EMSL-LV-539-12 EMSL-LV-0539-12
OFF-SITE ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT FOR THE NEVADA TEST SITE
AND OTHER TEST AREAS USED FOR UNDERGROUND NUCLEAR DETONATIONS
January through December 1976
by
Monitoring Operations Division
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
May 1977
This work performed under a Memorandum of
Understanding No. EY-76-A-08-0539
for the
U.S. ENERGY RESEARCH 6 DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
-------
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the
United States Government. Neither the United States nor the United
States Energy Research and Development Administration, nor any of
their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, makes any
warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or
responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any
information, apparatus, product or process disclosed, or represents
that its use would not infringe privately-owned rights.
AVAILABLE FROM THE NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
SPRINGFIELD, VA 22161
PRICE: PAPER COPY $5.45 MICROFICHE $2.25
11
-------
EMSL-LV-539-12 EMSL-LV-0539-12
OFF-SITE ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT FOR THE NEVADA TEST SITE
AND OTHER TEST AREAS USED FOR UNDERGROUND NUCLEAR DETONATIONS
January through December 1976
by
Monitoring Operations Division
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
May 1977
This work performed under a Memorandum of
Understanding No. EY-76-A-08-0539
for the
U.S. ENERGY RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
-------
PREFACE
The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) used the Nevada Test Site
(NTS) from January 1951 through January 19, 1975, as an area for
conducting nuclear detonations, nuclear rocket-engine develop-
ment, nuclear medicine studies, and miscellaneous nuclear and
non-nuclear experiments. Beginning on January 19, 1975, these
responsibilities were transferred to the newly-formed U.S. Ener-
gy Research and Development Administration (ERDA) . Atmosnheric
nuclear tests were conducted periodically from 1951 through Octo-
ber 30, 1958, at which time a testing moratorium was implemented.
Since September 1, 1961, all nuclear detonations have been con-
ducted underground with the expectation of containment except for
four slightly above-ground or shallow underground tests of
Operation Dominic II in 1962 and five nuclear earth-cratering
experiments conducted under the Plowshare program.
The U.S. Public Health Service (PHS), from 1953 through 1970,
and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), from 1970 to
the present, have maintained facilities at the NTS or in Las
Vegas, Nevada, for the purpose of providing an Off-Site Radiolog-
ical Safety Program for the nuclear testing program. In addi-
tion, off-site surveillance has been provided by the PHS/EPA for
nuclear explosive tests at places other than the NTS. Prior to
1953, the surveillance program was performed by the Los Alamos
Scientific Laboratory and U.S. Army personnel.
The objective of the Program since 1953 has been to measure
levels and trends of radioactivity in the off-site environment
surrounding testing areas to assure that the testing is in com-
pliance with existing radiation protection standards. To assess
off-site radiation levels, routine sampling networks for milk,
water, and air are maintained along with a dosimetry network and
special sampling of food crops, soil, etc., as required. For the
purpose of implementing protective actions, providing immediate
radiation monitoring, and obtaining environmental samples rapidly
after a release of radioactivity, mobile monitoring personnel are
also placed in areas downwind of NTS or other test areas prior to
each test.
In general, analytical results showing radioactivity levels
above naturally occurring levels have been published in reports
covering a test series or test project. Beginning in 1959 for
reactor tests, and in 1962 for weapons tests, surveillance data
for each individual test which released radioactivity off-site
were reported separately. Commencing in January 1964, and con-
-------
tinuing throuqh December 1970, these individual reports for nu-
clear tests wf>re also summarized and reported every 6 months.
The individual analytical results for all routine or special milk
samples were also included in the 6-month summary reports.
In 1971, t-.he AEC implemented a requirement {ERDA Manual,
Chapter 0513) for a comprehensive radiological monitoring report
from each of the several contractors or agencies involved in
major nuclear activities. The compilation of these various re-
ports since that time and their entry into the general literature
serve the purpose of providing a single source of information
concerning the environmental impact of nuclear activities. To
provide more rapid dissemination of data, the monthly report of
analytical results of all air data collected since July 1971, and
all milk and water samples collected since January 1972, were
also published in Radiation Data and Reports, a monthly publica-
tion of the EPA which was discontinued at the end of 197U.
Beginning with the first quarter of 1975, air and milk sample
data have been reported quarterly. Dosimetry data were included
beginning with the third quarter 1975.
Since 1962, PHS/EPA aircraft have also been used during nu-
clear tests to provide rapid monitoring and sampling for releases
of radioactivity. Early aircraft monitoring data obtained im-
mediately after a test are used to position mobile radiation
monitoring personnel on the ground, and the results of airborne
sampling are used to quantitate the inventories, diffusion, and
transport of the radionuclides released. Beginning in 1971, all
monitoring and sampling results by aircraft have been reported in
effluent monitoring data reports in accordance with the ERDA
Manual, Chapter 0513.
IV
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pacje
PREFACE iii
LIST OF FIGURES vi
LIST OF TABLES vii
INTRODUCTION 1
NEVADA TEST SITE 1
Site Location 1
Climate 2
Geology and Hydrology 3
Land Use of NTS Environs U
Population Distribution 5
OTHER TEST SITES 6
SUMMARY 8
MONITORING DATA COLLECTION, ANALYSIS, AND EVALUATION 10
AIR SURVEILLANCE NETWORK 12
NOBLE GAS AND TRITIUM SURVEILLANCE NETWORK 12
DOSTMETRY NETWORK 15
MILK SURVEILLANCE NETWORK 18
LONG-TERM HYDROLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM 20
Nevada Test Site 2 1
Other Test Sites 23
WHOLE-BODY COUNTING 24
DOSE ASSESSMENT 25
REFERENCES 26
APPENDIX A. TABLES 50
APPENDIX B. RADIATION PROTECTION STANDARDS FOR OFF-NTS 100
EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL EXPOSURE
APPENDIX C. REPLICATE SAMPLING PROGRAM 102
APPENDIX D. AIRBORNE RADIOACTIVITY FROM ATMOSPHERIC 106
NUCLEAR TESTS BY PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA
APPENDIX E. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS 129
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Number ^2j
1 Nevada Test Site Location 28
2 Nevada Test Site Road and Facility Map 29
3 Groundwater Flow Systems - Nevada Test Site 30
4 General Land Use, Nevada Test Site Vicinity 31
5 Location and Number of Family Milk Cows and Goats 32
6 Location and Number of Dairy Cows 33
7 Population of Arizona, California, Nevada, and 34
Utah Counties Near the Nevada Test Site
8 Air Surveillance Network - Nevada 35
9 Air Surveillance Network - Outside Nevada 36
10 Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network 37
11 Dosimetry Network 38
12 Milk Surveillance Network 39
13 Annual Average Concentrations of »°Sr (pCi/1) 40
Within Milk Surveillance Network, 1976
14 On-Site Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring 41
Program, Nevada Test Site
15 Off-Site Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring 42
Program, Nevada Test Site
16 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, 43
Carlsbad, New Mexico, Project Gnome/Coach
17 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, 44
Fallon, Nevada, Project Shoal
18 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, 45
Project Dribble/Miracle Play (vicinity of Tatum
Salt Dome, Mississippi)
19 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, 46
Project Dribble/Miracle Play (Tatum Salt Dome,
Mississippi)
20 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, 47
Rio Arriba County, New Mexico, Project Gasbuggy
21 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, 48
Rulison, Colorado, Project Rulison
22 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, 49
Central Nevada Test Area, Faultless Event
D-1 Gross Beta Radioactivity Concentrations 108
in Air at Duckwater, Nevada
D-2 Gross Beta Radioactivity Concentrations 108
in Air at Lone Pine, California
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Number Pagp
1 Characteristics of Climatic Types in Nevada 2
2 Total Airborne Radionuclide Releases from 10
the Nevada Test Site
3 Annual Average Concentrations of «5Kr 1972-1976 14
U Dosimetry Network Summary for the Years 1971-1976 17
5 Summary of Radionuclide Concentrations for 20
Milk Surveillance Network and Standby
Surveillance Network.
6 Detectable Concentrations of 90Sr, 238Puf 22
239Pu in Water Samples
A-1 Underground Testing Conducted Off the Nevada 51
Test Site
A-2 Summary of Analytical Procedures 53
A-3 1976 Summary of Analytical Results for the 55
Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network
A-4 1976 Summary of Radiation Doses for the 58
Dosimetry Network
A-5 1976 Summary of Analytical Results for the 62
Milk Surveillance Network
A-6 Analytical Criteria for Long-Term Hydrological 67
Monitoring Program Samples
A-7 1976 Summary of Analytical Results for the 68
Nevada Test Site Monthly Long-Term Hydrological
Monitoring Program
A-8 1976 Analytical Results for the Nevada Test Site 71
Semi-Annual Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring
Program
Vil
-------
LIST OF TABLES (continued)
Number Page
A-9 1976 Analytical Results for the Nevada Test Site 79
Annual Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
A-10 1976 Analytical Results for the Off-NTS Long- 82
Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
C-1 Samples and Analyses for Replicate Sampling 103
Program
C-2 Upper Confidence Limits of Sampling and 105
Analytical/Counting Errors
D-1 Locations of Maximum Radionuclide Concen- 108
trations in Air
EV-2 1976 Summary of Analytical Results for 109
Air Surveillance Network, Active Stations
D-3 1976 Summary of Analytical Results for 117
Air Surveillance Network, Standby Stations
vni
-------
INTRODUCTION
Under a Memorandum of Understanding, No. EY-76-A-08-0539,
with the U.S. Enerqy Research and Development Administration
(ERDA), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Environ-
mental Monitoring and Support Laboratory-Las Vegas (EMSL-LV),
continued its Off-Site Radiological Safety Program within the en-
vironment surrounding the Nevada Test Site (NTS) and at other
sites designated by the ERDA during CY 1976, This report, pre-
pared in accordance with the ERDA Manual, Chapter 0513, contains
summaries of EMSL-LV sampling methods, analytical procedures, and
the analytical results of environmental samples collected in sup-
port of ERDA nuclear testing activities. Where applicable, sam-
pling data are compared to appropriate guides for external and
internal exposures to ionizing radiation* In addition, a brief
summary of pertinent and demographical features of the NTS and
the NTS environs is presented for background information.
NEVADA TEST SITE
The major programs conducted at the NTS in the past have been
nuclear weapons development, proof-testing and weapons safety,
testing for peaceful uses of nuclear explosives (Project Plow-
share) , reactor/engine development for nuclear rocket and ram-jet
applications (Projects Pluto and Rover), basic high-energy nu-
clear physics research, and seismic studies (Vela Uniform). Dur-
ing this report period these programs were continued with the ex-
ception of Project Pluto, discontinued in 1964, and Project
Rover, which was terminated in January 1973. No Project Plow-
share nuclear tests or Vela Uniform studies have been conducted
at the NTS or any other site since 1970 and 1973, respectively.
All nuclear weapons tests since 1962 were conducted underground to
minimize the possibility of the release of fission products to
the atmosphere.
Site Location
The Nevada Test Site (Figures 1 and 2) is located in Nye
County, Nevada, with its southeast corner about 90 km northwest
of Las Vegas. The NTS has an area of about 3500 km2 and varies
from 40-56 km in width (east-west) and from 64-88 km in length
(north-south). This area consists of large basins or flats about
900-1200 m above mean sea level (MSL) surrounded by mountain
ranges 1800-2100 m MSL.
-------
The NTS is nearly surrounded by an exclusion area collective-
ly named the Nell is Air Force Range. The Range, particularly to
the north and east, provides a buffer zone between the test areas
and public lands. This buffer zone varies from 2U-10U km be-
tween the test area and land that is open to the public. Depend-
ing upon wind speed and direction, this provides a delay of from
1/2 to more than 6 hours before any accidental release of air-
borne radioactivity could pass over public lands.
Climate
The climate of the NTS and surrounding area is variable, pri-
marily due to altitude and the rugged terrain. Generally, the
climate is referred to as Continental Arid. Throughout the year
there is not sufficient water to support tree or crop growth
without irrigation.
The climate may be classified by the types of vegetation
which grow under these conditions. According to Houghton et al.,
this method, developed by Koppen1s classification of dry condi-
tions, is further subdivided on the basis of temperature and
severity of drought. Table 1, from Houghton et al., summarizes
the different characteristics of these climatic types in Nevada.
TABLE 1. CHARACTERISTICS OF CLIMATIC TYPES IN NEVADA
Climate
Type
Alpine
tundra
Humid
continental
Subhumid
continental
Mid- lati-
tude steppe
Mid-lati-
tude desert
Low-lati-
tude desert
Mean Temperature
oc
(OF)
Winter Summer
-18° -
( 0° -
-120 -
(10° -
-12° -
(10° -
-7° -
(20° -
.70 _
(20» _
HO _
(j,0o -
-90
15°)
-1°
30®)
-1°
30°)
40
<»0°)
HO
«0°>
10°
50°)
40
(400
10«>
(500
10°
(50°
18°
(650
18°
(650
270
(800
- 10°
- 50°)
- 21°
- 70°)
- 21°
- 70°)
- 270
- 80°)
- 270
- 80°)
- 32°
- 90°)
Annual Precipitation
cm
(inches)
Total* Snowfall
38
(15
64
(25
30
(12
15
( 6
8
( 3
5
( 2
- 114
- 45)
- 114
- 45)
- 64
- 25)
- 38
- 15)
- 20
- 8)
- 25
- 10)
Medium to
heavy
Heavy
Moderate
Light to
moderate
Light
Negligible
Dominant Percent
Vegetation of Area
Alpine
meadows
Pine- fir
forest
Pine or scrub
woodland
Sagebrush,
grass, scrub
Greasewood,
shad scale
Creosote
bush
—
1
15
57
20
7
which affect the
precipitation
water balance
overlap
in temperature
As pointed out by Houghton et al. , 90 percent of Nevada's
population lives in areas with less than 25 cm of rain per year
or in areas whach would be classified as mid-latitude steppe to
low-latitude desert regions.
-------
According to Quiring, 1968, the NTS average annual pr^cipita-
tion ranges from about 10 cm at the 900-m altitude to around 25
cm on the plateaus. During the winter months, the plateaus may
be snow-covered for periods of several days or weeks. Snow is
uncommon on the flats. Temperatures vary considerably with ele-
vation, slope, and local air currents. The average daily high
(low) temperatures at the lower altitudes are around 10° (-4°) C
in January and 35° (12°) C in July, with extremes of HU° and -26°
C. Corresponding temperatures on the plateaus are 2° (-1°) C in
January and 26° (18°) C in July with extremes of 38° and -29° C.
Temperatures as low as -3U° C and higher than 46° C have been
observed at the NTS.
The direction from which winds blow, as measured on a 30-m
tower at the Yucca observation station, is predominantly norther-
ly except for the months of May through August when winds from
the south-southwest predominate. Because of the prevalent
mountain/valley winds in the basins, south to southwest winds
predominate during daylight hours during most months. During the
winter months southerly winds have only a slight edge over north-
erly winds for a few hours during the warmest part of the day.
These wind patterns may be quite different at other locations on
the NTS because of local terrain effects and differences in ele-
vation (Quiring, 1968) .
Geology and Hydrology
Geological and hydrological studies of the NTS have been in
progress by the U.S. Geological Survey and various other institu-
tions since 1956. Because of this continuing effort, including
subsurface studies of numerous boreholes, the surface and under-
ground geological and hydrological characteristics for much of
the NTS are known in considerable detail. This is particularly
true for those areas in which underground experiments are con-
ducted. A comprehensive summary of the geology and hydrology of
the NTS was edited and published by Eckel, 1968.
There are two major hydrologic systems on the NTS (Figure 3).
Groundwater in the northwestern part of NTS or in the Pahute Mesa
area has been reported (WASH-DRAFT, to be published) to travel
somewhere between 2 and 80 m per year to the south and southwest
toward the Ash Meadows discharge area in the Amargosa Desert. It
is estimated that the groundwater to the east of the NTS moves
from north to south at a rate not less than 2 nor greater than
220 m per year. Carbon-1U analyses of this eastern groundwater
indicate that the lower velocity is nearer the true value. At
Mercury Valley, in the extreme southern part of the NTS, the
groundwater flow direction shifts to the southwest toward the Ash
Meadows discharge area in the southeastern Amargosa Valley,
-------
The water levels below the NTS vary from depths of about 100 m
beneath the surface at valleys in the southeastern part of the
site to more than 600 m beneath the surface at highlands to the
north. Although much of the valley fill is saturated, downward
movement of water is extremely slow. The primary aquifer in
these formations is the Paleozoic carbonates which underlie the
more recent tuffs and alluviums.
Land Use of NTS Environs
Figure 4 is a map of the off-NTS area showing general land
use. A wide variety of uses, such as farming, mining, grazing,
camping, fishing, and hunting, exist due to the variable ter-
rain. For example, within a 300-km radius west of the NTS, ele-
vations range from below sea level in Death Valley to 4420 m
above MSL in the Sierra Nevada Range, Additionally, parts of two
valleys of major agricultural importance (the Owens and San
Joaquin) are included. The areas south of the NTS are more uni-
form since the Mojave Desert ecosystem (mid-latitude desert) com-
prises most of this portion of Nevada, California, and Arizona.
The areas east of the NTS are primarily mid-latitude steppe with
some of the older river valleys, such as the Virgin River Valley
and Moapa Valley, supporting small-scale but intensive farming of
a variety of crops by irrigation. Grazing is also common in this
area, particularly to the northeast. The area north of the NTS
is also mid-latitude steppe where the major agricultural-related
activity is grazing of both cattle and sheep. Only areas of
minor agricultural importance, primarily the growing of alfalfa
hay, are found in this portion of the State within a distance of
300 km.
In the summer of 1974, a brief survey of home gardens around
the NTS found that a majority of the residents grow or have ac-
cess to locally grown fruits and vegetables. Approximately two
dozen of the surveyed gardens within 30-80 km of the NTS boundary
were selected for sampling. These gardens produce a variety of
root, leaf, seed, and fruit crops {Andrews, et al. , to be pub-
lished) .
The only industrial enterprises within the immediate off-NTS
area are 25 active mines, as shown in Figure 4, and several chem-
ical processing plants located near Henderson, Nevada (about 23
km south of Las Vegas). The number of employees for these opera-
tions varies from one person at several small mines to several
hundred workers for the chemical plants at Henderson. Most of
the individual mining operations involve less than 10 workers per
mine; however, a few operations employ up to 100-250 workers.
The major body of water close to the NTS is Lake Mead (100 km
southeast) a man-made lake supplied by water from the Colorado
River. Lake Mead supplies about 60 percent of the water used for
-------
domestic, recreational, and industrial purposes in the Las Veqas
Valley and a portion of the water used by southern California.
Smaller reservoirs and lakes located in the area are primarily
for irrigation and for livestock. In California, the Owens River
and Haiwee Reservoir feed into the Los Angeles Aqueduct and are
the major sources of domestic water for the Los Angeles area.
As indicated by Figure <4, there are many places scattered in
all directions from the NTS where such recreational activities as
hunting, fishing, and camping are enjoyed by both local residents
and tourists. In general, the camping and fishing sites to the
northwest, north, and northeast of the NTS are utilized through-
out the year except for the winter months. Camping and fishing
at locations southeast, south, and southwest are utilized
throughout the year with the most extensive activities occurring
during all months except the hot summer months. All hunting is
generally restricted to various times during the last 6 months
of the year.
Dairy farming is not extensive within the 300-km-radius area
under discussion. From a survey of milk cows during this report
period, 8900 dairy cows, 340 family goats, and 550 family cows
were located. The family cows and goats are found in all direc-
tions around the test site (Figure 5), whereas the dairy cows
(Figure 6) are located southeast of the test site (Moapa River
Valley, Nevada; Virgin River Valley, Nevada; and Las Vegas, Neva-
da), northeast {Hiko and Alamo, Nevada, area), west-northwest
(near Bishop, California), and southwest (near Barstow, Califor-
nia) .
Population Distribution
The populated area of primary concern around the NTS which is
sampled and monitored by surveillance Networks is shown in Figure
7 as the area within a 300-km radius of the NTS Control Point
(CP-1), except for the areas west of the Sierra Nevada Mountains
and in the southern portion of San Bernardino County. Based upon
the projections for the year 1975 by the U.S. Bureau of the Cen-
sus and the 1976 projections for Washoe and Clark Counties by the
University of Nevada (Reno), Figure 7 shows the current population
of counties in Nevada and pertinent portions of the States of
Arizona, California, and Utah. Las Vegas and vicinity is the only
major population center within the inscribed area of Figure 7.
With the assumption that the total populations of the counties
bisected by the 300-km radius lie within the inscribed area, there
is primary concern, about 60 percent of which lives in the Las
Vegas urbanized area. If the urbanized area is not considered
in determining population density, there are about 0.6 people per
km2 (1.5 people per mi2). For comparison, the United States
(50 states, 1970 census) has a population density of 22 people
-------
per km2, and the overall Nevada average from the 1975 projection
is 2.1 people per km2-
The off-site areas within about 80 km of NTS are predominant-
ly rural. Several small communities are located in the area, the
largest being in the Pahrump Valley. This growing rural communi-
ty, with an estimated population of about 2500, is located about
72 km south of the NTS. The Amargosa Farm area has a population
of about UOO and is located about 50 km southwest of the center
of the NTS. The Spring Meadows Farm area is a relatively new
development consisting of approximately 10,000 km2 (4000 m2) with
a population of about 60. This area is about 55 km south-south-
west of the NTS. The largest town in the near off-site area is
Beatty with a population of about 500; it is located about 65 km
to the west of the site.
In the adjacent states, the Mojave Desert of California,
which includes Death Valley National Monument, lies along the
southwestern border of Nevada. The population in the Monument
boundaries varies considerably from season to season with fewer
than 200 permanent residents and tourists in the area during any
given period in the summer months. However, during the winter,
as many as 12,000 tourists and campers can be in the area on any
particular day during the major holiday periods. The largest
town in this general area is Barstow, located 265 km south-south-
west of the NTS, with a population of about 18,200. The Owens
Valley, where numerous small towns are located, lies about 50 km
west of Death Valley, The largest town in Owens Valley is Bish-
op, located 225 km west-northwest of the NTS, with a population
of about 3600.
The extreme southwestern region of Utah is more developed
than the adjacent part of Nevada. The largest town, Cedar City,
with a population of 9900, is located 280 km east-northeast of
the NTS. The next largest community is St. George, located 220
km east of the NTS, with a population of 8000.
The extreme northwestern region of Arizona is mostly undevel-
oped range land with the exception of that portion in the Lake
Mead Recreation Area.
Several small retirement communities are found along the
Colorado River, primarily at Lake Mojave and Lake Havasu. The
largest town in the area is Kingman, located 280 km southeast of
the NTS, with a population of about 7500.
OTHER TEST SITES
Table A-1 lists the names, dates, locations, yields, depths,
and purposes of all underground nuclear tests conducted at loca-
-------
tions other than the NTS. No off-NTS nuclear tests were conduct-
ed during this report period.
-------
SUMMARY
During 1976, the monitoring of gamma radiation levels in the
environs of the NTS was continued through the use of an off-site
network of radiation dosimeters and gamma-rate recorders. Con-
centrations of radionuclides in pertinent environmental media
were also continuously or periodically monitored by established
air, milk, and water sampling networks. Before each underground
nuclear detonation, mobile radiation monitors, equipped with
radiation monitoring instruments and sampling equipment, were
on standby in off-NTS locations to respond to any accidental re-
lease of airborne radioactivity. An airplane was airborne near
the test area at detonation time to undertake tracking and sam-
pling of any release which might occur.
All radioactivity from the underground nuclear tests was
contained except for a total of about 91 curies (Ci) of radio-
activity which was reported by ERDA/NV as being released inter-
mittently throughout the year and small undetermined amounts of
tritium and e5Kr which slowly seep to the surface from the under-
ground test areas. The only off-NTS indication of this radio-
activity was determined from an air sample of the Noble Gas and
Tritium Surveillance Network collected at Death Valley Junction
during the period August 24-31. This sample had a 3H in air con-
centration of 2.TxlO-1 t (jCi/ml above background. The estimated
whole-body dose resulting from this concentration to a hypothe-
tical receptor at this location was calculated as 1.3 prem.
Based upon this dose and the population of residents between
the Nevada Test Site and Death Valley Junction, the estimated
dose commitment i > within a 80-km radius of the NTS Control
Point was estimated to be 0.00078 man-rem.
All other measurements of radioactivity made by the Off-Site
Radiological Safety Program were attributed to naturally occur-
ring radioactivity or atmospheric fallout and not related to
underground nuclear test operations during this report period.
Radioactivity from both atmospheric nuclear tests by the
People's Republic of China on September 25 at 2200 hours, PDT,
and on November 16 at 2200 hours, PST, were detected on filter
samples of the Air Surveillance Network beginning on samples
collected on October 4 and continuing throughout this report
>The dose commitment (product of estimated average dose and
population) at Las Vegas from 1 year's exposure to natural
background radiation is about 10,000 man-rem.
-------
period. The tests resulted in increases of airborne radio-
activity which were identified by the Air Surveillance Network as
the fission products 9szr, lO'Ru, io*Ru, i3ij, i32Te, »*°Ba,
141Ce, and »*4Ce. None of the other networks detected the radio-
activity from the Chinese tests.
The Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program used for the
monitoring of radionuclide concentrations in surface and ground-
waters which are down the hydrologic gradient from sites of past
underground nuclear tests was continued for the NTS and six
other sites located elsewhere in Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico,
and Mississipni. Naturally occurring radionuclides, such as
uranium isotopes and radium-226, were detected in samples col-
lected at most locations at levels which were comparable to
concentrations measured for previous years. Tritium was mea-
sured in all surface water samples at levels up to 3.0x10~6 pCi/
ml, which is not significantly different than the upper range
in concentrations (2.5x10-* pCi/ml) observed in the past from
atmospheric fallout. Except for samples collected at wells
known to be contaminated by the injection of high concentrations
of radioactivity for tracer studies, no radioactivity related to
past underground tests or to the contaminated wells was identi-
fied. However, three anomalies in 3H concentrations were ob-
served for well samples. One of the anomalies involved a monthly
sample collected on-NTS from Well U3CN-5, which had a 3H concen-
tration of 3.3x10-7 pCi/ml. The concentration cannot be explain-
ed, as all concentrations prior to and after the sample have been
5.1x10-8 pCi/ml or less. The other two anomalies concern two
semi-annual samples collected on-NTS at Well B, which were col-
lected from the well this year for the first time. The Well B
samples had concentrations of 2.5x10~7 )jCi/ml and 2.6x10~7
Although no explanation for all three results is available at
this time, the concentrations are only <0.01 percent of the
Concentration Guide (3x10~3 pCi/ml) for occupational exposures.
-------
MONITORING DATA COLLECTION, ANALYSIS, AND EVALUATION
The major portion of the Off-Site Radiological Safety Pro-
gram for the NTS consisted of continuously-operated dosimetry and
air sampling networks and scheduled collections of milk and water
samples at locations surrounding the NTS. Before each nuclear
test, mobile monitors were positioned in the off-site areas most
likely to be exposed to a possible release of radioactive mate-
rial. These monitors, equipped with radiation survey instru-
ments, gamma exposure-rate recorders, thermoluminescent dosim-
eters, portable air samplers, and supplies for collecting envi-
ronmental samples, were prepared to conduct a monitoring program
directed from the NTS Control Point via two-way radio communica-
tions. In addition, for each event at the NTS, a U.S. Air Force
aircraft with two Reynolds Electrical and Engineering Company
monitors eguipped with portable radiation survey instruments was
airborne near surface ground zero to detect and track any radio-
active effluent. One EMSL-LV cloud sampling and tracking air-
craft was also available to obtain in-cloud samples, assess total
cloud volume, and provide long-range tracking in the event of a
release of airborne radioactivity.
During this report period, only underground nuclear detona-
tions were conducted. All detonations were contained. However,
during re-entry drilling operations, occasional low level re-
leases of airborne radioactivity.- primarily radioxenon, did
occur. According to information provided by the Nevada Opera-
tions Office, ERDA, the following quantities of radionuclides
were released into the atmosphere during CY 1976:
TABLE 2. TOTAL AIRBORNE RADIONUCLIDE RELEASES AT THE
NEVADA TEST SITE
Quantity Released
Radionuclide (Ci)
3H 3.11
l33Xe 87.70
133mXe 0.23
135Xe C. (11
Total 91.05
10
-------
Continuous low-level releases of JH and 85Kr occur on the
NTS. Tritium is released primarily from the Sedan crater and by
evaporation from ponds formed by drainage of water from tunnel
test areas in the Rainier Mesa. Krypton-85 slowly seeps to the
surface from underground test areas. The quantities of radio-
activity from seepage are not quantitated, but are detected at
on-site sampling locations.
Contained within the following sections of this report are
descriptions for each surveillance network and interpretations
of the analytical results which are summarized (maximum, minimum,
and arithmetric average concentrations) in tables. Where appro-
priate, the arithmetric averages in the tables are compared to
the applicable ERDA Concentration Guides (CG's) listed in Appen-
dix B. Unless specificly stated otherwise, all concentration
averages are arithmetric averages.
For "grab" type samples, radionuclide concentrations were
extrapolated to the appropriate collection date. Concentrations
determined over a period of time were extrapolated to the mid-
point of the collection period. Concentration averages were
calculated assuming that each concentration less than the mini-
mum detectable concentration (MDC) was equal to the MDC, except
for the airborne radionuclide concentration averages determined
for the Air Surveillance Network. Due to the large number of
airborne radionuclides that can be present below the MDC, those
concentrations less than the MDC were assumed to be zero for the
computation of concentration averages, and only those radio-
nuclides detected above the MDC sometime during the year were
reported.
All radiological analyses referred to within the text are
briefly described in Table A-2 and listed with the minimum de-
tectable concentrations (MDC's). To assure validity of the data,
analytical personnel routinely calibrate equipment, split se-
lected samples (except for the Air Surveillance Network) for
replicate analyses, and analyze spiked samples prepared by the
Quality Assurance Branch, EMSL-LV, on a bi-monthly basis. All
quality assurance checks for the year identified no problems
which would affect the results reported here.
For the purpose of routinely assessing the sampling replica-
tion error plus analytical/counting errors associated with the
collection and analysis of the different types of network sam-
ples, a replicate sampling program for all sample types was
initiated at the end of CY 1975. A description of the proce-
dures and results is presented in Appendix C. From the results
of the program, the variances that have been observed in all
surveillance data were found to be greater than the sampling and
analytical/counting errors except for the 85Kr sampling and the
monitoring of environmental gamma radiation with TLD's. Appar-
ently the majority of the variation in 85Kr concentrations ob-
11
-------
served in the past has been primarily due to the sampling and
analytical/counting errors. As there are not sufficient TLD data
for any given station in one year, a proper assessment of total
variances in TLD results for a given station could not be made to
compare to the precision error determination of this program.
ATR SURVEILLANCE NETWORK
The Air Surveillance Network (ASN), operated by the EMSL-LV,
consisted of 48 active and 73 standby sampling stations located
in 21 Western States (Figures 8 and 9). Samples of airborne par-
ticulates were collected continuously at each active station on
10-cm diameter, glass-fiber filters at a flow rate of about 400m3
of air per day. The filters were collected three times per week,
resulting in 48- or 72-hour samples from each active station.
Activated charcoal cartridges directly behind the glass-fiber
filters were used regularly for the collection of gaseous radio-
iodines at 21 stations near the NTS. Charcoal cartridges could
have been added to all other stations and 67 standby stations
could have been activated, if necessary, by a telephone request
to station operators. All air samples (filters and cartridges)
were mailed to the EMSL-LV for analysis. Special retrieval
could have been arranged at selected locations in the event a
release of radioactivity was believed to have occurred.
During the year, the standby stations were activated quarter-
ly to check the operation of the samplers and to maintain an
understanding of Network procedures with station operators. Tn
anticipation of airborne radioactivity from the atmospheric
nuclear tests by the People's Republic of China on September 25
at 2200 hours PDT, and on November 16 at 2200 hours PST, 67 of
the standby stations were activated with charcoal cartridges
during the respective periods September 29 through October 15
and November 18-26.
During the report period, no airborne radioactivity related
to the underground nuclear testing program at the Nevada Test
Site was detected on filter samples or charcoal cartridges from
the ASN. However, radioactivity from both nuclear tests by the
People's Republic of China was detected on filter samples.
Appendix D describes and summarizes the analytical results of
those samples containing radioactivity from these tests.
NOBLE GAS AND TRITIUM SURVEILLANCE NETWORK
The Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network, which was
first established in March and April 1972, was operated to moni-
tor the airborne levels of radiokrypton, radioxenon, and tritium
(3H) in the forms of tritiated hydrogen (HT), tritiated water
(HTO) , and tritiated methane (CH3T) . The Network consists of
12
-------
four on-NTS and seven off-NTS stations shown in Figure 10.
The equipment used in this Network is composed of two sepa-
rate systems, a compressor-type air sampler and a molecular
sieve sampler. The compressor-type equipment continuously sam-
ples air over a 7-day period and stores it in two pressure tanks.
The tanks together hold approximately 2 m3 of air at atmospheric
pressure. They are replaced weekly and returned to the EMSL-LV
where the tank contents are separated and analyzed for *5Kr,
radioxenons, and CH3T by gas chromatography and liquid-scintil-
lation counting techniques (Table A-2). The molecular sieve equip-
ment samples air through a filter to remove particulates and then
through a series of molecular sieve columns. Approximately 5 m3
of air are passed through each sampler over a 7-day sampling
period. From the HTO absorbed on the first molecular sieve
column, the concentration of 3H in pCi/ml of recovered moisture
and in pCi/ml of sampled air is determined by liquid-scintilla-
tion counting techniques. The 3H, passing through the first
column as free hydrogen (HT), is oxidized and collected on the
last molecular sieve column. From the concentration of 3H for
the moisture recovered from the last column, the 3H (in ^Ci/ml
of sampled air) as HT is determined.
Table A-3 summarizes the results of this Network by listing
the maximum, minimum, and average concentrations for 8SKr, total
Xe or 133Xe, 3H as CH3T, 3H as HTO, and 3H as HT. The annual
average concentrations for each station were calculated over the
time period sampled assuming that all values less than MDC were
equal to the MDC. All concentrations of 8SKr, Xe or l33Xe, 3H as
CH3T, 3H as HTO, and 3H as HT are expressed in the same unit, pCi/
ml of air. Since the 3H concentration in air may vary by factors
of 15-20 while the concentration in pci/ml of atmospheric water
varies by factors up to about 7, the 3H concentration in pCi/ml
atmospheric moisture is also given in the table as a more re-
liable indicator in cases when background concentrations of HTO
are exceeded.
As shown by Table A-3, the average 85Kr concentrations for
the year were nearly the same for all stations, ranging from 1.7x
10-*1 pCi/ml to 2.0X10-11 pCi/ml, with an overall average of
1.93x10~11 pCi/ml. As shown by the following table, the 85Kr
levels for all stations have been gradually increasing. Since
this happened for all locations, the increase is probably a re-
sult of an increase in the ambient concentration world-wide,
primarily as a result of nuclear reactor operations. Based upon
the Network average concentrations over a 5-year period, this in-
crease amounts to 5x10~l* to 1.2x10-»3 pCi/ml/y.
13
-------
TABLE 3. ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS OF «SKR 1972-1976
Concentration, 10-11
Location
Death Valley Jet., Calif.
Beatty, Nev.
Diablo, Nev.
Hiko, Nev.
Indian Springs, Nev.
Las Vegas, Nev.
Mercury, NTS
Area 51, NTS
BJY, NTS
Area 12, NTS
Tonopah, Nev.
1972
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
-
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.6
1.6
1973
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.6
-
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.8
1.6
1.6
197U
1.8
1.7
1.7
1.7
-
1.7
1.8
1.7
1.9
1.8
1.8
1975
1.7
1.9
1.8
1.7
2.0
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.9
1.8
1.7
1976
2.0
2.0
1.9
1.7
2.0
1.8
1.9
2.0
2.0
2.0
1. 9
Total Network 1.62 1.61 1.76 1.81 1.93
The maximum concentrations for all stations ranged from 2.4x
10-ii pCi/ml to 2.9x10-n pCi/ml. Previously, those concentra-
tions equal to or greater than 2.5x10~»» »Ci/ml were attributed
to some outside source or anomalous variations. However, from
the expected geometric standard deviation resulting from the sam-
pling and analytical/counting errors, as determined from the Repli
cate Sampling Program (Appendix C), the 99% upper confidence
limits (TJCL's) on the geometric mean concentrations of asxr were
determined as 3.0x10-n MCi/ml or 3.6x10~n pCi/ml depending upon
whether one is considering the location having the lowest geo-
metric mean concentration (1.67x10-n pCi/ml at Hiko) for the
year or the location with the highest geometric mean concentra-
tion (2.01x10-11 pci/ml at BJY). Based upon the UCL's, all the
Network stations had variations in 8sKr concentrations which were
consistent with variations one would expect from the total errors
of sample collection and analysis determined from the Replicate
Sampling Program.
As in the past, concentrations of 3R as HTO in atmospheric
moisture were generally at background levels at all off-NTS
stations and at the on-NTS stations Mercury and Area 51 except
for occasional increases in individual samples. The on-NTS sta-
tions of BJY and Area 12 continued to have concentrations con-
sistently above background; the concentration averages for these
stations for this year were about a factor of 5 greater than
the average concentrations for all off-NTS stations.
All of the off-NTS stations had concentrations of ^H as HTO
in atmospheric moisture which were above the expected upper
limit of background (approximately 1.0x10~6 pCi/ml H2O) used in
the past. From the estimate of sampling and analytical counting
-------
errors for this type of sample (Appendix C), this upper limit
appears to be reasonable; however, an evaluation of the cumula-
tive frequency distributions of the annual data for each station
indicates that occasional concentrations above this limit were
all within the cumulative frequency distribution of environmental
background except for Death Valley Junction, which had a 3H con-
centration of 4.2x10~* nCi/ml of atmospheric moisture during the
period August 2U-31. This indicates that the variances in con-
centrations for the other off-NTS stations were normal variations
in environmental background. The total of the average 3H concen-
trations (HTO+HT+CH3T) at this location was 7.0x10~12 pCi/ml, or
<0.01 percent of the Concentration Guide (CG) for continuous ex-
posure to a suitable sample of the exposed population.
The average concentrations of 3H as HT (Table A-3) at all off-
NTS stations and at the on-NTS stations Mercury and Area 51 were
generally less than the averages for these locations last year,
whereas the average concentrations for Area 12 and BJY were
slightly higher than last year's averages. From a review of the
cumulative frequency distributions of the data for each station,
all concentrations seemed to be part of the environmental back-
ground.
Concentrations of 3H as CH3T were below the MDC at all loca-
tions as normally observed except for a few detectable concentra-
tions at all locations except Diablo during the months of Septem-
ber through November, The maximum concentrations for all loca-
tions ranged between 4.0x10~12 pCi/ml to I.SxIO-11 pCi/ml. The
total of the average 3H concentrations (HTO+HT+CH3T) for the
location having the highest CH3T concentration (1.8x10~11 pCi/ml
at Indian Springs) was <0.03 percent of the CG for exposure to a
suitable sample of the exposed population. Since the detectable
concentrations occurred generally throughout the Network during
the same period, the concentrations were not attributed to NTS
operations.
DOSIMETRY NETWORK
The Dosimetry Network during the first three quarters of 1976
consisted of 70 locations surrounding the Nevada Test Site which
were monitored continuously with thermoluminescent dosimeters
(TLD's). Eight stations were added to the network in the fourth
quarter of 1976 in order to improve the geographic distribu-
tion and population coverage, but these will not be reported
until 1977. The locations of all stations, shown in Figure 11,
are within a 270-km radius of the center of the NTS and include
both inhabited and uninhabited locations. Each Dosimetry Net-
work station was routinely equipped with three Harshaw model
2271-G2 (TLD-200) dosimeters which were exchanged on a quarterly
basis. Within the general area covered by the dosimetry sta-
tions, 25 cooperating off-site residents each wore a dosimeter.
15
-------
which was exchanged at the same time as the station dosimeters.
The model 2271-G2 dosimeters consist of two small "chips"
of dysprosium-activated calcium fluoride, designated TLD-200
by Harshaw, mounted in a window of Teflon plastic attached to
a small aluminum card. An energy compensation shield of 1.2-mm
thick cadmium metal is placed over the chips, and the whole card
is then sealed in an opaque plastic container. Three of these
dosimeters are placed in a rugged plastic housing located one
metre above the ground at each station location to standardize
the exposure geometry and to prevent tampering or pilferage.
After appropriate corrections were made for background ex-
posure accumulated during shipment between the Laboratory and
the monitoring location, the dosimeter readings for each station
were averaged, and this average value for each station was com-
pared to similar values from the past year to determine if the
new value was within the range of previous background values for
that station. Any values significantly greater than previous
values would have led to calculations of net exposure, while
values significantly less than previously would have been exam-
ined to determine possible reading or handling errors. The re-
sults from each of the personnel dosimeters were compared to
the background value of the nearest station to determine if a
net exposure had occurred.
The smallest exposure in excess of background radiation which
may be determined from these dosimeter readings depends primarily
on variations in the natural background at the particular sta-
tion location. Experience has shown these variations to be sig-
nificant from one monitoring period to another, occasionally
approaching 20 percent, which is decidedly greater than the pre-
cision of the dosimeters themselves. From the results of the
Replicate Sampling Program, Appendix C, the 99% upper confidence
limit for variations from the geometric mean due to precision
errors was estimated to be 14?L Typically, the smallest net ex-
posure observable for a 90-day monitoring period would be 5-15mR
in excess of background. The term "background", as used in this
context, refers to naturally occurring radioactivity plus a con-
tribution from residual man-made fission products.
Table A-4 lists the maximum, minimum, and average dose equiv-
alent rate (mrem/y) measured at each station in the network
during 1976 due to penetrating gamma radiation. Only one sta-
tion, a relatively new station. Mammoth Mountain, California,
(260 km northwest of CP-1, NTS) showed a small (8mR) exposure in
excess of the estimated background. Due to varying amounts of
snow cover during the year, this station may exhibit unusually
large variations in the observed exposure rate as a consequence
of its location. Further investigation is necessary to determine
the actual cause, though it is undoubtedly unrelated to the cur-
rent testing program at NTS. Only one of the cooperating off-
16
-------
site residents exhibited exposures (3-4mR) in excess of the esti-
mated background, but an investigation has indicated that this is
probably due to local variations in natural background and is un-
related to NTS activities.
The average exposure rate for the Dosimetry Network was
approximately the same in 1976 as in 1975, despite the fallout
detected by the Air Surveillance Network from atmospheric tests
conducted by the People's Republic of China in September and
November. Unusually low levels of world-wide fallout prevailed
throughout the year, though this may have been partially offset
by the increased cosmic ray flux, as 1976 marked the minimum of
the 11-year solar activity cycle (Anderson, 1972). The table be-
low shows the decreasing trend of the dose due to environmental
radiation from 1971 through 1976 for the Dosimetry Network.
TABLE 4. DOSIMETRY NETWORK SUMMARY FOR THE YEARS 1971-1976
Environmental Radiation Dose Rate (mrem/y)
Year Maximum Minimum Average
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
250
200
180
160
140
140
102
84
80
62
51
51
160
144
123
1 14
94
94
During 1976, investigations continued into the calibration
techniques for the TLD's used by the Dosimetry Network. Through
EMSL-LV participation in an international dosimeter intercompari-
son as well as a series of laboratory studies, it was discovered
that two significant factors were being underestimated, leading
to a general underestimation of the exposure measured by the 2271-
G2 dosimeters. First, inadequate allowance was being made for
scattered radiation present during the calibration exposure pro-
cess using 137Cs. By changing to a more appropriate exposure
geometry, a change of approximately 12% was noted. Secondly, in-
adequate allowance for fading of the stored TL signal within the
dosimeter was being made. By exposing the calibration controls
halfway through the issue-collection cycle, as well as placing
pre-irradiated dosimeters at each station in addition to the
routine ones, a more precise compensation for signal fading may
be achieved. The data presented in this report have been calcu-
lated in this manner, as will the data in future reports. Simi-
lar corrections to the 1975 data resulted in the values shown in
the above table which are 5-16% higher than those previously re-
ported.
17
-------
while it is nearly impossible to make comparisons of Dosim-
etry Network data with other in situ measurements - as very few
have been made - comparisons of measurements taken with these
dosimeters at other locations show reasonable agreement with rec-
ognized standards. For example, in the Second International
Tntercomparison of Environmental Dosimeters conducted during the
winter of 1975-76 in New York, after corrections for fading and
scattered radiation during calibration were made, the EPA esti-
mate of the field exposure was l7.5mR compared to the accepted
value of 17mR measured with a pressurized ionization chamber
(Burke et al., 1976). This difference is well within the esti-
mated precision of the EPA dosimetry system.
The function of the Dosimetry Network is to measure the radi-
ation exposures, if any, due to releases of radioactivity from
the NTS. To do this accurately requires establishment of the
environmental background radiation exposure rate at each moni-
toring station so that an exposure in excess of that background
can be noted. The ability to measure the background rate,
while both interesting and necessary, is of secondary importance
to the measurement of radiation doses due to NTS activities.
A network of 30 stationary gamma exposure rate recorders
placed at selected air sampling locations was used to document
gamma exposure rates at fixed locations {Figures 8 and 9) . These
recorders use a 2.5- by 30.5-cm constant-current ionization cham-
ber detector filled with methane, and operate on either 110V a.c.
or on a self-contained battery pack. They have a range of 0.004
mR/h to 40mR/h with an accuracy of about ^.10 percent. Beginning
in October of this report period, all but the following 10 sta-
tions in Nevada were placed on standby: Alamo, Beatty, Diablo,
Goldfield, Indian Springs, Lathrop Wells, Nyala, Scotty's Junc-
tion, Stone Cabin Ranch, Tonopah, and Twin Springs Ranch. During
the year, no increase in exposure rates attributable to NTS
operations was detected by the network of gamma-rate recorders.
MILK SURVEILLANCE NETWORK
Milk is only one of the sources of dietary intake of environ-
mental radioactivity. However, it is a very convenient indicator
of the general population's intake of biologically significant
radionuclide contaminants. For this reason it is monitored on a
routine basis. Few of the fission product radionuclides become
incorporated into the milk due to the selective metabolism of the
cow. However, those that are incorporated are very important
from a radiological health standpoint and are a very sensitive
measure of their concentrations in the environment. The six most
common fission product radionuclides which can occur in milk are
3H, 89,90sr(f i3»I, i37Cgf and i *oBa. A seventh radionuclide,
*°K, also occurs in milk at a reasonably constant concentration
of about 1.2x10-* pCi/ml. Since this is a naturally occurring
18
-------
radionuclide, it was not included in the analytical results
summarized in this section.
The milk surveillance networks operated by the EMSL-LV were
the routine Milk Surveillance Network (MSN) and the Standby Milk
Surveillance Network (SMSN). The MSN, during 1976 (Figure 12),
consisted of 22 different locations where 3.8-litre milk samples
were collected from family cows, commerical pasteurized milk pro-
ducers, Grade A raw milk intended for pasteurization, and Grade A
raw milk for local consumption. In the event of a release of
activity from the NTS, intensive sampling would have been con-
ducted in the affected area within a 480-km radius of CP-1, NTS,
to assess the radionuclide concentrations in milk, the radiation
doses that could result from the ingestion of the milk, and the
need for protective action. Samples are collected from milk
suppliers and producers beyond 480 km within the SMSN.
During 1975, 89 milk samples were collected from the MSN on a
quarterly collection schedule. Sampling was terminated at the
dairies in Bishop, Hiko, and Alamo, due to their going out of
business. No replacements for the ones at Bishop and Alamo were
available; however, sampling was begun at the Hansen Ranch as a
replacement for the Schofield Dairy at Hiko.
Each MSN milk sample was analyzed for gamma-emitters and
89,9osr. Samples collected at six locations from the MSN were
also analyzed for 3H. Table A-2 lists the general analytical pro-
cedures and detection limits for these analyses.
The SMSN consisted of about 158 Grade A milk processing plants
in all States west of the Mississippi River. Managers of these
facilities could be requested by telephone to collect raw milk
samples representing milk sheds supplying milk to the plants.
Since there were no releases of radioactivity from the NTS or
other test locations, this network was not activated except to
request one sample from most of the locations to check the readi-
ness and reliability of the network. During the year, 110 milk
samples were collected and analyzed by gamma spectrometry. Sam-
ples selected from all Western States were also analyzed for 3H
and *9 '9°Sr.
The analytical results of milk samples collected from the MSN
during 1976 are summarized in Table A-5, where the maximum, mini-
mum, and average concentrations of the l37Cs, 89,9°Sr, and 3H in
samples collected during the year are shown for each sampling
location. As shown by the following Table 5r the average radio-
nuclide concentrations for the whole Network are comparable to
those for the SMSN, if not slightly lower.
19
-------
TABLE 5. SUMMARY OF RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS
FOR MILK SURVEILLANCE NETWORK AND STANDBY
SURVEILLANCE NETWORK
Concentrat ion
(10-» pCi/ml)
Network
MSN
SMSN
Radionculide
137CS
90sr
3H
137CS
9°Sr
3H
No. of
Samples
87
88
23
110
55
29
C
Max
<10
6.5
<700
1 1
8.9
1500
C
Min
<2
<0.6
<300
<4
<0.7
<300
C
Avq
<4
<2
<400
<7
<3
<500
The observed levels of *°sr in milk from the area covered by
the MSN are generally below concentrations measured in other
locations in the United States due to the low rainfall and,
subsequently, low deposition of *°Sr: in Nevada. As shown in
Figure 13, higher concentrations of «°Sr measured by this Network
normally occur to the north of the NTS. This is suspected to be
the result of close-in fallout following the atmospheric nuclear
tests during the 1950's and the higher rainfall that occurs north
of the NTS. These higher concentrations are still below the
concentrations measured in many parts of the country and are
distinguishable only because of the low concentrations which
normally prevail in this area.
LONG-TERM HYDROLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM
During this reporting period, EMSL-LV personnel continued the
collection and analysis of water samples from wells, springs, and
spring-fed surface water sources which are down the hydrologic
gradient of the groundwater at the NTS and at off-NTS sites of
underground nuclear detonations to monitor for any migration of
test-related radionuclides through the movement of groundwater
The water samples were collected from well heads or spring dis-
charge points wherever possible. Prior to each sampling at a
wellhead, water was pumped from the acquirer to assure the
collection of representative samples. if pumps were not avail-
able, an electrical-mechanical water sampler capable of collect-
ing 3-litre samples at depths to 1800 m was used
20
-------
Nevada Test Site
For the NTS, attempts were made to sample 10 locations month-
ly and 22 locations semi-annually (Figures 1U and 15). Addition-
ally, samples were collected annually from 10 locations selected
from the former Water Surveillance Network, which was discon-
tinued in 1975. Not all stations could be sampled with the
desired frequency because of inclement weather conditions and
inoperative pumps.
During the year, sampling at Well 20A-2 and Well 19g-s was
discontinued because of possible collapse of the wells from
nuclear tests in the area. Also Well J-12 was redesignated as a
standby to Well J-13. Well 2, which was previously sampled semi-
annually, was added to the group of locations sampled monthly.
For each sampled location, samples of raw water, filtered
water, and filtered and acidified water were collected. The raw
water samples were analyzed for 3H. Portions of the filtered and
acidified samples were given radiochemical analyses by the cri-
teria summarized in Table A-6. Table A-2 summarizes the ana-
lytical techniques used. Each filter was also analyzed by gamma
spectrome try.
Tables A-7, A-8, and A-9 list the analytical results for all
samples collected and analyzed during this reporting period and
compares them to the CG's (Appendix B). As indicated by the
tables, all observed concentrations of the man-made radionuclides
3H, 89,9°Sr, and 23«,239pu were either below the MDC's or small
fractions of the CG's. The concentrations of these radionuclides
in all wells not contaminated by radioactive tracer studies were
also in conformance with the recently promulgated EPA Drinking
Water Regulations (Appendix B), even though few of the wells are
used for drinking water.
As in the past, 3H was detected in NTS Wells C and C-1 due
to tracer experiments conducted prior to the commencement of this
surveillance program. All 3H concentrations were below 0.01 per-
cent of the Concentration Guide for an occupationally-exposed
person.
Due to the absence of information on background levels of 3H
in all other deep wells, the 3H concentrations measured by the
program can only be compared to previous determinations. Such a
comparison for each location indicated that there are no signifi-
cant increases in concentrations which could be the result of 3H
migration from the sites of underground nuclear detonations.
Many of the samples collected from wells had 3H concentrations
near the MDC with fluctuations occasionally above the MDC. These
variations appear to be comparable to the variations from the
sampling and analytical/counting errors estimated from samples
receiving 238U analyses. The 99% upper confidence limits for sam-
21
-------
pies receiving *3»U analyses (Appendix C) were 4-9 times the
geometric mean concentration, depending upon whether the samples
were collected from well heads or with the electrical-mechanical
water sampler. Assuming that the geometric mean for a given
location is near the MDC for 3R, (approximately 9.0x10~9 pCi/ml)
the highest concentration of *H one would expect at the 99% con-
fidence level would be U. 0x10-" pCi/ml to 8.0x10-» pCi/ml. All
3H concentrations in samples from the wells were below these
levels except for one sample from Well U3CN-5 (3.30x10~* jjCi/ml)
and the two semi-annual samples from Well B (2.6x10~7 jjCi/ml and
2.5x10-7 Mci/ml) . Since the *H concentrations in samples from
Well U3CN-5 in past years have never exceeded 5.1x10~8 /jCi/ml,
this value is considered an anomaly. Well B was sampled this
year for the first time, so no past information on the 3H con-
centration in this well is available.
The 226Ra and 23»,23s,23su detected in most of the water
samples occur naturally in groundwater. The concentrations of
these radionuclides for this reporting period were similar to
the concentrations reported for previous years.
Tables A-7, A-8, and A-9 show concentrations of 9°Sr, 2
and 239Pu which were above their respective MDC's. These concen
trations, with two-sigma counting error and percentage of the
appropriate Concentration Guide, are shown as follows in Table 6
TABLE 6. DETECTABLE CONCENTRATIONS OF 9°SR, 23apUf
IN WATER SAMPLES
Cone. ±3-Sigma
Counting Error
Location Radionuclide (10~9 yCi/ml)
Well UE5C
Beatty City Supply
Las Vegas Well 28
Lathrop Wells City Supply
Twin Springs Ranch
Tonopah City Supply
2
2
2
Z
2
2
sapu
39Pu
90Sr
39Pu
39Pu
38pu
39Pu
0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
0.
0.
19
062
1
032
024
027
020
+
±
±
±
±
±
±
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
10
041
72
030
027
035
024
% of
Cone.
Guide
<0
<0
0
<0
<0
<0
<0
.0
.0
.4
.0
.0
.0
.0
1
1
1
1
1
1
All of the preceding concentrations are less or only slightly
greater than their respective three-sigma counting errors; there
fore, all the concentrations are considered to be the result of
statistical error and not necessarily true indications of the
presence of these radionuclides.
22
-------
Other Test Sites
The annual collection and radiological analysis of water
samples were continued for this program at all off-NTS sites of
underground nuclear detonations except for Project Cannikin on
Amchitka Island, Alaska, and Project Rio Blanco near Meeker,
Colorado. The latter two sites are the responsibility of other
agencies. The project sites at which samples were collected
are Project Gnome near Carlsbad, New Mexico; Project Faultless
in Central Nevada; Project Shoal near Fallon, Nevada; Project
Gasbuggy in Rio Arriba County, New Mexico; Project Rulison near
Rifle, Colorado; and Project Dribble at Tatum Dome, Mississippi.
Figures 16 through 22 identify the sampling locations, and
Table A-1 lists additional information on the location of each
site and tests performed at these locations.
All samples were analyzed using the same criteria (Table A-6)
as for samples from the NTS Programs. The analytical results of
all water samples collected during CY 1976 are summarized in
Table A-10 and compared to the CG's (Appendix B). In general,
the concentrations of the man-made radionuclide 3H, 89/'°Sr, and
238,239pu were less than the MDC's or a small fraction of the
CG's. The concentrations of these radionuclides in all wells not
previously contaminated by radioactive tracer studies were also
in conformance with the EPA Drinking Water Regulation (Appendix
B), although few of the wells are actually used for drinking
water. The concentrations of the naturally occurring radionu-
clides 226Ra and 234,235,assy were consistent with levels seen
for previous years. All 3H concentrations in well samples were
similar to concentrations measured during previous years.
The only sample results showing radioactivity concentrations
significantly above background levels were for USGS Wells Nos. H
and 8 near Malaga, New Mexico. As mentioned in previous re-
ports, these wells, which are fenced, posted, and locked to pre-
vent their use by unauthorized personnel, were contaminated by
the injection of high concentrations of radioactivity for a
radioactive tracer study.
All surface water samples had 3H concentrations no greater
than 2.5x10~6 pCi/ml, a level considered from past experience
to be the highest one would expect from atmospheric fallout, ex-
cept for a sample (3.0x10-* ± 0.26x10-* pCi/ml) collected from
Half Moon Creek Overflow, near Baxterville, Mississippi. Con-
sidering the counting error of this sample, the 3H concentration
was not considered to be significantly different from fluctua-
tions in background.
One surface water sample from Battlement Creek near Grand
Valley, Colorado, had a measured concentration of 9°Sr of 1.6t
0.85x10~9 jjCi/ml, which is 0.5 percent of the CG. The concentra-
tion was only slightly greater than the 3-sigma counting error;
23
-------
therefore, the concentration was considered to be the result of
statistical error and was not necessarily a true indication of
the presence of this radionuclide. The concentrations of this
radionuclide in samples collected previously to this report
period were all less than the MDC for s»<>Sr.
WHOLE-BODY COHNTING
During 1976, the measurements of body burdens of radio-
activity in selected off-site residents were continued. The
whole-body counting facility was described in a previous report
(NERC-LV-539-31, 1974).
About 49 off- site residents from 13 locations were examined
twice during the year. The home locations of these individuals
were Pahrump, Lund, Beatty, Caliente, Pioche, Nyala, Round Moun-
tain, Ely, Tempiute, Goldfield, Lathrop Wells, Tonopah, and
Spring Meadows Farms, Nevada. When possible, all members of a
family were included.
The minimum detectable concentrations for 137Cs by whole-
body counting was 5x10~9 pCi/q for a body weight of 70 kg and a
40-minute count. Each individual was also given a complete
hematological examination and a thyroid profile. A urine sample
was collected from each individual for 3H analysis, and composite
urine samples from each family were analyzed for 238,2
From the results of whole-body counting, the fission product
»3?Cs was detected above the detection limit in 82 individuals.
The maximum, minimum, and average concentrations for this radio-
nuclide were 2.8x10-«, 5.0x10-9, and 1.2x10~8 pCi/g body weight,
respectively, which were similar to last year's concentrations
(maximum of 4.3x10-*; minimum of 5.0x10-9; and average of 1.4x
10~a pCi/g body weight).
In regard to the hematological examinations and thyroid pro-
files, no abnormal results were observed which could be attri-
buted to past or present NTS testing operations. The concentra-
tions of 239Ri and 23«pu in all urine samples were <3x10~10 pCi/
ml and <1x10~io pCi/ml, respectively. Concentrations of SH in
urine samples were observed above the MDC of the measurement;
however, the levels observed (average of 0.7x10~* pCi/ml with a
range of 0.2x1 0-^ to 2. Ox10~* pCi/ml) were within the range of
background concentrations normally observed in surface waters or
atmospheric moisture.
24
-------
DOSE ASSESSMENT
The only radionuclide ascribed to NTS operations detected
off-NTS was 3H at Death Valley Junction, The above background
concentration of 3H occurred only in one sample collected over
the period Auqust 24-31. The 3H concentration in this sample was
U.2x10~* yCi/ml H2O or 2.9X10-11 pCi/ml air. Based upon an am-
bient 3H concentration of 2.0x10~12 pCi/ml air, the net 3H con-
centration at Death Valley Junction was 2.7x1Q~11 pCi/ml. The
whole-body dose from this concentration was estimated as
(2.7x10~11 MCi/m3) (7 days) (500 mrem/year) = 1.3 prem.
(2.0x10-7 Mci/m3) (365 days/year)
The 80-km dose commitment for the area between the NTS and Death
Valley Junction {population of 600) was estimated to be 0.00078
man-rem.
25
-------
REFERENCES
Anderson, Hugh R. "The Primary Cosmic Radiation." Proceedings
of the Second International Symposium on the Natural Radiation
Environment, Houston, Texas, August 7-11, 1972, CONF-720805-P1.
Published by Rice University and University of Texas, Houston,
Texas, pp 1-13.
Andrews, V. E. and J. C. Vandervort. "Fruit and Vegetable Sur-
vey. Nevada Test Site Environs." U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Las Vegas, Nevada. (To be published)
Burke, Gail De Planque, Thomas F. Gesell and Klaus Becher.
"Second International Intercomparison of Environmental Dosimeters
Under Field and Laboratory Conditions." Paper presented during
Tenth Midyear Topical Symposium of the Health Physics Society at
Saratoga Springs, New York, October 11-13, 1976. Published by
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York. pp 555-574.
Eckel, E. B., ed. Nevada Test Site. Memoir 110. The Geologi-
cal Society of America, Inc. Boulder, Colorado. 1968.
ERDA Manual, Chapter 0513. "Effluent and Environmental Monitoring
and Reporting." U.S. Energy Research and Development Administra-
tion. Washington, D.C. March 20, 1974.
Houghton, J. G., C. M. Sakamoto, R. O. Gifford, Nevada * s Weather
and Climate. Special Publication 2, Nevada Bureau of Mines and
Geology, Mackay School of Mines, University of Nevada-Reno, Reno,
Nevada. pp 69-74. 1975.
NERC-LV-539-31. "Environmental Monitoring Report for the Nevada
Test Site and Other Test Areas Used for Underground Nuclear
Detonations." U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas,
Nevada. May 1974.
Quiring, Ralph E., "Climatological Data, Nevada Test Site,
Nuclear Rocket Development Station (NRDS)." ERLTM-ARL-7. ESSA
Research Laboratories. August 1968.
University of Nevada (Reno). Population projections for Washoe
and Clark Counties for April 1976, according to telephone conver-
sation between R.F. Grossman, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Las Vegas, Nevada, and Dr. Chu, Bureau of Business and
Economic Research. May 12, 1977.
26
-------
U.S. Bureau of the Census. "Estimates of Population of California
Counties and Metropolitan Areas, July 1, 197U and 1975." Federal-
State Cooperative Program for Population Estimates. Series P-26.
No. 75-5. U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington, D.C. July
1976.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. "Estimates of the Population of Nevada
Counties and Metropolitan Areas, July 1, 197<4, and July 1, 1975."
Federal-State Cooperative Program for Population Estimates.
Series P-26. No. 75-28. U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington,
D.C. August 1976.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. "Estimates of the Population of
Arizona Counties and Metropolitan Areas, July 1, 1971, and July 1,
1975." Federal-State Cooperative Program for Population Estimates.
Series P-26. No. 75-3. U.S. Department of Commerce. Washington,
D.C. May 1976.
U.S. Bureau of the Census. "Estimates of the Population of Utah
Counties and Metropolitan Areas, July 1, 1974, and July 1, 1975."
Federal-State Cooperative Program for Population Estimates.
Series P-26. No. 75-U4. U.S. Department of Commerce.
Washington, D.C. May 1976.
WASH-DRAFT. "Preliminary Draft Environmental Statement, Nevada
Test Site FY-78 and Beyond." Nevada Operations Office, U.S.
Energy Research and Development Administration, Las Vegas, Nevada.
(To be published)
27
-------
Figure 1. Nevada Test Site Location
28
-------
EXPERIMENTAL FARM
Nuclear Rocket Development
SCALE IN FEET ' SCALE IN METRES
1OOOO O 300OO O 5OOO 1OOOO
Figure 2. Nevada Test Site Road and Facility Map
29
-------
V
NEVADA
TEST
SITE
Death Valley Jet.
SCALE IN MILES
0 10 20 30 40
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
SILENT CANYON CALDERA
TIMBER MOUNTAIN CALDERA
FLOW DIRECTION
GROUND WATER
SYSTEM BOUNDERIES
Figure 3. Groundwater Flow Systems - Nevada Test Site
30
-------
HWWEE
A CAMPING & RECREATIONAL
° AREAS
^ MINE
O HUNTING
• FISHING
SCALE IN MILES
0 50 100 150
0 50 100 150 200
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
Figure 4. General Land Use, Nevada Test Site Vicinity
31
-------
FAMILY MILK COWS
• FAMILY COWS
FAMILY GOATS
COMBINATIONS OF
COWS AND GOATS
Figure 5. Location and Number of Family Milk Cows and Goats
32
-------
ORMSBY
1272)
MILK DAIRIES
• GRADE A MILK COWS
A GRADE B MILK COWS
• GRADE A&B MILK COWS
Figure 6. Location and Number of Dairy Cows
33
-------
ORMSB
(25.300)
2/77
Figure 7. Population of Arizona, California, Nevada, and Utah
Counties Near the Nevada Test Site (U.S. Bureau of
the Census and University of Nevada (Reno))
34
-------
ALLON
FRENCHMAN
CURRANT
MAINT'
ROUND MTN
/
HOT CREEK RN
STONE CABIN RN O
TONOPAH
IN^NYAU SUNMYSIDE
**' *^ADAVEN \
SCOTTY'S JCT
N
SCALE IN MILES
50 100
50 100 150
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
A PREFILTER CHARCOAL CARTRIDGE
v GAMMA RATE RECORDER
PREFILTER GAMMA RATE RECORDER
PREFILTER CHARCOAL CARTRIDGE
PREFILTER ONLY
STANDBY STATIONS
Figure 8. Nevada Air Surveillance Stations
35
-------
CANADA
CO
C
l-l
(D
H-
h
CO
(D
O
fD
CO
ct
0)
ft
H-
O
3
O
C
rt
cn
H-
O.
0)
O
l-h
fD
^SEATTLE
SPOKANE
'WASHINGTON
OREGON
BURNS
I
NORTH
DAKOTA
[CALIFORNIA
g
MONTANA
©MISSOULA
BOZEMAN
® ©BILLINGS
/BOISE Sw^™""""-— ——«J ABERDEEN©
I.5L IDAHO FALLS, ©WORLAND leRAp|oc|TY
©POCATELLO WYOMINGlsQUTH DAKOTA
P'RESTON ©
OGANSl CASPER. I NEBRASKA
JI UNI V
•S V
is <™H°1
• MINNESOTA,
I
FALLS
/NEVADA
BISHOP\ PARO
|kjr '
' ek
^MINNEAPOLIS^
IsiOUX CITY \..
V IOWA \
% IOWA CITY &s
LONE PINE
EK
ENTERPRISE
VL
SBARSTOW
UTAH
MILFORD
^CAPITOL REEF NAT! MON •
9 ©JMONTICELLO ©PUEBLO!
cAK^f^0^^.
/NEW
IUrrnTrc. KINGMAN © / e
JNDIO© NEEI)LES WINSLOW
©PHOENIX '
ARIZONA
:LjiTiE_fc—\
^ST JOSEPH N
KANSAS ^ CLAYTONQ
• k« i f+ e+ /^ I
©DODGE CITY
ALBUQUERQUE .'AMARILLO
I,
I
'T OKLAHOMA f
I MUSKOGEE© 1
I ©NORMAN I
L0^^_ V I
^***^—J
JOPLIN
ARKANSAS
CARLSBAD
ABILENE
O PREFILTER.CHARCOAL CARTRIDGE,
GAMMA RATE RECORDER
PREFILTER. GAMMA RATE RECORDER
PREFILTER.CHARCOAL CARTRIDGE
PREFILTER ONLY STANDBY
STANDBY STATIONS
2/77
TEXAS
AUSTIN
LITTLE ROCKf
FORT WORTH \, MONROE/
LOUISIANA* ...«
I NEWORLEANS^
LAKE CHARLES!
MEXICO
SCALE IN MILES
100 200 301
6 100200 300 400
SCALE IN KILOMETERS
-------
GEYSER MAINT
STA
CURRANT MAINT STA
CURRANT
WARM SPGS
-• '
CLARK'S STA
DIABLO MAINT STA
SCOTTY'SJCT
NELLIS
AIR FORCE
RANGE
\ SPRINGDALE
\
NEVADA
TEST
SITE
LATHROP WELLS
FURNACE CREEK
' DEATH VALLEY JCT
SCALE IN MILES
50
50 100
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
NOBLE GAS & TRITIUM SAMPLING LOCATIONS
Figure 10. Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network
37
-------
LATHROP WELLS^L CACTUS SPGS
/SELBACH RN»J TINDIA
FURNACE CREEKC %* SPRING MEADOWS
^-—•* » "^^—- TTENNECO >
DEATH VALLEY JCT^ X 1
• TLD STATION LOCATION
SCALE IN MILES
0 50 100
50 100 150 200
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
Figure 11. Dosimetry Network
38
-------
C W
\W V.LIDA ^
AD J /V~* LIDA LIVESTO
1 1 S>
LIDA LIVESTOCK
\lv
KEOUGHHOTSPG
YRIBARREN RN
ItVAUA | NELLIS
TEST ' AIR FORCE
SITE ! RANGE
. • »• 1 . I f I I JJ n OUA
SIEDENTOPFRNL SITE RANGE 1 / \r
\\> \ UMn»P4 0MESQUITE
LA>HHW W>LL8Lr-, INDIAN SPGS-I APk^Xf B"°S "
/- JT.BI(FR RNi\U-^—*\ AGMAN^1|LOGANO_ALE
/ MHiktH m«M -r N. SEVENTY FIVE * VEGAS VALLEY DAIRY
/ \ PAHRUMPA i AC uPRA«^&LDS DAIRY FARM J
• MILK SAMPLING LOCATIONS
SCALE IN MILES
0 50 100
NOTE: WHEN SAMPLING LOCATION OCCURRED IN CITY OR TOWN:
THE SAMPLING LOCATION SYMBOL WAS USED FOR SHOWING
BOTH TOWN AND SAMPLING LOCATION.
0 50 100 150
2/77 SCALE IN KILOMETRES
Figure 12. Milk Surveillance Network
39
-------
YOUNG'S RANCH
\.m
BERG RANCH
3.7B
r'
VlDA LIVESTOCK CO.
KIRKEBY RANCH
2.0B
MANZONIE RANCH <2«McKENZIE DAIRY
2.5BBLUE EAGLE RANCH
<0.8BSHARP'S RANCH
I
I
i SCHOFIELD DAIRY I
<2« I
JUNE COX RANCH
YRIBARREN RANCH
NEVADA | MELLIS j
TEST
RILEY RANCH
"""I Z.2B
I , •
<2B
WESTERN
GOLD DAIRY
; AIR FORCE
I RANGE
---
ALAMO DAIRY
HUGHES BROS. DAIRY
<0.9B |
R. COX DAIRY
-SEVENTY FIVE~ <"• VEGAS VALLEY DAIRY
I
N
LOS" DAIRY
BURSON RANCH >
%
BILL NELSON DAIRY
MILK SAMPLING LOCATIONS
SCALE IN MILES
0 50 100
0 50 100 150 200
3/77 SCALE IN KILOMETRES
150
Figure 13.
Annual Average Concentrations of 90Sr (10~9 yCi/ml)
Within Milk Surveillance Network, 1976
40
-------
WATERTOWN NO. 3B
I
EXPERIMENTAL FARM
WELL UE15d
Nuclear Rocket Development
Station ,'
SCALE IN FEET
tMJ4-5a^B^gB
1000O O 30000
A MONTHLY
• SEMI-ANNUAL
Figure 14.
On-Site Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program,
Nevada Test Site
41
-------
• TWIN SPRGS RN
ROAD D WINDMILL
NELLIS AIR FORCE RANGE ,
COFFER'S HS/48-ldd
NEVADA TEST SITE
I
USAF #1
INDIAN SPGS AFB
SEWER CO #1
LATHROP WELLS
\
\
SPGS
17S/50E-14CAC*
\ I • CRYSTAL POOL
18S/51E-7db
ASH MEADOWS
\
• PAHRUMP
DEATH VALLEY JCT
A MONTHLY
• SEMI-ANNUAL
• ANNUAL
30 40 50 60 70 80
•i^M«^"t
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
0 10 20 30 40 50
SCALE IN MILES
2/77
Figure 15.
Off-Site Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program,
Nevada Test Site
42
-------
SGZ®
NEW MEXICO
EDDY COUNTY
CARLSBAD CITY WELL #7
LOVING CITY
•
WELL #2
A ON-SITE WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS
• OFF-SITE WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS
SCALE IN MILES
0 5 10
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
o a 16
MALAGA
CITY WATER
PHS WELL 9 •
PHS WELL 10
2/77
• PECOS RIVER
PUMPING STATION WELL #1
Figure 16. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations,
Carlsbad, New Mexico, Project Gnome/Coach
43
-------
CHURCHILL COUNTY
WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS
Figure 17.
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations,
Fallen, Nevada, Project Shoal
44
-------
OLUMBIA
\
LOWER LITTLE CREEK
SGZ
T SPEIGHTS,
M. LOWE'
R L ANDERSON
PURVIS
W. DANIELS JR («
R READY
BAXTERVILLE
WELL ASCOT 2
NORTH LUMBERTON
LUMBERTON
LAMAR
CO
SGZ0
TATUM DOME
WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
O 5 1O 15 2O 25 3O 35 4O
LOCATION MAPS
15 2O 25
SCALE IN MILES
LAMAR
COUNTY
Figure 18. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations,
Project Dribble/Miracle Play (vicinity of Tatum
Salt Dome, Mississippi)
45
-------
WELL HT-1
HALF MOON CREEK
eHALF MOON CREEK
OVERFLOW
WELL HT-5
LAMAR
CO
SGZ©
TATUM DOME
WELL HT-2C
LAMAR
COUNTY
LOCATION MAPS
WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS
SCALE IN FEET
0 400 800 1200 1600 1000
SCALE IN METRES
0 100 700 300 400 500 600
2/77
Figure 19.
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations,
Project Dribble/Miracle Play (Tatum Salt Dome,
Mississippi)
46
-------
TO DULCE CITY WATER
RIO ARRIBA COUNTY
LOCATION MAPS
TO LA JARA LAKE
TO BLANCO
(SAN JUAN RIVER)
BUBBLING SPG.
EPNG WELL 1O-36
I
• CAVE SPG.
ARNOLD RN.
WINDMILL #2
SGZ
LOWER BURROW
CANYON
I WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
0
SCALE IN MILES
0 5
2/77
Figure 20. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations,
Rio Arriba County, New Mexico, Project Gasbuggy
47
-------
GRAND VALLEY
CITY WATER
GRAND v.
VALLEY
POTTER HNrm~-^~~ /
' "'RULISON /
RN.
•BERNKLAU RN
A GARDNER RN««. ' ^ATTLEMINT^REEK
SPRING
SGZ
WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
8
SCALE IN MILES
0 5
2/77
VEGA RES
GARFIELD COUNTY
& SGZ
Figure 21.
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations,
Rulison, Colorado, Project Rulison
48
-------
NEVADA
RENO
\
LAS VEGAS
TONOPAH
0SGZ
CENTRAL NEVADA
AREA
SGZ/
HTH 2
'• HTH 1
I
i
I
I
i
I
HOT CREEK RANCH
*
I WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS '
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
O1 2345678
SCALE IN MILES
O 1 2 3 4 5
2/77
SIX-MILE WELL
BLUE JAY SPRING
BLUE JAY
MAINT STA
Figure 22.
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations,
Central Nevada Test Area, Faultless Event
49
-------
APPENDIX A. TABLES
50
-------
Table A-l. Underground Testing Conducted Off the Nevada Test Site
Name of Test,
Operation or
Project
Project Gnome/
Coach* > >
Project Shoal* «>
Project Dribble* « »
(Salmon Event)
Operation Long
Shot<*>
Project Dribble* « »
(Sterling Event)
Project Gasbuggy**>
Faultless Event*'*
Project Miracle
Play (Diode Tube) < * »
Project Rulison* » »
Operation Milrow*"
Project Miracle
Play (Humid
Water) < ' >
Operation
Cannikin* '»
Project Rio
Blanco* » >
Date
12/10/61
10/26/63
10/22/64
10/29/65
12/03/66
12/10/67
01/19/68
02/02/69
09/10/69
10/02/69
04/19/70
11/06/71
05/17/73
Location
48 km (30 mi) SE of
Carlsbad, N. Mex.
45 km (28 mi) SE of
Fa lion, Nev.
34 km (21 mi) SW of
Hattiesburg, Miss.
Amchitka Island,
Alaska
34 km (21 mi) SW of
Hattiesburg, Miss.
88 km (55 mi) E of
Farmington, N. Mex.
Central Nevada Test
Area 96 km (60 mi) E
of Tonopah, Nev.
34 km (21 mi) SW of
Hattiesburg, Miss.
19 km (12 mi) SW of
Rifle, Colo.
Amchitka Island,
Alaska
34 km (21 mi) SW of
Hattiesburg, Miss.
Amchitka Island,
Alaska
48 km (30 mi) SW of
Meeker, Colo.
Yield* «>
(kt)
3.1<»>
12
5.3
80
0.38
29
200-
1000
Non-
nuclear
explosion
40
1000
Non-
nuclear
explosion
<5000
3x30
Depth
m
(ft)
360
(1184)
366
(1200)
823
(2700)
716
(2350)
823
(2700)
1292
(4240)
914
(3000)
823
(2700)
2568
(8425)
1219
(4000)
823
(2700)
1829
(6000)
1780
to
2040
(5840
to
6690)
Purpose of
the Event* «< '>
Multi-purpose
experiment.
Nuclear test
detection re-
search experi-
ment.
Nuclear test
detection re-
search experi-
ment.
DOD nuclear
test detection
experiment.
Nuclear test
detection re-
search experi-
ment.
Joint Government-
Industry gas
stimulation ex-
periment .
Calibration
test.
Detonated in
Salmon/Sterling
cavity. Seismic
studies.
Gas stimulation
experiment.
Calibration test.
Detonated in
Salmon/Sterling
cavity. Seismic
studies.
Test of war-
head for
Spartan
missle.
Gas stimula-
tion experi-
ment.
51
-------
Table A-l. (continued)
< t > plowshare Events
<*>Vela Uniform Events
< "Weapons Tests
<*>Information from "Revised Nuclear Test Statistics," dated September 20, 197«, and
"Announced United States Nuclear Test Statistics," dated June 30, 1976, distributed by
David G. Jackson, Director, Office of Public Affairs, Energy Research &
Administration, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, Nevada.
News release AL-62-50, AEC Albuquerque Operations Office, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
December 1, 1961.
<»>"The Effects of Nuclear Weapons," Rev. Ed. 1964,
52
-------
Table A-2. Summary of Analytical Procedures
Type of
Analysis
Gamma
Spectroscopy< i 1
e«-90sr<3>
Analytical
Equipment
Gamma spectro-
meter with
10- cm-thick
by 10-cm-diam-
eter Nal (T1-
activated)
crystal with
input to 200
channels (0-2
MeV) of <»00-
channel, pulse-
height analyzer.
Low- background
thin-window.
gas- flow pro-
portional
Counting
Period
(Min)
100 min for
milk, water.
Long-Term
Hydro, sus-
pended sol-
ids, and air
filters; 10
min for air
charcoal
cartridges.
50
Analytical
Procedures
Radionuclide
concentra-
tions quan-
titated from
gamma spec-
trometer
data by com-
puter using
a least
squares
technique.
Chemical
separation by
ion exchange.
Separated sam-
Sample
Size
(Litre)
3.5 for
routine milk
and water
samples ;
800-1200 m»
for air fil-
ter samples;
7.3 litre
for long-
Term Hydro.
Water sus-
pended
solids.
1.0
Approximate
Detection
Limit «>
For routine milk
and water gen-
erally, 5x10~«
jjCi/ml for most
common fallout
radionuclides in
a simple spec-
trum. For air
filters.
2x10-'« pCi/ml.
For Long-Term
Hydro, sus-
pended solids.
3.0x10-« HCi/ml.
•«Sr = 2x10-«
fjCi/ml
«°Sr = 1x10-»
(jCi/ml.
3H<31
3H Enrichment
(Long-Term
Hydrological
Samples) <3>
234,Z35
238UC3>
22«Ra<3>
counter with a
5.7-cm diameter
window (80 tig/
cm*).
Automatic 200
liquid
scintillation
counter with
output printer.
Automatic 200
scintillation
counter with
output printer.
Alpha spectro- 1000
meter with «»5 1400
mm*, 300-pm
depletion depth
silicon surface
barrier detectors
operated in
vacuum chambers.
Single channel 30
analyzer
coupled to
P.M. tube
detector.
pie counted
successively;
activity cal-
culated by
simultaneous
equations.
Sample pre-
pared by
distillation.
0.005
Sample concen- 0.25
trated by
electrolysis
followed by
distillation.
Sample is 1
digested with
acid, separated
by ion exchange,
electroplated
on stainless
steel planchet
and counted by
alpha spectro-
meter.
Precipitated 1.5
with Ba, con-
verted to
chloride.
Stored for
30 days for
«22Rn 2Z6Ra to
equilibrate.
Radon gas
pumped into
scintillation
cell for alpha
scintillation
counting.
2x10-»
6x10-» pCi
Z3«pU
pCi/ml
*3«pu, Z3»U,
2x10-»
1x10-»o
53
-------
Table A-2. (continued)
Type of
Analysis
Gross alpha
Gross beta
in liquid
samples' 3>
Counting
Analytical Period
Equipment (Mini
Low- background 50
thin-window.
gas- flow pro-
portional
counter with a
5.7-an-diameter
window (80 \tq/
cm2) .
Sample
Analytical Size
Procedures (Litre)
Sample eva- 0.2
porated;
residue
weighed and
counted;
corrected for
self-attenu-
ation.
Approximate
Detection
Limit <2»
a = 3x10~» MCi/ml
^ = 2x10~» jiCi/ml
Gross beta
on air
filters'»>
• 'Kr
Xe
Low-level end
window, gas
flow propor-
tional counter
with a 12.7-
cm-diameter
window (100
mg/cm2).
Automatic
liquid scintil-
lation counter
with output
printer.
20
200
Filters
counted upon
receipt and
at 5 and 12
days after
collection;
last two
counts used
to extra-
polate con-
centration
to mid-col-
lection time
assuming T-* 2
decay or using
exper imentally
derived decay.
Physical HOO-
separation by 1000
gas chroma-
tography; dis-
solved in
toluene "cock-
tail" for count-
Ing.
10-cm
diameter
glass fiber
filter; sam-
ple collected
from 800-
2x10-is
= 2x10-ia
Xe - 2x10-**
pCi/ml
CH3T = 2x10-»z
jiCi/ml
<»>Lem, P. N. and Snelling, R. N. "Southwestern Radiological Health Laboratory Data
Analysis and Procedures Manual," SWRHL-21. Southwestern Radiological Health Laboratory,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas, NV. March 1971
<2>The detection limit for all samples is defined as that radioactivity which equals
the 2-sigma counting error.
<''Johns, F. B. "Handbook of Radiochemical Analytical Methods," EPA 680/4-75-001.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, NERC-LV, Las Vegas, NV. February 1975.
54
-------
Table A-3. 1976 Summary of Analytical Results
for the Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network
Sampling
Location
Death
Valley
Jet.,
Calif.
Beatty,
Nev.
Diablo,
Nev.
Hiko,
Nev.
Indian
Springs,
Nev.
No.
Days
Sampled
357.
357.
321.
357.
321.
328.
363.
363.
328.
363.
328.
328.
341.
341.
320.
335.
320.
320.
349.
349.
321.
349.
321.
321.
350.
357.
335.
363.
335.
328.
5
5
7
5
7
6
3
3
5
3
5
5
4
4
6
4
6
6
4
4
5
4
5
5
6
6
7
6
7
7
Radio-
nuclide
•*Kr
Total
>H as
'H as
3H as
3H as
«Kr
Total
'H as
3H as
*H as
3H as
«Kr
Total
3H as
'H as
'H as
*H as
«Kr
Total
3H as
3H as
3H as
'H as
8SKr
Total
3H as
3H as
3H as
3H as
Xe
HTO
CH3T
HTO
HT
Xe
HTO
CH3T
HTO
HT
Xe
HTO
CH3T
HTO
HT
Xe
HTO
CH3T
HTO
HT
Xe
HTO
CH3T
HTO
HT
Radioactivity
C
Units Max
10-tZjiCi/ml air
10-»2piCi/ml air
10-*jjCi/ml H2O
10-»*pCi/ml air
10-*2jjCi/ml air
10-i2pCi/ml air
10-»2pCi/ral air
10-»2MCi/ml air
10~*pCi/ml H2O
10-»2pCi/ml air
10-»ZpCi/ml air
10-i2pCi/ml air
10- 2fjCi/ml air
10- 2jiCi/ml air
10~6)jCi/ml H2O
10- ZpCi/ml air
10- 2>jCi/ml air
10- 2^ci/ml air
10-»a»jCi/ral air
10-»2pCi/ml air
10~6pCi/ml H2O
10-»2piCi/ml air
lO-i^pci/ml air
10-i2pCi/ml air
10~»2>jCi/ral air
10-izMci/ml air
1Q-6pCi/ml H2O
10~l2>jCi/ml air
10-*2jaCi/ml air
10-«2HCi/ml air
25
< 7
4.
7.
29
5.
24
< 7
1.
11
21
5.
25
< 8
1.
< 3
5.
2.
25
< 8
1.
6.
3.
1.
26
< 8
2.
18
12
7.
2
0
3
6
0
2
8
7
4
1
4
3
4
6
Concentrations
C C
Min Avq
12
< 4
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.2
< 0.4
15
< 4
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.2
< 0.2
12
< 4
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.4
< 0.3
11
< 4
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.3
< 0.2
12
< 4
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.2
< 0.2
20
< 5
% of
Cone.
Guide* i>
0.
<0.
02
01
< 0.5
< 3
< 3
< 2
20
< 5
< O.U
< 3
< 2
< 2
19
< 5
< o.u
< 2
< 2
< 0.8
17
< 5
<0.
0.
<0.
-
<0.
0.
<0.
—
<0.
0.
<0.
01
02
01
01
02
01
01
02
01
< 0.4
< 3
< 2
< 0.6
20
< 4
<0.
0.
<0.
01
02
01
< 0.5
< 3
< 2
< 2
<0.01
55
-------
Table A-3. (continued)
NO.
Samplinq Days
Location Sampled
Las Vegas,
Nev.
NTS, Nev.
Mercury
NTS, Nev.
Area 51<*>
NTS, Nev.
BJY
NTS, Nev.
Area 12
340.5
3U0.5
342.4
340.5
342.4
342.4
363.2
363.2
320.4
363.2
320.4
320. U
336.7
349.7
336.6
3U9.7
336.6
329.6
356.4
3 55. a
356.6
363.4
356.6
356.6
342.4
349.4
341.6
349.4
341.6
341.6
Radio-
nuclide
•«Kr
Total Xe
JH as HTO
3H as CHjT
'H as HTO
'H as HT
•sRr
Total Xe
'H as HTO
*H as CHjT
*H as HTO
JR as HT
9'Kr
Total Xe
3H as HTO
3H as CHjT
3H as HTO
'H as HT
««Kr
Total Xe
'H as HTO
3H as CH3T
3H as HTO
3H as HT
«s Kr
Total Xe
3H as HTO
'H as CH3T
3H as HTO
3H as HT
Radioactivity
C
Units Max
10-i2pCi/ml air
10->2pCi/ml air
10-'pCi/ml H20
10-»2>jCi/ml air
10-»2>jCi/ml air
10-i2/jCi/ml air
10-»2>jCi/mi air
10-»2pCi/ml air
10-*pCi/ml H20
10-»«>jCi/ml air
10-»2pCi/ml air
10-i2MCi/ml air
10-»2MCi/ml air
10-»*>jCi/ml air
10-*pCi/ml H20
10-i2pCi/ml air
10-»2pci/ml air
10-»2Mci/ml air
10- *>jCi/ml air
10- *>jCi/ml air
10- pCi/ml H2O
10- 2>jCi/ml air
10- 2pCi/ml air
10- *pCi/ml air
10-»2pci/ml air
10-»2pCi/ml air
10-»pCi/ml H2O
10->^Ci/ml air
10-»2^ci/ml air
10-»2^ci/ml air
29
< 7
1.1
7.0
17
1.8
26
< 6
3.6
11
19
3.9
25
< 6
15
7.0
35
< 5
27
< 6
6.9
4.0
51
< 8
24
< 6
71
4.0
230
75
Concentrations * of
C C Cone.
Min Avq Guide<»)
12 18
< 3 < 5
< 0.2 < 0
< 2 < 3
< 0.4 < 2
< 0.2 < 0.
12 19
< 4 < 5
< 0.2 < 0.
< 2 < 3
< 0.2 < 2
< 0.2 < 0.
12 20
< 4 < 4
< 0.3 < 0.
< 2 < 3
< 0.3 < 3
< 0.2 < 0.
13 20
< 4 < 5
< 0.3 < 2
< 2 < 3
< 0.6 < 7
< 0.2 < 2
13 20
< 4 < 5
< 0.3 < 9
< 2 < 3
< 0.5 <33
< 0.3 < 3
0.02
<0.01
.4
)
} <0.01
6 I
<0.01
<0.01
5
<0.01
7
<0.01
<0.01
9
<0.01
9
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
56
-------
Table A-3. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Tonopah,
Nev.
No.
Days
Sampled
363.3
363.3
363.5
363.3
363.5
357.5
Radio-
nuclide
Total
3H as
»H as
'H as
SH as
Xe
HTO
CH3T
HTO
HT
io-»
Radioactivity Concentrations
C C C
Units Max Min Avq
ZpCi/ml
10-*MCi/ml
10-»2jjCi/ml
10-1
*uCi/ml
air
air
H20
air
air
air
25
< 7
1.3
4.0
13
4.3
13
< 5
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.3
< 0.2
19
< 5
< 0.4
< 2
< 2
< 0.8
X of
Cone.
Guide <» >
0.
<0.
<0.
02
01
01
(») Concentration Guides used for NTS stations are those applicable to expo-
sures to radiation workers. Those used for off-NTS stations are for
exposure to a suitable sample of the population in an uncontrolled area.
See Appendix B for Concentration Guides.
<2> Also known as Groom Lake.
57
-------
Table A-4. 1976 Summary of Radiation Doses for the Dosimetry Network
Station.
Location
Adaven, Nev.
Alamo, Nev.
Baker, Calif.
Barstow, Calif.
Beatty, Nev.
Bishop, Calif.
Blue Eagle Ranch, Nev.
Blue Jay, Nev.
Cactus Springs, Nev.
Caliente, Nev.
Casey's Ranch, Nev.
Cedar City, Utah
Clark Station, Nev.
Coyote Summit, Nev.
Currant, Nev.
Death Valley Jet., Calif.
Desert Game Range, Nev.
Desert Oasis,. Nev.
Diablo Maint. Sta., Nev.
Duckwater, Nev.
Elgin, Nev.
Ely, Nev.
Measurement
Period
1/21/76 -
1/13/76 -
1/12/76 -
1/12/76 -
1/20/76 -
1/14/76 -
1/22/76 -
1/21/76 -
1/19/76 -
1/14/76 -
1/21/76 -
1/21/76 -
1/21/76 -
1/20/76 -
1/22/76 -
1/15/76 -
1/19/76 -
1/19/76 -
1/20/76 -
1/22/76 -
1/14/76 -
1/20/76 -
1/10/77
1/04/77
1/10/77
1/10/77
1/04/77
1/11/77
1/13/77
1/13/77
1/03/77
1/06/77
1/10/77
1/11/77
1/13/77
1/10/77
1/12/77
1/13/77
1/03/77
1/10/77
1/10/77
1/12/77
1/05/77
1/13/77
Dose
Equivalent Rate
(mrem/d)
Max. Min. Avq.
0.42
0.29
0.24
0.28
0.30
0.28
0.18
0.33
0.16
0.36
0.21
0.24
0.33
0.34
0.28
0.22
0.16
0.18
0.37
0.33
0.36
0.25
0.34
0.25
0.21
0.25
0.28
0.24
0. 16
0.29
0. 14
0.28
0. 18
0.20
0.28
0.31
0.23
0.21
0.15
0. 16
0.32
0.27
0.31
0.21
0.37
0.28
0.23
0.27
0.29
0.26
0.17
0.31
0. 15
0.33
0.20
0.22
0.32
0.33
0.26
0.22
0.15
0.17
0.34
0.30
0.34
0.23
Annual
Adjusted
Dose
Equiv-
alent
(mrem/v)
140
100
84
99
110
95
62
110
55
120
73
81
120
120
95
81
55
62
120
110
120
84
58
-------
Table A-U. (continued)
Station
Location
Measurement
Period
Dose
Equivalent Rate
(mrem/d)
Max. Min. Avg.
Annual
Adjusted
Dose
Equiv-
alent
(mrem/y)
Enterprise, Utah
Furnace Creek, Calif.
Geyser Maint. Sta., Nev.
Goldfield, Nev.
Groom Lake, Nev.
Hancock Summit, Nev.
Hiko, Nev.
Hot Creek Ranch, Nev.
Independence, Calif.
Indian Springs, Nev.
Kirkeby Ranch, Nev.
Koynes, Nev.
Las Vegas (Airport) , Nev.
Las Vegas (Placak) , Nev.
Las Vegas (USDI) , Nev.
Lathrop Wells, Nev.
Lida, Nev.
Lone Pine, Calif.
Lund, Nev.
Mammoth Mtn., Calif.
Manhattan, Nev.
Mesquite, Nev.
1/21/76 - 1/11/77
1/15/76 - 1/13/77
1/20/76 - 1/11/77
1/20/76 - 1/10/77
1/20/76 - 1/10/77
1/20/76 - 1/10/77
1/13/76 - 1/04/77
1/21/76 - 1/13/77
1/14/76 - 1/11/77
1/19/76 - 1/03/77
1/20/76 - 1/11/77
1/20/76 - 1/10/77
1/08/76 - 1/03/77
1/08/76 - 1/05/77
1/08/76 - 1/03/77
1/20/76 - 1/04/77
1/19/76 - 1/10/77
1/13/76 - 1/11/77
1/21/76 - 1/10/77
1/14/76 - 1/12/77
1/21/76 - 1/11/77
1/19/76 - 1/10/77
0.30 0.25 0.28 100
0.19 0.17 0.18 66
0.29 0.25 0.27 99
0.29 0.24 0.27 99
0.20 0.17 0.19 70
0.42 0.35 0.39 140
0.23 0.20 0.22 81
0.26 0.22 0.25 92
0.29 0.25 0.27 99
0.18 0.15 0.17 62
0.22 0.20 0.22 81
0.28 0.22 0.25 92
0.16 0.12 0.14 51
0.16 0.14 0.15 55
0.18 0.16 0.17 62
0.26 0.23 0.25 92
0.31 0.27 0.30 110
0.28 0.25 0.26 95
0.25 0.20 0.23 84
0.36 0.23 0.31 110
0.37 0.31 0.35 130
0.19 0.17 0.18 66
59
-------
Table A-4. (continued)
Station
Location
Measurement
Period
Dose
Equivalent Rate
(mrem/d)
Max. Min^ Avq.
Annual
Adjusted
Dose
Equiv-
alent
(mrem/v|
Nevada Farms, Nev.
Nuclear Eng. Co., Nev.
Nyala, Nev.
Olancha, Calif.
Pahrump, Nev.
Pine Creek Ranch, Nev.
Pioche, Nev.
Queen City Summit, Nev.
Reed Ranch, Nev.
Ridqecrest, Calif.
Round Mountain, Nev.
Scotty*s Junction, Nev.
Selbach Ranch, Nev.
Sherri's Bar, Nev.
Shoshone, Calif.
Spring Meadows, Nev.
Springdale, Nev.
St. George, Utah
Sunnyside, Nev.
Tempiute, Nev.
Tenneco, Nev.
Tonopah Test Range, Nev.
1/20/76 - 1/10/77
1/20/76 - 1/05/77
1/21/76 - 1/10/77
1/13/76 - 1/11/77
1/22/76 - 1/06/77
1/21/76 - 1/10/77
1/14/76 - 1/05/77
1/20/76 - 1/10/77
1/20/76 - 1/10/77
1/13/76 - 1/11/77
1/21/76 - 1/11/77
1/19/76 - 1/10/77
1/21/76 - 1/05/77
1/13/76 - 1/04/77
1/15/76 - 1/13/77
1/21/76 - 1/04/77
1/21/76 - 1/04/77
1/22/76 - 1/12/77
1/21/76 - 1/10/77
1/20/76 - 1/10/77
J/21/76 - 1/04/77
1/20/76 - 1/11/77
0.35 0.30 0.32 120
0.35 0.26 0.31 110
0.25 0.21 0.23 84
0.25 0.23 0.24 88
0.18 0.17 0.18 66
0.35 0.29 0.33 120
0.25 0.23 0.24 88
0.40 0.3U 0.37 140
0.30 0.27 0.29 110
0.24 0.22 0.23 84
0.34 0.29 0.32 120
0.34 0.29 0.31 110
0.31 0.27 0.29 110
0.22 0.18 0.20 73
0.32 0.28 0.30 110
0.18 0.16 0.16 59
0.34 0.29 0.32 120
0.18 0.17 0.18 66
0.20 0.17 0.19 70
0.30 0.26 0.28 100
0.29 0.26 0.28 100
0.34 0.28 0.32 120
60
-------
Table A-U. (continued)
station
Location
Measurement
Period
Dose
Equivalent Rate
(mrem/d)
Max. Min. Avq.
Annual
Adjusted
Dose
Equiv-
alent
(mrem/v)
Tonopah, Nev.
Twin Springs Ranch, Nev.
Warm Springs, Nev.
young's Ranch, Nev.
1/20/76 - 1/10/77 0.31 0.26 0.29 110
1/21/76 - 1/10/77 0.32 0.27 0.30 110
1/21/76 - 1/13/77 0.31 0.27 0.29 110
1/21/76 - 1/11/77 0.26 0.24 0.25 92
61
-------
Table A-5. 1976 Summary of Analytical Results for the
Milk Surveillance Network
Radioactivity Cone.
Sampling Sample
Location Type* » >
Hinkley, Calif. 12
Bill Nelson Dairy
Keough Hot Spgs., 13
Calif.
Yri barren Ranch
Olancha, Calif. 13
J. Riley Ranch
Alamo, Nev.<2> 14
Alamo Dairy
Austin, Nev, 13
Young's Ranch
Caliente, Nev. 13
June Cox Ranch
No. of
Samples
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Radio- C
nuclide Max
» 37Cs <5
89Sr <3
»»Sr 2. 1
t 37£3 <4
"Sr <3
'"Sr <2
1 37Cs <4
«»Sr <2
*°Sr 1.4
l37Cs 4.0
89Sr <2
»°Sr 1.3
»37Cs <4
B9Sr <2
9°Sr 2.7
3H 550
1 37Cs <5
8'Sr <3
*®Sr 2.4
C
Min
<4
<1
<0.8
<3
<1
<1
<4
<1
<0.7
4.0
<2
1.3
<4
<1
1.3
<300
<4
<0.8
<0.6
C
Avq
<4
<2
<2
<4
<2
<2
<4
<2
<1
4.0
<2
1.3
<4
<2
1.8
<400
<4
<2
<2
62
-------
Table A-5. (continued)
Radioactivity Cone.
(10-9
Sampling Sample
Location Type(IJ
Currant, Nev. 13
Blue Eagle Ranch
Currant, Nev. 13
Manzonie Ranch
Hiko, Nev. 12
schofield. Dairy' *>
Hiko, Nev. 13
Barrel Hansen
Ranch
Las Vegas, Nev. 12
LDS Dairy Farm
Lathrop Wells, 13
Nev.
Kirker Ranch
No. of
Samples
3(3)
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
1
1
1
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Radio- C
nuclide Max
»"Cs <6
»»Sr <7
9°Sr 4.0
»37CS <4
«»Sr <3
»°Sr 1.4
»3'CS <4
**Sr <3
<»°Sr 3.1
3H 650
13?CS <4
««Sr <0,8
9«Sr <0.6
137CS <5
8»Sr <2
9osr <0.9
3H <300
»37cs 4.6
«9Sr <2
»osr 1.3
C
Min
<4
<1
1.4
<4
<1
1. 1
<4
<2
1.4
<300
<4
<0. 8
<0.6
<4
<1
<0.6
<300
<4
<0.8
0.93
C
Avq
<5
<3
2.5
<4
<2
<2
<4
<2
2.2
<400
<4
<0.8
<0.6
<4
<1
<0.8
<300
<4
<1
1. 1
63
-------
Table A-5. (continued)
Radioactivity Cone.
Sampling Sample
Location Type* l >
Lida, Nev. 13
Lida Livestock Co.
Logandale, Nev. 12
Vegas Valley Dairy
Lund, Nev. 12
McKenzie Dairy
Mesquite, Nev. 12
Hughes Bros. Dairy
Moapa, Nev. 12
Agman Seventy- Five,
Inc.
No. of
Samples
4
3<*>
•3C*>
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Radio- C
nuclide Max
i "Cs <4
•»Sr <2
»osr 3.3
i37Cs <5
8'Sr <2
»°Sr 1-3
»3?CS <5
8*Sr <4
9°Sr 4.7
3H <300
1 37£g <5
89Sr <2
9°Sr 1.1
3H 1500
t 37(2"s <4
89Sr <2
9OSr 1.3
C
Min
<4
<2
0
<4
<0.9
<0.73
<4
<0.9
<0.9
<300
<4
<0.9
<0.7
<300
<4
<0. 9
1.0
C
Avq
<4
<2
<3
<4
<'
<4
<2
<2
<300
<4
<2
<0. 9
<700
<4
<2
<2
64
-------
Table A-5. (continued)
Radioactivity Cone.
Sampling Sample
Location Type<*>
Nyala, Nev. 13
Sharp's Ranch
Pahrump, Nev. 13
Burson Ranch
Round Mountain, 13
Nev.
Berg Ranch
Shoshone, Nev. 13
Kirkehy Ranch
Springdale, Nev. 13
siedentopf Ranch
Cedar City, Utah 12
Western Gold Dairy
No. of Radio- C
Samples nuclide Max
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
137CS <10
«»sr <3
»°Sr <1
3H 1200
i"cs <5
»«Sr <2
9°Sr <2
*37Cg <7
««Sr <4
'°Sr 6.5
*37CS <5
««Sr <3
90Sr 2.7
137Cs <5
8»Sr <3
90Sr <1
137Cs <4
89Sr <3
*osr 2.0
C
Man
<4
<0.8
<0.6
<300
<4
<1
<0.8
<2
<2
1.5
<4
<2
1.0
<4
<0.9
<0.7
<4
<1
C
Avq
<6
<2
<0.
<500
<4
<2
<0.
<4
<3
3.
<5
<2
2.
<4
<2
<0.
<4
<2
<2
8
9
7
0
8
65
-------
Table A-5. (continued)
Radioactivity Cone.
(10-9
Sampling
Location
St. George, Utah
R. Cox Dairy
Sample
Type* l >
12
No. of
Samples
4
U
H
Radio-
nuclide
1 37CS
e«Sr
90Sr
C
Max
12 = Raw Milk from Grade A Producer(s)
13 = Raw Milk from family cow(s)
1<* = Other than Grade A Producer (Raw)
<2>Alamo Dairy went out of business. No other sampling location
was available.
<3>One sample was of insufficient size for analysis.
<*>Schofield Dairy went out of business. Darrel Hansen Ranch
replaces sampling location.
(5>One sample went sour and could not be analyzed.
66
-------
Table A-6.
Analytical Criteria for Long-Terra Hydrological
Monitoring Program Samples
Monthly
Samples
Gross alpha All samples
Gross beta All samples
Gamma scan All samples
> All samples
Jan. and July
samples. Any
other sample
if gross beta
exceeds 1x
TO-8 jjCi/ml.
Any sample if
gross alpha
exceeds 3x
10-9 pCi/ml.
Jan. and July
samples in
CY76.
u
a 3 8 , 2 3 9 pu
Semi-Annual
Samples
All samples
All samples
All samples
All samples
Jan. sample only.
July sample if
gross beta ex-
ceeds Ix10-8
Any sample if
gross alpha
exceeds 3x
10-9 Mci/ml.
Jan. sample only
in CY76.
Jan. and July Jan. sample only
samples in in CY76
CY76.
Annual
Samples
All Samples
All samples
All samples
All samples
All samples col-
lected at loca-
tions for the
first time with-
in CY76. Subse-
quent samples if
gross beta exceeds
1x10-8
Any sample if
gross alpha ex-
ceeds 3x10-9
Only samples col-
lected at loca-
tions for the
first time during
CY76.
Only samples col-
lected at loca-
tions for the
first time during
CY76.
<•l >A11 samples were first analyzed by the more rapid conventional
technique (MDC of about 2x10-* pCi/ml) and then by the enrichment
technique (MDC of about 6x10~« pCi/ml).
67
-------
Table A-7-
1976 Summary of Analytical Results for the NTS Monthly
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
<»>No. No. Radioactivity Cone.
Sampling Samples Samples Radio- (10~9 pCi/ml)
Location Collected Analyzed nuclide Max Min Avg
NTS 12
Well 8
NTS 10
Well U3CN-5
NTS 12
Well A
NTS 12
Well C
12
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
10
9
9
9
2
2
2
2
2
12
3
3
10
2
2
2
2
2
12
6
6
12
2
2
2
2
2
3H
e9Sr
«osr
226Ra
234fJ
235U
238U
2sapu
239pu
3H
8»sr
90sr
2"Ra
234U
23SU
23«U
2 3 8pu
239pu
3H
89sr
'osr
22*Ra
234U
225U
238U
238pu
239pU
3H
«»Sr
90sr
2«6Ra
23*U
23Sy
2380
238pu
239pu
13
<4
<1
0. 12
0.62
0.09
0.27
<0. 3
<0.2
330
<4
<3
2.7
3.8
<0.8
1.0
<0.2
<0. 1
<9
<4
<2
0.28
5.3
<0. 07
1.6
<0. 03
<0.08
73
<4
<2
1.2
8.4
0.067
2.3
<0.04
<0.03
<7
<2
<0.6
<0.05
0.52
0.009
0.14
<0.02
<0.008
<6
<1
<0.6
1.2
2.0
<0.05
0.66
<0.04
<0.06
<6
<1
<0.7
0.033
5.2
0.066
1.4
<0.03
<0.04
<40
<1
<1
0.50
8.3
0.067
2.2
<0.02
<0.009
<9
<3
<0.8
<0.09
0.57
0.050
0. 21
<0.2
<0. 1
<50
<2
<2
<2
2.9
<0. 5
0.83
<0.2
<0.08
<8
<3
<2
0. 11
5.3
<0.07
t.5
O.03
<0.06
<60
<2
<2
0.89
8.4
0.067
2.3
<0.03
<0.02
% of
Cone.
Guide* 2 >
<0.01
<0.1
<0.3
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<0.7
<7
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 1
<0.7
0.4
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<0.07
3
0.03
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
68
-------
Table A-7. (continued)
No.
Sampling Samples
Location Collected
NTS ' 12
Well 5c
NTS 8
Well Army
No. 1
Beatty, 10
Nev.
Well 11S/48-1dd
NTS 8
Well 2
No.
Samples Radio-
Analyzed nuclide
12
2
2
9
2
2
2
2
2
8
2
2
6
2
2
2
2
2
10
2
2
9
2
2
2
2
2
8
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3H
8*Sr
9OSr
226Ra
23*U
235U
238U
238pU
239Pu
3R
89sr
9osr
22«Ra
23*U
235U
238U
238pu
239pU
3H
89Sr
9 O QT~
226 R^j
Z3*U
23SU
238U
238pu
239Pu
3H
89sr
9osr
234{J
23SU
238y
238pu
239PU
Radioactivity
(10~» pCi/n
Max Min
<20
<4
<1
0.56
4.6
<0. 1
2.5
<0.03
<0.02
12
<7
<6
0.71
2.4
0.044
0.88
<0.2
<0.2
15
<4
<2
0.26
8.5
0.091
2.0
<0. 05
<0.04
13
<4
<3
2.0
<0.04
0.55
<0.2
<0.2
<6
<2
<0.7
0.082
4.2
0.087
2.3
<0.009
<0.02
<7
<4
<0.6
0.24
2.2
0.037
0.78
<0.03
<0.02
<7
<3
<0.7
<0.04
8.3
0.071
2.0
<0.02
<0.03
<5
<2
<2
1.8
0.018
0.48
<0.02
<0.009
Cone.
»D
Avq
<9
<3
<0.9
0.25
4.4
<0. 1
2.4
<0.02
<0.02
<9
<5
<4
0. 37
2.3
0.041
0. 83
<0. 2
<0.2
<9
<3
<1
<0. 2
8.4
0.081
2.0
<0.04
<0.04
<9
<3
<3
1.9
<0.03
0.52
<0.02
<0. 1
% of
Cone.
Guide t«
<0.01
<0. 1
<0.3
0.8
0.02
<0.01
<0-01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.2
<1
1
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 1
<0.3
<0.7
0.03
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 1
<1
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
69
-------
Table A-7. (continued)
( l >NO.
Sampling Samples
Location Collected
NTS ' 12
Well J-13
No.
Samples Radio-
Analyzed nuclide
12
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
2
«<>Sr
22*Ra
23*U
23SU
238(J
238pu
23«pU
Radioactivity Cone.
(10-* pCi/ml)
Max Min Avq
77
<3
0.43
1.9
<0. 03
.30
<0.03
<0.02
<6
<2
<0.6
0.12
1.6
<0.02
.22
<0.03
<0.02
<20
<2
<0.8
0.22
1.8
<0.03
.26
<0.03
<0.02
% of
Cone.
Guide (2)
<0.01
<0.07
<0.3
0.7
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
NTS
Well Ul9c
6
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
3H
235^
238U
238Pu
239pu
<9
<4
<2
0.23
4.7
<0.06
0.78
<0.2
<0. 4
<7
<3
<0.7
0.056
0.67
<0.02
0.11
<0.02
<0.03
<8
<3
<2
o. 14
2.7
<0,04
0. 45
<0.2
<0.3
<0.01
<0.1
<0.7
0.5
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
-------
Table A-8. 1976 Analytical Results for the NTS Semi-Annual
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
Sampling
Location
NTS
Well UE15d
NTS
Well UE153
NTS
Test Well D
Radioactivity
Depth Sample Radio- Cone.
Date (m) < » > Type<2> nuclide f10-9 pCi/ml)
1/08 23 3H
*»Sr
9°Sr
22*Ra
234U
2350
Z3SU
238pU
239pu
7/12 23 3H
89sr
9t>sr
226Ra
2/03 571 23 3H
89Sr
90Sr
23 + U
235U
238U
238pu
239Pu
<7
<2
<2
1.5
14.9
0.038
1.3
<0.03
<0.01
<8
<0.01
<0.07
<0.7
5
0.02
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 1
<0. 2
5
<0. 01
<0.07
<0. 7
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
NTS 8/05
Test Well D
571
23
11
<0.01
NTS
Well UE1c
2/03
500
23
3H
89Sr
235U
238H
239pu
<8
<2
<2
<0.08
3.6
0.042
1.0
<0.02
<0.02
<0.01
<0. 07
<0. 7
0. 3
0. 01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0.01
NTS
Well UE1c
8/04
500
23
<9
0. 13
<0. 01
0. 4
71
-------
Table A-8. (continued)
sampling
Location
Depth
Date
Sample Radio-
Type* 2) nuclide
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10-^ Mci/ml)
% of
Cone.
Guide<3)
NTS
r>st Well B
2/03
503
23
3H
23SU
238U
238pu
239Pu
260
<2
<2
0. 18
0.21
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.01
<0.07
<0.7
0.6
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
NTS 8/05
Test Well B
504
23
250
<0.01
NTS
well C-1
1/08
23
3H
NTS
Well c-1
NTS
Well UE5C
7/13
8/04
23
23
9<>sr
23SU
23817
238pu
3H
3H
89sr
90Sr
23*U
2350
40
<2
<1
1.2
7-7
0.091
2.2
<0.02
<0.02
30
1.1
<9
<2
<1
3.4
-------
Table A-8. (continued)
Sampling
Locat ion
NTS
Well UE18r
NTS
Well 5B
Radioactivity
Depth Sample Radio- Cone.
Date Type<*> nuclide (10-» jjCi/ml)
8/03 507 23 *H
8'Sr
9<>sr
22*Ra
23*U
23SU
238U
238pu
239Pu
1/07 23 3H
s«sr
90Sr
226Ra
234JJ
23SU
238U
238pU
239pu
<8
<3
1.5
0.11
2.5
<0.03
o.uo
<0.03
<0.03
10
<1
<1
0.33
3.0
0.067
2.0
<0.03
<0.008
% of
Cone.
Guide* 3 >
<0.01
<0. 1
0. 5
0. H
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.03
<0.3
1
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
NTS
Well 5B
7/14
23
3H
<8
<0.01
NTS
Test Well F
2/02
1006
23
90Sr
235U
238^
238pu
239pu
<9
<2
<2
2.0
0.72
<0.02
0. 16
<0.03
<0.03
<0. 01
<0. 07
<0.7
7
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
NTS
Test Well F
8/02 1006
23
<8
<0.01
73
-------
Table A-8. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Date
Depth
(m) <*>
Sample
Type<2>
Radio-
nuclide
Radioactivity
Cone.
* of
Cone.
Guide<3>
NTS ' 1/14
Watertown No. 3
23
3H
90Sr
234U
23SU
238H
238pu
<8
<2
<1
1.4
0.023
0.65
<0.03
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
NTS 7/12
Watertown No. 3
23
<8
<0.01
Ash Meadows,
Nev.
Crystal Pool
1/13
27
Ash Meadows,
Nev.
Crystal Pool
7/19
27
Ash Meadows,
Nev.
Well 18S/51E-7DB
1/13
23
89Sr
235U
238U
23»pu
239Pu
90Sr
235U
238U
<8
<3
<2
0.45
14
0.27
4.8
<0.05
<0.03
<8
0. 14
<8
<3
<2
0.45
3.0
0.041
1.1
<0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 1
<0.7
2
0.05
<0.01
0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
0.5
<0.01
<0. 1
<0.7
2
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Ash Meadows, 7/19
Nev.
Well 18S/51E-7DB
23
3H
<8
<0.01
74
-------
Table A-8. (continued)
Sampling
Location Date
Ash Meadows, 1/13
N«=»v.
Well 17S/50E-1UCAC
Ash Meadows, 7/19
Nev.
Well 17S/50E-1UCAC
Ash Meadows, 1/13
Nev.
Fairbanks
Springs
Depth Sample Radio-
(m) < l > Type* 2 > nuclide
23 3H
89Sr
9°Sr
22*Ra
2340
235U
2 38{J
2 38pu
239Pu
23 3H
226Ra
27 3H
"Sr
90Sr
9 2 6 T3 3
ixCt
2 3*U
235U
238U
238pu
239pU
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10-* uCi/ml)
<8
<3
<2
0.76
2.7
0.043
1.0
<0.03
<0.03
<8
0.66
<8
<3
<2
0.31
2.3
o.oas
0.92
<0.03
<0.02
% of
Cone.
Guide* 3>
<0.01
<0. 1
<0.7
3
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 01
2
<0.01
<0. 1
<0. 7
1
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
Ash Meadows,
Nev.
Fairbanks
Springs
7/19
27
3H
<7
<0. 01
Beatty,
Nev.
City Supply
1/12
23
3R
235U
238pu
<8
<2
<1
0. 13
8.2
0. 12
2.6
<0.05
0.062
<0.01
<0. 07
<0. 3
0. 4
0. 3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
75
-------
Table A-8. (continued)
Radioactivity
Sampling Depth Sample Radio- Cone.
Location Date (m) <• l > TypeSr
Engineering Co. 226Ra
23*U
23SU
238TJ
23Spu
239Pu
Beatty, 7/20 23 3H
Nev. 22*Ra
Nuclear
Engineering Co.
Indian Springs, 1/12 23 3H
Nev- 89Sr
USAF No. 2 9(>Sr
22 6Ra
2 34U
23SU
2 38^
238pu
239pu
Indian Springs, 7/14 23 3H
Mev. 22*Ra
7.4
0.044
11
<2
<1
0.084
5.9
0.061
1.9
<0.05
<0.03
45
0. 19
17
<2
<1
0.22
5. 1
0.039
0.80
<0.02
<0.02
<8
0. 12
% of
Cone.
Guide* 3 )
<0.01
0.2
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
0. 3
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0. 6
<0. 01
<0.07
<0.3
0,7
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.4
76
-------
Table A-8. (continued)
Radioactivity
Sampling Depth Sample Radio- Cone.
Location Date fm) < » > Type nuclide (10-9 nCi/ml)
Indian Springs, 1/12
Nev.
Sewer Co. Inc.
Well No. 1
Indian Springs, ~F/^<^
Nev.
Sewer Co. Inc.
Well No. 1
Lathrop Wells, 1/12
Nev.
City Supply
23 3H
•»Sr
90Sr
226Ra
234H
235U
238U
aaapu
239pu
23 3R
226Ra
23 3H
89Sr
90sr
226Ra
23*U
23SU
238H
238pu
239Pu
<8
<1
<1
0. 10
3.4
O.OU1
0.66
<0.04
<0.03
<8
0.078
<8
<1
<1
0.084
1. 1
<0.01
<0.02
<0.02
0.032
% of
Cone.
Guide* 3 >
<0.01
<0.03
<0. 3
0. 3
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0. 3
<0.01
<0.03
<0, 3
0. 3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Lathrop Wells,
Nev.
City Supply
7/19
23
<8
<0.01
Springdale,
Nev.
Goss Springs
1/14
27
3H
235U
238U
238pU
11
<3
<2
0. 16
4.2
0.055
1. 1
<0.02
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 1
<0.7
0.5
0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
77
-------
Table A-8. (continued)
Radioactivity
Sampling Depth Sample Radio- Cone.
Location Date (m) < » > Type nuclide [10~9 MCi/ml)
Springdale, 7/15
Nev.
Goss Springs
Springdale, 2/05
Nev.
Road D Windmill
27 3H
2z*Ra
23 3H
89Sr
90sr
226Ra
23*U
235U
23BU
238pu
239pu
<7
0.072
<8
<3
<2
0.37
2.0
<0.04
1.0
<0.02
<0.02
% of
Cone.
Guide* 3>
<0.01
0.2
<0. 01
<0. 1
<0.7
1. 2
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Springdale,
Nev.
Road D Windmill
7/15
23
<7
<0.01
Shoshone,
Calif.
Shoshone Spring
1/13
27
Shoshone,
Calif.
Shoshone Spring
7/19
27
3H
a»Sr
9°Sr
226Ra
234U
23SU
238U
238pu
239pu
3H
226Ra
<30
<3
<2
0.24
4.2
0.042
1.4
<0.03
<0,02
<10
0.36
<0.01
<0. 1
<0. 7
0. 8
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
1
'"»> If 'depth not shown, water was collected at surface
<2>23 - Well
27 - Spring
<3Concentration Guides for drinking water at on-NTS locations are the
same as those for off-NTS locations. See Appendix B for Concentra-
tion Guides.
78
-------
Table A-9. 1976 Analytical Results for the
NTS Annual Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
Sampling Sample
Location Date Type* l >
Hiko, Nev. 7/06 27
Crystal Springs
Alamo, Nev. 7/06 23
City Supply
Warm Springs, Nev. 7/07 27
Twin springs Ranch
Diablo, Nev. 7/06 23
Highway Maint.
Station
Radio-
nuclide
3H
89sr
»°Sr
226Ra
2 3*U
23SU
238U
238pU
23»pU
3H
89Sr
90Sr
23*U
235U
238U
238Pu
239Pu
3H
89Sr
«osr
226R3
234U
235U
238U
238pU
2 3«pU
3H
8»Sr
90Sr
23*U
23SU
2 38U
238pU
2 39pu
Radioactivity
Cone.
riO-» pCi/ml)
<8
<3
<0.8
0.54
4.U
0.052
1.6
<0.04
-------
Table A-9. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Nyala, Nev.
Sharp Ranch
Adaven, Nev.
Adaven Spring
Pahrump, Nev,
Calvada Well 3
.
Tonopah, Nev.
City Supply
Sample Radio-
Date Type( l ' nuclide
7/07 23 3H
»-»Sr
90Sr
234U
23Sy
238y
238pu
239pu
7/07 27 3H
«*Sr
90Sr
22»Ra
23*U
23SU
238U
238pu
239pu
7/19 23 3H
89Sr
90Sr
22eRa
23*U
235O
23BU
23Spu
239pu
7/07 23 3H
8«sr
9°Sr
226Ra
234U
2 35U
238TJ
238pu
239pu
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10-9 pCi/ml)
<8
<3
<0.7
1.7
<0.03
0.65
<0.02
<0.03
130
<3
<0.6
0.078
3. 1
0.054
1. 1
<0.03
<0.03
<10
<4
<0.7
0. 13
8.4
0.13
2.6
<0.03
<0.02
<8
<3
<0.8
0. 18
3.2
<0.06
0.92
0.027
0.020
% of
Cone.
Guide<2>
<0.01
<0. 1
<0. 2
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 1
<0.2
0. 3
0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 1
<0. 2
0. 4
0. 03
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 1
<0.3
0. 6
0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
80
-------
Table A-9. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Clark Station,
Nev.
Tonopah Test
Range Well
No. 6
Las Vegas, Nev.
Well No. 28
Sample Radio-
Date Type
<0.01
<0. 1
<0. 2
0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 1
o. a
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
ti>23 - Well
27 - Spring
See Appendix
B for Concentration Guides.
81
-------
Table A-10. 1976 Analytical Results for the Off-NTS
Lonq-Term Hydrological Monitoring Prograln
Sampling
Location
Malaga,
N. Mex.
USGS Well
No. 1
Malaga,
N. Mex.
TTSGS Well
No. 4
Malaga,
N. Mex.
TJSGS Well
No. 8
Malaga,
N. Mex.
PHS Well No. 6
Depth Sample Radio-
Date (m) < ! > Type<2) nuclide
PROJECT GNOME
5/01 161 23 3H
»»Sr
9°Sr
22*Ra
23*U
23SU
23«U
238pu
239pu
5/01 148 23 »H
8»Sr
90gr
22*Ra
23»TJ
235U
238U
238pu
239Pu
5/01 14U 23 3R
89Sr
90Sr
137Cg
226Ra
234U
235U
2380
23«PU
239Pu
5/01 23 3H
8»Sr
»°Sr
23*D
235U
238H
238pU
239Pu
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10-9 pCi/ml)
8.6
<2
<1
5.0
5.9
0.062
1.8
<0.01
<0.007
870,000
<600
8700
3.9
2.3
<0.02
0.56
<0.02
<0.0067
980,000
<200
% of
Cone.
Guide<3>
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
17
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
29
<20
2900
13
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0. 01
33
<7
12,000 4000
170
3. 1
0.27
<0.02
0.083
<0.05
<0.03
140
<5
<3
0.94
0.064
0.71
<0.05
<0.04
0. 9
10
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 2
<1
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 01
82
-------
Table A-10. (continued)
Radioactivity
Sampling Depth Sample Radio- Cone.
Location Date (m) < l > Type*2* nuclide (10-« jjCi/ml)
Malaga, ' 4/30
N. Mex.
PHS Well No. 8
Malaga, 4/30
N. Mex.
PHS Well No. 9
Malaga, 4/30
N. Mex.
PHS Well No. 10
Malaga, 4/29
N. Mex.
City Water
23 3H
»»Sr
90sr
22 6Ra
23*U
235U
238U
238pu
239pu
2J 3H
8*Sr
90Sr
23*U
235U
23813
238pu
239pu
23 3H
a»sr
9 O ^T~
2 2 fe R A
23*0
23SU
238U
23«pU
239pU
23 3H
23!?
235U
238U
238pU
239PQ
6.7
<7
2. 1
0.069
7.3
0. 13
2.3
<0.003
<0.009
11
<6
<3
1.7
<0.02
0.60
<0.05
<0.03
<7
<6
<3
0.33
10
0.045
1.7
<0.03
<0.008
19
<5
<3
1.9
<0.02
0.62
<0.02
<0.02
% of
Cone.
Guide* 3)
<0.01
<0. 3
0.7
0. 2
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 2
<0. 1
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 2
<1
0. 1
0.03
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0. 2
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
83
-------
Table A-10. (continued)
Radioactivity
Sampling Depth Sample Radio- Cone.
Location Date (m) < » > Type<2> nuclide (10~» pCi/ml)
Malaga, ' 4/29
N. Mex.
Pecos River
Pumping Station
Loving, 4/29
N. Mex.
City Well No. 2
Carlsbad, 4/29
N. Mex.
City Well No. 7
Frenchman, 4/07
Nev.
Frenchman
Station
23 3H
e9sr
90Sr
«2*Ra
23*U
235U
238U
238pu
239pu
23 3R
89Sr
90Sr
23*n
235U
238U
238pu
239Pu
23 3H
«9Sr
9°Sr
23*U
235JJ
23«U
238PU
239pu
PROJECT SHOAL
23 3H
8«Sr
*°Sr
226Ra
23«U
23SU
238H
238pu
239pu
<9
<5
<3
0.15
0.027
<0.01
0.024
<0.01
<0.008
18
<5
<3
1.9
<0.02
0.65
<0.02
<0.02
17
<5
<3
0,69
<0.02
0.28
<0.03
<0.02
<20
<2
<1
0.089
22
0.39
11
<0.01
<0.05
% of
Cone.
Guide<3>
<0.01
<0.2
<1
0. 5
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 2
<1
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 2
<1
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 07
<0. 3
0. 3
0.07
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
<0.01
84
-------
Table A-10. (continued)
Radioactivity
Sampling Depth Sample Radio- Cone.
Location Date Tvpe<2> nuclide (10~9 pCi/ml)
Frenchman,' 4/07
Nev.
Well HS-1
Frenchman, 4/08
Nev.
Well H-3
Frenchman, 4/07
Nev.
Flowing Well
Frenchman, 4/07
Nev.
Hunts Station
23 'H
8'Sr
90sr
22*Ra
Z3*y
235U
238U
2 38pu
239pu
23 3H
234U
2-3SJJ
2380
238pu
239PU
23 3H
8 9 G[Y*
9 0 ^T"
226 T-) A
2 3*U
23SU
2380
238 p\j
239 p\j
23 'H
»<>Sr
23SU
238U
23«pu
239pU
<9
<2
<1
1. 1
0.34
<0.01
0.39
<0.02
<0.03
<9
<2
0. 18
3.5
0.038
2. 1
<0.04
<0.03
<8
<2
0. 12
0.39
<0.02
0.24
<0.01
<0.03
<9
<2
0.88
<0.01
0.49
<0.03
<0.04
% of
Cone.
Guide* 3 >
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
4
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
0. 6
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0,01
<0.01
<0. 07
<0. 3
0. 4
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0,07
<0. 3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0, 01
<0.01
85
-------
Table A-10. (continued)
Radioactivity % of
Sampling
Location
Baxterville,
Miss.
City Supply
Baxterville,
Miss.
Lower Little
Creek
Baxterville,
Miss.
Well HT-1
Depth Sample Radio-
Date (m) ( » > Type<2> nuclide
PROJECT DRIBBLE
1/12 23 3H
4/20 23 'H
89Sr
9°Sr
2 3 * I]
235U
238U
238pu
2J9Pu
7/12 23 3H
1/14 22 3H
4/25 22 3H
89Sr
9°Sr
2 3*U
23SH
2 38y
2 38pu
239Pu
7/12 22 3H
1/13 381 23 3H
4/21 378 23 *H
"Sr
90Sr
23«n
235U
238U
238pu
239pu
Cone.
[10-9 pci/ml)
86
83
<2
<2
<0.04
<0.02
<0.03
<0.03
<0.04
54
96
240
<2
<1
0.050
<0.02
0.053
<0.03
<0.02
35
60
40
<2
<1
0.020
<0.02
0.023
<0.03
<0.06
Cone.
<0. 01
<0,01
<0.07
<0.7
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 01
7/13
378
23
3H
24
<0.01
86
-------
Table A-10. (continued)
Sampling Depth
Location Date (m)<»>
Baxterville, 1/15 108
Miss.
Well HT-2c 4/24 108
7/14 108
Baxterville, 1/15 122
Miss.
Well HT-4 4/24 122
7/14 122
Baxterville, 1/15 183
Miss.
Well HT-5 4/24 183
Radioactivity
Sample Radio- Cone.
Type* 2 > nuclide (10-9 Mci/ml)
23 'H
23 3H
«»Sr
90Sr
23*U
23SU
238U
238pu
239pu
23 3H
23 3R
23 3H
s»Sr
90Sr
23*tJ
235{J
238U
238pu
239pu
23 3H
23 3H
23 3H
«"»Sr
90Sr
23«U
235U
238U
238pu
239Pu
<8
40
<2
<1
0.045
<0.02
0.029
<0.01
<0.02
18
16
26
<2
<1
2.9
<0.03
0.85
<0.02
<0.01
<7
<8
14
<7
<2
<0.05
<0.03
<0.05
<0.03
<0.02
% of
Cone.
Guide' * >
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 07
<0. 3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0, 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 3
<0.7
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
7/14
183
23
3H
<9
<0.01
87
-------
Table A-10. (continued)
Sampling Depth
Location Date (m) c * >
Baxterville, 1/15 282
Miss.
Well E-7 4/24 282
7/14 282
Baxterville, 1/14
Miss.
Well Ascot
No. 2 4/20
7/15
Radioactivity
Sample Radio- Cone.
Type<2) nuclide (10-* uCi/ml)
23 3H
23 SH
8*Sr
90Sr
23*U
Z35J7
238U
2 38pu
239Pu
23 3H
23 3H
226Ra
23 3H
8*Sr
90Sr
226Ra
234U
235U
238U
238pu
239Pu
23 3H
226Ra
13
16
<2
<1
<0.02
<0.01
<0.02
<0.02
<0.01
<8
<9
0.094
26
<2
<1
12
0.040
<0.03
<0.03
<0.07
<0.04
<8
7.8
% of
Cone.
Guide* 3>
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0. 3
<0.01
<0,07
<0. 3
40
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
26
Baxterville,
Miss.
Half Moon
Creek
1/11
4/21
22
22
7/11
22
3H
3H
90Sr
23SIJ
23en
238pu
239Pu
74
40
<0.01
<7
<2
<1
0.044
<0.009
<0.02
<0.02
<0.06
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
88
-------
Table A-10- (continued)
Radioactivity % of
Sampling
Location Date
Baxterville, 1/16
Miss.
Half Moon 4/23
Creek Overflow
7/11
Baxterville, 4/19
Miss.
T. Speights
Residence
Depth Sample Radio-
(m) Type<2> nuclide
22 3H
22 3H
HSr
2340
2 3 SO
2380
238pU
239pu
22 3H
89Sr
'0Sr
23 *H
23*0
23SO
23»O
238?^
239Pu
Cone.
770
2400
<3
0. 18
<0.08
0. 12
<0,07
<0.03
3000
<4
<1
110
<2
<0.03
<0.02
<0.03
<0.02
<0.04
Cone.
0.03
0.08
<0. 1
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
0. 1
<0. 1
<0. 3
<0.01
<0.07
<0.3
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
7/12
23
90
01
Baxterville, 1/16
Miss.
R. L. Anderson 4/22
Residence
23
23
3H
3H
2350
238O
238pU
7/14
23
3H
120
120
<2
<1
<0.03
<0.02
0.024
<0.02
<0.05
40
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0.01
89
-------
Table A-10. (continued)
Radioactivity % of
Sampling
Location Date
Baxterville, 1/12
Miss.
Mark Lowe 4/22
Residence
7/12
Baxterville, 1/16
Miss.
R. Ready 4/22
Residence
7/15
Baxterville, 1/16
Miss,
W. Daniels, Jr. 4/22
Residence
Depth Sample Radio-
fm) ( i> Type<2> nuclide
23 3H
23 3H
«9Sr
90Sr
23«U
23SU
238^
238pu
239pu
23 3H
89Sr
90Sr
23 3H
23 3H
«»Sr
9osr
23»U
23SU
238U
238pu
239Pu
23 3H
23 3H
23 3H
89Sr
90Sr
Z3*U
235U
238^
238pu
239pu
Cone.
MO-9 MCi/ml)
160
150
<2
<1
0.027
<0.008
<0.02
<0.03
<0.02
80
<4
<0.7
70
100
<2
<1
0. 12
<0.03
0,046
<0.02
<0.008
30
90
70
<2
<1
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.01
<0.01
Cone.
Guide* 3 >
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 2
<0. 3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0.01
7/12
23
<8
<0. 01
90
-------
Table A-10. (continued)
Radioactivity
Sampling Depth Sample Radio- Cone.
Location Date (m) < » > Type<*> nuclide (10~9 pCi/ml)
Lumberton, 1/12
Miss.
City Supply 4/19
Well No. 2
23 3R
23 3H
89Sr
90Sr
23»tl
23SU
238U
238pu
239Pu
<8
<7
<8
<1
0.26
<0.06
0. 11
<0.02
<0.01
% of
Cone.
Guide<3>
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 3
<0. 3
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
7/13
23
<7
<0.01
Purvis,
Miss.
City Supply
1/12
4/22
7/15
23
23
23
3H
23SU
238TJ
238pu
239PU
<8
<9
<0. 01
<8
<2
<1
<0.04
<0.03
<0.04
<0.02
<0.05
<0.01
<0. 07
<0. 3
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
Columbia,
Miss,
City Supply
1/12
4/22
23
23
3H
3H
90Sr
7/12
23
23SU
238TJ
238pu
239pu
3H
19
25
<2
<1
<0.03
<0.02
<0.03
<0.01
<0.007
<7
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 07
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
91
-------
Table A-10. (continued)
Radioactivity
Sampling Depth Sample Radio- Cone.
Location Date (nO < l > Tyoe< 2 > nuclide (10-* uCi/ml)
Lumberton, 1/12
Miss.
North Lumberton 4/19
City Supply
7/13
Baxterville, 1/16
Miss.
Pond W of GZ 4/23
23 3H
23 3H
23*y
23SO
238U
238pu
239pu
23 3H
226Ra
21 3H
21 3H
89Sr
9osr
23*^
23SU
238U
2 3»pu
239Pu
<7
16
<2
<0.05
<0.03
<0. 04
<0.02
<0.04
7.4
0. 16
54
61
<3
<1
0.042
<0.009
<0.02
<0.02
<0.008
% of
Cone.
Guide<3>
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0. 5
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 1
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0.01
7/11
21
31
<0.01
Gobernador,
N. Mex.
Arnold Ranch
5/23
PROJECT GASBUGGY
27 3H
234U
235U
238U
238pu
23»pu
<8
<2
<1
0. 17
2. 1
0.041
0.74
<0.02
<0.03
<0.01
<0.07
<0.3
0.6
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
92
-------
Table A-10. (continued)
Radioactivity
Sampling Depth Sample Radio- Cone.
Location Date (m) < l > Type<2> nuclide (10~9 jjCi/ml)
Gobernador, 5/23
N. Mex.
Lower Burro
Canyon
Gobernador, 5/23
N. Mex.
Fred Bixler
Ranch
Blanco, 5/23
N. Mex.
San Juan River
Gobernador, 5/23
N. Mex.
Cave Springs
23 3H
»9Sr
90Sr
22&Ra
23*U
235U
238U
23Spu
239Pu
23 3H
89Sr
90Sr
234{J
23SO
238U
Z38pu
23-Jpu
22 3H
89Sr
90sr
23*U
23SU
238U
238pu
23«pU
27 3H
89Sr
«osr
226Ra
23*U
Z3SIJ
2380
2 38 pu
239pU
5.8
<2
<1
0.26
0. 16
<0.02
<0.02
<0.03
<0. 01
<0.07
<0.3
0. 9
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 07
<0. 3
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.2
<0. 3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
93
-------
Table A-10. (continued)
Radioactivity
Sampling Depth Sample Radio- Cone.
Location Date (m) < » > Type<*> nuclide (10~9 ^Ci/ml)
Gobernador, 5/23
N. Mex.
Windmill No. 2
Gobernador, 5/23
N. Mex.
Bubbling Springs
Dulce, 5/23
N. Mex.
City Water
Supply
Dulce, 5/23
N. Mex.
La Jara Lake
23 3H
«9Sr
9osr
22«Ra
23*U
23SJJ
238U
23apu
239pu
27 3H
8»Sr
9oSr
22*Ra
23*tJ
23SU
238U
239PM
239PU
21 3H
8«Sr
90Sr
23*U
23SU
238U
238PU
239PU
21 3H
8«sr
90Sr
22*Ra
23«U
235U
238n
238pu
239pu
<7
<2
<1
0.083
O.UU
<0.6<*>
220
<3
<2
0.28
6.7
0.12
3.6
<0.01
<0.008
% of
Cone.
Guide<3>
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.03
<0. 3
0.5
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.02
<0. 02
<0.01
<0. 1
<0.2
0. 9
0.22
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
9U
-------
Table A-10. (continued)
Sampling Depth
Location Date (m) < 1 >
Gobernador, 5/22 1097
N. Mex.
EPNG Well 10-36
Radioactivity
Sample Radio- Cone.
Type nuclide (10~9 nCi/ml)
23 3H
"Si
90Sr
*2*Ra
23«U
23Sg
2380
238pu
239pu
<7
<5
<1
0.36
0.23
<0.05
0.091
<0.01
<0.009
% Of
Cone.
Guide<3)
<0.01
<0.2
<0. 3
1. 2
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
Rulison,
Colo.
Lee L. Hayward
Ranch
5/19
PROJECT RULISON
23 3H
23SU
238U
23«pU
470
<2
<0.8
0. 18
8.3
0. 13
4.5
<0.02
-------
Table A-10. (continued)
Radioactivity
Sampling Depth Sample Radio- Cone.
Location Date (m) < » > Type<2) nuclide M0~» MCi/ml)
Grand Valley, 5/19
Colo.
City Water
Supply
Grand Valley, 5/20
Colo.
Spring 300 Yds.
NW of GZ
Rulison, 5/19
Colo.
Felix Sefcovic
Ranch
Anvil Points, 5/19
Colo.
Rernklau Ranch
27 3H
89sr
90Sr
234TJ
235U
238U
238pu
239pU
27 3H
««Sr
90Sr
23»U
235JJ
238U
238pu
23*pU
23 3H
89Sr
90Sr
23«U
23STJ
238U
238pu
239pu
27 3H
89Sr
90Sr
23*U
235U
238O
238pu
239pu
<6
<2
<0.8
1.8
o.oas
0.72
<0.02
<0.02
270
<2
<0-8
1.5
0.037
0.71
<0.03
<0.06
420
<2
<0.8
O.U7
<0.03
0.24
<0.02
<0.03
350
<2
<0.8
2.8
<0,03
1.4
<0.02
<0.03
55 of
Cone.
Guide* s >
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0. 01
<0.07
<0.3
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
96
-------
Table A-10. (continued)
Radioactivity
Sampling Depth Sample Radio- Cone.
Location Date (m) < l > Type<«> nuclide (10~9 MCi/ml)
Grand Valley, 5/20
Colo.
Battlement Creek
Grand Valley, 5/20
Colo.
CER Well
Rulison, 5/19
Colo.
Potter Ranch
Blue Jay, 5/05
Nev.
Hiqhway Maint.
Station
22 3H
89Sr
9<>sr
23«U
23SU
238U
238pu
239pv,
13.6 23 3R
a«Sr
9osr
23*U
235U
238H
238pU
239pu
27 3H
89Sr
90sr
z*6Ra
23*U
23STJ
23«n
238PU
239pu
PROJECT FAULTLESS
23 3H
e«Sr
90Sr
22«Ra
234U
235U
238U
238pu
239Pu
250
<6
1.6
1. 1
<0.1
0.54
<0.009
<0.007
350
<6
<0.9
0.60
<0.07
O.UO
<0.01
<0.06
350
<2
<1
0. 1 1
5.U
0. 16
3.0
<0.02
<0.05
<7
<2
<8
0. 12
3.5
O.OU9
1.4
<0.02
<0.01
% of
Cone.
Guide* * >
<0.01
0.2
0. 5
<0.01
<0, 01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
0. 01
<0. 2
<0. 3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
0. IJ
0.02
<0.01
0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<3
0, 4
0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
97
-------
Table A-10. (continued)
Sampling Depth
Location Date (m) < l >
Warm Springs, 5/05
Nev.
Hot Creek
Ranch
Blue Jay, 5/05
Nev.
Blue Jay Spring
Blue Jay, 5/05
Nev.
Sixmile Well
Blue Jay, 5/06 259
Nev.
Well HTH-1
5/06 305
5/06 855
Radioactivity
Sample Radio- Cone.
Type<*> nuclide (10~9 pCi/ml)
27 3H
89Sr
90Sr
22*Ra
23*U
23SU
238U
238pu
239pu
27 3H
»»Sr
90Sr
226Ra
23*U
235TJ
238U
238pu
239pu
23 3H
89Sr
«osr
234U
235U
238U
238pu
239Pu
23 3H
a«Sr
9°Sr
23«U
235U
238U
238pu
239Pu
23 3H
23 3H
77
<2
<1
0.072
1.6
<0.01
<0.07
<0.3
0. 2
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.07
<3
0.5
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 2
<0. 7
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0. 01
98
-------
Table A-10. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Date
Depth
(m)< *>
Sample
Type*2 >
Padio-
nuclide
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10-9 uCi/ml)
% of
Cone.
Guide*3>
Blue Jay,
Nev.
Well HTH-2
5/06
23
3H
90Sr
23*0
235TJ
238U
238pU
<6
<2
<1
2.7
0.033
0.76
<0.04
<0.02
<0.01
<0.07
<0. 3
<0.01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0. 01
<0. 01
Blue Jay,
Nev.
Well HTH-2
5/06 213 23
5/06 300 23
3H
3H
"Sr
90Sr
<0. 01
234JJ
235U
238U
2 38 pu
239pu
26
<2
<1
0.056
2.7
If depth not shown, water was collected at surface
<2'21 - Pond, lake, reservoir, stock tank, or stock pond
22 - Stream, river, or creek
23 - Well
27 - Spring
<3Concentration Guides for drinking water at on-site locations are
the same as those for off-site locations. See Appendix B for Con-
centration Guides.
(*>Chemical yield of sample was only U0% resulting in higher
than normal MDC.
99
-------
APPENDIX B. RADIATION PROTECTION STANDARDS
FOR EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL EXPOSURE
ERDA ANNUAL DOSE COMMITMENT*»>
Type of Exposure
Dose Limit to
Critical Individuals
in Uncontrolled Area
at Points of Maximum
Probable Exposure treml
Dose Limit to
Suitable Sample
of the Exposed
Population in an
Uncontrolled Area (rem)
Whole Body, gonads
or bone marrow
Other organs
0.5
1.5
0.17
0.5
ERDA CONCENTRATION GUIDES (CG*s)
Sampling Radio-
CG
Network or Program
Air Surveillance Network
Noble Gas and Tritium
Surveillance Network,
On- NTS
Noble Gas and Tritium
Surveillance Network,
Off -NTS
Medium
air
air
air
nuclide
»«Zr
I03RU
««Kr
*H
133Xe
.!£
(uCi/ml)
3.3x10-»°
1.0x10-«
3.3x10-»»
1.0x10-»
3.3x10-i«
1.0x10-»
5.0x10-«
1.0x10-»
1.0x10-»
6.7x10-«
1.0x10-*
Basis of Exposure
Suitable sample
of the exposed
population in
uncontrolled area,
Individual in
controlled area.
Suitable sample
of the exposed
population in
uncontrolled area.
Network or Program
Long-Term Hydrological
Program
Sampling Radio-
Medium nuclide
water 3H
•«Sr
««Sr
I3TCs
"•Ra
23*0
23SO
236Q
23»Pu
23«pu
CG
fuCi/ml!
3.0x10-
3.0x10-
3.0x10-
2.0x10-
3.0x10-
3.0x10-
3.0x10-
«.0x10-
5.0x10-
5.0x10-
Basis of Exposure
Individual in a
controlled or an
uncontrolled area.
EPA DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS FOR RADIONUCLIDES**>
Maximum Contaminant Levels for Beta Particles and Photon Radioactivity from
Man-Made Radionuclides in Community Water Systems*'>
100
-------
(a) The average annual concentration of beta particle and photon radio-
activity from man-made radionuclides in drinking water shall not
produce an annual dose equivalent to the total body or any internal
organ greater than H millirem/year.
(b) Except for the radionuclides listed in Table B-1B the concentration of
man-made radionuclides causing 4 mrem total body or organ dose
equivalents shall be calculated on the basis of a 2 litre per day
drinking water intake using the 168 hour data listed in "Maximum
Permissible Body Burdens and Maximum Permissible Concentration of
Radionuclides in Air or Water for Occupational Exposure," NBS
Handbook 69 as amended August 1963, D.S. Department of Commerce.
If two or more radionuclides are present, the sum of their annual
dose equivalent to the total body or to any organ shall not exceed
4 millirem/year.
TABLE B-1. AVERAGE ANNUAL CONCENTRATION ASSUMED TO PRODUCE A
TOTAL BODY OR ORGAN DOSE OF 4 MHEM/YR
pCi
Radionuclide Critical Organ per litre
Tritium Total body 20,000
Strontium-90 Bone marrow 8
<»>"Radiation Protection Standards," ERDA Manual, Chapter 0524.
-------
APPENDIX C. REPLICATE SAMPLING PROGRAM
Purpose
The program was initiated for the purpose of routinely assessing
the errors due to sampling replication error and analytical/counting
errors associated with the collection and analysis of samples obtained
from the surveillance networks maintained around the Nevada Test Site
and other sites designated by the Nevada Operations Office, Energy Re-
search and Development Administration.
Procedure
The program involved the collection and analysis of replicate sam-
ples from the Air Surveillance Network (ASN), the Noble Gas and Tritium
Surveillance Network (NGSTSN), the Dosimetry Network and the Standby
Milk Surveillance Network (SMSN). Due to difficulties anticipated in
obtaining sufficient quantities of milk for duplicate samples from the
Milk Surveillance Network, duplicate samples were collected during the
annual activation of the SMSN.
At least 40 duplicate samples from each network were collected and
analyzed over the report period. Since three thermoluminescent (TLD)
cards consisting of two TLD chips each are used at each station of the
Dosimetry Network, no additional samples were necessary. The following
table summarizes the sampling information for each surveillance network.
TABLE C-1
SAMPLES AND ANALYSES FOR REPLICATE SAMPLING PROGRAM
Surveil-
lance
Network
ASN
Number of
Sampling
Locations
121
Samples
Collected
Per Year
8,300
Total No.
of
Replicate
Samples
131
Replicate
Sample
Size
2
Sample
Analysis
Gross p
NG&TSN
Dosimetry
11
11
1 1
11
11
70
572
572
572
572
572
289
12
12
8
44
289
2
2
2
2
2
4-6
3H
HTO
HT
H20
External
102
-------
Surveil- Number of
lance Sampling
Network Locations
SMSN
LTHMP
LTHMP
LTHMP
(surface)
(wellhead)
(deep well)
185
8
62
18
Samples
Collected
Per Year
185
16
187
36
Total No.
of
Replicate
Samples
96
11
22
1 1
Replicate
Sample Sample
Size Analysis
2
2
2
2
*°K
z 3 ay
238U
238U
There were other analyses for air, milk and water samples that
could not be included in this evaluation due to the fact that there
were not a sufficient number of analytical results available at the
time of this report. Since the sampling distributions of each sample
type appeared to be log-normal from the review of cumulative fre-
quency plots of the results, the variance of each set of repli-
cate sample results was estimated from the logarithms of the re-
sults in each set.
The variance, s2, of each set of replicate TLD results (n=6) was
estimated from the logarithms of the results by the standard expression.
n
s2 =
1=1
Since duplicate samples were collected for all other sample types, the
variances (s2) for these types were calculated from s2 = (0.886R)2,
where R is the absolute difference between the logarithms of the dupli-
cate sample results. For small sample sizes, this estimate of the vari-
ance is statistically efficient and certainly more convenient in
calculating than the standard expression.
The principle that the variances of random samples collected
from a normal population follow a chi-square distribution (x2) was then
used to estimate the confidence interval of the expected population
geometric variance for each type of sample analysis. The expressions
used are as follows:<2>
n
~^ o
s2 =
n
1=1
Lower Confidence Limit {LCL) =
n n
I(n.-l) (§2)/X2{0.995, I (n -1) }
1=1 1 1=1
Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) =
n n
£ (n.-l) (s2)/X2{0.005, I(n.-l)}
1=1 1 1=1
103
-------
LCL <02< UCL
where a2 - the true value of the population geometric variance.
n.-1 = the degrees of freedom for n samples collected for
1 the ith replicate sample.
32 = the expected geometric variance of the ith replicate
sample.
32 = the best estimate of sample geometric variance derived
from the variance estimates of all replicate samples
(the expected value of s2 is a2) .
The 99% upper confidence limit for the total error (sampling + ana-
lytical/counting errors) of the geometric mean of any group of samples
collected from a given network was then determined as the geometric
mean + 2.57s.
The following table summarizes the antilogarithm of the results for
the 99% confidence limits on the expected geometric standard deviation
of the total error, compares the confidence limits of the total error
with the ranges in geometric standard deviations observed from the data
of each network, and lists the 99% upper confidence limit (UCL) expected
from the sampling/analytical/counting errors for the geometric mean of
any Network samples.
TABLE C-2. UPPER CONFIDENCE LIMITS OF SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL/
COUNTING ERRORS
Surveil-
lance
Network
of
No. of
Repli-
cate
Analysis Samples
From Evaluation
Replicate Samples
99% Confidence Limits
For Expected Geometric
Standard Deviation
LCL0>995 s UCL0.00s
Observed
Geometric
Std Dev
From Net-
work Data
Min Max
99% UCL
of
Total
Error
ASN
NG5TSN
Gross /3
HTO
HT
131
40
12
12
8
1.83
1.20
1.41
1.52
1.20
2.03
1.26
1.69
1.90
1.34
2.33
1.38
1.81
3. 56
1.98
1.3 5.8
1.2 1.2
1.4 5. 1
1.8 5.2
1.7 2.6
6.2
1.8
3.8
5.2
2.2
Dosimetry
(TLD)
289
1.050
1.053 1.056
1.1 1. 3<3> 1. 1
104
-------
Surveil-
lance
Network
of
No. of
Repli-
cate
Analysis Samples
From Evaluation
Replicate Samples
99% Confidence Limits
For Expected Geometric
Standard Deviation
LCL0.,95 s DCL0.005
Observed
Geometric
Std Dev
From Net-
work Data
Min Max
99% UCL
of
Total
Error
SMSN
96
1.08
1.09
1. 11
1.0 1.2
1.3
LTHMP
(Surface)
(Wellhead)
(Deep Well)
23
23
23
8U
8U
8TJ
11
22
1 1
1
1
1
.77
.46
.72
2.
1.
2.
44
69
34
6.
2.
5.
25
32
74
9.
1. 1 7.4 3.
8.
9
9
9
From a comparison of the observed geometric standard deviation with
the expected geometric standard deviation from sampling and analytical/
counting errors, one can see that the observed variations in surveil-
lance data exceed the variance attributable to the sampling and ana-
lytical/counting errors except for the 85Kr data and the environmental
radiation TLD measurements. Apparently, the majority of variations in
8SKr concentrations are the result of the sampling and analytical/
counting errors. As there are not sufficient TLD data per station and
year, the actual variation in TLD exposures under environmental condi-
tions could not be determined. However, the variation in TLD data for
the Hanford environs can be used as a reasonable substitute.
<»>Snedecor, G. W. and W. G. Cochran.
State University Press, Ames, Iowa
Statistical Methods. The Iowa
6th ed. 1967. pp 39-47.
<2>Freud, J. E. Mathematical Statistics.
Engelwood, 1962. pp 189-197, 235.
Prentice Hall, N. J.
<3>Not based on FMSL-LV data. Fix, J. J. and P. J. Blumer. "Thermo-
luminescent Dosimeter (CaF2Dy) Measurement of Hanford Environs,
1971-1975." BNWL-2140, UC-41. Battelle Northwest Laboratories.
Richland, Washington. Jan. 1977. pp A-2 to A-7.
105
-------
APPENDIX D. AIRBORNE RADIOACTIVITY FROM ATMOSPHERIC NUCLEAR TESTS
BY PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA
Airborne radioactivity from the first atmospheric test by the
People »s Republic of China on September 25 at 2200 hours, PDT, was
detected throughout the Network beginning with samples collected over
a 3-day period (weekend) that ended October U. The airborne concen-
tration of gross beta radioactivity estimated from the analysis of
filters collected at those stations operated throughout October was
observed to reach its peak during the period October 15-25 and to
generally decrease throughout the remainder of the year, except for
a slight increase in November ±rom the second Chinese test. Typical
time series plots of the gross beta concentrations in air are shown
in Figures D-1 and D-2 for Duckwater, Nevada, and Lone Pine, California,
where the maximum individual concentration of gross beta radioactivity
(6.2x10~12 pCi/ml in a sample collected October 13-15) and the maxi-
mum quarterly average concentration of gross beta radioactivity
(<8.0x10~13 pCi/ml) occurred, respectively. The increase in gross
beta radioactivity concentrations from the second Chinese test (November
16 at 2200 hours, PST) shown by the small peaks shown on November 24
for these two stations and during the week of November 21 for 33 of the
other active stations. The highest concentration measured following the
second test was 2.1x10~12 pCi/ml for a sample collected at Boise, Idaho,
during the period November 22-23.
The fission products 9*7,rr i03Ru, t06RUr i»ic6r »»*ce, 131I, 13*Te,
l*°Ba, and naturally occurring 7Be were detected in various combinations
on many of the particulate filters collected during the 4th calendar
quarter and analyzed by gamma spectrometry. Due to gamma peak interfer-
ences and the large number of filters to be analyzed, the concentrations
for the radionuclides l°*Ru, ***Ce, and * **Ce could not be quantitated.
The fresh fission products 131I, iszje, and i*°Ba were detected on air
filters collected only during the month of October, whereas the longer-
lived fission products 9SZr, 1Q3Ru, *°«Ru, **>Ce, and i**Ce were de-
tected throughout the 4th quarter. No radionuclides were detected on
any of the charcoal cartridges. The following table shows the loca-
tions where the samples having the maximum concentration of each radio-
nuclide were collected.
106
-------
TABLE D-1.
LOCATIONS OF MAXIMUM RADIONUCLIDE
CONCENTRATIONS IN AIR
Location
Radio-
nuclide
Half-
Life
collection
Period
Max.
no-12
Cone.
pCi/ml)
%CG
Barstow, Calif. 7Be
Barstow, Calif. 9*Z
Bars tow, Calif.
Nyala, Nev. 1311
Lida, Nev. iszTe
Barstow, Calif. i*°Ba
53
65
40
8.0
3.3
13
10/13-
10/22-
10/22-
10/28-
10/04-
10/22-
10/15
10/25
10/25
10/30
10/06
10/25
0.84
3.9
2.6
1.0
0.17
a.6
<0.01
1
0.3
3
0.02
1
Although the CG's of the ERDA, as specified in the ERDA Manual, Chapter
0524 (Appendix B) , are not applicable to foreign nuclear tests, the per-
centages of the relevant CG's are shown as a means of interpreting the
potential radiological hazard from the observed concentrations of radio-
activity. Except for 131I, these CG's are the same as 1/10 of the maxi-
mum permissible concentrations in air recommended by the National Com-
mittee of Radiation Protection (NCRP) for continuous occupational ex-
posures. The CG for »3»I is 1/30 of the NCRP value.
From the gamma spectrometry results of all samples, the highest
total thyroid inhalation dose from radioiodines was calculated from
the samples collected at Nyala, Nevada, over the period October 2-30.
The doses estimated for that location were 0.15 mrem for a hypothetical
infant receptor and 0.081 mrem for a hypothetical adult receptor.
107
-------
7-
6-
(O
u
o.
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC
1976
Figure D-l. Gross Beta Radioactivity Concentrations in Air at
Duckwater, Nevada
5-
JAN FEB MAR'APR 'MAY 'JUN ' JUL'AUG'SEP OCt NOV' DEC
1976
Figure D-2.
Gross Beta Radioactivity Concentrations in Air at
Lone Pine, California
108
-------
Table D-2. 1976 Summary of Analytical Results for
Air Surveillance Network
Active Stations
Sampling
Location
Kingman, Ariz.
Seligman, Ariz.
Baker, Calif.
Bar stow, Calif.
Bishop, Calif.
Death Valley Jet. ,
Calif
*"Q JL J-i. *
No. Type of
Days Radio-
Sampled activity
10,0 7Be
40.0 ^szr
4.0 103Ru
12.0 tail
.0 i32Te
28.0 i*°Ba
7.0 *Be
43.8 9»Zr
10.0 103RU
14.0 i3ti
.0 i32Te
32.2 i*°Ba
8.9 *Be
38.6 «5Zr
4.9 103RU
13.7 i3il
.0 i32Te
28.6 i«°Ba
8.0 ?Be
49.0 9SZr
5.0 103RU
10.0 i3ii
.0 i32Te
26.0 i*°Ba
.0 rBe
41.0 9SZr
10.0 103RU
14.0 i3»I
.0 132T6
29.0 i*»Ba
5.0 'Be
42.3 »5Zr
5.0 103RU
3. 1 i3il
.0 i32Te
20.1 i*°Ba
Radioactivity
Concentration MO-9pCi/ml>
Max Min Avq
0.43
0.43
0. 12
0. 16
-
0.54
0.44
0.50
0.31
0.27
-
0.58
0.45
0.50
0. 10
0.21
-
0.60
0.84
3.9
2.6
0.20
-
4.6
0.63
0.29
0.22
-
0.59
0.34
0.66
0.097
0.022
—
0.54
0.20
0.20
0.052
0.035
-
0.048
0. 23
0.022
0.056
0.046
-
0.038
0. 15
0.012
0.080
0.030
-
0.028
0. 20
0,018
0. 11
0.063
—
0.029
0.021
0.077
0.028
—
0,075
0.26
0.021
0.081
0.022
—
0.037
0.0088
0.015
0.00094
0.0025
-
0.015
0.0056
0.018
0.0053
0.0054
-
0.021
0.0075
0.018
0.0013
0.0044
—
0.018
0.0087
0.049
0.022
0,0034
—
0.053
0.023
0. 0049
0.0046
—
0.024
0.0041
0.020
0.0013
0.00020
•"
O.C14
109
-------
Table D-2. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Furnace Creek, Calif.
Lone Pine, Calif.
Needles, Calif.
Ridgecrest, Calif.
Shoshone, Calif.
Alamo, Nev.
No.
Days
Sampled
3.0
46.0
10.0
9.9
.0
27.0
9.0
48. 1
12.9
16.9
.0
30.9
.0
35.0
2.0
8.8
.0
18.8
5.0
40.0
10.0
4.0
2.0
25.0
6.9
39.0
5.0
13.0
5.0
27.0
10.9
40.8
8.9
9.8
.0
29.7
Type of
Radio-
activity
?Be
»»Zr
»03RU
»3ir
i32Te
i*OBa
f Be
9szr
»°3RU
131X
i32Te
t*OBa
i Be
*szr
103RU
13»!
i32Te
i*°Ba
7 Be
9«Zr
*°3RU
131!
i32Te
^OBa
7 Be
9SZr
103Ru
131J
i32Te
»*<>Ba
*Be
9s2r
*03Ru
131!
i32Te
i'OBa
Radioactivity
Concentration 'IQ-'pCi/ml)
Max Min Avq
0.35
0.71
0.33
0. 18
-
1.6
0.45
0,70
0.25
0.26
-
0.62
—
0.66
0.52
0. 10
-
1.0
0.35
0.50
0. 19
0. 17
0. 16
0.41
0.29
0.69
0.22
0.30
0. 15
0.69
0.39
0.58
0.30
0.25
—
0.57
0.35
0.017
0.058
0.035
-
0.049
0.28
0.015
0.044
0.033
-
0.056
_
0.014
0.52
0.023
-
0.034
0.20
0.014
0.041
0. 12
0. 16
0.035
0.22
0.012
0. 10
0.029
0.032
0.031
0. 18
0.015
0.083
0.032
_
0.018
0.0031
0.017
0.0045
0.0034
-
0.022
0.014
0.038
0.0089
0. 0099
-
0.040
_
0.012
0.0044
0.0028
-
0.016
0.0036
0.016
0.0028
0.0016
0.00087
0.016
0.0047
0.019
0.0024
0.0044
0.0011
0.018
0.0079
0.020
0.0044
0.0038
_
0.020
110
-------
Table D-2. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Austin, Nev. '
Beatty, Nev,
Blue Eagle Ranch, Nev.
Blue Jay, Nev.
Caliente, Nev.
Currant Ranch, Nev.
Days
Sampled
4.2
35.9
10.8
7-9
.0
22.7
6.0
31.9
1.9
4.0
.0
22.0
9.9
35.8
3.0
7.0
.0
22.9
15.0
42.0
3.0
6.9
.0
28.0
.0
48.7
2. 1
7.7
.0
27.0
4.0
49. 1
1.9
7.2
.0
24.0
Radio-
activity
7Be
9*Zr
103RU
131!
i32Te
»*°Ba
7 Be
»«Zr
103RU
1311
i3?Te
i*°Ba
7 Be
9*Zr
103RU
1311
i32Te
i*°Ba
* Be
«Zr
l°3RU
1311
i32Te
i*OBa
7 Be
9szr
103RU
131J
iszTe
i*°Ba
7 Be
952r
103RU
131J
i32Te
i*QBa
Concentration MO~9(jCi/ml>
Max Min A.VQ
0.22
0.69
0.34
0.24
—
0.67
0.31
0.78
0.056
0.25
-
0.65
0.27
0.49
0. 14
0.20
-
0.48
0.33
0.48
0.24
0. 16
-
0.53
—
0.59
0.23
0.31
-
0.56
0.45
0.59
0.058
0.23
—
0.57
0. 15
0.020
0.058
0.042
—
0.052
0. 27
0.028
0.056
0. 12
-
0.047
0. 16
0.016
0. 14
0. 13
-
0.032
0. 15
0.015
0.24
0.061
-
0.015
—
0.013
0.23
0.020
—
0.020
0.40
0.014
0.058
0. 12
—
0.028
0.0026
0.026
0.0080
0.0019
—
0.025
0.0051
0.025
0.00031
0.0022
-
0.020
0.0062
0.013
0.0012
0.0033
-
0.012
0.0092
0.016
0.0020
0.0021
-
0.017
-
0.017
0.0013
0.0030
—
0.017
0.0048
0.020
0.00032
0.0033
—
0.019
111
-------
Table D-2. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Diablo, Nev. '
Duckwater, Nev.
Ely, Nev.
Eureka, Nev.
*
Fallini's Ranch, Nev.
Geyser Ranch, Nev.
No.
Days
Sampled
6.0
29.8
.0
4.0
.0
21.8
5.0
31.0
5.0
14.0
.0
19.0
12. 1
«2.2
5.0
5.8
.0
25.0
9.0
44.0
10.0
11.0
.0
28.0
11. 1
49.5
5. 1
13.2
2.0
28.3
9.0
39.0
9.0
11.0
.0
26.0
Type of
Radio-
activity
7Be
»szr
103RU
1311
i32Te
i*OBa
*Be
»szr
103RU
1311
i 3ZTe
»*«Ba
*Be
»szr
»°3RU
1 31 I
isaTe
»*°Ba
'Be
9S2r
lo*Ru
131J
i32Te
i»°Ba
7 Be
»5Zr
103RU
131 !
!3ZTe
i*OBa
7 Be
9szr
103RU
131T
132Te
»*<>Ba
Radioactivity
Concentration < 10-»»jCi/ml *
Max Min Avq
0.25
0.59
-
0.13
-
0.62
0.23
0.66
0.19
0.22
-
0.56
0.61
0.60
0.31
0.21
-
0.64
0.32
0.58
0.30
0.34
-
0.66
0.44
0.54
0.28
0. 18
0.10
0.56
0.44
0.48
0.17
0.22
-
0.53
0.23
0.014
-
0. 10
-
0.013
0.20
0.035
0. 18
0.036
-
0.062
0.30
0.013
0. 12
0.094
-
0.017
0.25
0.014
0.020
0.058
—
0.022
0. 10
0.0086
0.073
0.032
0. 10
0.026
0. 15
0.016
0.059
0.028
—
0.056
0.0040
0.015
-
0.0013
-
0.014
0.0030
0.015
0.0026
0.0047
-
0.013
0.013
0.020
0.0035
0.0029
-
0.021
0.0068
0.016
0.0042
0.0052
—
0.016
0.0068
0.021
0.0027
0.0038
0.00055
0.019
0,0067
0.020
0.0031
0.0037
_
0.020
112
-------
Table D-2. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Goldfield, Nev.
Groom Lake, Nev.
Hiko, Nev.
Indian Springs, Nev.
Las Vegas, Nev.
Lathrop Wells, Nev.
No.
Days
Sampled
2.7
47.7
5.0
9.0
-0
24.0
7.0
35. 1
6.0
8.0
.0
30.2
6.0
42.0
3.9
4.0
.0
26.0
2.0
40.0
6.0
10.0
.0
28.0
3.0
36. 1
10.0
5.0
.0
28.0
2.0
31.0
5.0
14.0
.0
24.0
Type of
Radio-
activity
7Be
»*Zr
103Ru
1311
i32Te
**<>Ba
7 Be
»«Zr
103RU
1311
i32Te
»*QBa
7 Be
»szr
»°3RU
1 31 J
i32Te
i*°Ba
7 Be
«szr
103RU
131!
i32Te
i*°Ba
7 Be
9S2r
103RU
1311
i32Te
i«OBa
7 Be
»52r
»03RU
1 31 J
i32Te
t«°Ba
Radioactivity
Concentration MO~9MCi/ml>
Max Min Avq
0. 14
0.58
0. 14
0.23
-
0.55
0.55
0.74
0.18
0.23
-
0.63
0.41
0.70
0.062
0.064
-
0.69
0.22
0.33
0. 16
0. 16
-
0.34
0. 14
0.93
0.22
0.060
-
0.56
0.79
0.66
0.092
0.23
—
0.69
0. 14
0.015
0.037
0.013
-
0.024
0.23
0.016
0.031
0.031
-
0.029
0. 14
0.015
0.050
0.035
-
0.020
0.22
0.011
0.076
0.059
-
0.049
0. 14
0.028
0.058
0.052
—
0.027
0.79
0.027
0.043
0.077
—
0.039
0.0012
0.023
0,0014
0.0028
-
0.020
0.0066
0.019
0.0025
0.0025
-
0.019
0.0045
0.019
0.00060
0.00054
-
0.021
0.0012
0.012
0.0020
0.0028
-
0.013
0.0013
0.022
0.0043
0.00087
—
0. 019
0.0045
0.018
0.0010
0.0068
—
0.018
113
-------
Table D-2. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Lida, Nev.
Lund, Nev.
Mesquite, Nev.
Moapa, Nev.
Nya la , Nev.
Pahrurnp, Nev.
No.
Days
Sampled
9.0
33.9
7.0
12.0
2.0
28.0
7.8
50.8
7.0
11.8
2.8
30.8
10.0
03.0
8.0
5.0
.0
29.0
6.0
36.4
5. 1
7-9
.0
20.8
7.0
44.0
5.0
9.0
.0
26.0
3.9
33.9
5.0
7.9
.0
27.8
Type of
Radio-
activity
'Be
««2r
»03RU
tail
i32Te
»*°Ba
'Be
"Zr
103RU
1 31 !
i32Te
i*°Ba
'Be
»szr
103RU
1311
i32Te
»*°Ba
'Be
»5zr
103RU
131J
i32Te
i*°Ba
'Be
«Zr
»03RU
131J
i32Te
^OBa
'Be
»szr
»03Ru
131X
!32Te
»*°Ba
Radioactivity
Concentration < 10-»^Ci/ml>
Max Min Avq
0.33
0.70
0.20
0.32
0.17
0.59
0.36
0.80
0.34
0.24
0.042
0.80
0.41
0.50
0.16
0, 14
-
0.56
0.40
0.66
0.26
0. 14
-
0.54
0.38
0.85
0.44
1.0
—
1.5
0.23
0.39
0.22
0.25
—
0.43
0. 12
0.014
0.048
0.095
0.17
0.017
0.27
0.014
0.063
0.021
0.042
0.034
0. 15
0.015
0.079
0.044
-
0.015
0.32
0.020
0.073
0.022
-
0.075
0.31
0.017
0.29
0.033
—
0.031
0.22
0.0090
0.077
0.017
—
0.014
0.0063
0.024
0.0025
0.0062
0.00094
0.023
0.0064
0.027
0.0039
0.0034
0.00032
0.025
0.0084
0.015
0.0026
0.0011
—
0.016
0.0082
0.020
0.0035
0.0023
—
0.019
0.0069
0.027
0.0050
0.0085
—
0.030
0.0024
0.015
0.0022
0.0019
_
0.012
114
-------
Table D-2. {continued)
Sampling
Location
Pioche, Nev.
Round Mountain, Nev.
Scotty's Junction, Nev.
Stone Cabin Ranch, Nev.
Sunnyside, Nev.
Tonopah, Nev.
No. Type of
Days Radio-
Sampled activity
7.0 'Be
30.9 »«Zr
5.0 i°3RU
7.0 1311
.0 i32Te
19.0 i * o Ba
7.0 'Be
38.0 »5Zr
7.0 i°3RU
15.0 i3ii
.0 i32Te
29.0 **°Ba
9.0 'Be
38.0 *5Zr
3.0 i°3RU
9.0 i3ii
.0 i32Te
26.0 i*°Ba
6.0 'Be
43.8 9«Zr
9.9 1°3RU
10.9 i3ii
.0 i32Te
28.9 i*OBa
5. 1 'Be
38.4 »5Zr
2.7 103RU
11.3 i3ii
.0 i32Te
24.0 i»
Max Min Avq
0.36
0.22
0.17
0.076
-
0.22
0.49
0.64
0.23
0.23
-
0.49
0.57
1.2
0.11
0.48
-
0.97
0.36
0.77
0.30
0.56
-
0.94
0.62
0.76
0.27
0.20
—
0.67
0.34
0.75
—
0.26
—
0.66
0.24
0.017
0.042
0.028
-
0.032
0.33
0.021
0.028
0.029
-
0.044
0.25
0.019
0. 11
0.025
—
0.034
0. 19
0.013
0. 16
0.069
—
0.020
0.43
0.011
0.27
0.027
*
0.045
0.30
0.018
—
0.031
«.
0.024
0.0057
0.0062
0.0017
0.00092
-
0.0057
0.0072
0.022
0.0024
0.0045
-
0.018
0.0097
0.024
0.00096
0.0039
—
0.023
0.0047
0.021
0.0064
0.0066
—
0.022
0.0074
0.0.19
0.0020
0.0036
"m"
0.018
0.0053
0.025
^
0.0055
~
0.022
115
-------
Table D-2. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Tonopah Test 'Range, Nev.
Cedar City, Utah
Delta, Utah
Garrison, Utah
Mil ford, Utah
St. George, Utah
No. Type of
Days Radio-
Sampled activity
5.9 7Be
29.3 952r
6.7 l°3Ru
7.0 »3i!
.0 !3ZTe
18.9 l*°Ba
. 0 7Be
23.7 952r
6.9 1 03Ru
8.8 *3»I
.0 !3HTe
19.7 »»OBa
5.9 7Be
35.8 «s2r
5.0 1°3RU
7.0 i3ii
.0 i32Te
18.9 14°Ba
4.0 7Be
35.0 9sjr
2.0 103RU
7.0 i3i!
.0 »32Te
19.0 1*°Ba
.0 7Be
21.7 «s2r
.0 * ° 3 Ru
.0 »3ii
.0 *32Te
4.8 l*°Ba
3.0 7Be
32.6 952r
11.1 103Ru
17.8 »3iz
.0 » 3 2 Te
25.8 14°Ba
Radioactivity
Concentration 1 10-9(jCi/ml>
Max Win Avg
0.20
0.71
0.27
0.23
-
0.71
-
0.42
0.21
0. 11
-
0.46
0.44
0.38
0. 19
0.14
-
0 .4 1
0.40
0.95
0.19
0.12
—
0.89
_
0. 18
—
-
-
0.16
0.16
0.42
0.29
0.15
—
0.53
0. 19
0.023
0.043
0. 13
-
0.060
-
0.027
0.074
0.037
-
0.040
0.28
0.016
0. 15
0.053
-
0,054
0.33
0.019
0. 19
0.036
—
0.023
_
0.019
—
—
—
0.13
0. 16
0.015
0.027
0.022
—
0.039
0.0040
0.025
0.0039
0.0049
-
0.027
-
0.0091
0.0028
0.0021
-
0.010
0.0098
0.021
0.0037
0.0030
-
0.017
0.0041
0.015
0.0011
0.0015
—
0.014
.
0.0060
—
—
—
0.0025
0.0013
0.016
0.0042
0.0044
—
0.017
Also known as Area 51,
116
-------
Table D-3
1976 Summary of Analytical Results for
Air Surveillance Network
Standby Stations
No. Type of
Radioactivity
Sampling
Location
Phoenix, Ariz.
Winslow, Ariz.
Little Rock, Ark.
Indio, Calif.
Denver, Colo.
Durango, Colo.
Days
Sampled
4.3
16.3
.0
5.8
.0
10,8
6.0
16.0
2.0
3.0
3.0
14.0
2.0
9.0
.0
.0
.0
2.0
3.0
16.0
-0
6.0
.0
14.0
.0
14.8
.0
7.0
.0
7.0
.0
12.4
.0
.0
.0
5.4
Radio-
activity
'Be
9sZr
»03RU
131J
i 32Te
i*°Ba
'Be
«szr
103RU
1311
i 32-re
i«oBa
'Be
95Zr
1 ° 3Ru
1311
i 32Te
i*oBa
'Be
I 0 3Ru
131J
i 32Te
i*oBa
'Be
1311
!*oS
'Be
103RU
1311
1'oS
Concentration (10-pCi/ml>
Max Min Avq
0.44
0.21
-
0.043
-
0.24
0.46
0.092
0.055
0.013
0.019
0. 18
0.17
0.052
-
-
-
0.052
0.50
0.45
-
0.095
-
0.37
0.12
0.081
0.19
0.19
—
—
0.21
0. 15
0.022
-
0.035
-
0.016
0. 19
0.012
0.055
0.013
0.019
0.014
0. 17
0.022
-
-
-
0.052
0.50
0.024
-
0.079
—
0.020
0.032
0.037
0.1 1
0.017
—
—
0.032
0.018
0.020
-
0.0040
-
0.020
0.037
0.011
0.0021
0.0073
0.0011
0.019
0.068
0.078
—
-
—
0.0021
0.021
0.033
-
0.0073
—
0.034
0.017
0, 0093
0.022
0.012
~~
—
0.012
117
-------
Table D-3. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Grand Junction,
Colo.
Pueblo, Colo.
Boise, Idaho
Idaho Falls,
Idaho
Mountain Home,
Idaho
Pocatello, Idaho
No. Type of
Days Radio-
Sampled activity
.0 *Be
14.9 «szr
.0 1°3RU
6.0 i3ii
.0 i32Te
7.0 i*OBa
4.0 *Be
13.9 95Zr
.0 1 ° 3RU
4.9 13*1
.0 i32Te
6.9 i*°Ba
7.0 *Be
10.0 «szr
.0 1°3RU
2. 0 »3ii
2.0 *32Te
6.0 i«°Ba
1.3 7Be
13.2 «szr
.0 10 3RU
3.3 i3i!
.0 i32Te
7.2 i«OBa
4.0 7Be
12.0 9*Zr
.0 1«3RU
5.0 131!
.0 i 32Te
7.0 i*OBa
2.0 ?Be
13.7 95Zr
.0 10 3RU
.0 I3ii
.0 1 32fe
7.0 »*OBa
Radioactivity
Concentration ( 10-*pCi/ml>
Max Min AVQ
_
0.30
-
0.094
-
0.20
0.71
0.20
-
0.090
-
0.21
0.67
0.094
—
0.068
0, 12
0.25
0.23
0.13
—
0.062
_
0. 11
0.63
0.12
_
0.065
_
0.11
0.24
0,12
_
_
_
0. Ifi
_
0.019
-
0.035
-
0.087
0.30
0.040
-
0.034
-
0.088
0.20
0.029
—
0.068
0.12
0.033
0.23
0.022
_
0.026
_
0.055
0.25
0.021
_
0.022
_
0.078
0.24
0.029
^ „
^,
_
n.ne,1^
_^
0.022
-
0.0065
—
0.018
0.045
0.023
—
0.0062
-
0.020
0.052
0.013
_
0.0028
0.0049
0.016
0.0060
0.020
_
0.0027
_
0.013
0.033
0.012
_
0.0036
^ .
0.012
0.0096
0.019
_ .
_
_
n. m5
118
-------
Table D-3. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Preston, Idaho
Twin Falls, Idaho
Iowa City, Iowa
Sioux City, Iowa
Dodge City, Kans.
Lake Charles, La.
No. Type of
Days Radio-
Sampled activity
3.0 *Be
10.9 "Zr
.0 103RU
5.0 »3ii
.0 i32Te
5.0 i*OBa
4.7 *Be
14.0 9*Zr
.0 103RU
5.0 »3ii
.0 »32Te
10.0 i*°Ba
7.0 ?Be
7.7 »*Zr
.0 1°3RU
2.0 i3ii
.0 *32Te
4.0 i»°Ba
6.0 *Be
10.9 "szr
.0 K>3RU
.0 »31I
.0 i32Te
10.0 *«°Ba
7.0 7Be
16.6 9SZr
.0 l°3Ru
5.0 i3ii
3.0 i32Te
7.0 t*°Ba
.0 7Be
3.8 9SZr
.0 »°3RU
.0 »3»I
.0 i32Te
2.0 i*«Ba
Radioactivity
Concentration < 10-9pCi/ml>
Max Min Avq
0.51
0.068
-
0.041
-
0.086
0.40
0.37
-
0.10
-
0. 19
0.44
0.041
-
0.038
-
0.058
0.17
0.13
—
—
-
0. 14
0. 16
0.073
—
0.030
0.028
0.087
0.019
—
—
-
0.033
0.51
0.018
-
0.028
-
0.054
0.25
0.031
-
0.038
-
0.049
0.26
0.028
-
0.038
-
0.026
0. 10
0.015
—
—
—
0.018
0. 11
0.023
—
0.028
0.028
0.071
0.019
•"•
— •
—
0.033
0.031
0.011
-
0.0036
-
0.0074
0.029
0.024
-
0.0049
-
0.019
0.055
0.0061
—
0.0018
-
0.0040
0.015
0.012
—
—
—
0.011
0.018
0.013
—
0.0029
0.0017
0.011
0.0014
""•
™
-~
0.0013
119
-------
Table D-3. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Monroe, La.
New Orleans, La.
Minneapolis, Minn.
Clayton, Mo.
Joplin, Mo.
St. Joseph, Mo.
No.
Days
Sampled
3.0
10.7
.0
.0
.0
4.9
.0
5.9
.0
.0
.0
3.9
4.9
6. 1
.0
2.0
.0
7.0
5.0
7.9
.0
2.0
.0
4.0
.0
6.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
5.7
12,7
.0
4.0
.0
7.0
Type of
Radio-
activity
7Be
9»Zr
103RU
131J
i32Te
i*oBa
f Be
»5Zr
103RU
1311
i3*Te
i«°Ba
7 Be
9SZr
1°3RU
131Z
i32Te
**°Ba
7Be
95Zr
*03RU
131J
i32Te
**°Ba
7 Be
9»2ir
KJ3RU
131!
i 32Te
»«°Ba
7 Be
9«Zr
1°3RU
131X
132Te
i*°Ba
Radioactivity
Concentration < 10-9jjCi/ml>
Max Min Avqr
0.15
0.061
-
-
-
0.11
—
0.040
-
-
-
0.057
0.34
0.13
-
0.077
-
0.10
0.26
0.087
-
0.037
—
0.088
_
0.042
—
—
—
-
0.29
0. 15
_
0.066
—
0.23
0. 15
0.018
-
-
-
0.022
—
0.033
-
-
-
0.046
0. 13
0.020
-
0.077
-
0.045
0. 19
0.030
-
0.037
—
0.077
_
0.030
-
_
_
-
0. 16
0.023
_
0.048
_
0.026
0.010
0.0088
-
-
-
0.0065
_
0.0049
-
-
-
0.0044
0.020
0.0066
-
0.0030
-
0.0081
0.022
0.0083
-
0.0014
_
0.0063
0.0051
—
_
_
-
0.025
0.014
_
0.0046
_
0.018
120
-------
Table D-3. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Billings, Mont.
Bozeman, Mont.
Missoula, Mont.
North Platte,
Nebr.
Battle Mountain,
Nev.
Currant Maint.
Sta., Nev.
No. Type of
Days Radio-
Sampled activity
9.0 7Be
12.1 »5zr
- 0 l ° 3Ru
6.0 »3il
H . o 132 Te
9.0 i*»Ba
5.0 7Be
14.7 "Zr
.0 l°3Ru
5.0 »3»I
.0 132Te
7.0 i*°Ba
5.0 7Be
10.7 9»Zr
.0 103RU
.0 i3»I
.0 l 3 2 Te
8.0 i*oBa
2.9 7Be
14.8 9S2r
.0 *03Ru
6.8 »3*I
.0 132Te
6.8 i»°Ba
.0 7Be
5.3 9SZr
.0 103Ru
.0 131I
. o »32Xe
.0 »»OBa
5. 1 7Be
14.6 95Zr
.0 103Ru
.0 131I
.0 iszTe
7.2 14°Ba
Radioactivity
Concentration { 10~ ''nCi/ml >
Max Min Avg
0.34
0.087
-
0.058
0, 04 1
0.13
0.21
0.092
-
0.038
-
0.12
0.15
0,093
-
-
-
0.045
0.36
0.10
-
0.067
-
0. 13
0.034
—
-
—
—
0.68
0.17
—
0.34
0. 12
0.025
-
0.026
0.041
0.026
0.21
0.029
-
0.027
-
0.050
0. 13
0.041
-
-
-
0.011
0.36
0.037
—
0.054
-
0.11
0.020
—
—
—
—
0.33
0.015
—
0.025
0.042
0.015
—
0.0070
0.0041
0.019
0.020
0.014
-
0.0032
-
0.012
0.014
0.013
-
-
-
0.0149
0.022
0.020
-
0.0082
-
0.018
0.0047
—
—
—
—
0.59
0.021
~
0.026
121
-------
Table D-3. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Currie, Nev.
Elkor Nev.
Fallen, Nev.
Frenchman Sta. ,
Nev.
Lovelock, Nev.
Reno, Nev.
No.
Days
Sampled
3.0
17.9
.0
7.9
.0
9.0
4.0
11.8
2.0
4.0
.0
7.0
.0
5.7
.0
.0
.0
.0
4.9
18.4
.0
7.8
.0
10.8
.0
13. 1
.0
7. 1
.0
9. 1
.0
14.9
.0
7.2
2. 1
7.2
Type of
Radio-
activity
7Be
95Zr
103RU
1311
i32Te
i»<>Ba
'Be
««Zr
103RU
1311
i32Te
i*°Ba
7 Be
95Zr
1°3RU
1311
i32Te
i*<»Ba
7 Be
oszr
103RU
131!
i 3ZTe
i*°Ba
7 Be
9SZr
»°3Ru
131J
i32Te
l*°Ba
'Be
»»Zr
lOSRu
131J
i 32Te
**°Ba
Radioactivity
Concentration < 10~9pCi/ml^
Max Min Avq
0.15
0. 17
-
0.11
-
0.24
0.45
0.11
0.063
0.089
-
0.10
—
0.040
-
-
-
-
0.59
0.41
—
0.15
—
0.39
._
0.31
-
0.13
-
0.24
_
0.21
—
0. 12
0.12
0.31
0. 15
0.020
-
0.032
-
0.044
0.32
0.023
0.063
0.046
-
0.052
—
0.023
-
-
-
—
0.50
0.022
—
0.026
—
0.044
_
0.014
—
0.053
—
0.064
w
0.019
_
0. 10
0.12
0.18
0.010
0.026
-
0.011
-
0.021
0.031
0.012
0.0057
0.0056
-
0.011
—
0.0045
-
-
—
-
0.52
0.034
—
0,013
—
0.035
*
0.061
—
0.023
—
0.059
_
0.026
_
0.016
0.0050
0.038
122
-------
Table D-3. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Warm Springs, Nev.
Wells, Nev.
Winnemucca, Nev.
Albuquerque,
N. Mex.
Carlsbad, N. Mex.
Muskogee, Ok la.
No. Type of
Days Radio-
Sampled activity
- 0 7Be
10. 1 9«Zr
.0 i03Ru
4.0 i3»I
.0 l *2Te
4.0 i * o Ba
3.0 7Be
14.0 95Zr
.0 *03Ru
.0 1311
.0 * 32Te
10.0 i*°Ba
13.0 «*Zr
3.0 i°3Ru
7.0 »31I
,0 i32Te
7.0 * * ° Ba
7.0 7Be
17.0 9SZr
.0 l 03Ru
11.0 13»I
3_ Q 13 2Te
12.0 i«OBa
1.0 7Be
8.4 9»Zr
2.7 »3ii
4.7 i*<>Ba
3.0 7Be
12.9 9SZr
5.0 »3»I
_ 0 * 32Te
5. 0 * *°Ba
Radioactivity
Concentration < 1 0~ 9pCi/ml >
Max Min Avq
.^
0.32
-
0. 10
-
0.22
0.24
0.097
-
-
-
0,088
0. 14
0.066
0.091
-
0. 19
0.26
0.17
—
0.12
0.023
0.27
0.52
0.17
0.081
0.20
0. 19
0.48
0. 13
0.32
._
0.026
-
0.086
-
0.19
0.24
0.024
-
-
~
0.049
0.040
0.066
0.056
-
0.13
0.22
0.029
—
0.011
0.023
0.012
0.52
0.018
0.081
0.027
0. 19
0.028
0.040
0.068
_
0.023
—
0.0073
-
0.017
0.013
0.014
-
-
-
0.013
0.023
0.0042
0.010
-
0.021
0.031
0.018
—
0.0081
0.0013
0.020
0.013
0.015
0.052
0.014
0.011
0.034
0.0087
0.020
123
-------
Table D-3. (continued)
No. Type of
Radioactivity
Sampling
Location
Norman, Okla.
Burns, Oreg.
Medford, Oreg.
Aberdeen, S. Dak.
Rapid City, S. Dak.
Abilene, Tex.
Days Radio-
Sampled activity
.0 *Be
11.1 *52r
2.0 i03RU
2.0 i3ii
.0 * 3*Te
8. 9 l * °Ba
4.9 ?Be
19.1 952r
.0 * ° 3Ru
7.1 13*1
5.1 i32Te
9.1 i*°Ba
.0 ?Be
4. 0 9SZr
.0 J ° 3Ru
.0 tail
.0 i 3ZTe
.0 i»°Ba
9.0 7Be
9.0 9»2r
2.0 i<>3Ru
3.0 13*1
3.0 * 3 2 Te
7. 0 i *°Ba
6.8 *Be
11.0 *szr
.0 103RU
2.0 i3ii
.0 132Te
4.2 i*<>Ba
5. 0 ?Be
13.1 »5Zr
.0 10 3RU
3.0 »3ii
.0 »32Te
7.3 i4<>Ba
Concentration MO-9pCi/ml>
Max Min Avg
_
0.12
0.084
0.078
-
0. 18
0.23
0.12
-
0.076
0.049
0.21
—
0.049
-
-
-
-
0.26
0.053
0.053
0.029
0.048
0.085
0,34
1.2
-
0.063
—
1.3
0.23
0.42
-
0.053
—
0.55
_
0.021
0.084
0.078
-
0.023
0. 17
0.035
-
0.033
0.047
0.058
—
0.049
-
-
-
-
0- 12
0.024
0.053
0.029
0.048
0.046
0.23
0.049
—
0.063
—
0.074
0.21
0.016
—
0.053
—
0.13
_
0.014
0.0038
0.0036
-
0.021
0.017
0.026
-
0.0082
0.0046
0.024
_
0.0049
-
—
-
-
0.038
0.0068
0. 0021
0.0017
0.0029
0.0097
0.035
0.032
_
0.0024
—
0.012
0.022
0.029
—
0.0031
—
0.039
124
-------
Table D-3. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Amarillo, Tex.
Austin, Tex.
Fort Worth, Tex.
Bryce Canyon, Utah
Capitol Reef, Utah
Dugway, Utah
No. Type of
Days Radio-
Sampled activity
.0 'Be
17.7 »szr
.0 »03RU
8.0 i31!
.0 l 32Te
10.0 l4°Ba
2.8 *Be
18.0 95Zr
.0 l03Ru
5.8 »3il
.0 i32Te
10.0 »*°Ba
3.0 7Be
11.0 *5Zr
.0 » ° 3 Ru
5.0 131I
,0 * 32Te
7.0 i*°Ba
.0 7Be
3.9 9SZr
.0 103Ru
.0 i31!
.0 1 3 2 Te
.0 i*<>Ba
.0 7Be
16.5 9SZr
.0 i°3Ru
4.0 131I
m \J J- C
9.0 »*<>Ba
8.0 7Be
19.0 95Zr
.0 l03Ru
.0 13JI
m 0 132 Te
11.0 »*°Ba
Radioactivity
Concentration < 10~9fjCi/ml >
Max Min Avg
_
0.32
-
0.073
-
0.20
0.45
0.33
-
0. 16
-
0.28
0.40
0.071
-
0.045
-
0.084
0.031
—
-
-
*•
0.25
-
0. 13
-
0.30
0.30
0.12
—
—
—
0.099
.
0.024
-
0.059
-
0.061
0.45
0.025
-
0.032
-
0.058
0.40
0.034
-
0.026
-
0.048
0.031
—
—
—
•*
0.022
—
0.025
—
0.013
0.14
0.012
*
—
""•
0.017
_
0.025
-
0.0089
-
0.022
0.029
0.038
-
0.013
-
0.031
0.023
0.010
—
0.0032
—
0.0086
0.027
—
—
—
^
0.024
—
0.0064
—
0.020
0.032
0.015
**"
*
^
0.013
125
-------
Table D-3. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Enterprise, Utah
Loqan, Utah
Monticello, Utah
Pa rowan, Utah
Provo, Utah
Salt Lake City,
Utah
NO.
Days
Sampled
2.0
14.9
.0
3.0
.0
10.9
2. 1
8.4
.0
3.3
.0
3.3
.0
15.0
.0
6.0
.0
10.0
.0
13. 1
.0
3.0
.0
7. 1
2.0
15.9
.0
9.0
.0
9.0
.0
16. 6
3.0
3.0
.0
8.7
Type of
Radio-
activity
'Be
9*Zr
103RU
1311
i32Te
i*«Ba
f Be
952r
103RU
131J
i32Te
i«°Ba
^Be
««Zr
103RU
131 J
11 3?Te
i*»Ba
7Be
»szr
103RU
131J
132Te
i*«Ba
^Be
95Zr
103RU
131!
132Te
J*°Ba
7Be
9szr
103RU
131!
i32Te
»*«>Ba
Radioactivity
Concentration MO~9pCi/ml>
Max Min Avq
0.25
0.17
-
0.025
-
0. 16
0.25
O.OU7
-
0.060
-
0. 16
—
0. 13
-
0.10
-
0.21
_
0.11
-
0.031
-
0.14
0.33
0.11
-
0.050
-
0.13
_
1.3
0.34
0.61
-
1.4
0.25
0.023
-
0.025
-
0.024
0.25
0.037
-
0.043
-
0.029
_
0.019
-
0.031
-
0.060
_
0.026
—
0.031
—
0.058
0.33
0.030
—
0.025
—
0.077
^
0.036
0.28
0, 17
—
0.090
0.015
0.024
-
0.0022
-
0.028
0.016
0.010
—
0.0047
-
0.071
_
0.014
-
0.0055
—
0.023
_
0.01 1
—
0.0018
—
0.012
0.012
0.016
—
0.059
—
0.019
_
0.080
0.014
0.017
—
0.074
126
-------
Table D-3. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Vernal, Utah
Wendover, Utah
Seattle, Wash.
Spokane, Wash.
Casper, Wyo.
Rock Springs, Wyo.
No.
Days
Sampled
5.0
11. 1
.0
.0
.0
7.0
6.0
13.0
2.0
.0
.0
7.0
.0
10.0
.0
5.9
.0
7.9
2.0
4.0
.0
.0
.0
.0
5.0
15.8
.0
5.0
.0
8.0
2.0
9.8
.0
2.0
.0
6.0
Type of
Radio-
activity
7Be
9*Zr
*°3RU
1311
i32Te
»»°Ba
*Be
9*Zr
l°3RU
131!
132Te
**°Ba
*Be
9S2r
»°3RU
131!
i32Te
i*°Ba
f Be
9*Zr
1°3RU
1311
i32Te
»*OBa
'Be
««Zr
103RU
131!
i32Te
i *°Ba
f Be
»*Zr
103Ru
131!
132T6
1 *OBa
Radioactivity
Concentration < 10-9pCi/ml >
Max Min A.vq
0.26
0. 12
-
-
-
0.17
O.UU
0.080
0.062
-
-
0.078
0.19
-
0.036
-
0.10
0.20
0.11
-
-
—
—
0.43
0.057
0.048
0.063
0.35
0.077
0.046
0.098
0. 14
0.030
-
-
-
0.055
0.26
0.01 1
0.062
-
-
0.018
0.017
-
0.016
-
0.039
0.20
0.013
-
-
—
—
0.20
0.020
0.037
0.054
0.35
0.015
0.046
0.056
0.022
0.022
-
-
-
0.017
0.034
0.010
0.0024
-
-
0.0069
0.01 1
-
0,0025
-
0.0082
0.0083
0.0031
—
—
—
—
0.028
0.01 1
0.0041
0.0087
0.014
0.0087
0.0019
0.0088
127
-------
Sampling
Location
Table D-3. (continued)
No. Type of
Days Radio-
Sampled activity
Radioactivity
Concentration < 10~9(jCi/ml>
Max _ Min _ Avq
Norland, Wyb.
8.0 *Be
16.0
.0
3.0
.0
7.0
0.36
0.12
0.20
0.041
0.052 0.052
0.11 0.033
0.037
0.018
0.0030
0.011
128
-------
APPENDIX E. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
A EC
ASN
C
CG
Ci
cm
CP-1
CY
D. E.
EMSL-LV
EPA
ERDA
ERDA/NV
ft
kg
kt
LCL
LLL
LTHMP
m
MDC
mrem/y
mrem/d
mR
mR/h
MSL
MSM
nCi
NGSTSN
NTS
PHS
pCi
SMSN
TLD
ncL
TTSGS
WSN
3H
HT
Micro-roentgen-equivalent-man.
Microcurie per gram.
Microcurie per millilitre.
Atomic Energy Commission.
Air Surveillance Network.
Temperature in Celsius.
Concentration Guide.
Curie.
Centimetre.
Control Point One.
Calendar Year.
DOSP Equivalent.
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory-
Las Vegas.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Energy Research and Development Administration.
Enerqy Research and Development Administration/
Nevada Operations Office.
Feet.
Kilogram.
Kiloton.
Lower confidence limit.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory.
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
Metre.
Minimum detectable concentration.
Milli-roentgen-equivalent-man per year.
Milli-roentgen-equivalent-man per day.
Mi Hi-roentgen.
Milli-roentgen per hour.
Mean sea level.
Milk Surveillance Network.
Nanocurie.
Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network.
Nevada Test Site.
Public Health Service.
Picocurie.
Standby Milk Surveillance Network.
Thermoluminescent dosimeter.
Upper confidence limit.
United States Geological Society.
Water Surveillance Network.
Tritium or Hydrogen-3.
Tritiated Hydrogen.
129
-------
HTO Tritiated Water.
CH3T Tritiated Methane.
Ba Barium.
Be Berylium.
Cs Cesium.
I , Iodine.
K Potassium.
Kr Krypton.
Pu Plutonium,
Ra Radium.
Ru Ruthenium,
Sr Strontium.
Te Tellurium.
IT Uranium.
Xe Xenon.
Zr Zirconium.
X2 Chi-square.
a Geometric standard deviation.
-------
DISTRIBUTION
1-25 Environmental Monitoring 6 Research Laboratory, Las
Vegas, NV
26 Mahlon E. Gates, Manager, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
27 Troy E. Wade, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
28 David G. Jackson, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
29 Paul B. Dunaway, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
30-31 Bruce W. Church, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV (2)
32 Mary G. White, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
33 Roger Ray, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
34 Chief, NOB/DNA, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
35-36 Robert R. Loux, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV (2)
37 Arthur J. Whitman, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
38 Elwood M. Douthett, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
39 Shed R. Elliott, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
40 Ernest D. Campbell, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
41 Thomas M. Humphrey, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
42 - 43 Peter K. Fitzsimmons, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV (2)
44 Robert W, Newman, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
45 Harold F. Mueller, ARL/WSNSO, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
46 Virgil Quinn, ARL/WSNSO, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
47 _ 49 Technical Library, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV (3)
50 Mail and Records, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
51 R. S. Brundage, CER Geonuclear Corporation, P.O. Box
15090, Las Vegas, NV 89114
131
-------
52 Hattie V. Carwell, ERDA/SAN, San Francisco Operations
Office, 1333 Broadway, Oakland, CA 9U616
53 - 57 Hal Hollister, DSSC, ERDA, Washington, D.C. (5)
58 Major General J. K. Bratton, AGMMA, ERDA, Washington,
D.C.
59 A. J, Hodges, DMA, ERDA, Washington, D.C.
60 Gordon Facer, MA, ERDA, Washington, D.C.
61 Andrew J. Pressesky, ROD, ERDA, Washington, D.C.
62 James L. Liverman, BER, ERDA, Washington, D.C.
63 Gilbert J. Ferber, ARL/NOAA, Silver Springs, MD
6U - 65 William Horton, Bureau of Environmental Health, State of
Nevada, 505 E. King St., Carson City, NV 89710 (2)
66 Dr. Wilson K. Talley, Assistant Administrator for
Research & Development, EPA, Washington, D.C.
67 William D. Rowe, Deputy Assistant Administrator for
Radiation Programs, EPA, Washington, D.C.
68 Dr. William A. Mills, Director, Division of Criteria 8
Standards, ORP, EPA, Washington, D.C.
69 David S. Smith, Director, Division of Technology Assess-
ment, ORP, EPA, Washington, D.C.
70-71 Floyd L. Galpin, Director, Environmental Analysis
Division, ORP, EPA, Washington, D.C. (2)
72 Dr. Gordon Everett, Director, Office of Technical
Analysis, EPA, Washington, D.C.
73 Regional Administrator, EPA, Region IV, Atlanta, GA
74 Regional Radiation Representative, EPA, Region IV,
Atlanta, GA
75 State of Mississippi
76 Regional Administrator, EPA, Region VI, Dallas, TX
77 Regional Radiation Representative, EPA, Region VI,
Dallas, TX
78 State of New Mexico
132
-------
79 Regional Administrator, EPA, Region VIII, Denver, CO
RO Regional Radiation Representative, EPA, Region VIII,
Denver, CO
81 State of Colorado
82 State of Utah
83 Regional Administrator, EPA, Region IX, San Francisco, CA
8U Regional Radiation Representative, EPA, Region IX, San
Francisco, CA
85 State of Arizona
86 State of California
87 State of Nevada
88 Eastern Environmental Radiation Facility, EPA,
Montgomery, AL
89 Library, EPA, Washington, D.C.
90 Kenneth M. Oswald, LLL, Mercury, NV
91 Roger E. Batzel, LLL, Livermore, CA
92 James E. Carothers, LLL, Livermore, CA
93 John C. Hopkins, LASL, Los Alamos, NM
94 Jerome E. Dummer, LASL, Los Alamos, NM
95 Arden E. Bicker, REECo, Mercury. NV
96 A. W. Western, REECo, Mercury, NV
97 Savino W. Cavender, M.D. , REECo, Mercury, NV
98 Carter D. Broyles, sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM
99 George E. Tucker, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM
100 Albert E. Doles, Eberline Instrument Co., Santa Fe, NM
101 Robert H. Wilson, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY
102 Richard S. Davidson, Battelle Memorial Institute,
Columbus, OH
133
-------
103 J. P. Corley, Battelle Memorial Institute, Richland, WA
104 Dr. Lloyd Smith, President, Desert Research Institute,
University of Nevada, Reno, NV
105 ERDA/HQ Library, Attni Eugene Rippeon, ERDA, Washington,
D.C.
106-133 Technical Information Center, Oak Pidge, TN (for public
availability)
13U T, F. Cornwell, DMA, ERDA, Washington, D.C.
134
-------
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND
SUPPORT LABORATORY
P.O. BOX 15027
LAS VEGAS. NEVADA 89114
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
EPA-335
------- |