United Slates
           Environmental Protection
           Agency
Air and Radiation
(6604J)
402-R-93-043
September 1993
4>EPA   EPA's Map of Radon Zones

           MINNESOTA


-------

-------
       EPA'S MAP OF RADON ZONES
               MINNESOTA
             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
        ASSESSMENTSrINTRODUCTION
  III. REGION 5 GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL
                SUMMARY
V. PRELIMINARY GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL
        ASSESSMENT OF MINNESOTA
 V. EPA'S MAP OF RADON ZONES -- MINNESOTA

-------

-------
                                     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, local 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 RaHnn
       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

-------
                                                             i-   CM
                                                                       CO
 d
 o
SI
 o
ns
                                                                                 O)
                                                                                 .c

                                                                                 •3
                                                                                 c  ju


                                                                                 £  1
                                                                                 p-
                                                                                 •i  s
                                                                                 "O  
**,
o
1
O)
£
•tf
(0
-£

-Q
1
-c

-------
CO
JJ>

CO

-------
 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  Radon  Potential  Provinces  for  Nebraska
         Lincoln County
           Hi 111
                    Uo i 11111
                               Lot
Figure 4
        NEBRASKA  -  EPA Map  of  Radon  Zones
        Lincoln  County
         Zone 1     Zone 2    Zone 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. Gundersen 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 that 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
  state, 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 (~:Rn) is produced from  the radioactive decay of radium (226Ra), which  is, in turn,
 a product of the decay of uranium (238U) (fig. I).  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

-------
                                                                            •o

                                                                            CJ
2
— «O
CO Q>
*** >*
ll
£ s
2 T-
=J «o
T




3
%

9 2
n ™
CM Q>
E **
= <=>
£± C9
§0
r-
= ^i
J i
  =^TciA
CM
2

I
§
o

»S

                                                              O

                                                              •o
                                                              «<-!
                                                              o

                                                              s
                                                              T3


                                                              1
                                                              l_c
                                                                            T3

                                                                            C3
                                                                            I
                                                                            O



                                                                            .^







                                                                            ID
                                                                               03
                                                                               
-------
  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 =  10'9 meters), or about 2x10'6 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 wintei, 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 cold 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 lithologic 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 arc 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, 1988a; Smith
and others, 1987), and in  Clinton, New Jersey (Henry and others,  1991;  Muessig and Bell,
1988).

NURE 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 (2HBi), 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

-------
                 FLIGHT  LIKE SPACING  Of SURE  AERIAL SURVEYS
                     2 k'U  (1  MILE)
                     5 KJ(  (3  MILES)
                     2 k 5  KU
                 E3 10 KM  {6 HILES)
                     5 t 10  EH
                     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.

-------
     Figure 2 is an index map of NURE 1° x 2° quadrangles showing the flight-line spacing
 for each quadrangle.  In general, the more closely spaced the flightlines are, the more area
 was covered by the aerial gamma survey, and thus, more detail is available in the data set.
 For an altitude of 400 ft above the ground surface and with primary flightline spacing
 typically between 3 and 6 miles, less than 10 percent of the ground surface of the United
 States was actually measured by  the airborne gamma-ray detectors (Duval and others, 1989),
 although some areas had better coverage than others due to the differences in flight-line
 spacing between  areas (fig.  2). This suggests that some localized uranium anomalies may not
 have been detected by the aerial  surveys, but the good correlations of eU patterns with
 geologic outcrop patterns indicate that, at relatively small scales (approximately 1:1,000,000
 or smaller) the National eU map  (Duval and others,  1989) gives reasonably good estimates of
 average surface uranium concentrations and thus can assist in the prediction of radon potential
 of rocks and soils, especially when augmented  with additional geologic and soil data.
     The shallow (20-30 cm) depth of investigation of gamma-ray spectrometers, either
 ground-based or airborne (Duval  and others, 1971; Durrance,  1986), suggests that gamma-ray
 data may sometimes underestimate the radon-source strength in  soils in which some of the
 radionuclides in  the near-surface  soil layers have been  transported downward through the soil
 profile.  In such cases the concentration of radioactive  minerals  in the A horizon  would be
 lower than in the B horizon, where such minerals are typically concentrated.  The
 concentration of radionuclides in  the C horizon and below may be relatively unaffected by
 surface solution processes.  Under these conditions the surface gamma-ray  signal  may indicate
 a lower radon source concentration than actually  exists in the deeper soil layers, which are
 most likely to affect radon levels in structures with basements.  The redistribution of
 radionuclides in soil profiles is dependent on a  combination of climatic, geologic, and
 geochemical factors.  There  is reason to believe that correlations of eU with actual soil
 radium and uranium concentrations at a depth relevant  to radon  entry  into structures may be
 regionally variable (Duval,  1989;  Schumann and Gundersen, 1991). Given sufficient
 understanding of the factors  cited above, these regional differences may be predictable.

 SOIL SURVEY DATA

    Soil  surveys prepared by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) provide data on soil
 characteristics, including soil-cover thickness, grain-size distribution, permeability, shrink-
 swell potential, vegetative cover, generalized groundwater characteristics, and land use.  The
 reports are available in county formats and State summaries.  The county reports typically
 contain both generalized and detailed maps of soils in the area.
    Because of time and map-scale constraints,  it was impractical to examine county soil
 reports for each county in the United States, so  more generalized summaries at appropriate
 scales  were used where available.   For State or  regional-scale radon characterizations, soil
 maps were compared to  geologic maps of the area, and the soil descriptions, shrink-swell
 potential, drainage characteristics, depth to seasonal high water table, permeability, and other
 relevant characteristics of each soil group noted.  Technical soil terms used in soil surveys are
generally complex; however, a good summary of soil engineering terms and the national
distribution of technical soil  types is the "Soils" sheet of the National Atlas (U.S. Department
of Agriculture, 1987).
                                           II-8     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
    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

-------
§1
Q
                                                                                                b
                                                                                                 ex
                                                                                           •S     s
                                                                                                 8
                                                                                                 e/3
                                                                                                "3
 c
 o
•o
 2

 o
 o
T3

 60
 C

 g
                                                                                                OO
                                                                                                 C
                                                                                                 o
                                                                                                •§
                                                                                                Oi

                                                                                                ."2

                                                                                                 L>
                                                                                                ."5
                                                                                                'K
                                                                                                 u
                                                                                                OS
                                                                                                <
                                                                                                CL.
                                                                                                rt
                                                                                                W
                                                                                                u
                                                                                                •S
                                                                                                c
                                                                                                |

                                                                                                (4-1
                                                                                                O
                                                                                                *-l




                                                                                                1

                                                                                                CO
                                                                                                3
                                                                                                to

-------
    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.
    Radon 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 1, 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 from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
 TABLE 1. RADON INDEX MATRIX, "ppm eU" indicates parts per million of equivalent
 uranium, as indicated by NURE aerial radiometric data.  See text discussion for details.
                                   INCREASING RADON POTENTIAL
FACTOR
INDOOR RADON (average)
AERIAL RADIO ACTIVITY
GEOLOGY*
SOIL PERMEABILITY
ARCHITECTURE TYPE
POINT VALUE
1
<2pCi/L
< 1.5 ppm eU
negative
low
mostly slab
2
2-4pCi/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
            LOW
            MODEPxATE/VARIABLE
            HIGH
                                    Probable average screening
                       Point range	indoor radon for area
                       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
j.i>\_ixc,rt.oii'N\j v^\_»iNrijLU»riiM_ri ^
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
                                    II-12     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
included as supplementary information and 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
+he 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 NURE 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 '?%v 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),
and 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 to 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, K.S., 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
       (S AGEEP), Golden, Colorado, March 13-16,1989:  Society of Engineering and Mineral
       Exploration Geophysicists, p. 1-61.

Duval, J.S., Cook, E.G., 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 Hansman,
       R.H., 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.
                                         JJ-17      Reprinted from USGS Open-File 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-Bolinder, 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, Term., U.S. Department of
       Energy Report ORNL/SUB/84-0024/1.

Smith, R.C., II, 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 Gesell, T.F.,
       and Lowder, W.M. (eds), Natural radiation environment IH, 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 rocks, 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.
                                         JJ-19     Reprinted ftom USGS Open-FUe Report 93-292

-------
                                                APPENDIX  A
                                        GEOLOGIC TIME  SCALE
Subdivisions (and their symbols)
Eon or
Eonothem
Phanerozoic2

Proterozoic
(B)


Archean
Era or
Erathem
Cenozoic 2
(Cz)
Mesozoic2
(M!)
Paleozoic



L>tt.
MiOdll
Prot»*eioie tvi
Proi.fS«ie (XI
un
ArrhMn (Wl
Arth»n(V)
'"' " £«ny
1 ArthMn IUI
Period, System,
Subperiod. Subsystem
Quaternary
(Q)
Neogene 2
Subperiod or
Tertiary Subsystem (N)
m Paleogene
Subperiod or
Subsystem (Pi)
Cretaceous
(K)
Jurassic
(J)
Triassic
(10
Permian
(P)
Pennsylvanian
Carboniferous (P)
-Sy
-------
                                    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 pCi/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 study of radon

aerial radiometric, 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.
                                          n-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, i.e., 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.
                                          H-22      Reprinted from USGS Open-FUe 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 ability 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, yellow, 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 metamorphism.

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 metamorphism 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
                                           H-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 b^ing 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 (CaCOa).

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 (lithification) 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 USGS 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 unbedded 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.
                                          n-26      Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
                                          APPENDIX  C
                                 EPA REGIONAL OFFICES
EPA  Regional  Offices
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	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-Ftfe Report 93-292

-------
                                  STATE RADON CONTACTS
                                              May, 1993
  Alabama        James McNees
                 Division of Radiation Control
                 Alabama Department of Public Health
                 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) 255-4845
 Arkansas        Lee Getshner
                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 llth Avenue
               Denver, CO 80220
               (303) 692-3057
               1-800-846-3986 in state
 Connecticut  Alan J. Siniscalchi
             Radon Program
             Connecticut Department of Health
               Services
             150 Washington Street
             Hartford, CT 06106-4474
             (203)566-3122

    Delaware  Marai G. 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 Rpbert 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, FL 32399-0700
            (904)488-1525
            1-800-543-8279 in state
            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) 5864700
                                              11-28      Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
Tdaho
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Pat McGavarn
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, IL 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 70884-2135
              (504) 925-7042
              1-800-256-2494 in state

       Maine  BobStilwell
              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, SE
              P.O. Box 59040
              Minneapolis, MN 55459-0040
              (612) 627-5480
              1-800-798-9050 in state
                                                11-29       Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
 Mississippi     Silas Anderson
                Division of Radiological Health
                Department of Health
                3150 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

 Montana        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

New Hampshire David Chase
               Bureau of Radiological Health
               Division of Public Health Services
               Health and Welfare Building
               Six Hazen Drive
               Concord, NH 03301
               (603)271-4674
               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) 827-4300

    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 Dakota  Arlen 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
               1-800-523-4439 in state
                                               E-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, PA 17120
(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)734-4631
               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

         2D1 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 TJ
             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) 753-4518
                 1-800-323-9727 In State

 West Virginia    BeattieL. 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 Weiffenbach
                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
                                               n-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) 8824795
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
Florida  Walter Schmidt
        Florida Geological Survey
        903 ".V. Tennessee S..
        Tallahassee, FL 32304-7700
        (904)488-4191
Georgia  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
        Morrill 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, EL 61820
        (217) 333-4747

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

   Iowa  Donald L. Koch
        Iowa Department of Natural Resources
        Geological Survey Bureau
        109 Trowbridge Hall
        Iowa City, JA 52242-1319
        (319) 335-1575
 Kansas Lee C.Gerhard
        Kansas Geological Survey
        1930 Constant Ave., West
        University of Kansas
        Lawrence, KS 66047
        (913) 864-3965
,dlllpUS
                                               n-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
    New Jersey
  New Mexico
    New York
 Eugene L. Boudette
 Dept. of Environmental Services
 117 James Hall
 University of New Hampshire
 Durham, NH 03824-3589
 (603) 862-3160

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

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

Robert H. Fakundiny
New York State Geological Survey
3136 Cultural Education Center
Empire State Plaza
Albany, NY 12230
(518)474-5816
                                               11-34      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 DepL 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
               Donald A. Hull
               DepL of Geology & Mineral Indust.
               Suite 965
               800 NE Oregon St. #28
               Portland, OR 97232-2162
               (503)731-4600
Pennsylvania    Donald M. HosMns
               Dept. of Environmental Resources
               Bureau of Topographic & Geologic
                 Survey
               P.O. Box 2357
               Harrisburg, PA 17105-2357
               (717) 787-2169

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

Rhode Island    J. Allan Cain
               Department of Geology
               University of Rhode Island
               315 Green Hall
               Kingston, RI02881
               (401) 792-2265
South Carolina Alan-Jon W. Zupan (Acting)
              South Carolina Geological Survey
              5 Geology Road
              Columbia, SC 29210-9998
              (803)737-9440

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

    Tennessee Edward T. Luther
              Tennessee Division of Geology
              13th Floor, 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  Diane L. Conrad
               Vermont Division of Geology and
                 Mineral Resources
               103 South Main St.
               Waterbury, VT 05671
               (802)244-5164
      Virginia  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
                                               H-35      Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
  West 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
                                              n-36      Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292

-------
              EPA REGION 5 GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL SUMMARY
                                           by
               R. Randall Schumann, Douglass E. Owen, and Sandra L. Szarzi
                                  U.S, Geological Survey

       EPA Region 5 comprises the states of Illinois, muiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and
Wisconsin.  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 all 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 chapter. More detailed information on the geology
and radon potential of each state in Region 5 is given in the individual state chapters. The
individual chapters describing the geology and radon potential of the six states in EPA Region 5,
though much more detailed than this summary, still are generalized assessments and there is no
substitute for having a home tested. Radon levels, both high and low, can be quite localized, and
within any radon potential area homes with indoor radon levels both above and below the
predicted average will likely be found.
       Radon potential in EPA Region 5 is controlled by three primary factors.  Bedrock
geology provides the source material for the overlying glacial deposits, and in areas with no
glacial cover, directly provides the parent material for the soils. Glacial geology (fig. 1) is an
important factor because glaciers redistributed the bedrock and  glacially-derived soils have
different soil characteristics from soils developed on bedrock.  Climate, particularly precipitation
and temperature, in concert with the soil's parent material, controls soil moisture, the extent of
soil development and weathering, and the types of weathering products that form in the soils.
The following is a brief, generalized discussion of the bedrock and glacial geology of EPA
Region 5 as they pertain to indoor radon. More detailed discussions may be found in the
individual state geologic radon potential chapters.
      Western and southern Minnesota are underlain by deposits of the Des Moines and Red
River glacial lobes. Des Moines lobe tills are silty clays  and clays derived from Upper
Cretaceous sandstones and shales,  which have relatively  high concentrations of uranium and high
radon emanating power. Deposits of the Red River lobe  are similar to those of the Des Moines
lobe, but also contain silt and clay deposits of glacial Lake Agassiz, a large glacial lake that
occupied the Red River Valley along the Minnesota-North Dakota border. The Upper
Cretaceous Pierre Shale provides good radon source material because, as a whole, it contains
higher-than-average amounts of uranium (average crustal abundance of uranium is about 2.5
parts per million).  Glacial deposits of the Red River and Des Moines lobes generate high
(> 4 pCi/L) average indoor radon concentrations (fig. 2)  and have high geologic radon potential
(fig. 3).  Northern Wisconsin, the western part of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, and part of
northern  Minnesota are underlain by glacial deposits of the Lake Superior lobe. Parts of northern
Minnesota are also underlain by deposits of the Rainy and Wadena lobes (fig. 1). The
underlying source rocks for these tills are Precambrian volcanic rocks, metasedimentary and
metavolcanic rocks, and granitic plutonic rocks of the Canadian Shield. The volcanic,
metasedimentary, and metavolcanic rocks have relatively low uranium contents, and the granitic
rocks have variable, mostly moderate to high, uranium contents. The sandy tills derived from the


                                           HI-1    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-E

-------
 CO


£


la
 oo

 
-------
   C/3 i—i
   *Q CO
-I 8-3
i g»-3
s •~| &
2 ftts
t! S2

13-S g
 03.
 4-»
 03

 Q
•n o
-«
as
 »
 ^ CM Ctf

S|a^
« § ^'S
 _ H ±5 C
•s I Is
 oo o3 O •*-*

 g 8^"S
 Q « -s fe
  43
  O
    .a
s-a
4J  O
5-8
O  j^
»o  eg
        13
O *O **3 o3


C ^-, O M
*^  CO ^^ ^3

§)^-*o £
"8 JiS V-l 03
b   
-------
\
                                                                                                       >n

                                                                                                       o
                                                                                                       • i—c
                                                                                                       W>

                                                                                                       &
 Cfl
 ctf



I
13
•.s


I
 o
 ex,


 §
'O

 g
 o

•a
 o
r—(
 o
 (L>

O
                                                                                                      en

                                                                                                       8

-------
volcanic, metasedimentary, and metavolcanic rocks have relatively high permeability, but
because of their lower uranium content of and lower emanating power, they have mostly
moderate to locally high radon potential (fig. 3).  Sandy, granite-rich tills in northern Minnesota
generally have high radon potential. Granites and granite gneisses, black slates and graphitic
schists, and iron-formation are associated with anon.     , uranium concentrations and locally
high radon in northern Wisconsin and adjacent northwestern Michigan.  In central Wisconsin,
uraniferous granites of the Middle Proterozoic Wolf River and Wausau plutons are exposed at
the surface.or covered by a thin layer of glacial deposits and cause some of the highest indoor
radon concentrations in  the State. An area in southwestern Wisconsin and adjacent smaller parts
of Minnesota, Iowa, and Illinois, is called the  "Driftless Area" (fig. 1). It is not covered by
glacial deposits but parts of the area were likely overrun by glaciers at least once. The Driftless
Area is underlain by Cambrian and Ordovician limestone, dolomite, and sandstone with
moderate to high radon potential.
       Glacial deposits  in southern Wisconsin, northern and central Illinois, and western Indiana
are primarily from the Green Bay and Lake Michigan lobes. The Green Bay and Lake Michigan
lobes advanced from their source in the Hudson Bay region of Canada and moved southward,
terminating in Illinois and Iowa.  These tills range from sandy to clayey and are derived
primarily, from shales, sandstones, and carbonate rocks of southern Wisconsin, the western
Michigan Basin, and the northern Illinois Basin. A small part of eastern  Illinois and much of
western Indiana are covered  by deposits of the Huron-Erie lobe, and west-central Illinois is
covered by glacial deposits of pre-Wisconsinan, mostly Illinoian, age.  The Huron-Erie lobe
entered Illinois from the east and moved westward and southwestward into the State.  Huron-Erie
lobe and pre-Wisconsinan glacial deposits are derived from Paleozoic shale, sandstone, siltstone,
carbonate rocks, and coal of  the Illinois Basin, and they are commonly calcareous due to the
addition of limestones and dolomites of northern Indiana and Ohio and southern Ontario. In
contrast, Lake Michigan lobe deposits contain significant amounts of dark gray to black
Devonian and Mississippian  shales of the Michigan Basin, accounting for the high clay content
of Lake Michigan lobe tills.  Unglaciated southernmost Illinois is part of the Mississippi
Embayment of the Coastal Plain and has low geologic radon potential.
       Wisconsin-age glacial deposits in Indiana were deposited by three main glacial lobes—
the Lake Michigan lobe, which advanced southward as far as central Indiana; the Huron-Erie
lobe; and the Saginaw sublobe of the Huron lobe (labeled Huron lobe on fig. 1), which advanced
from the northeast across northern Ohio and southern Michigan, respectively.  Michigan lobe
deposits are clayey near  Lake Michigan, sandy and gravelly in an outwash and morainal area in
northwestern Indiana, and clayey to loamy in west-central Indiana. Saginaw sublobe deposits are
loamy and calcareous and are derived primarily from carbonate rocks and shale. The Huron-Erie
lobe advanced from the northeast and covered much of northern and central Indiana at its
maximum extent Eastern Indiana and western Ohio are underlain by tills of the Huron-Erie lobe
that are derived in part from  black shales of the Devonian Ohio Shale and Devonian-
Mississippian New Albany Shale, but also include Paleozoic limestone, dolomite, sandstone,
siltstone, and gray shale. Black shales and carbonates underlie and provide source material for
glacial deposits in a roughly  north-south pattern through central Ohio, including the Columbus
area, and extend south of the glacial limit, where the black shales form a  prominant arcuate
pattern in northern Kentucky that curves northward into southern Indiana and underlies glacial
deposits in east-central Indiana. The overall radon potential of this area is high. Eastern Ohio is
underlain by Devonian to Permian shales and limestones with moderate to high radon potential.
                                           HI-5    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-E

-------
       The Michigan Basin covers all of the Southern Peninsula and the eastern half of the
Northern Peninsula of Michigan, as well as parts of eastern Wisconsin and northeastern Illinois,
northern Indiana, and northwestern Ohio. Glacial deposits include silty and clayey tills of the
Lake Michigan, Huron, and Huron-Erie lobes (fig.  1).  Huron lobe tills are sandy to gravelly and
calcareous, containing pebbles and cobbles of limestone, dolomite, and some sandstone and
shale, with boulders of igneous and metamorphic rocks and quartzite. Tills of the Huron-Erie
and Lake Michigan lobes are derived from similar source rocks but are more silty and clayey in
texture.  Source rocks for these tills are sandstones, gray  shales, and carbonate rocks of the
Michigan Basin, which are generally poor radon sources. In the Southern Peninsula, the
Devonian Bell, Antrim, and Ellsworth Shales, and Mississippian Sunbury Shale locally contain
organic-rich black shale layers with higher-than-average  amounts of uranium, except for the
Antrim Shale, which is organic rich throughout. These shales underlie and constitute source rock
for glacial  deposits in the northern, southeastern, and southwestern parts of the Southern
Peninsula,  and are locally exposed at the surface in the northern part of the Southern Peninsula.
Because of generally moist soils, soils developed on tills  derived from black shales in Michigan
generate moderate to locally high radon, with higher values more common in the southern part of
the State (fig. 2).
     Glaciated areas present special problems for radon-potential assessment because bedrock
material in the central United States was commonly transported hundreds of km from its source.
Glaciers  are quite effective in redistributing uranium-rich rocks; for example, in Ohio, uranium-
bearing black shales have been disseminated over much of western Ohio and eastern Indiana,
now covering a much larger area than their original outcrop pattern, and display a prominent
radiometric high.  The physical, chemical, and drainage characteristics of soils formed from
glacial deposits vary according to source bedrock type and the glacial features on which they are
formed.  For example, soils formed from ground moraine deposits tend to be more poorly
drained and contain more fine-grained material than soils formed on kames, moraines, or eskers,
which are generally coarser and well-drained. In general, soils developed from coarser-grained
tills are poorly structured, poorly sorted, and poorly developed, but are generally more highly
permeable  than the bedrock from which they are derived.
     Clayey tills, such as those underlying parts of western and southern Minnesota, have
relatively high emanation coefficients and usually have low to moderate permeability, depending
on the degree to which the clays are mixed with coarser sediments. Tills consisting of mostly
coarse material tend to emanate less radon because larger grains have lower surface area-to-
volume ratios, but because these soils have generally high permeabilities, radon transport
distances are generally longer. Structures built in these materials are thus able to draw soil air
from a larger source volume, so moderately to highly elevated indoor radon concentrations may
be achieved from comparatively lower-radioactivity soils. In till soils with extremely high
permeability, atmospheric dilution may become significant, and if the soils have low to moderate
radium contents, elevated indoor radon levels would be less likely to occur. Soil moisture has a
significant  effect on radon generation and transport and high levels of soil moisture generally
lower the radon potential of an area. The main effect of soil moisture is its tendency to occlude
soil pores and thus inhibit soil-gas transport. Soils in wetter climates from northern Minnesota to
northern  Michigan generally have lower radon potential than soils derived from similar tills in
the southern parts of those states or in Indiana and Illinois, in part because of higher soil moisture
conditions  to the north.
                                           HI-6     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-E

-------
    PRELIMINARY GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL ASSESSMENT OF MINNESOTA
                                           by
                        R. Randall Schumann and Kevin M. Schmidt
                                 U.S. Geological Survey

INTRODUCTION

       Many of the rocks and soils in Minnesota have the potential to generate levels of indoor
radon exceeding the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) guideline of 4 pCi/L. In a
survey of 919 homes conducted during the winter of 1987-88 by the Minnesota Department of
Health and the EPA, 44 percent of the homes had indoor radon levels exceeding this value.
       This is a generalized assessment of geologic radon potential of rocks, soils, and surficial
deposits of Minnesota.  The scale of this assessment is such that it is inappropriate for use in
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. 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

       Minnesota's landscape is diverse and is influenced in most of the State by the action of
glaciers.  A map of physiographic provinces (fig. 1) shows several distinct areas characterized by
different  landscape features.  The following discussion is summarized in large part from Wright
(1972a).  The Superior Upland is an area primarily of glacial erosion, where exposed bedrock has
been eroded by glaciers, producing linear patterns of lakes and ridges.  The North Shore Highland,
in the eastern part of the Superior Upland, is a ridge formed by resistant lava flows that follows the
shore of Lake Superior. Prominent features in the southern and western parts of the Superior
Upland are the Toimi drumlin area, characterized by elongate mounds of glacial drift (drumlins),
and the Giants Range, a ridge of granite flanking the Mesabi Iron Range on the north from Hibbing
to Babbitt. The Giants Range rises about 60-120 m above the surrounding landscape. The Mesabi
Range is  easily recognized by the many large open-pit iron mines and piles of mine tailings in the
area.  Many of the mine pits are now occupied by lakes.
       The Western Lake Section of the Central Lowlands province (fig. 1) is characterized by
glacial landscape features including various types of glacial hills and ridges, including moraines,
drumlins, eskers, and kames; and depressions, most of which are filled with lakes or wetlands.
The northwestern part of this  area is occupied by a pitted outwash plain in the Bemidji area. The
major glacial features in the Western Lake Section are the Alexandria moraine complex, a 15-30
km-wide belt of north-south trending ridges along the western margin of the Western Lake Section
that reach 500 m (1,700 feet) above sea level in the Leaf Hills (Wright, 1972a), and the western
part of the St. Croix moraine, a 10 km-wide ridge extending for about 160 km from St. Cloud
north to Walker.
                                           IV-1    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-E

-------
            Red River Lowland
           (Lake Agassiz Plain)
                                                   Superior ;
                                                    Upland
                     -r   ,
                       Central Lowland
                         Western Lake
                            Section
                        Till Prairie
 Prairie
 Coteau"
(dissected
till plains)
                       Wisconsin
                        Driftless
                        Section
                               50
100km
                               30    60 miles
Figure 1. Generalized physiographic regions of Minnesota (after Belthuis, 1966,
and Schwartz and Thiel, 1963).

-------
       The Till Prairie (or till plain) Section of the Central Lowlands province occupies most of the
southern half of the State. This area is relatively flat and featureless, except where it is dissected
by rivers and streams, largest of which is the Minnesota River. Linear ridges and chains of lakes
are common features and the lakes may owe their origin to buried preglacial valleys (Wright,
1972a). Along the southern border of Minnesota the Till Prairie lies between dissected, till-
manfled uplands.  The eastern part consists of the dissected till plains and Wisconsin driftless area
(fig. 1), which is partially covered by loess (windblown silt). In the southwestern corner of
Minnesota lies the Coteau des Prairies, or Prairie Coteau, an upland area between the Minnesota
River lowland and the James River basin (in South Dakota).  The eastern escarpment of the Prairie
Coteau is straight and steep, and probably represents a bedrock highland that existed in preglacial
time. The Coteau des Prairies is also covered by loess deposits.
       The Red River Lowland,in the northwestern part of the State, is a relatively flat-lying
lowland that was once part of the Lake Agassiz Basin, one of the largest Wisconsinan glacial lakes
in North America. The flatness and the lake clays have made this area very poorly drained, and, as
a result, much of the northeastern part of this area is occupied by wetlands.
       A significant portion of Minnesota's population is clustered around urban centers such as
the Twin Cities and Duluth (fig. 2).  Major land uses in the State include agriculture and
manufacturing in the southern part of the State and logging, mining, and tourism in the north.
Minnesota is divided into 87 counties (fig. 3).

GEOLOGY

       The discussion of geology is divided into three sections: bedrock geology, glacial geology,
and uranium geology. "Bedrock" refers to pre-glacial rock units, which are covered by
unconsolidated, Pleistocene glacial deposits in most parts of the State.  Generalized bedrock
geologic maps (figs. 4 and 5) show the types and distribution of rocks that underlie glacial deposits
or are exposed at the surface in some areas. The glacial deposits are composed of material derived
from underlying bedrock and from rock units to the north, northwest, and northeast.  The
discussion of bedrock geology is summarized from Ojakangas and Matsch (1982), Sims (1970),
and Sims and Morey (1972). The section on glacial geology is summarized from Wright and Ruhe
(1965), Wright (1972b), and Hobbs and Goebel (1982). For more detailed discussions and maps
of the geology, the reader is encouraged to consult these and other reports.
       Bedrock geology: Northeastern Minnesota has more exposures of bedrock at the surface
than any other part of the State (fig. 6). Erosion has exposed Middle Proterozoic volcanic and
igneous intrusive rocks including basalt, felsite, and rhyolite along the shore of Lake Superior.
Intrusive into these are rocks of the Middle Proterozoic Duluth Complex, composed primarily of
gabbro and anorthosite (fig.  4). The area covering most of northern Minnesota labelled "crystalline
rocks" on figure 4 is underlain by Precambrian rocks of the Canadian Shield, the core of the North
American continent. They comprise mainly metamorphic (metasedimentary and metavolcanic)
rocks and granites of Archean age, including the Giants Range and Vermilion Granites. Because
many of the volcanic rocks have undergone "greenschist-facies" metamorphism, the metavolcanic
complexes in this area are commonly referred to as  "greenstone belts". The northwestern corner of
the State is underlain by Ordovician carbonates (limestone and dolomite) and Jurassic redbeds.
       Iron-formation rocks (thick black lines in figures 4 and 5) include the Biwabik Iron
Formation in the Mesabi Range, the Gunflint Iron Formation in the Gunflint Range, and the
Trommald Iron Formation in the Cuyuna Range.  The iron-bearing rocks range from silicate-rich to
                                           IV-3    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-E

-------
                                                            0 to 25000
                                                            25001 to 50000
                                                            50001 to 100000
                                                            100001 to 500000
                                                            500001 to 1032431
Figure 2. Population of counties in Minnesota (1990 U.S. Census data).

-------
Figure 3.  Minnesota counties.

-------
              -,_!	I	
               !  Patchy Cretaceous
                 sandstone and clay
                                      Crystalline
                                         rocks
Crystalline rocks
                Patchy Cretaceous
              - - shale, sandstone,
                     and clay
                            >•  V—T
                             Paleozoic
                        ,    sandstone,
                       -~~~r  dolomite •<
                                       i
               Sioux Quartzite
                                   50    100km
                                   30    60 miles
Figure 4. Generalized bedrock geologic map of Minnesota (after Wright, 19725).

-------

                                                                                                                          EXPLANATION
                                                                                                                      Dominantly limestone and dolomite
                                                                                                                       with lesser  sandstone and shale
                                                                                                                       Dominantly sandstone and shale
                                                                                                                       with lesser limestone and dolomite
                                                                                                                         Dominantly quortzitic rocks
    |-'TEtt.oW MEOICHS1C-;
                                                      _.,   -
                                                                                                                          Psr,  sandstone and shale
                                                                                                                      Pvr, dominantly mafic volcanic rocks
                                                                                                                    Poa,  gabbroic and related plutonic rocks
                                                                                                                   Alkaline and alkollc intrusive rocks, undivided
                                                                                                                   Pv,   dominantly mafic to felsfc volcanic rocks
                                                                                                                    Ps,   dominantly metasedimentary rocks
                                                                                                                         Pif,    major iron -formation
                                                                                                                        Ag,   granitic rocks, undivided
                                                                                                                       Ami,   migmotitic rocks, undivided
                                                                                                                   Amg,  dominantly metasedimentary rocks
                                                                                                                     Amv.  dominantly metavolcanic rocks
  Orthogneiss and poragnefss;  locally
includes granitic rocks of  A  and  P
 age, and bedded rocks of   P  age
Figure 5.  Generalized bedrock geologic map of Minnesota (modified from Morey, 1981).

-------
                                     30
60  miles
                                     50
100 km
Figure 6. Map showing areas (shaded) in which bedrock is at the surface or covered by less than
15 m of glacial drift (after Morey, 1982).

-------
carbonate rich and they are mineralogically complex.  The term "taconite" is sometimes used to
describe iron-formation that contains economic quantities of magnetite. To the southeast of the
Mesabi Iron Range is an area of argillite, or weakly metamorphosed claystone or shale.  One of the
major rock units in this area is the Early Proterozoic Thomson Formation, which consists mainly
of intermixed graywacke, siltstone, and shale, and increases in degree of metamorphism to the
southwest (Keighin and others, 1972).
       The area of crystalline rocks to the south of the argillite area in figure 4 consists of Early
Proterozoic rocks of granitic composition (diorite, granodiorite, and quartz monzonite) and the
Archean-age McGrath Gneiss (Keighin and others, 1972; Sims, 1970). To the east of these rocks
are red-colored sandstone and interbedded shale of the Middle Proterozoic Hinckley and Fond du
lac Formations (Sims, 1970), and volcanic rocks, mostly basalt, along the Minnesota-Wisconsin
border just south of Lake Superior (figs. 4, 5). The area of crystalline rocks in west-central
Minnesota (fig. 4) consists of metamorphic and igneous rocks, including mafic (containing dark-
colored minerals such as hornblende) gneisses; mafic lavas and other metavolcanic rocks;
metasedimentary rocks such as graywacke, slate, metaconglomerate, and quartzite; and felsic
granites and gneisses (Sims, 1970).
       Most of the western and some of the northern part of Minnesota is underlain by Cretaceous
marine and nonmarine shale, sandstone, and minor limestone that overlie crystalline rocks.  In
northern Minnesota these rocks are called the Coleraine Formation, and in northwestern and
southwestern Minnesota they are called the Split Rock Creek Formation, and are equivalent to the
Dakota, Graneros, Greenhorn,  Carlisle, Niobrara, and Pierre Formations (Setterholm, 1990).
Small, localized outcrops of Cretaceous sandstone and shale also occur in the vicinity of Austin,
and in eastern Goodhue and western Wabasha Counties in southeastern Minnesota (fig. 5).
       In southwestern Minnesota the Cretaceous rocks form a discontinuous cover over older
metamorphic and igneous rocks.  One of these, the Early Proterozoic Sioux Quartzite, covers an
area from the southwestern corner of the State eastward to the Minnesota River (fig. 4).  The
quartzite typically consists of red  or pink, tightly silica-cemented, medium-grained quartz sand
containing occasional beds of conglomerate and mudstone (Southwick and others, 1986).
       The southeastern quarter of Minnesota is underlain by more than 300 m of carbonates,
primarily limestone  and dolomite; sandstone; and shale, ranging from Cambrian to Devonian in
age. Approximately 75 percent of the area shown as "Paleozoic sandstone and dolomite" in figure
4 is underlain by carbonate rocks. These rocks are the primary ground-water aquifers for much of
southeastern Minnesota (Lively and Southwick, 1981).
       Glacial geology: Pleistocene-age glacial drift covers most of Minnesota. The drift ranges
in thickness from zero in the northeastern and southeastern parts of the State (fig. 6) to as much as
150 m in the northwestern part (Ojakangas and Matsch, 1982). Glacial drift exposed at the
surface, most of which was deposited during the Wisconsinan glacial period, has been divided
into deposits of four major ice lobes that advanced at different times and moved in different
directions, from areas with different source lithologies (fig. 7). Each lobe experienced multiple
phases of ice advance, some of which overlapped with other lobes in time and space. In order of
roughly decreasing age, the major lobes are the Wadena, Rainy, Superior, and Des Moines.
Wadena lobe deposits are pre-late Wisconsinan in age, those of the other three lobes are of late
Wisconsinan age.
                                           IV-9     Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-E

-------
                                                     EXPLANATON
                                                        Glacial lake deposits


                                                        Des Moines lobe


                                                        Superior lobe


                                                        Rainy lobe



                                                        Wadena lobe


                                                        Pre-Wisconsinan

                                                        and bedrock
              &fe$:«s#K^ PV-,
              li-O^ar o }•. .. TV-?••-•%v  ' v !
                    !  -, ,,,?".
              '"• •.'. ""  '     4. s
              ^^•1.--?	J	H-LT ^ - '« — —•"

              '^A©^ ',r>_?
                           0    30    60  miles
                           I	h	h

                           0    50    100 km
Figure 7. Generalized map showing glacial deposits in Minnesota (after Hobbs and Goebel,

1982).

-------
       Drift of the Wadena lobe is exposed mainly in central Minnesota (fig. 7). The Wadena lobe
advanced southward from the north and northwest. Wadena drift is dominantly gray to buff-
colored, sandy, calcareous till derived from carbonate rocks of southern Manitoba and
northwestern Minnesota.
       The Rainy lobe moved from northeast to southwest. Rainy lobe drift covers parts of
northeastern and central Minnesota and varies in both color and constituent lithology. In the
northeast the drift is derived primarily from gabbro and basalt, giving it a gray color. Further west
the drift is light gray to light brown, reflecting a dominantly granite source. In central Minnesota,
Rainy lobe drift is derived mostly from metamorphic rocks and has a brown color resulting from
oxidation of the metamorphic rock fragments.
       The Superior lobe advanced from northeast to southwest in the eastern part of the State,
roughly parallel to the Rainy lobe. It deposited sandy red till containing sandstone and slate
pebbles with little or no carbonate or shale.
       Drift of the Des Moines lobe was primarily derived from Upper Cretaceous shales of
southern Manitoba, eastern North Dakota, and western Minnesota. Sublobes of the Des Moines
lobe moved eastward across northern Minnesota (the St. Louis sublobe) and southward to central
Iowa (main part of the Des Moines lobe). Till derived from the Des Moines lobe is generally gray
to buff, calcareous, and silty to clayey. Silty and clayey lacustrine deposits of Lake Agassiz cover
much of the Red River Valley in the northwestern part of the State (fig. 7). Pre-Wisconsinan
glacial deposits and Wisconsinan loess (included in the area labelled "Pre-Wisconsin") cover parts
of the southwestern and southeastern parts of the State (fig. 7).
       Uranium geology: Many areas in Minnesota are covered by rocks or sediments that contain
enough uranium (here defined as > 2.5 ppm U) to generate radon at levels of concern. Rocks of
the greenstone-granite terrane in northern Minnesota, labelled Ag, Amg, and Amv (fig. 5),
generally have low uranium contents, due in large part to their mafic compositions. Some of the
granite plutons in this area may have locally higher amounts of uranium. For example, some
migmatitic parts of the Vermilion  Granitic Complex contain up to 9 ppm U, probably due to
melting and mixing with older metasedimentary rocks (Morey,  1981).  Rocks in northeastern
Minnesota labelled Pvr, Pga, and  Psr in figure 5, which include the Duluth Complex, are
generally low in uranium.  The Thomson Formation in east-central Minnesota may contain uranium
in northwest-trending fracture zones and along the contact between the Thomson and Fond du Lac
Formations in Carlton and Pine Counties (fig. 5). Radioactivity anomalies in ground water derived
from the Hinckley Sandstone suggest that it may  contain uranium accumulation zones in the
vicinity of Mora (Morey, 1981). Metasedimentary rocks in northeastern Minnesota, labelled Ps in
figure 5, are generally low in uranium. The basal part of the Mille Lacs Group in northwestern
Pine County and Morrison County and phosphate-rich beds in the Thomson Formation may
contain locally elevated uranium concentrations.
       Rocks of central Minnesota and the  Minnesota River valley include gneisses labelled Amg
and Agn in figure 5.  These rocks  contain 1-10 ppm uranium, with higher concentrations (5-12
ppm) occurring in granitic pegmatites that traverse the gneisses (Morey, 1981). In northwestern
Pine County near Denham, anomalously high concentrations of uranium and radon occur in several
water wells (Morey and Lively, 1980; Lively and Southwick, 1981). The Sacred Heart Granite in
Redwood, Renville, and Yellow Medicine Counties contains 10-20 ppm U, and the St. Cloud
Granite contains an average of about 5 ppm U but locally contains as much as 12 ppm U (Morey,
1981).
                                         IV-ll    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-E

-------
        Upper Cretaceous sedimentary rocks in southeastern Minnesota and along the Red River
 Valley are labelled K in figure 5. These rocks contain a few (3-10?) ppm U on average, but locally
 as much as 20 ppm has been found in Cretaceous shale in the Red River Valley (Morey, 1981). Li
 general, tills derived from Cretaceous shale in the southern and western parts of the State contain
 more uranium than tills derived from metamorphic and other crystalline rocks in other parts of the
 State. Water from some wells sourced in the Sioux Quartzite, labelled Pq in southwestern
 Minnesota (fig. 5), contains anomalously high concentrations of uranium and radon, suggesting
 localized uranium enrichment, possibly along the unconformity at the base of the Sioux Quartzite
 (Morey, 1981).
        Cambrian (C), Devonian (D), and Ordovician (O) limestone, dolomite, and sandstone in
 southeastern Minnesota (fig. 5) are generally low in uranium, but these rocks contain small
 amounts of uranium-bearing heavy minerals that may be locally concentrated as the carbonate
 matrix dissolves away during weathering or development of solution features. Carbonate bedrock
 containing fractures or solution features, and soils developed on carbonate rocks, may generate
 sufficient radon to be of concern in some areas.

 SOILS

        Soils in Minnesota belong primarily to the great soil groups Alfisols, Entisols, and
 Histosols in northeastern and east-central Minnesota, and Mollisols in western and southern
 Minnesota (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1987).  Figure 8 is a
 generalized map of soil types. A generalized soil permeability map  (fig. 9) was compiled by the
 authors using Soil Conservation Service (SCS) soil surveys and a hydrogeologic map of the State
 (Kanivetsky,. 1979).  The soil permeabilities listed are for water, but gas permeability is generally
 similar to permeability to water if the soils are not excessively wet.
       About hah0 of the State is underlain by soils of moderate permeability (defined here as
 between 0.6 and 6.0 in/hr in percolation tests) (fig. 9). Low permeability (< 0.6 in/hr) soils are
 mainly those developed from glacial lake deposits in northern and western Minnesota. Soils
 developed on till of the Des Moines glacial lobe are low to moderate in permeability where the till is
 mainly derived from shale.  Cracking of clayey glacial soils during dry periods can significantly
 enhance permeability to gases.
       Much of the area shown in the moderate or high soil permeability category in northern
 Minnesota is wetland with seasonally or continuously saturated soils, so the permeability to soil
 gas in this area is low.  High permeability (> 6.0 in.hr) soils occur mainly in central Minnesota but
 are scattered across the State (fig. 9).  These soils are mainly derived from outwash of sandy tills,
 particularly those of the Rainy and Wadena lobes.

 INDOOR RADON DATA

       Screening indoor radon data from 919 homes tested in the State/EPA Residential Radon
 Survey of Minnesota conducted during the winter of 1987-88 are listed in Table 1 and shown in
 figure 10. These data represent short-term (2-7 day) screening indoor radon measurements using
 charcoal canisters. The sampling distribution was biased toward population centers, and some
 less-populated areas of the State are represented by inadequate or no samples. Only eight counties
 had more than 20 homes tested and only four counties had more than 50 homes tested (Table 1).
Data are only shown in Figure 10 for counties in which more than 5 homes were tested. Although
the data are insufficient to represent indoor radon levels across Minnesota at a statistically


                                          IV-12   Reprinted from USGS Open-FUe Report 93-292-E

-------
                                                .SCALE OF MILES
                                                20  40  60   BO  100
                                                       Coarse-fine prairie and organic
                                                       soils of glacial lake plain
                                                       Coarse-fine and organic soils
                                                       of glacial lake plain
                                                       Coarse-fine forest soils and
                                                       rock outcrops of N.E. Minn.
                                                       Fine textured forest soils of
                                                       east central Minnesota
                                                       Silty prairie soil of
                                                       southwestern Minnesota
                                                       Medium-fine prairie/prairie
                                                       border soils of western Minn.
                                                       Coarse-medium forest soils
                                                       from glacial outwash
                                                           Coarse-medium prairie soils
                                                         J from glacial outwash
                                                                medium text, forest
                                                                soils of M. Cdnt.Minn.
                                                                 Coarse-medim* forest
                                                                 soils of E.C«int'.Minn.
Coarse-fine forest soils of east
central Minnesota
Silty forest-prairie soils of
southeastern Minnesota
Medium-fine prairie/prairie
border soils SE0 Minnesota
                                          Medium-fine prairie border soils of
                                          central Minnesota
                                          Medium-fine prairie soils of south
                                          central Minnesota
                                    ^   ^)  Iron mines and dumps
Figure 8.  Generalized map of soil associations in Minnesota (modified from Belthuis, 1966).

-------
                                                          EXPLANATION

                                                        Soil Permeability (in/hr)

                                                            High (>6)


                                                       P\"-] Moderate (0.6-6)


                                                            Low (<0.6)
                            0
                            \-
30
60 miles
                                 50   100 km
Figure 9. Generalized soil permeability map of Minnesota, compiled by the authors from data in

Kanivetsky (1979) and SCS county soil surveys.

-------
                                                   Bsmt. & 1 st Floor Rn
                                                      %>4pCi/L
                                                           OtolO
                                                           11 to 20
                                                           21 to 40
                                                           41 to 60
                                                           61 to 80
                                                           81 to 100
                                                           Missing Data (< 5 measurements)
                                                           100 Miles
                                                  Bsmt. & 1st Floor Rn
                                              Average Concentration (pCi/L)

                                                 2 J3  0.0 to 1.9
                                              15 rvVI  2.0 to 4.0
                                          29           4.1 to 9.9
                                                    ]  Missing Data (< 5 measurements)
                                                          100 Miles
Figure 10.  Screening indoor radon data from the EPA/State Residential Radon Survey of Minnesota,
1987-88, for counties with 5 or more measurements.  Data are from 2-7 day charcoal canister tests.
Histograms in map legends show the number of counties in each category. The number of samples
in each county (see Table 1) may not be sufficient to statistically characterize the radon levels of the
counties, but they do suggest general trends. Unequal category intervals were chosen to provide
reference to decision and action levels.

-------
TABLE 1.  Screening indoor radon data from the EPA/State Residential Radon Survey of
Minnesota conducted during 1987-88. Data represent 2-7 day charcoal canister measurements
from the lowest level of each home tested.
COUNTY
AITKIN
ANOKA
BECKER
BELTRAMI
BENTON
BIG STONE
BLUE EARTH
BROWN
CARLTON
CARVER
CASS
CfflPPEWA
CfflSAGO
CLAY
CLEARWATER
COOK
COTTONWOOD
CROW WING
DAKOTA
DODGE
DOUGLAS
FARIBAULT
FILLMORE
FREEBORN
GOODHUE
HENNEPIN
HOUSTON
HUBBARD
ISANTI
ITASCA
JACKSON
KANABEC
KANDIYOffl
K1TTSON
KOOCfflCHING
LACQUIPARLE
LAKE
LAKE OF THE WOODJ
LESUEUR
LINCOLN
LYON
NO. OF
MEAS.
4
52
3
7
4
3
14
4
10
6
5
4
6
14
4
2
4
12
63
3
9
6
2
9
14
105
6
5
3
11
5
4
4
3
7
2
9
4
5
4
8
MEAN
2.1
3.0
3.3
4.0
3.8
4.9
7.7
5.8
3.0
7.3
4.5
7.1
3.7
8.9
3.1
2.1
5.1
3.1
4.7
6.1
5.5
2.8
2.9
9.5
8.8
4.6
5.3
2.7
2.9
3.0
8.9
4.0
8.6
4.1
1.6
13.7
1.9
5.2
5.7
9.9
6.9
GEOM.
MEAN
1.9
2.3
2.9
3.1
3.5
4.5
6.7
5.1
2.5
3.0
4.1
5.6
2.8
5.9
2.7
1.9
1.8
2.6
3.6
6.1
5.2
1.7
2.8
7.0
6.3
3.6
4.6
2.2
2.9
2.5
7.5
3.4
7.9
3.0
1.5
13.4
1.4
4.5
5.0
8.5
6.5
MEDIAN
2.2
2.3
4.3
4.6
2.9
5.0
6.9
5.4
2.8
7.2
4.0
8.6
3.3
7.9
3.4
2.1
4.7
2.7
4.3
5.7
5.5
2.9
2.9
6.3
5.3
3.9
4.2
2.8
3.0
2.5
8.4
3.2
9.0
4.5
1.4
13.7
1.3
3.8
4.2
9.3
6.2
STD.
DEV.
0.8
2.0
1.9
2.1
1.9
2.3
3.7
3.3
1.6
6.1
2.0
3.9
2.7
7.5
1.6
0.9
4.9
1.9
3.6
1.0
1.7
1.9
0.5
9.3
10.5
3.5
2.8
1.6
0.7
2.3
5.2
2.7
3.9
3.0
0.6
3.3
2.1
3.4
3.8
5.9
2.5
MAXIMUM
2.9
8.1
4.5
. 6.3
6.6
7.2
14.3
10.1
5.6
14.7
7.4
10.0
8.1
26.6
4.8
2.7
11.1
6.7
21.2
7.2
7.8
5.2
3.2
32.6
43.5
23.6
9.0
4.6
3.6
9.4
15.3
7.9
12.3
6.9
2.8
16.0
7.1
10.1
12.5
17.5
12.0
%>4 pCi/L
0
27
67
71
25
67
86
50
30
67
40
75
50
57
25
0
50
42
52
100
78
33
0
78
71
45
50
20
0
18
80
25
100
67
0
100
11
50
60
75
100
%>20pCi/L
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
11
7
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

-------
TABLE 1 (continued).  Screening indoor radon data for Minnesota.
COUNTY
MAHNOMEN
MARSHALL
MARTIN
MCLEOD .
MEEKER
MILLELACS
MORRISON
MOWER
MURRAY
NICOLLET
NOBLES
NORMAN
OLMSTED
OTTER TAIL
PENNINGTON
PINE
PIPESTONE
POLK
POPE
RAMSEY
REDWOOD
RENVILLE
RICE
ROCK
ROSEAU
SCOTT
SHERBURNE
SIBLEY
ST. LOUIS
STEARNS
STEELE
STEVENS
SW1F1'
TODD
TRAVERSE
WABASHA
WADENA
WASECA
WASHINGTON •
WATONWAN
WDLKIN
WINONA
WRIGHT
YELLOW MEDICINE
NO. OF
MEAS.
1
9
7
13
5
2
9
13
1
4
3
3
23
8
3
6
4
4
2
32
5
3
11
2
14
13
8
4
116
25
10
2
4
3
4
7
5
4
46
3
1
13
13
2
MEAN
3.9
9.9
4.3
5.8
3.7
3.1
3.1
7.1
12.1
9.7
7.1
3.8
4.3
5.2
3.3
2.1
6.9
5.1
3.6
3.6
8.5
4.6
6.9
5.0
4.3
7.5
3.2
3.8
3.1
4.9
5.6
6.3
2.9
5.0
8.2
6.9
3.3
3.1
4.7
9.9
9.3
6.1
5.8
3.3
GEOM.
MEAN
3.9
3.3
2.6
2.8
3.4
1.7
2.9
4.9
12.1
8.7
6.9
2.7
3.4
3.8
1.9
1.9
5.4
3.9
3.6
3.0
6.3
4.2
5.9
3.7
3.5
4.9
3.0
3.5
2.2
4.0
4.9
6.0
2.7
4.4
6.2
5.6
2.7
1.5
3.5
9.3
9.3
4.3
4.9
3.3
MEDIAN
3.9
1.5
4.1
2.8
3.2
3.1
3.0
6.4
12.1
9.5
6.2
1.6
3.2
3.5
3.7
1.7
6.9
4.7
3.6
3.3
7.4
5.8
5.6
5.0
3.6
4.3
3.0
4.4
2.0
5.0
4.8
6.3
2.7
6.0
5.4
8.4
3.2
1.3
3.8
10.2
9.3
4.7
5.1
3.3
STD.
DEV.
0.0
16.2
3.6
7.0
2.1
3.7
1.1
6.2
0.0
4.8
2.3
3.8
3.0
4.5
2.8
1.1
4.7
3.8
0.3
2.3
7.3
2.2
4.6
4.8
3.1
7.5
1.2
1.6
3.7
3.2
2.9
2.5
1.4
2.5
7.6
3.7
1.7
4.2
4.0
4.1
0.0
4.1
3.7
0.6
MAXIMUM
3.9
48.2
9.2
25.4
7.2
5.7
4.9
24.0
12.1
15.7
9.7
8.1
11.2
12.6
5.8
4.1
12.1
9.6
3.8
10.1
20.7
6.0
19.0
8.4
11.4
25.2
5.1
5.0
32.2
14.5
10.6
8.0
4.8
6.8
19.3
11.5
4.8
9.3
20.4
13.8
9.3
11.8
15.9
3.7
%>4 pCi/L
0
33
57
38
20
50
22
62
100
100
100
33
43
38
33
17
75
50
0
31
60
67
82
50
36
54
25
50
18
52
60
100
25
67
50
71
40
25
46
100
100
69
69
0
%>20 pCi/L
0
22
0
8
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0

-------
significant level, and any interpretations based on these data should not be considered definitive,
they do indicate trends related to geology, soils, and other factors.
       Overall, 44 percent of the homes in this screening survey had indoor radon levels that
exceeded 4 pCi/L. The maximum level recorded in this survey was 48.2 pCi/L in Marshall
County. With the exception of Faribault and Meeker Counties, average indoor radon
concentrations are consistently greater than 4 pCi/L in all counties with 5  measurements or more
south of a northwest-southeast trending line from Clay County to Dakota and Washington
Counties (fig. 10). Cass, Marshall, and Roseau Counties also have average indoor radon levels
greater than 4 pCi/L (fig. 10). The same general trend is seen in the percentage of homes tested in
each county that had indoor radon levels greater than 4 pCi/L (fig. 10). Note that although
Fairbault County had an average indoor radon level of 2.7 pCi/L, 33 percent of the homes
measured in the county had levels exceeding 4 pCi/L (fig. 10; Table 1). The central part of the
State has generally moderate (2-4 pCi/L) average radon levels, though some counties have low
(<2 pCi/L) and high (>4 pCi/L) average indoor radon levels (fig. 10).
       In general, northeastern Minnesota is characterized by low to moderate indoor radon levels.
Most of the counties in the northeastern part of the State have average indoor radon levels less than
3 pCi/L, with the exception of St. Louis County (3.1 pCi/L).  Data from counties in the Red River
Valley and other areas underlain by deposits of glacial Lake Agassiz are scarce, but this area may
have generally high  indoor radon levels as indicated by data from Clay, Marshall, and Roseau
Counties, which each have average indoor radon levels exceeding 4 pCi/L (fig. 10).

GEOLOGIC RADON POTENTIAL

       An aerial radiometric map of Minnesota (fig. 11) corresponds fairly well with patterns of
surficial units. The highest values of equivalent uranium (eTJ) are associated with Lake Agassiz
sediments in the Red River Valley along the Minnesota-North Dakota state line, with loess and
areas of thin glacial  cover or exposed bedrock in the southeast and southwest corners of the State,
and with some Des Moines lobe deposits in southwestern Minnesota (figs. 7,11).  Low eU values
are associated with glacial deposits derived from metavolcanic and metasedimentary rocks in the
northeast and north-central parts of the State. Some of the lowest eU values (near zero ppm eU)
are associated with wetlands in northern Minnesota, particularly in the Red Lake-Lake of the
Woods area (fig. 11). The eU pattern is consistent with the surficial geology within the State,
although the radiometric signature of the State as a whole appears lower than expected compared to
indoor and soil-gas radon, and compared with the radiometric signature of non-glaciated areas on a
national scale (see Duval and others, 1989). Recent studies (for example, Lively and others, 1991;
Schumann and others, 1991) suggest that radium in some near-surface soil horizons may have
been leached and transported downward in the soil profile, giving lower surface radiometric
signatures while generating significant radon at depth (1-2 m? or greater), as indicated by measured
soil-gas radon concentrations, to produce elevated indoor radon levels. In general, soils can
develop more rapidly on glacial deposits than on bedrock, because crushing and grinding of the
rocks by glaciers can enhance soil weathering processes (Jenny, 1935). Glacial crushing reduces
the grain size of rock fragments, enhancing radon emanation by increasing the surface area-to-
volume ratio of the grains, and enhances radionuclide mobility by exposing uranium on grain
surfaces where it can be more readily leached by oxidizing ground water. In addition, some
poorly-sorted glacial drift may have higher permeability than the bedrock from which it is derived,
allowing enhanced radon migration through the soil.  Cracking of clayey glacial soils during dry
                                          IV-18    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-E

-------
Figure 11. Aerial radiometric map of Minnesota (after Duval and others, 1989). Contour lines at
     1.5 and 2.5 ppm equivalent uranium (eU). Pixels shaded from 0 to 6.0 ppm eU at 0.5 ppm elJ
    increments; darker pixels have lower eU values; white indicates no data.

-------
 periods can create secondary permeability and allow convective radon transport to occur. This
 could be an important factor associated with elevated radon levels in areas of clay-rich glacial
 deposits.
       Glacial lake deposits are likely to generate elevated indoor radon levels. Clays and silts of
 Lake Agassiz, in the Red River Valley, are known to generate elevated radon in homes and in soil
 gas in Manitoba (Grasty, 1989) and North Dakota (Schumann and others,  1991). Clay-rich glacial
 deposits of the Des Moines lobe have a high radon potential where they contain fragments of
 Cretaceous shale as major constituents. Des Moines lobe deposits cover most of southern
 Minnesota, although the shale content decreases eastward. Areas underlain by deposits of the St.
 Louis sublobe of the Des Moines lobe in north-central Minnesota, tills of the Superior and Rainy
 lobes in northeastern Minnesota, and by mafic crystalline bedrock in northern Minnesota have
 moderate radon potential because of the overall lower uranium content of the mafic source rocks.
 Deposits derived from felsic source rocks may have locally higher U contents.  In either case,
 however, the sandy tills derived from these rocks have higher permeability than the clayey glacial
 deposits in western and southern Minnesota (suggested by limited measurements of soil-gas radon
 and soil permeability by Schumann and others, 1991), allowing building foundations to draw on a
 relatively large soil source volume, producing moderately elevated (generally 2-10 pCi/L) indoor
 radon levels (fig. 10).
       Areas underlain by Wadena lobe deposits in the central part of the State have high geologic
 radon potential. These deposits are derived from carbonate rocks, shale, sandstone, and granitic
 rocks and have low to locally elevated uranium contents and moderate to high soil permeability.
 The higher radon potential of Wadena lobe deposits compared to other glacial deposits in
 northeastern Minnesota may be due to a slightly different bedrock source for the Wadena lobe
 deposits or to mixing with Des Moines lobe deposits. Areas of limestone bedrock, thin glacial
 cover, pre-Wisconsinan glacial deposits, and Wisconsinan loess in the southeast and southwest
 corners of Minnesota also have high radon potential. These areas are underlain by Sioux Quartzite
 in the southwest and Qrdovician carbonates in the southeast, both of which may contain localized
 concentrations of uranium (see the uranium section of this chapter).
       Elevated radon in ground water may be a source of indoor radon for some homes obtaining
 their water from domestic wells. The Minnesota Geological Survey tested radon concentrations in
 1,975 private water wells from seven areas in the State in which geologic factors were thought to
 be favorable for uranium accumulation (Lively and Southwick, 1981). Of these samples, about 90
 percent contained less than 2000 pCi/L radon, about 10 percent contained 2000-10,000 pCi/L, and
 about one percent exceeded 10,000 pCi/L. The highest radon level of the wells tested in the study
 was 26,000 pCi/L in east-central Minnesota  (Lively and Southwick, 1981). In general, most of
 the water samples with elevated radon levels were obtained from wells finished in bedrock in east-
 central Minnesota (primarily in Carlton, Pine, Aitkin, and Kanabec Counties).  About 100 of the
 wells tested in this area (11 percent) had radon levels in excess of 2000 pCi/L, and of these, more
 than 90 percent were finished in bedrock. Seventeen percent of the wells tested in the Sanborn-
Jeffers test area, in Brown and Cottonwood Counties, also had radon levels greater than 2000
pCi/L (Lively .and Southwick, 1981). In the remaining 5 test areas, fewer than 5 percent of the
wells within in each area had radon concentrations exceeding 2000 pCi/L.
                                          IV-20    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-E

-------
SUMMARY

       For this assessment, Minnesota was divided into six geologic radon potential areas
(fig. 12) and each area assigned Radon Index (RI) and Confidence Index (CI) rankings (Table 2).
Area GLA (Glacial Lake Agassiz) has a high radon potential (RI=15) with high confidence
(CI=10). Area WL (deposits of the Wadena lobe in central Minnesota) has a high (RI=14) radon
potential with high confidence (CI=10). Area DML (deposits of the Des Moines lobe in southern
Minnesota, which also includes some Wadena lobe and glacial lake deposits) has a high radon
potential (RI=14) with high confidence (CI=10). Two Geologic Field Evidence (GFE) points
were added to the scores for areas GLA, WL, and DML in light of reports of field studies showing
that significant levels of soil-gas radon are generated in these areas (Lively and others, 1991;
Schumann and others, 1991). Area PW (pre-Wisconsinan glacial deposits, which also includes
outcrops of Sioux Quartzite in southwestern Minnesota, Ordovician carbonate bedrock in the
southeastern part of the State, and loess in both areas) has a high radon potential (RI=12) and a
moderate confidence index (CI=9). Area GDV (glacial deposits derived primarily from volcanic
rocks) is underlain by metavolcanic bedrock and deposits of the Superior and Rainy lobes in
northeastern Minnesota, and by a relatively small area of Des Moines lobe deposits (mainly
deposits of the Grantsburg sublobe) in east-central Minnesota (compare figures 12 and 7) which
appear to have properties similar to surrounding Superior lobe deposits. Area GDV has a moderate
radon potential (RI=10) with moderate confidence (CI=9). Area SLS (deposits of the St. Louis
sublobe in northern Minnesota) has a moderate radon potential (RI=10) with a moderate confidence
index (CI=7).  The confidence index rating of 1 for the indoor radon data is due to the scarcity of
indoor radon data in this area.
       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 that 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 radori 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-21    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-E

-------
 TABLE 2. Radon Index (RI) and Confidence Index (CI) scores for geologic radon potential areas
 of Minnesota. See figure 12 for locations and abbreviations of areas.
                                    AREA
FACTOR
INDOOR RADON
RADIOACTIVITY
GEOLOGY
SOIL PERM.
ARCHITECTURE
GFE POINTS
TOTAL
GLA
RI CI
3 3
3 2
3 3
1 2
3
+2
15 10
WL
RI CI
3 3
1 2
3 3
2 2
3
+2
14 10
DML
RI CI
3 3
1 2
3 3
2 2
3
+2
14 10
       RANKING HIGH  HIGH
HIGH  HIGH
HIGH  HIGH
FACTOR
INDOOR RADON
RADIOACTIVITY
GEOLOGY
SOIL PERM.
ARCHITECTURE
GFE POINTS
TOTAL
PW
RI CI
3 3
2 2
2 2
2 2
3
0
12 9
GDV
RI CI
2
1
2
2
3
0
10
3
2
2
2
—
—
9
SLS
RI CI
2 1
1 2
2 2
2 2
3
0
10 7
       RANKING  HIGH  MOD
MOD  MOD
MOD  MOD
RADON INDEX SCORING:
Radon potential catesorv
LOW
MODERATE/VARIABLE
HIGH
Point ranee
3-8 points
9- 11 points
> 1 1 points
Probable screening indoor
radon average for area
< 2 pCi/L
2-4pCi/L
> 4 pCi/L
                         Possible range of points = 3 to 17

CONFIDENCE INDEX SCORING:
         LOW CONFIDENCE
         MODERATE CONFIDENCE
         HIGH CONFIDENCE
       4-6 points
       7-9 points
       10 -12 points
                         Possible range of points = 4 to 12
                                    IV-22   Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-E

-------
                                    30
60 miles
                                     50
100 km
Figure 12. Geologic radon potential areas of Minnesota.  GLA, glacial Lake Agassiz; SLS,
deposits of the St Louis sublobe of Des Moines lobe; GDV, glacial deposits derived primarily
from volcanic rocks;  WL, deposits of the Wadena lobe; DML, deposits of the Des Moines lobe;
PW, pre-Wisconsinan deposits (includes Wisconsinan loess and older bedrock).  Dark shading
indicates high radon potential; lighter shading indicates moderate or variable radon potential.
See Table 2 for radon index and confidence index rankings.

-------
                         REFERENCES USED IN THIS REPORT
        AND GENERAL REFERENCES PERTAINING TO RADON IN MINNESOTA

 Adams, J.A.S., 1972, Emanation characteristics of rocks, soils and Rn-222 loss effect on the
        U-Pb system discordance, in Development of Remote Methods for Obtaining Soil
        Information and Location of Construction Materials Using Gamma Ray Signatures for
        Project THEMIS: Rice Univ., Dep. Geol., Annual Report, U.S. Army Eng. Waterways
        Experiment. Station, p. 1-157.

 Belthuis, Lyda, 1966, Minnesota in Maps: Duluth, University of Minnesota, 78 p.

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

 Grasty, R.L., 1989, The relationship of geology and gamma-ray spectrometry to radon in homes:
        EOS, v. 70, p. 496.

 Hobbs, H.C., and Goebel, J.E., 1982, Quaternary geologic map of Minnesota:  Minnesota
       Geological Survey Map S-l, scale 1:500,000.

 Jenny, H., 1935, The clay content of the soil as related to climatic factors, particularly temperature:
       Soil Science, v. 40, p.  111-128.

 Kanivetsky, Roman, 1979, Hydrogeologic Map of Minnesota: Quaternary Hydrogeology:
       Minnesota Geological Survey Map S-3, scale 1:500,000.

 Keighin, C.W., Morey, G.B., and Goldich, S.S.,  1972, East-central Minnesota, in Sims,  P.K.,
       and Morey,  G.B. (eds), Geology of Minnesota: A centennial volume: St. Paul, MN,
       Minnesota Geological Survey, p. 240-255.

 Lively, R.S. and Morey, G.B.,  1980, Hydrogeochemical distribution of uranium and radon in
       east-central  Minnesota:  Eos, Transactions, American Geophysical Union, v. 61, p.  1192 .

 Lively, R.S. and Morey, G.B.,  1982, Hydrogeochemical distribution of uranium and radon in
       east-central  Minnesota, in Perry, E. C., Jr., and Montgomery, C. W. (eds), Isotope
       studies  of hydrologic processes; selected papers from a symposium: De Kalb, JJL,
       Northern Illinois University Press, p. 91-107.

 Lively, R.S. and Southwick, D.L., 1981, Radon activity in ground  waters of seven test areas in
       Minnesota:  Minnesota Geological Survey Report of Investigations 25,60 p.

Lively, Richard, Steck, Daniel, and Brasaemle, Bruce, 1991, A site study of soil characteristics
       and soil gas radon in Rochester, Minnesota: Center for Urban and Regional Affairs report
       CURA  91-2, 15 p.

Morey, G.B., 1976,  Geologic map of Minnesota, bedrock geology:  Minnesota Geological Survey
       Miscellaneous Map Series Map M-24, scale 1:3,168,000.
                                        IV-24    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-E

-------
Morey, G.B., 1981, Geologic terranes of Minnesota and their uranium potential: Minnesota
       Geological Survey Information Circular 19,40 p.

Morey, G.B., 1982, Geologic map of Minnesota, bedrock outcrops: Minnesota Geological
       Survey State Map Series Map S-10, scale 1:3,168,000.

Morey, G.B., and Lively, R.S., 1980, Detailed geochemical survey for east-central Minnesota,
       geology and geochemistry of selected uranium targets: U.S. Department of Energy Open-
       File Report GJBX-60(80) [K/UR-32], 178  p.

Ojakangas, R.W., and Matsch, C.L. ,1982, Minnesota's geology:  Minneapolis, Minn.,
       University of Minnesota Press, 255 p.

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.

Schwartz, G.M., and Thiel, G.A., 1963, Minnesota's rocks and waters: Minnesota Geological
       Survey Bulletin 37, 366 p.

Setterholm, D.R., 1990, Geologic maps of the Late Cretaceous rocks, southwestern Minnesota:
       Minnesota Geological Survey Miscellaneous Map Series Map M-69, scale 1:750,000.

Sims, P.K., 1970, Geologic map of Minnesota:  Bedrock geology:  Minnesota Geological Survey
       Miscellaneous Map M-14, scale 1:1,000,000.

Sims, P.K., and Morey,. G.B., 1972, Resume of geology of Minnesota, in Sims, P.K., and
       Morey, G.B. (eds), Geology of Minnesota:  A centennial volume: St. Paul, Minn.,
       Minnesota Geological Survey, p. 3-17.

Southwick, D.L. and Lively, R.S., 1984, Hydrogeochemical anomalies associated with the basal
       contact of the Sioux Quartzite along the north margin of the Cottonwood County basin, in
       D.L. Southwick (ed), Shorter contributions to the geology of the Sioux Quartzite (early
       Proterozoic), southwestern Minnesota:  Minnesota Geological Survey Report of
       Investigations 32, p. 45-58.

Southwick, D.L., Morey, G.B., and Mossier, J.H., 1986, Fluvial origin of the lower Proterozoic
       Sioux Quartzite, southwestern Minnesota: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 97,
       p.  1432-1441.

Steck, D.J., 1987 , Geological variation of radon sources and indoor radon concentrations along
       the southwestern edge of the Canadian Shield: Health Physics, v. 52, p. S40.
                                         IV-25    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-E

-------
Steck, D.J., 1988 , Geological variation of radon sources and indoor radon along the southwestern
       edge of the Canadian Shield, in M.A. Marikos and R.H. Hansman (ed), Geologic causes
       of natural radionuclide anomalies: Proceedings of GEORAD conference St Louis, MO,
       United States Apr. 21-22,1987, Missouri Department of Natural Resources Special
       Publication 4, p. 17-23.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, 1987, Soils: U.S. Geological Survey
       National Atlas sheet 38077-BE-NA-07M-00, scale 1:7,500,000.

Wright, H.E., Jr., 1972a, Physiography of Minnesota, in Sims, P.K., and Morey, G.B. (eds),
       Geology of Minnesota: A centennial volume: St. Paul, Minn., Minnesota Geological
       Survey, p. 561-578.

Wright, H.E., Jr., 1972b, Quaternary history of Minnesota, m Sims, P.K., and Morey, G.B.
       (eds), Geology of Minnesota:  A centennial volume:  St. Paul, Minn., Minnesota
       Geological Survey, p. 515-547.

Wright, H.E., Jr., and Ruhe, R.V., 1965, Glaciation of Minnesota and Iowa, in Wright, H.E.,
       Jr., and Frey, D.G. (eds.), The Quaternary of the United States: Princeton, NJ, Princeton
       University Press, p. 29-41.
                                         IV-26    Reprinted from USGS Open-File Report 93-292-E

-------
                            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.)
MINNESOTA MAP OF RADON ZONES

       The Minnesota Map of Radon Zones and its supporting documentation (Part IV of this
report) have received extensive review by Minnesota geologists and radon program experts.
The map for Minnesota 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.
       Five county designations do not strictly follow the methodology for adapting the
geologic provinces to county boundaries.  EPA  and the Minnesota Department of Health have
decided to include Pennington, Mahnomen, Becker, Sherburne  and  Kanabec counties as Zone
1 counties. Supplemental measurement data from local  American Lung Association affiliate
indicate that homes  in these counties have an indoor radon potential above the EPA's action
level of 4 pCi/L.
       Although the information provided in Part IV of this report  — the State chapter entitled
"Preliminary Geologic Radon Potential Assessment of Minnesota" — 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 5 EPA office or the
Minnesota radon program for information on testing and fixing homes.  Telephone numbers
and addresses can be found in Part II of this report.
                                         V-l

-------

-------

-------

-------