EMSL-LV-0539-36
OFFSITE ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT FOR THE NEVADA TEST SITE
AND OTHER TEST AREAS USED FOR UNDERGROUND NUCLEAR DETONATIONS
January through December 1979
Nuclear Radiation Assessment Division
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
April 1980
This work performed under Memorandum of
Understanding No. EY-76-A-08-0539
for the
U.S. Department of Energy
-------
DISCLAIMER
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United
States Government. Neither the United States nor the United States Department
of Energy, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied,
or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, complete-
ness or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process
disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned
rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or
service by trade name, mark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily
constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United
States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors
expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United
States Government or any agency thereof.
AVAILABLE FROM THE NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE-
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
SPRINGFIELD, VA 22161
PRICE: PAPER COPY $4.50 MICROFICHE $3.00
PRICE CODE A03 PRICE CODE A01
-------
EMSL-LV-0539-36
OFFSITE ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT FOR THE NEVADA TEST SITE
AND OTHER TEST AREAS USED FOR UNDERGROUND NUCLEAR DETONATIONS
January through December 1979
by
G.' D. Potter, R. F. Grossman, W. A. Bliss, D. J. Thome
Nuclear Radiation Assessment Division
Envi ronmenta 1 Monitor'i ng Systems Laboratory
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Las Vegas, ~evada 89114
and
Jaci L. Hopper
Reynolds Electrical & Engineering Company, Inc.
Las Vegas, Nevada 89102
Thi s work performed under Memorandum of
Understanding No. EY-76-A-08-0539
for the
U.S. Department of Energy
-------
PREFACE
The U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) used the Nevada Test Site (NTS)
frOOl January 1951 through January 19. 1976, for conducting nuclear weapons
tests, nuclear rocket-engine development, nuclear medicine studies, and other
nuclear and non-nuclear experiments. Beginning January 19, 1976, these
activities became the responsibility of the newly formed U.S. Energy Research
and Development Administration (ERDA). On October I, 1977 the ERDA was merged
with other energy-related agencies to form the U.S. Department of Energy
(DOE). Atmospheric nuclear tests were conducted periodically from January 27,
1951, through October 30, 1958, after which a testing moratorium was in effect
until September I, 1961. Since September I, 1961~ all nuclear detonations
have been conducted 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 between 1962 and 1968.
Prior to 1954, the surveillance program was performed by the Los Alamos
Scientific Laboratory and the U.S. Army. From 1954 through 1970, the U.S.
Public Health Service (PHS), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) from 1970 to the present, provioed an Offsite Radiological Safety
Program for nuclear testing. The PHS or EPA has also provided offsite
surveillance for nuclear explosive tests at places other than the NTS.
Since 1954, the objective of this surveillance program has been to measure
levels and trends of radioactivity in the offsite environment surrounding
testing areas to ascertain whether the testing is in compliance with existing
radiation protection standards. Offsite levels of radiation and radioactivity
are assessed by sampling milk, water, and air; deploying dosimeters; and
sampling food crops, soil, etc., as required. To implement protective
actions, provide immediate radiation monitoring, and obtain environmental
sampl es rapidly after any rel ease of I'adi oact ivity, personnel with mobil e
monitoring equipment are placed in areas downwind from the test site prior to
each test. Since 1962, aircraft have also been deployed to rapidly monitor
and sample releases of radioactivity during nuclear tests. Monitoring data
obtained by the ,aircraft crew immediately after a test are used to position
mobile radiation monitoring personnel on the ground. Data from airborne
sampling are used to quantify the inventories, diffusion, and transport of the
radionuclides released.
Prior to 1959
Beginning in 1959
surveillance data
radioactivity off
a report was published for each test series or test project.
for reactor tests, and in 1962 for weapons tests,
were published for each individual test that released
site. From January 1964) through December 1970,
i i
-------
semi-annual summaries of these reports for individual nuclear tests were also
pub 1 tshed.
In 1971, the AEC implemented a requirement, now referred to as the DOE
Manual, Chapter 0513, that each contractor or agency involved in major nuclear
activities provide a comprehensive radiological monitoring report. Since
1971, the EPA has fulfilled the annual reporting requirements of this DOE
directive.
i ; i
-------
iv
-------
CONT~NTS
Preface. . . . . . . . . .
Figures. . . . . . . . . .
Tables. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.........
..............
. . . . .
. . . .
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
......
Abbreviations and Symbols. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Acknowl edgment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Program Summary -- 1979.
Introduction. . .
.....
. . . . . . .
............
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.....
........
Description of the Nevada Test Site. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Airborne Releases of Radioactivity at the NTS During 1979. . . . . .
Other Tests. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Methods. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . .
...........
.......
Speci al Test Support. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Routine Monitoring and Sampling. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Qu a 1 i ty As sur a n c e. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Results and Discussion. . . .
. . . .
.....
.......
.....
Air Surveillance Network. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Network. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Milk Surveillance Network. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Animal Investigation Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Offsite Human Surveillance Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Dose Assessment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References.
. . . . . . . . . .
. . . .
.....
. . . . . . .
. . . .
Appendix A.
Sampling and Analysis Procedures and Quality Assurance
Analytical Procedures. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Replicate Sampling Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Intercomparison Studies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Appendix B.
Data Summary for Monitoring Networks
Tabl e B-1.
1979 Summary of Analytical Results for Air
Surveillance Network Active Stations. .
. . . . ~ . .
v
i i
vii
ix
x
xii
1
2
2
16
17
19
19
19
31
49
49
50
51
53
54
54
54
56
57
59
61
63
65
-------
1979 Analytical Results for the NTS Annual
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program.
Table 8-10. 1979 Analytical Results for the Off-NTS
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program.
Table B-2.
Tab 1 e B-3.
Table B-4.
Table 8-5.
Table B-6.
Tabl e B-7.
Table B-8.
Table 8-9.
1979 Summary of Analytical Results for Air
Surveillance Network Standby Stations. . .
.....-
Air Concentrations of Plutonium-239 at Selected Air
Surveillance Network Stations, 1978-1979 . . . . . . .
1979 Summary of Analytical Results for the
Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network
. . . . . .
1979 Summary of Radiation Doses for the
Dosimetry Network. . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
1979 Summary of Analytical Results for the
Milk Surveillance Network. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . .
1979 Summary of Analytical Results for the NTS
Monthly Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program. . .
1979 Analytical Results for the NTS Semi-Annual
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program. . .
. . . .
. . . . . .
......
Table 8-11. Special Analytical Result~ for the Long-Term
Hydrological Monitoring Program - Project Dribble. . .
Appendix C. Radiation Protection Standards for External and
Internal Exposure
DOE An nua 1 Dos e Commitment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
EPA Drinking Water Regulations for Radionuclides . . . . . . . . . .
DOE Concentration Guides. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
vi
68
69
70
72
74
77
78
80
81
90
91
91
92
-------
FIGURES
Number
Page
1
Location of the Nevada Test Site. . .
..........
. . . .
3
4
2 Nevada Test Site roads and facilities.
......
. . . . . . .
3 Groundwater flow systems around the Nevada Test Site. .
4 General land use in the Nevada Test Site envi rons . .
.....
7
9
. . . . . .
5 Distribution and number of family milk tows and goats,
by county. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . 11
6 Distribution of dairy cows, by county.
7 Distribution of beef cattle, by county.
.........
. . . . 12
. . . .
. . . .
. . . . . 13
8 Distribution of sheep, by county. . . . .
. . . .
. . . .
. . . . 14
9 Population of Arizona, California, Nevada, and Utah
counties near the Nevada Test Site. . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . 15
10 Air Surveil lance Network station~ within Nevada. . . .
. . . . . 20
11 Air Surveillance Network stations in States other than Nevada. . 21
12 Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network stations.
. . . . . . 23
13 Theromluminescent Dosimeter Network stations.
. . . . . . . . . . 24
14 Milk Surveillance Network statior.s.
. . . . .
........
. . 27
15 Onsite Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites on the Nevada Test Site. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . 28
16 Offsite Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites surrounding the Nevada Test Site. . . . . . . . .
. . . . 29
17
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling sites
for Projects Gnome and Coach, Carlsbad, New Mexico. . . . . . . 34
18 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Project Shoal, Fallon.. Nevada. . . . . .
. . . . . . 35
vi i
-------
Number
19 long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Projects Dribble and Miracle Play, vicinity of
Tatum Salt Dome, Mississippi. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
20 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Projects Dribble and Miracle Play,
Tatum Salt Dome, Mississippi. . . . . . . . . . .
......
21 long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Projects Dribble and Miracle Play,
Tatum Salt Dome, Mississippi. . . . . . . . . . .
22 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Project Gasbuggy, P.io Arriba County,
......
New Mex i co. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
......
23 Long-Term Hydro'iogical Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Project Rulison, Rulison, Colorado. . . .
24 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Faultless Event, Central Nevada Test Area
. . . . .
.....
25 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Project Rio Blanco, Rio Blanco County.
Colorado. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . .
26 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Project Cannikan, Amchitka Island, Alaska
. . . . .
27 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Project Milrow, Amchitka Island, Alaska.
. . . . .
28 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Project Longshot, Amchitka Island, Alaska. . . . .
29 Background sampling sites for the long-Term Hydrological
Monitoring Program on Amchitka Island, Alaska. . . . . . . .
30 Wildlife collection sites on the Nevada Test Site.
. . . . . .
31 Location of residents particip~ting in the Offsite
Human Surveillance Program. . . . . . . . . . . . . . " . . .
32 Energy response of thermoluminescent dosimeters. . . . . . . .
33 Distribution of Network concentrations of Krypton-85. .
. . . .
34 Trend in annual concentrations ot Krypton-85. . . . . . . . . .
viii
Page
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
44
45
46
47
48
52
52
-------
Number
TABLES
1
2
Page
6
Characteristics of Climatic Types in Nevada. .
........
Total Airborne Radionuclid~ Releases at the NTS During 1979 . . 16
Underground Tests Conducted Off the Nevada Test Site. . . . . . 17
3
4
Summary Results of the Fourth International Intercomparison
of Environmental Dosimeters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5
6
Annual Average Krypton-85 Concentrations in Air, 1972-1979. . . 51
Dosimetry Network Summary for the Years 1971-1979 . . . . . . . 53
7
Summary of Radionuclide Concentrations for Milk Surveillance
Network and Standby Milk Surveillance Network. . . . . . . . 53
8
Water Sampling Locations Where Samples Were Found to
Contain Manmade Radioactivity. . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . 55
1X
-------
\.1m
\.Irem
\.ICi/g
\.ICi /ml
AEC
ASN
C
CG
Ci
cm
CP-l
CY
D.E.
DOE
DOE/NV
EMSL/LV
EPA
ERDA
ERDA/NV
ft
GZ
h
kg
km
kt
LCL
LLL
L THMP
m
MDC
mm
MPa
mrem/y
mren/d
mR
mR/h
MSL
\.ICi
MSN
nCi
NGTSN
NTS
ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
mi crometer
microroentgen equivalent man
microcurie per gram
mir.rocurie per milliliter
Atomic Energy Commission
Ai r Surveillance Network
temperature in Celsius
Concentration Guide
Curie
cent imeter
Control Point One
Calendar Year
Dos e Equ i va 1 ent
U.S. Department of Energy
U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office
Envi ronmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory-
Las Vegas
U.S, Envi rorrnental Protection Agency
Energy Research and Development Administration
Energy Research and Development Administration,
Nevada Operations Office
feet
Ground Zero
hour
k i log r am
kilometer
kiloton
lower confidence 1imit
Lawrence Livermore Laborato ry
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
meter
minimum detectable concentration
mill imeter
mega pascal
milliroentgen equivalent man per year
milliroentgen e~uivalent mar per day
milliroentgen
milliroentgen per hour
Mea n Sea Level
microcurie
Milk Surveillance NetWJrk
nanocurie
Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance NetWJrk
Nevada Test Site
x
-------
PHS
pCi
SMSN
TLD
UCL
USGS
WSN
y
3H
HTO
Ba
Be
Cs
I
K
Kr
Pu
Ra
Ru
Sr
Te
U
Xe
Zr
Public Health Service
picocurie
Standby Milk Surveillance Network
thermoluminescent dosimeter
Upper Confidence Limit
United States Geological Survey
Water Surveillance Network
year
tritium or hydrogen-3
trit i ated water
ba ri urn
beryl i urn
cesium
iodine
potassium
krypton
plutonium
radium
rut hen i urn
strontium
tellurium
uranium
xenon
zirconium
xi
-------
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors of this report gratefully acknowledge M. E. Kaye, M.D. and Dr.
R. G. Patzer for providing the whole-body counting information.
xii
-------
PROGRAM SUMMARY -- 1979
No radioactivity from the nuclear tests conducted at the Nevada Test Site
(NTS) in 1979 was measured offsite by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency's Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, which continued its
Offsite Radiological Safety Program for the NTS and other sites of past
underground nuclear tests. For each test, the Laboratory provided airborne
meteorological measurements, ground and airborne radiation monitoring teams,
and special briefings to the Test Controller's Advisory Panel.
No measurable concentrations of manmade radionuclides attributable to the
testing program were found i~ humans living in the environs of the NTS as
determined by whole-body counts of individuals residing there.
The only radioactivity from non-NTS sites of past underground nuclear
tests was due to tritium, which was measured in water samples collected from
the Project Dribble Site near Hattiesburg, Mississipp.;, and the Project Long
Shot Site on Amchitka Island, Alaska. The maximum concentrations measured at
these locations were 10 and 0.1 percent of the Concentration Guide,
respectively. Further sampling is planned at the Project Dribble site.
A small amount of airborne radioactivity originating from nuclear tests
carried out by the People's Republic of China was detected during 1979 at some
stations scattered throughout the Air Surveillance Network.
Sampling of tissues from wildlife and domestic animals on and around the
NTS was continued by the Laboratory.s Animal Investigation Program. Data from
analysis of these tissues are published separately in an annual repcrt.
Dose assessment calculations were not warranted this year because no
radioactivity from the nuclear tests conducted at the NTS during 1979 was
detected by the offsite monitoring networks.
1
-------
INTRODUCTION
Under Memorandum of Understanding No. EY-76-A-08-0539 with the U.S.
Department of Energy (DOE), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.s. (EPA)
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory--Las Vegas (EMSL-~V), contlnued
its Offsite Radiological Safety Prosram for the Nevada Test Slte (NTS) and for
other sites designated by the DOE during calendar year 1979. This report, .
prepared in accordance with the DOE Manual, Chapte: 0513 ~ERDA 1974), ~ontalns
descriptions of pertinent features of the NTS and ltS enVlrons, summarles of
the EMSL-LV dosimetry and sampling methods, analytical procedures, and the
analytical results from environmental measurements. Where applicable,
dosimetry and sampling data are compared to appropriate guides tor external
and internal exposures of humans to ionizing radiation.
DESCRIPTION OF THE NEVADA TEST SITE
Historically, the major programs conducted at the NTS have been nuclear
weapons development, proof-testing and weapons safety, testing peaceful uses
of nuclear explosives (Plowshare Program), reactor engine development for
nuclear rocket and ramjet applications (Projects Pluto and Rover), high-
energy nuclear physics research, and seismic studies (Vela Uniform). During
1979, nuclear weapons development, proof-testing and weapons safety, and
nuclear physics programs were continued. Project Pluto was discontinued in
1964; Project Rover was terminated in January 1973; Plowshare tests were
terminated in 1970; Vela Uniform studies ceased in 1973. All nuclear weapons
tests since 1962 have been conducted underground.
Site Location
The NTS is located in Nye County, Nevada, with its southeast corner about
90 km northwest of Las Vegas (Figures 1 and 2). It has an area of about 3,500
km and varies from 40 to 56 km in w;dth (east-west) and from 64 to 88 km in
length (north-south). This area consists of large basins or flats about 900
to 1,200 m above mean sea level (MSL} surrounded by mountain ranges rising
1,800 to 2,300 m above MSL.
The NTS is surrounded on three sides by exclusion areas, collectively
named the Nellis Air Force Range, which provide a buffer zone between the test
areas and public lands. This buffer zone varies from 24 to 104 km between the
t~st a~ea and land that is open to the public. Depending upon wind speed and
dlrectlon, from 1/2 to more than 6 hours will elapse before any release of
airborne radioactivity could pass over public lands.
2
-------
N
Scale in Miles
50 100
1/80
50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
200
George
Figure 1. Location of the Nevada Test Site.
3
-------
~
1
"
9
7
18
3
11
I
N.R.D.S. I
Buffer Zone I
Desert Game
Range
17 50 "'0./ OfJOPlIh
S 'ro", M
erClJry)
Scale in Miles
o 5 10
~~
o 5 10 16 20
1/80 Scale in Kilometers
Las Vegas
(65 miles from Mercury)
Figure 2.
Nevada Test Site roads and facilities.
4
-------
Climate
The climate of the NTS and surrounding area is variable, due to its
variations in altitude and its rugged terrain. Generally, the climate is
referred to as continental arid. Throughout the year, there is insufficient
Witer to support the growth of callmon food crops without irrigation.
Climate may be classified by the types of vegetation indigenous to an
area. According to Houghton et ale (197S), this method of classification of
dry condition, developed by Doppen, is further subdivided on the basis of
temperature and severity of drought. Table 1 (Houghton et ale 1975)
summarizes the characteristics of climatic types for Nevada.
As Houghton et al. point out, 90 percent of Nevada's population 1 ives in
areas with less than 25 cm of rainfall per year or in areas that wcul d be
classified as mid-latitude steppe to low-latitude desert regions.
According to Quiring (1968), the NTS average annual precipitation ranges
from about 10 cm at the lower elevations to around 25 cm on the higher
elevations. During the winter months, the plateaus may be snow-covered for a
period of several days or weeks. Snow is uncommon on the flats. Temperatures
vary considerably with elevation, slope, and local air currents. The average
daily hiyh (low) temperatures at the lower altitudes are around 50°F(25°F)
in January and 95°F(55°F) in July, with extremes of 110°F and -15°F.
Correspondi ng temperatures on the pl ateaus are 35°F(25°F) in January and
80°F(65°F) in July with extremes of lOO°F and -20°F. Temperature extremes as
low as -30°F and higher than 115°F have been observed.
The wind directions, as measured on a 30-m tower at an observation station
about 9 km NNW of Yucca Lake, is predomi nant ly northerly except duri ng the
months of May through August when winds from the south-southwest predominate
(Quiring 1968). Because of the prevalent mountain/valley winds in the basins,
south to southwest winds predominate duv-ing daylight hours of most months.
During the winder months southerly winds have only a slight edge over
northerly winds for a ftW hours during the warmest part of the day. These
wi nd pattern s may be quite di fferent at other 1 ocat ions on the NTS because of
local terrain effects and differences in elevation.
Geology and Hydrology
Geological and hydrological studies of the NTS have been in progress by
the U.S. Geological Survey and various other organizations since 1956.
Because of this continuing effort, including subsurface studies of numerous
boreholes, the surface and underground 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
conducted. A comprehensive slJllmary of the geology and hydrology of the NTS
has been edited and pub 1 i shed by Ecke 1 (1968).
ho major hydrologic systems shown in Figure 3 exist on the NTS (ERDA
1977). Ground water in the northwestern part of the NTS or in the Pahute Mesa
area has been rejX)rted to flow at a rate of 2 rn to 180 m per year to the
5
-------
TABLE 1.
CHARACTERISTICS OF CLIMATIC TYPES IN NEVADA (from Houghton et al. 1975)
Climate
T e
Alpine
tundra
Humid
continental
0'\
Subhumid
continental
r.:id-latitude
steppe
Mid-latitude
desert
Low-latitude
desert
Mean Temperature
°C
(OF)
Winter
-18° to -go
( 0° to 15°)
-12° to -1°
(10° to 30°)
-12° to -1°
(10° to 30°)
-7° to 4°
(20° to 40°)
-7° to 4°
(20° to 40°)
-4° to 10°
(40° to 50°)
Surrmer
4° to 10°
(40° to 50°)
10° to 21°
(500 to 70°)
10° to 21°
(50° to 70°)
18° to 27°
(65° to 80°)
18° to 27°
(650 to 80°)
27° to 32°
(80° to 90°)
Annual Precipitation
em
(inches)
Total* Snowfall
38 to 114
(15 to 45)
64 to 114
(25 to 45)
30 to 64
(12 to 25)
15 to 38
( 6 to 15)
8 to 20
( 3 to 8)
5 to 25
( 2 to 10)
Medium to
heavy
Heavy
Moderate
Li ght to
moderate
Light
Negligible
Dominant
Ve etation
Alpine
meadows
Pine-fir
forest
Pi ne or sc rub
woodland
Sagebrush,
grass, scrub
Greasewood,
shadscale
Creosote
bush
*Limits of annual precipitation overlap because of variations in temperature which affect the
water balance.
Percent
of Area
1
15
57
20
7
-------
I / 3'
(ll
, \ '",", /J
\ Pahute Mesa ') / J
Ground Water r' I
System ", "~
[' """" \
' '
, '
_/ ...., ..: ('~J "
, "" """~~c;O~'~ \
0'\:' o~
~
{Nevada
Test
I Site
~ \ I
\
I
Ash Meadows
Ground Water System
\
\
/
J
(
Indian Springs J
-,,' /' \_/
\ I" /'
V \./
~1$
C'~. ~~
~J'; Q:
0".. ~
.,
/~ ,
,
Scale in Miles
o 10 20 30
~,~
o 10 20 30 40
1/80 Scale in Kilometers
Nevada
--. --. Flow Direction
- - - Ground Water System Boundaries
-.-.- Silent Canyon Caldera
.....,....... Timber Mountain Caldera
Figure 3.
Groundwater flow systems around the Nevada Test Site.
7
-------
south and southwest toward the Ash Meadows Discharge Area in the Amargosa
Deser~. It is estimated that the ground water to the east of the NTS moves
from north to south at a rate of not le~s than 2 m nor greater than 220 m per
year. Carbon-14 analyses of this eastel'n ground water indicate that the lower
velocity is nearer the true value. At Mercury Valley in the extrane southern
part of the NTS, the eastern ground water flow shifts southwest toward the Ash
Meadows Di scharge Area.
The water levels under the NTS vary from depths of about 100 m beneath the
surface of valleys in the southeastern part of the site to more than 600 m
beneath the surface of highlands to the north. Although much of the valley
fill is saturated downWlrd movenent of Wlter is extremely sl CM. The primary
aquifer in these formations is the Paleozoic carbonates that underlie the more
recent tuffs and alluviums.
Land Use of NTS Environs
Figure 4 is a rrap of the off-NTS area showi ng a wide variety of land uses,
such as farming, mining, grazing, camping, fishing, and hunting. For example,
within a 300-km radius west of the NTS, elevations range from 85 m bel ON MSL
in Death Valley to 4,420 m above MSL in the Sierra Nevada Range. Parts of two
major agricultural valleys (the Owens and San Joaquin) are included. The
areas south of the NTS are more uniform since the Mojave Desert ecosystem
(mid-latitude desert) comprises most of this portion of Nevada, California,
and Arizona. The areas east of the NTS a re prima ri ly mi d-l at itude steppe with
some of the older river valleys, such as the Virgin River Valley and r-'lOapa
Valley, supporting irrigation for small-scale but intensive farming of a
variety of crops. 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 activity is grazing of cattle and sheep. Minor
agriculture, primarily the grCMing of alfalfa hay, is found in this portion of
the State within 300 km of the NTS Contl'ol Point-1 (CP-1). Many of the
residents grCM or have access to locally grCMn fruits and vegetables.
Industry within the immediate off-NTS area includes 34 active mi nes and
mills, tWJ oil fields at Trap Springs and Eagle Springs, and several
industrial plants in Henderson, Nevada (Figure 4). The number of employees
for these operations may vary from one person at several of the small mines to
several hundred workers for the oil fields north of the NTS and the industrial
plants in Henderson. Most of the individual mining operations involve less
than 10 workers per mine; however, a few operations employ 100 to 250 workers.
The rrajor boqy of water close to the NTS is Lake Mead (100 km southeast).
a manmade lake supplied by water from the Colorado River. Lake Mead supplies
about 60 percent of the water used for doo~stic, recreational and industrial
purposes in the Las Vegas Valley. Some Lake Mead water is us~d in Arizona,
southern California, and Mexico. Smaller reservoirs and lakes located in the
area are used primarily for irrigation find for watering 1 ivestock. In'
California, the Owens River and Haiwee Reservoir feed into the Los Angeles
Aqueduct and constitute the major sources of water for the Los Angeles area.
8
-------
Lake
Tahoe
GRAZING
o
FARMS^l \GRAZ!NG
GRAZING
A\
\BeatTO
Scale in Miles
50
50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
AIRIES-
Cedar City
V
DAIRIES
A Camping & Recreational
Areas
D Hunting
• Fishing
O Mine
A Oil Fields
Lake Havasu
Figure 4. General land use in thf N^.ida Test Site environs.
-------
Ma~ recreational areas, in all directions around the NTS (Figure 4)hare
used for such activities as hunting, fishing and cafllJing. In general, t eS
camping and fishing sites to the northwest, north, and northeast of ~he NT
are ut i 1 i zed throughout the year except for the wi nter months. . C~mplng and
fishing locations to the southeast, south, and soutt~est are utlllzed
throughout the year. The hunting season is from September through January.
Dairy farming is not extensive within 300 km of the NTS. A surv7Y of milk
cows during the summer of 1979 showed 8,200 dairy cows, 730 family mllk cows
and 258 family milk goats in the area. The family cows and goats are.
distributed in all directions around the NTS (Figure 5), whereas most da1ry
cows (Figure 6) are located southeast of the Site (Moapa River, Nevada; Virgin
River Valley, Nevada; and Las Vegas, Nevada), northeast (Lund), and southwest
(near Barstow, California).
Grazing is the most comrron land use within 300 km of the site.
Approximately 250,000 cattle and 280,000 sheep (California 1979; Nevada
Departrrent of Agriculture 1978; Utah Departrrent of Agriculture 1979) were
pastured within this area during 1979. The distributions of the cattle and
sheep by county are shown in Figures 7 and 8, respectively.
Population Distribution
Figure 9 shows the current population of counties surrounding the NTS
based on projections by the States in which the counties were located.
Excluding the Las Vegas area, the major population center (approximately
435,000 in 1979), the population density within thi5 area is about 0.6 persons
per square kilometer. For comparison, the 48 contiguous states (1970 census)
had a population density of approximately 26 persons per square kilometer.
The estimated average population density for Nevada in 1979 was 2.6 persons
per square kil ometer.
The offsite area within 80 km of the NTS (the area in which the dose
commitment must be determined for the purpose of this report) is predominantly
rural. Several small communities are located in the area, the largest being
in the Pah rump Vall eYe Thi s growi n9 rural community. with an est imated
population of about 3,600, is located about 72 km south-southwest of the NTS
Control Point-I. The Amargosa Farm Area, which has a population of about
1,000, is located about 50 km southwest of CP-1. The largest town in the
near-offsite area is Beatty, which has a population of about 600 and is
located approximately 65 km to the west of CP-l.
The Mojave Desert of California, which includes Death Valley National
MonuJrent, lies along the southwestern border of Nevada. The National Park
Servi ce (1980) estimates that the pepul ation within the Monument boundaries
ranges from a minimum ~f 900 permanent residents during the sumrrer months to
as n:'any as ~5,00? tOUrlS~S and ccmpers on a'1Y particular day during the major
holldqy perlods 1n the Wlnter months, and as many as 80 000 during "Death
Valley Days" in the month of November. The largest tow~ and contiguous
populated area in the Mojave Desert is Barstow, located 265 km south-southwest
of th~ NTS, ~th a pepul a~ion of about 25,000. The next largest popul ated
area 1S the R1dgecrest-Chlna Lake area, which has a population of about
10
-------
0 50 100 150
1/80 Scale in Kilometers
Figure 5. Distribution and number of family milk cows and goats, by county.
11
-------
0 50 100 160
1/80 Scale in Kilometers
Figure 6. Distribution of dairy cows, by county.
12
-------
0 50 100 150
1/80 Scale in Kilometers
Figure 7. Distribution of beef cattle, by county.
13
-------
Humboldt
5,000
Pershing
6,000
Scale in Miles
0 25 50 75 100
0 50 100 150
/on Scale in Kilometers
Figure 8. Distribution of sheep, by county.
14
-------
Storey-
1,365
Carson
32,374
Douglas
16,766
N
San Bernardino
812.883
Scale in Miles
25 50 75 100
0 50 100 150
1/80 Scale in Kilometers
Figure 9. Population of Arizona, California, Nevada, and
Utah counties near the Nevada Test Site.
15
-------
20,000 and is located about 190 km southwest of the NTS. The Owens Valley,
where- numerous small towns are located, 1 i es about 50 km west of Death V all ey.
The largest town in Owens Valley is Bishop, located 225 km west-northwest of
the NTS, with a population of about 5,300 including contiguous populated
areas.
The extreme southwestern region of Utah is more developed than the
adjacent part of Nevada. The largest town, Cedar City, with a population of
10,700, 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
9,100.
The extreme northwestern region of Arizona is mostly range land for that
portion in the Lake Mead Recreation Area, In addition, several small
communities lie along the Colorado River. The largest town in the area is
Kingman, located 280 km southeast of the NTS, with a population of about
8,000.
AIRBORNE RELEASES OF RADIOACTIVITY AT THE NTS DURING 1979
During 1979, all nuclear detonations were conducted underground, and all
were contained. However, during re-entry drilling operations, occasional
low-level releases of airborne radioactivity did occur. According to
information provided by the Nevada Operations Office, DOE, the quantities of
radionuclides released into the atmosphere during 1979 are shown in
Table 2.
TABLE 2.
TOTAL AIRBORNE RADIONUCLIDE RELEASES
AT THE NTS DURING 1979
Radionuclide
Quantity Released
(Ci )
Tritium
Krypton-85
Iodine-131
Xenon-133
Xenon-133m
Xenon-135
12.6
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
12.6
Tot a 1
NO = no detectable release
There is also a continuous unknown low-level release of tritium and
krypton-85 on the NTS. Tritium is released primarily from the Sedan Crater
16
-------
and by the evaporation of water from ponds formed by drainage of water from
tunnel test areas in the Rainier Mesa. The seepage of krypton-85 and tritium
to the surface from underground test areas is suspected. The short-lived
iodines and xenons are released only during a venting or during a drillback
operation.
OTHER TESTS
The name, date, location, yield, depth, and purpose of each underground
nuclear test conducted off the NTS are shown in Table 3. No off-NTS nuclear
tests were conducted during 1979.
TABLE 3. UNDERGROUND TESTS CONDuCTED OFF THE NEVADA TEST SITE
Name of Test, Depth
Operation or Vi el d i m Purpose of
Project Date Location (kt) (ft) the event~.*
Project/Gncme 12/10/61 48 km (30 mi) SE of 3.1** 360 Multi-purpose
Coach* Carlsbad, N. Mex. (1184) experi1T1E!nt.
Project Shoalt 10/26/63 45 km (28 mi) SE of 12 366 Nuclear Test
Fallon, Nev. (1200) detection re-
search experi-
ment.
Project Dribblet 10/22/64 34 km (21 mi) SWof 5.3 823 Nuclear test
(Salmon Event) Hattiesburg, Miss. (2700) detection re-
search experi-
ment.
OperaTion Long 10/29/65 Amchitka Isl and, 80 716 DOD nuclear
Shott Alaska (2350) test detection
experiment.
Project Dribblet 12/03/66 34 km (21 mi) SWof 0.38 823 Nuclear test
(Sterl i ng Event) Hattiesburg, Miss. (2700) detec"tion re-
search E'xperi-
ment.
Project Gasbuggy* 12/10/67 88 km (55 mi) E of 29 1292 Joint Government-
Farmington, N. Mex. (4240) Industry gas
stimulation ex-
periment.
Faultless Event* 01/19/68 Central Nevada Test 200- 914 Calibration
Area 96 km (60 mil E 1000 (3000) test.
of Tonopah, Nev.
Project Miracle 02/02/69 34 km (21 mi) SWof Non- 823 Detonated in
Play (Diode Tube)* Hattiesburg, Miss. nuclear (2700) Salmon/Sterli ng
explosion cavity. Seismic
studies.
Project Rul i son* 09/10/69 19 km (12) SW of 40 2568 Gas Stimulation
Rifle, Colo. (8425) experiment.
Operation Milrow* 10/02/69 Amchitka Island, 1000 1219 Calibration test.
Alaska (4000)
(continued)
17
-------
TABLE 3.
Continued
Name of Test,
Operat i on or
Project Date Location
Project Miracle* 04/19/70 34 km (21 mi) SWof
Play (Humid Hattiesburg. Miss.
Water)t
Operation 11/06/71 Amchitka Island,
Canniki n* Alaska
Project Rio 05/17/73 48 km (30 mi) SWof
Blanco* Meeker, Colo.
Depth
m
(ft)
Yield
(kt)
Purpose of
the event
Non-
nucl ear
explosion
823
(2700)
<5000
1829
(6000)
3x30
1780
to
2040
(5840
to
6690)
Detonated in
Salmon/Sterling
cavity. Seismic
studies.
Test of war-
head for
SpartC!n
missile.
Gas stimula-
tion experi-
ment.
*Plowshare Events
tVela Uniform Events
*Weapons Tests
9Information from "Revised Nuclear Test Statistics," dated September 20, 1974, 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, ABC Albuquerque Operations Office, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
December I, 1961.
**"The Effects of Nuclear Weapons," Rev. Ed. 1964.
18
-------
METHODS
SPECIAL TEST SUPPORT
Before each nuclear test, mobile monitoring personnel were positioned in
the offsite areas most likely to be exposed should a release of radioactive
material occur. These monitors, equipped with radiation survey instruments,
gamma exposure-rate recorders, thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD's), portable
air samplers, and supplies for collecting environmental samples, were prepared
to conduct a monitoring program directed from the NTS Control Point (CP-1) via
two-way radio communications.
In addition, for each event at the NTS, a U.S. Air Force aircraft, with
two Reynolds Electrical and Engineering Company monitoring personnel equipped
with portable radiation survey instruments, was airborne near surface ground
zero to detect and track any radioactive effluent. One EMSL-LV cloud sampling
and tracking aircraft was also airborne over NTS to obtain samples, assess
total cloud volume, and provide long-range tracking in the event of a release
of airborne radioactivity. A second EMSL-LV aircraft was airborne to gather
meteorological data and to perform cloud tracking. Information from these
aircraft was used in positioning the radiation monitors.
ROUTINE MONITORING AND SAMPLING
The Offsite Radiological Safety Program 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.
Air Surveillance Network
The Air Surveillance Network (ASN) is operated to monitor environmental
levels of radioactivity from NTS operations. At the beginning of 1979, the
ASN consisted of 49 continously operating sampling stations and 73 standby
stations in 21 western States. By February 1, 1979, 24 of the active stations
were changed to standby stations, and later in the year operation of the
Diablo station was terminated. At the end of the year, the network had 25
active stations and 96 standby stations (Figures 10 and 11).
Samples of airborne particulates were collected at each active station on
4-in (10-cm) diameter glass-fiber or Microsorban filters at a flow rate of
about 350 m3per day. Filters were changed after sampler operation periods of
2 or 3 days (700 to 1,100 m3). Activated charcoal cartridges directly behind
the filters, used to collect gaseous radioiodine, were changed at the same
time as the filters. The stations were operated by State and municipal health
19
-------
£
&
Reno
N
^Winnemucca
A Battle Mtn.
, Elko
Lovelock
ACurrie
. Fallen
Eureka
^Frenchman
A Ely
Bound Mtn A
^^ A RliJP
Hot Creek Rn A. Ajay
Stone Cabin Rn A Fajlini's
Rn.
Clark's Sta.
TonopahA
Currant
_ , A Maim.
Duckwater ^ Sta
Angleworm Rn.A A ALunc(
.Blue Eagle A Geyser
' Rn ^^
^•Sunnyside
ami ii a ^^
AARn. ANyala
» ^^^^ ^^
•k \ J^ Adaven
Warm Springs
0)
Goldfieldl
Lida
Alamo
Pioche
. Cahente
Scotty's
Fleur De Lis Rr,.
Beany
V
Lathrop Wi
Dansby Rn.
Scale in Miles
50 100
150
1/80
50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
200
Glendale(
dian Springs
k Spring Meadows Rn.
Pahrump
0 Active ASN Station
A Stand-by Station
esquite
Figure 10. Air Surveillance Network stations within Nevada.
20
-------
...
Arizona
...
Scale in Miles
~
100 300 500 700
Scale in Kilometers
.Active ASN Station
... Stand-by ASN Station
1/80
Figure 11.
CANADA
----
Montana
North Dakota
Kansas
Oklahoma
...
...
...
Air Surveillance Network stations in States other than Ne~ada.
...
...
...
Wyoming
.
...
South Dakota
...
...
Nebraska
...
...
...
Colorado
...
...
...
New Mexico
...
.
...
Texas
,
\
~-,
MEXICO \,
\
21
-------
department personnel or by local residents. All air filters and charcoal
cartridges were mailed to the EMSL-LV for analysis. All standby stations were
operated for I-week periods each quarter for performance eva luation.
The filters and cartridges were analyzed by gamma spectrometry. If fresh
fission products had been detected on the filters, radiochemical analysis
would have been performed for stronti~1-89,90 and plutonium. isotopes on
selected filters. Appendix Table A-I sUlnmarizes the analytlcal procedures and
minimum detectable concentrations (MDC's) for each analysis. Gross beta
analyses for samples from all stations were discontinued in 1979 in favor of
high reso 1 uti on gamma s pect rome try, wh i th reso 1 ve s comp 1 ex mi xt ures of
gamma-emitting radionuclides and eliminates nonspecific background
interferences. Quarterly composites from 11 ASN stations were analyzed for
plutonium-238 and plutonium-239.
In anticipation of airborne radioactivity from the atmospheric nuclear
test by the People's Republic of China at 0100 EST on December 14, ~978, 66 of
the standby stations were activated with filters and charcoal cartrldges from
Decanber 15,1978, through January 5, 1979.
Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network
The Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network monitors the airborne
levels of radiokrypton, radioxenon, and tritium. In May 1979, the sampling
stations in Death Valley Junction and Las Vegas were ranoved from the Network,
and new stations were added at Area 15 and Area 400 on the NTS and at Lathrop
Wells in the offsite area to enhance the monitoring for effluents from
experirrental hi gh-l eve 1 waste st uqy area s. Current ly thi s netwo rk consists of
six stations on and six stations off the NTS as shown in Figure 12 (the Area
51 station is considered an NTS station).
T\\O sampling systems are used in this Net\\Ork: a compressor-type air
sampl er and a mol ecul ar sieve scrnpl ere The compressor-type equi p1Ient
continuously samples air over a 7-day period and stores it in two pressure
tanks, which together hold approximately 1 cubic meter of air at about 220 psi
(1.6 Mpa). The tanks are exchanged weekly and returned to the EMSL-LV where
thei r contents are analy zed for krypton-85 and radi oxenon.
A molecular sieve colu~n is used to collect tritiated water from air. A
prefilter is used to ranove particles before air passes through the molecular
sieve column. Approximately 5 cubic meters of air are passed through each
sampler over a 7-day sampling period. Tritiated water (HTO) absorbed on the
molecular sieve column is recovered, anc the concentration of tritium in
wa~er! exp~essed inyCi/ml o~ sampled air, is determined by liquid
sClntlllatlon countlng technlques. Analyses for tritium hydride and tritiated
methane were discontinued in 1979.
Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Network
The Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Net\\Ork comprises 78 stations at both
inhabited and uninhabited locations within a 300-km radius of the CP-l. Each
22
-------
|Tonopah
Scale in Miles
10 20 30 40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
1/80 Scale in Kilometers
Rachel
Nellis
Air Force
Range
iHiko
Indian Springs
• Las Vegas
r
I
Nevada
(Noble Gas & Tritium Sampling Locations
\
Nevada Test Site &
Nellis Air Force Range
Location
Map
Figure 12. Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network stations.
23
-------
^Austin
• Young Rn.
• Eureka
Duckwaier I
Hot Creek
Rn.
.Blue
'Jay
Nyalag
Adaven
N
Warm Springs^
Clark's Sta.
• Ely
Kirkeby Rn.
•
Hund
Angle
Worm
• Rn.
tBlue Eagle
Rn •Sunnyside
^Casey's Rn.
Mammoth Mtn.
Bishop
•Complex I
• Pine Creek Rn.
^Koynes
1 - • Hiko
^-Tempiute i
Coyote Smt.
Garrison
kPioche
I
Independence •
Lone Pine 4
Olancha<
^Scotty's Jefc
SpringdaleQ
Beattyl
Nuclear Eng. Co
Lathrop Wells
Selbach Rn.«
American Borate
Furnace Creek•
Death Valley Jet.
• Ridgecrest
Caliente ^
oyote Smt. |_ •
•Alamo •Elgin |E«««P«*»
Carp
• St. George
Scale in Miles
50
11/80
50 100
Scale in Kilometers
150
• Bar stow
Shoshone
• Baker
I Thermoluminescent Dosimeter Stations
Figure 13. Thermo!umlnescent Dosimeter Network stations.
24
-------
stat~on is equipped with three Harshaw Model 2271-G2 (TLD200) thermo-
luminescent dosirneters (TLD's) to measure environmental background leve1s as
well as accidental releases of gamma-emitting radioactivity (Figure 13).
Within the area covered by the Network, each of 24 offsite residents wore a
dosimeter during 1979. All TLD's were exchanged quarterly.
The only major change in the Network during 1979 was the removal of gamma
rate recorders from Network stations beginning February 1, 1979. The
dosimeters at Pine Creek Ranch station were not exchanged until the third
quarter due to weather conditions and the erection of a padlocked fence. At
the beginning of the third quarter, this station was moved outside the fence
several hundred feet from its original location. Dosimeters stolen from
several stations were replaced the f01lowing quarter.
The Model 2271-G2 dosimeter consi5ts of two small "chips" of dysprosium-
activated calcium fluoride 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 card containing the chips, and the shielded card is
then sealed in an opaque plastic card holder. Three of these dosimeters are
placed in a secured, rugged, plastic housing 1 meter above ground level at
each station to standardize the exposure geometry. One dosimeter is issued to
each of 24 offsite residents who are instructed in its proper wearing.
After appropriate corrections were made for background exposure
accumulated during shipment between the laboratory and the monitoring
location, the TLD readings for each station were averaged. The average value
for each station was then compared to the values obtained during the previous
year to determine whether the new value was within the range of previous
background values for that station. The data from each of the personnel
dosimeters were compared to the background value measured at the nearest
station.
The smallest exposure above background radiation that can be determined
from these TLD readings depends primarily on variations in the natural
background exposure rate at the particular station. In the absence of other
independent exposure rate measurements, one must compare the present exposure
rate with valid prior measurements of natural background. Typically, the
smallest net exposure detectable at the 99 percent confidence level for a
90-day exposure period would be 5 to 15 mR above background. Depending on
location, the background ranges from 15 to 35 mR. The term "background," as
used in this context, refers to naturally occurring radioactivity plus a
contribution from residual manmade fission products, such as world-wide
fallout.
Milk Surveillance Networks
Milk is one of the most important pathways by which manmade radionuclides
enter the diet of man. For this reason, milk produced near the NTS is
monitored routinely. The six most common fission p,'oducts observed in milk
are tritium, strontium-89,90, radioiodines, cesium-137, and barium-140.
Concentrations of potassium-40, a naturally occurring radionuclide found in
milk, are not reported.
25
-------
The routine Milk Surveillance Network (MSN) and the Standby Milk
Surveillance Network (SMSN) were continued during 1979 to monitor
concentrations of radicnuclides in milk. The MSN consisted of 24 s~npling
sites (Figure 14) at which EMSL-LV personnel collected 4 liters of raw milk
each quarter from family cows, commercial producers, and pasturization p~ants.
In the event of a release of radioactivity from the NTS, extensive sampllng
would be conducted in the affected area within a 480 km radius of CP-l to
assess the radionuclide concentrations in milk, the radiation doses that could
result from the ingestion of milk, and the protective actions required. Milk
suppliers and producers beyond 480 km are normally sampled by the SMSN;
however, EMSL-LV monitors are prepared to collect samples as far out as
necessa ry to ass ure adequate and time ly coverage.
The SMSN consists of about 140 Grade A milk processing plants in all
States west of the Mississippi River. Federal regional offices and State
health departments can be requested to collect raw milk samples representing
milk sheds supplying milk to processing plants. During 1979, there was no
release of radioact ivity from the NTS; therefore, thi s Net\'K>ri< was act ivated
only for performance testing.
All mi lk sampl es from the MSN were analyzed for gamma ani tters and
strontium-89,90. Six milk samples were also analyzed for tritium. Selected
samples from the SMSN were analyzed for gamma anitters, strontilJIl-89,90, and
tritium. Appendix Table A-I lists the analytical procedures and detection
1 imits for these analyses.
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
The Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program (LTHMP) was continued during
1979. Wells, spri ngs, and surface water sources near underground nuclear
detonation test areas in Alaska, Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico, and Mississippi
were sampled periodically to monitor for the migration of test-related
radionuclides. A deep-well water sampler, capable of collecting 3-liter
samples from depths to 1,800 m, was used to collect many of the samples from
wells havi ng no pLmps.
Nevada Test Site
Figures 15 and 16 show the sampling locations around the NTS. Eleven
stations are sampled monthly \'kIile 20 stations, 8 of than on the NTS, are
sampled semiannually. Eleven other offsite stations are sampled annually.
Not all stations could be sampled with the desired frequency because of
inclement weather or inoperative pumps. Two locations were not sampled at
all: Well UE18r and Road D windmill.
Each sample was analyzed for gamma emitters and tritium. Gross alpha and
beta radioactivity measuranents were made on all samples collected prior to
October 1, 1979. at \'kIich time these analyses were discontinued in favor of
high resolution gamma spectrometry. For each sampled location samples of raw
water and filtered/acidified water were collected. The raw water samples were
analyzed for tritilJIl. Portions of the filtered/acidified saTIpl es were
analyzed for gamma emitters. Appendix Tab1 e C-1 sLmmarizes the analytical
26
-------
s?
f
•Reno
Bishop 0
Keough Hot Springs (|
Yribarren Rn.
Scale in Miles
SO
•Winnemuccj
• Wells
• Elko
•Austin
| Young Rn.
Round Mtn.i
Berg Rn. I
Tonopah0
Manzonie Rn. |
Curranu
• Ely
J|Kirkeby Rn.
• Shoshone
(Lund i
McKenzie Dairy
(Blue Eagle Rn.
Warm Springs
INyala
Sharp's Rn.
Hansen Rn • .Panaca
H.koT Caliente«™june Cox Rn
I Alamo
Sharp Res.
pringdale
SieJentopf Rn
LathropWells
Kirker Rn.,
Western
General Dairy
• St. George
R. Cox Dairy
Mesquite
1/80
50 100 160
Scale in Kilometers
• Milk Sampling Locations
NOTE: When sampling location occurred
in city or town, the sampling location
symbol VMS used for showing both town
and sampling location.
.1
'PfJ • Hughes Bros. Dairy
^ AgmanH «Logandale
Indian Spgs. Seventy Five Jvegas Valley Dairy
Pahrump* 9 0LDS Dairy Farm
Oxborrow Rn.Bj Las Vegas
Burson Rn.™
• Trona
I Stanford Rn.
te
• •Barstow
Bill Nelson Dairy
Hinkley
Figure 14. Milk Surveillance Network stations.
27
-------
~
I
"
10
De.en Glme
Ringe
SClle In Miles
o 6 10
~~
o 6 10 16 2.0
1/80 Scale in Kilometers
A Monthly
. Semi-Annual
1.8. Vag..
(66 mile. from Mercuryl
Figure 15. Onsite Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
sampling sites on the Nevada Test Site.
28
-------
Twin Springs Rn,
INyala
fTonopah
(Adaven Springs
I Diablo
0TTR Well #6
Nell.s
Air Force
Range
Road D Windmill I
Springdalea ^
^^ Goss Springs! mi
Beattv
•Neco
I
Tempiute
• Hiko
^Crystal Springs
^ Alamo
Lathrop Wells
N
\
Well 17S/50E-14CA'
V •Crystal Pool
Well 18S/51E-7dbB«Ash Meadows
Death Valley Jet.*
1
db|
USAF#2|
Fairbanks Springs
Indian Springs AFB
Sewer Co. Well #1
Calvada Well #3
iLas Vegas
Well #28
Scale in Miles
10 20 30
40
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
1/80 Scale in Kilometers
Spring
Nevada
I Annual Samples
Semi-Annual Samples
Nevada Test Site
Nellis Air Force
Location Map
rtap\J
Figure 16. Offsite Long-term Hydrological Monitoring Program
sampling sites surrounding the Nevada Test Site.
29
-------
techniques used. Suspended solids collected on each filter were also analyzed
for gamma emitters.
Other Test Sites
Annual water samples were collected from all off-NTS sites of under~round
nuclear detonations except for the Project Faultless site near Warm Sprlngs,
Nevada, where sampling will be resumed in 1980. These sites included P~oject
Gnome near Carlsbad, New Mexico; Project Shoal near Fallon, Nevada; ProJect
Dribble (Miracle Play) near Hattiesburg, Mississippi; Project Gasbuggy near
Gobernador, New Mexico; Project Rulison near Grand Valley. Colorado; Project
Rio Blanco in Rio Blanco County, Colorado; and Projects Long Shot/Mil row/
Cannikin on Amchitka Island, Alaska. Figures 17 through 29 identify the
sampling locations, and Table 3 (p. 17-18) lists additional information on the
location of each site and tests performed at these locations.
Because tritium was observed to exceed background levels in water samples
taken from the Half Moon Creek overflow, twelve wells were drilled in April
1978 to monitor these tritium concentrations quarter1y (DOE 1978). Quarterly
collection of water samples from these wells continued until March 1979 when a
new drilling program (DOE 1979) was planned by the DOE/NV. The EMSL-LV was
assigned responsibility for radiological safety, field analysis for tritium,
providing contract monitoring, quality assurance services, and laboratory
analyses for the program between July 18, 1979 and September 5, 1979 by the
DOE/NV.
Animal Investigation Program
The basic responsibility of the Animal Investigation Program (AlP) is to
monitor the radionuclide burdens in, and damage to, domestic animals and
wildlife on and around the NTS. These analyses have not been completed, but
will be reported in the annual AlP report for 1979.
Animals sampled were deer, eagles, rabbits, chuckars, a horse, a coyote, a
bobcat, desert bighorn sheep, and cattlen Some of these animals were found
dead as road kills or from natural causes; others were collected and
sacrificed for sampling. Figure 30 shows where the animals were collected.
Animals were necropsied whenever possible. Samples of the adrenals, eyes,
heart, kidneys, liver, lungs, muscle, spleeo, thyroid, gonads, and gross
lesions were collected for histopathological evaluation if post mortem change
had not occurred. Tissues from large animals collected for radioanalysis
included liver, lung, tracheobrochial lymph node, muscle, thyroid, blood,
kidney, fetus, and bone samples from the samples from the femur or hock.
Rumen or stomach contents were also taken for radioanalysis. In small
animals, bone from the entire skeleton, muscle, skin, entire gastrointestinal
tract, and composited internal organs, included liver, lungs, kidneys, and
spleen, were collected for radioanalysis.
Soft tissues and rumen contents werp. analyzed for gamma emitters. Tissue
water from blood was analyzed for tritium. If blood was not available a soft
30
-------
tissue was substituted.
plutonium-238,239.
A sizeable mule deer herd described by Smith et al. (1978) resides in the
mountainous regions of the NTS during the summer. If they move to
unrestricted lands, these deer may be h~nted by members of the public. A
study designed to determine migration patterns of the herd through tracking
individual deer outfitted with collars containing miniature radio transmitters
was begun in 1975 and continued through 1979.
Bone was analyzed for strontium-89,90 and
During the summer and fall of 1979, 11 mule deer were captured either by
the chemical restraint of free-ranging animals (Smith et al. 1978) or by
trapping (Giles 1979). These deer were outfitted with radiotransmitter
collars, ear tags, and reflective markers suspended from the collar. These 11
newly installed transmitters brought to 25 the total number of working
transmitters in the field (14 from previous years). Laboratory personnel
monitored the movements of the deer weekly with hand-held receivers and
directional antenna. Thirteen other deer were captured but were unsuitable
for collaring and were released after visible markers had been attached.
Offsite Human Surveillannce Program
During 1979, the Offsite Human Surveillance Program continued to determine
levels of radionuclides in families residing around the NTS. Whole-body
counts and phYsical examinations are performed semiannually to determine
levels of radioactivity in the body and to document any physical changes that
might be attributed to the effects of chronic exposure to radiation.
Currently, 56 individuals from 19 families participate in the program.
The geographical locations of the participating families are shown in
Figure 31. These families travel to the EMSL-LV, where a whole-body count of
each person is performed to determine the body burden of gamma-emitting
radionuclides. A short medical history, complete blood count, urinalysis and
a thyroid profile are obtained for each individual, and each receives a
physical examination.
The results of each whole-body count are provided to the families
immediately after counting is completed. Results from the blood analyses,
urinalysis and physical examinations are sent to the families at a later date.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
A quality assurance program is carried out on sampling and radioanalytical
procedures to assure that data from these procedures will be valid. This
program includes instrumental quality control procedures, the analysis of
replicate samples to measure precision, and the analysis of cross-check
samples obtained from an independent l~boratory to measure accuracy.
Radioanalytical counting systems and TLD systems are calibrated using
radionuclide standards that are traceable to the National Bureau of Standards
31
-------
(NBS). These standards are obtained from the Quality Assurance Division at
EMSL-lV or from NBS. Each standard source used for TLD calibrations is
periodically checked for accuracy in accordance with procedures traceable to
NBS. The most recent such determination was performed in October 1979.
To determine accuracy of the data obtained from the TLD systems,
dosimeters are periodically submitted to the University of Texas School of
Public Health for intercomparisons of environmental dosimeters. Dosimeters
were submitted to the Fourth International Intercomparison of Environmental
Dosimeters in January 1979 (Table 4).
TABLE 4. SUMMARY RESULTS OF THE FOURTH INTERNATIONAL
INTERCOMPARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL DOSIMETERS
Quant ity
Mean
Standa rd
Deviation
Remarks
Summary of "low" laboratory results (mR):
EMSL-LV dosimeters
All dosimeters (121)
Calculated exposure
11.1
12.0
12.2
0.8
3.8
1.2
Summary of "high" laboratory results (mR):
EMSL-LV dosimeters
All dosimeters (122)
Calculated exposure
43.1
43.9
45.8
Summary of fi el d results (mR):
EMSL-LV dosimeters
All dosimeters (120)
Measured exposure
14.3
16.0
14.1
3.2
6.6
4.6
1.1
4.5
0.7
EMSL-LV results 8% lower than
the mean for all participants
and 9% lower than the calcu-
lated exposure.
EMSL-LV results 2% lower than
the mean for all participants
and 6% lower than the calcu-
lated exposure.
EMSL-LV results 11% lower than
the mean for all participants
and 1% higher than the
measured exposure.
A study to determine the response of the TLD's over a range of energies
performed in 1974 w~s repeated in 1979. TLD's exposed by the NBS were read
out at.the.EMSL-LV 1~ t~e usua~ manner. The results for this intercomparison,
shown 1n F1gure 32, 1nd1cate llttle or no change in energy dependence from one
year to the other. All TLD measurements are in conformance with standards
proposed by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI 1975).
32
-------
Instrument quality control charts are used to assure that instrument
background measurements and the response of laboratory instruments to a
reference standard are within required limits.
Precision of the results, as influenced by sampling and analytical errors,
is estimated through a program of replicate analysis and duplicate sampling.
Approximately 20 percent of all samples are used to determine sampling and
analytical error. About 10 percent of the samples are collected in duplicate
and analyzed to obtain an estimate of sampling and analytical error
(Appendix A). An additional 10 percent of the samples are split in the
laboratory to obtain an estimate of the analytical error. For the TLD
Network, six replicate exposures are made (from the six chips) at each
station. Estimates of the total error in precision are made from the
variances of these replicates (Appendix Table A-3).
Accuracy determinations are made by the analysis of intercomparison
samples provided by the Quality Assurance Division, EMSL-LV (EPA 1979). These
intercomparison samples consist of simulated environmental samples containing
known amounts of one or more radionuclides. The intercomparison samples are
analyzed, and the results sent to the Quality Assurance Division for
statistical analysis and comparison with the known value and analytical values
obtained by other participating laboratories. These intercomparisons are
performed bimonthly, quarterly, or semiannually, depending upon the type of
sample. The results of the analyses of these cross-check samples for 1979 are
summarized in the (Appendix Table A-4).
33
-------
Carlsbad
.
Carlsbad City Well #7
Loving City Well #2.
EPA Well #6.
EPA Well #9. .
EPA Well #10. EPA Well #8
~
r
. Pecos River
Pumping Station Well #1
Scale in Miles
o 5 10
~II
o : 6 10 15
1/80 Scale in Kilometers
(BSurface Ground Zero
A On-Site Water Sampling Locations
. Off-Site Water Sampling Locations
New Mexico / ~~g
/~ SGZe
~
,--
--
-- -Eddy County
Location Maps
Figure 17. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling sites
for Projects Gnome and Coach, Carlsbad, New Mexico.
34
-------
"... .,£hurchill Co,::,n'y
Mineral County
Fallon
<.t.'
o~~
~
~
"1-
~
I
Frenchman
Hunts Station.
.Flowing Well
8H-3
EB SGZ
.HS-1
-
-
-
-
Scale in Miles
r 5 10
",. I I I
o 5 10 15
1/80 Scale in Kilometers
-----~
*---- -Churchill
Nevada County
E9Surface Ground Zero
. Water Sampling Locations
Figure 18.
Location Maps
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Project Shoal, Fallon, Nevada.
35
."
-------
~
I
Bryant. . Lower Little Creek 11
B. Chambliss. ~SGZ
~Speights .R.L.,Anderson
M L .W. Daniels Jr. Purvis
. owe
B .11 .R. Ready
axtervi e
Well Ascot 2.
North Lumberton.
59
Scale in Miles
o 5 10 15
~
o 5 10 15 20 25
1/80 Scale in Kilometers
EBSurface Ground Zero
. Water Sampling Stations
Location Maps
Figure 19. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Projects Dribble and Miracle Play, vicinity of
Tatum Salt Dome, Mississippi.
36
-------
.. -..
, ,
, .
, .
. '
~ ,.,' '.'.. I
IZJ . . .
o . . .
«: . '.'-
" . .,
~cV:' .)-.
'V .' ..
tt;-... I,' ...
~.. . -.. ~
c,if'J... '. ~
~... Half Moon Creek
~ '
.S" ..
;:s. .8
o~..'
.'
,
,
,
.
,
.
,
.
.
,
.
,
.
,
,
,
,
,
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-.. .....
~
1
Well HT -2C
Scale in Feet
~oo
o 100 200 300 400 500 600
1/80 Scale in Meters
EeSurface Ground Zero
. Water Sampling Locations
Well HT-1.
(plugged 6/79)
"&.0..,
.. -
Half Moon Creek
SGZ _overflOW)".
,./\, . .
.. '-. 8.
1\....:..,., '.
r, .
~ \... :
( , .
'-
~.;"", :,.: ee""~'
, ' G (} .'
Well HT- '" eo,,: rantham.,'
: .8 .-..-........."
Well I-IT-4 ) ..'
, .
, .
f ...-
" . . ..
.........1'.....
,I
\.
\
t)
fl!:
vJ
f"
j/
~I
1t1,
.::r'
I
.
Location Maps
Figure 20. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Projects Dribble and Miracle Play, Tatum Salt
Dome, Mississippi.
37
-------
.HMH-6
HMH-4
,
\
.
"
"
"
'I
"
"
-..)
./..
./
/"
l. /.,
. i .,/'
./
HMH-~.. ~
~ -., ,,~
.' /."
-..- -."
.,... -.---- --
."--",,,.--
."",.--",..---
- -
N ---
~-
j
Scale in Feet
100 200 300
I~
50 100
Scale in Meters
o
I
o
1/80
EaSurface Ground Zero
. Water Sampling Locations
\
"'
.
. J
HMH-5 "" '-..
"" '.
,,"" ""-""",
" " ",
"" " '. t
,,~ \~
"" ;~
~" ~o
,~ ~o
I \?
'. C).
.HMH-10 '~1'
\
~alf Moon Creek /
Overflow ..
.HMH-1 (
PS-3 (plugge 6/79) \
SGZ ~
.HMH-2 \
. .HMH-9 l
HMH~1 (
\
'\
.
\
.
.
,
.
.
HMH-8
.HMH-7
Location Maps
Figure 21. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling sites
for Projects Dribble and Miracle Play, Tatum Dome, Mississippi.
38
-------
. Windmill #2
EPNG Well 10-36 8r\
'11 SGZ
.Cave Spring
. Arnold Rn.
Lower Burro Canyon.
~
I
8
- - -I
5
-- -e
E9SGZ
........
....,
'.....
New Mexico
Rio Arriba County
Scale in Kilometers
o
r-
o
1/80 Scale in Miles
EB Surface Ground Zero
. Water Sampling Locations
Location Maps
Figure 22. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling sites
for Project Gasbuggy, Rio Arriba County, New Mexico.
39
-------
.Aifle
,..., ,.-'-
,_..., "
Potter An. ,
-- ,
..Aulison ,
---I -.....~~
"
----~ ~
"'-Sefcovic An.
- -~I"'r. Hay';ard An.
, --
,I ,
. I "Battlement Creek
! A. Gardner An.' .fER Test Well
T J mPring
I/ID
Scale in Miles
o 5
~-~
o 8
Scale in Kilometers
Colorado
-
---------
---------
Garfield County
E9 Surface Ground Zero
. Water Sampling Locations
1/80
Location Maps
Figure 23. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Project Rulison, Rulison, Colorado.
40
-------
~
I
I
I
I
~
SGZ~HTH 2
'11 HTH 1
\
,
I
,
" ",
" I
/" I
" I
, ,," I
I - "1
'-" '-, ,,/ I
I ~-,~ " \
, ',;," ,
',.,;' \
\ Six-Mile Well.'
I
,
I
I
I
,
I
,
I
I
,
I
I
I
I
~
I
I
,
I
. Jim Bias Well
(Blue Jay Springs)
o
I j
o 5
1/80 Scale in Kilometers
EaSurface Ground Zero
. Water Sampling Locations
Scale in Miles
/~
1 Ny~r
~
--
--
5
~
10
Nevada /
/
/
Figure 24. Long-Tenm Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling sites
for Faultless Event, Central Nevada Test Area. (No samples
were collected during 1979; collection will resume in 1980.)
41
-------
CER-4
Fawn Cr. No.3
~
I
--
Rio Blanco County
- -
Garfield County
---
---
--
-----
-
Scale in Miles
o
~
o
1/80 Scale in Kilometers
ED Surface Ground Zero 0 Water Well (Sampled}
. Artesian Well A Spring (Flumed & Sampled)
o Windmill . Stream
5
.
8
..
Colorado
-~
Rio Blanco County
Location Maps
Figure 25. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Project Rio Blanco, Rio Blanco County, Colorado.
42
-------
-- ---
-
Bering Sea
Sand Beach Cove
AEC- 1. i . I
; ! 1 ~
~ !e~(;?
r./ tl .../
iIJ. -
tit 0J ~
-. 7
-------
~
t!6@
~~ .
1'),"
").
-S>o
~O"
~
Scale in Feet
o 600 1200
I I ~
I
o 200 400
1/80 Scale in Meters
/
/
Figure 27. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Project Milrow, Amchitka Island, Alaska.
e>
~.~._.-
Figure 28. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling
sites for Project Longshot. Amchitka Island, Alaska.
44
-------
~
-------
~
1-
=:;= Pacific Ocean
Scale in Miles
0 5 10
'-I I I I
o 5 10
1/80 Scale in Kilometers
-
-
~Duck Cove Cr.
~Milrow
E9Surface Ground Zero
. Sampling Locations
~~ase~ -
Kirilof Point
Bering Sea
Constantine Harbor
Engineer Road
Engineer's Pit
~
Baker Runway
South Hangar
Maintenance Building
Scale in Miles
o 1
~II
o 1
1/80 Scale in Kilometers
Pacific Ocean ~
. Sampling Locations
Figure 29. Background sampling sites for the Long-Term Hydrological
Monitoring Program on Amchitka Island, Alaska. (Base camp area
is shown in larger scale in the lower portion of the figure.)
45
-------
~
I
"
10
9
18
11
Desen Game
Range
Scale in Miles
o 5 10
~~
o 5 10 16 20
1/80 Scale in Kilometers
. Animal Collection Site
Las Vegas
(65 miles from Mercury)
Figure 30.
Wildlife collection sites on the Nevada Test Site.
46
-------
. Wells
. Winnemucca
QZ .Elko
:: CD
0' ~
2. i
III
~~
~ III
o.~
III
. Reno . Austin
.Ely
Tonopah..
~
I
Scale in Miles
o 50 100
.,. ..,.....J I I
o 50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
150
r-
200
1/80
. Resident, Counted
Figure 31.
.
.
.
..
"
. .
.
.
.
.
Cedar City
.
.
.
Alamo.
St. George
.
.
z~
CD _.
~ ~
0. ::J
III III
.
Las Vegas
Location of residents participating in the Offsite
Human Surveillance Program.
47
-------
tJ)
u
r--
M
0
-
>-
-
'S;
'':;
'(jj 0.1
c:
Q)
(/)
Q)
>
'':;
m
Q)
a:
1.0
.-1974
&---1979
0.01
0.010
0.10
1.0
Figure 32.
Photon Energy (Mev)
Energy response of thennoluminescent dosimeters.
48
-------
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
No test-re~ated radioactivity from the nuclear testing programs conducted
at the NTS durlng 1979 was measured offsite in air, milk, or water. The only
radioactivity observed from non-NTS sites of past underground nuclear tests
was from small amounts of tritium found in water samples from the Project
Dribble site in Mississippi and the Project Long Shot site in Alaska. The
concentrations of tritium in these samples were no greater than 10 percent of
the Concentration Guide. These waters are not used for human consumption and
would not constitute a health hazard. Results from the offsite Radiological
Safety Program are discussed below and specific data are presented in the
Appendix tables.
AIR SURVEILLANCE NETWORK
During 1979, no airborne radioactivity related to the underground testing
program at the NTS was detected on any sample from the Network. However,
naturally occurring beryllium-7 and the fission products zirconium-95,
cesium-137, barium-140, and cerium-144 from past nuclear tests conducted by
the People's Republic of China were detected on air filters. Appendix Tables
B-1 and B-2 summarize data from these samples.
Appendix Table B-3 shows the average concentration of plutonium-239 in
airborne particulates collected at sp.lected stations of the Air Surveillance
Network. The particulate samples were collected on filters and composited
quarterly prior to analysis. The four Nevada stations represent air samples
collected near the NTS (Figure 10), while the other three stations represent
remote locations (Figure 11).
All observed concentrations of plutonium-239 were attributed to worldwide
fallout. The plutonium concentrations shown for 1978 and 1979 are generally
within the same range as those measurements for the northern hemisphere
reported for 1977 and 1978 by Toonkel (1980) except for one high concentration
observed at Rachel, Nevada, (1.1 x 10-16 ~Ci/ml) during the second quarter
of 1979 and one high value observed at Diablo, Nevada, (1.0 x 10-16 ~Ci/ml)
during the fourth quarter of 1978. However, both of these values are less
than 0.04 percent of the Concentration Guide (Appendix C) for exposure to the
general public and are within a factor of two of the highest concentrations
observed by Toonkel in the United States. Differences of a factor of two have
been observed for air samples in the Duplicate Sampling Program (Appendix
Table A-3).
49
-------
NOBLE GAS AND TRITIUM SURVEILLANCE NETWORK
Maximum concentrations of krypton-85 for the stations in the Noble Gas and
Tritium Surveillance Network ranged from 1.1 x 10-11 ~Ci/ml to 3.3 x 10-11
~Ci/ml (Appendix Table B-3). As shown in Figure 33, the maximum
concentrations for the Network stations combined follow a lognormal
distribution with a geometric mean of 1.88 x 10-11 ~Ci/ml and a geometric
deviation of 1.16. As the expected geometric standard deviation of the
krypton-85 measurements attributed to sampling, analytical, and counting
errors was determined to be 1.1 from the duplicate sampling program (Appendix
A), the variation in the krypton..85 concentrations throughout the Network
appears to be caused primarily by the measurement errors.
The annual average concentrations at each station were calculated over the
time period sampled using all values, including those less than the MDC. All
concentrations of krypton-85, xenon..133, and tritium listed in Appendix
Table B-3 are expressed in ~Ci/ml of air. Since the tritium concentration in
air varies by factors of 15 to 20 while the concentrations in ~Ci/ml of
atmospheric moisture vary by factors of up to about 7, the tritium
concentration in ~Ci per ml of atmospheric moisture is also given in Appendix
Table B-3 as a more reliable indicator.
The average concentration of krypton-85 for the year at all stations was
the same (1.9 x 10-11 ~Ci/ml), except for the concentration at BJY
(2.2 x 10-11 ~Ci/ml), which was significantly different from the Network
average at the 95 percent confidence level. The average concentration at this
station has been the highest in the Network more often than at any other
station, probably because of its central location on the NTS where seepage of
the radioactive noble gases from past underground nuclear detonations is
suspected. As shown in Table 5 and Figure 34, the average concentration of
krypton-85 for the Network has gradually increased since sampling began in
1972. This increase, observed at all stations, probably reflects the
worldwide increase in ambient concentrations resulting from the proliferation
of nuclear technology.
Xenon-133 was detected only on the NTS. If the highest concentration
measured had persisted throughout the year, the occupational exposure would
have been less than 0.01 percent of the CG (Appendix C).
As in the past, tritium as HTO in atmospheric moisture samples was
generally at background concentrations; i.e., below the MDC of approximately
3 x 10-7 ~Ci/ml at all off-NTS stations and at the on-NTS stations at
Mercury, Area 400, and Area 51. Occasional increased concentrations were
observed at Area 400 and Area 51. The on-NTS stations at Area 15, BJY, and
Area 12 had concentrations consistently above background; the concentration
averages for these stations were factors of 5 to 65 times the average for all
off-NTS stations.
50
-------
10.0
9.0
E 8.0
"- 7.0
o 6.0
::!. 5.0
52 4.0
x
1979
Geometric Mean = 1.88 x 10-11 uCi/ml
Geometric Standard Deviation = 1.16
c'
o
.~
co
...
...
c
~
c
o
u
...
~
'"
'"
3.0
5
95
2.0
Cumulative Frequency, %
Figure 33.
Distribution of Network concentrations of krypton-85.
4.0
E
"-
o
::!..
3.0
-
b
....
x
e,j
c
o
U
~
'"
'"
2.0
(1)
CJ)
co
...
~
-------
TABLE 5. ANNUAL AVERAGE KRYPTON-85 CONCENTRATIONS IN AIR, 1972-1979
85Kr Concentrations (xl0-11 ~Ci/ml)
Sampl i ng 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979
Locations
Beatty, Nev. 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.9 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.9
Diablo & Rachel, Nev.* 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.9 2.0 1.9
Hiko, Nev. 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.7 1.7 1.9 2.0 1.9
Indian Springs, Nev. 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.9
NTS, Mercury, Nev. 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.8 1.9 2.0 1.0 1.9
NTS, Area 51, Nev. 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.8 2.0 1.9 2.0 1.9
NTS, BJ Y, Nev. 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.2
NTS, Area 12, Nev. 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.8 2.0 1.9 2.0 1.9
Tonopah, Nev. 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.7 1.9 1.9 2.0 1.8
Las Vegas, Nev.* 1.6 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.8 2.0 2.0
Death Valley, Calif.* 1.6 1.5 1.8 1.7 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.9
NTS, Area 15, Nev.t 1.9
NTS, Area 400, Nev.t 1.8
Lathrop Wells, Nev.t 1.9
Network Average 1.6 1.6 1.8 1.8 1.9 2.0 2.0 1.9
*Removed 1979
tNew stations 1979
*Station at Diablo was moved to Rachel i n Ma rc h 1979.
THERMOLUMINESCENT DOSIMETRY NETWORK
During 1979 none of the stations in the Network received an exposure above
background; however, a net exposure was recorded for three consecutive
quarters on dosimeters worn by one offsite resident. We investigated and
found that the resident had placed the TLD next to a radium-dial alann clock
rather than wearing it as instructed. The net exposure was attributed to the
proximity of the TLD to the clock.
Appendix Table B-5 lists the maximum, minimum, and average dose equivalent
rate (mrem/day) measured at each station in the Network during 1979. No
allowance was made for the small additional exposure due to the neutron
component of the cosmic ray spectrum. No station exhibited an exposure in
excess of background.
Table 6 shows that the average annual dose rate for the Dosimetry Network
is consistent with the Network average established in 1975. The general trend
is decreasing from 1971 to 1975 and is leveling off since 1975, except for a
high bias in the 1977 results attributed to mechanical readout problems. The
trend shown by the Network average is indicative of the trend exhibited by
individual stations.
52
-------
TABLE 6. DOSIMETRY NETWORK SUMMARY
FOR THE YEARS 1971-1979
Environmental Radiation Dose Rate
(mrem/y)
Year
Average
Maximum
Minimum
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
250
200
180
160
140
140
170
150
140
102
84
80
62
51
51
60
50
49
160
144
123
114
94
94
101
95
92
MILK SURVEILLANCE NETWORK
The analytical results for the 1979 MSN samples are summarized in Appendix
Table B-6, where the maximum, minimum, and average concentrations of tritium,
strontium-89, and strontium-90, in samples collected during 1979 are shown for
each sampling location. The average radionuclide concentrations for the MSN
and the SMSN listed in Table 7 are comparable.
TABLE 7. SUMMARY OF RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS FOR MILK SURVEILLANCE
NETWORK AND STANDBY MILK SURVEILLANCE NETWORK
Concentrations (xl0-9 ~Ci/ml)
No. of Cmin Cavg
Network Radionuclide Samples Cmax
MSN 3H 6 19400 <400 <400
89Sr 21 <50 <2 <10
90Sr 21 9 <1 <3
SMSN 3H 11 <400 <400 <400
89S-r 11 <40 <20 <20
90Sr 11 3.6 <1 <2
53
-------
LONG-TERM HYDROLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM
Table 8 lists the locations at which water samples were found to contain
man-made radioactivity. Radioactivity in samples collected at these lecations
have been reported previously, except for Well UE7ns, which was added to this
program in 1979. The data for all samples analyzed are compiled in Appendix
Tables B-7 through B-11 and compared to the CGls in Appendix C.
None of the radionuclide concentrations found at the locations listed in
Table 8 are expected to result in radiation exposures to residents in the
areas where the samples were collected. Well C, Test Well B, and Well UE7ns
are located on the NTS and are not used for drinking water. USGS Wells 4 and
8 on private land at the Project Gnome site are closed and locked to prevent
their use. The Half-Moon Creek overflow and the HMH holes at the Project
Dribble site are about 1 mile from the nearest residence and are not sources
of drinking water for humans, although the Half-Moon Creek overflow is used by
cattle grazing in the area. The shallow wells at the Project Long Shot site
are in an isolated location and are not sources of drinking water.
To make certain that the subsurface tritium contamination near the Project
Dribble site has not entered an aquifer used by offsite residents, further
drilling and water sampling is planned by representatives of the State of
Mississippi, the U.S. Department of Energy, and the EPA.
We observed no increase in either gross alpha or gross beta radioactivity
in samples analyzed for this activity. The concentrations ranged from
<2 x 10-9 to <1 X 10-7 ~Ci gross alpha per milliliter and from <3 x 10-9
to <8 X 10-8 ~Ci gross beta per milliliter.
ANIMAL INVESTIGATION PROGRAM
No animal damage claims were made during 1979. Annual reports for the
Animal Investigation Program are published separately.
OFFSITE HUMAN SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM
During 1979 a total of 465 whole body and 556 phoswich counts were
performe~ on people. Cesium-137 was detected by the NaI(Tl) whole body
counter ln 79 out of 92 whole body measurements. The maximum, minimum, and
average body ~urd~ns for this radionuclide were 3.0 x 10-8, <0.5 X 10-9,
and 1.4 x 10- ~Cl/g body weight, respectively, which were similar to last
year's concentrations (maximum of 3.4 x 10-8 ~Ci/g; minimum of
<5.0 x 10-9; and average of 1.3 x 10-8 ~Ci/g body weight).
No abnormal hematological findings or thyroid profiles were observed that
could be attributed to past or present NTS testing operations.
54
-------
TABLE 8. WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS WHERE SAMPLES WERE FOUND TO CONTAIN
MANMADE RADIOACTIVITY
Concentration % of
Sampling Type of Cone.
Location Radi oact i vity (x10_9 jJCi/ml) Guide
NTS, Well C 3H 34-170* <0.01
NTS, Test Well B 3H 140-180* <0.01
NTS, Well UE7ns 3H 13-3,700* <0.2
Project Gnome, USGS Well 4 Gross a 23,000
3H 580,000 20
90Sr 14,000 5,000
Project Gnome, USGS Well 8 Gross a 14,000
3H 510,000 20
90Sr 13,000 4,000
137CS 30 0.2
Project Dribble, 3H
Wells HMH-1 through 11 360-320,000* 0.01-10
Project Dribble, Well PS-3 3H 110 <0.01
Project Dribble, 3H
Half-Moon Creek overflow 530-1,700 0.2-0.06
Project Long Shot, 3H 0.01
We 11 WL-2 390
Project Long Shot, 3H 300 0.01
EPA, Well 1
Project Long Shot, 3H 4,100 0.1
Well GZ, No. 1
Project Long Shot, 3H 580 0.02
We 11 GZ, No.2
Project Long Shot, 3H 1,200 0.04
Mud Pit, No.1
Project Long Shot, 3H 1,200 0.04
Mud Pit, No.2
Project Long Shot, 3H 1,700 0.06
Mud Pit, No.3
.. --
*Concentration range
55
-------
The concentrations of tritium in urine samples from p-eople (average of
7.6 x 10-7 ~Ci/ml with a range of <3.0 x 10-7 to 5.3 X 10-6 ~Ci/ml) were
within the range of background concentrations normally observed in surface
waters or in atmospheric moisture. The single high level (5.3 x 10-6
~Ci/ml) could have resulted from a tritiated luminous dial watch worn by the
subject.
DOSE ASSESSMENT
Dose assessment calculations are not included in this report because
detectable levels of radioactivity from the 1979 nuclear testing program at
the NTS were not observed offsite by any of the monitoring networks. Residual
radioactivity was observed in waters from off-NTS wells known to be
contaminated during past nuclear tests at the Project Dribble Site near
Hattiesburg, Mississippi, and at the Project Long Shot Site on Amchitka
Island, Alaska. However, the waters from these contaminated wells are not
used for drinking purposes.
56
-------
REFERENCES
ANSI. 1975. "American National Standard Performance Testing and
Specifications for Thermoluminescent Dosimetry (Environmental
Applications)." ANSI N545-1975. American National Standards
Inc., New York, New York.
Procedural
Inst itute,
California.
1979.
Personal communication with California county agents.
DOE. .1978. "Spe~ial Study, Tat~m Dome Test Site, Lamar County, Mississippi,
Flnal Report. NVO-200. U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations
Office, Las Vegas, Nevada.
DOE. 1979. "Tatum Dome Drilling and Radiological Monitoring Plan." NVO-20S.
U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office. Las Vegas, Nevada.
Ecke 1, E. B., ed. 1968. "Nevada Test Site." Memoi r 110.
Society of America, Inc., Boulder, Colorado.
The Geological
EPA. 1979. "Envi ronmental Radi oact i vity Laboratory Intercompari son Studi es
Program 1978-1979." EPA-600j4-78-032. E.nvironmental Monitoring and
Support Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas,
Nevada. (Available from U.S. Department of Commerce, NTIS, Springfield,
VA 22161)
ERDA. 1974. ERDA Manual, Chapter 0513, "Effluent and Environmental
Monitoring and Reporting." U.S. Energy Research and Development
Administration, Washington, D.C.
ERDA. 1977. "Final Environmental Impact Statement, Nye County, Nevada."
ERDA-1551. U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration, Nevada
Operations Office, Las Vegas, Nevada. (Available from U.S. Department of
Commerce, NTIS, Springfield, VA 22161)
Gi 1 es, K. R. 1979. "A Summer Trappi ng Method for Mul e Deer."
EMSL-LV-0539-27. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental
Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Houghton, J. G., C. M. Sakamoto, and R. O. Gifford. 1975. "Nevada's Weather
and Climate." Special Publication 2. Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology,
Mackay School of Mines, University of Nevada, Reno, Nevada. pp. 69-74.
National Park Service. 1980. Personal communication with Chief Ranger R.
Ranier, Death Valley National Monument, Death Valley, California.
57
-------
Nevada Department of Agriculture. 1978. "Nevada Agricultural Statistics
1978. " Nevada Crop and Livestock Report i ng Service, Reno, Nevada.
Quiring, Ralph E. 1968. "C1 imato1ogica1 Data, Nevada Test Site, Nuclear
Rocket Development Station (NRDS)." ERLTM-ARL-7. ESSA Research
Laboratories, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Smith, D. D., K. R. Giles, D. E. Bernhardt, and K. W. Brown. 1978.. "Animal
Investigation Program 1976 Annual Report, Nevada Test Site and Vicinity."
EMSL-LV-0539-20. u.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental
Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Toonke1, L. E. 1980. "Appendi x to Envi ronmenta 1 Measurements Laboratory.
Environmental Quarterly." EML-371 Appendix, UC--ll. Environmental
Measurements Laboratory. U. S. Department of Energy. New York, N. Y.
10014.
Utah Department of P,griculture. 1979. "Utah Agricultural Statistics, 1978."
State of Utah Department of Agriculture, Salt Lake City, Utah.
58
-------
APPENDIX A.
SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
AND QUALITY ASSURANCE
ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
The procedures for analyzing samples collected for offsite surveillance,
described by Johns et al. in IIRadiochemical Analytical Procedures for Analyses
of Environmental Samplesll (EMSL-LV-0539-17, pubslished by the EMSL-LV in 1979)
are summarized in Table A-I.
TABLE A-I. SUMMARY OF ANAL YTI CAL PROCEDURES
Counting Sample Approximate
Type of Analytical Period Ana lyt i ca I Size Detect ion
Analysis* Equipment (min) Procedures (liter) L imit**
NaI(Tl) Gamma spectro- 10 min. for Radionuclide 700-1200 m3 For air cc 4xl0-14
Spectrometry meter with air charcoal concentra- for air cc \ACI/ml.
Na I d~tector cartrijges tions quan- samples.
calibrated at tified from
10 keY per g4lll1ll1 spec-
channel (0.05- tral datil by
2.0 MeY range). computer
us i ng a I east
squares
technique.
IG & Ge (Li) Gamma spectro- Individual Radionucllde Same as For routine milk
gamma meter with IG or ai r f11 t~rs concent rat i on above. and water generally,
S pect romet ry Ge(L i) detector 30 min quantified -lxl0-8 \ACi/ml for
calibrated at 0.5 air filter from gamma most common fallout
keY/channel (0.4 composites. spectral data radionuclides in a
to 2 MeY range) -1200 min. by on-li ne simple spectrum.
individual detec- 100 mi n for computer pro- Filters, for Long-
tor efficiencies milk, water, gram. Radio- Tenn Hydro. sus-
ranging from Long-1'enn nucl ides In air pended solids, 6.0x
'" 15% to 35%. Hydro, sus- fil ter compos ite 10-9\ACI/ml.
pended solids. samples ue
identified only.
89-90Sr Low-background 50 Chemical 1.0 89Sr . 5xlO-9
thin-window, separat 10n by \ACi/ml
gas-flow pro- ion exchange. gOSr . 2xl0-9
port i ona I Separated sam- \ACi/ml.
counter with a pI e counted
5.7 -an di ameter successively;
wi ndow (80 \Ag/cm2) activity cal-
culated by
s imul taneous
equations.
3H Automatic 200 Sample pre- 0.005 4xl0-7 IICi /ml
liquid pa red by
scintillation dl st illat Ion.
counter with
output printer.
(continued)
59
-------
TABLE A-I.
Continued
Type of
Analysis*
3H Enrichment
(Long-Term
Hydrological
Sampl es)
238,239pu
234,235,238U
226Ra
Gross alpha
Gross beta
in liquid
sampl es
Gross beta
on air
filters
85Kr, 133Xe
CH3T
Analytical
Equi pment
Automatic
sci nt 111 at ion
counter with
output pri nter.
Alpha spectro-
meter with 450
l11li2, 300-~m
depl etion depth,
silicon surface
barrier detectors
ope rat ed in
vacuum chambers.
Single channel
ana lyzer
coupled to
P.M. tube
detector.
Low-background
thin-window,
gas- flow pro-
port i ona 1
counter with a
5.7-cm-diameter
window (80 ~g/
em2).
Low-level end
window, gas
flow propor-
tional counter
with a 12.7-
em-diameter
wi ndow (100
mg/cm2) .
Automat i c
liquid scintil-
lation counter
with output
printer.
Counting
Period
(min)
200
Analytical
Procedures
Sample concen- 0.25
trated by
electrolysis
followed by
dist 111at ion.
Sample is acid 1.0
di gest
-------
REPLICATE SAMPLING PROGRAM
The replicate sampling program was initiated for the purpose of routinely
assessing the errors due to sam~ing, analysis and counting of sam~es
obtained from the surveillance networks maintained around the Nevada Test Site
and other sites designated by the Nevada Operations Office, Department of
Energy .
The program involved the collection and analysis of replicate samples from
the Air Surveillance Net\'.Ork (ASN), the Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance
Network (NGTSN), the Dosimetry Network and the Standby Mi lk Surveillance
Network (SMSN). Due to difficulties anticipated in obtaining sufficient
quantities of milk for duplicate sanples from the Milk Surveillance Network,
duplicate samples \\ere collected during the annual activation of the SMSN.
TABLE A-2.
SAMPLES AND ANALYSES FOR REPLICATE SAMPLING PROGRAM*
Set s of
Number of Samples Repl i cate Number of
Surveillance Sampl i ng Co 11 ected Sampl es Repl icates Sampl e
Network Locations Per Year Co 11 ected Per Set Ana ly s is
ASN 121 8,300 533 2 Gross t3
Y Spect romet ry
NGTSN 11 572 52 2 85Kr, 3H, HTO,
HT, H20
Dos imet ry 78 212 212 4-6 External
SMSN 150 150 -30 2 40K
L TJ-t.1P 134 254 ""3 5 2 Gross ex, G ros s t3,
3H
*Only the Dosimetry Network had a sufficient number of replicate samples
during 1979. The duplicate sampnng results reported for all other net\'.Orks
a re for 1978.
At least 30 duplicate samples from each net\'.Ork \\ere collected and
analyzed over the report period. Since three thennolu~inescent (TLD~ cards
consisting of two TLD chips each are used at each statlOn of the,Doslmetry
Network, no addit i onal sanpl es \\ere necessary. Table A-2 summa rlzes the
sampling infonnation for each surveillance network.
Since the sampling distributions of each sample type appeared to be log
nOnTIa 1 from the revi ew of cumul at ive frequency plots of the results, the
variance of each set of replicate sample results was estirreted from the
1 oga rithns of the result sin each set.
61
-------
The variance, S2, of each set of replicate TLD results (n=6) was estimated
from the logarithms of the results by the standard expression
S2
=
n
L (xi - x)2/ (ni - 1)
i=l
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 duplicate sample
results. For small sample sizes, this estimate of the variance is
statistically efficient* and certainly more convenient to calculate 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 e$timate the
confidence interval of the expected population geometric variance for each
type of sample analysis. The expressions used are as follows:(2)
52 =
n
I (ni
i=l
n
l)sf / L (ni - 1)
i=l
n n
Lower Confidence Limit (LCL) = L (ni - 1)(52) / X2 0.995, L (ni - 1 )
i=l i=l
n n
Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) = L (ni - 1)(52) / X2 0.005, L (ni - 1)
i=1 i =1
where cr 2
LCL i cr 2 ~ UCL
= the true value of the population geometric variance
ni-1
= the degrees of freedom for n samples collected for the ith
replicate sample
= the expected geometric variance of the ith replicate sample
s~
1
52 =
the best estimate of sample geometric variance derived from the
variance estimates of all replicate samples (the expected value
of s 2 i S cr2).
*Snedecor, G. W., and W. G. Cochran. Statistical Methods.
University Press, Ames, Iowa. 6th Ed. 1967. pp. 39-47.
The Iowa State
62
-------
The 99% upper confidence limit for the total error (sampling + analytical
+ cou~ting errors) of the geometric mean of any group of samples collected
from a given network was then determined as the geometric mean +2.575.
The following table lists the expected geometric standard deviation and
its 99% upper confidence limit (UCL) for most analyses.
TABLE A-3.
UPPER CONFIDENCE LIMITS OF SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL/COUNTING
ERRORS*
Sets of Expected
Replicate Geometric 99% UCL
Surveillance Samples Stnd. Dev. of
Network Analysis Evaluated s Total Error
ASN Gross 8 533 2.03 6.2
7Be 86 1.46 2.6
131l 23 1.48 2.8
132Te 13 1.53 3.0
140Ba 28 1.50 2.8
144Ce 21 1.52 2.9
N GT SN 85Kr 44 1.088 1.2
3H 51 1.42 2.4
HTO 20 2.29 8.4
HT 21 2.84 15
Dos imetry Y (TLD) 212 1. 061 1.2
SMSN 40K 32 1.086 1.2
LTHMP Gross ex 38 1.55 3.1
Gross 8 27 1.29 1.9
3H (conv.) 36 1.12 1.3
3H (enrich.) 50 1.34 2.1
*Only the Dosimetry Network had a sufficient number of replicate samples
during 1979. The duplicate sampling results reported for all other networks
are for 1978.
INTERCOMPARISON STUDIES
Data from analysis of intercomparison samples are statistically analyzed
and compared with known values and values obtained from other participating
laboratories. A summary of the statistical analysis is given in Table A-4.
The 1979 analyses were within acceptable limits except for the strontium-90
analyses of milk. However, none of the analytical results differed from the
known values by more than 25 percent~
63
-------
TABLE A-4. 1979 QUALITY ASSURANCE INTERCOMPARISONS
Mean of Mean Range
Replicate Plus Nonnalized
Analyses Standard Known Deviation from:
to Error of Value
Analysis Month (x10-9 j.lCi Iml) Range (x10-9 j.lCi/ml) Grand Avg. Cone.
Gross a Jan 10 t 2 0.35 6 1.1 1.5
in water Mar 5 t 1 0.12 10 -1. 5 -1.6
Gross a Jan 15 t 3 0.71 16 -0.4 -0.2
in water Mar 8 t 1 0.24 16 -2.7 -2.7
3H in water Jan 1,167 t 1.5 0.36 1,250 -0.7 -0.6
Apr 2,233 t 58 0.17 2,270 -0.3 -0.2
Sep 13,130 t 318 0.91 13,200 0.2 -0.3
90Sr in water Jan 7 t 1 0.39 6 1.0 0.8
89Sr in water Jan 15 t 3 0.24 14 0.5 0.2
U in water Feb 34 t 3 0.74 35 0.1 -0.3
60Co in water Oct 6 t 2 0.35 6 -0.2 0.1
134(5 in water Oct 8 t 1 0.24 7 0.1 0.2
137(S in water Oct 11tO 0.0 11 -0.3 -0.0
13q in milk Jan 111 t 9 2.92 105 1.7 2.1
137CS in milk Jan 51 t 1 0.24 49 -0.2 0.6
140Ba in milk Jan <4 0
90Sr in milk Jan 8 t 2 . 2.10 19 -10.4 -12.7
89Sr in milk Jan 29 t 2 0.47 33 -0.1 -1.3
40K in mil k Jan 1,548 t 104 1. 76 1,560 1.1 -0.3
137Cs in
air filters Jan 9 t 1 0.24 6 0.4 1.0
(pCi Ifilter) Mar 32 t 2 0.35 21 2.9 3.7
1311 in water Apr 41 t 8 3.60 40 0.0 0.4
64
-------
APPENDIX B. DATA SUMMARY FOR MONITORING NETWORKS
TABLE B-1. 1979 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR AIR SURVEILLANCE NETWORK
ACTIVE STATIONS*
------- -- -
No. Type of Radioactivity Cone.
Sampl i ng Days Radio- (X10-12 ~Ci/ml)
Location Detected act i vity Cmax Cmin Cavg
Baker, Cali f. 8.3 7Be 0.29 0.12 0.11
Bishop, Calif. 7.0 7Be 0.43 0.31 0.21
Death Valley Jet., i32.9 7Be 1.9 0.13 0.12
Ca 1 i f. 5.0 137Cs 0.014 0.0087 <0.001
Furnace Creek, Calif. 139 . 4 7Be 1.03 0.084 0.11
Needles, Calif. 3.2 7Be 0.14 0.14 0.14
Ridyecrest, Calif. 5.0 7Be 0.29 0.26 0.23
Shoshone, Calif. 136.1 7Be 1.16 0.098 0.12
Alamo, Nev. 89.8 7Be 3.4 0.094 0.10
Beatty, Nev. 120.7 7Be 1.3 0.081 0.12
3.0 137Cs 0.013 0.013 <0.001
Blue Eagle Ranch, Nev. 113.9 7Be 1.3 0.11 0.14
3.0 95Zr 0.025 0.025 <0.001
5.0 137CS 0.022 0.020 <0.001
Blue Jay, Nev. 2.0 7Be 0.22 0.22 0.045
Caliente, Nev. 3.0 7Be 0.13 0.13 0.067
Angleworm Ranch, Nev. 3.8 7Be 0.48 0.48 0.19
(continued)
65
-------
TABLE B-1. Cont i nued
No. Type of Radioactivity Cone.
Sampling Days Radio- (xlO-12 J.lCi/ml t
Location Detected act ivity Cmax Cmin Cavg
D i ab 10, Nev. 4.1 7Be 0.16 0.16 0.062
Duckwater, Nev. 3.0 7Be 0.30 0.30 0.11
Eureka, Nev. 6.0 7Be 0.46 0.27 0.36
Fallini1s Ranch, Nev. 131.5 7Be 1.3 0.13 0.12
2.0 137CS 0.019 0.019 <0.001
Glendale, Nev. 94.5 7Be 1.2 0.12 0.11
3.0 137CS 0.016 0.016 <0.001
Goldfiel d, Nev. 82.1 7Be 1.1 0.15 0.090
6.0 137CS 0.042 0.017 <0.001
Area 51, NTS, Nev.t 96.8 7Be 0.84 0.10 0.13
2.0 137CS 0.037 0.037 <0.001
Hiko, Nev. 96.7 7Be 1.1 0.0066 0.094
Indian Springs, Nev. 58.9 7Be 1.0 0.078 0.069
Las Vegas, Nev. 116.5 7Be 1.5 0.088 <0.2
Lathrop Wells, Nev. 91.0 7Be 1.2 0.092 0.14
3.2 137CS 0.0084 0.0084 <0.001
Li da, Nev. 2.0 7Be 0.27 0.27 0.11
Lund, Nev. 2.0 7Be 0.34 0.34 0.14
Mesquite, Nev. 6.0 7Be 0.16 0.15 0.061
Nyala, Nev. 51.0 7Be 1.4 0.076 0.047
2.0 95Zr 0.0095 0.0095 <0.001
Pahrump, Nev. 112.8 7Be 1.2 0.062 0.097
Pioche, Nev. 5.0 7Be 0.37 0.19 0.14
(continued)
66
-------
TABLE B-1. Continued
No. Type of Radioactivity Conc.
Sampling Days Radio- (X10-12 }JCijml)
Location Detected activity Cmax Cmin Cavg
Scotty's Junction, Nev. 128.4 7Be 2.0 0.10 0.13
3.0 137CS 0.017 0.017 <0.001
Stone Cabin Ranch, Nev. 78.1 7Be 0.98 0.20 0.12
5.0 13 7Ce 0.12 0.067 0.0018
Sunnyside, Nev. 132.2 7Be 1.6 0.11 0.17
2.3 137CS 0.016 0.016 <0.001
Robison Trailer Park 74.7 7Be 2.8 0.13 0.15
Rachel, Nev.
Tonopah, Nev. 116.3 7Be 1.9 0.16 0.16
Tonopah Test Range, 110.0 7Be 1.6 0.14 0.14
Nev. 3.0 137CS 0.014 0.14 <0.001
3.0 144Ce 0.064 ~ 0.064 <0.001
Delta, Utah 52.7 7Be 3.4 ~ 0.17 0.13
2.0 137CS 0.031 0.031 <0.001
Garrison, Utah 2.0 7Be 0.38 0.38 0.051
St. George, Utah 72.1 7Be 1.0 0.12 0.074
7.2 137CS 0.085 0.032 0.0011
2.1 140 Ba 0.055 0.055 <0.001
* Those stations not reported here had samples indicating radioactivity
concentrations less than the MDC, which is approximately 4 x 10-14 }JCijml.
t Also known as Groom Lake.
67
-------
TABLE B-2.
1979 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR AIR SURVEILLANCE
NETWORK STANDBY STATIONS*
No. Type of Radioactivity Cone.
Sampl i ng Days Radio- (x10-12 ~Ci/ml)
Location Detected act ivity Cmax COlin Cavg
Wi n slow, A r i z. 2.0 1 40 Ba 0.046 0.046 0.023
Indio, Calif. 2.0 7Be 0'.23 0.23 0.23
Grand Junction, 6.1 7Be 0.28 0.22 0.11
Colo. 2.0 95 Zr 0.012 0.012 0.0017
Idaho Falls, 2.1 7 Be 0.42 0.42 0.42
Idaho
Mountain Horne, 2.0 7Be 0.31 0.31 0.15
Ida ho
Twin Falls, Idaho 2.0 7 Be 0.20 0.20 0.057
Sioux City, Iowa 3.0 7 Be 0.26 0.26 0.26
Monroe, La. 3.0 7 Be 0.17 0.17 0.17
Joplin, Mo. 2.9 7 Be 0.22 0.22 0.16
St. Joseph, Mo. 3.0 7 Be 0.22 0.22
Frenchman Sta., 1.9 7 Be 0.34 0.34 0.16
Nev.
Capitol Reef, Utah 2.0 1 40Ba 0.042 0.042 0.021
Logan, Utah 1.9 140Ba 0.051 0.051 0.051
Provo, Utah 1.9 7 Be 0.30 0.30 0.15
Seattle, Wash. 1.0 140 Ba 0.060 0.060 0.060
* Samples from stations not reported here contained less radioactivity
than the MDC of approximately 4 x 10-14 ~Ci/ml.
68
-------
TABLE B-3. AIR CONCENTRATIONS OF 239PU AT SELECTED AIR SURVEILLANCE
NETWORK STATIONS, 1978-1979
Sampling Period
On Off 239Pu Con-
Sampling Dates Sampl er centrat ion
Location Year Date Time Date Time Off (x10-18 ~Ci/ml)
Rachel, 1978 0401 1235 0703 1830 5/12-15, 16-24 19
Nevada 0703 1835 1002 1920 56
1002 1920 0102 1530 10/13-16; 11/4-8 13
1979 0102 1530 0402 1400 2/5-7. 16-19 37
0404 1600 0702 0800 4/25-27; 5/8-9 110
0704 0800 1001 1500 7/25-26, 28-29; 31
8/17-21
1001 1500 1230 1330 11/28-12/14 62
Las Vegas, 1978 1002 0803 0102 0755 9.7
Nevada
1979 0102 0758 0402 0828 18
0402 0829 0702 0817 <9
0702 0820 1001 0800 32
1001 0805 0102 0845 12/7-12, 21-26 7.5
Lathrop Wells, 1979 2010 2075 0402 1211 <5
Nevada 0402 1211 0702 1420 5/11-15; 6/25-28 <7
0702 1425 1003 0820 7/23-8/9; 9/26-27 21
Diablo, 1978 1002 1700 0102 1700 12/10-14 100
Nevada
1979 0102 1700 0223 1330 1/5-23; 2/17-20 13
Ba rstow, 1978 1120 0700 1219 1215 10
Ca 1 if.
1979 0112 0700 0201 0700 7/6-9
0629 0700 0713 0700 16
Provo, 1978 1020 0805 1101 0900 24
Utah 1215 0900 0101 1500 27
1979 0702 0900 0713 0853
1001 0900 1008 0915 38
Aberdeen, 1978 1020 0800 1103 0800
South Oak. 1215 1130 0101 1100 12
1979 0629 080a 0713 0800
1001 0800 1008 0800 16
69
-------
TABLE B-4. 1979 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR THE
NOBLE GAS AND TRITIUM SURVEILLANCE NETWORK
No. Radioactivity Cone. % of
Samp 1 i ng Days Radio- (x10-12JjCi/ml )** Cone.
Location Samples nuclide Crnax Cmin Cavg Guide*
Beatty, Nev. 348.3 85Kr 24 14 19 0.02
348.4 133Xe <20 <3 <3 <0.01
364.5 3H in atm. rn. 0.98 <0.4 <0.4
364.5 3H as HTO in air 5.7 <0.3 <1 <0.01
Death Valley 138 . 7 85Kr 23 15 19 0.02
Jet., C a I if. 138.7 133Xe <6 <3 <3 <0.01
131.8 3H in atm. m. 0.9 <0.4 <0.4
131.8 3H as HTO in air <4 <2 <2 <0.01
Diablo, Nev.t 75.9 85Kr 26 18 21 0.02
75.9 133Xe <3 <2 <2 <0.01
68.9 3H in atm. rn. 0.82 <0.5 <0.5
68.9 3H as HTO in air 6.1 <0.9 <2 <0.01
Hi ko, Nev. 327.5 85Kr 30 14 19 <0.2
334.5 133Xe <7 <3 <3 <0.01
357.6 3H in atm. m. 1.2 <0.3 <0.3
357.6 3H as HTO in air 12 <0.7 <2 <0.01
Indian Springs, 333.5 85Kr 23 16 19 0.02
Nev. 362.4 133Xe <20 <3 <3 <0.01
355.5 3H in atm. rn. 0.96 <0.4 <0.4
355.5 3H as HTO in air 7.5 <1 <1 <0.01
Lathrop Wells, 217.6 85Kr 23 13 19 0.02
Nev. 225.8 133Xe <20 <3 <3 <0.01
203.6 3 H in atm. rn. 0.97 <0.4 <0.4
203.6 3H as HTO in air 4.4 <2 <2 <0.01
Rachel, Nev. 280.6 85Kr 21 14 18 0.02
283.7 1 3 3Xe <7 <3 <3 <0.01
275.7' 3H in atm. rn. 1.1 <0.3 <0.3
275.7 3H as HTO in air <6 <0.8 <0.8 <0.01
Tonopah, Nev. 359.4 85Kr 23 14 18 <0.02
364.5 133Xe <10 <3 <3 <0.01
335.7 3H in atm. m. 1.0 <0.3 <0.3
335.7 3H as HTO in air 6.2 <0.5 <0.8 <0.01
(continued)
70
-------
TABLE B-4.
Continued
Sampling
Location
No.
Days
Samples
Radio-
nuclide
Radioactivity Cone.
(x10-12 ~Ci /ml ) **
Cmax Cmin Cavg
% of
Cone.
Gu i,de*
Area 15, 210.8 85 Kr 24 14 19 <0.01
NTS, Nev.:f ~ 217.7 133 Xe <40 <3 <3 <0.01
155.7 3H in atm. m. 22 <0.5 <0.6
155.7 3H as HTO in air 62 <2 <17 <0.01
Area 51, 347.6 85 Kr 31 12 19 <0.01
NTS, Nev.:f ~ 340.8 1 3 3 Xe 17 <2 <2 <0.01
348.6 3 H i n atm. m. 20 <0.4 <0.8
348.6 3H as HTO in air 19 <0.4 <2 <0.01
Area 400, 201.6 85 Kr 23 11 18 <0.01
NTS, Nev. ~ 218.4 133 Xe <14 <3 <3 <0.01
176.5 3H in atm. m. 2.4 <0.4 <0.5
176.5 3H as HTO in air 7.7 2.0 <3 <0.01
BJY, NTS, Nev. 336.8 85 Kr 33 15 21 <0.01
337.8 13 3 Xe 24 <2 <2 <0.01
307.5 3H in atm. m. 5 <0.4 <2
307.5 3H as HTO in air 27 1.5 <7 <0.01
Mercury, 347.6 85 Kr 25 13 19 <0.01
NTS, Nev. 362.6 13 3 Xe <9 <0.4 <0.4 <0.01
312.7 3H in atm. m. 1.J. <0.4 <0.4
312.7 3H as HTO in air 6.5 0.77 <2 <0.01
Area 12, 323.8 85 Kr 23 14 19 <0.01
NTS, Nev. 332.7 133 Xe <14 <3 <3 <0.01
329.6 3H in atm. m. 43 <0.4 <8
329.6 3H as HTO in air 92 <0.9 <26 <0.01
*Concentration Guides used for NTS stations are those applicable 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.
tSampler was moved to Rachel, Nevada.
tAl so known as Groom Lake.
~New station added to the Network.
**Concentrations of tritium in atmospheric moisture (atm. m.) are expressed
as 10-6 ~Ci per ml of water collected.
-"
"
-------
TABLE G-5. 1979 SUMMARY OF RADIATION DOSES FOR THE DOSIMETRY NETWORK
Station
Location
Measurement
Period
Adaven, Nev. 01/10/79 - 01/30/80
Alamo, Nev.* 01/08/79 - 01/08/80
Area 51-NTS, Nev. 01/08/79 - 01/14/80
Austin, Nev. 01/09/79 - 01/29/80
Baker, Calif. 01/08/79 - 01/14/80
Barstow, Calif. 01/08/79 - 01/14/80
Beatty, Nev. 01/03/79 - 01/08/80
Bishop, Calif.t 01/10/79 - 01/15/80
Blue Eagle Ranch, Nev. 01/09/79 - 01/29/80
Blue Jay, Nev. 01/11/79 - 01/16/80
Cactus Springs, Nev. 01/02/79 - 01/07/80
Caliente, Nev. 01/09/79 - 01/09/80
Carp, Nev. 01/09/79 - 01/10/80
Casey's Ranch, Nev. 01/10/79 - 01/16/80
Cedar City, Utah 01/16/79 - 01/16/80
Clark Station, Nev. 01/11/79 - 01/15/80
Complex I, Nev. 01/10/79 - 01/30/80
Coyote SUllllllit, Nev. 01/12/79 - 01/15/80
Currant, Nev. 01/09/79 - 01/29/80
Death Valley Jet., Calif. 01/11/79 - 01/17/80
Desert Game Range, Nev. 01/02/79 - 01/07/80
Diablo Maint. Sta.. Nev. 01/11/79 - 01/15/80
Duckwater, Nev. 01/09/79 - 01/29/80
Elgin, Nev. 01/09/79 - 01/10/80
Ely, Nev. 01/09/79 - 01/29/80
Enterprise, Utah 01/16/79 - 01/16/80
Eureka, Nev. 01/10/79 - 01/30/80
Furnace Creek, Calif. 01/11/79 - 01/17/80
Garrison, Utah 01/08/79 - 01/28/80
Geyser Maint. Sta., Nev. 01/08/79 - 01/28/80
Glendale, Utah 01/15/79 - 01/15/80
Goldfield, Nev. 01/08/79 - 01/28/80
Hancock Summit, Nev. 01/12/79 - 01/15/80
Hiko, Nev. 01/08/79 - 01/08/80
Hot Creek Ranch, Nev. 01/11/79 - 01/16/80
Independence, Calif. 01/09/79 - 01/15/80
Indian Springs, Nev. 01/02/79 - 01/07/80
Kirkeby Ranch, Nev. 01/08/79 - 01/28/80
Koynes, Nev. 01/12/79 - 01/17/80
Las Vegas (Airport), Nev. 01/19/79 - 01/15/80
Las Vegas (Placak), Nev. 01/19/79 - 01/15/80
Las Vegas (USDI), Nev. 01/19/79 - 01/15/80
Lathrop Wells, Nev.i 01/03/79 - 01/08/80
72
Annual
Dose Adjusted
Equivalent Rate Dose
(mrem/d) Equivalent
Max. Min. Avg. (mrem/y)
0.31 0.35 130
0.22 0.24 88
0.16 0.19 68
0.28 0.31 110
0.21 0.22 81
0.29 0.30 110
0.23 0.25 91
0.25 0.27 98
0.16 0.17 63
0.33 0.34 120
0.15 0.17 63
0.27 0.30 110
0.28 0.29 100
0.17 0.19 69
0.19 0.21 76
0.28 0.30 110
0.27 0.28 100
0.32 0.33 120
0.26 0.28 100
0.20 0.21 78
0.13 0.15 55
0.34 0.36 130
0.25 0.27 99
0.34 0.34 120
0.20 0.21 77
0.25 0.27 99
0.25 0.29 104
0.17 0.18 65
0.18 0.19 71
0.28 0.29 100
0.14 0.16 59
0.24 0.25 92
0.37 0.38 140
0.20 0.21 76
0.24 0.25 92
0.23 0.26 95
0.15 0.16 60
0.18 0.20 75
0.24 0.25 92
0.13 0.14 49
0.14 0.14 50
0.16 0.17 62
0.16 0.24 87
(continued)
0.39
0.27
0.19
0.36
0.24
0.31
0.27
0.29
0.18
0.35
0.18
0.32
0.30
0.20
0.22
0.32
0.29
0.35
0.29
0.21
0.17
0.37
0.29
0.35
0.22
0.29
0.30
0.18
0.21
0.31
0.17
0.26
0.40
0.22
0.27
0.27
0.17
0.21
0.26
0.14
0.14
0.17
0.27
-------
TABLE B-S. Continued
Station Measurement
Location Period
Lida, Nev. 01/08/79 - 01/28/80
Lone Pine, Calif. 01/09/79 - 01/15/80
Lund, Nev. 01/10/79 - 01/29/80
Mammoth Mtn., Calif.~ 01/10/79 - 11/06/79
Manhattan, Nev. 01/09/79 - 01/29/80
Mesquite, Nev. 01/15/79 - 01/15/80
Nevada Farms, Nev. 01/12/79 - 01/15/80
Nuclear Eng. Co., Nev. 01/03/79 - 01/08/80
Nyala, Nev. 01/10/79 - 01/16/80
Olancha, Calif. 01/09/79 - 01/15/80
Pahrump, Nev.# 01/02/79 - 01/09/80
Pine Creek Ranch, Nev. 07/20/79 - 01/30/80
Pioche, Nev. 01/10/79 - 01/09/80
Queen City Summit, Nev.** 01/12/79 - 01/15/80
Reed Ranch, Nev. 01/11/79 - 01/15/80
Ridgecrest, Calif. 01/09/79 - 01/15/80
Robison's Tr- Park, Nev. 01/12/79 - 01/15/80
Round Mountain, Nev- 01/09/79 - 01/28/80
Rox, Nev.tt 05/09/79 - 01/15/80
Scotty's Junction, Nev. 01/08/79 - 01/28/80
Selbach Ranch, Nev. 01/03/79 - 01/08/80
Sherri's Bar, Nev. 01/08/79 - 01/08/80
Shoshone, Calif. 01/11/79 - 01/17/80
Springdale, Nev. 01/03/79 - 01/08/80
Spring Meadows, Nev. 01/02/79 - 01/07/80
St. George, Utah 01/16/79 - 01/17/80
Stone Cabin Ranch, Nev. 01/11/79 - 01/17/80
Sunnyside, Nev. 01/10/79 - 01/30/80
Tempiute, Nev. 01/12/79 - 01/17/80
Tenneco, Nev. 01/02/79 - 01/07/80
Tonopah, Nev. 01/08/79 - 01/28/80
Tonopah Test Range, Nev. 01/09/79 - 01/29/80
Twin Springs Ranch, Nev. 01/11/79 - 01/16/80
Warm Springs, Nev. 01/11/79 - 01/15/80
Young=s Ranch, Nev. 01/09/79 - 01/29/80
Dose
Equivalent Rate
(mrem/d)
Max. Min.
0.28
0.27
0.24
0.37
0.37
0.19
0.36
0.33
0.23
0.26
0.19
0.35
0.24
0.38
0.32
0.22
0.33
0.31
0.26
0.26
0.33
0.23
0.30
0.32
0.19
0.18
0.32
0.18
0.34
0.28
0.30
0.27
0.30
0.30
0.25
0.26
0.24
0.23
0.22
0.32
0.16
0.31
0.29
0.21
0.25
0.16
0.32
0.22
0.36
0.30
0.17
0.30
0.27
0.25
0.25
0.29
0.19
0.25
0.31
0.14
0.16
0.29
0.16
0.31
0.26
0.28
0.25
0.27
0.25
0.13
Avg.
0.28
0.25
0.24
0.30
0.35
0.18
0.33
0.32
0.21
0.26
0.16
0.33
0.23
0.37
0.31
0.21
0.32
0.29
0.26
0.26
0.30
0.21
0.28
0.32
0.17
0.18
0.30
0.18
0.32
0.27
0.30
0.27
0.28
0.29
0.24
Annual
Adjusted
Dose
Equivalent
(mrem/y)
100
93
87
110
130
65
120
120
78
93
60
120
84
130
110
77
120
110
95
93
110
76
100
110
61
64
110
66
120
99
110
98
100
110
89
*Stolen second quarter 1979, replaced third quarter 1979.
tDosimeters and container stolen third quarter 1979,
replaced fourth quarter 1979.
*Station moved fourth quarter 1979.
~Fourth quarter exchange not possible due to weather conditions.
#Station moved second quarter 1979.
**Station monitored only third and fourth quarter 1979.
ttDosimeters and container stolen first quarter 1979.
replaced second quarter 1979.
73
-------
TABLE B-6.
1979 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR THE
MILK SURVEILLANCE NETWORK
Radioactivity Cone.
(x10-9 \.ICi/ml)
Sampl i ng
Location
Sample
Type*
No. of
Samples
Radio-
nuclide
Cmax
Cmin
Cavg
Hi nk 1 ey. Calif.,
Bill Nelson Dairy
12
3
4
89Sr
90Sr
<30
2.2
<2
<0.8
<10
<2
KeQ~gh Hot Spgs., 13 3 89Sr <20 <3 <8
Ca 1 if. 4 90Sr 2.7 <1 <2
Yribarren Ranch
Trona, Calif., 13 3 89Sr <20 <2 <8
Stanford Ranch 3 90Sr 5.2 1.2 <3
Austin, Nev., 14 4 3H 700 <400 <400
Young1s Ranch 2 89Sr <20 <3 <9
4 90Sr 4.3 <1 <3
Ca 1 i ente, Nev., 13 2 89Sr <3 <2 <2
June Cox Ranch 3 90Sr 5.2 1.2 <3
Currant, Nev., 13 3 89Sr <30 3.8 <10
Blue Eagle Ranch 4 90Sr 9.0 <2 <4
Hi ko, Nev., 13 2 3H <400 <400 <400
Darrel Hansen Ranch 2 89Sr <30 <2 <20
2 90Sr 1.4 <2 <2
Las Vegas, Nev., 12 4 3H <500 <400 <400
LOS Dairy Farm 3 89Sr <30 <2 <20
4 90Sr 1.9 <1 <2
Lathrop Wells, Nev., 13 3 89Sr <2 <20 <9
Kirker Ranch 3 90Sr 2.6 <2 <2
(continued)
74
-------
TABLE B-6.
Cont i nued
Radioactivity Cone.
(x10-9 ~Ci/ml)
Sampling
Location
Sample
Type*
No. of
Samples
Radio-
nuclide
Crnax
Cmin
Cavg
L i da, Nev., 13 1 89Sr <20 <20 <20
Lida Livestock Co. 1 90Sr 2.0 2.0 2.0
Loga nda 1 e, Nev., 12 1 89Sr <2 <2 <2
Vegas Valley Dairy 1 90Sr <2 <2 <2
Lund, Nev., 12 4 3H 1400 <400 <400
McKenzie Dairy 3 89Sr <20 <2 <7
4 90Sr 3.9 0.94 <2
Mesqui te, Nev., 12 4 3H 770 <400 400
Hugh Bros. Dairy 3 89Sr <30 <2 <8
4 90Sr 3.5 0.83 <2
Moapa, Nev., 12 3 89Sr <20 2.3 <9
Agman Seventy-Five, Inc. 4 90Sr 1.6 0.76 <0.76
Nya 1 a, Nev., 13 4 3H 930 <400 <400
Sharp's Ranch 3 89Sr <30 <2 <2
4 90Sr 5.6 <0.72 <3
Overton, Nev., 12 2 89Sr <50 <3 <30
Robi son Da i ry 3 90Sr 3.7 <2 <3
Pahrump, Nev., 13 0 89Sr
Oxborrow Ranch 1 90Sr 2.0 2.0 2.0
Round Mountain, 13 3 89Sr <20 <2 <9
Nev., 3 90Sr 6.6 1.4 3.2
Berg Ranch
(continued)
75
-------
TABLE B-6. Continued
Radioactivity Cone.
(xlO-9 J,lCi /ml)
Sampling Sampl e 'No. of Radio-
Location Type* Samples nuclide Cmax Cmin Cavg
Shoshone, Nev., 13 1 89Sr 3.5 3.5 3.5
Kirkeby Ranch 1 90Sr 3.0 3.0 3.0
Springdale, Nev., 13 1 89Sr <8 <8 <8
Boiling Pot Ranch 1 90Sr 2.5 2.5 2.5
Cedar City, Utah, 12 3 89Sr <20 <2 <9
Western General Dairy 4 90Sr 1.9 <0.8 <2
St. George, Utah, 12 2 89Sr <20 <3 <10
Cot tom Da i ry 3 90Sr 3.6 1.2 <2
*12 = raw milk from Grade A producer(s); 13 = raw milk from family cow(s);
14 = other than Grade A producer (raw)
76
-------
TABLE 8-7. 1979 SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR THE NTS MONTHLY
LONG-TERM HYDROLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM
Type of Radioactivity Cone. % of
S alii p 1 i ng No. Radio- (x10-g IlCi /ml ) Cone.
Location Samples* activity Cmax Cmin Cavg Guide
Well 8 7 Gras s a <3 <2 <2
7 Gras s S <6 <4 <4
8 3H 23 <10 <10 <0.01
Well U3CN-5 7 Gross a 11 2.7 <4
7 Gross S 1.2 <6 <6
8 3H 16 <10 <10 <0.01
Well A 7 Gross a <30 <3 <3
7 Gross S 11 <6 <6
8 3H 31 <9 <9 <0.01
Well C 7 Gross a 13 <6 <6
7 Gross S 15 <2 <20
8 3H 170 34 73 <0.01
Well 5c 7 Gross a 8.1 <4 <4
7 Gross S 9.8 <6 <6
8 3H 23 <10 <10 <0.01
Army Well 7 Gross a 3.1 <2 <2
No.1 7 Gras s S <6 3.8 <4
8 3H 18 <10 <10 <0.01
Well 2 7 Gross a <4 <3 <3
7 Gross S 8.0 <6 <6
8 3H 48 <10 <10 <0.01
Test Well B 3 Gross a <3 <3 <3
3 Gross S <6 <6 <6
4 3H 180 140 160 0.01
Well J-13 7 Gross a <4 <3 <3
7 Gras s S <6 3.9 <4
7 3H 35 <10 <10 <0.01
Well UE7ns 7 Gross a 6.5 <2 <2
6 Gras s S 5.9 <3 <3
8 3H 3,700 13 1,500 0.05
Well U19c 6 Gross a <5 <3 <3
6 Gross S 6.3 4.5 4.5
8 3H 35 <10 <10 <0.01
* Samples could not be collected every month due to weather conditions or
inoperative pumps.
t Concentration Guides for drinking water at on-NTS locations are the same as
those for off-NTS locations. See Appendix B for Concentration Guides.
77
-------
TABLE B-8. 1979 ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR THE NTS SEMI-ANNUAL*
LONG-TERM HYDROLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM
Type of Radioactivity % of
Sampling Sampl e Radio- Cone. Cone.
Location Date Typet activity (x10-9 ~Ci/ml) Guide:f
NTS, 01/17 23 Gross ex 4.4
Well UE15d Gross f3 8.6
3H NA
NTS, 01/19 23 Gross ex <4
Test Well D, Gross f3 <6
3H NA <0.01
NTS, 02/23 23 Gross ex 3.1
Well UE1c, Gross f3 <6
::!H <10 <0.01
NTS, 02/22 23 Gross ex <6
Hell C-1 Gross f3 <20
3H 14 <0.01
NTS, 01/16 23 Gross ex <3
Well UE5C Gross f3 <6
3H <20 <0.01
NTS, 01/16 23 Gross ex <3
Well 5b Gross f3 <6
3H <20 <0.01
NTS, 01/16 23 Gross ex 3.8
Test Well F, Gross f3 <6
3H <20 <0.01
Ash Meadows, Nev., 03/05 27 Gross ex <4
Crystal Pool Gross f3 <6
3H <10 <0.01
Ash Meadows, Nev., 03/05 23 Gross ex <4
Well 18S/51E-7DB Gross f3 7.1
3H <10 <0.01
Ash Meadows, Nev., 03/05 23 Gross ex 4.8
Well 17S/50E-14CAC Gross f3 8.8
3H <10 <0.01
(continued)
78
-------
TABLE B-8.
Continued
Sampl i ng
Location
Date
Ash Meadows, Nev.,
Fairbanks Springs
03/05
Beatty, Nev.,
City Supply,
12S/47E-70BO
03/06
Beatty, Nev.,
Nuclear
Engineering Co.
03/07
Beatty, Nev.,
Coffers Well,
11S/48/100
03/06
Indian Springs, Nev., 02/22
USAF No.2
Indian Springs, Nev., 02/20
Sewer Co. Inc.,
Well No.1
Lathrop Wells, Nev., 03/07
City Supply
Springdale, Nev.,
Goss Springs
03/06
Sample
Ty pe t
Type of
Radio-
activity
Radioactivity
Conc.
(x10-9 ~Ci/ml)
% of
Conc.
Guide*
Gross a
Gross f3
3H
Gross a
Gras s f3
3H
Gross a
Gross f3
3H
Gross a
Gross f3
3H
Gross a
GTOS S f3
3H
Gross a
Gross f3
3H
Gross a
Gras s f3
3H
Gross a
Gross f3
3H
27
79
<4
<6
<10
<0.01
23
23
23
23
23
23
27
<6
<20
<10
<0.01
<20
<10
<0.01
4.5
<6
<10
<6
<20
<20
<0.01
<0.01
<3
<6
11
2.7
<6
(10
<0.01
<0.01
<10
<20
<10
<0.01
*During 1979 samples were collected only once.
t23 = Well; 27 = Spring
*Concentration Guides for drinking water at on-NTS locations
as those for off-NTS locations. See Appendix B.
are the same
-------
TABLE B-9. 1979 ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR THE NTS ANNUAL LONG-TERM
HYDROLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM
Type of Radi oaet i v ity % of
Sampling Sample Radio- Cone. Cone.
Location Date Type * activity (x10-9 lJCi/ml) Guide"!"
Shoshone, Calif. 11/16 27 3H 800 0.03
Shos hone Spri ng
Hiko, Nev. 11/14 27 3H 460 0.02
Crystal Spri ngs
Alamo, Nev. 11/14 23 3H 360 0.01
City Suppl y
Warm Springs, Nev. 11/14 27 3H 460 0.02
Twin Springs Ranch
Nyala, Nev. 11/15 23 3H 580 0.02
Sharp Ranch
Adaven, Nev. 11/15 27 3H 1800 0.06
Adaven Spri ng
Pahrump, Nev. 11/16 23 3H 510 0.02
Calvada Well 3
Tonopah, Nev. 11/15 23 3H <10 <0.01
City Supply
Clark Station, 11/15 23 3H 16 <0.01
Nev. Tonopah Test
Range Well 6
Las Vegas, Nev. 11/09 23 3H 0.83 <0.01
Water Di strict
Well No. 28
Tempiute, Nev. 11/14 23 3H 510 0.02
Union Carbide Well
*23 = Well; 27 = Spring
tSee Appendix B for Concentration Guides.
80
-------
TABLE B-10. 1979 ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR THE OFF-NTS LONG-TERM
HYDROLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM (ANNUAL SAMPLES)
Sampling
Location
Depth Sample
Date (m) * Type t
Type of
Radio-
act ivity
Radi oact i v Hy
Cone.
(x10-9IlCi/ml)
% of
Cone.
Guide:J:
PROJECT GNOME -- NEW MEXICO
Malaga, USGS 3/22 162 23 Gross a <509
We 11 No.1 Gross a <609
3H <10 <0.01
Malaga, USGS 3/22 148 23 Gross a <2009
We 11 No.4 Gross B 23,000
3H 580,000 19
90 Sr 14,000 50
Malaga, USGS 3/24 144 23 Gross a <609
Well No.8 Gross a 14,000
3H 510,000 17
90 Sr 13,000 40
1 37 Cs 30 0.2
Malaga, PHS 3/24 25 23 Gross a <3
Well No.6 Gross a <6
3H 100 <0.01
Ma 1 aga, PHS 3/24 157 23 Gross a <409
Well No.8 Gras s a 7.5
3H 17 <0.01
Malaga, PHS 3/24 59 23 Gross a <3
Well No.9 Gross a <6
3H <10 <0.01
Malaga, PHS 3/24 137 23 Gross a . <3009
Well No. 10 Gross a <30
3 H 16 <0.01
Malaga, 3/23 236 23 Gross a <20
Pecos River Gross W <30
Pumping Stations 3H <10 <0.01
Lovi ng, Ci ty 3/23 69 23 Gross a. <3
Well No.2 Gr(lsc; t3 <6
3 H <10 <0.01
(cant i nued)
81
-------
TABLE 8-10.
Continued
Sampling
Location
Depth Sample
Date (m)* Typet
Type of
Radio-
act i vity
Radioactivity
Cone.
(x10-9 lJCi/ml)
% of
Cone.
Guide*
-~---
Carl sbad, City
Well No.7
3/23
249
23
Gross a
Gross a
3H
<4
<20
<11
<0.01
---------------------------------------
PROJECT SHOAL -- NEVADA
Frenchman, 6/13 not 23 Gross a 20
Frenchman known Gross a 16
Station 3H 21 <0.01
Frenchman, Well 6/13 213 23 Gross a <3
HS-1 Gross a 0.1
3H <9 <0.01
Frenchman, 6/13 146 23 Gross a 51
Well H-3 Gross a 19
3H <10 <0.01
Frenchman, 6/13 not 23 Gross a <100
Fl owi ng Well known Gross a <80
3H <10 <0.01
Frenchman, 6/13 96 23 Gross a 17
Hunts Station Gross a 14
3H <10 <0.01
---------------------------------------
PROJECT DRIBBLE -- MISSISSIPPI
Baxterville, 3/13 95 23 Gross a <2
City Suppl Y Gross a <6
3H <20
Baxterville, 3/13 sfc. 22 Gross a <2
Lower L ittl e Gras s a <6
Creek 311 68
<0.01
<0.01
(continued)
82-
-------
TABLE B-10. Cant i nued
Type of Radioactivity % of
S am p 1 i ng Depth Sample Radio- Conc. Conc.
Location Date (m)* Typet act i vity (x10-9 lICi/ml) Guide*
Baxterville, 3/15 407 23 Gross a <7
Well HT-1 Gross a <30
3H 15 <0.01
Baxtervill e, 3/15 116 23 Gross a <2
We 11 HT -2c Gras s a <6
3H 30 <0.01
Baxterville, 3/14 131 23 Gross a <3
We 11 HT -4 Gross a <6
3H <10 <0.01
Baxterville, 3/14 197 23 Gross a <2
Well HT-5 Gross a <6
3H 29 <0.01
Baxterville, 3/14 302 23 Gross a <4
Well E-7 Gross S <20
3H 78 <0.01
Baxterv ill e, 3/16 640 23 Gross a <200
Well Ascot Gross a <30
No.2 3H <20 <0.01
Baxtervi 11 e, 3/15 sfc. 22 Gross a <2
Half Moon Gross S <6
Creek 3H 49 <0.01
Baxterville, 3/15 sfc. 22 Gross a <2
Half Moon Gross S <6
Creek Overflow 3H 530 <0.02
Baxterville, 3/12 13 23 Gross a <2
1. Spe i ghts Gross a (6
residence 3H <10 <0.01
Baxtervill e, 3/13 29 23 Gross a < 2
R. L. Anderson Gras s a < 6
residence 3H <10 <0.01
Baxterville, 3/13 sfc. 23 3H 61 <0.01
L. J. Bryant
residence (creek)
(continued)
83
-------
TABLE 8-10.
Continued
Sampling
Location
Date
Depth Sample
(10)* Typet
Type of
Radio-
act i vity
Radioactivity
Cone.
(x10-9 llCi/ml)
% of
Cone.
Guide:!:
Baxterville, 3/13 not 23 3H 10 <0.01
B. Chambliss known
residence
Baxterville, 3/14 30 23 Gross a <2
Ma rk Lowe Gross t3 <6
residence 3H <10 <0.01
Baxterville, 3/14 26 23 Gross a <2
R. Ready Gross t3 <6
residence 3H 53 <0.01
Baxtervill e, 3/12 28 23 Gross a <2
W. Daniels Gross t3 <6
residence 3H <10 <0.01
Lumberton, 3/13 262 23 Gross a <2
City Suppl y Gross t3 <6
Well No.2 3H <20 <0.01
Purvis, 3/12 295 23 Gross a <2
City Supply Gross t3 <6
3H 37 <0.01
Columbia, 3/13 41 23 Gross a <2
City Supply Gross t3 <6
3H <10 <0.01
Lumberton, 3/13 258 23 Gross a <1
North Lumberton Gross t3 <3
City Supply 3H <10 <0.01
Baxterville, 3/15 sfc. 21 Gross a <2
Pond W of GZ Gross t3 <6
3H 24 <0.01
---------------------------------------
PROJECT GASBUGGY -- NEW MEXICO
Gobernador, 9/30 sfc. 27 3H <10 <0.01
Arnold Ranch
(continued)
8lt
-------
TABLE B-lO.
Continued
Sampling
Location
Depth Sample
Date (m)* Typet
Type of
Radio-
activity
Radioactivity
Conc.
(xlO-9 lJCi/ml)
% of
Conc.
Guide*
Gobernador, Lower 9/30 70 23 3H <20 <0.01
Burro Canyon
Gobernador, Fred 9/30 53 23 3H <19 <0.01
Bixler Ranch
Gobernador, 9/30 sfc. 27 3H <10 <0.01
Cave Springs
Gobernador, 9/30 not 23 3H <20 <0.01
Wi ndmi 11 No.2 known
Gobernador, 9/30 sfc. 27 3H 85 <0.01
Bubbl i ng Spri ngs
Gobernador, 9/30 sfc. 22 3H 72 <0.01
La Jara Creek
Gobernador, 9/29 1,181 23 3H <20 <0.01
EPNG Well 10-36
---------------------------------------
PROJECT RULISON -- COLORADO
Rul i son, Lee L. 10/4 not 23 3H 390 0.01
Haywa rd Ranch known
Rul i son, Gl en 10/4 not 23 3H 440 0.01
Schwab Ranch known
Grand Valley. 10/4 not 23 3H 310 0.01
Al bert Gardner known
Ranch
Grand Vall ey. 10/4 sfc. 27 3H 40 <0.01
City Water
Supply
Grand Vall ey 10/4 sfc. 27 3H 180 <0.01
Spring 300 Yds.
NW of GZ (continued)
85
-------
TABLE B-10.
Cont i nued
Sampling
Location
Depth Sampl e
Date (m)* Typet
Type of
Radio-
act i vity
Radioactivity
Cone.
(x10-9 llCi/ml)
% of
Cone.
Guide*
Rulison, Felix 10/4 not '23 3H 300 0.01
Sefc;ovi c Ranch known
Grand Valley, 10/4 sfc. 22 3H 240 <0.01
Battlement Creek
Grand Vall ey, 10/4 14 23 3H 230 <0.01
CER Well
Ru 1 i so n, 10/4 sfc. 27 3H 280 <0.01
Potter Ranch
---------------------------------------
PROJECT RIO BLANCO -- COLORADO
Rio Blanco, 10/2 sfc. 22 3H 53 <0.01
Fawn Creek
6,800 ft Upstream
Rio Blanco, 10/2 sfc. 22 3H 48 <0.01
Fawn Creek
500 ft Upstream
Rio Blanco, 10/2 sfc. 22 3H 60 <0.01
Fawn Creek
500 ft Downstream
Rio Blanco, 10/2 sfc. 22 3H 55 <0.01
Fawn Creek
8,400 ft Downstream
Rio Blanco, 10/2 sfc. 27 3H 46 <0.01
Fawn Creek No.1
Rio Blanco, 10/2 sfc. 27 3H 62 <0.01
Fawn Creek No.3
Rio Blanco, 10/2 sfc. 27 3H 110 <0.01
CER No.1
Black Sulphur
(continued)
8(;
-------
TABLE B-10.
Continued
Sampling
Location
Date
Rio Blanco,
CER No.4
Black Sulphur
10/2
Rio Blanco, 10/2
B-1 Equi ty Camp
Rio Blanco, 10/2
Brennan Windmill
Rio Blanco, 10/2
Johnson Artesian
Well
Rio Blanco,
Well RB-D-01
10/3
Depth Sampl e
( m) * Type t
Type of
Radio-
act i vity
% of
Conc.
Guide:j:
Radi oact i vity
Conc.
( xl 0 -9 J.I C i / m 1 )
sfc.
3H
<0.01
27
100
sfc. 27 3H
not 23 3H
known
not 23 3H
known
476 23 3H
110 <0.01
<20 <0.01
<20 <0.01
23
<0.01
------------------------~--------------
PROJECT CANNIKIN -- AMCHITKA, ALASKA
South End of 9/27 sfc. 21 3H 86 <0.01
Cannikin Lake
North End of 9/27 sfc. 21 3H 60 <0.01
Cannikin Lake
Well HTH-3 9/27 42 23 3H 77 <0.01
Ice Box Lake 9/27 sfc. 21 3H 18 <0.01
White Alice Creek 9/27 sfc. 22 3H 68 <0.01
Pit South of 9/27 sfc. 21 3H 47 <0.01
Cannikin GZ
----------------------------------------
PROJECT MILROW -- AMCHITKA, ALASKA
Heart Lake
9/28
sfc.
21
3H
41
<0.01
(continued)
87
-------
TABLE B-10.
Continued
Sampl i ng
Location
Depth Sample
Date (m)* Typet
Type of
Radio-
activity
Radioactivity
Cone.
(x10-9 llCi/ml)
% of
Cone.
Guide::j:
Well W-5 9/28 0.83 23 3H 68 <0.01
Well W-6 9/28 0.94 23 3H 55 <0.01
We 11 W-8 9/28 1.6 23 3H 54 <0.01
Well W-15 9/28 1.0 23 3H 55 <0.01
Well W-10 9/28 2.0 23 3H 58 <0.01
Well W-ll 9/28 1.5 23 3H 120 <0.01
Well W-3 9/28 1.1 23 3H 91 <0.01
We 11 W-2 9/28 0.3 23 3H LOST
Cl evenyer Creek 9(28 sfc. 22 3H 55 <0.01
Well W-4 9/28 0.46 23 3H 48 <0.01
Well W-7 9/28 0.31 23 3H 55 <0.01
Well W-13 9/28 0.74 23 3H 69 <0.01
Well W-18 9/28 0.20 23 3H 37 <0.01
---------------------------------------
PROJECT LONG SHOT -- AMCHITKA, ALASKA
Well WL-2 9/29 3.0 23 3H 390 <0.01
EPA Well-1 9/29 6.6 23 3H 300 <0.01
Reed Pond 9/29 sfc. 21 3H 53 <0.01
Well GZ No.1 9/29 27.4 23 3H 4,100 0.1
Well GZ No.2 9/29 12.2 23 3H 580 0.02
(continued)
88
-------
TABLE 8-10.
Continued
Sampl i ng
Location
Date
Depth Sample
(m) * Type t
Type of
Radio-
activity
Radioactivity
Conc.
( xl 0 -9 ~ C i / m 1 )
% of
Conc.
Guide:f:
Well WL-1 9/29 0.8 23 3H 39 <0.01
Mud Pit No. 1 9/29 sfc. 21 3H 1,200 0.04
Mud Pit No.2 9/29 sfc. 21 3H 1,200 0.04
Mud Pit No.3 9/29 sfc. 21 3H 1,700 0.06
---------------------------------------
BACKGROUND SAMPLES -- AMCHITKA, ALASKA
Constantine 9/29 sfc. 27 3H 99 <0.01
Spring
Army Well No. 1 9/29 26 23 3H 88 <0.01
Jones Lake 9/29 sfc. 21 3H 49 <0.01
Army Well No.2 10/1 16.0 23 3H 30 <0.01
Army Well No.3 10/1 92.0 23 3H 120 <0.01
Well AEC 1 10/1 6.6 23 3H 91 <0.01
Duck Cove Creek 9/29 sfc. 22 3H 65 <0.01
* sfc. = surface
t 21 = Pond, lake, reservoir, stock tank, or stock pond; 22 = Stream, river,
or creek; 23 = Well; 26 = Rain; 27 = Spring.
:f: Concentration Guides (CG) for drinking water at onsite locations
are the same as those for offsite locations. See Appendix B for
Concentration Guides. As gross alpha and gross beta radioactivity
concentrations were used only for identifying gross radioactivity
concentration increases, and as more complete radionuclide analyses
were made in the past, calculating the percent of the concentration
guide was not considered appropriate.
9 High MDC due to high concentration of dissolved solids.
89
-------
TABLE B-11. SPECIAL ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR THE LONG-TERM
HYDROLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM - PROJECT DRIBBLE*
H Concentration % of
Sa[l1pling Depth Cone.
Location Date (m) (x10-9 llCi/ml) Guide
HMH-1 01/09 3.8 320,000 10
08/03 10,000 0.3
HMH-2 01/09 3.6 180,000 6.0
08/03 4,600 0.2
HMH-3 01/09 3.0 80 <0.01
08/03 800 0.03
HMH-4 01/09 1.9 <400 <0.01
08/03 550 0.02
HMH-5 01/09 2.6 9,900 0.3
08/03 8,800 0.3
HMH-6 01/09 1.6 390 0.01
08/03 1,100 0.04
HMH-7 01/09 2.0 770 0.02
08/03 1,200 0.04
HMH-8 01/09 3.6 58 <0.01
08/03 360 0.01
HMH-9 01/09 1.7 97 <0.01
08/03 <400 0.01
HMH-10 01/09 2.6 49 <0.01
08/03 700 0.02
HMH -11 01/09 2.6 24,000 0.08
08/03 9,200 0.03
PS-3 01/09 35 110 <0.01
*Each sample was also analyzed by gamma spectrometry. No gamma-emitting
radionuclides were detected above the MDC of -1 x 10-8 llCi/ml.
tsfc. = surface
90
-------
APPENDIX C. RADIATION PROTECTION STANDARDS FOR
EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL EXPOSURE
DOE ANNUAL DOSE COMMITMENT
The annual dose commitment tabulated below is from IIStandards for
Radiation Protectionll in DOE manual, Chapter 0524.
Type of Exposure
Dose Limit to Critical
Individuals in Uncontrolled
Area at Points of Maximium
Probable Exposure (rem)
Dose Limit to Suitable
Sample of the Exposed
Population in an
Uncontrolled Area (rem)
Whole Body. gonads
or bone marrow
0.5
0.17
Other organs
1.5
0.5
EPA DRINKING WATER REGULATIONS FOR RADIONUCLIDES
The EPA drinking water regulations for radionuclides are set forth in
Title 40 of the code of Federal Regulations, Chapter 1, Part 141. They were
published in the Federal Register, Vol. 41, No. 133, on July 9,1976.
For purposes of the regulation listed below, IIcommunity water systemll is
defined as a public water system that serves a population of which 70 percent
or greater are residents. A public water system is a system for the provision
to the public of piped water for human consumption, if such system has at
least 15 service connections or regularly serves an average of 25 individuals
daily at least 3 months out of the year.
The regulation is stated in terms of annual dose equivalent and average
annual concentration assumed to produce that dose equivalent.
Maximum Contaminant Levels for Beta Particles and Photon Radioactivity from
Man-Made Radionuclides in Community Water Systems
The average annual concentration of beta particle and photon radioactivity
from manmade radionuclides in drinking water shall not produce an annual dose
91
-------
equivalent to the total body or any internal organ greater than 4 millirem per
yea r. .
Except for the tritium and strontium-90, the concentration of manmade
radionuclides causing 4 mrem total body or organ dose equivalents shall be
calculated on the basis of a 2-liter 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, U.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
per year.
Average Annual Concentration Assumed to Produce a Total Body
or Organ Dose of 4 mrem/year
Radionuclide Critical Organ pCi per 1 iter
Tritium Total body 20,000
Strontium-90 Bone marrow 8
DOE CONCENTRATION GUIDES
This table of concentration guides (CG,s) is from the DOE Manual, Chapter
0524, "Standards for Radiation Protection."
Network or Program
Sampling
Medium
Radio-
nuclide
CG
(~Ci/ml)
Basis of Exposure
Air Surveillance
Network
air
7Be
95Zr
131I
132 Te
137CS
140Ba
144Ce
239pu
92
1.1 X 10-8
3.3 X 10-10
3.3 X 10-11
1.3 X 10-9
1. 7 x 10- 10
3.3 X 10-10
6. 7 x 10- 10
3.3 X 10-13
Suitable sample
of the exposed
population in
uncontrolled area.
(continued)
-------
Sampl i ng Radio- CG
Network or Program Medium nuclide (lICi/ml) Basis of Exposure
Noble Gas and Trit i urn air 85Kr 1.0 x 10-5 Invidicual in
Surveillance Netwot'k, 3H 5.0 x 10-6 controlled area.
On-NTS 133Xe 1.0 x 10-5
Noble Gas and Tritium air 85Kr 1.0 x 10-7 Suitable sample
Surveillance Network, 3H 6.7 x 10-8 of the exposed
Off-NTS 133Xe 1.0 x 10-7 population in
uncontrolled area.
Long-Term water 3H 3.0 x 10-3 Individual in a
Hydrological Program 89Sr 3.0 x 10-6 controlled or an
90Sr 3.0 x 10-7 uncontrolled area.
137Cs 2.0 x 10-5
226 Ra 3.0 x 10-8
234U 3.0 X 10-5
235U 3.0 X 10-5
238U 4.0 X 10-5
238pu 5.0 X 10-6
239pu 5.0 X 10-6
93
------- |