rameters a, a2, and a; were determined by the X(2k—-1) M,=a,P,S8,+Pe™ 3 De ? k=1 t+o\,,(1—P,) [8] where M, =milk level in the n‘* month expressed in micromicrocurles per liter P,=proportion of cows on pasture in the a‘ month Sn ==cumulative level of strontium 90 in the soil in the m** month expressed in millicurles per square mile A ==pasture depletion constant, the reciprocal of the half-residence time D,;, = deposition during the &* month expressed in millicuries per square mile per month Ms average milk level over the closest pre- ceding harvest season expressed in micromucrocuries per liter This equation has the form of a multiple regression M,=a0;X\, +arNon +03Xan [9 with independent and dependent variables as indicated. The basic time period will be taken as l month with 7 = 1, 2, 3, .. ., 638 months as the total time covered extending from July 1957 to September 1962. The values of the variables Xin, Vo, and 3, were computed and the paTable 2. Station least squares analysis using a computer. Computation times involved are on the order of 14 hour per station. Values for deposition and soil levels, when available, were extracted from the Health and Safety Laboratory report made by the Atomic Energy Commission. Unfortunately, there were a few missing monthly deposition values in each of the stations. However, if the particular monthly station values are compared with the overall average deposition rates by month, a constant relation is observed. These results are plotted in figure 2 for the five stations. Asan example, suppose that the value for New York is missing for June, but that the corresponding overall average is 4 millicuries per square mile, Then, the estimated station value is 6 millicuries per square mile. A conservative estimate for the spring of 1962 is that the deposition rates will be the same as during the spring of 1959. The maximum deposition rates which would occur under the worst possible assumptions are assumed to be about twice the expected rates. The average soil levels are based on those estimated by Knapp. The estimated milk levels do not differ greatly with different values for 71/2, although they get progressively worse with the longer half-times. The optimum half-time for each station was Average proportion of cows in pasture during each month | Jan. Feb. | Mar. Apr. May June July Aug. | Sept. Oct. Nov. 0.20; . 00 0620) . 00 0.22) . 00 0.36, . 00 1.00; . 62 1.00 1.00 1.00); 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.98 . 87 0.78 . OL 0. 37 . 01 St. Louis.____________-- 1,01 . 02 13 94 OF .o7 97 .938 . 45 . 09 0: Cincinnati__.._..2-_ 2 New York City. _____.- Sacramento _____ lee eee Salt Lake City. ..__.___- | . 08 . 00 Table 3. . 10 . 00 . AT . 00 . 81 . 00 .84) . 61 . 84 . 84 . 71 5 . 84 .95 , . 75 | . 83 . 78 | .7 . 45 . 02 J 1 . Ol Model parameters yielding best fit for each station oo Station Ti Cincinnati_.._.-...--._.- ee. woe ene New York City... ---- © 7+ - oe aoe Sacramento__-.--.-- 2 eee ee 0. 75 .75 2. 00 0. 10 . 10 . 02 Salt Lake City__...___-----__--- + --_2-- Lie ee 2. 00 . 04 St. Louis.._.--......0-- == ee ee eee eee 1060 . 32 Dee. 25 ay 21 Qs 3.7 2.7 3. 2 13.7 1.1 as Percent variation accounted for 1.1 .9 1.0 6 4 ~ .8 4 1.0 | é Public Health Repor

Select target paragraph3