EPA RadNet System Issue

Submitted by Anonymous on Sun, 2011-04-17 11:47

Obviously there appear to be multiple issues with the EPA's RadNet monitoring system; however, I wanted to find out if anyone else has observed over the last several days whether it appears that the monitors are being put in review status whenever the Beta Gross Count Rate (CPM) gets near 200. For example, after a fairly brief review, it appears that this was done today with the monitors in Grand Junction, Colorado, Phoenix, Tucson, and Las Vegas. Once the monitors are brought back to active status, the level is below 200, and the data that is supposed to be recorded while the monitor is in review status does not get posted.

‹ Fallout comparison to Chernobyl BRAWM, are you testing FRESH milk (from the udder) or prepackaged? Milk is prepackaged up to 90 days so some should be fine. ›

Definitely have been....

Submitted by LisaT (not verified) on Sun, 2011-04-17 20:21.

Watching some issues with the EPA monitoring - they are regularly pulling the beta counts offline when they start spiking, and there are some other irregularities too.

check out this article that

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 2011-04-17 17:09.

check out this article that states that after a spike of radiation in Washington state, monitor goes out of service...What a coincidence...
http://enenews.com/coincidence-washington-air-monitor-sustained-radiatio...

A very valid question raised

Submitted by CME (not verified) on Sun, 2011-04-17 12:48.

A very valid question raised about EPA. I have noticed over time that they erase spikes; most of the pre-3/11 data is made to look like what is occurring after 3/11 so as to "normalize" the data ( I have seen data fudged regarding this). Considering how the EPA has taken a nonchalant and dismissive view of the dangers of Fukushima AND their very shady past history,I would not take their reading seriously. Go to http://www.radiationnetwork.com/ for a more reliable reading.

With regard to the

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 2011-04-17 13:06.

With regard to the radiationnetwork.com Web site, is the CPM displayed for beta particles or gamma particles? I could not find anything on their Web site regarding this. When comparing their data to the EPA RadNet data, it seems like their data is closest to the RadNet Gamma Energy Range 9 or 10 Gross (CPM).

Someone on a different board

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 2011-04-17 12:40.

Someone on a different board posted that Jacksonville went to 400 cpm, and then the monitors were off for awhile.

Maybe high spikes make them analyze the data more carefully...or ???

EPA Reviews

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Sun, 2011-04-17 12:19.

I'm not sure what the EPA does during their reviews. They
may reset the monitor and not post data that they deem
inaccurate for whatever reason.

I will say that spikes up to 200 are not uncommon for those
areas. Phoenix has had number 150+ spikes since around 3/29.
There is no pre-japan earthquake data for Phoenix. But, Tucson
is showing data back to around 2/17. And there are at least
a few spikes in the Tucson data approaching the 200 mark. So,
Tucson data doesn't appear to be any different pre/post Japan
event. Yuma data is spotty at best. Both pre and post Japan.
Las Vegas data is all over the map. Including a 950+ spike
on 3/8. Grand Junction data is the same. So, I wouldn't go
by any of this data unless there is a sustained high level.

The gamma data for these areas all look normal *except* for
Phoenix, which shows a sustained elevation for some ranges
since 4/5.