EMSL-LV-0539-13 EMSL-LV-0539-13
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE RADIOACTIVITY SURVEY,
NEVADA TEST SITE ENVIRONS
by
Monitoring Operations Division
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
Published April 1978
This surveillance performed under a Memorandum of
Understanding No. EY-76-A-08-0539
for the
U..S. ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United
States Government. Neither the United States nor the United States Energy
Research and Development Administration, nor any of their employees, nor any
of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, make any warranty,
express or implied, or assume any legal liability or responsibility for the
accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product
or process disclosed, or represent that its use would not infringe privately-
owned rights.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical
Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
PRICE: PAPER COPY $4.00 MICROFICHE $3.00
-------
EMSL-LV-0539-13 EMSL-LV-0539-13
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE RADIOACTIVITY SURVEY,
NEVADA TEST SITE ENVIRONS
by
Vernon E. Andrews and Jack C. Vandervort
Monitoring Operations Division
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
Published April 1978
This surveillance performed under a Memorandum of
Understanding No. EY-76-A-08-0539
for the
U. S. ENERGY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
-------
Effective October 1, 1977, the U.S. Energy Research and Development
Administration was designated the U.S. Department of Energy. Prior to
January 19, 1975, the U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration
was designated as the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission.
11
-------
ABSTRACT
During the 1974 growing season, the Environmental Monitoring and Support
Laboratory-Las Vegas, of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, collected
samples of fruits and vegetables grown in the off-site area surrounding the
Nevada Test Site. The objective was to estimate the potential radiological
dose to off-site residents from consumption of locally grown foodstuffs.
Irrigation water and soil were collected from the gardens and orchards sampled.
Soil concentrations of cesium-137 and plutonium-239 reflected the effects of
close-in fallout from nuclear testing at the Nevada Jest Site. The only radio-
nuclide measured in fruit and vegetable samples which might be related to such
fallout was strontium-90, for which the first year estimated dose to bone marrow
of an adult with an assumed rate of consumption of the food would be 0.14 millirad.
m
-------
CONTENTS
Page
Abstract iii
List of Figures v
List of Tables v
Acknowledgements vi
Introduction 1
Sample Collection " 2
Sample Analysis 3
Discussion 13
Conclusions and Recommendations 13
References 15
Appendices 16
iv
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Number Page
1 Sample Collection Locations 5
2 Background Sample Origins 6
3 Cs-137 in Soil, Cumulative Frequency Distributions 8
LIST OF TABLES
Number Page
1 Sample Collection Summary 4
2 Background Sample Summary 6
3 Summary of 137Cs-in-Soil 9
4 Summary of 239Pu-in-Soil 11
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We are indebted to, and gratefully acknowledge the support of, the many
off-site residents for their enthusiastic support of this study. As anyone
who has ever gardened in the desert can testify, it is not without personal
sacrifice that these people have provided samples of several kilograms each
of their produce. Without their participation the study would not have been
possible.
-------
INTRODUCTION
When the decision was made in December 1950 to use the area now known as
the Nevada Test Site (NTS) for relatively low yield atmospheric nuclear detona-
tions, the most important factor considered was public safety. The low popula-
tion density existing at that time has changed little in 25 years. Outside of
the metropolitan Las Vegas complex southeast of the NTS, the sparse population
is located in a few small towns and on widely scattered ranches.
With the NTS off-site area composed primarily of Basin Range Desert and
Mojave Desert systems, truck farming is almost nonexistent and only a few
small dairies are operated. The majority of the foodstuffs consumed are pro-
duced well outside the immediate off-site area and so are unaffected by close-
in fallout from nuclear testing at the NTS. However, a number of families in
the area maintain milk cows for family use and grow home gardens.
From January 1951 until the moratorium on nuclear weapons testing which
began in October 1958, atmospheric nuclear testing resulted in the deposition
of fallout radioactivity in most of the off-site area. Since nuclear testing
resumed in September 1961, all detonations have been underground except for the
four small atmospheric tests of Dominic II in 1962. Occasional accidental
releases from underground tests have occurred and several planned small releases
of radioactivity resulted from Plowshare cratering experiments. Because of pre-
shot safety planning, the majority of the fallout was deposited in unpopulated
or sparsely populated areas.
The off-site radiological safety program, conducted first by the U.S. Public
Health Service and later by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through
the Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory in Las Vegas (EMSL-LV), has
monitored public radiation exposure since 1954. Steps have been taken, when
necessary, to reduce exposures to the residents. Monitoring emphasis has been on
measurement of airborne radioactivity, whole-body external gamma exposure, and
measurement of radionuclides in milk and water. Occasional samples of locally
grown produce indicated that it contributed a negligible fraction of the radia-
tion dose to the off-site residents.
With the success in controlling releases of radioactivity from the NTS since
January 1971, it was believed that the majority of radiation exposure levels above
background would be due to fallout deposited prior to that time. The possibility
existed that uptake of old fallout by locally grown crops might contribute to a
measurable portion of the current population dose. It was decided, therefore, to
conduct a one-time intensive survey of radioactivity levels in locally grown fruits
and vegetables during 1974 to assess the potential contribution of these foods to
the radiation dose.
grains
The plan was to collect samples of edible root crops, leafy vegetables,
3-v.ins, and fruits, plus garden soil and irrigation water. Prior to the 1974
growing season, off-site residents were contacted to determine gardening
practices and arrange for collection of sufficient sample material for mean-
ingful analyses. In some cases, additional plantings were necessary to provide
-------
enough of a given crop. In all cases, excellent cooperation was given by
the off-site residents contacted, and without their assistance the project
could not have been carried out.
The intent was to perform a general analysis for gamma-emitting radio-
nuclides plus radiochemical analyses for isotopes of strontium and plutonium,
iron-55 (^5Fe), and tritium on selected samples. Because of unexpected ana-
lytical problems, plutonium and 55Fe results for fruits and vegetables are
not included in this report.
This report describes the sampling and analytical procedures used, the
results of sample analysis, and the conclusions reached on the basis of those
results.
SAMPLE COLLECTION
SAMPLING METHODS
Crops from selected gardens and orchards in the off-site area were hand-
picked by EPA representatives. In general, all samples were logged and tagged
in the field at the time of collection. Although the actual sample sizes
varied slightly, based upon availability at some locations, an attempt was
made to obtain 4 kilograms (kg) of each crop sampled. Root crops were collect-
ed by removing the portion above ground with clippers or knife and removing
the root and its surrounding soil with a coring tool. After separating the
soil from the root, the root and soil were bagged separately. When it was
not possible to collect sufficient root or leaf crop sample of one type, com-
posites of two similar crops were collected. Sweet corn was shucked in the
field. Fruit crops were picked at random from the applicable orchards. Crop
irrigation water was collected at the point of distribution in 4-litre con-
tainers. Surface soil samples were also collected in gardens and orchards
using a 10- by 10- by 5-centimetre (cm) deep scoop. Duplicate soil samples
were collected at 10 locations to assess the variability in soil sampling.
Alfalfa was collected as a reference crop at the six sampling locations where
it was grown.
SAMPLE LOCATIONS
Samples were collected from 26 home gardens and orchards representing 19
areas. Multiple sites were sampled in some areas to obtain as wide a variety
of sample types as possible. In many areas represented by only a single-family
ranch, prior contact with the residents made it possible to assure planting of
most vegetable types of interest or planting of a sufficient quantity of each
type to permit sampling. Sampling locations and types of samples collected at
each location in the NTS off-site area are listed in Table 1. Azimuths and
distances are measured from the NTS Control Point (CP). The CP is located near
the geographic center of the atmospheric test areas. The locations are plotted
in Figure 1, keyed to Table 1 by sampling location number. As shown in Figure
1, the majority of the sampling locations are in the northeast quadrant. Sam-
pling was concentrated in that area because it had most often been downwind
from nuclear tests at the NTS. Also, beyond the California border to the
southwest lie Death Valley and the Panamint Range where no known gardening is
practiced.
-------
During the sample collection period in the off-site area, background veg-
etable and fruit samples, representing worldwide fallout, were purchased from
a retail supermarket in Las Vegas. The sample types and origins are listed in
Table 2. Figure 2 shows the approximate origins of the background samples.
SAMPLE ANALYSIS
ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
Because the interest of the project was to assess the potential for in-
gestion of radionuclides in the locally grown produce, the food samples were
prepared for analysis as they would have been in the kitchen. In general,
samples were washed, peeled when appropriate, and allowed to dry. Corn was
cut from the cob before analysis.
All samples—food, water, and soil—were initially analyzed for gamma-
emitting nuclides by gamma spectroscopy using a 10.2- by 10.2-cm thallium-
activated sodium iodide crystal and 400-channel pulse height analyzer.
Moisture was removed from fruit and vegetable samples by freeze drying.
The recovered water from 25 off-site samples and 10 background samples was
distilled and analyzed for tritium (3H) by liquid scintillation. The dried
samples were analyzed for strontium-89 and -90 (89>90Sr) and plutonium-238 and
-239 (238»239Pu).
Soil samples were dried in air and analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides
on a gamma spectrometer. The samples were screened to 10-mesh (2-millimetre
screen opening) and oven dried. A 10-gram (g) aliquot of the fraction passing
the 10-mesh screen was analyzed for 23*»239Pu, a 1-g aliquot was analyzed for
89>90Sr, and eight samples were analyzed for 55Fe using either a 1-g or 10-g
aliquot. The potassium (K) content was determined from the naturally occurring
lt°K by gamma spectroscopy.
After the water samples had been gamma scanned, a 200-millilitre (ml)
aliquot was removed and evaporated to dryness. The residue was counted on a
low-background, thin-window, gas-flow proportional counter for gross alpha and
gross beta radioactivity. A 5-ml aliquot of water was distilled and counted
in a liquid scintillation counter for 3H. In several cases a 250-ml aliquot
was concentrated by electrolysis to enrich the sample in 3H and counted by
liquid scintillation for 3H. In the first method the detection limit was about
300 picocuries per litre (pCi/1). By the enrichment method the detection limit
was about 7 pCi/1.
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
SOIL SAMPLES
Results of all soil sample analyses are listed in Appendix 1. Because of
unexpected analytical difficulties, only eight samples were analyzed for 55Fe.
On the initial analysis using 1 g of soil, all results were below the detection
limit of 4 pCi/g. Four of these samples, from Alamo (locations 1 and 2), Hiko
(13), and Lathrop Wells (15), were reanalyzed using 10 g of soil. Samples 1
and 2 contained 0.7 and 0.6 pCi/g, respectively. The others were below the
detectable limit of 0.5 pCi/g.
-------
TABLE 1. SAMPLE COLLECTION SUMMARY
AZIMUTH,
LOCATION DISTANCE
NO. (Nevada) (Dea. km)3
1 Alamo 058°, 92
2 Alamo 058°, 92
3 Alamo 058°, 92
4 Ash Springs 052°, 95
5 Ash Springs 052°, 95
6 Ash Springs 052°, 95
7 Adaven 018°, 138
8 Beatty 267°, 61
9 Clark Station 340°, 138
10 Currant 015°, 182
11 Goldfield 307°, 137
12 Hiko 045°, 105
13 Hiko 045°, 105
14 Indian Springs 138°, 61
15 Lathrop Wells 223°, 53
16 Logandale 106°, 145
17 Nyala 016°, 177
18 Nyala 012°, 148
19 Overton 109°, 156
20 Pahrump 170°, 88
21 Pahrump 175°, 72
22 Scotty's Jet. 288°, 72
23 Springdale 280°, 60
24 Sunnyside 027°, 175
25 Tonopah 318°, 164
26 Warm Springs 350°, 175
SAMPLE
s_
d>
+->
to
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
sn
c
O)
•o
to
C3
X
X
D
X
X
D
X
D
X
X
X
X
X
X
D
X
D
X
D
D
X
D
D
Tl
Orchard J
X
X
X
X
X
X
D
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
PI
M-
tO
O)
_J
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
4J
o
0
CŁ
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
AIT ,
-a
o>
O)
t/0
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-M
3
i-
u_
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
-------
A SampU Collection Location!
17 K.y.d to Tabl. 1
Figure 1. Sample Collection Locations
-------
TABLE 2. BACKGROUND SAMPLE SURVEY
DATE
07/08/74
07/08/74
07/08/74
07/08/74
07/08/74
07/08/74
07/08/74
07/08/74
07/08/74
10/16/74
10/16/74
10/16/74
ITEM
Carrots
Cabbage
Turnips
Lettuce
Turnip Greens
Sweet Corn
Peaches
Apricots
Plums
Plums
Lettuce
Cabbage
STATION NUMBER
27
27
28
28
28
29
30
31
32
32
33
34
ORIGIN
Santa Maria, California
Santa Maria, California
Salinas, California
Salinas, California
Salinas, California
Coachella, California
Redding, California
Banning, California
Santa Rosa, California
Santa Rosa, California
Blythe, California
Orem, Utah
SCALE: | Cm » Appro* 85 km
-E '
D 100 200 300 400 500
KILOMETRES
Background Sample Collection Location
Keyed to Table 2
Figure 2. Background Sample Origins
6
-------
Only two samples contained detectable amounts of 90Sr. The orchard sam-
ple from Alamo (1) and the garden sample from Sunnyside (24) both contained
2.6 pCi/g of soil. Strontium-89 has a relatively short half-life of 52.7 days,
The last release of radioactivity from NTS which could have deposited 89Sr in
the off-site area was the Baneberry Event of December 18, 1970. With at least
24 half-lives for decay since that event no 89Sr was expected to be present
from NTS activities. Relatively heavy fallout activity was measured in the
spring of 1974 by the EMSL-LV Air Surveillance Network (ASN), including zir-
conium-95 with a half-life of 65.5 days (1-5). This was believed to be the
result of an atmospheric nuclear test by the People's Republic of China (PRC)
on June 23, 1973. Additionally, during July of 1974, fallout radioactivity
resulting from the atmospheric nuclear test by the PRC on June 17, 1974, was
detected by the ASN. The one sample with detectable 89Sr, from Scotty's Junc-
tion (22), of 1.4 ±1.1 pCi/g is believed to be a result of those two tests.
Cesium-137 in Soil
The only gamma-emitting fission-product radioactivity detected in the soil
samples was *37Cs. It was initially assumed that the concentrations in orchard
soil, representing relatively undisturbed soil, and in garden soil, which would
be relatively well mixed, would be significantly different. A histogram and
plot of cumulative frequency distribution indicated that the garden soil 137Cs
concentrations belonged to three distributions which were fairly well grouped
by geographical location. The sampling points were regrouped into three sets
to correspond approximately to the cumulative fallout patterns in the NTS en-
virons. These groups were from (1) the arc from 315° to 025° from the NTS CP,
except for Warm Springs (Hot Creek), (2) the remainder of the northern half of
the off-site area (J270° to 315°) + (025° to 090°) plus Warm Springs], and (3)
the arc from 090° to 270°. The first group was from the area most affected by
close-in fallout from the NTS, while the last group was from the area least
affected.
Groups 2 and 3 contained samples with less than detectable concentrations
of 137Cs. A graphical technique described by Denham and Waite (6)» which per-
mits the inclusion of non-detectable results, was used to derive the statisti-
cal parameters for those groups. The 137Cs data from groups 1 and 2 were
found to follow a log-normal distribution, as shown in Figure 3. The few pos-
itive results from group 3 more closely followed a normal distribution. Re-
sults of the statistical analysis of 137Cs concentrations in soil are summar-
ized in Table 3. Group 1 samples were found to have a geometric mean concen-
tration of 0.89 pCi/g. For the second group the geometric mean of the con-
centrations was 0.33 pCi/g. Of the eight samples collected from group 3, four
were less than detectable. The four positive results in group 3 provide a
relatively poor basis for statistical analysis, but the distribution appeared
to be normal, with a mean of about 0.05 pCi/g.
Because of the smaller number of orchard samples collected and the non-
random nature of the collection it was more difficult to determine satisfac-
tory distributions. Seven of the 16 orchard soil samples were collected from
the second area. The cumulative frequency distribution of those seven was
approximately log-normal with a geometric mean of 0.37 and a standard geometric
deviation of 1.36; not significantly different from the garden soil distribution
-------
PERCENT LESS THAN
0
Figure 3.. Cs-137 in Soil, Cumulative Frequency Distributions
in that area. When the orchard samples were grouped with the three garden
soil groups no significant changes were observed. Therefore, it was deduced
that no significant difference occurs for 137Cs in the two types of soil sam-
ples.
Plutonium-239 in Soil
A meaningful analysis of 239Pu results in soil samples was more difficult.
Half of the 16 orchard soil samples contained concentrations of 239Pu below
0.03 pCi/g, the highest value reported for those samples as the minimum detect-
able concentration. Three-fourths of the 33 garden soil samples contained less
than 0.04 pCi/g, the highest value for minimum detectable concentration in that
group. The minimum detectable concentration is defined as that value at which
two standard deviations of the sample count equals the sample count (2-sigma=
± 100%). One of the plutonium counting systems was contaminated, raising the
background and, therefore, the detectable limit. Although some samples are
shown with measurable concentrations as low as 0.019 pCi/g of soil, those sam-
ples counted on the contaminated system had detection limits of 0.03 to 0.04
pCi/g. The graphical method of determining statistical parameters requires
that all results less than the maximum value determined for the minimum detect-
able concentration be grouped with that maximum value. This technique permits
the determination of means which are below the minimum detectable concentrations,
8
-------
TABLE 3. SUMMARY OF r37CS-IN-SOIL STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Area
covered
Sample (Azimuth
Group from CP)
137Cs Concentration
in Garden Soil
137Cs Concentration
in Orchard Soil
Mean, Range,
pCi/g Std. Dev. pCi/g
Mean,
pCi/g
Std. Dev.
Range,
pCi/g
1 315°-025°
minus
Warm Springs
2 (270°-315°)+
(025°-090°)+
Warm Springs
3 090°-270°
0.89
0.33'
0.05
1.58
1.59'
NC
0.39-1.9
-------
A preliminary graphical analysis of the 239Pu data showed that the three
highest concentrations—0.13, 0.14, and 0.17 pCi/g—did not fit in any distri-
bution with the other samples, which had a maximum concentration of 0.070 pCi/g.
Therefore, those three samples were considered separately in the succeeding
statistical analyses. The results of statistical analysis of the 239Pu in soil
concentrations are shown in Table 4.
Taking the garden soil samples from the northern half of the array—north of
an east-west line through the NTS CP—a good fit to a log-normal distribution was
found with a geometric mean of 0.027 pCi/g. Using all garden soil samples the
results were not significantly different, with a geometric mean for all garden
soil samples of 0.029 pCi/g. However, the maximum concentration measured in
garden soil from the southern half was 0.045 pCi/g compared to the maximum of
0.070 pCi/g for the northern half (not including the three highest). Therefore,
it is likely that with more samples a difference in means would be found between
those samples collected from north and south of the NTS CP.
The orchard samples, representing undisturbed soil, did not fit a good
distribution in either a normal or log-normal plot, tending to be grouped at
the upper levels. An approximate geometric mean of 0.048 pCi/g was determined
for 239Pu in orchard soil samples. Unlike the 137Cs, the distribution of 239Pu
in garden soil appears to differ from that in orchard soil. It is possible that
Cs is more soluble and, therefore, more uniformly distributed with depth, than
the 239Pu.
The finding of a small group of high concentrations is similar to findings
by other investigators. Results of 239Pu analysis of soil samples collected in
the same general areas covered by this survey showed two distributions with
geometric means of about 4 and 42 nanocuries per square metre (nCi/m2)(7).
Assuming a bulk soil density of 1.5 g/cm3 and a soil sampling depth of 5 cm,
the concentration of 0.048 pCi/g in orchard soil would be equivalent to an area
deposition of 3.6 nCi/m2. Using the same assumptions, the geometric mean
0.14 pCi/g for the three highest results gives an area deposition of 11 nCi/m2.
Those results agree well with the previous findings.
WATER SAMPLES
Analytical results of individual water samples are listed in Appendix 2.
All results are typical of natural background radioactivity in groundwater of
the NTS area except for 3H. Most 3H in the environment is the result of nuclear
testing. Concentrations of 3H in atmospheric water vapor in the NTS area during
1974 were about 500 pCi/1 of water, reflecting general worldwide distribution.
Most of the water sampled originated from irrigation wells, which are normally
very low in 3H, as shown by the three low concentrations resulting from analysis
by the enrichment technique. Most of the samples were actually collected, how-
ever, not at the well, but from irrigation ditches. That resulted in some
samples with 3H concentrations slightly above the detection limit, which were
probably picked up from the soil. This 3H could have been deposited there at
earlier times as a result of local contamination from testing at the NTS or
from rainfall bearing 3H distributed worldwide. No 3H above natural background
has been identified in off-NTS groundwater by the routine collections of the
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program (8).
10
-------
TABLE 4. SUMMARY OF 239PU-IN-SOIL STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
Area
covered
(Azimuth
from CP)
239Pu Concentration
in Garden Soil
Geometric
Mean, Geometric Range,
pCi/g , Std. Dev. pCi/g
239Pu Concentration
in Orchard Soil
Geometric
Mean, Geometric Range,
pCi/g Std. Dev. pCi/g
270°-090°
0.027
1.72
-------
FRUIT AND VEGETABLE SAMPLES
Analytical results for the fruit and vegetable samples are listed in Appen-
dix 3. Tritium analyses were performed on 25 of the fruit and vegetable samples
collected in the NTS off-site area. The concentrations were found to be dis-
tributed log-normally with a geometric mean of 230 pCi/1 of water recovered and
a standard geometric deviation of 1.93. These results agree with those observed
in the irrigation water samples. Tritium analysis of the 10 background samples
purchased in July resulted in a geometric mean of 670 pCi/1 of water recovered
with a standard geometric deviation of 1.25. As with most other radionuclides
resulting from nuclear testing, ^ti concentrations may vary with location depend-
ing on altitude, latitude, rainfall, or other factors. This is reflected in
the higher concentrations of 3H observed in the background samples. The lower
3H concentrations in fruit and vegetable samples from near the NTS as compared
to the background samples may also be a result of the greater use of well water
for irrigation in the NTS vicinity. The lower concentrations of 3H in well
water than in atmospheric water, including rainfall, would be reflected in the
foods grown with that water.
Only two gamma-emitting radionuclides were identified in the fruit and
vegetable samples by gamma spectroscopy. These were naturally occurring
beryllium-7 (7Be), found in four samples, and the fission product zirconium-95
(95Zr), which was identified in four samples. Beryllium-7 is produced through
cosmic ray interactions in the stratosphere. Since these gamma-emitting nuclides
were found only on leafy vegetables and alfalfa it is believed that they occurred
as fallout deposited directly on the leaves rather than through uptake from the
soil. The relatively short half-lives of 53.4 days for 7Be and 65.5 days for 95Zr
would make that mode seem most likely. As discussed in the soil results section,
the finding of 95Zr was due to atmospheric nuclear tests by the People's Republic
of China in June 1973 and June 1974.
One of the 16 samples analyzed for 89,90$r was positive for 89Sr. This
result was also due to the nuclear tests by the People's Republic of China.
Strontium-90 was measured at slightly above the detection limit in six of
the samples collected around the NTS and in none of the background samples.
No correlation was found between 90Sr results and close-in fallout patterns
from atmospheric testing at the NTS; however, comparing the off-site results
with the background samples indicates that the 90Sr observed resulted from
close-in fallout from the NTS.
12
-------
DISCUSSION
Analysis of soil samples for both gamma -emitting radionuclides (137Cs)
and 239Pu shows the impact of close-in fallout from atmospheric testing at the
NTS. The only radionuclide identified in fruit and vegetable samples which
might be related to NTS close-in fallout was 90Sr. Although 90Sr was above the
detectable concentration in only two of the soil samples analyzed, it was detec-
ted in six of the fruit and vegetable samples. For the purpose of making con-
servative estimates it was assumed that all of the 90Sr in the fruit and vege-
table samples was deposited as close-in fallout.
An attempt was made to evaluate these findings in terms of radiation dose
to off-site residents consuming locally grown foods. Because the study was not
intended to be, and could not be, a comprehensive study to calculate dose to
the population, it was necessary to make certain assumptions to arrive at an
estimated dose. The foods considered and the 90Sr concentrations used were:
lettuce, 12 pCi/g; chard, 32 pCi/g; onions, 14 pCi/g; corn, 9.2 pCi/g; root
vegetables, 6.8 pCi/g. It was assumed that an adult would consume 400 g/week
of lettuce for half the year; 200 g/week each of chard, corn, and roots through-
out the year; and 50 g/week of onions throughout the year. This consumption
would result in a total intake of 660 pCi/yr. The recommended intake of calcium
for an adult is 0.8 g/day or 292 g/yr *9'. The radiation dose to the bone marrow
of an adult, from FRC Report No. 7 (10), would be calculated from:
0.6 rad to bone marrow in first year
i 90Sr/100 g calcium ingested.
During the first year of such consumption the dose would be 0.14 mrad. It is
estimated that an individual will reach 86% of 90Sr equilibrium in bones in 50
years (n). With an annual intake of 660 pCi 90Srand 292 g calcium, the con-
centration in bone calcium would be 1.94 x 10~3yCi/g. Using the relationship,
0.9 rem/yr per yCi 90Sr/g calcium (10), the annual dose rate to bone marrow
after 50 years of intake would be 1.7 mrad. That dose is 1% of the radiation
protection standard for average dose to a suitable sample of the population!12).
Applying the estimated dose to the past 20 years would yield an estimated accumu-
lated dose of 5.8 mrad.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The calculated dose to bone marrow of an adult would be 0.14 mrad/yr for
the first year of consumption of locally grown foods based on the 90Sr content
of foods collected in 1974, or less than 0.1% of the radiation protection stan-
dard for average dose to a suitable sample of the population and would reach
1.7 mrad/yr after 50 years of such exposure or 1% of the radiation protection
standard. In actuality, such continuous exposure would not likely occur, even
in cases of continuous residence, due to radioactive decay. In 50 years, with
no additional deposition, the 90Sr present would be reduced to 30% of its cur-
rent value.
13
-------
In view of the low potential for radiation dose to the off-site population,
further monitoring of this nature is not recommended for the near future. How-
ever, the portion of the original study relating to 55Fe and 239Pu measurements
should, and will, be rescheduled. Accordingly, a follow-up to this report will
include the analytical results of samples collected specifically for analysis of
those radionuclides.
14
-------
REFERENCES
1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Radiation Data and Reports. Vol. 15,
No. 8, pp. 508-510. Washington, D.C. August 1974
2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Radiation Data and Reports. Vol. 15,
No. 9, pp. 594-597. Washington, D.C. September 1974
3. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Radiation Data and Reports. Vol. 15,
No. 10, pp. 674-676. Washington, D.C. October 1974
4. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Radiation Data and Reports. Vol. 15,
No. 11, pp. 711-713. Washington, D.C. November 1974
5. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Radiation Data and Reports. Vol. 15,
No. 12, pp. 795-798. Washington, D.C. December 1974
6. Denham, Dale H. and David A. Waite. Some practical applications of the log-
normal distribution for interpreting environmental data. BNWL-SA-4840,
Battelle-Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington. July 1975
7. Church, B. W., D. N. Brady, I. Aoki, and W. A. Bliss. "Distribution and
inventory element activities on-NTS and off-NTS." The Dynamics of Plutonium
in Desert "Environments. NVO-142. p 311. Las Vegas, Nevada. July 1974
8. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental monitoring report for
the Nevada Test Site and other areas used for underground nuclear detonations.
January through December 1974. NERC-LV-539-39. Las Vegas, Nevada. May 1975
9. Hodgman, C. D. ed. Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. Forty-third edition.
The Chemical Rubber Publishing Company. Cleveland, Ohio, p 1976. 1961
10. Federal Radiation Council. Background material for the development of radia-
tion protection standards: Protective action guides for strontium-89,
strontium-90, and cesium-137. Report No. 7. 44 pp. May 1965
11. The International Commission on Radiological Protection. Report of Committee
II on permissible dose for internal radiation. ICRP Publication 2. p85. 1959
12. U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration. "Standards for radiation
protection." ERDA Manual Chapter 0524. p 3. April 1975
15
-------
APPENDICES
Appendix Page
1 Soil Sample Analytical Results 17
2 Water Sample Analytical Results 19
3 Fruit and Vegetable Sample Results 20
16
-------
APPENDIX 1. SOIL SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS
STATION
NUMBER
1
1
2
3
4
4
5
6
7
7
8
8
8
9
10
10
10
11
12
13
13
13
14
14
15
15
16
COLLECTION
DATE (1974)
06/05
06/05
06/05
08/26
09/24
09/24
06/06
06/06
07/23
08/24
07/11
07/23
08/15
08/12
07/18
08/14
08/27
07/19
08/05
06/05
06/05
08/13
06/13
07/08
06/07
07/17
07/15
SOURCE
0
G
G
0
G
Gb
G
0
G
G
G
0
G
G
G
0
G
G
G
G
0
0
0
G
0
G
0
55Fe
0.7 ± 0.45
NA
0.6 ± 0.44
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.5
NA
NA
<4
NA
<0.5
NA
NA
89Sr
<3
<2
<2
<2
<3
<3
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<3
<2
<2
<2
RADIONUCLIDE
9°Sr
2.6 ± 1.4
<2
<2
<2
<2
<3
<2
<2
<2
<2
<1
<1
<1
<2
<1
<1
<1
<2
<2
<2
<2
<1
<2
<1
<2
<2
<1
CONCENTRATION (pCi/g)a
13?CS
0.31
0.29
0.19
0.45
0.19
0.37
0.50
0.32
1.2
0.69
ND
0.41
ND
1.9
0.80
1.0
0.91
0.48
0.78
0.60
0.54
0.32
0.29
ND
0.33
0.41
0.31
<0.
<0.
<0.
<0.
<0.
<0.
<0.
<0.
<0.
0.
<0.
<0.
<0.
<0.
<0.
<0.
0.
<0.
<0.
<0.
0.
<0.
<0.
<0.
<0.
<0.
<0.
238pu
004
007
005
03
04
04
004
007
04
031 ± 0.025
03
05
03
03
04
05
038 ± 0.031
03
03
004
0054 ± 0.0049
03
05
04
006
04
03
239Pu
0.055 ±
0.019 ±
0.022 ±
<0.03
<0.03
<0.04
0.030 ±
0.066 ±
0.070 ±
<0.03
0.044 ±
<0.03
0.029 ±
<0.03
0.044 ±
0.042 ±
0.17 ±
0.054 ±
0.022 ±
0.029 ±
0.022 ±
<0.03
0.065 ±
<0.04
0.014 ±
<0.04
<0.03
0.013
0.006
0.007
0.009
0.012
0.032
0.023
0.020
0.035
0.038
0.052
0.027
0.021
0.008
0.011
0.041
0.008
K
(mg/g)
22
26
25
28
44
34
22
22
28
51
30
31
37
55
9.4
16
20
24
22
27
22
27
8.4
13
32
32
23
-------
APPENDIX 1. (CONTINUED)
00
STATION
NUMBER
17
17
18
18
18
19
20
20
20
21
21
22
22
23
23
23
24
25
25
26
26
26
COLLECTION
DATE (1974)
07/18
08/21
06/12
07/23
08/28
07/15
06/06
07/12
08/15
06/26
06/26
08/12
09/16
06/28
08/15
08/15
08/28
07/19
09/17
06/19
08/27
09/17
RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATION (pCi/g)a
SOURCE 55pe 89Sr 9(Kv
G
0
0
G
G
G
0
G
G
G
0
G
G
0
G
G
G
G
G
0
G
G
NA
NA
<4
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
<4
NA
NA
NA
NA
<4
NA
NA
<2
<2
<3
<2
<1
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<3
<2
1.4 ± 1.1
<2
<2
<2
<3
<2
<2
<2
<2
<2
<1
<2
<1
<2
<0.8
<1
<2
<1
<2
<1
<1
<0.9
<0.9
<1
<1
<2
2.6 ± 1.4
<1
<1
<0.9
<2
<1
137Cs
1.1
1.0
0.96
0.39
0.52
0.11
0.37
0.29
0.68
ND
ND
0.31
ND
0.16
ND
0.43
0.26
1.3
0.93
0.56
0.36
0.33
<0
<0
<0
<0
<0
<0
<0
<0
<0
<0
<0
<0
<0
<0
<0
<0
<0
0
<0
0
<0
<0
238pu
.04
.03
.04
.03
.03
.04
.005
.04
.04
.05
.04
.03
.05
.03
.03
.03
.03
.0035 ± 0.0030
.04
.046 ± 0.043
.04
.04
239|
<0.04
0.068 ±
0.13 ±
0.031 ±
0.033 ±
<0.03
0.026 ±
<0.03
<0.04
0.045 ±
<0.02
<0.03
<0.04
0.14 ±
<0.03
0.046 ±
<0.02
0.034 ±
<0.04
0.069 ±
0.064 ±
<0.03
^u
0.041
0.046
0.026
0.022
0.005
0.028
0.037
0.032
0.008
0.032
0.037
K
(mg/g)
24
25
27
17
26
16
17
18
23
24
22
47
46
30
43
49
9.6
32
52
16
16
17"
a Detectable concentrations given ± 2-sigma counting error
b Duplicate Sample
0 = Orchard; G = Garden
NA = No Analysis
NO = Not Detected
-------
APPENDIX 2
WATER SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS
RADIOACTIVITY CONCENTRATION (pCi/litre)a
STATION
NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
21
22
23
24
25
26
COLLECTION
DATE (1974)
06/05
06/05
08/26
09/24
06/06
06/06
06/12
06/11
06/06
07/11
06/07
08/05
06/05
06/13
06/07
07/15
07/15
06/05
07/15
06/06
06/26
06/26
06/07
06/12
06/11
06/06
06/19
Gross
9.
9.
7.
8.
5.
4.
5.
9.
<2
<4
14
7.
9.
<3
<4
7.
8.
<3
7.
3.
3.
2.
6.
22
12
<4
<5
9
4
5
5
4
2
6
7
6
7
5
0
6
7
1
9
5
Alpha
± 4
± 4
± 5
± 4
± 3
± 4
± 3
± 6
± 6
± 4
± 4
± 6
± 5
± 6
± 3
± 2
± 2
± 5
± 9
± 5
.7
.6
.3
.6
.8
.0
.6
.4
.5
.2
.6
.0
.1
.6
.0
.7
.7
.2
.0
.0
Gross Beta
6
9
13
7
9
10
<3
13
7
8
11
9
8
<3
6
16
4
<3
18
<3
3
5
13
15
5
5
15
.8
.3
.3
.6
.5
.1
.8
.3
.3
.7
.5
.3
.7
.5
±3
± 3
±3
±3
±3
±3
± 3
± 3
±3
±3
±3
±3
± 3
±4
±3
±4
± 3
± 3
± 3
± 3
± 3
± 3
± 3
.2
.4
.9
.3
.4
.5
.8
.3
.3
.6
.8
.3
.2
.0
.1
.2
.0
.1
.7
.9
.1
.1
.8
3H
<300
<300
NA
<300
NA
240 ±
330 ±
<300
390 ±
<300
<300
<7
<300
<300
<300
<300
<300
<300
<300
<7
<300
<300
<300
42 ±
<300
<300
250 ±
220
220
220
3
210
a Radioactivity concentrations ± 2-sigma counting error
NA = No Analysis
19
-------
APPENDIX 3. FRUIT AND VEGETABLE SAMPLE RESULTS
ro
O
ilHI IUN
NUMBER
1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
9
10
10
10
10
10
11
11
i> AMPLE
TYPE
Mxd Rt
Crt + Bt
Corn
Cabbage
Peaches
Cabbage
Mxd Rt
Tnp + Bt
Apples
Turnip
Greens
Mxd Rt
Tnp + Rtb
Corn
Alfalfa
Apples
Turnip
Roots
Turnip
Greens
Peaches
Corn
Carrots
Turnip
Roots
Turnip
Greens
Plums
Corn
Corn
Cabbage
Corn
COLLECTION
DATE (1974)
08/05
08/05
08/05
08/21
09/24
08/13
08/13
07/23
07/23
08/28
08/28
08/28
07/11
07/11
07/23
07/23
08/12
07/18
07/18
08/14
08/21
08/27
07/16
09/16
37 89 90
H Be Sr Sr
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
< 9 6.8
(5.5)a
ND
400
ND
ND < 9 < 5
570 <40 <22
ND
<300 ND
380 . ND
(280) a
ND
ND
<300 ND < 8 < 4
ND
ND <20 <13
ND
ND
ND < 9 < 5
ND
ND
95
Zr
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
44
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
K
(mg/g)
2.4
2.3
1.9
2.9
2.8
4.2
1.8
3.9
2.7
2.1
6.7
2.2
2.4
3.9
3.1
2.6
3.5
4.9
3.2
4.3
2.4
2.3
2.3
2.3
ASH
(*)
1.03
0.96
0.52
1.01
0.66
0.75
0.58
1.46
1.26
0.80
3.90
1.37
0.79
2.11
1.99
1.06
0.71
1.36
1.30
1.29
1.29
0.84
0.83
0.69
MOISTURE
(%)
91.7
76.9
96.2
91.6
94.4
92.4
85.4
94.8
93.7
91.7
73.8
86.4
95.7
91.9
92.7
80.4
74.0
94.3
90.8
78.7
79.7
67.6
94.5
67,4
-------
APPENDIX 3. (CONTINUED)
RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATION (pCi/kg WET WEIGHT)
STATION
NUMBER
11
12
12
12
13
14
14
14
14
15
15
15
16
17
17
17
17
17
18
18
18
18
SAMPLE
TYPE
Potatoes
Corn
Chard
Onions
Apples
Onions
Lettuce
Corn
Peaches
Cabbage
Turnip
Roots
Peaches
Plums
Mxd Lf
Tnp + Ltc
Turnip
Roots
Plums
Corn
Al fal fa
Apricots
Mxd Rt
Crt + On
Mxd Lf
Cbg + Ltc
Corn
COLLECTION
DATE (1974)
09/16
08/05
08/05
08/05
09/09
07/08
07/08
07/08
08/15
07/17
07/17
06/07
07/15
07/18
07/18
08/21
08/21
08/27
07/11
07/23
07/23
08/28
3H
<300
<300
<300
<300
490
(280)a
360
(320)a
<300
<300
<300
<300
<300
7Be 89Sr 90Sr
NO
ND
100 <31 32 M
(20)*
ND < 8 14 ,
(5.2)8
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND 14 , <8
(ID*
ND
ND
ND <12 < 7
910
ND
ND
ND < 9 < 6
ND
95Zr
ND
ND
25
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
63
ND
ND
ND
ND
K
(mg/g)
4.6
2.2
6.5
1.9
1.6
1.7
4.0
3.8
2.6
2.6
2.1
2.1
2.5
3.9
3.2
4.5
2.7
4.7
4.1
2.6
2.3
2.4
ASH
(%)
1.20
1.02
2.8
0.51
0.63
0.54
1.35
0.78
1.04
1.24
0.92
1.01
0.49
1.00
1.18
2.25
1.40
4.01
0.90
0.89
0.72
0.50
MOISTURE
(%)
83.6
82.9
88.4
90.0
88.5
91.6
91.6
81.0
90.0
95.5
94.6
93.4
88.9
92.0
95.4
87.0
62.7
66.6
92.4
91.5
93.8
64.6
-------
APPENDIX 3. (CONTINUED)
r-o
3 Ittl 1UN
NUMBER
18
19
19
20
20
20
20
21
21
21
21
22
22
23
23
23
23
23
24
24
24
24
i> AMPLE
TYPE
Alfalfa
(Hay)
Beets
Lettuce
Lettuce
Apricots
Turnip
Roots
Corn
Radish
Plums
Corn
Alfalfa
Lettuce
Mxd Rt
Crt + Tnp
Chard
Turnip
Roots
Alfalfa
Pears
Corn
Cabbage
Corn
Alfalfa
Carrots
COLLECTION
DATE (1974)
08/28
07/15
07/15
06/06
07/03
07/12
07/15
06/26
06/26
07/24
09/12
07/15
08/12
06/28
08/15
08/15
09/11
09/11
08/28
08/28
08/28
08/28
3
H
<300
640
(280)a
650
(290)a
330
(270)a
480
(400)a
<300
<300
<300
<300
<300
500 ,
(290)8
7 89 90
Be Sr Sr
720 <95 75
(54)a
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND <11 9.2
(7.4)a
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND <12 < 7
ND
ND
95
Zr
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
110
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
K
(mg/g)
27
2.8
3.5
3.4
2.6
2.5
3.0
2.6
3.8
2.8
4.6
4.8
2.7
3.3
2.5
22
1.6
2.7
2.6
2.0
5.7
2.6
ASH
(X)
8.50
1.07
0.94
1.04
0.74
0.68
0.87
0.85
0.87
0.82
2.94
1.32
0.98
1.84
0.63
9.06
1.09
0.87
0.52
1.20
2.97
0.78
MOISTURE
(%)
No
Analysis
91.9
95.8
No
Analysis
92.0
95.8
65.6
94.3
88.9
78.2
73.1
92.2
94.3
95.3
87.0
86.9
86.2
98.2
53.0
-------
APPENDIX 3. (CONTINUED)
ro
OJ
STATION
NUMBER
25
25
25
25
26
26
27
Bkg
27
Bkg
28
Bkg
28
Bkg
28
Bkg
28
Bkg
29
Bkg
30
Bkg
31
Bkg
32
Bkg
32
Bkg
33
Bkg
SAMPLE
TYPE
Cabbage
Lettuce
Carrots
Corn
Pears
Potatoes
Carrots
Cabbage
Turnip
Roots
Turnip
Roots
Turnip
Greens
Lettuce
Corn
Peaches
Apricots
Plums
Plums
Lettuce
F
COLLECTION
DATE (1974)
07/12
07/19
08/14
08/14
08/27
08/27
07/08
07/08
07/08
07/08
07/08
07/08
07/08
07/08
07/08
07/08
10/16
10/16
tADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATION (pCi/kg WET
3
H
820 ,
(300)8
450 .
(270)*
650
(280)a
760,
(250)*
1300 ,
(290)*
750
(280)*
640 a
(310)*
670
(280)a
640 ,
(280)*
560
(280)*
7 89 90
Be Sr Sr
ND
ND <16 12,
(11)
\ * /
ND
ND < 5 < 3
ND
ND
ND < 5 < 3
ND < 5 « 3
ND < 6 < 4
ND <10 < 7
ND <17 < 9
ND < 3 < 2
ND < 8 < 5
ND < 5 < 5
ND < 6 < 5
ND < 3 < 2
ND
ND
WEIGHT)
95
Zr
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
K
(mg/g)
2.1
4.6
2.4
3.0
1.1
5.0
2.6
2.3
1.3
4.3
4.5
1.9
2.9
2.5
3.3
1.7
2.3
1.4
ASH
(X)
1.76
1.40
1.09
0.51
0.58
1.55
0.57
0.57
0.64
1.10
1.40
0.33
0.97
0.53
1.00
0.34
1.40
0.42
MOISTURE
(X)
96.8
90.7
72.5
84.6
95.4
93.2
93.6
90.3
92.3
97.0
73.2
93.1
93.1
91.2
88.8
97.0
-------
APPENDIX 3. (CONTINUED)
RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATION (pCi/kg MET WEIGHT)
STATION SAMPLE COLLECTION ~, ; 71 ^T ^ K ASH MOISTURE
NUMBER TYPE DATE (1974) H Be Sr Sr Zr (mg/g) (%) (%)
34 Cabbage 10/16 ND ND 2.0 0.56 92.2
Bkg
ro
a - Values shown in parentheses are the 2-sigma counting error term.
Mxd Rt = Mixed Roots; Crt = Carrot; Bt = Beet; Tnp = Turnip; Rtb = Rutabaga; On = Onion; Mxd Lf = Mixed Leaf;
Ltc = Lettuce; Cbg -Cabbage
ND = Not Detected
-------
DISTRIBUTION
1 - 40 Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory - Las Vegas, NV
41 Mahlon E. Gates, Manager, DOE/NV, Las Vegas, NV
42 Troy E. Wade, DOE/NV, Las Vegas, NV
43 David G. Jackson, DOE/NV, Las Vegas, NV
44 Paul J. Mudra, DOE/NV, Las Vegas, NV
45 Elwood M. Douthett, DOE/NV, Las Vegas, NV
46 - 47 Ernest D. Campbell, DOE/NV, Las Vegas, NV
48 - 49 Paul B. Dunaway, DOE/NV, Las Vegas, NV
50 Roger Ray, DOE/NV, Las Vegas, NV
51 Robert W. Taft, DOE/NV, Las Vegas, NV
52 Leon Silverstrom, DOE/NV, Las Vegas, NV
53 Robert W. Newman, DOE/NV, Las Vegas, NV
54 Bruce W. Church, DOE/NV, Las Vegas, NV
55 Peter K. Fitzsimmons, DOE/NV, Las Vegas, NV
56 - 57 Technical Library, DOE/NV, Las Vegas, NV
58 Chief, NOB/DNA, DOE/NV, Las Vegas, NV
59 Hal Hoi lister, DOES, DOE/HQ, Washington, DC
60 Tommy F. McCraw, DOS, DOE/HQ, Washington, DC
61 L. Joe Deal, DOS, DOE/HQ, Washington, DC
62 - 66 Maj. Gen. Joseph K. Bratton, DMA, DOE/HQ, Washington, DC
67 Gordon F. Facer, DMA, DOE/HQ, Washington, DC
68 James L. Liverman, Director, DBER, DOE/HQ, Washington, DC
69 Robert L. Watters, DBER, DOE/HQ, Washington, DC
70 John S. Kirby-Smith, DBER, DOE/HQ, Washington, DC
71 Jeff Swinebroad, DBER, DOE/HQ, Washington, DC
72 Robert W. Wood, DBER, DOE/HQ, Washington, DC
73 William S. Osburn, Jr., DBER, DOE/HQ, Washington, DC
74 Marcy Williamson, HSL/INEL, DOE/ID, Idaho Falls, ID
75 Steven V- Kaye, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN
76 Helen Pfuderer, Ecological Science Information Center, Oak Ridge National
Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN
-------
77 Library Systems Branch (PM-213), EPA/HQ, Washington, DC
78 Albert Printz, Director, Office of Technical Analysis (EN-329), EPA/HQ,
Washington, DC
79 Stephen J. Gage, Asst. Admin, for Research and Development (RD-672),
EPA/HQ, Washington, DC
80 William D. Rowe, Deputy Asst. Admin, for Radiation Programs (AW-458),
EPA/HQ, Washington, DC
81 William A. Mills, Director, Criteria and Standards Division (AW-460),
EPA/HQ, Washington, DC
82 Floyd L. Galpin, Director, Environmental Analysis Division (AW-461),
EPA/HQ, Washington, DC
83 David S. Smith, Director, Technology Assessment Division (AW-459),
EPA/HQ, Washington, DC
84 Paul DeFalco, Jr., Regional Administrator, Region IX, EPA, San Francisco, CA
85 James K. Channell, Regional Radiation Representative, Region IX, EPA,
San Francisco, CA
86 Richard L. Blanchard, Director, Radiochemistry and Nuclear Engineering
Branch, EPA, Cincinnati, OH
87 Charles R. Porter, Director, Eastern Environmental Radiation Facility, EPA,
Montgomery, AL
88 Peter Halpin, Chief, APTIC, EPA, Research Triangle Park, NC
89 Harold F. Mueller, NOAA/WSNSO, Las Vegas, NV
90 Gilbert J. Ferber, ARL/NOAA, Silver Spring, MD
91 Kenneth M. Oswald, Manager, Health and Safety, LLL, Mercury, NV
92 Bernard W. Shore, LLL, Livermore, CA
93 Richard L. Wagner, LLL, Livermore, CA
94 Howard W. Tewes, LLL, Livermore, CA
95 Paul L. Phelps, LLL, Livermore, CA
96 Mortimer L. Mendelsohn, LLL, Livermore, CA
97 John C. Hopkins, LASL, Los Alamos, NM
98 Harry S. Jordan, LASL, Los Alamos, NM
99 Lamar J. Johnson, LASL, Los Alamos, NM
100 George E. Tucker, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM
101 Carter D. Broyles, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM
102 Melvin L. Merritt, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM
103 Richard S. Davidson, Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, OH
104 Arden E. Bicker, REECo, Mercury, NV
105 Savino W. Cavender, REECo, Mercury, NV
106 Auda F. Morrow, RE/CETO, NTS, Mercury, NV
-------
107 Billy Moore, NTSSO, DOE/NTS, Mercury, NV
108 Lloyd P. Smith, President, Desert Research Institute, University of
Nevada, Reno, NV
109 Paul R. Fenske, Desert Research Institute, University of Nevada,
Reno, NV
110 Thomas P. O'Farrell, Director, Applied Ecology and Physiology Center,
Desert Research Institute, Boulder City, NV
111 Library, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV
112 Lester L. Skolil, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA
113 William Morton, Bureau of Environmental Health, State of Nevada,
Carson City, NV
114 Deward W. Efurd, McClellan Central Laboratory, McClellan Air Force Base, CA
115 - 141 Technical Information Center, DOE, Oak Ridge, TN (for public availability)
------- |