[ RadSafe ] Radiation testing in California.

Mon Sep 30 14:09:46 CDT 2013

One more set of data for CA -- the RHB has air/water monitoring results
posted here:
http://j.mp/1fXivNz

EPA RADNET info:
http://j.mp/14Ywpug

This has the radnet info from the period right after the incident (a
tool to give estimates based on your address):
http://j.mp/16DrDWk

---
Cary Renquist
cary.renquist at ezag.com

-----Original Message-----
From: radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu
[mailto:radsafe-bounces at health.phys.iit.edu] On Behalf Of Miller, Mark L
Sent: Monday, 30 September 2013 8:12 AM
To: The International Radiation Protection (Health Physics) Mailing List
Cc: Wade Allison; Miller,Mark L; Matthew Kaspar; Denman,Matthew Roy;
Jerry M Cuttler; drmaxlevin at me.com; Leo Gomez; Tony Brooks; Borders,Rex
J (External Contacts); Yehoshua Socol; Marek Janiak; Ulsh, Brant; Ludwik
Dobrzynski; Elizabeth Ruedig; Kanokporn NoyRithidech; Charles L Sanders;
Jim Hylko; Scott, Bobby; Cynthia H. McCollough; Osborn,Douglas;
Krzysztof Fornalski
Subject: [ RadSafe ] Radiation testing in California.

Max,

I applaud your curiosity and initiative.  Although Fukushima was indeed
a very big deal, the environmental consequences, especially in the U.S.
were virtually nil.  LOTS of measurements in the U.S. were made
immediately following the accident.  They showed scarcely measureable
initially, and became undetectable with a very short time.  For ongoing,
routine measurements that you can review to corroborate and support your
inquiries, I recommend that you read the Radiological Environmental
impact sections of the various Annual Site Environmental Reports that
are available on line.  Several  recommendations are:

*        The Pantex Site Environmental Report for 2011 is available
online at
http://www.pantex.com/about/environment/regComp/regCompDocs/index.htm.

*        The Lawrence Livermore Lab (CA) report can be accessed on the
Internet at https://saer.llnl.gov

*         The 2012 Annual Site Environmental Report for the Hanford Site
has been approved for public distribution at
http://msa.hanford.gov/page.cfm/EnvironmentalReports2001-latest.

*         Brookhaven National Laboratory has been approved for public
distribution. The report is available online at
http://www.bnl.gov/ewms/ser/.

*         The CY 2012 Annual Site Environmental Reports for Sandia
National Laboratories, New Mexico and the Tonopah Test Range, Nevada and
Kauai Test Facility, Hawaii are available online at:
http://www.sandia.gov/news/publications/environmental_reports/index.html

*         2012 Annual Site Environmental Report for Argonne National
Laboratory: http://www.anl.gov/community/environmental-protection

You might check similar reports for the San Onofre Nuclear Generating
Plant, which is required to submit annual reports to the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission.

-----Original Message-----
From: Max Levin [mailto:drmaxlevin at me.com]
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2013 5:06 PM
To: radsafe at health.phys.iit.edu
Subject: [ RadSafe ] Radiation testing in California.

   My name is Max. I am a Holistic Chiropractor in L.A. and have a long
background in health-science.

I am looking for a little perspective and was hoping that you may have
some useful information and experience to share.

As you might expect , I have been following the events beginning with
and following the Fukushima Daiichi disaster in MArch 2011.   There was
very little public information the first 2 years, and anyone who might
know a thing or two  was not concerned a bit,  but it left a bad taste
in my mouth.   Being a level 7 on the INES  was nothing to ignore.   So,
I began to spend more time looking for information.

the past several months there has been a flood of stories and blogs and
eventually the mainstream media began doing some pretty crappy
reporting.   It has been an education with a steep learning curve and
after sorting the data from the hype , i feel i have good grasp on  what
I know and what i still need to learn.

with few exceptions ( Berk. Dept of Nuclear Engineering) there has been
little testing of local soil, dairy, meats, air, water and marine life
from the our Pacific west coast.    And what has been done seemed to
have ceased over a year ago.

I decided to do what I could to evaluate the contamination level of my
environment.

I few weeks ago I  purchased  a Mazur PRM-9000. Im sure you are familiar
with it (  it is a radiation monitor with a pancake style geiger
-mueller tube with a mica window.)   I understand its limitations , but
it is a start.

After learning the parameters of the  of the device and establishing
controlled testing protocol, i have tested a couple dozen samples
ranging for pacific northwest seafood to local grown  vegetables and
even a couple items from across the states.   results varied, but in
several test samples  I found reading from 25-50% over background
radiation.   and reproduced those results.   So here is my question.

HAs it always been common to find readings like this in foods such as
tomatoes, kale and seafood?

What change has there been in the past 2 years in foods, if any?    And
what is common to detect with a geiger counter of this sensitivity?

I am looking for data about radiation contamination in similar foods
pre-fukushima and  across the country , but it seems that there is no
published data.       To my surprise,  I found contamination in Catfish
farmed from North Carolina  and and Tomatoes from fresno and local
oxnard Kale, alaskan Cod, washington snapper and hawaiian ahi, but very
little  in japanese farmed yellowtail and  brocolli from arizona.   (
all of my samples have been dehydrated for testing and over timed scans
against a backround control scan)

Have these foods always had some level of contamination, or is this a
result of recent events?

Having no idea what things have been like in past years and in other
regions and not being able to identify any specific radioisotope, nor
evaluate the Bq/Kg value has made is challenging to interpret my
results.   I am , however a bit concerned with the fact that I am
getting any above background readings at all.

If anyone can offer and help or even direct me to someone who can, i
would be greatly appreciated.   Besides citizens in Japan, there doesnt
seem to be anyone doing this type of testing locally.

Thank you for your time.

Dr. Max

_______________________________________________
You are currently subscribed to the RadSafe mailing list

Before posting a message to RadSafe be sure to have read and understood
the RadSafe rules. These can be found at:
http://health.phys.iit.edu/radsaferules.html

For information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe and other settings
visit: http://health.phys.iit.edu