-------
TABLE 6. RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN CATTLE TISSUE SAMPLES - 1984
GO
MAY - 1984
BOV-1
DUPLICATE BOV-1
BOV-2
DUPLICATE BOV-2
BOV-3
BOV-4
OCTOBER 1984
BOV-5
BOV-6
MUSCLES
K(g/kg*)
239Pu(pCi/kg*)
4.0 ± 0.3
0.020 ± 0.028**
NC
3.5 ± 0.3
0.075 ± 0.03
NC
4.7 ± 0.3
0.18 ± 0.05
4.2 ± 0.4
0.011 ± 0.021**
5.7 ± 0.4
•NR
3.8 ± 0.4
NR
LUNGS
K(g/kg*)
239Pu(pC1/kg*)
7.1 ± 1.0
0.086 ± 0.059
NC
4.7 ± 0.6
0.043 ± 0.041
NC
5.0 ± 0.5
0.066 ± 0.049
1.9 ± 0.5
0.055 ± 0.053
5.7 ± 0.6
NR
4.8 ± 0.6
NR
LIVER
K(g/kg*) BLOOD
239Pu(pCi/kg*) 3H(pCi/l)
4.2 ± 0.4 <260
0.066 ± 0.041
***
4.0 ± 0.4 <490
0.11 ± 0.051
4.1 ± 0.4
0.086 ± 0.036
3.9 ± 0.4 <490
0.095 ± 0.035
4.1 ± 0.3 <490
0.023 ± 0.034**
4.5 ± 0.4 <260
NR
4.7 ± 0.4 <260
NR
BONE
90Sr(pCi/g ash)
239Pu(pCi/g ash)
1.8 ± 0.2
0.013 ± 0.006
1.8 ± 0.2
0.084 ± 0.005
2.7 ± 0.2
0.00 ± 0.003**
2.5 ± 0.2
0.028 ± 0.009
2.2 ± 0.2
0.028 ± 0.006
1.6 ± 0.2
0.0072 ± 0.0046
NR
NR
(continued)
-------
TABLE 6. (Continued)
MUSCLES LUNGS LIVER BONE
K(g/kg*) K(g/kg*) K(g/kg*) BLOOD 90Sr(pCi/g ash)
239Pu(pCi/kg*) 239Pu(pCi/kg*) 239Pu(pCi/kg*) 3H(pCi/D 239Pu(pCi/g ash)
BOV-7 5.9 ± 0.4 2.8 ± 0.6 4.8 ± 0.3 <260 NR
NR NR NR
BOV-8 5.4 ± 0.4 3.7 ± 0.5 4.8 ± 0.3 <260 NR
NR NR NR
*Wet weight.
**Counting error exceeds reported activity.
***Lost in chemistry.
NC Not collected
NR Not reported, analysis not completed.
00
01
-------
EXTERNAL EXPOSURE MONITORING
Thermo!uminescent Dosimetry Network
External radiation exposure of people 1s due primarily to medical sources
and to natural 'sources such as cosmic radiation and naturally occurring radio-
activity 1n soil. Radioactivity from fallout generated by past atmospheric
nuclear testing causes approximately 0.6 percent of a person's total exposure.
Until 1965, film badges were used to document external exposure, but TLD's
gradually replaced film as the measurement Instrument because of their greater
sensitivity and precision. From 1970 to 1974 the EMSL-LV used the TLD-12
dosimeter but changed to the TLD-200 1n 1975.
Network Design—
The TLD network 1s designed to measure environmental radiation exposure
at a location rather than to an Individual because of the many uncertainties
associated with personnel monitoring. Several Individuals, some residing within
and some residing outside of estimated fallout zones from past nuclear tests at
the NTS, have been monitored so that any correlations that may exist between
personnel and environmental monitoring could be obtained. The network consists
of 86 monitored locations encircling the NTS with some concentration in the
area of the estimated fallout zones (Figure 14). This arrangement permits
an estimate of average background exposure; yet any increase due to NTS activ-
ities can be detected.
Methods—
In 1984 the TLD Network consisted of 86 stations at both inhabited and
uninhabited locations within a 300-km radius of the CP-1. Each station is
equipped with three Harshaw thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD's) to measure
gamma exposures resulting from environmental background as well as accidental
releases of gamma-emitting radioactivity. Within the area covered by the
Network, 49 off-site residents wore dosimeters during 1984. All TLD's were
exchanged quarterly with personnel TLD's being changed to monthly in July.
The Harshaw Model 2271-G2 (TLD-200) dosimeter consists 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 dosim-
eter 1s issued to each of 49 off-site residents who are instructed in its proper
wearing.
After appropriate corrections were made for exposure accumulated during
shipment between the laboratory and the monitoring location, and for the re-
sponse factor, the six TLD chip readings for each station were averaged. The
average value for each station was then compared to the values obtained during
the previous four quarters at that station to determine whether the new value
was within the range of previous background values for that station. The
36
-------
• Austin
Young Rn
Eureka
• Ely
Ktrkeby Rn
G*bbt •Round Win _
Manhattan •
Mina» Stone Cabin •
Duckwater 4
Hot Creek
*?• .Blue
•jay
Currant
(Blu
Rn
• Blue Eagle
i Lund
• Geyser
unnyside
• Complex I
• Pine Creek Rn •Pioche
- ^ Tl*Hiko I
Rachel^6"1?'"'8 •Cal.ente _
- - Coyote Smt Ic...
•Alamo »Elgm |Enle"
• Carp
Salt Lake Otyfl
Tonopah^ Twin Spgs Rn
. -„„ -, ablo
Goldtield^
Scotty's Jet
prmgdalef
Beauv
US Ecology•
Lathrop Wells
(Garrison
-,
pnse Cedar
• St George
Mesqutte
> Thermoluminescent Dosimeter Stations (86)
Figure 14. Locations monitored with TLD's.
37
-------
result from each of the personnel dosimeters was compared to the average back-
ground value measured at the nearest fixed station over the previous four
quarters.
The smallest exposure above background radiation that can be determined
from these TLD readings depends primarily on the magnitude of variations in the
natural background exposure rate at the particular station. In the absence of
other independent exposure rate measurements, the present exposure rate is
compared 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 1 to 5 mR above background.
Depending on location, the background ranges from 15 to 35 mR per quarter.
The term "background," as used in this context, refers to naturally occurring
radioactivity plus a contribution from residual manmade fission products, such
as worldwide fallout.
Results-
Appendix Table E-10 lists the maximum, minimum, and average dose equiva-
lent rate (mrem/day) and the annual adjusted dose equivalent rate (average in
mrem/day times the number of days 1n the year) measured at each station in the
Network during 1984. 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 during 1984.
Appendix Table E-ll lists the personnel number; associated background
station; the maximum, minimum, and average dose equivalent rate (mrem/d); and
the annual dose equivalent (mrem) measured for each off-site resident monitored
during 1984. Twelve dosimeters worn by residents exhibited exposures in excess
of background. These exposures are attributed to higher background levels in
the residence than at the background station location or to occupational ex-
posure (Nos. 45, 49, 52, 57). Usually, the average dose equivalent rates of
the off-site residents is lower than their background stations due to the shield-
Ing provided by their homes or places of work.
Table 7 shows that the average annual dose rate for the Dosimetry Network
1s consistent with the Network average established in 1975. Annual doses
decreased from 1971 to 1975 with a leveling trend 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, although this average is also affected by the mix of stations at
different altitudes (note Figure 15).
Because of the great range 1n the results, 35 to 133 mrem, an average for
the whole area monitored may be inappropriate for estimating individual exposure.
This would be particularly true if the exposure of a particular resident were
desired. Since environmental radiation exposure can vary markedly with both
altitude and the natural radioactivity In the soil, and since the altitude of
the TLD station location is relatively easy to obtain, the measured dose rates
for 1975 to 1984 were plotted as a function of altitude. As most of Nevada
lies between 2,000 and 6,000 feet above mean sea level, this range was used and
38
-------
TABLE 7. DOSIMETRY NETWORK SUMMARY FOR THE YEARS 1971 - 1984
=============================================================
Environmental Radiation Dose Rate (mrem/y)
Year
Maximum
Minimum
Average
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
==============:
250
200
180
160
140
140
170
150
140
140
142
139
140
133
102
84
80
62
51
51
60
50
49
51
40
42
42
35
160
144
123
114
94
94
101
95
92
90
90
88
87
85
Station Altitude
4 - 6.000 ft.
50
75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82
Calendar Year 19--
Flgure 15. Average annual TLD exposure as a function of station altitude.
39
-------
was split Into two sections for plotting purposes. The results, shown 1n
Figure 15, Indicate that the average exposure at altitudes between 4,000 and
6,000 feet Is about 20 mrem/a higher than that at altitudes between 2,000 and
4,000 feet, although both curves follow the same trend as the overall averages
listed 1n Table:7. Thus, If an Individual does not live near a monitored loca-
tion, an estimate of exposure could be based on the altitude of his residence
rather than on the average for the whole area monitored.
Pressurized Ion Chamber Network (PIC)
This network 1s located at the 15 Community Monitoring Stations identified
on Figure 2 plus stations at Complex I, Furnace Creek, Nyala, Stone Cabin Ranch,
Tlkaboo Valley, Twin Springs, and Lathrop Wells. The PIC used 1s manufactured
by Reuter-Stokes. The output 1s displayed on both a paper tape and a digital
readout, so the station manager can observe the response. All data is stored
on cassette tapes which are read into a computer at EMSL-LV each week. The
computer output consists of a table containing hourly, daily, and weekly sum-
maries of the maximum, minimum, average, and standard deviation of the gamma
exposure rate.
The data for 1984 are displayed 1n Table 8 as the average pR/hr and annual
mR from each station. When these data are compared to the TLD results for the
same 22 stations, It Is found that the PIC response is about 34% higher than
the TLD response. This 1s attributed, primarily, to the difference in energy
response (plateau) of the two instruments.
INTERNAL EXPOSURE MONITORING
Internal exposure Is caused by ingested or Inhaled radionuclides that
remain in the body either temporarily or for longer times because of storage in
tissues. At EMSL-LV two methods are used to detect such body-burdens: whole-
body counting and urinalysls.
The whole-body counting facility has been maintained at EMSL-LV since 1966
and is equipped to determine the identity and quantity of gamma-emitting radio-
active materials which may have been inhaled or ingested into the body. A
single thallium-activated sodium Iodide crystal, 28 x 10 centimeters, 1s used
to measure gamma radiation having energies ranging from 0.1 to 2.5 MeV. Two
phoswlch detectors are available and can be placed on the chest to measure
low-energy radiation - for example, 17 KeV X-rays from plutonium-239. The most
likely mode of intake for most alpha-emitting radionuclides is inhalation, and
the most important of these radionuclides also emit low-energy X-rays which can
be detected 1n the lungs by the phoswlch detectors. An additional phoswich
detector is used to determine low-energy radionuclide concentrations in bone,
by moving the detector around the skull.
Network Design
This activity consists of two portions, an Off-site Human Surveillance
Program and a Radiological Safety Program. The design for the Off-site Human
Surveillance Program Is to measure radionuclide body-burdens in a representative
40
-------
TABLE 8. PRESSURIZED ION CHAMBER
READINGS - uR/HOUR
EXPOSURE RATE ANNUAL
(MICRO-R/H)* ADJUSTED
cvoncimr
STATION LOCATION
ALAMO, NV
AUSTIN, NV
BEATTY, NV
CEDAR CITY, UT
COMPLEX 1, NV
ELY, NV
FURNACE CREEK, CA
GOLDFIELD, NV
INDIAN SPRINGS, NV
LAS VEGAS, NV (UNLV)
LATHROP WELLS, NV
NYALA, NV
OVERTON, NV
PAHRUMP, NV
RACHEL, NV
SALT LAKE CITY, UT
SHOSHONE, CA
ST. GEORGE, UT
STONE CABIN RNCH, NV
TIKABOO VALLEY, NV
TONOPAH, NV
TWIN SPRGS RANCH, NV
MEASUREMENT PERIOD
01/01/84-12/30/84
01/01/84-12/30/84
01/01/84-12/30/84
01/01/84-12/30/84
01/03/84-12/30/84
01/04/84-12/27/84
01/01/84-12/30/84
01/01/84-12/30/84
01/01/84-12/30/84
01/01/84-12/30/84
01/01/84-12/30/84
01/01/84-12/30/84
01/05/84-12/30/84
01/01/84-12/30/84
01/01/84-12/30/84
01/01/84-12/30/84
01/01/84-12/30/84
01/04/84-12/30/84
01/01/84-12/30/84
01/01/84-12/30/84
01/01/84-12/30/84
01/01/84-12/30/84
MAX.
19.6
25.0
22.2
15.4
23.4
17.8
17.6
20.0
14.1
14.6
19.0
17.7
13.5
12.8
21.3
16.1
16.8
13.0
22.1
21.3
22.3
21.2
MIN.
7.2
14.3
8.2
8.8
10.0
10.1
1.0
11.3
2.0
3.4
9.1
5.8
2.3
6.7
13.3
1.4
9.7
7.2
9.6
12.8
15.2
AVG. (MR/Y)
14.08
17.82
16.13
10.41
18.38
12.01
10.21
14.35
7.89
7.12
13.28
12.58
8.18
7.71
16.72
11.17
11.19
8.77
16.57
15.75
17.58
14.1 17.13
===================
123
156
141
91
161
105
89
126
69
62
116
110
72
67
146
98
98
77
145
138
154
150
========
*The MAX and MIN values are obtained from the instantaneous readings,
number of families who reside In areas that were subjected to fallout during
the early years of nuclear weapons tests. A few families who reside 1n areas
not affected by such fallout were also selected for comparative study. The
principal constraint to the program is the cooperation received from the people
in the area of study.
The Radiological Safety Program portion requires all employees who may be
exposed to radioactive materials in the course of their work to undergo a
periodic whole-body count. Some DOE contractor employees are also included in
this program.
Methods
The Off-Site Human Surveillance Program was initiated in December 1970 to
determine levels of radioactive nuclides in some of the families residing in
communities and ranches surrounding the Nevada Test Site. Biannual counting is
performed in the spring and fall. This program started with 34 families (142
41
-------
Individuals). In 1984, 16 of these families (37 individuals) were still active
1n the program. The geographical locations of the families which participated
in 1984 are shown 1n Figure 16.
These persons travel to the Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
where a whole-body count of each person is made to determine the body burden of
gamma-emitting radionuclldes. A urine sample is collected for analysis and a
short medical history, complete blood count, thyroid profile and physical exam-
inations are obtained on each participant at one of the visits. Results of
the whole-body count are available before the families leave the facility and
are discussed with the subjects. The results of the blood and urine tests are
sent to the families, along with a letter of explanation from the examining
physician.
In 1982, 15 new families were added to the surveillance program. These
people are 1n charge of the community monitoring stations described in the fol-
lowing section. In 1984, three long-time residents in the off-site area, with
their families, were added. As with the first group of families, each person
receives a whole-body count, medical history, complete blood count, thyroid
profile, etc.
In addition to the above off-site families, counts are performed routinely
on EPA and other contractor's employees as a part of the health monitoring
programs. Counts on other individuals in the general population from Las Vegas
and other cities are used for comparison.
Results
During 1984, a total of 409 Nal(Tl) and 800 phoswich spectra were obtained
from individuals, of which 130 were from persons participating in the Off-site
Human Surveillance Program. Also, about 1,600 spectra for calibrations and
background were generated. Ces1um-l37 is generally the only fission product
detected though none was found in the persons counted this year. Body burdens
of Cs-137 1n the off-site population detected in previous years were similar to
those in other U.S. residents from California to New York. All spectra collec-
ted in 1984 were representative of normal background for people and showed only
natural potassium-40. No plutonium was detected in any of the phoswich spectra.
The concentration of tritium in urine samples from the off-site residents
varied from 0 to 1,650 pCi/L with an average value of 210 pCi/L. Nearly all
the concentrations measured were in the range of background levels measured in
water and reflect only natural exposure. The source for the high values
(Salt Lake City residents) is unknown but 1s not attributed to NTS activities.
The tritium concentration in urines from EPA employees had a mean of 214 pCi/L
and a range of 0 to 1080 pCi/L.
As reported in previous years, medical examination of the off-site families
revealed a generally healthy population. In regard to the hematological examin-
ations and thyroid profiles, no abnormal results were observed which could be
attributed to past or present NTS testing operations.
42
-------
Nevada
•Austin
Currant
O
Ely
6
o Lund
Salt Lake City
0 Nvala Eagle Valley
OAdaven Ol
Elgin
O
Alamo
BunkervilleO
• Cedar City
• St. George
Arizona
DK ^
Pahrump
•
Shoshone
O Offsite Family
• Community Monitoring Sta. Family
« Overton
La'keMead
Figure 16. Location of families in the Human Surveillance Program.
43
-------
COMMUNITY MONITORING STATIONS
In order to Increase public knowledge about and participation in radio-
logical surveillance activities as conducted by DOE and EPA; the DOE, through
an Interagency Agreement with EPA and contracts with the Desert Research Insti-
tute (DRI) of th£ University of Nevada, and the University of Utah, has estab-
lished a network of 15 Community Monitoring Stations 1n the off-NTS areas. Each
station 1s operated by a local resident, in most cases a science teacher, who
is trained in radiological surveillance methods by the University of Utah. The
stations are equipped and maintained, and samples are collected and analyzed by
EMSL-LV. DRI provides data interpretation to the communities Involved and pays
the station operators for their services.
Each station contains one of the samplers for the ASN, NGTSN and Dosimetry
networks discussed earlier, plus a pressurized ion chamber (PIC) and recorder
for Immediate readout of external gamma exposure, and a recording barograph.
All of the equipment 1s mounted on a stand at a convenient location in each
community so the residents are aware of the surveillance and, if interested,
can have ready access to the data. The station locations are those indicated
in Figure 2.
The data from these stations are Included in the tables in Appendix E with
the other data from the appropriate networks. Table 8 contains a summary of
the PIC data.
CLAIMS INVESTIGATIONS
One of the public service functions of the EMSL-LV is to investigate
claims of Injury allegedly due to radiation originating from NTS activities. A
physician and a veterinarian, qualified by education or experience in the field
of radlobiology, investigate claims of radiation injury to determine whether or
not radiation exposure may be involved.
Investigation of claims from people involves determining the type of
illness, from examining physicians records and diagnoses, and determining the
possibility of radiation exposure through residence history and examination of
historical radiation surveillance data. These investigations can be conducted
by the Medical Liaison Officers Network (MLON) or by the EMSL-LV physician,
depending on where the claim is made. The MLON is composed of physicians, one
from each state, who are trained in radiobiology.
The EMSL-LV veterinarian conducts similar investigations for claims of
injury to domestic animals. In most cases the injuries investigated have been
due to common causes such as bacterial infections or unusual events such as
feeding on halogeton, a poisonous plant. No such claims were made in 1984.
PUBLIC INFORMATION PROGRAM
An important function of the Off-site Program has been to create and main-
tain, to the extent possible, public confidence that all reasonable safeguards
44
-------
are being employed to preserve public health and property from possible hazards
resulting from nuclear testing. Much of this responsibility is carried out
through personal contact with off-site residents by the radiation monitors who
advise the residents of program developments and answer questions about test
activities.
For any test where ground motion may be perceptible off site, monitors
visit remote locations and active mines beforehand to advise operators of pos-
sible problems. They also stand by on test day to advise of schedule changes.
Mine operators are reimbursed for time lost due to these activities. After the
test, monitors inform all their contacts that the test is over and whether or
not any radiation was detected off site.
The series of "town hall" meetings,initiated during Fiscal Year 1982 near
community monitoring stations was continued for CY 1984. The meetings were
organized to familiarize the local citizenry with the NTS nuclear testing and
related activities, to show how the surveillance networks function, and to
answer questions or expressed concerns of the attending public. During CY84,
meetings were held according to the following schedule:
January 12, 1984 Mesquite, NV July 18, 1984 Amargosa Valley, NV
February 14, 1984 Eureka, NV August 22, 1984 Kanab, UT
March 22, 1984 Searchlight,, NV August 23, 1984 Fredonia, AZ
April 19, 1984 Bullhead City, AZ October 17, 1984 Kingman, AZ
May 26, 1984 Currant, NV November 27, 1984 Silver Peak, NV
June 13, 1984 Enterprise, UT November 28, 1984 Bishop, CA
June 14, 1984 Mil ford, UT
Other activities included arranging NTS tours for business and community
leaders from Beatty, Death Valley, Amargosa Valley and Pahrump; for the
Community Monitoring Station managers, and for members of the Medical Liaison
Officers Network. Talks on the Off-site Program were given at Twin Springs
school and to civic and professional organizations in Reno, Carson City,
Tonapah and Las Vegas in June, August, October, and November. A complete
Community Monitoring Station was exhibited at the Southern Arizona State Fair
in Fredonia during September.
With the continued population growth in the off-site area in recent years
and the continuing concern for keeping radiation exposures as low as reasonably
achievable, the EMSL-LV realized that it would need local government assistance
to implement all protective actions that could be needed to protect close-in
population centers should an underground nuclear test accidently vent. EMSL-LV
staff discussed the kinds of assistance needed with the Nevada State Division
of Emergency Management, and obtained the State's concurrence with its plan to
work with County emergency management officials to develop modifications or
additions to their adopted emergency response plans. These changes would
specify protective actions and procedures for implementing them and would serve
as formal agreements on Federal and local government responsibilities and
authorities.
During fiscal year 1984, an Appendix to the Radiological Defense Annex
of the Lincoln County and Nye County (Nevada) emergency plans was approved by
45
-------
Federal, State, and County agency officials and was signed. This Appendix Is
expected to serve as a model for developing similar agreements with officials
of Clark, Esmeralda, and possibly White P1ne counties. The County plans, with
their new appendices, will be annexed to the master plan DOE 1s developing for
off-site emergency response for an accidental venting or seepage at the Nevada
Test Site.
DOSE ASSESSMENT
Dose assessment calculations for NTS-related radioactivity are not pos-
sible because detectable levels of radioactivity from the 1984 nuclear testing
program at the NTS were not observed off site by any of the monitoring networks.
However, an exposure can be calculated by using atmospheric dispersion and
reported releases of radioactivity from the NTS (Table 1), This calculation
is shown below. Residual radioactivity was observed in waters from wells in
other nuclear testing areas known to be contaminated during past nuclear tests
at the Project Dribble Site near Hattlesburg, Mississippi; Project Gnome near
Malaga, New Mexico; and at the Project Long Shot Site on Amchitka Island,
Alaska. However, the waters from these contaminated wells are not used for
drinking purposes.
An estimate of exposure of an average adult in Nevada due to worldwide
radioactivity can be made based on the data from the monitoring networks. The
principal data are strontium-90 1n milk (0.27 pC1/L) from previous atmospheric
tests; krypton-85 1n air (26 pCi/m3) from power reactors and reprocessing
plants; and plutonium-239 in air (24 aCi/m3) from previous atmospheric tests.
Assumptions: 1) Breathing rate = 7,300 m3/a
2) Water intake = 438 L/a, milk = 1/2 of water or 219 L/a
3) 8,766 hr/a
From DOE/EP-0023 Appendix B (DOE 1981a); first-year Dose Factors are:
1) Kr-85 (Immersion) 2,200 mrem/hr per uCi/mL, whole body
(nCi/mL = 1012 pCi/m3),
2) Sr-90 (ingestion) 45 mrem/uCi intake, whole body, and
3) Pu-239 (inhalation) 48,000 mrem/uCi to lung.
Calculated annual dose:
26 pCi/m3 A ! ,
Kr-85: 2,200 mrem/hr x 8,760 hr/a x -—--- = 5.01 x 1(H mrem/a
10*2 pCi/m3
Sr-90: 45 mrem/uC1 x 10-6 uCi/pCi x 0.27 pC1/L x 219 L/a = 0.0027 mrem/a
Pu-239: 4.8 x 104 mrem/pCi x 24 aCi/m3 x 10-12 uCi/aC1 x 7,300 m3/a =
0.0084 mrem/a
46
-------
The highest postulated annual dose estimate to man, from the results of
the 1984 Biomonitoring Program, was calculated to be 0.58 mrem. This would
result from the Pu-239 content of liver from the cattle sample if an individual
ate 0.5 kg per day for the whole year and if the liver tissue had the maximum
measured plutonium.
Therefore, the total maximized annual dose to an adult in Nevada from
worldwide radioactivity (assuming the above conditions) as detected by EMSL-LV
monitoring networks is the sum of the above amounts or 0.59 mrem. Natural
radioactivity in the body (K-40, C-14, Ra-226, etc.) results in annual internal
doses ranging from 26 to 36 mrem per year (FRC I960), and the calculated in-
ternal dose Is only 5.9 percent of this 10 mrem variation.
The external exposures to Nevadans range from 35 to 133 mrem/a as measured
by the TLD network. In the U.S., reported external exposures range from 63 to
200 mrem/a, depending on elevation (sea coast or Rocky Mountains) and on the
natural radioactivity 1n the soil (NCRP 1971). The exposures measured by the
TLD's compare favorably with that range as the TLD station's altitude varies
from 500 to over 7,000 feet above MSL and the uranium content in soil probably
also varies markedly among stations.
No radioactivity released at the NTS was measured off site, therefore, the
dose to the off-site population from these releases was calculated by using
average weather data and atmospheric diffusion equations. Wind direction and
speed data were available for a 12-year period as were 25,000 hourly observa-
tions of Pasquill stability class. Based on the releases shown in Table 1, the
estimated population dose to the 8500 people within 80 km of CP-1 was 1 x 10"3
person-rem. The highest estimated dose was 2.6 x 10~4 mrem/yr to an individual
living in Indian Springs, with lesser amounts to individuals in Amargosa, Beatty,
Lathrop Wells, Pahrump, and Rachel. Both results were higher than last year
due to an increased seepage of short-lived noble gases and to a doubling of
the population in the affected area.
47
-------
SECTION 6
REFERENCES
ANSI, 1975. "American National Standard Performance Testing and Procedural
Specifications for Thermo!uminescent Dosimetry (Environmental Applica-
tions)." ANSI N545-1975. American National Standards Institute, Inc.,
New York, New York.
Bernhardt, D. E., A. A. Moghissi and J. A. Cochran, 1973. Atmospheric Concen-
trations of Fission Product Noble Gases, pp. 4-19, in Noble Gases, CONF-
730915.
Black, S. C. and D. D. Smith, 1984. "Nevada Test Site Experimental Farm
Summary Report 1963-1981". EPA 600/4-84-066, DOE/DP/0539-052. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring Systems Labor-
atory, Las Vegas, Nevada.
California, 1982. Personal communication from California county agents.
DOE, 1981a. A Guide for Environmental Radiological Surveillance at U.S.
Department of Energy Installations. Report No. DOE/EP-0023.
DOE, 1981b. Environmental Protection, Safety, and Health Protection Program
for DOE Operations; Chapter XI. Requirements for Radiation Protection.
Order DOE 5480.1, U.S. Department of Energy.
DOE, 1981c. Environmental Protection, Safety, and Health Protection Informa-
tion Reporting Requirements. Order DOE 5484.1, U.S. Department of Energy.
DOE, 1983. Personal communication from Health Physics Division, DOE/NV.
EPA, 1981. "Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory Intercomparison Studies
Program 1978-1979." EPA-600/4-81-004. Environmental Monitoring and
Support Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas,
Nevada. (Available from U.S. Department of Commerce, NTIS, Springfield,
VA 22161.)
ERDA, 1977. "Final Environmental Impact Statement, Nye County, Nevada." ERDA-
1551. U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration, Nevada Opera-
tions Office, Las Vegas, Nevada. (Available from U.S. Department of
Commerce, NTIS, Springfield, VA 22161.)
48
-------
Fenske, P. R. and T. M. Humphrey, Jr., 1980. "The Tatum Dome Project Lamar
County, Mississippi" NVO-225. U.S. Department of Energy. Nevada Opera-
tions Office, Las Vegas, Nevada.
FRC, 1960. Background Material for the Development of Radiation Protection
Standards. Staff Report No. 1, Federal Radiation Council.
Giles, K. R., 1979. "A Summer Trapping Method for Mule Deer." EMSL-LV-0539-27.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring and Support
Laboratory, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Giles, K. R., 1985. Characteristics and Migration Patterns of Mule Deer on
the Nevada Test Site. In: Proceedings of the Nevada Chapters of the
Wildlife Society and the Society for Range Management. Ely, Nevada.
Holder, L. E. 1972. "National Network of Physicians Investigates Claims of
Radiation Injury in the Non-Occupationally Exposed Population." American
Journal of Public Health.
Houghton, J. G., C. M. Sakamoto, and R. 0. 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.
Jarvis, A. N. and L. Siu, 1981. Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory Inter-
comparison Studies Program - FY 1981-82, EPA-600/4-81-004, Las Vegas,
Nevada.
National Park Service, 1980. Personal Communication with Chief Ranger R.
Rainer, Death Valley National Monument, Death Valley, California.
NCRP, 1975. Natural Background Radiation in the United States. NCRP Report
No. 45, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements.
NCRP, 1971. Basic Radiation Protection Criteria. NCRP Report No. 39, National
Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements.
Nevada Department of Agriculture, 1979. "Nevada Agricultural Statistics 1979."
Nevada Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, Reno, Nevada.
Patzer, R. G. and M. E. Kaye, 1982. "Results of a Human Surveillance Program
in the Off-site Area Surrounding the Nevada Test Site." Health Phys.
43:791-801.
Potter, G. D., R. F. Grossman, W. A. Bliss, D. J. Thome, 1980. "Off-site Envi-
ronmental Monitoring Report for the Nevada Test Site and Other Test Areas
used for Underground Nuclear Detonation, January through December 1979."
EMSL-LV-0539-36. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental
Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Quiring, R. E., 1968. "Climatological Data, Nevada Test Site, Nuclear Rocket
Development Station (NRDS)." ERLTM-ARL-7. ESSA Research Laboratories,
Las Vegas, Nevada.
49
-------
Smith. D. D. and V. E. Andrews, 1981. Selected Radioisotopes in Animal Tissues:
90Sr and 137Cs Measurements from 1956 to 1977. U.S. Environmental Pro-
tection Agency Report EPA-600/3-81-027 (DOE/DP/00539-040). Las Vegas,
Nevada.
i
Smith, D. D. and S. C. Black, 1984. Animal Investigation Program for the Nevada
Test Site 1957-1981, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental
Monitoring Systems Laboratory Report EPA 600/6-84-020, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Smith, D. D., and J. S. Coogan, 1984. "Population Distribution Around the Nevada
Test Site - 1984". EPA-600/4-84-067, DOE/DP/0539-053. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas,
Nevada.
Smith j D. D., K. R. Giles and D. E. Bernhardt, 1982. Animal Investigation
Program 1980 Annual Report: Nevada Test Site and Vicinity. U.S. Envir-
onmental Protection Agency Report EPA 600/3-82-077.
Toonkel, L. E., 1980. "Appendix to Environmental Measurements Laboratory,
Environmental Quarterly." EML-371 Appendix, UC—11. Environmental Meas-
urements Laboratory. U.S. Department of Energy, New York, N.Y.
10014.
UNSCEAR, 1977. Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiations, United Nations
Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation 1977 Report to the
General Assembly.
Utah Department of Agriculture, 1979. "Utah Agricultural Statistics, 1978."
State of Utah Department of Agriculture, Salt Lake City, Utah.
Winograd, I. J. and W. Thordarson, 1975. Hydrogeologic and hydrochemical
framework, south-central Great Basin, Nevada-California, with special
reference to the Nevada Test Site, USGS Professional Paper 712-C, Denver,
Colorado.
50
-------
APPENDIX A. SITE DATA
SITE DESCRIPTION
A summary of the uses of the NTS and its immediate environs is included
in Section 3 of this report. More detailed data and descriptive maps are
contained in this Appendix.
Location
The NTS is located in Nye County, Nevada, with its southeast corner about
90 km northwest of Las Vegas (Figure 1 in main report). It has an area of
about 3,500 square km and varies from 40 to 56 km in width (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
test area and land that is open to the public. Depending upon wind speed and
direction, from 2 to more than 6 hours will elapse before any release of air-
borne radioactivity could pass over public lands.
Hi mate
The climate of the NTS and surrounding area is variable, due to its varia-
tions in altitude and its rugged terrain. Generally, the climate is referred
to as continental arid. Throughout the year, there is insufficient water to
support the growth of common food crops without irrigation.
Climate may be classified by the types of vegetation indigenous to an
area. According to Houghton et al. (1975), this method of classification of
dry condition, developed by Doppen, is further subdivided on the basis of
temperature and severity of drought. Table A-l (Houghton et al. 1975) summar-
izes the characteristics of climatic types for Nevada.
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 eleva-
tions. 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
high (low) temperatures at the lower altitudes are around 50F (25F) in January
and 95F (55F) in July, with extremes of 110F and -15F. Corresponding tempera-
tures on the plateaus are 35F (25F) in January and 80F (65F) in July with ex-
115F have been observed.
51
-------
TABLE A-l. CHARACTERISTICS OF CLIMATIC TYPES IN NEVADA (from Houghton et al. 1975)
in
ro
Mean Temperature
°C
(°F)
Climate Type Winter Summer
Alpine
tundra
Humid
continental
Subhumi d
continental
Mid-latitude
steppe
Mid-latitude
desert
Low-1 ati tude
desert
-18° to -9°
( 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°)
4° to 10°
(40° to 50°)
10° to 21°
(50° to 70°)
10° to 21°
(50° to 70°)
18° to 27°
(65° to 80°)
18° to 27°
(65° to 80°)
27° to 32°
(80° to 90°)
Annual Precipitation
cm
(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
Light to
moderate
Light
Negligible
Dominant Percent
Vegetation of Area
Al pi ne
meadows
Pine-fir 1
forest
Pine or scrub 15
woodland
Sagebrush, 57
grass, scrub
Greasewood, 20
shadscale
Creosote 7
bush
*Limits of annual precipitation overlap because
water balance.
of variations in temperature which affect the
-------
The wind direction, as measured on a 30 m tower at an observation station
about 9 km NNW of Yucca Lake, 1s predominantly northerly except during 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 during daylight hours of most months.
During the winter months southerly winds have only a slight edge over northerly
winds for a few hours during the warmest part of the day. These wind patterns
may be quite different at other locations on the NTS because of local terrain
effects and differences In elevation.
Geology and Hydrology
Two major hydrologic systems shown in Figure A-l exist on the NTS (ERDA
1977). Ground water in the northwestern part of the NTS or in the Pahute Mesa
area has been reported to flow at a rate of 2 m to 180 m per year to the south
and southwest toward the Ash Meadows Discharge Area in the Amargosa Desert. It
is estimated that the ground water to the east of the NTS moves from north to
south at a rate of not less than 2 m nor greater than 220 m per year. Carbon-14
analyses of this eastern ground water indicate that the lower velocity is
nearer the true value. At Mercury Valley in the extreme southern part of the
NTS, the eastern ground water flow shifts southwestward toward the Ash Meadows
Discharge Area.
Land Use of NTS Environs
Figure A-2 is a map of the off-NTS area showing a wide variety of land
uses, such as farming, mining, grazing, camping, fishing, and hunting within a
300-km radius of the NTS. For example, west of the NTS, elevations range from
85 m below 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 are primarily mid-latitude steppe with some
of the older river valleys, such as the Virgin River Valley and Moapa Valley,
supporting irrigation for small-scale but intensive farming of a variety of
crops. Grazing 1s also common in this area, particularly to the northeast.
The area north of the NTS is also mid-latitude steppe, where the major agricul-
tural activity is grazing of cattle and sheep. Minor agriculture, primarily
the growing of alfalfa hay, is found in this portion of the State within 300 km
of the NTS Control Point-1 (CP-1). Many of the residents grow or have access
to locally grown fruits and vegetables.
Many recreational areas, In all directions around the NTS (Figure A-2) are
used for such activities as hunting, fishing, and camping. In general, the
camping and fishing sites to the northwest, north, and northeast of the NTS are
utilized throughout the year except for the winter months. Camping and fishing
locations to the southeast, south, and southwest are utilized throughout the
year. The hunting season is from September through January.
53
-------
Pahute Mesa
Ground Water
System
Ash Meadows
Ground Water System
\
20 30 40
3/81 Seal* in Kilometers
» i» Flow Direction
—• — «— Ground Water System Boundaries
— •—••— Silent Canyon Caldera
••••• Timber Mountain Caldera
Figure A-l. Ground-water flow systems around the Nevada Test Site.
54
-------
6 50 100 150
3/81 Scale in Kilometers
A Camping & Recreational
Areas
O Hunting
• Fishing
O Mines
A Oil Fields
JA|
Lake Havasu
Figure A-2. General land use within 300 km of the Nevada Test Site.
55
-------
Population Distribution
Figure A-3 shows the current population of counties surrounding the NTS
based on 1980 census figures. Excluding Clark County, the major population
center (approximately 463,000 1n 1980), the population density within a 150 km
radius of the NTS 1s about 0.5 persons per square kilometer. For comparison,
the 48 contiguous states (1980 census) had a population density of approximately
29 persons per square kilometer. The estimated average population density for
Nevada 1n 1980 was 2.8 persons per square kilometer.
The off-site area within 80 km of the NTS (the area 1n which the dose
commitment must be determined for the purpose of this report) 1s predominantly
rural. Several small communities are located 1n the area, the largest being In
the Pahrump Valley. This growing rural community, with an estimated population
of about 5,500, 1s located about 72 km south of the NTS CP-1. The Amargosa
Farm Area, which has a population of about 1,500, 1s located about 50 km south-
west of CP-1. The largest town 1n the near-offslte area 1s Beatty, which has a
population of about 800 and 1s located approximately 65 km to the west of CP-1.
A report by Smith and Coogan was published 1n 1984 which summarizes the popula-
tion distribution within selected rural areas out to 200 kilometers from the
Control Point on the NTS.
The Mojave Desert of California, which Includes Death Valley National
Monument, Hes along the southwestern border of Nevada. The National Park
Service (1980) estimates that the population within the Monument boundaries
ranges from a minimum of 200 permanent residents during the summer months to as
many as 5,000 tourists and campers on any particular day during the major hol-
iday periods 1n the winter months, and as many as 30,000 during "Death Valley
Days" 1n the month of November. The largest town and contiguous populated area
(about 40 square miles) 1n the Mojave Desert 1s Barstow, located 265 km south-
southwest of the NTS, with a 1983 population of about 36,000. The next largest
populated area 1s the Rldgecrest-Chlna Lake area, which has a current population
of about 25,000 and 1s located about 190 km southwest of the NTS. The Owens
Valley, where numerous small towns are located, lies about 50 km west of Death
Valley. The largest town 1n Owens Valley 1s Bishop, located 225 km west-north-
west of the NTS, with a population of about 5,300 Including contiguous populated
areas.
The extreme southwestern region of Utah 1s more developed than the adjacent
part of Nevada. The largest community 1s St. George, located 220 km east of
the NTS, with a population of 11,300. The next largest town, Cedar City, with
a population of 10,900, 1s located 280 km east northeast of the NTS.
The extreme northwestern region of Arizona 1s mostly range land except for
that portion 1n the Lake Mead Recreation Area. In addition, several small com-
munities He along the Colorado River. The largest town 1n the area 1s Klngman,
located 280 km southeast of the NTS, with a population of about 9,300. Figures
A-4 through A-7 show the domestic animal populations 1n the counties near the
NTS.
56
-------
Storey,
1,500
Canon
City
33,600
Douglas
19,500
N
Sell* in Miltt
0 26 50 76 100
0 60 100 160
3/85 Se«l» in Kllom«t«r»
Figure A-3. Population of Arizona, California, Nevada, and Utah
counties near the Nevada Test site (1980).
57
-------
XX Cows
(XX) Goati
Figure A-4. Distribution of family milk cows and goats, by county (1984),
58
-------
N
\Kern
7,720
Sell* in Milet
25 50 75 100
I
San Bernardir
34,876
0 50 100 150
3/85 Seal* in Kilometer!
Figure A-5. Distribution of dairy cows, by county (1984),
59
-------
Canon
City
1,200
Box Elder
30,600
Humboldt
74,000
Panning
30,000
Lander
28.000
Washoe
34,000
Churchill
75,000
White Pine
32,000
yo
Douglas ? 59,006
22.000 ) V 1 Mineral
4,700
Etmeralda
MonoX g QOO
4.000
Lincoln
20,000
Washington
9,800
San Bernardino
134,000
Scalt m Miles
0 25 50 75 100
0 50 100 150
3/85 Seal* in Kilom*l»ri
Figure A-6. Distribution of beef cattle, by county, 1984.
60
-------
0 60 tOO 1
3/85 Scali in Kilomcttrt
Figure A-7. Distribution of sheep, by county, 1984.
61
-------
APPENDIX B. SAMPLE ANALYSIS PROCEDURES
ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
The procedures for analyzing samples collected for offslte surveillance are
described by Johns et al. 1n "Rad1ochem1cal Analytical Procedures for Analyses
of Environmental Samples" (EMSL-LV-0539-17, 1979) and are summarized In Table
B-l.
TABLE B-l. SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES
Type of
Analysis
IG Ge(U)
Gamma
Spec
trometry**
Analytical
Equipment
IG or Ge(L1)
detector cali-
brated at 0.5 keV/
channel (0.04
to 2 MeV range)
Individual detec-
tor efficiencies
ranging from
15% to 35%.
Counting
Period
(m1n)
A1r charcoal
cartridges
and Individual
air filters,
30 m1n; air
filter com-
posites, 1200
m1n. 100 m1n
for milk.
water, sus-
pended solids.
Analytical
Procedures
Rad1onucl1de
concentration
quantified
from gamma
spectral data
by on-Hne
computer pro-
gram. Radlo-
nuclldes 1n air
filter composite
samples are
Identified only.
Sample
Size
120-300 m3
for air
filters;
and char-
coal car-
tridges;
3-1/2
liters for
milk and
water.
Approximate
Detection
Limit*
For routine milk
and water generally,
5 pC1/L for most
common fallout
radlonuclldes 1n a
simple spectrum.
Filters for LTHMP
suspended solids,
6 pC1/L. Air
filters and char-
coal cartridges,
0.04 pC1/m3.
Gross beta
on air
filters
Low-level end
window, gas
flow proportional
counter with a
12.7 cm diameter
window (80 pg/cm2)
30
Samples are
counted after
decay of
naturally-
occurlng
radlonuclldes
and, If neces-
sary, extrapo-
lated to mid-
point of col-
lection 1n
accordance with
t.-l.z decay or
an experiment-
ally-derived
decay.
120-300 m3 0.5 pd/sample.
(continued)
62
-------
TABLE B-l. (Continued)
Type of
Analysis
Sr-89-90
Analytical
Equipment
Low-background
thin-window,
gas-flow pro-
portional
counter.
Counting
Period
(mln)
50
Analytical
Procedures
Chemical separa-
tion by Ion ex-
change. Separated
sample counted
successively; ac-
tivity calculated
by simultaneous
solution of equa-
tions.
Sample
Size
1.0 liter
for milk
or water.
0.1-1 kg
for tissue.
Approximate
Detection
Limit*
Sr-89 • 5 pCI/L
Sr-90 - 2 pC1/L.
H-3
H-3
Enrichment
(Long-Term
Hydro-
logical
Samples)
Pu-238,239
Kr-85,
Xe-133,
Xe-135
Automatic 200
liquid
scintillation
counter with
output printer.
Automatic 200
scintillation
counter with
output printer.
Alpha spectro- 1000-1400
meter with 450
mm, 300-pm
depletion depth,
silicon surface
barrier detectors
operated 1n
vacuum chambers.
Automatic 200
liquid scintil-
lation counter
with output
printer.
Sample pre-
pared by
distillation.
Sample concen-
trated by
electrolysis
followed by
distillation.
Water sample or
acid-digested
filter or tissue
samples separated
by Ion exchange,
electro-plated on
stainless steel
planchet.
Separation by
gas chromatogra-
phy; d1 solved 1n
toluene "cocktail1
for counting
4 ml
for water
250 ml
for water
1.0 liter
for water;
0.1-1 kg
for tissue;
5,000-
10,000 m3
for air.
0.4-1.0
for air
400 pCI/L.
10 pC1/L.
Pu-238 - 0.08 pC1/L
Pu-239 - 0.04 pC1/L
for water. For
tissue samples,
0.04 pC1 per total
sample for all
Isotopes; 5-10 aC1/m3
for plutonlum on air
filters.
Kr-85. Xe-133, Xe-135
• 4 pC1/m3.
*The detection limit Is defined as 3.29 slgma where slgma equals the counting error of the sa«ple
and Type I error « Type II error » 5 percent. (J. P. Corley, 0. H. Denham, R. E. Jaqulsh, 0. E.
Mlchels, A. R. Olsen, 0. A. Walte, A Guide for Environmental Radiological Surveillance at U.S.
Dept. of Energy Installations, July 1981, Office of Operational Safety Report DOE/EP-0023, U.S.
DOE, Washington, D. C.)
**6amma Spectrometry using either an Intrinsic germanium (16), or lithium-drifted germanium diode
(Ge(LD) detector.
63
-------
APPENDIX C. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCEDURES
PRECISION OF ANALYSIS
The duplicate sampling program was Initiated for the purpose of routinely
assessing the errors due to sampling, analysis, and counting of samples obtained
from the surveillance networks maintained by the EMSL-LV.
The program consists of the analysis of duplicate or replicate samples
from the ASN, the NGTSN, the LTHMP, and the Doslmetry Network. As the radio-
activity concentration In samples collected from the LTHMP and the MSN are
below detection levels, most duplicate samples for these networks are prepared
from spiked solutions. The NGTSN samples are generally split for analysis.
At least 30 duplicate samples from each network are normally collected and
analyzed over the report period. Since three TLD cards consisting of two TLD
chips each are used at each station of the Doslmetry Network, no additional
samples were necessary. Table C-l summarizes the sampling information for each
surveillance network.
To estimate the precision of a methodology, the standard deviation of
replicate results is needed. Thus, for example, the variance, s2, of each set
TABLE C-l. SAMPLES AND ANALYSES FOR DUPLICATE SAMPLING PROGRAM, 1984
ssssssaiaaasaasassassssssasssasssasssassssssasssssssssssssssssassssssssssss:
Surveillance
Network
Number of
Sampling
Locations
Samples
Collected
This Year
Sets of
Duplicate
Samples
Collected
Number
Per Set
Sample
Analysis
ASN
NGTSN
Doslmetry
MSN
LTHMP
114
16
86
31
134
4,533
835 (NG)
833 (H3)
344
98
254
469
27
32
344
25
125
2
2
4-6
2
Gross beta,
y Spectrometry
Kr-85, H-3,
H20, HTO
Effective dose
from gamma
K-40, Sr-89,
Sr-90
H-3
64
-------
of replicate TLD results (n=6) was estimated from the results by the standard
expression,
0 k 2
s2 = E (x< - x) / (k - 1)
1=1
where k = number of sets of replicates.
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 1s
the absolute difference between the duplicate sample results. For small sample
sizes, this estimate of the variance 1s statistically efficient* and certainly
more convenient to calculate than the standard expression. The standard devia-
tion 1s obtained by taking the square root.
The principle that the variances of random samples collected from a normal
population follow a ch1-square distribution (X2) was then used to estimate the
expected population standard deviation for each type of sample analysis. The
expression used 1s as follows:**
s =
k
Z (n^ - Ds-iV Z (n* - 1)
1=1 1=1
1/2
where n^-1 = the degrees of freedom for n samples collected for the ith
replicate sample
2
Sj = the expected variance of the 1th replicate sample
s = the best estimate of sample standard deviation derived from the
variance estimates of all replicate samples (the expected value
of s2 1s cr2).
For expressing the precision of measurement in common units, the coefficient
of variation (s/x") was calculated for each sample type. These are displayed 1n
Table C-2 for those analyses for which there were adequate data.
To estimate the precision of counting, approximately 10 percent of all
samples are counted a second time. These are unknown to the analyst. Since
all such replicate counting gave results within the counting error, the preci-
sion data in Table C-2 represents errors principally 1n analysis.
*Snedecor, G. W., and W. G. Cochran. Statistical Methods. The Iowa State
University Press, Ames, Iowa. 6th Ed. 1967. pp. 39-47.
**Freund, J. E. Mathematical Statistics. Prentice Hall, Englewood, New Jersey.
1962. pp 189-235.
65
-------
TABLE C-2. SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL PRECISION - 1984
Surveillance
Network
ASN
NGTSN
Analysis '
Gross p
Be-7 (1982)
Kr-85
HTO
H20
Sets of
Replicate
Samples
Evaluated
39
9
26
*
29
Coefficient
of Variation
(*)
55
37
15
26
24
Dosimetry
MSN
LTHMP
(TLD)
K-40
Sr-89
Sr-90
H-3
H-3
344
55
33
34
41
56
4.1
11
11
16
9.7
19
*Estimate of precision was calculated from the errors in the H-3 conventional
analysis and the measurement of atmospheric moisture (H20).
ACCURACY OF ANALYSIS
Data from the analysis of intercomparison samples are statistically anal-
yzed and compared to known values and values obtained from other participating
laboratories. A summary of the statistical analysis 1s given in Table C-3,
which compares the mean of three replicate analyses with the known value. The
normalized deviation is a measure of the accuracy of the analysis when compared
to the known concentration. The determination of this parameter is explained
1n detail separately (Jarvis and Siu). If the value of this parameter (in
multiples of standard normal deviate, unltless) lies between control limits of
-3 and +3, the precision or accuracy of the analysis is within normal statis-
tical variation. However, if the parameters exceed these limits, one must
suspect that there Is some cause other than normal statistical variations that
contributed to the difference between the measured values and the known value.
As shown by this table, all analyses were within the control limit.
To measure the performance of the contractor laboratory for analysis
of animal tissues, a known amount of activity was added to several samples.
The reported activity is compared to the known amount in Table C-4. The aver-
age bias for Sr-90 was -22 percent and for Pu-239 was -19 percent.
66
-------
TABLE C-3. QUALITY ASSURANCE INTERCOMPARISON RESULTS - 1984
sassasaaaaaa:
Analysis
H-3 1n
water
H-3 1n
urine
Cr-51 1n
water
Co-60 1n
water
Zn-65 1n
water
Ru-106 1n
water
1-131 1n
water
Cs-134 1n
water
Cs-137 1n
water
aasaaaasaaas
Month
Feb
Apr
Jun
Aug
Oct
Dec
Mar
Jun
Nov
Feb
Jun
Oct
Feb
Jun
Oct*
Oct*
Feb
Jun
Oct
Feb
Jun
Oct
Apr
Aug
Dec.
Feb
Jun
Oct*
Oct*
Feb
Jun
Oct*
Oct*
Mean of
Replicate
Analyses
(pC1/L)
2333
2389
2917
2746
2640
3022
3927
2183
2011
41
<60
<40
9
30
19
16
49
59
147
44
32
45
<10
34
36
25
43
31
<3
15
35
24
15
Known
Value
(pC1/L)
2383
3508
3081
2817
2810
3182
4496
2319
2012
40
66
40
10
31
20
14
50
63
147
61
29
47
6
34
36
31
47
31
2
16
37
24
14
Normalized
Deviation from:
Known Cone.
-0.2
-0.6
-0.6
-0.3
-0.8
-0.8
-2.6
-0.7
0.0
0.5
—
---
-0.2
-0.5
-0.2
0.6
-0.5
-1.4
-0.1
-6.0
1.2
-0.8
___
-0.1
-0.1
-2.0
-1.4
0.0
---
-0.3
-0.8
-0.1
0.2
67
(continued)
-------
TABLE C-3. (Continued)
333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333533333333333=3333335333
Mean of
Analysis
Sr-89 1n
milk
Sr-90 in
milk
1-131 1n
milk
Cs-137 1n
milk
Cs-137 1n
air filters
Month
June
Oct
June
Oct
June
Oct
June
Oct
Aug
Nov
.Replicate Known Normalized
, Analyses Value Deviation from:
(pC1/L) (pC1/L) Known Cone.
25
23
17
16
Not
41
33
32
10
7
25
22
17
16
reported - excessive decay
42
35
32
15
10
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.3
-0.7
0.0
-1.8
-0.9
(pd/fHter)
23393833333333333333383333333533333333333333333=33333333333333335333333333333
*In October 1984, two Intercomparlson studies were conducted for Co-60,
Cs-134, and Cs-137 1n water.
QUALITY ASSURANCE-DOSIMETRY
Radioanalytlcal counting systems and TLD systems are calibrated using
radlonucllde standards that are traceable to the National Bureau of Standards
(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 1n accordance with procedures traceable to
NBS.
To determine accuracy of the data obtained from the TLD systems, dosim-
eters are submitted to the International Intercomparlson of environmental
dosimeters. Dosimeters were submitted to the Sixth International Intercompar-
lson in July 1981 (Table C-5). All TLD measurements are performed in conform-
ance with standards proposed by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI
1975).
68
-------
TABLE C-4. QUALITY ASSURANCE RESULTS FOR THE BIOENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM - 1984
Sample Type
and
Shipment
Number
Activity Added
Nucllde pCI/g Bone Ash
% B1as+
Activity Reported or
pC1/g Bone Ash Precision*
Bone Ash
Ash 24
52
Ash 25
52
Ash 26
52
Ash 27
52
Ash 7
55
Ash 8
55
Ash 9
55
Ash 10
55
Duplicate Samples
Bov 11 Bone
Bov 11 Bone
BHS 15 Bone
BHS 15 Bone Dup
BHS 18 Bone
BHS 18 Bone Dup
BOV 1 Bone
BOV 1 Bone Dup
BOV 2 Bone
BOV 2 Bone Dup
239PU
90Sr
239Pu
90Sr
239Pu
90Sr
239Pu
90Sr
239Pu
90Sr
239Pu
90Sr
239Pu
90Sr
239Pu
90Sr
90Sr
90Sr
90Sr
90Sr
90Sr
90Sr
239Pu
90Sr
239Pu
90Sr
239Pu
90Sr
239Pu
90Sr
Spiked Samples
0.20
9.76
0
0
0.19
9.1
0
0
0.13
1.2
0
0
0.13
1.2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.13
8.97
0.00024**
1.6
0.14
8.9
0.00029**
1.6
0.11
2.8
0.00037**
1.7
0.13
2.5
0.003**
1.98
1.5
1.8
4.3
3.9
1.0
0.8
0.013
1.8
0.084
1.8
0.00
2.7
0.02
2.5
Bias (B) = Recovery -1; where recovery 1s
-35
-25
-26
•21
-15
•12
0
-31
-0.16
0.086
0.19
-1.3
0
-1.7
0.07
and xi = net activity reported
u v= activity added
t Precision (Cv)
xl + X2
**Count1ng error exceeds reported activity
x r-rrr where
= first value
3 second value
69
-------
TABLE C-5. SUMMARY RESULTS OF THE SIXTH INTERNATIONAL
INTERCOM?ARISON OF ENVIRONMENTAL DOSIMETERS
333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333=333333333333333333333333333333=
Quantity
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Comments
Summary of Laboratory Results (mR):
EMSL-LV Dosimeters 146 11
All Dosimeters 149 21
Calculated Exposure 158 8
Summary of Field (Pre-1rradlated) Results (mR):
EMSL-LV Dosimeters 191 14
All Dosimeters 191 30
Calculated Exposure 202 10
Summary of Field Results (mR):
EMSL-LV Dosimeters 43.1
All Dosimeters 45.0
Calculated Exposure 43.5
3.2
16.4
2.2
EMSL-LV results 2% lower
than all dosimeters and
8% lower than the
calculated exposure.
EMSL-LV results 0% lower
than all dosimeters and 5%
lower than the calculated
exposure.
EMSL-LV results 4.2% lower
than all dosimeters and
0.9% lower than the
calculated exposure.
3 333 3 = 333 = 333 33 33 3333 = 3 33 3 = 33 = 3 33 = 3 = 3 333 3 333 3 3 33 3 3 3 3 = 333 3 = 33 3 = 3 333333 = 3 3 = 3 333
70
-------
APPENDIX D. RADIATION PROTECTION STANDARDS FOR
EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL EXPOSURE
DOE ANNUAL DOSE COMMITMENT
The annual dose commitment tabulated below 1s from "Basic Radiation
Protection Criteria" 1n NCRP Report No. 39.
Dose Limit to Individuals Dose Limit to Suitable
1n Uncontrolled Area at Sample of the Exposed
Points of Maximum Probable Population 1n an
Type of Exposure Exposure (rem) Uncontrolled Area (rem)
Whole body, gonads, 0.5 0.17
or bone marrow
Other organs 1.5 0.5
DOE CONCENTRATION GUIDES
The concentration guides (CG's) 1n Table D-l are from the DOE Order
5480.1, Chapter XI, "Requirements for Radiation Protection." All values are
annual average concentrations. The Concentration Guides are based on a
suitable sample of the exposed population In an uncontrolled area. The
final column lists the Minimum Detectable Concentration from Appendix B as
a percent of the CG.
EPA CONCENTRATION GUIDE
In 1976 the Environmental Protection Agency published concentration
guides for drinking water (Part 141, CFR 40, Amended) which Included 20,000
pC1/L for tritium. This concentration would result 1n 4 mrem/a to an
Individual from continuous exposure.
71
-------
TABLE 0-1. DOE CONCENTRATION GUIDES
Network or Program
A1r Surveillance
Network
Noble Gas and Tritium
Surveillance Network
Long-Term
Hydrologlcal Program
M1lk Surveillance
Networks
Sampling Radlo-
. Medium nucllde
i
air Be-7
Zr-95
Nb-95
Mo-99
Ru-103
1-131
Te-132
Cs-137
Ba-140
La-140
Ce-141
Ce-144
Pu-239
air Kr-85
H-3
Xe-133
Xe-135
water H-3
Sr-89
Sr-90
Cs-137
Ra-226
U-234
U-235
U-238*
Pu-238
Pu-239
milk H-3
Cs-137
Sr-89
Sr-90
CG
(pC1/m3)
1.3 x 104
3.3 x 102
1.0 x 103
2.3 x 103
1.0 x 103
3.3 x IQl
1.3 x 103
1.7 x 102
3.3 x 102
1.3 x 103
1.7 x 103
6.7 x IQl
2.0 x lO"2
1.0 x 105
6.7 x 104
1.0 x 105
3.3 x 104
(pCI/L)
1.0 x 10?
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 102
6.7 x 103
1.0 x IQl
1.3 x 103
1.3 x 103
2.0 x 102
1.7 x 103
1.7 x 103
1.0 x 106
6.7 x 103
1.0 x 103
1.0 x 102
MDC as % of CG
3.1 x 10-4
1.2 x lO'2
4.0 x 10~3
1.7 x 10-3
4.0 x 10-3
1.2 x 10-1
3.1 x 10-3
2.4 x 10-2
1.2 x 10-2
3.1 x 10-3
2.4 x 10-3
6.0 x 10-2
5.0 x 10-2
4.0 x 10"3
6.0 x 10-1
4.0 x ID'3
1.2 x 10-2
1.0 x 10-3
5.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-0
1.5 x lO-1
4.7 x 10-3
2.4 x 10-3'
1.0 x 10~3
1.5 x 10-1
5.0 x 10-1
2.0 x 10-°
Concentration based on chemical toxlclty.
72
-------
APPENDIX E. DATA SUMMARY FOR THE MONITORING NETWORKS
TABLE E-l. SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR AIR SURVEILLANCE NETWORK
CONTINUOUSLY OPERATING STATIONS - 1984
=======3333 333=3=3 ===3 =3= ======
SAMPLING LOCATION
DEATH VALLEY JCT, CA
FURNACE CREEK, CA
SHOSHONE, CA
ALAMO, NV
AUSTIN, NV
BEATTY, NV
STONE CABIN RANCH, NV
CURRANT, NV - BLUE EAGLE RANCH
GOLDFIELD, NV
GROOM LAKE, NV
HIKO, NV
INDIAN SPRINGS, NV
LAS VEGAS, NV
LATHROP WELLS, NV
OVERTON, NV
PAHRUMP, NV
NO. DAYS
DETECTED
/SAMPLED
13.0/367.0
26.9/364.5
21.7/319.5
15.0/362.5
7.2/349.4
4.0/345.9
12.9/342.6
5.0/360.4
7.9/364.2
21.7/317.1
5.0/363.2
11.7/362.7
8.5/357.0
15.9/350.9
16.9/356.9
21.0/353.1
RADIO-
NUCLIDE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
RADIOACTIVITY CONC.
(PCI/M3)
MAX
0.75
0.60
0.43
0.59
0.29
0.58
0.98
0.81
0.64
0.58
0.36
0.89
0.54
0.81
0.90
0.71
MIN
0.31
0.25
0.16
0.43
0.29
0.48
0.44
0.47
0.39
0.29
0.33
0.29
0.33
0.33
0.21
0.37
AVG*
0.018
0.029
0.020
0.021
0.0060
0.0061
0.024
0.0084
0.011
0.028
0.0048
0.018
0.010
0.021
0.021
0.029
(continued)
73
-------
TABLE E-l. Continued
sassssasssassBaassaBassasssBisssssssssassssssssssssssssssssassBsssssssssssssssas
NO. DAYS RADIOACTIVITY CONC.
(PCI/M3)
SAMPLING LOCATION
SCOTTY'S JCT, NV
SUNNYSIDE, NV
RACHEL, NV - ROBINSON TRAILER
TONOPAH, NV
TTR, NV
FALLINI'S (TWIN SPGS) RANCH, NV
CEDAR CITY, UT
DELTA, UT
MILFORD, UT
ST GEORGE, UT
SALT LAKE CITY, UT
Uf. 1 tly 1 L.U
/SAMPLED
11.0/365.3
5.0/363.9
9.0/344.5
2.0/365.9
42.4/360.1
4.0/360.6
8.0/349.3
3.7/199.1
24.7/303.9
15.0/336.3
53.1/355.3
r\rtuiu-
NUCLIDE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
MAX
0.58
0.55
0.69
0.62
0.52
0.79
0.92
0.48
0.50 '
0.61
0.57
MIN
0.25
0.53
0.20
0.62
0.19
0.44
0.55
0.48
0.13
0.27
0.22
AVG*
0.014
0.0074
0.012
0.0033
0.039
0.0068
0.015
0.0088
0.017
0.022
0.043
*AVG MEANS TIME-WEIGHTED AVERAGE OVER TOTAL SAMPLING TIME.
THE FOLLOWING STATIONS HAD NEGLIGIBLE GAMMA-SPECTRA:
ELY, NV
NYALA, NV :
74
-------
TABLE 1-2. SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR AIR SURVEILLANCE NETWORK
STANDBY STATIONS - OPERATED 1 OR 2 WEEKS PER QUARTER - 1984
3ssBS3333333S333B33BSss33ssss3===s===::=s3===3=
NO. DAYS RADIOACTIVITY CONC.
SAMPLING LOCATION
KINGMAN, AZ
INDIO, CA
CLAYTON, MO
LUND, NV
RENO, NV
MEDFORD, OR
BRYCE CANYON, UT
DETECTED
l*W 1 LaW 1 UL/
/SAMPLED
2.0/28.1
3.0/20.8
2.0/28.0
3.0/27.2
2.0/28.1
3.1/20.7
2.0/28.9
RADIO-
i\f\u AU
NUCLIDE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
7BE
MAX
0.48
0.39
0.56
0.69
0.45
0.50
0.77
\r\si/ru i
MIN
0.48
0.39
0.56
0.69
0.45
0.50
0.77
AVG
0.034
0.055
0.040
0.076
0.031
0.076
0.054
33S3333333333333a33S3333Sa3333S3333::33S333B33333333333333S3r
THE FOLLOWING STATIONS HAD NEGLIGIBLE GAMMA-SPECTRA:
GLOBE, AZ
TUCSON, AZ
WINSLOW, AZ
YUMA, AZ
LITTLE ROCK, AR
ALTURAS, CA
BAKER, CA
BISHOP, CA
CHICO, CA
LONE PINE, CA
NEEDLES, CA
RIDGECREST, CA
SANTA ROSA, CA
CORTEZ, CO
DENVER, CO
GRAND JUNCTION, CO
MOUNTAIN HOME, ID
NAMPA, ID
POCATELLO, ID
FORT DODGE, IA
IOWA CITY, IA
DODGE CITY, KS
MONROE, LA
MINNEAPOLIS, MN
JOPLIN, MO
GREAT FALLS, MT
KALISPELL, MT
MILES CITY, MT
NORTH PLATTE, NE
BATTLE MOUNTAIN, NV
BLUE JAY, NV
CALIENTE, NV
CURRANT, NV - ANGLE WORM RANCH
CURRIE, NV
ELKO, NV
EUREKA, NV
FALLON, NV
FRENCHMAN STATION, NV
GEYSER RANCH, NV
LOVELOCK, NV
MESQUITE, NV
PIOCHE, NV
ROUND MOUNTAIN, NV
WARM SPRINGS, NV
WELLS, NV
WINNEMUCCA, NV
ALBUQUERQUE, NM
CARLSBAD, NM
SHIPROCK, NM
BISMARK, ND
FARGO, ND
WILLISTON, ND
MUSKOGEE, OK
BURNS, OR
RAPID CITY, SD
AMARILLO, TX
AUSTIN, TX
MIDLAND, TX
TYLER, TX
ENTERPRISE, UT
GARRISON, UT
LOGAN, UT
PAROWAN, UT
VERNAL, UT
WENDOVER.UT
SEATTLE, WA
SPOKANE, WA
ROCK SPRINGS, WY
WORLAND, WY
75
-------
TABLE E-3. SUMMARY OF GROSS BETA ANALYSES FOR AIR SURVEILLANCE NETWORK - 1984
:
SAMPLING LOCATION
SHOSHONE, CA
LAS VEGAS, NV
DELTA, UT
MILFORD, UT
ST GEORGE, UT
RADIOACTIVITY CONC.
NO. DAYS
SAMPLED
324.7
353.9
199.1
303.9
331.3
MAX
0.035
0.027
0.064
0.040
0.032
(PCI/M3)
MIN
-0.0032
-0.011
0.0016
-0.0042
0.0
AVG
0.013
0.011
0.014
0.012
0.013
76
-------
TABLE E-4. PLUTONIUM-239 CONCENTRATION IN COMPOSITED AIR SAMPLES* - 1984
=========== ====3========= ======================-====================
First Second Third Fourth Annual
Sampling Location Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter Average
WINSLOW, AZ
BISHOP, CA
MT HOME, ID
IOWA CITY, IA
MONROE, LA
JOPLIN, MO
LAS VEGAS, NV
LATHROP WELLS, NV
RACHEL, NV
ALBUQUERQUE/CARLSBAD, NM
MUSKOGEE, OK
MEDFORD/BURNS, OR
RAPID CITY, SD
AUSTIN, TX
VERNAL, UT
SALT LAKE CITY, UT
SEATTLE/SPOKANE, WA
WORLAND, WY
25.2
._
31.6
9.28
5.62**
7.05**
-0.6**
24.4
42.8
494
0**
3.14**
5.93**
1.26**
11.0**
41.5
-1.47**
0**
25.2
153
31.6
11.5
6.78**
7.05**
5.6**
34.4**
42.1
438
0**
3.51**
5.77**
1.26**
—
38.5
-1.47**
0**
-11.9**
_-
—
711***
7.65**
..
14.4
58.9
3.54**
42.7
305
2.68**
67.7**
47.1**
67.6
5.39**
70.7
-19.8**
29.1
22.5
__ .
--
—
47**
9.0**
5.55**
14.2**
2.81**
3.63**
15.0**
19.8**
—
4.27**
-3.95**
0**
—
16.9
87.5
31.6
210
6.8**
17.6**
5.4**
31.2
25,6
256
94.1
4.7**
24.9**
16.2**
30.4
24.6
17.1**
0**
*A11 data expressed 1n aC1/m3.
**Result 1s less than 2 x counting error. MDC varied from
***Insuff1c1ent sample, concentration 1s Inaccurate.
10 to 50 aCi/m3.
77
-------
TABLE E-5. SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR THE NOBLE GAS AND TRITIUM
SURVEILLANCE NETWORK - 1984
=================================
NO. SAMPLES
SAMPLING
LOCATION
SHOSHONE,
CA
ALAMO,
NV
ALAMO, (SHERRI
NV
AUSTIN,
NV
*
BEATTY,
NV
ELY,
NV
GOLDFIELD,
NV
INDIAN SPRINGS
NV
LAS VEGAS,
NV
POSITIVE/
NEGATIVE
47/6
41/12
52/0
52/0
44/7
43/8
52/0
52/0
'S) 1/0
1/0
50/2
45/7
52/0
52/0
46/5
39/12
51/1
51/1
48/4
42/10
49/2
49/2
48/4
43/9
51/0
51/0
, 46/6
41/11
53/0
53/0
47/6
43/10
50/3
50/3
RADIONUCLIDE
85KR
133XE
3H IN ATM. M.*
3H AS HTO IN AIR
85KR
133XE
3H IN 'ATM. M.*
3H AS HTO IN AIR
85KR
133XE
85KR
133XE
3H IN ATM. M.*
3H AS HTO IN AIR
85KR
133XE
3H IN ATM. M.*
3H AS HTO IN AIR
85KR
133XE
3H IN ATM. M.*
3H AS HTO IN AIR
85KR
133XE
3H IN ATM. M.*
3H AS HTO IN AIR
85KR
133XE
3H IN ATM. M.*
3H AS HTO IN AIR
85KR
133XE
3H IN ATM. M.*
3H AS HTO IN AIR
RADIOACTIVITY CONC.
(PCI/M3)* 1
MAX
38
27
0.40
2.5
34
37
0.40
4.5
33
6.8
34
32
0.46
2.5
34
31
0.30
2.1
34
23
0.50
2.3
40
30
0.43
2.3
34
33
0.45
4.1
35
35
0.67
3.3
MIN
18
-9.3
-0.22
-1.4
21
-6.6
-0.28
-1.3
33
6.8
20
-14
-0.34
-1.6
19
-19
-0.19
-1.7
19
-13
-0.25
-1.3
18
-14
-0.25
-2.3
20
-19
-0.25
-0.96
19
-7.9
-0.16
-1.1
AVG
26
5.3
0.043
0.31
28
7.7
0.055
0.43
33
6.8
27
5.5
0.021
0.15
26
6.0
0.064
0.34
26
4.9
0.061
0.40
28
5.2
0.021
0.063
25
5.3
0.052
0.30
27
6.5
0.079
0.45
'ERCENT
CONC.
GUIDE*
0.03
<0.01
-
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
-
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
-
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
-
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
-
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
-
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
-
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
-
<0.01
1 \
(continued)
78
-------
TABLE E-5. Continued
NO. SAMPLES
RADIOACTIVITY CONC.
SAMPLING
s/rvi ir L. t, ii u
LOCATION
LATHROP WELLS,
NV
OVERTON,
NV
PAHRUMP,
NV
RACHEL,
NV
TONOPAH,
NV
CEDAR CITY,
UT
ST GEORGE,
UT
SALT LAKE CITY,
UT
POSITIVE/
r v/w i i * i I* /
NEGATIVE
49/3
43/9
50/2
50/2
42/12
39/15
48/4
48/4
45/8
41/12
52/1
52/1
48/4
47/5
50/2
50/2
48/4
43/9
52/0
52/0
49/4
46/7
50/2
50/2
41/11
39/13
52/1
52/1
38/12
32/18
39/12
39/12
RADIONUCLIDE
85KR
133XE
3H IN ATM. M.*
3H AS HTO IN AIR
85KR
133XE
3H IN ATM. M.*
3H AS HTO IN AIR
85KR
133XE
3H IN ATM. M.*
3H AS HTO IN AIR
85KR
133XE
3H IN ATM. M.*
3H AS HTO IN AIR
85KR
133XE
3H IN ATM. M.*
3H AS HTO IN AIR
85KR
133XE
3H IN ATM. M.*
3H AS HTO IN AIR
85KR
133XE
3H IN ATM. M.*
3H AS HTO IN AIR
85KR
133XE
3H IN ATM. M.*
3H AS HTO IN AIR
MAX
36
51
0.37
4.0
35
20
0.48
4.3
34
29
0.45
2.4
32
38
0.44
3.0
34
41
0.48
2.3
34
33
0.29
1.9
33
31
0.35
4.0
35
60
0.36
3.6
irui/mo;"
MIN
20
-21
-0.22
-1.1
19
-18
-0.28
-1.6
18
-16
-0.21
-2.4
21
-16
-0.33
-1.4
18
-11
-0.25
-1.6
18
-58
-0.35
-2.3
19
-8.8
-0.28
-2.4
20
-9.8
-0.26
-2.0
i
AVG
26
7.1
0.077
0.46
26
5.8
0.015
0.13
27
5.9
0.052
0.22
26
6.2
0.050
0.33
26
6.5
0.026
0.14
26
5.7
0.0074
0.056
26
5.7
0.038
0.29
29
12
0.068
0.56
re.KUC.Nl
rnur
wUNl» .
GUIDEi
0.03
<0.01
_
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
-
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
_
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
-
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
-
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
-
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
-
<0.01
0.03
0.01
-
<0.01
* CONCENTRATIONS OF TRITIUM IN ATMOSPHERIC MOISTURE (ATM. M.) ARE EXPRESSED AS
PCI PER ML OF WATER COLLECTED.
± CONCENTRATION GUIDES USED ARE FOR EXPOSURE TO A SUITABLE SAMPLE OF THE POPUL-
ATION IN AN UNCONTROLLED AREA.
79
-------
TABLE E-6. SUMMARY OF TRITIUM RESULTS FOR THE NTS MONTHLY LONG-TERM
HYDROLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM - 1984
SAMPLING
LOCATION
WELL 2
WELL 3
WELL 4
WELL 4 CP-1 .
WELL 5C
WELL 8
WELL A
TEST WELL B
WELL C
WELL J-13
WELL U19C
WELL UE7NS
WELL ARMY 1
=================
i
NO.
SAMPLES
12
12
12
5
12
12
12
11
12
12
8
8
12
===================================
TRITIUM CONCENTRATION
(PCI/L)
MAX
5.1
8.3
15
0.0
6.7
4.8
20
190
34
2.9
2.0
4600
3.3
MIN
-1.9
-1.3
-2.3
-6.0
-8.5
-6.6
0.0
5.6
19
-14
-49
990
-6.1
AVG
1.4
4.6
3.0
-2.4
-0.54
0.65
3.8
150
27
-0.77
-6.6
2200
-1.2
PERCENT
CONC.
GUIDE
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.2
<0.01
80
-------
TABLE E-7. TRITIUM RESULTS FOR THE LONG-TERM HYDROLOGICAL MONITORING
PROGRAM - 1984
==============================================================================
COLLECTION CONC. ± 2 SIGMA PCT OF
DATE TRITIUM CONC.
SAMPLING LOCATION 1984 (PCI/L) GUIDE
SHOSHONE, CA
SHOSHONE SPRING
ADAVEN SPRING, NV
ALAMO, NV
CITY WELL 4
ASH MEADOWS, NV
CRYSTAL POOL
FAIRBANKS SPRINGS
WELL 17S-50E-14CAC
WELL 18S-51E-7DB
BEATTY, NV
CITY SUPPLY 12S-47E-7DB
COFFERS WELL 11S/48/1DD
USECOLOGY
BOULDER CITY, NV
LAKE MEAD INTAKE
01/11
10/01
09/06
01/16
06/27
01/16
08/08
01/16
06/28
08/08
01/16
06/27
01/17
08/07
01/17
06/26
01/03
01/16
08/13
09/04
-100 ± 180*
59 ± 130*
65 ± 120*
5.6 ± 5.2*
-58 ± 120*
25 ± 18
2.9 ± 4.5*
4.1 ± 5.2*
NC
2.0 ± 4.2*
7.1 ± 5.0*
-53 ± 120*
2.6 ± 5.4*
7.5 ± 4.0
0.25 ± 7.9*
-100 ± 120*
-0.22 ± 4.7*
170 ± 8
62 ± 5
220 ± 110
<0.01
<0.3
<0.3
<0.03
<0.01
0.1
<0.01
<0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.04
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.9
0.3
1
CLARK STATION, NV
TTR WELL 6
HIKO, NV
CRYSTAL SPRINGS
10/04
09/06
200 ± 110
77 ± 120*
<0.4 (continued)
81
-------
TABLE E-7. Continued
SAMPLING LOCATION ;
INDIAN SPRINGS, NV
SEWER CO. INC. WELL 1
USAF WELL 2
LAS VEGAS, NV
WELL 28
LATHROP WELLS, NV
CITY 15S-50E-18CDC
NTS, NV
WELL 5B
WELL C-l
TEST WELL D
WELL U3CN-5
WELL U16D
WELL UE1C
WELL UE5C
WELL UE15D
COLLECTION
DATE
1984
01/16
01/16
01/22
01/17
01/09
07/18
08/06
01/10
07/18
08/07
01/18
07/19
08/08
07/05
08/06
01/10
07/18
01/18
07/19
08/08
01/09
07/18
08/06
01/10
07/13
08/07
CONC. ± 2 SIGMA
TRITIUM
(PCI/L)
9.9 ± 4.9
14 ± 5
-17 ± 180*
10 ± 5
1.7 ± 7.6*
-0.99 ± 5.9*
4.7 ± 4.6*
11 ± 8
11 ± 5
15 ± 4
0.33 ± 7.5*
5.2 ± 5.6*
-59 ± 110*
NC
NC
3.9 ± 7.5*
-2.2 ± 5.5*
0.92 ± 7.5*
4.1 ± 5.8*
-51 ± 110*
3.7 ± 7.7*
1.0 ± 5.6*
0 ± 4.5*
63 ± 7
4.1 ± 6.0*
29 ± 4
PCT OF
CONC.
GUIDE
0.05
0.07
<0.01
0.5
<0.01
<0.01
<0.02
0.05
0.05
0.08
<0.01
<0.03
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.02
<0.01
<0.02
<0.01
<0.01
0.3
<0.02
0.1 (continue
82
-------
Mile 27 Streams
5555 Bering Sea =§========§
r^ , ^ - — Tr^a^^-»_%w^ w
Cannikin =^3:
^^^S Pacific Ocean ^^^^^^«
Constantino Harbor
Duck Cove Cr.
3/82 Scale in Kilometers
: Base Camp Area
£ ^Surface Ground Zero
Sampling Locations
5 Bering Sea 5g35S5£S£
Constantino Harbor
Infa
•M
Mason Lakeo
Constamine Spring
Clevanger Lak
Sampling Locations
[Pacific Ocean ^s
Figure E-l. Amchitka Island and background sampling locations for the LTHMP,
-------
SAMPLING LOCATION
TABLE E-7.
COLLECTION
DATE
1984
Continued
CONC. ± 2 SIGMA PCT OF
TRITIUM CONC.
(PCI/L) GUIDE
NYALA, NV
SHARP'S RANCH
OASIS VALLEY, NV
GOSS SPRINGS
PAHRUMP, NV
CALVADA WELL 3
TEMPIUTE, NV
UNION CARBIDE WELL
TONOPAH, NV
CITY WELL
WARM SPRINGS, NV
10/04
01/17
08/07
10/04
10/03
10/05
18 ± 130*
8.0 ± 4.5
3.7 ± 4.6*
36 ± 130*
70 ± 130*
18 ± 130*
<0.09
0.04
<0.02
<0.2
<0.3
<0.09
TWIN SPRINGS RANCH
AMCHITKA, AK - BACKGROUND
ARMY WELL 1
ARMY WELL 2
ARMY WELL 3
ARMY WELL 4
CONSTANTINE SPRING
DUCK COVE CREEK
JONES LAKE
RAIN SAMPLE
10/04
SAMPLES
05/03
05/02
05/02
05/02
05/03
05/03
05/03
05/03
05/08
05/09
57 ± 130*
46 ± 5
26 ± 5
62 ± 5
59 ± 5
65 ± 5
29 ± 4
33 ± 5
35 ± 5
22 ± 5
31 ± 5
<0.3
0.2
0.1
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
(continued)
84
-------
s5=Bering
oimy ^*™"^^~^— ~^—'. ^_=~^^- — ^^.^^IC
' ^^L~^__^—^^^^^^ — — ^"^^-'•* ^J J
) Surface Ground Zero
Sampling Locations
Figure E-2. LTHMP sampling locations for Project Cannikin.
85
-------
TABLE 1-7. Continued
=============================
c
SAMPLING LOCATION ;
SITE D HYDRO EXPLOR HOLE
SITE E HYDRO EXPLOR HOLE
PROJECT CANNIKIN - AMCHITKA,
NORTH END CANNIKIN LAKE
SOUTH END CANNIKIN LAKE
DK-45 LAKE1"
ICE BOX LAKE
PIT S OF CANNIKIN GZ
WELL HTH-3
WHITE ALICE CREEK
STREAM EAST OF LONG SHOT*
PROJECT LONG SHOT - AMCHITKA,
EPA WELL-1
LONG SHOT POND 1
LONG SHOT POND 2
LONG SHOT POND 3
MUD PIT 1
MUD PIT 2
MUD PIT 3
REED POND
WELL GZ 1
WELL GZ 2
:====== = ====
iOLLECTION
DATE
1984
05/02
05/02
AK
05/02
05/02
05/03
05/02
05/02
05/02
05/02
05/05
AK
05/05
05/05
05/05
05/05
05/05
05/05
05/05
05/05
05/05
05/05
CONC. ± 2 SIGMA
TRITIUM
(PCI/L)
73 t 5
140 ± 6
40 ± 5
49 ± 5
42 ± 5
45 ± 5
18 ± 4
48 ± 5
38 ± 5
660 ± 11
5.6 ± 4.8*
23 ± 4
26 ± 4
56 ± 5
490 ± 9
580 ± 8
710 ± 9
59 ± 5
3200 ± 140
220 ± 6
PCT OF
CONC.
GUIDE
0.4
0.7
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.2
0.09
0.2
0.2
3
<0.03
0.1
0.1
0.3
2
3
4
0.3
20
1
(continued)
-------
Collapse
Boundary.
&>
Scale in Feet
0 600 1200
0 200 400
I/an Scale in Meters
Surface Ground Zero
Sampling Locations
Long Shot
Pond #3
0 100
Scale in Meters
Surface Ground Zero
Sampling Locations
Figure E-3. LTHMP sampling locations for Projects Milrow and Long Shot.
87
-------
TABLE E-7.
================
Continued
SAMPLING LOCATION
WELL WL-1
WELL WL-2
PROJECT MILROW - AMCHITKA,
CLEVENGER CREEK
HEART LAKE
WELL W-2
WELL W-3
WELL W-4
WELL W-5
WELL W-6
WELL W-7
WELL W-8
WELL W-9
WELL W-10
WELL W-ll
WELL W-12
WELL W-13
WELL W-14
WELL W-15
WELL W-16
WELL W-17
WELL W-18
WELL W-19
COLLECTION
DATE
1984
05/05
05/05
AK
05/04
05/04
05/04
05/04
05/04
05/04
05/04
05/04
05/04
05/04
05/04
05/04
05/04
05/04
05/04
05/04
05/04
05/04
05/04
05/04
CONC. ± 2 SIGMA
TRITIUM
(PCI/L)
53 ± 5
710 ± 9
47 ± 5
23 ± 5
33 ± 4
32 ± 5
NC
22 ± 4
22 ± 5
17 ± 4
30 ± 4
NC
43 ± 4
110 ± 5
NC
54 ± 4
38 ± 4
20 ± 4
NC
27 ± 5
54 ± 5
NC
PCT OF
CONC.
GUIDE
0.3
4
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.09
0.1
0.2
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.3
(continued)
-------
Fawn Cr. 500' Downstream
IB-D-01
SGZ
Fawn Cr. 500' Upstream
Bio Blanco County
Garfield County
Ri° Blanco Countv
0 Surface Ground Zero D Water Well
Artesian Well A Spring
O Windmill • Stream
Figure E-4. LTHMP sampling locations for Project Rio Blanco.
89
-------
TABLE E-7. Continued
==========================================================:
COLLECTION
DATE
SAMPLING LOCATION , 1984
PROJECT RIO BLANCO - COLORADO
RIO BLANCO, CO
B-l EQUITY CAMP
BRENNAN WINDMILL
CER 1 BLACK SULPHUR
CER 4 BLACK SULPHUR
FAWN CREEK 1
FAWN CREEK 3
FAWN CREEK 6800FT UPSTR
FAWN CREEK 500FT UPSTR
FAWN CREEK 500FT DNSTR
FAWN CREEK 8400FT DNSTR
JOHNSON ARTESIAN WELL
WELL RB-D-01
PROJECT RULISON - COLORADO
GRAND VALLEY, CO
CITY SPRING
ALBERT GARDNER RANCH
RULISON, CO
LEE HAYWARD RANCH
POTTER RANCH
G. SCHWAB RANCH (R.SEARCY)
FELIX SEFCOVIC RANCH
06/22
06/22
06/22
06/22
06/22
06/22
06/22
06/22
06/22
06/22
06/22
06/22
06/20
06/21
06/21
06/21
06/21
06/21
CONC. ± 2 SIGMA
TRITIUM
(PCI/L)
100 ± 5
45 ± 4
78 ± 5
110 ± 5
51 ± 5
63 ± 5
69 ± 5
79 ± 5
74 ± 5
75 ± 4
-0.93 ± 4.2*
13 ± 4
3.3 ± 5.0*
200 ± 6
310 ± 7
160 ± 6
180 ± 6
240 ±7
PCT OF
CONC.
GUIDE
0.5
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.4
<0.01
0.07
<0.02
1
2
0.8
0.9
1 (continue*
90
-------
N
Grand Valley
City Water
Rn.
Grand Valley/t J
G- Schwab—PonefRn. /
••»• /
^fW/
JlSefcovic Rn.
iL. Hay ward Rn.
"""*!
Scale in Miles
Scale in Kilometers
) Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
3/81
«Settlement Creek
£ER Test Well
•Spring
Location Maps
Figure E-5. LTHMP sampling locations for Project Rullson.
91
-------
i
A.C. Mills
G. KellyB I
B. ChamblissB
\T. Speights
Lowe
N
Baxterville
Well Ascot 2m
Creek
•alt Dome Timber Co.
. Anderson
B.R. Anderson I
,SGZ
•R.L. Anderson'
W. Daniels Jr./ rfpurvis
Lumberton
Scale in Miles
5 10
0
3/85
5 10 15 20
Scale in Kilometers
>^^»
Mississippi
Surface Ground Zero
• Water Sampling Stations
La mar
County
Tatum Dome0SGZ
"
Location Maps
Figure E-6. LTHMP sampling locations for Project Dribble
towns and residences.
92
-------
TABLE E-7. Continued
COLLECTION
DATE
SAMPLING LOCATION 1984
GRAND VALLEY, CO
BATTLEMENT CREEK
SPRING 300 YRDS NW OF G
CER TEST WELL
PROJECT DRIBBLE - MISSISSIPPI
BAXTERVILLE, MS
BAXTERVILLE CITY WELL
COLUMBIA, MS
CITY WELL 64B
LUMBERTON, MS
CITY WELL 2
PURVIS, MS
CITY SUPPLY
BAXTERVILLE, MS
HALF MOON CREEK
LOWER LITTLE CREEK
B R ANDERSON
H ANDERSON
R L ANDERSON
B CHAMBLISS
W DANIELS OR
G KELLY
06/20
06/20
06/20
04/17
04/17
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/17
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
CONC. ± 2 SIGMA
TRITIUM
(PCI/L)
120
130
110
63
10
2.4
-0.22
50
50
50
44
53
3.5
42
1.1
± 5
± 6
± 6
± 5
± 5
± 5.8*
± 5.0*
± 5
± 5
± 5
± 5
± 5
± 5.1*
± 5
± 4.8*
PCT OF
CONC.
GUIDE
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.3
0.05
<0.01
<0.01
0.3
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.3
<0.02
0.2
<0.01
(continued)
93
-------
V
)
Half Moon Creek 1
,__,Overflow
HMH-1 ^v (
HMH-9
Scale in Feet
100 200
300
50
Scaln in Meters
100
)Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
I
!v
[Mississippi /
Lamar
County
Tatum Dome^SGZ
Location Maps
Figure E-7. LTHMP sampling locations for Project Dribble -
94
near GZ.
-------
SAMPLING LOCATION
M LOWE
A C MILLS
R MILLS
R READY
T SPEIGHTS
WELL ASCOT 2
HALF MOON CREEK OVRFLW
WELL E-7
WELL HM-1
WELL HM-2A
WELL HM-2B
WELL HM-3
WELL HMH-1
WELL HMH-2
WELL HMH-3
WELL HMH-4
WELL HMH-5
WELL HMH-6
WELL HMH-7
WELL HMH-8
WELL HMH-9
WELL HMH-10
WELL HMH-1 1
TABLE E-7
COLLECTION
DATE
1984
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/17
04/18
04/16
04/17
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
. Continued
CONC. ± 2 SIGMA
TRITIUM
(PCI/L)
39 ± 5
0.74 ± 4.9*
39 ± 5
90 ± 5
74 ± 5
15 ± 5
280 ± 7
9.0 ± 4.4
1.3 ± 4.9*
4.5 ± 4.9*
1.1 ± 4.8*
1.1 ± 5.6*
5800 ± 170
1800 ± 130
110 ± 6
32 ± 5
2600 ± 140
610 ± 9
290 ± 7
30 ± 5
28 ± 5
26 ± 6
820 ± 120
S53S5SS5SSS13S»3wSSSS3«
PCT OF
CONC.
GUIDE
0.2
<0.01
0.2
0.4
0.4
0.07
1
0.04
<0.01
<0.02
<0.01
<0.01
30
9
0.5
0.2
10
3
1
0.2
0.1
0.1
4 (continued)
95
-------
'•. , REECO Pit - C
'•. I / REECO Pit - B
'..'^ I I REECO Pit - A
Moon" Creek
Overflow ^«
•Well _
Well E-7«Well HT-4 j
J * * *
f —-: /
'-^. \ .'
X '•->• Grantham
• • *•-"••—».._«
ur.A I .*
,&,
Scale in Feel
40O 800 1200 16O02000
0 100 200 300 400 500 60
3/83 Scale in Meiers
)Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
*/
Location Maps
Figure E-8. LTHMP sampling locations for Project Dribble - near salt dome.
96
-------
SGZ
HTH 2
jlHTH 1
I
I
Hot Creek \
Ranch
Six Mid!
I Jim Bias Well
(Blue Jay Springs)
N
)Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
I Blue Jay
Mamt Sta
INye
County
Location Maps
Figure E-9. LTHMP sampling locations for Project Faultless.
97
-------
TABLE E-7. Continued
c
SAMPLING LOCATION
BAXTERVILLE, MS
WELL HM-L
WELL HM-L 2
WELL HM-S
HT-2C
WELL HT-4
WELL HT-5
POND WEST OF GZ
REECO PIT DRAINAGE-A
REECO PIT DRAINAGE-B .
REECO PIT DRAINAGE-C
SALT DOME TIMBER CO
PROJECT FAULTLESS - NEVADA
BLUE JAY, NV
BIAS WELL
HOT CREEK RANCH SPRING
MAINTENANCE STATION
SIX MILE WELL
HTH-1 WELL
HTH-2 WELL
PROJECT SHOAL - NEVADA
FRENCHMAN STATION, NV
HUNTS STATION
FLOWING WELL
IOLLECTION
DATE
1984
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/17
04/17
04/17
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
04/16
07/23
07/25
07/24
07/25
07/25
07/25
02/22
02/22
CONC. ± 2 SIGMA
TRITIUM
(PCI/L)
1400 ± 130
2.1 ± 5.1*
18000 ± 270
32 ± 5
8.7 ± 4.4
5.4 ± 4.9*
27 ± 5
38 ± 5
800 ± 10
510 ± 9
47 ± 5
-4.1 ± 5.0*
3.2 ± 5.6*
-9.2 ± 4.7*
NC
1.1 ± 5.6*
-2.2 ± 5.5*
-1.7 ± 8.5*
0 ± 8.7*
PCT OF
CONC.
GUIDE
7
<0.01
90
0.2
0.04
<0.03
0.1
0.2
4
3
0.2
<0.01
<0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01 (contlni
98
-------
Churchill County
Mineral County
Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
Location Maps
Figure E-10. LTHMP sampling locations for Project Shoal
99
-------
SGZ
• Cave Spring
I Arnold Rn.
N
Scale in Kilometers
0 8
0 5
3/81 Scale in Miles
I Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
Lower Burro Canyon
New Mexico
Rio Arriba County
Location Maps
Figure E-ll. LTHMP sampling locations for Project Gasbuggy,
100
-------
TABLE E-7. Continued
SAMPLING LOCATION
FRENCHMAN STATION
WELL H-3
WELL HS-1
COLLECTION
DATE
1984
02/22
02/22
02/23
CONC. ± 2 SIGMA
TRITIUM
(PCI/L)
-10 ± 8*
NC
-11 ± 8*
PCT OF
CONC.
GUIDE
<0.01
<0.01
PROJECT GASBUGGY - NEW MEXICO
GOBERNADOR, NM
ARNOLD RANCH
BIXLER RANCH
BUBBLING SPRINGS
CAVE SPRINGS
LA JARA CREEK
LOWER BURRO CANYON
WELL 28.3.33.233 SOUTH
WELL 30.3.32.343 NORTH
JICARILLA WELL 1
WINDMILL 2
EPNG WELL 10-36
PROJECT GNOME - NEW MEXICO
06/06
06/06
06/06
06/07
06/07
06/06
06/07
06/07
06/06
06/07
06/07
5.4 ± 4.6*
13 ± 4
84 ± 5
68 ± 5
64 ± 5
NA
NC
NC
11 ± 4
NC
400 ± 8
<0.03
0.06
0.4
0.3
0.3
0.05
2
CARLSBAD, NM
CARLSBAD CITY WELL 7 05/31
LOVING, NM
CITY WATER WELL 2 05/31
8.5 ± 3.9
7.1 ± 4.2
0.04
0.04
(continued)
101
-------
Carlsbad
Carlsbad City Well til
Loving City Well #2
N
PHS weii ttam
PHS Well #10
Pecos River
Pumping Station Well #1
Scale in Miles
0 5 10
3/81
10 15
Scale in Kilometers
fWSurface Ground Zero
A On-Site Water Sampling Locations
B Off-Site Water Sampling Locations
New Mexico
SGZ0I
"Eddy County
Location Maps
Figure E-12. LTHMP sampling stations for Project Gnome.
102
-------
TABLE 1-7. Continued
aasasssaaasaaaasaasasaasajsaaaassaasssaaaaaaaaaaaaaasaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
SAMPLING LOCATION
COLLECTION CONC. ± 2 SIGMA PCT OF
DATE TRITIUM CONC.
1984 (PCI/L) GUIDE
MALAGA, NM
PECOS PUMPING STATION 05/31
PHS WELL 6 06/02
PHS WELL 8 06/02
PHS WELL 9 06/02
PHS WELL 10 06/02
USGS WELL 1 06/01
USGS WELL 4 06/01
USGS WELL 8s 06/01
WELL LRL-7* 06/02
1.3 ± 4.6*
80 ± 5
19 ± 4
2.4 ± 4.4*
18 ± 4
2.9 ± 4.5*
280000 ± 960
200000 ± 810
18000 ± 260
<0.01
0.4
0.09
<0.01
0.09
<0.01
1000
1000
90
sssssaaaasaaaaaaaasaassassssaasaaasaaaaassasaaaaaaaaaaaaasaaaaaaaaaasaaaaaaaaa
ANALYSIS
RESULT
2 SIGMA
UNITS
FOOTNOTES
tDK-45 LAKE
4-STR. E. LONG SHOT
§USGS WELL 8
IWELL LRL-7
NC - No sample collected - pump out/gate locked/dry well, etc.
* CONCENTRATION IS LESS THAN THE MINIMUM DETECTABLE CONCENTRATION (MDC)
238PU
239PU
238PU
239PU
137CS
137CS
0.066
0.024
-0.0048
0
95
210
0.059*
0.035*
0.023*
11
16
pC1/M3
pCi/M3
PC1/L
pCi/L
pC1/L
pC1/L
103
-------
TABLE E-8. SUMMARY OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR THE MILK SURVEILLANCE
NETWORK - 1984
SAMPLING
LOCATION
BISHOP, CA
WHITE MOUNTAIN RANCH
HINKLEY, CA
BILL NELSON DAIRY
RIDGECREST, CA
CEDARSAGE FARM
KEOUGH HOT SPGS, CA
YR I BARREN RANCH
ADAVEN, NV
UHALDE RANCH
ALAMO, NV
WHIPPLE RANCH
RACHEL, NV
FALL IS RANCH
RACHEL, NV
JAMES MOODY
AUSTIN, NV
YOUNG'S RANCH
CURRANT, NV
BLUE EAGLE RANCH
CURRANT, NV
MANZONIE RANCH
SAMPLE
TYPE
13
12
10
13
13
13
10
13
13
13
13
NO. OF
SAMPLES
2
2
2
5
2
4
5
3
3
2
2
1
1
1
3
1
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
5
5
3
2
3
:=========
RADIO-
NUCLIDE
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
RADIOACTIVITY CONC.
(PCI/L)
MAX
200
-1.5
3.1
210
0.097
2.8
170
2.2
2.9
50
-0.48
39
1.8
-1.9
120
2.0
-1.8
320
-2.7
3.2
160
1.6
0.14
260
2.1
5.1
220
1.8
5.6
280
1.2
0.69
MIN
49
-10
1.4
-12
-3.6
-0.57
3.8
-3.0
-0.74
8.7
-6.4
39
1.8
-1.9
21
2.0
-1.8
-160
-2.7
-1.9
130
0.0090
-0.13
160
-1.8
-1.5
-74
-7.4
-0.84
26
-0.69
-3.0
AVG
130
-5.8
2.2
85
-1.7
1.3
73
-0.67
1.1
29
-3.4
39
1.8
-1.9
81
2.0
-1.8
81
-2.7
0.66
140
0.80
0.0035
220
0.44
1.2
39
-1.0
1.4
190
0.23
-1.3
(continued)
104
-------
TABLE E-8. Continued
RADIOACTIVITY CONC.
(PCI/L)
onnruinva
LOCATION
DYER, NV
ROTHROCK RANCH
60LDFIELD, NV
FRAYNE RANCH
LAS VEGAS, NV
LOS DAIRY FARMS
LATHROP WELLS, NV
LOGANDALE, NV
KNUDSEN DAIRY
LUND, NV
MCKENZIE DAIRY
MCGILL, NV
LARSEN RANCH
MESQUITE, NV
SF AND K DAIRY
MOAPA, NV
DECADE CORP
NYALA, NV
SHARP'S RANCH
CALIENTE, NV
JUNE COX RANCH
ROUND MT, NV
BERG'S RANCH
onriruu
TYPE
13
10
12
10
12
12
13
12
12
13
13
13
nu • ur
SAMPLES
2
1
1
2
1
1
5
4
4
1
5
2
3
5
3
3
3
1
2
5
3
3
5
2
3
2
1
1
5
2
3
1
1
NUCLIDE
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
89SR
90SR
MAX
250
-5.5
4.5
220
-3.4
2.6
350
2.0
0.63
180
120
1.6
1.8
200
2.2
0.50
310
-1.1
1.4
170
3.0
0.23
350
-1.8
1.6
320
-1.0
1.5
350
3.0
0.64
0.55
2.8
MIN
69
-5.5
4.5
120
-3.4
2.6
11
-2.1
-0.19
180
-49
-1.6
-1.4
-150
0.23
-1.1
11
-1.1
-4.4
1.0
0.79
-2.1
-45
-4.2
-4.5
84
-1.0
1.5
-60
0.89
-0.18
0.55
2.8
AVG
160
-5.5
4.5
170
-3.4
2.6
160
0.87
0.27
180
43
0.020
0.16
47
1.0
-0.47
160
-1.1
-1.5
83
2.2
-0.84
110
-3.0
-0.63
200
-1.0
1.5
180
2.0
0.25
0.55
2.8
(continued)
105
-------
TABLE E-8. Continued
RADIOACTIVITY CONC.
(PCI/L)
vjni'ir L. i iiu
LOCATION
SHOSHONE, NV
HARBECKE RANCH
WARM SPRINGS, NV
TWIN SPRINGS RANCH
CEDAR CITY, UT
WESTERN GEN DAIRIES
ST GEORGE, UT
GENTRY DAIRY
ST GEORGE, UT
DROUBAY DAIRY
offriri-c.
TYPE
13
13
12
12
12
lew • \JI
SAMPLES
3
5
5
3
2
2
4
2
3
1
1
4
1
3
rsnuiu-
NUCLIDE
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
89SR
90SR
3H
89SR
90SR
MAX
230
0.94
5.7
130
0.19
4.5
71
0.86
1.2
-2.5
1.6
170
-0.62
1.4
MIN
160
-16
0.69
-140
-2.8
2.0
-51
-0.39
-4.3
-2.5
1.6
2.5
-0.62
-4.7
AVG
180
-4.7
3.3
-12
-1.3
3.2
4.1
0.24
-0.91
-2.5
1.6
85
-0.62
-0.84
:=============================================================================
106
-------
TABLE E-9. ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR THE STANDBY MILK SURVEILLANCE
NETWORK - 1984
CONC. ± 2 SIGMA
OUL.I.I-U 1 1UIH
DATE
SAMPLING LOCATION 1984
GAMMA
KINGMAN, AZ
CANYON FARMS
TUCSON, AZ
SHAMROCK DAIRY, PIMA CO
BAKERSFIELD, CA
CARNATION DAIRY
SANTA ROSA, CA
GLEN OAKS FARM
WILLOWS, CA
FOREMOST FOODS COMPANY
PUEBLO, CO
HYDE PARK DAIRY CO.
FLENSBURG, MN
FLENSBURG CO-OP CMRY
ATOKA, OK
89SR
(PCI/L)
90SR
(PCI/L)
SPECTRAL AND STRONTIUM ANALYSES**
07/23
07/23
07/23
07/23
07/23
07/09
05/22
07/10
2.3 ± 2.1*
-0.49 ± 2.1*
1.8 ± 2.1*
-2.7 ± 1.7*
1.4 ± 1.9*
-0.69 ± 1.7*
NA
NA
0.0022 ±
0.99 ±
-0.69 ±
2.0 ±
-0.59 ±
-0.17 ±
NA
NA
2.2*
2.2*
2.2*
1.8*
2.0*
1.8*
MUNGLE DAIRY
107
(continued)
-------
TABLE E-9. Continued
COLLECTION
•. DATE
SAMPLING LOCATION 1984
COLLECTION
DATE
SAMPLING LOCATION 1984
GAMMA SPECTRAL ANALYSES ONLY**
PIMA, AZ
SMITH HUNT DAIRY
TAYLOR, AZ
SUNRISE DAIRY
TEMPE, AZ
UNITED DAIRYMEN OF AZ
YUMA, AZ
GOLDEN WEST DAIRY
FAYETTEVILLE, AR
UNIVERSITY OF AR
LITTLE ROCK, AR
BORDENS
PARAGOULD, AR
FOREMOST FOODS INC
RUSSELLVILLE, AR
ARKANSAS TECH UNIV
HELENDALE, CA
OSTERKAMP DAIRY NO 2
CHINO, CA
CALIF INST FOR MEN
FERNBRIDGE, CA
HUMBOLDT CREAMERY
HOLTVILLE, CA
SCHAFFNERSON DAIRY
LEMON GROVE, CA
MILLER DAIRY
MANTECA, CA
07/23
07/23
07/23
07/24
06/25
06/25
06/26
06/26
07/23
07/24
03/05
07/23
07/23
08/23
07/23
OXNARD, CA
CHASE BROS DAIRY
PALO ALTO, CA
PENINSULA CREAMERY
REDDING, CA
MCCOLL'S DAIRY PROD
SAN LUIS OBISPO, CA
CAL STATE POLY
SAUGUS, CA
WAYSIDE HONOR RANCH
SMITH RIVER CA
COUNTRY MAID DAIRY
SOLEDAD, CA
CTF DAIRY
TRACY, CA
DEUEL VOC INST
WEED CA
MEDO-BEL CREAMERY
COLORADO SPGS, CO
SINTON DAIRY CO
DELTA, CO
ARDEN MEADOW GOLD DAIRY
FT COLLINS, CO
POUDRE VALLEY DAIRY
GRAND JCT, CO
COLORADO WEST DAIRIES
BOISE, ID
07/23
03/05
07/23
07/23
07/23
07/23
07/23
07/23
08/28
09/05
07/09
07/11
07/09
07/09
08/13
DEJAGER DAIRY NO 2 NORTH
MEADOW GOLD DAIRIES
108
-------
TABLE E-9. Continued
3333333383333333333383333333333333333333333333333333333383333333333333=33333333
COLLECTION
DATE
SAMPLING LOCATION 1984
COLLECTION
DATE
SAMPLING LOCATION 1984
GAMMA SPECTRAL ANALYSES ONLY**
TWIN FALLS, ID
YOUNGS DAIRY
CALDWELL, ID
OCA RECEIVING STA
IDAHO FALLS, ID
WESTERN GENERAL DAIRY
LEWISTON, ID
GOLDEN GRAIN DAIRY PROD
POCATELLO, ID
ROWLAND'S DAIRY
DAVENPORT, I A
SWISS VALLEY FARMS CO
KIMBALLTON, IA
AMP I RECEIVING STA
LAKE MILLS, IA
LAKE MILLS COOP CRMY
LEMARS, I A
WELLS DAIRY
GARDEN CITY, KS
MYERS MILK PROD
ELLIS, KS
MID-AMERICA DAIRY
TOPEKA, KS
THE DAIRY CO
BATON ROUGE, LA
LA STATE UN IV
HAMMOND, LA
08/13
08/13
08/13
08/13
08/13
02/29
03/02
02/29
02/29
02/29
06/04
06/04
06/04
06/25
06/27
LAFAYETTE, LA
UNIV SOUTHWESTERN LA
RUSTON, LA
TECH UNIV DAIRY
DALTON, MN
DALTON CO-OP CREAMERY
FLENSBURG, MN+
FLENSBURG CO-OP CMRY
FOSSTON, MN
LAND 0' LAKES INC
NICOLLET, MN
WALTER SCHULTZ FARM
ROCHESTER, MN
ASSC MILK PRODUCERS
AURORA, MO
MID-AMERICA DIARY INC
CHILLICOTHE, MO
MID-AMERICA DAIRYMEN
JACKSON, MO
MID-AMERICA DAIRYMEN INC
JEFFERSON CITY, MO
CENTRAL DAIRY CO
BOZEMAN, MT
DARIGOLD FARMS
GREAT FALLS, MT
MEADOW GOLD DAIRY
HAVRE, MT
* • • «v • MVMII r* • 4> n \r
06/25
06/25
05/23
05/22
05/21
05/16
05/21
06/04
06/05
06/04
06/05
07/09
08/24
08/22
SOUTHEASTERN LA COLLEGE
VITA-RICH DAIRY
109
-------
TABLE E-9. Continued
COLLECTION
DATE
SAMPLING LOCATION 1984
COLLECTION
DATE
SAMPLING LOCATION 1984
GAMMA SPECTRAL ANALYSES ONLY**
KALISPELL, MT
EQUITY SUPPLY CO
NORTH PLATTE, NE
MID-AMERICA DAIRYMEN
FALLON, NV
CREAMLAND DAIRY
LAS VEGAS, NV
ANDERSON DAIRY
ALBUQUERQUE, NM
BORDEN'S VALLEY GOLD
LA PLATA, NM
ROTHLISBERGER DAIRY
BISMARCK, ND
BRIDGEMENS CREAMERY
DEVILS LAKE, ND
LAKE VIEW DAIRY
FARGO, ND
CASSCLAY CREAMERY
GRAND FORKS, ND
MINNESOTA DAIRY
JAMESTOWN, ND
COUNTRY BOY DAIRY
WILLISTON, ND
PETERSONS CREAMERY
ATOKA, OK*
MUNGLE DAIRY
CLAREMORE, OK
07/06
06/04
07/23
07/23
07/09
07/12
07/23
07/18
07/19
07/18
07/18
07/17
07/10
07/09
MCALESTER, OK
OKLA ST PENITENTIARY
STILLWATER, OK
OSU DAIRY
CORVALLIS, OR
SUNNY BROOK DAIRY
EUGENE, OR
ECHO SPRINGS DAIRY
GRANTS PASS, OR
VALLEY OF ROGUE DAIRY
KLAMATH FALLS, OR
NEDO BEL CREAMERY
MEDFORD, OR
DAIRYGOLD FARMS
MYRTLE POINT, OR
SAFEWAY STORES INC
PORTLAND, OR
DARIGOLD FARMS
REDMOND, OR
EBERHARD'S CREAMERY INC
TILLAMOOK, OR
TILLAMOOK CO CRMY
MITCHELL, SD
CULHANES DAIRY
SIOUX FALLS, SD
TERRACE PARK DAIRY
VOLGA, SD
07/09
07/09
08/14
08/13
08/13
08/24
08/13
08/13
08/13
08/11
08/14
07/09
07/09
07/09
SWAN BROS DAIRY
LAND O1LAKES INC
110
-------
TABLE E-9. Continued
COLLECTION COLLECTION
DATE DATE
SAMPLING LOCATION 1984 SAMPLING LOCATION 1984
GAMMA SPECTRAL ANALYSES ONLY**
BEAVER, UT 07/09 MOSES LAKE, WA 08/13
CACHE VALLEY DAIRY SAFEWAY STORES INC.
PROVO, UT 07/16 SPOKANE, WA 08/13
BYU DAIRY PRODUCTS LAB CONSOLIDATED DAIRY
CEDAR CITY, UT 07/09 POWELL, WY 07/09
WESTERN GEN DAIRIES CREAM OF THE VALLEY DAIRY
SMITHFIELD, UT 07/10 RIVERTON, WY 07/09
CACHE VALLEY DAIRY ALBERTSON'S PLANT
====3sss=3ss=:B=ss = === === = ========== = =============•==•========= ====================
* CONCENTRATION IS LESS THAN THE MINIMUM DETECTABLE CONCENTRATION (MDC).
** POTASSIUM-40 WAS THE ONLY GAMMA-EMITTER DETECTED EXCEPT FOR THE RESULTS
BELOW:
ANALYSIS RESULT 2SIGMA UNITS
+ 137CS 11 7 PCI/L
* 137CS 3.2 1.8 PCI/L
111
-------
TABLE E-10. SUMMARY OF RADIATION DOSE EQUIVALENTS FROM TLD DATA - 1984
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =: = = = = = = = = = = =; = = = =: = = = = = =: = = = = = = = =: = = = - =
ADJUSTED
DOSE EQUIVALENT RATE DOSE
MEASUREMENT PERIOD (MREM/D) EQUIVALENT
o i r\ i ivjii
LOCATION
ADAVEN, NV
ALAMO, NV
AMERICAN BORATE, NV
AUSTIN, NV
BAKER, CA
BARSTOW, CA
BEATTY, NV
BISHOP, CA
BLUE EAGLE RANCH, NV
BLUE JAY, NV
CACTUS SPRINGS, NV
CALIENTE, NV
CARP, NV
CASEY'S RANCH, NV
CEDAR CITY, UT
CLARK STATION, NV
COALDALE, NV
COMPLEX 1, NV
CORN CREEK, NV
COYOTE SUMMIT, NV
CRYSTAL, NV
CURRANT, NY
DEATH VALLEY JCT, CA
DIABLO MAINT. STA., NV
DUCKWATER, NV
ELGIN, NV
ELY, NV
ENTERPRISE, UT
EUREKA, NV
FURNACE CREEK, CA
GABBS, NV
GARRISON, UT
GEYSER RANCH, NV
GOLDFIELD, NV
GROOM LAKE-NTS, NV
HANCOCK SUMMIT, NV
HIKO, NV
HOT CK RNCH, NV
INDEPENDENCE, CA
INDIAN SPRINGS, NV
KIRKEBY RANCH, NV
KOYNES RANCH, NV
LAS VEGAS, NV (AIRPT)
ISSUE
01/06/84
01/06/84
01/04/84
01/05/84
01/03/84
01/03/84
01/04/84
01/04/84
01/05/84
01/05/84
01/03/84
01/09/84
04/04/84
01/04/84
01/05/84
01/05/84
01/04/84
01/06/84
01/03/84
01/03/84
01/04/84
01/03/84
01/06/84
01/04/84
01/03/84
01/09/84
01/04/84
01/05/84
01/05/84
01/06/84
01/04/84
01/04/84
01/04/84
01/03/84
01/03/84
01/03/84
01/10/84
01/05/84
01/04/84
01/03/84
01/04/84
01/04/84
01/03/84
COLLECT
01/09/85
01/09/85
01/10/85
01/17/85
01/07/85
01/07/85
01/07/85
01/08/85
01/08/85
01/15/85
01/07/85
01/10/85
01/10/85
01/15/85
01/08/85
01/16/85
01/16/85
01/09/85
01/07/85
01/15/85
01/07/85 -
01/08/85
01/10/85
01/16/85
01/08/85
01/10/85
01/08/85
01/09/85
01/17/85
01/10/85
01/16/85
01/07/85
01/07/85
01/15/85
01/15/85
01/15/85
01/09/85
01/21/85
01/08/85
01/07/85
01/07/85
01/15/85
01/02/85
MAX.
0.32
0.23
0.27
0.34
0.23
0.28
0.32
0.27
0.19
0.32
0.16
0.29
0.28
0.21
0.21
0.30
0.28
0.32
0.12
0.32
0.19
0.28
0.20
0.34
0.27
0.33
0.23
0.33
0.29
0.18
0.20
0.20
0.28
0.25
0.19
0.39
0.20
0.24
0.25
0.14
0.22
0.27
0.14
MIN.
0.29
0.21
0.24
0.32
0.19
0.24
0.26
0.23
0.16
0.28
0.14
0.26
0.24
0.17
0.17
0.27
0.24
0.28
0.11
0.27
0.16
0.24
0.16
0.27
0.22
0.28
0.20
0.27
0.26
0.14
0.18
0.18
0.24
0.23
0.15
0.32
0.19
0.19
0.21
0.12
0.19
0.19
0.12
AVG.
0.31
0.23
0.25
0.33
0.21
0.26
0.29
0.26
0.18
0.30
0.15
0.27
0.26
0.19
0.19
0.29
0.27
0.31
0.12
0.30
0.18
0.27
0.18
0.32
0.26
0.31
0.22
0.30
0.28
0.16
0.19
0.19
0.26
0.24
0.18
0.37
0.19
0.23
0.23
0.13
0.21
0.24
0.13
(MREM/Y)
112
82
91
119
76
94
104
93
64
110
55
100
95
69
68
104
97
111
42
111
66
97
66
115
93
112
80
110
101
58
68
70
95
87
64
133
69
82
82
48
74
86
48
(continued)
112
-------
TABLE E-10. Continued
sssassassassssssasasss
STATION
LOCATION
LAS VEGAS, NV (PLACAK)
LAS VEGAS, NV (UNLV)
LAS VEGAS, NV (USD I)
LATHROP WELLS, NV
LAVADA'S MARKET, NV
LIDA, NV
LONE PINE, CA
LUND, NV
MAMMOTH MOUNTAIN, CA
MANHATTAN, NV
MESQUITE, NV
MINA, NV
MOAPA, NV
NYALA, NV
OLANCHA, CA
OVERTON, NV
PAHRUMP, NV
PENOYER FARMS, NV
PINE CREEK RANCH, NV
PIOCHE, NV
QUEEN CITY SMT, NV
RACHEL, NV
REED RANCH, NV
RIDGECREST, CA
ROUND MT, NV
S. DESERT COR CENTR.NV
SALT LAKE CITY, UT
SCOTTY'S JCT, NV
SHERI'S RANCH, NV
SHOSHONE, CA
SPRINGDALE, NV
ST. GEORGE, UT
STONE CABIN RANCH, NV
SUNNYSIDE, NV
TEMPIUTE, NV
TIKABOO VALLEY, NV
TONOPAH TEST RNG, NV
TONOPAH, NV
TWIN SPRGS RNCH, NV
USECOLOGY, NV
VALLEY CREST, CA
WARM SPRINGS, NV
YOUNG'S RANCH, NV
MEASUREMENT PERIOD
ISSUE
01/03/84
01/03/84
01/03/84
01/03/84
01/04/84
01/03/84
01/04/84
01/03/84
01/05/84
01/05/84
01/04/84
01/04/84
01/03/84
01/04/84
01/04/84
01/04/84
01/04/84
01/04/84
01/06/84
01/09/84
01/04/84
01/04/84
01/04/84
01/04/84
01/05/84
01/03/84
01/04/84
01/03/84
01/10/84
01/06/84
01/03/84
01/04/84
01/05/84
01/03/84
01/03/84
01/03/84
01/04/84
01/04/84
01/04/84
01/03/84
01/06/84
01/05/84
01/05/84
COLLECT
01/02/85
01/02/85
01/02/85
01/07/85
01/09/85
01/15/85
01/08/85
01/10/85
01/09/85
01/17/85
01/07/85
01/16/85
01/07/85
01/16/85
01/08/85
01/07/85
01/07/85
01/16/85
01/10/85
01/09/85
01/15/85
01/15/85
01/15/85
01/07/85
01/17/85
01/07/85
01/04/85
01/15/85
01/11/85
01/11/85
01/08/85
01/07/85
01/15/85
01/09/85
01/15/85
01/15/85
01/16/85
01/15/85
01/16/85
01/07/85
01/10/85
01/16/85
01/17/85
DOSE EQUIVALENT RATE
(MREM/D)
MAX.
0.14
0.12
0.17
0.25
0.24
0.26
0.24
0.24
0.35
0.35
0.18
0.27
0.20
0.23
0.26
0.17
0.14
0.31
0.34
0.21
0.35
0.29
0.30
0.23
0.31
0.14
0.24
0.29
0.25
0.20
0.30
0.18
0.30
0.16
0.29
0.29
0.28
0.32
0.30
0.30
0.15
0.32
0.25
MIN.
0.12
0.10
0.14
0.22
0.20
0.24
0.20
0.20
0.22
0.32
0.13
0.23
0.14
0.18
0.22
0.12
0.00
0.26
0.30
0.20
0.30
0.25
0.25
0.20
0.29
0.13
0.18
0.26
0.21
0.16
0.26
0.12
0.24
0.14
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.29
0.26
0.27
0.13
0.28
0.23
AVG.
0.13
0.11
0.16
0.23
0.22
0.25
0.22
0.22
0.27
0.33
0.16
0.25
0.17
0.21
0.24
0.14
0.10
0.29
0.32
0.21
0.33
0.28
0.28
0.21
0.30
0.13
0.21
0.27
0.23
0.18
0.28
0.15
0.28
0.15
0.28
0.27
0.27
0.31
0.28
0.28
0.14
0.31
0.24
ADJUSTED
DOSE
EQUIVALENT
(MREM/Y)
48
41
57
85
81
90
80
81
97
121
57
92
62
77
87
52
35
105
117
75
121
101
103
76
109
47
77
100
85
66
102
53
101
56
102
100
97
111
104
103
51
112
87
113
-------
TABLE E-ll. SUMMARY (
RES-
I- BACKGROUND
DENT STATION
NO. LOCATION '
2
3
6
7
8
9
10
11
13
14
15
18
19
21
22
24
25
27
28
29
30
33
CALIENTE, NV
BLUE JAY, NV
INDIAN SPRINGS, NV
GOLDFIELD, NV
TWIN SPRINGS RANCH, NV
BLUE EAGLE RANCH, NV
COYOTE SUMMIT, NV
COYOTE SUMMIT, NV
KOYNES RANCH, NV
TIKABOO VALLEY, NV
TIKABOO VALLEY, NV
NYALA, NV
GOLDFIELD, NV
BEATTY, NV
ALAMO, NV
LAS VEGAS, NV (USD I)
CORN CREEK, NV
PAHRUMP, NV
HOT CREEK RANCH, NV
STONE CABIN RANCH, NV
RACHEL, NV
LATHROP WELLS, NV
DF RADIATION DOSES FOR OFFSITE R
DOSE EQUIV
MEASUREMENT PERIOD (MREy
ISSUE
01/09/84
04/12/84
01/03/83
01/03/84
01/04/84
01/05/84
01/06/84
01/06/84
01/04/84
01/03/84
01/03/84
01/04/84
01/03/84
01/04/84
01/06/84
01/03/84
01/03/84
01/04/84
01/05/84
01/05/84
01/03/84
01/04/84
COLLECT
01/10/85
06/29/84
01/08/85
01/15/85
01/16/85
01/08/85
01/09/85
01/09/85
01/15/85
01/15/85
01/15/85
01/16/85
01/15/85
01/08/85
01/09/85
01/04/85
01/02/85
06/27/84
01/15/85
01/15/85
01/21/85
01/09/85
MAX.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
30
28
17
23
29
17
30
30
19
23
23
21
25
25
18
15
15
19
28
28
25
22
RESIDENTS - 1984
'ALENT RATE NET
I/D) EXPOSURE
MIN.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
26
28
15
16
27
16
28
29
17
21
22
18
19
22
18
13
14
17
26
25
25
17
AVG.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
29
28
16
20
28
17
29
29
18
23
22
19
21
24
18
14
15
18
26
27
25
20
(MREM)
0.
0.
2.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
b.
0.
0.
0.
0.
2.
7.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
0
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
7
5
0
0
0
0
(continued)
114
-------
RES-
I- BACKGROUND
TABLE E-ll. Continued
:=========================================================
DOSE EQUIVALENT RATE NET
MEASUREMENT PERIOD (MREM/D) EXPOSURE
UC.FI
NO.
34
35
36
37
38
40
41
42
44
45
47
49
50
51
52
54
55
56
57
59
60
i o mi iun
LOCATION
FURNACE CREEK, CA
DEATH VALLEY JCT., CA
PAHRUMP, NV
INDIAN SPRINGS, NV
BEATTY, NV
GOLDFIELD, NV
AUSTIN, NV
TONOPAH, NV
CEDAR CITY, UT
ST. GEORGE, UT
ELY, NV
LAS VEGAS, NV (UNLV)
HOT CREEK RANCH, NV
TONOPAH, NV
SALT LAKE CITY, UT
RACHEL, NV
RACHEL, NV
CORN CREEK STATION, NV
OVERTON, NV
CEDAR CITY, UT
SHOSHONE, CA
ISSUE
01/06/84
01/06/84
01/03/84
01/03/84
01/04/84
01/03/84
01/05/84
01/04/84
01/05/84
01/04/84
01/04/84
01/03/84
01/05/84
01/04/84
01/06/84
01/04/84
01/04/84
01/03/84
01/03/84
01/05/84
01/06/84
COLLECT
01/10/85
01/10/85
01/08/85
01/10/85
01/08/85
01/15/85
12/11/84
01/15/85
01/08/85
01/07/85
01/08/85
01/02/85
01/15/85
01/16/85
01/04/85
01/15/85
01/21/85
01/02/85
01/07/85
01/08/85
01/18/85
M^
0,
0,
0.
0,
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
\X.
.17
,21
,14
,21
32
24
30
28
22
51
26
20
28
34
89
28
26
14
37
28
20
M:
0,
0,
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
IN.
.13
,17
,12
.16
,25
21
26
24
19
15
21
18
26
22
22
20
25
13
19
21
14
A!
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0,
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
/G.
.16
.19
.13
.18
,30
,22
26
26
21
25
24
19
27
26
57
26
25
14
26
24
18
(MR!
0,
0,
0,
9,
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
35.
3.
26.
0.
0.
86.
0.
0.
0.
41.
12.
0.
:M)
.0
.0
.0
.1
,9
,0
,0
0
0
5
2
5
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
3
0
(continued)
115
-------
RES-
I- BACKGROUND
TABLE E-ll. Continued
MEASUREMENT PERIOD
DOSE EQUIVALENT RATE NET
(MREM/D) EXPOSURE
UC.IV 1
NO.
223
232
233
234
235
239
O 1 M 1 lum
LOCATION
' ISSUE
LAS VEGAS, NV (USD I) 01/04/84
HIKO, NV
ELY, NV
ALAMO, NV
CALIENTE, NV
TONOPAH, NV
04/03/84
05/24/84
05/24/84
05/24/84
09/12/84
COLLECT
01/02/85
01/09/85
11/05/84
09/06/84
01/10/85
10/04/84
MAX.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
13
23
23
21
27
28
0
0
0
0
0
0
MIN.
.12
.20
.15
.20
.17
.28
AVG.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
12
22
18
20
21
28
(MREM)
0.
3.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0
6
0
0
0
0
116
-------
ADDENDUM
NON-RADIOLOGICAL SUPPLEMENT TO THE NTS ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT
Prepared by:
Industrial Hygiene
Reynolds Electrical and Engineering Co., Inc.
Report Period: Calendar Year, 1984
INTRODUCTION
Environmental compliance activities which are the subject of this report
are regulated under Chapter 445 of the state of Nevada Administrative Codes.
Chapters 445.131, 445.361, and 445.401 respectively address water pollution
control, public water systems, and air pollution. There are a total of 16
facilities which have current State of Nevada operating permits or approval.
For common information including site description, geology, land use, etc.,
reference the EPA Annual Report.
SUMMARY
Water Pollution
No effluent monitoring is required.
Air Pollution
There were no violations of the 14 State air pollution operating permits.
No effluent monitoring 1s required and none was performed. The allowable
emissions are established by State-determined operating constraints which
were not exceeded.
Ground-water Monitoring
Composite quarterly samples were taken from two wells to monitor changes
in nitrate concentration.
117
-------
MONITORING DATA COLLECTION, ANALYSIS, AND EVALUATION
Air Pollution Control
a. Area 1 Shaker Plant-
Operating restrictions to Permits 922 and 923 were not violated
during this period. The facilities were not operated 1n excess of the
allowable hours and an annual production report will be forwarded to the
State by April 15, 1985.
b. Area 12 Concrete Batch Plant—
The plant did not exceed the permit restriction of 8 hours per
day, nor more than 296 hours per year. An annual report will be for-
warded to the State by April 15, 1985.
c. Area 3 Aggregate Plant—
The restrictions to Operating Permit 919 were not exceeded.
The plant did not operate 1n excess of 8 hours per day, nor more than
280 hours per year. An annual production report will be submitted by
April 15, 1985.
d. Area 5 Aggregate Plant—
The restrictions to Operating Permit 920 were not exceeded.
The plant did nnot operate 1n excess of 8 hours per day, nor more than
650 hours per year. An annual production report will be submitted by
April 15, 1985.
e. Area 5 Surface Area Disturbance—
The restrictions to Permit 921 were not exceeded. A final
fugitive dust control plan will be submitted at least six months prior to
abandonment of the site.
f. Area 2 Stemming Systems—
The restrictions to Operating Permits 957 and 958 were not
exceeded.
g. NTS 4,000,000 BTU/hour or Greater Boiler Permits—
The restrictions to Permits 509 through 513 and 925 were not
exceeded. The boilers were not operated in excess of 8,400 hours per
year. All boilers used Number 2 fuel oil. An annual analysis of fuel for
sulfur and BTU content will be submitted by October 1, 1985.
Ground-water Monitoring
Monthly ground-water samples were collected from Wells Ue5C and Ue58 and
composited into calendar year quarterly samples to monitor changes in nitrate
concentration. The sample from Well Ue5B was 21.0 milligrams of nitrates per
liter (mg/1) and the sample from Well Ue5C was 11.3 mg/1.
118
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Pleaie read Instructions on the reverie before completing}
1. REPORT NO.
DOE/DP/0539-055
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
OFFSITE ENFIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT
Radiation Monitoring Around U.S. Nuclear Test Areas,
Calendar Year 1984
5. REPORT DATE
I. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
G. D. Potter, S. C. Black, R. F. Grossman,
R. G. Patzer, and D. D. Smith
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
EPA 600/4-85-035
i. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
X6EH10
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
LAG DE-A108-76DP00539
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
U. S. Department of Energy
Nevada Operations Office
P. 0. Box 14100
Las Vegas, NV 89114
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
Response - 1984
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA 600/07
16. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Prepared for the U. S. Department of Energy under Interagency Agreement No.
DE-A108-76DP00539
16. ABSTRACT
This report covers the routine radiation monitoring activities conducted by the
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory-Las Vegas in areas which may be affected
by nuclear testing programs of the Department of Energy. This monitoring is conducted
to document compliance with standards, to identify trends in environmental radiation,
and to provide such information to the public. It summarizes these activities for
calendar year 1984.
No radioactivity attributable to NTS activities was detectable offsite by the monitor-
ing networks. Using recorded wind data and Pasquill stability categories, atmospheric
dispersion calculations based on reported radionuclides releases yield an estimated
dose of 1X10 person-rem to the population within 80 km of the Nevada Test Site during
1983. World-Wide fallout of Kr-85, Sr-90, Cs-137, and Pu-239 detected by the monitor-
ing networks would cause maximum exposure to an individual of less than 0.6 mrem per
year. Plutonium in air was still detectable along with krypton-85, which continued its
gradual increase, as has been reported previously. Cesium and strontium in air were
near their detection limits. An occasional net exposure to offsite residents has been
detected by the TLD network. On investigation, the cause of such net exposures has
been due to personal habits or occupational activities, not to NTS activities.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS C. COSATI Field/GlOUp
S. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELEASE TO THE PUBLIC
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
UNCLASSIFIED
21. NO. OF PAGES
136
20. SECURITY CLASS (TMipage)
UNCLASSIFIED
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (R.v. 4-77) PREVIOUS EDITION IS OMOLETE
-------