SWRHL-112r
      RADIONUCLIDE STUDIES IN DAIRY COWS FOLLOWING
                    PROJECT SCHOONER
                           by
Stuart C. Black, David N. McNeils, and Erich W. Bretthauer
              Radiological Research Program
        Western Environmental Research Laboratory

             ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                 Published January 1972
       This  study  performed under Memorandum of
              Understanding No. SF 54 373
                       for the
             U.  S.  ATOMIC  ENERGY COMMISSION

-------
  This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored
  by the United States Government. Neither the United States
  nor the United States Atomic Energy Cormrission, nor any of
  their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcon-
  tractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, express
  or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility
  for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any infor-
  mation, apparatus, product or process disclosed, or repre-
  sents that its use would not infringe privately-owned rights.
    Available from the National Technical Information Service,
                  U. S. Department of Commerce
                      Springfield, Va. 22151

 ,c. ^        Price:  Paper copy $3.00; microfiche $.95.
OcfO

-------
                                                                  SWRHL-112r
               RADIONUCLIDE STUDIES IN DAIRY COWS FOLLOWING
                             PROJECT SCHOONER
                                    by
        Stuart C. Black, David N. McNeils, and Erich W. Bretthauer
                      Radiological Research Program
                Western Environmental Research Laboratory*

                     ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
                          Published January 1972
                 This study performed under Memorandum of
                       Understanding No. SF 54 373
                                 for the
                      U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
*Formerly Southwestern Radiological Health Laboratory, part of the U.S,
 Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Public Health Service,
 Environmental Health Service, Environmental  Control  Administration,
 Bureau of Radiological Health.

-------
                                ABSTRACT

Hay bales were placed 30 to 50 miles from surface ground  zero  in  the  pre-
dicted downwind direction of the effluent from Project  Schooner,  con-
ducted December 8, 1968.  Subsequent to contamination,  the  hay was  re-
covered and fed to groups of dairy cows in a controlled ingestion
experiment.  As noted in similar experiments during  the Cabriolet and
Buggy cratering tests, the secretion of 131I in milk was  below expecta-
tions.  Less than 4% of the ingested 131I was secreted  in milk, and the
peak milk concentration was less than half the expected value.

Concurrent measurements of 187W transfer indicated that less than 0.07%
of the ingested tungsten was secreted in milk and that  the  peak con-
centration in milk was only 0.0002 times the peak concentration of tungsten
in hay.

-------
                           TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT                                                              i
LIST OF TABLES                                                        iii
LIST OF FIGURES                                                       iv
I. INTRODUCTION                                                       1
II.  PROCEDURE                                                        3
III.  RESULTS                                                         7
IV.  DISCUSSION                                                       7
V.  SUMMARY                                                           10
REFERENCES                                                            11
DISTRIBUTION

-------
                             LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.  Cow Grouping, Milk Production and  Feeding  Schedule for
          the Project Schooner Experiment.                            12
Table 2.  Radionuclide Concentrations in Milk,  Average for  Four
          Cows of Group I.                                           13
Table 3.  Radionuclide Concentrations in Milk,  Average for  Four
          Cows of Group II.                                           14
Table 4.  Radionuclide Concentrations in Milk,  Average for  Four
          Cows of Group III.                                         15
Table 5.  Radionuclide Concentrations in Hay Fed  the Group  I Cows.    16
Table 6.  Radionuclide Concentrations in Hay Fed  the Group  II Cows.   17
Table 7.  Radionuclide Concentrations in Hay Fed  the Group  III Cows.  18
Table 8.  Air and Deposition Data.                                   19
Table 9.  Correlation Between Planchets and  Hay Deposition.           20
Table 10. Summary of Data for the Schooner  Experiment.                21

-------
                            LIST  OF  FIGURES



Fiqure 1.   Locations  of  Sampling  Stations  1-11.                       4



Figure 2.      I  Concentrations  in Milk  and Hay, Group  I  Cows.         22


           131
Figure 3.      I  Concentrations  in Milk  and Hav. Group  II Cows.        23


           131
Figure 4.      I  Concentrations  in Milk  and Hay, Group  III Cows.       24

           133

Figure 5.      I  Concentrations  in Milk  of Three Grouns of Cows.       25

           107

Fiaure 6.      W  Concentrations  in Milk  of Three Groups of Cows.       26
                                   iv

-------
I.  Introduction
The results of radioiodine studies in dairy cows following the Kiwi TNT and Pin
             (1 2}
Stripe eventsv ' ' indicated some differences occurred in the forage-cow-
milk system which appeared to depend on the gaseous/particulate ratio of
the debris deposited on cow forage.  This ratio appears to vary with
distance normal to the centerline of the effluent cloud.   During the
Cabriolet and Buggy tests    , an attempt was made to confirm this  point,
but the data obtained were unsuitable for this purpose. Project Schooner
presented another opportunity to explore these differences.

Since Schooner was to be executed in December and since dairy cows  are
fed hay at this time of year, hay was used in this study.  Baled hay was
placed at selected locations in the expected downwind pattern of the
Schooner effluent at distances farther from surface ground zero (SGZ) than
those used during Cabriolet and Buggy.  After cloud passage,  measured amounts
of hay from certain locations were fed to dairy cows in a controlled
ingestion experiment.

The experiment was planned to accomplish the following objectives:
                                                    187
    A.  To determine the amount of radioiodines and    W deposited  on
        baled hay and secreted in the milk of cows fed this  hay;
    B.  To determine the differences, if any, in the forage-cow-milk
        system for these isotopes when the cows are fed hay from bales
        contaminated by different portions of the cloud;
    C.  To search for correlations among such parameters as  gaseous/
        particulate ratio, integrated air concentration, planchet
        deposition and exposure rates on the one hand and forage contamination,
        peak milk concentration and effective half-life on the other hand.

Project Schooner wasa nuclear experiment in a layered tuffaceous medium
executed as a part of the Plowshare Program for development of nuclear

-------
excavation.  Schooner was detonated on 8 December 1968 at approximately
0800 (PST), in Area 20, Nevada Test Site (NTS).   The  resultant yield was
31 ± 4 kt.  Emplacement depth (to the working point)  was  108 meters
(355 feet).

-------
II.  Procedure

Sixteen stations were established at different azimuths downwind from surface
ground zero, stations 1-11 are shown in Fiqure 1. Each station had 25 bales of
hay arranged in a grid pattern(rather than a pile) to maximize the
amount of contamination by the effluent cloud.  Each station also
contained the following samplers:

    A.  Fourteen 11.4-cm olanchets for ground and hay deposition
        measurements.
    B.  Two microscope slides for particle size studies.
    C.  Two air samplers (4.8 I/sec = 10.2 cfm) with Whatman 541 and
        charcoal filters.
Certain stations had special equipment as follows:
    D.  lonization chambers and meteorological instruments - for wind
        velocity and direction, temperature and gamma exposure rates at
        both 1 m and 10 m above ground - Stations 2,4,6,8,9,10.
    E.  Cascade impactor - for particle size and size to activity ratio
        measurements - Stations 2,4,6,8,10.
    F.  Portable survey meters with chart recorders - for recording mR/h
        as a function of time - Stations 7,11,12,13,14,16.

During cloud passage it was noted that the cloud had split into two portions.
The upper portion passed near Station 11, and the lower portion (base surge)
passed near Station 3.  After cloud passage, survey meter readinqs were made
of the beta plus gamma mR/h on the 11.4-cm planchets on top  of the hay bales
at each station.  On the basis of these readings, the hay bales from Stations
3, 10 and 11 were selected for feeding to the dairy cows.

The hay bales from the three selected stations were picked up, covered with
plastic and moved to the dairy farm.  The hay was chopped, one station at
a time, and stored for the ingestion experiment.  Sufficient hay was chopped
to feed four cows for 10 days at 20 kg per cow per day.

The dairy herd was divided into four groups by a stratified random selection
based on the average milk production of each cow.  Table  1 shows the cows
in each group and other pertinent data.  Background samples of  hay, grain,
water and milk were taken prior to the start of contaminated hay ingestion.

-------
                              10C
'30°
                                           'Cedar
                                            Pass
                                         N G  E
                                                            Old Highway 25
                                                               \
              Reed
             Ranch
330°
                                                               o
                                                               z
                                                                                          ,30 MILE  ARC
               GROUND  ZERO
                                                                NORTH
                                                                             Station  Location
                                 Figure 1.   Locations  of Sampling Stations 1-11.

-------
During the ingestion experiment, chopped hay was removed from the
storage enclosure, sampled and weighed.  After each milking, the weighed
hay was offered the cows in special feed mangers which prevented loss
of hay during feeding.  Any residue in the feed mangers after the
feeding period was weighed to determine the actual  amount consumed.  The
hay was sampled by taking five handfulls from various locations in each
manger.  The samples were placed in plastic bags and were then  compressed
into a standard geometry for counting.  The first feeding of the cows
was in the afternoon of D + 1.

The cows were kept on the normal twice-a-day milking schedule (approximately
0600 and 1500) until milk sampling was terminated on D + 16.  Each cow
was assigned an individual milking bucket for the duration of the
experiment.  At each milking a disposable plastic container was filled
with milk from the bucket and formaldehyde added as a preservative.  For
counting, the contents of the plastic container were transferred to a
3.5-Titer Marinelli beaker and adjusted to volume,  if necessary, with
distilled water.  Before adding the water, the milk was weighed to determine
the actual volume for use in concentration calculations.

The count median diameter (CMD) of the particulates deposited on the micro-
scope slides at each station was determined optically by use of a calibrated
reticule in the eyepiece of the microscope.  The CMD was based on the Feret
diameter measurement.

The radioactivity in the cloud passing over each station, as measured by
the air samplers, is expressed as the integrated air concentration.  This
term has the units of pCi-s/m  and is calculated by adding the total
activity on the prefilter to that on the charcoal cartridge and dividing
                               2
the sum by the sampling rate (m /s).

One hay bale at each station had a planchet centered on each exposed
surface.  The activity on the planchets, corrected for  the exposed area
of the bale, was summed and divided by the weight of the bale to estimate
the yCi/kg.  This estimate can then be compared with the measured  value  of

-------
hay samples and, if sufficiently accurate,  could  be used  instead of grab
sampling to estimate forage contamination.

All counting was done with 10-cm Nal(Tl)  crystals  and  associated 400-channel
analyzers.  The resultant gamma  spectra  were  analyzed  by  a  least squares
method.

-------
III.  Results

The group average values for 187W, 131I and 133I concentrations in milk
                                                             131
are shown in Tables 2-4 and are plotted in Figures 2-6.   The    I and
187
   W concentrations in hay are shown in Tables 5-7.
                                           2                187      131
The integrated air concentrations and pCi/m  deposition  for    W and    I
are shown for eleven of the study stations in Table 8.

The analysis of milk from control cows (Group IV) and water, grain and
uncontaminated forage fed to all groups indicated that the contaminated
hay was the only signifi
experimental cow groups.

The data and correlations between the activities measured in planchets
and
131
hay was the only significant source of    I,     I  and     W  in  the
                                                                 187
and those measured by hay sampling are shown  in  Table 9  for both    W  and
Based on the deposition data from the planchets, there was no significant
                      187      131
fractionation between    W and    I over the first eleven stations of
the sampling arc.  Activity levels at Station 12 were too low to be
included in the study and the activity levels at Stations 13-16 remained
essentially background.  The count median diameter of the particles collected on
glass slides at each station was also constant ranging only from 0.6 to
0.9 ym.  A significant correlation at the 99% confidence level was noted
between the size of individual particles and their activity.
IV.  Discussion

Differences in the levels of the milk and forage from the three study areas
(Stations 3, 10 & ll)are attributable simply to the total amount of
activity deposited.  The ratio between stations is relatively constant for
the following data:  (a)  the activity deposited, (b)  the peak gamma-exposure
                     187      131
rate, (c)  the total    W and    I in the milk and hay, and (d)  the peak
activity in the milk.  These ratios are 2-4 times higher for Station 11 than
for Station 10 which in turn is 4-5 times higher than Station 3.  This same
ratio does not hold true for the integrated air concentrations for which

-------
Station 11  was 1.4 higher than Station 10 which, in turn, was 1.3 higher
than Station 3.  This difference between air concentrations and ground
deposition is probably due to the difference in filter to charcoal  ratios
(F/C) observed.  The average F/C ratio for the first three stations on
the arc is 15 while the average for Stations 4-11  is five.  This indicated
difference in particulate to gaseous ratios is compatible with the fact
that the first three stations, with the higher particulate component, were
exposed to the base surge cloud while the rest of the arc was exposed
to the main or higher elevation cloud.

In most measurements made, except in milk, the tungsten activity was ap-
proximately 1000 times the 131I activity.  The observations that onlv 1/50
as much tungsten as iodine appeared in milk (total  percent in milk) and that
the milk to forage ratio for 187W was only 1/100 the ratio for 131I,
probably were the reasons for the peak milk activity of tungsten beinq only
ten times that of iodine.  Table 10 summarizes these data for the two
radioisotopes.

As in the Cabriolet and Buggy experiments, the low  milk  to forage ratios
in all three cow groups; the low  percent in milk,  and the long effective
half-life in milk during feeding indicated that the 131I  was less bio-
logically available in the Schooner debris than in  other  experiments.  ~
The relatively long T ,.,. for 133I indicates that this radioiodine was
also  less available.  The 131I values one would expect, based on other
       (1 2 4-6)
studiesv ' '   " are:  peak milk concentration in  2-3 days; percent in milk
of 8-10, and T -«: in milk of 4-5 days.

This  low biological availability was apparently true for  the 187H also.  In
a multiple ingestion experiment     using a solution of Na~WO. administered
to four cows, the average percent recovered in milk was 0.6, or about ten
times as much as was recovered in this experiment.

These results suggest that 187W, though present at  activity levels 1000
times the levels of 131I, presents less of a hazard than  radioiodine

                                    8

-------
because of the smaller transfer to milk, the shorter effective half-life
in milk and the apparent lack of concentration in a specific organ.

The data from the planchets fixed to hay bales indicate reasonable cor-
relation between planchet and hay deposition for    I.  The    W cor-
relation was good only for one of the three sets of data.   This may
have been caused by analytical errors more than any other factor.   The
use of the planchet on top of the bale resulted in a better estimate of
the concentration in hay than the use of all five planchets.  This is
advantageous since, realistically, a single deposition collector is the
most probable occurrence at a given location.

The T -.p for    I in hay, as shown in Figures 2-4 is nearly normal for
the procedures employed in this study.  After retrieval from the field
stations, the hay was put throuqh a chopper and immediately stored in a
protective enclosure.  Thus, the activity in the hav would decrease only
by radioactive decay and by some loss of particles during handling.  The
loose particles, however, would be caught in the lower levels of the
chopped hay and this would tend to increase the activity in the later
feedings.

The correlative data, which can be derived from Table 10,  indicate that
the planchet data (yCi/m2) and the peak gamma mR/h (measured 1  m above
ground) will yield reasonably good predictions of the peak milk concen-
tration, as was true in the Cabriolet and Buggy experiments.  The inte-
grated air concentration (yCi-s/m3) gave a poor prediction of this
parameter; however, the prediction is much improved if the integrated air
concentration is divided by the filter/charcoal ratio.  This tends to
support the assumption made in the TNT* ' and Pin Stripe*   ' experiments
that the particulate/gaseous make-up of the debris from nuclear tests has
some bearing on the forage-cow-milk transfer of radioiodine.

The reduced biological  availability, in the cow, indicated by the results
of the last three cratering tests (Cabriolet, Buggy, and Schooner) sug-
gests some change has been made in the device design or emplacement tech-
                              (4}
niques since the earlier test.v ' This change is beneficial, at least in
the sense that the hazard to humans drinking milk produced in the down-
wind fallout pattern of these three tests has been markedly reduced.

-------
V.  Summary

Baled hay and monitoring instruments were placed at 16 stations located
on an arc which was 30 to 50 miles downwind of the Plowshare cratering
test code-named Schooner.  After the test, hay from three of the
contaminated stations was fed to groups of dairy cows.  Sufficient contam-
inated hay was available to feed the cows twice-a-day for ten days.
Surveillance data were also obtained at the three stations.

As was indicated in the Cabriolet and Buggy experiments, the biological
                131   133      187
availability of    I,    I and    W was much reduced compared to previous
                                  i o-i                             107
experiments.  Less than 4% of the    I and less than 0.07% of the    W
ingested by the cows was secreted in their milk.
                                                                       2
The surveillance data indicated that either the areal  deposition (pCi/m
on planchets) or the 1 m peak gamma mR/h were useful for predicting the
peak concentration which would appear in cow's milk.  There was also an
indication that the particulate/gaseous ratio in the debris deposited at
the experimental stations had some effect on the peak concentration of
radioiodine in the milk.  The prediction of peak milk concentration from
air sampler data was improved if the integrated air concentration was
divided by the filter/charcoal activity ratio.
                                  10

-------
                           REFERENCES

1.  S. C.  Black, D.  S.  Barth, R.  E.  Engel  and  K.  H.  Falter,
    Radioiodine studies following the transient nuclear  test  (TNT)
    of a KIWI reactor,  Southwestern  Radiological  Health  Lab.  Report
    SWRHL-26r, Las Vegas, NV 1969.
2.  D. S.  Barth, R.  E.  Engel, S.  C.  Black  and  W.  Shimoda,  Dairy
    Farm radioiodine studies following the Pin Stripe  Event of
    April  25, 1966,  Southwestern  Radiological  Health Lab.  Report
    SWRHL-41r, Las Vegas, NV 1969.
3.  S. C.  Black, E.  W.  Bretthauer and D. N.  McNelis, Radioiodine studies
    with dairy cows  following two Plowshare  experiments, SWRHL-85r
    published September 1971.
4.  S. C.  Black, R.  E.  Engel, D.  S.  Barth  and  V.  W.  Randecker,
    Radioiodine studies in dairy  cows following the  Palanquin event,
    Southwestern Radiological Health Lab Report PNE-914F,  Las Vegas,
    NV. September 1971.
                                                131
5.  R. E.  Stanley, S.  C.  Black and  D. S. Barth,   I dairy cow studies
    using  a dry aerosol.   Southwestern Radiological  Health Lab.
    Report SWRHL-42r,  Las Vegas,  NV  1969.
6.  W. Shimoda, S. C.  Black, K. H.  Falter, R.  E.  Engel and D. S. Barth,
    Study  of a single  dose    I -    I ratio in dairy  cows, Southwestern
    Radiological Health Lab.  Report SWRHL-27r, Las  Vegas, NV. 1970.
7.  A. Mullen, E. W. Bretthauer,  and R. E. Stanley,  Excretion of radio-
    tungsten by the  dairy cow. Presented  at the American  Chemical Society
    Annual Meeting,  Chicago, IL.  1970.
                                 11

-------
                      TABLE  1

COW GROUPING,  MILK PRODUCTION  AND  FEEDING SCHEDULE  FOR THE
              PROJECT  SCHOONER EXPERIMENT




Group
No. Cow
27
39
I
43
46
16
36
II
84
86
13
35
III
47
62
11
12

IV 21

44
83
Group
Average
Daily Daily
Milk Milk
Production Production
(liters) (liters)
24.3
16.7
19.1
11.1
24.2
17.4
10.5
16.7
16.2
22.8
18.7
9.1
13.7
13.9
13.1
28.7
18.8

27.4 24.7

21.5
27.1


Beta + Gamma
mR/h on hay
at 0800
D + 1 Remarks

Fed 10 kg of hay from
90-110
Station 11 twice daily


Fed 10 kg of hay from
18-30
Station 10 twice daily


Fed 10 kg of hay from
8-10
Station 3 twice dai ly



Control group, fed

uncontaminated hay.


                             12

-------
                          TABLE 2



RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN MILK, AVERAGE FOR FOUR COWS OF GROUP I.
Date
12/9
12/10

12/11

12/12

12/13

12/14

12/15

12/16

12/17

12/18

12/19

12/20

12/21

12/22

12/23

12/24
Time
1550
0740
1530
0750
1540
1040
1555
0745
1525
0740
1530
0750
1540
0720
1540
0730
1540
0730
1735
0710
1540
0740
1540
0710
1600
0715
1530
0650
1545
0705
Collection
Time
Days*
0
0.66
1.00
1.67
2.00
2.79
3.01
3.66
3.98
4.66
4.99
5.67
5.99
6.65
6.99
7.66
7.99
Not mi 1 ked
9.07
9.64
9.99
10.66
10.99
11.64
12.02
12.64
12.99
13.63
13.99
14.64
131j
nCi/1
ND
0.319
0.497
0.736
0.762
0.936
0.986
1.00
0.919
0.899
0.921
0.951
1.01
0.889
0.947
0.872
0.993

0.798
1.04
0.949
0.780
0.579
0.277
0.185
0.100
0.078
0.046
0.032
0.021
133j
nCi/1
ND
1.26
1.65
1.26
1.01
0.727
0.600
0.427
0.297
0.162
0.185
0.116
0.095
0.052
0.066
0.049














187W
nCi/1
0.168
6.82
12.80
12.80
11.50
8.80
7.99
5.01
3.93
2.63
2.39
1.62
1.38
1.07
0.843
0.543
0.499

0.291
0.205
0.136
0.128








*Days after initial  feeding





                                    13

-------
                             TABLE 3
RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN MILK, AVERAGE  FOR FOUR COWS OF GROUP II
Date
12/9
12/10

12/11

12/12

12/13

12/14
12/15

12/16

12/17

12/18

12/19

12/20

12/21

12/22

12/23

12/24
*Days after
Time
1530
0725
1520
0730
1530
1025
1545
0730
1510
0730
1515
0730
1525
0700
1525
0720
1530
0730
1715
0700
1525
0725
1530
0710
1600
0715
1530
0650
1545
0705
initial
Collection
Time
Days*
0
0.67
1.00
1.67
2.00
2.79
3.01
3.67
3.99
4.67
4.99
5.67
6.00
6.65
7.00
7.67
8.00
8.67
9.11
9.65
10.00
10.67
11.00
11.66
12.02
12.66
13.00
13.65
14.01
14.66
feeding
131j 133j
pCi/1 pCi/1
ND ND
74 386
142 515
186 345
203 269
232 197
255 186
281 110
270 99
269 59
308 57
283
295
269
291
277
290
Not collected
261
354
365
302
202
106
70
41
27
16
19
12

187W
nCi/1
0.327
1.56
2.29
2.63
2.98
2.38
2.05
1.47
1.18
0.890
0.606
0.453
0.396
0.274
0.226
0.141
0.125

0.094












                                    14

-------
                            TABLE 4




RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN MILK,  AVERAGE FOR FOUR COWS OF GROUP III
Date
12/9
12/10

12/11

12/12

12/13

12/14

12/15

12/16

12/17

12/18

12/19

12/20

12/21

12/22

12/23

12/24
Time
1505
0710
1500
0710
1515
1010
1535
0710
1500
0710
1500
0710
1500
0650
1510
0710
1520
0710
1700
0650
1515
0715
1520
0710
1600
0715
1530
0650
1545
0705
Collection
Time
Days*
0
0.67
1.00
1.67
2.01
2.79
3.01
3.67
4.00
4.67
5.00
5.67
6.00
6.66
7.00
7.67
8.01
8.67
9.10
9.65
10.01
10.67
11.01
11.67
12.04
12.67
13.03
13.65
14.02
14.66
131j 133J
pCi/1 pCi/1
<10 D
45 221
61 216
72 135
69 127
71 81
65
62
65
73
60
54
63
64
59
60
63
Not collected
58
68
61
54
46
22
17
12
<10
12
<10
<10
187W
nCi/1
0.211
0.786
2.09
1.78
1.76
1.21
0.822
0.544
0.419
0.262
0.259
0.175
0.120
0.077
0.094















*Days  after initial  feeding
                                   15

-------
                         TABLE  5

     RADIONUCLIDE  CONCENTRATIONS IN  HAY FED THE GROUP I  COWS
Date Fed
12/9/68
12/10
12/10
12/11
12/11
12/12
12/12
12/13
12/13
12/14
12/14
12/15
12/15
12/16
12/16
12/17
12/17
12/18**
12/18
12/19
12/19
Totals
Time
p.m.
a.m.
p .m.
a.m.
p.m.
a.m.
p .m.
a.m.
p.m.
a .m.
p .m.
a .m.
p.m.
a.m.
p.m.
a .m.
p.m.
a.m.
p.m.
a .m.
p .m.

Feed
kg
9.75
6.49
5.44
5.64
9.73
7.50
8.10
7.60
8.23
6.68
7.89
8.47
9.68
9.74
9.73
9.12
10.00

8.73
7.12
8.62
154.62
131j
nCi/kg
ND*
55.7
38.3
45.3
38.8
41.9
39.6
33.2
24.5
22.8
31.3
26.7
27.1
23.8
22.4
23.3
26.6

24.2
27.0
18.0

187W
uCi/kg
34.300
23.400
65.800
12.500
9.110
5.230
4.730
2.780
2.720
1.060
0.994
1.000
0.523
0.293
0.278
0.166
0.179

0.070
0.062
0.053

 *Nondetectable
**The feeding on 12/18/68 a.m.  was not given.
                                 16

-------
                          TABLE 6


       RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN HAY FED THE  GROUP  II  COWS
Date Fbd
12/9/68
12/10
12/10
12/11
12/11
12/12
12/12
12/13
12/13
12/14
12/14
12/15
12/15
12/16
12/16
12/17
12/17
12/18*
12/18
12/19
12/19
Totals
Time
p.m.
a.m.
p.m.
a.m.
p.m.
a.m.
p.m.
a.m.
p.m.
a .m.
p.m.
a.m.
p.m.
a .m.
p.m.
a .m.
p.m.
a.m.
p.m.
a .m.
p.m.

Feed
kg
8.82
6.17
8.17
5.62
9.62
6.78
8.38
6.20
8.19
4.95
7.11
7.32
9.12
9.22
9.01
8.13
10.00

9.00
6.87
8.29
156.99
131j
nCi/kg
19.3
16.3
15.3
13.7
14.4
11.5
10.2
5.93
7.90
9.51
9.76
11.2
10.0
9.85
7.57
9.26
7.53

7.55
12.5
7.35

187W
yCi/kg
14.300
7.250
5.580
3.330
2.690
1.530
1.400
0.965
0.726
0.020
0.329
0.233
0.210
0.115
0.095
0.068
0.051

0.027
ND**
ND

 *The feeding on 12/18/68 a.m.  was not given
**Nondetectable
                                 17

-------
                     TABLE 7





RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN HAY FED THE GROUP III COWS,
Date Fed
12/9/68
12/10
12/10
12/11
12/11
12/12
12/12
12/13
12/13
12/14
12/14
12/15
12/15
12/16
12/16
12/17
12/17
12/18*
12/18
12/19
12/19
Totals
Time
p.m.
a.m.
p.m.
a.m.
p.m.
a.m.
p.m.
a.m.
p.m.
a.m.
p.m.
a.m.
p.m.
a.m.
p.m.
a.m.
p.m.
a.m.
p.m.
a .m.
p.m.

Feed
kg
8.97
6.57
7.18
6.83
9.25
6.52
7.20
6.98
8.20
4.39
6.55
7.38
9.20
9.72
9.67
9.59
10.00

9.23
7.82
8.50
156.76
131j
nCi/kg
4.27
3.95
2.57
2.56
2.55
2.78
3.17
2.98
2.56
3.26
2.27
2.39
1.96
2.11
1.84
1.72
1.69

1.49
1.92
1.35

187H
yd/kg
12.000
3.270
1.330
1.090
0.620
0.415
0.457
0.201
0.026
0.015
0.079
0.084
0.047
0.034
0.027
0.014
0.014

0.006
0.002
0.004

                            18

-------
                                TABLE 8



                         AIR AND DEPOSITION DATA
Number
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Y at 1 m
Peak
mR/h
7
12*
14*
4
7*
8
9
12*
13*
34*
100

L31I yCi
3.00
8.53
1.53
0.56
0.42
0.82
0.83
1.28
1.51
2.02
3.20
Integrated Air
Concentration
-s/m3 187W mCi-s/m3
3.41
10.60
1.88
0.56
0.47
0.72
0.94
1.21
1.35
2.58
3.40
Filter to
Charcoal
Ratio
19.3
12.0
13.7
5.2
4.1
3.5
6.0
5.6
6.0
4.1
6.4
Deposition
131T
2
yCi/m
0.078
0.47
0.39
0.19
0.29
0.39
0.54
0.41
0.36
1.93
6.43
187w2
mCi/m
0.062
0.360
0.407
0.178
0.240
0.316
0.425
0.361
0.368
1.80
6.57
*Extrapolated from observed decay data.
                                        19

-------
                             TABLE 9

         CORRELATION BETWEEN PLANCHETS AND HAY DEPOSITION
Station
3
10
11
3
10
11
Estimate by planchet data*
All five Top only
8.5 7.26
42.0 34.6
142 129
8.1 5.84
43.2 34.4
69.3 59.3
	 Q 	 _ 	 , 	
Measured in hay
187W data-pCi/kg
27.6
32.8
313
131I data-nCi/kg
4.75
24.2
66.2
Ratios
Hay/5 plan Hay/top plan
3.2 3.8
0.78 0.95
2.2 2.4
0.59 0.81
0.56 0.70
0.95 1.11
*Activity/nr of planchets  on 5 exposed  surfaces  of hay bale corrected to surface
area of bale and divided by weight of bale.  "Top only" indicates  planchet on
upper surface only was used.
                                    20

-------
                                              TABLE  10
                            SUMMARY OF  DATA  FOR THE  SCHOONER EXPERIMENT
PO
Cow Peak y
Group mR/h
I 100
II 34
III 14
I 100
II 34
III 14
Integrated
Planchet Air Filter to
Deposit Concentration Charcoal
yCi/m2 yCi-sec/m3 Ratio
6.43
1.93
0.39
6510
1800
407
3.20
2.02
1.53
3400
2580
1880
I Data
6.4
4.1
13.7
W Data
6.4
4.1
13.7
Peak
Milk
nCi/1
1.
0.
0.
12.
2.
2.
04
308
073
8
98
09
Milk to
Forage
Ratio*
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
019
019
017
00019
00021
00017
Time
% in to peak
Mi 1 k Days
3.94
2.88
2.59
.067
.058
.048
9.6
10.0
4.6
1.0
2.0
1.0
Teff
During
feeding
days
63
30
38
1.28
1.27
1.10
in milk
After
feeding
days
0.75
0.86
0.74

-
-
      *The peak milk concentration  divided  by  the  peak  hay  concentration.

-------
                 131
!;__] Figure 2. -   I concentrations  in milk and  hay,  Group I
cows,
                                   22

-------
Figure 3.-   I  concentrations in milk and hay, Group  II cows.
                           r'-j- t }"T

-------
   1O
    9

    8

    V

    6


    5
ff
                                                                               •H+
                                                         it
            ^3-
                                                         73"
                                                                          It
                                   #

                                          -m-t-
x,

o


-------

Figure 5.-   I concentrations  in milk of  three groups of cows.

-------
       ~T
                                                     •f——r- r
                                                     EHEEz
                                                                                           —I-
      tsr:
                               *-t—
                               :-*r
                     ' V
                    —   s
                                        r X
S-i
0)
4-1
•i-l
l:t

       H---J
          ±
           •

                             187
               -r- Figure 6.-    W concentrations in milk  of three groups of cows
                                    f
                                       t
                                                 ^
                                                           i ;-H
          i-1

-------
                                 DISTRIBUTION

 1  - 20  WERL, Las Vegas,  Nevada
     21  Robert E. Miller,  Manager,  NVOO/AEC,  Las  Vegas, Nevada
     22  Robert H. Thalgott,  NVOO/AEC,  Las Vegas,  Nevada
     23  Thomas H. Blankenship, NVOO/AEC, Las  Vegas, Nevada
     24  Henry G.  Vermillion, NVOO/AEC, Las Vegas, Nevada
     25  Donald W. Hendricks, NVOO/AEC, Las Vegas, Nevada
     26  Elwood M. Douthett,  NVOO/AEC,  Las Vegas,  Nevada
     27  Jared J.  Davis, NVOO/AEC, Las  Vegas,  Nevada
     28  Ernest D. Campbell,  NVOO/AEC,  Las Vegas,  Nevada
29 - 30  Technical Library, NVOO/AEC, Las Vegas, Nevada
     31  Chief, NOB/DNA, NVOO/AEC, Las  Vegas,  Nevada
     32  Joseph J. DiNunno, Office of Environmental Affairs, USAEC, Washington,  D.C.
     33  Martin B. Biles, DOS, USAEC, Washington,  D.C.
     34  Roy D. Maxwell, DOS, USAEC, Washington, D.C.
     35  Assistant General Manager,  DMA, USAEC, Washington, D.C.
     36  Gordon C. Facer, DMA, USAEC, Washington,  D.C.
     37  John S.  Kelly, DPNE, USAEC, Washington, D.C.
     38  Fred J.  Clark, Jr.,  DPNE, USAEC, Washington, D.C.
     39  John R.  Totter, DBM, USAEC, Washington, D.C.
     40  John S.  Kirby-Smith, DBM, USAEC, Washington, D.C.
     41  L.  Joe Deal,  DBM, USAEC, Washington,  D.C.
     42  Charles  L.  Osterberg, DBM,  USAEC, Washington, D.C.
     43  Rudolf J. Engelmann, DBM, USAEC, Washington, D.C.
     44  Philip W. Allen, ARL/NOAA,  Las Vegas, Nevada
     45  Gilbert J.  Ferber, ARL/NOAA, Silver Spring, Maryland
     46  Stanley M.  Greenfield, Assistant Administrator for Research & Monitoring,
         EPA, Washington, D.C.
     47  Acting Deputy Assistant  Administrator for Radiation Programs,
         EPA, Rockville, Maryland
     48  Paul C.  Tompkins, Act. Dir., Div. of  Criteria & Standards, Office  of
         Radiation Programs,  EPA, Rockville, Maryland
49 - 50  Charles L.  Weaver, Act.  Dir.,  Div. of Surveillance &  Inspection,
         Office of Radiation  Programs,  EPA, Rockville, Maryland
     51  Ernest D. Harward, Act.  Dir.,  Div. of Technology  Assessment, Office of
         Radiation Programs,  EPA, Rockville, Maryland

-------
Distribution (continued)
        52  Acting Dir., Twinbrook Research Laboratory, EPA,  Rockville, Md.
        53  Gordon Everett, Dir., Office of Technical  Analysis, EPA, Washington, D.C
        54  Bernd Kahn, Radiochemistry & Nuclear Enqineerinn, NFPC,  Cincinnati, 0.
        55  Regional Admin., Region IX, EPA, San Francisco,  California
        56  Eastern Environmental Radiation Laboratory, EPA,  Montgomery, Alabama
        57  William C. King, LLL, Mercury, Nevada
        58  Bernard W. Shore, LLL, Livermore, California
        59  James E. Carothers, LLL, Livermore, California
        60  Roger E. Batzel, LLL, Livermore, California
        61  Howard A. Tewes, LLL, Livermore, California
        62  Lawrence S. Germain, LLL, Livermore, California
        63  Paul L. Phelps, LLL, Livermore, California
        64  William E. Ogle, LASL, Los Alamos, New Mexico
        65  Harry J. Otway, LASL, Los Alamos, New Mexico
        66  George E. Tucker, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, New  Mexico
        67  Wright H. Langham, LASL, Los Alamos, New Mexico
        68  Harry S. Jordan, LASL, Los Alamos, New Mexico
        69  Arden E. Bicker, REECo., Mercury, Nevada
        70  Clinton S. Maupin, REECo., Mercury, Nevada
        71  Byron F. Murphey, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, New  Mexico
        72  Melvin L. Merritt, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico
        73  Richard S. Davidson, Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, Ohio
        74  R. Glen Fuller, Battelle Memorial Institute, Las  Vegas,  Nevada
        75  Steven V. Kaye, Oak Ridge National Lab., Oak Ridge, Tennessee
        76  Leo  K. Bustad, University of California, Davis,  California
        77  Leonard A. Sagan, Palo Alto Medical Clinic, Palo  Alto,  California
        78  Vincent Schultz, Washington State University, Pullman,  Washington
        79  Arthur Wallace, University of California, Los Angeles,  California
        80  Wesley E. Niles, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada
        81  Robert C. Pendleton, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah
        82  William S. Twenhofel, U. S. Geological Survey, Denver,  Colorado
        83  Paul R. Fenske, Desert Research Institute, University of Nevada,
            Reno, Nevada
        84  John M. Ward,  President, Desert Research Institute, University of
            Nevada, Reno,  Nevada
    85 - 86  DTIE, USAEC, Oak Ridge, Tennessee (for public availability)

-------