Go back to the interactive dataset

Precipitation RadNet Laboratory Analysis

This is a filtered view based on RadNet Laboratory Analysis.

Row numberStateLocationDate PostedDate CollectedSample TypeUnitBa-140Co-60Cs-134Cs-136Cs-137I-131I-132I-133Te-129Te-129mTe-132
101PAHarrisburg04/15/201103/31/2011PrecipitationpCi/l5.9
102TNKnoxville05/24/201104/26/2011Precipitation pCi/l
103TNKnoxville05/24/201104/29/2011Precipitation pCi/l
104TNKnoxville04/26/201104/19/2011Precipitation pCi/l
105TNKnoxville04/13/201104/05/2011PrecipitationpCi/l
106TNKnoxville04/13/201104/01/2011PrecipitationpCi/l26
107TNKnoxville04/10/201103/28/2011PrecipitationpCi/l3.1
108TNNashville05/03/201104/19/2011PrecipitationpCi/l
109TNNashville04/13/201103/15/2011PrecipitationpCi/l
110TNNashville04/13/201103/31/2011PrecipitationpCi/l19
111TNNashville04/13/201103/28/2011PrecipitationpCi/l72
112TNNashville 04/25/201104/14/2011Precipitation pCi/l
113TNNashville 04/20/201104/06/2011PrecipitationpCi/l5.3
114TNOak Ridge/K-1204/04/201103/24/2011PrecipitationpCi/l17.7
115TNOak Ridge/K-1204/04/201103/17/2011PrecipitationpCi/l
116TNOak Ridge/K2505/24/201104/28/2011Precipitation pCi/l
117TNOak Ridge/K2504/26/201104/18/2011Precipitation pCi/l
118TNOak Ridge/K-2504/25/201104/14/2011Precipitation pCi/l
119TNOak Ridge/K-2504/15/201104/07/2011PrecipitationpCi/l
120TNOak Ridge/K-2504/13/201103/31/2011PrecipitationpCi/l1.219
121TNOak Ridge/K-2504/13/201104/04/2011PrecipitationpCi/l40
122TNOak Ridge/Melton05/24/201104/28/2011Precipitation pCi/l
123TNOak Ridge/Melton04/26/201104/18/2011Precipitation pCi/l
124TNOak Ridge/Melton04/25/201104/14/2011Precipitation pCi/l
125TNOak Ridge/Melton04/15/201104/07/2011PrecipitationpCi/l3.7
126TNOak Ridge/Melton04/13/201103/31/2011PrecipitationpCi/l0.8721
127TNOak Ridge/Melton04/10/201103/28/2011PrecipitationpCi/l1.31.481
128TNOak Ridge/Melton04/04/201103/24/2011PrecipitationpCi/l18.3
129TNOak Ridge/Melton04/04/201103/17/2011PrecipitationpCi/l
130TNOak Ridge/Y-1204/15/201104/07/2011PrecipitationpCi/l2.1
131TNOak Ridge/Y-1204/13/201104/04/2011PrecipitationpCi/l2.154
132TNOak Ridge/Y-1204/10/201103/28/2011PrecipitationpCi/l
133TNOak Ridge/Y-1204/04/201103/17/2011PrecipitationpCi/l
134TNOak Ridge/Y-1204/04/201103/24/2011PrecipitationpCi/l13.4
135TNOak Ridge/Y-12 04/13/201103/31/2011PrecipitationpCi/l1.31.420
136TNOak Ridge/Y12E05/24/201104/28/2011Precipitation pCi/l
137TNOak Ridge/Y12E04/26/201104/18/2011Precipitation pCi/l
138TNOak Ridge/Y-12E04/25/201104/14/2011Precipitation pCi/l
139TXAustin04/22/201104/12/2011PrecipitationpCi/l
140UTSalt Lake City05/24/201104/14/2011Precipitation pCi/l
141UTSalt Lake City05/24/201104/28/2011Precipitation pCi/l
142UTSalt Lake City05/03/201104/21/2011PrecipitationpCi/l
143UTSalt Lake City04/20/201104/04/2011PrecipitationpCi/l8.2
144UTSalt Lake City04/20/201104/07/2011PrecipitationpCi/l14
145UTSalt Lake City04/13/201103/28/2011PrecipitationpCi/l1.4190
146UTSalt Lake City04/08/201103/17/2011PrecipitationpCi/l8.1
147VALynchburg04/13/201104/01/2011PrecipitationpCi/l9.3
148WAOlympia05/24/201104/25/2011PrecipitationpCi/l1.7
149WAOlympia05/24/201104/28/2011PrecipitationpCi/l
150WAOlympia05/03/201104/18/2011PrecipitationpCi/l

About

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

created Apr 04, 2011

updated Aug 20, 2011

View Full Page
Activity
Community Rating
Current value: 0.0 out of 5
Your Rating
Current value: out of 5
Raters
0
Visits
206297
Downloads
24121
Comments
24
Contributors
0
Meta
Category
Government
Permissions
Public
Tags
government, data, radiation, japan, radnet, epa, milk, precipitation, drinking, water, rain, snow, sleet, air, filter, cartridge
Row Count
157
Licensing and Attribution
Data Provided By
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Source Link
http://www.epa.gov/japan2011
License
Public Domain

Filter

  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;

Sort

  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;
  • ;

Search

Saved Views

Post a Comment

Comments

  • Total Comments: 24
  • Average Rating: 0.0

  • Rating: No rating
  • Author: alexpage41
  • Posted: 4 months ago

You acknowledge that there is no plan to inform people of elevated levels by not acting when this was known.

  • Rating: No rating
  • Author: cpt.a.j.reed
  • Posted: almost 3 years ago

well it's been over one month again, your other websites are useless, why don't you have a page that shows real time radiation and what it comes from. Not your alpha beta graph but a real time monitor that shows cesium, plutonium, uranium, Tellurium,and the lot by name and the real amounts not your -5% figures that you show us. Perhaps you have forgotten that you work for us and that your job is to keep us and our families alert and safe' not to capitulate to the whims of politicians and their money. Please, just make it easy for us to see and correct so that we cane make informed decisions. If every day there was an article on the front page of the news paper about how many leaks and other problems were reported in US nuclear plants then perhaps you guys could spend more time making sure that our water is safe and free from things like fluoride, and taking the poison out of baby formula because I would bet that people would want them shut down.

  • Rating: No rating
  • Author: cpt.a.j.reed
  • Posted: almost 3 years ago

well it's been over one month again, your other websites are useless, why don't you have a page that shows real time radiation and what it comes from. Not your alpha beta graph but a real time monitor that shows cesium, plutonium, uranium, Tellurium,and the lot by name and the real amounts not your -5% figures that you show us. Perhaps you have forgotten that you work for us and that your job is to keep us and our families alert and safe' not to capitulate to the whims of politicians and their money. Please, just make it easy for us to see and correct so that we cane make informed decisions. If every day there was an article on the front page of the news paper about how many leaks and other problems were reported in US nuclear plants then perhaps you guys could spend more time making sure that our water is safe and free from things like fluoride, and taking the poison out of baby formula because I would bet that people would want them shut down.

  • Rating: No rating
  • Author: cpt.a.j.reed
  • Posted: almost 3 years ago

Once again if you don't look I am sure that you will not find. You guys aren't even trying to hid the fact that your not trying to find it. Her is a quote from your website about tracking radiation in fish. "FDA and NOAA do not anticipate contamination of living marine resources in U.S. waters at this time. For this reason, sampling of U.S. harvested seafood is not currently planned."

  • Rating: No rating
  • Author: cpt.a.j.reed
  • Posted: almost 3 years ago

I looked at you web page and I see this "As always, EPA's RadNet system of more than 100 stationary monitors will continue to provide EPA scientists near-real-time data on the slightest fluctuations in background radiation levels." first off we don't care about your "normal background" radiation. If you have access to real-time information then why don't you simply put up a link to it? When you don't come out with information it makes people not trust you. If you lo at what has happened in Japan then you should realize that keeping information from The People will in-turn make you look very bad when it come to light.

  • Rating: No rating
  • Author: cpt.a.j.reed
  • Posted: almost 3 years ago

so now it takes you guys a month to put up your faulty data? The last day from Olympia you don't even post, you put the one from 3 days before after it. If we track the half-life of I-131 which has a half-life of 8 days then the real number that you have is 3.87. And you find no Cesium at all.? We know that the levels found in the area in milk are higher than what you are finding in the rain. How is this possible with out some sort of misinformation? oh yeah the + or - 5% I forgot that you guys do us the favor of just taking out the 5. take a look at Radiation Network people

  • Rating: No rating
  • Author: nc1r3rob
  • Posted: almost 3 years ago

I am new to this site and am trying to figure out how to convert these results into percentages (i.e. 700% above limits). I saw it posted somewhere and now I cannot find it. Any ideas?

  • Rating: No rating
  • Author: josopdx
  • Posted: almost 3 years ago

why is that though there was precipitation results that were positive for I-131 of 86.8 pCi/m3 in Portland Oregon on 4/4/2011, there have been no follow up results for weeks while Olympia WA has had 7 precipitation results from 4/4/2011 and 4/25/2011?

  • Rating: No rating
  • Author: lisahajek
  • Posted: almost 3 years ago

I notice absolutely no data for Wisconsin or South Dakota. Why is this?

  • Rating: No rating
  • Author: josopdx
  • Posted: almost 3 years ago

When and where will there be more air filter information on Uranium, Plutonium, Strontium? There are no columns for them in the interactive format and the previous data is over a month old. Also why is that though there was precipitation results that were positive for I-131 of 86.8 pCi/m3 in Portland Oregon on 4/4/2011, there have been no follow up results for weeks while Olympia WA has had 7 air filter results from 4/4/2011 and 4/25/2011?

  • Rating: No rating
  • Author: mandia
  • Posted: almost 3 years ago

Will you be posting new results for Seattle soon?

  • Rating: No rating
  • Author: stevevegas
  • Posted: almost 3 years ago

What does an I-131 rating of 6.8 mean? Is that a safe level?

  • Rating: No rating
  • Author: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
  • Posted: almost 3 years ago

We test for a number of isotopes. We haven't found plutonium.

  • Rating: No rating
  • Author: 4thrabbit
  • Posted: about 3 years ago

Are you testing for Plutonium? I don't see it listed.

Sharing

This view is public

Publishing

See Preview