OVERVIEW OF CRESP AMCHITKA RADIONUCLIDE DATA SET

OVERVIEW OF CRESP AMCHITKA RADIONUCLIDE DATA SET

March 3, 2006

CRESP is pleased to make available the raw analytic results for radionuclides in biota from its Independent Scientific Assessment of the Amchitka marine environment, including the reference site at Kiska Island. The specimens analyzed were mainly collected close to the three Amchitka test sites (Long Shot, Milrow, Cannikin) or at Kiska. The results have been reported in two documents (Powers et al. 2005and Powers et al. 2006; see below). This data set includes all the data used by CRESP in these two reports.

The background, rationale, methods, results, interpretation, and discussion have already been published and posted on the CRESP web site the Independent Science Assessment (Powers et al. 2005, released at a public meeting in Anchorage on August 1, 2005), and as an addendum (Powers et al. 2006; released on January 11, 2006). These formed the basis for CRESP's vision of a biomonitoring plan for Amchitka: Biomonitoring for Ecosystem and Human Health Protection at Amchitka Island (Burger et al. 2006).

The results are presented below. The Code Sheet(1) is needed to interpret all data sets (2- 6). All data are reported on a wet weight basis. (See note (7).)

1. The CODE SHEET file explains the structure of the data set including the specimen identification numbers, laboratory codes, species codes, and location codes.

PLEASE NOTE that the analytic laboratories only received the LAB CODE number and were BLIND with regard to the species
and location of each sample. The code was NOT broken until analytic results had been validated.

2. Actinides (Americium, Plutonium, and Uranium isotopes) analyzed at INEEL. This data set also contains the results for Strontium-90, which is not an actinide.

3. Gamma results analyzed at INEEL for Co-60, Cs-137, Eu-152, I-129.

4. 1000 gram samples analyzed at Vanderbilt for I-129, Am-241, Cs-137, Co-60 and Eu-152.

5. 100 gram samples analyzed at Vanderbilt for I-129, Am-241, Cs-137, Co-60 and Eu-152. Page 1. Page 2.

6. GPS LOCATIONS OF SAMPLES COLLECTED DURING THE CRESP EXPEDITION 2004. Samples collected in the summer of 2004 by the biological team on the Ocean Explorer during the CRESP expedition to Amchitka and Kiska were associated with a GPS location, recorded at the time of collection. This document provides the information necessary to associate field identification numbers with the laboratory code and with the GPS location. The samples were identified by a field number that included a species code, location code, collector code, and number. The field identification code is called Sample ID in the following tables. To ensure that the analytical laboratories (Vanderbilt University, Idaho National Laboratory) did not know either the species or the location of the sample, a new laboratory code was given to each sample prepared in the Rutgers laboratory (called Lab code on the tables). The analytical laboratory was given the matrix as kelp, soft tissue, or bone.

There are three tables provided: Table 1 is for the 1000 gram samples that were analyzed at Vanderbilt University. Table 2, called VU 300 samples, is for 100 gram samples that were also analyzed at Vanderbilt University. Table 3, labeled INL, provides the GPS coordinates for the samples that were analyzed at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory for the gamma and alpha streams.

7. Wet  to Dry Weight Conversions for Biota for Amchikta and Kiska.

Note, no results are provided for Tc-99 analyses. Sixty composite samples (see Table 11.2 of Powers et al, 2005) of either muscle or algae were analyzed for Tc-99 with results indicating no concentrations above the method detection limit. For fish muscle samples, the typical detection limit was 0.10-0.18 Bq/kg wet wt, with overall Tc-99 analytical recovery based on laboratory control samples and internal standards of 90.5+/- 8.7%. For algae samples, the typical detection limit was 0.055-0.26 Bq/kg wet wt, with overall Tc-99 analytical recovery based on laboratory control samples and internal standards of 94.0+/-3.4%.

These data have been posted on March 3, 2006. As results are published in the peer-reviewed literature, links to the published papers will be posted.

REFERENCES

Powers, C.W., Burger, J., Kosson, D., Gochfeld, M., and D. Barnes, eds., et al. 2005. Biological and Geophysical Aspects of Potential Radionuclide Exposure in the Amchitka Marine Environment. Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation, Institute for Responsible Management, Piscataway, New Jersey.

Powers CW, Burger J, Kosson D, Gochfeld M. 2006. Addendum to Final Amchitka Report: Additional Radiological Data for Bioindicator Selection. Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation, Institute for Responsible Management, Piscataway, New Jersey (Released January 11, 2006).

Burger J, Gochfeld M, Kosson D, Powers CW. 2006. Biomonitoring for Ecosystem and Human Health Protection at Amchitka Island. Consortium for Risk Evaluation with Stakeholder Participation, Institute for Responsible Management, Piscataway, New Jersey (Released January 13, 2006).

Stakeholder input, comments, and questions about this report can be sent to cresp@eohsi.rutgers.edu