SWRHL-29r
RADIOIODINE STUDY IN CONJUNCTION WITH
PROJECT SULKY
by the
Bioenvironmental Research Program
Southwestern Radiological Health Laboratory
U. S. Public Health Service
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
Las Vegas, Nevada
May 27, 1966
This surveillance performed under a Memorandum of
Understanding (No. SF 54 373)
for the
U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
-------
LEGAL NOTICE
This report •was prepared as an account of Government sponsored
work. Neither the United States, nor the Atomic Energy Commission,
nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission:
A. Makes any warranty or representation, expressed or implied,
with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of the in-
formation contained in this report, or that the use of any information,
apparatus, method, or process disclosed in this report may not in-
fringe privately owned rights; or
B. Assumes any liabilities with respect to the use of, or for damages
resulting from the use of any information, apparatus, method, or pro-
cess disclosed in this report.
As used in the above, "person acting on behalf of the Commission" in-
cludes any employee or contractor of the Commission, or employee
of such contractor, to the extent that such employee or contractor of
the Commission, or employee of such contractor prepares, dissemin-
ates, or provides access to, any information pursuant to his employ-
ment or contract with the Commission, or his employment with such
contractor.
OOOS4
-------
SWRHL-29r
RADIOIODINE STUDY IN CONJUNCTION WITH
PROJECT SULKY
by the-
Bioenvironmental Research Program
Southwestern Radiological Health Laboratory
U. S. Public Health Service
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
Las Vegas, Nevada
Copy No. 64
Library
SWRHL
Las Vegas, Nevada
May 27, 1966
This surveillance performed under a Memorandum of
Understanding (No. SF 54 373)
for the
U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
-------
ABSTRACT
A research project was developed in conjunction with Project Sulky, a
nuclear cratering experiment, with the primary objective of quantitating
the amount of radioiodine which would be excreted in the milk of dairy
cows fed under simulated •winter-feeding conditions.
The cows were exposed to radioiodine by inhalation only, by ingestion
only, and by inhalation and ingestion combined. Cows were positioned
at stations established downwind of Ground Zero for determining inhala-
tion exposure. Stacks of baled alfalfa hay and piles of loose alfalfa hay
were placed at these downwind stations. The hay, when contaminated
by fallout, was to be fed to cows to determine ingestion exposure.
Measurements were made of the levels of radioiodine in the air, depo-
sited on the hay, and in the cows' milk. It was also planned to find
relative efficiencies of high volume and low volume air samplers for
the collection of radioiodine, and to test an air sampling device designed
to remove biologically available radioiodine.
Significant amounts of radioactivity -were not released. Therefore,
none of the objectives of the experiment was achieved.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT i
TABLE OF CONTENTS ii
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES iv
INTRODUCTION 1
PROCEDURE 3
A. Typical Station Layout 3
B. Biomedical Study • 5
C. Biophysical Sampling Study 10
D. Air Sampling Study 13
E. Radiation Survey 13
F. Soil and Vegetation Study 14
G. Baled Hay Study 14
H. Piled, Loose Hay Study 16
I. Ejecta Study 16
J. Analytical Methods 18
SCHEDULE OF FIELD ACTIVITIES 20
RESULTS 21
A. Biomedical Study 21
B. Biophysical Sampling Study 21
C. Air Sampling Study 21
D. Radiation Survey 26
E. Soil and Vegetation Study 26
F. Baled Hay Study 26
G. Piled, Loose Hay Study 26
H. Ejecta Study 26
DISCUSSION 27
CONCLUSIONS 29
ii
-------
Table of Contents (Continued)
APPENDIX I 30
APPENDIX II 31
APPENDIX III 32
APPENDIX IV 33
APPENDIX V 34
APPENDIX VI 35
APPENDIX VII 36
APPENDIX VIII 37
APPENDIX IX 38
APPENDIX X 39
APPENDIX XI 40
APPENDIX XII 42
DISTRIBUTION
111
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Station locations from Sulky Ground Zero.
Table 2. Items at each station location.
Table 3. Expected type of exposure at each station.
Table 4. Individual and group milk production and PBI.
Table 5. PBI analysis of milk.
Table 6. Ejecta collector stations.
Table 7. Sample collection schedule.
Table 8. Results of analysis of ejecta collectors.
5
5
8
8
9
18
20
26
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Typical station layout.
Figure 2. Station locations.
Figure 3. Typical stanchion arrangement.
Figure 4. Biophysical sampling device.
Figure 5. Rat inhalation chamber.
Figure 6. Stacked baled hay.
Figure 7. Ejecta station locations.
Figure 8. Average milk production for cow stations.
Figure 9. Average daily milk production for Station F-6.
Figure 10. Average daily milk production for Station N-6.
Figure 11. Average daily milk production for Camp 16.
4
6
7
11
12
15
17
22
23
24
25
IV
-------
INTRODUCTION
Project Sulky was a nuclear cratering experiment in hard rock executed
as part of the Plowshare Program for development of nuclear excava-
tion. The purposes of the Sulky experiment were: (1) to determine the
distribution of radioactivity produced at a greater scaled depth than
Danny Boy, which would provide basic input for the design of follow-on
larger yield experiments in a similar medium; (2) to determine the
concentrations of certain radionuclides airborne at various distances;
and (3) to produce crater mechanics information at a greater scaled
depth than Danny Boy.
Project Sulky was fired December 18, 1964 at approximately 1135
Pacific Standard Time (1935 Greenwich Mean Time) on Buckboard
Mesa, Area 18, Nevada Test Site. The depth of burial was 27.4 meters
(90 feet) and the resultant yield was 85 + 15 tons. The emplacement
hole, U18d, was located at geodetic coordinates
Lat N 37° 4' 57"
Long W 116° 20' 33"
It was deemed appropriate to develop and carry out a research project
in conjunction with this nuclear experiment with the primary objective
of quantitating the amount of radioiodine which would be excreted in the
milk of dairy cows fed under simulated winter-feeding conditions. From
the data obtained, it was hoped to establish whether or not a. significant
amount of radioiodine is excreted via milk without the animal grazing on
fresh forage contaminated with fallout. Also, if radioiodine enters the
milk, it -would possible to follow its increase in concentration and decay
in time under these conditions. Thus, the following specific objectives
were established: (l)to relate environmental levels of radioiodine to
-------
resulting levels in milk of dairy cows maintained under simulated winter'
feeding conditions, (2) to determine the amount of radioiodine deposited
upon stacked, baled alfalfa hay and upon piled, loose alfalfa hay, (3) to
measure relative efficiencies of high volume and low volume air sam-
plers for the collection of radioiodine, (4) to test an air sampling de-
vice designed to remove biologically available radioiodine, and (5) to
measure thyroid radioiodine levels of field personnel -who may be ex-
posed to radioiodine by inhalation while performing field duties.
-------
PROCEDURE
Stations were established downwind from Ground Zero, except for a
station at Area 16 camp-site, and equipped with various sampling
apparatus for measuring radioiodine.
A. Typical Station Layout (see Figure 1)
Field stations F-6 and N-6 consisted of two concentric
rectangles staked at each corner and at the center of
each side. The long axis of these rectangles was ori-
ented perpendicular to Ground Zero(GZ) on predeter-
mined azimuths and arcs (Table 1). Due to terrain
factors, the dimensions of the rectangles varied slightly
from station to station, but the main difference was that
stations N-3 and N-8 did not have stanchions (Table 2).
Equipment located within the outer rectangle (stakes 1-8)
consisted of micrometeorological instruments operated
by the Weather Bureau, physical sampling equipment,, a
500 gallon water supply tank for cows, and a power gen-
erator and portable compressor for milking equipment.
Located within the inner rectangle (stakes 1-8) were six
portable cow stanchions, a stack of 27 bales of alfalfa
hay, and a pile of 10 bales of loose alfalfa hay.
-------
micro-meteorological
instruments
pnysi,?al
A sampling
equipment
/""N water-tank
generator
2
A
to ground zero
stanchions
6
24m
baled hoy
j
CO
loose hoyy
scale 2-5cm = 30m
A outer monitoring stakes
• inner monitoring stakes
4
A
Figure 1. Typical station layout.
-------
Table 1. Station locations from Sulky Ground Zero.
Station
F-6
N-3
N-6
N-8
Camp 16
Distance
4, 000'
22,000'
22,000'
19, 750'
50, 000'
Azimuth
330°
319°
.
332°
350°
109°
Remarks
10, 000' Danny Boy
Arc at 310° from
D. B. Ground Zero
10, 000' Danny Boy.
Arc at 340 from
D. B. Ground Zero
10, 000' Danny Boy
Arc at 020° from
D. B. Ground Zero
Area 16 Camp-site
Table 2. Items at each station location.
Station
F-6
N-3
N-6
N-8
Camp 16
Animals
yes
no
yes
no
yes
Hay Stacked
and Baled
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
Hay Loosely
Piled
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
Air
Samplers
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
Biophysical
Samplers
yes
no
no
no
no
B. Biomedical Study
Fifteen adult lactating Holstein cows were grouped as
shown in Table 3 and placed in the respective stations
shown in Figures 1 and 2. Each cow served as its own
control. Two animal stations were located near the
meteorologically predicted hot-line but at different dis-
tances from Ground Zero. Each of these animal stations
consisted of six portable milking stanchions designed to
hold dairy cows comfortably (Figure 3). These stanchions
5
-------
Area 19
BUCKBOARD MESA —\ SUCI(Y
G
Figure 2. Station locations.
6
-------
Figure 3. Typical stanchion arrangement.
-------
permitted free movement of the head laterally and verti-
cally, restricting only the forward and backward move-
ments. These were arranged as normal dairy barn
stanchions but mounted on a steel platform for portability.
The placement of cows in the groups was determined on
the basis of production (Table 4 and Appendices I-III)
and protein bound iodine (PBI) (Table 5). Degree of
tractability was the only bias that entered into the selection
of cows for station N-6.
Table 3. Expected type of exposure at each station.
Expected type of
Group Cow Numbers Station
exposure
I 1, 13 F-6 Inhalation
8, 27 N-6 Inhalation
II 11, 21, 23, 29 F-6 Inhalation
Ingestion
24, 25, 26, 28 N-6 Inhalation
Ingestion
III 2, 16, 22 Camp 16 Ingestion
Table 4. Individual and group milk production and FBI
Group
I
Average
Cow
Number
1
8
13
27
Average Milk
liters/day
15.3
14.9
16. 8
19.8
16. 7 .
PBI-ugm%
D-14
5. 1
4. 7
4.4
4. 0
4. 5
-------
Table 4. Individual and group milk production and PBI(cont')
„ Cow
Group
Number
II
Average
III
Average
11
21
23
24
25
26
28
29
2
16
22
.Average Milk
liters/day
17.3
15. 1
18,6
22.9
17.4
31.1
17. 0
17.6
19.6
17. 7
19.0
21.0
19.2
,PBI-ugm%
D-14
5.2
4. 3
3.6
5.7
4.0
3.8
3,1
4.2
4.2
5.9
5.6
4.2
5. 2
Table 5. FBI analysis of milk.
Cow
Group „ ,
Number
Camp 16
Average
F-6
Average
N-6
Average
2
16
22
1
11
13
21
23
29
8
24
25
26
27
28
D - 14
5.9
5.6
4.2
5.2
5. 1
5. 2
4.4
4.3
3.6
4.2
4.5
4. 7
5.7
4.0
3.8
4.0
3. 1
4.2
PBI-|jLgm% '
D - 11 D + 19
5. 1
6.6
3.3
5.0
4. 8
5. 3
5. 0
,3.8
4. 0
4.9
4.6
4.6
4.6
4.7
*
5.2
5.8
5. 0
5.2
5. 3
4.5
5.0
2. 1
5.6
5. 5
4. 0
2. 2
3.6
3.8
5.4
4.8
*
.*
5.6
4.4
5. 1
D + 46
4.9
3. 1
3.9
4. 0
4. 0
4. 5
3.6
2.9
3.4
3. 5
3.7
4.9
3. 8
3.2
4. 2
4.0
4.4
4. 1
* Contaminated with Hg ions.
-------
Time of milking was as close to the regular schedule as possible.
Each cow was milked with the same milking unit (Surge milking
bucket) throughout the experiment and with the same equipment as
used normally at the PHS dairy barn. Milking techniques were
identical to those used during normal routine milking. The total
quantity of milk from each cow and quantity of milk sample taken
were recorded from D-ll to D+l for field stations and D+3 to D+19
after return to the PHS dairy barn (see Appendices IV-IX). Blood
for FBI was taken on D^-14, D-ll, D+19, and D+46 (Table 5). In-
dividual water and grain samples were collected from each cow's
supply at each station.
C. Biophysical Sampling Study
The physical sampling device consisted of two prefilters, an elec-
trostatic precipitator, a flow meter, a spark gap and a cylinder
of basic ion exchange resin (Dowex 1 x 8) connected to a reservoir
consisting of two 200 liter evacuated flasks encased in hardened
foam (see Figure 4). , The unit was placed at Station F-6. Ten
white rats (Group I), housed in open mesh cages, were placed at
approximately the same level as the sampling head. The sampler
was automatically started at cloud passage and ran for three hours
to fill the reservoir flasks.
The reservoir and rats were removed from the field after the event
on Drday. Ten rats (Group II) were placed in a modified inhalation
chamber (see Figure 5) connected to the reservoir and allowed to
breathe the collected air for three hours. Group I and II rats were
sacrificed at D+48 hours. Each thyroid was dissected, pooled by
groups and beta counted.
10
-------
INTAKE
PRE-RLTERS
ELECTROSTATIC
PRECIPITATOR
ROTOMETER
i> ;TESLA COIL
SPARK SAP
RESIN FILTER
GNITION COIL
Figure 4. Biophysical sampling device.
-------
«)
Figure 5. Rat inhalation chamber.
-------
D. Air Sampling Study
Four fixed stations and two mobile stations were established.
Each station was equipped with a high volume air sampler (Gel-
man type E glas-s1 fiber prefilter and MSA BM 2306 charcoal car-
tridge) with a flow rate of 15 cfm and a low volume air sampler
(membrane millipore type HA prefilter and cartridge loaded with
charcoal from an MSA type BM2306 charcoal cartridge) with a
flow rate of 1. 5 cfm. The area of the prefilters differed such
that the face velocity at the prefilters was equal for each sampler,
but the velocity through the charcoal was about five times greater
in the high volume sampler as compared to the low volume. The
six stations were located as follows:
1. An unmanned station at F-6. An ion chamber contin-
uously monitored the background and -was set to turn
on the air samplers -when the dose rate exceeded
0. 1 mR/hr.
2.-4. An unmanned station at N-3, N-6, and N-8. The
air samplers at these stations were turned on at the
last possible moment before shot time.
5. A pickup truck with air samplers and survey instru-
ments stationed on Pahute Mesa and driven into the
path of the cloud.
6. A similar mobile unit stationed in the Gold Flat-Kawich
Valley Area.
The use of the two mobile units was a precautionary measure in
case the effluent cloud did not pass over the fixed stations.
E. Radiation Survey
The radiation survey was conducted at each of the stakes of both
rectangles (see Figure 1) with an E-500B and scintillation detector
to measure gamma radiation levels at the surface and at three feet
above the ground. D-l background measurements, as measured
by the E-500B, are listed for stations F-6, N-6 and Camp 16 in
13
-------
Appendix X. Film badges were placed on each cow stanchion, in
back of each cow, and on all stakes.
F. Soil and Vegetation Study
Samples of soil were taken to a depth of 2cm and from an area
approximately 15 x 15cm at stakes 2, 4, 6, and 8 of each station
(see Figure 1). Natural vegetation was sampled at the same lo-
cation.
G. Baled Hay Study
Twenty-seven alfalfa hay bales were stacked 3 deep, 3 wide, and
3 high at all stations (Table 2 and Figure 6). Most of the stems
of the hay were oriented parallel to the azimuth lines and the
largest surface area was. exposed to Ground Zero. Samples were
taken -with a core sampling device consisting of a 90cm length of
10cm diameter steel pipe. One end of the pipe was ground to a
sharp serrated edge to serve as a cutting edge. The serrations
were placed about 1. 2cm apart. The opposite end of the pipe -was
drilled through both sides to allow for insertion of a steel bar to
serve as a handle.
A -wooden pole capped with a 13. 7cm diameter sponge served as
a ramrod. This was used to push the sample out of the core^sam-
pler intcraKplastic sample bag.
Core samples were taken from certain areas of a bale marked A,
B, and C as shown in Figure 6. Samples were taken vertically
through A and C and horizontally through B. Bales to be sampled
were placed on a plywood slab covered with two thicknesses of
plastic. The contaminated surface of the bales was placed on the
plastic. The corer was placed on the upper side of the bale,
cutting side down, and rotated back and forth through about 1/4 turn,
14
-------
STACKED BALES
'4*0
DIRECTION OF LIE
OF HAY STEMS
2 WIRE BALES
INDIVIDUAL BALE
Figure 6. Stacked baled hay.
15
-------
pressure being applied from above. When the corer had penetrated
the bale completely, it was withdrawn and laid horizontally across
the bale. The ramr.od sponge, covered with a 30cm x 30cm piece
of flannel cloth, -was inserted into the handle end of the device to
push the sample into a plastic sample bag. This sample bag was
then rolled tightly around the sample and sealed with tape. In this
manner the exposed end of the sample was at the bottom of the
sealed sample bag.
H. Piled, Loose Hay Study
•>
Ten bales of alfalfa hay were broken up and piled approximately
100cm high and 200cm square at all stations (Table 2 and Figure 1).
The top was covered by 1" chicken mesh -wire on a rectangular
board frame.
Samples were taken from the top 8cm and the second 8cm at five
different locations which included each corner and the center of
the pile. Each composite sample was placed in a plastic bag.
I. Ejecta Study
Ejecta-collector stations were located between the 500' and 8000' arcs
(Table 6 and Figure 7). Sample collectors were 43. 5cm x 33. Ocm
x 11.9cm plastic trays with self-contained lids. The trays were
positioned with the lids on prior to D-day and held in place by wire
and four spikes.
16
-------
GROUND ZERO
FALLOUT TRAYS
Figure 7. Ejecta station locations.
17
-------
Table 6. Ejecta collector stations.
Ring
Numbers
A
B
D
F
G
H
N
Radial
Distance
(Ft. from GZ)
1,
2,
4,
5,
8,
22,
500'
000'
000'
000'
800'
000'
000'
360
o
300°,
295
305
310
320
319
o
o
0
0
o
Bearing
, 90°
320°,
, 310
, 320
, 330
, 340
, 332
, 180°, 270°
340°, 360°, 30°, 1 20°, 205°
°, 330°, 350°, 15°
°, 330°, 340°, 360°
°, 350°
0
o o
, 350
J. Analytical Methods
Liquid samples were placed in 3. 5 liter inverted well aluminum
beakers to be analyzed for gamma emitting radioisotopes using a
400-channel analyzer with a 4"x 4" Nal (Tl) crystal detector.
Based on fifty minute counts, the minimum detectable level for 1 31I in
milk samples is 20 picocuries per liter (pCi/1) with an associated
error of + 20 pGi/1, or + 10%, whichever is larger. All values
•were corrected for decay to time of collection. . Samples having
less than the minimum detectable level of activity at time of count
were not corrected to time of collection.
Depending upon size, vegetation samples were packaged in alumi-
num beakers or in 400 ml "cottage cheese" containers. Since the
sample size was non-standard, it was impossible to give a mini-
mum level for l 31I in pCi/kg or pCi/m2 . Instead, there was
assigned a minimum total activity of 100 pCi per sample as the
threshold of detection. At 100 pCi, the associated error due to
counting statistics is + 100%. Since the presence of fresh fission
products complicates the calculation (standards for some isotopes
are not available), a value of + 100 pCi/kg, or + 50%, whichever
18
-------
is larger, was assigned as the best estimate of the analytical
error for all gamma analyses of samples other than milk. The
presence of 198Au made the detection of l 311 impossible in vege-
tation samples for about ten days following detonation. The ac-
curacy of.1 31I determinations in soil samples was assumed to be
comparable to that of vegetation measurements.
Air sample prefilters were counted for gross beta activity with a
thin window, large area gas flow proportional probe connected to
a high speed sealer. The system has an efficiency of approxi-
mately 30% for 1. 5 Mev beta particles and background for this
system is 575 + 20 counts per minute. Charcoal cartridges were
examined for gamma emitting radioisotopes by placing each car-
tridge directly on a 4"x 4" sodium iodide crystal coupled to a
400-channel pulse height analyzer set to view energies from 0 to
2 Mev. Assuming no break in the prefilter, the activity on the
cartridge should represent the gaseous fission products only.
Detection efficiency for this geometry is about 18% at 0.51 Mev.
The minimum detectable activity is about 200 pCi for any specific
isotope.
19
-------
SCHEDULE OF FIELD ACTIVITIES
The stations were staked, the cow stanchions positioned and covered
ejecta trays placed at D-14. The water tanks, power generators,
feed boxes, milking equipment and hay were moved to stations on D-13.
Cows were moved to F-6 and N-6 on D-12, and to Camp 16 on D-ll.
The cows were removed from Camp 16 at D+l and from F-6 and N-6
at D+2. Samples were collected as shown in Table 7.
Table 7. Sample collection schedule.
Type of
Sample
Milk
Blood
Water
Hay
Grain
Soil
Vegetation
Air
Fallout
Ejecta
Survey meter
Film badge
Precipitation
Rat thyroids
Background
Sampling
D-ll
D-14, D-ll
D-ll
D-12, D-ll
D-ll
D-12
D-12
D-12, D-4
D-l
D-12, to H-4
Post -Event
Sampling
D-day, D + l, D+2
D+19, D+46
D-day, D+l, D+2
D-day, D+l, D+2
D -day
D-day
D-day
D-day, D+l, D+2
D-day
D+l
D-day, D+l
D-day
D+2
Remarks
Normal milking other
days
No background samples
No background samples
Trace precipitation
occurred
+48 hours after expo-
sure to aerosol
20
-------
RESULTS
A. Biomedical Study
Milk production dropped slightly from D-11 to D+l, which was the
period of time the cows were being milked in the field. However,
fluctuations of daily milk production were no greater during this
period than before and after movement (Appendices-1—III and Fig-
ures 8-11). Total milk production of cows at all stations dropped
approximately 15 percent from pre-exposure levels. Cows at F-6
and Camp 16 had higher milk production following return to the
dairy barn than during the control period.
Milk samples taken on D-day, D+l, and D+2 contained no detect-
able radioiodine. Hay, piled or baled, was not fed to any of the
cows at any time.
The PBI levels were essentially normal for all groups (Table 5).
Fluctuations noted were probably due to seasonal changes, rather
than stress invoked.
B. Biophysical Sampling Study
Group I rat thyroids were pooled by groups and counted for fifteen
hours on a 400-channel gamma spectrometer. Group II thyroids
were handled in the same manner as Group I. Suggestions of the
presence of 33I and I were observed in Group I only.
C. Air Sampling Study
All samples were within background except for a mobile high
volume air sampler which measured approximately 2 cpm/m3
of gross beta on the filter and a low volume sampler which
measured approximately 1 cpm/m3 of gross beta. The two air
samplers were at separate locations approximately 25 miles
from Ground Zero in Kawich Valley. The wide-beta system was
21
-------
2
H-
o
O)
£3
IB
IO
l^y
IO
•
ro
O
i
CM
I
a
.4-
Q
I
O
i
Q
£
Q
1
ro
+
a
ro
i
Q
i
CM
I
+*
O
1
i
a
4-
O
1
ro
a
ro
i
O
1
s
0
-K
0
1
1
Q
-h
Q
1
fO
4-
Camp 16 Cows Station F-6 Cows Station N-6 Cows
Note: ( ) -()doys over which milk production was Averaged
Figure 8. Average milk production for cow stations.
22
-------
0>
1^
in
c
o
>>
o
_ c
r fc.
o
o
0)
»-
o
o
o
-24
-20
-16
-12
-8
-4
+ 4
+ 8
+ 12
+ 16
+20
Days
Figure 9. Average daily milk production for Station F-6.
-------
(A
O
o
o
o
Q>
0)
O
Q
O
O
I I
o 20-
-24
-20
-16
-12
•— O
-4
+ 4
+ 8
+ 12
+ 16
+ 20
Days
Figure 10. Average daily milk production for Station N-6.
-------
25
o 20
(A
k.
0)
15
(0
a
o
O
0)
0>
<»-
o
>>
o
o
o
V
10
-24
-20
-16
-12
-4
+ 4
8
+ 12
+ 16
+ 2O
Days
Figure 11. Average daily milk production for Camp 16.
-------
calibrated with Sr-Y only so conversion of the activity detected
to pCi would not be justifiable. The extremely low activity pre-
vented half-life determination or beta spectrometry so no
attempt was made to identify the isotopes.
D. Radiation Survey
Measurements taken on D-day, with an E-500B, were slightly
above background at the outer and inner stakes at station F-6.
By D+l, the intensities were essentially background. Levels
at stations N-6 and N-8 remained at background (see Appen-
dices XI and XII). Film badge readings were below detectable
limits.
E. Soil and Vegetation Study
All samples had no detectable concentrations of the radioiodines.
F. Baled Hay Study
All samples had no detectable concentrations of the radioiodines.
G. Piled, Loose Hay Study
All samples had no detectable concentrations of the radioiodines.
H. Ejecta Study
The lids were removed from the trays on D-l. On D+l the trays
were collected. The only visible sample collected in any of the
trays was some snow which had fallen during the previous night.
Although there were no samples available for a particle size
determination, only the trays which were assumed to have been
in the path of the cloud were gamma scanned on D+4 (see Table 8).
Table 8. Results of analysis of ejecta collectors.
'Station
'B-13
JB- 14
iD-15
131I
pCi/tray
4 x 103
5 x 103
46 x 103
133I
pCi/tray
94 x 104
13 x 104
1.07 x 105
26
-------
DISCUSSION
It is realized that so few animals could, hardly have given definitive
results for possible uptake of radioiodine from inhalation. However,
it was hoped that the results would yield sufficient qualitative informa-
tion to serve as input data for the design of a future, more definitive
experiment. Two cows at each of two stations were used for the study
of inhalation. This insured that a significant number of cows remained
for the ingestion experiment to give some measure of the variability
of the results.
The animals used in the experiment were maintained under Grade A
dairy conditions as closely as possible -when in the field. In this man-
ner, water and food intake, excretion of radioiodines in milk, urine
and feces and normal let down of milk would simulate the typical -win-
ter conditions existing on many farms in the Great Basin area.
No serious ill effects in the cows were noticed at any time during the
experiment. Most of the cows showed signs of being cramped, espe-
cially early in the morning. It -was not completely understood whether
this -was due to the extreme cold -weather or being stanchioned, or both.
As an indicator of ill health, milk production is by far the most reli-
able source. The slight drop in production could be due to decreased
water intake.
Many types of air samplers have been used in attempts to measure
radioiodine concentrations in air. In most instances, the samplers
used operated at 15 cfm or more. Since radioiodine is generally pre-
sent in the atmosphere in gaseous forms as well as particulate, these
samplers usually consist of a prefilter and a charcoal cartridge. When
operating such an instrument at 15 cfm it is possible, by elution or
27
-------
attrition, to lose some of the activity absorbed on the charcoal. This
may be particularly true when the air sampler is located in the trajec-
tory of a fallout cloud so that several hours may elapse between the
time of cloud passage and the time the sampler is shut off. Higher
velocities through the sampler will also result in minimum contact
time between air and charcoal. The use of the low volume samplers
was an attempt to minimize these effects in collecting air samples.
The purpose of having the three hay stations at the greater distance
was to allow for some flexibility in the plan in case trajectory predic-
tion was slightly in error. Provisions were made to quickly establish
another feeding station at any desired, more distant location in the
event that the trajectory of the fallout varied considerably from the
prediction. In the event that the fallout extended as far as distant
ranches, an attempt would have been made to conduct the same experi-
ment utilizing the ranchers' cows.
28
-------
CONCLUSIONS
Although none of the objectives of the experiment was achieved due to
lack of significant amounts of released radioactivity, the exercise was
extremely useful in training personnel and in methods development.
Experience gained in sample collection, instrument reliability, ade-
quacy of sampling program, sample processing, and setting up and
maintaining sample stations was valuable in developing field method-
ology. The demonstrated ability to maintain a small herd of lactating
cows in a remote location under -winter conditions will result in an
almost unlimited scope of studying inhalation of fission products by
the cow and subsequent secretion in the milk.
29
-------
APPENDIX I
MILK PRODUCTION OF COWS AT STATION F-6 - LITERS
(Before moving to F-6)
Date
D-24
D-23
D-22
D-21
D-20
D-19
D-18
D-17
D-16
D-15
D-14
D-13
Average
Cow 1
15.9
13.7
16.6
15.1
15.0
13.7
13.6
12.7
16.8
15.0
17.3
18.6
15.3
Cow 1 1
19.5
15.9
18.6
19.1
15.9
15.9
18.2
17.7
15.9
17.7
18.6
15. 1
17.3
Cow 13
16.8
16.4
20.9
18.6
15.0
13. 2
16.8
17.7
18.6
15.9
17.7
13.7
16.8
Cow 21
15. 1
13.6
15.0
16.8
12.3
13.6
15.9
16.8
17.3
16.4
15. 1
13.3
15. 1
Cow 23
25.0
20.0
15.9
15.0
15.0
18.6
18.6
23.2
20.0
20.5
18.2
13.6
18.6
Cow 29
16.8
19.1
22.3
20.5
13.7
17.3
16.8
16.8
18.6
19-1
19.5
10.5
17.6
Average
18.2
16.5
18.2
17.5
14.5
15.4
16.7
17.5
17.9
17.4
17.7
14. 1
16.8
30
-------
APPENDIX II
MILK PRODUCTION OF COWS AT STATION N-6 - LITERS
(Before moving to N-6)
Date
D-24
D-23
D-22
D-21
D-20
D-19
D-18
D-17
D-16
D-15
D-14
D-13
Averag
Cow 8
15.9
15.9
15.1
16.8
13.7
13.6
15.9
15.2
15.9
15.9
15.0
9.3
;e 14.9
Cow 24
22.8
20.0
30.5
25.8
19.5
20.5
21.3
34.8
20.7
22.8
20.9
15.7
22.9
Cow 25
18.6
17.7
17.5
19.5
15.1
16.8
16.8
17.7
18.2
17.3
21.8
11.9
17.4
Cow 26
33.2
31.7
16.6
33.2
25.8
30.3
34.8
24. 1
36.2
38.2
37.2
31.4
31.1
Cow 27
20.5
20.5
20.0
21.5
16.4
16.4
19.5
22.5
21.8
22.8
18.6
16.8
19.8
Cow 28
16.8
18.2
16.8
18.2
16.4
15. 1
16.4
15.9
20.0
17.7
20.5
12.3
17.0
Averai
21.3
20.7
19.4
22.5
17.8
18.8
20.8
21.7
22. 1
22.5
22.3
16.2
20.5
31
-------
APPENDIX III
MILK PRODUCTION OF COWS AT CAMP 16 - LITERS
(Before moving to Camp 16)
Date Cow 2 Cow 16 Cow 22 Average
D-24
D-23
D-22
D-21
D-20
D-19
D-18
D-17
D-16
D-15
D-14
D-13
11.3
18.6
19.1
17.7
16.8
15.0
19.1
15.2
20.5
21.8
17.3
20.0
20.9
15.9
21.4
22.3
16.8
16.8
20.9
16.4
17.7
20.9
19.5
18.2
21.4
20.0
22.3
23.6
20.5
20.0
21.8
21.4
19.1
23.2
22.7
15.9
17.9
18.2
20.9
21.2
18.0
17.3
20.6
17.7
19.1
22.0
19.8
18.0
Average 17.7 19-0 21.0 19.2
32
-------
APPENDIX IV
MILK PRODUCTION OF COWS AT STATION F-6 - LITERS
(While at F-6)
Date Cow 1 Cow 11 Cow 13 Cow 21 Cow 23 Cow 29 Average
D-ll
D-10
D-9
D-8
D-7
D-6
D-5
D-4
D-3
D-2
D-l
D-day
D+l
Average
17.5
13.9
12.1
13.2
14.6
13.2
12.8
12.8
14.8
12.3
13.7
12.3
15.0
13.7
18.1
18.7
17.8
20.5
20.0
19.1
16.4
17.8
19.6
16. 1
1.8.1
21.6
15.0
18.4
6.9
15.4
15.0
13.2
15.2
12.8
12.5
12.8
12.8
12. 1
12.8
15.9
13.7
13.2
13.4
16.1
15.2
15.0
15.4
13.7
14.6
14.6
15.9
13.2
14.3
10.9
12.9
14.2
15.9
17.3
18.7
19.6
20.9
18. 1
17.8
18.7
17.8
15.7
16.9
19.6
17.3
18.0
13.4
15.7
17.3
16.6
16.4
14.6
17.8
16.9
16.9
12.9
16.4
15.2
14. 1
15.7
14. 1
15.9
15.9
16.9
17.3
15.4
15.4
15.4
16.4
13.7
16.4
15.9
14.6
15.6
33
-------
APPENDIX V
MILK PRODUCTION OF COWS AT STATION N-6 - LITERS
(While at N-6)
Date Cow 8 Cow 24 Cow 25 Cow 26 Cow 27 Cow 28 Average
D-ll
D-10
D-9
D-8
D-7
D-6
D-5
D-4
D-3
D-2
D-l
D-day
D+l
Average
14.6
13.7
15.2
13.2
15.9
15.0
15.4
14.8
15.9
15.4
12.9
10.7
9.2
14.0
18.7
16.4
19.6
20.9
21.9
29.8
20.3
21. 1
21.1
23.4
16.6
11.6
14.3
19.7
14.1
13.2
15.4
15.6
16.9
16.9
15.9
17.3
16.1
15.5
15.4
11.9
10.7
15.0
30.0
22.9
26.4
24.6
21.9
24.6
27.3
25.9
31.4
26.1
20.9
26. 1
22.8
25.4
19.3
18.9
20.5
21.1
22.7
22.7
21.9
21.4
22.7
22.4
18.7
18.7
16.9
20.6
11.6
13.2
15.9
15.4
18.7
15.4
16.4
15.0
15.7
12. 1
10.9
7.7
6.6
13.4
18. 1
16.4
18.7
18.7
19.6
20.9
19.6
19.1
20.5
19.1
15.9
14.6
13.7
18. 1
34
-------
APPENDIX VI
MILK PRODUCTION OF COWS AT CAMP 16 - LITERS
(While at Camp 16)
Date
D-10
D-9
D-8
D-7
D-6
D-5
D-4
D-3
D-2
D-l
D-day
P+l
Average
Cow 2
20.5
19.1
20.5
20.0
19-6
20.5
18.1
20.0
20.2
18.1
19.6
18.4
19.6
Cow 16
16.4
10.7
15.9
17.3
17.3
18.1
18. 1
19.1
17.8
16.9
19.8
20.0
17.3
Cow 22
17.9
16.9
18.7
18.7
19.6
16.9
20.0
19.3
19.6
19.6
21.5
9.2
18.2
Average
18.3
15.6
18.4
18.7
18.8
18.5
18.7
19.5
19.2
18.2
20.3
15.9
18.3
35
-------
Date
APPENDIX VII
MILK PRODUCTION OF COWS AT STATION F-6 - LITERS
(After return to dairy barn, Well 3, NTS)
Cow 1 Cow 11 Cow 13 Cow 21 Cow 23 Cow 29 Average
D+3
D+4
D+5
D+6
D+7
D+8
D+9
D+10
D+ll
D+12
D+13
D+14
D+15
D+16
D+17
D+18
D+19
Average
15. 1
9.6
13.6
15.9
15.0
16.8
12.3
13.6
13.7
13.7
15.0
15. 1
15. 1
15.0
15.9
15.9
15.0
j 14.5
22.3
21.9
20.0
20.0
17.7
19.1
17.5
22. 1
15.9
16.4
21.9
20.9
20.5
19.5
20.9
20.2
19.5
19.9
16.4
16.8
16.8
18.2
17.7
17.3
17.3
17.3
16.4
16.8
18.6
18.6
17.3
20.5
18.2
15.9
17.3
17.5
17.7
17.3
16.8
17.3
18.2
15.9
17.3
13.3
18.2
17.3
17.3
17.3
20.0
18. 2
17.3
20.5
19.1
17.6
19.7
19.1
20.0
19.1
19.5
16.8
20.7
19.1
20.5
17.7
18.6
18.6
18.2
21.9
20.7
20.7
21.7
19.6
13.9
15.9
13.7
15.0
17.3
13.6
17. 3
16.4
15.9
15.9
15.9
15.9
15.9
17.3
20.5
16.8
17.7
16.2
17.5
16.8
16.8
17.6
17.6
16.6
17.1
17.0
16.8
16.3
17.9
17.7
17.8
18.7
18.9
18.7
18.4
17.6
36
-------
APPENDIX VIII
MILK PRODUCTION OF COWS AT STATION N-6 - LITERS
(After return to dairy barn, Well 3, NTS)
Date Cow 8 Cow 24 Cow 25 Cow 26 Cow 27. Cow 28 Average
D+3
D+4
D+5
D+6
D+7
D+8
D+9
D+10
D+ll
D+12
D+13
D+14
D+15
D+16
D+17
D+18
D+19
Average
10.5
11.9
12.8
12.1
20.9
13.2
15.9
15.9
15.9
13.6
15.9
16.8
16.4
16.4
16.4
13.6
16.6
! 15.0
18.6
18.9
17.7
17.3
19.5
18.2
17.3
16.4
18.2
17.7
19.5
18.6
18.6
19.1
19.1
20.2
20.5
18.6
15.9
15.0
15. 1
15.9
13.6
12.7
13.6
17.7
15.1
15.1
16.4
15.9
15. 1
19.5
15.0
15.0
15.9
15.4
21.8
25.2
26.4
28.9
30.0
27.7
29.1
30. 5
29.5
28. 1
23.7
29. 1
27.7
36.4
33.2
32.3
35. -0
29.1
18.6
22.1
16.8
19.1
20.0
15.9
17.3
20.5
19.5
20.2
20.0
20.0
18.2
12.7
20.7
20.0
20.0
18.9
8.2
8.2
6.9
8.4
17.7
8.4
10.0
10.5
10.0
9.1
10.9
11.4
10.0
13.2
9.5
12. 1
9.1
10.2
15.6
16.9
16.0
17.0
20.3
16.0
17.2
18.6
18.0
17.3
17.7
18.6
17.7
19.6
19.0
18.9
19.5
17.9
37
-------
APPENDIX IX
MILK PRODUCTION OF COWS AT CAMP 16 - LITERS
(After return to dairy barn, Well 3, NTS)
Date
D+3
D+4
D+5
D+6
D+7
D+ 8
D+9
D+10
D+ll
D+12
D+13
D+14
D+15
D+16
D+17
D+18
D+19
Average
Cow 2
20.5
25.2
18.0
21.4
20.5
20.5
20.5
20.0
21.4
19-5
22.3
20.5
20.9
20.9
21.8
21.4
19.5
20.9
Cow 16
20.0
19.1
18.2
17.3
19.5
18.2
17.7
18.6
16.4
18.2
19.1
16.4
17.3
18.6
19.1
21.4
20.5
18.6
Cow 22
20.9
20.7
18.2
20.9
21.8
18.2
18.2
20.5
20.5
20.5
19-5
11.8
12.7
17.3
18.2
18.0
17.7
18.6
Average
20.5
21.7
18. 1
19.9
20.6
19.0
18.8
19.7
19.4
19.4
20. 3
16.2
17.0
19.0
19.7
20.3
19.2
19.3
38
-------
APPENDIX X
BACKGROUND DOSE RATE MEASUREMENTS
MADE ON D-l USING AN E-500B
LOCATION
Gamma Dose Rate
(mR/hr)
Surface
Station F-6, Inner Stake 1
Inner Stake 3
Inner Stake 5
Inner Stake 7
Station N-6, Inner Stake 1
Inner Stake 3
Inner Stake 5
Inner Stake 7
Camp 16, Inner Stake 1
Inner Stake 3
Inner Stake 5
Inner Stake 7
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.035
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.05
0.035
0.03
0.03
0.03
39
-------
APPENDIX XI
DOSE RATE MEASUREMENTS MADE
ON D-DAY USING AN E-500B
LOCATION
Station F-6, Outer Stake 1
Outer Stake 2
Outer Stake 3
Outer Stake 4
Outer Stake 5
Outer Stake 6
Outer Stake 7
Outer Stake 8
Inner Stake 1
Inner Stake 2
Inner Stake 3
Inner Stake 4
Inner Stake 5
Inner Stake 6
Inner Stake 7
Inner Stake 8
Station N-6, Outer Stake 1
Outer Stake 2
Inner Stake 1
Inner Stake 2
Station N-8, Outer Stake 1
Outer Stake 2
Outer Stake 3
Outer Stake 4
Outer Stake 5
Outer Stake 6
Outer Stake 7
Outer Stake 8
Inner Stake 1
Inner Stake 2
Inner Stake 3
TIME
1807
1809
1810
1819
1822
1823
1825
1827
1832
1835
1836
1838
1840
1842
1843
1844
1733
1736
1732
1737
1912
1913
1914
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921
1922
1923
Gamma Dose Rate
(mR/hr)
Surface
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.05
0. 10
0.09
0.09
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.04
0.02
0. 10
0.02
0.02
0.05
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.02
0.04
3' Above Ground
0.09
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0. 10
0.09
0. 10
0.04
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.04
0.03
0.06
0.02
0.02
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.02
0.03
40
-------
APPENDIX XI (Cont)
MEASUREMENTS ON HAY
LOCATION
Station F-6, West Edge
of Stack
North Edge
East Edge
South Edge
Top of Stack
Station N-8, West Edge
of Stack
North Edge
East Edge
South Edge
Top of Stack
BALED
Time
1846
1848
1850
1845
1849
1924
1926
1928
1929
1927
(mR/hr)
0.04
0.05
0.04
0.05
0.06
0.02
0.01
0.04
0.03
0.03
LOOSE
Time
1852
1851
1930
1933
1932
1934
1931
(mR/hr)
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.05
0.03
41
-------
APPENDIX XII
DOSE RATE MEASUREMENTS MADE
ON D+l USING AN E-500B
LOCATION
Station F-6, Outer Stake 1
Outer Stake 2
Outer Stake 3
Outer Stake 4
Outer Stake 5
Outer Stake 6
Outer Stake 7
Outer Stake 8
Inner Stake 1
Inner Stake 2
Inner Stake 3
Inner Stake 4
Inner Stake 5
Inner Stake 6
Inner Stake 7
Inner Stake 8
TIME
1201
1202
1205
1207
1208
1209
1211
1212
1213
1214
1215
1216
1217
1218
1219
1220
Gamma Dose Rate
(mR/hr)
Surface
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.04
0.04
0.04
0.02
0.04
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.02
3' Above Ground
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.04
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.04
0. 04
0.03
0.02
0.04
MEASUREMENTS ON HAY
LOCATION
Station F-6, West Edge
of Stack
North Edge
East Edge
South Edge
Top of Stack
BALED
Time
1229
1228
1228
1229
1230
(mR/hr)
0.05
0.04
0.03
0.04
0.05
LOOSE
Time
1227
1225
1226
1226
1227
(mR/hr)
0.03
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.04
42
-------
DISTRIBUTION
1 - 20 SWRHL, Las Vegas, Nevada
21 James E. Reeves, Manager, NVOO/AEC, Las Vegas, Nevada
22 Robert H. Thalgott, NVOO/AEC, Las Vegas, Nevada
23 Chief, NOB/DASA, NVOO/AEC, Las Vegas, Nevada
24 Donald Edwards, Safety Evaluation Div. , NVOO/AEC, Las Vegas
25 Peter A. Morris, DOS, USAEC, Washington, D. C.
26 John S. Kelly, DPNE, USAEC, Washington, D. C.
27 - 28 Philip W. Allen, ARFRO/ESSA, NVOO, Las Vegas, Nevada
29 G. D. Ferber, ARL, ESSA, Washington, D. C.
30 Ernest C. Anderson, DRH, PHS, Washington, D. C.
31 James G. Terrill, Jr., DRH, PHS, Washington, D. C.
32 Donald J. Nelson, TOB, DRH, PHS, Washington, D. C.
33 Bernd Kahn, DRH, RATSEC, Cincinnati, Ohio
34 Arve H. Dahl, DRH, PHS, Rockville, Maryland
35 Raymond Moore, DRH, PHS, Region VII, Dallas, Texas
36 Northeastern Radiological Health Lab. , Winchester, Mass.
37 Southeastern Radiological Health Lab. , Montgomery, Ala.
38 William C. King, LRL, Mercury, Nevada
39 John W. Gofman, LRL, Livermore, California
40 William E. Ogle, LASL, Los Alamos, New Mexico
41 Ed Fleming, LRL, Livermore, California
42 Harry S. Jordan, LASL, Los Alamos, New Mexico
43 Robert H. Goeckermann, LRL, Livermore, California
44 Victor M. Milligan, REECo. , Mercury, Nevada
45 Clinton S. Maupin, REECo. , Mercury, Nevada
46 Brig. Gen. D. L. Crowson, DMA, USAEC,, Washington, D. C.
47 - 50 Donald Hendricks, Safety Evaluation Div. , NVOO/AEC, Las Vegas
51 Mail & Records, NVOO/AEC, Las Vegas, Nevada
------- |