Unttad States
          Environmental Protector
          Agency
Air and Radiation
(6604J)
402-R-93-021
September 1993
oEPA  EPA's Map of Radon Zones
           ALABAMA
                                                  at toast 60% mydsa fibe

-------
Page Intentionally Blank

-------
       EPA'S MAP OF RADON ZONES
                ALABAMA •
             RADON DIVISION
  OFFICE OF RADIATION AND INDOOR AIR
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
            SEPTEMBER, 1993

-------
                             ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
       This document was prepared by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's)
Office of Radiation and Indoor Air (ORIA) in conjunction with the U.S. Geological Survey
(USGS).  Sharon W. White was the EPA project manager.  Numerous other people in  ORIA
were instrumental in the development of the Map of Radon Zones, including Lisa Ratcliff,
Kirk Maconaughey, R. Thomas Peake, Dave Rowson, and Steve Page.

       EPA would especially like to acknowledge the outstanding effort of the USGS
radon team — Linda Gundersen, Randy Schumann, Jim Otton, Doug Owen, Russell
Dubiel, Kendell Dickinson, and Sandra Szarzi — in developing the technical base for the
Map of Radon Zones.

       ORIA would also like to recognize the efforts of all the EPA Regional Offices  in
coordinating the reviews with the State programs and the Association of American State
Geologists (AASG) for providing a liaison  with the State geological surveys. In addition,
appreciation is  expressed to all of the State radon programs and geological  surveys for their
technical input and review of the Map of Radon Zones.

-------
           TABLE OF CONTENTS
              I. OVERVIEW
     II. THE USGS/EPA RADON POTENTIAL
       ASSESSMENTSiINTRODUCTION
  III. REGION 4 GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL
               SUMMARY
V. PRELIMINARY GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL
         ASSESSMENT OF ALABAMA
 V. EPA'S MAP OF RADON ZONES - ALABAMA

-------
Page Intentionally Blank

-------
                                     OVERVIEW
       Sections 307 and 309 of the 1988 Indoor Radon Abatement Act (IRAA) direct EPA to
identify areas of the United States that have the potential to produce elevated levels of radon.
EPA, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the Association of American State Geologists
(AASG) have worked closely over the past several years to produce a series of maps and
documents which address these directives.  The EPA Map of Radon Zones is a compilation of
that work  and fulfills the requirements of sections 307 and 309 of IRAA.  The Map of Radon
Zones identifies, on a county-by-county basis, areas of the U.S. that have the highest potential
for elevated indoor radon levels (greater than 4 pCi/L).
       The Map of Radon Zones is designed to assist national, State and local governments
and organizations to target their radon program activities and resources.  It is also intended to
help building code officials determine areas that are the highest priority  for adopting  radon-
resistant building practices.  The Map of Radon Zones should not be used to determine if
individual homes in any given area need to be tested for radon.   EPA recommends that all
homes be tested  for radon, regardless of geographic location or the zone designation of
the county in which they are located.
       This  document provides background information concerning the development of the
Map of Radon Zones. It explains the purposes of the map, the approach for developing the
map (including  the respective roles of EPA and USGS), the data sources used, the conclusions
and confidence  levels developed for the prediction of radon potential, and the review process
that was conducted to finalize this effort.

BACKGROUND

       Radon (Rn222) is a colorless,  odorless, radioactive gas.  It  comes from the natural
decay of uranium that is found in nearly all soils.  It typically moves through the ground to
the air above and into homes  and other buildings through cracks  and openings in the
foundation.  Any  home,  school or workplace may have a radon problem, regardless of
whether it is new or old, well-sealed or drafty, or with or without a basement. Nearly one out
of every 15  homes in  the U.S. is estimated to have elevated annual average levels of indoor
radon.
       Radon first gained national attention in early  1984, when  extremely high levels of
indoor radon were found in areas of Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York, along the
Reading Prong-physiographic province.  EPA established a Radon Program in 1985 to assist
States and homeowners in reducing their risk of lung cancer from indoor radon.
       Since 1985, EPA and USGS have been working together  to continually increase our
understanding of radon sources and the migration dynamics that  cause elevated indoor radon
levels.  Early efforts resulted in the 1987 map entitled "Areas with Potentially High Radon
Levels."  This map was based on limited geologic information only because few indoor radon
measurements were available  at the time. The development of EPA's Map of Radon Zones
and its technical foundation, USGS' National Geologic Radon Province Map, has been based
on additional information from six years of the State/EPA Residential Radon Surveys,
independent State residential surveys, and continued  expansion of geologic and geophysical
information, particularly the data from the  National Uranium Resource Evaluation project.
                                          1-1

-------
 Purpose of the Map of Radon Zones

       EPA's Map of Radon Zones (Figure 1) assigns each of the 3141 counties in the
 United States to one of three zones:

              o     Zone 1 counties have a predicted average indoor screening level > than
                    4 pCi/L

              o     Zone 2 counties have a predicted average screening level > 2 pCi/L  and
                    < 4 pCi/L

              o     Zone 3 counties have a predicted average screening level < 2 pCi/L

       The Zone designations were determined by assessing five factors that are known to be
 important indicators of radon potential: indoor radon measurements, geology, aerial
 radioactivity, soil parameters, and foundation types.
       The predictions of average screening levels in each of the Zones is an expression of
 radon potential in the lowest liveable area of a structure.  This map is unable to estimate
 actual  exposures to radon.  EPA recommends methods for testing and fixing individual homes
 based on an estimate of actual exposure to radon. For more information on testing and  fixing
 elevated radon levels in homes consult these EPA publications: A Citizen's Guide to Radon,
 the Consumer's Guide to Radon Reduction and the Home Buyer's and Seller's Guide to
 Radon,
       EPA believes that States, focal governments and other organizations can achieve
 optimal risk reductions by targeting resources and program activities to  high radon potential
 areas.  Emphasizing targeted approaches (technical assistance, information and outreach
 efforts, promotion of real estate mandates  and policies and building codes, etc.) in such  areas
 addresses the greatest potential  risks first.
       EPA also believes that the use of passive radon control systems in the construction of
 new homes in Zone 1 counties, and the activation of those systems if necessitated by follow-
 up testing,  is a cost effective approach to achieving significant radon  risk reduction.
       The Map of Radon Zones and its supporting  documentation establish no regulatory
 requirements.  Use of this map  by State or local radon programs  and  building code officials is
voluntary.  The information presented on the  Map of Radon Zones and  in the supporting
 documentation is  not applicable to radon in water.

 Development of the Map of Radon Zones

       The technical foundation for the Map of Radon Zones is the USGS Geologic Radon
 Province Map. In order to examine the radon potential for the United States, the USGS
 began by identifying approximately  360 separate geologic provinces for the  U.S.  The
provinces are shown on the USGS  Geologic Radon Province Map (Figure 2). Each of the
geologic provinces was evaluated by examining the available data for that area: indoor radon
 measurements, geology, aerial radioactivity, soil parameters, and foundation  types.  As stated
previously, these five factors are considered to be of basic importance in assessing radon
                                          1-2

-------
 Figure 1
                                                EPA  Map  of  Radon  Zones
                                                                                 lone designation for Puerto KKO is under development.
Guam   Preliminary Zone designation.    J£*f f/,e purpose of this mop is to assist Notional, State and local organizations to target their resources and to implement radon-resistant building codes.
                                     This map is not intended to be used to determine if a home in a given zone should be tested for radon. Homes with elevated levels of radon have been fauna
                                     in all three zones, Alt homes should be tested, regardless of geographic location.
      IMPORTANT:  Consult the EPA Map of Radon Zones document (EPA-402-R-93-071) before using  this map.  This document contains information on radon potential variations within counties.
                EPA also recommends that this map be supplemented with any available local data in order to further understand and predict the radon potential of a specific area.

-------
Figure 2
   GENERALIZED GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL OF THE UNITED STATES
                            by the U.S. Geological Survey
                                        Continental United States
                                           and Hawaii
                                                 500
                                                                Geologic Radon
                                                                  Potential
                                                                {Predicted Average
                                                              Screening Measurement)
                                                                  LOW (<2pCI/L)
                                                              P^3 MODERATE/VARIABLE


                                                                  HIGH (>4pCi/L)
                                            Miles
                                                                          6/93

-------
 potential and some data are available for each of these factors in every geologic province. The
• province-boundaries do not coincide with political borders (county .and .state)-but define areas
 of general radon potential.  The five factors were assigned numerical values based on an
 assessment of their respective contribution to radon potential, and a confidence level was
 assigned to each contributing variable.  The approach used by USGS to estimate the radon
 potential for each province is described in  Part II of this document.
       EPA  subsequently developed the Map of Radon Zones by extrapolating from the
 province level to the county level so that all counties in the U.S. were assigned to one of
 three radon zones.  EPA assigned each  county to a given zone based on its provincial radon
 potential.  For example, if a county'is located within a geologic province that has a predicted.
 average screening level greater than 4 pCi/L, it was assigned to Zone 1., Likewise, counties
 located in  provinces with predicted average screening levels > 2 pCi/L and < 4 pCi/L, and
 less than 2 pCi/L, were assigned to Zones 2 and 3, respectively.
       If the boundaries of a county fall in more than one geologic province, the county was
 assigned to a zone based on the predicted radon potential of the province in which most of
 the area lies. For example, if three different provinces cross through a given county, the
 county was assigned to the zone representing the radon potential  of the province containing
 most of the county's land area.  (In this case, it is not technically correct to say that the
 predicted average screening level applies to the entire county since the county falls in
 multiple provinces with differing radon potentials.)
       Figures 3 and 4 demonstrate an  example of how EPA extrapolated the county zone
 designations for Nebraska from the USGS  geologic province map for the State.  As figure 3
 shows, USGS has identified 5 geologic provinces for Nebraska.  Most of the counties are
 extrapolated "straight" from their corresponding provinces, but there are counties "partitioned"
 by several provinces — for example, Lincoln  County.  Although Lincoln county falls in
 multiple provinces, it was assigned to Zone 3 because most of its area falls in the province
 with the lowest  radon potential.
       It is important to note that EPA's extrapolation  from the province level to the
 county level may mask significant "highs" and "lows" within specific counties.  In other
 words, within-county variations in radon potential are not shown on the Map of Radon
 Zones. EPA recommends that users who may need to address specific within-county
 variations in radon potential  (e.g., local government officials considering the
 implementation of radon-resistant construction codes) consult USGS* Geologic Radon
 Province Map and  the State chapters provided with this map for more detailed
 information, as well as any locally available data.

 Map Validation

       The Map of Radon Zones is intended to represent a preliminary assessment of radon
 potential for the entire United States. The factors that are  used in this effort —indoor radon
 data, geology, aerial radioactivity, soils, and foundation type — are basic indicators for radon
 potential.  It is important to note, however, that the map's county zone designations are not
 "statistically valid" predictions  due to the nature of the data available for these 5 factors at the
 county level.  In order to validate the map in light of this lack of statistical confidence, EPA
 conducted a number of analyses.  These analyses have helped EPA  to identify the best
 situations in which to apply the map, and its limitations.
                                           1-5

-------
Figure 3
                 Geologic  Radofl  Potential  Provinces  for  .Nebraska
         Lincoln County
           8i|i      Underlie      Lo«
Figure 4
         NEBRASKA  -  EPA  Map  of Radon Zones
        Lincoln County
         Zoat I     lent I    Zoic 3
                                       1-6

-------
       One such analysis involved comparing county zone designations to indoor radon
• measurements from the State/EPA Residential Radon Surveys (SRRS). -- Screening averages
 for counties with at least 100 measurements were compared to the counties' predicted radon
 potential as indicated by the Map of Radon Zones,  EPA found that 72% of the county
 screening averages were correctly reflected by the appropriate zone designations on the Map.
 In all other cases, they only differed by 1 zone.
       Another accuracy analysis used the annual average data from the National Residential
 Radon Survey (NRRS).  The NRRS  indicated that approximately 6 million homes in the
 United States have annual averages greater than or equal to 4 pCi/L.  By cross checking the
 county location of the approximately 5,700 homes which participated in  the survey, their
 radon  measurements,  and the zone designations  for these counties, EPA found that
 approximately 3.8 million homes of the 5.4 million  homes with radon levels greater than or
 equal to 4 pCi/L will be found in counties designated as Zone 1.  A random sampling of an
 equal number of counties would have only found approximately 1.8 million homes greater
 than 4 pCi/L. In other words, this analysis indicated that the map approach is three times
 more efficient at identifying high radon areas than random selection of zone designations.
       Together, these analyses show that the approach EPA used to develop the Map of
 Radon Zones is a reasonable one.  In addition, the Agency's confidence is enhanced by results
 of the extensive State review process — the map generally agrees with the States' knowledge
 of and experience in their own jurisdictions.  However, the accuracy analyses highlight two
 important points:  the fact that elevated levels will be found in Zones 2 and 3, and that there
 will be significant numbers of homes with lower indoor radon levels in all of the Zones.  For
 these reasons,  users of the Map of Radon Zones need to supplement the Map with locally
 available data whenever  possible.  Although all  known  "hot spots", i.e.,  localized  areas of
 consistently elevated levels,  are discussed in the State-
 specific chapters, accurately defining the boundaries of the "hot spots" on this  scale of map is
 not possible at  this time.  Also, unknown "hot spots" do exist.
       The Map of Radon Zones is intended to  be a starting point for characterizing radon
 potential because our knowledge of radon sources and transport is always growing.  Although
 this effort represents the best data available at this time, EPA will continue to  study these
 parameters and others such as house  construction, ventilation features and meteorology factors
 in order to better characterize the presence of radon in U.S homes, especially in high  risk
 areas.  These efforts will eventually- assist EPA in refining and revising the conclusions of the
 Map of Radon  Zones. And  although this map is most appropriately used as a targeting tool
 by  the, aforementioned audiences — the Agency encourages all residents to test their homes
 for radon, regardless of geographic location or the zone designation  of the county in
 which they live.  Similarly, the Map of Radon Zones should not to be used in lieu of
 testing during real estate transactions.

 Review Process

       The Map of Radon Zones has undergone extensive review within EPA and outside the
 Agency.  The Association of American State Geologists (AASG) played an integral role in
 this review process.  The AASG individual State geologists have reviewed their State-specific
 information, the USGS Geologic Radon Province Map, and other materials for their geologic
 content and consistency.
                                           1-7

-------
        In .addition to each State geologist providing technical comments,.the State radon
'offices were asked to comment on their respective States' radon potential evaluations.  In
 particular, the States were asked to evaluate the data used to assign their counties to specific
 zones.  EPA and USGS worked with the States to resolve any issues concerning county zone
 designations.  In a few cases, States have requested changes in county  zone designations.  The
 requests were based on additional data from the State on geology, indoor radon
 measurements, population, etc. Upon reviewing the data submitted by the States, EPA did
 make some changes in  zone designations.  These changes, which do not strictly follow the
 methodology outlined in-this document,-are discussed in'the respective State chapters.
        EPA encourages the States and counties to conduct further research and data collection
 efforts  to refine the  Map of Radon Zones.  EPA would like  to be kept informed of any
 changes the States, counties, or others make to the maps.  Updates and revisions will be
 handled in a similar fashion to the way the map was developed.  States should notify EPA of
 any proposed changes by forwarding the changes through the Regional EPA offices that are
 listed in Part II.  Depending on the amount of new information that is  presented, EPA  will
 consider updating this map periodically.  The  State radon programs should initiate proper
 notification of the appropriate State officials when the Map of Radon Zones is released and
 when revisions or updates are made  by  the State or EPA.
                                           1-8

-------
    THE USGS/EPA RADON POTENTIAL ASSESSMENTS: AN INTRODUCTION
                                           by
                     Linda C.S. Gttndersen and R. Randall Schumann
                                  U.S. Geological Survey
                                          and
                                    Sharon  W. White
                           U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

BACKGROUND

    The Indoor Radon Abatement Act of 1988 (15 U.S.C, 2661-2671) directed the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to identify areas of the United States th~at have the
potential to produce harmful levels of indoor radon. These characterizations were to be based
on both geological data and on indoor radon levels in homes and other structures. The EPA
also was directed to develop model  standards and techniques for new building construction
that would provide adequate prevention or mitigation of radon entry. As  part of an
Interagency Agreement between the EPA and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the USGS
has prepared radon potential estimates for the United States. This report is one of ten
booklets that document this effort.   The purpose  and intended use of these reports is to help
identify areas where states  can target their radon program resources, to provide guidance in
selecting the most appropriate building code options for areas, and to provide general
information on radon  and geology for each state  for federal, state, and municipal officials
dealing with radon issues.   These reports are not intended to be used as a substitute for
indoor radon testing, and they cannot and should not be used to estimate or predict the
indoor radon concentrations of individual homes, building sites, or housing tracts. Elevated
levels of indoor radon have been found in every  State, and EPA recommends that all homes
be tested for indoor radon.
    Booklets detailing the radon potential assessment for the U.S.  have been developed for
each State. USGS geologists are the authors of the geologic radon potential booklets.  Each
booklet consists of several  components, the first  being an overview to the mapping project
(Part I), this introduction to the USGS assessment (Part II), including a general discussion of
radon (occurrence, transport, etc.), and details concerning the types of data used.   The  third
component is a summary chapter outlining the general geology and geologic radon potential
of the EPA Region (Part III).  The fourth component is an individual chapter for each state
(Part IV). Each state chapter discusses the state's specific geographic setting, soils, geologic
setting, geologic radon potential, indoor radon  data, and a summary  outlining the radon
potential rankings of geologic areas in the state.  A variety of maps  are presented in each
chapter—geologic, geographic, population, soils, aerial  radioactivity, and indoor radon data by
county. Finally, the booklets contain EPA's map of radon zones for each state and an
accompanying description (Part V).
    Because of constraints  on the scales of maps presented in these reports and because the
smallest units used to present the indoor radon data are counties, some generalizations have
been  made in order to estimate the radon potential of each area.  Variations in geology, soil
characteristics, climatic factors, homeowner lifestyles, and other factors that influence  radon
concentrations can be quite large within any particular  geologic area, so these reports cannot
be used to estimate or predict the indoor radon concentrations of. individual homes or  housing


                                          II-l    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
'tracts.  Within any area of a given geologic radon potential ranking, there are likely to be
 areas where the radon potential is lower or higher than that assigned to' the area as a whole,
 especially in larger areas such as the large counties in. some western states.
     In  each state  chapter, references to additional reports related to radon are listed for the
 i>tate, and the reader is urged to  consult these reports for more detailed information. In most
 cases the best sources of information on radon  for specific areas are state and local
 departments of health, state departments responsible for nuclear safety or environmental
 protection, and U.S.  EPA regional offices. More detailed information on state or local
 geology may be obtained from the state geological surveys. Addresses  and telephone
 numbers of state radon contacts, geological surveys, and EPA regional offices are listed in
 Appendix C at the end of this chapter.

 RADON GENERATION AND TRANSPORT IN SOILS

     Radon (H2Rn) is  produced from the  radioactive decay of radium (226Ra), which is, in turn,
 a. product of the decay of uranium (M8U) (fig. 1).  The  half-life of 222Rn is 3.825 days. Other
 isotopes of radon  occur  naturally, but, with the exception of thoron (220Rn), which occurs in
 concentrations high enough to be of concern in a few localized areas, they are less important
 in terms of indoor radon risk because of their extremely short half-lives and less common
 occurrence.  In general,  the concentration  and mobility of radon in soil are dependent on
 several factors, the most important of which are the soil's radium  content and distribution,
 porosity, permeability to gas movement, and moisture content.  These characteristics are, in
 turn, determined by the  soil's parent-material composition, climate, and the soil's age or
 maturity.  If parent-material composition,  climate, vegetation, age of the soil, and topography
 are known, the physical  and chemical properties of a soil in a given area can be predicted.
     As soils form, they develop distinct layers,  or horizons, that are cumulatively called the
 soil profile.  The A horizon is a surface or near-surface horizon containing a relative
 abundance of organic matter but dominated by  mineral matter.  Some soils contain an E
 horizon, directly below the A horizon, that is generally characterized by loss of clays, iron, or
 aluminum, and has a characteristically lighter color than the A horizon.   The B horizon
 underlies the A or E horizon.  Important characteristics of B horizons include accumulation of
 clays, iron oxides, calcium carbonate or other soluble salts, and organic matter complexes.  In
 drier environments, a horizon may exist within  or below the B horizon that is dominated by
 calcium carbonate, often called caliche or  calcrete.  This carbonate-cemented horizon is
 designated the K horizon in modern soil classification schemes. The C  horizon underlies the
 B (or K) and is a zone of weathered parent material  that does not exhibit characteristics of A
 or B horizons; that is, it is generally not a zone of leaching or accumulation.  In soils formed
 in place from the  underlying bedrock, the  C horizon is a zone of  unconsolidated, weathered
 bedrock overlying the unweathered bedrock.
     The shape and orientation of soil particles (soil structure) control  permeability and affect
 water movement in the soil.  Soils with  blocky or granular structure have roughly equivalent
 permeabilities in the horizontal and vertical directions,  and air and water can  infiltrate the soil
 relatively easily.  However, in soils with platy structure, horizontal permeability  is much
 greater than vertical permeability, and air  and moisture infiltration is generally slow.  Soils
•with prismatic or  columnar structure have dominantly vertical permeability.  Platy and
 prismatic structures form in soils with high clay contents.  In soils with shrink-swell clays, air


                                           II-2    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report  93-292

-------
                                                                                                                                         ;l
                                                                                                             Uranlum-238
                                                                                                             .51 billion years
                                                                                                p\ProlaeBnluin-234
                                                                                                  1.17 mln.
                                                                                                             247,000 years
                                                                Radon-222
X
                                                  Radlum-226 fa
                                                   1602 years
                                                                                       ^80,000 years
                                                                                       f
                                               Polonium-2l8
                                tf  3.82 days
                             L/«
27mln. X
                                      eismuth.214
                           STABLE
                   Figure -1. The uranium-238 decay series, showing the half-lives of elements and their modes of decay (after Wanty and
                   Schoen, 1991). a denotes alpha decay, p denotes beta decay.

-------
"and moisture infiltration rates and depth of wetting may be limited when the cracks in the
 surface soil layers swell shut. Clay-rich B horizons, particularly those with massive or platy
 structure, can form a capping layer that impedes the escape of soil gas to the surface
 (Schumann and others, 1992),  However, the shrinkage of clays can act to open or widen
 cracks upon drying, thus increasing the soil's permeability to gas flow during drier periods.
       Radon transport in soils occurs by two processes: (1) diffusion and (2)  flow (Tanner,
 1964),  Diffusion is the process whereby radon atoms move from areas of higher
 concentration to areas of lower concentration in response to a concentration gradient. Flow is
 the process by which soil air moves through soil pores in response to differences in pressure
 within the soil or between the soil and the atmosphere, carrying the radon atoms along  with it.
 Diffusion is the dominant radon transport process in soils of low permeability, whereas flow
 tends to  dominate in highly permeable soils (Sextro and others, 1987).   In low-permeability
 soils, much of the radon may decay before it is able to enter a building because its transport
 rate is reduced.  Conversely, highly permeable soils, even those that are relatively low in
 radium, such as those derived from some types of glacial deposits, have been associated with
 high indoor radon levels in Europe and in the northern United States (Akerblom  and others,
 1984; Kunz and others, 1989; Sextro and others, 1987). In areas of karst topography formed
 in carbonate rock (limestone or dolomite) environments, solution cavities and fissures can
 increase  soil permeability at depth by providing additional pathways for gas flow.
     Not  all radium  contained in soil grains and grain coatings will result in mobile radon
 when the radium decays. Depending on where the radium is distributed in the soil, many of
 the radon atoms may remain imbedded in the soil grain containing the parent radium atom, or
become imbedded in adjacent soil grains.  The portion  of radium that releases radon into the
pores and fractures  of rocks and soils is called the emanating fraction.  When a radium atom
decays to radon, the energy  generated is strong enough to send the radon atom a distance of
about 40 nanometers (1 nm  = 10"" meters), or about 2x10"* inches—this is known as alpha
recoil (Tanner, 1980).  Moisture in the soil lessens the chance of a recoiling  radon atom
becoming imbedded in an adjacent grain.  Because water is more dense than air,  a radon atom
will  travel a shorter distance in a water-filled pore than in an air-filled pore,  thus increasing
the likelihood that the radon atom will remain in the pore space. Intermediate  moisture levels
enhance  radon emanation but do not significantly  affect permeability.  However,  high
moisture levels can  significantly decrease the gas permeability of the soil and impede radon
movement through the soil.
    Concentrations of radon in soils are generally many times higher than those inside of
buildings, ranging from tens of pCi/L to more than  100,000 pCi/L, but typically in  the range
of hundreds to low  thousands of pCi/L.  Soil-gas radon concentrations can vary in response to
variations in climate and weather on hourly, daily, or seasonal time scales. Schumann and
others (1992) and Rose and  others (1988) recorded order-of-magnitude variations in soil-gas
radon concentrations between seasons in Colorado and Pennsylvania. The most important
factors appear to be (1) soil moisture conditions, which are controlled in large part by
precipitation; (2) barometric pressure; and (3) temperature.  Washington and Rose (1990)
suggest that temperature-controlled partitioning  of radon between water  and gas in soil pores
also  has  a significant influence on the amount of mobile radon in soil gas.
    Homes in hilly  limestone regions of the southern Appalachians were found to have higher
indoor radon concentrations during the summer than in the winter.  A suggested cause for this
phenomenon involves temperature/pressure-driven flow of radon-laden air from subsurface


                                          II-4     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
'solution cavities in the carbonate rock into houses. As warm air enters solution cavities that
 are higher on the hillslope than the homes, it cools and settles, pushing radon-laden air from
 lower in the cave or cavity system into structures on the hillslope (Gammage and others,
 1993).  In contrast, homes built over caves having openings situated below the level of the
 home had higher indoor radon levels in the winter, caused by cooler outside air entering the
 cave, driving radon-laden air into cracks and solution cavities in the rock and soil, and
 ultimately, into homes (Gammage and others, 1993),

 RADON ENTRY INTO BUILDINGS

    A driving force (reduced atmospheric pressure in the house relative to the soil, producing
 a pressure gradient) and entry points must exist for radon to  enter a building from the soil.
 The negative pressure caused by furnace combustion, ventilation devices, and the stack effect
 (the rising and escape of warm air from the upper floors of the building, causing a
 temperature and pressure gradient within the structure) during coid winter months are
 common driving forces. Cracks and other penetrations through building foundations, sump
 holes, and slab-to-foundation wall joints are common entry points.
    Radon levels in the basement are generally higher than those on the main floor or upper
 floors of most structures. Homes with basements generally provide more entry points for
 radon, commonly have a more pronounced stack effect, and typically have lower air pressure
 relative to the surrounding soil than  nonbasement homes.  The term "nonbasement" applies to
 slab-on-grade or crawl space construction,

 METHODS AND SOURCES OF DATA

    The assessments of radon potential in the booklets that follow this introduction were
 made using five main types of data:  (1) geologic (lithologic); (2) aerial radiometric; (3) soil
 characteristics, including soil moisture, permeability, and drainage characteristics; (4) indoor
 radon data; and (5) building architecture (specifically, whether homes in each area are built
 slab-on-grade or have a basement or crawl space).  These five factors were evaluated and
 integrated to produce estimates of radon potential.  Field measurements of soil-gas radon or
 soil radioactivity were not used except where such data were available in existing, published
 reports of local field studies.  Where applicable, such field studies are described in the
 individual  state chapters.

 GEOLOGIC DATA

    The types and distribution of lithologic units and other  geologic features in an
 assessment area are of primary importance in determining radon potential. Rock types that
 are most likely to cause indoor radon problems include carbonaceous black shales, glauconite-
 bearing sandstones, certain kinds of  fluvial sandstones and fluvial sediments, phosphorites,
 chalk, karst-producing carbonate rocks, certain  kinds of glacial deposits, bauxite, uranium-rich
 granitic rocks, metamorphic rocks of granitic composition, silica-rich volcanic rocks, many
 sheared or faulted rocks, some coals, and certain kinds of contact metamorphosed rocks.
 Rock types least likely to cause radon problems include marine quartz sands, non-
 carbonaceous shales and siltstones, certain kinds  of clays, silica-poor metamorphic and


                                           II-5    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
"igneous rocks, and basalts.  Exceptions exist'within these general H'thologic groups because of
 the occurrence of localized uranium deposits, commonly of the hydrotHermal type in
 crystalline rocks or the "roll-front"  type in sedimentary rocks.  Uranium and radium are
 commonly sited in heavy minerals, iron-oxide coatings on rock and soil grains, and organic
 materials in soils and sediments.  Less common are uranium associated with phosphate and
 carbonate complexes in rocks and soils, and uranium minerals.
    Although many cases of elevated indoor radon levels can be traced to high radium and
 (or) uranium concentrations in parent rocks,-some structural features, most notably faults and
 shear zones, have  been identified as sites of localized uranium concentrations (Deffeyes and
 MacGregor, 1980) and have been associated with some of the highest reported indoor radon
 levels (Gundersen, 1991). The two highest known indoor radon occurrences are associated
 with sheared fault zones in Boyertown, Pennsylvania (Gundersen and others, 198Sa; Smith
 and others, 1987), and in Clinton, New Jersey (Henry and others, 1991; Muessig and Bell,
 1988).

 MURE AERIAL RADIOMETRIC DATA

    Aerial radiometric data are used to quantify the radioactivity of rocks and soils.
 Equivalent uranium (eU) data provide  an estimate of the surficial concentrations of radon
 parent materials (uranium, radium)  in rocks and soils. Equivalent uranium is calculated from
 the counts received by a gamma-ray detector from the 1.76 MeV (mega-electron volts)
 emission energy corresponding to bismuth-214 (JI4Bi), with the assumption that uranium and
 its decay products are  in secular equilibrium. Equivalent uranium is expressed in units of
 parts per million (ppm). Gamma radioactivity also may be expressed in terms of a radium
 activity; 3 ppm eU corresponds to approximately 1 picocurie per gram (pCi/g) of radium-226.
 Although radon is highly mobile in soil and its concentration is affected by meteorological
 conditions (Kovach, 1945; Klusman and Jaacks, 1987; Schery and others, 1984; Schumann
 and others, 1992), statistical correlations between average soil-gas radon concentrations and
 average eU values for  a wide variety of soils have been documented (Gundersen and others,
 1988a,  1988b; Schumann and Owen, 1988). Aerial radiometric data can provide an estimate
 of radon source strength over a region, but the amount  of radon that is able to enter a home
 from  the soil is dependent on several local factors, including soil structure, grain size
 distribution, moisture content, and permeability, as well  as type of house construction and its
 structural condition.
    The aerial radiometric data used for these characterizations  were collected as part of the
 Department of Energy  National Uranium Resource Evaluation (NURE) program of the 1970s
 and early 1980s.  The  purpose of the NURE program was to identify and describe areas in the
 United  States having potential uranium resources (U.S. Department of Energy, 1976).  The
 NURE  aerial radiometric data were collected by aircraft in which a gamma-ray spectrometer
 was mounted, flying approximately 122 m (400 ft) above the ground surface.  The equivalent
 uranium maps presented in the state 'chapters were generated from reprocessed NURE data in
 which smoothing,  filtering, recalibrating, and matching of adjacent quadrangle  data sets were
 performed to compensate for background, altitude, calibration, and other types of errors and
 inconsistencies in the original data set  (Duval.and others,. 1989). The data were then gridded
 and contoured to produce maps of eU  with a pixel size corresponding to approximately 2.5 x
 2.5 km (1.6 x 1.6  mi).


                                          II-6     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
                 FllCUT LINE  SPACING  OF SORE  AERIAL SURVEYS
                     2  KU (1  HUE)
                     5  IM (3  MILES)
                     2  t 5 KM
                 E3  10  KM (6  HUES)
                     5  t 10 IK
                     NO  DATA
Figure 2. Nominal flightline spacings for NURE aerial gamma-ray surveys covering the
contiguous United States (from Duval and others, 1990). Rectangles represent I°x2° quadrangles.

-------
Page Intentionally Blank

-------
    Soil permeability is commonly expressed" in'SCS soil surveys in terms of the speed, in
inches per hour (in/hr), at which water soaks into the soil, as measured 'in a soil percolation
test.  Although in/hr are not truly units of permeability, these units are in widespread use and
are referred to  as "permeability" in SCS soil surveys. The permeabilities listed in the SCS
surveys are  for water, but they generally correlate well with gas permeability. Because data
on gas permeability of soils is extremely limited, data on permeability to water is used as a
substitute except in cases in which excessive soil moisture is known to exist. Water in soil
pores inhibits gas transport, so the amount of radon available to a home is effectively reduced
by a high water table. Areas likely to have high water tables include river valleys, coastal
areas, and some areas overlain by deposits of glacial origin (for example, loess).
    Soil permeabilities greater than 6.0 in/hr may be considered high, and permeabilities less
than 0.6 in/hr may be considered low in terms of soil-gas transport.  Soils with low
permeability may generally be considered to have a lower radon potential than more
permeable soils with  similar radium concentrations.  Many well-developed soils contain a
clay-rich B  horizon that may impede vertical soil gas transport.  Radon generated below this
horizon cannot readily escape to the surface, so it would instead tend to move laterally,
especially under the influence of a negative pressure exerted by a building.
    Shrink-swell potential is an indicator of the abundance of smectitic (swelling) clays in a
soil.  Soils with a high shrink-swell potential may cause  building foundations to crack,
creating pathways for radon entry into the structure.  During dry periods,  desiccation cracks in
shrink-swell soils provide additional pathways for soil-gas transport and effectively increase
the gas permeability of the soil. Soil  permeability data and soil profile data thus provide
important information for regional radon assessments.

INDOOR RADON DATA

    Two major sources of indoor radon data were used.  The first and largest source of data is
from the State/EPA Residential Radon Survey (Ronca-Battista and others, 1988; Dziuban and
others, 1990). Forty-two states completed EPA-sponsored indoor radon surveys between 1986
and 1992 (fig. 3).  The State/EPA Residential Radon Surveys were designed  to be
comprehensive and statistically significant at the state level, and were subjected to high levels
of quality assurance and control.  The surveys collected screening indoor radon measurements,
defined as 2-7 day measurements using  charcoal canister radon detectors placed in the lowest
livable area of the home.  The target population for the surveys included owner-occupied
single family, detached housing units  (White and others, 1989), although attached structures
such as duplexes, townhouses, or condominiums were included in some of the surveys if they
met the other criteria and had contact with the ground surface.  Participants were selected
randomly from telephone-directory listings.  In total, approximately 60,000 homes were tested
in the State/EPA surveys.
    The second source of indoor radon data comes from residential surveys that have been
conducted in a specific state or region of the country (e.g. independent state  surveys or utility
company surveys).  Several states, including Delaware, Florida, Illinois, New Hampshire, New
Jersey, New York, Oregon, and Utah, have conducted their own surveys of indoor radon.  The
quality  and  design of a state or other  independent survey are discussed and referenced where
•the data are used.
                                           II-9     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
                                         STATE/EPA RESIDENTIAL RADON
                                      SURVEY SCREENING MEASUREMENTS
                                        Estimated Percent of Houses with Screening Levels Greater than 4 pCi/L

                                0            5             10           15           20     and  >
 The Stales of OI-.in,NII.HI.NY. and UT
 have conducted their own surveys. OK &
 SO declined to participate in the SRKS.
These results arc based on 2-1 day screening
measurements in the lowest livable level and should not
be used to estimate annual averages or health risks.
Figure 3. Percent of homes tested in the State/EPA Residential Radon Survey with screening indoor radon levels exceeding 4 pCi/L.

-------
   . .Data for only those counties with five or more measurements are shown in the indoor
radon maps in the state chapters,  although data for all counties with a nonzero number of
measurements are listed in the indoor radon data tables in each state chapter.  In total, indoor
radon data from more than 100,000 homes nationwide were used in the compilation of these
assessments. Radon data from State or regional indoor radon surveys, public health
organizations, or other sources  are discussed in addition to the primary data sources where
they are available.  Nearly all of the data used in these evaluations represent short-term (2-7
day) screening measurements from the lowest livable space of the homes.  Specific details
concerning the nature and use of indoor radon data sets other than the State/EPA Residential
Radon Survey are discussed in the individual State chapters.

RADON INDEX AND  CONFIDENCE INDEX

    Many of the geologic methods used to evaluate an area for radon potential require
subjective opinions  based on the professional judgment and experience of the individual
geologist.  The evaluations are  nevertheless based on  established scientific principles that are
universally applicable to any geographic area or geologic setting.  This section describes the
methods and conceptual framework used by the  U.S.  Geological Survey to evaluate areas  for
radon potential based on the five factors discussed in  the previous sections.  The scheme is
divided into two basic parts, a Radon Index (RI), used to rank the general radon potential of
the area, and the Confidence Index (CI), used to express the level of confidence in the
prediction based on the  quantity and quality of the data used to make the determination.  This
scheme works best if the areas to be evaluated are delineated by geologically-based
boundaries (geologic provinces) rather than political ones (state/county boundaries) in which
the geology may vary across the area.
    Ration Index.  Table 1 presents the Radon Index (RI) matrix. The five factors—indoor
radon data, geology, aerial  radioactivity, soil parameters, and house foundation type—were
quantitatively ranked (using a point value of  I, 2, or 3) for their respective contribution to
radon potential in a given area. At least some data for the 5 factors are consistently available
for every geologic province.  Because each of these main factors encompass a wide variety  of
complex and variable components, the geologists performing the evaluation relied heavily on
their professional judgment and experience in assigning point values to each category and in
determining the  overall  radon potential  ranking.  Background information  on these factors is
discussed in more detail in the  preceding sections of this introduction.
    Indoor radon was evaluated using unweighted  arithmetic means of the indoor radon data
for each geologic area to be assessed.  Other expressions of indoor radon  levels in an area
also could  have  been  used, such as weighted  averages or annual averages, but these types of
data were not consistently available for the entire United States at the time of this writing, or
the schemes were not considered sufficient to provide a means  of consistent comparison
across all areas.  For this report, charcoal-canister  screening measurement data from the
State/EPA  Residential Radon Surveys and other carefully selected sources were used, as
described in the  preceding  section.  To  maintain consistency, other indoor radon data sets
(vendor, state, or other data) were not considered in scoring the indoor radon factor of the
Radon Index if they were not randomly sampled or could not be statistically combined with ,
the primary indoor  radon data sets.  However, these additional radon data sets can provide a
means to further refine  correlations between geologic factors and radon potential, so they  are


                                          II-11     Reprinted  fronvUSGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
TABLE 1." RADON INDEX MATRIX, "ppm eU" indicates parts per, million of equivalent
uranium, as indicated by NUKE aerial radiometric data. See text discussion for details.

FACTOR
INDOOR RADON (average)
AERIAL RADIOACTIVITY
GEOLOGY*
SOIL PERMEABILITY
ARCHITECTURE TYPE
INCREASING RADON POTENTIAL ^

POINT VALUE
1
<2pCi/L
< 1.5 ppm eU
negative
low
mostly slab
2
2-4 pCi/L
1,5 - 2.5 ppm eU
variable
moderate
mixed
3
>4pCi/L
> 2.5 ppm eU
positive
high
mostly basement
'GEOLOGIC FIELD EVIDENCE (GFE) POINTS: GFE points are assigned in addition to points
   for the "Geology" factor for specific, relevant geologic field studies. See text for details.

   Geologic evidence supporting:   HIGH radon        +2 points
                             MODERATE        +1 point
                             LOW             -2 points
                  No relevant geologic field studies     0 points
SCORING:
            Radon potential category
Point rane
                                   Probable average screening
                                    indoor radon for area
            LOW
            MODERATE/VARIABLE
            HIGH
                      3-8 points
                     9-11 points
                     12-17 points
                   <2pCi/L
                   2-4pCi/L
                   >4pCi/L
                     POSSIBLE RANGE OF POINTS = 3 to 17
TABLE 2.  CONFIDENCE INDEX MATRIX
                                    INCREASING CONFIDENCE
FACTOR
INDOOR RADON DATA
AERIAL RADIO ACTIVITY
GEOLOGIC DATA
SOIL PERMEABILITY
POINT VALUE
1
sparse/no data
questionable/no data
questionable
questionable/no data
2
fair coverage/quality
glacial cover
variable
variable
3
good coverage/quality
no glacial cover
proven geol. model
reliable, abundant
SCORING:
LOW CONFIDENCE
MODERATE CONFIDENCE
HIGH CONFIDENCE
        4-6 points
        7-9 points
        10 -12 points
                     POSSIBLE RANGE OF POINTS = 4 to 12
                                    11-12     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
'included "as supplementary information arid are discussed in the individual State chapters. If
the average screening indoor radon level for an area was less than 2 pCi/L, the indoor radon
factor was assigned 1 point, if it was between 2 and 4 pCi/L, it was scored 2 points, and if
the average screening indoor radon level for an area was greater than 4 pCi/L, the indoor
radon factor was assigned 3 RI points.
    Aerial radioactivity data used in this report are from the equivalent uranium map of the
conterminous United States compiled from NUKE aerial gamma-ray surveys (Duval and
others, 1989).  These data indicate the gamma  radioactivity from approximately  the upper 30
cm of rock and soil, expressed in units of ppm equivalent uranium.  An approximate average
value of eU was  determined visually for each area and point values assigned based on
whether the overall eU for the area falls below 1.5 ppm  (1 point), between 1.5 and 2.5 ppm
(2 points), or greater than 2.5  ppm (3 points).
    The geology  factor is complex and actually incorporates many geologic characteristics.  In
the matrix, "positive" and "negative" refer to the presence or absence and distribution of rock
types known to have high uranium contents and to generate elevated radon in soils or indoors.
Examples of "positive" rock types include granites, black shales, phosphatic rocks, and other
rock types described in the preceding "geologic data" section. Examples of "negative" rock
types include marine quartz sands and some clays.  The term "variable" indicates that the
geology within the region is variable or that the rock types in the area are known or suspected
to generate  elevated radon in some areas but not in others due to compositional differences,
climatic effects, localizeddistribution of uranium, or other factors.  Geologic information
indicates not only how much uranium  is present in the rocks and soils but also gives clues for
predicting general radon  emanation and mobility characteristics through additional factors
such as structure  (notably the  presence of faults or shears) and geochemical characteristics
(for example, a phosphate-rich sandstone will likely contain more uranium than a sandstone
containing little or no phosphate  because the phosphate forms chemical complexes with
uranium).  "Negative", "variable", and  "positive" geology were assigned 1, 2, and 3 points,
respectively.
    In cases where additional  reinforcing or contradictory geologic evidence is available,
Geologic Field Evidence (GFE) points were added to or  subtracted from an area's score
(Table 1).  Relevant geologic  field studies are important  to enhancing our understanding of
how geologic processes affect radon distribution.  In some cases, geologic models and
supporting field data reinforced an already  strong (high or low) score; in others, they provided
important contradictory data.  GFE points were applied for geologically-sound evidence that
supports the prediction (but which may contradict one or more  factors) on the basis of known
geologic  field studies in the area or in areas with geologic and climatic settings similar
enough that they  could be applied with full confidence.  For example, areas of the Dakotas,
Minnesota, and Iowa that are covered with Wisconsin-age glacial deposits exhibit a low  aerial
radiometric signature and score only one RI point in that category.  However, data from
geologic  field studies in North Dakota and Minnesota (Schumann and others, 1991) suggest
that eU is a poor predictor of  geologic radon potential in this area because radionuclides have

                                          11-13     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
"been leached from the upper soil layers but are'present and possibly even concentrated in
 deeper soil horizons, generating significant soil-gas radon.  This positive supporting field
 evidence adds two GFE points to the score, which helps to counteract the invalid conclusion
 suggested by the radiometric data.  No GFE points are awarded if there are no documented
 field studies for the area.
     "Soil permeability" refers to several soil characteristics that influence radon concentration
 and mobility, including soil type, grain size, structure, soil moisture, drainage, slope, and
 permeability. In the matrix, "low" refers to permeabilities less than about 0.6 in/hr; "high"
 corresponds  to greater than about 6.0 in/hr, in U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) standard
 soil percolation tests.  The SCS data are for water permeability, which generally correlates
 well with the gas permeability of the soil except when the soil moisture content is very high.
 Areas with consistently high water tables were thus considered to have low gas permeability.
 "Low, "moderate", and "high" permeability were assigned 1, 2,  and  3 points,  respectively.
     Architecture  type refers to whether homes in the area have  mostly  basements (3 points),
 mostly slab-on-grade construction (1 point), or a mixture of the'two.  Split-level and crawl
 space homes fall  into the "mixed" category (2 points).  Architecture information  is necessary
 to properly interpret the indoor radon data and produce geologic radon potential  categories
 that are consistent with screening indoor radon data.
     The overall  RI for an area is calculated by adding the individual RI scores for the 5
 factors, plus  or minus GFE points,  if any.  The total RI for an area falls in one of three
 categories—low,  moderate or variable, or high.  The point ranges for the three categories were
 determined by examining the possible combinations of points for the 5 factors and setting
 rules such  that a  majority (3 of 5 factors) would determine the final score for the low and
 high categories, with allowances for possible deviation from an  ideal score by the other two
 factors.  The moderate/variable category lies between these two ranges.  A  total deviation of 3
 points from the "ideal"  score was considered reasonable to allow for natural variability of
 factors—if two of the five factors are allowed to vary from the  "ideal" for  a category, they
 can differ by a minimum of 2  (1 point different each) and a maximum of 4 points (2 points
 different each).  With "ideal" scores of 5, 10, and 15 points describing low, moderate, and
 high geologic radon potential, respectively, an ideal low score of 5 points plus 3 points for
 possible variability allows a  maximum of 8 points in the low category.  Similarly, an ideal
 high score of 15  points minus  3 points gives a minimum of 12  points for the high category.
 Note, however, that if both other factors differ by two points from the "ideal", indicating
 considerable variability in the system,  the total point score would lie in the adjacent (i.e.,
 moderate/variable) category.
    Confidence Index.  Except for architecture  type, the same factors were used to establish a
 Confidence Index (CI) for the  radon potential prediction for each area (Table 2).  Architecture
 type was not included in the confidence index because house construction data are readily and
 reliably available through surveys taken by agencies and industry groups including the
 National Association of Home Builders, U.S.  Department of Housing and Urban
 Development, and the Federal  Housing Administration; thus it was not considered necessary

                                          11-14     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
 to question the quality or validity of these data.' The other factors were scored on the basis of
 the quality and quantity of the data used to complete the RI matrix.
    Indoor radon data were evaluated based on the distribution and number of data points and
 on whether the data were collected by random sampling (State/EPA Residential  Radon Survey
 or other state survey data) or volunteered vendor data (likely to be nonrandom and biased
 toward population centers and/or high indoor radon levels).  The categories listed in the  CI
 matrix for indoor radon data ("sparse or, no data", "fair coverage or quality", and "good
 coverage/quality") indicate the sampling density and statistical robustness of an indoor radon
 data set.  Data from the State/EPA Residential Radon Survey and statistically valid state
 surveys were typically assigned 3 Confidence Index  points unless the data were poorly
 distributed or absent in the area evaluated.
    Aerial radioactivity data are  available for all but a few areas of the continental United
 States and for part of Alaska.  An  evaluation of the quality of the  radioactivity data was based
 on  whether there appeared to be a  good correlation between the radioactivity and the actual
 amount of uranium or radium available  to generate mobile radon in the rocks and soils of the
 area evaluated.  In general, the greatest  problems with correlations among eU, geology, and
 soil-gas or indoor radon levels were associated with  glacial deposits (see the discussion in a
 previous section) and typically were assigned a 2-point Confidence Index score. Correlations
 among eU, geology, and radon were generally sound in unglaciated areas and were usually
 assigned 3 CI points.  Again, however, radioactivity  data in some unglaciated areas may have
 been  assigned fewer than 3 points, and in glaciated areas may be assigned only one point, if
 the data were considered questionable or if coverage was poor.
    To assign Confidence Index  scores for the geologic data factor, rock types and geologic
 settings for which a physical-chemical, process-based understanding of radon generation  and
 mobility exists were regarded as having "proven geologic models" (3  points); a high
 confidence could be held for predictions in such areas.  Rocks for which the processes are
 less well known or for which data are contradictory  were regarded as "variable" (2 points),
 arid those  about which little is known or for which no apparent correlations have been found
 were deemed "questionable" (1 point).
    The soil permeability factor  was also scored based on quality and amount of data. The
 three categories for soil permeability in  the Confidence  Index are similar in concept, and
 scored similarly, to those for the geologic data factor.  Soil permeability can be roughly
 estimated from grain size and drainage  class if data from standard, accepted soil percolation
 tests  are unavailable; however, the reliability of the data would be lower than if percolation
 test figures or other measured permeability data are  available, because an estimate of this type
 does  not encompass all the factors that affect soil permeability and thus may be inaccurate in
 some instances.  Most published soil permeability data are for water; although this is
 generally closely related to the air permeability of the soil, there are some  instances when it
 may  provide an incorrect estimate. Examples of areas in which water permeability data may
• not accurately reflect air permeability include areas with consistently  high levels of soil
 moisture, or clay-rich soils, which  would have a low water permeability but may have a

                                           11-15    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
significantly higher air permeability when dry due to shrinkage cracks in. the soil.  These
additional factors were applied to the soil permeability factor when assigning the RI score, but
may have less certainty in some cases and thus would be assigned a lower CI score.
    The Radon Index and Confidence Index give a general indication of the relative
contributions of the interrelated geologic factors influencing  radon generation and transport in
rocks and soils,  and thus, of the potential for elevated indoor radon levels Jo occur in a
particular area.  However, because these reports are somewhat-generalized to cover relatively
large areas of States, it is highly- recommended that more detailed studies be performed in
local  areas of interest,  using the methods  and general information in these booklets as a guide.
                                          11-16    Reprinted from.USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
                                REFERENCES CITED

Akerblom, G., Anderson, P., and Clavensjo, B,, 1984, Soil gas radon—A source for indoor radon
       daughters: Radiation Protection Dosimetry, v. 7, p. 49-54.

Deffeyes, ELS,, and MacGregor, I.D., 1980, World uranium resources: Scientific American,
       v. 242, p. 66-76.

Durrance, E.M., 1986, Radioactivity in geology: Principles and applications: New York, N.Y.,
       Wiley and Sons, 441 p.

Duval, J.S., 1989, Radioactivity and some of its applications in geology: Proceedings of the
       symposium on the application of geophysics to engineering and environmental problems
       (SAGEEP), Golden, Colorado, March 13-16,1989: Society of Engineering and Mineral
       Exploration Geophysicists, p.  1-61.

Duval, J.S., Cook, B.C., and Adams, J.A.S., 1971,  Circle of investigation of an airborne
       gamma-ray spectrometer: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 76, p. 8466-8470.

Duval, J.S., Jones, W.J., Riggle, F.R., and Pitkin, J.A., 1989, Equivalent uranium map of
       conterminous United States: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 89-478,10 p.

Duval, J.S., Reimer, G.M., Schumann, R.R., Owen, D.E., and Otton, J.K., 1990, Soil-gas
       radon compared to aerial and ground gamma-ray measurements at study sites near Greeley
       and Fort Collins, Colorado:  U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 90-648,42 p.

Dziuban, J.A., Clifford, M.A., White, S.B., Bergstein, J.W., and Alexander, B.V.,  1990,
       Residential radon survey of twenty-three States, in Proceedings of the 1990 International
       Symposium on Radon and Radon Reduction Technology, Vol. HI: Preprints: U.S.
       Environmental Protection Agency report EPA/600/9-90/005c, Paper IV-2,17 p.

Gammage, R.B., Wilson, D.L., Saultz, R.J., and Bauer, B.C., 1993, Subtereanean transport of
       radon and elevated indoor radon in hilly karst terranes:  Atmospheric Environment
       (in press).

Gundersen, L.C.S., Reimer,, G.M.,  and Agard, S.S., 1988a, Correlation between geology, radon
       in soil gas, and indoor radon in the Reading Prong, in Marikos, M.A., and Han'sman,
       RJEL, eds., Geologic causes of natural radionuclide anomalies: Missouri Department of
       Natural Resources Special Publication 4, p. 91-102.

Gundersen, L.C.S,  Reimer, G.M., Wiggs, C.R., and Rice, C.A., 1988b, Map showing radon
       potential of rocks and soils in Montgomery County, Maryland: U.S. Geological Survey
       Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-2043, scale 1:62,500.

Gundersen, Linda C.S., 1991, Radon in sheared metamorphic and igneous rocks, in Gundersen,
       Linda C.S.,  and  Richard B.  Wanty, eds., Field studies of radon in rocks, soils, and water:
       U.S. Geol. Survey Bulletin no. 1971, p. 39-50.
                                         11-17      Reprinted fiom USGS Qpen-FUe Report 93-292

-------
'Henry, Mitchell E., Kaeding, Margret E., and Monteverde, Donald, 1991, Radon in'soil gas and
       gamma-ray activity of rocks and soils at the Mulligan Quarry, Clinton, New Jersey, in
       Gundersen, Linda C.S., and Richard B. Wanty, eds., Field studies of radon in rocks,
       soils, and water: U.S. Geol. Survey Bulletin no. 1971, p. 65-75.

 Klusman, R. W., and Jaacks, J. A., 1987, Environmental influences upon mercury, radon, and
       helium concentrations in soil gases at a site near Denver, Colorado: Journal of
       Geochemical Exploration, v. 27, p. 259-280.

 Kovach, E.M., 1945, Meteorological influences upon the radon content of soil gas: Transactions,
       American Geophysical Union, v. 26,  p. 241-248.

 Kunz, C., Laymon, C.A., and Parker, C., 1989, Gravelly soils and indoor radon, in Osborne,
       M.C., and Harrison, J., eds., Proceedings of the 1988 EPA Symposium on Radon and
       Radon Reduction Technology, Volume 1:  U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report
       EPA/600/9-89/006A, p. 5-75-5-86.

 Muessig, K., and Bell, C., 1988, Use of airborne radiometric data to direct testing for elevated
       indoor radon: Northeastern Environmental Science, v. 7, no. 1, p. 45-51.

 Ronca-Battista, M., Moon, M., Bergsten, J., White, S.B., Holt, N., and Alexander, B., 1988,
       Radon-222 concentrations in the United States—Results of sample surveys in five states:
       Radiation Protection Dosimetry,  v.  24, p. 307-312.

 Rose, A.W., Washington, J.W., and Greeman, D.J., 1988, Variability of radon with depth and
       season in a central Pennsylvania soil developed on limestone: Northeastern Environmental
       Science, v.  7, p. 35-39.

 Schery, S.D., Gaeddert, D.H., and Wilkening, M.H., 1984, Factors affecting exhalation of radon
       from a gravelly sandy loam: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 89, p. 7299-7309.,

 Schumann, R.R., and Owen, D.E., 1988, Relationships between geology, equivalent uranium
       concentration, and radon in soil gas, Fairfax County, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey
       Open-File Report 88-18,28 p.

 Schumann, R.R., and Gundersen, L.C.S., 1991, Regional differences in radon emanation
       coefficients in soils: Geological Society of America Abstracts With Programs, v. 23,
       no. 1, p. 125.

 Schumann, R.R., Peake, R.T., Schmidt, K.M., and Owen, D.E., 1991, Correlations of soil-gas
       and indoor radon with geology in glacially derived soils of the northern Great Plains, in
       Proceedings of the 1990 International Symposium on Radon and Radon Reduction
       Technology, Volume 2, Symposium Oral Papers: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
       report EPA/600/9-9 l/026b, p. 6-23-6-36.
                                          JJ-18     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
"Schumann, R.R., Owen,D.E., and Asher-BoHnder, S., 1992, Effects *of weather and soil
       characteristics on temporal variations in soil-gas radon concentrations, in Gates, A.E., and
       Gundersen, L.C.S., eds,, Geologic controls on radon: Geological Society of America
       Special Paper 271, p. 65-72.

Sextro, R.G., Moed, B.A., Nazaroff, W.W., Revzan, K.L., and Nero, A.V., 1987,
       Investigations of soil as a source of indoor radon, in Hopke, P.K., ed., Radon and its
       decay products: American Chemical Society Symposium Series 331, p. 10-29.

Sterling, R., Meixel, G., Shen, L., Labs, K., and Bligh, T., 1985, Assessment of the energy
       savings potential of building foundations research: Oak Ridge, Tenn., U.S. Department of
       Energy Report ORNL/SUB/84-0024/1.

Smith, R.C., E, Reilly, M.A., Rose, A.W., Barnes, J.H., and Berkheiser, S.W., Jr., 1987,
       Radon: a profound case: Pennsylvania Geology, v. 18, p. 1-7.

Tanner, A.B., 1964, Radon migration in the ground:  a review, in-Adams, J.A.S., and Lowder,
       W.M.', eds., The natural radiation environment: Chicago, HI., University of Chicago
       Press, p. 161-190.

Tanner, A.B., 1980, Radon migration in the ground: a supplementary review, in GeseU, T.F.,
       and Lowder, W.M. (eds), Natural radiation environment ffl, Symposium proceedings,
       Houston, Texas, v. 1, p. 5-56.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1987, Principal kinds of soils:  Orders, suborders, and great
       groups: U.S. Geological Survey, National Atlas of the United States of America, sheet
       38077-BE-NA-07M-00, scale 1:7,500,000.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1976, National Uranium Resource Evaluation preliminary report,
       prepared by the U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration, Grand Junction,
       Colo.: GJO-11(76).

Wanty, Richard B., and Schoen, Robert, 1991, A review of the chemical processes affecting the
       mobility of radionuclides in natural waters, with applications, in Gundersen, Linda C.S.,
       and Richard  B. Wanty, eds., Field studies of radon in rockSi soils, and water: U.S.
       Geological Survey Bulletin no. 1971, p. 183-194.

Washington, J.W., and Rose, A.W., 1990, Regional and temporal relations of radon in soil gas to
       soil temperature and moisture:  Geophysical Research Letters, v. 17, p. 829-832.

White, S.B., Bergsten, J.W., Alexander, B.V., and Ronca-Battista, M., 1989, Multi-State
       surveys of indoor  222Rn:  Health Physics, v. 57,  p. 891-896.
                                         11-19     Reprinted from USGS Opoi-FUe Report 93-292

-------
Page Intentionally Blank

-------
                                              APPENDIX  A
                                      GEOLOGIC TIME SCALE
Subdivisions (and their symbols)
Eon or
Eonotbem
'haneroioic2

Proterozoie
(gj


Archean

Era or
Erathem
Cenozoie 2
(CD
Mesozoic2

'aleozoic
(ril


tewrei oic OB
M.OCit
E»«v
rawoieie (X)
AtxMtn rwi
MioOH
*rc*«»r (U)
Period, System,
Subperiod, Subsystem
Quaternary2
(Q)
Neocene 2
' ' SuBoeriod Of
Tertian/ Subsystem !N>
2
Subperiod or
Subsystem (ft)
Cretaceous
(Kt
Jurassic
U!
Triassic
(1)
Permian
(PS
Pennsylvanian
Carboniferous (F)
'^' Mississippian
(M)

Devonian
(D)


Silurian
/Cl


Ordovician
<0»

Cambrian
rC)
Epoch or Series
Holocene
Pleistocene
Pliocene
Miocene
Oligocene
Eocene
Paleocene
Late
Early
Late
Middle
Early
Late
Middle
Early
Late
Early
Late
Middle
Early
Laie
Early
Late
Middle
Early
Late
Middle
Early
Late
Middle
Early
Late
Middle
Early
Upper
Lower
Upper
Middle
Lower
Upper
Middle
Lower
Upper
Lower
Upper
Middle
Lower
Upper
Lower
Uooer
Middle
Lower
Upper
Middle
Lower
Upper
Middle
Lower
Upper
Middle
Lower
None defined
None defined
None defined
None defined
None defined
None defined
prcArcft<*ft (pA) *
Age estimates
of boundaries
in mega-annum
CMa)1

.0 ty
.6 (1.&-1.9)





So (S5-S7J
138 (135— 141}































    1 Ranges reflect uneonaintiet of isotopic and biostmtigraphic »g* assignments. Age boundaries not closely br»ck«ed by existing
tfata shown by -> Decay constants and isotopic ratios employed are tiled in St»ig«r and JAg*r (1977). Designation m.y. used (or an
interval of time.
    9 Modifiers (tower, middle, upper or e»rty, middle, tele) when used with these Hems we informal divisions of the larger unit: the
first lene'r ol the modifier is lowercase.
    'Rocks older than 570 Ma also called Preeambrian (p-C). a time term without specific rank.
    'Informal time term without specific rank.
                                      USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
Page Intentionally Blank

-------
                                    APPENDIX  B
                               GLOSSARY OF TERMS
Units of measure
pCi/L (picocuries per liter)- a unit of measure of radioactivity used to describe radon
concentrations in a volume of air.  One picocurie (10~12 curies) is equal to about 2.2 disintegrations
of radon atoms per minute. A liter is about 1.06 quarts. The.average concentration of radon in
U.S. homes measured to date is between 1 and 2 pCS/L.

Bq/m3 (Becquerels per cubic meter)- a metric unit of radioactivity used to describe radon
concentrations in a volume of air.  One becquerel is equal to one radioactive disintegration per
second. One pCi/L is equal to 37 Bq/m3.

ppm (parts per million)- a unit of measure of concentration by weight of an element in a
substance, in this case, soil or rock.  One ppm of uranium contained in a ton of rock corresponds
to about 0.03 ounces of uranium. The average concentration of uranium in soils in the United
States is between 1 and  2 ppm.

in/hr (inches per hour)- a unit of measure used by soil scientists and engineers to describe the
permeability of a soil to water flowing through it It is measured by digging a hole 1 foot (12
inches) square and one foot deep, filling it with water, and measuring the time it takes for the water
to drain from the hole. The drop in height of the water level in the hole, measured in inches, is
then divided by the time (in hours) to determine the permeability. Soils range in permeability from
less than 0.06 in/hr to greater than  20 in/hr, but most soils in the United States have permeabilities
between these two extremes.
Geologic terms and terms related to the sftdy of radon

aerial radiometrie, aeroradiometric survey  A survey of radioactivity, usually gamma rays,
taken by an aircraft carrying a gamma-ray spectrometer pointed at the ground surface.

alluvial fan A low, widespread mass of loose rock and soil material, shaped like an open fan
and deposited by a stream at the point where it flows from a narrow mountain valley out onto a
plain or broader valley. May also form at the junction with larger streams or when the gradient of
the stream abruptly decreases.

alluvium, alluvial  General terms referring to unconsolidated detrital material deposited by a
stream or other body of running water.

alpha-track detector A passive radon measurement device consisting of a plastic film that is
sensitive  to alpha particles.  The film is etched with acid in a laboratory after it is exposed. The
etching reveals scratches, or "tracks", left by the alpha particles resulting from radon decay, which
can then be counted to calculate the radon concentration. Useful for long-term (1-12 months)
radon tests.

amphibolite  A mafic metamorphic rock consisting mainly of pyroxenes and(or) amphibole and
plagioclase.
                                         11-21     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
' argillite, argillaceous Terms referring to a rock derived from clay 'or shale, or any sedimentary
 rock containing an appreciable amount of clay-size material, ie., argillaceous sandstone.

 arid Term describing a climate characterized by dryness, or an evaporation rate that exceeds the
 amount of precipitation.

 basalt A general term for a dark-colored mafic igneous rocks that may be of extrusive origin,
 such as volcanic basalt flows, or intrusive origin, such as basalt dikes,

 batholith  A mass of plutonic igneous rock that has more than 40 square miles of surface
 exposure and no known bottom.

 carbonate A sedimentary rock consisting of the carbonate (COs) compounds of calcium,
 magnesium, or iron, e.g. limestone and dolomite.

 carbonaceous  Said of a rock or sediment that is rich in carbon, is coaly, or contains organic
matter.

charcoal canister A passive radon measurement device consisting of a small container of
granulated activated charcoal that is designed to adsorb radon. Useful for short duration (2-7 days)
measurements only. May be referred to as a "screening" test

chert A hard, extremely dense sedimentary rock consisting dominantly of interlocking crystals of
quartz. Crystals are not visible to the naked eye, giving the rock a milky, dull luster. It may be
white or gray but is commonly colored red, black, yellow, blue, pink, brown, or green.

clastic pertaining to a rock or sediment composed of fragments that are derived from preexisting
rocks or minerals. The most common clastic sedimentary rocks are sandstone and shale.

clay A rock containing clay mineral fragments or material of any composition having a diameter
less than 1/256 mm,

clay mineral One of a complex and loosely defined group of finely crystalline minerals made up
of water, silicate and aluminum (and a wide variety of other elements). They are formed chiefly by
alteration or weathering of primary silicate minerals. Certain clay minerals are noted for their small
size and ability to absorb substantial amounts of water, causing them to swell. The change in size
that occurs as these clays change between dry and wet is referred to as their "shrink-swell"
potential.

concretion A hard, compact mass of mineral matter, normally subspherical but commonly
irregular in shape; formed by precipitation from  a water solution about a nucleus or center, such as
a leaf, shell, bone, or fossil, within a sedimentary or fractured rock.

conglomerate  A coarse-grained, clastic sedimentary rock composed of rock and mineral
fragments larger than 2 mm, set in a finer-grained matrix of clastic material.

cuesta A hill or ridge with a gentle slope on one side and a steep slope on the other. The
formation of a cuesta is controlled by the different weathering properties and the structural dip of
the rocks forming the hill or ridge.

daughter product A nuclide formed by the disintegration of a radioactive precursor or "parent"
atom.
                                          11-22     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
delta, deltaic  Referring to a low, flat, alluvial tract of land having a triangular or fan shape,
located at or near the mouth of a river. It results from the accumulation of sediment deposited by a
river at the point at which the river loses its abiMty to transport the sediment, commonly where a
river meets-a larger body of water such as a lake or ocean.              - -

dike A tabular; igneous intrusion of rock, younger than the surrounding rock, that commonly cuts
across the bedding or foliation of the rock it intrudes.

diorite A plutonic igneous rock that is medium in color and contains visible dark minerals that
make up less than 50% of the rock. It also contains abundant sodium plagioclase and minor
quartz.

dolomite  A carbonate sedimentary rock of which more than 50% consists of the mineral dolomite
(CaMg(CO3>2), and is commonly white, gray, brown, yeEow, or pinkish in color.

drainage The manner in which the waters of an area pass, flow off of, or flow into the soil.
Also refers to the water features of an area, such as lakes and rivers, that drain it

eolian  Pertaining to sediments deposited by the wind.

esker A long, narrow, steep-sided ridge composed of irregular beds of sand and gravel deposited
by streams beneath a glacier and left behind when the ice melted.

evapotranspiration Loss of water from a land area by evaporation from the soil and
transpiration from plants.

extrusive Said of igneous rocks that have been erupted onto the surface of the Earth.

fault A fracture or zone of fractures in rock or sediment along which there has been movement.

fluvial, fluvial deposit  Pertaining to sediment that has been deposited by a river or stream.

foliation A linear feature in a rock defined by both mineralogic and structural characteristics.  It
may be formed during deformation or metamorphisrn.

formation A mappable body of rock having similar characteristics.

glacial deposit Any sediment transported and deposited by a glacier or processes associated
with glaciers, such as glaciofluvial sediments deposited by streams flowing from melting glaciers.

gneiss A rock formed by metamorphisrn in which bands and lenses of minerals of similar
composition alternate with bands and lenses of different composition, giving the rock a striped or
"foliated" appearance.

granite Broadly applied, any coarsely crystalline, quartz- and feldspar-bearing igneous plutonic
rock. Technically, granites have between 10 and 50% quartz, and alkali feldspar comprises at least
65% of the total feldspar.

gravel An unconsolidated, natural accumulation of rock fragments consisting predominantly of
particles greater than 2 mm in size.

heavy minerals Mineral grains in sediment or sedimentary rock having higher than average
specific gravity. May form layers and lenses because of wind or water sorting by weight and size
                                          11-23     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
' and may'be referred to as a "placer deposit." Some heavy minerals are magnetite, garnet, zircon,
 monazite, and xenotime.

 igneous Said of a rock or mineral that solidified from molten or partly molten rock material. It is
 one of the three main classes into which rocks are divided, the others being sedimentary and
 metamorphic.

 intermontane A term that refers to an area between two mountains or mountain ranges.

 intrusion, intrusive The processes of emplacement or injection of molten rock into pre-existing
 rock.  Also refers to the rock formed by intrusive processes, such as an "intrusive igneous rock".

 kame A low mound, knob, hummock, or short irregular ridge formed by a glacial stream at the
 margin of a melting glacier; composed of bedded sand and gravel.

 karst terrain A type of topography that is formed on limestone, gypsum and other rocks by
 dissolution of the rock by water," forming sinkholes and caves.

 lignite A brownish-black coal that is intermediate in coalification between peat and
 subbituminous coal.

 limestone A carbonate  sedimentary rock consisting of more than 50% calcium carbonate,
 primarily in the form of the mineral calcite
 lithology The description of rocks in hand specimen and in outcrop on the basis of color,
 composition, and grain size.

 loam A permeable soil composed of a mixture of relatively equal parts clay, silt, and sand, and
 usually containing some organic matter.

 loess A fine-grained eolian deposit composed of silt-sized particles generally thought to have
 been deposited from windblown dust of Pleistocene age.

 mafic Term describing an igneous rock containing more than 50% dark-colored minerals.

 marine Term describing sediments deposited in the ocean, or precipitated from ocean waters.

 metamorphic Any rock derived from pre-existing rocks by mineralogical, chemical, or structural
 changes in response to changes in temperature, pressure, stress, and the chemical environment.
 Phyllite, schist, amphibolite, and gneiss are metamorphic rocks.

 moraine A mound, ridge, or other distinct accumulation of unsorted, unbedded glacial material,
 predominantly till, deposited by the action of glacial ice.

 outcrop That part of a geologic formation or structure that appears at the surface of the Earth, as
 in "rock outcrop".

 percolation test A term used in engineering for a test to determine the water permeability of a
 soil. A hole is dug and filled with water and the rate of water level decline is measured.

 permeability The capacity of a rock, sediment, or soil to transmit liquid or gas.

 phosphate, phosphatic, phosphorite Any rock or sediment containing a significant amount
 of phosphate minerals, i.e., minerals containing PO4.


                                          11-24     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
physiographic province A region in which all parts are similar in geologic structure and
climate, which has had a uniform geomorphic history, and whose topography or landforms differ
significantly from adjacent regions.
placer deposit See heavy minerals
residual Formed by weathering of a material in place.
residuum Deposit of residual material.
rhyolite An extrusive igneous rock of volcanic origin, compositionally equivalent to granite.
sandstone A clastic sedimentary rock composed of sand-sized rock and mineral material that is
more or less firmly cemented.  Sand particles range from 1/16 to 2 mm in size.
schist A strongly foliated crystalline rock, formed by metamorphism, that can be readily split into
thin flakes or slabs.  Contains mica; minerals are typically aligned.
screening level Result of an indoor radon test taken with a charcoal canister or similar device,
for a short period of time, usually less than seven days. May indicate the potential for an indoor
radon problem but does not indicate annual exposure to radon.
sediment Deposits of rock and mineral particles or fragments originating from material that is
transported by air, water or ice, or that accumulate by natural chemical precipitation or secretion of
organisms.
semiarid Refers to a climate that has slightly more precipitation than an arid climate.
shale A fine-grained sedimentary rock formed from solidification (litMfication) of clay or mud.
shear zone Refers to  a roughly linear zone of rock that has been faulted by ductile or non-ductile
processes in which the rock is sheared and both sides are displaced relative to one another.
shrink-swell clay  See clay mineral.
siltstone A fine-grained clastic sedimentary rock composed of silt-sized rock and mineral
material and more or less firmly cemented. Silt particles range from 1/16 to  1/256 mm in size.
sinkhole A roughly circular depression in a karst area measuring meters to tens of meters in
diameter. It is funnel shaped and is formed by collapse of the surface material into an underlying
void created by the dissolution of carbonate rock.
slope An inclined part of the earth's surface.
solution cavity A hole, channel or cave-like cavity formed by dissolution of rock.
stratigraphy The study of rock strata; also refers to the succession of rocks of a particular area,
surficial materials Unconsolidated glacial, wind-, or waterborne deposits occurring on the
earth's surface.
tablelands General term for a broad, elevated region with a nearly level surface of considerable
extent.
                                          11-25     Reprinted from TJSGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
' terrace gravel Gravel-sized material that caps ridges and terraces, left behind by a stream as it
 cuts down to a lower level.

 terrain A tract or region of the Earth's surface considered as a physical feature or an ecological
 environment.

 till  Unsorted, generally unconsolidated and imbedded rock and mineral material deposited directly
 adjacent to and underneath a glacier, without reworking by meltwater. Size of grains varies greatly
 from clay to boulders.

 uraniferous Containing uranium, usually more than 2 ppm.

 vendor data Used in this report to refer to indoor radon data collected and measured by
 commercial vendors of radon measurement devices and/or services.

 volcanic Pertaining to the activities, structures, and extrusive rock types of a volcano.

 water table  The surface forming the boundary between the zone of saturation and the zone of
 aeration; the top surface of a body of unconfined groundwater in rock or soil.

 weathering  The destructive process by which earth and rock materials,  on exposure to
 atmospheric elements, are changed in color, texture, composition, firmness, or form with little or
 no transport of the material.
                                           11-26      Reprinted from USGS Open-Hie Report 93-292

-------
                                           APPENDIX C
                                  EPA REGIONAL  OFFICES
EPA  Regional  Offi£fis__
State
EPA  Region
EPA Region 1
JFK Federal Building
Boston, MA 02203
(617)  565-4502

EPA Region 2
(2AIR:RAD)
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY 10278
(212)  264-4110

Region 3 (3AH14)
841 Chestnut Street
Philadelphia,  PA 19107
(215)  597-8326

EPA Region 4
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, GA 30365
(404)  347-3907

EPA Region 5 (5AR26)
77 West Jackson Blvd.
Chicago, IL 60604-3507
(312)  886-6175

EPA Region 6 (6T-AS)
1445 Ross Avenue
Dallas, TX 75202-2733
(214)  655-7224

EPA Region 7
726 Minnesota Avenue
Kansas City, KS 66101
(913)  551-7604

EPA Region 8
(8HWM-RP)
999 18th Street
One Denver Place, Suite 1300
Denver, CO 80202-2413
(303)  293-1713

EPA Region 9 (A-3)
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA 94105
(415)  744-1048

EPA Region 10
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98101
(202) 442-7660
Alabama	4
Alaska	10
Arizona	9
Arkansas	6
California	.9
Colorado	.-	8
Connecticut.,.,.	...1
Delaware	...3
District of Columbia	3
Florida	4
Georgia	~~4
Hawaii	9
Idaho	10
Illinois	5
Indiana	5
Iowa	7
Kansas	.•	7
Kentucky...,	4
Louisiana	6
Maine	1
Maryland	3
Massachusetts..............	1
Michigan..........	5
Minnesota	5
Mississippi	4
Missouri	7
Montana	I..8
Nebraska	7
Nevada	9
New Hampshire	1
New  Jersey	2
New Mexico....	6
New York	2
North  Carolina	4
North  Dakota.	8
Ohio.............	5
Oklahoma..	6
Oregon	10
Pennsylvania	3
Rhode Island	1
South  Carolina	4
South  Dakota	8
Tennessee	4
Texas	6
Utah	8
Vermont	1
Virginia	3
Washington............	10
West Virginia..	..3
Wisconsin........	5
Wyoming....	8
                                                 n-27
       Reprinted from USGS Open-Fife Report 93-292

-------
                                 STATE RADON  CONTACTS
                                            May, 1993
Alabama       James McNees
               Division of Radiation Control
               Alabama Department of Public E  -ih
               State Office Building
               Montgomery, AL 36130
               (205) 242-5315
               1-800-582-1866 in state  .

Alaska         Charles Tedford
               Department of Health and Social
                 Services
               P.O. Box 110613
               Juneau,AK 99811-0613
               (907)465-3019
               1-800-478-4845 in state

Arizona        John Stewart
               Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency
               4814 South 40th St.
               Phoenix, AZ 85040
               (602) 2554845
Arkansas       Lee Gershner
               Division of Radiation Control
               Department of Health
               4815 Markham Street, Slot 30
               Little Rock, AR 72205-3867
               (501)661-2301
California       J. David Quinton
               Department of Health Services
               714 P Street, Room 600
               Sacramento, CA 94234-7320
               (916) 324-2208
               1-800-745-7236 in state
Colorado       Linda Martin
               Department of Health
               4210 East 11th Avenue
               Denver, CO 80220
               (303)692-3057
               1-800-846-3986 in state
 Connecticut Alan J. Siniscalchi
            Radon Program
            ConneCi. ^ut Department of Health
              Services
            .150 Washington Street
            HartfoM, CT 061064474
           • (203) 566-3122

   Delaware MaraiG. Rejai
            Office of Radiation Control
            Division of Public Health
            P.O. Box 637
            Dover, DE 19903
            (302)736-3028
            1-800-554-4636 In State

    District Robert Davis
of Columbia DC Department of Consumer and
              Regulatory Affairs
            614 H Street NW
            Room 1014
            Washington, DC 20001
            (202)727-71068

    Florida N. Michael Gilley
            Office of Radiation Control
            Department of Health and
              Rehabilitative Services
            1317 Winewood Boulevard
            Tallahassee, EL 32399-0700
            (904)488-1525
            1-800-543-8279 in state

    Georgia Richard Schreiber
            Georgia Department of Human
              Resources
            878 Peachtree St, Room 100
            Atlanta, GA 30309
            (404) 894-6644
            1-800-745-0037 in state

    Hawaii Russell Takata
            Environmental Health Services
              Division
            591 Ala Moana Boulevard
            Honolulu, ffl 96813-2498
            (808) 586-4700
                                              n-28
      Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
Idaho
nib*
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
PatMcGavarn
Office of Environmental Health
450 West State Street
Boise, ID 83720
(208) 334-6584
1-800-445-8647 in state
Richard Allen
Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety
1301 Outer Park Drive
Springfield, EL 62704
(217) 524-5614
1-800-325-1245 in state
Lorand Magyar
Radiological Health Section
Indiana State Department of Health
1330 West Michigan Street
P.O. Box 1964
Indianapolis, IN 46206
(317)633-8563
1-800-272-9723 In State

Donald A. Plater
Bureau of Radiological Health
Iowa Department of Public Health
Lucas State Office Building
Des Moines, IA 50319-0075
(515) 281-3478
1-800-383-5992 In State

Harold Spiker
Radiation Control Program
Kansas Department of Health and
  Environment
109 SW 9th Street
6th Floor Mills Building
Topeka, KS 66612
(913) 296-1561

JeanaPhelps  •
Radiation Control Branch
Department of Health Services
Cabinet for Human Resources
275 East Main Street
Frankfort, KY 40601
(502) 564-3700
    Louisiana Matt Schlenker
              Louisiana Department of
                Environmental Quality
              P.O. Box 82135
              Baton Rouge, LA 70£"4-2135
              (504) 925-7042"
              1-800-256-2494 in state
              Bob Stilwell
              Division of Health Engineering
              Department of Human Services
              State House, Station 10
              Augusta, ME 04333
              (207) 289-5676
              1-800-232-0842 in state
    Maryland  Leon J. Rachuba
              Radiological Health Program
              Maryland Department of the
                Environment
              2500 Broening Highway
              Baltimore, MD 21224
              (410)631-3301
              1-800-872-3666 In State

Massachusetts  William J. Bell
              Radiation Control Program
              Department of Public Health
              23 Service Center
              Northampton, MA 01060
              (413) 586-7525
              1-800-445-1255 in state

    Michigan  Sue Hendershott
              Division of Radiological Health
              Bureau of Environmental and
                Occupational Health
              3423 North Logan Street
              P.O. Box 30195
              Lansing, MI 48909
              (517) 335-8194

   Minnesota  Laura Oatmann
              Indoor Air Quality Unit
              925 Delaware Street, SB
              P.O. Box 59040
              Minneapolis, MN 55459-0040
              (612) 627-5480
              1-800-798-9050 in state
                                                n-29
                                            Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
'Mississippi     Silas Anderson
                Division of Radiological Health
                Department of Health
                3 150 Lawson Street
                P.O. Box 1700
                Jackson, MS 39215-1700
                (601)354-6657
                1-800-626-7739 in state

 Missouri        Kenneth V. Miller
                Bureau of Radiological Health
                Missouri Department of Health
                1730 East Elm
                P.O. Box 570
                Jefferson City, MO 65102
                (314)751-6083
                1-800-669-7236 In State
                Adrian C. Howe
                Occupational Health Bureau
                Montana Department of Health and
                 Environmental Sciences
                Cogswell Building A113
                Helena, MT 59620
                (406)444-3671
Nebraska       Joseph Milone
               Division of Radiological Health
               Nebraska Department of Health '
               301 Centennial Mall, South
               P.O. Box 95007
               Lincoln, NE 68509
               (402)471-2168
               1-800-334-9491 In State

Nevada         Stan Marshall
               Department of Human Resources
               505 East King Street
               Room 203
               Carson City, NV 89710
               (702)687-5394

Nj£!H£ Hampshire David Chase
               Bureau of Radiological Health
               Division of Public Health Services
               Health and Welfare Building
               Six Hazen Drive
               Concord, NH 03301
               (603) 211-4614
               1-800-852-3345 x4674
    New Jersey  Tonalee Carlson Key
               Division of Environmental Quality
               Department of Environmental
                 Protection  .
               CN415
               Trenton, NJ 08625-0145
               (609) 987-6369
               1-800-648-0394 in state

•'  New Mexico  William M. Floyd
               Radiation Licensing and Registration
                 Section
               New Mexico Environmental
                 Improvement Division
               1190 St. Francis Drive'
               Santa Fe,NM 87503
               (505) 8274300

     New York  William J. Condon
               Bureau of Environmental Radiation
                 Protection
               New York State Health Department
               Two University Place
               Albany, NY 12202
               (518)458-6495
               1-800-458-1158 in state

North Carolina  Dr. Felix Fong
               Radiation Protection Division
               Department of Environmental Health
                 and Natural Resources
               701 Barbour Drive
               Raleigh, NC 27603-2008
               (919) 571-4141
               1-800-662-7301 (recorded info x4196)

  North Dgkota  Allen Jacobson
               North Dakota Department of Health
               1200 Missouri Avenue, Room 304
               P.O. Box 5520
               Bismarck, ND 58502-5520
               (701)221-5188

         Ohio  Marcie Matthews
               Radiological Health Program
               Department of Health
               1224 Kinnear Road - Suite 120
               Columbus, OH 43212
               (614)644-2727
               1-800-5234439 in state
                                               H-30
        Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
'Oklahoma'
 Oregon
 Pennsylvania
 Puerto Rico
 Rhode Island
 South Carolina
 Gene Smith
 Radiation Protection Division
 Oklahoma State Department  of
  Health
 P.O. Box 53551
 Oklahoma City, OK 73152
 (405) 271-5221
George Toombs
Department of Human Resources
Health Division
1400 SW 5th Avenue
Portland, OR 97201
(503)731-4014
 Michael Pyles
 Pennsylvania Department of
  Environmental Resources
 Bureau of Radiation Protection
 P.O. Box 2063
 Harrisburg,PA17120
 (717) 783-3594
 1-800-23-RADON In State

 David Saldana
 Radiological Health Division
 G.P.O. Call Box 70184
.Rio Piedras,"Puerto Rico 00936
 (809) 767-3563
 Edmund Arcand
 Division of Occupational Health and
  Radiation
 Department of Health
 205 Cannon Building
 Davis Street
 Providence, RI02908
 (401) 277-2438
                Bureau of Radiological Health
                Department of Health and
                  Environmental Control
                2600 Bull Street
                Columbia, SC 29201
                (803)734^631
                1-800-768-0362
South Dakota MikePochop
             Division of Environment Regulation
             Department of Water and Natural
               Resources
             Joe Foss Building, Room 217
             523 E. Capitol
             Pierre, SD 57501-3181
             (605)773-3351

   Tennessee Susie Shimek
             Division of Air Pollution Control
             Bureau of the Environment
             Department of Environment and
               Conservation
             Customs House, 701 Broadway
             Nashville, TN 37219-5403
             (615) 532-0733
             1-800-232-1139 in state

       Texas Gary Smith
             Bureau of Radiation Control
             Texas Department of Health
             1100 West 49th Street
             Austin, TX 78756-3189
             (512) 834-6688
        Utah John Hultquist
             Bureau of Radiation Control
             Utah State Department of Health
             288 North, 1460 West
             P.O. Box 16690
             Salt Lake City, UT 84116-0690
             (801) 536-4250

    Vermont Paul demons
             Occupational and Radiological Health
               Division
             Vermont Department of Health
             10 Baldwin Street
             Montpelier, VT 05602
             (802) 828-2886
             1-800-640-0601 in state

Virgin Islands Contact the U.S. Environmental
             Protection Agency, Region II
             in New York
             (212)264-4110
                                                n-3i
                                           Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
Virginia  "      Shelly Ottenbrite
               Bureau of Radiological Health
               Department of Health
               109 Governor Street
               Richmond, VA 23219
               (804)786-5932
               1-800-468-0138 in state

Washington     Kate Coleman
               Department of Health
               Office of Radiation Protection
               Airdustrial Building 5, LE-13
               Olympia, WA 98504
               (206)753^518
               1-800-323-9727 In State

WestVirginia   BeaMe L. DeBord
               Industrial Hygiene Division
               West Virginia Department of Health
               151 llth Avenue
               South Charleston, WV 25303
               (304) 558-3526
               1-800-922-1255 In State

Wisconsin      Conrad Werffenbach
               Radiation Protection Section
               Division of Health
               Department of Health and Social
                 Services
               P.O. Box 309
               Madison, WI53701-0309
               (608)267-4796
               1-800-798-9050 in state

Wyoming      Janet Hough
               Wyoming Department of Health and
                 Social Services
               Hathway Building, 4th Floor
               Cheyenne, WY 82002-0710
               (307) 777-6015
               1-800-458-5847 in state
                                               11-32      Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
                            STATE GEOLOGICAL SURVEYS
                                            May, 1993
Alabama        Ernest A. Mancini
               Geological Survey of Alabama
               P.O. Box 0
               420 Hackberry Lane
               Tuscaloosa, AL 35486-9780
               (205) 349-2852

Alaska         Thomas E. Smith
               Alaska Division of Geological &
                 Geophysical Surveys
               794 University Ave., Suite 200
               Fairbanks, AK  99709-3645
               (907)479-7147

Arizona         Larry D. Fellows
               Arizona Geological Survey
               845 North Park Ave., Suite 100
               Tucson, AZ 85719
               (602) 882-4795
Arkansas        Norman F. Williams
               Arkansas Geological Commission
               Vardelle Parham Geology Center
               3815 West Roosevelt Rd.
               Little Rock, AR 72204
               (501) 324-9165

California       James F. Davis
               California Division of Mines &
                 Geology
               801 K Street, MS 12-30
               Sacramento, CA 95814-3531
               (916) 445-1923

Colorado        Pat Rogers (Acting)
               Colorado Geological Survey
               1313 Sherman St., Rm 715
               Denver, CO 80203
               (303)866-2611

Connecticut     Richard C. Hyde
               Connecticut Geological & Natural
                 History Survey
               165 Capitol Ave., Rm. 553
               Hartford, CT 06106
               (203) 566-3540

Delaware       Robert R. Jordan
               Delaware Geological Survey
               University of Delaware
               101 Penny Hall
               Newark, DE 19716-7501
               (302)831-2833
        Walter Schmidt
        Florida Geological Survey
        903 W. Tennessee St.
        Tallahassee, FL 32304-7700
        (904)488-4191
        William H. McLemore
        Georgia Geologic Survey
        Rm. 400
        19 Martin Luther King Jr. Dr. SW
        Atlanta, GA 30334   '
        (404) 656-3214
Hawaii  Manabu Tagomori
        Dept. of Land and Natural Resources
        Division of Water & Land Mgt
        P.O. Box 373
        Honolulu, ffl 96809
        (808) 548-7539

  Idaho  Earl H. Bennett
        Idaho Geological Survey
        University of Idaho
        Merrill Hall, Rm. 332
        Moscow, ID 83843
        (208) 885-7991

Illinois  Morris W. Leighton
        Illinois State Geological Survey
        Natural Resources Building
        615 East Peabody Dr.
        Champaign,  IL 61820
        (217) 333-4747

Indiana  Norman C. Hester
        Indiana Geological Survey
        611 North Walnut Grove
        Bloomington, IN 47405
        (812) 855-9350

  Iowa  Donald L. Koch
        Iowa Department of Natural Resources
        Geological Survey Bureau
        109 Trowbridge Hall
        Iowa City, IA 52242-1319
        (319) 335-1575

Kansas  Lee C. Gerhard
        Kansas Geological Survey
        1930 Constant Ave., West Campus
        University of Kansas
        Lawrence, KS 66047
        (913) 864-3965
                                               H-33
  Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
•Kentucky  "     Donald C. Haney
               Kentucky Geological Survey
               University of Kentucky
               228 Mining & Mineral Resources
                 Building
               Lexington, KY 40506-0107
               (606)257-5500

Louisiana       William E. Marsalis
               Louisiana Geological Survey
               P.O. Box 2827
               University Station
               Baton Rouge, LA 70821-2827
               <504) 388-5320

Maine         Walter A. Anderson
               Maine Geological Survey
               Department of Conservation
               State House, Station 22
               Augusta, ME 04333
               (207)289-2801
Maryland       Emery T. Cleaves
               Maryland Geological Survey
               2300 St. Paul Street
               Baltimore, MD 21218-5210
               (410)554-5500
Massachusetts   Joseph A. Sinnott
               Massachusetts Office of
                 Environmental Affairs
               100 Cambridge St, Room 2000
               Boston, MA 02202
               (617) 727-9800

Michigan       R. Thomas Segall
               Michigan Geological Survey Division
               Box 30256
               Lansing, MI 48909
               (517) 334-6923

Minnesota      Priscilla C. Grew
               Minnesota Geological Survey
               2642 University Ave.
               St. Paul, MN 55114-1057
               (612) 627-4780
Mississippi     S. Cragin Knox
               Mississippi Office of Geology
               P.O. Box 20307
               Jackson, MS 39289-1307
               (601)961-5500
      Missouri James H. Williams'
               Missouri Division of Geology &
                 Land Survey
               111 Fairgrounds Road
               P.O. Box 250
               Rolla, MO 65401
               (314) 368-2100

      Montana Edward T. Ruppel
               Montana Bureau of Mines & Geology
               Montana College of Mineral Science
                 and Technology, Main Hall
               Butte, MT 59701
               (406)496-4180

      Nebraska Perry B. Wigley
               Nebraska Conservation & Survey
                 Division
               113 Nebraska Hall
               University of Nebraska
               Lincoln, NE 68588-0517
               (402)472-2410

        Nevada Jonathan G. Price
               Nevada Bureau of Mines & Geology
               Stop 178
               University of Nevada-Reno
               Reno, NV 89557-0088
               (702)784-6691

New Hampshire Eugene L. Boudette
               Dept. of Environmental Services
               117 James Hall
               University of New Hampshire
               Durham, NH 03824-3589
               (603) 862-3160

    NewJersey HaigF.Kasabach
               New Jersey Geological Survey
               P.O. Box 427
               Trenton, NJ 08625
               (609)292-1185

   New Mexico Charles E. Chapin
               New Mexico Bureau of Mines &
                 Mineral Resources
               Campus Station
               Socorro.NM  87801
               (505) 835-5420

     NewYork Robert H. Fakundiny
               New York State Geological Survey
               3136 Cultural Education Center
               Empire State Plaza
               Albany, NY 12230
               (518)474-5816
                                               JJ-34      Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
 North Carolina Charles H. Gardner
               North Carolina Geological Survey
               P.O. Box 27687
               Raleigh, NC 27611-7687
               (919)733-3833

North Dakota    John P. Bluemle
               North Dakota Geological Survey
               600 East Blvd.
               Bismarck, ND 58505-0840
               (701) 224-4109
Ohio           Thomas M. Berg
               Ohio Dept. of Natural Resources
               Division of Geological Survey
               4383 Fountain Square Drive
               Columbus, OH 43224-1362
               (614) 265-6576

Oklahoma      Charles J. Mankin
               Oklahoma Geological Survey
               Room N-131, Energy Center
               100E.Boyd
               Norman, OK 73019-0628
               (405) 325-3031

Oregon         Donald A. Hull
               Dept. of Geology & Mineral Indust.
               Suite 965
               800 NE Oregon St. f28
               Portland, OR 97232-2162
               (503) 731-4600

Pennsylvania    Donald M. Hoskins
               Dept. of Environmental Resources
               Bureau of Topographic & Geologic
                 Survey
               P.O. Box 2357
               Hanisburg,PA 17105-2357
               (717) 787-2169

Puerto Rico     Ramdn M. Alonso
               Puerto Rico Geological Survey
                 Division
               Box 5887
               Puerta de Tierra Station
               San Juan, P.R. 00906
               (809) 722-2526

Rhpdelsland    J. Allan Cain
               Department of Geology
               University of Rhode bland
               315 Green Hall
               Kingston, M 02881
               (401)792-2265
'South Carolina  Alan-Jon W.Zupari (Acting)
               South Carolina Geological Survey
               5 Geology Road
               Columbia, SC 29210-9998
               (803) 737-9440

  South Dakota  CM. Christensen (Acting)
               South Dakota Geological Survey
               Science Center
               University of South Dakota
               Vermfflion, SD 57069-2390
               (605)677-5227

     Tennessee  Edward T.Luther
               Tennessee Division of Geology
               13th Moor, L & C Tower
               401 Church Street
               Nashville, TN 37243-0445
               (615) 532-1500

        Texas  William L. Fisher
               Texas Bureau of Economic Geology
               University of Texas
               University Station, Box X
               Austin, TX 78713-7508
               (512)471-7721

         Utah  M. Lee Allison
               Utah Geological & Mineral Survey
               2363  S. Foothill Dr.
               Salt Lake City, UT 84109-1491
               (801)467-7970
      Vermont Dane L.Conrad
              Vermont Division of Geology and
                Mineral Resources
              103 South Main St.
              Waterbury.VT 05671
              (802)244-5164
               Stanley S. Johnson
               Virginia Division of Mineral
                Resources
               P.O. Box 3667
               Charlottesville, VA 22903
               (804)293-5121
   Washington  Raymond Lasmanis
               Washington Division of Geology &
                 Earth Resources
               Department of Natural Resources
               P.O. Box 47007
               Olympia, Washington  98504-7007
               (206)902-1450
                                               11-35      Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
  3Vest Virginia Larry D.Woodfork
               West Virginia Geological and
                 Economic Survey
               Mont Chateau Research Center •
               P.O. Box 879
               Morgantown, WV 26507-0879
               (304)594-2331

Wisconsin      James Robertson
               Wisconsin Geological & Natural
                 History Survey
               3817 Mineral Point Road
               Madison, WI 53705-5100
               (608)263-7384  .

Wyoming       Gary B. Glass
               Geological Survey of Wyoming
               University of Wyoming
               Box 3008, University Station
               Laramie, WY 82071-3008
               (307)766-2286
                                              H-36
Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
•              EPA REGION 4 GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL SUMMARY
                                           by
              Linda C.S. Gundersen, James K. Otton, andR. Randall Schumann
                                 U.S. Geological Survey

       EPA Region 4 includes the states of Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi,
North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee. For each state, geologic radon potential areas
were delineated and ranked on the basis of geologic, soil, housing construction, and other factors.
Areas in which the average screening indoor radon level of all homes within the area is estimated to
be greater than 4 pCi/L were ranked high.  Areas in which the average screening indoor radon
level of all homes within the area is estimated to be between 2 and 4 pCi/L were ranked
moderate/variable, and areas in which the average screening indoor radon level of alt homes within
the area is estimated to be less than 2 pCi/L were ranked low. Information on the data used and on
the radon potential ranking scheme is given in the introduction to this volume. More detailed
information on the geology and radon potential of each state in Region 4 is given in the individual
state chapters.  The individual chapters describing the geology and radon potential of the states in
EPA Region 4, though much more detailed than this summary, still are generalized assessments
and there is no substitute for having a home tested. Within any radon potential area homes with
indoor radon levels both above and below the predicted average will likely be found.
       Major geologic/physiographic provinces for Region 4 are shown in figure 1 and are
referred to in the  summary that follows. The moderate climate,  use of air conditioning, evaporative
coolers, or open windows for ventilation, and the small proportion of homes with basements
throughout much of Region 4 contribute to generally low indoor radon levels in spite of the fact
that this area has  substantial areas of high surface radioactivity.
       Maps showing arithmetic means of measured indoor radon levels are shown in figure 2.
Indoor radon data for Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina,
and Tennessee are from the State/EPA Residential Radon Survey. Data for Florida are from the
Florida Statewide Radon Study.  County screening indoor radon averages range from less than 1
pCi/L to 4.6 pCi/L. The geologic radon potential areas in Region 4 have been summarized from
the individual state chapters and are shown in figure 3.

ALABAMA

The Plateaus
       The Interior Low Plateaus have been ranked high in geologic radon potential. The
Mississippian carbonate rocks and shales that underlie this province appear to have high (>2.5 ppm
elJ) to moderate  (1.5-2.5 ppm eU) radioactivity associated with them. The carbonates and shales
are also associated with most of the highest county indoor radon averages for the State, particularly
in Colbert, Madison, Lawrence, and Lauderdale Counties. The geologic units that may be the
source of these problems, as indicated by the radioactivity, appear to be parts of the Fort Payne
Chert, the Tuscumbia Limestone, the'Monteagle, Bangor, Pride Mountain, and Parkwood
Formations, and  the Floyd Shale. Indoor radon levels in homes built on the St. Genevieve
Limestone, Tuscumbia Limestone, and Fort Payne Chert averaged between 3.0 and 4.3 pCi/L.
Soils developed from carbonate rocks  are often .elevated in uranium and radium. Carbonate soils
are derived from the dissolution of the CaCOs that makes up the majority of the rock.  When  the
CaCOs has been dissolved away, the soils are enriched in the remaining impurities, predominantly
                                           m-l    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
Figure 1. Geologic radon potential areas of EPA Region 4.  See next page for names of
numbered areas.

-------
'Figure 1 (continued).  Geologic radon potential areas of EPA Region 4.  Note: although some
 areas, for example, the Coastal Plain, are contiguous from state to state, they are sometimes
 referred to by slightly different names or are subdivided differently in different states, thus are
 numbered and labelled seperately on this figure.
 l-Jackson Purchase (Coastal Plain)
 2-Western Coalfield
 3-Mississippian Plateau
 4-Eastern Pennyroyal
 5-New Albany Shale
 6-OuterBluegrass
 7-Inner Bluegrass
 8-Cumberland Plateau (Appalachian Plateau)
 9-Mississippi alluvial plain
 IQ-Loess-covered Coastal Plain
 11-Eastern Coastal Plain
 12-Cherty Highland
 13-Highland Rim
 14-Nashville Basin
 15—Appalachian Plateau
 16-Ridge and Valley
 17-Unafca Mountains
 18-Blue Ridge Belt
 19-Brevard Fault Zone
 20-Chauga Belt
 21-Inner Piedmont
 22-Kings Mountain Belt
 23-Dan River Basin
 24-Milton Belt
 25-Charfotte Belt
 26-Carolina Slate Belt
 27-Wadesboro sub-basin
 28-Sanford-Durham sub-basins
 29-Raleigh Belt
 30-Easteni Slate Belt
31-Inner Coastal Plain
32-Outer Coastal Plain
33-Jackson Prairies
34-Loess Mils
35-North Central Hills
36-Flatwoods
37-Pontotoc Ridge
38-Black Prairies
39-Tombigbee Hills
40-Coastal Pine Meadows
41-Pine Hills
42-Interior Low Plateaus
43-Inner Coastal Plain (Cretaceous)
44-Northern Piedmont (faults, phylite and granite rocks)
45-Wedowee and Emuckfaw Groups
46-Inner Piedmoni/Dadeville Complex
47-Southern Piedmont
48-Inner and Outer Coastal Plain (Tertiary Rocks)
49-Rome-Kingston Thrust Stack
50-Georgiabama Thrust Stack (north of Allatoona Fault)
51-Georgiabama Thrust Stack (south of Allatoona Fault)
52-LUtle River Thrust Slack
53-Coastai Plain (Cretaceous/Tertiary)
54-Coastal Plain (Quatemary/Pliocene-Pleistocene gravels)
55-Upper Coastal Plain
56-Middle Coastal Plain
57-Lower Coastal Plain
58-Highlands
59-Lowlands
60-Dade County, anomalous area.
                                                m-3     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
                                                                         Indoor Radon Screening
                                                                      Measurements: Average (pCi/L)
                                                                               0.0 to 1.9
                                                                               2.0 to 4.0
                                                                               4.1 to 6.0
                                                                               6.1 to 13.8
                                                                               Missing Data
                                                                               or < 5 measurements
Figure 2.  Screening indoor radon averages for counties with 5 or more measurements in EPA
Region 4. Data for all states in Region4 except Florida from the State/EPA Residential Radon
Survey. Data for Florida are from the Florida Statewide Radon Study. Histograms in map
legend show the number of counties in each category.

-------
                                                                   GEOLOGIC
                                                                RADON POTENTIAL
                                                              |   1 LOW
                                                              HU MODERATE/VARIABLE
                                                                  HIGH
Figure 3, Geologic radon potential areas of EPA Region 4. For more detail, refer to individual
state radon potential chapters.

-------
'base metals, including uranium. Rinds containing high concentrations' of uranium arid uranium
 minerals can be formed on the surfaces of rocks affected by CaCOa dissolution and karstification.
 Karst and cave morphology is also thought to promote the flow and accumulation of radon.
 Because carbonate soils are clayey, they have a tendency to crack when they dry and may develop
 very high permeability from the fractures. Under i»;c *    mditions, however, the soils derived
 from carbonates have generally low permeability.
       The Appalachian Plateaus region is ranked moderate in radon potential. Indoor radon is
 generally low (< 2 pCi/L) to-moderate (2-4 pCi/L). Radioactivity is low to moderate and soil
 permeability is moderate. The sandstone of the Pottsville Formation is not noted for being
 uranium-bearing, but uraniferous carbonaceous shales interbedded with the sandstone may be the
 cause of locally moderate to high (>4 pCi/L)  indoor radon. Cullman County had several indoor
 radon measurements greater than 4 pCi/L, including one measurement of 19.8 pCi/L: Winston and
 Walker Counties also had several indoor radon levels greater than 4 pCi/L in the Alabama
 Department of Public Health data set

 Valley and Ridge
       The Valley and Ridge province has been ranked moderate in geologic radon potential.
 Radioactivity is generally moderate in the Valley and Ridge, with high radioactivity occurring along
 the southeastern border with the Piedmont. Indoor radon is highly variable, with generally low
 county averages and one high county average. Most of the counties had a few readings greater
 than 4 pCi/L. The soils of the Valley and Ridge have low to moderate permeability. The
 permeability may be locally high in dry clayey soils and karst areas. Carbonate soils derived from
 Cambrian-Ordovician rock units of the Valley and Ridge province cause known indoor radon
 problems in eastern Tennessee, western New Jersey, western Virginia, eastern West Virginia and
 central and eastern Pennsylvania.  Further, the Devonian Chattanooga Shale crops out locally in
 parts of the Valley and Ridge. This shale is widely known to be highly uraniferous and has been
 identified as a source of high indoor radon in Kentucky.

 Piedmont
       Where it is possible to associate high  radioactivity and/or high indoor radon levels with
 particular areas, parts of the Piedmont have been ranked moderate to high in radon potential.
 Radiometric anomalies occur over the Talladega Fault zone, which separates the Paleozoic
 carbonates from the metamorphic rocks.  Some of the metamorphic rocks in the Northern
 Piedmont, including the Poe Bridge Mountain Group, the Mad Indian Group, parts of the
 Wedowee Group, and the Higgins Ferry Group, also have high radioactivity associated with them.
 In many cases the radiometric anomalies appear to be associated with rocks in fault zones, graphitic
 schists and phyllites, felsic gneiss, and other granitic rocks. Furthermore, Talladega, Calhoun,
 Clebume, and Randolph Counties all have some high indoor radon measurements. Uranium in
 graphitic phyllite with an assay value of 0.076 percent UsOg has been reported from Clebume
 County and similar graphitic phyllites from the Georgia Piedmont average 4.7 ppm uranium.
 Graphitic phyllites and schists in other parts of the Piedmont are known sources of radon and have
 high indoor radon levels associated with them. Another source of uranium in Piedmont
 metamorphic rocks is monazite, which contains high amounts of both uranium and thorium. It is a
 common accessory mineral in gneisses and granites throughout the Piedmont and its resistance to
 weathering and high density result in local monazite concentrations in saprolite. A uraniferous
 monazite belt that crosses the Piedmont in northern Chambers and Tallapoosa County may provide
                                           m-6    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
a source of radon. Soils of the Northern and Sb'uthern Piedmont have moderate to high
permeability, whereas soils developed from mafic rocks of the Dadeville Complex have low
permeability. Because the DadeviMe Complex consists primarily of mafic rocks with low
radioactivity and low permeability, the Dadeville Complex was ranked separately from other
Piedmont rocks and is ranked low in geologic radon potential.

Coastal Plain
       More than half of Alabama is covered by the sediments of-the Coastal Plain. Indoor radon
levels are generally less than 4 pCi/L and commonly less than 2 pCi/L in this province. Soil
permeability is variable-generally low in clays and moderate to high in silts and sands. A distinct
radiometric high is located over the central belt of marly sandy clay and chalk known as the Selma
Group. Within the Selma Group high radioactivity is associated with the DemopolisChalk,
Mooreville Chalk, Prairie Bluffs Chalk, and the Ripiey Formation in central and western Alabama.
In eastern Alabama and into Georgia these rocks are dominated by the glaueonitic sands and clays
of the Providence Sand, Cusseta Sand, and Blufftown Formation, These units have overall
moderate geologic radon potential.
       As part of a study by the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. EPA to assess the radon
potential of the Coastal Plain sediments in the United States, data on radon in soil gas, surface
gamma-ray activity, and soil permeability were coEected and examined. Data were collected in the
Alabama Coastal Plain along a transect running from just north of Montgomery, Alabama, to just
south of De Funiak Springs, Florida.  The highest soil-gas radon concentrations and equivalent
uranium were found in the Cretaceous Mooreville Chalk, carbonaceous sands and clays of the
Providence Sand, and the glauconitic sands of the Eutaw and Ripiey Formations. However,
permeability in many of these units is slow—generally less  than IxlCH2 cm2, and soil-gas radon
was difficult to collect. Geologic units that have the lowest soil-gas radon concentrations and eU
include the quartz sands of the Cretaceous Gordo Formation and quartz sands and residuum of the
undifferentiated upper Tertiary sediments. Low to moderate radon and uranium concentrations
were measured in the glauconitic sands and clays of the Tertiary Porters Creek Formation and in
the glauconitic sands, limestones, and clays of the Tertiary Nanafalia, Lisbon Formation, and the
Tuscahoma Sand. The indoor radon in some counties underlain by the Selma Group is in the 2-4
pCi/L range with a few measurements greater  than 4 pCi/L, higher than in most other parts of the
Alabama Coastal Plain. High uranium and radon concentrations in the sediments of the Jackson
Group, locally exceeding 8 ppm U, but generally in the 1-4 ppm U range, and high soil-gas radon
concentrations, are associated with faults and oil and gas wells in Choctaw County. Indoor radon
measurements are generally low in these areas, but may be locally high.

FLORIDA

       Florida lies entirely within the Coastal  Plain, but there are six distinctive areas in Florida for
which geologic radon potential may be evaluated—the Northern Highlands, Central Highlands, the
Central and Northern Highlands  anomalous areas, the Gulf Coastal Lowlands, Atlantic Coastal
Lowlands, and an area here termed the Dade County anomalous area.
       The Northern Highlands province has generally low geologic radon potential.  All counties
entirely within this province have average indoor radon levels less than 1 pCi/L. Leon County
averaged 1.7 and 1.8 pCi/L in the two surveys of the Florida Statewide Radon Study. Most of
these data likely come from Tallahassee, which lies within an area of moderately elevated eU. This
                                           ffl-7    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
'area and those parts of southern Columbia, western Union, and northern Alachua County which
are underlain by phosphatic rocks, and limited areas where coarse gravels occur in river terraces in
the western panhandle, are likely to have elevated radon potential.
       The Central Highlands province has variable geologic radon potential.  Generally low
radon potential occurs in low eU areas in tl  sasterr a   '  Duthern part, jf this province. Moderate
radon potential occurs in the western part of this province where uraniferous phosphatic rocks are
close to the surface. Localized areas in which uranium contents of soils and shallow subsoils
exceed 100 ppm are likely, and indoor-radon levels may exceed 20 pCi/L or. more where this
occurs, Alachua (lies in both the Central and Northern Highlands), Marion, and Sumter Counties
report indoor radon values exceeding 20 pCi/L.  Excessively well-drained hillslopes may also
contribute to higher radon potential.
       The Gulf Coastal Lowland Province generally has low radon potential. High-rainfall and
high water tables cause very moist soils  which inhibit radon movement. Equivalent uranium is low
in most areas except in some coastal bay areas of western peninsular Florida. Some isolated areas
of elevated radon potential may occur in these areas of higher eU.
       The Atlantic Coastal Lowland area generally has low radon potential. High rainfall and
high water tables cause very moist soils that inhibit radon movement Equivalent uranium is low in
most areas. In some beach sand areas in northern Florida, elevated eU seems to be associated with
heavy minerals; however, there is no evidence to suggest that elevated indoor radon occurs in these
areas.
       An area in southwestern Dade County, underlain by thin sandy soils covering shallow
limestone bedrock, has equivalent uranium values as high as 3.5 ppm. Unusually high levels of
radium are present in soils formed on the Pleistocene Key Largo Limestone and perhaps on other
rock formations in certain areas of the Florida Keys and in southwestern Dade County.  Areas of
elevated eU and elevated indoor radon in Dade County are likely related to these unusual soils.
These soils may be responsible for the modestly elevated eU in soils and for the elevated indoor
radon levels, and they may extend into Collier County as well.

GEORGIA

Piedmont and Blue Ridge
       The oldest rocks in Georgia form the mountains  and rolling hills of the Blue Ridge
Province and most of the Piedmont Province. These highly deformed rocks are separated by a
series of thrust faults superimposing groups of older rocks over younger rocks, comprising the
Georgiabama Thrust Stack. The igneous and metamorphic rocks in the Georgiabama Thrust Stack
north of the Altoona Fault have been ranked moderate overall in geologic radon potential, but the
radon potential of the area is variable. Mafic rocks are expected to have low radon potential
whereas phyllite, slate, some metagraywacke, granitic gneiss and granite have  moderate to high
radon potential. Soil permeability is slow to moderate in most soils. Counties in this area have
average indoor radon levels that vary from low to high (< 1 pCi/L to > 4 pCi/L), but the
measurements are predominantly in the  moderate range. The highest indoor radon reading, 18.7
pCi/L, was measured in the northern-Blue Ridge in Fannin County, which is underlain
predominantly by metagraywacke, slate, phyllite, and mica schists. Equivalent uranium
concentrations in rocks and soils of this area are moderate to high.
       The Georgiabama Thrust Stack south of the Alatoona Fault has also been ranked moderate .
in geologic radon potential. The majority of this part of the Georgiabama Thrust Stack is underlain
                                           ffl-8    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
' by schist"and amphibolite of the Zebulon sheet; which have generally low radioactivity where not
 intruded by granites or where not highly sheared, particularly south of theTowaliga Fault An area
 with distinctly low aeroradiometric readings which is underlain by mafic metamorphic rocks lies
 between the Brevard and Allatoona Faults in the northwestern Georgiabama Thrust Stack. All of
 .heje rocks have slow to moderate permeability, and ii.Joor radon values are geneiJly low to
 moderate.  A central zone of biotite gneiss, granitic gneiss, and granite has elevated uranium
 concentrations and high equivalent uranium (>2.5 ppm) on the NURE map.  Soil permeability is
 generally low to locally moderate,  Indoor radon levels are generally moderate. Recent soil-gas
 radon studies in the Brevard zone and surrounding rocks show that this zone may yield unusually
 high soil-gas radon where the zone crosses the Ben Hill and Palmetto granites. Surface gamma-
 ray spectrometer measurements yielded equivalent uranium from 4 to 17 ppm over granite and
 granitic biotite gneiss (Lithonia gneiss). Soil-gas radon concentrations commonly exceeded 2,000
 pCi/L and the highest soil-gas radon measured was 26,000 pCi/L in faulted Ben Hill granite.
 Undeformed Lithonia gneiss had average soil radon of more than 2,000 pCi/L. Mica schist
 averaged less than 1,000 pCi/L where it is undeformed. The Stone Mountain granite and mafic
 rocks yielded low soil-gas radon. The Grenville Basement granite and granite gneiss have
 moderate to locally high radon potential. Radioactivity is generally moderate to high and soil
 permeability is generally moderate.
        The Little River Thrust Stack is generally low to moderate in geologic radon potential.  It is
 underlain primarily by mafic metamorphic rocks with low radon potential, but each belt contains
 areas of rocks with moderate to locally high radon potential. Metadacites have moderate radon
 potential and moderate radioactivity.  Faults and shear zones have local areas of mineralization and
 locally high permeability. Granite intrusives may also have moderate radon potential.
 Aeroradioactivity is generally low and soil permeability is generally moderate.

 Ridge and Valley
        The Rome-Kingston Thrust Stack is ranked low in geologic radon potential; however,
 some of the limestones and shales in this area may have moderate to high radon potential.  Indoor
 radon is variable but generally low  to moderate. Permeability of the soils is low to moderate.
 Equivalent uranium is moderate to locally high, especially along the Carters Dam and Emerson
 faults.  Carbonate soils of the Valley and Ridge Province are likely to cause indoor radon
 problems. The Devonian Chattanooga Shale, which crops out locally in parts of the Valley and
 Ridge, is highly uraniferous and has been identified as a source of high indoor radon levels in
 Kentucky.  Numerous gamma radioactivity anomalies are associated with the Pennington
 Formation,  Bangor Limestone, Fort Paine Chert, Chattanooga Shale, Floyd Shale, the Knox
 Group, and the Rome Formation.

 Appalachian Plateau
        The Appalachian Plateau has been ranked low in geologic radon potential. Sandstone is the
 dominant rock type and it generally has low uranium concentrations. Equivalent uranium is low to
 moderate.  Permeability of the soils is moderate and indoor radon levels are low.

 Coastal Plain
        The Coastal Plain has been ranked low in radon potential, but certain areas of the Coastal
 Plain in which glauconitic, carbonaceous, and phosphatic sediments are abundant may have
 moderate geologic radon potential. The highest soil-gas radon concentrations (>1000 pCi/L) and
                                           m-9    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
* equivalent uranium (eU) concentrations (>2 ppm) in studies of radon in soil-gas in the Coastal
 Plain of Alabama were found in the carbonaceous sands and clays of the Providence Sand and the
 glauconitic sands of the Eutaw and Ripley Formations. Low to moderate soil-gas radon and
 uranium concentrations were measured in the glauconitic sands, limestones, and clays of the
 Tertiary Nanafalia and Lisbon Formations, and the Tuscahoma Sand.  Equivalent rock units in
 Georgia are also likely to be sources of high radon levels. Equivalent uranium is moderate in the
 Cretaceous and Tertiary-age sediments and low, with local highs, in the Quaternary sediments.
 Radioactivity highs in-much of the Coastal Plain are-related to phosphate and heavy-mineral
 concentrations. In the shoreline complexes and in several sediment units such as the Hawthorn
 Formation, the phosphate concentrations are naturally occurring. In the Black Lands and in many
 portions of the central Coastal Plain that have abundant agricultural activity, the radioactivity may
 be related to the use of phosphate fertilizers.  Indoor radon in the Coastal Plain is generally low.

 KENTUCKY
        Three primary areas in Kentucky are identified as being underlain by rock types and
 geologic features suspected of producing elevated radon levels:  (1) areas underlain by Devonian
 black shales in the Outer Bluegrass region; (2) areas underlain by the Ordovician Lexington
 Limestone, particularly the Tanglewood Member, in the Inner Bluegrass region; and (3) areas of
 the Mississippian Plateau underlain by karsted limestones or black shales.  In addition, some
 homes underlain by, or in close proximity to, major faults in the Western Coalfield and Inner
 Bluegrass regions may have locally elevated indoor radon levels due to localized concentrations of
 radioactive minerals and higher permeability in fault and fracture zones.
 Appalachian Plateau
        The black shale and limestone areas in the Mississippian Plateau region have associated
 high surface radioactivity, and the Western Coalfield contains scattered radioactivity anomalies.
 The arcuate pattern of radioactivity anomalies along the southern edge of the Outer Bluegrass
 region corresponds closely to the outcrop pattern of the New Albany Shale. A group of
 radiometric anomalies in the vicinity of Warren and Logan counties appears to correspond to
 outcrops of the Mississippian Ste. Genevieve and St. Louis Limestones. The clastic sedimentary
 rocks of the Cumberland Plateau region are characterized by relatively low surface radioactivity and
 generally have low indoor radon levels.
        in the Mississippian Plateau Region, locally elevated indoor radon levels are likely in areas
 with high soil permeability, solution cavities, or localized concentrations of radioactive minerals in
 karst regions, and in areas underlain black shale along the State's southern border. Of particular
 concern are the Devonian-Mississippian Chattanooga Shale (equivalent to the New Albany Shale),
 limestones in the Mississippian Fort Payne Formation, and the Mississippian Salem, Warsaw,
 Harrodsburg, St. Louis, and Ste, Genevieve Limestones in south-central Kentucky.
        Caves, produced by limestone solution and relatively common in central Kentucky, are
 natural concentrators of radon and can be a local source of high radon levels.  Levels of radon
 decay products approaching a maximum of 2.0 working levels (WL), which corresponds to about
 400 pCi/L of radon (assuming that radon and its decay products are in 50 percent equilibrium), and
 averaging about 0,70 WL, or about 140 pCi/L of radon, have been recorded in Mammoth Cave,
 Although these levels are not considered hazardous if the exposure is of short duration, such as
 would be experienced by a visitor to the cave, it could be of concern to National Park Service
 employees and other persons that spend longer periods of time in the caves. Another potential
 hazard is  the use of cave air for building air temperature control, as was formerly done at the
                                           ffl-10    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
"Mammoth Cave National Park visitor center. The'cave air, which averages 54°F, was pumped into
the visitor center for cooling, but this process has been discontinued due to'the relatively high
radioactivity associated with the cave air.

Coastal Plain
       The majority of homes in the Jackson Purchase Region (Coastal Plain) have low indoor
radon levels, although the area is underlain in part by loess with an eU signature in the 2.0-3.0
ppm range.  The poor correspondence with surface radioactivity in this area appears to be due to a
combination of low soil permeability and high water tables. The Coastal Plain is the only part of
the State in which seasonal high water tables were consistently listed in the SCS soil surveys as
less than 6 ft, and commonly less than 2 ft.

MISSISSIPPI

       Examination of the available data reveals that Mississippi is generally an area of low radon
potential. Indoor radon levels in Mississippi are generally low; however, several counties had
individual homes with radon levels greater than 4 pCi/L. Counties with maximum levels greater
than 4 pCi/L are concentrated  in the northeastern part of the State within the glauconitic and
phosphatic sediments of the Tombigbee Hills and Black Prairies. Readings greater than 4 pCi/L
also occur in the Mississippi Alluvial Plain, the eastern part of the Pine Hills Province, and in
loess-covered areas. Glauconitic and phosphatic sediments of the Coastal Plain, particularly the
Cretaceous and lower Tertiary-age geologic units located in the northeastern portion of the State,
have some geologic potential  to produce radon. Based on radioactivity and studies of radon in
other parts of the Coastal Plain, the Black Prairies and Pontotoc Ridge have been assigned
moderate geologic radon potential; all other parts of Mississippi are considered to be low in
geologic radon potential. The climate, soil, and lifestyle of the inhabitants of Mississippi have
influenced building construction styles and building ventilation which, in general, do not allow
high concentrations of radon to accumulate.

Coastal Plain
       A study of the radon in the Coastal Plain of Texas, Tennessee, and Alabama suggests that
glauconitic, phosphatic,  and carbonaceous sediments and sedimentary rdcks, equivalent to those in
Mississippi, can cause elevated levels of indoor radon.  Ground-based surveys of radioactivity and
radon in soils in that study indicate that the Upper Cretaceous through Lower Tertiary Coastal Plain
sediments are sources of high soil-gas radon (> 1,000 pCi/L) and soil uranium concentrations.
The high equivalent uranium found over the Coastal Plain sediments in northeastern Mississippi
supports the possibility of a similar source of high radon levels. Chalks, clays and marls tend to
have low permeability when moist and higher permeability when dry due to desiccation fractures
and joints.
       The youngest Coastal Plain sediments, particularly Oligocene and younger, have
decreasing amounts of glauconite and phosphate and become increasingly siliceous and therefore
less likely to be  significant sources of radon. Some carbonaceous units may be possible radon
sources.
       Loess in Tennessee, and probably elsewhere, is known to generate high levels of radon in
both dry and saturated soils. Both thin and thick loess units can easily be traced on the
                                           ra-11    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
' radioactivity map of Mississippi by following the "highest of the modefate'equivalent uranium
 anomalies.  Loess tends to have low permeability when moist and higher permeability when dry.

 Mississippi Alluvial Plain
        The Mississippi Alluvial Plain contains several areas with locally high elJ, as well as
 having moderate radioactivity overall. These high elJ areas are located close to the river in Bolivar
 and Washington Counties. The highest indoor radon level recorded in Mississippi in the
 State/EPA Residential Radon Survey (22:8 pCi/L) occurs-within Bolivar .County and the second
 highest radon level of homes measured to date in the State (16.1 pCi/L) occurs in Washington
 County. It is not apparent from the data available whether the high eU and indoor radon levels are
 correlative, and only a few indoor radon readings in each county are greater than 4 pCi/L. The
 geology of the region is not generally conducive to high uranium concentrations, except possibly in
 heavy-mineral placer deposits. Further, elevated radioactivity in the Mississippi Alluvial Plain may
 be due in part to uranium in phosphatic fertilizers. Locally high soil permeability in some of the
 alluvial sediments may allow locally high indoor radon levels to occur.
        The southeastern half of Mississippi has low radioactivity and low indoor radon levels.
 The few indoor radon readings greater than 4 pCi/L were between 4.1 and 5.8 pCi/L. The lowest
 eU is associated with the coastal deposits and the Citronelle Formation, which are predominantly
 quartz sands with low radon potential. Slightly higher eU, though still low overall, is associated
 with the Pascagoula and Hattiesburg Formations and Catahoula Formation. Soils in this area are
 variably poorly to well drained with slow to moderate permeabilities.
        The Chattanooga Shale and related sedimentary rocks in the northeastern part of the State
 have the potential to be sources of high indoor radon levels. In Tennessee and Kentucky, the
 Chattanooga Shale has high uranium concentrations and is associated with high indoor radon levels
 in those states.  The extent of these rocks in Mississippi is minor.

 NORTH CAROLINA

 Blue Ridge
        The Blue Ridge has been ranked moderate overall in geologic radon potential, but it is
 actually variably moderate to high in radon potential. The province has Mghly variable geology
 and because of the constraints imposed by viewing the'indoor radon data at the county level, it is
 impossible to assign specific geologic areas of the Blue Ridge to  specific moderate or high indoor
 radon levels. Average indoor radon levels are moderate (2-4 pCi/L) in the majority of counties.
 However, two counties have indoor radon averages between 4.1  and  6 pCi/L (Cherokee and
 Buncomb Counties) and three counties in the northern Blue Ridge (AUeghany, Watauga, and
 Mitchell) have indoor radon averages greater than 6 pCi/L. These three counties are generally
 underlain by granitic gneiss, mica schist, and minor amphibolite  and phyllite. Transylvania and
 Henderson Counties, which are underlain by parts of the Blue Ridge and Inner Piedmont, also
 have indoor radon averages greater than 6 pCi/L. The Brevard fault  zone, Henderson Gneiss, and
 Ceasars Head Granite are possible sources of high indoor radon  in these two counties. Equivalent
 uranium is variable from low to high in the Blue Ridge. The highest  eU appears to be associated
 with the Ocoee Supergroup in the southern Blue Ridge, rocks in  the Grandfather Mountain
 Window, and metamorphic rocks in parts of Haywood and Buncomb Counties. Soils are
 generally moderate in permeability.
                                           ffl-12    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
•   •    The Chauga belt and Brevard fault zone are ranked high in geologic radon potential. The
Chauga belt consists predominantly of the Henderson Gneiss. High elJ and high uranium in
stream sediments appears to be associated with the Brevard fault zone, Henderson Gneiss, and
Ceasars Head Granite in this area. Average indoor radon levels in the two counties that the main
part of the Chauga belt and the southern portion of the Brevard fault zone passes through are high.
The soils have moderate permeability.

Piedmont
       The Inner Piedmont and Kings Mountain belts have been ranked moderate in geologic
radon potential. Indoor radon levels are generally moderate.  Granitic plutons, granitic gneiss,
monazite-rich gneiss and schist, pegmatites, and fault zones appear to have high eU and high
uranium concentrations in stream sediment samples. Many of the granitic plutons are known to be
enriched in uranium and recent studies suggest that the soils developed on many of the uraniferous
granitic plutons and related fault zones in the Blue Ridge and Piedmont are possible sources of
radon. Measured soil-gas radon concentrations commonly exceeded 1,000 pCi/L in soils
developed on the Cherryville Granite, Rolesville Suite, and the Sims, Sandy Mush, and Castalia
plutons.  Soils developed on the Rocky Mount, Spruce Pine, Toluca, Mt. Airy, and Stone
Mountain plutons had relatively low soil-gas radon concentrations. Soil permeabilities in the Inner
Piedmont, Brevard fault zone, and Kings Mountain belt are variably low to moderate which,
together with the large proportion of homes without basements, may account for the abundance of
moderate indoor radon levels.
       Most shear zones in the Piedmont and Blue Ridge should be regarded as having the
potential to produce very localized moderate to high indoor radon levels.  Geochemical and
structural models developed from studies of shear zones in granitic metamorphic and igneous rocks
from the Reading Prong in New York to the Piedmont in Virginia indicate that uranium
enrichment, the redistribution of uranium into the rock foliation during deformation, and high
radon emanation, are common to most shear zones. Because they are very localized sources of
radon and uranium, shear zones may not always be detected by radiometric or stream sediments
surveys.
       The Charlotte belt has been ranked low in geologic radon potential but it is actually quite
variable-dominantiy low in the southern portion of the belt and higher in the northern portion of
the belt  Equivalent uranium is generally low, with locally high eU occurring in the central and
northern portions of the belt, associated with the Concord and Salisbury Plutonic Suites.
Permeability of the soils is generally low to moderate and indoor radon levels are generally low.
       The Carolina slate belt has been ranked low in radon potential where it is underlain
primarily by metavolcanic rocks. Where it crops out east of the Mesozoic basins it has been ranked
moderate. Aeroradioactivity over the Carolina slate belt, uranium in stream sediment samples, and
indoor radon levels are markedly low.  Permeability of many of the metavolcanic units is generally
low to locally moderate. East of the Wadesboro subbasin in Anson and Richmond Counties lies a
small area of the slate belt that is intruded by the Lilesville Granite and Peedee Gabbro. It has high
eU and high uranium concentrations in stream sediments, and moderate to high permeability in the
soils, and is a likely source of moderate to high indoor radon levels.
       The Raleigh belt has been ranked moderate in geologic radon potential. Equivalent uranium
in the Raleigh belt is generally moderate to high and appears to be associated with granitic intrusive
rocks, including the Castalia and Wilton plutons and the Rolesville Suite. A belt of monazite-
bearing rocks also passes through the Raleigh belt and may account for part of the observed high
                                           ffl-13    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
' radioactivity. Soils have variably low to moderate permeability. Indoor radon levels are generally
 moderate.

 Coastal Plain
        In the Coastal Plain province, moderate to hlg'    is associated with the Cretaceous and
 Tertiary sediments of the Inner Coastal Plain. Permeability of the soils is highly variable but
 generally moderate to low, and may be locally high in sands and gravels.  Seasonally high water
 tables are common. -Indoor radon levels in the .Coastal Plain are generally low. The Inner Coastal
 Plain is ranked low in geologic radon potential but may be locally moderate to high, especially in
 areas underlain by Cretaceous sediments.  Glauconitic, phosphatic, monazite-rieh, and
 carbonaceous sediments and sedimentary rocks in the Coastal Plain of Texas, New Jersey, and
 Alabama, similar to some Coastal Plain sediments in North Carolina, are the source for moderate
 indoor radon levels seen in parts of the Inner Coastal Plain of these states.
        The Outer Coastal Plain has low eU, low indoor radon levels, and is generally underlain by
 sediments with low uranium concentrations. Soil permeability is variable but generally moderate.
 Seasonally high water tables are common. A few isolated areas of high radioactivity in the Outer
 Coastal Plain may be related to heavy mineral and phosphate deposits in the shoreline sediments.
 The area has been ranked low in geologic radon potential, but may have local moderate or high
 indoor radon occurrences related to heavy minerals or phosphate deposits.

 SOUTH CAROLINA

 Blue Ridge and Piedmont
        The Blue Ridge and Piedmont Provinces have moderate geologic radon potential. Possible
 sources of radon include uraniferous granites, biotite and granitic gneiss, and shear zones. Soils
 developed on many of the uraniferous granitic plutons and some fault zones within the Piedmont
 and Blue Ridge of North and South Carolina yield high soil-gas radon (>1,000 pCi/L). In the
 Blue Ridge, sheared graphitic rocks may be a local source for high indoor radon concentrations.
        More than 10 percent of the homes tested in Greenville and Oconee Counties, in the Blue
 Ridge and Piedmont, have indoor radon levels greater than 4 pCi/L. Greenville County also has
 the highest indoor radon measurement in the State, 80.7 pCi/L, the highest radioactivity, associated
 with the Silurian-Devonian Ceasers Head Granitic Gneiss, and with biotite gneiss in the Carolina
 monazite belt.  In Oconee County, the Toxaway Gneiss and graphitic rocks in the Brevard Fault
 Zone may account for the higher incidence of indoor radon levels'exceeding 4 pCi/L and the higher
 overall indoor radon average of the county. Average indoor radon levels in the Blue Ridge and
 Piedmont are generally higher than in the rest of the State, and moderate to high radioactivity is
 common. Most of the soils formed on granitic rocks have moderate permeability and do not
 represent an impediment to radon mobility. Mafic rocks in the Blue Ridge and Piedmont have low
 radon potential. These rocks have low concentrations of uranium, and soils formed from them
 have low permeability.

 Coastal Plain
        In the Coastal Plain Province, moderate to high radioactivity is associated with the
 Cretaceous and Tertiary sediments of the upper Coastal Plain. Glauconitic, phosphatic, monazite-
 rich, and carbonaceous sediments and sedimentary rocks in the Coastal Plain of Texas, New
 Jersey, and Alabama, similar to some of those in South Carolina, cause elevated levels of indoor
                                           m-14    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
radon. Grangeburg County is the only other county besides Greenville and Ocoriee Counties that
has an average indoor radon level greater than 2 pCi/L. It is underlain by Lower Tertiary
sediments in an extremely dissected part of the Coastal Plain. Radioactivity is moderate to low.
Soils are highly variable in the county because of the complicated erosion patterns. The few high
values of indoor radon for this county create an overall higher indoor radon average for the county.
These locally high readings may be due to local accumulations of monazite, glaucohite, or
phosphate that can occur within these particular sediments.
       The lower Coastal Plain* has low to locally high radioactivity and low indoor radon levels.
Most of the sediments have low uranium concentrations with the exception of the uraniferous,
phosphatic sediments of the Cooper Group and local, heavy-mineral placer deposits within some
of the Quaternary units. The area has been ranked low in geologic radon potential overall, but the
radon potential may be locally high in areas underlain by these uraniferous sediments.

TENNESSEE

Coastal Plain and Mississippi Alluvial Plain
       The Mississippi Alluvial Plain has low geologic radon potential.  The high soil moisture,
high water tables, and the lack of permeable soils lower the radon potential in spite of moderate elJ
values.  Some areas with very sandy or excessively-drained soils may cause homes to have indoor
radon levels exceeding 4 pQ/L.
       The loess-covered parts of the Coastal Plain have low radon potential in spite of moderate
elJ values and elevated soil-gas radon concentrations. The radon potential is lowered by the high
moisture content and low permeability of the soils. The lack of basements in homes also lowers
the potential.  If prolonged dry periods were to occur in this area, some homes might  see a
significant increase in indoor radon, especially those with basements or crawl spaces. The eastern
Coastal Plain has moderate geologic radon potential. NURE data show elevated eU values
compared to the rest of the Coastal Plain. Soil-gas radon levels are locally elevated.

Highland Rim and Nashville Basin
       The Highland Rim and Nashville Basin are underlain by sedimentary rocks of Paleozoic
age, principally limestone, shale, chert, and dolostone. The part of the Highland Rim that is
underlain by cherty limestone (Fort Payne Formation) has high geologic radon potential. This area
has moderate to locally high eU and soils that are cherty and excessively  well drained. The
limestone and shale part of the Highland Rim has moderate radon potential. The Nashville Basin
has high geologic radon potential. The elevated eU, the presence of abundant phosphatic soils,
local karst, and the presence of generally well-drained soils all contribute to this high geologic
radon potential. Very high (>20 pCi/L) to extreme indoor radon values (>200 pCi/L) are possible
where homes are sited on soils developed on the Chattanooga shale, on phosphate-rich residual
soils, or on karst pinnacles.

Appalachian Plateau
       Sandstones and shales underlie most of the Appalachian Plateau, which generally has
moderate geologic radon potential. These rocks are typically not good sources of radon and values
for eU are among the lowest in the State. However, many sandy, well-drained to excessively-
drained soils are present in this region, and may be a source of locally elevated radon levels
because of their high permeability.
                                           IQ-15    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
Ridge and Valley
       Folded and faulted Paleozoic limestone, shale, chert, dolostone, and sandstone underlie
most of the Ridge and Valley region, with sandstone and cherry dolostone forming most of the
ridges and limestone and shale Torming me  of the "a"  .  . The Ridge .nd Valley region has high
geologic radon potential because of elevated ell values, karst, and well drained soils. Very high
(>20 pQ/L) to extreme indoor radon values (>200 pCi/L) are pdssible where homes are sited on
soils developed on black shales, phosphate-rich residual soils, or karst pinnacles. Homes with
basements are more likely to yield elevated indoor radon levels than homes with slab-bn-grade
construction.

Unaka Mountains
       The Unaka Mountains are underlain by siltstone, sandstone, conglomerate, quartzite,
phyllite, gneiss, granite, and metamorphosed volcanic rocks of Precambrian and Paleozoic age that
have moderate geologic radon potential. Values of elJ are generally moderate, although they are
locally high. Some very high (>20 pCi/L) to extreme (>200 pCi/L) indoor radon levels are
possible where homes are sited on phosphate-rich residual soils developed on phosphatic carbonate
rocks, or on pegmatite in the metamorphic rock areas, but the former are much less common in this
region than in the Nashville Basin and the Ridge and Valley region.
                                          M-16   Reprinted from USOS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
.   ,   PRELIMINARY GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL ASSESSMENT OF ALABAMA
                                           by
                                  Linda C.S. Gundersen
                                  US. Geological Survey

 INTRODUCTION

       This is a generalized assessment of geologic radon potential of rocks, soils, and surficial
 deposits of Alabama. The scale of this assessment is such that it is inappropriate for use hi
 identifying the radon potential of small areas such as neighborhoods, individual building sites, or
 housing tracts.  Any localized assessment of radon potential must be supplemented with additional
 data and information from the locality. Within any area of a given radon potential ranking, there
 are likely to be areas with higher or lower radon levels than characterized for the area as a whole.
 Indoor radon levels, both high and low, can be quite localized, and there is no substitute for testing
 individual homes. Elevated levels of indoor radon have been found in every State, and EPA
 recommends that all homes be tested. Elevated levels of indoor radon have been found in every
 State, and EPA recommends that all homes be tested. For more information on radon, the reader is
 urged to consult the local or State radon program or EPA regional office. More detailed
 information on state or local geology may be obtained from the state geological survey. Addresses
 and phone numbers for these agencies are listed in chapter 1 of this booklet

 PHYSIOGRAPHIC AND GEOGRAPHIC SETTING

       The physiography of Alabama (fig. 1) is in part a reflection of the underlying bedrock
 geology (fig. 2). Alabama is divided into four major physiographic provinces: the Plateau, the
 Valley and Ridge, the Coastal Plain, and the Piedmont Most of these are subdivided into several
 smaller regions which will be referred to throughout this report. The Plateau is subdivided into the
 Interior Low Plateaus and the Appalachian Plateaus.  Elevation ranges from 700 ft in the south to
 1,000 ft in the north. The Plateau surface is heavily dissected and hilly in the eastern portion.
       The Valley and Ridge province consists of parallel ridges and valleys with a conspicuous
 northeast-southwest trend. The ridges are underlain by sandstone and chert, whereas the valleys
 are developed on carbonate rocks and shales. The Valley  and Ridge province is divided into
 western and eastern halves. Elevation ranges from 500 to 1,200 ft
       The Piedmont is subdivided into northern, inner, and southern parts (fig. 1). It is a
 mature, dissected peneplain surface that is underlain by igneous and metamorphic rocks of
 Precambrian and Paleozoic age. Most of the Piedmont is rolling hills and valleys with several
 hundred feet of relief. The highest point in Alabama, Mount Cheaha, at 2,407 feet above sea level,
 is located in the Piedmont
       The Coastal Plain is underlain by relatively unconsolidated sediments of Cretaceous to
 Tertiary age. For the purposes of this report, it has been divided into the Inner Coastal Plain and
 Outer Coastal Plain based on the age and character of the sediments. The relief of the Coastal Plain
 is characterized by lines of low hills (cuestas) separated by lowland areas; the alternating hills and
 valleys are called a belted plain. Elevation varies from sea level to 300 ft.
       Alabama has a humid subtropical climate controlled by warm, moist air from the Gulf of
 Mexico and rare cool, continental air from Canada and Alaska.  Summers are hot and humid,
 winters are temperate; below-freezing temperatures usually last less than 48 hours. Rainfall
 averages 53 inches annually and is fairly well distributed  throughout the year (fig. 3).


                                           IV-l     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
     PHYSIOGRAPHIC PROVINCES
Figure 1. Physiographic provinces of Alabama (from Szabd and others, 1988).

-------
                                                                                                      EXPLANATION
                                                                                                      AluviaJ, tow terraco. deltaic and
                                                                                                      coastal deposits
                                                                                                      Residuum
                                                                                                      CfTrorwKa Formation
                                                                                                      Mtocena Series
                                                                                                      Jackson Group «nd OBgocene
                                                                                                      Series
                                                                                                      Clatoome Group
                                                                                                      WBcox Group
                                                                                                      Midway Group
                                                                                                      Upper Selma Group
                                                                                                      Lower Sekna Group
                                                                                                      Eutaw Formal ton
                                                                                                      Tusca too sa Group
                                                                                                      Potuvlte Formation
                                                                                                      Parkwood Formation tnd
                                                                                                      Bangor Utmatom
                                                                                                      HartsoHa Sandstons and Pride
                                                                                                      Mtn. Formatton
                                                                                                      TutcuntHa Unwstona
                                                                                                      Fort Payiw ClMft
                                                                                                      Mtosfeslppl*n undMsrenUaMd
                                                                                                      MhM^ Dw., SI., and OnJ.
                                                                                                      Sytl»nw(MDS
-------
                                                                              N
Figure 3. Average annual precipitation in Alabama (from Facts on File, 1984).

-------
                                                   POPULATION (1990)

                                                  O 0 to 25000
                                                  Q 25001 to 50000
                                                  E3 50001 to 100000
                                                  M 100001 to 500000
                                                  • 500001 to 651525
Figure 4. Population of counties in Alabama (1990 U.S. Census data).

-------
....   In 1990 the population was 4,040,587, of which 60 percent is .urban 
-------
Figure 5. Generalized soil and surficial deposits map of Alabama (after Richmond and Fullerton,
1988, and Richmond and others, 1988).

-------
Page Intentionally Blank

-------
.  FIGURE 5 (cont) GENERALIZED SOILS AND SURMCIAL DEPOSITS MAP OF ALABAMA
                               DESCRIPTION OF UNITS
  1.  Cherty clay residual soil, contains minor sand and silt, low permeability.
  2.  Cherty clay to silty clay residual soil, locally phosphatic, low permeability.
  3.  Sand and gravel residual soil, locally eherty, locally limonitic, Mgh permeability.
  4.  Cherty clay, silty clay, and sandy clay residual soil, low permeability, moderate shrink-swell
     potential, solution and collapse features common. Where soils are shallow, solution cavities
     impart Mgh permeability to the soil.
  5.  Sand to clayey sand residual soil, Mgh shrink-swell potential where developed on shale,
     moderate permeability.
  6.  Clay, clay loam, sandy clay, and sand residual soil, poorly drained, moderate shrink-swell
     potential, low to moderate permeability.
  7.,  Cherty clay to silty clay residual soil, low permeability.
  8.  Micaceous sandy clayey silt saprolite developed on felsic scMst, gneiss, phylMte, and granite,
     low shrink-swell potential, moderate to Mgh permeability.
  9.  Clayey sand to sandy clay saprolite developed on amphibolite and other mafic rocks, variable
     (low-Mgh) shrink-swell potential, low to moderate permeability.
  10. Clay loam and clay residual soil formed on limestone, low permeability.
  11. Clay residual soil, Mgh shrink-swell potential, low permeability.
  12. Medium to coarse sand, clayey sand, and sandy clay residual soil, moderate shrink-swell
      potential, moderate to high permeability.
  13. Siliceous clay and clayey silt residual soil formed on clay bedrock, low permeability.
  14. Fine to coarse sand residual soil, limonitic, locally clayey, generally Mgh permeability.
  15. Pine sandy clay residual soil, locally includes medium to coarse sand, moderate permeability.
  16. Clayey sand residual soil, ferruginous, locally contains pebbles to boulders of chert and
      limestone, karst features common, moderate permeability.
  17. Alluvial pebble gravel and sand, contains lenses of sandy clay, moderate to high permeability.
  18. Intermixed clay, silt, and sandy loam, peat, and muck, commonly wet, low to moderate
      permeability.

-------
Page Intentionally Blank

-------
.fragments of sandstone.  These soils are moderately well drained, with slow to moderate
 permeability. Areas of shale are overlain by clay and silty clay decomposition residuum containing
 shale chips and hematitie zones. Permeability is slow.
       The Appalachian Plateaus province includes Mississippian rocks like the ones just
 described but most of the province is underlain by Pennsylvanian sandstone, shale, and coal.
 Mississippian units crop out in the northeastern part of the plateau (especially the Tuseumbia,
 Monteagle, and Bangor Limestones) and along the north side of Sand Mountain in the Sequatchie
 Valley. The central part of the Sequatchie Valley is underlain by Cambrian-Devonian sedimentary
 rocks and is rimmed by the Tuscumbia Limestone, Fort Payne Chert, Monteagle Limestone,
 Bangor Limestone, Pride Mountain Formation, Hartselle Sandstone, and Pennington Formation.
 The Cambrian-Devonian rocks of the Sequatchie Valley include: dolomite and limestone
 comprising the Knox Group; the Stones River Group limestones and shales; the Nashville Group
 limestones; the shales and limestones of the Inman Formation; the Leipers Limestone; the
 Sequatchie Formation shale, glauconitic limestone, mudstone, and minor sandstone; the Red
 Mountain Formation sandstone, siltstone, shale and limestone; and the Chattanooga Shale. The
 soils are mostly cherty solution clay residuum with slow permeability and poor drainage.
       Most of the Pennsylvanian rocks of the Appalachian Plateaus are included in the PottsviUe
 Formation. This massive formation is sometimes divided into lower and upper parts  and generally
 consists of cyclic sequences of sandstone, siltstone, shale, and coal. The sandstones are thin- to
 thick-bedded, quartzose, and partly conglomeratic. Shales are dark gray to black, carbonaceous,
 and coaly.  Cods are usually thin and discontinuous, but some thicker, producing coal seams
 occur in several parts of the plateaus.  Soils are coarse to fine sand, clayey sand, and sandy clay,
 and may include chips of sandstone and shale. Soils have moderate to moderately rapid
 permeability and are well drained. Where clayey, the soils have a high shrink-swell potential and
 have slow permeability when moist

 Valley and Ridge
       The Valley and Ridge province is underlain by Paleozoic sedimentary rocks, many of
 which have already been described. The majority of the area is underlain by two major rock
 groups: Cambrian through Ordovician rocks and upper Mississippian through Pennsylvanian
 rocks. Very thin outcrops of Silurian and Devonian sandstones and shales, predominantly the
 Silurian Red Mountain Formation and the Devonian Chattanooga Shale, lie between the two major
 rock groups. The Cambrian through Qrdovician rocks include sandstone,  mudstone, shale,
 limestone, and dolomite. The oldest Cambrian rocks are predominantly clastic and consist of
 various sandstones, conglomerates, mudstones, and siltstones of the Chilhowee Group, including
 the Cochran, Nichols, Weisner, and Wilson Ridge Formations. The middle to upper Cambrian
 rocks contain progressively more carbonate units, beginning with the Shady Dolomite; the Rome
 Formation, consisting of sandstone, shale, mudstone, and siltstone interbedded with limestone and
 dolomite; and the Conasauga Formation, a thick-bedded dolomite with limestone and shale.  Of all
 these units, the Conasauga has the most extensive outcrop pattern, especially in the western part of
 the Valley and Ridge province, in the Coosa River Valley surrounding Weiss Reservoir, and in the
 Canoe Creek Valley.
       The Upper Cambrian and Ordovician-age rocks of the Valley and Ridge province are
 dominated by limestone and dolomite. Much of the Valley and Ridge is underlain by the
 undifferentiated Knox Group dolomite, limestone, and chert; the Chickamauga Limestone and
 conglomerates; and the interbedded calcareous shales and argillaceous limestone of the Sequatchie
                                           IV-9    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
. Formation.  The Chepultepee and Copper .Ridge Dolomites of the Knpx Group also:underlie
 significant parts of the western Valley and Ridge province. Other Ordovieian limestone units of
 lesser extent include the Newala, Little Oak, and Lenoir Limestones, the Athens Shale, shale,
 limestone, mudstone, siltstone, and sandstone of the Greensport Formation, and the Colvin
 Mountain Sandstone.
        Much of the western Valley and Ridge province is underlain by upper Mississippian
 through Pennsylvanian sedimentary rocks, including many of the units previously described. The
 three units that crop out most extensively are the Pottsville and Parkwood Formations and the
 Hoyd Shale.  The Floyd Shale is a dark-gray sideritic shale with minor limestone and chert.
        Soils in the Valley and Ridge are predominantly a solution residuum of reddish-orange silty
 to sandy clay developed on limestone. Chert and shale fragments are found in the soil in places.
 Permeability is slow and the soils are poorly to moderately drained. Clayey sand, clay loam, and
 sandy clay are developed on some limestone and most dolomite. This soil is poorly to moderately
 drained, slowly to moderately permeable, and where clayey, the soils have a high shrink-swell
 potential.  Over sandstones, the soils are clayey sand to sandy clay with abundant iron oxide and
 fragments of sandstone. These soils are moderately well drained, with slow to moderate
 permeability. Areas of shale have clay and silty clay decomposition residuum containing shale
 chips and hematitic zones.  Permeability is slow.

 Piedmont
        The Piedmont is underlain by the oldest rocks in Alabama.  They range in age from 200
 million years to nearly 1 billion years and consist of a complicated sequence of igneous and
 metamorphic rocks that have been folded and faulted to form the southern extent of the
 Appalachian Mountains.  A map of the major faults in the Piedmont and other provinces is given in
 figure 6. The Towaliga fault, an extensive zone of mylonite (ductily sheared rock) separates the
 Southern Piedmont from the Inner Piedmont. The Southern Piedmont is underlain by a northeast-
 trending sequence of gneiss, schist, quartzite, and marble, with a minor granite intrusive known as
 the HospUika Granite hosted in the Phenix City Gneiss.  The gneisses are generally quartz-rich
 diorite gneiss and the schists are micaceous with biotite or muscovite. Quartzite forms layers
 within schist, and towards the top of the section, it is associated with the Chewacla Marble. The
 southern part of the Inner Piedmont is underlain by complexly-folded amphibolites and ulttamafic
 rocks that form a distinct pattern on the geologic map. The rest of the Inner Piedmont is underlain
 by feldspathic gneiss, mica schist, and minor granite.
        The Brevard Fault zone is an extensive fault with a complex movement history that
 separates the Inner Piedmont from the Northern Piedmont The fault zone occurs in the Jacksons
 Gap Group, which includes schist, phyllonite, and mylonite, and the Tallassee Metaquartzite,
 composed of quartzite, conglomerate, and schist.  The Northern Piedmont rocks consist of several
 complex sequences of low-to high-grade metasedimentary rocks intruded by igneous rocks of
 varying composition. Just to the north of the Brevard fault is the Emuckfaw Group, consisting of
 muscovite-gamet-biotite schist, metagraywacke, quartzite, calc-silicate rock, and minor
 amphibolite. The rock is sheared to mylonite in places and hosts the Zana Granite, a gneissic
 quartz monzonite. The Glenlock Schist, a muscovite-graphite-garnet schist and metagraywacke/is
 also found within the Emuckfaw Group. The Wedowee Group crops out north of the Emuckfaw
 Group and is dominated by aluminosilicate schists with variable composition including muscovite,
 garnet, graphite, chlorite, biotite, sericite, and kyanite. Phyllite, quartzite, and feldspathic gneiss
 are also found in the section. Southwest along strike of the Wedowee Group is a complicated
                                          IV-10   Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
                                               Alexander City lault
                                               Birmingham anticlmortum
                                               Big Canoa Valtey fault
                                               Brevard fault 2one (includes
                                               Abanda and Katy Creek laulls)
                                               Cahaba synclinorium
                                               Coosa deformed bell
                                               Coosa synctinonum
                                               Eden lault
                                               Enitachopco line laull system
                                               Gilbert own laull zone
                                               Gordon anticline
                                               Goal Rock laull zone (Includes Goat
                                               Rock and Barlletls Ferry loulis)
                                               Helena fault
                                               Haicheligbee anticline
                  HollJns lina fault
                  Jackson laull
                  Jacksonville laull complex
                  Murphrees Valley anticline
                  Omaha laull
                  Opossum Valley lautl
                  Pell Gly fault
                  Rome fault
                  Saquatchie anticline
                  Sleeping Giants khppe
                  Stonewall lute
                  Straight Mountain lault
                  Towaliga lautl zone
                  Taltadega-Caifersville laull syslerr
                  West Bend laull zone
                  Wills Valley amiclme
             SCALE

          0    10   20 Miles
- —  Anticline

     Thrust fault, teeth on upper plate

-*-   Margin of East Warrior Platform

     Normal fault
Figure 6,  Major structural features of Alabama (from Szabo and others,  1988).

-------
. sequence, of igneous rocks. The Elkahatchee Quartz Diorite Gneiss underlies most of, this area and
 locally contains the Hissop Granite. To the northwest, the Elkahatchee Quartz Diorite Gneiss is
 bounded by Wedowee Group schists, the Hatchet Creek Group biotite schists and gneisses, and
 the Rockford Granite. A complicated, thinly-layered sequence of metasedimentary rocks
 comprising the Mitchell Dam Amphibolite, the Poe Bridge Mountain Group, and the Higgins Ferry
 Group, consists of variable aluminosiUcate schists, feldspathic gneiss, quartzite, and amphibolite.
 These rocks crop out just northwest of the Hatchet Creek Group.
       The Mad Indian Group, consisting of gneisses and schists, crops out to the north of the
 main sequence of the Wedowee Group.  It is bounded to the north by the Ketohepedrakee
 Amphibolite, interlayered with Poe Bridge Mountain Group quartzite and schist The Hillabee
 Greenstone, which consists of massive fine-grained greenstone, mafic phyliite, and minor quartz
 dacite, crops out in a long sinuous band across the Northern Piedmont from northeast to southwest
 and separates the Higgins Ferry and Poe Bridge Mountain Group metamorphic rocks from the
 low-grade Paleozoic metasedimentary rocks of the Talladega Group. The northernmost part of the
 Northern Piedmont consists of low-grade metasedimentary rocks of the Talladega Group, followed
 to the north by the Kahatehee Mountain Group, the Sylacauga Marble Group, and the Heflin
 Phyliite. The Talladega Group consists predominantly of various quartzite members,
 metagraywacke, metaconglomerate, metasiltstone, chert, and phyliite.  Parts of the Talladega
 Group contain marine invertebrate fossils of Devonian age. The Heflin Phyllite is made up of
 metasiltstone, metasandstone, marble, and phyliite. The Sylacauga Marble consists of dolomite
 and calcite marble, dolomite, phyliite, and chert. The Kahatohee Mountain Group is predominantly
 slate and phyliite with metasiltstone, quartzite, marble, metasandstone, and metaconglomerate.
       Soils of the Piedmont are saprolite with clay in the subsurface and with drainage and
 permeability characteristics determined by the mineral content of the saprolite.  Silty to clayey
 sandy saprolite, sandy clay, and slightly clayey sandy soils are developed on gneissic granite,
 felsic schist and gneiss, and other foliated granitic rocks. Saprolite thickness is 2 m or more, and
 the saprolite is generally well drained and moderately permeable. Argillaceous saprolite, consisting
 of micaceous clayey sand to sandy clay or clayey silt, is developed on amphibolite, mafic
 metavolcanic rocks, and ultramafic rocks. These soils  have variable shrink-swell potential, are
 slowly permeable, and are poorly drained. Micaceous  saprolite and micaceous sandy silt are
 developed on the felsic micaceous schist, phyllitic rock, aluminous schist, and graphitic schist
 These soils and saprolite are well drained and moderately permeable. Quartz-rich saprolite and
 slightly clayey to very sandy saprolite are developed on quartzite, quartz-mica  schist, and quartz-
 rich metasedimentary rocks. These soils  are moderately to rapidly permeable and well drained.

 The Coastal Plain
       More than half of Alabama is underlain by the relatively unconsolidated sediments of the
 Coastal Plain. The oldest rocks and sediments exposed in the northern Coastal Plain of Alabama
 are the Tuscaloosa Group, which includes the sands and locally indurated sandstones of the
 generally nonmarine Gordo and Coker Formations.  The Coker Formation  consists of micaceous,
 very fine- to coarse-grained sand, gravel, and interbedded clay. In ELmore County, the Coker
 Formation includes marine glauconitic sands. The Gordo Formation is sand and gravelly sand
 with partly carbonaceous clay beds.
       Sands also dominate the Eutaw Formation; however, it is predominantly marine in origin.
 The Eutaw is a micaceous, fossiliferous, fine to medium quartz sand, with interbeds of micaceous
 sandy clay, carbonaceous clay, and thin glauconitic, fossiliferous sandstone.
                                          IV-12   Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
: . T; ..  The Selma Group crops out to the south of the Eutaw Formation and consists of
 fossiliferous, glauconitic chalk to the west and fossiliferous, micaceous, carbonaceous clays and
 sands in the east, near the Georgia-Alabama state line. At the base of the Selma Group is the
 Mooreville Chalk, a finely sandy, argillaceous, fossiliferous chalk with several thin limestone and
 clay beds at the top (the Arcola Limestone Member). The Blufftown Formation extends from the
 Chattahoochee River westward into Russell County where it is divided by an eastward-extending
 tongue of the Mooreville Chalk. The Blufftown consists of glauconitic, calcareous fine sand,
 fossiliferous sand and clay, micaceous clay and marl, and carbonaceous clay and silt The
 Blufftown merges to the west with the Mooreville Chalk and the lower part of the Demopolis
 Chalk. The Demopolis Chalk overlies the Mooreville Chalk in the western and central part of the
 outcrop belt; to the east it merges with the Cusseta Sand Member of the Ripley Formation. In the
 west, the Demopolis Chalk consists of fossiliferous chalk with thin beds of marly chalk.  In the
 east it splits into two tongues of fine sandy, micaceous chalk. The Cusseta Sand is a crossbedded
 medium to coarse glauconitic sand with beds of fossiliferous fine sand and fossiliferous,
 carbonaceous clay. The Ripley Formation extends all the way across Alabama and is a massive,
 micaceous, glauconitic, fossiliferous sand with sandy calcareous clay, and thin indurated beds of
 fossiliferous sandstone.  The Prairie Bluff Chalk and the Providence Sand crop out south of the
 Ripley Formation. The Prairie Bluff Chalk is a sandy, fossiliferous, brittle chalk with silty,
 sandy, calcareous, glauconitic, fossiliferous clay and limestone. The Prairie Bluff thins eastward
 where it interfingers with the Providence Sand. The Providence Sand consists of crossbedded fine
 to coarse sand and molded clay containing lignite, sand, and kaolin.  The lower part of the unit is
 thin-bedded silty clay and micaceous, carbonaceous, fossiliferous fine sand.
       "The oldest Tertiary sediments in Alabama make up the Midway Group. These are the
 Clayton Formation, the Porters Creek Formation, and the Naheola Formation. The Clayton
 Formation, at the base of the Midway Group, consists of sandy fossiliferous limestones,
 fossiliferous calcareous silt, and fine sand. Lirnonite-goethite, reddish sand, and chert boulders
 characterize the residuum of the Clayton. The Porters Creek Formation is a massive plastic clay
 grading eastward into calcareous micaceous clayey sand, sandy clay, and fqssiliferous clayey
 limestone. A thin glauconitic shell marl occurs at the top (Matthews Landing Marl Member). The
 Naheola Formation is interbedded glauconitic sand, clay, silt, and lignite.
       To the south, the Midway Group is succeeded by the Wilcox Group, consisting of the
 Nanafalia, Tuscahoma, and Hatchetigbee Formations. The Nanafalia Formation contains several
 members  of clay, fossiliferous clay, fine sand, glauconitic fossiliferous sand, gravel, and some
 lignite. The Tuscahoma Sand is a laminated, thin-bedded carbonaceous silt and clay  interbedded
 with fine sand. At its base is glauconitic fine sand with coarse sand and gravel. The Eocene
 Hatchetigbee Formation forms a narrow band of laminated, carbonaceous clay, silt, and sand, with
 glauconitic fossiliferous sand and sandstone concretions.
       The Claibome and Jackson Groups are Eocene in age. The CMbome Group consists of
 the sandy clay, fossiliferous and glauconitic sands, and limestone of the Tallahatta Formation, and
 the glauconitic fossiliferous sand, marl, and carbonaceous clay of the Lisbon Formation and
 Gosport Sand.  The Jackson Group is subdivided into three formations—the Yazoo Clay, the
 Crystal River Formation, and the Moodys Branch Formation. Glauconitic, calcareous,
 fossiliferous sand and sandy limestone make up the Moodys Branch Formation, which occurs at
 the base of the Jackson Group.  The Yazoo Clay occurs in the western part of the State and grades
 eastward into the Crystal River Formation.  The Yazoo Clay is predominantly fossiliferous,
                                          IV-13    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
calcareous clay to clayey glaueonitic limestone, marl, and sand.  The Crystal River Formation is a
very fossiliferous, chalky limestone.
       The Oligocene sediments are predominantly fossiliferous, calcareous sands, sandy
fossiliferous, glauconitic limestones, glauconitic marls, and various clays. In descending order the
Oligocene Series consists of the locally fossiliferous, calcareous, argillaceous sand of the Paynes
Hammock Sand; the fossiliferous glauconitic limestone and marl of the Chikasawhay Limestone;
the Byram Formation, which consists of carbonaceous, locally fossiliferous, clay and sand, sandy
glauconitic fossiliferous marl, and coquinoid, crystalline limestone with tabular cavities; the
porous, fossiliferous limestone of the Marianna Limestone; the carbonaceous clay and glauconitic
fossiliferous sand of the Forest HUl Sand; the Red Bluff Clay, consisting of carbonaceous clay
with selenite crystals, glauconitic fossiliferous limestone, and interbedded silty clay and sand; and
the Bumpnose Limestone, a chalky, glauconitic, fossiliferous argillaceous limestone.
       The Miocene Series, which is not differentiated into individual units, consists of thin-
bedded to massive sands interbedded with clays and gravelly sands.  In the southeastern part of the
State, residuum is formed over many parts of the Jackson Group, and Oligocene and Miocene
sediments. This residuum, derived from the solution and collapse of limestone in the lowest units
and slumping of the other sediments, is described as sandy clay with scattered layers of medium to
coarse sand, chert and limestone boulders, and limonitic sand masses.
       The youngest extensive outcrop of sediments in the Coastal Plain is Quaternary in age and
is mapped as the Citronelle Formation. The Citronelle Formation consists of deeply-weathered
fine to very coarse quartz sand and lenticular beds of clay and gravel. Other Quaternary age
sediments include alluvial, coastal and low terrace deposits, as well as older high terrace deposits.
The terrace deposits consist of sand, clay, and gravel, with some heavy mineral deposits associated
with the major rivers and streams within the State. The coastal deposits are quartz sand with shell
fragments, except in the Mississippi sound, bays, lagoons, and lakes; and in estuaries, where clay,
peat, and mud are found.

RADIOACTVTTY
       An aeroradiometric map of Alabama (fig. 7) was compiled from spectral gamma-ray data
acquired during the U.S. Department of Energy's National Uranium Resource Evaluation (MURE)
program (Duval and others, 1989). For the purposes of this report, low equivalent uranium (eU)
is defined as less than 1.5 parts per million (ppm), moderate eU is defined as 1.5-2.5 ppm, and
high eU is defined as greater than 2.5 ppm. In figure 7, low eU is found in the southernmost outer
Coastal Plain associated with the upper Tertiary and Quaternary sediments. These are mostly
quartz sands.  Moderate eU covers most of the State and is associated with the older Coastal Plain
rocks and sediments, the Mississippian and Pennsylvanian-age sedimentary rocks of the
Appalachian Plateau, and the Paleozoic and Proterozoic rocks of the Valley and Ridge and
Piedmont High eU is associated with the Upper Cretaceous highly glauconitic and locally
phosphatic chalks, marls, and sands of the Mooreville and Demopolis Chalk, and the Blufftown
and Ripley Formations. High eU is also associated with Mississippian limestones, Proterozoic
granites, and faulted metamorphic rocks.  Counties in which eU exceeds 2.5 ppm in approximately
25 percent or more of their area include: Sumter, Perry, Dallas, Greene, Hale, Lowndes,
Marengo, Montgomery, Bullock, Russell, and Macon in the Coastal Plain; Coosa, Clay,
Randolph, and Lee in the Piedmont; Talladega in the Valley and Ridge; and Madison, Lawrence,
Limestone and Lauderdale Counties in the Plateaus.
                                          IV-14    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------

-------
, INDOOR RADON DATA               ...        ,         .          .  .:

       Indoor radon data from 1,180 homes sampled in the State/EPA Residential Radon Survey
 conducted in Alabama during the winter of 1986-87 are shown in figure 8a and Table 1.  Data are
 shown in figure 8a only for those counties with five or more measurements.  First-floor
 measurements (taken in homes without basements) far outnumber basement measurements and are
 distributed throughout the State.  The basement measurements, however, are restricted to the
 northern part of the State. The maximum value recorded in the survey was 180 pCi/L in Calhoun
 County.  The average for the State was 1.7 pCi/L and 6.9 percent of the homes tested had indoor
 radon levels greater than 4 pCi/L. Counties with low average indoor radon levels (< 2 pCi/L) are
 found throughout the State, but are the most consistently low in the Coastal Plain province.
 Counties with moderate (2-4 pCi/L) indoor radon averages occur in parts of the Piedmont and
 Plateaus provinces.  Only Calhoun County, in the Valley and Ridge province, and Lawrence
 County, in the Interior Low Plateaus province, have high (>4 pCi/L) indoor radon averages.
       The Alabama Department of Public Health has compiled more than 8000 indoor radon
 measurements from commercial vendors across Alabama. These data are shown in figure 8b and
 consist of indoor radon measurements collected between 1987-1992. The data include both long-
 and short-term measurements, as well as data from basement and non-basement  homes.  The
 measurements were made during all seasons of the year. In this data set, Colbert and Madison
 Counties had indoor radon averages greater than 4 pCi/L (fig. 9 is a map of counties for reference).
 However, the general regional distribution of high, moderate, and low indoor radon levels is
 similar to that from the randomly-sampled State/EPA Residential Radon Survey.

 GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL

 The Plateaus
       In the Interior Low Plateaus have been ranked high in geologic radon potential. The
 Mississippian carbonate rocks and shales that underlie this province appear to have high to
 moderate radioactivity associated with them. The carbonates and shales are also  associated with
 most of the highest county indoor radon averages for the State, particularly in Colbert, Madison,
 Lawrence, and Lauderdale Counties.  The geologic units that may be the source of these problems,
 as indicated by the radioactivity, appear to be parts of the Fort Payne Chert, the Tuscumbia
 Limestone, the Monteagle, Bangor, Pride Mountain, and Parkwood Formations, and the Floyd
 Shale. Gammage and Wilson (1992) and Wilson and others (1991) found that indoor radon levels
 in homes built on the St. Genevieve Limestone, Tuscumbia Limestone, and Fort Payne Chert
 averaged between 3.0 and 4.3 pCi/L.  Soils developed from carbonate rocks are often elevated in
 uranium and radium. Carbonate soils are derived from the dissolution of the CaCOa that makes up
 the majority of the original carbonate rock. After the CaCOs has been dissolved  away, the soils are
 enriched in the remaining impurities, predominantly base metals, including uranium. Rinds
 containing high concentrations of uranium and uranium minerals can be formed on the surfaces of
 rocks affected by CaCQs dissolution and karstification.  Karst and cave morphology is also
 thought to promote the flow and accumulation of radon. Because carbonate soils are clayey, they
 have a tendency to crack when they dry and may develop very high permeability  due to the
 fractures. Under moist conditions, however, the soils derived from carbonate rocks generally have
 low permeability.
                                         IV-16   Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D,

-------
S|BAJ9jui A"io§ajBD
                            •sjaA3j uopoB PUB uoispap 6j aoiraiajsi sptAoid oj irasoip
                               pi3U3§ isalins op A"3ip jnq 'sapunoo aqj jo spA3| uopsi aqi
                   oj JUSTDTJJIIS aq iou ABUI (| atqsx aag) A"junoo qosa in safdurcs jo laqumu
    "AroSajBO qoBa ui sapunoo jo jaqumu aip MOIJS spuaSaf dsui ui suiBjSo?s|H  *sjsai
       ABp £-^ uioij sie BJBQ 'sjuauiamsBaui aioui 10 g qjpa sapunoo JDJ '£8~986l '
    jo  aAjmg uopB-jj |Bpu3piS3-jj aiBis/VdH 3V i"o-9 ^J^P uopBi jooptn SUTUSSJOS "B
siuetusjnseeui g > Jo
           BUISSJ^J
         6" I °IQ'Q
                  . "8'liusg
                       ijfli 001.
siusuieanseeuj g > jo
          OB OUS  El 2
          02 °m  ESS 6
           QI.OIQ  |vVv-vW»-v-vVvl SS
            uyjooy js|. ^ 'iiusg

-------
Page Intentionally Blank

-------
TABLE 1.  Screening indoor radon data from the EPA/State Residential Radon Survey of
Alabama conducted during 1986-87. Data represent 2-7 day charcoal canister measurements
from the lowest level of each home tested.
COUNTY
AUTAUGA
BALDWIN
BARBOUR
BIBB
BLOUNT
BULLOCK
BUTLER
CALHOUN
CHAMBERS
CHEROKEE
CHILTON
CHOCTAW
CLARKE
CLAY
CLEBURNE
COFFEE
COLBERT
CONECUH
COOSA
COVINGTON
CRENSHAW
CULLMAN
DALE
DALLAS
DE KALB
ELMORE
ESCAMBIA
ETOWAH
FAYETTE
FRANKLIN
GENEVA
GREENE
HALE
HENRY
HOUSTON
JACKSON
JEFFERSON
LAMAR
LAUDERDALE
LAWRENCE
LEE
NO. OF
MEAS.
9
31
9
7
11
6
18
23
9
1
9
15
8
11
6
18
10
14
8
16
13
30
3
18
31
25
9
21
7
8
7
8
10
8
10
21
78
12
44
9
20
MEAN
1.5
1.0
0.4
0.8
0.9
0.3
0.7
9.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.6
0.7
1.7
2.8
1.1
4.0
0.6
1.4
0.9
0.6
2.0
1.5
0.7
1.6
1.1
0.9
0.7
0.9
0.9
0.5
0.9
0.9
1.0
0.8
1.0
1.5
1.0
2.6
15.3
0.9
GEOM.
MEAN
0.8
' 0.5
0.3
0.6
0.7
0.3
0.4
1.4
0.3
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
1.0
1.8
0.8
3.2
0.4
0.8
0.7
0.4
0.9
1.1
0.5
0.9
0.8
0.4
0.5
0.7
0.5
0.5
0.8
0.5
0.7
0.6
0.7
1.0
0.7
1.5
1.4
0.6
MEDIAN
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.5
1.1
0.4
0.4
1.3
0.3
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.4
1.1
1.6
0.8
3.3
0.5
0.9
0.8
0.6.
1.0
1.9
0.5
0.8
0.8
0.5
0.6
0.8
0.7
0.4
0.7
0.5
0.6
0.8
0.9
0.9
0.8
1.3
1.0
0.6
STD.
DEV.
2.0
1.8
0.3
0.6
0.6
0.2
0.7
37.2
0.4
0.0
0.4
0.4
0.9
2.3
2.9
1.0
2.9
0.5
1.8
0.6
0.5
3.7
1.1
0.5
2.4
1.0
1.3
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.3
0.6
1.2
0.8
0.5
0.6
1.6
0.8
3.2
42.7
1.0
MAXIMUM
6.3
8.5
0.8
1.9
1.9
0.4
2.5
180.0
1.4
0.5
1.3
1.7
2.9
8.2
8.2
3.7
10.0
1.7
5.7
1.8
1.6
19.8
2.3
2.2
11.7
5.0
4.1
3.1
2.0
1.7
1.2
2.2
4.1
2.6
1.8
2.4
10.3
2.6
16.0
129.1
4.6
%>4 pCi/L
11
6
0
0
0
0
0
9
0
0
0
0
0
9
17
0
30
0
13
0
0
7
0
0
6
4
11
0
0
0
0
0
10
0
0
0
8
0
18
11
5
%>20 pCi/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
11
0

-------
TABLE 1 (continued). Screening indoor radon data for Alabama.
COUNTY
LIMESTONE
LOWNDES
MACON
MADISON
MARENGO
MARION
MARSHALL
MOBILE
MONROE
MONTGOMERY
MORGAN
PERRY
PICKENS
PIKE
RANDOLPH
RUSSELL
SHELBY
ST. GLAIR
SUMTER
TALLADEGA
TALLAPOOSA
TUSCALOOSA
WALKER
WASHINGTON
WDLCOX
WINSTON
NO. OF
MEAS.
35
4
5
119
11
10
34
43
9
25
47
9
11
8
9
9
27
14
8
37
19
14
14
13
7
8
MEAN
1.6
0.6
0.5
3.5
0.9
1.3
1.1
0.6
0.9
0.9
1.6
1.1
0.4
1.1
1.1
0.6
1.6
1.4
0.3
1.4
1.3
1.1
1.4
0.6
0.6
1.7
GEOM.
MEAN
1.0
0.4
0.4
2.1
0.7
0.9
0.6
0.4
0.7
0.7
0.9
0.5
0.3
0.8
0.9
0.5
0.9
1.1
0.2
1.0
0,8
0.9
1.0
0.4
0.4
1.1
MEDIAN
1.0
0.4
0.5
2.0
0.8
0.9
0.5
0.5
0.9
0.7
1.0
0.5
0.4
1.1
1.3
0.6
0.8
0.9
0.2
1.1
0.8
0.9
1.1
0.6
0.5
1.2
STD.
DEV.
1.7
0.7
0.3
4.7
0.9
1.2
1.8
0.5
0.7
0.7
2.3
1.2
0.2
0.7
0.6
0.4
2.5
1.3
0.4
1.2
1.3
0.7
1.1
0.5
0.5
1.9
MAXIMUM
6.8
1.6
0.7
36.6
3.6
3.4
10.0
2.3
2.0
2.8
12.4
3.3
0.6
2.2
1.9
1.4
11.6
5.0
1.1
5.4
5.3
2.7
4.5
1.7
1.6
6.2
%>4pCi/L
11
0
0
25
0
0
6
0
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
11
7
0
5
5
0
7
0
0
13
%>20 pCi/L
0
0
0
2
. 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

-------
                                                      Bsmt. & 1st Floor Rn
                                            54 L
..l.f.M OtolO
 7 E3 11 to 20
 5 123 21 to 30
  1 8 31 to 40
                                                    100 Miles
                                                         Bsmt & 1st Floor Rn
                                                      Average Concentration (pCi/L)
                                            53
                                                               I
                                                           3
                                                           2
       0.0 to 1.9
       2.0 to 3.0
       3.1 to 4.0
       4.1 to 5.0
Figure 8b.  Indoor radon for Alabama collected by the Alabama Department of Public Health.
Data are from charcoal canister and alpha-track radon detectors purchased from commercial
vendors by homeowners during the period 1987-1992.  Histograms in map legends show the
number of counties in each category.  Unequal category intervals were chosen to provide
reference to decision and action levels.

-------
Page Intentionally Blank

-------
                                                                       w
                                                                   o  , to  ?a  30  40  so
                                                                   b- I    I  4.	i	1
Figure 9. Counties and county seats in Alabama (from Facts on File, 1984).

-------
Page Intentionally Blank

-------
,	  The Appalachian Plateaus has been, ranked moderate in geologic radon potential. Indoor
 radon levels are generally low to moderate. Radioactivity is low-to moderate and soil permeability
 is moderate. The sandstone of the Pottsville Formation is not noted for being uraniferous, but
 uraniferous carbonaceous shales interbedded with the sandstone may be the cause of locally
 moderate to high indoor radon levels. Culman County had several indoor radon measurements
 greater than 4 pCi/L, including one measurement of 19.8 pCi/L. Winston and Walker Counties
 also had several indoor radon levels greater than 4 pCi/L in the Alabama Department of Public
 Health data set

 Valley and Ridge
       The Valley and Ridge province has been ranked moderate in geologic radon potential.
 Radioactivity is generally moderate in the Valley and Ridge, with high radioactivity occurring along
 the southeastern border with the Piedmont. Indoor radon levels are highly variable, with generally
 low county averages and one high county average.  Most of the counties had a few readings greater
 than 4 pCi/L. The soils of the Valley and Ridge have low to moderate permeability. The
 permeability may be locally high in dry clayey soils and karstic areas. Carbonate soils derived
 from Cambrian-Qrdovician rock units of the Valley and Ridge province cause known indoor radon
 problems in eastern Tennessee, western New Jersey, western Virginia, eastern West Virginia
 (Schultz and others, 1992), and central and eastern Pennsylvania. Further, the Devonian
 Chattanooga Shale crops out locally in parts of the Valley and Ridge. This shale is known to be
 highly uraniferous (Glover,  1959) and has been identified as a source of high indoor radon in
 Kentucky (Peake and Schumann, 1991).

 Piedmont
       Where it is possible to associate high radioactivity and/or high indoor radon levels with
 particular areas, parts of the Piedmont have been ranked moderate to high in radon potential.
 Radiometric anomalies occur over the Talladega Fault zone, which separates the Paleozoic
 carbonate rocks from the metamorphic rocks. Some of the metamorphic rocks in the Northern
 Piedmont,  including the Poe Bridge Mountain Group, the Mad Indian Group, parts of the
 Wedowee Group, and the Higgins Ferry Group, also have high radioactivity associated with them.
 In many cases the radiometric anomalies appear to be associated with rocks in fault zones, graphitic
 schists and phyllites, felsic gneiss, and other granitic rocks. Furthermore, Talladega, Calhoun,
 Cleburne, and Randolph Counties all have some high indoor radon measurements. Uranium in
 graphitic phyllite with an assay value of 0.076 percent UaOg has been reported from Cleburne
 County (Grauch and Zarinski, 1976), and similar graphitic phyllites from the Georgia Piedmont
 average 4.7 ppm uranium (McConnell and Costello, 1980). Graphitic phyllites  and schists in other
 parts of the Piedmont are known sources of radon and have high indoor radon concentrations
 associated  with them (Gundersen and others, 1988). Another source of uranium in Piedmont
 metamorphic rocks is monazite, which contains high amounts of both uranium and thorium. It is a
 common accessory mineral in gneisses and granites throughout the Piedmont and its resistance to
 weathering and high density result in local monazite concentrations in saprolite,  Mertie (1953)
 describes a uraniferous monazite belt that crosses the Piedmont in northern Chambers and
 Tallapoosa Counties that may be a source of radon.  Soils of the Northern and Southern Piedmont
 have moderate to high permeability, whereas soils developed from mafic rocks of the Dadeville
 Complex have low permeability.  Because the DadevEle Complex consists primarily of mafic rocks
                                          IV-22    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
Page Intentionally Blank

-------
, with lowjadioaetivity and low soil permeability, the Dadeville Complex was ranked separately
 from other Piedmont rocks and is ranked low in geologic radon potential!

 Coastal Plain
        More than half of Alabama is covered by the sediments of the Coastal Plain. Indoor radon
 levels are generally less than 4 pCi/L and are commonly less than 2 pCi/L in this province. Soil
 permeability is variable, generally low in clays and moderate to high in silts and sands.  A distinct
 radiometric high is located over the central belt of marly sandy clay and chalk known as the Selma
 Group. Within the Selma Groupi high radioactivity is associated with the Demopolis Chalk,
 Mooreville Chalk, PraMe Bluffs Chalk, and the Ripley Formation in central and western Alabama,
 and in eastern Alabama and into Georgia, where these rocks are dominated by the glauconitic sands
 and clays of the Providence Sand, Cusseta Sand, and Blufftown Formation. These units have
 moderate geologic radon potential overall.
        As part of a study by the U.S. Geological Survey and the U.S. EPA to assess the radon
 potential of the Coastal Plain sediments in the United States, data on radon in soil gas, surface
 gamma-ray activity, and soil permeability were collected and examined (Gundersen and Peake,
 1992). Data were collected in the Alabama Coastal Plain along a transect running from just north
 of Montgomery, Alabama, to just south of De Funiak Springs, Florida. The highest soil-gas radon
 and equivalent uranium concentrations were found in the Cretaceous Mooreville Chalk,
 carbonaceous sands and clays of the Providence Sand, and the glauconitic sands of the Eutaw and
 Ripley Formations. However, permeability in many of these units is slow—generally less than
 .IxlO"12 cm2, and soil-gas samples for radon analysis were difficult to collect. Geologic units that
 have the lowest soil-gas radon and eU concentrations include the quartz sands of the Cretaceous
 Gordo Formation and quartz sands and residuum of the undifferentiated upper Tertiary sediments.
 Low to moderate radon and uranium concentrations were measured in the glauconitic sands and
 clays of the Tertiary Porters Creek Formation and in the glauconitic sands, limestones, and clays of
 the Tertiary Nanafalia and Lisbon Formations, and the Tuscahoma Sand.  The indoor radon levels
 in some counties underlain by the Selma Group are in the 2-4 pCi/L range, with a few
 measurements greater than 4 pCi/L—higher than in most other parts of the Alabama Coastal Plain.
 Chase (1984) reports high uranium and radon concentrations in the sediments of the Jackson
 Group, locally exceeding 8 ppm U, but generally in the 1-4 ppm U range, and high soil-gas radon
 concentrations associated with faults and oil and gas wells in Choctaw County (fig. 6). Indoor
 radon levels are generally low in these areas, but may be locally high.

 SUMMARY

        For the purpose of this assessment, Alabama has been divided into eight geologic radon
 potential areas and each area assigned a Radon Index (RI) and  a Confidence Index  (CI) score
 (Table 2).  The RI is a relative measure of radon potential based on geologic, soil, radioactivity,
 architecture, and indoor radon data.  The CI is a measure of the confidence of the RI assessment
 based on the quality and quantity of the data used to assess the  geologic radon potential (please see
 the introduction chapter to this regional book for a detailed discussion of the indexes). Figure 10 is
 a map showing the geologic radon potential of the eight designated areas in Alabama.
        In the northern, more temperate part of the State, in which some basement architecture is
 present, winters are less mild, and where geologic radon potential is higher, indoor radon levels
• are significantly higher than in the remainder of the State,  Of particular concern are the soils
                                           IV-23    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
. developed -on carbonate rocks of the Interior Lpw Plateaus and the Valley and Ridge,: which appear
 to be the source of many of the high" radon levels recorded in the State. The Interior Low Plateau is
 rated high in geologic radon potential, but the Valley and Ridge province has been rated moderate
 because of generally lower indoor radon levels and the moderate radioactivity of the area. In the
 Piedmont, rocks in fault zones, graphitic schists and phyllites, felsic gneiss and other granitic
 rocks may be associated with locally high indoor radon concentrations and these rocks are
 abundant in the Northern Piedmont The DadeviUe Complex is low in radon potential because of
 the low radioactivity of the mafic rocks that comprise it
       Within the Inner Coastal Plain, glauconitic, phosphatic, and carbonaceous sediments are a
 documented source of radon, although these areas had only a few high indoor radon levels and
 generally low soil permeability. This area has therefore been ranked moderate in geologic radon
potential. The climate, soil, and lifestyle of the inhabitants of much of southern Alabama have
influenced building construction styles and building ventilation which, in general, do not allow
 high concentrations of radon to accumulate in structures. Much of the outer Coastal Plain is
underlain by sediments with low to moderate radioactivity that are poor sources of radon. The
outer Coastal Plain has therefore been ranked low in geologic radon potential.
       This is a generalized assessment of the State's geologic radon potential and there is no
substitute for having a home tested. The conclusions about radon potential presented in this report
cannot be applied to individual homes or building sites. Indoor radon levels, both high and low,
can be quite localized, and within any radon potential area there will likely be areas with higher or
lower radon potential than assigned to the area as a whole. Any local decisions about radon should
not be made without consulting all available local data. For additional information on radon and
how to test, contact your State radon program or EPA regional office. More detailed information
on state or local geology may be obtained from the state geological survey. Addresses and phone
numbers for these agencies are listed in chapter 1 of this booklet
                                          IV-24    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
                                                       GEOLOGIC
                                                   RADON  POTENTIAL
                                                   =j HIGH
                                                      MODERATE/VARIABLE
                                                      LOW
Figure 10.  Geologic radon potential areas of Alabama. Numbers correspond to listings in
Table 2. See text for discussion of areas.

-------
TABLE .2; RI and CI scores for geologic radon pptential areas of Alabama. Numbers refer to
areas shown on figure 10.
FACTOR
INDOOR RADON
RADIOACTIVITY
GEOLOGY
SOIL PERM.
ARCHITECTURE
GFE POINTS
TOTAL

Interior Low
Plateaus (1)
RI CI
2
2
3
2
1
2
12
High
2
3
• 2
3
10
High
Appalachian Plateaus
(2)
RI CI
2
2
2
2
1
0
9
Mod
2
3
2
3
10
High
Valley and Ridge
(3)
RI CI
2
2
2
2
1
0
9
Mod
2
3
2
3
10
High
FACTOR
  Southern Piedmont (7)
Wedowee, Emuckfaw Grps (5)
       RI      CI
Northern Piedmont-faults,
phyllite, granitic rocks (4)
    RI     CI
  Inner Piedmont/
DadeviUe Complex (6)
  RI     CI
INDOOR RADON
RADIOACTIVITY
GEOLOGY
SOIL PERM.
ARCHITECTURE
GFE POINTS
TOTAL

2
2
2
2
1
0
9
Mod
2
3
2
3
.
-
10
High
2
3
3
3
1
0
12
High
2
3
3
3
.
-
11
High
1
1
2
2
1
0
7
Low
3
3
3
3
-
-
12
High
FACTOR
     Cretaceous of the
   Inner Coastal Plain (8)
       RI     CI
Tertiary of Inner Coastal Plain
and the Outer Coastal Plain (9)
    RI     CI
INDOOR RADON
RADIOACTIVITY
GEOLOGY
SOIL FIRM,
ARCHITECTURE
GFE POINTS
TOTAL

1
3
3
2
1
0
10
Mod
2
3
2
3
-
.
10
High
1
1
2
2
1
0
7
Low
3
3
3
3
.
-
12
High
RADON INDEX SCORING:

         Radon potential category
         LOW                        3-8 points
         MODERATE/VARIABLE       9-11 points
         HIGH                       > 11 points

                           Possible range of points = 3 to 17

CONFIDENCE INDEX SCORING:
                                       Probable screening indoor
                        Point range	radon average for area
                                              <2pCi/L
                                              2~4pCi/L
                                              >4pCi/L
         LOW CONFIDENCE
         MODERATE CONFIDENCE
         HIGH CONFIDENCE
                               4-6 points
                               7-9 points
                              10 -12 points
                           Possible range of points = 4 to 12
                                       IV-26   Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
                        REFERENCES CITED IN THIS REPORT         .   ;
           AND OTHER REFERENCES RELEVANT TO RADON IN ALABAMA
Chase, D.D. and Richter, K.E., 1983, Structural control of radon distribution in oil fields in the
      Gilbertown area, Choctaw County, Alabama: Geological Society of America, Abstracts
      with Programs, v. 15, p. 100.

Chase, D.D., 1984, Radon distribution controls and possible sources in the Gilbertown oil field
      area, Choctaw County, Alabama: Master's Thesis, Univ. of Alabama, p. 80.

Duval, J.S., Jones, W.J., Riggle, F.R., and Pitkin, J.A., 1989, Equivalent uranium map of
      conterminous United States: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 89-478,10 p.

Facts on File, Inc., 1984, State Maps on File: Facts on File Publications.

Gammage, R.B., and Wilson, D.L., 1992, Investigation of radon entry and effectiveness of
      mitigation measures, in Radon research program: U.S. Department of Energy report
      DOE/ER-0536P, p. 43-46.

Glover, L., 1959, Stratigraphy and uranium content of the Chattanooga Shale in northeastern
      Alabama, northwestern Georgia, and eastern Tennessee: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin
      1087-E, 168 p.

Grauch, R.I., and Zarinski, K., 1976, Generalized descriptions of uranium-bearing veins,
      pegmatites, and disseminations in non-sedimentary rocks, eastern United States: U.S.
      Geological Survey Open-File Report 76-582,114 p.

Gundersen, L.C.S, Reimer, G.M., Wiggs, C.R., and Rice, C.A., 1988, Map showing radon
      potential of rocks and soils in Montgomery County, Maryland:  U.S. Geological Survey
      Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-2043, scale 1:62,500.

Gundersen, L.C.S., and Peake, R.T., 1992, Radon in the Coastal Plain of Texas, Alabama, and
      New Jersey, in Gates, A.E., and Gundersen, L.C.S., eds., Geologic controls on radon:
      Geological Society of America Special-Paper 271, p. 53-64.

McConnell, K.I., and Costello, J.O., 1980, Uranium evaluation of graphitic phyllites and  other
      selected rocks in the Georgia Piedmont and Blue Ridge, Georgia Department of Natural
      resources, Environmental Protection Division, Georgia Geological Survey, Open File
      Report 80-5,41 p.

Mertie, J.B., Jr. 1953, Monazite deposits of the southeastern Atlantic states: U.S. Geological
      Survey Circular 237, 31 p.

Odom, A.L. and Mose, D.G.,  1989, Radon potential risk maps for Florida, Georgia and Alabama:
      Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, v. 21, p. 53.
                                        IV-27    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
, Peake, R.T., and Schumann, R.R., 1991, Regional radon characterizations, in Gundersen,
       L.C.S., and Wanty, R.B., eds., Field Studies of Radon in Rocks,. Soils, and Water: U.S.
       Geological Survey Bulletin 1971, p. 163-175.

 Richmond, G.M. and Fullerton, D.S., eds., 1988, Quaternary geologic map of the Lookout
       Mountain 4x6° Quadrangle, United States:  Quaternary Geologic Atlas of the United States,
       U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Map 1-1420 (NI-16), scale
       1:1,000,000.

 Richmond, G.M., Fullerton, D.S., and Weide, D.L., eds., 1988, Quaternary Geologic Map of the
       Mobile 4x6° Quadrangle, United States: Quaternary Geologic Atlas of the United States,
       U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Investigations Map 1-1420 (NH-16), scale
       1:1,000,000.

 Schrader, E.L., 1980, Uranium reconnaissance survey along the Gilbertown fault system,
       Choctaw County, Alabama: Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs,
       v. 12,  p. 207-208.

 Schultz, A.P., Wiggs, C.R., and Brower, S.D., 1992, Geologic and environmental implications
       of high soil-gas radon concentrations in the Great Valley, Jefferson and Berkeley Counties,
       West Virginia, in Gates, A.E., and Gundersen, L.C.S., eds., Geologic controls on radon:
       Geological Society of America Special Paper 271, p. 29-44.

 Szabo, M.W., Osborne, W.E., and Copeland, C.W. Jr. and Neathery, T.L., 1988, Geologic map
       of Alabama: Alabama Geological Survey Special Publication 220, scale 1: 250,000.

 U.S. Soil Conservation Service, 1987, Principal kinds of Soils: National Atlas of the United States
       of America, U.S. Geological Survey, 38077-BE-NA-07M-00.

 Wilson,  D.L., Gammage, R.B., Dudney, C.S., and Saultz, R.J., 1991, Summertime elevation of
       222Rn levels in Huntsville, Alabama, homes: Health Physics, v. 60, p. 189-197.
                                          IV-28   Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-D

-------
                           EPA's Map.of Radon Zones
       The USGS' Geologic Radon Province Map is the technical foundation for EPA's Map
of Radon Zones.  The Geologic Radon Province Map defines the radon potential for
approximately 360 geologic provinces. EPA has adapted this information to fit a county
boundary map in order to produce the Map of Radon Zones.
       The Map of Radon Zones is based on the same range of predicted screening levels of
indoor radon  as USGS1 Geologic Radon Province Map.  EPA defines the three zones as
follows:  Zone One areas have an average predicted indoor radon screening potential greater
than 4 pCi/L.  Zone Two areas are predicted to  have an average indoor radon screening
potential between  2 pCi/L and 4 pCi/L.  Zone Three areas are predicted to have an average
indoor radon  screening potential less than 2  pCi/L.
       Since  the geologic province boundaries cross state and county boundaries, a strict
translation of counties from the Geologic Radon Province Map  to the Map of Radon  Zones
was not possible.  For counties that have variable radon potential (i.e., are located in  two or
more provinces of different rankings), the counties  were assigned to a zone based on the
predicted radon potential of the province in which most of its area lies.  (See Part I for more
details.)

ALABAMA MAP OF RADON ZONES

       The Alabama Map of Radon Zones and its supporting documentation (Part IV of this
report) have received extensive review by Alabama geologists and  radon program experts.
The map for Alabama generally reflects current State knowledge about radon for its counties.
Some States have  been able to conduct radon investigations  in areas smaller than geologic
provinces and counties, so it is important to  consult locally available data.
       Although the information  provided in Part IV of this report — the State chapter entitled
"Preliminary Geologic Radon Potential Assessment of Alabama" — may appear to be quite
specific, it cannot  be applied to determine the radon levels of a neighborhood, housing tract,
individual house, etc.  THE ONLY WAY TO DETERMINE IF A HOUSE HAS
ELEVATED INDOOR  RADON IS TO TEST. Contact the Region 4 EPA office or the
Alabama radon program  for information on testing  and fixing homes.  Telephone numbers and
addresses can be found in Part II of this report.
                                         V-l

-------
ALABAMA -  EPA Map of  Radon Zones
      The purpose of this map is to assist National, State and local organizations
      to target their resources and to implement radon-resistant building codes.
   This map b not Intended to determine If a home In a given zone should be tested
   for radon. Homes with elevated levels of radon have been found In all three
   zones.  All homos should be tested, rogtrdlass of zone designation.
                                                      :• • \- • • ESCAHHA •. f;  :.:. :K^_^-=
 Zone 1
Zone 2       Zone 3
IMPORTANT: Consult the publication entitled "Preliminary Geologic Radon
Potential Assessment of Alabama* before using this map. This
document contains information on radon potential variations within counties,
EPA also recommends that this map be supplemented with any available
local data in order to further understand and predict the radon potential of a
specific area.

-------