed dose, D, and the quality
factor, Q, at the point of interest in biological tissue using the formula H = D x Q. The NCRP similarly
defines equivalent dose, H, as the product of the absorbed dose, D, and the radiation weighting factor, wr
in the equation H = Dwr. The dose equivalent concept is applicable only to doses that are not great
enough to produce biomedical effects.
The quality factor or radiation weighting factor is a dimensionless quantity that depends in part on the
stopping power for charged particles, and it accounts for the differences in biological effectiveness found
among the types of radiation. Originally relative biological effectiveness (RBE) was used rather than Q
to define the quantity, rem, which was of use in risk assessment. The generally accepted values for
quality factors and radiation weighting factors for various radiation types are provided in Table D-3. The
dose equivalent rate is the time rate of change of the dose equivalent to organs and tissues and is
expressed as rem/unit time or sievert/unit time.
AMERICIUM D-10
APPENDIX D
Table D-3. Quality Factors (Q) and Radiation Weighting Factors
Type of radiation Quality factor (Q) Radiation Weighting Factor (wr)

X, gamma, or beta radiation 1 1
Alpha particles, multiple-charged 20 20
particles, fission fragments and
heavy particles of unknown charge
Neutrons (100 keV to 2 MeV), 7.5–11 20
protons, alpha particles, charged
particles of unknown energy depending on energy
Neutrons of unknown energy 10

Thermal neutrons 2 5
High-energy protons 10 5
Source: USNRC. 2004. Standards for the protection against radiation, tables 1004(b).1 and 1004(b).2. 10 CFR 20.1004.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. NCRP 1993.
D.5.2 Relative Biological Effectiveness
RBE is used to denote the experimentally determined ratio of the absorbed dose from one radiation type
to the absorbed dose of a reference radiation required to produce an identical biologic effect under the
same conditions. Gamma rays from cobalt-60 and 200–250 kVp x-rays have been used as reference
standards. The term RBE has been widely used in experimental radiobiology, and the term quality factor
(or radiation weighting factor) is used in calculations of dose equivalents for radiation safety purposes
(ICRP 1977; NCRP 1971; UNSCEAR 1982). Any RBE value applies only to a specific biological end
point, in a specific exposure, under specific conditions to a specific species. There are no generally
applicable values of RBE since RBEs are specific to a given exposure scenario.
D.5.3 Effective Dose Equivalent (or Effective Dose)
The absorbed dose is usually defined as the mean energy imparted per unit mass to an organ or tissue.
This represents a simplification of the actual problem. Normally when an individual ingests or inhales a
radionuclide or is exposed to external radiation that enters the body (gamma), the dose is not uniform
throughout the whole body. The simplifying assumption is that the detriment will be the same whether
the body is uniformly or non-uniformly irradiated. In an attempt to compare detriment from absorbed
dose of a limited portion of the body with the detriment from total body dose, the ICRP (1977) has
derived a concept of effective dose equivalent. ICRP (1990) changed this term to effective dose, but it
has not yet been adopted by the USNRC or DOE.
The effective dose equivalent, HE, is
HE = ∑ Wt Ht
where Ht is the dose equivalent (or equivalent dose) in the tissue t, Wt is the tissue weighting factor in that
tissue, which represents the estimated proportion of the stochastic risk resulting from tissue, t, to the
stochastic risk when the whole body is uniformly irradiated for occupational exposures under certain
conditions (ICRP 1977). Tissue weighting factors for selected tissues are listed in Table D-4.
AMERICIUM D-11
APPENDIX D
Table D-4. Tissue Weighting Factors for Calculating Effective Dose

Equivalent and Effective Dose for Selected Tissues
Tissue weighting factor

Tissue NCRP115/ ICRP60 USNRC/ICRP26
Bladder 0.05 –
Bone marrow 0.12 0.12
Bone surface 0.01 0.03
Breast 0.05 0.15
Colon 0.12 –
Esophagus 0.05 –
Gonads 0.20 0.25
Liver 0.05 –
Lung 0.12 0.12
Skin 0.01 –
Stomach 0.12 –
Thyroid 0.05 0.03
Remainder 0.05 0.30
Total 1.00 1.00
ICRP60 = International Commission on Radiological Protection, 1990 Recommendations of the ICRP
NCRP115 = National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. 1993. Risk Estimates for Radiation Protection,
Report 115. Bethesda, Maryland
USNRC = Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20
D.5.4 SI Units
The ICRU (1980), ICRP (1984), and NCRP (1985) now recommend that the rad, roentgen, curie, and rem
be replaced by the SI units: gray (Gy), Coulomb per kilogram (C/kg), Becquerel (Bq), and sievert (Sv),
respectively. The relationship between the customary units and the international system of units (SI) for
radiological quantities is shown in Table D-5.
AMERICIUM D-12
APPENDIX D
Table D-5. Comparison of Common and SI Units for Radiation Quantities
Customary
Quantity units Definition SI units Definition
Activity (A) curie (Ci) 3.7x1010 trans- becquerel (Bq) s-1
formations s-1
Absorbed dose (D) rad 10-2 Jkg-1 gray (Gy) Jkg-1
Absorbed dose rate rad per second 10-2 Jkg-1s-1 gray per second Jkg-1 s-1
(Ď) (rad s-1) (Gy s-1)
Dose equivalent (H) rem 10-2 Jkg-1 sievert (Sv) Jkg-1
Dose equivalent rate rem per second 10-2 Jkg-1s-1 sievert per second Jkg-1 s-1
( ) (rem s-1) (Sv s-1)
Effective dose rem 10-2 Jkg-1 Sievert (Sv) Jkg-1
Equivalent dose (H) rem 10-2 Jkg-1 Sievert (Sv) Jkg-1
Linear energy kiloelectron 1.602x10-10 Jm-1 kiloelectron volts 1.602x10-10 Jm-1
transfer (LET) volts per per micrometer
micrometer (keV µm-1)
(keV µm-1)
Jkg-1 = Joules per kilogram; Jkg-1s-1 = Joules per kilogram per second; Jm-1 = Joules per meter; s-1 = per second
REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX D
ATSDR. 1990a. Toxicological profile for thorium. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
Public Health Service. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. Atlanta, GA.
ATSDR. 1990b. Toxicological profile for radium. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
ATSDR. 1990c. Toxicological profile for radon. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
ATSDR. 1999. Toxicological profile for uranium. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
BEIR III. 1980. The effects on populations of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation. Committee
on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiations, National Research Council. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.
BEIR IV. 1988. Health risks of radon and other internally deposited alpha emitters. Committee on the
Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiations, National Research Council. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.
BEIR V. 1988. Health effects of exposure to low levels of ionizing radiation. Committee on the
Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiations, National Research Council. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.
Brodsky A. 1996. Review of radiation risks and uranium toxicity with application to decisions
associated with decommissioning clean-up criteria. Hebron,Connecticut: RSA Publications.
AMERICIUM D-13
APPENDIX D
Cember H. 1996. Introduction to health physics. New York., NY: McGraw Hill.
Early P, Razzak M, Sodee D. 1979. Nuclear medicine technology. 2nd ed. St. Louis: C.V. Mosby
Company.
Eichholz G. 1982. Environmental aspects of nuclear power. Ann Arbor, MI: Ann Arbor Science.
Hendee W. 1973. Radioactive isotopes in biological research. New York, NY: John Wiley and Sons.
Hobbs C, McClellan R. 1986. Radiation and radioactive materials. In: Doull J, et al., eds. Casarett and
Doull's Toxicology. 3rd ed. New York, NY: Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc., 497-530.
ICRP. 1977. International Commission on Radiological Protection. Recommendations of the

International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 26. Vol 1. No. 3. Oxford:
Pergamon Press.
ICRP. 1979. International Commission on Radiological Protection. Limits for intakes of radionuclides
by workers. ICRP Publication 20. Vol. 3. No. 1-4. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
ICRP. 1979. Limits for Intakes of Radionuclides by Workers. Publication 30. International
Commission on Radiological Protection. Pergamon Press.
ICRP. 1984. International Commission on Radiological Protection. A compilation of the major concepts
and quantities in use by ICRP. ICRP Publication 42. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
ICRP. 1990. International Commission on Radiological Protection 1990 Recommendations of the ICRP
ICRU. 1980. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements. ICRU Report No. 33.
Washington, DC.
James A. 1987. A reconsideration of cells at risk and other key factors in radon daughter dosimetry. In:
Hopke P, ed. Radon and its decay products: Occurrence, properties and health effects. ACS Symposium
Series 331. Washington, DC: American Chemical Society, 400-418.
James A, Roy M. 1987. Dosimetric lung models. In: Gerber G, et al., ed. Age-related factors in
radionuclide metabolism and dosimetry. Boston: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 95-108.
Kondo S. 1993. Health effects of low-level radiation. Kinki University Press, Osaka, Japan (available
from Medical Physics Publishing, Madison, Wisconsin).
Kato H, Schull W. 1982. Studies of the mortality of A-bomb survivors. Report 7 Part 8, Cancer
mortality among atomic bomb survivors, 1950-78. Radiat Res 90;395-432.
Mettler F, Moseley R. 1985. Medical effects of ionizing radiation. New York: Grune and Stratton.
NCRP. 1971. Basic radiation protection criteria. National Council on Radiation Protection and
Measurements. Report No. 39. Washington, DC.
NCRP. 1985. A handbook of radioactivity measurements procedures. 2nd ed. National Council on
Radiation Protection and Measurements. Report No. 58. Bethesda, MD:
AMERICIUM D-14
APPENDIX D
NCRP. 1993. Risk estimates for radiation protection. National Council on Radiation Protection and
Measurements. Report 115. Bethesda, Maryland
Otake M, Schull W. 1984. Mental retardation in children exposed in utero to the atomic bombs: A
reassessment. Technical Report RERF TR 1-83, Radiation Effects Research Foundation, Japan.
Rubin P, Casarett G. 1968. Clinical radiation pathology. Philadelphia: W.B. Sanders Company, 33.
UNSCEAR. 1977. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. Sources
and effects of ionizing radiation. New York: United Nations.
UNSCEAR. 1982. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. Ionizing
radiation: Sources and biological effects. New York: United Nations.
UNSCEAR. 1986. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. Genetic
and somatic effects of ionizing radiation. New York: United Nations.
UNSCEAR. 1988. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. Sources,
effects and risks of ionization radiation. New York: United Nations.
UNSCEAR. 1993. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. Sources
and effects of ionizing radiation. New York: United Nations.
USNRC. 1999. Standards for the protection against radiation, table 1004(b).1. 10 CFR 20.1004. U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
AMERICIUM E-1
APPENDIX E. INDEX
absorbed dose........................................................................................................................................ 16, 93

adsorbed ............................................................................................................................................ 145, 154
adsorption.................................................................................................. 142, 143, 144, 145, 150, 151, 194
anaerobic ................................................................................................................................................... 146
bioaccumulation........................................................................................................................ 146, 150, 185
bioavailability ........................................................................................................................................... 187
bioconcentration factor ............................................................................................................................. 149
biokinetic .............................................................................................. 16, 60, 62, 76, 84, 91, 103, 152, 189
biokinetics ......................................................................................................................... 16, 19, 82, 92, 103
biological half-time..................................................................................................................... 32, 103, 151
biological half-times ................................................................................................................................... 32
biomarker .............................................................................................................................................. 92, 93
biomarkers .................................................................................................................................... 92, 93, 189
blood cell count....................................................................................................................... 21, 23, 28, 102
blood cell counts ..................................................................................................................... 21, 23, 28, 102
body weight effects ............................................................................................................................... 23, 25
breast milk................................................................................................................................. 103, 182, 183
cancer ...............................5, 7, 13, 14, 24, 25, 27, 28, 30, 89, 90, 95, 97, 100, 104, 180, 205, 207, 208, 212
carcinogen ................................................................................................................................................... 13
carcinogenic .......................................................................................................................................... 17, 30
carcinomas .................................................................................................................................................. 30
cardiovascular ................................................................................................................................. 20, 25, 27
cardiovascular effects...................................................................................................................... 20, 25, 27
caribou ...................................................................................................................................................... 179
Chernobyl...................................................................... 4, 125, 131, 141, 154, 156, 162, 168, 169, 176, 179
chromosomal aberrations ............................................................................................................................ 94
clearance ..............................................................32, 33, 38, 53, 55, 57, 62, 63, 64, 67, 68, 86, 90, 150, 193
crustaceans ................................................................................................................ 127, 150, 172, 173, 180
death............................................................................................ 17, 19, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 45, 91, 102, 180
dermal effects........................................................................................................................................ 25, 27
DNA............................................................................................................................................................ 93
dose coefficients............................................................................................................................ 16, 62, 178
dose equivalent...................................................................................................................... 16, 31, 179, 212
elimination half-time................................................................................................................................... 50
elimination half-times ................................................................................................................................. 50
endocrine................................................................................................................................... 22, 25, 87, 88
endocrine effects ............................................................................................................................. 22, 25, 28
erythema...................................................................................................................................................... 15
external radiation .................................................................................................................... 12, 31, 32, 212
fetal tissue ............................................................................................................................................. 29, 51
fetus..................................................................................................... 50, 86, 89, 91, 92, 103, 104, 105, 206
fractional absorption ................................................................................................................................... 90
gastrointestinal effects .......................................................................................................................... 25, 27
general population....................................................................... 4, 11, 14, 92, 129, 175, 180, 182, 183, 187
genotoxic................................................................................................................................. 17, 31, 32, 101
genotoxicity............................................................................................................................................... 101
AMERICIUM E-2
APPENDIX E
groundwater ................................................................ 15, 122, 128, 132, 133, 141, 143, 156, 157, 159, 205
half-life...............................................2, 3, 11, 35, 67, 92, 107, 119, 120, 125, 130, 131, 150, 152, 159, 193
Hematological Effects..................................................................................................................... 21, 26, 28
hematopoietic.................................................................................................................................. 13, 14, 21
hepatic effects ................................................................................................................................. 22, 25, 28
hydrolysis.............................................................................................................................................. 12, 87
immunological .................................................................................................................. 17, 23, 24, 26, 100
leukopenia ................................................................................................................................................... 13
lichen......................................................................................................................................... 151, 169, 179
lichens ....................................................................................................................................................... 179
lymphatic .................................................................................................................................................... 63
metabolic effects ................................................................................................................................... 23, 27
micronuclei ................................................................................................................................................. 31
milk ....................................................................................... 51, 91, 103, 105, 153, 175, 176, 178, 182, 183
mucociliary ............................................................................................................. 19, 38, 54, 55, 57, 68, 84
musculoskeletal effects ............................................................................................................................... 21
neonatal ........................................................................................................................... 40, 50, 91, 104, 183
neoplastic .................................................................................................................................................... 30
neurobehavioral........................................................................................................................................... 88
nuclear.................................1, 3, 4, 7, 11, 15, 18, 31, 93, 117, 119, 120, 121, 122, 125, 128, 129, 130, 131,
132, 133, 135, 140, 142, 144, 148, 151, 153, 154, 155, 156, 158, 159, 160, 162,
163, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 179, 181, 183, 184, 185, 186
ocular effects................................................................................................................................... 19, 25, 27
pharmacodynamic ....................................................................................................................................... 58
pharmacokinetic.............................................................................................................................. 58, 59, 61
pharmacokinetics .............................................................................................................. 18, 89, 90, 95, 104
placenta ....................................................................................................................................................... 86
placental barrier ........................................................................................................................................ 103
radiation syndrome.................................................................................................................................... 102
rate constant ................................................................................................................................................ 78
rate constants............................................................................................................................................... 78
reindeer ..................................................................................................................................... 151, 169, 179
renal effects..................................................................................................................................... 22, 25, 27
retention ...............16, 33, 35, 36, 38, 40, 46, 53, 63, 67, 68, 73, 76, 78, 80, 85, 87, 140, 150, 151, 161, 193
sequestered.................................................................................................................................................. 87
solubility ......................................................................................................... 38, 62, 84, 134, 147, 152, 185
thrombocytopenia ........................................................................................................................... 13, 21, 26
thyroid............................................................................................................................... 6, 13, 28, 100, 119
thyroxine ..................................................................................................................................................... 28
toxicokinetic............................................................................................................................ 15, 18, 54, 103
toxicokinetics ............................................................................................................................................ 103
tumors ................................................................................................................................................... 30, 95
weanling...................................................................................................................................................... 44

Toxicological Profile For Americium

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Toxicological Profile For Americium

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Toxicological Profile For Americium

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

TOXICOLOGICAL PROFILE FOR

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry

QUICK REFERENCE FOR HEALTH CARE PROVIDERS

Toxicological Profiles are a unique compilation of toxicological information on a given hazardous

Primary Chapters/Sections of Interest

Other Sections of Interest:

ATSDR Information Center

Case Studies in Environmental Medicine: Taking an Exposure History—The importance of taking an

Hazards; Skin Lesions and Environmental Exposures; Cholinesterase-Inhibiting Pesticide

Managing Hazardous Materials Incidents is a three-volume set of recommendations for on-scene

Other Agencies and Organizations

The American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine (ACOEM) is an association of

Sam Keith, M.S., C.H.P.

Lisa Ingerman, Ph.D.

THE PROFILE HAS UNDERGONE THE FOLLOWING ATSDR INTERNAL REVIEWS:

1. Ronald Kathren, C.H.P., D.E.E., Emeritus Professor of Pharmaceutical Science, Washington

1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT.......................................................................................................... 1

2. RELEVANCE TO PUBLIC HEALTH ................................................................................................. 11

3.2.2.6 Developmental Effects ................................................................................................. 25

4. CHEMICAL, PHYSICAL, and RADIOLOGICAL INFORMATION ............................................... 103

5. PRODUCTION, IMPORT/EXPORT, USE, AND DISPOSAL .......................................................... 113

6. POTENTIAL FOR HUMAN EXPOSURE ......................................................................................... 121

7. ANALYTICAL METHODS ............................................................................................................... 183

8. REGULATIONS AND ADVISORIES ............................................................................................... 201

9. REFERENCES .................................................................................................................................... 209

10. GLOSSARY ...................................................................................................................................... 259

APPENDIX A. ATSDR MINIMAL RISK LEVELS AND WORKSHEETS.........................................A-1

3-1. Conceptual Representation of a Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic (PBPK) Model for a

3-3. The Human Respiratory Tract Model: Absorption into Blood.......................................................... 66

3-4. ICRP (1989) Model of Americium Biokinetics.................................................................................. 68

3-5. Leggett (1992) Model of Americium Biokinetics .............................................................................. 70

3-9. Existing Information on Health Effects of Americium ...................................................................... 94

5-1. Production Table for 241Am .............................................................................................................. 115

6-1. Frequency of NPL Sites with Americium Contamination................................................................ 122

3-1. Retention and Absorption Estimates in Animals Exposed to Americium Compounds by

3-2. Absorption Estimates in Animals Exposed to Americium Compounds by Ingestion ........................ 40

3-3. Tissue Americium Levels from Human Autopsies............................................................................. 46

4-1. Principal Americium Isotopes .......................................................................................................... 105

4-3. Properties of Some Americium Ions................................................................................................. 109

6-1. Concentrations of 241Am in Soil and Sediment................................................................................. 132

6-2. Bioconcentration Factors for 241Am.................................................................................................. 145

6-3. Concentrations of 241Am in Water .................................................................................................... 153

6-4. Average Concentrations of 241Am in Food ....................................................................................... 159

6-5. Concentrations of 241Am in Fauna .................................................................................................... 162

8.1 Regulations and Guidelines Applicable to Americium...................................................................... 200

1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT

1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT

1.1 WHAT IS AMERICIUM?

Americium (pronounced, 1am-c-0ris(h)-‘-cm) is a human-made, radioactive element. There are

1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT

The predominant commercial use of 241Am is in ionization-type smoke detectors. This

1.2 WHAT HAPPENS TO AMERICIUM WHEN IT ENTERS THE ENVIRONMENT?

1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT

1.3 HOW MIGHT I BE EXPOSED TO AMERICIUM?

1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT

1.4 HOW CAN AMERICIUM ENTER AND LEAVE MY BODY?

1.5 HOW CAN AMERICIUM AFFECT MY HEALTH?

1. PUBLIC HEALTH STATEMENT