SWRHL~36r
STATUS OF THE NEVADA TEST SITE
EXPERIMENTAL FARM
Summary Report for July 1964 - December 1965
by
Richard L. Douglas
Bioenvironmental Research Program
Southwestern Radiological Health Laboratory
U. S. Public Health Service
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
Las Vegas, Nevada
January 17, 1967
This work performed under Memorandum of
Understanding (No. SF 54 373)
for the
U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
-------
SWRHL-36r
STATUS OF THE NEVADA TEST SITE
EXPERIMENTAL FARM
Summary Report for July 1964 - December 1965
by
Richard L. Douglas
Bioenvironmental Research Program
Southwestern Radiological Health Laboratory
U. S. Public Health Service
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare
Las Vegas; Nevada
Copy No. 55
Donald Hendricks
Safety Evaluation Division
NVOO/AEC
Las Vegas, Nevada
January 17, 1967
This work performed under Memorandum of
Understanding (No. SF 54 373)
for the
U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE EXPERIMENTAL FARM
FACILITY 5
A. Specific Site Characteristics 5
B. Cultivated Area 5
C. Well and Reservoir 6
D. Irrigation System 9
E. Other Agricultural Equipment 11
F. Laboratory and Animal Facilities 12
G. Permanent Research and Support Equipment 14
III. AGRONOMY PRACTICES 16
IV. RESEARCH PROJECTS - PAST AND FUTURE 20
REFERENCES
APPENDIX I PRECIPITATION DATA
APPENDIX II IRRIGATION DATA
APPENDIX III FERTILIZER APPLICATIONS
DISTRIBUTION
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. Summer weather conditions in Area 15, NTS
(four-year average). 6
Table 2. Average reservoir leakage losses. 8
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. Location of PHS facilities on the Nevada Test
Site. 3
Figure 2. Plan of experimental farm. 10
Figure 3. Area plan of the experimental farm building
complex. 13
ii
-------
I. INTRODUCTION
On July 1, 1963, the U. S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) awarded
a contract to the U. S. Public Health Service, Southwestern Radio-
logical Health Laboratory (SWRHL) to study the transport of radio-
iodine from the environment to man. The most pressing problem
was the determination of the passage of radioiodine through the air-
forage-dairy cow-milk-man food chain. In order to initiate this pro-
gram, the Bioenvironmental Research Program (BRP) was established
within SWRHL for the sole purpose of developing a field and laboratory
research program which would answer the questions posed by the AEC.
In addition to this research on radioiodine, the Research Branch of
the Division of Radiological Health, U. S. Public Health Service, was
seeking answers to questions about the uptake by plants of long-lived
fission products and neutron activation products in fallout and subse-
quent passage of these products through man's food chains. Since
much of the data and information collected in one of these programs
would also be required by the other, it seemed logical to combine the
two to avoid unnecessary duplication of equipment, facilities, and
effort. Therefore, the Aged Radionuclide Program was formed as a
sub-section of the BRP with Public Health Service funding. The Aged
Radionuclide Program officially came into being on July 1, 1965,
although its requirements had been considered earlier along with
those for the BRP.
Because an extensive effort was to be devoted to the passage of radio-
iodine through the human food chain, and because this research was
to be conducted under field conditions, an experimental farm facility
was required. The Nevada Test Site (NTS), with its sources of
-------
radioactive materials resulting from various nuclear detonations and
tests, seemed to be an excellent area in which to develop this experi-
mental farm. The original concept of the farm included about 30 acres
of irrigated land, facilities for a 24-cow dairy herd, and a laboratory
building.
Criteria for the farm site were drawn up and the search for a specific
location on the NTS was begun in 1963. Personnel from several
organizations provided helpful consultation and advice regarding site
selection. These organizations included the U. S. Weather Bureau,
the U. S. Geological Survey, the Clark County Agricultural Extension
Service of the University of Nevada, and Reynolds Electric and
Engineering Co. (REECo), the prime contractor at the NTS. Six
different areas were evaluated in terms of the following criteria:
1. A land area of about 30 acres
2. An adequate and dependable water supply for irrigation of
this acreage
3. Accessability
4. Availability of electrical power
5. Construction cost (largely influenced by 2, 3, and 4)
6. The presence of significant levels of fallout activity which
would allow field research by the Aged Radionuclide Program
7. Soil type and growing season which would permit a simulation
of current farming practices in the southwestern United States
One site was finally selected as providing the best compromise with
all these criteria. This site was located at Well UE 1 5d in Area 15
near the north end of the NTS (see Figure 1). Although some problems
were anticipated in developing the well for our needs, it seemed to be
-------
I Nuclear Rccket Development Station
n* p^ir
I Tlpplpoh f
\ Spring /'.
SCALE IN FEET
1 | I
IO,OOO 0 10,000 2O,000 30,000
Figure 1. Location of PHS facilities on the Nevada Test Site.
-------
the best overall choice among the water supplies available. A paved
road approached to within one-quarter mile of the site, and an
electrical power line was located within one mile of the site. Temper-
ature data collected over several years indicated that the growing
season was adequate for forage and grain crops. This site, located
about three miles downwind from the Sedan crater, was contaminated
with considerable radioactivity from this 1962 Plowshare event.
Design and construction of the facility began in the spring of 1964.
The land clearing and reservoir construction was completed and the
first crop was planted that fall. However, the laboratory and dairy
facilities were not completed in time for occupancy before the end of
this report period.
Seventeen Holstein cows were purchased in April 1964 for use in field
studies that spring. Since the Experimental Farm -was not completed
then, they were housed in a temporary barn and corral at Well 3B,
NTS, (see Figure 1), and fed forage purchased on a contract basis.
-------
II. DESCRIPTION OF THE EXPERIMENTAL FARM FACILITY
A. Specific Site Characteristics
The site is located on a gently sloping alluvial fan in a high desert
valley surrounded by mountains on the east, north, and west. The
average elevation is 4560 feet and the average land slope is 2-4% to
the southeast. The soil is a gravelly sandy loam with some cobbles
and stones scattered throughout. The area has a dense desert cover
of natural vegetation, predominately black brush (Coleogyne ramosis -
sima), wolf berry (Lycium andersonii), small rabbit brush (Chryso-
thamnus viscidiflorus), desert needle grass (Stipa speciosa), four-
wing saltbush (Atriplex canescens), and Indian rice grass (Oryzopsis
hymenoides).
Prevailing winds during the spring, summer and fall are from the
south-southwest during the daytime. Northerly drainage winds pre-
dominate during summer nights. During the winter, the winds are
predominately from the north with some tendency to reverse during
daytime, but less so than in summer. General weather conditions in
Area 15, averaged over a four-year period, are presented in Table 1.
B. Cultivated Area
A roughly square area of about 29 acres lying to the southeast of the
well was graded to remove native vegetation and to smooth a few small
natural drainage channels. The contractor was asked to disturb the
soil as little as possible consistent with achieving the desired results.
Some of the larger rocks were removed with a tractor and front-end
loader. The clearing job was completed about the end of August 1964,
and the area was fenced with woven wire fence and three strands of
barbed wire on steel posts.
-------
Table 1. Summer weather conditions in Area 15, NTS (four-year
average).
Month Apr May Jun Jul Aag Sep Qct
Average Wind Speed; (miles per hour)
Average Speed 10 9 9 9 8 7 8
Relative Humidity: (percent)
Mean maximum 51 44 35 31 40 50 53
Mean minimum 11 10 9 8 11 14 17
Temperature: (degrees Fahrenheit)
Mean maximum 72 76 89 95 92 87 72
Mean minimum 43 47 58 64 62 55 47
Average annual precipitation: 4. 5 inches
C. Well and Reservoir
Well UE 15d was originally drilled as an exploratory water well. It
had a seven-inch (outside diameter) casing from the ground surface
to a depth of 1784 feet. A 4-1/2 inch lining started at 1667 feet and
went down to 5400 feet. The static water level was at 670 feet, with
80% of the water coming from an aquifer between 5200 and 5300 feet.
The well was test pumped at a rate of 78 gallons per minute.
When the well was drilled, considerable trouble was encountered with
lost circulation of drilling mud because the casing was ruptured at
several points. In an attempt to remedy this situation, large quan-
tities of cottonseed hulls, redwood bark, cement, ground rubber tires
and cellophane were pumped down the well to try to plug the ruptures.
This material was to be flushed out when the well was pumped, but
REECo engineers were afraid that it would ruin a pump. Therefore
-------
they recommended developing the well by jetting it with an air com-
pressor to clean the well out and test its capacity.
Accordingly, a compressor was set up and jetting began in May, 1964.
The flow rate ranged from 100 to 150 gpm. After several weeks of
testing, some drilling material was still being flushed out. The
engineers concluded that so much of this material had been injected
that it would probably never be completely flushed out. However,
since compressor jetting would not be a practical method for routinely
producing water, they decided to install a special pump designed to
handle the drilling material.
A 73-stage Byron Jackson submersible pump (Model D225B) with
a 180 horsepower, 1040 volt motor was installed at the 1700-foot
level during September 1964. This pump has a rating of 200 gpm
at 2000-foot head. Although this pump was designed to handle small
amounts of this type of material, the amount pumped out exceeded
the capacity of the pump and caused pump failure on two occasions.
The pump was replaced in June and again in August 1965.
A flow rate of 550 gpm for about eight hours per day were desired
for the irrigation system. Since a maximum flow rate of about 200 gpm
was anticipated from the well, a storage reservoir was necessary to
keep an adequate water supply available for the irrigation pump. A
reservoir of about one million gallons capacity was designed and con-
structed in the summer of 1964. The reservoir, of trapezoidal cross
section, was approximately 120 feet square at the top with a design
water depth of 13 feet. The porosity of the soil at this site required
sealing the sides and bottom of the reservoir. Bentonite clay was
used as a sealant.
-------
The reservoir was filled in the fall of 1964, just prior to the planting
of the first crop. After filling, it was apparent that the reservoir
leaked badly and it was doubtful if an adequate water supply for corp
irrigation could be maintained during the summer months. In the
spring of 1965, the water in the reservoir was pumped out and the
sides were coated with cement grout applied over 2-inch mesh screen.
The bottom of the reservoir was not grouted because the REECo
engineers felt that the thick layer of bentonite on the bottom (which
had washed off the sides) had sealed it. However, the leakage losses
•were still apparent after the grouting.
Data collection was started in June of 1965 so that the actual reservoir
losses could be determined. Since only approximate values were
desired, the leakage losses were calculated as the difference bet-ween
what was pumped into and out of the reservoir during a given period
of time. If there was a difference in the water level in the reservoir
between the beginning and end of the period, this was accounted for
in the calculations.
The following table indicates average losses over periods of approx-
imately one month duration.
Table 2. Average reservoir leakage losses.
Period Covered in 1965 Losses in Gallons per day
June 14 to July 14 60,000
July 14 to August 13 44, 500
August 13 to September 20* 32,000
September 20 to October 20 38,000
October 20 to November 8 33,000
November 8 to December 7 26, 000
*Reservoir nearly empty 30% of the period due to failure of the well
pump.
-------
The trend of the data indicates a substantial decrease in losses due
to leakage. This probably resulted from a gradual expansion of the
bentonite with the passage of time, which provided a better seal of
the bottom of the reservoir.
D. Irrigation System
In the original planning for the irrigation system both sprinkler and
surface flooding methods were considered. A sprinkler system was
chosen because: (1) the soil is too porous for a flooding system to
operate efficiently, (2) a flooding system would require extensive
grading and land leveling, and (3) a sprinkler system allows greater
flexibility.
The irrigation system was installed in the fall of 1964. It consisted
of a centrifugal pump mounted on the north bank of the reservoir,
a 900-foot main line, and sixteen 767-foot laterals connected to the
main line at right angles (see Figure 2). This system provided irri-
gation coverage of approximately 16. 5 acres.
The pump (Peerless Mfg. Co., Type "A" Size 6A-13) delivers 550 gpm
at 140 feet of head and is powered by a 30 hp - 1750 rpm - 480 volt
electric motor. At the pump, a water meter (Sparling Model CF-115)
indicates both the flow rate and the total gallons of water which have
passed through the meter. The main line is 6-inch O.D. , 12 gauge
cement-coated steel pipe, buried 18 inches below grade. The laterals
are 3-inch O.D. , 12 gauge, asphalt dipped, steel pipe, installed on
the ground surface and spaced approximately 60 feet apart. Each
lateral has 20 Rainbird Model 40B sprinkler heads which at 50 psi
deliver 7. 2 gpm and cover a circle of about 40 feet. The heads
are spaced approximately 40 feet apart and are mounted 21 inches
-------
7Q
e
(V
3
O
i-n
fD
X
"0
CD
TRANSFORMER STATION
r
1 LATERAL NO.S
i
SCALE: i" = 200' >,.
^
BOUNDARY OF FENCED AREA-
-------
above the lateral on 3/4" galvanized pipe risers. The water flow
through each lateral is controlled by a gate valve located just off
the main line.
The system was originally installed with every second lateral 20 feet
shorter than the adjacent one and the heads on alternate laterals
staggered. Theoretically, this method of spacing should have given
optimum distribution of the water. However, in our case it did not,
as there were areas in the middle of the field which did not receive
adequate water. In addition, the edges of the field were ragged and
hard to farm. Therefore, in late 1965 the short laterals were
lengthened 20 feet so that the heads on all the laterals are now the
same distance from the main line.
As originally constructed, the first three laterals joined the main
line at the base of the reservoir bank. This setup did not leave room
to turn farm machinery without running up on the bank. To correct
this situation, in December of 1965 the first 20-foot section of each
of these three laterals was buried to allow turning space.
E. Other Agricultural Equipment
The following basic pieces of farm machinery were purchased during
the summer of 1964:
Tractor - Massey-Ferguson Model 35
Grain drill - Massey-Ferguson Model 33
Forage chopper - Massey-Ferguson Model Super 60
Self-unloading wagon - Gehl Model 85
Disc - Massey-Ferguson Model 25
Manure spreader - Massey-Ferguson Model 18
Manure loader - Massey-Ferguson Model 38
Rear-mounted scraper blade - Massey-Ferguson Model 17
Fertilizer spreader - Lely Whirlwind
11
-------
F. Laboratory and Animal Facilities
The original concept of the building complex included a 40'x 90' labor-
atory building with milking parlor; an attached 30'x 48' holding barnj
a 120'x 130' corral with feed bunks, water tanks, shade, and loading
chute; a 26'x 60' hay storage shed and a 26'x 60" machine shed. Such
a complex was tob expensive, however, and in the final design the
laboratory building was reduced to 40'x 74' and the holding barn and
machine shed were deleted.
Sierra Construction Company began construction of the building com-
plex in May 1965. Figure 3 shows an area plan of the building com-
plex.
Disposal of the milk from the herd of 24 cows presented a problem.
Government regulations and possible radioactive contamination pro-
hibited human consumption. Disposal to a septic tank was judged
undesirable because of the possible adverse effects the milk might
have on the biochemical activity in the tank. It was decided to use
a liquid manure handling system to take care of both the milk and the
manure which was washed from the barn. A commercially-available
liquid manure system designed especially for dairy operations (Easy-
Way Disposal System, manufactured by the Vaughn Co. , Inc.) was
chosen. This system consists of an 18, 000-gallon underground con-
crete tank which collects the manure and milk. A clock-operated
agitator in the tank keeps the solids in suspension, and a special
chopper pump empties the tank into a 1100-gallon tank wagon. The
tank wagon has a spreader with which the contents can be emptied on
the field.
12
-------
Figure 3. Area plan of the experimental farm building complex.
13
-------
G. Permanent Research and Support Equipment
It was recognized from the beginning of this research project that
weather conditions affect the passage of radioiodine through the food
chain, particularly in the deposition of an aerosol on the ground or
crops. Therefore, it was desired to have a complete record of the
micrometeorology of the Experimental Farm. An agreement was
made with the U. S. Weather Bureau personnel assigned to the AEC
Nevada Operations Office to obtain such a record.
The approach used was to install two permanent instrumentation
towers in the crop area, from which data could be transmitted by
line to readout and recording equipment in the telemetry room of
the laboratory. During 1965, a 30-meter tower was erected at the
midpoint of the No. 6 lateral, a 10-meter tower at the midpoint of
the No. 12 lateral, and two electrical outlet boxes were installed on
each of these laterals (see Figure 2). Portable one-meter towers
can be plugged into the outlet boxes and placed anywhere in the crop
area. Sensors on the towers are capable of making the following
measurements:
30-meter tower
Wind speed and direction at one, ten and thirty meters
Ambient temperature at one meter
Temperature difference between one and ten meters
Temperature difference between one and thirty meters
Dew point at one meter
Soil temperature two inches below surface
10-meter tower
Wind speed and direction at one and ten meters
Ambient temperature at one meter
Temperature difference between one and ten meters
14
-------
One-meter towers (portable)
Wind speed and direction
Ambient temperature
Dew point
Soil temperature
At the end of 1965, the meteorology towers and associated power and
telemetry lines were the only equipment permanently installed in the
field. Installation of the system was essentially complete, but prob-
lems were still being encountered with the telemetry equipment.
Other meteorological equipment was set up near the laboratory to
measure insolation, precipitation, and evaporation rate. Precipita-
tion data from October 1, 1964 through December 1965 are tabulated
in Appendix I. Insolation and evaporation data for this reporting
period have not been completely processed.
15
-------
III. AGRONOMY PRACTICES
For convenience of operating the farm machinery, the entire strip
of land between adjacent irrigation laterals was planted to the same
crop. The laterals were numbered one through sixteen, with lateral
No. 1 being the northernmost one. (See Figure 2.) The area between
adjacent laterals is called a land, and the lands are numbered as
shown. Lands Nos. 1 and 17, being on the ends of the system, are
slightly smaller than the others. Each of the 15 full-sized lands
(Nos. 2 through 16) is about one acre in area.
The cropping pattern used is based on the capacity of the irrigation
system. The pump was designed to provide a sufficient flow rate
and pressure to handle a set of four laterals at once, i. e. , laterals 1-4,
5-8, etc. Each crop type is planted in adjacent lands which are irri-
gated simultaneously by one set of laterals.
When development of the farm site was begun in the spring of 1964,
it was hoped that construction would be finished in time to allow plant-
ing a fall crop in September. However, due to various delays we
were not able to begin planting until late October. The local Agricul-
tural Extension Service agent gave advice pertaining to suitable forage
varieties, seeding rates, and fertilizer application rates for this area.
Because of the late season, he advised seeding Brevor wheat and
Alpine barley at the rate of 100 pounds of seed per acre. Hopefully,
these varieties would germinate and become established before cold
weather set in, and then make good growth in the spring. He also
advised that we apply 100 pounds each of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus
(P2 O5 ) per acre.
16
-------
The phosphorus fertilizer was applied on October 21 and 22, 1964,
with the grain drill, the only piece of equipment available at that
time. Treble superphosphate (45% PzOs) was used as a source of
phosphorus. An application of 220 pounds of fertilizer per acre
provided the desired 100 pounds of P2O5 per acre. The entire field
was disced to cover the fertilizer on October 27.
On October 28, the lower half of the field (lands 9-17) was irrigated
with 1/4 inch of water prior to planting. On the same day, lands 1-4
were seeded to Ramona wheat (Brevor wheat seed was not available
locally) and fertilized with 220 pounds of urea (45% nitrogen) per
acre. This application rate gave 100 pounds of N per acre. Lands 5-8
were seeded to Alpine barley and fertilized with nitrogen at the same
rate as lands 1-4. On October 29, the area seeded the previous day
was irrigated with 1/2 inch of water. Lands 9-12 were seeded to
barley and lands 12-17 seeded to wheat, and then fertilized with
220 pounds of urea (100 pounds of N) per acre.
The seed planted in the fall of 1964 did not provide a good crop in
1965. Apparently, the main reason for the failure was the fact that
the seed was planted so late that seedlings did not become well estab-
lished before winter. Consequently, the entire field was replanted
in the spring of 1965. On May 27, the upper half of the field (lands 1-9)
was seeded with 100 pounds per acre of Alpine barley. At the same
time, 220 pounds of urea (100 pounds of N) were applied per acre.
The lower half of the field (lands 10-17) was fertilized at the same
rate and seeded with 30 pounds per acre of Piper Sudan grass.
A heavy infestation of aphids was noticed in mid-June. On June 28,
the entire field was sprayed with 4-1/2 gallons of 56. 5% Malathion,
applied at the rate of one quart per acre.
17
-------
Approximately 32 tons of surplus ammonium nitrate (33. 5% nitrogen)
was obtained from REECo for use as a top dressing. On July 13, 1965,
the entire field was top dressed with 340 pounds of ammonium nitrate
(110 pounds of N) per acre. On August 13, the Sudan grass was
fertilized with 85 pounds of nitrogen per acre, and on August 18 the
barley was fertilized with 105 pounds of nitrogen per acre. On
September 12, the Sudan grass was fertilized with an additional
50 pounds of nitrogen per acre, applied as urea.
The Sudan grass planted on the lower half of the field germinated
well and produced a good stand. However^ the barley planted at the
same time on the upper half of the field did not make a good crop.
The exact reason or reasons for this poor crop is not known, but
apparently it was due to at least two factors. It seemed to have been
damaged more by the aphids, and was also hurt by the lack of water
when the well pump failed in June.
On September 16, 1965, the barley in the first nine lands was disced
under. This area was then fertilized with 300 pounds of treble super-
phosphate (135 pounds P2O5) per acre and seeded with a mixture of
Kanota oats and Lahontan alfalfa. The oats were seeded at the rate
of 35 pounds per acre, and the alfalfa at 25 pounds per acre. Thirty
pounds of nitrogen per acre were applied at the time of planting.
On September 25, the Sudan grass in lands 10-17 was fertilized
with 25 pounds of nitrogen per acre.
During October the Sudan grass was harvested with the forage chopper.
An amount that the dairy cows could eat was chopped each day, and
this "green chop" was taken to the barn at Well 3B and fed to the
cows. About nine tons of green chop were cut from lands 10-13
18
-------
(approximately four acres). Lands 14-17 were not harvested because
they were heavily infested with Russian thistle.
When the green chopping was completed in late October, the Sudan
stubble in lands 10-13 was disced three times and the area was seeded
to rye grain. The area was fertilized prior to planting with 200 pounds
of treble superphosphate (90 pounds of P2O5) and 300 pounds of
ammonium nitrate (100 pounds of N) per acre. On November 4, rye
grain was seeded at the rate of 100 pounds per acre. An additional
55 pounds of urea (25 pounds of N) per acre was applied at the time
of planting. The last four lands (14-17) were disced and left fallow.
Appendix II shows the amount of water applied by date and the total
amount during the report period. It should be recognized that all
areas under irrigation did not receive exactly the amount of water
stated. Some of the factors which cause non-uniform water applica-
tion are evaporation losses, wind drift of the spray, damaged or
improperly adjusted sprinkler heads, irregular spacing of laterals
and heads, and leaks in the system.
The types and amounts of fertilizer applied by date and the total
amount applied during the report period are summarized in Appendix III.
19
-------
IV. RESEARCH PROJECTS - PAST AND FUTURE
Only one major experiment, designated Project Hayseed, was per-
formed at the Experimental Farm during the reporting period. On
October 4, 1965, a diatomaceous earth aerosol tagged with J 3 11 was
released over a section of growing Sudan grass, a stack of spread
hay, and a stack of spread green chop. The growing Sudan grass
was cut as green chop, and each of the three types of contaminated
forage were fed to groups of lactating dairy cows. An additional
group of cows was placed in the aerosol cloud for an inhalation study.
The levels of l 31I in the milk were related to l 31I concentrations in
forage and air. Further details of this study have been published in
References 1 and 2.
Two major experiments are planned for 1966. In the early summer,
a dry aerosol tagged with 131I is to be released over a mixed stand
of oats and alfalfa (Project Alfalfa) in a study very similar to Project
Hayseed. A study is planned for late summer where a 13ll tagged
solution will be sprayed over a portion of the field to simulate the
"rainout" of radioiodine (Project Rainout).
Experiments will be started within the Aged Radionuclide Program to
study the movement in the soil and the uptake by plants of the long-
lived radionuclides from Sedan fallout. An auxilliary irrigation system
is planned which will allow irrigation of small plots of undisturbed
soil. These micro plots will be used for experiments and pilot studies
which could not conveneintly be conducted in the main crop area.
20
-------
REFERENCES
1. Earth, D.S., nl 31I Dairy Cow Uptake Studies Using a Synthetic
Dry Aerosol", SWRHL-28r, to be published.
2. Earth, D.S. , and Seal, M. , "Radioiodine Transport Through the
Ecosystem, Air-Forage-Cow-Milk Using a Synthetic Dry Aerosol",
Radioecological Concentration Processes, Proceedings of an
International Symposium held in Stockholm, April 25-29, 1966.
21
-------
APPENDICES
APPENDIX I. PRECIPITATION DATA 22
APPENDIX II. IRRIGATION DATA 24
APPENDIX III. FERTILIZER APPLICATIONS 30
-------
APPENDIX I
PRECIPITATION DATA
The precipitation gauge was set up at the Experimental Farm on
October 1, 1964. The daily precipitation (in inches) is tabulated
by months during the report period.
DATE
October 29, 1964
Total:
November 9, 1964
10
13
15
16
17
Total:
December 2, 1964
11
19
28
31
Total:
January 7, 1965
19
Total:
February 6, 1965
INCHES
0. 06
0. 06
0. 10
0. 05
0. 03
0. 04
0. 27
0. 02
0. 51
0. 01
0. 02
0. 02
0. 03
0. 02
0. 10
0. 09
0. 02
0. 11
0. 01
March
April
1
1
1
1
Total:
12, 1965
13
27
31
Total:
1, 1965
2
3
4
6
8
9
0
1
2
3
Total:
0. 01
0. 69
0. 20
0. 08
0. 17
1. 14
1. 09
0. 09
0. 58
0. 50
0. 01
0. 17
0. 15
0. 15
0. 02
0. 27
0. 12
3. 15
DATE
May 2, 1965
3
14
22
24
Total:
June 3, 1965
16
25
Total:
July 15, 1965
16
17
18
19
24
25
31
Total:
August 10, 1965
11
12
13
15
16
17
18
Total:
September, 1965
October, 1965
INCHES
0. 01
0. 03
0. 05
0. 05
0. 02
0. 16
0. 13
0. 01
0. 01
0. 15
0. 01
0. 08
0. 04
0. 01
0. 01
0. 10
0. 04
0. 10
0. 39
0. 07
0. 01
0. 11
0. 02
0. 30
0. 34
0. 01
0. 12
0. 98
(22)
-------
DATE
INCHES
November 14, 1965
15
16
17
18
22
23
24
25
Total:
0. 15
0. 13
0.64
0.48
0.06
1.08
0.06
0.03
0.03
2.66
DATE
December 9,
10
11
12
13
29
31
Total:
1965
INCHES
1. 13
0.02
0.03
0.05
0, 01
1.40
0. 04
2.68
Total precipitation for report period
October 1, 1964 to December 31, 1965
= 12. 10 inches
23
-------
APPENDIX II
IRRIGATION DATA
The water applied during the reporting period is tabulated by date of
application and by four sets of laterals. The figures recorded are
gallons of water applied, as determined by the difference between
the irrigation pump meter readings before and after irrigation. The
gallons of water applied through each set of laterals is totaled for
the period of October 28, 1964 to May 31, 1965, and monthly there-
after to the end of 1965. Each of these totals is converted to inches
of water applied, using the conversion factor of 28,000 gallons through
four laterals being approximately equal to one-quarter inch of water
over the area covered. The water depths are rounded to the nearest
one-quarter inch. The total depth of water applied through each set
is summarized at the end of the Appendix.
Gallons Applied
Lateral Numbers
DATE
Oct
Oct
Oct
Nov
Nov
Dec
Dec
Mar
Mar
>\;
May
28, 1964
29
31
2
6
11
17
2, 1965
8
24
1
--
57
44
57
28
28
28
28
28
47
--
- 4
--
, 000
,000
, 000
,000
, 000
,000
,000
,000
, 000
--
5 .
--
57
45
57
28
28
28
28
28
47
--
- 8
--
, 000
,000
,000
,000
, 000
,000
, 000
,000
,000
--
9 •
28
--
44
57
28
28
28
5
--
47
-12
, 000
--
, 000
, 000
, 000
, 000
,000
,000
--
,000
--
13
28
--
45
57
28
28
28
--
--
47
6
-16
, 000
--
,000
, 000
,000
,000
, 000
--
--
, 000
,000
TOTAL,
56,
114,
178,
228,
112,
112,
112,
61,
56,
188,
6,
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
000
*No record of how this water was applied since it was done by REECo
personnel testing irrigation system. Assumed to be applied uniformly
over the field.
24
-------
Lateral Numbers
DATE
May 26, 1965
May 28
May 31
Total gallons
applied during
period
Inches of water
applied during
period
June 2, 1965
June 4
June 7
June 9
June 1 1
June 14
June 16
June 18
June 21
June 23
Total gallons
applied in
June
Inches of
water applied
in June
July 1, 1965
July 6
July 9
July 12
July 13
1 - 4
57,000
57,000
57,000
516,000
4-1/2"
57,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
28, 000
28,000
28,000
36,000
28,000
317,000
2-3/4"
57,000
29,000
58,000
58,000
58,000
5-8
57.000
57,000
57,000
517,000
4-1/2"
57,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
34,000
315,000
2-3/4"
56,000
29,000
58,000
58,000
58,000
25
9 -12
57,000
14,000
57,000
393,000
3-1/2"
57,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
281,000
2-1/2"
28,000
29,000
58,000
58,000
58,000
13-16
57,000
57,000
57,000
438,000
3-3/4"
57,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
29,000
28,000
28,000
28,000
310,000
2-3/4"
28,000
29,000
60,000
58,000
58,000
TOTAL
228,000
185,000
228,000
1,864,000
228,000
112,000
112,000
112,000
112,000
112,000
113,000
112,000
120,000
90,000
1,223,000
169,000
116,000
234,000
232,000
232,000
-------
Lateral Numbers
DATE
July 14, 1965
July 16
July 19
July 21
July 23
July 26
July 28
July 30
Total gallons
applied in
July
Inches of
water applied
in July
Aug 2, 1965
Aug 4
Aug 6
Aug 9
Aug 11
Aug 13
Aug 18
Aug 26
Aug 27
Aug 30
Total gallons
applied in
August
Inches of
water applied
in August
1 - 4
29,000
58, 000
58,000
58, 000
29, 000
58,000
58,000
29,000
637,000
5-1/2"
58,000
67, 000
58, 000
58, 000
63,000
66, 000
58,000
52, 000
480,000
4-1/4"
5-8
29,000
58,000
58,000
58,000
34, 000
58,000
58, 000
29, 000
641,000
5-1/2"
58, 000
58, 000
58, 000
58, 000
58,000
58,000
58,000
51, 000
457, 000
4"
9 -12
29, 000
58,000
58, 000
58, 000
29,000
58,000
58,000
29,000
608,000
5-1/4"
58, 000
58, 000
58, 000
61,000
58, 000
48,000
58,000
58,000
457,000
4"
13-16
29,000
58,000
58,000
58,000
29, 000
59, 000
58,000
29,000
611,000
5-1/4"
58,000
73, 000
58, 000
58,000
58, 000
74,000
58,000
58, 000
495,000
4-1/2"
TOTAL
116,000
232,000
232,000
232, 000
121,000
233,000
232,000
116,000
2,497,000
232,000
256,000
232,000
235, 000
237,000
246,000
116, 000
58,000
58,000
219,000
1,889,000
26
-------
Lateral Numbers
DATE
Sept 1, 1965
Sept 2
Sept 3
Sept 6
Sept 9
Sept 10
Sept 12
Sept 17
Sept 20
Sept 21
Sept 22
Sept 23
Sept 25
Sept 26*
Sept 27
Total gallons
applied in
September
Inches of
water applied
in September
1 - 4
29,000
58,000
58,000
29,000
58,000
58,000
46,000
36,000
39,000
29,000
58,000
30,000
73,000
601,000
5-1/4"
5-8
58,000
58,000
58,000
29,000
58,000
58,000
46,000
36,000
39,000
29,000
58,000
30,000
35,000
592,000
5-1/4"
9 -12
87,000
87,000
58,000
58, 000
87,000
58,000
58,000
58,000
58,000
30,000
58,000
697,000
6-1/4"
13-16
87,000
87,000
58,000
58,000
87,000
58,000
58,000
58,000
30,000
62,000
643,000 2,
5-3/4"
TOTAL
203,000
58,000
290,000
232,000
174,000
116,000
174,000
232,000
208,000
72,000
136,000
58,000
232,000
120,000
228,000
533,000
*Between September 25 and September 27, the records on 120,000 gallons
of water were lost. It was assumed to be applied uniformly over the
entire field on September 26.
*Sept 28-
Oct 4, 1965
Oct 5
Oct 6
Oct 7
200,000
30,000
36,000
32,000
200,000
58,000
46,000
29,000
200,000
74,000
29,000
70,000
200,000
58,000
29,000
29,000
800,000
220,000
140,000
160,000
*During this period, the records on 798, 000 gallons of water were lost.
However, this water was known to be applied approximately uniformly
over the entire field.
27
-------
Lateral Numbers
DATE
Oct 8, 1965
Oct 9
Oct 11
Oct 12
Oct 13
Oct 14
Oct 15
Oct 16
Oct 18
Oct 20
Oct 21
Oct 23
Oct 25
Oct 26
Oct 29
Total gallons
applied in
October
Inches of
water applied
in October
Nov 1, 1965
Nov 3
Nov 4
Nov 5
Nov 8
Nov 10
Nov 12
Nov 18
Total gallons
applied in
November
Inches of water
applied in Nov
1 - 4
35,000
94,000
29,000
29,000
29,000
42,000
34, 000
29, 000
29, 000
29, 000
29,000
29.000
15,000
29,000
58,000
837, 000
7-1/2"
48,000
29,000
66,000
23,000
18,000
184,000
1-1/2"
5-8
29,000
29, 000
29, 000
29, ooo
60, 000
51,000
51,000
29, ooo
29,000
29, 000
29,000
29,000
16,000
29, 000
95,000
896,000
8"
48,000
58, 000
29,000
29, 000
29,000
193,000
1-3/4"
(28)
9 -12
58,000
58, 000
70,000
29, 000
72, 000
53,000
53, 000
766,000
6-3/4"
68,000
84, 000
29,000
29,000
18,000
29,000
257,000
2-1/4"
13-16
94, 000
39,000
42,000
15,000
58,000
30,000
48,000
21, 000
29,000
29, 000
721, 000
6-1/2"
29,000
29. 000
1/4"
TOTAL
216,000
220,000
170,000
87,000
176,000
93,000
196,000
88,000
106,000
79,000
58,000
87,000
60, 000
58,000
206,000
3,220,000
96, 000
68,000
142,000
87,000
124,000
18, 000
110,000
18,000
645,000
-------
Lateral Numbers
DATE
Dec 7, 1965
Total gallons
applied in
December
Inches of
water applied
in December
1 - 4
29,000
29,000
1/4"
SUMMARY OF
DATE
Oct, 1964 thru
May, 1965
June, 1965
July, 1965
August, 1965
Sept, 1965
Oct, 1965
Nov, 1965
Dec, 1965
Total for period:
1 - 4
4-1/2"
2-3/4"
5-1/2"
4-1/4"
5-1/4"
7-1/2"
1-1/2"
1/4"
31-1/2"
5-8
29,000
29,000
1/4"
9 -12
58,000
58,000
1/2"
INCHES OF WATER
Lateral
5-8
4-1/2"
2-3/4"
5-1/2"
4"
5-1/4"
8"
1-3/4"
1/4"
32"
Numbers
9 -12
3-1/2"
2-1/2"
5-1/4"
4"
6-1/4"
6-3/4"
2-1/4"
1/2"
31"
13-16 TOTAL
116,000
116,000
0
APPLIED
13-16
3-3/4"
2-3/4"
5-1/4"
4-1/2"
5-3/4"
6-1/2"
1/4"
0
28-3/4"
29
-------
APPENDIX III
FERTILIZER APPLICATIONS
Nitrogen was applied as urea (45% nitrogen) or ammonium nitrate (33. 5%
nitrogen). Phosphorus was applied as treble superphosphate (45% PzO5).
Fertilizer applications are expressed as units, or pounds, of actual
nutrient per acre.
Lands 1-4 58 9-12 13-17
DATE
10/21-
22/64
5/27/65
7/13/65
8/13-
18/65
o / i 9 / At;
9/16/65
9/25/65
1 0/28 /65
1 1 /04/65
Jt orm oi — — -r-
NITROGEN N 2 5
Urea 100 100
Urea 100
Ammonium
Nitrate
Ammonium
Nitrate
TTri=>a
Urea 30 135
TJrpa
Ammonium
Nitrate
N P2o5 N P2o5 N P2o5
100 100 100 100 100 100
100 --- 100 --- 100
110 --- 110 --- 110
105 --- 85 85
RO ^0
30 1^5
7c oc
- inn on inn on
25 25
TOTALS: 445 235 445 235 595 190 595 190
30
-------
DISTRIBUTION
1 - 20 SWRHL, Las Vegas, Nevada
21 .lames K. Reeves, Manager, NVOO/AKC. I,,IK Veyas, 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 DOS, USAEC, Washington, D. C.
26 JohnS. 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 - 34 Charles L. Weaver, NCRH, USPHS, Rockville, Maryland (5)
35 Program Director, NCRH, USPHS Region IX, San Francisco
36 Bernd Kahn, DRH, RATSEC, Cincinnati, Ohio
37 Northeastern Radiological Health Lab. , Winchester, Mass.
38 Southeastern Radiological Health Lab. , Montgomery, Ala.
39 William C. King, LRL, Mercury, Nevada
40 John W. Gofman, LRL, Livermore, California
41 William E. Ogle, LASL, Los Alamos, New Mexico
42 Ed Fleming, LRL, Livermore, California
43 Harry S. Jordan, LASL, Los Alamos, New Mexico
44 H. J. Reynolds, LRL, Livermore, California
45 Roger E. Batzel, LRL, Livermore, California
46 Victor M. Milligan, REECo. , Mercury; Nevada
47 Clinton S. Maupin, REECo. , Mercury, Nevada
48 Director, DMA, USAEC, Washington, D. C.
49 Byron Murphey, Sandia Corporation, Albuquerque, New Mexico
50 USGS, Las Vegas, Nevada
51 T. L. Jackson, Soils Dept. , OSU, Corvallis, Oregon
52 R. H. Wilson, University of Rochester, Rochester; N. Y.
-------
53 Verle Bohman, College of Agriculture, U of N, Reno, Nevada
54 Clifton Blincoe, College of Agriculture, U of N, Reno, Nevada
55 - 58 Donald Hendricks, Safety Evaluation Div. , NVOO/AEC, Las Vegas (4)
59 Mail & Records, NVOO/AEC, Las Vegas, Nevada
60 DTIE, Oak Ridge, Tennessee
61 Library, Nevada Southern University, Las Vegas, Nevada
------- |