RDTroja,
I understand the electron capture mechanism, but it's nothing special. It's basically an alternative to positron emission (i.e., a proton needs to turn into a neutron), but positron emission is usually reserved to lower atomic number isotopes[? - I think]. It's just another form of decay, by isotopes that aren't otherwise a significant ALARA concern (e.g., little or no penetrating gammas). I understand that plants may make an attempt to filter or reduce production of gamma emitting isotopes (e.g., through use of different materials) but that isn't increasing production of EC isotope, it's just reducing the other contaminants [isn't it?]. EC isotopes (e.g., Fe-55) are already present in all commercial power waste streams, but so is Ni-63, which is a very weak beta emitter which presents the same operational problems as Fe-55, so I guess my question would be "why is the EC mechanism being singled out?".
I have to believe that there are some isotopic concentrating mechanisms at work, otherwise you wouldn't have "EC Areas." You'd just realize that EC isotopes are your primary isotopic concern and monitor accordingly (i.e., everywhere would be an EC Area, wouldn't it?).
wlrun3,
Mixed Activation and Fission Products (MAFP); your basic commercial power plant isotopic waste stream, as opposed to a NORM or Uranium or TRU waste stream or something more exotic from a research facility, hospital, or university (e.g., pure C-14 waste streams). Sometimes you use lingo so much that you forget what lingo is standard and what's specialized for your business.
mgm