SWRHL-28r
  131I DAIRY COW UPTAKE STUDIES USING
       A SYNTHETIC DRY AEROSOL
                   by the
    Bioenvironmental Research Program
 Southwestern Radiological Health Laboratory
         U. S. Public Health Service
Department of Health, Education,  and Welfare
             Las Vegas, Nevada
               April 18,  1966

-------
                            PREFACE






Project Hayseed was the name given to this first in a planned series



of controlled field experiments to be conducted by the Bioenvironmental



Research Program (BRP).  These experiments will be designed to



elucidate problems in radioiodine mechanisms of transport through



the biosphere and dosimetry under controlled conditions.






In this report,  the introduction,  discussion,  and summary of the total



report were written by the senior staff.  The sections dealing with



a specific part of the project were written by members of the units



of BRP to which that part was assigned.

-------
                      ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS






While most of the experiments reported were planned and executed



by the BRP staff,  personnel from other programs  at the Southwestern



Radiological Health Laboratory (SWRHL) contributed suggestions or



aid in sample  analysis.  U. S. Weather Bureau personnel under



N. A. Kennedy were responsible for placing and operating the



weather instruments and the meteorology section of this report is



based on their data.   The Radiochemistry Program and Physics and



Data Analysis Service of SWRHL provided aid in sample analysis



and the Electronics Program aided materially in design and oper-



ation of the Remote Monitoring System.

-------
                      TABLE OF CONTENTS


PREFACE                                                      i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS                                        ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS                                        iii

LIST OF TABLES                                              vii

LIST OF FIGURES                                             ix

LIST-OF PLATES                                              xi

INTRODUCTION                                                 1

AEROSOL GENERATION                                         7

   I    Objective                                                7

  II    Procedure                                               7
         A  Aerosol Selection                                    7
         B  Aerosol Generation Tests                            7
         C  Aerosol Tests                                       8
             1  Particle size                                    8
             2  Duration                                         8
             3  Tagging Tests                                   8
             4  Dispersion Tests                                 10
         D   Field Release of l 31 I Tagged Aerosol               10

III       Results and Discussion                                  12

METEOROLOGY                                                 14

   I     Introduction                                             14

  II     Objectives                                               14

 III     Procedure                                               14

  IV     Results                                                 16

   V     Discussion                                              16

ANIMAL HUSBANDRY                                           19

COUNTING SYSTEM                                             27
   I     System Description                                      27

  II     Geometry and Calibration                               27

 III     Error  Estimates                                        29
                                111

-------
                     TABLE OF CONTENTS


FALLOUT AND AIR SAMPLING                                31

   I     Objectives                                            31
        A  Preliminary Program                              31
        B  Project Hayseed                                   31

  II     Procedure                                            32
        A  Preliminary Program                              32
        B  Project Hayseed                                   33

 III     Results                                               34
        A  Preliminary Program                              34
        B  Project Hayseed                                   38

  IV    Discussion                                           49
        A  Preliminary Program                              49
        B  Project Hayseed                                   50

   V    Summary and Conclusions                              53

PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS                                    55

   I     Objective                                             55
  II     Procedure                                            55

 III     Results                                               57
  IV    Discussion                                           68

   V    Summary and Conclusions                              71

MOBILE MONITORING                                        72
   I     Objectives                                            72

  II     Procedure                                            72

 III     Results and Discussion                                73
         1   Dose rate monitoring                               73
         2   Air Sampling                                      73
         3   Soil Sampling                                      7 3

  IV    Summary and Conclusions                              74

CONTROLLED AREA MONITORING                            75

   I     Objective                                             75

  II     Procedure                                            75
 III     Results                                               76

                               iv

-------
                     TABLE OF  CONTENTS


  IV    Discussion                                           78

   V    Conclusions                                           78
SAMPLE ANALYSIS                                           79

   I     Objectives                                            79

  II     Procedure                                            79
        1   Milk and Water                                    79
        2   Hay                                               80
        3   Green Chop and Natural Vegetation                  80
        4   Soil and Grain                                     80
        5   Charcoal Cartridge                                80
        6   Filter Papers and Fallout Trays                    81

 III     Results                                               81
        1   Uncontaminated Feed                               81
        Z   Contaminated Feed                                 87
        3   Milk Results                                       90

  IV    Discussion                                          132

   V    Summary                                            141

SPREAD HAY AND GREEN CHOP DEPTH STUDY              144

   I     Objective                                            144

  II.    Procedure                                           144
 III     Sampling                                            145
  IV    Results   '                                           146
   V    Discussion                                          146
SOIL AND NATURAL VEGETATION STUDY                    149
   I     Objective                                            149

  II     Procedure                                           149
 III     Results                                              149
  IV    Discussion                                          150
   V    Summary and Conclusions                            150
PASTURE CONTAMINATION                                  151
   I     Introduction                                          151

  II     Objectives                                           151
                                 v

-------
                     TABLE OF CONTENTS


 III     Procedure                                          151

  IV    Results and Discussion                              153

   V    Summary and Conclusions                           157

THYROID UPTAKE IN CALVES                              158

   I     Objectives                                          158

  II     Procedure                                          158
        A  Calf History                                     158
        B  Equipment                                      159
        C  Counting                                        161

 III     Results                                             165
  IV    Discussion                                         165

   V    Summary                                           173

REMOTE  MONITORING SYSTEM   .                          175

        Introduction                                        175

   I     Objectives                                          181

  II     Procedure                                          182

 III     Results                                             183
        A  General                                         183
        B  Wind Data                                       183
        C  Temperature Sensors                            185
        D  Radiation Sensors                               186

  IV    Conclusions                                        187

RESERVOIR WATER SAMPLING                             194

   I     Objective                                           194

  II     Procedure                                          194

 III     Results                                             194

  IV    Discussion                                         194

   V    Conclusions                                        195
SUMMARY OF RESULTS OF THE TOTAL STUDY             196

CONCLUSION OF THE TOTAL STUDY                        202

REFERENCES                            '                  204

APPENDIX

DISTRIBUTION
                                VI

-------
                        LIST OF TABLES
Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table

Table
1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.
8.

9.
Table

Table

Table   10.
Table   11.


Table   12.


Table   13.

Table   14.

Table   15.


Table   16.


Table   17.


Table   18.


Table   19.


Table   20.
Production data on cows.                             20

Feeding schedule for the dairy herd.                  21

Counting efficiencies for 131I.                        29

Sieve analysis.                                       34

Iodine -131 deposition.                                42

Air sampler data.                                    44

Contamination level comparison (pCi/m2) between
fallout planchets and hand cut green chop.             45

Deposition velocities (relative to planchets).           49

Deposition ratios for various samples.                54

Particle size of pre -Hayseed test aerosol.            58
Particle size of Hayseed aerosol from Group I
photographs  (109x).                                  58

Adjusted particle size from Group I photographs
(109x) data for stakes  5,7,8,9, 10, 11.                 59

Particle size from Group II photographs (142x).       60

Hayseed aerosol particle size - final data.            60

Survey instrument measurements in the controlled
area.                                                76

Iodine-131 measurements  in uncontaminated hay
fed to cows  (pCi/kg).                                 82

Iodine-131 measurements  in uncontaminated fresh
green chop fed to cows (pCi/kg).                      84

Iodine-131 measurements  in water and grain sam-
ples at Well  3, NTS.                                  86

Iodine-131 in high -volume air samples collected
at Well 3 for the month of  October.                   88

Iodine-131 in Group II contaminated spread hay.       89
                                Vll

-------
                        LIST OF TABLES
Table  21.   Iodine-131 in Group III contaminated green chop.       91

Table  22.   Iodine-131 in Group IV contaminated green chop.       92

Table  23.   Data for Group V control cows.                        95

Table  24.   Data for Group I inhalation cows.                     101

Table  25.   Data for Group II contaminated spread hay cows.      108

Table  26.   Data for Group III contaminated spread green
             chop cows.                                          115

Table  27.   Data for Group IV contaminated fresh green chop
             cows.                                               122

Table  28.   Ratios  of average daily peak pCi/liter  in milk and
             average daily peak pCi/kg in feed.                    134

Table  29.   Percent of iodine secreted in milk.                   135

Table  30.   Range of 1 31I values for  individual cows within
             groups (October,  1965).                              136

Table  31.   Summary of averages for feed and milk  results.      142

Table  32.   Chemical analysis of hay used for Project Hayseed.   145

Table  33.   Iodine-131 activity on growing Sudan grass.           155
Table  34.   Iodine-131 activity on fresh cut Sudan grass at time
             of feeding.                                          156

Table  35.   Data on calves.                                      159

Table  36.   Iodine-131 activity data for  calf thyroid  study.        166

Table  37.   Summary of calf data.                                168

Table  38.   Comparison of dosage calculations from this study
             with those predicted by Federal Radiation Council
             Report 5 (8).                                        173

Table  39.   List of instrumentation.                              184

Table  40.   Peak average values and effective half-lives in  the
             different forages  used.                               202

Table  41.   Average milk values obtained for the controlled
             1 3l I ingestion studies.                               202
                               Vlll

-------
                        LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Figure
Figure
Figure
1.
2.
3.
4.
Figure    5.
Figure    6.
Figure    7.
Figure    8.
Figure    9.
Figure   10.
Figure   11.
Figure   12.
Figure   13.
Figure   14.
Figure   15.
Figure   16.
Figure   17.
Figure   18.
Figure   19.
Figure   20.
Figure   21.

Figure   22.
Figure   23.
PHS farm.
Aerosol generator.
Experimental area.
Meteorological instrumentation for Project
Hayseed.
Wind speed and direction.
T-10 meter vs 1 meter.
Portable stanchion.
Cow positions in Well 3 corrals.
Cumulative distribution of particle sizes.
Aerosol deposition on 15  x 15 m plots.
Aerosol deposition on 15  x 15 m plots.
Sampling grid planchet fallout data ((JtCi/m2).
Beta vs gamma data on planchets.
Planchet data.
Planchet data.
Pasture deposition from pasture samples.
Particle sizes on row 1 slides.
Particle sizes on row 2 slides.
Particle sizes on row 3 slides.
Particle size distribution curves.
Average net mR/hr  surface (3 +
field.
                                      in contaminated
    Iodine -131 in air and milk samples.
    Iodine -131 in milk following inhalation average for
    4 cows  - Group I.
  3
  9
 11

 15
 17
 18
 22
 25
 35
 36
 37
 39
 40
 46
 47
 48
 61
 62
 63
 64

 77
 93

128
                                IX

-------
                        LIST OF FIGURES


Figure   24.   Iodine-131 in milk following ingestion average of
              4 cows fed contaminated spread hay - Group II.      129

Figure   25.   Iodine-131 in milk following ingestion average of
              4 cows fed contaminated spread green chop -
              Group III.                                          130

Figure   26.   Iodine-131 in milk following ingestion average of
              4 cows fed contaminated fresh green chop -
              Group IV.                                          131
Figure   27.   Average 131I activity in feed.                       140

Figure   28.   Results of hay depth study.                          147

Figure   29.   Results of green chop depth study.                   148

Figure   30.   Daily cutting of the contaminated Sudan grass.       152

Figure   31.   Average l 3l I data calf study.                        169
Figure   32.   Total pCi 1 31I in thyroid calf  study.                 170
Figure   33.   Block diagram of information flow,  Remote Moni-
              toring System.                                     176

Figure   34.   Particulate  sampler.                               178

Figure   35.   Particulate  sampler, front section.                  179
Figure   36.   Gaseous sampler.                                  180
Figure   37.   Wind direction and speed during aerosol release.     188

Figure   38.   Comparison of wind direction sensors.              189

Figure   39.   Comparison of wind speed sensors                  190

Figure   40.   T and AT during aerosol release                    191
Figure   41.   Comparison of temperature  sensors.                192

Figure   42.   Radiation sensor outputs.                           193

-------
                      LIST OF PLATES
Plate  1     Group  II cows in portable stanchion showing
             high wall manger and water supply                24

Plate  2     Photomicrographs of deposited aerosol row 1      65

Plate  3     Photomicrographs of deposited aerosol row 3      66

Plate  4     Photograph of pre-Hayseed test aerosol           67

Plate  5     Photograph of TMC 400 channel pulse hieght
             analyzer with 3" Nal crystal used to determine
             total pCi in thyroid                              160

Plate  6     Platform on wheels with mounted yoke and
             crystal assembly welded to a Jack (-with calf)     162

Plate  7     Platform, on wheels -with mounted yoke and
             crystal assembly welded to a Jack                163

Plate  8     Photograph of specially designed head holder     164
                                XI

-------
                          INTRODUCTION






One of the significant findings of a field radioiodine study conducted



following the Pike underground nuclear test  was the measurement



of 131I in the milk of dairy cows eating only hay and grain.  The



observed levels were a factor of approximately six lower than the



measured levels of   3 I in the milk of cows eating fresh green for-



age at the same location.  In addition, the apparent effective decay



half life  (T   )  of    I observed  in the milk of dairy cows eating



fresh green forage appeared to differ from the effective decay half-



life of *  31I observed in the milk of dairy cows eating only hay and



grain.





A field experiment was also conducted following the Transient



Nuclear  Test (TNT) of a Kiwi reactor  .  This field experiment was



designed, in part, to test  the finding of the Pike experiment that



the kinetics of  the secretion of  radioiodine in  the milk of cows eat-



ing contaminated hay might differ from that of cows eating contam-



inated fresh green forage.  In two groups of study  cows fed



contaminated hay from different stations, the results were appar-



ently contradictory.  For  cows in one group an  effective decay half-



life of 5. 5 days during feeding was observed.   This value is in good



agreement with a  similar  one of 5. 9 days from  the Pike study.



However, cows in another group exhibited an  effective  decay half-



life of Z. 8 days.   These results are inconclusive with regard to con-



firming or negating  the Pike observations.  In evaluating these re-



sults it was pointed  out that the  characteristics of  the radioiodine



contaminants at the  two different stations were  apparently quite



different.  The material deposited on hay at the closest station,





                                 1

-------
which displayed a T    of 2. 8 days, was predominantly gaseous in nature,
                   G-L-L

whereas the contaminant at the other  station was more particulate


in nature.   It must be emphasized that the radiodines generated during


the TNT came from an exploding reactor while those generated during


Pike came from an inadvertent release from an underground nuclear


experiment. The physical and  chemical nature  of the  radioiodines


from such different sources might be inherently different with concomitant


differences in biological availability to dairy cows.



The next opportunity to investigate these matters occurred in con-


junction with the  Palanquin event,  a nuclear excavation experiment.


Our Palanquin study included specific radioiodine experiments to


measure dairy cow inhalation-only uptake, uptake from ingestion of


contaminated hay, and uptake from inges.tion of  contaminated fresh green


forage.  Any total assessment of radioiodine uptake by dairy cows must


include measurement of inhalation uptake, uptake from ingestion  of


contaminated fresh green forage, uptake from ingestion of contaminated


hay and/or  grain, and uptake from contaminated water.  For the


Palanquin study the method used to contaminate forage for  subsequent feeding


to dairy cows involved spreading hay  and freshly cut green chop over  a


suitable desert area within the  expected fallout pattern.  Considerable


success was attained in contaminating the forage in this fashion.  It


is clear, however, that such artificial systems  for obtaining contamina-


tion must be related to more realistic systems before we will be


able to  completely interpret and evaluate the data obtained  from


Palanquin.  The major purpose of Project Hayseed was to relate  our


artificial systems for obtaining contamination to a more realistic


system when the  contaminant is a synthetic, dry aerosol tagged with 1 31I.




An ideal system for collection of contamination  would  be an actual


field of growing forage located  in a fallout pattern.  Since this has


rarely been available  during the existence of this program, we have had

-------
A PPEAJ-D i ><•-- •  I	.E?Jr|:S-v.£AR M
           COMTAMMlATCD A«M
      5cAUC  I "B

-------
to content ourselves with using artificial systems.  The availability

of a good stand of Sudan grass (Sorghum sudanense) at the PHS Experimental

Farm, Area 15,  Nevada Test Site (NTS) (Figure 1) gave us the capability

of establishing relationships among the contamination characteristics

of the three systems:

                 1.  Spread hay (as for Palanquin)

                 2.  Spread green chop (as for Palanquin)

                 3.  Growing  Sudan grass

Ideally the radioactive material released should have  been composed

of fresh mixed fission products of the same character as those released

following Palanquin.  However,  for various reasons we decided for

this experiment to utilize a relatively simple synthetic,  dry aerosol of

diatomaceous earth tagged with l 31I. A dry aerosol was chosen because

such a material may simulate close-in  particulate fallout from a

nuclear excavation experiment  conducted in a desert environment.

Somewhat similar field releases of  31I over growing forage have

been accomplished previously at NRTS, Idaho Falls, Idaho3.  Project

Hayseed differed from the NRTS experiments in the following particulars:
       1.  Form of activity released
           Method of feeding contamin-
           ated forage
                                            NRTS
Molecular iodine
Grazing
      PHS

 Iodide labeled
 fine particulate
 dry aerosol
Weighed amounts
of green chop and
hay
In addition,  in our experiment -we contaminated spread hay and spread green

chop side by side with the growing grass.  This was not done in the NRTS

study.  Another difference was that the contaminated pasture was green chopped

                                 4

-------
each day so weighed amounts could be fed (called fresh green chop

in this study) whereas the NRTS cows were allowed to graze.


The primary objectives of the present study were:

       1.   To relate the amounts  of : 31I deposited per kilogram

            upon spread hay, spread green chop and growing Sudan

            grass as a result of dissemination of * 311 in the form

            of a dry aerosol.

       2.   To relate the kinetics of the secretion of 1 31I in the

            milk of dairy cows fed the three different types of

            contaminated forage described above.

       3.   To determine the uptake of l 31I and subsequently to  follow

            the kinetics of secretion of this 1 31I in the milk of

            dairy cows maintained in a contaminated environment

            but not allowed to eat contaminated food or water.


Of course, techniques for characterizing and disseminating the l 31I

tagged aerosol had to be developed prior to the experiment.


In addition to following the time course of radioiodine in cow's milk

resulting from the different types of exposure,  ancillary experiments

•were designed to determine the movement of 1 31I in soil, the penetration

of tagged aerosol through hay and green chop piles, the effects of spray

irrigation on pasture contamination, the  evaluation of a Remote Monitoring

System, the thyroid uptake of calves drinking contaminated milk, the

particle sizes of the aerosol, and the variation in aerosol deposition

on the  experimental plot.  The results from successful studies such  as

these could be used in the design of a more accurate model for estimating

potential dose to humans from radioiodine released to the environment.


The design criterion for this project was contamination of the experimental
                   r       7
plot to a level of 10 pCi/m  with a dry aerosol tagged with l 31I.

-------
This level of contamination on green chop and hay was expected,  after



ingestion by dairy cow, to give peak levels in the milk of approximately



104 pCi l 31 I/liter.






The experiment was successfully conducted during the time 0530-0600 on



October 4, 1965.  The results of each separate experiment will be presented



in the following  sections.

-------
                      AEROSOL GENERATION

                            S. C. Black


 I.   Objectives

     The following objectives were set for the aerosol generation

     portion of the Hayseed Project:

           To generate a dry aerosol tagged with radioiodine.

           To deposit this aerosol on an area 40 x 15 meters on
           the farm.

           To contaminate the desired area to a level of at
           least 105 pCi/m2.


II.   Procedure

     A.    Aerosol selection.

           Since a dry aerosol was desired, the materials consid-

           ered were clay,  ball-milled sand and diatomaceous

           earth(DE).  The DE was picked because it was  readily

           available,, exists  in small particle sizes, does  not

           clump  excessively when wet and is basically siliceous

           as the  particles from a cratering event may be.

     B.    Aerosol generation tests.

           An attempt to use a paint  sprayer was unsuccessful so

           the aerosol was placed  in a suction flask with inlet

           air coming into the flask both tangentially and normally

           to the flask wall.   In both cases quiet spaces were

           created in the flask which prevented unloading of all the

           aerosol.   The generator finally chosen is shown in

           Figure 2.   A one-liter round-bottom flask,  two-hole

           rubber stopper and 3/8" glass  tubing were used to con-

           struct  the generator.

-------
C.    Aerosol tests.



      The following tests were conducted to determine the



      characteristics of the aerosol and the generator:



      1.   Particle size.



          The smallest sieve available locally was Z50 mesh,



          so all the DE that passed through this  sieve was



          used.  This restricted the particle  size range of the



          aerosol to  61|J. or less.  Since the density of the DE



          was 0.26,  the aerodynamic particle size range was



          l6p. or less.   Samples were collected for particle



          sizing by operating the generator in still air and



          collecting the particles on glass slides.





      2.   Duration.



          It appeared reasonable to generate  a cloud which



          •would require 10-20 minutes to pass over the



          experimental area as  this would approach fallout



          cloud duration at close-in positions.  Generation



          time was varied by adjusting the volume airflow



          rate and the  amount of aerosol placed  in the



          generator.





      3.   Tagging  tests.



          Approximately 150 g.  of DE was slurried with



          400 ml of ethanol, containing l 31 I as Na l 3 U,



          and dried by suction filtration. Only 15% of the



          1 3l I was picked up even after stirring the mixture



          for 20 minutes.  In view of this, the method of



          choice was to mix well and dry the  mixture without



          filtration.  The dried  material was  sieved again to



          break up agglomerates.  To determine whether or



          not the J 31I would be released from the DE, some

-------
In

-------
          of the tagged material was mixed with hamburger,



          fed to dogs, and thyroid uptake measured.





          With an area of 600 m2 to be contaminated to a



          level of 105 pCi/m2 ,  60 uCi of l 31I had to be



          deposited.  If 5% of the cloud was deposited and



          10% of the  amount deposited stuck to the vegetation,



          then 12 mCi was  required.  To allow for uneven



          deposition  and losses in tagging and re-sieving,



          50 mCi of     I were ordered.





      4.   Dispersion tests.



          To determine the area covered by the generators,



          a 15 x  15m plot was  selected on the farm and



          three generators, operating from one pump,  were



          placed  5m in front of the plot.  Untagged DE was



          used as the aerosol,  and the generators -were



          operated under a variety of wind conditions.  De-



          position was  measured by collecting the aerosol



          on glass slides placed on stakes  at grass height



          on the  plot.





D.    Field  release of 131I  tagged  aerosol.



      For the actual field release, it was decided  to use 10



      generators.  Nine of the generators  were sufficient to



      cover the 15 x 40 m plot but  a tenth one was placed on



      the upwind  side of the plot to permit more even distri-



      bution.  The generators were placed  at 4.4 m intervals



      starting 2.2m  from one edge of the  field on a line



      •which was 5 m  from the upwind  side.  As of the day of



      release, the 131I received would decay to 3 1 mCi.  This



      was divided into equal portions and used to  tag ten batches






                              10

-------
                       '.• 'ls    /••/'•  n /•   w'VA  >/' <;A-

                       JV 7 V   /j^i'C'.'/'v/ e/ener£-l-t'i"^.
                       |D D D'   /4;r 5Ampler j
                       t~\ C*\ r~*   i'i •    t'j    f      I ' i
                              6
                                                   H-
     V  ;  V     V
.^_-	  1
       .2"

               0
              ^L
V
                       i/2
      O
      -a
v     v     v
                                         '    //,4V

 .a
                                                       '73
                O
3-
                                                                 t**-
                                                                 >tf
                                                                 ~>i


-------
         of 150 g. each of DE.  The tagging was done about 70 hours before



         release to allow sufficient time for drying and resieving.  Each



         batch was resieved individually and then counted.  The recount



         showed that 22. 1 mCi was available for release over the plot.



         The arrangement of equipment in the experimental area is  shown



         in Fig.  3.






         The aerosol generators were operated from three air pumps with



         the flow rate for each generator controlled by rotameters.   The



         release occurred in the early morning hours  (0530-0556 hours  PST)



         on October 4, 1965 and was governed by a weather vane placed
         1 m above ground level.   The generators were run when the vane



         indicated a 330  to  360  wind.



         were 30" above ground level.
indicated a 330  to 360 wind.  'The outlets from the generators
III.  Results and Discussion



      A.   From the particle  size test, it appeared that much of the heavier



          material fell out in the first few feet.  The aerosol deposited



          21 feet away had a  CMD of  17u.






      B.   The duration tests indicated that a flow of 2. 5 cfm with 150 g .



          of DE in the generator would dispense the aerosol in 1 3 to 15



          minutes.






      C.   The tagging tests indicated that there was negligible loss of



          1 3 11 when the slurried DE was air-dried and resieved.



          The  two dogs had an uptake of  24. 6% and 26. 2%, three days



          after ingestion, indicating that the DE readily released the



          iodine tag under these conditions.








      D.   The dispersion tests, with untagged aerosol, indicated that the



          morning drainage winds were suitable as a release condition;





                                          12

-------
    however, releases with higher winds, winds from a different
    direction or highly variable winds could be used with a satisfactory
    deposition.  The three generators were adequate for covering
    the 15 x 15 m area.  The early morning release, though ,  required
    17-18 minutes to unload the generators, probably because the
    higher humidity caused some clumping or an increase in particle
    weight.

E.  The actual experimental field release was highly successful with
    a relatively high percentage  deposition and with all of the designed
    area  being contaminated.  The release of  all the aerosol required
    approximately 30 minutes because the generators were turned
    off when the wind veered too far  in one direction and because
    the humidity -was fairly high.  The latter factor -was due, in part,
    to the fact that the  field was  sprayed about six hours prior  to
    release so the grass  would have  a "dew" on it  to make the aerosol
    adhere to the  grass.
                                    13

-------
                           METEOROLOGY



                             S.  C. Black






 I.   Introduction



      It is reasonable to expect that obvious weather conditions such



      as wind speed and direction, humidity and precipitation would



      have some effect on aerosol deposition, particularly when



      deposition in a certain area is desired.  As a consequence of



      this expectation, meteorological data is routinely monitored



      in the area of interest during all field tests.   The routine



      measurements are wind speed,  wind direction, temperature,



      relative humidity and precipitation, with the first four meas-



      urements  made at both 1 meter  and 10 meters above ground.





 II.   Objectives



      For this project, the folio-wing objectives were set as the



      minimum  requirements:



      1.     To obtain background data in Area 15,  NTS, on wind



            directions and speed to aid the planning for the aerosol



            generation experiment.



      2.     To gather pertinent localized weather data during and



            after the experiment.





III.   Procedure



      Instrumentation was installed at the Area  15 farm to record wind



      speed and direction  so that trends  could be observed and predic-



      tions made.  The arrangement of the instruments  is shown on



      Figure 4.   This arrangement allowed measurements upwind and



      downwind  of the experimental plot  as well as wind and temperature
                                    14

-------
          METEOROLOGICAL INSTRUMENTATION FOR
                    PROJECT HAYSEED
                                                                    7, > 
-------
      measurements at two elevations.





      Analog recordings of'the instruments were made so that both



      instantaneous and average values could be determined.





IV.   Results



      Preliminary data indicated that early morning would be the



      optimum time for an aerosol release.  At that time winds are



      generally from the north(drainage winds) at about 3-5 mph



      with an inversion layer close to the ground.





      The release did  occur near daybreak on October 4,  1965.



      The meteorological data are  shown in tables in the Appendix.



      Graphs of the data during the time of aerosol release are



      shown  in Figures 5 and 6.





V.    Discussion



      The daybreak time was highly suitable for this experiment.



      The inversion confined the aerosol to lower layers and the



      1-2 mph winds allowed maximum deposition on the area of



      interest. The slight variation in wind direction probably aided




     the experiment  by causing mixing of the 10 aerosol streams



     resulting in a more uniform deposition.
                                    16

-------
                                          A
                                      i

                                                        \
                                                            -\
            /   \          /
          •/       v        '"
                      Y
V
3


 a


7
                ~\
                                                                                                                                      *>.    -
                                                                                                       A
                                                                                                                                                                     f
                   \
/ - \ «•-•-••-
./-••; "... A •. H f - - 	 tf-" - :- — •'
*" " ' ~; "r" ""~~. :" ;J " '""'"• "' '" v "">' •" '\
•-, / ....... , ,/ - • . -. \£ - :.:%» 	
— 	 .-" ; '. :'",..;, .;-'N'--, .•;-;:;•,,*>
"~ T . • ~ '
-- '— '- ' - --- •


-------
                                                                                                                       Fit  v  "   AT (/In -
                                                           I  J
7
                                  '\
                                                                                                                                        --4'
                                                                                                 '."'/

-------
                      ANIMAL HUSBANDRY



                           R. E.  Engel






Holstein dairy cows from the Animal Husbandry Unit were divided into



five groups of four each.   These cows were in the milking line and



grouped for this experiment as listed in Tables 1 and 2.  All cows



were kept as free  as possible of fecal and urine accumulations on



the mammary gland.  Prior to applying the milking unit,  the mam-



mary gland was washed thoroughly with running lukewarm water.



The gland was then wiped dry with a clean absorbent paper towel.





Each cow was milked with the same Surge milking unit  throughout



the duration of the experiment.   Normal milking procedures were



followed with one  exception; the cows were released from their



respective corral  areas according to group.  This change in the



social  order did not seem  to affect the  milk production  after the first



day.





Grain was  fed from  a metal bin that was filled at each milking.  The



grain was a commercially prepared ration and bagged in  paper sacks.



To fill the  bin,  it  was  necessary to wheel  it to a storehouse approxi-



mately 50 feet from the milking stanchions.  The sacks were opened,



the bin filled and returned to approximately five feet in front of the



manger.  The grain was scooped out by means of a special grain



scale-scoop.  At no time  did the scoop come in contact with the cows



or other structures  other than the  grain bin.





All cows in all groups were handled by identical means during  the



milking procedure.  Milk from each cow was saved in a 4-liter



cubitainer  containing lOcc of 37%  formaldehyde.  From this point



in the  procedure,  each group was treated  differently.





                                  19

-------
Table 1.   Production data on cows.
L.OW Days in
Group TV-, i T->
Number Production
I 1
5
46
47
II 12
19
21
25
III 15
18
27
29
IV 43
44
45
48
V 13
24
28
36
272
178
195
230
264
144
75
268
225
57
30
230
240
178
22
108
29
171
Liters
per day
27
11
22
23
11
13
22
35
20
17
30
31
21
16
21
25
27
24
27
Total
Prod, /liters
985
4670
4469
5466
4428
5560
2795
2453
5817
4776
1737
939
1386
5046
6347
552
2864
705
4854
177
/o
Butterfat
2. 1
3. 0
2. 3
2. 6
3. 5
2. 8
3. 1
2.9
3. 0
2. 8
2.6
2. 3
4.6
3. 1
2. 1
2. 9
2. 3
2. 3
3. 0
gm fat '
daily
567
330
506
598
385
364
682
1015
600
476
780
713
966
496
441
725
621
552
810
days
pregnant
N.P.
154
22
94
135
30
24
N.P.
92
169
N.P.
N.P.
140
92
145
N.P.
30
N.P.
112
EDP*
rating
73
97
110
123
99
112
100
104
104.-
96
107
76
N. V.
N. V.
112
93
103
54
135
^Electronic data processing (EDP) relative value index for the milking herd.   The average cow
 of our herd is equal to  100.  This index is determined for us by the Dairy Herd Improvement
 Association.

-------
Table 2.  Feeding schedule for the dairy herd.
Group
I
II
III
IV
V
Notes:
Number
. _ Food Food
oi Cows
4 H
4 H*
4 H GC*
4 H
3 H
H* Contaminated hay
Food Remarks
GC Air uptake only.
GC Contaminated hay.
Contaminated old green
chop.
GC** Contaminated fresh
green chop.
GC Control cows.
spread as for Palanquin.
GC* Contaminated Sudan green chop spread as for
Palanquin.

GC** Fresh green chop
grass.
made from contaminated Sudan
H Uncontaminated hay.

GC Fresh green chop
grass.
made from uncontaminated Sudan
Group I cows were milked and then moved at H-3 hours from the



dairy barn (Well 3, NTS) to Area 15 farm,  a distance of approxi-



mately 15 miles.  They were placed in portable stanchions designed



to hold dairy cows comfortably (See Figure  7).   These stanchions



permitted free movement of the head laterally and vertically,



restricting only the forward and backward movement.  These are



similar to dairy barn stanchions but mounted on a steel platform



for  portability.  Cows 1,  5,  46 and 47 were arranged in  that order



from east to west and spaced at approximately  1 m.   These animals



were placed so as to  face the north, 80 feet west of the third riser



on the south side of the third lateral at the  southwest corner of the



Sudan plot (Figure 3). Plywood was placed  on the ground in front



of the cows  to prevent ingestion of any feed  stuffs.  No water was





                                  21

-------
v^Ti^T'v
 I   i/xsr: .>--np'i
 l/n IP!

                   Scale l'=20"
 Figure 7 - Portable Stanchion
        22

-------
made available during this period.  Themuzzelof each cow was



washed from separate buckets at H + 1 hour.  The four cows were



then loaded into a cattle trailer,  removed from the contaminated



area and transported back to the dairy barn (Well 3).  They were



decontaminated and placed in a; holding corral having community



water and feed mangers only for this group.





Groups II,  III,  IV and V consisted of the main milking herd and



remained at Well 3 corrals throughout the experiment.  Each



outside stanchion had an individual high wall manger and water



supply (Plate 1) and was numbered with the cow's number and



group for the particular cow occupying each stanchion(Figure 8).



All cows were fed according to the schedule shown in Table 2.





Following the morning milking, at approximately 0800,  Group  II



cows were  fed 10 kg of green chop.  The uneaten green chop  was



weighed to  obtain the  amount of green chop consumed.  Then 10 kg



of contaminated hay was fed in the same mangers and again the



uneaten portions weighed to determine the amount  consumed.



Daily individual samples of hay and  green chop for this group,



as well as for all other groups, were taken by removing  one  hand-



ful from each surface corner and  one handful from the bottom of



each individual manger and placing each combined sample  in



separate plastic bags.  Each cow was kept in its stanchion until



the afternoon milking.





Group III, IV and V cows were treated in the same manner with the



only difference being  in the type of feed consumed.  Group II and



IV cows were fed contaminated forage for a period of 6 days  an'd



Group III for a period of 4 days.   10 kg of fresh uncontaminated green



chop was fed to each  cow in all groups except Group III throughout



the duration of the experiment. An extra  5 kg of uncontaminated hay



was fed to each cow in the evening.





                                  23

-------

          I
^,VV*;:M.-~.

-------
No.  28     43  44 45 48





29
27
18
15


24
13

25
21
19
12





•
1
!



	
—
z


__, 	 ._









'
1.4 j
. 1
1 Cow Cows
Group V Group IV

_ Cows Group III



Cows Group V

_

-
Cows Group II

















!










CALF











WORKING

^^^
Cows
Group I
1
5
46
47


PENS











CHUTE








LOADING CHUTE
  BARN
       Figure 8 - Cow Positions in Well 3 Corrals

-------
The percent of butterfat,  Electronic Data Processing (EDP) relative



value index, grams of fat per day and liters of milk per day data on



all cows prior  to and during this experiment are shown in the Appendix



as are data on  PBI,  serum protein and CBC.
                                  2.6

-------
                         COUNTING SYSTEM
                            A. A. Mullen

  I.   System Description:
      A. Gamma spectrometry is done on a system consisting of a
          TMC Model 404C400 channel pulse height analyzer,  a Model
          520 P punch control with HV supply,  a Model 522 Resolver-
          Integrator, IBM Model 11C typewriter, a Tally Model 420
          perforator,  and a Model 424 reader.  The detector consists
          of two 4" x 9" Nal (Tl) crystals mounted facing each other
          with vertical spacing variable from direct contact to 14" separa-
          tion.  Each crystal has a HV supply and is viewed by four 3" PM
          tubes.  The crystal assembly is mounted in a specially  fabricated
          12-ton steel shield with 6" •walls.   The inside dimensions are
          39" x 42" x 42" and the inside is lined with Pb, Cd, and Cu
          sheeting.
      B.  The beta system consists of a  Beckman Model  1610 wide-beta
          with automatic sample changer, time-of-day and manual slide
          options.  Readout is by means  of an IBM Model 26 printing card
          punch.  Argon-10% methane is used as the counting gas.
II.    Geometry and Calibration:
      For Project Hayseed,  calibration was  required only for    I
      though the presence of aged mixed fission products in some samples
      required appropriate  correction.
                                      27

-------
The geometries used in the gamma analysis were:

    Milk
    Water

    Soil


    Grain

    Hay


    Charcoal



    Green Chop
                     - A 4-liter plastic cubitainer, volume
                      adjusted with distilled water if necessary.

                     - Same as milk.

                     - Sample adjusted to 400 ml in a cottage
                      cheese container with lid

                     - Same as soil.

                     - Sample compressed in cottage cheese
                      container with lid.

                     - From air sampler,  the cartridge was
                      opened and the charcoal placed in a 400 ml
                      cottage  cheese container.

                     - Hand-packed into 3" x 7 1/2" diameter  (800ml)
                      plastic container with lid.
    Natural
     Vegetation

    Filter Paper

    Fallout Tray
                     - Same as green chop.

                     - Placed in a plastic bag.

                     - 5" diameter by 1/4" deep planchet.

To prevent contamination, all samples were placed in plastic bags

and sealed with tape  before being centered between the crystals.

For beta counting, the fallout trays were the stainless  steel planchets

normally used in this system and were counted as is; filter papers

were  placed in similar planchets for counting.

The counting efficiencies of this system  are  shown in Table  3 for

   I in the various geometries used during this experiment.
                                28

-------
                                        131
      Table 3.   Counting efficiencies for    I.
      Sample Type
Geometry
Efficiency
Minimum
Detectable
levels
      Milk & Water

      Soil & Grain


      Hay


      Charcoal


      Green Chop and
      vegetation

      Filter Paper

      Fallout Tray
      Gamma Counting

4-liter cubitainer      18.6

400 ml cottage cheese
container              36. 2

400 ml cottage cheese
container              36. 2

400 ml cottage cheese
container              48. 0
800 ml container

flat plastic bag

5" planchet
   28. 5

   64.2

   66.6
                 10_+ 5 pCi/1

                 80+_10 pCi/kg

                100 + 15 pCi/kg
75 + 10 pCi/kg
      Filter Paper and
      Fallout Tray
                                 Beta Counting
5" planchet
   37.8 °,o
      NOTE:  The resolution of the gamma system is 9% based on the l 37 Cs photopeak

III.   Error Estimates

      We have not, to date, determined the error of the opposed 4" x 9"

      crystals; however,  reasonable estimates can be made for some geometries.

      The Physics and Data Analysis Service, SWRHL,  have reported their

      errors with a 4" x 4" single crystal.  Based on fifty minutes counts,

      the minimum detectable level for milk samples (3. 5 liters inverted

      aluminum beaker) was 20 pCi/1 with an associated error of +  20 pCi/1 or
                                          2-9

-------
10%, whichever is larger.  We reported in an earlier section of this
report that our minimum detectable level for milk and water cubitainer
samples was 10 -f 5 pCi/1.  It is estimated that the counting error by
the opposed crystals is less than the 10% reported by Physics and Data
Analysis.
Samples such as vegetation, grain, hay, soil and charcoal, which were
packaged in 400 ml cottage cheese and 800 ml containers, were not simi-
lar in nature.  Since the samples were not uniform, the minimum
detectable levels are reported separately. It is impossible to give
an accurate estimate of error,  but the best estimate  would be less
than 50%.
The filter papers and fallout trays were gamma scanned by the  opposed
crystals, and the efficiencies were 64.2 and 66.6%, respectively.
It is difficult to give accurate values for minimum detectable levels and
associated errors.  It is estimated that the minimum detectable level
was 50 pCi and the associated error -f  10%.
Air sample prefilters  and  fallout trays were counted  for gross beta
activity by the  Beckman System.  The system has an efficiency of 37.8%
for 1. 5 Mev beta particles and background for this system was  10+1
counts per  minute.  There is no basis for an estimate of error  for this
system.
                                    30

-------
                  FALLOUT AND AIR SAMPLING

                            D. McNeils


I.   Objectives

    A.    Preliminary Program.

          An experimental program was devised as a precursor to

          Project Hayseed wherein certain influencing parameters

          were  to be investigated.  Some of the bulk physical pro-

          perties of the candidate carrier,  diatomaceous  earth,

          needed to be determined and a decision made as to its

          adequacy for the operation.  Specifically,  the distribution

          of particle sizes in the bulk material,  the  count median

          diameter, and the equivalent aerodynamic size* of the
          aerosolized particles are major factors in influencing the

          transport characteristics and the respirable nature of the
          aerosol.

          The efficiency of the generators also required investigation

          as to  their sufficiency to uniformly cover a test area under

          varying meteorological  conditions and a determination of

          the most favorable wind conditions,  time of day, and

          generator placement and: operation had to be made.


    B.    Project Hayseed

          The objectives sought in the deposition studies were to

          determine if the test criteria had been met,  i. e. , whether

          the lateral distribution was uniform  and -whether the
          *The diameter of a solid unit density sphere having the
           same terminal streamline settling velocity as the particle
           in question.
                                   31

-------
           contamination levels were 10  pCi  3  I/kg on the Sudan


           grass in the test area.  In addition, correlations were


           sought between air concentration and deposition on


           (1) a horizontal plane above the grass, (2) the Sudan


           grass, (3) stacked green chop,  (4) stacked hay  and


           (5) soil.  Interrelationships between the depositions  on                    ,


           these various  materials were also sought.                                j
                                                                                   I


II.   Procedure                                                                    J

                                                                                   i
     A.    Preliminary Program.                                                   !


           The bulk density of the DE was  computed by averaging a


           series of mass to volume measurements and a  particle                    ,
                                                                                   i
           size distribution was determined by sieve analysis utilizing


           a W. S. Tyler Ro-Tap Testing Sieve Shaker with Tyler


           Standard Screens.


           One  1000 ml round-bottom flask was used in generating


           an untagged aerosol in an atmosphere  that approached


           quiescence.   Clean glass  slides were  placed at 6.4 meters


           from and at the same height  as  the source.  A Zeiss


           Photomicroscope,  at  1000 magnification with a net reticule


           which divided  the field into squares 6(J. on a side, was used


           in measuring the maximum horizontal dimension of each


           particle.  With the  assumption that the particles are com-


           pletely random in their orientation, the median size that


           is derived from this type  of measurement is that of a sphere


           having the diameter of the average of  these measurements.


           A 15m x 15m test grid with 16 uniformly spaced sampling


           stakes was used to  determine the  deposition characteristics


           of the untagged carrier under varying  meteorological con-


           ditions. Glass slides with a thin coating of immersion oil


           were placed at grass height at each of the sample  stakes.


                                   32

-------
      After aerosol release,  the samples thus collected were



      subjectively graded according to the particle population



      density with a value  of 4+ being assigned to the slides



      with the most particles and the  other slides  being



      assigned values of 3+, 2+ or 1+ depending on their pop-



      ulation density.  Contour overlays based on  density



      gradient were made  and optimum performance was noted



      as a function of meteorological  conditions.






B.    Project Hayseed



      For Project Hayseed,  a test grid -with 45 sampling po-



      sitions was prepared as shown in Figure 3.





      Stainless steel planchets 4. 5 inches in diameter (0. Olm2)



      were placed on stakes at a height of 1 meter at each of



      the sampling positions to collect fallout  as the cloud



      passed.





      Sudan grass samples were taken from the bases of the



      stakes by hand cutting all the grass above 10 cm in a



      0. 16m2 area.





      Soil samples were taken by cutting three plugs near  the



      stakes which included a total area of 0. 0137m2.





      The hay and green chop samples were not related to an



      area measurement,  but were correlated with the other



      data on a per unit mass basis.





Four  low-  and one high-volume air sampler were  operated



during the test at positions indicated in Figure 3.  The sampling



train  of each contained Gelman glass  fiber prefilters and char-



coal cartridges.  For the low-volume sampler,  the  prefilters



were  two inches in diameter and were backed  by approximately





                               33

-------
      37 grams of activated charcoal contained in a 3" long x 1-1/4"

      (ID) plastic tube.  An MSA standard charcoal cartridge for

      organic vapors was used with the high-volume sampler.  The

      prefilters were  sprayed with clear plastic prior to removal

      from the samplers so surface deposited particles would not be

      dislodged during handling.



III.   Results

      A.    Preliminary Program.

            The count median diameter of the aerosol particles at

            6.4 meters from the generating source was 1 7fo. with  an

            average geometric standard deviation, 6lfi indicating some uniformity in the size

            progression.



      Table 4.   Sieve Analysis
Size (|J.)
> 354
> 175
> 124
> 88
> 74
61
1 61
Amt (g
1.
16.
9.
10.
11.
11.
190.
;ms)
70
55
20
30
10
70
40
% Total
0. 68
6.59
3.67
4. 10
4.42
4.66
75. 88
                                250.95         .             99.99
                                    34

-------
100
         \
        v\
                          .  SO*/.  SI'
                            15.87% Siil.
                                          V3.1S"
                                                                                         CMD  --
                                                                                 -©•
                                                                       -.©
 *
-------
       L .
                                             ~Q-
w
   '•  !  ? ' '  1  '  '

.-•    »
1.^ .
'I
) 	 -\- 	 <
' 3^"''
r , . •: . .
fl ' 'I • J
V f '


'"•/•'r-Uf-fJ . . t i-
' : .1 • ; |Y ' :- [
^TT'-": 	 :'
T~J H
\4-t i • i j , • l •
.. .. J j , ;
i • ; j

! 1
t- - i . t
.* , , .-
> - j i . 1 1 /
/ —

                 "v:
                                              -t>
                      —4>
      Xl.->'.-V'/  /cV4^/'  ,'.

-------
N
                                                                    3
A
                              A
                          ,  r    //   -  .'
                                    r.

-------
    The first of the four preliminary field exercises on September 22,



    1965, was conducted at 0625 hours to make use of the low speed



    drainage winds at sunup.    The average wind direction was  from



    the NW making approximately a 20  angle with the normal to the



    front edge of the field.  Wind speed was 2. 5 to 3. 5 mph and the



    generation was accomplished in 18 minutes.  Figures 10 and 11



    show the contours of deposition density for this and the three



    successive trials.  Test number two commenced at 0710 hours



    and lasted 17 minutes with winds variable about  the normal  to



    the field front at speeds 1 to 3 mph.  Test three commenced at



    1323 at which time the winds had reversed in direction and were



    variable out of the  south from 3 to 6 mph with gusts to 12 mph.



    Duration of the generation was 13 minutes.  The generators were



    run intermittently as  winds  appeared favorable from the south



    at \vind speeds of 1 to 6 mph for the last test.  This trial folio-wed



    closely behind  the third run.  The deposition level was ac-



    ceptable for each run but the most uniformly dense coverage was



    received from  the low speed drainage winds about sun-up where



    approximately  31% of the grid was graded 4+ and 42% graded



    as 3 + .






B.  Project Hayseed



    The deposition of the  1 31 I tagged DE, based on the planchet



    fallout data,  is shown on a unit contour interval  isopleth of the



    test grid in Figure 12.  The generator positions and source



    strengths are also  noted.  The figures are rounded to the near-



    est fjiCi/m2 and these and all other data in this section are cor-



    rected for physical decay.





    The beta-particle detection  data compares favorably with the



    Y- ray measurements  as shown in Figure  13.   A  slight deviation
                                  38

-------
ilijtr
r?
V.
                                                                               <
                                                               v.
                                                               1,3V
                                  V
                                  2.,0-f
\i
Z.26.


-------
     5 i     - T"
r-
o
t
 r
 o

 p

                                                                !      i
                                                                                                           - rrrr"
                                                                                                                  i- - -
                                                                                         \~--.•-/-
                      I  --.   ! .






                     j	j__



                      i *   • •  i


                                                                                                                                    —OQ-
                 -^
                             —F
                                      r~iz 'S.~'.~~	~:
                                        ...   | . —
""   ' "*"  H •    r
                                                                     -!.. .  -.1-
                                                  _j	L
    ^" " f ' ""]   "T•: ~ ±: -^-^-f^-i^^-^^-i—- -j- - _-

     - - -I -,   \    ~ t  -    ',..-.,	i	--.! - . .   :
                                                                                                                         t  -  -  .
                                                                                                                       -i  -  I

-------
from the theoretical unit ratio line may be noted in the



region of higher activity.  This deviation is probably



due to the use of "dead time" compensation in the



•y- scanner and not in the (3-counter.  The deposition



on the crops,  planchets,  and soil is  enumerated in



Table 5 and the air sampler data are listed in Table 6.



A comparison of the area deposition on the planchets



vs.  the Sudan grass is  shown in Table  7.





The  total activity deposited was calculated from both



the Sudan grass and the planchet data.   Figures  14 and



15 show the portion of the grid  which includes the Sudan



grass,  stacked hay, and green  chop  divided into geo-



metrical shapes to appropriately credit the sampling



positions for the  planchet data.  The numbers shown



are the activity on  the planchets in uCi/m2 times the



alloted  area in m2 .  Approximately 6. 6% of the total



activity aerosolized is  accounted for in this manner.





Likewise, the deposition on the Sudan grass went into the



construction of Figure  16 which accounts for 14. 3% of



the total activity  generated.  An additional 5. 5% was



deposited on the 909 kg of stacked green chop and ap-



proximately 1% on  the 409 kg of stacked hay for a com-



bined total deposition of 20. 8%.  Deposition velocities



were calculated using data  from the  three "on-grid" air



samplers and from the deposition planchets at the same



positions, i.e. , in the  vicinity  of stakes 3,  32,  and 34.



Results of this calculation are shown in Table 8.
                         41

-------
l^Rle 5. l31 I Deposition,
Stake No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
Planchets
uCi/m 2
8.
4.
2.
0.
6.
4.
2.
2.
3.
2.
2.
1.
3.
2.
2.
1.
2.
1.
1.
2.
1.
1.
5.
3.
2.
2.
2.
1.
1.
1.
0.
17
97
86
86
98
47
89
01
38
88
52
53
72
04
16
40
18
80
42
79
80
88
12
21
28
41
15
34
54
11
53
Sudan grass
M-Ci/m2

9.

3.
20.

4.


7.

4.
17.

6.

5.

3.

3.

8.

3.

5.

8.

1.

76

39
99

30


85

03
61

44

38

87

61

55

18

34

44

73
Soil Soil Sudan grass Stacked Stacked
|j.Ci/m2 |j.Ci/kg |j.Ci/kg Green Chop Hay
X 105 pCi/kg X 105 pCi/kg

6.

1.
9.

1.04 .051 2.


3.

2.
8.

2.

3.
2.07 .051
1.

1.

5.
2.33 .085
1.

1.

3.

0.

35

62
23

82


90

30
36

35

19

38

93

41

45

96

65

67
Average        2. 72




                                                                                           (cont1)

-------
Table 5. 131 I Deposition (cont1)
Stake No.
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44 " "
45
Planchets Sudan grass
f- • 1 2 /-• 1 2
|j.Ci/m |J.Ci/m
7.84
7. 38
0. 26
1. 09
2.68
2. 10
3.96
2.60
2.96
3. 19
4. 91
4. 94
8.49
3.87
Soil Soil Sudan grass Stacked
|j.Ci/m2 (j.Ci/kg H-Ci/kg Green Chop
X 105 pCi/kg




0. 77
0. 80
0. 99
3. 37
0. 77





Stacked
Hay
X 105 pCi/kg









0. 34
0. 52
O.-.7.8..
0. 63
0.45
Grand Average  3.13
7. 15
1.8.
. 05
3. 54
1. 34
0. 54

-------
Table 6.  Air sampler data.
Sampler
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
Flow rate
(cfm)
0.60
0.40
0. 85
0. 95
1. 20
12. 50
Charcoal
Cartridge
X 104 pCi
1.56
8. 37
0. 20
1. 10
0. 71
3. 52
Filter
X 104 pci
3.96
5. 28
1.69
0. 09
2. 90
15.60
Total
X 104 pci
5. 52
13.65
1. 89
1. 19
3.61
19. 12
107 pCi-sec
m3
19. 50
72. 35
4. 71
2. 66
6. 38
3. 24
Ratio f
cc
2. 54
0. 63
8.45
0. 08
4. 08
4.43
                                          44

-------
Table 7.   Contamination level comparison (pCi/m2) between fallout
          planchets and hand cut green chop.
Stake No.
2
4
. 5
7
10
12
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
29
31
Green Chop
9. 76x 106
3. 39
20.99
4. 30
7.85
4. 03
17. 61
6.44
5. 38
3. 87
3.61
8. 55
3. 18
5. 34
8.44
1. 73
Planchet
4. 97 x 106
0. 86
6. 98
2.89
2. 88
1. 53
3. 72
2. 16
2. 18
1.42
1. 80
5. 12
2. 28
2. 15
1. 54
0. 53
Ratio (GC/P)
1.96
1.62
3. 01
1.49
2. 73
2. 63
4. 73
2. 98
2.47
2. 73
2. 01
1.67
1.39
2.48
5.48
3. 26
                                Average               2.81
                                95% Confidence Level ± 0. 62
                                  45

-------
               Figure  14

             FLA1TCKE?  DATA
42.50    23.13
                                     35-CO
                           .no

                                      > • i I^/•"' I'Qpoci'sjion on i"£,r:- j'^ii' ^
                                      0.32  Green  Qhots Stao".;' Decc^itio-
                                      0.50  Hay Stac1;  Depo=:itioc
                                      6.57;y Total  Dspocitior. on  Area

-------
                i Deposited, or. the Outlined Areas
XI
                 r

-------

               fa '"'>   ',1 i i •*' c. .-5^
      uGi  Total
 3*16 = 14.3^. Cr: Pasture
22 -°9     l.o;  On Stacked  Haj
          3. 5/J On Stacked  Green Choj
Total   20.8?;

-------
      Table 8.  Deposition velocities  (relative to planchets)




      „     .J_.     ,        Planchet deposition         pCi/m2         m
      Deposition velocity = —	;	—-c	;—— = 	
                           Total integrated doxe (air)  pCi-sec/m3    sec


                Position                     Deposition velocity


                Stake  3                         1.47 cm/sec


                Stake  32                        1. 08 cm/sec


                Stake  34 and 35 Average        1.4Z cm/sec


                Average                        1.3Z cm/sec
IV.   Discussion


      A.    Preliminary Program.


            A review of the aerosol release data from the preliminary


            experiment on the  sampling grid shows a marked reduction


            in generation time between the first and third runs.  The


            second trial agrees with this trend which appears to be


            caused by the change in humidity as the day progressed.


            The moist air passing over  the dry powder early in the


            day caused a  slower release rate and an increase in the


            particle or floe size.



            This trend was  borne out in the actual operation where


            the exposure  lasted longer than expected and the CMD


            was greater than that of the sample previously taken



            in a dry, still atmosphere.



            One recommendation for future efforts would be to incor-


            porate an air drying capability in the aerosol generation


            apparatus. This would allow for better control of the


            aerosolizing rate and a more reproducible particle size


            distribution.  This latter feature assumes that agglom-


            eration of discrete particles causes the formation of an


            aerosol of greater CMD.




                                    49

-------
B.    Project Hayseed



      The fallout planchets  represent segments of a horizontal



      plane at one meter above the ground where deposition



      ranged from 0. 26 to 8.49  [J.Ci/m2 .  The lateral distribution



      is quite uniform along the leading edge of the test plot



      (Figure 12) and the  uniformity  improves toward the rear.



      Peak areas along the  front correspond, as expected, to



      the stronger sources  while the  NE corner,  which is the



      region  of lowest activity,  was apparently on the fringes



      of the aerosol plume.  One extra generator was employed



      to cover the upwind flank, but it appears that an additional



      one  should have been  used to cover the downwind side also



      to allow for variable winds.





      A recommendation for future exercises is to collect ad-



      ditional fallout samples at ground and at an intermediate



      level to allow for a  better characterization of the aerosol



      cloud.  Also, a ground level sample may better represent



      the deposition on the field and would lend itself to depo-



      sition velocity calculations.





      The data presented  in Table 5 (page 42) permit comparison



      of the deposition on the planchets, Sudan grass and soil on



      an area basis and also the soil, Sudan grass, stacked green



      chop and stacked hay  on a mass basis.





      Using the three common points between the soil and the



      planchets, the deposition appears approximately 1.7 times



      higher  on the planchets at the one meter level.  The data



      for this assertion are obviously limited and,  therefore,



      for future  exercises more soil  samples should be taken



      and  the deposition compared with that on ground level



      fallout  planchets.
                              50

-------
A comparison of the deposition on the stacked green chop



and the stacked hay indicates 2. 21 times higher activity



on the green chop.  If the one inconsistent data point (the



deposition on the green chop at Stake 39) is eliminated,



this ratio becomes 1. 58.  This is the reverse of what was



expected from  the planchet  data where the deposition



over the stacked hay is 1. 57 times higher.   This anomaly



may be due to higher bulk density and a correspondingly



larger surface  area on the green  chop  stack.  The higher



moisture  content of the green chop could also play a role.





A ratio of the averages of the deposition on the Sudan grass



in pCi/kg to pCi/m2 yields  a field average of 494 grams



of crop per square meter.   The crop height was estimated



at 15  to 18 inches.  Preexercise forecasts were for a one



meter high  crop and approximately one kg of grass per



square meter.





The erratic filter to charcoal cartridge activity ratio



presented in Table 6 indicates gross leakage in the pre-



filters.  This was confirmed in two separate post-Project



Hayseed experiments.  In one,  a  sampling train similar



to the  ones  used with the low-volume samplers in the



study sampled  a similarly tagged aerosol from a container.



The results showed 10. 7 times as much collected on the



prefilter as on  the  charcoal cartridge.  In the other



experiment, two charcoal cartridges from Project  Hayseed



were  opened for inspection.  The packing filters on the



ends of the  one  cartridge plus  the empty cartridge itself



accounted for approximately 99%  of the total cartridge



activity.  When the charcoal from the other was washed



with water and a wetting agent (Eastman's Filter Flo),
                       51

-------
approximately 85% of its activity was eliminated.   This



indicates that in each case the preponderance of the en-



trapped iodine was in particulate form and suggests that



leakage through or around the prefilters did occur.





Correlations using the air sampler data are based on the



total activity collected.  The total integrated dose levels



for the three "on-grid" samplers follow the activity



trends established from the  fallout planchet data.





The data presented in Figure 16 show 14. 3%  of the source



activity deposited on the Sudan grass and an additional



6. 5% on the stacked hay and green chop for a combined



total of 20. 8% or 4. 6 mCi.   This information is derived



from the hand cut samples.





The data from the fallout planchets presented in Figures  14



and 15 show an accounting for 5. 8% on the Sudan grass  and



0. 8% on the two stacks  for a total of 6. 6% deposition.   This



figure is less than the crop data because the  planchets



sample only vertical fallout  while the crop also  samples



horizontally.  The crop  sample data indicate 2. 5 times



higher activity on the Sudan  grass alone than do the



planchet  figures,  and 3. 2 times higher  activity for the



combined test plot.   It may be noted that both of these



figures fall within the 95% confidence limits of the average



point by point comparison between the planchets and the



hand cut  green chop outlined in Table 7.





The 14. 3% deposition on the Sudan grass previously quoted



is based  on experimental findings while the additional



6. 5% on the forage stacks is based on estimated weights



and is therefore not quite as reliable.   The stack  materials





                        52

-------
           •will be weighed prior to all future exercises.





           The deposition velocities presented in Table 8 are



           calculated relative to the fallout planchets at the one



           meter level.   They do establish a correlation between



           aerial concentration and deposition which is uniform



           over the limited data points.  It is recommended that



           consideration be given in the future to placing plan-



           chets at different heights in the various sampling areas



           and that additional air samplers  be used to include these



           areas.   This would permit computation of deposition



           velocities relative to the various crops or materials



           involved in the experiment.






V.   Summary and Conclusions.



     An experiment designed to determine correlations among aerial



     concentrations and deposition on certain forage materials and



     on soil for a  specific aerosol was conducted.  Approximately



     21% of a radioiodine-tagged aerosol was deposited on  a 600 m



     test grid with activity ranging from 3. 4 x 105 to 9. 2 x 106 pCi/kg



     forage.   The lateral distribution appeared  to be uniform  and the



     drop in  activity from front to rear averaged approximately 63%.



     Deposition velocities (which associate  airborne activity with



     deposition) relative to the fallout planchets have been  calculated



     and average 1. 32 cm/sec.





     Although some of the data are limited, the correlations attained



     appear both reasonable and consistent.   The experimental cri-



     teria  imposed on the deposition phase of operation Hayseed



     were  satisfactorily met by achieving uniform lateral distribution,-



     activity levels of 105 pCi/kg on the growing Sudan grass,  and  by
                                   53

-------
            determination of deposition and concentration relationships.

            Some of the ratios between various samples which can be

            calculated from the results of this experiment are shown in
            Table 9.  Some of the variation in these results  may be due

            to the positioning of the planchets 1-meter above ground and
            some may be due to sampling errors.

            Table 9.  Deposition ratios for various samples
Ratio1 "
pCi/m2
IAD
pCi/kg
IAD
,_, Spread
Planchet „
Hay
* 1.32 1.27
. 0017
Spread Green Chop
7. 01
. 0042
Pasture
3.67
. Oil
Soil
0. 93
. 00026
Planchet
 pCi/m 2
        (3)
1.0
0. 30
054
0. 38
1. 50
(1)  IAD is integrated air dose or pCi-sec/m3.

(2)  Figures in this row are deposition velocities (cm/sec)

(3)  This row is the ratio of planchet deposition to area deposition on other
    samples.
                                          54

-------
                    PARTICLE SIZE ANALYSIS



                             W. L. Wagner







 I.   Objective



      The objective of this study was to determine, at certain pertinent



      distances from origin, the particle size distribution and other



      characteristics of the diatomaceous earth aerosol generated for



      Project Hayseed.  Characteristics of primary interest were the



      geometric mean diameter and geometric standard deviation.







II.    Procedure



      Twelve  stakes were placed in the  15 meter by 40 meter test plot in



      an array of three rows of four  stakes.  A diagram of the  placements



      is  shown in Figure 3 (Page 11).  The front  stakes (row 1) were



      placed 5 meters from the row of aerosol generators, the middle



      row (row 2)  at 12. 5 meters and the rear row (row 3) at 20 meters.



      The distance between stakes  in a row is 10 meters with the  end



      stakes being 5 meters from the edge of the plot.






      At grass height (about  18  inches from the ground) 1 inch x 3 inch



      glass  microscope  slides were placed horizontally on wooden blocks



      taped  to the  stakes.  The  blocks were on the side of the stakes facing



      the aerosol generators.  New slides were used and were  cleaned with



      lens tissue and distilled water just prior to placement on the blocks



      at  about 15-30 minutes before the generators were turned on.






      Immediately after generation was completed, the slides were collected



      and transported to the BRP aerosol physics laboratory in Las Vegas.
                                       55

-------
The slides were examined and photographed using a Zeiss Photomicroscope
and Kodak Panatomic-X 35mm film.  All sizing was  subsequently performed
on photomicrographs representing magnifications of  109 and 142.
These prints will be respectively referred to herein  as the group  1
and group 2 photographs.

The particles on the photographs were  sized using a  Zeiss TGZ-3
Particle Size Analyzer.  This sizing instrument has  an illuminated
iris diaphragm which is imaged by a lens  on a. flat transparent plate.
A circle of light is  visible through photographs which are placed on
the plate for examination.   The diameter of the iris can be varied
manually and is coupled either exponentially or linearly to 48
counting channels which represent specified particle  size ranges.
The photograph to be examined is placed  on the glass plate and a
particle to be sized is centered over the iris image.   The diameter of
the iris is then adjusted so that the area of light appears to  be equal
to the area of the particle.  A foot switch  is  pressed thereby record-
ing the equivalent area diameter of the particle in one of the 48
counters representing the  appropriate size range.

The analyzer records  either the number of particles in each size
range or the number of particles equal to  or less than each  size
range.  It usually makes little difference which recording method
is used since both forms of the data are required for  complete
analysis and one can be obtained from the other.  The number of
particles in each size  range is used to  show a size vs. frequency
distribution curve and the  summation of particles equal to or  less
than certain  sizes is used  to obtain a log-size vs.  probability of
occurrence curve.  Both curves are necessary to characterize
an aerosol.
                                 56

-------
       Although particle  sizing was done on each slide, it seemed more meaning-


       ful to present the  data on the basis of rows; therefore, the data from all


       the slides in a row were incorporated and normalized to obtain a single


       composite set of data describing the aerosol deposited at each row of


       stakes on the test plot.




III.    Results


       In all tables  Mg represents the geometric mean diameter * and + cr   and
       -crE  represent two different cases of the geometric standard deviation.

       mi     i      r           i   •   i ,    i        •          84. 13 percent size
       I he values 01 + cr^ are obtained by the equation + 
-------
Table 10.  Particle size of  pre-Hayseed test aerosol.
Sample

1
2
1
2


Table 11, Particle

Stake
1
2
3
4
.5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Mg +
Microns
Group 1 Photos
12.5
14.0
Group 2 Photos
15.5
16.5
Average
14.6
size of Hayseed aerosol from
Mg
O
Microns +
28.5
29.0
27.0
25.5
18 .0
20.0
17.0
14.0
12.0
16.0
18.0
20.5
* g

1.9
1.9
1.9
1.8

1.9
Group 1

°~g
1.8
2.0
1.7
2.0
2.0
1.8
2. 1
2.4
2.6
2. 1
1.8
2.0
-ffg

3.0
2.4
2.2
2.0

2.4
photographs (109x).

- * g
2.7
2.6
1.9
2.6
-
3.0
6.8
-
-
16. 0
3.6
4.4
                                          58

-------
Table 12. Adjusted  particle size from Group 1  photographs (109x)
           data for  stakes 5, 7, 8,  9,  10,  11 adjusted.
Stake
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
M
Microns
28.5
29.0
27.0
25.5
21.5
20.0
20.0
20.0
19.5
20.0
19.0
20.5
+ 'g
1.8
2.0
1.7
2.0
1.7
1.8
1.9
2.0
1. 5
1.8
1.8
2.0
cr
- g
2.7
2.6
1.9
2.6
4. 1
3.0
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.6
4.4
                                     59

-------
Table 13. Particle size from Group 2  photographs (14?x).
Stake
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
M
g
Microns
30.0
28.5
27.0
28.0
23.0
22.0
19.5
20.0
19.0
19.0
20.0
23.0
cr
+ g
1.6
2.0
1.7
1.8
1.7
: 1.6
1.9
1.9
1.8
1.8
1.7
1.7
cr
- g
2.4
2.0
1.7
2.0
1.9
2.1
2.7
4.0
2.9
2.2
2.1
2.0
Table 14. Hayseed aerosol  particle size -  final data.
Row

1
2
3
' M
g
Microns
28
21
20
CT
+ g

1.8
1.8
1.8
(T
- g

2. 2
3.4
3. 1
                                          60

-------
too
        t
        V
                                                                                                                   i     i
                                                                                                                                                               I
                                                                                                                                                               *
      X
                                                                                                   - 1 - - - -  i - -
                                                            ' J     £3

-------
IOC
                                           X
                                        X
                                    X
                                 X
                              X
                           X
                        X
                                                                                              t-J<4
        X
                 X
              X

-------
        V
bo
       x

-------
   20
   IS
    D
' Qi

 O ;
           .5.-— 10
              ,  ; , j ,
IS   l 20
                                                        i :   :
                                                        : ROW 3;
                                               (Stakes .9.^ 10, 11,.
25
                                                                     . 3..'% of particles were .greater^.
                                                                      than 60/u .  ;   .•;••:!       i
                                                 _r r
 30,    35j   ,40



Particle! size
                                                    1
                                            _:_...Csjtakes .5, .6
                                             45    50
             55    .60.    65' i  70:   i 75
                                                         iri' microns
                                                                    ....{ 3% iof; particles, were, .greater...!. ...... i	

                                                                     j than: 60^  \  •. :  f  I •'
   -•0
   2
                                                        I

10    IS   :  20:  :  25: : I 30     35'    40' :  45     50    55
                                                                    .
                                          Particle  size) in microns
                                                                                60
                                                   65  : : 7 .  ; .  75 !
                                        M
   15
                                                      ROW 1   \

                                              (Stakes..!, .2, 3,4)
0)
0
'$-(
4)
                                                                      9% of particles

                                                                      than 60yu
                1Q    :15     20    25
      3d    35
                                     4Q
45    50     55    6Q
                                                               65    70
                                                                                                   75
                                                          i r^  mfr*


-------
 ,v
            *
   *  -1*
     •
      tf
      <€ JP-
                            V *
                          if'  /
                          «  ->*
•  »
   *• +

  • * *r
   ^  
  ^   ^*
*t
   . ^ • »^ v
r,'•*  -"HfX-n
 J*.  ^ 4'*»^ * V     "v

    *^^       * %A  >^^fc
 •  A   "  ^'/,v^<
              f
 *'*•   \

-------
i

-------

-------
IV.  Discussion

      The pre-Hayseed test aerosol described in the previous section was

      comprised of diatomaceous earth particles from about Ifj,  to 60u .

      Essentially no particles were detected below IJJL  and only about 10%

      were below 4[i .   Ninety-seven percent of the particles were below

      60|j. , but since the aerosol consisted of only that material which would

     .pass a  250-mesh screen (pore  size = 6l|o. ), this was expected.  On

      the basis of these initial findings,  it was decided that the magnifications

      of the final photographic prints would be adjusted so that the range

      of about 2 to 5|Ji  would fall into the lowest counter of the TGZ-3

      analyzer.  Using the reduced mode of the analyzer, the highest

      channel would include particles up to 85(j, .  To meet this requirement

      two sets of photomicrographs were printed,  one having a total

      magnification of 109 and the other of 142 as mentioned in the proced-

      ure section.



      Although the difference in magnification of the two groups of

      photographs  should not affect the determination of M  it can be
                                                        &
      readily observed, by comparing the results in Tables 10,  11,

      and 13, that  it did.   The geometric mean diameters for rows 2

      and 3 determined from the group 1  photographs  were  smaller

      than those determined from group 2. It was observed that the

      group 2 photographs had far fewer particles  in the range  of  0 to 5|J.

      than group 1 had.  It was later discovered that the reason for

      this was that the exposure  time during enlargement of the group 2

      photographs  was not of sufficient duration to fully develop the

      image of the particles in the size range of question.   This can be

      corrected in the  future by the use of a higher contrast film and

      more careful enlargement  of the 35mm negatives.
                                      68

-------
The number of particles less than 5(Ji was much greater than was
expected on the basis of the  pre-Hayseed test aerosol results.
The percentage of particles  in that range for the test aerosol was
about 16%, whereas it was as high as 30% for the Hayseed aerosol.
If anything, it had been expected that the Hayseed aerosol would
deposit fewer particles less than  5(i  in size because of the  humid
ambient conditions and the presence  of a 1 to  5 mph wind.  The
pre-Hayseed aerosol was generated  in a relatively dry,  quiescent
room.  Consequently, it -was suspected that a large number of the
particles in this range were artifacts.   To verify this, an investigation
was made of some glass microscope slides from the same  box as
those used to collect the Hayseed aerosol.  After being cleaned
with distilled water  and lens tissue,  as were the original slides,
a large number of particles  in the range of 0. 5 to 5|j. were  observed.
It was apparent that the cleaning of the slides must be more thorough
in the future.   On all tests in the  future, slides will be washed in a
detergent and rinsed with alcohol and double  distilled water.

The background count did not significantly affect the slides  in row  1.
It is assumed that this is because of  the heavier deposition  and larger
particle size and that contamination, though  present,  was not observable.

Considering that artifacts -were present to an  undetermined extent, it was
decided to  attempt to adjust  the data  on the basis of some reasonable
assumption which would minimize the effect in the  less than 5(j. size
range.  Since the particle range in question consisted of no more
than. 16% of the total for the  pre-Hayseed test aerosol, it seemed
reasonable to assume that the number  of particles  could be adjusted
so that no stake had more than 16% of total particles below  5(0. .
The particles thus eliminated were assumed  to represent that
portion of the particles below  $(o.  that was present  as  contamination
                                 69

-------
on the glass  slides.  Table 12 contains the results achieved when


this adjustment was made.  The group 1 adjusted data give results


comparable to those of group 2.  This group 2 data were essentially


modified mechanically by the short enlargement time which eliminated


a portion of the particles in the smallest range.  Since only the smallest


size range was affected,  it was felt that the results from the  group 2


photographs  could be used for further determinations.  Supporting


this is the fact that the group 1 and group 2 photographs give  data


which compare favorably to data achieved by visual sizing in


which no particles below 2u were included.  Particles of less than


2(j,  were excluded since only 4% of the pre-Hayseed test aerosol


particles  were in this range.




Even though  the distribution of particles below 5u  is uncertain and  .


can only be assumed,  the distribution of particles above  5u is


accurately shown.  Therefore, the slope and position of the log-probability


curves were, for the size ranges at about the 50% size and above,


not greatly affected.   The geometric mean diameters and the geometric


standard deviations represented by +cr  are reasonably accurate.
                                     o



Since there is no reason to believe that  the particle size of the


diatomaceous earth aerosol is not normally distributed, the dotted


lines shown in Figures 17, 18 and 19 indicate what the curves of


the deposited aerosol  might actually be.




The distribution curves,  of rows  2 and  3, Figure 20, are slightly


bimodal because of the high percentage  of particles in the 0 to 5(J.


size range.  There is a slight possibility that the curve is truly


bimodal if a  carrier material was present in the  aerosol.  The


more probable reason is that the  amount of material on the slides


representing contamination, either atmospheric or preexisting,


was greater  than assumed.  A distribution curve plotted from




                                 70

-------
    the dotted line shown in Figures 18 and 19, for example,  would

    not be bimodal.



    It is evident from Figures 21 and 22 that the  larger particles and

    conglomerations of particles were predominantly deposited on the

    front row and that the particles -were both fewer and smaller  on the

    back row.  One problem in determining M  for the front row  -was that
                                            &
    there is no  satisfactory method of evaluating whether the conglomera-

    tions occurred prior to  or after deposition on the slides.  All

    conglomerations were counted as single particles.



    As mentioned in a previous section, the bulk density of the diato-

    maceous earth was determined to be 0. 26 gms/cc. An approxima-

    tion of the aerodynamic particle sizes  can be obtained from this

    figure;  however, the effect of shape is unknown.  Since the particles

    are in the shapes of flakes and rods, the true aerodynamic sizes

    are probably less than that which would be  determined by the above

    factor.



V.  Summary and Conclusions

    Particle size distributions for a diatomaceous earth aerosol deposited

    on glass slides were determined and are presented in graph form.

    Geometric mean diameters were  28|j. at 5 meters from the aerosol

    generators,  21[j. at 12.5 meters, and 20[x  at 20 meters.  The

    particles were sized from photomicrographs.



    Background  contamination was high and quantitatively unknown in

    the size range less than 5(J.  introducing some error in the results.

    The data were adjusted to  minimize the error.
                                     71

-------
                      MOBILE MONITORING
                           R. L. Douglas

  I. Objective
    The objective of the mobile monitoring for  Project Hayseed was
    to determine if any of the radioactive aerosol which was released
    escaped from the farm to an area where it  might constitute  a safety
    hazard.

II.  Procedure
    Two mobile monitoring teams were located downwind of the farm on
    the nearest major roads, and were directed to the best location by
    the Test Director  based on wind direction data at the farm at the
    time of aerosol release.    Team   6  was  located   at the
    junction  of the Mercury Highway and the Area 15 road.
    •was located about  0.8 mile east of Team 6  on the Area  15 road.  In
    relation to the farm, the approximate locations of the two teams were:
    Team 5, 175° at 1. 7 miles;  Team 6, 155° at 2. 0 miles.

    Each team consisted of two men in a four-wheel drive vehicle
    equipped with a two-way radio.   The monitoring and sampling
    equipment  carried by each team included:
              2 Eberline E-500B survey instruments
              1 Precision "Scintillator" survey instrument
              1 Gelman air  sampler
              13.5 kw generator
              Miscellaneous monitoring supplies
    The two teams left the farm at about 0500 hours. Background dose
    rate measurements  of both beta plus gamma at  ground level and gamma
    at three feet above the ground were taken with survey instruments
    prior to the aerosol release.  After the release, the air samplers

                                     72

-------
         (equipped with prefilters and charcoal cartridges) were started and



         the dose rate was measured periodically.  At about 0640 hours,



         the Test Director instructed the teams to stop monitoring and return



         to the farm.  Team 5 collected a surface soil sample before leaving



         its location.







III. Results and Discussion



         1.   Dose rate monitoring.



             The background at the monitoring locations varied between



             0.1 and 0.4 mR/hr.  Background is  at a higher level here



             because the area is covered with the throw-out from the



             Sedan Event,  and variable because the loose surface dust



             is stirred up when one walks in this  area.  No activity above



             background was observed with the survey instruments after



             the aerosol release.




         2.   Air Sampling



             The air sampler operated by Team 5 overheated and cut



             off after running about six minutes.   The prefilter and



             charcoal cartridge showed no detectable 131I activity.



             The air sampler operated by Team 6 ran from 0530 to



             0640 hours.  The samples from it also showed no



             detectable 131I activity.



         3.   Soil Sampling



             No activity due to 1 31I was found on  the soil sample collected



             by Team 5.
                                         73

-------
IV  Summary and Conclusions



    Two mobile monitoring teams were stationed downwind of the Experimental



    Farm during Project Hayseed to detect any 1 31I activity which might



    have  escaped from the farm.  Both teams took dose rate readings with



    portable survey instruments and collected air samples with a Gelman



    sampler.  A surface soil sample was taken at one location.   No



    activity due to l 31I was  detected at either location.
                                    74

-------
                 CONTROLLED AREA MONITORING



                            J. G. Veater







  I.  Objective



      The objective of this portion of the study was to measure the



      radiation levels in an area contaminated with J 31I aerosol.



      Included in this area were growing Sudan grass, a pile of green



      chop,  a pile of hay, and 4 cows in stanchions.







II.   Procedure



      One E-500B survey instrument, five Thermoluminescent



      Dosimeter  packs,  (CaF Mn, EGG&G Model 2) and fifty Dupont



      film badges(range  30 mR to  5000 mR) -were used in the survey.






      Background measurements were taken throughout the prescribed



      area,  on the feed piles and at the stanchions two days and one



      day prior to the event.  Measurements included y  a.t 3 feet above



      and at the surface  and (3  +  y on the ground surface.  Film badges



     •were placed throughout the area and dosimeter packs were placed in



     the field, on the piles, and at one stanchion.






      One hour after the release,  measurements -were taken throughout



     the field on the feed piles, and  on the cows.  Twenty-four hours



      after-ward measurements -were  taken in the field and on the piles.






      Radiation intensities were measured at representative spots



     throughout the area of contamination on succeeding days until



      levels again reached background.
                                      75

-------
III.  Results
   All gamma measurements -were not significantly above background.
   The (3 4- y on the surface did indicate levels above background and the
   results are summarized in Table 15. All of these measurements  are
   reported as net (above background).

   The film badges and thermoluminescent dosimeters had no measurable
   exposure above the lower detection limit.

   Average levels of (3 +y activity at the stakes nearest to the aerosol
   generators (5 meters) was 0. 38mR/hr at H+ 1.  The back row, 20 meters from
   the  generators, averaged 0.05  mR/hr.  The range  was fromO.Olto 0.76 mR/hr
   above background.  Measured activity in the field decreased by approximately
   50% daily.  The decrease is attributed to physical factors other than  radio-
   active decay.  Figure 21 shows the average P  +y dose rate in the field as
   a function of time.

   The dose rate  on the cows' backs averaged 0.05 mR/hr and on the  legs
   0. 1 mR/hr.  This  indicated a low lying cloud which was approximately
   2 to 3 feet high as  it entered the measured area.

Table  15.   Survey instrument  measurements in the controlled area.
Date
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
4, 1965
4
4
5
5
5
6
7
Ground Level
Time Average Net mR/hr Location
Beta and Gamma
H
H
H
H
H
H


- 1
- 1
- 1
- 24
- 24
- 24


. 17
. 30
. 25
. 08
1.40
.04
.03
Bkg
All of field
Green chop pile
Hay Pile
All of Field
Green chop pile
Hay pile
Field (7 stakes)
Field (7 stakes)
                                       76

-------
   rr   iT- ll-lii-
 ...)_..
                     »
                           1  ii

                           < -r !4

                            - m
                      ^^
                           I I i^'L
                           i M -1 i"
                               ••--
                               i '• * i
          . ^...j . ^
           . t
          ! H
          i t:.
        .44!;
                                •>->'•
                                         Xi

               T 4-t |-j,. jlfl^WWi-Kffl-1-fri- M
               !li] h- t.M:M:iM'iiim-M-T-tl
      •nMMiTMM
      Ml! LM. Ml
MM.-L:; ,i4.i:LU.
: ! 1 • .1 MM M I i- . !

it-MI'trf
                                   •
_l_j.


i- i
                                   ki
                 -fir*

-------
IV.   Discussion
      The measurements collebted should be considered as  relative values
      only.  The two major reasons for this are:
            (1)  the instrument had been calibrated for measurement of
            mixed fission products, and (Z) this area was contaminated
            with aged fission products from a prior event which resulted
            in a high, variable background.   The precision of the survey
            instrument and the fluctuating background leave much room
            for error.
 V.   Conclusions
      The gamma levels in the contaminated area were too low to measure
      with survey-type instruments.  Beta plus gamma dose rates at
      ground level were  measureable and decreased with a  one-day
      effective half -life." The one-day  effective half-life was probably due to
      removal of activity by green chopping operations,  by wind action
      and by irrigation.
                                       78

-------
                          SAMPLE ANALYSIS



                             W. Shimoda








 I.    Objectives



      1.  To determine 131I activity in all samples submitted for analysis.



      2.  To relate the secretion of  ! 3 11 in the milk of dairy cows to their



         intake of contaminated forage.



      3.  To determine the uptake  of * 3l I and subsequently to follow its



         secretion in the milk of dairy cows following aerosol inhalation



         when the cows are not allowed to  consume contaminated food



         and water.








II.    Procedure



      All samples were taken to a  central location, logged and numbered



      in chronological order.  All  samples were gamma scanned by two



      4" x 9" opposed Nal crystals.  The samples were counted  until a



      minimum of 2000 counts was achieved in the 0. 36Mev  1 31I channel



      or a maximum time of 40 minutes.  The filter papers from the air



      sampling equipment and the fallout trays from the aerosol generation



      were also counted in the Beckman Wide-Beta gas-flow counter.



      The samples were beta counted for 10,000 counts or 10 minutes,



      whichever came first.  The various samples were handled in the



      manner described below.






      1. Milk and Water



        The volume of milk and water samples was kept constant at 4-liters



        by  removing excess milk  or water from the cubitainer or adding



        distilled water to the container.  The 4-liter plastic cubitainer was



        washed, weighed and placed into a large plastic bag and sealed



        prior to gamma scanning.
                                        79

-------
2. Hay



   Each of the hay samples was contained in a sealed 9" x 15"



   plastic bag with a 6mil thickness.  The bag was three-fourths



   full and packed.  The hay samples were  weighed and the bagged



   hay sample was compressed by means of a 12 ton Carver Labor-



   atory Press so that the compressed hay  would fit into a cottage



   cheese container  (400 ml volume). The cottage cheese container



   was  placed in a plastic bag, sealed with  masking tape and gamma



   scanned.








3. Green Chop and Natural Vegetation



   The  spread and fresh green chop and natural vegetation samples



   were placed in  plastic bags.  These samples were weighed and



   placed in a rigid  round plastic  dish (800  ml volume) with  a cover



   and then counted.








4. Soil  and Grain



   Each of the soil and grain samples'was placed in a 400 ml



   cottage  cheese container which was  covered and  sealed.



   Each of the samples was weighed and placed into a plastic bag,



   sealed with masking tape and counted.








5. Charcoal Cartridge



   The  charcoal cartridge from the air sampling equipment was



   opened and the contents were transferred to a cottage cheese



   container.  The container was  sealed with masking tape,



   placed into a plastic bag, sealed and gamma scanned.
                                  80

-------
      6.  Filter Papers and Fallout Trays



         The filters were placed in a plastic bag, sealed and gamma



         scanned.   The fallout  trays were contained in 5" plastic petri



         dishes and the dishes were placed in plastic bags, sealed and



         gamma scanned.






         The filter  papers and fall out trays were then removed from



         their sealed environment.  The filter papers were held in place



         on a 5" planchet by double edged masking tape.  Then the planchets



         and fallout trays were placed in holders and beta counted.






III.   Results



      1.  Uncontaminated Feed



         As a standard procedure, uncontaminated feed such as  hay, green



         chop, grain and water fed to the cows was analyzed for * 31I activity.



         The average quantity of nonradioactive hay and green chop consumed



         by all cows of all groups was 10 kg per  day.  The grain consumption



         averaged 6 kg per day for all cows.






         Tables  16, 17, and 18  show the results  of the 131I activity measurements



         in the samples mentioned above.






         The results indicate  that    I contamination was as high as



         8.6 E3* pCi/kg  for supposedly uncontaminated hay,  green chop and



         grain samples.   The water samples analyzed for activity also



         indicated concentrations up to  150 pCi/liter.  The overall  daily



         averages of 1 31I activity in hay and green chop samples did not



         exceed  749 pCi/kg/day during the experiment.  The activity present










         -:-  8. 6E3 = 8.6  x 103 = 8600
                                       81

-------
Table 16.   3  I measurements in uncontaminated hay fed to cows (pCi/kg).





                                   (1)
Date Group I Group II
10/4 740




10/5 750




10/6 6ZO




10/7 ND




10/8 510



10/9 560



Group III
ND
440
580
210
310
8ZO
460
700
460
610
ND
ND
Z70
460
182
75
ND
ND
570
136
ND



1000



Group IV
570
940
ND
160
412
430
660
ND
270
340
590
ND
180
500
317
430
160
150
ND
135
ND
ND
ND
ND
290
ND
ND
ND
Group V
8600




350




ND




ND




ND



ND



                                                          72





(1)   Group II was fed contaminated hay from 10/4 through 10/9.




ND = Not Detectable,






                                    1   82
cont.

-------
Table 16.   31I measurements in uncontaminated hay fed to cows (pCi/kg).
                                 (cont)
                                   (2)
                            Bulk Supply Samples
10/10
10/11
10/12
10/13
10/14
10/15
10/16
10/17
10/18
10/19
10/20
10/21
10/22
1100

ND
ND
250
ND
ND
360
1300
ND
ND
ND
ND
1100
—
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
350
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
            Average pCi/kg/day
            Group I     Group II    Group III    Group IV   Group V
               291         231         276         226        483

             (2) Beginning October  10, only two samples were taken daily
                from the bulk supply.  The average of these two samples
                was then taken as representative for Groups I, II, III,  IV
                and V for the  purpose of computing the over-all  background
                averages for the duration of the study .

             ND = Not Detectable
                                       83

-------
Table 17.   3  1 measurements in uncontaminated fresh green chop
          fed to cows (pCi/kg).
Date
10/4




10/5




10/6




10/7




10/8




10/9



Group I Group II Group III (1) Group IV (iproup V
ND 680 ND
80
850
ND
402
1400 940 450
1300
890
900
1007
830 504 780
770
180
1200
672
1600 2000 7600
1400
3300
6900
3400
690 1300 1000
890
450
270
727
430 520 870
1800
2600
2000
                         1700
(1)  Groupe III and IV -were fed contaminated green chop from 10/4 through 10/9.
ND =  Not Detectable
                                       84

-------
Table 17.     I measurements in uncontaminated fresh green chop
          fed  to cows (pCi/kg). (cont1)
                                  (2)
                           Bulk Supply Samples
            10/10                 420                ND
                                  680                380
                                  550                190

            10/11                 557                596
            10/12                 444                444
            10/13                 812                154
            1.0/14                 166                123
            10/15                   72                 55
            10/16                 140                190
            10/17                   ND               190
            10/18                   ND               210
            10/19                 390                 ND
            10/20                 420                180
            10/21                   ND                ND
            10/22                   ND               640
            Average pCi/kg/day
            Group I    Group II   Group III    Group IV   Group V
            359          749         259          259        528
            (2)    From this date on, two samples only were analyzed
                  daily from the bulk supply.  The average of these two
                  samples was then taken as representative for groups
                  I, II, III, IV and V for the purpose of computing the
                  over-all background averages for  the duration of the
                  study.

            ND =  Not Detectable
                                      85

-------
Table 18.   3  I measurements in water and grain samples at Well 3,  NTS.
Date
   Water pCi/liter
Control    Inhalation
    Grain pCi/kg
Control       Inhalation
9/29/65
10/4
10/5
10/6
10/7
10/8
10/9
10/10
10/11
10/12
10/13
10/14
10/15
10/16
10/17
10/18
10/19
10/20
10/21
10/22
ND
60
80
40
70
30
30
50
150
40
70
10
30
50
40
40
60
40
50
""

70
90
20
60
ND
__
60
110
40
70
30
40
70
60
70
60
60
__
'"
..
ND
200
ND
290
460
ND
230
ND
ND
ND
250
ND
ND
310
230
300
ND
380
"

270
300
ND
270
210
ND
ND
230
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND
100
100
320

"
Control Group 2, 3,4 and 5 cows
Inhalation Group 1 cows
ND = Not Detectable
--  = No sample taken
                                       86

-------
 in the uncontaminated feed samples does not significantly alter the



 overall intake of l 31I since the level was low compared to the high



 activity of the contaminated feed.  Of course, this contamination did



 affect the control group and corrections were made for the added intake



 in the experimental group to obtain net activity in milk samples.  No cor-




rections were made in the 131I feed intake values for cross -contamination



in the feed.   More stringent measures to avoid cross-contamination



 are being examined for future experiments.






 As a partial solution to the cross-contamination, the air sampling



 data obtained at Well 3, NTS (Table  19) and the control group milk



 results are compared in Figure 22.  It  can be seen that the two



 curves have a strong correlation. The average level  of * 31I activity



 in each group of cows at the a.m. milking on October 4 -was taken



 as the base line control value for that group.  At each subsequent



 milking this base line value was corrected by a linear factor obtained



 by taking the Group V average for that milking and dividing it by the



 Group V  base line value.  The average  background value so obtained



 was subtracted from each  cow's  gross  J 31I level in the milk to obtain



 the  net activity.






 Contaminated Feed



 The  1 3 ! I in spread hay, spread and fresh green chop fed to cows is



 shown in Tables 20,  21 and 22.  The hay was sufficient in quantity to



 feed four cows  for six days as was the fresh green chop.  The spread



 green chop was sufficient for  only four  days  for four cows.






 In Table  20 is listed the amount of J 31I ingested by the individual cows



 in Group II, which received contaminated spread hay.  The table includes



 the  quantity of hay consumed by the individual cows and the total l 3 11



 activity per daily feeding.  Each  cow consumed an average of 6. 1 to 8. 0 kg



of hay per day and average  intake concentration by each cow ranged from





                                     87

-------
Table 19. l 3 l1 in high-volume air samples collected at Well 3 for the month



          of October.
Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
IS
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Volume of Air-m3 Prefilter -pCi
225
262
175
224
233
195
218
225
276
221
213
225
210
Continuous Sampling
441
235
254
272
210
212
238
Continuous Sampling
486
229
227
238
50
50
50
50
140
50
50
50
50
50
100
50
400

50
120
50
80
80
50
50

50
50
50
80
Char coal -pCi Total pCi pCi/m3
170
50
1200
50
130
160
320
240
220
270
960
600
90

140
50
100
110
80
170
50

230
180
240
510
220
100
1250
100
270
210
370
290
270
320
1060
650
490

190
170
150
190
160
220
100

280
230
290
590
.97
.38
7. 14
.44
1. 15
1. 07
1.69
1. 28
.97
1.44
4.97
2.88
2.33
.42
.42
.73
.59
.69
.76
1.03
.42
. 57
. 57
1.00
1.27
2.47
                                           88

-------
 Table 20.  l 3 l1 in Group II contaminated spread hay.
Date
10/4
10/5
10/6
10/7
10/8
... 10/9
~3 Total
Averag*
Cow
Sample
pCi/kg
6.6E5*
1.5E5
1.5E5
3.2E5
a.7E5
3.0E5
18. 5E5
e 3. IE5
12 Ingested
Total
kg pCi
6.3
7.0
8.7
8. 2
4.9
4.2
39.3
6.5
4.2E6
l.OE
1.3E6
2.6E6
1.3E6
1.3E6
11. 7E6
2. OE
Cow
Sample
pCi/kg
3. 5E5
3.9E5
2.9E5
4.9E
3. OE5
1.4E5
19. 6E5
3. 3E5
19 Ingested
Total
kg pCi
6.4
8.5
6.9
7.6
4.5
5.8
39.7
6.6
2.2E6
3.3E6
2.0E6
3.7E6
1.4E
0.8E6
13.4E6
2.2E6
Cow
Sample
pCi/kg
3.3E5
1.3E5
1.4E5
2.5E5
1.7E5
1.7E5
11. 9E5
2.0E5
21 Ingested
Total
kg pCi
4.7
7.4
7.9
6.6
5. 2
5.0
36.8
6. 1
1.5E6
l.OE6
LIE6
1.6E6
0.9E
0.9E
7.0E6
1.2E6
Cow 25 Ingested
Sample Total
pCi/kg kg pCi
2.8E5
5.2E5
2.2E5
1. 3E5
2.4E5
0.8E5
14. 7E5
2. 5E5
6.5
9.6
9.8
9.4 '
6.2
6:4
47.9
8.0
1.8E6
5.0E6
2. 1E°
• 1.2E6
1.5E6
0. 5E
12.1E°
2.0E6
 Total for Group  -  164 kg = 44. 2E  pCi

                         5
 Average for group - 2. 7E  pCi/kg


*6.6E5=  6.6xl05= 660,000

-------
      Z.OE5 to 3. 3E5  pCi/kg.  The average of l 3 11 activity in hay consumed
      by the four cows was 2i7E5  pCi/kg.

      The amount of l 3 11 in spread green chop fed the cows in Group III
      is shown in Table 21.   The samples, which were taken just prior to
      feeding, had an average values for each cow which ranged  from 4.9E5
      to 1.7E6 pCi/kg. Each cow consumed an average of 7.0 to 8.0  kg
      daily for four days.   The total intake by each cow varied from 1.7E7
      to 4. 6E7  pCi.  This range was greater than that in the spread hay
      fed to Group II.  The average of  l 31I activity in spread green chop
      consumed  by the four cows was 9.7E5  pCi/kg.

      Table 22 shows the results for Group IV cows which received the
      contaminated fresh green chop.  The samples taken from the individ-
      ual feeding boxes showed averages of 1. 3 to 1. 6E6 pCi/kg.  The
      individual  cows daily average consumption of green chop was 4. 8 to
      9.2  kg.  Therefore, the total average daily 131I intake by these cows
      ranged from 7.4E6 to 1. 4E7  pCi.  The average daily intake of 131I
      activity was  1. 5E  pCi/kg, which was  greater than the average  value for
      Group III.  In general,  there was sufficient l 31I activity in the hay,
      spread and fresh green chop fed  to the cows to be easily detectable in
      their milk.

3.     Milk Results
      The milk results for  all cows were  recorded individually for each
      morning and evening  milking.  The  data, as shown in tables 23 to 27,
      were arranged to show gross and net  l 31I activity in pCi/liter and
      total pCi.  All tables show the background milk values normalized
      for each milking, based on the control milk (Group V), as well as
      the production of milk in liters,  and the average values  for each milking.
      As was mentioned earlier,  the control group cows  showed  activity in
      their milk (See Table 23 and Figure 22).  The activity in the milk of
      the control cows rose steadily from October 4 (D-Day) until it reached
      a peak on October 11 (D + 7). The average milk production from the
                                      90

-------
Table 21.   1 3 11 in Group III contaminated green chop.
Date
10/4
10/5
10/6
10/7
Total
Average
Cow ]
Sample
pCi/kg
1 . 8E
1.9E6
0.2E6
2.9E6
1.7E6
I 5 Ingested .
Total
kg pCi
8.0
7.3
7. 3
b. 5
28. 1
7.0
1.4E?
1.4E?
0. 2E?
1.6E7
4.6E?
1. 2E7
Cow
Sample
pCi/kg
1.
32.
1.
1.
37.
9.
5
9E
8E5
4E5
6E5
7E5
4E5
18 Ingested
Total
kg pCi
8.7
6.7
8.8
6.6
30.8
7. 7
1.
21.
1.
1.
25.
6.
6E6
3E6
OE6
8E6
5E6
Cow
Sample
pCi/kg
0. 5E
1. 3E
1.3E6
6
0.4E
3.5E6
8.8E6
27 Ingested
Total
kg pCi
9. 1
7.6
8.9
4.9
30. 5
7.6
4.3E6
9.9E6
11. 5E6
2. OE
27. 8E6
6.9E6
Cow
Sample
pCi/kg
4.
9.
2.
2.
19.
4.
7E5
9E5
IE5
9E5
9E5
29 Ingested
Total
kg pCi
8. 8
9.5
8. 1
5. 5
31.9
8. 0
4.
9.
1.
1.
16.
4.
IE6
3E6
8E6
6E6
8E6
2E6
Total for Group - 121 kg =  11. 7E .pCi



Average for Group  - 9.7E   pCi/kg

-------
Table 2.2. .     I in Group IV contaminated green chop.
Cow 43 Ingested

Date

10/4

10/5

10/6

10/7
—•
r^ 10/8
"~**
10/9
Sample
pCi/kg
6
2.2E
6
2. 5E
6
1.2E
6
0.8E
6
1. 2E
6
1. OE

kg

5. 5

6.0

4.4

7.6

7. 0

9.7
Total
pCi
6
11. 9E
6
14. 9E
6
5.4E
6
6. IE
6 -
8.3E°
6
9.8E
Cow 44 Ingested
Sample
pCi/kg
6
2. IE
6
2. 5E
6
1.6E
6
0.9E
6
0.9E
6
1. 3E

kg

8. 5

9.6

9. 5

8.7

9.0

9.7
Total
pCi
6
17. 6E
6
24. 2E
6
15. 2E
6
7.6E
6
7.8E
6
12. IE
Cow 45 Ingested
Sample
pCi/kg
6
1. 5E
6
3.0E
6
1.8E
6
0.9E
6
l.OE
6
1. OE

kg

4.

5.

4.

2.

3.

9.



5

3

2

3

0

5
Total
pCi
6
6. 5E
6
16. OE
6
7.4E
6
2.0E
6
2.8E
6
9.6E
Gow
Sample
pCi/kg
6
1.6E
6
2.9E
6
1. 2E
6
0..8E
6
0.7E
6
0.8E
48 Ingested

kg

5.4

8. 2

7. 2

2. 5

7.8

8.9
Total
pCi
6
8.8E
6
23. 8E
6
8.5E
6
?.. IE
6
5.7E
6
7.3E°
Total
8.9E
Average   1.5E
40.2  56.4E
          6.7   9.4E
9.3E     55.0  84. 5E      9. 2E     28.8   44. 3E    8.0E




1.6E      9.2   1.4E      1.5E     4.8    7.4E    1.3E*
40.0   56. 2E
                                                                             6.6    9.4E
Total for Group - 164 kg =  2.4E
Average for Group - 1.5E  pCi/kg

-------
\o

-------
 control cows was from 6. 6 to 15.6 liters for each milking.  The high-

 est value of 1 3 1 I activity recorded was 536 pCi/ 1.


 One group of cows did not receive  1 31I activity by ingestion but only by

 inhalation on D-Day.   The milk results from these cows (Group I) are

 recorded in Table 24 and the values are plotted in Figure 23.   The
                                     2
 highest 1 31I value recorded was 1. 2E  pCi/liter by cow 46 from the

 first milking after the release.   It can be  seen that all of the first

 milkings after inhalation gave the highest  activity  in milk.   The average

 milk production from the inhalation cows ranged from 5. 5 to 12.3 liters for

 each milking.  The curve, as shown in Figure 23, declines  rapidly

 from D-day to D+.4 days.  The effective half-life in the milk after

 inhalation was 0. 8 day.


 Group  II cows received the contaminated  spread hay.  The milk

 results are shown in Table 25 and the values are plotted in Figure
                                   4
 24. The highest l 311 activity (2. 9E  pCi/1) in milk was recorded

 from cow  12  on  D  +  1. The average milk production for each  milking

 for all cows within the group ranged from 5. 1 to 12.8 liters.  The

 curve, as shown in Figure 24, indicates the time variation during

 the six day feeding.  Each point of the curve is an average value of

 four daily analyses.   The effective half-life during the feeding  operation

 was 2. 7 days.  The curve dropped rapidly for five days after the

 contaminated feeding was stopped so  that the effective half-life during

 this time was less than one  day.



 The contaminated  spread green chop  was fed to Group III cows  for

 four days.  The milk results from this group are shown in Table 26

 and the values are plotted in Figure 25.   The points on the graph are

 the daily average values. The highest value tabulated in milk was

 2.9E4  pCi/liter from cow 15  on D + ?,. The average milk production in

this group  ranged from 6.8 to 13. 2 liters  for each  milking.  Figure 25

shows the time variation of milk activity during and after feeding of


                                   94

-------
Table 23. Data for Group V control cows.
Date of
Milking Time
9/29 pm

10/4 a.m.

p m

10/5 a m

p m

10/6 a m

p m
Cow
13
24
28
Average
13
24
28
Average
13
24
28
Average
13
24
28
Average
13
24
28
Average
13
24
28
Average
13
24
28
Gross 1311
pCi/liter
10
10
20
13
34
54
119
69
72
73
64
69
104
120
79
101
91
61
129
94
160
96
119
125
91
72
95
Production
Liters
12.5
14.4
11.8
12.9
11.9
12.3
11.0
11.7
9.7
8. 3
6.6
8. 2
13.2
9.2
7. 5
10.0
7.5
10. 5
6. 1
8. 0
11.0
13.6
9.7
11.4
7.0
8.3
4.4
Total
1.3E2
1.4E
2.4E
1.7E2
4.0E2
6.6E
1.3E
7.9E2
7. OE2
6. IE2
4. 2E
5.8E2
!:£*
5.9E
l.OE3
6.8E2
6'4E2
7.9E
7.0.E2
1:1*1
1.2E
1.4E3
6.4E2
6.0E
4. 2E
                          Average
86
6.6
5. 5E
(table 23 continued}
                                         95

-------
  Table 23.  Data for Group V control cows.   (Cont. )
Date of
Milking
10/7









10/8












10/9










10/10



Time Cow
am 13
24
28

Average
p m 13
24
28

Average
am 13
24

28

Average

p m 13
24
28

Average

am 13
24
28

Average

p m 13
24
28

Average
am 13
24

28
Gross131!
pCi/liter
105
108
117

110
272
220
252

248
165
102

221

163

174
95
177

149

125
94
105

108

126
89
99

105
126
108

93
Production
Liters
12.7
14.0
10. 5

12.4
7.9
8.8
6.6

7.8
11.4
12. 3

11.4

11.7

8.8
8.8
7.0

8.2

12.3
15.8
12. 3

13. 5

7.9
8.8
7. 5

8. 1
12.7
15.4

13.2
Total
1.3E3
1.5E3
1.2E3
3
1. 3E
2. IE3
1. 9E
1.7E
3
1.9E
3
1.3E^
3
2.5E
3
1.9E
3
1.5E
8.4E
1. 2E
3
1.2E
3
1'5E3
1. 5E
1. 3E0
3
1.4E
3
1
-------
Table  Z3.~Da.ta. for Group V control cows. (Cont. )
Date of
Milking
10/10
10/11



10/12



10/13


Time Cow
p m 13
24
28
Average
am 13
24
28
Average
p m 13
. 24
28
Average
am 13
24
28
Average
p m 13
24
28
Average
am 13
24
28
Average
p m 13
24
28
Gross 131I
pCi/liter
246
141
475
287
309
191
382
298
479
289
536
434
263
155
223
212
169
97
157
141
98
95
127
107
93
72
113
Production
Liters
7.9
9.2
7. 5
8.2
12. 3
14.5
13.6
13.5
7.9
9.2
7.0
8.0
11.0
13.2
14. 0
12.7
8.8
12.7
9.2
10. 2
13.2
14.0
12. 3
13. 2
9.2
10. 5
8.8
Total
3.6E3
2.3E3
2O TT^
• O f-j
5.2E3
3-9 E
3.8E3
2.7E
3.8E
3.4E3
2.0E3
3. IE
2.7E3
1.5E3
1.2E
1.4E
1.4E3
1.6E3
1.4E3
8'6E2
9.9E2
                          Average
93
9.5
8.7E
(table 23 cont.)
                                           97

-------
Table 23.  Data for Group V control cows, (cont.)
Date of
Milking

10/14










10/15










10/16











10/17


Time Cow

am 13
24
28
Average

p m 13
24
28

Average

am 13
- 24

28

Average

p m 13
24
28
Average
am 13
24

28
Average

p m 13
24
28

Average

am 13
24
28
Gross 131I
pCi/liter

74
84
91
83

70
68
86

75

68
52

83

68

40
53
64
52
70
103

132
102

10
10
23

14

10
20
128
Production
Liters

12.7
16.7
13.6
14.3

7.9
8.8
7.9

8. 2

13.2
15.8

12.7

13.9

8.3
8.8
7.9
8.9
15.8
17. 1

14. 0
15.6

8.8
10. 1
8. 3

9. 1

12.3
14. 5
11.4
Total
2
9.4E
1.4E
1.2E3
1.2E3
2
5.5E
6.0E
6,8E
2
6. IE
2
9.0E2
8 2E
3
1. IE
2
9.4E
2
3.3E
4.7E
5. IE2
4.4E:
1. IE
1 8E3
3
1.8E
1.6E3
1
8.8E
l.OE
1.9E
2
1. 3E
2
l.ZE
2.9E
1.5E
                         Average
52
12.7
6.4E
                                                                          2
(table 23 cont. )
                                         98

-------
Table 23- Data for Group V control cows,  (cont.)
Date of
Milking Time
10/17 p m

10/18 a m

p m

10/19 am

p m

10/20 a m

p m
(table 23 cont. )
Cow
13
24
28
Average
13
24
28
Average
13
24
28
Average
13
24
28
Average
13
24
28
Average
13
24
28
Average
13
24
28
Average
Gross 131I
pCi/liter
57
100
111
89
25
36
14
25
10
60
50
40
40
77
10
42
95
74
67
79
39
27
38
35
20
78
10
36
99
Production
Liters
7.9
9.7
6.6
8. 1
9.7
16.2
13.2
13.0
8.8
8.8
7.9
8.5
11.4
15.4
12. 3
13.0
7.9
11.4
7.0
8.8
14.0
18.9
13. 2
15.4
8.8
11.9
7.0
9.2
Total
4.5E2
9.7E
7. 3E
7. 2E2
2.4E2
5.8E
1.8E
Z.7E2
8>8E2
5.3E
4.0E
3.4E2
4.6E2
1.2E
1. 2E
5.9E2
8.4E2
4.7E
6.9E2
5. 5E
5. IE
5.0E
5.2E2
1.8E2
9.3E
7.0E
3.9E2

-------
Table 23.  Data for Group V control cows. (cont.)
Date of
Milking
10/21



10/22


Time Cow
am 13
24
28
Average
p m 13
24
28
Average
am 13
24
28
Average
p m 13
24
28
Gross 131I
pCi/liter
10
53
45
36
79
62
58
66
72
75
74
74
69
' 92
84
Production
Liters
12. 3
18.4
12.7
14.5
8.8
11.0
7. 5
9.1
12. 3
14. 5
11.9
12.9
7.5
10. 5
7.0
Total
131I
1>2E2
9.8E
5.7E
5.6E2
7.0E2
6'8E2
4.4E
6. IE2
8.9E2
1>1E2
8.8E
9.2E2
5.2 E2
9.7E
5.9E
                         Average
82
6.9E
                                        100

-------
Table 24.  Data for Group I inhalation cows.
Date of
Milking Time Cow Gross 131I
9/29 a m 1
5
46
47
Average
10/4 a m 1
5
46
47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
Average
10/5 a m 1
5
46
47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
10
10
10
20
13
109
91
68
72
85
473
517
1243
453

324
373
739
268

252
438
637
254
pCi/liter
Control
--

__

_ _

--
--

86
86
86
86

124
124
124
124

116
116
116
116
Net 1 31I
__

__

_ _
--

--

387
431
1157
367
585
200
249
615
144
302
136
322
521
138
Production
Liters
14.4
6.8
9.9
10. 6

4.0
3. 5
7.9
8.8
6.0
16.7
7. 5
8. 3
8.8
10. 3
15.4
5.7
9.7
11.4
10.6
7.9
3. 5
6. 1
7.0
Total
--

--

_ _


--

6. 5E3
3. 2E3
9.6E3
3. 2E3
5, 6E3
3.0E3
1.-4E3
6.0E3
1.6E3
3. OE3
1. IE3
1. IE3
3. 2E3
9.7E2
                  Average                         279           6.1      1.6E3
                                        101

-------
Table 24.  Data for Group I inhalation cows. (cont. )
Date of
Milking Time Cow Gross 131I
10/6 am 1
5
46
47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
Average
10/7 a m 1
5
46
47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
Average
10/8 am 1
5
46
47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
160
244
379
243

189
171
321
208

164
191
212
181

297
302
330
237

170
151
195
157

126
223
143
116
pCi/liter
Control
111
111
111
111

106
106
106
106

135
135
135
135

305
305
305
305

201
201
201
201

183
183
183
183
Net 131I
49
133
268
132
145
83
65
215
102
116
29
56
77
46
52
0
0
25
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
40
0
0
Production Total
Liters 131I
16.2
6.1
9.7
9.2
10.3
10. 5
3. 5
5.7
7.9
6.9
16.3
6.6
12.3
9.7
11.2
9.2
4.8
5.7
8.8
7. 1
16. 2
6.6
10. 1
10. 1
10.8
10. 1
4.0
6.1
7. 5
7.9E2
8. IE2
2.6E3
1.2E3
1.4E3
8.7E2
2. 3E2
1. 2E3
8. IE2
7.7E2
4.7E2
3.7E2
9.5E2
4.5E2
5.6E2
0
0
1.4E2
0
35
0
0
0
0
0
0
80
0
0
( table  24 cont. )
                  Average
                                        102
10
6.9
20

-------
Table 24. Data for Group I inhalation cows.(cont.)
Date of pCi/liter
Milking Time Cow Gross ?1I Control
10/9 a m 1
5
46
47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
Average
10/10 am 1
5
46
47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
Average
10/11 a m 1
5
46
.47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
126
136
111
101

158
134
124
123

280
147
165
228

—
10
222
258

399
10
262
340

359
359
271
283
133
133
133
133

129
129
129
129

135
135
135
135


352
352
352

366
366
366
366

533
533
533
533
Net 131I
0
3
0
0
1
29
5
0
0
8
145
12
30
93
70
—
0
0
0
0
33
0
0
0
8
0
0
0
0
Production Total
Liters 131I
13.6
6.6
9.7
11.9
10. 5
11.0
4.4
6.6
6.6
7.2
14.0
5.7
9.2
11.0
10.0
7.9
4.8
5.7
7.0
6.4
17.6
6.6
9.7
10.5
11. 1
10. 5
4.0
6.6
7. 5
0
19
0
0
5
3.2E2
20
0
0
85
2.0E3
68
2.8E2
1. OE2
1.6E2

0
0
0
0
5.8E2
0
0
0
1. 5E2
0
0
0
0
                   Average                            0           7.2         0(

(cont. )
                                         103

-------
Table 24. Data for Group I inhalation cows, (cont.)
Date of pCi/liter
Milking Time Cow Gross131! Control Net131!
10/12 am 1
5
46
47
Average
p m ' 1
5
46
47
Average
10/13 am 1
5
46
47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
Average
10/14 am 1
5
46
47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
172
169
110
141

161
140
85
140

114
120
85
66

103
112
78
101

81
75
67
75

80
71
75
79
264
264
264
264

172
172
172
172

132
132
132
132

114
114
114
114

102
102
102
102

92
92
92
92
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Production
Liters
14. 5
6.6
9.2
10.0
10. 1
11.0
4.4
7.0
8.3
7.7
14.9
5.7
8. 3
9.7
9.7
11.4
4.4
6.6
7.9
7.6
16.7
7. 0
9.7
15.8
12.3
11.0
3.0
6.6
6.6
Toted
131I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
(table 24 cont.)
                  Average
                                         104
6.8

-------
Table 24. Data for Group I inhalation cows. (cont. )
Date of pCi/ liter
Milking Time Cow Gross 131I Control
10/15 am 1
5
46
47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
Average
10/16 am 1
5
46
47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
Average
10/17 a m 1
5
46
47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
76
69
72
65

71
58
54
56

85
71
58
54

10
10
10
10

— -
10
10
10

43
24
81
44
84
84
84
84

64
64
64
64

126
126
126
126

172
172
172
172

64
64
64
64

110
110
110
110
Net * 31I
0
0
0
0
0
7
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
_ _
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Production Total
Liters 131I
15.5
7.0
10. 1
10. 1
10.7
10. 1
4.0
6.6
7.0
6.9
17.6
7. 0
10. 5
10. 5
11.4
10. 1
3. 5
6.1
7.0
6.7
13.6
5. 3
8.8
7.9
8.9
6.6
8.8
6.6
6. 1
0
0
0
0
0
71
0
0
0
18
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
—
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
                   Average
7. 0
(table 24 cont. )
                                        105

-------
Table 24. Data for Group I inhalation cows.(cont.)
Date of
Milking Time Cow Gross13
10/18 a m 1
5
46
47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
Average
10/19 am 1
5
46
47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
Average
10/20 am 1
- . . .. 5
46
47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
63
43
70
32

50
20
40
10

20
20
20
10

79
68
83
76

69
76
66
66

30
10
10
10
pCi/liter
LI Control
31
31
31
31

49
49
49
49

54
54
54
54

117
117
117
117

43
43
43
43

44
44
44
44
Net 131I
32
12
39
1
21
1
0
0
0
>1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
26
36
23
23
27
0
0
0
0
Production
Liters
18.0
6.6
8.8
11.9
11. 3
10. 1
3. 5
7. 5
7.0
7.0
11.4
6. 1
8. 3
9.2
8.8
7. 5
3. 5
4.8
6.6
5.6
18.0
7.9
9.6
11.4
11.7
8.8
3. 5
4.8
4.8
Total
5.8E2
79.
3.4E2
12
2.5E2
10
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4.7E2
2.8E2
2. 2E2
2.6E2
3.0E2
0
0
0
0
(table 24 cont, )
                   Average
106
                          5. 5

-------
Table 24 . Data for Group I inhalation cows. (cont. )
Date of
Milking
10/21









10/22








Time Cow
am 1
5
46
47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
Average
am. 1
5
46
47
Average
p m 1
5
46
47
Gross
30
10
20
10

72
63
62
109

69
88
70
85

70
84
118
114
pCi/liter
131 1 Control
44
44
44
44

82
82
82
82

91
91
91
91

101
101
101
101
Net 131I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1?
13
Production
Liters
15.8
6.6
9.2
7.9
9.9
9.2
3.5
5. 3
8.8
6.7
13.2
5.7
8.8
8.3
5.5
8.8
4.4
5. 3
7. 5
Total
131I
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
90
98
                  Average
6. 5
29
                                        107

-------
 Table 25.  Data for Group II contaminated spread hay cows.
Date of
Milking
9/29




10/4









10/5









10/6



Time Cow
am 12
19
21
25
Average
am 12
19
21
25
Average
p m 12
19
21
25
Average
am 12
19
21
25
Average
p m 12
19
21
25
Average
am 12
19
21
25
pCi/liter
Gross
131 1 Control
Net
Production
131 1 Liters
ND
ND 	 	
10
30
10
80
77
96
74
82
1.
3.
1.
1.

2.
6.
4.
3.

2.
9.
6.
6.

1.
6.
6.
5.








7E4
OE3
9E3
3E3

9E4
6E3
OE3
4E3

6E4
6E3
OE3
7E3

5E4
5E3
9E3
6E3













1
	
	

_ _ _
	
	
	

83
83
83
83

20
120
1
1

1
1
1
1

1
20
20

12
12
12
12

07
107
1
1
07
07
-
-

_
-
-
-

1
3
1
1
5
2
6
3
3
1
2
9
5
6
1
1
6
6
5

--

_ _
--

--

.7E4
.OE3
.9E3
.3E3
,8E3
.9E4
.5E3
.9E3
.3E3
.IE4
.6E4
.5E3
.9E3
.6E3
.2E4
.5E4
,4E3
,8E3
.5E3
8
6
9
16

6
6
8
16
9
4
4
7
14
7
7
7
8
16
10
4
4
6
10
6
7
5
9
18
.4
.8
. 1
.3

.6
.6
•8
. 2
.6
.4
.8
. 0
.0
.6
.9
. 0
.8
. 7
. 1
.0
.4
. 1
. 1
. 2
.5
.7
.2
.4
Total
131I

-
-
-

_
-
-
-

7
1
1
1
3
2
4
3
5
9
1
1
3
6
5
1
3
6
10



--

_ _
--
--
--

.5E4
.4E4
. 3E4
.8E4
.OE4
.3E5
.6E4
.4E4
.5E4
.IE4
.OE5
.2E4
,6E4
.7E4
.3E4
. 3E5
.6E4
. 3E4
.IE4
                    Average
8.4E3
10. 2
8.2E4
(table 25 cont. )
                                       108

-------
Table 25. Data for Group II contaminated spread hay cows, (cont.)
Date of Gross pCi/liter
Milking Time Cow 131I Control
10/6 p m 12
19
21
25
Average
10/7 am 12
19
21
25
Average
p m 12
19
21
25
Average
10/8 am 12
19
21
25
Average
p m 12
19
21
25
Average
10/9 am 12
19
21
25
1.8E4
8.6E3
5.3E3
7.6E3

8.9E3
4.5E3
5.9E3
4. IE3

2.2E4
6.5E3
3.4E3
6.7E3

9.0E3
4.2E3
4.4E3
4.0E3

1.4E4
4.0E3
3.6E3
4.3E3

9.2E3
2.8E3
4.3E3
3.2E3
104
104
104
104

130
130
130
130

294
294
294
294

194
194
194
194

176
176
176
176

128
128
128
128
Net 131I
1.8E4
8.5E3
5.2E3
7.5E3
9.8E3
8.8E3
4.4E3
5.8E3
4.0E3
5.8E3
2. 2E4
6.2E3
3. IE3
6.4E3
9.4E3
8.8E3
4.0E3
4. 2E3
3.8E3
5.2E3
1.4E4
3.8E3
3.4E3
4. IE3
6.3E3
9. IE3
2.7E3
4.2E3
3. IE3
Production Total
Liters 131I
4.4
4.0
5.7
11.0
6.3
6.1
7.0
8. 3
17. 1
9.6
5. 3
4.8
5.7
11.9
6.9
7.9
7.9
7.5
19.8
10.8
4.8
4.8
4.8
11.4
6.5
6.6
7.5
7.9
19.3
7.9E4
3.4E4
3.0E4
8.3E4
5.7E4
5.4E4
3. IE4
4.8E4
6.8E4
5.0E4
1.2E5
3.0E4
1.8E4
7.6E4
6. IE4
7.0E4
3.2E4
3.2E4
7.5E4
5. 2E4
6.7E4
1.8E4
1.6E4
4.7E4
3. 7E4
I
6.0E4
2.0E4
3.3E4
6.0E4
                    Average                        4.8E3        10.3      4. 3E4

(table 25 cont. )
                                       109

-------
Table 25. Data for Group II contaminated spread hay cows.    (Cont.)
Date of
Milking Time Cow
10/9 P m 12
19
21
25
Average
10/10 am 12
19
21
25
Average
p m 12
19
21
25
Average
10/11 am 12
19
21
25
Average
p m 12
19
21
25
Average
10/12 am 12
19
21
25
Average
Gross pCi/liter
131 1 Control
1.8E3
4.5E3
5.9E3
5. IE3

6.5E3
2.9E3
4. IE3
3. IE3

4. OJC3
1.7J-:3
1.6E3
2. IE3

2.6E3
1.4E3
2.0E3
1.2E3

1.9E3
1. IE3
1.7E3
1.3E3

8. 3E2
4.8E2
LIE3
4.9E2
.
125
125
125
125

130
130
130
130

341
341
341
341

353
353
353
353

515
515
515
515

254
254
254
254

Net 131I
1.7E3
4.4E3
5.8E3
5.0E3
4. 2E3
6.4E3
2.8E3
4.0E3
3.0E3
4. IE3
3.7E3
1.4E3
1. 3E3
1.8E3
2. IE3
2.2E3
l.OE3
1.6E3
8.5E2
1.4E3
1.4E3
5.9E2
1.2E3
7.9E2
9.9E2
5.8E2
2. 3E2
8.5E2
2.4E2
4.8E2
Production Total
Liters 131I
2.6
4.4
4.0
9.2
5. 1
10. 1
9.2
9.7
20. 2
12.3
4.4
4.0
4.8
14.0
6.8
7.0
7.0
8.8
18.0
10.2
4.0
4.0
4.8
10.5
5.8
7.0
6.6
8.3
17.6
9.9
4.4E3
1.9E4
2.3E4
4.6E3
1. 3E4
6.5E4
2.6E4
3.9E4
6. IE4
4. 8E4
1.6E4
5.6E3
6.2E3
2.5E4
1.3E4
1.5E4
7.0E3
1.4E4
1.5E4
1.3E3
5.6E3
2.4E3
5.8E3
8.3E3
5.5E3
4. IE3
1. 5E3
7. IE3
4.2E3
4.2E3
(table 25 cont.)
                                        110

-------
Table 25- Data for Group II contaminated spread hay cows.  (Cont.)
Date of
Milking
10/12




10/13









10/14









10/15



Time Cow
p m 12
19
21
25
Average
am 12
19
21
25
Average
p m 12
19
21
25
Average
am 12
19
21
25
Average
p m 12
19
21
25
Average
am 12
19
21
25
Gross
131j
5.3E2
2.9E2
7.5E2
3.4E2

2.8E2
1.7E2
3.9E2
1.8E2

2.8E2
1.8E2
2.4E2
1.8E2

2.2E2
1. IE2
2.4E2
1.7E2

1.8E2
1. 2E2
1.6E2
1.2E2

2. OE2
1. IE2
1.6E2
1.2E2
pCi/liter
Control Net 131I
166
166
166
166

127
127
127
127

110
110
110
110

98
98
98
98

89
89
89
89

81
81
81
81
3.6E2
1.2E2
5.8E2
1.7E2
3. IE2
153
43
263
53
128
170
70
130
70
110
122
12
142
72
87
91
31
71
31
56
119
29
79
39
Production
Liters
4.4
4.4
5.7
11.4
6.5
6.1
7.5
8.3
17. 6
9.8
5.7
4.0
6.6
12.7
7. 3
7.0
7.0
8.8
16.7
9.9
4.0
4.0
6. 1
11.0
6.3
7.5
7.0
9.7
17. 1
Total
131J-
1.6E3
5.3E2
3.3E3
1.9E3
1.8E3
9.2E2
3.2E2
2.2E3
9. 3E2
1. IE3
9.7E2
2. 8E2
8.6E2
8.9E2
7.5E2
8.5E2
8.4E2
1.2E3
1.2E3
l.OE3
3.6E2
1. 2E2
4. 3E2
3.4E2
3. IE2
8.9E2
2.0E2
7.7E2
6.7E2
(table 25 cont)
                    Average
                                        111
67
10. 3
6. 3E'

-------
Table 25. Data for Group II contaminated spread hay cows.   (Cont.)
Date of
Milking
10/15




10/16






i


10/17









10/18



Time Cow
p m 12
19
21
25
Average
am 12
19
21
25
Average
p m 12
19
21
25
Average
am 12
19
21
25
Average
p m 12
19
21
25
Average
am 12
19
21
25
Gross
177
72
111
101

177
73
107
86

140
50
162
100

— — .
40
70
50

136
51
76
74

118
72
92
70
pCi/liter
Control
62
62
62
62

121
121
121
121

16
16
16
16

— _ —
62
62
62

106
106
106
106

30
30
30
30
Net 131I
115
10
49
39
53
56
0
0
0
14
124
34
146
84
97
— . «
0
12
0
4
30
0
0
0
8
88
42
62
40
Production
Liters
4.8
4.4
6.6
12.3
7.0
8.8
7.9
9.7
17.6
11.0
4.4
4.0
6.1
11.9
6.6
6.6
6.6
9.7
15.8
9.7
4.4
4.4
6.6
11.0
6.6
7.0
6.6
9.7
17.6
Total
5.5E2
4.4E2
3.2E2
4.8E2
4.5E2
4.9E2
0
0
0
1.2E2
5.5E2
1.4E2
8.9E2
10. OE2
6.5E2
_ _ _
0
1,2E2
0
40
1.3E2
0
0
0
33
6.2E2
2.8E2
6.0E2
7.0E2
                    Average
58
10. 2
5.5E<
(table 25 cont. )
                                       112

-------
Table 25. Data for Group II contaminated spread hay cows.  (cont. )
Date of
Milking
10/18




10/19









10/20









10/21



Time Cow
p m 12
19
21
25
Average
am 12
19
21
25
Average
p m 12
19
21
25
Average
am 12
19
21
25
Average
p m 12
19
21
25
Average
am 12
19
21
25
Gross pCi/liter
131 1 Control
100
70
87
85

100
40
89
74

109
87
81
92

94
60
66
83

90
60
83
59

80
20
78
82
48
48
48
48

50
50
50
50

93
93
93
93

42
42
42
42

43
43
43
43

43
43
43
43
Net 131I
52
22
39
37
38
50
0
39
24
28
16
0
0
0
4
52
18
24
41
34
47
17
40
16
30
37
0
35
39
Production Total
Liters 131I
4.8
4.8
6.1
12.3
7.0
7.5
6.1
10. 1
16.2
12.8
4.8
4.4
6.1
10. 1
6.4
7.5
7.5
9.7
17.6
10.6
4.4
4.4
7.0
11.0
6.7
7.0
7.0
10.4
17.6
2.5E2
1. IE2
2.4E2
4.6E2
2.7E2
3.8E2
0
3.9E2
3.9E2
2.9E2
7.7E2
0
0
0
1.9E2
3.9E2
1.4E2
2.3E2
7.2E2
3.7E2
2. IE2
7.5E2
2.8E2
1.8E2
3.6E2
2. 6E2
0
3.6E2
6.9E2
(table 25 cont.)
                    Average
28
10.5
3. 3E'
                                      113

-------
Table 25. Data for Group II contaminated spread hay cows. (cont. )
Date of
Milking
10/21




10/22









Time Cow
p m 12
19
21
25
Average
am 12
19
21
25
Average
p m 12
19
21
25
Average
Gross
137
88
122
128

163
117
141
99

192
141
135
140

pCi/liter
Control
79
79
79
79

88
88
88
88

98
98
98
98

•Net 131I
58
9
43
49
40
75
29
53
11
42
94
43
37
42
54
Production
Liters
4.4
4.4
5. 3
11.4
6.4
7.0
6.6
9.2
16.7
9.9
4.0
4.4
7.0
11.0
6.6
Total
2.6E2
4.0E2
2. 3E2
5.6E2
3.6E2
5.3E2
1.9E2
4.9E2
1.8E2
3.5E2
3.8E2
1.9E2
2. 6E2
4. 6E2
3.2E2
                                       114

-------
Table 26. Data for Group III contaminated spread green chop cows.
Date of
Milking Time Cow
9/29 am 15
18
27
29
Average
10/4 am 15
18
27
29
Average
p m 15
18
27
29
Average
10/5 am 15
18
27
29
Average
p m 15
18
27
29
Average
10/6 am 15
18
27
29
Average
Gross pCi/liter
131 1 Control
20
ND
ND
20
81
67
78
125
88
1. 3E4
5.3.E3
3.7E3
1.9E3

1.5E3
6.3E3
4. IE3
2.9E3

2.8E*
1.3E4
9.5E3
4. 3E3

1.9E4
1. IE4
6.9E3
3.5E3

89
89
89
89

128
128
128
128

120
120
120
120

114
114
114
114

Production
Net131! Liters
1.3E4
5.2E3
3.6E3
1.8E3
5.gE3
1.4E3
6.2E3
4.0E3
2.8E3
3.6E3
2.8E4
1.3E4
9.4E3
4.2E3
1.5E4
1.9E4
1.1E4
6.8E3
3.4E3
l.OE4
9.1
7.2
14.4
16.0
11.7
8.8
6.6
15.8
15.8
11.7
6. 1
4.4
13.2
14.5
9.6
7.9
6.1
14.5
16.7
11. 3
4.8
3.5
10. 1
8.8
6.8
8.3
5.7
13.6
19.3
11.7
Total
131I
7.9E4
2. 3E4
4.8E4
2.6E4
4.4E4
LIE4
3.8E4
5.8E4
4.7E4
3.9E4
1.3E5
4. 6E4
9.5E4
3.7E4
7.7E4
1.6E5
6.3E4
9.2E4
6.6E4
9.5E4
(table 26 cont.)
                                       115

-------
Table 26. Data for Group III contaminated spread green chop cows. (cont. )
Date of Gross pCi/liter
Milking Time Cow 131I Control
10/6 p m 15
18
27
29
Average
10/7 am 15
18
27
29
Average
p m 15
18
27
29
Average
10/8 am 15
18
27
29
Average
p m 15
18
27
29
Average
10/9 am 15
18
27
29
2.9E4
1.3E4
1. IE4
4.6E3

1.7E4
7.0E3
8.8E3
3.4E3

2.3E4
8.6E3
8.9E3
5.0E3

1.4E4
6.6E3
8.9E3
2.2E3

l.OE4
3.8E3
5.4E3
1.9E3

5.8E3
2.4E3
3. IE3
1.3E3
110
110
110
110

140
140
140
140

316
316
316
316

208
208
208
208

189
189
189
189

137
137
137
137
Production
Net131 1 Liters
2. 9E4
1 . 3E4
1. IE4
4.5E3
1.4E4
1.7E4
6.9E3
8.7E3
3.3E3
9.0E3
2. 3E4
8.3E3
8.6E3
4. 7E3
1. IE4
1.4E4
6.4E3
8.7E3
2.0E3
7.8E3
9.9E3
3.6E3
5.2E3
1.7E3
5. IE3
5.7E3
2.3E3
3.0E3
1.2E3
5.7
4.4
11.4
11.4
8.2
7.0
5.3
13.2
13. 2
9.7
6.1
5.7
12.3
14.9
9.7
7.9
4.8
15.4
17. 1
11.3
6.6
4.8
14.9
11.4
9.4
8.8
4.8
16. 2
15.8
Total
131j
1.7E5
5.7E4.
1.3E5
5. IE4
l.OE5
1. 2E5
3.7E4
1. IE5
4.4E4
7.8E4
1.4E5
4.7E4
1. IE5
7.0E4
9. 2E4
1. IE5
3. IE4
1. 3E5
3.4E4
7.6E4
6.5E4
1.7E4
7. 7E4
1.9E4
4.5E4
5.QE4
1. IE4
4. 9E4
. 1.9E4
(table 26 cont. )
                   Average
                                       116
3. IE3
11.4
3.2E4

-------
Table 26. Data for Group III contaminated spread green chop cows.   (cont.)
Date of
Milking
10/9




10/10









10/11









10/12



Time Cow
p m 15
18
27
29
Average
am 15
18
27
29
Average
15
18
27
29
Average
am 15
18
27
29
Average
p m 15
18
27
29
Average
am 15
18
27
29
Gross pCi/liter
131 1 Control
4.8E3
2.6E3
2.4E3
9.9E2

2.4E3
9.2E2
1. IE3
5.9E2

1.8E3
6.4E2
8.2E2
4.8E2

1. IE3
4.8E2
5.4E2
3.4E2

7. 3E2
6.7E2
6.6E2
3.6E2

5.4E2
3. 3E2
2.7E2
1.5E2
134
134
134
134

140
140
140
140

366
366
366
366

. 379
379
379
379

553
553
553
553

273
273
273
273
Net 131I
4. 7E3
2.5E3
2.3E3
8.6E2
2.6E3
2. 3E3
7.8E2
9.6E2
4.5E2
1. IE3
1.4E3
2.7E2
4.5E2
1. IE2
5.5E2
7.2E2
1. OE2
1.6E2
0
2.4E2
1.8E2
1.2E2
1. IE2
0
l.OE2
2.7E2
57
0
0
Production Total
Liters 131I
6.1
4.4
10.5
15.4
9.1
9.7
7.5
16.2.
18.0
12.9
5.3
4.0
11.0
11.9
8. 1
10. 1
6. 1
16.7
16.7
12.4
6.1
5. 3
11. 0
13.2
8.9
9.7
6.1
18.0
17.6
2.9E4
1. IE4
2.4E4
1.3E4
1.9E4
2. 2E4
5.9E3
1.6E4
8. IE3
1.3E4
7.4E3
1. IE3
5. OE3
1. 3E3
3.7E3
7. 3E3
6. IE2 .
2.7E3
0
2.7E3
1. IE3
6.4E2
1. 2E3
0
7.4E2
2.6E3
3.5E2
0
0
                    Average
12.9
7.4E2
(table 26 cont. )
                                       117

-------
Table 26. Data for Group III contaminated spread green chop cows.  (cont. )
Date of
Milking
10/12




10/13









10/14









10/15



Time Cow
p m 15
18
27
29
Average
am 15
18
27
29
Average
p m 15
18
27
29
Average
am 15
18
27
29
Average
p m 15
18
27
29
Average
am 15
18
27
29
Gross
131I
4.7E2
2.8E2
1.6E2
2.0E2

17
200
186
201

252
183
136
110

186
146
87
154

200
93 i
107
89

131
137
92
93
pCi/liter
Control
178
178
178
178

136
136
136
136

118
118
118
118

106
106
106
106

96
96
96
96

87
87
87
87
Net 131I
2.9E2
l.OE2
0
22
l.OE2
0
64
50
65
44
134
65
18
0
54
80
30
0
48
40
104
0
11
0
28
44
50
5
6
Production
Liters
5.3
4.4
9.7
11.9
7.8
8.8
5. 3
17. 1
15.8
11.8
6. 1
4.4
10. 1
12.7
8. 3
8. 3
5.7
16.2
15.8
11. 5
5.7
4.4
11.4
12.7
8.6
8.3
6.1
15.8
15.4
Total
131!
1.5E3
4.4E2
0
2.6E2
3.0E2
0
3.4E2
8.6E2
l.OE3
5.5E2
8. 2E2
2.9E2
1.8E2
0
3.2E2
6.6E2
1.7E2
0
7.6E2
4.0E2
5.9E2
0
1. 3E2
0
1.8E2
3.7E2
3. IE2
7.9E1
9.2E1
                    Average
26
11.4
2. IE2
(table 26 cont. )
                                       118

-------
Table 26. Data for Group III contaminated spread green chop cows.  (cont. )
Date of
Milking Time
10/15 p m




10/16 am




p m




10/17 a m




p m




10/18 am



Cow
15
18
27
29
Average
15
18
27
29
Average
15
18
27
29
Average
15
18
27
29
Average
15
18
27
29
Average
15
18
27
29
Gross
131I
132
108
95
61

145
112
108
74

0
110
59
65

90
70
80
30

106
91
68
53

98
86
65
45
pCi/liter
Control
66
66
66
66

130
130
130
130

18
18
18
18

66
66
66
66

114
114
114
114

32
32
32
32
Net1 31I
66
42
29
0
34
15
0
0
0
4
0
92
41
47
42
24
4
14
0
11
0
0
0
0
0
66
54
33
13
Production
Liters
5.7
4.0
11.9
11.4
8.3
9.7
7.9
17.6
17.6
13.2
5.7
7.0
11.4
14.5
9.7
7.5
3.5
17. 1
16.7
11.2
5. 3
4.4
11.0
11.0
7.9
8.8
4.8
16.2
16.7
Total
131I
3.8E2
1.7E2
3.5E2
0
2. 3E2
1.5E2
0
0
0
3.8E1
0
6.4E2
4.7E2
6.8E2
4.5E2
1.8E2
1.4E1
2.4E2
0
1. IE2
1. IE2
0
0
0
0
5.8E2
2.6E2
5. 3E2
2. 2E2
                    Average
42
11.6
4.0E'
(table 26 cont.)
                                       119

-------
Table 26. Data for Group III contaminated s'prea'ci green chop cows.  (cont. )
Date of
Milking
.10/18




10/19









10/20









10/21




Gross
Time Cow 131I
p m 15
18
27
29
Average
am 15
18
27
29
Average
p m 15
18
27
29
Average
am 15
18
27
29
Average
p m 15
18
27
29
Average
am 15
18
27
29
Average
100
50
84
74

60
50
108
119

99
97
75
70

79
84
57
63

70
60
83
124

50
50
82
54

pCi/liter
Control
51
51
51
51

54
54
54
54

100
100
100
100

45
45
45
45

46
46
46
46

46
46
46
46

Net 1311
49
0
33
23
26
6
0
54
65
31
0
0
0
0
0
34
39
12
18
26
24
14
37
78
. 38
4
4
36
8
13
Production Total
Liters 131I
5.7
3. 1
11.9
12.7
8.4
8.3
5.3
15.8
16.2
11.4
4.8
4.4
11.0
14.0
8.5
9.7
6.6
16.2
16.7
12.3
5. 3
3.5
12.3
13.6
8.7
7.5
5. 3
16.7
18.9
12. 1
2.8E2
0
3.9E2
2.9E2
2;4E2
5.0E1
0
8. 5E2
1. IE3
5.0E2
0
0
0
0
0
3. 3E2
2.6E2
1.9E2
3.0E2
2.7E2
1. 3E2
4.9E1
4.6E2
1. IE3
4. 3E2
3.0E1
2. IE1
6.0E2
1. 5E2
2.0E2
(table 26 cont)
                                        120

-------
Table 26.  Data for Group III contaminated spread green chop cows.   (cont. )
Date of                     Gross  pCi/liter                Production   Total
Milking    Time   Cow     131I        Control    Net131!   Liters     131I


10/21      pm     15         14          84          0         6.6       0
                   18         90          84          6         4.4      2. 6E1
                   27         80          84          0        11.4       0
                   29         97          84          13         9.7      1. 3E2

                   Average                          5         8.0      3.9E1

10/22      am     15        128          94          34         7.5      2. 6E2
                   18        124          94          30         5.3      1.6E2
                   27        113          94          19        16.2      3. IE2
                   29        136          94          42        18.0      7.6E2

                   Average                          31        11.8      3. 7E2

           pm     15        139         105          34         6.6      2. 2E2
                   18      "  154         105          49         4.4      2. 2E2
                   27        137         105          32        11.9      3. 8E2
                   29        142         105          37        11.9      4.4E2

                   Average                          38         8.7      3. 2E2
                                     121

-------
Table 27.  Data for Group IV contaminated fresh green chop cows.
Date of Gross pCi/liter
Milking Time Cow il31I Control
9/29 am 43
44
45
48
Average
10/4 am 43
44
45
48
Average
p m 43
44
45
48
Average
10/5 am 43
44
45
48
Average
p m 43
44
45
48
Average
10/6 am 43
44
45
48
30
0
20
30

71
119
49
108
86
1.5E4
2. IE4
7.7E3
5.2E3

1.7E4
2. 3E4
8.8E3
8.8E3

2.7E4
2.3E4
2.3E4
1.4E4

2.4E4
3.3E4
1.7E4
1.3E4
	

	
	

87
87
87
87

126
126
126
126

117
117
117
117

112
112
112
112
Production Total
Net l 31I Liters 131I
	

	
	

1.5E4
2. IE4
7.6E3
5. IE3
1.2E4
1.7E4
2. 3E4
8.7E3
8.7E3
1.4E4
2.7E4
2.3E4
2. 3E4
1.4E4
2.2E4
2.4E4
3.3E4
1.7E4
1.3E4
9.9
6.5
6. 1
9.9
8. 1
10. 5
4.4
6.6
11.4
8.2
7.9
7.9
3. 1
11.9
7. 7
12. 3
7. 5
6.6
14.5
10. 2
4.8
2.6
4.0
8. 3
4.9
10. 1
7.9
6.6
12. 3
	

	
	

1.2E5
1.7E5
2.4E4
6. IE4
9. 3E4
2. IE5
1.7E5
5.7E4
1.3E5
1.4E5
1.3E5
6.0E4
9.2E4
1. 2E5
l.OE5
2.4E5
2.6E5
1. IE5
1.6E5
(table 27 cont. )
                   Average
2.2E4
9.2
1.9E!
                                      122

-------
Table 27.  Data for Group IV contaminated fresh green chop cows.    (cont. )
Date of
Milking
10/6

10/7



10/8



10/9

Time Cow
p m 43
44
45
48
Average
am 43
44
45
48
Average
p m 43
44
45
48
Average
am 43
44
45
48
Average
p m 43
44
45
48
Average
am 43
44
45
48
Average
Gross pCi/liter
131 1 Control
2. OE4
3.5E4
1.6E4
1.4E4

l.OE4
1.9E4
9. OE3
8.9E3

7. IE3
1.9E4
8.5E3
1. IE4

6.0E3
1.4E4
4.8E3
8.6E3

9.5E3
1.8E4
7. 5E3
1. IE4

7.7E3
1. 3E4
5. IE3
7.7E3

108
108
108
108

137
137
137
137

309
309
309
309

203
203
203
203

185
185
185
185

134
134
134
134

Net 1 31I
2.0E4
3.5E4
1.6E4
1.4E4
2. IE4
9.9E3
1.9E4
8.9E3
8.8E3
1.2E4
6.8E3
1.9E4
8.2E3
1. IE4
1. IE4
5.8E3
1.4E4
4. 6E3
8.4E3
8. 2E3
9. 3E3
1.8E4
7. 3E3
1. IE4
1. IE4
7.6E3
1. 3E4
5.0E3
7.6E3
8. 3E3
Production Total
Liters 131I
4.8
4.4
3.5
9.2
5.5
9.2
4.4
5.7
13.2
8. 1
6.6
7.0
4.8
9.7
7.0
8.8
6.6
5. 3
13.2
8.5
7.9
5. 3
4.8
10. 1
7.0
9.7
6.6
4.8
12.7
8.5
9.6E5
1.5E5
5.6E4
1.3E5
1. IE5
9. IE4
8.4E4
5. IE4
1.2E5
8.7E4
4.5E4
1. 3E5
3.9E4
1. IE5
8. IE4
5. IE4
9.2E4
2.4E4
1. IE5
6.9E4
7.3E4
9.5E4
3.5E4
1. IE5
7.8E4
7.4E4
8.6E4
2.4E4
9.7E4
7.0E4
(table 27 cont.)
                                        123

-------
Table 27.  Data for Group IV contaminated fresh green chop cows.   (cont.)
Date of
Milking
10/9

10/10



10/11



10/12


Time Cow
p m 43
44
45
48
Average
am 43
44
45
48
Average
p m 44
45
48
Average
am 44
45
48
Average
p m 44
45
48
Average
am 44
45
48
Average
p m 44
45
48
Gross pCi/liter
131 1 Control
8.9E3
1.4E4
l.OE4
9.7E3

1.5E4
l.OE4
7. IE3
7.2E3

8.0E3
6.3E3
6.6E3

4.4E3
3.0E3
4.6E3

3.4E3
2.3E3
3.7E3

1. 3E3
8.5E2
2.3E3

8. 3E2
7.5E2
1.6E3
131
131
131
131

137
137
137
137

383
383
383

397
397
397

578
578
578

285
285
285

186
186
186
Production Total
Net 131I Liters 131I
8.8E3
1.4E4
9.-9E3
9.6E3
1. IE4
1.5E4
9.9E3
7.0E3
7. IE3
9.8E3
7.6E3
5.9E3
6.2E3
6.6E3
4. OE3
2.6E3
4. 2E3
3.6E3
2.8E3
1.7E3
3. IE3
2.5E3
l.OE3
5. 7E2
2.0E3
1. 2E3
6.4E2
5.6E2
1.4E2
7.0
5. 3
5. 3
10. 1
6.9
2.2
7.9
4.8
15.8
7.7
4.4
4.4
7.9
5.6
6.1
6.6
14.0
8.9
5. 3
4.4
11.4
7. 0
7.0
4.0
15.8
8.9
3. 5
4.8
9.2
6. 2E4
7.4E4
5.2E4
9.7E4
7. IE4
3.3E4
7.8E4
3.4E4
1. IE5
6.4E4
3.3E4
2.6E4
4.9E4
3.6E4
2.4E4
1.7E4
5.9E4
3.3E4
1.5E4
7.5E3
3.5E4
1.9E4
7. OE3
2.3E3
3.2E4
1.4E4
2.2E3
2.7E3
1. 3E3
(table 27 cont. )
                    Average
                                       124
4.5E2
5.8
2. IE3

-------
Table 27.  Data lor Group IV contaminated fresh green chop cows.  (cont. )
Date of
Milking
10/13



10/14



10/15



10/16
Time Cow
am 44
45
48
Average
p m 44
45
48
Average
am 44
45
48
Average
p m 44
45
48
Average
am 44
45
48
Average
p m 44
45
48
Average
am 44
45
48
Gross pCi/liter
131 1 Control
5.4E2
4.7E2
l.OE3

4.4E2
3- 3E2
7. OE2

3.9E2
2.7E2
4.9E2

3. IE2
2.4E2
4.6E2

2.5E2
1.8E2
3.5E2

2.4E2
1.8E2
2.8E2

2.4E2
2.0E2
2.6E2
143
143
143

123
123
123

110
110
110

100
100
100

91
91
91

69
69
69

136
136
136
Production Total
Net l 31I Liters 131I
4.0E2
3.3E2
8.6E2
5.3E2
3.2E2
2. IE2
5.8E2
3.7E2
2.8E2
1.6E2
3.8E2
2.7E2
2. IE2
1.4E2
3.6E2
2.4E2
1.6E2
89
2.6E2
1.7E2
1.7E2
1. IE2
2. IE2
1.6E2
l.OE2
64
1. 2E2
7.0
7.0
14.9
9.6
7.9
4.0
10.5
7. 5
5. 3
5.7
13.2
8. 1
5.7
3.5
10. 1
6.4
6. 1
5. 3
13.6
8. 3
5. 3
4. 0
9.7
6.3
6.1
6. 1
14.9
2. 8E3
2. 3E3
1.3E4
6.0E3
2.5E3
8.4E2
6.0E3
3. IE3
1.5E3
9. IE2
. 5.0E3
2.5E3
1. 2.E3
4.9E2
3.6E3
1.8E3
9.8E2
4.7E2
3.5E3
1.7E3
9.0E2
4.4E2
2.0E3
1. IE3
6. IE2
3.9E2
1.8E3
                    Average
               95
9.0
9.3E'
(table 27 cont. )
125

-------
Table 27.  Data for Group IV contaminated fresh green chop cows.   (cont. )
Date of
Milking
10/16



10/17







10/18







10/19






Time Cow
p m 44
45
48
Average
am 44
45
48
Average
p m 44
45
48
Average
a m 44
45
48
Average
p m 44
45
48
Average
am 44
45
48
Average
p m 44
45
48
Gross
1.7E2
l.OE2
2.0E2

160
90
174

212
127
185

119
81
169

140
120
140

120
70
156

133
64
136
pCi/liter
Control
18
18
18

69
69
69

119
119
119

33
33
33

53
53
53

56
56
56

105
105
105
Net 131I
1.5E2
82
1.8E2
1.4E2
91
21
105
72
93
8
66
56
86
48
136
90
87
67
87
80
64
14
100
59
28
0
31
Production
Liters
5.3
3. 1
10.5
6.3
6.6
4.4
12.7
7.9
2.6
4.0
9.2
5. 3
7.9
4.8
13.2
8.6
4.8
4.0
9.7
6.2
6.1
4.4
12. 3
7.6
5.7
3.5
9.7
Total
8. OE2
2. 5E2
1.9E3
9.8E2
6.0E2
9.2E1
1. 3E3
6.6E2
2.4E2
3.2E1
6. 1E2
2. 9E2
6.8E2
2. 3E2
1.8E3
9.0E2
4. 2E2
2.7E2
8.4E2
5. IE2
3.9E2
6.2E1
1. 2E3
5. 5E2
1.6E2
0
3.0E2
                   Average
20
6.3
1. 5E2
                                      126

-------
Table 27.  Data for Group IV contaminated fresh green chop cows.   (Cont. )
Date of
Milking Time Cow
10/20 a m 44
45
48
Average
p m 44
45
48
Average
10/21 am 44
45
48
Average
p m 44
45
. 48
Average
10/22 am 44
45
48
Average
p m 44
45
48
Gross pCi/liter
131 1 Control
112
71
140

90
30
147

80
70
103

123
119
"144

117
141
155

138 :
148
139
47
47
47

48
48
48

48
48
48

88
88
88

98
98
98

109
109
109
Net 131I
65
24
93
61
42
0
99
47
32
22
55
36
35
31
56
41
19
43
57
40
29
39
30
Production Total
Liters 131I
6. 1
5.3
14.0
8.5
4.0
3. 1
8.8
5.3
4.8
5. 3
13.6
7.9
5.7
3.5
9.7
6.3
6.6
2.6
12.3
7.2
4.8
4.4
9.7
4.0E2
1.3E2
1.3E3
6. IE2
1.7E2
0
8.7E2
3. 5E2
1.5E2
1.2E2
7. 5E2
3.4E2
2.0E2
1. IE2
5.4E2
2. 8E2
1.3E2
1. IE2
7. OE2
3. IE2
1.4E2
1.7E2
2.9E2
                   Average
33
6.3
2.0E'
                                      127

-------
10
                                                                    in
                                                                  •Jf:r

-------
                                ,• '    •/-;''  ;  .',:    '  !  I  .  i •  '

                                                                                                                                !.;
'

                                                                                                                          •k


                                                                                                                             "'X
                                                                                                                                            '.    .   ,   :  /
                                                                                                                                                       i f1
                                                                                                                                             i;  .
                                                                                                                                                    >

                                                                                                                                              '•i;.-*''

-------

-------
\c
r


I











1





:


H : ;
' 1 ' :





1 •
.... . _
• •
.
.
•
'



'


.
'.
. i










"
'

'

',
' .
'' \

:. I

I
'

, i ; '
:T- "
t i

• i • '
' !" '
-i — . . ,
. . .

(
; i '.'.
. .


\
i
•
.









'






. , . .

! .


| .
i

j ;

, , i
i
! •
! :
i . i
• t '




•
•s.
'^' ''I*,

1 '.' i i '



_

.- '




•


<

, .1 ..





; . -
•

. i :
' ,
: 1 !

I 1 :

i I •
i ' !






V— >-~i

.i.




'• .









' ,
. '' .

: .


' T
I |
|
jT. /
//f'jSy


* * / !? *
, (
* t .
1



f



^--
.



: ;
i
. -
•












• •

•

i
,- i
'~tc7 1
, ,

" '*'/


i
; ;
'










' *
•-












i
'...








i
r
' •

i

'
,

1
;. . -
1 ' :
r -
i ;
1

"*- i
%'
h







i
i









/ .
">'', , '




.





* • ',
', X • ' ,
-IV • • ; • • - - t i
.'-V.i , ' • l : :
: ' ; : *; i . • - • • ; ;
: ; v. . • . . . ' . . ,
• ' ; : \ : • . ' i
! • ' : N .-!--..
: '• , ' X ' i i
': • • ' J j H . . i .
> : i • . A
: :.. ''- ;
i> .
' . • . V '
V i i ,. : i
. . t\ '
i t '3 ["" ~~
' '•<
v ;
.
; ' • ; -t ; !' : - • 1 •
• , . '•. ; : 1 :
! " i
• : \~ ~ '[
! • • *"V • i - !
vi |
: : ' i • = 1 : H| ''• ^
• : ! • < | 1 c >v ' }
.: i ( : ! -.. l 'h.

; ; ' . :
i i . i

i ' ' ' ' i .
-r 	 -t- 1 ; - • rr
1 .1 .
i . : . » .. . ; . . ,
( i
; . , . . i . , (
	 1 .. JM . .

          t j. ] i -1  . ; ! i I  :*
            1 i i    : •  :  >^/ '   .;..:• :
          , ~~x            |
          ' .   '     :   : . ; i
                       >-
                        >

-------
      contaminated spread green chop.  The effective half-life was estimated
      to be  2. 3 days.  The curve, after the feeding of contaminated forage
      was stopped, declined rapidly from D +  4 to D +  9.  During this
      period effective half-life was less than one day.

      Group IV cows  were fed the contaminated fresh green chop for six
      days.  The results of the milk data  are tabulated in Table  27 and the
      values are plotted in Figure 26.  The highest pCi/1  in milk  was
      recorded as 3.  5E4 from cow 44 on D +  2.  The average milk production
      for the four cows for each milking ranged from 4.9 to 10. 2 liters.
      Cow 43's milk production was stopped on D +  7 due  to an acute attack
      of mastitis.  The curve as  shown in Figure 26  shows the time variation
      of activity during and aft er feeding  of contaminated feed. The effective
      half-life during feeding was 3. 0 days.  Immediately  after the removal
      of contaminated feed, the curve declined rapidly for seven days, and
      the half-life during this time was less than one  day.

TV    Discussion
      In all experimental groups, the effective half-life, after the  removal
      of contaminated feed or after inhalation,  was less than one day.
      The contaminated  forage fed to cows was continued for four  to six
      days and the effective half-life during the feeding period was 2. 3
      to 3.0 days.  This finding implies that, for cows on the same diet
      (green chop, hay and grain), there is  no  significant difference in
      the kinetics of secretion of l 3 11 in milk for the three different types
      of ingested contaminated feed used in this study.

      In order to determine the relative values of the milk secretion of
      1 31I from different types  of contaminated forage, the ratios  of the
      average daily peak activity in milk to the average daily peak in
      each type of forage -were calculated.  The results of these  calculations
      are shown in Table 28.  Group II cows, receiving the contaminated
                                      132

-------
spread hay, gave a ratio of 0. 27, the contaminated spread green chop
Group III cows gave 0. 0086 and the fresh contaminated green chop
group was  calculated to have a 0. 0081 ratio.  The  spread and fresh
green chop ratios were similar; whereas, the spread hay ratio was
considerable higher.

It is apparent that radioactive iodine from the spread and fresh green
chop was not as available to the cow.  A possible explanation is that
the grass was binding the 1 3 * I within or on the plant itself or perhaps
some unknown factor was operating.

The percent of iodine secretion in milk from the total intake of
contaminated feed was calculated for all cows and  the results are
shown in Table 29.  The group II cows, receiving the contaminated
spread hay, secreted 6. 3% in the milk; -while 2. 0% was recorded for
the Group III cows which received the  spread green chop.  The fresh
green chop fed to Group IV cows resulted in a 2. 1% secretion in milk.
The low  secretion of the two latter groups indicates that  radioactive
iodine was  not taken up as readily as in the first group (Group II).
This evidence substantiates the milk to grass ratios as recorded in
Table 28.

Table 30 presents, for specified milkings,  the maximum and minimum
values of 1  31I measured in the milk of different cows -within each group
together with the milk production and PBI values for the  cows exhibiting
the extremes.  The largest ratio between the maximum and minimum values
occurred at the a. m. milking on October 4 in Group II,  and was  13. 1.
At the 5% confidence level there is no difference in the average maximum/
minumum ratios for Groups I and II. Groups I and II are significantly
larger than Group IV. Group III is significantly larger than Groups I,
II and IV.  A possible implication of the large value for Group III is
that the J 31I activity on the forage fed Group III cows , spread green
                               133

-------
Table 28.  Ratios of  average daily peak pCi/liter in milk and average
          daily peak pCi/kg in feed.
Average Daily Peak
Group pCi/liter in Milk
II 1.1E4
III 1 . 2E4
IV 2. 2E4
Average Daily Peak
pCi/kg Feed Ratio
4. IE5 0.027
1.4E6* 0.0086
2.7E6 0.0081
          *  This peak value represents a combination of the first two days
             measured values.  Since the spread green chop was not subject
             to any possible recontamination of the order observed,  it is in-
             conceivable that the levels actually increased from D to D +  1
             by the amount observed.  It follows that sampling errors  must
             have been the cause of this anomaly.  Therefore, to obtain a
             "best" average peak daily level, the second day's value was
             extrapolated back to D day and then the two  results were  averaged
             to give the value recorded in the table,  (see Figure 30.)
                                      134

-------
Table 29.  Percent of iodine secreted in milk.
Group Cow
II 1Z
19
21
25

III 15
18
27
29

IV 43*
44
45
48

Milk Secretion Feed
Total pCi Total pCi
1. IE6
3.4E5
4.8E5
7.8E5
Average
1. 2E6
4. IE5
9.5E5
4.4E5
Average
1. 2E6
1.6E6
6.8E5
1.6E6
Average
11. 7E6
13.4E6
7. OE6
12. IE6

4.6E7
2.6E7
7.5E7
1. 7E7

5.6E7
8.5E7
4.4E7
5.6E7

in Milk
9.4
2.5
6.9
6.4
6. 3%
2.6
1.6
1. 3
2.6
2.0%
2.1
1.9
1.5
2.9
2.1%
* This  cow had an acute attack of mastitis after D +  7
                                        135

-------
    Table 30.
Range of ! 3 l
lvalues for individual cows within groups (October, 1965).
OJ
Date
Am or
PM
Group
4 PM
5 AM
5 PM
6 AM
6 PM
7 AM
Averaj
Group
4 PM
5 AM
5 PM
6 AM
6 PM
7 AM
7 PM
8 AM
8 PM
9 AM
9 PM
10 AM
10 PM
11 AM
11 PM
12 AM
12 PM
Maximum
(pCi/1)
I Cows
1, 157
615
521
268
215
77
?e
II Cows
17, 000
29, 000
26,000
15,000
18, 000
8,800
22, 000
8,800
14,000
9,100
5,800
6,400
3,700
2, 200
1,400
850
580
Cow

46
46
46
46
46
46


12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
21
12
12
12
12
21
21
Milk
Produced
(liters)

8. 3
9.7
6. 1
9.7
5. 7
12. 3
8. 6 + 2.6

4.4
7.9
4.0
7.5
4.4
6. 1
5. 3
7.9
4.8
6.6
4.0
10. 1
4.4
7.0
4.0
8. 3
5.7
PBI

3.05
3. 05
3.05
3. 05
3.05
3.05


2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.25
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.80
2.25
2.25
Minimum
(pCi/1)

366
144
136
49
65
29


1, 300
3, 300
5,900
5, 500
5, 200
4, 000
3, 100
3,800
3,400
2,700
1,700
2,800
1,300
850
590
230
120
Cow

47
47
1
1
5
1


25
25
21
25
21
25
21
25
21
19
12
19
21
25
19
19
19
Milk
Produced
(liters)

8.8
11.4
7.9
16.2
3. 5
16. 3
10.7 + 5. 3

14.0
16.7
6.1
18.4
5.7
17. 1
5.7
19.8
4.8
7. 5
2.6
9.2
4.8
18. 0
4.0
6.6
4.4
PBI

2.97
2.97
2. 70
2.70
3. 15
2. 70


2.00
2. 00
2. 25
2.00
2.25
2. 00
2.25
2.00
2. 25
2.75
2.80
2.75
2.25
2. 00
2.75
2.75
2.75
Max/Min

3.2
4. 3
3.8
5. 5
3. 3
2.7
.3.8 + ]. 0

13. 1
8.9
4.4
2.7
3. 5
2. 2
7. 1
2. 3
4. 1
3.4
3.4
2.3
2.8
2.6
2.4
3. 7
4.8
    Average
    (table 30 cont.)
                     6.0 + 1.0
                                                 9. 7 + 3. 1
4. 3
1.

-------
e 30.  Range of 131I values for individual  cows
      (October,  1965).
                                                    "hin groups
(cont. )
Date
AM or
PM
Group III
4 PM
5 AM
5 PM
6 AM
6 PM
7 AM
7 PM
8 AM
8 PM
9 AM
9 PM
10 AM
10 PM
Average
Group IV
4 PM
5 AM

5 PM
6 AM
6 PM
7 AM
7 PM
8 AM
8 PM
9 AM
9 PM
Maximum
(pCi/1)
Cows
13,000
14, 000
28,000
19, 000
29, 000
17,000
23,000
14, 000
9,900
5, 700
4,700
2,300
1,400

Cows
21,000
23, ooo

27, 000
33,000
35,000
19, 000
19, 000
14, 000
18, 000
13, 000
14,000
Cow

15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15
15


44
44

43
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
44
Milk
Produced
(liters)

6. 1
7.9
4.8
8. 3
5. 7
7. 0
6. 1
7.9
6.6
8.8
6.1
9.7
5. 3
6.9 + 0.9

7.9
7. 5

4.8
7.9
4.4
4.4
7.0
6.6
5. 3
6.6
5. 3
P 131

2.25
2.25
2.25
2. 25
2. 25
2.25
2. 25
2.25
2. 25
2. 25
2. 25
2. 25
2.25


3.42
3.42

2.75
3.42
3.42
3.42
3.42
3.42
3.42
3.42
3.42
Minimum
(pCi/1)

1,800
2,800
4,200
3,400
4, 500
3, 300
4,700
2,000
1,700
1, 200
860
450
110


5, 100
8,700

14,000
13,000
14,000
8,800
6,800
4,600
7,300
5,000
8,800
Cow

29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29
29


48
45
48
48
48
48
48
43
45
45
45
43
Milk
Produced
(liters)

14. 5
16.7
8.8
19.3
11.4
13. 2
14.9
17. 1
11.4
15.8
15.4
18. 0
11.9
14. 5+1.8

11.9
6.6*
14. 5*
8. 3
12.3
9.2
13.2
6.6
5. 3
4.8
4.8
7.0
PBI

2. 00
2. 00
2.00
2.00
2. 00
2. 00
2. 00
2. 00
2. 00
2. 00
2. 00
2. 00
2.00


2. 52
4.00
2. 52
2. 52
2. 52
2. 52
2.52
2.75
4. 00
4.00
4. 00
2.75
Max/Min

7. 2
5. 0
6.7
5.6
6.4
5.2
4.9
7. 0
5.8
4.8
5. 5
5. 1
12.7
6. 3 + 1.3

4. 1
2.6

1.9
2. 5
2. 5
2. 2
2.8
3.0
2.5
2.6
1.6
(table 30 cont. )

-------
oo
Table 30.  Range of  31I values for individual cows within groups
          (October,  1965).
                                                                       (cont.)
Date
Am or
PM
Group IV
10 AM
10 PM
11 AM
11 PM
12 AM
12 PM
13 AM
13 PM
14 AM
14 PM
15 AM
15 PM
Average
Maximum
(pCi/1)
Cows (cont. )
15,000
7,600
4, 200
3, 100
2,000
640
860
580
380
360
260
210

Cow

43
44
48
48
48
44
48
48
48
48
48
48

Grand Average
Milk
Produced
(liters)

2. 2
4.4
14. 0
11.4
15.8
3. 5
14.9
10. 5
13.2
10. 1
13.6
9.7
8. 3 + 1.7
7.4
PBI

2.75
3.42
2. 52
2.52
2. 52
3.42
2. 52
2. 52
2. 52
2. 52
2.52
2. 52


Minimum
(pCi/1)

7, 000
5,900
2,600
1,700
570
140
330
210
160
140
89
110


Cow

45
45
45
45
45
48
45
45
45
45
45
45


Milk
Produced
(liters)

4.8
4.4
6.6
4.4
4. 0
9.2
7. 0
4. 0
5.7
3. 5
5. 3
4.0
6.8 + 1.3
9.7
PBI

4.00
4. 00
4. 00
4. 00
4. 00
2. 52
4.00
4.00
4. 00
4. 00
4. 00
4.00


Max /Min

2. 1
1. 3
1.6
1.8
3. 5
4.6
2.6
2.8
2.4
2.6
2.9
1.9
2. 5 + 0.4
4. 0
    The 95% confidence interval of the mean is given for all averages except the grand average.

    * These two values -were averaged and treated as a datum.

-------
chop, was not as uniformly distributed as it -was in the other cases.

If one compares the amount of milk produced by the cow having the
maximum 1 31I concentration in its milk to the amount of milk produced
by the cow having the minimum 1 31I concentration for each milking  an
interesting qualitative finding emerges.  For Groups I,  II and III
combined, in 29 cases out of 36 the cow exhibiting the minimum l 31I
in the milk had the larger milk production.  However, for  Group IV
cows, in 14 out of 24 comparisons the cow exhibiting the minimum
1 31I in the milk had the smaller milk production.  These apparently
contradictory observations imply that there might be some basic
difference in the -way Group IV cows metabolized l 31I compared to
the  other groups.

Figure 30 presents a plot of average daily concentrations of 1 31I
in the different forages used in this study. A  least squares fit
indicates an Effective half-life for hay of  5.4 days and for  fresh green
chop of  3. 6 days.  Due to the limited number of points and the  great
scatter, it was not possible to determine a reliable effective half-life
for  spread green chop.

For the inhalation cows,  Group I, it is possible to estimate the percent
retention of the 1 31I if one makes certain assumptions.
Assume:
                                                               4
       (1)   The average  inhalation cow breathed 106 liters/min.
       (2)  The average of the two air samplers operating  on each
           side of the inhalation cows gives a representative integrated
           air dose for the average inhalation cow exposure.
       (3)   An average of 6. 3 percent of the total 1 31I uptake in the
           inhalation cows was secreted in the milk.  (This is the
           average of Group II cows. )
The calculation goes as follows:
                                139

-------
                                                                           Or-	O   (is/V!if If

                                                                                .4

                                                                                -fl
                                                                                            -y5i
                    JJA        -^

-------
        106 liters/min =  1.8E-3m3/sec by a simple conversion.
        The average inhalation exposure, using assumption (2), is
        (72. 35 +  4.71) E7  =  38. 5E7 pCi-sec.  It follows that the
              2                       j-,-,3
        exposure for an average cow was (38. 5E7 pCi-sec)
        (1.8E-3m3/sec) =  6.7E5 pCi.
rrr
    From data in Table 26 the total 1 31I output of all cows of  Group I
    is calculated to be 5. 5E4 pCi.  Thus, the average total J 31I single cow
    out-put was  5. 5E4 = 1.4E4  pCi.  Using assumption (3), the total 131I
                 4                           i  4"F4
    retained in a average  cow of Group I was    ^~*   =  2. 2E  pCi.  Finally,
                                              . 063
    the percent uptake is calculated to be 2. 2E5 pCi  ,, nr^     ^
                                         6.7E5 pCi(1°0) - 33/°
    The peak value of l 31I in the inhalation cows, Group I, was 1. 2E3 pCi/1;
    whereas, in the fresh green chop cows, Group IV,  the peak was 3. 5E4 .
    Thus the  ratio is  3. 5E4 =  29.  Since this study  was conducted under
    meterological  conditions which probably maximized deposition and
    minimized inhalation uptake (the most dense visible cloud of aerosol did
    not reach as high as the muzzles of the inhalation cows), this ratio of
    29 to 1 for peak 1 31I concentrations in the milk  of cows fed fresh green
    chop comparedto that  of inhalation cows is probably a maximum. In
    future studies we plan to raise  our aerosol generation nozzles to a
    higher level  and we speculate that, when this is done the 29 to 1 ratio
    will decrease; i. e. , the inhalation uptake maximum * 31I concentration
    in milk will constitute a greater fraction of the maximum 1  311
    concentration in milk  of cows obtaining their l 31I from fresh contam-
    inated green chop.

V.  Summary
    To summarize the experiment Table 31 was prepared to record the
    values of intrest in one table.
    1.   The peak values of 1 31I activity in milk of inhalation cows were
         found in the first  milking 10 hours after inhalation and  these values
         declined rapidly with an effective half-life of 0. 8 day.   The  ratio of
                                    141

-------
Table 31.  Summary of averages for feed and milk results.
                              Highest
                      Time of Average
                      Peak    Daily
                      Value    Value
                     in Milk  in Milk
                                                                  T  f for Milk
                                                                   eff
                                                                                      Ratio of
                               Average pCi/kg in  Feed    T
                                                           Gil
                                                          for
                                             After    Average
   Uncont.       Cont.
                   .       Feeding Daily Peaks      %
Green  Forage    ur*ng    stopped  Milk pCi/1   131I
Group
                                    Green
Description Hours   pCi/1     Hay   Chop    Hay   Chop    days   days""5     day    Feed pCi/kg In Milk
       Inhalation
       cows
              10     5.9E2     291   359
                                               0.8
II      Fed Contami-
       nated Spread
       Hay
              24     LIE4     231   749     2. 7E5
                            5.4      2.7
                           < 1
          0. 027
             6.3
III     Fed Contami-
       nated Spread
       Green Chop
              48     1.2E4     276   259
                                     2.3
                           < 1
          0.0086
             2. 0
       Fed Contami-
       nated Fresh
       Green Chop

       Control Cows
              48     2. 2E4
                     3.7E
                          2 ..,
226   259

483   528
  1.5E6  3.6     3.0
< 1
0.0081
2. 1
       *  This value was observed on D +  7 due to a possible    I excursion at Well 3,  NTS.

-------
    the peak value in  milk of inhalation cows to that of fresh green chop
    ingestion cows was 1/29.
2.  The contaminated spread and fresh green chop fed to cows led to
    similar 1 31I secretion in milk as indicated by the milk to grass
    activity ratios of 0.0086 and 0.0081 and an effective half-life during
    feeding of 3. 0 and 2. 3 days respectively.
3.  The cows did not metabolize the 1 31I in spread and fresh contaminated
    green chop in the same manner or to the same extent as that in spread
    hay as indicated by differences of the milk to grass ratios.  There was
    no apparent difference, however, in Effective half-lives during
    feeding for the three cases.

4.  The percent  secretion in milk resulting  from feeding spread and
    fresh grass was different from the spread hay as indicated by the
    2. 0 and 2. 1% figures for the former groups  compared to 6. 3%
    for the latter group.  This evidence substantiates the different
    milk to grass ratios indicated above.
5.  In view of the observed levels in the control forage samples, it
    is apparent that a small * 31I excursion of unknown description took
    place at Well 3, NTS,  during the  experiment.
                                143

-------
          SPREAD HAY AND GREEN CHOP DEPTH STUDY



                            Ken Brown






 I.   Objective



     To compare levels and depth of penetration of 131I at selected



     layers in hay and green chop stacks.






II.   Procedure



     The hay used for the depth study was  grown at Milford, Utah,



     procurred from a local source, and stored at the dairy barn at



     Well 3 until used. Nine bales of hay were used with a com-



     bined estimated net weight of 900 pounds.  The green chop used



     was Sorghum sudanense grown at Area 15 Experimental Farm.



     The estimated net weight of the fresh cut green chop was  2000



     pounds.  A chemical analysis was run on a sample of this hay.



     Results are shown in Table 32.





     The hay was unbaled and spread on a  plastic sheet as was the



     green chop.  The dimensions of the two stacks were identical;



     both  measured  6  meters in length, 4 meters in -width and  30  cen-



     timeters in depth.  The areas chosen for the hay and green chop



     stacks are shown in Figure 3.





     The hay stack was prepared for study by using, as  depth spacers,



     two-inch mesh  chicken wire pre-cut into one meter square



     sections.  Three wire spacers were placed  at each corner and



     three in the center of the stack to provide unmixed samples



     from each position.  They were placed to divide the 30 cm depth



     of the stack into three equal portions.  A lettered wooden stake



     placed at each corner and in the center served as a means of
                                  144

-------
      identifying the location within the stack.






      Table 32.   Chemical analysis of hay used for Project Hayseed.





      Protein                                                16.80%



      Fat                                                     2.46%



      Crude fiber                                            22. 71%



      Crude Ash                                              6. 73%



      Moisture                                                8. 64%



      Digestible protein                                      15.80%



      Total digestible  protein                                 54.60%



      Carotene



           Mg/pound                                         55. 0



           Parts per million                                122. 0



           International units                            91685. 0






      Analysis by Morse Laboratories, California






      Green chop was  freshly cut and stacked identically to the hay



      stack.  A  large piece of plastic sheet was spread over both stacks



      to protect the vegetation from irrigation water.  (Normal irri-



      gation was carried out for the duration of this project. )






III.   Sampling



      One background  sample was taken from the hay stack.  This



      sample, taken at random,  included  representative portions from



      each layer.  One background sample was also taken  from the



      green chop stack. This sample was taken in the same way the



      hay background  sample was  taken.





      Fifteen  samples from  each stack were  collected following the



      aerosol release.  Three samples were taken from each corner



      and three  from the center.   One sample was taken at each depth.
                                   145

-------
      The person collecting at one depth  continued to collect all sam-



      ples at that same depth using the same hand.   This procedure



      was duplicated for each different depth using a different hand or



      clean  glove so that cross-contamination between layers was kept



      at a minimum.  The wire spacers served as a means of quick



      identification and collection of  samples at the selected sampling



      depths.






IV.   Results



      The results shown on the following diagrams are for iodine



      activity  expressed as pCi/kg.  The percentages  shown repre-



      sent the amount  of l 3 * I found at that particular sampling



      location.  The uppermost figure represents the top layer,



      the middle figure represents the second layer,  and the bottom



      figure, the third layer.






 V.   Discussion



      A comparison of the results  from the two stacks shows a greater



      deposition of  1 3 1 I on the top  layer of the green chop stack.   This



      could  be due to the much greater density of the green chop  since



      the hay stack had more deposition on the bottom two layers than



      did the green chop.





      It is suspected that cross-contamination between layers in  the



      hay was much greater  than that in the  green chop.   Radioactive



      particles on the  dry, and somewhat brittle, surface of the hay



      would have more of a tendency to drop  off and  contaminate



      lower layers  during  sample collection.





      Improvements of techniques  for the future will include weighing



      exactly the amount of hay and green chop used.  A smaller mesh



      chicken  wire  for separating the different layers will be used in



      the future to impede the falling through of radioactive pieces of



      hay and  green chop during sample collection.





                                   146

-------
        131
                                               FIGURE  28

                                      RESULTS of HAI DEPTH STUDY
LOCATION
TOTAL ACTIVITY
                                         TOP LAYER
MIDDLE LAYER
                                                                                    BOTTOM LAYER
Stake N
Stake 0
Stake P
Stake Q
Stake R
1.02 x 106
1.55 x 106
2.35 x 106
1.89 x 106
1.35 x 106
77. C$ r 7.85xl05
77.1$ = I.l9xl06
93.3$ = 2.19xl06
90.8$ - 1.72xl06
83.8$ = 1.13xl06
19.136 = 1.95xl05
15.9$ = 2.48x105
3.9$ r 9.1^x10^
3.3$ = 6.16x10^
8.4$ = 1.12xl05
3.9$ = 3.95x10^
7.0$ = 1.07xl05
2.8$ = 6.51x10^
5.9$ = 1.12xl05
7.8$ = 1.05xl05
Top layer average    -  86.0$
Second layer average =   8.7$
Third layer average  =   5.3$

All above data in pCi/kg
              l.U x
              8.60 x
                                       10b  pCi/kg
                                       105  pCi/kg
                                       104  pCi/kg

-------
          131
                                               FIGURE 29

                                   RESULTS of GREEN CHOP DKPTH STUDY
 LOCATION
TOTAL ACTIVITY
TOP LAYER
MIDDLE LAYER
Top layer average    =  98.0Q&
Second layer average *   1.4-4$
Third layer average  =   0.90
-------
             SOIL AND NATURAL VEGETATION STUDY


                            E.  M. Daley




 I,   Objective


      To determine the direction and extent of contamination beyond


      the boundaries of the farm caused by the release of the  l 31I


      aerosol.  Soil and natural vegetation  samples were used as an


      indication.




 II.   Procedure


      Undisturbed soil samples were taken from the top layer of


      soil with a  surface soil sampler having an area of 22. 50 cm


      by 15. 20 cm  and a depth of 1. 27 cm.   The samples were placed


      in cottage cheese containers,  sealed  and labeled for  counting.



      Natural vegetation samples of 200 grams,  of which at least


      75 percent  were leaves of the plant, were taken at distances


      of 100m, 150m  and 200m from the line of generators.  Samples


      were taken  by breaking the vegetation off by hand.  Samples


      were then placed in plastic bags, sealed and labeled  for


      counting.



      Each type of  sample was taken from five sampling areas located


      outside the  boundaries of the farm, downwind from the aerosol


      generators.
                                !



HI.   Results


      All of the samples yielded negative results,  when compared to


      similar samples collected two days prior to the release, except


      for those collected in an area 100m south of the aerosol gener-


      ators,  as shown in the following tabulation:
                                   149

-------
               Results of Soil and Vegetation Sampling



      Type of sample           Location                   I pCi/kg




                            100m south of the              „  „   , „ 3
      Soil                        ,                         3.8x10
                            line of generators.




                            100m south of the                      ,
      Vegetation             ,.                              8. 9 x  104
                            line of generators






IV.   Discussion


      The vegetation sample showing the increase was Russian thistle


      (Salsola Kali)  which was  growing 100 meters south of the line


      of generators.  Russian thistle is an annual.  The other species


      collected were Rabbit  brush (Chrysothamnus Viscidiflorus) and


      four-winged salt bush  (Atriplex Canescens) which are perennials.


      The soil sample showing an increased activity was taken from


      the same area as the Russian thistle samples.




 V.   Summary and  conclusions.


      Samples of soil and natural vegetation were  taken outside of the


      boundaries of  the farm in Area 15 to determine the direction and


      extent of contamination beyond the farm proper.



      From data  obtained it  can be assumed that the release was  almost


      completely contained on the farm and no significant contamination


      extended as far as 150m from the line of generators.
                                   150

-------
                    PASTURE CONTAMINATION



                          V. W.  Randecker






 I.   Introduction



      Once a day for six days after the release of the aerosol,  the



      Sudan grass in the experimental plot was cut by a forage chopper



      and thrown into a self-unloading forage box which trailed the



      forage chopper.  At the end of the six  day period, the supply  of



      Sudan grass in the plot was  exhausted  (See Figure 30).






 II.   Objectives



      1.     To determine the  change  caused by irrigation in * 31I



            activity on the  growing Sudan grass.



      2.     To determine the  change  caused by the mechanical



            cutting and transportation processes in J 3ll activity



            on  the growing Sudan grass.






III.   Procedure



      To accomplish the first objective, Sudan grass samples were



      obtained  in the contaminated plot within  a one meter radius of



      sixteen stakes (2,  4, 5, 7, 10, 12, 13, 15, 17, 19, 21, 23, 25, 27, 29



      and 31).  Samples  were taken at three different times: D + 1 hour,



      D + 32 hours and D + 80 hours.  These times correspond to



      sampling just after the release of the aerosol and just after the



      first and second post-aerosol release  irrigations.   After the



      third set of  samples  was acquired, sampling ceased because



      of the limited number of stations at which uncut grass was  still



      within  a one meter radius.
                                   151

-------
        Figure 3G- Daily Cutting of the Contaminated  Sudan Grass
D+5
D+3





D+2
D day
                                                            Scale:   1"  = 5 meters

-------
      To accomplish the second objective,  every day just prior to the



      green chopping of the contaminated Sudan grass,  three or more



      randomly spaced samples were obtained  in the area to be cut.





      All  samples contained a volume of grass in an area of 40 x  40 cm



      and cut to approximately 10 centimeters  above the soil level



      (the cutting level of the forage chopper).   Each sample was  pro-



      cured by one person encircling a group of stems with his hand



      and bringing the stems  together at the middle. Another person



      cut  the plants  approximately 10 cm above the  soil level with a



      pair of shears and the first person placed the  grass in his hand



      into a plastic bag.  This continued until a 40 x 40 cm  area had



      been cut.  The person holding  the stems  together decontaminated



      his hand  before obtaining the next sample.  This method of



      sampling was  selected because it minimized dislodging the  dia-



      tomaceous earth from the plants when sampling.  Also,  it was



      a quick and practical method of sampling.





      The l 31 I activity in the samples was calculated by subtracting



      the average activity of the background Sudan grass samples from



      the gross activity of the samples under a given range of gamma



      energie.s. The J 3l I activity in the samples was computed on



      both an activity per area and activity per weight basis.  In meeting



      the first  objective,  the  activity per area  basis was used because



      of the non-uniformity of density of the Sudan grass in the plot.  In



      meeting the  second objective,  the activity per weight  basis  was



      used because the sampling of grass,  just before being fed to the



      cow, could only be done on  a weight basis.






IV.   Results and Discussion



      The results of this  study are tabulated in Tables 33 and 34.   The



      average of all the stations indicated that  the activity on the  grass
                                   153

-------
just after the first irrigation  (D + 32 hrs. )  was only 16. 5% of



the activity just after the aerosol release (D + 2 hrs. ).   For



the row of stakes nearest the  aerosol generators there was



an average 90% decrease with the next rows in order away



from the aerosol generators having decreases of 80%,  79%



and 79% or an average 83. 5%  decrese.  During the irrigation



0. 65 cm  of water was sprayed on the area at a rate of  0. 80 cm



per hour.  The large variation in percent decreases across the



plot is not surprising since there was a large variation in the



initial  deposition of    I.  The majority of  the decrease  in



activity was probably caused by the irrigation process.





The average of all the stations indicated  that the activity on



the grass just after the second irrigation (D + 80 hrs. ) was 69%



of the activity just after  the first irrigation (or a 31% decrease



in activity) with a range  in the four  rows of stakes between 51%



and 93%.  1. 30 cm of water was applied to  the area during this



irrigation at a  rate of 0. 8 cm per hour.  During the period



between the two sets of samples  (two days), the  radionuclide



decay of  ! 3 l I alone would account for a 16% decrease.   It can



be seen that the reduction of activity caused by the second



irrigation after D day was much less than after the first irrigation.





There  was an average 151% increase in activity  from the time



the grass was cut to the  time  it was fed to the cattle.  The range



of increase was from 101 to 264%.  The most probable explana-



tion for this occurrance  is that the forage chopper's blades



acted as  a large air  mover and sucked the l 31I from the surface



of the soil and deposited it on the Sudan grass while the grass



was in the process of being cut.  This hypothesis can be



neither supported nor refuted by existing soil and  vegetation




data.   Further field studies may furnish  a basis for interpre-



tation of  the data.





                             154

-------
Table 33.   Iodine-131 activity on growing Sudan grass.
Stake
2
4
5
7
10 •
12
13
15
17
19
21
23
25
27
29
31
Ave rage
D+2 hours
(iCi/m2
10. 01
3. 60
21. 68
4. 39
7. 94
4. 17
18. 00
6.68
5.41
3. 94
3. 38
8. 74
3. 18
5. 54
8. 62
1. 78
7. 31
Activity
H-Ci/kg
6. 50
1. 72
9. 59
2. 88
3. 93
2. 38
8. 55
2.43
3. 21
1.41
1.82
5. 53
1.45
2. 03
3. 74
0. 69
3.61
Ratios between daily



D+32 hours
(j.Ci/m2
2. 00
0. 61
2. 22
1. 07
2. 02
0. 96
1.61
1. 03
1. 18
0.42
0. 89
2. 13
0. 99
1. 12
0.64
0.47
1. 21
activities on

Activity
M-Ci/kg
1. 35
0. 31
1. 53
0. 84
1. 06
0.45
0. 79
0. 74
0. 92
0. 31
0. 53
1. 30
0. 38
0. 65
0.45
0. 32
0. 75
D+80 hours Activity
(j,Ci/m2 (a,Ci/kg
1. 02
0.46
1. 78
1.49
1. 39
0. 50
1.68
0.88
0. 53
0.43
0.45
0. 82
0. 24.
1. 04
0. 65
0. 12
0. 84
growing Sudan gras


0. 70
0. 20
1.45
0. 81
0.87
0. 25
1. 19
0. 52
0.47
0. 15
0. 37
0. 59
0. 20
0. 58
0.49
0. 08
0. 55
s.
Ratio
Row
1
2
3
4
Average
D+2 hours
u.Ci/m2
19.84
8. 14
5. 00
3. 33
7. 31
D+32 hours D+80 hours D+2
|JLCi/m2 (JtCi/m2
1.93
1. 59
1. 03
0. 69
1. 21
1. 73
0. 88
0. 96
0. 35
0. 84
D+32
10
5
4
4
6
hours
hours
. 28
. 11
.85
.82
.04
D+32 hours
D+80 hours
1. 11
1. 80
1. 07
1. 97
1.44
                                    155

-------
Table 34.  Iodine-131 activity on fresh cut Sudan grass at time of feeding.
                          J.31I activity in uCi/kg

  Date           Cow 43   •  Cow 44     Cow 45     Cow 48     Average
D+3 hours
D+26 hours
D+50 hours
D+74 hours
D+98 hours
D+122 hours
2. 17
2.48
1. 23
0. 80
1. 18
1. 01
2. 07
2. 52
1. 60
0.88
0. 86
1. 25
1.45
2.98
1. 77
0. 86
0. 95
1.01
1. 62
2. 90
1. 18
0.84
0. 73
0.83
1.83
2.72
1.45
0.85
0.93
1.03
           Activity of Sudan grass before being cut for feeding.
                         1 3l
                             I activity in
Date
D+2 hours
D+25 hours
D+49 hours
D+73 hours
D+97 hours
Sample
A
0. 69
2. 09
0. 68
0.45
1. 00
Sample
B
1.45
1. 07
0. 31
0. 65
0.44
Sample
C
1.41
2. 03
0. 68
1. 07
1. 32
Sample
D
2. 38
	
	
	
	
Sample
E
1. 72
	
	
	
	
Average
1. 53
1. 73
0. 55
0. 72
0. 92
   Ratios of activities on Sudan grass (before being cut and being fed).
                         1 3l I activity in [j.Ci/kg
  Date
Average activity
before being cut
Average activity
before being fed
Ratios of activities
 before  being fed
 before  being cut
D Day
D + 1
D H
D -:
D H
D H
f- 2
H 3
h 4
h 5
1. 53
1. 73
0. 55
0. 72
0. 92
	
1. 83
2. 72
1.45
0.85
0. 93
1. 03
1. 20
1.57
2. 64
1.18
1. 01
	
                                     156

-------
      The results  of this study could have been more definitive if



      more  samples had been taken and at closer time intervals.



      Although the Sudan grass was a. good collector of the aerosol



      compared with other devices, there was a large variation of



      activity between samples.  Only a large number of samples will



      enable the determination of more precise averages.  If diato-



      maceous earth is used again  as a vehicle for  radionuclide(s),



      spraying the area from which the sample is to be  collected with



      a very fine mist of water will probably prevent dislodging par-



      ticles  from the  stems and leaves, especially  when sampling just



      after the release of the aerosol.






V .    Summary and Conclusions.



      An experiment was conducted to determine any change in    I



      activity of growing Sudan grass caused by the irrigation, cutting



      and transportation processes.  The first irrigation was the



      major cause of l 31I activity decrease  (83. 5%) in a 30 hour period.



      The second irrigation caused only 15% decrease even though



      twice  as much water was used.  This suggests that a portion of



      the aerosol is more firmly bound to the  vegetation.   The true



      change in activity caused by the cutting and transportation



      process, is undeterminable at  this time due to a lack of sup-



      porting soil and  vegetation data.  The data indicate that green



      chopping added  activity to the samples.  Further field studies



      may furnish a basis for interpretation of the data  obtained.
                                   157

-------
                   THYROID UPTAKE IN CALVES

                            J.  G. Veater


 I.   Objectives
     An examination of results obtained from recent experimental

     work performed by the BRP staff indicated that the following
     information would be useful:

     1.    To measure in vivo  the uptake of  31I in calves thyroids
           as a function of time.

     2.    To determine if a difference of uptake exists in the

           thyroids because the milk consumed came from cows

           eating different types of contaminated feed.
     3.    To compare the use of the detecting  device with and

           without  a collimator to determine the best method for

           measuring thyroid activity.


II.   Procedure
     A.    Calf History

           Six calves were used for  this study.   The physical data
           on each are shown in Table 35.  The  calves were arbi-
           trarily divided into three units  of two, each unit to drink
           milk from one  of the cow groups (See Table 37). The

           calves were housed  in separate pens.  They -were fed
           eight pounds (3. 64 liters) .of milk from individual milk
           pails, at 0800 and 1600 hours with each calf receiving
           milk from only one cow*.  Thus each calf  received a
           total of  sixteen pounds of contaminated milk each day
           *One calf, 54, received milk from more than one cow
            because  of mastitis problems,  which led to low milk
            production in the assigned cow, 43.  For the feeding
            schedule for this calf see Table 37.
                                   158

-------
          with the exception of the first day, October 4,  on which

          all calves received only eight pounts.  In addition to the

          milk, supplemental amounts of hay and grain were pro-
          vided. Water was  piped into each pen.   All calves re-

          mained in good health as indicated by physical  examina-

          tions and body temeratures taken at  each day of count.
Table 35.  Data on calves.
I. D.
42
49
51
53
54
55
Birth
date
1965
7/18
8/4
8/24 .
9/1
8/30
9/8
Sex
M
F
F
F
M
F
Heart
girth
in.
53
44. 5
41
43
43
43
Weight
Ibs.
428 •
242
195
215
230
210
Breed
(D
Holstein
Hoi
Her-Hol
Her-Hol
Her-Hol
Hoi
Thyroid
weight
gm (2)
24. 3
13.8
11. 1
12. 2
13. 1
11.9
FBI
H%
5.6
7. 0
6.0
6.7
12. 0
6.8
(1)  Hoi = Holstein, Her-Hol = Hereford-Holstein cross
(2)  Thyroid wt. (gm) = 0. 125  body wt.  (kg.), relationship
    established by PHS personnel.

    B.    Equipment

          The  analytical equipment consisted of a TMC 400 channel

          pulse height analyzer coupled with a 3"  Nal crystal.  The
          crystal was enclosed in a stainless steel, lead lined

          assembly with a detachable wide mouth  focusing colli-

          mator  forward from the crystal.. The collimator is

          five  inches in length and five inches across at the mouth.

          All data were recorded on IBM printout sheets and tally

          406 punch tape (see Plate 5).  The crystal assembly was

          attached  to a platform mounted yoke welded to a jack.
                                  159

-------

-------
      The platform was  on wheels.   The whole assembly was



      designed so that positioning could be accomplished with



      a minimum of effort (see Plate 6).





      For restraining the animals,  a specially designed head



      holder was adapted to a modified holding stanchion



      (see Plates 7 and 8).






C.    Counting



      During practice and training sessions we found that the



      calves could be effectively restrained for approximately



      forty-five minutes.  After this length of time they became



      restless and were hard to control.  Because of this,  it



      was decided that one four minute and two ten minute counts



      would be taken on  each animal during each  day of count.



      The one exception to this was two calves which were



      measured twice; once with the collimator on,  and  once



      without.  They were still counted for two ten minute



      and one four minute counts for each  measurement, but



      were released  between measurements.





      The data obtained  from the three counts on each calf  were



      averaged to determine the total pCi in the thyroid.





      The thyroid location was  established by manual palpation



      using  the crest of  the cricoid cartilage and the first few



      tracheal rings as reference points.   The crystal was  then



      positioned  so that  the thyroid mass was centered six



      inches from the face of the crystal with the collimator on.



      With the collimator off,  the thyroid was centered one inch



      from the crystal face.   At these distances, the efficien-



      cies were calculated to be 1.2% and  10.8%  respectively.
                             161

-------

-------
 •W... L.'
V

-------

-------
            Backgrounds on the calves and equipment were taken on



            D-5 and D day.  The first feeding of contaminated milk



            was on the afternoon of D day.  Counting of calves com-



            menced on the morning of D + 1 following the morning



            feeding.  Daily counts  continued from D + 1 toD+ 11.



            Additional measurements were  collected D + 14, D +  16



            and D + 18.  Background levels  were recorded before



            the first count and at 1200 hours each day.






III.   Results



      The results of the calf thyroid measurements are set forth in



      Table 36 along with the daily amounts of radioiodine ingested.



      A summary of the data is shown in Table  37 and the average



      values for five of the calves  are shown as curves of activity



      versus time in Figure 31.  The thyroid  measurements of each



      calf are plotted as a function of time in  Figure 32.





      The measurements with  and  -without collimator indicated that



      either method was suitable for determining thyroid activity.






IV.   Discussion



      The general shape of the thyroid activity versus time curves



      was similar for all calves, indicating similar iodine metabolism.



      There are differences in detail in these curves, though, which



      should be pointed out. The most striking difference is  in the



      effective half-life  which  is represented  by the portion of the



      curves after the peak value is  reached.   Two distinct slopes are



      apparent here. One slope, termed  "interim  T  " in Table 37,



      occurred during continued ingestion of activity. An average



      value  of 12 days can be calculated for this half-life if the two



      extreme  values of 5 1 days for  calf No. 53 and 5.4 days for



      calf No.  55  are ignored.  The  second  slope,  which  occurs at  the





                                   165

-------
Table 36.  Iodine-131 activity data for calf thyroid study.

Date
Oct. 4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Average

Daily In-
ge stion
pCi
4, 760
60, 700
162, 000
63, 700
56,600
60, 500
906
1, 750
920
608
554
382
375
437
349
549
382
419
608

Calf 54
Thyroid
Content
pCi

250
824
2,980
4, 610
8, 580
10, 700
10, 500
10, 200
8, 530
7, 500
6, 150


5, 070

4, 130

3, 160


%
Daily
dose

5. 3
1. 2
1. 3
1. 7
2.8
3. 2
3.4
3.6
3. 2
3. 0
2. 7


2.8

2. 7

2. 5
2.8

Daily In-
gestion
pCi
5, 230
36,400
44, 500
33, 800
24, 100
15, 500
18, 500
11, 200
4, 370
2, 320
1,030
983
783
594
612
471
542
561
1, 000

Calf 42
Thyroid
Content
pCi

1,460
4, 360
8, 050
11, 700
15, 500
12, 000
14, 300
11, 700
13, 100
11, 700
12, 000


8, 070

6, 370

4, 660


%
Daily
dose

27. 9
10. 5
9.8
10. 7
12.4
9.2
10. 3
8.4
9.9
9.5
10.4


8. 8

8. 1

6.9
10. 9

Daily In-
gestion
pCi
4, 760
36,400
45, 100
35, 500
30, 200
30, 100
26, 000
9, 180
3, 000
1, 300
1, 000
794
491
568
564
604
517
765
870

Calf 49
Thyroid
Content
pCi

665
3,960
8,660
16, 000
19, 100
21, 500
21, 900
23, 300
19, 900
19, 000
17, 300


13, 000

9,600

7, 580


%
Daily
dose

14. 0
9. 7
10. 1
13. 5
13. 7
13.6
12.8
14. 0
12. 7
13. 2
13. 0


12. 3

10. 6

9. 7
12.4
                                                                            (continued)
                                            166

-------
Table 36.  Iodine-131 activity data for calf thyroid study,  (cont1)
Calf 51
Date
Oct. 4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
Average
Daily In-
gestion
pCi
6,910
26, 200
29,400
30, 600
15, 100
8, 000
3, 880
2, 550
1, 280
797
885
561
506
360
433
688
680
550
1, 000

Thyroid
Content
pCi

1,
3,
5,
8,
12,
12,
11,
11,
10,
9,
8,


6,

5,

3,


200
170
360
960
100
000
700
100
100
730
210


020

020

890

%
Daily
dose

17. 3
9. 7
9. 0
9.9
13. 0
12. 8
13. 0
12.9
12. 9
13. 1
11.8


10. 9

10. 5

9. 3
11.9
Daily In-
gestion
pCi
13,600
39,400
63, 700
64,400
51, 900
19,800
6, 900
4, 360
1, 500
1, 170
1, 020
681
954
535
542
666
510
590
910

Calf 55
Thyroid
Content
pCi


4,
15,
24,
38,
39,
41,
35,
33,
28,
26,


17,

12,

9,


636
880
300
300
100
200
000
900
500
800
300


400

100

800

%
Daily
dose

4. 7
9.4
13.4
14. 6
18. 5
20. 5
22. 5
20. 9
19. 7
19. 5
19.2


16. 0

13. 0

12. 2
16. 0
Daily In-
gestion
pCi
19, 000
82,800
98,400
71,400
71,400
63, 500
50, 200
30, 100
14, 100
6, 350
3,470
2, 320
1,690
1, 310
1, 130
1, 060
1, 040
899
1, 070

Calf 53
Thyroid
Content
pCi

1, 540
6,600
16,600
29, 500
41, 900
47, 900
53, 100
51, 100
52, 500
50,400
51, 300


39, 700

29, 000

24, 000


%
Daily
dose

8. 1
6.6
8. 7
12. 0
14. 0
14. 2
14. 7
14. 1
15. 1
15. 5
16.9


16.5

14. 1

13.6
13. 2
                                             167

-------
Table 37.  Summary of calf data.
Milk
Calf from Cow fed Calf PBI Peak thyroid
No. cow 1^8% Peak in milk
No.
42 21 Hay 5.6 0.62
49 25 Hay 7.0 0.84
51 29 Spread green ^ Q ^ ?3
chop
55 27 Spread green ^ g ^Q6
chop
53 48 Fresh green ^ ? ^ Q5
chop
54 43* Fresh green ^ Q Q^2
chop
*The feeding schedule for Calf 54 is given below:
Date Pounds fed
Oct. 4p.m. 8
5 a. m. 6
5 p. m. 5
3
6 a. m. 8
6 p. m. 5
3
7-9 a.m. and p.m. 16
10-22 a.m. and p.m. 16
Interim
Average ^ T
% uptake
Days Days
10.9 11 5.2
12.4 15 5.8
11.9 11 6.2
16.0 5.4 5.2
13.2 51 6.4
2.8 12 6.1

Milk from cow No.
25
45
24
43
43
24
43
43
24
Total
dose
thyroid
rads
0. 10
0. 21
0. 16
0.47
0. 92
0. 11









                                           168

-------
•t
o:  u
a
TL-

-------
                  .__L_ii—
        -2^-n^h
         ... i-p-H-p

                 _J_i_i_i	:^4_vl4i.

   ^HH^HH-HH-'-K-H^F^
   _J_Lu_a_U-H -4-^-.^.-^
         7t+H=
                  Etrirr-a
           pr-±i;
                       4z
   s  "sj •  pm
  [£   \ffi33
           m
                -T-^-I—!—!—
!+
a • j B



H w *
j. w !/:
         *fc4±
           4=t:
          'ttztfct
                  hCFH

                         S
                            ._> -I ^ ^.j-l-,j-4-. ^..U^p-j" ;

                            - '  '- .:~L^.|—L--J—1—-t—i— 4~--j-—

                              mpurmj
                                                  T-i~tt
                        -J--
         im,^
          Mfc-H
                         13TK
             U4_
                                                      ^^
EJiat
                                          l'4-i--
         —I—I	[-. -H	

  jj:ij_L_|j_i_l_

  ^•-U-JIUL
   /Ml  miL_.

         Elilli=
                         3:
                £S
                                  4..
                                        4rt :rt
      W.L~ •—H-

      r.mr
                                        riEiH'E
                         S-rt?/
                                        -i,..-.,. ,	I...I  -J. J


                                        .Uf,.tlH,-^i^-~-^
                                               •4:
                         -4-:-4-
                                                  V(~
                                                           ^]
                                                          £m+=

                                HEfEjE^EEtl
                       ±g±

                       -^^-Ttfi~4==S4^K-rt«'-jii=4=4s^.Tir
                       „.]—(--.u,,,*- i S-TT^::.:;. _ .|^J	 .. . y^
                        ,  L —-r^ i n^  i i  -  ,  ; :


                      *r
                                                             rjJrtt;
                                                                      ^1^3
                                            ir: =j::j^.-pt_

t^Uii^*?^t:
                                         •T---5T4
                                             ffHNri
                                             i-!--^-i- .1- ._
                              HMfeiij^^-  ! -N-j ^:^fe]iHf%l|i^ t&j^i H:irii|iS^








                                               -t- -i •   i 1  ! f--,,.- -i  '. —\-—\ -- Z-— 4..".»=N™^,.-, _.'-._:.:..,..(..  •-— -   ..t - - - t  I r- ; -  - ' - -f - i -- i- -- j - {--. - | . —j- - i-_ .- ' _ '.. -.-1 -_...} . i - -i— -;. -'.   «- . - i  : . I  l i-.-i. _ j.  ._.;.. ..,..-,.-.  * ,  ! i „_,. ._ i. /-— - --- - .--,.- j- . _ -  '. .  ;

                                               1 -- - . - • --| '•- : -'-  — '•  -'•• .. j- i . ;- • _ i „ — L .  '=&.*,„__:- _ '. -. ..(,., .1. -  : -   - . )— - 1 - - ;  j   i t  i 1 ' .. ' .. - \ .. .;  •..._!_;-'--•--•-•-- j	. - (. - * - - • • • - • i  -- '  t - j - • —'-- r  -,--.- J - ~  - -  -- i  • -,- - ~~ - '	 - 1 - • - • \  ' '	"- -- -





















                                               T~->-...'... ~l -- i --;--. "^iv'K :  __ _"„•_; ' ".. .:_ . j.	!	..„.;.*.	  ~ .„ •. ..... ..  i "Ti	_.;.>_].   , ..*!  "^i? 3;_. H " T-Jt :.. ~.T! T ". . ["r"!"""" !T.7~T^" ! " -  . J_. . *~ \. .,  . . - -.- I  ;.....-_ 4---.-  I ".__~7.  .; ._, . 1 . :	-'....^1.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    8




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   ! '7

                                 ' \  ^t^__	___  ^	I.     . _ _	'	_^ _ HS?%ft^1|f:if^
                                                                                                 ...i .rT7:0-,
                                                               1T^"._X	i-—-
                                E}r:
                       EtjEEf?
                       .-^_rz3_^ii—t- -

                       E§^P
                                                    "^"
                                                         s
                                                                                                                       :::^;S--.-:.: Lrt.j.	 '    ""	 '  ' "	  " """ ~ ~	---..-...    	
                                                                                                                                       •^i.
                                                                                                                                                         _ .; 	_	j	,	_J_-	

                                                                                                                     .sajr-i—:—— i T«~..-: .--i-.-,	  .-   .---  --|— -  .:-	_-- ;... ;  .-:-t....-4, - 1-
                                                                                                 fii—.-EFi^^r:-^ 34^3^f--£^qT-


                                             +i.
                                                                       :IL
                                                      ,.t,..L
                                             ':t[itt:


                                             ~&l=r:
                                                                    ---3.2-
                                                                                                                                    - r-. • , ----j--' : -":-f .---i--t--7-i-r-i—.-- -T	•  r-J--.-. -i-; | ~;-r --,--J- --.- <• .--j- •-• ---L-:..f j..^-4-.^-|	,— —-i-j-,-
                                                                                                                                    »cjr			!—•	,-i-.._...T-i-|_i_;	r.^..i	(.-|_H._;__,.	,.. t_*	,.-.[._,	i	1—!—!- T--! -|	i—i-^—I	j	1	{	




                                                                                                                                    •;"bi^.-::J'
                                                                                                                                                          -4-'
                                                                                                                        -v";Kt;-:- J—--;
                                                                           ^-H^±-P*-". :-Lt±^-- --'"N^-iii; — ^'~

                                                                                         _J-4-
                                                                           S3
                                                                                                  "|"T jthl Jl4"7l~'T±r "T"+"f"" T'1"
                                                                    3S

                                                                                                                       _) _ t_
                                                                          :ti:r
                                                                                                                    i.
                                            ^^
                           •//^
^
                                                                                                                      -:rb::.pr-


                                                                                                                       44^4.
                                                                             ._.LHJ
                                                                                                                                                                   **~3>.
                                                                                                                                                            ~t3±ff-
                                                                                                                                                                                                        .-:-•.•:_-:-;-• i  I



                                                                                                                                                                                                        -r-1:-- ;  9



                                                                                                                                                                                                        - r~-H  B



                                                                                                                                                                                                        -'    !  7

                                                                            i i  I i  • : •  i   • •  ' i
                                                                           -i-j-p-   p -•j—— ;   r


                                                                                                        MT
                                                                 ;±
                                                                                      u ";:'13~1 ~i• :U'"4-'
                                                                                      _'j_:..rr]. t-'t"  -i -1



                                                                                      .TFH^ji^f
                                                                                      -1-*-:	j j-l-t-1

                                                                                     :-:h::r;-p:rir:

                                                                                     -I-;  : • !
                                                                                                                                                                 ,"--L:r r:"i-::T-I5 V.'r
v/<$.
vvy
                                                             11. L
                                                                                                                                                                                         rvi-j- |-.|-i--r--t

                                                                                                                                                                                         -i:-r+rFferi
                                                                                                                                                                                                    ..,._.._
                                                                                                                                                                     :pp
                                                                                                                                                  -r-r-l-t-t-r
                                                                                                                                                                                        _i_L
                                                                                                                                                                          3T



                                                                                                                                                                                                                       '••! h

-------
end of the curve,  probably represents the true effective half-



life as. the activity added through ingestion here is minimal.



The average value here is 5. 8 days.





The data for calf No. 54 are difficult to interpret.  One  reason



for this is that the source of milk for this calf was varied



because of mastitis  in the cow and insufficient milk production.



The high PBI,  indicative of a possible hyperthyroid condition,



combined with the low thyroid uptake of a 2. 8%, generally con-



strued to be indicative  of a hypothyroid condition,  seem to be



contradictory.  We have no explanation for this  apparent



anomaly.  The consistent data obtained for the other five calves



tend  to eliminate measurement error from consideration as a



significant contributory factor to this observation.





The percent thyroid uptake by the calves was  calculated by



dividing the thyroid  content of any given day by the decay cor-



rected amount of 131I ingested up to 24 hours previous to the



thyroid measurement.  This type of calculation  assumes that



most  of the uptake occurs by  24 hours after ingestion and treats



all previously ingested  radioiodine as if it were given  as a single



dose 24 hours before the thyroid measurement.  The relatively



constant percent uptake (% Daily Dose in Table 36) suggests that



there is no serious error in this method of calculation.  Whether



the average percent uptake is correct or not for these calves



would have to be determined by single dose  studies in  them.





The infinite beta and gamma dose to the thyroid was calculated



for each calf based on the thyroid measurements.  The equations



used were:
                            171

-------
      (1)  R    = 51. 2  EC + R  =1.1 (51. 2EC)  rads/day(5)


      (2)  R    = 119C  rads(6)
           (3+Y

Where E is the average energy of the beta particles in Mev

(0. 19 Mev) and C is the iodine concentration in |j.Ci/g. the

daily gamma dose, Equation (1),  is assumed to be 10% of the

beta dose.  Equation (2) gives  the infinite dose for a concen-

tration of C (aCi/g.


Using the activity measured in the thyroid each day (Table  36)

and the  estimated thyroid weight, the daily dose to the thyroid

was  calculated with Equation (1).   The final thyroid measure-

ment on D + 18 was used in Equation (2) to calculate the in-

finite dose from that point onward.  The sum of these doses

then gives the  total dose estimate shown in Table  37.


Doses for all calves except calf 54 were predicted by  the methods

of FRC  Report 5    for comparison with our dose  estimates. In

particular,  the peak value of daily ingested dose in pCi for each

calf  was used in conjunction with  the estimated thyroid weight

for the same calf to perform each calculation.   A sample cal-

culation is given below for Calf 42.  From FRC Report 5, 8.4E

pCi131Ipeak ingested daily amount leads  to a predicted infinite

dose to  a  2g human thyroid of  1 rad.  Assuming that the same

relationship holds for calves and  noting from Table 37 that the

peak ingested daily amount for calf 42, whose thyroid weighs
                  4
24. 3 g,  was 4. 45E  pCi : 31I leads to the following dose estimate:
The doses for the other calves were calculated in similar fashion.

Results obtained are presented in Table 38.  It can be seen that,

on the average,  the FRC estimate is 3.4 times our calculated
                             172

-------
     estimate.  Thus, for the experimental conditions of this study,

     the FRC estimates are quite conservative.  Part of the dis-

     crepancy between our dose estimates and FRC dose estimates

     is accounted for by noting that the effective half-life in the
                                <
     milk of our study cows was = 3 days whereas the FRC model

     assumes an effective half-life in milk of approximately 5 days.

     Table 38.  Comparison of dosage calculations from this study
                with those predicted by Federal Radiation Council
                Report 5 (8).
Calf No.
42
49
51
55
53

Our calculated
dose (rads)
0. 10
0.21
0. 16
0.47
0. 92

FRC predicted FRC dose
dose (rads
0.44
0. 78
0.66
1.29
1. 92

) our dose
4.4
3. 7
4. 1
2. 7
2. 1
Average 3.4
V.   Summary

     A group of six calves was fed milk containing  31I.  The milk

     was produced by cows fed either hay, spread green chop,  or

     fresh pasture which had been contaminated by a dry aerosol

     tagged with radioiodine. A method was devised for measuring

     the thyroid activity of the calves, on a daily basis, which

     yielded reasonably consistent data.   The data so obtained indi-

     cated the following:

        1.   The iodine metabolism in the calves was independent

            of the type of contaminated forage ingested by the cow.

        2.   The ratio of peak activity in thyroid to peak activity in

            milk consumed averaged 0. 86.
                                  173

-------
3.   The peak thyroid activity occurred seven days after



    the start of ingestion.



4.   The effective half-life of the radioiodine in calf thyroids



    averaged 5. 8 days.



5.   The total doses to the calf thyroids were a factor of



    3.4 lower on the average than would have been pre-



    dicted on the basis of FRC Report 5.
                          174

-------
                 REMOTE MONITORING SYSTEM

                            R.  B. Evans

Introduction
In an effort to formulate models for doses to human populations
from fission-product releases, the Bioenvironmental Research Program
is investigating the transmission of radioiodine through the Biosphere
with particular  emphasis on the  milk chain portion of the human food
chain.  Defining correlations between doses and iodine uptake depends
heavily upon knowing with accuracy not only what  activity was present
in the vicinity of experimental animals and forage during a release
but also what deposition conditions existed during tenure of air-borne
activity and the length of this tenure.

The Remote Monitoring System has been developed to measure
activity and deposition parameters as strict functions of time.
The parameters measured are gross gamma levels,  concentrations
of air-borne activity,  wind velocity and direction  and air temperature
as a function of time.   The weather parameters are measured at two
levels in an effort to detect and quantitate air turbulance and ambient
temperature, two important and relatively easily-measured factors
influencing deposition.  To aid in processing the massive amounts of
data expected, the system  "reads  out" on computer-compatible
paper tape.

Figure  33  is a block diagram of  information flow in the  system.  The
machine operates in two modes, manual and automatic.  The manual
mode is  useful for trouble-shooting and servicing; normally the
system operates automatically and periodically gathers data from
all of its sensors.  An electronic clock controls and initiates all
                                175

-------
i	
               /?/
      33 - .i'
                                  • V. V    /'-

-------
functions of the system through what is labelled the "Master
Programmer".  The analog-to-digital (A-D)  converter changes all
analog inputs (position of the wind vanes,  angular velocity of the
anemometers,  resistance of the thermometers, and current of
the ion chambers) into digital representations -which are processed
by the ''Readout Control" and punched out on  paper tape.

Before each periodic "interrogation" of the sensors,  the Master
Programmer "gates open" the sealers,  which count pulses from the
scintillators and G-M tubes for one minute and feed their totals
through the Readout Control onto tape as the  Programmer demands.

The system records twelve numbers at each  interrogation: wind
direction and -wind velocity at altitudes of one meter  and ten
meters, ambient temperature at one meter,  the temperature differen-
tial between one meter and ten meters,  gross gamma levels as indicated
by two ion  chambers, and the count rates from two scintillators and
two G-M tubes.

The two G-M tubes and one of the scintillators are incorporated into
the box labelled "Air Sampler"  in Figure  33.  Figure 34 breaks this
box down into two sections called "Particulate Sampler" and "Gaseous
Sampler".

Figure 35 is a diagram of the Particulate Sampler.  A specially
constructed lead shield contains two G-M tubes which scan a strip
of filter tape fed through the shield  by a tape puller mechanism;
the sampled air flows through the tape perpendicular  to its face.
An Amperex No. 18550 G-M tube (referred to as the  "peanut tube")
is positioned above the section of filter tape in the incident air stream
to watch the buildup of particulate activity.
                                177

-------

-------
r
• f=

                                                                                                                            C-i* £ c. ,

-------
                                  f
c
       .^-*
       1
                          Oui

-------
    After a preset number of hours, the section of tape in the air

    flow is  moved through the shield and positioned under an Amperex

    No.  18546 G-M tube (generally referred to as the "pancake tube").

    The pancake tube sees the changes in count rate caused by the

    build-up of daughter products and  the decay of activity on the filter

    tape.  This gives a measure of the half-life of the particulate activity.



    Figure  36 is a diagram of the Gaseous Sampler. After  having passed

    through the particulate sampler, the sampled air is then filtered

    through a cartridge of activated charcoal centered in a shielded

    sodium iodide scintillator.  The pulses from the scintillator  are

    fed into a single-channel analyzer  which in turn feeds into the

    system's sealers.



    Time plots of count rates from the "peanut tube" and the scintillator

    then provide time profiles of particulate and gaseous air-borne

    activity.



    The system is housed in a small house trailer which contains a

   . propane-powered five kilowatt generator.  The  weather instruments

    are mounted on two masts,  one meter and ten meters high.



I.   Objectives

    To operate the Remote Meteorological and Radiological Monitoring

    System in conditions similar to but somewhat more controlled

    than those which existed at Station 3,  during the Palanquin Event;
                                  I
    to run preliminary field tests on the system's particulate  sampler;

    to measure the effects of low-level cloud "shine" on the through-side-

    hole crystal-charcoal cartridge air sampler; to compare the system's

    data with other simultaneous measurements by the ESSA (formerly

    USWB).
                                    181

-------
II.  Procedure



    During the week preceding the release, the system was moved into



    place, south of the area to be contaminated,  and calibrated.  The



    wind vanes were oriented with the aid of the ESSA personnel and



    their  theodolite.  Ion chambers, G-M tubes, and scintillation counters



    were  field calibrated.






    The particulate  air sampler and the scintillation counters were



    located externally to the equipment trailer.  Two crystals were



    used; one through-side-hole -was placed in a shield with 2 inches



    of lead shielding to monitor  a charcoal cartridge. This  shield



    was drilled with two  1" holes to allow air passage through the



    charcoal cartridge.   Another crystal, also a through-side-hole



    type,  was placed in another  shield similar to the first except for



    the absence of air passage holes.  The second crystal was used as a



    "shine" monitor.






    The particulate  sampler used here was a specially-prepared lead



    shield which holds two G-M  tubes, one Amperex 18550 and one



    Amperex 18546.  Hollingsworth and Voss HV-70 tape was used as



    a paper prefilter.






    One control air  sampler was run side-by-side with the system's



    air sampler; it used HV-70 as pre-filter and a charcoal  cartridge



    identical to that monitored by the system.








    During the release the system recorded data from all  inputs-at



    two-minute intervals.








    Samples were removed from the system immediately after  the run



    and placed in plastic  bags.   Filters were  changed and  the collected



    filters transported to Las  Vegas for counting.






                                    182

-------
III. Results

   A.  General

        The system operated satisfactorily from 1300 hours on October 2,
                 \
        to 2300 hours, on October 4.  At 2300 hours, the system's clock

        malfunctioned, causing the system to advance its indicated time

        two hours at each change of the hour until 0900 hours, October 5.

        The system then continued without further malfunction for several

        days.



        During the release the data were transmitted by wire-teletype to

        the Hayseed control point in the USPHS barn,  enabling administrative

        personnel to monitor gross gamma levels directly down wind from

        the grid as the release progressed.  Data collected by the system

        was processed by computer to provide plots of the weather and

        ion chamber data and tables of selected variables printed in  a

        readily understandable format.


        Plots of the weather, G-M, and scintillator count-rates during

        the release are included at the end of this section.



   B.   Wind Data

        Wind direction and speed were monitored at altitudes of 1. 6

        meters and 10 meters by the  USPHS,  and 1 meter,  3.7 meters and

        10 meters by the ESSA.



        Figure 37 is a plot of wind direction and wind  speed versus time

        for the morning of the release.



        Figure 38 and Figure 39 are plots  comparing the various wind

        sensors used. The  sensor numbers referred  to are the designations

        used by the ESSA in its report of meteorological data for the

        release.  The 1 meter ESSA sensor No. 1 is part of a digital data
                                   183

-------
         acquisition system similar to the USPHS system.  The other

         ESSA wind sensors are analog devices  (see Table 39, list of
         instrumentation).


         The average wind directions and speeds over the period 0532 to

         0600 hours,  October  4, as indicated by the various  sensors in

         the field, are given below:
        Wind Direction
             355
                o
             358^
             346
             336C
o
        Wind Speed

             1. 4 mph
             2. 7 mph
             3. 2 mph
             2. 8 mph
             3.1 mph
Sensor No.

    1
    2=:=
    3
    4
   • 5*

Sensor No.
    1
    2*
    3
    4
    5*
                             Level    No. of Points Averaged
 1  m
 1.6m
 3.7 m
10.   m
10.   m
15
15
29
29
15
                             Level    No. of Points Averaged
                               1   m
                               1.6m
                               3. 7 m
                              10.
                              10.
                  15
                  15
                  29
                  29
                  15
           Indicates USPHS Sensors
        There is the expected shear in velocity from ground level to 10
        meters, and there also seems to be a shear in direction.

Table 39.  List of Instrumentation.
        Wind Sensors
        No.  1 Berkeley No.  V-101 (ESSA)
        No.  ?., No.  5 Berkeley No.  V-101 (USPHS)
        No.  3 Beckman and Whitley System No.  170-11 (ESSA)
        No.  4 Climet System Cl-3,  540 degree (ESSA)
        Temperature
        No.  6 Cambridge Model 110 (ESSA)
        No.  7 Cambridge Model 110 (ESSA)
        No.  8 Cambridge Model 110 (USPHS)
        No.  9 Bendix No.  594 (ESSA)
                             Temperature Difference

                              No.  10 Cambridge Model 110
                                                 (ESSA)
                              No.  11 Cambridge Model 110
                                                 (USPHS)
                                    184

-------
    The averages of the three low;-level wind directions fall within



    five degrees of one another and the 10 meter sensors average



    within 10 degrees.   The sensor No.  1  wind speed curve is"smoother"



    than the other wind speed plots, probably because the points plotted



    are two-minute averages,  and because sensor  No.  1 is capable of



    resolving wind speed to 0. 1 mph,  compared with 1 mph resolution



    for the other sensors.






C.  Temperature Sensors



    Figure 40  shows a strong inversion present during the entire



    morning with some turbulence present during the actual release.



    From the wind data  and the inversion  plot,  it appears that a



    better time for release would have been between 0400 and 0500



    hours, since both the winds and the inversion were more stable then.






    For the period 0530 to 0600 inversion  data from both ESSA and



    USPHS are plotted; the curves show the same basic  "shape" but



    differ in magnitude and time correspondence.  The two sets of



    sensors were separated by more than  200 ft. ,  which,  at the wind



    velocities recorded,  could explain the lag between curves.   The



    ESSA low-level transducer was 1 meter from the surface, while the



    USPHS lower level was 1. 6 meters, which would explain the smaller



    magnitudes observed for the USPHS system.






    Figure 41 compares ambient temperature data recorded by sensors



    6,7, 8 and  9.  Sensors 6, 7 and 8  agree very well in shape,  while



    the analog  Bendix No. 594 ignored most fluctuations.  The four



    average temperatures for the period 0530 to 0600 are below:
Sensor

6

7

8

9

Level

1 m

1 m

1.6m

1 m
185
Average
o
50.6 F.
o
50.9 F.
o
51.7 F.
o
51.4 F.


-------
D.  Radiation Sensors

    Figure 42 graphs scintillator and G -M indications.  From these

    curves the cloud tenure appears to  be approximately 20 minutes.

    The points plotted are simply the cpm recorded, without  efficiencies

    taken into account.


    Leakage is apparent from the "pancake" (Amperex 18546) G-M curve;

    only the "peanut" tube should have indicated a step increase of activity.

    Evidently activity migrated from the peanut tube to the pancake cavity.

    Also,  since the aerosol was designed to contain only particle-bound

    activity, little or no activity should have been found in the charcoal

    cartridge.  At 0745,  just before the cartridge was removed, the

    scintillator indicated approximately 2200 pCi in the  cartridge, pointing

    to gross leakage in the prefilter.


    The shielded crystal  indicated little or no shine.  The average count

    rate for the period 0400 to 0428,  was 115 cpm; for the period  0430

    to 0458, 120  cpm; for the  period  0500 to 0528,  121 cpm; for the  period

    0530 to 0628, 119 cpm.  Atthe 95% confidence level, these averages

    are not significantly different.


    The following activities (referred to time of collection) were

    found in the system and control samplers and in conventional

    samplers near the  system:
                                                      Ratio  of Prefilter
Sampler
System
System
Control
Control
Hi-Vol
Hi-Vol
Lo-Vol
Lo-Vol




(No.
(No.
(No.
(No.




6)
6)
5)
5)
Filter Type
Prefilter
Cartridge
Prefilter
Cartridge
Prefilter
Cartridge
Prefilter
Cartridge
Activity to Charcoal Cartridge
1.
2.
6.
3.
15.
3.
2.
0.
40
22
20
12
60
52
90
71
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
o3
O3
O3
O3
O4
O4
O4
O4
pCi
pCi
pCi
pCi
pCi
pCi
pCi
pCi
0.

1.

4.

4.

630

99

43

08

    Evidently there was leakage in both system and control prefilters.
                                    186

-------
      The following efficiencies were measured for the detectors for
      their respective sample configurations:

                       Detector                Efficiency
                       Through-side crystal         46%
                       18546 tube                   29%
                       18550 tube                    9.7%

      Gross gamma levels during the release were not significantly
      different from background,  as indicated by both the system ion
      chambers and an Eberline RM-11 located near the system.

IV.   Conclusions
      "Shine"  through the shield is not an important contribution to
      the count-rate of the scintillator-charcoal-cartridge sampler
      for    I in this experiment.  The  present meterological tower
      height of 10 meters is  sufficient for measurement of strong
      inversions over green  crops with  the existing system.  Modifica-
      tion of the particulate  sampler shield will be necessary to
      prevent  leakage and migration of activity between G-M tubes.

      The system clock proved to be unsatisfactory and was modified.
      System weather data compares favorabley with that from  existing
      analog devices  used by the Environmental Science Services
      Administration (Weather Bureau).
                                     187

-------

-------

-------

-------

-------
       :;p



                                 :±l±ti±
• i i    :  l i•- -
~r-T-r-t- -rTTT-ir -i-
                                                              -HH±-
                                                              4444-
                                                                                                      ffi
                                                                                                     f-Hrt
                                                                          ttft

-------
•V •

-------
                        RESERVOIR WATER SAMPLING


                                   K. W.  Brown


   I..  Objective
       To determine if the growing Sudan grass was being recontaminated

       during normal crop irrigation.


  II.    Procedure

       One  gallon water samples from the surface of the reservoir,  the
       source of the irrigation water,  were collected as follows:

                        D-3        One background sample
                        D-Day      One sample collected
                        D+ 1        One sample collected
                        D+ 3        One sample collected
III.    Results
                                                             i 3 i
                         1.   D-3    Background sample =  40 pCi/liter
                         2.   D-Day Sample             = 580 pCi/liter
                         3.   D+ 1  Sample             = 230 pCi/liter
                         4.   D+ 3  Sample             =  30 pCi/liter
 IV.   Discussion
       As noted in the preceding results,  the water was slightly contaminated

       before the use of the aerosolized l 31I.  A sharp increase in contamination

       occurred  on D-Day, perhaps caused by  changing meteorological conditions,

       followed by a  decrease on D+ 1  and D+ 3.


       Suggestions for improvement would be to collect water  samples

       directly from the lateral instead of the surface of the reservoir.

       The reason for this is that the water being pumped onto the field is

       not coming from the surface, but is being pumped from a depth of

       twelve feet.
                                       194

-------
      Irrigations were recorded as follows:


           D+ 1                  D+ 3               D+ 4              D+ 5

      58, 000 gallons        29, 000 gallons      94, 000 gallons     39, 000 gallons


      If one assumes that on D+ 1 the l 31I contamination was homogeneously


      distributed throughout the reservoir, it can be calculated that 3. OE3


      pCi/m2 was placed on the growing forage on D+ 1 with the irrigation


      water.  Table 34 shows that the average contamination on the field


      was measured to be  1. 21  E6 pCi/m2 .  Thus, under the assumed


      conditions, the contamination added in  the irrigation water on D+  1
      was (       '     ) (100) or 0. 25% of the total.
             1 • L* 1 SLt




V.    Conclusions


      Results indicate that some recontamination of the field took place


      during each irrigation.   The maximum amount of 1 31I that could


      have been added by this mechanism was on D+ 1  and amounted to only


      0. 25% of the total.  Such an additional small amount of 1 31I would


      not make any significant change in the observed  results.
                                     195

-------
SUMMARY OF RESULTS AND DISCUSSION OF THE TOTAL STUDY






For more detailed results and discussion of each separate experiment



conducted the reader is  referred to the pertinent section.  The results



and discussion given in this section will only include the highlights of



selected portions of the  total study.





Methods and procedures for disseminating a dry aerosol of diato-



maceous earth tagged with 1311 were developed.  A total amount of



22 mCi of  3 I was attached to 1500 g of diatomaceous earth and this



material was disseminated by using a line  source of ten separate



equally-spaced generators.  The experimental plot of 40 x 15 meters



was contaminated, as measured by fallout  collectors, to levels



ranging from 0. 26 to 8.40 fiCi/m  . Measurements of the total



combined depositions on growing Sudan grass, spread hay and spread



Sudan green chop accounted for 20. 8% of the total 22 mCi of l 3 l I



disseminated.  Measured concentrations  of contaminated forage



sampled in situ immediately folio-wing the release averaged 3. 54E



pCi/kg on growing Sudan grass, 1.34E  pCi/kg on spread Sudan



green chop and 0. 54E pCi/kg on  spread  hay.





Geometric mean diameters for the aerosol particle size distributions



were calculated to be 28 |J. at 5 meters from the generators,  21  (a. at



12. 5 meters and 20  JJL at  20 meters.  With a measured density of 0. 26



for diatomaceous earth the observed geometric mean diameters cor-



respond approximately to aerodynamic sizes  of 7. 3fi, 5. 5(J. and 5. 2|a



respectively.   The calculation of true aerodynamic particle sizes



would require a knowledge of shape factors.
                                 196

-------
Air sampler data for the integrated 131I air dose at different lo-

                                                             y 0 C i — s e c
cations over the experimental plot ranged from  2.66 to 12. 35E  —	5—
                                     0                            m3

Measurements with portable survey instruments should be considered


as relative values only.   The dose rate  on the backs of the inhalation


cows  averaged two times that on their legs indicating a low lying


aerosol cloud which was approximately  Z to 3 feet high as  it entered


the measured area.  Dose rates in the field decreased by approxi-


mately 50%  daily.   This decrease was probably  due  to a  combination


of removal of activity by green chopping operations, wind  action and


irrigation.



Measurements of contaminated forage sampled just  prior to feeding


to dairy cows gave peak daily average values for fresh green chop


of 2. 7E  pCi/kg, for spread green chop of 1.4E  pCi/kg and for


spread hay of 4. IE  pCi/kg.  These values are  seen to be in the


ratios 6.6:3.4:1.  Comparing these values  to those of the samples


taken earlier  rn situ shows that in the case of fresh  green  chop,


1  31I activity was lost in handling, whereas for the cases of both


spread green  chop  and hay, the peak daily average observed for the


fed forage was higher than the stack averages of the in_ situ - samples.


This is not too surprising since the J 31I activity was definitely not


uniformly distributed throughout the total volume of the spread


forage as  was assumed for the in situ results.   The  relative values


as measured just prior to feeding are certainly the most significant


with regard to subsequent131 1 levels  in milk.



The peak  daily average values of  1 3 ll activity in milk  were

     4                                             4
2. 2E   pCi/1 for the cows fed fresh green chop,  1.  2E  pCi/1 for the

                                     4
cows  fed spread green chop, and  1. IE  pCi/1 for the cows fed spread


hay.  The ratios of the peak average daily milk  values in pCi/1 to


the peak average daily forage values in  pCi/kg give  some measure of


the relative biological availabilities of131 I on different types of forage.
                                 197

-------
The  ratios are seen to be 0. 0081, 0. 0086 and 0. 027 respectively for


fresh green chop, spread green chop and spread hay.  It would appear


that  the    I is less biologically available to dairy cows when it is


on spread and fresh green chop than when on hay.  This is confirmed


by the relative percents of the total  3  I ingested doses which were


secreted in milk  for the different  cases.   The values here were


Z. 1% for fresh green chop fed cows, Z. 0% for  spread green chop fed


cows and 6. 3% for hay fed cows.



The  effect  referred to in the last paragraph,     I being less avail-


able  for secretion into milk when  it is deposited on green grass,


has not been observed in previous studies where the contamination


has been from real field sources.  Thus it is assumed that this


effect is related to the characteristics of our synthetic aerosol and


release conditions and possibly to the type of pasture grass.  In


order to hope to apply our data from this study to the prediction of


milk  levels which might result from true field releases,  an ap-


propriate  correction must be  made.  If one assumes that the milk


to forage ratio of 0. OZ7  for the hay  cows is the most reasonable,


it is  possible to make estimated adjustments in the fresh green  chop


and spread green chop peak daily  average milk levels.  The adjusted


peak  milk level for fresh green chop cows thus becomes  ( '     )
      .                                                 u. 0 08 1
      4        4
(Z. 2E ) =  7. 3E  pCi/1 and for spread green chop cows the adjusted

          0.OZ7         4        4
value is (   ' n _.0 , ) (1. 2E ) = 3. 8E  pCi/1.  In summary then it may
          U. 0Oofa

be said that, with our actual contaminating conditions and assumed


equal biological availabilities for  1 3 1I from all types of forage,  the


predicted  maximum daily peak averages in the milk would have

          4                                         4
been  7. 3E   pCi/1 for fresh  green  chop fed cows, 3. 8E  pCi/1 for

                                    4
spread green chop fed cows and 1. IE pCi/1 for hay fed cows.  One


observation which can be made is that the spread green chop would


have  more closely approximated the fresh green chop results had


the surface area  of the  green  chop stack been increased by
                                 198

-------
approximately a factor of two while keeping the total weight constant.


This would have resulted in the peak average contamination also in-


creasing by approximately  a factor of two with the peak average milk


levels  being correspondingly increased.



By noting that the average peak milk value for cows exposed to the

                                                4
field aerosol (inhalation) was 585 pCi/1 or-~0. IE  pCi/1,  several


interesting comments may  be made.



If dairy cows had been exposed from eating combinations of contam-


inated  fresh green  chop  and contaminated hay as -well as from inha-


lation, the total peak average milk level would be predicted to have


been approximately 7. 3E  +1.1E  + 0. IE  = 8. 5E  pCi/1.   Again


this statement has  assumed equal biological availability for the 131I


on fresh green chop and on hay.  Of the total, the level due  to fresh


green chop is  85. 9%,  that due  to hay is 1Z. 9% and that due  to


inhalation is 1. 2%.  It is believed that  these adjusted relative per-


centages calculated from this study may have applicability  to ac-


tual field releases.  Note that  the relative contributions predicted

                                         7. 3
from fresh green chop to that for hay are -—- = 6. 6.  In our study


following the Pike Event we measured  this ratio to be approximately


6 for an  actual field release.



The comparison of the relative predicted inhalation value must await


evaluation of additional field measurements from  actual releases.  For


reasons  stated previously we feel that  the predicted relative inhalation


value of  1. 2%  of the total is probably somewhat low for a true field


release at a location close  to the release point.



The apparent  effective decay half-lives for  the  3  I levels in the


milk of the different groups of study cows were remarkably similar


for the fresh green  chop, spread green chop and hay fed cows.


During feeding the  effective half-life for fresh green chop cows was
                                 199

-------
3. 0 days, for spread green chop 'cows it was  Z. 3 days and for hay




cows  it was Z. 7 days.  Since each value is estimated  to be only




accurate to +_ 1 day, there  is no apparent difference in half-lives



during feeding for the three different groups of cows.  After cessa-




tion of contaminated forage feeding all groups exhibited a half-life




of less than one day.  This was  in agreement with  the effective




half-life of 0.8 day observed in  inhalation cows.





The effective half-life in hay during the feeding period was cal-




culated to be  5.4 days whereas the effective half-life  in fresh green



chop over the feeding period was 3.6 days.   The shorter effective




half-life for  fresh green chop may be due to the loss of particulate



activity during green chopping plus the  "wash-off" caused by spray



irrigation as  stated earlier in this report (84% decrease in activity).




In the face of these findings one would expect the effective half-life



in the milk of the hay cows to be longer than the effective half-life in




the milk of the fresh green chop cows.  As  mentioned previously




this was not  the case.  We  presently have no  explanation for these



apparently contradictory findings.  In future studies  we plan to in-



vestigate these matters  further.   For this study all cows  were on a



diet of green  chop, hay  and grain.  On our next test study cows



receiving contaminated  hay will not  receive uncontaminated fresh




green chop as they did in this  study.  We suspect that the addition




of fresh  green chop to a cow's diet alters the kinetics of l 31 I




secretion in  the milk, even if the 1 31 I is present on hay.





It is  clearly  recognized  that absolute values for forage contamination




and milk levels  of 131I,  as well as kinetics, obtained from a study



such as this  can never be directly applied to actual field situations,




since we used a synthetic dry aerosol contaminant which may or



may not have any relation to a true field source of    I.   However,




we feel that relative values found  for our different groups of study
                                  ZOO

-------
cows may have more significance.  We will be able to test this hy-


pothesis in the future by comparing relative  results obtained with


similar experimental configurations during actual nuclear cratering


experiments.  Pertinent data have already been obtained following


Palanquin and these results will be published as  soon as feasible.




Activities of  3  I measured in vivo in the calves drinking contami-



nated milk exhibited approximately the  same time variation for all


calves.  In general, thyroid activity levels increased until a max-


imum was reached seven days after the beginning of the ingestion.

                                                       o

This agrees with the findings of Lengemann and Swanson  in cows.


After the maximum was reached the levels decreased with an effec-


tive  half-life of about 12 days during the duration of the feeding of


contaminated milk.  After the feeding of contaminated milk  stopped,


the effective half-life changed to approximately 6 days.   We are


currently working on a mathematical model to describe this


behavior.




Our  calculations  of doses to the calves  thyroids were lower by an


average  factor of 3.4 than doses calculated by the use of FRC


Report 5.  Even  if allowance is made for the difference in


effective half-lives in the milk,  2. 7 days average in our case


versus 5. 0 days  for the FRC model, the FRC predicted dose is


still a factor of  1.8 larger  than ours.  Thus,  it appears that the FRC


predicted dose is a conservative one.  Our findings in this regard

                                                        9
are in agreement with the findings of other investigators.
                                 201

-------
              CONCLUSIONS OF THE TOTAL STUDY


All primary objectives of the study were accomplished.


As determined just prior to feeding to dairy cows,  peak average

values and effective half-lives of 1 3 l 1 in the different forages used

were as follows:


Table 40.  Peak average values  and effective half-lives  in the
  	different forages used.	

          Spread Hay     Spread  Green Chop    Fresh  Green Chop

  Peak          5                 66
Average   4. IE  pCi/kg     1. 4E pCi/kg       2. 7E   pCi/kg
 Values

  T
   eff      5. 4 days               --*            3. 6 days

  *The values  here had too  much variability to  allow the determina-
   tion of a reliable T 'r
                     eff.


Table ^1.  Average milk values  obtained for the controlled 131I
           ingestion studies.
Type of
Forage

Spread Hay
Spread Green
Chop
Fresh Green
Chop
Time to
Maximum
(hours)

24
48

48

Maximum
Value
(pCi/1)
4
1. IE
1.2E4

2. 2E4

Teff during
feeding
(days)

2. 7
2. 3

3. 0

1 Teff after
feeding
(days)

< 1
< 1

<1

Average
Peak
pCi/1 +
pCi/kg

0. 027
0. 0086

0. 0081

% of
Ingested
131 I in
milk

6. 3
2. 0

2. 1

From the above it may be concluded that, for the conditions of this study,

there was no apparent difference in effective half-lives in the milk for the

                                 202

-------
different  types of forage.  Also,  it may be concluded that    I was



handled differently when deposited on the  spread and fresh green



chop compared to the hay in the  sense that it was not as biologi-



cally available for secretion into the milk in the  former cases.




The average * 31 I milk values obtained for the inhalation  cows were



as follows:



          Time to     Maximum   T


          Maximum      Value      .

          ,,      v       / <-• /i\     (days)
          (hours)	(pCi/1)	__



             10            585         0.8




An important finding of this study was  the large decrease in pasture



contamination caused by spray irrigation which suggests  that this may



be a  useful countermeasure for contaminated pastures.  Of course,



this may be true  only for our particular type of aerosol and pasture.



In any  event  this  matter will be further explored in subsequent



experimentation.





The conclusions  reached from our ancillary studies will be found



in pertinent previous sections of this report.
* Rather than inhalation cows a more correct descriptive term here



would be "air uptake" cows since all 131I activity entering these cows



came to them via their air environment.  How much uptake was



actually via inhalation and how much via licking of their contaminated



muzzles,  is unknown. Every  effort was made to minimize  the licking



uptake by decontaminating the  cows' muzzles as soon as possible



after the experiment.
                                  203

-------
                          REFERENCES

1.   Earth, D.  S.  & J.  G.  Veater, TID-21764, Nov.  1964.

2.   Radioiodine Studies Following TNT.  - in press.

3.   Hawley,  C. A.  et al, IDO-12035, June 1964.

4.   Handbook of Respiration,  National Academy of Sciences, W. B.
                   Saunders Company, 1958.

5.   Hine & Brownell,  Radiation  Dosimetry,  Academic Press,
                   N. Y. , 1958.

6.   Quimby, Feitelberg, & Silver,   Radioactive Isotopes in Clinical
                   Practice,  Lea & Febiger,  Philadelphia,  1958.
7.   FRC Report #5, Govt. Printing Office, Washington, 1964.

8.   Lengemann, F. W.  fc E. W.  Swanson,  J. Dairy Sci.  40,
                   216-24 (1957).
9.   Bernard, S. R. et al, Health Phys.  9,  1307-23 (1963).
                                 204

-------
                           APPENDIX






Table 1.   Meteorological Data                                   205



Table 2.   Additional control data for each of the study cows.      213



Table 3.   FBI values for Hayseed cows.                          219



Table 4.   Serum protein values for Hayseed cows.                220



Table 5.   CBC values for Hayseed cows.                         221



Table 6.   Average  CBC  values for Hayseed cows.                 226







Figure 1. Comparison of PBI, Serum Protein  and Hct.            227

-------
                   Table 1.  Meteorological data.


Event:  Project Hayseed, October 4,  1965

Locations:  See Figure 4
Instrumentation:

    Wind Sensors
         (1)  Berkeley No. V-101
         (2) and (5)  Berkeley No.  V-101
         (3)  Beckman and Whitley System No.  170-11
         (4)  Climet System Cl-3,  540 Degree

    Temperature
         (6), (7), (8) Cambridge Model 110
         (9)  Bendix 594

    Temperature Difference
         (10) and (11)  Cambridge Model 110

    Relative Humidity
         (1Z)  Bendix 594

Notes:
    A.   1 meter (1) air transport data available at 5 minute intervals
         until 1000  PDT 10/7/65 and at  15 minute intervals until
         0945 PDT  10/8/65.
    B.   1.6 meter (2) and 10 meter (5) instantaneous wind data available
         at 5 minute intervals until 0945 PDT 10/8/65.   Data on tape.
    C.   Ambient temperature (6), (7) and temperature difference (10)
         data available at 5 minute intervals until 0945  PDT 10/8/65.
    D.   Ambient temperature (8) and temperature difference (11)
         available at 5 minute intervals until 0945 PDT 10/8/65.  Data
         on  tape.
    E.   All times are Pacific Daylight  time.

L e g e nd:
    ddd  direction from which -wind in blowing (degrees azimuth-true)
    ff   wind speed (miles per  hour)
    TT  temperature (degrees F)
    RH  relative humidity (%)

                                205

-------
Table 1. Meteorological data, wind data.
Time
PDT
JO/ 4
0532
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
5i
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
0600
0700
0800
0900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
(corit. )
#1 (1m)
Components
E
-002

+ 000

+ 001

-oos

-002

+ 009

+ 001

-008

+ 002

+ 000

-002

+ 000

-003

+ 002

-000







Notetfl


N
+ 022

+ 022

+ 008

+ 012

+ 008

+ 015

+ 018

+ 016

+ 021

+ Oil

+ 023

+ 009

+ 003

+ 002

+ 004










#2 (]
ddd

344

330

355

339

348

016

358

341

345

353

007

028

004

050

031







Note


. . 6m)
ff

03

03

03

02

02

02

04

04

04

04

04

02

01

02

01







#2


//3 (3.
ddd

345
335
340
350
350
335
340
010
025
020
005
355
355
355
355
345
335
340
355
005
005
010
330
320
340
040
050
040
030
350
040
100
135
190
180
185
180
175

7m)
ff

04
03
03
03
02
02
02
02
03
03
03
04
04
05
06
05
05
05
04
04
03
03
02
02
01
02
02
03
03
04
04
05
04
08
10
10
11
11

•#4 (1
ddd

350
340
350
355
355
340
360
005
010
025
020
360
360
355
345
345
340
330
330
330
325
010
005
005
010
025
360
020
010
350
045
090
170
160
180
190
190
190

Om)
ff

01
02
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
02
02
03
05
04
02
07
05
07
06
06
05
06
04
02
01
01
01
04
05
05
03
08
12
13
14
13

#5 (10m)
ddd ff

006

357

344

013

017

035

Oil

004

358

350

343

349

335

023

010

Note #2









03

03

02

02

02

01

04

05

04

06

06

03

03

01

01










                          206

-------
           Table 1. Meteorological data, wind data.    (cont.)
Time
PDT
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
0000
10/5
0100
0200
0300
0400
0500
0600
0700
0800
0900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
0000
10/6
0100
0200
0300
0400
0500
#1 (1m) #2 (1.6m) #3
Components ddd ff ddd
180
170
175
290
320
315
325
325
330

325
325
350
335
355
330
320
320
140
255
135
165
190
200
235
315
280
290
260
315
260
360
360
090

325
015
010
360
030
(3.7m)
ff
11
11
09
04
05
06
05
06
06

06
06
05
05
04
04
04
03
04
03
05
04
06
05
06
12
08
07
03
06
08
05
06
05

07
13
14
12
08
#4
ddd
190
190
185
225
315
325
345
360
360

360
005
360
350
350
010
350
350
090
180
170
135
190
190
195
315
285
300
270
345
315
040
360
360

315
025
035
020
035
(10m) #5 (10m)
ff ddd ff
13
12
11
03
03
05
06
05
06

06
08
08
05
05
05
05
02
03
02
M



















(cont. )
                                     207

-------
Table 1.  Meteorological data, wind data.    (cont. )
Time #1 (1m)
PDT Components
0600
0700
0800
0900
1000
1100
1ZOO
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
0000
10/7
0100
0200
0300
0400
0500
0600
0700
0800
0900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
(cont. )
#2 (1.6m) #3 (3.
ddd ff ddd
020
360
045
015
030
035
035
045
060
035
035
060
035
345
335
325
335
360
325

360
360
030
050
100
125
125
170
060
010
020
020
030
015
015
020
025
025
350

,7m)
ff
10
09
08
12
14
14
12
10
10
11
11
09
08
07
08
08
05
04
03

07
08
06
07
06
05
04
05
08
12
13
09
09
10
10
10
11
10
07

#4 (10m) #5 (10m)
ddd ff ddd ff
045
010
045
030
040
045
040
050
060
040
045
070
045
010
010
350
340
360
340

360
360
030
050
125
100
100
120
045
020
030
045
045
045
040
040
040
040
020









M
12
13
12
10
08
12
11
08
07
03

10
12
08
11
09
07
05
06
08
13
15
12
10
11
12
10
12
12
09

                          208

-------
          Table 1. Meteorological data, wind data.    (cont. )
Time     #1 (1m)       #2 (1.6m)      #3 (3. 7m)  #4 (10m)      #5 (10m)
PDT    Components    ddd    ff     ddd    ff   ddd   ff      ddd     ff
2000
2100
2200
2300
0000
325
330
325
300
315
06
05
08
04
05
360
360
320
270
315
08
09
11
04
05
10/8

0100                                 350    04   020   05
0200                                 330    08   360   10
0300                                 360    09   045   10
0400                                 315    03   360   04
0500                                 090    07   080   09
0600                                 350    07   360   09
0700                                 010    10   025   12
0800                                 270    04   190   04
0900                                 190    05   190   05
                                  209

-------
Table 1.  Meteorological data, temperature and relative humidity.
Time
PDT
10/4
0532
0534
0536
0538
0540
0542
0544
0546
0548
0550
0552
0554
0556
0558
0600
0700
0800
0900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
10/5
0000
0100
0200
0300
(cont. )
a 6
(1m)
(pole)
TT
52
53
54
56
55
53
50
48
47
47
48
48
50
49
49
47
60
67
73
76
78
77
78
80
80
79
74
64
58
54
53
52

51
52
52
56

Ambient
ill
(1m) (1
(port)
TT
53
55
56
56
56
52
49
47
47
48
48
48
49
49
50
47
62
68
74
77
80
80
82
82
81
80
74
63
58
54
54
52

52
53
53
56

Temp.
#8
. 6m)
TT
53
52
54
55
57
58
52
49
48
47
48
50
50
51
51























(1m)
TT
52
52
52
52
52
52
52
51
51
51
51
51
51
51
50
49
60
70
76
79
80
82
83
83
82
80
76
65
60
55
54
53

52
53
53
54

Delta T
#10 #11
TT TT
7.1 7.4
5.5 7.4
3.9 5.6
2.2 4.7
2.5 3.7
4.6 3.0
8.6 6.8
10.5 10.6
11.3 11. 5
12.9 12.3
13.0 9.6
11. 5 7.0
8.9 6.0
8.6 4.7
5.7 4.9
12.7
M
0.0
-0.8
-1. 5
-1.3
-1.7
-1.6
-1. 1
-0.4
0. 2
2.7
8. 1
12.3
16. 5
15. 5
14. 5

14. 1
13.3
11.7
7. 5

Rel. Hum.
#12
RH
36
36
36
36
36
36
36
34
34
34
34
34
34
34
34
38
32
24
22
20
18
18
16
15
14
14
14
24
29
32
32
33

34
34
34
30

                               210

-------
Ta.ble 1.  Meteorological data, temperature and relative humidity,  (cont. )
Time
PDT

0400
0500
0600
0700
0800
0900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
10/6
0000
0100
0200
0300
0400
0500
0600
0700
OSOO
0900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
(cont. )
#6
(1m)
(pole)
TT
52
52
48
52
56
52
66
75
77
75
82
8.3
M
M
77
72
71
67
61
57

58
68
66
66
62
59
60
58
58
63
74
72
74
78
71
61
79
80
76

Ambient Temp.
//7 #8-
(1m) (1.6m)
(port)
TT
52
53
48
54
59
61
68
75
79
81
83
M
M
M
77
73
72
67
61
59

59
69
69
69
67
60
61
58
64
70
76
73
76
79
77
73
81
81
78

#9 '
(1m)
TT
53
52
50
50
55
64
67
76
80
82
85
86
84
84
79
71
71
68
60
65

60
68
68
68
67
60
60
59
64
71
74
73
74
80
81
72
79
81
79

Delta T
#10 #11
TT
9.8
5.4
9.7
3.8
5. 3
14.0
5.4
-0. 1
-1.0
-1.4
-1.2
M
M
M
4. 3
3.7
4.7
5. 1
5.2
8.8

4. 1
4. 0
1.7
1.9
2.2
1. 3
3. 1
2.1
-0. 1
-0. 1
-1.4
-0. 1
-0. 3
-0.8
1.3
16.6
0.9
1.7
4.0

Rel. Hum.
#12
RH
31
30
33
30
40
36
43
20
17
16
15
18
18
17
18
20
20
19
24
23

25
23
24
25
26
32
33
34
32
30
28
28
26
24
24
32
25
22
22

                                   211

-------
Table 1.  Meteorological data, temperature and relative humidity,  (cont. )
Time
PDT

1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
10/7
0000
0100
0200
0300
0400
0500
0600
0700
0800
0900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1400
1500
1600
1700
1800
1900
2000
2100
2200
2300
10/8
0000
0100
0200
0300
0400
0500
0600
0700
0300
0900
i
#6
(1m)
(pole)
TT
67
65
62
58
62

55
63
66
64
58
58
58
57
60
55
74
74
50
70
71
83
82
82
78
68
69
63
50
57

54
57
63
66
61
59
62
60
64
70
\mbient Temj
#7 #8
(1m) (1.6:
(port)
TT
67
65
62
59
61

56
63
69
67
59
58
59
58
63
70
77
78
73
77
83
85
84
83
79
68
69 .
63
63
57

53
56
64
67
61
60
64
63
65
71
3.
#9
m) (1m)
TT
67
66
62
60
60

62
63
67
63
61
58
57
58
61
74
76
78
74
76
82
84
85
84
82
70
67
65
65
62

56
55
63
64
60
60
60
64
63
72
Delta T
#10 #
TT
6.9
7.5
9.2
12.4
7.2

13.7
5. 5
4.9
5.8
2.0
2.0
3.9
2.8
0.7
-0.7
-0. 1
-0.7
13.3
7.3
-0. 1
0.0
0.8
1. 5
3.9
9.3
3. 1
11.5
3. 3
10.7

12.7
8.3
6.7
1.9
1.5
5.7
3. 1
3. 1
1. 5
-0. 3 (j
Rel. Hum.
^11 #12
RH
30
30
32
31
32

30
30
29
30
31
33
35
35
34
28
28
25
35
34
25
22
22
20
19
24
26
28
28
26

33
34
28
26
26
26
28
26
27
oao_y: 2 12] 24

-------
Table 2.  Additional control data for each of the study cows.
Group
I



II



in



IV



V

Cow
Number
1
5
46
47
12
19
21
25
15
18
27
29
43
44
45
48
13
24
28
Butter fat %
D(-63)
to
D(-33)
2.7
3. 5
3.4
2.3
3.4
3.7
3. 5
2.4
2.8
3. 1
2.5
2.0
3.5
3.2
2.7
dry
2.8
dry
3.8
D(-33)
to
D(-3)
2.1
3.0
2.3
2C6
3.5
2.8
3. 1
2.9
3.0
2.8
2.6
2.3
4.6
3. 1
2 . 1
2.9
2.3
2.3
3. 0
D(-3)
to
D(+ 27)
2.0
3.6
3.2
3.4
3.9
3.2
3.7
3.8
3.2
3.7
2.6
2.4
4.6
2.8
2.6
3.2
3.3
2.4
3.2
DHIA Rating
D(-63)
to
D(-33)
85
91
106
119
96
110
99
90
100
95
105
53
N.V.
N.V.
114
dry
107
dry
129
D(-33)
to
D(-3)
73
97
110
123
99
112
100
104
104
96
107
76
N.V.
N.V.
112
93
103
54
135
D(-3)
to
D(+ 27)
66
97
107
119
96
114
102
109
108
91
104
79
N.V.
N.V.
109
97
102
67
133
                          213

-------
Table 2.  Additional control data for each of the  study cows.
                           GROUP I
Cow No
Dav
D Day
D(+ 1)
D(+ 2)
D(+ 3)
D( + 4)
D(+ 5)
D(+ 6)
D(+ 7)
D(+ 8)
D(+ 9)
D(+ 10)
D(+ 11)
D(+ 12)
D(+ 13)
D(+ 14)
D(+ 15)
D(+ 16)
D(+ 17)
D(+ 18)
.
1
5
L/ Gm Fat/ L/
Day Day Day
21
23
27
25
26
25
22
28
25
26
27
25
28
20
28
19
27
26
22
420
460
540
500
520
500
440
560
500
520
540
500
560
400
560
380
540
520
440
11
9
10
11
11
11
11
11
11
10
10
11
11
14
10
10
11
10
10
46
Gm Fat/ L/
Day Day
396
324
360
396
396
396
396
396
396
360
360
396
396
504
360
360
396
360
360
16
16
15
18
16
16
15
16
10
15
16
17
17
15
16
13
14
14
14
Gm Fat/
Day
512
512
480
576
512
512
480
512
320
480
512
544
544
480
512
416
448
448
448
47
L/
Day
18
18
17
18
18
18
18
18
18
18
22
17
18
14
19
16
16
17
16
GmFat/
Day
612
612
578
612
612
612
612
612
612
612
748
578
612
476
646
544
544
578
544
Average
L/ Gm Fat/
Day Day
16.
16.
17.
18.
17.
17.
16.
18.
16.
17.
18.
17.
18.
15.
18.
14.
17.
16.
15.
5
5
3
0
8
5
5
3
0
3
8
5
5
8
3
5
0
8
5
485
477
490
521
510
505
482
520
457
493
540
505
528
465
520
425
482
477
448
                            214

-------
Table 2.  Additional control data for each of the study cows.




                          GROUP II
Cow No.
Day
D Day
D(+ 1)
D(+ 2)
D|+ 3)
D(+ 4)
D(+ 5)
D(+ 6)
D(+ 7)
D(+ 8)
D(+9)
D{+ 10)
D{+ 11)
D{+ 12)
D(+ 13)
D(+ 14)
D(+ 15)
D(+ 16)
D(+ 17)
D(+ 18)
12
L/ Cm Fat/
Day Day
11
12
12
11
13
9
14
11
11
12
11
12
13
11
11
12
12
11
11
341
372
372
341
403
279
434
341
341
372
341
372
403
341
341
372
372
341
341
W
Day
11
11
10
12
13
12
13
11
11
11
11
11
12
1.1
11
11
12
11
11
19
21
Gm Fat/ L/
Day Day
352
352
320
384
416
384
416
352
352
352
352
352
384
352
352
352
384
352
352
16
15
15
14
12
12
14
14
14
15
15
16
16
16
16
16
17
16
16
Gm Fat/
Day
592
555
555
518
444
444
518
518
518
555
555
592
592
592
592
592
629
592
592
W
Day
30
27
29
29
20
29
34
29
29
30
28
29
29
27
30
26
29
29
28
25
Average
Gm Fat/ L/ Gm Fat/
Day Day Day
1140
1026
1102
1102
760
1102
1292
1102
1102
1140
1064
1102
1102
1026
1140
988
1102
1102
1064
17.0
16. 3
16. 5
16.5
14. 5
15. 5
18.8
16. 3
16. 3
17.0
16. 3
17. 0
17. 5
16. 3
17.0
16. 3
17. 5
16.8
16.5
606. 3
576. 3
587. 3
586.3
505.8
552. 3
665.0
578. 3
578. 3
604.8
578. 0
604. 5
620.3
577.8
606. 3
576. 0
621.8
596.8
587. 3
                         215

-------
Table 2.  Additional control data for each of the study cows,
                          GROUP III
Cow No.
Day
D Day
D(+ 1)
D(+ 2)
D(+ 3)
D(+4)
D(+ 5)
D(+ 6)
D(+7 )
D(+ 8)
D(+ 9)
D(+ 10)
D(+ 11)
D(+ 12)
D(+ 13)
D(+ 14)
D(+ 15)
D(+ 16)
D(+ 17)
D(+ 18)

L/
Day
15
13
14
13
14
15
15
16
15
15
14
14
15
13
15
13
15
14
14
15

Gm Fat/ L/
Day Day
480
416
448
416
448
480
480
512
480
480
448
448
480
416
480
416
480
448
448
11
10
10
11
10
9
11
11
11
10
10
10
15
8
8
10
10
10
10
18
27
Gm Fat/ L/
Day Day
418
380
380
418
380
342
418
418
418
380
380
380
570
304
304
380
380
380
380
29
25
25
25
30
27
27
28
28
27
28
28
29
28
28
27
29
28
28
Gm Fat/
Day
754
650
650
650
780
702
702
728
728
702
728
728
754
728
728
702
754
728
728
L/
Day
30
25
31
28
29
31
30
30
29
29
29
27
32
28
29
30
30
29
30
29
Average
Gm Fat/ L/ Gm Fat/
Day Day Day
720
600
744
672
696
744
720
720
696
696
696
648
768
672
696
720
720
696
720
21.3
18. 3
20. 0
19. 3
20.8
20. 5
20.8
21.3
20.8
20.3
20. 3
19.8
22.8
19.3
20. 0
20.0
21. 0
20. 3
20. 5
593.0
511. 5
555. 5
539. 0
576. 0
567. 0
580.0
594. 5
580.5
564. 5
563. 0
551. 0
643.0
530. 0
552.0 ,
554. 5;
583. 5
563.0
569. 0
                         216

-------
Table 2.  Additional control data for each of the study cows.
                          GROUP IV
Cow No. 43

L/ Gm Fat/ L/
Day Day Day Day
D Day 18 828
D(+ 1) 17 782
D(+ 2) 15 690
D(+ 3) 16 736
D(+ 4) 17 782
D(+ 5) 17 782
D(+ 6) 2 92
D(+ 7)
D{+ 8)
D(+ 9)
D(+ 10)
D(+ 11)
D(+ 12)
D(+ 13)
D(+ 14)
D(+ 15)
D(+ 16)
D(+ 17)
D(+ 18)
12
10
12
11
12
12
12
11
11
15
11
11
11
9
13
12
10
11
11
44
45
Gm Fat/ L/
Day Day
336
280
336
308
336
336
336
308
308
420
308
308
308
252
364
336
280
308
308
10
11
10
11
10
10
9
11
9
11
9
9
9
8
9
8
8
9
7
Gm Fat/
Day
260
286
260
286
260
260
234
286
234
286
234
234
234
208
234
208
208
234
182
L/
Day
23
23
22
23
23
23
24
25
25
25
23
23
25
22
23
22
23
23
22
48
Average
Gm Fat/ L/ Gm Fat/
Day Day Day
736
736
704
736
736
736
768
800
800
800
736
736
800
704
736
704
736
736
704
15.8
15. 3
14.8
15.3
15. 5
15.5
11.8
15.7
15.0
17.0
14. 3
14. 3
15.0
13. 0
15. 0
14. 0
13.7
14.3
13. 3
540.0
521. 0
497. 5
516. 5
528. 5
528.5
357.5
464.7
447. 3
502. 0
426.0
426. 0
447. 3
388.0
444. 7 ,
416. Oj
408.0
426. 0
398. 0
                         217

-------
Table 2.  Additional control data for each of the study cows.
                           GROUP V
Cow No.
Day
D Day
D(+ 1)
D(+ 2)
D(+ 3)
D(+ 4)
D(+ 5)
D(+6)
D(+ 7)
D(+8)
D(+ 9)
D(+ 10)
D(+ 11)
D(+ 12)
D(+ 13)
D(+ 14)
D(+ 15)
D(+ 16)
D(+ 17)
D(+ 18)
1
W
Day
22
21
18
21
20
20
21
20
20
22
21
22
25
20
14
19
23
21
20
3
Gm Fat/
Day
726
693
594
693
660
660
693
660
660
726
693
726
825
660
594
627
759
693
660

L/
Day
21
20
22
23
21
25
25
24
26
25
25
25
27
24
25
27
31
29
25
24
Gm Fat
Day
504
480
528
552
504
600
600
576
624
600
600
600
648
576
600
648
744
696
600

W
Day
18
14
14
17
18
20
21
21
23
21
22
21
22
18
21
19
20
20
19
28
Gm Fat/
Day
576
448
448
544
576
640
672
672
736
672
704
672
704
576
672
608
640
640
608
Average
L/ Gm Fat/
Day Day
20.3
18. 3
18. 0
20.3
19.7
21.7
22.3
21.7
23.0
22.7
22.7
22.7
24.7
20.7
21.3
21.7
24.7
23. 3
21. 3
602.0
540. 3
523. 3
596.3
580.0
633. 3
655.0
636.0
673. 3
666.0
665.7
666. 0
725.7
604.0
622.0
627.7
714. 3
676.3
622.7
                         218

-------
                Table  3.  FBI values for Hayseed cows.
tSJ
Gi™ *~\ i i r~»
J. *_* -U. £.S
I



Average
II



Average
III



Average
IV



Average
V


Average
C ow
1
5
47
46

12
19
21
25

15
18
27
29

43
44
45
48

13
24
28

D-
5
2
-
-
3
3
3
3
4
3
3
3
4
3
3
_
-
-
-
-
5
3
2
4
111
. 30
.62
	
	
.96
. 70
.65
. 70
. 75
. 95
. 20
. 50
. 50
. 50
. 68
	
	
	
	
	
. 74
.87
. 75
. 12
D-
3.
3.

--
3.
3.
3.
2.
3.
3.
3.
3.
5.
3.
3.
	


--

2.
3.
3.
2.
83
62
31

--
46
75
00
67
16
15
03
30
00
75
77
	


--
--
33
30
00
88
D-
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
2.
3.
3.
2.
3.
3.
3.
3.
2.
3.
3.
4.
3.
2.
3.
3.
2.
55
25
13
63
37
35
90
10
80
20
25
53
12
87
25
19
87
42
75
50
63
13
07
00
73
D
2.
3.
2.
3.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
"l
d .
2.
3.
2.
2.
2.
2.
3.
4.
2.
3.
2.
2.
3.
2.
-20
70
15
97
05
97
80
75
25
00
45
25
00
50
00
44
75
42
00
52
17
25
15
37
59
D+9
4.
3.
3.
5.
3.
4.
3.
2.
2.
2.
4.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
2.
3.
3.
3.
2.
3.
10
05
00
58
93
10
01
58
00
92
35
42
27
25
57
00
15
25
60
00
00
50
60
03
D+44
2.
6.
3.
3.
4.
3.
3.
2.
2.
2.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
2.
3.
12.
3.
5.
3.
3.
3.
3.
85
45
87
10
07
15
12
85
55
92
45
80
45
75
61
80
77
60
25
60
15
25
50
30
D+73
3.
3.
4.
5 .
3.
2.
3.
2.
2.
2.
3.
12.
10.
2.
7.
3.
7.
6.
2.
4.
3.
2.
2.
2.
20
02
10
18
88
20
30
75
90
79
75
80
50
90
49
20
95
00
60
94
10
60
85
85
Average
3.
3.
3.
4.
3.
3.
3.
2.
2.
3.
3.
4.
4.
3.
3.
2.
4.
5.
3.
4.
3.
3.
3.
3.
57
53
51
06
67
37
13
80
94
06
22
70
44
20
84
92
34
92
09
07
10
00
01
05

-------
CS)
ro
o
Group
I



Average
II



Average
III



Average
IV



Average
V


Cow
1
5
47
46

12
19
21
25

15
18
27
29

43
44
45
48

13
24
28
D-
7
7
-
-
7
7
7
7
7
7
8
8
7
7
7
_
-
-
-
-
6
7
7
111
. 10
.80
	
	
.40
.40
.60
.60
. 20
.45
. 00
. 10
. 00
.80
. 70
_ _ _
	
	
	
	
.40
. 20
. 90
D-83
7
8
-
-
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
6
8
7
_
-
-
-
-
7
7
7
. 10 .
. 00
	
	
. 55
. 30
. 70
. 50
. 00
. 38
. 90
. 70
.60
. 10
. 60
	
	
	
	
	
. 50
. 10
. 90
D-
6.
7.
7.
7.
7.
6.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
6.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
6.
7.
7.
6.
7.
55
30
60
30
00
05
90
60
10
40
25
60
60
10
30
20
10
40
70
80
25
40
60
70
D-20
7. 10
7. 90
7. 40
7. 20
7.40
6. 80
7. 50
7. 30
7. 60
7. 30
7.40
7. 70
6. 80
7. 50
7. 40
7. 50
7. 60
7. 50
6.40
7. 25
7. 60
7. 00
7. 90
D+9
7.
7.
7.


7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
7.
8.
7.
8.
7.
7.
7.
7.
6.
7.
7.
7.
8.
30
50
70


40
60
40
90
58
60
20
40
00
80
60
20
70
90
35
90
60
20
D+44
7. 50
8. 30
7. 20


7. 30
7. 60
7. 20
7. 70
7.45
7. 70
8. 20
6. 90
7. 20
7. 50
8. 00
7. 30
7. 70
6. 60
7.40
7. 40
7. 70
7. 70
D+73
7.
7.
7.


7.
7.

7.






7.
7.
7.
6.
7.
7.
7.
7.
10
70
30


30
50

60






80
60
60
80
45
60
40
70
/i. V G I" cl L; G
7.
7.
7.


7.
7.

7.






7.
7.
7.
6.
7.
7.
7.
7.
07
83
38


20
59

49






50
42
60
70
31
40
23
86
       Average             7.17     7.50     7.23   7.50     7.90     7.60    7.57      7.50

-------
Append^^Table 5.  CBC values for Hayseed cows.
'J-roup Cow Date
I 1 6-16-65
7-14-65
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
11-17-65
12-16-65
Average
I 5 6-16-65
7-14-65
8-11-65
9-15-65
1.0-13-65
11-17-65
12-16-65
Average
T 47 A 1 A A1^
S. *± 1 U — ID— O 3
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
11-17-65
12-16-65
gms.
Hgb
11
10
10
10
10
10
11
10
10
10
10
10
09
11
11
10


10
11
11
11
12
HCT
39
35
33
33
36
34
38
35
34
35
34
32
30
37
37
34


33
35
39
36
41
1x1 O6
Rbc
052
043
045
043
043
045
047
045
043
043
047
042
045
047
046
045


046
046
048
046
050
W. B.C.
009300
008200
009300
009400
006900
008600
009400
008729
010200
009700
008350
007950
009400
009700
007600
008986


008700
008800
008350
008800
009700
EOS.
01
01
02
02
01
02
02
01
00
03
01
03
. 02
01
01
01


00
02
02
00
01
BASO.
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00


00
00
00
00
00
JUV.
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00


00
00
00
00
00
STAB
00
01
01
01
01
02
01
01
02
02
00
01
01
00
00
01


01
00
00
01
00
SEGS
43
20
20
19
20
20
21
23
48
21
12
16
21
19
23
23


23
24
22
19
21
LYMPH
56
77
78
77
78
75
75
74
48
72
87
79
76
79
75
74


75
74
76
78
78
MONO
00
01
00
01
00
01
01
01
02
02
00
01
00
01
01
01


01
00
00
02
00
        Average
11
37
047
008870
01
00
00
00
22
76
01
        46
7 -1 4-AS
i •* j. ^t ••• \j _j
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
11-17-65
12-16-65

11
10
11
10
12

37
34
37
33
39

045
045
047
043
.047

010700
009000
008900
009000
009400

00
00
00
02
00

00
00
00
00
00

00
00
00
00
00

02
02
01
02
02

20
20
26
16
19

78
78
73
80
79

00
00
00
00
00
 (Cont.) Average
11
36
045
009400
00
00
00
02
20
78
00

-------
Appendix Table 5.  CBC values for Hayseed cows.
                           (cont. )
Group Cow Date
II 12 6-16-65
7-14-65
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
11-17-65
12-16-65
Average
II 19 6-16-65
7-14-65
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
_ 11-17-65
N 12-16-65
ro
Average
II 21 6-16-65
7-14-65
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
11-17-65
12-16-65
Average
II 25 6-16-65
7-14-65
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
11-17-65
12-16-65
gms.
Hgb
11
11
11
12
12
12
11
11
10
10
10
12
11
12
11

11
11
10
11
11
10
11
11
11
10
10
08
10
10
10
10
%
HCT
37
37
37
40
40
39
41
39
35
35
33
36
39
41
33

36
35
34
35
35
37
37
35
35
33
30
26
33
31
33
33
Ixl0b
Rbc
046
047
048
051
049
047
050
048
046
045
045
047
047
049
045

046
048
043
047
044
046
046
046
046
047
041
040
047
043
042
046
W. B. C.
009100
008100
009750
009600
006850
008350
007150
008414
010800
007400
009400
009000
009000
009800
010000

009342
009300
006500
008850
008350
009600
009300
006100
008286
008700
010700
008350
009200
009400
008600
009250
%
EOS.
04
02
03
02
01
01
02
02
01
00
00
02
00
03
02

01
02
01
04
01
01
03
00
02
01
00
01
01
00
00
01
%
BASO.
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00

00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
. 00
%
JUV.
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00

00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
%
STAB
01
01
00
01
00
00
00
01
01
02
01
02
00
03
02

02
01
00
00
01
00
00
00
00
02
01
01
01
00
01
01
%
SEGS
40
29
20
21
20
20
26
25
22
29
26
29
20
29
24

26
20
32
12
20
25
26
22
22
37
30
20
17
22
26
27
%
LYMPH
53
67
76
76
79
79
70
71
76
66
73
66
80
64
72

71
76
67
83
78
74
71
78
76
60
69
77
81
78
72
71
%
MONO
02
01
01
00
00
00
02
01
00
02
00
01
00
01
00

00
01
00
01
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
01
00
00
01
00
(Cont. )  Average
10
31
044
009171
00
00
00
01
26
73
00

-------
Appendj^^Table 5.  CBC values for Hayseed cows.   (cont.
Group
III







III







III







III






Cow Date
15 6-16-65
7-14-65
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
11-17-65
12-16-65
Average
18 6-16-65
7-14-65
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
11-17-65
12-16-65
Average
27 6-16-65
7-14-65
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
11-17-65
12-16-65
Average
29 6-16-65
7-14-65
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
11-17-65
12-16-65
gms.
Hgb
12
11
12
11
11
11
11
11
10
10
10
11
11
11
12
11
10
11
10
10
10
10
11
10
10
11
11
11
10
10
11
%
HCT
37
39
38
36
39
38
37
38
34
34
34
34
36
35
39
35
34
34
33
31
34
33
36
34
34
36
36
34
34
32
37
Ixl0fa
Rbc
047
044
048
048
048
047
048
047
045
043
046
046
048
047
048
046
047
048
047
043
046
040
045
045
047
048
048
047
046
041
048
W. B. C
010100
008700
008000
008800
007300
008950
009400
008750
008800
008300
009850
009850
009250
009250
007200
008929
008150
007700
009050
008950
007600
007850
009000
008329
011800
009350
008600
009250
007750
006800
009750
%
EOS.
01
01
00
02
00
02
00
01
02
02
02
01
02
00
00
01
02
02
00
01
00
03
02
01
01
01
00
00
00
01
00
%
BASO.
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
%
JUV.
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
%
STAB
01
02
01
02
02
00
00
01
01
01
00
00
01
00
00
00
01
01
02
02
00
02
00
01
02
02
00
02
02
02
00
%
SEGS
19
19
20
22
22
26
18
21
30
22
19
23
21
20
21
22
20
25
21
17
23
25
23
22
30
30
19
23
22
24
21
%
LYMPH
78
77
77
73
76
71
82
76
67
75
79
76
75
80
78
77
76
71
77
79
77
69
74
75
67
67
80
75
76
73
77
%
MONO
01
01
02
01
00
01
00
01
00
00
00
00
01
00
01
00
01
01
00
01
00
01
01
01
00
00
01
00
00
00
02
(cont. )  Average
11
35
046
009043
00
00
00
01
24
75
00

-------
   Appenda^Table 5. CBC values for Hayseed cows.  (cont. 1
DO
Gr ou p
TV
JL V








TV
J. V







TV
X V







TV
J. V






Co\v Date
4-2 A 1 A -AS
^rj U — JL u u _J
7 14 AS
f — 1 T: — O D
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
11-17165
12-16-65
Average
44 A 1 A -A 5
^TT U — 1 U — U -J
7 1 4 AS
/ — I ^± — O O
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
11-17-65
12-16-65
Average
4S A -1 A -A5
*± J tj "* J- U >J _J
7 14 -A ^
1 •• X rt -* U _/
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
11-17-65
12-16-65
Average
48 A 1 A -AS
rro u J. u u -/
7 1 4 A S
( — 1 rt — O 3
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
11-17-65
12-16-65
gms.
Hgb




12
11
11
10
12
11



11
11
11
11
12
11



11
11
11
11
12
11


-_ —
12
11
10
10
11
HCT




37
34
36
34
38
36



38
37
36
37
40
38


— ~,
37
36
39
38
40
38


— •.
40
37
36
33
36
1x1 O6
Rbc




048
046
048
043
049
047



048
048
049
045
048
048



046
047
051
046
046
047


_ — _
047
046
047
043
047
W. B. C.




007200
009650
008400
008350
008400
008390



007850
009700
--9200
009050
008850
008930



009000
009850
009450
009350
008300
009190



010100
009150
008750
006600
009300
EOS.




03
01
01
02
00
01



00
02
00
00
01
00



02
01
02
01
02
02



01
01
00
02
02
BASO.




00
00
00
00
00
00



00
00
00
00
00
00



00
00
00
00
00
00


— _
00
00
00
00
00
JUV.




00
00
00
00
00
00



00
00
00
00
00
00



00
00
00
00
00
00



00
00
00
00
00
STAB




01
00
00
01
00
00



02
01
01
00
01
01



00
00
00
03
00
01



00
01
00
00
01
SEGS




20
23
21
24
23
23



21
21
24
23
20
22



22
21
25
20
18
21



22
27
20
23
22
LYMPH




75
74
77
72
76
75



77
75
75
75
78
76



76
78
72
76
80
76 .



77
70
80
75
75
MONO




01
02
01
01
01
01



00
01
00
02
00
01



00
00
01
00
00
00


— —
00
01
00
00
00
            Average
    (cont. )
11
36    046
008780
01
00
00
00
23
76
00

-------
Append^BTable 5.  CBC values for Hayseed cows.  (cont.
Group
V







V







y






Cow .Date
13 6-16-65
7-14-65
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
11-17-65
12-16-65
Average
24 6-16-65
7-14-65
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
11-17-65
12-16-65
Average
28 6-16-65
7-14-65
8-11-65
9-15-65
10-13-65
11-17-65
12-16-65
gms.
Hgb
11
10
10
10
10
11
11
10
10
10
10
09
08
10
09
09
09
10
10
10
10
10
10
HCT
36
32
32
32
34
36
39
34
33
34
32
29
26
30
27
30
30
33
32
32
33
30
32
IxlO6
Rbc
047
042
046
047
046
046
049
046
045
046
046
042
040
040
040
043
044
046
047
045
047
038
044
W. B. C.
007700
007950
007650
009150
007050
008850
008950
008186
014400
008250
008900
009900
010300
009200
008850
009971
007000
009500
009800
009200
006550
009700
009600
EOS.
03
00
00
00
01
00
02
01
00
01
00
01
01
05
01
01
01
02
01
01
02
02
01
BASO.
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
JUV
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
STAB
01
00
02
02
00
02
01
01
00
02
01
01
02
00
00
01
01
01
01
01
00
00
01
SEGS
46
30
24
20
17
14
20
24
20
32
23
18
48
22
25
28
18
31
24
21
21
20
19
LYMPH
50
70
74
78
81
86
76
74
80
65
76
80
49
70
73
70
80
66
74
77
77
78
79
MONO
00
00
00
00
01
00
01
00
00
00
00
00
00
03
01
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
Average
                           10
32
044
008764
01
00
00
01
22
76
00

-------
             Table 6.  Average CBC values for  Hayseed
ro
Group



I






II






III








IV






V



Date
D-lll
D-83
D-55
D-20
D+9
D+44
D+73
D-lll
D-83
D-55
D-20
D+9
D+44
D+73
D-lll
D-83
D-55
D-20
D+9
D+44
D+73
Dill
- 1 1 1
DO 0
— O J
D-55
D-20
D+9
D+44
D+73
D-lll
D-83
D-55
D-20
D+9
D+44
D+73
gms.
Hgta
11
10
10
10
10
10
11
11
10
10
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
11
10
10
11

~" ~~

~™ "~
11
11
11
10
12
10
10
10
10
09
10
10
%
HCT
37
35
36
34
35
35
39
35
34
33
36
37
38
36
35
36
35
34
36
35
37

~ ~

~" ""
38
36
37
36
39
33
33
32
31
31
32
33
IxlO6
Rbc
048
043
045
044
046
045
048
046
044
045
047
046
046
047
046
046
047
046
047
044
047

_ _ _

— — —
047
047
049
044
048
059
044
046
045
045
041
044
W. B. C.
009750
008950
009263
008788
008388 .
009025
009025
009475
008175
009088
009038
008713
009013
008125
009712
008513
008875
009213
007975
008213
008838




008515
009588
008950
008338
008713
009700
008567
008783
009417
007966
009250
009133--
%
EOS.
01
02
01
02
01
01
01
02
01
02
02
00
02
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
00



— —
02
01
01
01
01
01
01
00
01
01
02
01
%
BASO.
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00



_ —
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
%
JUV.
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00



~" ~"
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
%-
STAB
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
00
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
00



— *~
01
01
00
01
01
01
01
01
01
01
00
01
%
SEGS
45
21
29
19
22
19
21
30
30
19
22
22
25
25
25
24
19
21
22
24
21



"~ ""
21
23
22
22
21
28
31
24
20
29
19
21
%
LYMPH
52
75
79
77
76
78
76
66
67
77
75
78
72
73
72
73
78
76
76
73
78




76
74
76
75
77
70
67
75
78
69
78
76
%
MONO
01
01
00
01
00
01
01
01
01
01
00
00
00
00
01
01
01
01
00
01
01

_ —

_ _
00
01
01
01
00
00
00
00
00
00
01
01

-------
                                                                                      ! I
**.  3
                                    a
                                                                                                                                    c,
                                                                                                                                   • .'--I
J&c

-------