United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Radiation
and indoor Air
Washington, DC 20460
EPA/402/R •96/007
June 1996
£EPA
Offsite Environmental
Monitoring Report
Radiation Monitoring Around
United States Nuclear Test
Areas, Calendar Year 1993
-------
Offsite Environmental Monitoring Report:
Radiation Monitoring Around United States
Nuclear Test Areas, Calendar Year 1993
Contributors:
Deb J. Chaloud, Don M. Daigler, Max G. Davis, Bruce B. Dicey,
Scott H. Faller, Chris A. Fontana, Ken R. Giles, Polly A. Huff,
Anita A. Mullen, Anne C. Neale, Frank Novielli, Mark Sells, and
the Nuclear Radiation Assessment Division
Prepared for:
U.S. Department of Energy
under Interagency Agreement
Number DE-A108-86-NV10522
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING SYSTEMS LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
LAS VEGAS, NV 89193-3478
-------
Notice
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) through the Office of Research and Development (ORD),
funded and performed the research described here. It has been subjected to the Agency's peer review
and has been approved as an EPA publication. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not
constitute endorsement or recommendation for use.
Subsequent to the completion of this study but prior to publication of this report an internal EPA
reorganization resulted in a name change for some organizational elements. The EPA Environmental
Monitoring Systems Laboratory - Las Vegas (EMSL-LV) is now the Characterization Research Division
Las Vegas (CRD-LV), part of the EPA National Exposure Research Laboratory (NERL). The Radiation
Sciences Division (RSD) is now the Office of Radiation and Indoor Air (ORIA), Radiation Sciences
Laboratory-Las Vegas.
-------
Abstract
This report describes the Offsite Radiation Safety Program conducted during 1993 by the Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA's) Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory - Las Vegas (EMSL-LV). This
laboratory operates an environmental radiation monitoring program in the region surrounding the Nevada
Test Site (NTS) and at former test sites in Alaska, Colorado, Mississippi, Nevada, and New Mexico. The
surveillance program is designed to measure levels and trends of radioactivity, if present, in the
environment surrounding testing areas to ascertain whether current radiation levels and associated doses
to the general public are in compliance with existing radiation protection standards. The surveillance
program additionally has the responsibility to take action to protect the health and well being of the public
in the event of any accidental release of radioactive contaminants. Offsite levels of radiation and
radioactivity are assessed by sampling milk, water, and air; by deploying thermoluminescent dosimeters
(TLDs) and using pressurized ionization chambers (PICs); by biological monitoring of foodstuffs including
animal tissues and food crops; and by measurement of radioactive material deposited in humans.
No nuclear weapons testing was conducted in 1993 due to the continuing nuclear test moratorium. During
this period, EMSL-LV personnel maintained capability to provide direct monitoring support if testing were
to be resumed. In such a circumstance, personnel with mobile monitoring equipment are placed in areas
downwind from the test site prior to each nuclear weapons test to implement protective actions, provide
immediate radiation monitoring, and to collect environmental samples rapidly after any occurrence of
radioactivity release.
Comparison of the measurements and sample analysis results with background levels and with appropriate
standards and regulations indicated that there was no radioactivity detected offsite by the various EPA
monitoring networks and that no radiation exposure above natural background, to the population living in
the vicinity of the NTS could be attributed to current NTS activities. Annual and long-term (10-year) trends
were evaluated in the Noble Gas, Tritium, Milk Surveillance, Biomonitoring, TLD, and PIC networks, and
the Long Term Hydrological Monitoring Program (LTHMP). All evaluated data were consistent with
previous data history. No radiation directly attributable to current NTS activities was detected in any
samples. Monitoring network data indicate the greatest population exposure came from naturally occurring
background radiation, which yielded an average exposure of 97 mrem/year (9.7 X 10~1 mSv/year).
Worldwide fallout accounted for approximately 0.05 mrem/year (5X10" mSv/year). Calculation of
maximum potential dose to offsite residents based on onsite source emission measurements provided by
the Department of Energy (DOE) resulted in a maximum calculated dose from this source of 0.004
mrem/year (3.8 X 10~5 mSv/year). Calculation of the maximum potential dose to an individual based on
EMSL-LV monitoring network measurements, using metabolic and dietary presumptions detailed in Chapter
8 of this report, indicates that the maximum dose to such a hypothetical individual would have been 0.054
mrem/year (5.4 X 10" mSv/year). When compared to radiation exposures attributable to natural
background radiation, dose contributions from source emissions and from monitoring network measure-
ments are considered to be insignificant.
in
-------
Contents
Notice . ii
Abstract . iii
Figures . ix
Tables . xi
Abbreviations, Acronyms, Units of Measure, and Conversions xii
Acknowledgements xiv
SECTION 1
1
Introduction
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
Program Description
Offsite Environmental Surveillance
Groundwater Protection . .
Offsite Radiological Quality Assurance
Offsite Monitoring
1
1
2
3
4
4
SECTION 2
2 Description of the Nevada Test Site
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
Location
Climate
Hydrology
Regional Land Use
Population Distribution
6
... 6
6
. . 8
8
11
SECTION 3
3 External Ambient Gamma Monitoring . .18
3.1 Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Network . . . 18
3.1.1 Design . 18
3.1.2 Results of TLD Monitoring . 18
3.1.3 Quality Assurance/Quality Control . 20
3.1.4 Data Management . . 22
3.2 Pressurized Ion Chambers . . 22
3.2.1 Network Design . 22
3.2.2 Procedures . . 22
3.2.3 Results . . 24
3.2.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control . 24
3.3 Comparison of TLD Results to PIC Measurements 25
SECTION 4
4.0 Atmospheric Monitoring ... .29
4.1 Air Surveillance Network 29
4.1.1 Design 29
4.1.2 Procedures 29
4.1.3 Results ... 32
4.2 Tritium in Atmospheric Moisture ... . 32
4.2.1 Design . 35
-------
Contents
(continued)
4.2.2 Procedures 35
4.2.3 Results '.'.''..'' • • • • • 37
4.3 Noble Gas Sampling Network 37
4.3.1 Design '.'.''.'.' 37
4.3.2 Procedures 37
4.3.3 Results ',[ . 37
4.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 37
SECTION 5
5.0 Foodstuffs 40
5.1 Milk Surveillance Network 40
5.1.1 Design . . 40
5.1.2 Procedures 40
5.1.3 Results 42
5.1.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 42
5.2 Animal Investigation Program 42
5.2.1 Network Design 44
5.2.2 Sample Collection and Analysis Procedures 44
5.2.3 Sample Results for Bighorn Sheep 49
5.2.4 Sample Results for Mule Deer 49
5.2.5 Sample Results for Cattle 52
5.2.6 Sample Results for Chukar and Quail 53
5.2.7 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 55
5.3 Fruits and Vegetables Monitoring 55
5.3.1 Network Design 55
5.3.2 Sample Collection and Analysis Procedures 56
5.3.3 Sample Results 56
5.3.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 56
SECTION 6
6.0 Internal Dosimetry 57
6.1 Network Design 57
6.2 Procedures . 57
6.3 Results 59
6.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 59
SECTION 7
7.0 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program 61
7.1 Network Design 61
7.1.1 Sampling Locations 61
7.1.2 Sampling and Analysis Procedures 62
7.1.3 Quality Assurance/Quality Control Samples 62
7.1.4 Data Management and Analysis ... 63
7.2 Nevada Test Site Monitoring . . 53
7.3 Offsite Monitoring in the Vicinity of the Nevada Test Site _ QQ
7 4 Hydrological Monitoring at Other Locations . . gg
7.4.1 Project FAULTLESS, Nevada . ' ' 68
vi
-------
Contents
(continued)
7.4.2 Project SHOAL, Nevada
7.4.3 Project RULISON, Colorado
7.4.4 Project RIO BLANCO, Colorado
7.4.5 Project GNOME, New Mexico
7.4.6 Project GASBUGGY, New Mexico
7.4.7 Project DRIBBLE, Mississippi
7.4.8 Project MILROW, LONGSHOT, and CANNIKIN, Amchitka Island,
Alaska
7.5 SUMMARY
70
70
73
75
79
80
84
85
SECTION 8
8.
Dose Assessment
8.1 Estimated Dose from Nevada Test Site Activity Data
8.2 Estimated Dose from Offsite Radiological Safety Program Monitoring Network
Data
8.3 Dose from Background Radiation
8.4 Summary
88
88
90
93
93
SECTION 9
9.0
Weapons Test and Liquefied Gaseous Fuels Spills Facility Support
9.1 Weapons Tests Support
9.2 Liquefied Gaseous Fuels Spills Test Facility Support
96
96
96
SECTION 10
10.
Public Information and Community Assistance Programs
10.1 Community Radiation Monitoring Program
10.2 Community Education Outreach Program
97
97
97
SECTION 11
11.0
Quality Assurance
11.1 Policy
11.2 Data Quality Objectives
11.2.1 Representativeness, Comparability, and Completeness Objective
11.2.2 Precision and Accuracy Objectives of Radioanalytical Analyses
11.2.3 Quality of Exposure Estimates
11.3 Data Validation
11.4 Quality Assessment of 1993 Data
11.4.1 Completeness
11.4.2 Precision
11.4.3 Accuracy
11.4.4 Comparability
11.4.5 Representativeness
101
101
101
101
102
102
102
103
104
106
109
112
112
SECTION 12
12. Sample Analysis Procedures 119
VII
-------
Contents (continued)
SECTION 13
13. Training Program 121
SECTION 14
14. Radiation Protection Standards for External and Internal Exposure 123
14.1 Dose Equivalent Commitment 123
14.2 Concentration Guides . . . 123
14.3 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Drinking Water Guide 123
SECTION 15
15 Summary and Conclusions 125
15.1 Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Program 125
15.2 Pressurized Ion Chamber Network 125
15.3 Air Surveillance Network 125
15.3.1 Standby Air Surveillance Network 125
15.3.2 Special Monitoring TOMSK-7 Incident 125
15.4 Tritium in Atmospheric Moisture 126
15.5 Noble Gas Sampling Network 126
15.6 Foodstuffs 126
15.7 Internal Dosimetry 126
15.8 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program 127
15.8.1 Nevada Test Site Monitoring 127
15.8.2 Offsite Monitoring in the Vicinity of the Nevada Test Site 127
15.8.3 LTHMP at Off-NTS Nuclear Device Test Locations 127
15.9 Dose Assessment 127
15.10 Weapons Test and Liquified Gaseous Fuels Spills Test Facility 128
References 129
Glossary of Terms 131
Appendix A 134
Appendix B .... 141
Appendix C 150
Appendix D 157
viii
-------
Figures
Figure 1. Location of the Nevada Test Site. . 7
Figure 2. Ground water flow systems around the Nevada Test Site. 9
Figure 3 General land use within 180 miles (300 km) of the Nevada Test Site. 10
Figure 4. Population of Arizona, California, Nevada, and Utah counties near the Nevada
Test Site. 12
Figure 5. Distribution of family milk cows and goats, by county, 1993 14
Figures. Distribution of dairy cows, by county, 1993. . . . 15
Figure 7 Distribution of beef cattle, by county, 1993. 16
Figure 8. Distribution of sheep, by county, 1993. 17
Figure 9. Thermoluminescent Dosimeters (fixed environmental stations and personnel). 19
Figure 10. Summary of Annual TLD Data, 1971 1993. .. 21
Figure 11. Pressurized Ion Chamber network station locations. 23
Figure 12. Distribution of weekly averages from the Pressurized Ion Chamber data. 26
Figure 13. Thermoluminescent Dosimetry versus Pressurized Ion Chamber data, 1993. 28
Figure 14. Air Surveillance Network stations, 1993. 30
Figure 15. Standby Air Surveillance Network stations, 1993. 31
Figure 16. Offsite Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network sampling locations, 1993. 36
Figure 17. Milk Surveillance Network stations, 1993. . . .41
Figure 18. Standby Milk Surveillance Network stations, 1993. 43
Figure 19. Collection sites for animals sampled offsite, 1993. 48
Figure 20. Average strontium levels in bighorn sheep 1955 1993. . 51
Figure 21. Average strontium levels in deer 1955 1993. 52
Figure 22. Average strontium levels in cattle 1955 1993. 53
Figure 23. Collection Sites for animals sampled on the NTS, 1993. 54
Figure 24. Number and Location of Participants in the Offsite Internal Dosimetry Program. 58
Figure 25. Wells on the Nevada Test Site included in the Long-Term Hydrological
Monitoring Program, 1993 64
Figure 26. Tritium concentration trends in Test Well B on the Nevada Test Site. 66
Figure 27. Wells outside the Nevada Test Site included in the Long-Term Hydrological
Monitoring Program, 1993. 67
Figure 28. Tritium results in water from Adaven Springs, Nevada. . 69
Figure 29. Trend of tritium results in water from Lake Mead, Nevada. 69
Figure 30. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling locations for Project
FAULTLESS, 1993. 71
Figure 31. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling locations for Project
SHOAL, 1993. . . 72
Figure 32. Tritium results for water from Smith/James Spring, Nevada. 73
Figure 33. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling locations for Project
RULISON, 1993. ... 74
Figure 34. Tritium trends in ground water, Lee Hayward Ranch, Colorado. 75
Figure 35. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling locations for Project RIO
BLANCO, Colorado. 76
IX
-------
(continued)
Figure 36. Tritium results in water from CER No. 4, Rio Blanco, Colorado • -77
Figure 37. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling locations for Project
GNOME, 1993. . . . ... 78
Figure 38. Tritium results in water from Well LRL-7 near Project GNOME, New Mexico. . 79
Figure 39. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling locations for Project
GASBUGGY, 1993. . . . . . 81
Figure 40. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling locations for Project
DRIBBLE near ground zero, 1993. . . 82
Figure 41. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling locations for Project
DRIBBLE towns and residences, 1993. . . . 83
Figure 42. Tritium result trends in Baxterville, MS public drinking water supply, 1993. . . 84
Figure 43. Tritium results in Well HM-S, Salmon Site, Project DRIBBLE. . . . . 85
Figure 44. Tritium results in Water from Well GZ No.1 near Project LONGSHOT, Amchita
Island, Alaska. ... 86
Figure 45. Community Monitoring Station Locations, 1993. . . 98
Figure 46. Precision results for conventional method tritium . 107
Figure 47. Precision results for enriched method tritium in water. .107
Figure 48. Precision results for alpha in air. . 108
Figure 49. Precision results for beta in air .... 108
Figure 50. Precision results from composite samples for 85Kr in noble gas 110
Figure 51. Precision results from split samples for 85Kr in noble gas 110
Figure 52. Precision results for K (total) in milk . . . . .111
Figure 53. FRMAC Field Team members set up a hi-vol air sampler. 121
Figure 54. FRMAC Field Team members collect a representative vegetation sample. . .122
-------
Tables
1. Summary of Effective Dose Equivalents from NTS Operations during 1993. . . 3
2. Characteristics of Climatic Types in Nevada (from Houghton et al., 1975) . . 8
3. Summary of Weekly Gamma Exposure Rates as Measured by Pressurized Ion
Chambers, 1993. . . 25
4. Weeks for which Pressurized Ion Chamber Data were unavailable, 1993. . 27
5. Gross Beta Results for the Offsite Air Surveillance Network, 1993 . 33
6. Gross Alpha Results for the Offsite Air Surveillance, 1993 34
7. Offsite Airborne Plutonium Concentration, 1993 35
8. Offsite Atmospheric Tritium Results for Routine Samplers, 1993 38
9. Offsite Noble Gas results for Routine Samplers, 1993 39
10. Standby Milk Surveillance Network Sampling Location Changes, 1993 .... 42
11. Summary of Radionuclides Detected in Milk Samples 44
12. Offsite Milk Surveillance 3H Results, 1993 . . . . 45
13. Offsite Milk Surveillance 89Sr Results, 1993 . 46
14. Offsite Milk Surveillance 90Sr Results, 1993 47
15. Radiochemical Results for Animal Samples, 1993 50
16. Detectable 3H, 90Sr, 238Pu and 239+240Pu Concentrations in Vegetables . 56
17. Tritium in Urine, Offsite Internal Dosimetry Program, 1993 60
18. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Summary of Tritium Results for Nevada
Test Site Network, 1993 . . 65
19. NTS Radionuclide Discharges and Releases, 1993 89
20. Radionuclide Emissions on the NTS, 1993 90
21. Summary of Effective Dose Equivalents from NTS Operations during 1993 91
22. Monitoring Networks Data used in Dose Calculations . . .92
23. Dose Calculations from Monitoring Network Data 94
24. Community Radiation Monitoring Program Outreach Presentations, 1993 99
25. Community Radiation Monitoring Program Presentation Topics . 100
26. Data Completeness of Offsite Radiological Safety Program Networks 105
27. Overall Precision of Analysis .111
28. Accuracy of Analysis from EPA Performance Evaluation .... . . 113
29. Accuracy of Analysis from DOE Performance Evaluation Studies 115
30. Comparability of Analysis from EPA Performace Evaluation Studies . ..117
31. Summary of Analytical Procedures 119
32. Routine Monitoring Guides ... 124
XI
-------
Abbreviations, Acronyms, Units of Measure, and
Conversions
ABBREVIATIONS and ACRONYMS
AEC - Atomic Energy Commission MSN
ALARA - As Low as Reasonably Achievable NCRP
ALI - Annual Limit on Intake
ASM - Air Surveillance Network NIST
ANSI - American National Standards
Institute NGTSN
BOC - Bureau of Census
BOMAB - Bottle Mannequin Absorber NPDWR
CEDE - Committed Effective Dose
Equivalent NPS
CFR - Code of Federal Regulations NTS
CG - Concentration Guide NRD
CP-1 - Control Point One
CRMP - Community Radiation Monitoring ORSP
Program
DAC - Derived Air Concentration PHS
DCG - Derived Concentration Guide PIC
DOE - U.S. Department of Energy QA
DOELAP - Department of Energy, QC
Laboratory Accreditation Program RAWS
DQO - data quality objective
DRI - Desert Research Institute RCF
ECF - Element Correction Factor RCRA
EDE - Effective Dose Equivalent
EML - Environmental Monitoring SASN
Laboratory S.D.
EMSL-LV - Environmental Monitoring Systems SGZ
Laboratory-Las Vegas SMSN
EPA - U.S. Environmental Protection SOP
Agency STDMS
FDA - Food and Drug Administration
FRMAC - Federal Radiological Monitoring TLD
and Assessment Center USGS
GOES - Geostationary Operational WSNSO
Environmental Satellite
GZ - Ground Zero
HTO ~ tritiated water
HpGe - High purity germanium
lAGs - Interagency Agreements
ICRP - International Commission on
Radiological Protection
LGFSTF - Liquefied Gaseous Fuels Spill
Test Facility
LTHMP - Long-Term Hydrological
Monitoring Program
MDC — minimum detectable concentration
MSL - mean sea level
Milk Surveillance Network
National Council on Radiation
Protection and Measurements
National Institute of Standards
and Technology
Noble Gas and Tritium
Surveillance Network
National Primary Drinking
Water Regulation
National Park Service
Nevada Test Site
Nuclear Radiation Assessment
Division
Offsite Radiological Safety
Program
U.S. Public Health Service
-pressurized ion chamber
quality assurance
quality control
Remote Automatic Weather
Station
reference correction factor
Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act
Standby Air Surveillance Network
standard deviation
Surface Ground Zero
Standby Milk Surveillance Network
standard operating procedure
Sample Tracking Data
Management System
thermoluminescent dosimetry
U.S. Geological Survey
Weather Service Nuclear Support
Office
XII
-------
Abbreviations, Acronyms, Units of Measure, and
Conversions (continued)
UNITS OF MEASURE
Bq - Becquerel, one disintegration per mo
second mR
C - coulomb mrem
°C -- degrees centigrade mSv
Ci -- Curie pCi
cm - centimeter, 1/100 meter qt
eV -- electron volt R
°F - degrees Fahrenheit rad
g - gram rem
hr - hour
keV - one thousand electron volts Sv
kg - kilogram, 1000 grams wk
km - kilometer, 1000 meters yr
L - liter //Ci
Ib - pound //R
m - meter
MeV -- one million electron volts %
mg - milligram, 10~3 gram +
min - minute <
ml_ -- milliliter, 10'3 liter
-- month
- milliroentgen, 10"3 roentgen
- millirem, 10~3 rem
-- millisievert, 10~3 sievert
- picocurie, 10~12 curie
-- quarter
- roentgen
- unit of absorbed dose, 100 ergs/g
- dose equivalent, the rad adjusted
for biological effect
-- sievert, equivalent to 100 rem
-- week
- year
- microcurie, 10"6 curie
- microroentgen, 10"6
roentgen
- percent
-- plus or minus
- less than
-- equals
- approximately equals
PREFIXES CONVERSIONS
a
f
P
n
atto =
femto =
pico =
nano =
1Q-18
io-15
io-12
m9
p micro = 10
m milli = 10"3
k kilo = 103
Multiply by
Concentrations
//Ci/mL 109
//Ci/mL 1012
SI Units
rad
rem
pCi
mR/yr
10-2
io-2
3.7 x 10'2
2.6 x 1Q-7
To Obtain
pCi/L
pCi/m3
Gray (Gy=1 Joule/kg)
Sievert (Sv)
Becquerel (Bq)
Coulomb (C)/kg-yr
XIII
-------
Acknowledgements
External peer reviews were provided by Dr. Kenneth C. Kerns, Iowa State University (Ames, Iowa) and
Dr. Mark J. Rudin, University of Nevada Las Vegas (Las Vegas, Nevada). Internal reviewer, in addition
to the authors, included Bruce B. Dicey, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Las Vegas, Nevada). The
contributions of these reviewers in production of this final version of the 1993 annual report are gratefully
acknowledged.
The authors would like to thank Paul J. Weeden for his advice and assistance in the coordination and
preparation of this report. We also want to thank the staff of the ORIA Radiation Sciences Laboratory-Las
Vegas for collecting samples, maintaining equipment, interfacing with offsite residents, and for analyzing
the samples. Appreciation is also extended to Terry L. Mouck, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Las
Vegas, Nevada), for desktop publishing support.
XIV
-------
1 Introduction
The U.S. Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) used
the Nevada Test Site (NTS), between January
1951 and January 1975, for conducting nuclear
weapons tests, nuclear rocket engine development,
nuclear medicine studies, and for other nuclear and
nonnuclear experiments. Beginning in mid-January
1975, these activities became the responsibility of
the U.S. Energy Research and Development
Administration. Two years later this organization
was merged with other energy-related agencies to
form the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).
Atmospheric weapons tests were conducted
periodically at the NTS from January 1951 through
October 1958, followed by a test moratorium which
was in effect until September 1961. Since then all
nuclear detonations at the NTS have been con-
ducted underground, with the expectation of con-
tainment, except the above-ground and shallow
underground tests of Operation Sunbeam and
cratering experiments conducted under the Plow-
share program between 1962 and 1968.
Prior to 1954, an offsite radiation surveillance
program was performed by personnel from the Los
Alamos Scientific Laboratory and the U.S. Army.
Beginning in 1954, and continuing through 1970,
this program was conducted by the U.S. Public
Health Service (PHS). When the U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA) was formed in
December 1970, certain radiation responsibilities
from several federal agencies were transferred to
it, including the Offsite Radiological Safety Program
(ORSP) of the PHS. Since 1970, the EPA Envi-
ronmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory-Las
Vegas (EMSL-LV) has conducted the ORSP, both
in Nevada and at other U.S. nuclear test sites,
under interagency agreements (lAGs) with the
DOE or its predecessor agencies.
Since 1954, the three major objectives of the
ORSP have been:
• Assuring the health and safety of the
people living near the NTS.
• Measuring and documenting levels and
trends of environmental radiation or radio-
active contaminants in the vicinity of
atomic testing areas.
• Verifying compliance with applicable
radiation protection standards, guidelines,
and regulations.
Offsite levels of radiation and radioactivity are
assessed by gamma-ray measurements using
pressurized ion chambers (PICs) and thermolumi-
nescent dosimeters (TLDs); by sampling air, water,
milk, food crops, other vegetation, soil, and ani-
mals; and by human exposure and biological assay
procedures.
1.1 Program Description
Monitoring and surveillance on and around the
Nevada Test Site (NTS) during 1993 indicated that
operations on the NTS were conducted in compli-
ance with applicable federal and DOE guidelines,
i.e., the dose the maximally exposed offsite
individual could have received was less than 0.04
percent of the 10 mrem per year guide for air
exposure. No nuclear tests were conducted due to
the moratorium. All discharges of radioactive
liquids remained onsite in containment ponds, and
there was no indication of potential migration of
radioactivity to the offsite area through ground-
water. Surveillance around the NTS indicated that
airborne radioactivity from diffusion, evaporation of
effluents, or resuspension was not detectable
offsite. No measurable net exposure to members
of the offsite population was detected through the
offsite dosimetry program. Using the CAP88-PC
model and NTS radionuclide emissions data, the
calculated effective dose equivalent to the maxi-
mally exposed individual offsite would have been
4 X 10"3 mrem (4 X 10"5 mSv) Any person receiv-
ing this dose would also have received 97 mrem
(9.7 X 10"1 mSv) from natural background radiation.
1.2 Offsite Environmental
Surveillance
The offsite radiological monitoring program is
conducted around the NTS by the EPA's EMSL
LV, under an Interagency Agreement with DOE.
This program consists of several extensive environ-
mental sampling, radiation detection, and dosimetry
networks.
-------
In 1993 the Air Surveillance Network (ASM) was
made up of 30 continuously operating sampling
locations surrounding the NTS and 77 standby
stations (operated one week each quarter) in all
states west of the Mississippi River. The 30 ASN
stations included 18 located at Community Radia-
tion Monitoring Program (CRMP) stations, de-
scribed below. During 1993 no airborne radioactiv-
ity related to current activities at the NTS was
detected on any sample from the ASN. Other than
naturally occurring 7Be, the only specific
radionuclide possibly detected by this network was
238Pu or 239+240pu on a few air filter samples.
The Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network
(NGTSN) consisted of 21 offsite noble gas sam-
plers (8 on standby) and 21 tritium-in-air samplers
(seven on standby) located outside the NTS and
exclusion areas in the states of Nevada, California,
and Utah. During 1993 no radioactivity that could
be related to NTS activities was detected at any
NGTSN sampling station.
As in previous years, results for 133Xe and HTO
were typically below the minimum detectable
concentration (MDC). The annual average results
for krypton, 28 x 10"12 u.Ci/ml_, although above the
MDC, were within the range of worldwide values
expected from sampling background levels and the
range was similar to last year's.
Sampling of Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring
Program (LTHMP) wells and surface waters around
the NTS showed only background radionuclide
concentrations. The LTHMP also included ground-
water and surface water monitoring at locations in
Colorado, Mississippi, New Mexico, Alaska, and
Nevada where underground tests were conducted.
The results obtained from analysis of samples
collected at those locations were consistent with
previous data except for a sample from a deep well
at Project GASBUGGY where the tritium concen-
tration appears to be increasing and 137Cs has
been detected. No concentrations of radioactivity
detected in water, milk, vegetation, soil, fish, or
animal samples posed any significant health risk.
The Milk Surveillance Network (MSN) consisted of
24 sampling locations within 300 km (186 mi) of
the NTS and 115 Standby Milk Surveillance Net-
work (SMSN) locations throughout the major milk
sheds west of the Mississippi River. Tritium and
90Sr are rarely detected in milk samples at present
and B9Sr is practically never detected. The levels
in both milk networks have decreased over time
since reaching a maximum in 1964. The results
from these networks are consistent with previous
data and indicate little or no change.
Other foods were analyzed regularly, most of which
were meat from domestic or game animals collect-
ed on and around the NTS. The 90Sr levels in
samples of animal bone remained very low, as did
239+24opu jn botn bone ancj |jver samp|es. Carrots,
kohlrabi, broccoli, summer squash, turnips, pears,
potatoes, green onions, and apples from several
offsite locations contained normal 40K activity.
Small amounts of 239+240pu and 90Sr found on a few
samples were attributed to incomplete washing of
soil from the samples.
In 1993, external exposure was monitored by a
network of 127 TLDs and 27 pressurized ion
chambers (PICs). The PIC network in the commu-
nities surrounding the NTS indicated background
exposures, ranging from 66 to 166 mR/yr, that
were consistent with previous data and well within
the range of background data in other areas of the
U.S.
Internal exposure was assessed by whole-body
counting through use of a single germanium
detector, lung counting with six semi-planar detec-
tors, and bioassay through radiochemical proce-
dures. In 1993 counts were made on 144 individu-
als, of whom 56 were participants in the Offsite
Internal Dosimetry Program. In general, the
spectra obtained were representative of natural
background with only normal 40K being detected.
No transuranics were detected in any lung counting
data. Physical examination of offsite residents
revealed only a normal, healthy population consis-
tent with the age and sex distribution of that popu-
lation.
No radioactivity attributable to current NTS opera-
tions was detected by any of the monitoring net-
works. However, based on the releases reported
by NTS users, atmospheric dispersion model
calculations (CAP88-PC) (EPA 1992) indicated
that the maximum potential effective dose equiva-
lent to any offsite individual would have been 4 x
10~3 mrem (4 x 10~s mSv), and the dose to the
population within 80 kilometers of the emission
sites would have been 1.2 x10"2 person-rern (1.2 x
10'4 person-Sv). The hypothetical person receiving
this dose was also exposed to 97 mrem from
natural background radiation. A summary of the
potential effective dose equivalents due to opera-
tions at the NTS is presented in Table 1.
-------
A network of 18 CRMP stations is operated by
local residents. Each station is an integral part of
the ASN, NGTSN, and TLD networks. In addition,
they are equipped with a PIC connected to a
gamma-rate recorder. Each station also has
satellite telemetry transmitting equipment so that
gamma exposure measurements acquired by the
PICs are transmitted via the Geostationary Opera-
tional Environmental Satellite (GOES) to the NTS
and from there to the EMSL-LV by dedicated
telephone line. Another nine PICs with the same
capabilities are distributed in other locations around
the NTS. Samples and data from these CRMP
stations are analyzed and reported by EMSL-LV
and interpreted and reported by the Desert Re-
search Institute, University of Nevada System. All
measurements for 1993 were within the normal
background range for the U.S.
1.3 Groundwater
Protection
DOE/NV instituted a Long-Term Hydrological
Monitoring Program (LTHMP) in 1972 to be operat-
ed by the EPA under an Interagency Agreement.
Groundwater was monitored on and around the
NTS, at eight sites in other states, and at two off-
NTS locations in Nevada in 1993 to detect the
presence of any radioactivity that may be related to
past nuclear testing activities. No radioactivity was
detected above background levels in the ground-
Table 1. Summary of Effective Dose Equivalents from NTS Operations during 1993
Dose
Location
NESHAPic)
Standard
Percentage
of NESHAP
Background
Percentage of
Background
Maximum EDE at
NTS Boundary'3'
4.8 x 10'3 mrem
(4.8 x 1CT5 mSv)
Maximum EDE to
an Individual'*"
3.8± 0.57 x 10"3 mrem
(3.8x 10'6 mSv)
Site boundary 58 km Indian Springs, 80 km
SSE of NTS Area 12 SSE of NTS Area 12
10 mrem per yr
(0.1 mSv per yr)
0.05
97 mrem
(0.97 mSv)
5.Ox 10'3
10 mrem per yr
(0.1 mSv per yr)
0.04
97 mrem
(0.97 mSv)
4.0 x 10"'
Collective EDE to
Population within 80 km
of the NTS Sources
1.2x1 0'2 person-rem
21 ,750 people within
80 km of NTS Sources
1747 person-rem
(17.5 person Sv)
6.9 x 10"
(a) The maximum boundary dose is to a hypothetical individual who remains in the open
continuously during the year at the NTS boundary located 58 km SSE from the Area 12
tunnel ponds.
(b) The maximum individual dose is to an individual outside the NTS boundary at a residence
where the highest dose-rate occurs as calculated by CAP88-PC (Version 1.0) using NTS
effluents listed in Table 20, assuming all trrtiated water input to containment ponds was
evaporated, and summing the contributions from each NTS source.
(c)
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants.
-------
water sampling network surrounding the NTS.
Low levels of tritium, in the form of HTO, were
detected in onsite wells as has occurred previously
although none exceeded 0.2 percent of the Nation-
al Primary Drinking Water Regulation level.
HTO was detected in samples from wells at for-
merly utilized sites, such as DRIBBLE (MS),
GNOME (NM), and GASBUGGY (NM) at levels
consistent with previous experience. The tritium
concentration in Well EPNG 10-36 at GASBUGGY
began increasing about 1984, and 137Cs was
detected for the second year in a row.
Because wells that were drilled for water supply or
exploratory purposes are used in the NTS monitor-
ing program rather than wells drilled specifically for
groundwater monitoring, an extensive program of
well drilling for groundwater characterization has
been started. The design of the program is for
installation of approximately 100 wells at strategic
locations on and near the NTS. Five of these
wells have been completed, six existing wells
refurbished and water quality parameters are being
collected for future use in the characterization
project.
Other activities in this program included studies of
groundwater transport of contaminants
(radionuclide migration studies) and
nonradiological monitoring for water quality as-
sessment and RCRA requirements.
1.4 Offsite Radiological
Quality Assurance
The policy of the EPA requires participation in a
centrally managed QA program by all EPA organi-
zational units involved in environmental data
collection. The QA program developed by the
Nuclear Radiation Assessment Division (NRD) of
the EMSL-LV for the Offsite Radiological Safety
Program (ORSP) meets all requirements of EPA
policy, and also includes applicable elements of
the Department of Energy QA requirements and
regulations. The ORSP QA program defines data
quality objectives (DQOs), which are statements of
the quality of data a decision maker needs to
ensure that a decision based on those data is
defensible. Achieved data quality may then be
evaluated against these DQOs.
1.5 Offsite Monitoring
Under the terms of an Interagency Agreement
between DOE and EPA, the EPA EMSL-LV
conducts the Offsite Radiation Safety Program
(ORSP) in the areas surrounding the NTS. The
largest component of EMSL-LV's program is
routine monitoring of potential human exposure
pathways. Another component is public informa-
tion and community assistance activities.
As a result of the continuing moratorium on
nuclear weapons testing, only simulated tests were
conducted in 1993. Four simulated nuclear
weapons test readiness exercises and one non-
proliferation experiment using conventional (non-
nuclear) explosives were conducted at the NTS.
For each one, EMSL-LV senior personnel served
on the Test Controller's Scientific Advisory Panel
and on the EPA offsite radiological safety staff. To
add as much realism as possible to the exercises,
actual meteorological conditions were used and
data flow was managed in the same manner as in
a real test. Routine off-site environmental radia-
tion monitoring continued throughout 1993 as in
past years.
Town hall meetings and public information presen-
tations provide a forum for increasing public
awareness of NTS activities, disseminating radia-
tion monitoring results, and addressing concerns of
residents related to environmental radiation and
possible health effects. This community education
outreach program is discussed in Section 10.
Community Radiation Monitoring Program (CRMP)
stations have been established in prominent
locations in a number of offsite communities. The
CRMP stations contain samplers for several of the
monitoring networks and are managed by local
residents. The University of Utah and DRI are
cooperators with EPA in the CRMP. The CRMP is
discussed in Section 4.
Environmental monitoring networks, described in
the following subsections, measure radioactivity in
air, atmospheric moisture, milk, local foodstuffs,
and groundwater. These networks monitor the
major potential pathways of radionuclide transfer
to man via inhalation, submersion, and ingestion.
Direct measurement of offsite resident exposure
through the external and internal dosimetry pro-
grams provides confirmation of the exposures
measured in the monitoring networks. Ambient
-------
gamma radiation levels are continuously monitored
at selected locations using Reuter-Stokes pressur-
ized ion chambers (PICs) and Panasonic TLDs.
Atmospheric monitoring equipment includes air
samplers, noble gas samplers, and atmospheric
moisture (tritium-in-air) samplers. Milk, game and
domestic animals, and foodstuffs (fruits and vege-
tables) are routinely sampled and analyzed.
Groundwater on and in the vicinity of the NTS is
monitored in the Long-Term Hydrological Monitor-
ing Program (LTHMP). Data from these monitoring
networks are used to calculate an annual exposure
dose to the offsite residents, as described in
Section 8.
-------
2 Description of the Nevada Test Site
The Nevada Test Site (NTS), located in southern
Nevada, was the primary location for testing of
nuclear explosives in the continental U.S. from
1951 until the present moratorium began. Histori-
cal testing has included (1) atmospheric testing in
the 1950s and early 1960s, (2) underground
testing in drilled, vertical holes and horizontal
tunnels, (3) earth-cratering experiments, and (4)
open-air nuclear reactor and engine testing. No
nuclear tests were conducted in 1993. Limited
non-nuclear testing has included controlled spills of
hazardous material at the Liquified Gaseous Fuels
Spill Test Facility. Low-level radioactive and mixed
waste disposal and storage facilities for defense
waste are also operated on the NTS.
The NTS environment is characterized by desert
valley and Great Basin mountain terrain and
topography, with a climate, flora, and fauna typical
of the southern Great Basin deserts. Restricted
access and extended wind transport times are
notable features of the remote location of the NTS
and adjacent U.S. Air Force lands. Also character-
istic of this area are the great depths to slow-
moving groundwaters and little or no surface water.
These features afford protection to the inhabitants
of the surrounding area from potential radiation
exposures as a result of releases of radioactivity or
other contaminants from operations on the NTS.
Population density within 150 km of the NTS is
only 0.5 persons per square kilometer versus
approximately 29 persons per square kilometer in
the 48 contiguous states. The predominant land
use surrounding the NTS is open range for live-
stock grazing with scattered mining and recre-
ational areas.
The EPA's Environmental Monitoring Systems
Laboratory in Las Vegas, Nevada (EMSL-LV),
conducts hydrological studies at eight U.S. nuclear
testing locations off the NTS. The last test con-
ducted at any of these sites was in 1973 (Project
RIO BLANCO in Colorado).
2.1 Location
The NTS is located in Nye County, Nevada, with
its southeast corner about 54 miles (90 km) north-
west of Las Vegas (Figure 1). It occupies an area
of about 1,350 square miles (3,750 square km),
varies from 28 to 35 miles (46 to 58 km) in width
(east-west) and from 49 to 55 miles (82 to 92 km)
in length (north-south). This area consists of large
basins or flats about 2,970 to 3,900 feet (900 to
1,200 m) above mean sea level (MSL) surrounded
by mountain ranges rising from 5,940 to 7,590 feet
(1,800 to 2,300 m) above MSL.
The NTS is surrounded on three sides by exclusion
areas, collectively named the Nellis Air Force Base
Range Complex, which provides a buffer zone
between the test areas and privately owned lands.
This buffer zone varies from 14 to 62 miles (24 to
104 km) between the test area and land that is
open to the public. In the unlikely event of an
atmospheric release of radioactivity (venting), two
to more than six hours would elapse, depending on
wind speed and direction, before any release of
airborne radioactivity would reach private lands.
2.2 Climate
The climate of the NTS and surrounding area is
variable, due to its wide range in altitude and its
rugged terrain. Most of Nevada has a semi-arid
climate characterized as mid-latitude steppe.
Throughout the year, water is insufficient to support
the growth of common food crops without irrigation.
Climate may be classified by the types of vegeta-
tion indigenous to an area. According to Nevada
Weather and Climate (Houghton et al., 1975), this
method of classification developed by Koppen is
further subdivided on the basis of "...seasonal
distribution of rainfall and the degree of summer
heat or winter cold." Table 2 summarizes the
characteristics of climatic types for Nevada.
According to Quiring (1968), the NTS average
annual precipitation ranges from about 4 inches
(10 cm) at the lower elevations to around 10
inches (25 cm) at the higher elevations. During the
winter months, the plateaus may be snow-covered
for a period of several days or weeks. Snow is
uncommon on the flats. Temperatures vary con«
siderably with elevation, slope, and local air cur-
rents. The average daily temperature ranges at
the lower altitudes are around 25 to 50°F (-4 to
10°C) in January and 55 to 95°F (13 to 35°C) jn
-------
I
50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 1. Location of the Nevada Test Site.
-------
July, with extremes of -1ST (-26°C) and 120°F
(49°C). Corresponding temperatures on the pla-
teaus are 25 to 35°F (-4 to 2°C) in January and 65
to 80°F (18 to 27°C) in July with extremes of -30°F
(-34°C)and 115°F (46°C).
The wind direction, as measured on a 98 ft (30 m)
tower at an observation station approximately 7
miles (11 km) north-northwest of CP-1, is predomi-
nantly northerly except during the months of May
through August when winds from the south-south-
west 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 predominate slightly 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.
2.3 Hydrology
Two major hydrologic systems shown in Figure 2
exist on the NTS (U.S. Energy Research and
Development Administration, 1977). Ground water
in the northwestern part of the NTS (the Pahute
Mesa area) flows at a rate of 6.6 to 600 feet (2 to
180 m) per year to the south and southwest
toward the Ash Meadows discharge area in the
Amargosa Desert. Ground water to the east of the
NTS moves from north to south at a rate of not
less than 6.6 feet (2 m) nor greater than 730 feet
(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 to the south-
west, toward the Ash Meadows discharge area.
2.4 Regional Land Use
Figure 3 is a map of the off-NTS area showing a
wide variety of land uses, such as mining, camp-
ing, fishing, and hunting within a 180-mile (300
km) radius of the NTS operations control center at
CP-1 (the location of CP-1 is shown on Figures 2
and 5). West of the NTS, elevations range from
280 feet (85 m) below MSL in Death Valley to
14,600 feet (4,420 m) above MSL in the Sierra
Nevada.
Table 2. Characteristics of Climatic
Climate Type
Alpine tundra
Humid continental
Subhumid continental
Mid-latitude steppe
Mid-latitude desert
Low-latitude desert
Types in Nevada (from Houghton et al. 1975)
Temperature
°F
(°C)
Winter Summer
Oto 15
(-18 to -9)
10 to 30
(-12 to-1)
10 to 30
(-12 to-1)
20 to 40
(-7 to 4)
20 to 40
(-7 to 4)
40 to 50
(-4 to 10)
40 to 50
(4 to 10)
50 to 70
(10 to 21)
50 to 70
(10 to 21)
65 to 80
(18 to 27)
65 to 80
(18 to 27)
80 to 90
(27 to 32)
Annual
Precipitation
inches
(cm)
Total*
15 to 45
(38 to 114)
25 to 45
(64 to 114)
12 to 25
(30 to 64)
16 to 15
(15 to 38)
3 to 8
(8 to 20)
2 to 10
(5 to 25)
Snowfall
Medium to
heavy
Heavy
Moderate
Light to
moderate
Light
Negligible
Percent
Dominant of
Vegetation Area
Alpine meadows
Pine-fir forest 1
Pine or scrub 15
woodland
Sagebrush, grass, 57
scrub
Greasewood, 20
shadscale
Creosote bush 7 *
* Limits of annual precipitation overlap because of variations in temperature which affect the water balance.
-------
/
f
V
Pahute Mesa
Ground Water
System
Ash Meadows
Ground Water System
\
I
. .. „ .
Indian Springs
Las Vegas
Flow Direction
Ground Water
System Boundaries
Silent Canyon
Caldera
Timber Mountain
Caldera
Scale in Miles
10 20
10 20 30 40
Scale in Kilometers
LOCATION MAP
Figure 2. Ground water flow systems around the Nevada Test Site.
9
-------
I r
. Camping &
Recreational
Areas
D Hunting
• Fishing
O Mines
A Oil Fields
Lake Havasu
100
50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 3. General land use within 180 miles (300 km) of the Nevada Test Site.
10
-------
Portions 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, Califor-
nia, 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
the Moapa Valley, supporting irrigation for small-
scale but intensive farming of a variety of crops.
Grazing is also common in this area, particularly to
the northeast. The area north of the NTS is also
mid-latitude steppe, where the major agricultural
activity is grazing of cattle and sheep. Minor
agriculture, primarily the growing of alfalfa hay, is
found in this portion of Nevada within 180 miles
(300 km) of the CP-1. Many of the residents have
access to locally grown fruits and vegetables.
Recreational areas lie in all directions around the
NTS (Figure 4) and 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 closed during winter
months. Camping and fishing locations to the
southeast, south, and southwest are utilized
throughout the year. The peak of the hunting
season is from September through January.
2.5 Population Distribution
Knowledge of population densities and spatial
distribution of farm animals is necessary to assess
protective measures required in the event of an
accidental release of radioactivity at the NTS.
Figure 4 shows the population of counties sur-
rounding the NTS based on the 1990 Bureau of
Census (BOC) count (DOC, 1990). Excluding
Clark County, the major population center (approxi-
mately 741,459 in 1990), the population density of
counties adjacent to the NTS is about 0.7 persons
per square mile (0.4 persons per square kilometer).
For comparison, the population density of the 48
contiguous states was 70.3 persons per square
mile (27 persons per square kilometer) (DOC,
1990). The estimated average population density
for Nevada in 1990 was 10.9 persons per square
mile (3.1 persons per square kilometer) (DOC,
1986).
The offsite area within 48 miles (80 km) of CP-1
(the primary area in which the dose commitment
must be determined for the purpose of this report)
is predominantly rural. Several small communities
are located in the area, the largest being in Pah-
rump Valley. Pahrump, a growing rural community
with a population of 7,425 (DOC, 1990), is located
48 miles (80 km) south of CP-1. The small resi-
dential community of Crystal, Nevada, also located
in the Pahrump Valley, is several miles north of the
town of Pahrump (Figure 3). The Amargosa farm
area, which has a population of about 950, is
located 30 miles (50 km) southwest of CP-1. The
largest town in the near offsite area is Beatty,
which has a population of about 1,500 and is
located approximately 39 miles (65 km) to the west
of CP-1.
The Mojave Desert of California, which includes
Death Valley National Monument, lies along the
southwestern border of Nevada. The National
Park Service (NPS) estimated 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
including campers on any particular day during the
major holiday periods in the winter months, and as
many as 30,000 during "Death Valley Days" in
November (NPS, 1990). The largest populated
area is the Ridgecrest, California area, which has
a population of 27,725 and is located 114 miles
(190 km) southwest of the NTS. The next largest
town is Barstow, California, located 159 miles (265
km) south-southwest of the NTS, with a 1990
population of 21,472. The Owens Valley, where
numerous small towns are located, lies 30 miles
(50 km) west of Death Valley. The largest town in
the Owens Valley is Bishop, California, located 135
miles (225 km) west-northwest of the NTS, with a
population of 3,475 (DOC, 1990).
The extreme southwestern region of Utah is more
developed than the adjacent part of Nevada. The
largest community is St. George, located 132 miles
(220 km) east of the NTS, with a 1990 population
of 28,502. The next largest town, Cedar City, with
a population of 13,443, is located 168 miles (280
km) east-northeast of the NTS (DOC, 1990).
The extreme northwestern region of Arizona is
mostly range land except for that portion in the
Lake Mead National Recreation Area. In addition,
several small communities lie along the Colorado
River.
The largest towns in the area are Bullhead City, 99
miles (165 km) south-southeast of the NTS, with a
1990 population of 21,951 and Kingman, located
11
-------
Douglas!
27i637 } Mono
F/gure 4. Population of Arizona, California, Nevada, and Utah counties near the Nevada Test Site.
12
-------
168 miles (280 km) southeast of the NTS, with a 8 were compiled for Nevada and Utah from the
population of 12,722 (DOC, 1990). Nevada Agricultural Statistics 1994 report (Nevada
Agricultural Statistics Service, 1994) and from the
Figures 5 through 8 show the most recent esti- 1994 Utah Agricultural Statistics report (Utah
mates of the domestic animal populations in the Agricultural Statistics Service, 1994).
counties near the NTS. Domestic animal numbers
are updated through interim surveys as part of
routine monitoring and by periodic resurveys. The
numbers given in Figure 5, showing distribution of
family milk cows and goats, are determined from
these interim surveys. The numbers in Figures 6 to
13
-------
Washoe :
5(28)
Storey f
0(14)
Carson
City
0(0)
Douglas -
3(4)
Lyon
5(32)
00 Cows
(00) Goats
50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 5. Distribution of family milk cows and goats, by county - 1993
14
-------
Washoe "
500
Storey f
Lyon
1,970
50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
All * counties total 480 dairy cows.
Individual county values not published
to avoid disclosure of individual operations.
Figure 6. Distribution of dairy cows, by county - 1993
15
-------
I
I
Washoe f
28,000
Storey I
300
Carson £
City
1,700
Douglas -
20,000
Lyon
46,000
SO 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 7. Distribution of beef cattle, by county - 1993
16
-------
Washoe
Lyon
11,000
50 100
Scale in Kilometers
All counties total 9,500 sheep.
Individual county values not published to avoid disclosure of individual operations.
Figure 8. Distribution of sheep, by county - 1993
17
-------
3 External Ambient Gamma Monitoring
External ambient gamma radiation is measured by
the Thermoluminescent Dosimetry (TLD) Network
and also by the Pressurized Ion Chamber (PIC)
Network. The primary function of the two networks
is to detect changes in ambient gamma radiation.
In the absence of nuclear testing, ambient gamma
radiation rates naturally differ among locations
since rates vary with altitude (cosmic radiation) and
with radioactivity in the soil (terrestrial radiation).
Ambient gamma radiation will also vary slightly at
a location due to changes in weather patterns and
other factors.
3.1 Thermoluminescent
Dosimetry Network
The primary function of the EPA EMSL-LV environ-
mental dosimetry program is to define a mecha-
nism for identifying any increase in radiation levels
in areas surrounding the NTS. This is accom-
plished by developing baseline information regard-
ing ambient radiation levels from all radiation
sources and looking for any deviations from data
trends. In addition to the environmental TLD
program, EPA deploys personnel TLDs to individu-
als volunteers living in areas surrounding the NTS.
Information gathered from this program would help
identify possible exposures to residents. Basic
philosophies for program development for the
personnel TLD program are essentially similar to
the environmental TLD program.
3.1.1 Design
The current EPA TLD program utilizes the Panaso-
nic Model UD-802 TLD for personnel monitoring
and the UD-814 TLD for environmental monitoring.
Each dosimeter is read using the Panasonic Model
UD-71OA automatic dosimeter reader.
The UD-802 TLD incorporates two elements of
Li2B4O7:Cu and two elements of CaSO4:Tm phos-
phors. The phosphors are behind approximately
17, 300, 300, and 1000 mg/cm2 of attenuation,
respectively. With the use of different phosphors
and filtrations, a dose algorithm can be applied to
ratios of the different element responses. This
process defines the radiation type and energy and
provides a mechanism for assessing an absorbed
dose equivalent.
Environmental monitoring is accomplished using
the UD-814 TLD, which is made up of one element
of Li2B4O7:Cu and three elements of CaSO4:Tm.
The CaSO4:Tm elements are behind approximately
1000 mg/cm2 attenuation. An average of the
corrected values for elements two through four
gives the total exposure for each TLD. Two UD-
814 TLDs are deployed at each station per moni-
toring period.
In general terms, TLDs operate by trapping elec-
trons at an elevated energy state. After the collec-
tion period, each TLD element is heated. When
heat is applied to the phosphor, the trapped elec-
trons are released and the energy differences
between the initial energies of the electrons and
the energies at the elevated state are given off in
the form of photons. These photons are then
collected using a photomultipliertube. The number
of photons emitted, and the resulting electrical
signal, is proportional to the initial deposited ener-
gy-
3.1.2 Results of TLD Monitoring
ENVIRONMENTAL DATA:
During 1993 a total of 127 offsite stations was
monitored using TLDs. There was a dramatic
decrease in the number of fixed environmental
monitoring locations in 1993 due to the nuclear test
moratorium that began in October 1992. Figure 9
shows current fixed environmental monitoring
locations. Total annual exposures were calculated
by dividing each quarterly result by the number of
days representing each deployment period. The
quarterly daily rates were averaged to obtain an
annual daily average. If a deployment period over-
lapped the beginning or end of the year a daily
rate was calculated, for that deployment period,
and multiplied by the number of days that fell
within 1993. The total average daily rate was then
multiplied by 365.25 to determine the total annual
exposure for each station.
During 1993 annual exposures ranged from 55 mR
(0.55 mSv)/yr at Corn Creek, NV to 305 mR (3.0
mSv) at Warm Springs No.2 with a mean exposure
of 98 mR (0.98 mSv)/yr for the network. The next
18
-------
k. Locations monitored with both personnel
and fixed station TLDs. (25)
> Towns
I Towns monitored with both personnel
and fixed station TLDs. (16)
Note: Numbers beside symbols represent
the number of personnel TLDs at that
location.
Figure 9. Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Fixed Environmental Stations and Personnel- 1993
19
-------
highest exposure occurred at Manhattan, NV: 175
mR (1.8 mSv)/yr.
Transit control dosimeters accompany station TLDs
during transit to the deployment location and during
their return to the processing laboratory. Between
1988 and 1991 transit control TLDs were inappro-
priately subtracted from the station TLDs, this
reduced the deployment exposure. Operational
techniques have since changed for defining these
transit exposures to provide more correct data for
measurements since 1992. A summary of current
and past annual exposure data is shown in Figure
10.
PERSONNEL DATA:
Detailed results for 1993 are shown in Appendix A,
Table A.2. The number of personnel monitored
with TLDs were 69 in 1993. The locations of the
personnel monitored in 1993 are shown on the
map in Figure 9. The total annual EDE was
calculated by summing the quarterly exposure data
for the year.
During 1993, the low was 61 mrem (0.61 mSv), the
high was 190 mrem (1.9 mSv), and the mean was
106 mrem (1.1 mSv) for all monitored personnel.
Total annual whole body absorbed dose equiva-
lents were calculated by summing all available data
for the year. If data gaps occurred, all available
data was summed and a daily rate was computed
by dividing the sum by the number of days with
available data. The daily rate was then multiplied
by 365.25 days.
3.1.3 Quality Assurance/
Quality Control
During 1993, two calibration instruments were
available to support the program. One is a TLD
irradiator manufactured by Williston-Elin housing a
nominal 1.8 Ci 137Cs source. This irradiator pro-
vides for automated irradiations of the TLDs. The
second calibration instrument is a nominal 10 Ci
137Cs well type irradiator. Unlike the Williston-Elin
irradiators, this well type does not provide automat-
ed capabilities. TLD exposures accomplished with
the well type irradiator are monitored using a
Victoreen E-5000 precision electrometer whose
calibration is traceable to the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST). The exposure
rates of both irradiators have been confirmed by
measurement using a precision electrometer which
has a calibration traceable to NIST. Panasonic
UD-802 dosimeters exposed by these irradiators
are used to calibrate the TLD readers and to verify
TLD reader linearity. Control dosimeters of the
same type as field dosimeters (UD-802 or UD-814)
are exposed and read together with the field
dosimeters. This provides daily on-line process
quality control checks in the form of irradiated
controls.
Each magazine containing TLDs to be read nor-
mally contains three irradiated control TLDs that
have been exposed to a nominal 200 mR at least
24 hours prior to the reading. After the irradiated
controls have been read, the ratio of recorded
exposure to delivered exposure is calculated and
recorded for each of the four elements of the
dosimeter. This ratio is applied to all raw element
readings from field and unirradiated control dosim-
eters to automatically compensate for reader
variations.
Prior to being placed in service, element correction
factors are determined for all dosimeters. Whenev-
er a dosimeter is read, the mean of the three most
recent correction factor determinations is applied to
each element to compensate for normal variability
(caused primarily by the TLD manufacturing pro-
cess) in individual dosimeter response.
In addition to irradiated control dosimeters, each
group of TLDs is accompanied by three unirradi-
ated control dosimeters during deployment and
during return. These unirradiated controls are
evaluated at the dosimetry laboratory to ensure
that the TLDs did not receive any excess dose
while either in transit or storage. The exposure
received while either in storage or transit is typical-
ly negligible and thus is not subtracted.
An assessment of TLD data quality is based on the
assumption that exposures measured at a fixed
location will remain substantially constant over an
extended period of time. A number of factors will
combine to affect the certainty of measurements.
The total uncertainty of the reported exposures is
a combination of random and systematic compo-
nents. The random component is primarily the
statistical uncertainty in the reading of the TLD
elements themselves. Based on repeated known
exposures, this random uncertainty for the calcium
sulfate elements used to determine exposure to
fixed environmental stations is estimated to be
approximately ± 3 to 5%. There are also several
20
-------
450-
400-
350-
1- 300-
E '.
1
H 25°"
DC
rj
Q. 200-
fi
"co
c
< 150-
100-
50-
o-
••
\
^\
^
^^
— ,
— - —
— - — .
\
-
/
/
\
1 '
1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 TJT I -• 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1IT 1 I T|I *1 ' F~
71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94
Calendar Year 19...
Figure 10. Summary of Annual TLD Data, 1971 1993.
systematic components of exposure uncertainty,
including energy-directional response, fading,
calibration, and exposures received while in stor-
age. These uncertainties are estimated according
to established statistical methods for propagation
of uncertainty.
Accuracy and reproducibility of TLD processing has
been evaluated via the Department of Energy
Laboratory Accreditation Program (DOELAP). This
process concluded that procedures and practices
utilized by the EPA EMSL-LV TLD Laboratory
comply with standards published by the Depart-
ment of Energy. This evaluation includes three
rounds of blind performance testing over the range
of 50 mrem to 500 rads and a comprehensive
onsite assessment by DOELAP site assessors.
The DOELAP accreditation process requires a
determination of the lower limit of delectability and
verification that the TLD readers exhibit linear
performance over the range included in the perfor-
mance testing program. The lower limit of
delectability for the EMSL-LV TLD Laboratory has
been calculated to be approximately 3 mrem above
background at the 95% confidence level.
21
-------
3.1.4 Data Management
3.2.2 Procedures
The TLD data base resides on a Digital Equipment
Corporation MicroVAX II directly connected to the
two Panasonic TLD readers. Samples are tracked
using field data cards and an issue data base
tracking system incorporated into the reader
control software. Two major software packages
are utilized by the TLD network. The first, a
proprietary package written and supported by
International Science Associates, controls the TLD
readers, tracks dosimeter performance, completes
necessary calculations to determine absorbed
dose equivalent, performs automated QA/QC
functions, and generates raw data files and re-
ports. The second software package, locally
developed, maintains privacy act information and
the identifying data, generates reports in a number
of predefined formats, and provides archival
storage of TLD results dating to 1971.
3.2 Pressurized Ion Chambers
The Pressurized Ion Chamber (PIC) Network
continuously measures ambient gamma radiation
exposure rates, and because of its sensitivity, may
detect low-level exposures not detected by other
monitoring methods. The primary function of the
PIC network is to detect changes in ambient
gamma radiation due to anthropogenic activities.
In the absence of anthropogenic activities, ambient
gamma radiation rates naturally differ among
locations as rates vary with altitude (cosmic radia-
tion) and with radioactivity in the soil (terrestrial
radiation). Ambient gamma radiation also varies
slightly within a location due to weather patterns.
3.2.1 Network Design
There are 27 PICs stationed in communities
around the NTS which provide near real-time esti-
mates of gamma exposure rates. In addition,
stations located at Terrell's Ranch and Amargosa
Valley Community Center which are part of the
Yucca mountain Project would, in the event of a
release of radioactivity, be used to track emis-
sions. The locations of the PICs are shown in
Figure 11. Eighteen of the PICs are located at
CRMP stations which are discussed in Section 10.
The PIC Network utilizes Reuter-Stokes models
1011, 1012, and 1013 PICs. The PIC is a spheri-
cal shell filled with argon gas to a pressure 25
times that of atmospheric. In the center of the
chamber is a spherical electrode with a charge
opposite to the outer shell. When gamma radia-
tion penetrates the sphere, ionization of the gas
occurs and the ions are collected by the center
electrode. The electrical current generated is
measured, and the intensity of the radiation field is
determined from the magnitude of this current.
Data are retrieved from the PICs shortly after
measurements are made. The near real-time
telemetry-based data retrieval is achieved by the
connection of each PIC to a data collection plat-
form which collects and transmits the data. Gam-
ma exposure measurements are transmitted via
the Geostationary Operational Environmental
Satellite (GOES) directly to a receiver earth station
at the NTS and from there to the EMSL-LV by
dedicated telephone line. Each station routinely
transmits data every four hours (i.e., 4-hour aver-
age, 1-minute maximum, and 1-minute minimum
values) unless the gamma exposure rate exceeds
the currently established alarm threshold. When
the threshold is exceeded for two consecutive 1-
minute samples, the system goes into the alarm
mode and transmits a string of nine consecutive 1-
minute values every 2 to 15 minutes. Additionally,
the location and status (i.e.,routine or alarm mode)
of each station are shown on a map display in the
CP-1 control room at the NTS and at EMSL-LV.
Thus, the PIC Network is able to provide immedi-
ate documentation of radioactive cloud passage in
the event of an accidental release from the NTS.
The threshold limits are established at approxi-
mately two times background for each station
location. These threshold values range from 16
//R/h for Pahrump, Nevada to 35 //R/h for Milford,
Utah and Stone Cabin Ranch, Nevada. A
significant improvement was made to the network
during 1993. In previous years, and in the first
half of 1993, 4-hour average, 1-minute minimum,
and 1-minute maximum values were the only
values transmitted every four hours. During 1993,
the software at the stations was upgraded to allow
a string of 48 five-minute averages to be transmit4
ted every four hours.
22
-------
NEVADA
PYRAMID
I LAKE
Austin
| Ely
Nyala
Stone Twin Uhaldes Rn.
Cabir^Rn.spnngs Rn. • Pioche
• *
Complex 1
• Calie te
Medlins Rn.
• Alamo
Overton
'V Indian Springs
Pahrump™
•% Las fl
Shoshone • ^ Vegas
UTAH
Delta i
• Milford
• Cedar City
• St. George
ARIZONA
N
Community Monitoring Stations (18)
Other PIC Locations (9)
Scale in Miles
SO
100
50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 11 Pressurized Ion Chamber Network Station Locations - 1993
23
-------
In addition to telemetry retrieval, PIC data are also
recorded on both magnetic tapes and hard-copy
strip charts at 24 of the 27 EPA stations and on
magnetic cards for the other three EPA stations.
The magnetic tapes and cards, which are collected
weekly, provide a backup to the telemetry data and
are also useful for investigating anomalies because
the data are recorded in smaller increments of time
(5-minute averages). The PICs also contain a
liquid crystal display, permitting interested persons
to monitor current readings.
The data are evaluated weekly by EMSL-LV
personnel. Trends and anomalies are investigated
and equipment problems are identified and referred
to field personnel for correction. Weekly averages
are stored in Lotus files on a personal computer.
These weekly averages are compiled from the 4-
hour averages from the telemetry data, when
available, and from the 5-minute averages from the
magnetic tapes or cards when the telemetry data
are unavailable. Computer-generated reports of
the PIC weekly average data are issued weekly for
posting at each station. These reports indicate the
current week's average gamma exposure rate, the
previous week's and year's averages, and the
maximum and minimum background levels in the
U.S.
3.2.3 Results
Table 3 contains the number of weekly averages
available from each station and the maximum,
minimum, mean, standard deviation, and median of
the weekly averages. The mean ranged from 7.5
u.R/hr at Pahrump, Nevada to 19.0 u.R/hr at Austin,
Nevada or annual exposures from 66 to 166 mR
(17 to 43 uC-kg). For each station, this table also
shows the total mR/yr (calculated based on the
mean of the weekly averages) and the average
gamma exposure rate from 1992. Total mR/yr
measured by this network ranged from 66 mR/yr at
Pahrump, Nevada to 166 mR/yr at Austin, Nevada.
Background levels of environmental gamma expo-
sure rates in the U.S. (from the combined effects
of terrestrial and cosmic sources) vary between 49
and 247 mR/yr (Committee on the Biological
Effects of Ionizing Radiation, 1980). The annual
exposure levels observed at each PIC station are
well within these U.S. background levels. Figure
12 shows the distribution of the weekly averages
from each station arranged by ascending means
(represented by filled circles). The left and right
edges of the box on the graph represent the 25th
and 75th percentiles of the distribution of the
weekly averages (i.e., 50 percent of the data falls
within this region). The vertical line drawn inside
the box represents the 50th percentile or median
value. The horizontal lines extend from the box to
the minimum and maximum values.
The data from the Las Vegas, Uhalde's Ranch,
Rachel, and Austin stations show the greatest
range and the most variability. The Las Vegas
station was moved in February approximately 300
ft from one side of the parking lot to another. This
caused an increase in the average PIC value from
approximately 6.0 u,R/hr to 9.0 u.R/hr. This in-
crease is probably caused by moving the station
from a relatively paved area to a less paved area
where more radon is able to emanate from the
ground. The data from the Uhalde's Ranch,
Rachel, and Austin stations have historically shown
natural fluctuations during the winter months (EPA
600/R-93/141). In addition to these natural fluctua-
tions, both the Uhalde's Ranch station and the
Rachel station experienced equipment problems
during the winter months. These equipment
problems contributed to the variability in the data
from these two stations. The mean exposure at
the Indian Springs station increased from 8.9 u.R/hr
in 1992 to 11 nR/hr in 1993. This was due to
landscaping changes made to the station in late
1992 and to the calibration of the PIC which was
done in November 1993. The PIC data presented
in this section are based on weekly averages of
gamma exposure rates from each station. Weekly
averages were compiled for every station for every
week during 1993, with the exception of the weeks
listed in Table 4. Data were unavailable during
these weeks due to equipment failure.
3.2.4 Quality Assurance/Quality
Control
Several measures are taken to ensure that the PIC
data are of acceptable quality:
• The PICs are calibrated at least once every
two years and usually once a year. The
DOE requires that the PICs be calibrated
every two years.
• Radiation monitoring technicians place a
radioactive source of a known exposure on
the PICs weekly to check the performance
of the units.
24
-------
Table 3. Summary of Weekly Gamma Exposure Rates as Measured by Pressurized Ion
Chamber- 1993
Gamma Exposure Rate (//R/hr)
Number of
Station
Furnace Creek, CA
Shoshone, CA
Alamo, NV
Weekly
Averages
50
52
52
Amargosa Valley, NV 52
Austin, NV
Beatty, NV
Caliente, NV
Complex I, NV
Ely, NV
Goldfield, NV
Indian Springs, NV
Las Vegas, NV
Medlin's Ranch, NV
Nyala, NV
Overton, NV
Pahrump, NV
Pioche, NV
Rachel, NV
Stone Cabin Ranch,
Tonopah, NV
Twin Springs, NV
Uhalde's Ranch, NV
Cedar City, UT
Delta, UT
Milford, UT
Salt Lake City, UT
St. George, UT
Note: Multiply //R/hr
52
51
50
51
52
52
52
49
51
51
50
52
52
47
NV52
52
51
51
52
52
51
49
41
by 2.6 x
Arithmetic
Maximum
10.8
12.4
13.9
14.3
20.6
17.9
15.2
17.5
14.9
16.1
12.1
10.1
16.3
13.0
9.9
9.1
12.4
18.1
18.5
18.1
17.5
18.4
14.1
12.6
18.5
11.2
9.0
Minimum
9.8
11.5
13.0
13.6
14.9
15.9
14.1
13.9
11.6
13.8
10.0
6.0
14.7
11.0
8.9
7.0
10.7
13.6
14.8
14.8
15.0
11.1
11.4
10.1
17.0
8.5
8.0
10'1° to obtain C -kg'1
Mean
10.1
12.0
13.3
14.0
19.0
16.5
14.6
15.5
13.4
14.9
11.0
9.5
15.8
11.9
9.1
7.5
11.8
16.6
17.3
17.2
16.6
16.3
13.1
11.9
17.6
10.6
8.3
•hr'1
Standard
Deviation
0.20
0.14
0.24
0.11
1.72
0.64
0.30
0.67
0.74
0.35
0.51
1.20
0.34
0.65
0.23
0.65
0.43
0.92
0.87
0.58
0.57
2.16
0.74
0.50
0.38
0.63
0.30
Median
10.0
12.0
13.3
14.0
19.9
16.2
14.5
15.6
13.4
15.0
11.0
10.0
15.9
11.9
9.0
7.2
12.0
17.0
17.4
17.1
16.7
17.3
13.3
12.0
17.5
11.0
8.2
mR/yr
88
105
117
123
166
145
128
136
117
131
97
83
138
104
80
66
103
145
152
151
146
143
115
104
154
93
73
1992
Mean
(//R/hr)
10.1
11.9
13.7
14.4
19.3
16.0
14.4
15.8
12.6
14.5
8.9
6.0
15.8
11.9
9.0
7.7
12.0
16.2
17.6
16.9
16.7
17.4
12.3
12.1
17.4
11.0
8.4
• Source check calibration and background
exposure rate data are evaluated weekly
and compared to historical values.
• Data transmitted via the telemetry system
are compared to the magnetic tape data on
a weekly basis to check that both systems
are reporting the same numbers. Whenev-
er weekly averages from the two sets of
numbers are not in agreement, the cause
of the discrepancy is investigated and
corrected.
A data quality assessment of the PIC data is given
in Section 11, Quality Assurance.
3.3 Comparison of TLD
Results to PIC
Measurements
A comparison was conducted between the 1993
TLD data and the 1993 PIC data. This compari-
son showed only minor fluctuations between the
two sets of data. PIC data compared to TLD data
ranged from a low of a 10% difference at Overton,
Nevada to a high of a 25% difference at Cedar
City, Utah, with a mean deviation of +5%. A visual
representation of this comparison is shown in
Figure 13.
25
-------
Pahrump, NV -
St. George, UT -
Overton, NV -
Las Vegas, NV -
Furnace Creek, CA -
Salt Lake City, UT -
Indian Springs, NV -
Pioche, NV -
Nyala, NV -
Delta, UT -
Shoshone, CA -
Cedar City, UT -
Alamo, NV -
Ely, NV -
Amargosa Valley, NV -
Caliente, NV -
Goldfield, NV -
Complex I, NV -
Medlins Ranch, NV -
Uhaldes Ranch, NV -
Beatty, NV -
Rachel, NV -
Twin Springs, NV -
Tonopah, NV -
Stone Cabin, NV -
Milford, UT -
Austin, NV -
IT*"!—'
SH
-EHH
5.0
10.0 15.0 20.0
Average Weekly Gamma Rate (uR/hr)
25.0
Figure 12 Distribution of the weekly averages from each Pressurized Ion Chamber network station
1993
26
-------
Table 4. Weeks for which Pressurized Ion Chamber Data were Unavailable
Station Week Ending Station
Alamo, Nevada
Austin, Nevada
Cedar City, Utah
Delta, Utah
Furnace Creek,
California
Las Vegas, Nevada
Medlin's Ranch,
Nevada
July 15
July 22
July 28
January 14
May 12
May 26
June 2
January 21
January 28
March 11
Nyala, Nevada
Pahrump, Nevada
Salt Lake City, Utah
St. George, Utah
Twin Springs, Nevada
Week Ending
February 25
March 11
November 17
November 24
June 16
November 11
November 24
February 4
February 18
February 25
May 12
June 16
December 30
27
-------
160
150
130-
120-
CO
to
Q
Q
100-
90:
80-
70
60-
50-
50
60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
PIC Data
Figure 13. Thermoluminescent Dosimetry versus Pressurized Ion Chamber Networks - 1993
28
-------
4 Atmospheric Monitoring
The inhalation of radioactive airborne particles can
be a major pathway for human exposure to radia-
tion. The atmospheric monitoring networks are
designed to detect environmental radiation from
NTS and non-NTS activities. Data from atmo-
spheric monitoring can determine the concentra-
tion and source of airborne radioactivity and can
project the fallout patterns and durations of expo-
sure to man. Atmospheric monitoring networks
include the Air Surveillance, Noble Gas, and
Atmospheric Moisture (Tritium-in-Air) networks.
The atmospheric monitoring networks were de-
signed to monitor the areas within 350 kilometers
(220 miles) of the NTS. These continuously
operating networks are supplemented by standby
networks which cover the contiguous states west
of the Mississippi River.
Many of the data collected from the atmospheric
monitoring networks fall below the minimum
detectable concentration (MDC). Averages of data
presented in this chapter were calculated including
measured results below MDCs. All of the data
collected from the atmospheric monitoring net-
works reside on a VAX computer in the Sample
Tracking Data Management System (STDMS).
4.1 Air Surveillance Network
4.1.1 Design
During 1993 the ASN consisted of 30 continuously
operating sampling stations (see Figure 14 for
these locations) and 77 standby stations (Figure
15) that were scheduled to be activated one week
per quarter.
Twenty-four standby stations were activated over
a three-week period during April 1993 immediately
following the Russian TOMSK-7 incident. During
the fourth quarter of 1993, only eleven of the
standby stations were activated because of
unforeseen budget restrictions.
The low-volume air sampler at each station is
equipped to collect particulate radionuclides on
fiber filters and gaseous radioiodines in charcoal
cartridges. The filters and charcoal cartridge
samples from all active stations and the filters from
standby stations receive complete analyses at the
EMSL-LVRadioanalysis Laboratory. The charcoal
cartridge samples from standby stations are ana-
lyzed only if there is some reason to expect the
presence of radioiodine. Duplicate air samples are
collected from three routine ASN stations each
week. The duplicate samplers operate at random-
ly selected stations continuously for three months
and are then moved to a new location.
The air sampler at each station was equipped to
collect particulate radionuclides on fiber prefilters
and gaseous radioiodines in charcoal cartridges.
Prefilters and charcoal cartridges collected from all
ASN and prefilters collected from all SASN sta-
tions received complete analyses at EMSL-LV.
Charcoal cartridges are collected from the SASN
stations and would be available for analyses
should the need arise.
4.1.2 Procedures
At each ASN station, samples of airborne particu-
lates are collected as air is drawn through 5 cm
(2.1 in) diameter, glass-fiber filters (prefilters) at a
flow rate of about 80 m3 (2800 ft3) per day. Filters
are exchanged after sampler operation periods of
about one week (approximately 560 m3 or 20,000
ft3). Activated charcoal cartridges placed directly
behind the filters to collect gaseous radioiodines
are exchanged at the same time as the filters.
Duplicate air samples were obtained weekly from
various stations. Four air samplers, which are
identical to the ASN station samplers, were rotated
between ASN stations for three to four week
periods. The results of the duplicate field sample
analyses are given in Section 11 as part of the
data quality assessment.
At EMSL-LV, both the prefilters and the charcoal
cartridges are initially analyzed by high resolution
gamma spectrometry. Each of the prefilters is
then analyzed for gross beta activity. Gross beta
analysis is performed on the prefilters 7 to 14 days
after sample collection to allow time for the decay
of naturally occurring radon-thoron daughter pro-
ducts. Gross beta analysis is used to detect trends
29
-------
NEVADA I UTAH
I PYRAMID
LAKE
Austin •
I Ely
Blue Eagle Rn.
^^
\,*\^
^ ^, Tonopah
Stone
Cabin Rn Nyala Sunnyside
* •
Springs Rn
v
w
Pioche
^^ I i riuuntj
*\Goldfield • • ^Llsh Rachel
^ 1 Ar» ' .^
88$kx P •™° •^ e
^^
GtODM
LaXfe
• Alamo
Overton <
Delta •
• Milford
• Cedar City
• St. George
Amargosa Valleyjj
Furnace Creek • % v
*v Indian Springs
Death Valley > _ _ ' ta,
Junctbn • \» Pahrump^ ^^J/LAK£MEAD
Shoshone* \ Laj^
\
ARIZONA
Routine Air Sampling Stations (30)
Scale in Miles
50
100
50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 14. Air Surveillance Network stations - 1993.
30
-------
A Standby Air Surveillance
Network Stations (77)
Scale in Miles
0 100 300 500
100 300 500 700
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 15. Standby Air Surveillance Network stations - 1993.
31
-------
in atmospheric radioactivity since it is more sensi-
tive than gamma spectrometry for this purpose.
Selected prefilters are then composited (combined)
and analyzed for plutonium isotopes. Additional
information on the analytical procedures is provid-
ed in Section 12.
Selected air prefilters were also analyzed for
plutonium isotopes. Prefilters are composited
monthly for each of four ASN stations (Alamo,
Amargosa Valley, Las Vegas, and Rachel, Nevada)
and are composited quarterly for two SASN sta-
tions in each of 13 states: Arizona, California,
Colorado, Idaho, Missouri, Montana, New Mexico,
North Dakota, Oregon, Texas, Utah, Washington,
and Wyoming.
4.1.3 Results
The following sections describe results for the ASN
and its associated standby network (SASN), noble
gas samplers, and atmospheric moisture samplers.
The atmospheric monitoring networks measure the
major radionuclides which could potentially be
emitted from activities on the NTS. Collectively,
these networks represent the possible inhalation
and submersion components of radiation exposure
pathways to the general public.
Gamma spectrometry was performed on all ASN
and SASN samples. The majority of the samples
were gamma-spectrum negligible (i.e., no gamma-
emitting radionuclides detected). Naturally occur-
ring 7Be, averaging 3.0 x 10~13 u.Ci/ml_, was infre-
quently detected. Alpha and beta results for 58
samples were not included in data analysis. These
results were excluded because they met one or
more of the following criteria: sampling duration of
greater than 14 days, total volume of less than 400
m3, average flow rate less than 2.9 rrfVhr or greater
than 4.0 m3/hr, or power outage lasting more than
one-third of sampling interval length. All remaining
results were used in data analysis, including
preparation of tables.
As in previous years, the gross beta results from
both networks consistently exceeded the analysis
minimum detectable activity concentration (MDC).
The annual average gross beta activity was 1.5 x
10'14 u.Ci/mL for the ASN and 1.5x10'14 u,Ci/mL for
the SASN. Summary gross beta results for the
ASN are in Table 5 and for the SASN in Table B-5,
Appendix B. No samples were collected at the
SASN station in Needles, CA in 1993. Twenty-four
SASN samplers were activated following the
TOMSK-7 incident in Russia. The period of sam-
ple collection varied from two to seven days.
Gross beta results are given in Appendix B, Table
B-6.
Gross alpha analysis was performed on all sam-
ples. The average annual gross alpha activities
were 9.0 x m16 u,Ci/mL for the ASN and 8.1 x 10'16
u.Ci/mL for the SASN. Summary gross alpha
results for the ASN are presented in Table 6 and
for the SASN in Table B-1, Appendix B. Gross
alpha results for the samples collected in the wake
of the TOMSK-7 incident are provided in Table B-
2, Appendix B.
Selected air prefilters were also analyzed for
plutonium isotopes. This report contains results for
samples collected during the first, second and third
quarters of 1993, presented in Table 7 for the ASN
and in Table B-3, Appendix B, for the SASN. Due
to the length of time required for analysis of pluto-
nium isotopes, the data for the fourth quarter were
not available for inclusion in this report, but will be
included in the combined report for 1994. Samples
exceeding the analysis MDC within the ASN
networks for the first three quarters of 1993 were
the June and July samples from Alamo, NV for
238Pu and the July sample from Rachel, NV for
239+24opu ana|ysjs The SASN second quarter
composite sample for New Mexico exceeded the
MDC for 238Pu. The MDC for239+240Pu was exceed-
ed in the second quarter composite samples from
New Mexico and Wyoming, and third quarter
composite samples from Texas and Wyoming. In
total, eight out of 146 analyses exceeded the MDC
for Pu.
No samples were received from the Texas SASN
stations for the second quarter of 1993 and the
data for samples received from Oregon for the third
quarter 1993 were not available at the time of this
writing. Single SASN samples were analyzed for
plutonium in instances when the second prefilter
was not received and three prefilters were
composited when a standby sampler was operated
more than once in a given quarter.
4.2 Tritium In Atmospheric
Moisture
32
-------
Table 5. Gross Beta Results for the Offsite Air Surveillance Network - 1993
Gross Beta Concentration (10'14 uCi/mL)
Sampling Location
Death Valley Junction, CA
Furnace Creek, CA
Shoshone, CA
Alamo, NV
Amargosa Valley, NV
Austin, NV
Beatty, NV
Caliente, NV
Clark Station, NV
Stone Cabin Ranch
Currant, NV
Blue Eagle Ranch
Ely, NV
Goldfield, NV
Groom Lake, NV
Hiko, NV
Indian Springs, NV
Las Vegas, NV
Nyala, NV
Overton, NV
Pahrump, NV
Pioche, NV
Rachel, NV
Sunnyside, NV
Tonopah, NV
Tonopah Test Range, NV
Twin Springs, NV
Fallini's Ranch
Cedar City, UT
Delta, UT
Milford, UT
Salt Lake City, UT
St. George, UT
Number
48
48
52
51
49
50
52
50
52
51
52
52
49
52
52
50
52
51
52
51
49
49
50
50
51
52
48
52
51
49
Maximum
3.3
4.6
3.5
3.3
3.0
3.0
2.9
3.3
3.0
3.9
3.4
2.9
3.4
3.9
3.1
3.1
3.7
3.5
2.6
3.0
4.5
3.2
3.1
3.1
4.4
2.5
4.7
4.3
4.2
3.4
Minimum
0.45
0.47
0.54
0.63
0.47
0.03
0.62
0.12
0.29
-0.10
0.44
0.56
0.5
0.58
0.17
0.07
0.19
0.11
0.63
0.36
0.24
0.3
0.56
0.17
0.84
0.46
0.33
0.02
0.44
0.06
Arithmetic
Mean
1.5
1.8
1.7
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.7
1.4
1.4
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.7
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.3
1.7
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.4
1.6
1.4
1.9
1.3
1.8
1.8
1.6
1.7
Standard
Deviation
0.65
0.96
0.68
0.51
0.63
0.61
0.56
0.53
0.60
0.77
0.54
0.61
0.63
0.62
0.59
0.55
0.7
0.65
0.5
0.57
0.79
0.57
0.64
0.64
0.82
0.46
0.87
0.76
0.69
0.75
Mean MDC: 2.4 x 10"15 u.Ci/mL
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 2.9 x 10'1
33
-------
Number
48
48
52
51
49
50
52
50
Maximum
4.1
4.7
3.0
2.8
3.3
3.4
3.6
1.8
Minimum
-0.4
-0.7
-0.1
0.0
-0.1
-0.6
-0.3
-0.5
Arithmetic
Mean
1.4
1.2
1.0
1.1
1.3
0.91
1.2
0.68
Standard
Deviation
1.0
1.1
0.66
0.62
0.85
0.74
0.83
0.52
52
4.4
-0.4
1.3
Table 6. Gross Alpha Results for the Offsite Air Surveillance Network - 1993
Gross Alpha Concentration (10'1S u,Ci/mL)
Sampling Location
Death Valley Jet, CA
Furnace Creek, CA
Shoshone, CA
Alamo, NV
Amargosa Valley, NV
Austin, NV
Beatty, NV
Caliente, NV
Clark Station, NV
Stone Cabin Ranch
Currant, NV
Blue Eagle Ranch
Ely, NV
Goldfield, NV
Groom Lake, NV
Hiko, NV
Indian Springs, NV
Las Vegas, NV
Nyala, NV
Overton, NV
Pahrump, NV
Pioche, NV
Rachel, NV
Sunnyside, NV
Tonopah, NV
Tonopah Test Range, NV
Twin Springs, NV
Fallini's Ranch
Cedar City, UT
Delta, UT
Milford, UT
Salt Lake City, UT
St. George, UT
Mean MDC: 8.0 x 10-16uCi/mL
0.92
51
52
52
49
52
52
50
52
51
52
51
49
49
50
50
51
52
48
52
51
49
2.1
1.6
1.9
3.5
2.4
1.8
2.6
1.9
2.0
3.3
1.8
2.1
3.2
1.9
2.6
2.7
2.2
2.0
3.0
2.5
4.0
-0.4
-0.2
-0.6
-0.2
-0.1
-0.2
-0.4
-0.6
-0.6
-0.4
-0.5
-0.6
-0.2
-0.2
-0.3
-0.3
0.1
-0.5
-0.6
-0.8
-0.3
0.58
0.58
0.63
1.5
0.9
0.66
0.94
0.6
0.71
0.93
0.55
0.59
0.89
0.71
0.83
0.77
1.1
0.64
0.85
0.63
1.2
0.59
0.41
0.48
0.7
0.52
0.49
0.69
0.52
0.52
0.76
0.48
0.48
0.74
0.52
0.65
0.54
0.49
0.53
0.73
0.56
0.87
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 2.7 x 10'16 u,Ci/mL
34
-------
Table 7. Offsite Airborne Plutonium Concentrations 1993
238Pu Concentration (1CT18 //Ci/mL)
Composite
Sampling Location
Alamo, NV
Amargosa Valley, NV
Las Vegas, NV
Rachel, NV
Mean MDC: 16 x 10'18//Ci/mL
Arithmetic Standard Mean as
Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation %DCG
9
9
9
9
7 1
29
52
9.5
-1.3
-4.9
5.7
-4.0
4.3
6.8
1.4
3
10
18
4.4
0.7
1.7
2.6
0.5
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 9.9 x 10'18 //Ci/mL
Arithmetic Standard Mean as
Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation %DCG
DCG Derived Concentration Guide; Established by DOE Order as 3 x 10~15 //Ci/mL
(10-18
Composite
Sampling Location
Alamo, NV
Amargosa Valley, NV
Las Vegas, NV
Rachel, NV
Mean MDC: 12 x 10'18 //Ci/mL
9
9
9
9
6.1
12
12
41
-0.9
0.0
-1.3
-8.2
1.5
3
1.6
3.7
2.6
4.7
3.9
14
0.6
1.2
0.6
1.4
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 8.8 x 10 //Ci/mL
DCG Derived Concentration Guide; Established by DOE Order as 3 x 10'15//Ci/mL
NA Not applicable, result is
-------
NEVADA I UTAH
I Ely
I Cali e
> Alamo
Amargosa Vall
Amargosa
Delta
Milford
Cedar City
St. George
ARIZONA
Overton 4
Indian Springs ill |
Pahrunip • JJ/LAKEMEAD
"% Las •
Shoshone • ^ Vegas
\ \
\i
Nv
N
• Both Noble Gas and Tritium (13)
• Standby Noble Gas and Tritium (7)
A Tritium, Standby Noble Gas (1)
Scale in Miles
50
100
50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 16. Offsite Noble Gas sampling and Tritium-in-Air Network stations - 1993.
36
-------
4.2.3 Results
Approximately 5% of the total number of samples
collected were invalid due to equipment malfunc-
tions, power outages during collection, frozen lines,
or insufficient sample volume. Sample results that
exceeded the analysis MDC were: Amargosa
Valley (December 6-13), Amargosa Center (July
22 - 29), and Goldfield (April 21 28). The annual
HTO network average was 3.0 x 10"7 pCi/mL.
Summary data results are given in Table 8 for the
routine stations and in Table B-4, Appendix B, for
the standby stations.
4.3 Noble Gas Sampling
Network
4.3.1 Design
A second part of the EMSL-LV offsite air network
is the Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network
(NGTSN). Noble gases may be released into the
atmosphere from research and power reactor
facilities, fuel reprocessing facilities, and from
nuclear testing. Noble gases may also be released
during drillbacks and tunnel purgings, which take
place after a nuclear test. Environmental levels of
the xenons, with their very short half-lives, are
normally below the minimum detectable concentra-
tion (MDC). Krypton-85 disperses more or less
uniformly over the entire globe because of its half-
life, 10.7 years, and the lack of significant sinks
(NCRP, 1975). For these reasons, 85Kr results are
expected to be above the MDC. Tritium is created
by natural forces in the upper atmosphere and is
also emitted from nuclear reactors, reprocessing
facilities (non-NTS facilities), and worldwide nuclear
testing.
The locations of the NGTSN stations are shown in
Figure 20. The NGTSN is designed to detect any
increase in offsite levels of xenon, krypton, or
atmospheric tritium due to possible NTS emissions.
Routinely operated network samplers are typically
located in populated areas surrounding the NTS
and standby samplers are located in communities
at some distance from the NTS. In 1993, this
network consisted of 13 routine noble gas tritium-
in-air samplers, plus eight on standby, located in
the states of Nevada, Utah, and California. The
stations on routine sampling status ring the NTS to
detect any emissions of noble gases or atmospher-
ic tritium which reach the population centers in the
immediate offsite area. In addition, a tritium
sampler is routinely operated near a nuclear
research reactor in Salt Lake City, Utah.
4.3.2 Procedures
Noble gas samples are collected by compressing
air into storage tanks (bottles). Air is continuously
sampled over a 7-day period, collecting approxi-
mately 0.6 m3 (21.2 ft3) of air into a four-bottle
system. One bottle is filled over the entire sam-
pling period. The other three bottles are filled
consecutively over the same sampling period in 56-
hour increments. The bottle containing the sample
from the entire sampling period is the only sample
which is routinely analyzed. If xenons or abnor-
mally high levels of 85Kr were detected in this
sample, then the other three samples would be
analyzed. For the analysis, samples are con-
densed at liquid nitrogen temperature. Gas chro-
matography is then used to separate the gaseous
radionuclide fractions. The radioactive gases are
dissolved in liquid scintillation "cocktails," then
counted to determine activity.
4.3.3 Results
All samples were analyzed for 85Kr and 133Xe and
the summary data results are given in Table 9 for
the routine stations. Eight standby stations were
run quarterly to ascertain operational status; the
samples were not analyzed. Of the 676 samples
collected in 1993, analyses were not performed on
63 samples (9.3 percent) due to insufficient volume
collected or sampler malfunctions. As expected, all
85Kr results exceeded the MDC and all 133Xe results
were below the MDC. The annual averages for the
continuously operated samplers were 2.8 x 10"11
uCi/mL for 85Kr and -2.1 x 10'11 uCi/mL for 133Xe.
4.4 Quality Assurance/
Quality Control
General QA/QC guidelines for the atmospheric
monitoring networks are as follows:
• All field sampling and laboratory instru-
ments are calibrated and the date of cali-
bration is marked on a decal affixed to the
equipment.
37
-------
Table 8. Offsite Atmospheric Tritium Results for Routine Samplers 1993
HTO Concentration (10"6 pCi/mU
Sampling Location
Alamo, NV
Amargosa Valley, NV
Amargosa Valley
Community Center, NV
Beatty, NV
Goldfield, NV
Indian Springs, NV
Las Vegas, NV
Overton, NV
Pahrump, NV
Rachel, NV
Tonopah, NV
Twin Springs, NV
Fallini's Ranch
Salt Lake City, UT
St. George, UT
Mean MDC: 3.6 x 10"6 pCi/mL
Number Maximum Minimum
46
51
49
44
48
50
51
52
49
47
52
52
49
45
52
38
77
32
34
29
32
45
48
28
25
24
36
34
-23
-34
-53
-22
-132
-18
-21
-62
-27
-26
-45
-27
-29
-51
Arithmetic
Mean
5.5
2.4
4.7
2.3
2.1
8.5
4.8
4.1
1.4
1.1
2.4
3
33
32
Standard
Deviation
16
13
22
11
23
8.5
13
19
15
11
11
9.5
14
16
Mean as
%DCG
5.5
2.4
4.7
2.3
2.1
2.9
4.8
4.1
1.4
1.1
2.4
NA
NA
NA
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 2.1 x 10"6 pCi/mL
DCG Derived Concentration Guide; Established by DOE Order as 1 x 10~2 pCi/mL
MDC Minimum Detectable Concentration
NA Less than MDC. Not applicable.
• Maintaining a file of calibration records,
control charts, and log books.
• Assigning unique sample numbers.
• Obtaining laboratory supervisor approval of
all analytical results before they are entered
into the permanent data base.
• Maintaining files of QA data, which includes
raw analytical data, intermediate calcula-
tions, and review reports.
• Performing analysis of blanks to verify
method interferences caused by contami-
nants in solvents, reagents, glassware, and
other sample processing are known and
minimized.
Estimating analytical accuracy with perfor-
mance evaluation samples. For the gamma
analysis of fiber filters, spiked samples should
be within ± 10% of the known value. Gross
beta analysis should be within ± 20%. Pluto-
nium analysis of internal spikes should pro-
duce results within ± 20% of the known
value. For the noble gases, spiked samples
should be within ± 20% of the known value.
• Estimating precision of laboratory analytical
techniques and total precision for the entire
system (both analytical and sampling error)
using replicates. Field duplicate air samples
as well as internal laboratory replicates are
analyzed for the ASN. Only internal laborato-
ry replicates are analyzed for the noble gas
and the HTO samples.
• Determining bias (the difference between the
value obtained and the true or reference
value) by participating in intercomparispn
studies.
Further discussion of the QA program and the data
quality assessment is given in Chapter 11.
38
-------
Number
44
49
41
48
47
49
51
50
48
41
48
47
46
Maximum
3.2
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.2
3.3
3.1
3.1
3.2
3.3
Minimum
2.1
2.4
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.3
2.2
2.1
2.0
2.2
2.3
2.1
Arithmetic
Mean
2.7
2.8
2.7
2.7
2.7
2.8
3.2
2.7
2.8
2.7
2.7
2.8
2.7
Standard
Deviation
0.22
0.19
0.21
0.23
0.24
0.21
3.1
0.23
0.24
0.23
0.21
0.2
0.27
Mean as
%DCG
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Table 9. Offsite Noble Gas Results for Routine Samplers - 1993
BSKr Concentration (10'11 uCi/mL)
Sampling Location
Alamo, NV
Amargosa Valley, NV
Amargosa Valley
Community Center, NV
Beatty, NV
Goldfield, NV
Indian Springs, NV
Las Vegas, NV
Overton, NV
Pahrump, NV
Rachel, NV
Tonopah, NV
Twin Springs, NV
Fallini's Ranch
St. George, UT
Mean MDC: 0.57 x 10'11 (iCi/mL Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 0.11 x 1011
DCG Derived Concentration Guide; Established by DOE Order as 6 x 10~7 ^Ci/mL
133Xe Concentration (10'12 uCi/mL)
Sampling Location
Alamo, NV
Amargosa Valley, NV
Amargosa Valley
Community Center, NV
Beatty, NV
Goldfield, NV
Indian Springs, NV
Las Vegas, NV
Overton, NV
Pahrump, NV
Rachel, NV
Tonopah, NV
Twin Springs, NV
Fallini's Ranch
St. George, UT
Mean MDC: 16.0 x 10'11 \iC\/ml Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 7.2 x10'11
DCG Derived Concentration Guide; Established by DOE Order as 6.0 x 10s u,Ci/mL
NA Not applicable; mean is less than MDC
Number
44
49
41
49
47
50
51
50
48
41
49
47
47
Maximum
8.6
4.7
8.6
6.8
7.5
11
5.9
11
5.5
8.4
12.0
12
19
Minimum
-13
-10
-16
-14
-11
-10
-8.1
-20
-13
-14
-19
-15
-19
Arithmetic
Mean
-1.6
-1.9
-2.8
-2.3
-2.7
-1.5
-1.8
-3.8
-2.1
-2.4
-1.4
-2.7
-0.9
Standard
Deviation
4.5
3.1
5.1
4.4
3.9
4.2
3.4
6.7
4.0
5.4
6.1
5.3
7.2
Mean as
%DCG
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
39
-------
5.0 Foodstuffs
Ingestion is one of the critical exposure pathways
for radionuclides to humans. Food crops may
absorb radionuclides from the soil in which they
are grown. Radionuclides may be found on the
surface of fruits, vegetables, or food crops. The
source of these radionuclides may be atmospheric
deposition, resuspension, or adhering particles of
soil. Weather patterns, especially precipitation, can
affect soil inventories of radionuclides. Grazing
animals ingest radionuclides which may have been
deposited on forage grasses and, while grazing,
ingest soil which could contain radionuclides.
Certain organs in the grazing animal, such as liver
and muscle, may bioaccumulate radionuclides.
These radionuclides are transported to humans by
consumption of meat and meat products. In the
case of dairy cattle, ingested radionuclides may be
transferred to milk. Water is another significant
ingestion transport pathway of radionuclides to
humans.
To monitor the ingestion pathways, milk surveil-
lance and biomonitoring networks are operated
within the Offsite Radiological Safety Program
(ORSP). The Milk Surveillance Network (MSN)
includes commercial dairies and family-owned milk
cows and goats representing the major milksheds
within 186 miles (300 km) of the NTS. The MSN
is supplemented by the Standby Milk Surveillance
Network (SMSN) which includes all states west of
the Mississippi. The biomonitoring network in-
cludes the animal investigation program and
monitoring of radionuclides in locally grown fruits
and vegetables.
5.1 Milk Surveillance Network
Milk is particularly important in assessing levels of
radioactivity in a given area and the exposure of
the population as a result of ingesting milk or milk
products. Milk is one of the most universally con-
sumed foodstuffs and certain radionuclides are
readily traceable through the food chain from feed
or forage to the consumer. This is particularly true
of radioiodine isotopes which, when consumed by
children, can cause significant impairment of
thyroid function. Because dairy animals consume
vegetation representing a large area of ground
cover and because many radionuclides are trans-
ferred to milk, analysis of milk samples may yield
information on the deposition of small amounts of
radionuclides over a relatively large area. Accord-
ingly, milk is closely monitored by EMSL-LV
through the MSN and the SMSN. Records are
kept of cow and goat locations by maintaining a
dairy animal and population census.
5.1.1 Design
The MSN includes commercial dairies and family-
owned milk cows and goats representing the major
milksheds within 300 km (186 mi) of the NTS. At
the beginning of 1993, there were 24 MSN collec-
tion sites. The 24 locations sampled in 1993
appear in Figure 17. Changes to the network are
summarized in Table 10.
The SMSN consists of dairies or processing plants
representing major milksheds west of the Missis-
sippi River. The network is activated annually by
contacting cooperating Food and Drug Administra-
tion (FDA) Regional Milk Specialists, who in turn
contact State Dairy Regulators to enlist cooperating
milk processors or producers. The annual activa-
tion permits trends to be monitored and ensures
proper operation of the SMSN should an emergen-
cy arise. The 115 locations sampled in 1993
appear in Figure 18. There were no changes to
the SMSN during 1993.
The dairy animal and population census is continu-
ally updated for those areas within 385 km (240
mi) north and east of CP-1 and within 200 km (125
mi) south and west of CP-1. The remainder of the
Nevada counties and the western-most Utah
counties are surveyed approximately every other
year. The locations of processing plants and com-
mercial dairy herds in Idaho and the remainder of
Utah can be obtained from the milk and food
sections of the respective state governments.
5.1.2 Procedures
Raw milk is collected in 1-gallon (3.8 L) collapsible
cubitainers and preserved with formaldehyde!
Routine sampling is conducted monthly for the
MSN and annually for the SMSN, or whenever
local or worldwide radiation events suggest possi-
40
-------
I
I PYRAMID
LAKE
•
V
>
A f
v A"stln
Young Rn.B
V
Lemon
K. Harper
^ Tonopah •
In. • An
^•Dyer
Warm
Springs
NEVADA | UTAH
j
i
i
i
i
i
i
McGill |
• McKay's Rn.
„ , *E'y =
kwater Bradshaw Rn. B Harbecke Rn
m _ • Shoshone
• Lund -
Currant • R. Horsley RnJ
• Sharp's Rn. §
• Nyala j
i 1
T_ !
t".NH."|p e JUnS C°X Rn^ '
PhS'ss, "F°-
{NEVADA^ Dan, Rn_ |
Cedar City
• Brent Jones
Dairy
Hafen
Amargosa
Bar-B-Cue
Rn i
John DeeT'x Indian :
Pahrump 0
Pahrump Dairy •
X.
LAKE MEAD
• Inyokern
• Frances Jones Farm
>Hinkley
I Desert View Dairy
1 00
50 100
Scale in Kilometers
150
• Milk
Sampling
Locations
• Nearest Town
NOTE: When
sampling location
occurred in city or
town, the sampling
location symbol was
used for showing
both town and
sampling location.
Figure 17. Milk Surveillance Network Stations - 1993.
41
-------
Table 10. Milk Surveillance Network Sampling Location Changes
Location
Irene Brown Ranch,
Benton, California
Blue Eagle Ranch,
Currant, Nevada
Harbecke Ranch,
Shoshone, Nevada
Frances Jones Farm
Inyokern, California
Frayne Ranch
Bellehelen, Nevada
Manzonie Ranch
Currant, Nevada
Deleted
Deleted
Added
Deleted
Effective Date
04/15/93
10/03/93
07/06/93
03/18/93
04/08/93
12/07/93
1993
Reason for Change
Sold goats
Sold cow
Owner no longer
wishes to participate
Added to network
Moved
No samples during 1993
No samples during 1993
ble radiation concerns, such as the Chernobyl
incident or nuclear testing by foreign nations.
All milk samples are analyzed by high-resolution
gamma spectroscopy to detect gamma-emitting
radionuclides. One sample per quarter from each
MSN location and two from each SMSN sampling
location in each state excluding Nevada are evalu-
ated by radiochemical analysis. These samples
are analyzed for 3H by liquid scintillation counting
and for 89Sr and 90Sr by radiochemical separation
and beta counting.
5.1.3 Results
The average total potassium concentration derived
from 40K activity was 1.5 g/L. No other non-natural
gamma-emitting radionuclides were detected.
Selected MSN and SMSN milk samples were
analyzed for 3H, 89Sr, and 90Sr. Summaries of the
MSN results are in Tables 12 for 3H, 13 for 89Sr,
and 14 for 90Sr. The results for the annual SMSN
samples analyzed for 3H, 89Sr, and 90Sr are given
in Table C-1, Appendix C. Samples analyzed by
gamma spectrometry for the SMSN are listed in
Table C-2, Appendix C.
In conclusion, the MSN and SMSN data are con-
sistent with previous years and are not indicative
of increasing or decreasing trends. No radio-
activity directly related to current NTS activities
was evident.
5.1.4 Quality Assurance/Control
Procedures for the operation, maintenance and
calibration of laboratory counting equipment, the
control and statistical analysis of the sample and
the data review and records are documented in
approved SOPs. External and internal comparison
studies were performed and field and internal
duplicate samples were obtained for precision and
accuracy assessments. Analytical results are
reviewed for completeness and comparability.
Trends are identified and potential risks to humans
and the environment are determined based on the
data. The data quality assessment is given in
Chapter 11.
5.2 Animal Investigation
Program
The primary purpose of the animal investigation,
program is monitoring of the ingestion transport
pathway to humans. Therefore, animals which are
likely to be consumed by humans are targeted by
42
-------
• Standby Milk Surveillance
Network Station (115)
Scale in Miles
0 100 300 500
100 300 500 700
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 18. Standby Milk Surveillance Network Stations - 1993.
43
-------
Table 11. Summary of Radionuclides Detected in Milk Samples
Milk Surveillance Network
No. of samples with results > MDC
(Network average concentration in pCi/L)
1993
1992
5 (153)
1991
3H 0 (122) 5 (153) 2 (152)
89Sr 0(-0.16) 4 (-0.011) 1(0.303)
90Sr 2 (0.55) 5 (0.650) 4 (0.546)
Standby Milk Surveillance Network
No. of samples with results > MDC
(Network average concentration in pCi/L)
1993
3H 1 (164)
1992
1991
1 (153)
6 (158)
89Sr 1 (0.0075) 4 (0.376) 3 (0.420)
90Sr 15(1.10) 17(0.994) 18(1.236)
the program. These are bighorn sheep, mule deer,
and beef cattle.
A veterinarian retained through EPA EMSL-LV
investigates any claims of damage to animals
caused by radiation. No such claims were re-
ceived in 1993.
5.2.1 Network Design
The objective of the animal investigation program
is to determine whether there is any potential for
radionuclides to reach humans through the inges-
tion pathway. To that end, the program is based
upon what is considered to be a worst-case sce-
nario. Mule deer are migratory; the ranges of the
herds which inhabit the NTS include lands outside
the federal exclusionary area in which hunting is
permitted. Therefore, it is theoretically possible for
a resident to consume meat from a deer which had
become contaminated with radionuclides during its
inhabitation of the NTS. During the years of
atmospheric testing, fission products were carried
outside the boundaries of the NTS and deposited
in the offsite area. Longer-lived radionuclides,
particularly plutonium and strontium isotopes, are
still detected in soil in the area. Some of these
radionuclides may be ingested by animals residing
in those areas. Cattle are purchased from ranches
where atmospheric tests are known to have depos-
ited radionuclides. The continued monitoring of
bighorn sheep provides a long-term history for
examination of radioactivity trends in large grazing
animals.
The collected animals are not selected to be
representative of average radionuclide levels in
animals residing in the offsite area, nor are they
designed to be necessarily representative of the
herd from which they are drawn. However, selec-
tion is not random. There is an inherent nonran-
dom selection in hunting and the ranchers select
the cattle to be sold. Because the program is not
statistically based, no conclusions can or should be
drawn regarding average concentrations of radio-
nuclides in animals in the offsite area, nor should
any conclusions be drawn regarding average
radionuclide ingestion by humans. The collection
sites for the bighorn sheep, deer, and cattle ana-
lyzed in 1993 are shown in Figure 19.
5.2.2 Sample Collection and
Analysis Procedures
During the bighorn sheep season in November and
December, licensed hunters in Nevada are asked
to donate one leg bone and two kidney samples
from each bighorn sheep taken. The location
where the sheep was taken and any other avail-
able information are recorded on the field data
form. The bone and kidney samples are weighed,
sealed in labeled sample bags, and stored in a
controlled freezer until processing. Weights are
recorded on the field data form. After completion
of the hunting season, a subset of the samples is
selected to represent areas around the NTS. The
kidneys are delivered to the EPA EMSL-LV
Radioanalysis Laboratory for analysis of gamma-
emitting radionuclides and tritium. All bone sam-
ples are shipped in a single batch to a contract
44
-------
Table 12. Offsite Milk Surveillance 3H Results - 1993
3H Concentration (10'7 uCi/mL)
Sampling Location
Hinkley, CA
Desert View Dairy
Inyokern, CA
Frances Jones Farm
Alamo, NV
Cortney Dahl Ranch
Amargosa Valley, NV
Bar-B-Cue Ranch
John Deer Ranch
Austin, NV
Young's Ranch
Caliente, NV
June Cox Ranch
Currant, NV
Blue Eagle Ranch
Duckwater, NV
Bradshaw's Ranch
Dyer, NV
Ozel Lemon
Logandale, NV
Leonard Marshall
Lund, NV
Ronald Horsley Ranch
McGill, NV
McKay's Ranch
Mesquite, NV
Hafen Dairy
Moapa, NV
Rockview Dairies
Nyala, NV
Sharp's Ranch
Pahrump, NV
Pahrump Dairy
Shoshone, NV
Harbecke Ranch
Tonopah, NV
Karen Harper Ranch
Cedar City, UT
Brent Jones Dairy
Ivins, UT
David Hafen Dairy
Number
4
4
4
2
3
3
4
1
4
4
2
4
3
4
4
4
5
1
4
4
4
Maximum
1.4
1.5
3.3
2.5
2.0
1.8
2.8
-0.8
3.2
3.8
2.3
1.9
2.3
1.7
3.0
4.0
3.9
1.3
2.0
3.7
2.2
Minimum
0.0
-1.1
-1.6
1.8
-1.4
-0.4
0.6
-0.8
-0.6
-0.5
1.2
0.9
-0.1
0.4
-0.4
1.6
-1.2
1.3
0.0
1.0
0.4
Arithmetic
Mean
0.7
0.5
0.9
2.1
0.1
0.8
1.8
-0.8
0.8
1.2
1.8
1.3
1.2
0.9
1.2
2.5
1.4
1.3
1.0
2.4
1.4
Standard
Deviation
0.7
1.1
2.0
0.5
1.8
1.1
1.0
-
1.8
2.0
0.8
0.4
1.2
0.6
1.6
1.1
1.9
—
0.9
1.1
0.8
Mean as
%DCG
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Mean MDC: 3.5 x 10'7 u,Ci/mL
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 0.80 x 10'7 u.Ci/mL
DCG Derived Concentration Guide; Established by DOE Order as 9 x 10'5 u.Ci/mL
NA Less than MDC. Not applicable.
45
-------
Table 13. Offsite Milk Surveillance 89Sr Results - 1993
Sampling Location
Hinkley, CA
Desert View Dairy
Inyokern, CA
Frances Jones Farm
Alamo, NV
Cortney Dahl Ranch
Amargosa Valley, NV
Bar-B-Cue Ranch
John Deer Ranch
Caliente, NV
June Cox Ranch
Currant, NV
Manzonie Ranch
Duckwater, NV
Bradshaw's Ranch
Dyer, NV
Ozel Lemon
Logandale, NV
Leonard Marshall
Lund, NV
Ronald Horsley Ranch
McGill, NV
McKay's Ranch
Mesquite, NV
Hafen Dairy
Moapa, NV
Rockview Dairies
Nyala, NV
Sharp's Ranch
Pahrump, NV
Pahrump Dairy
Tonopah, NV
Karen Harper Ranch
Cedar City, UT
Brent Jones Dairy
Ivins, UT
David Hafen Dairy
Mean MDC: 3.5 x 1CT10 u.Ci/mL
89Sr Concentration (10'1° uCi/mL)
Arithmetic Standard Mean as
Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation %DCG
2
1
3
2
1
3
1
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
2
8.0
-7.6
7.8
5.6
6.5
1.9
0.0
2.8
0.4
5.3
3.7
-0.9
4.9
12.0
-7.4
6.7
-0.8
-2.4
2.1
-18.0
-7.6
-8.8
-8.1
6.5
-9.7
0.0
2.3
-2.0
1.8
-6.2
-1.9
-2.6
-12.0
-10.0
-18.0
-10.0
-11.0
-12.0
-4.9
-7.6
-0.4
-1.3
6.5
-2.4
0.0
2.5
-0.9
3.5
-1.1
-1.4
1.2
-0.3
-8.9
-2.1
-4.4
-6.8
-5.0
18.0
-
8.3
9.7
6.3
-
0.3
1.8
2.5
5.0
0.7
5.3
17.0
2.2
14.0
5.2
6.2
10.0
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 0.8 x 10'10 u,Ci/mL
DCG Derived Concentration Guide; Established by DOE Order as 8 x 10~7 u.Ci/mL
NA Less than MDC. Not applicable.
46
-------
Table 14. Offsite Milk Surveillance
90Sr Results- 1993
90Sr Concentration (1 0
•10 uCi/mL)
Arithmetic Standard Mean as
Sampling Location
Hinkley, CA
Desert View Dairy
Inyokern, CA
Frances Jones Farm
Alamo, NV
Cortney Dahl Ranch
Amargosa Valley, NV
Bar B Cue Ranch
John Deer Ranch
Austin, NV
Young's Ranch
Caliente, NV
June Cox Ranch
Currant, NV
Manzonie Ranch
Duckwater, NV
Bradshaw's Ranch
Dyer, NV
Ozel Lemon
Logandale, NV
Leonard Marshall
Lund, NV
Ronald Horsley Ranch
McGill, NV
McKay's Ranch
Mesquite, NV
Hafen Dairy
Moapa, NV
Rockview Dairies
Nyala, NV
Sharp's Ranch
Pahrump, NV
Pahrump Dairy
Shoshone, NV
Harbecke Ranch
Tonopah, NV
Karen Harper Ranch
Cedar City, UT
Brent Jones Dairy
Ivins, UT
David Hafen Dairy
Mean MDC: 14.2 x 10'10 ^Ci/mL
DCG Derived Concentration Guide;
Number Maximum
4
4
4
2
3
2
3
1
3
4
2
4
3
4
4
4
4
1
4
4
4
7.0
6.9
9.5
6.7
2.6
3.9
8.5
13.0
7.3
9.4
1.8
4.7
6.4
9.4
7.0
12.0
9.5
21.0
22.0
12.0
12.0
Minimum Mean
-0.4
0.1
0.3
0.1
-0.8
3.6
2.1
13.0
2.9
0.5
1.2
1.0
4.3
1.7
-0.5
3.1
-0.1
21.0
6.7
0.9
-1.6
Standard Deviation
Established by DOE
Order
3.1
3.3
5.7
3.4
0.5
3.8
6.3
13.0
4.6
5.2
1.5
3.7
5.3
4.5
3.4
8.8
4.3
21.0
12.0
7.1
6.6
of Mean MDC:
as 3 x 1 0'8 \iC\/
Deviation %DCG
3.2
3.2
3.9
4.7
1.8
0.2
3.7
2.3
3.7
0.4
1.8
1.0
3.6
3.8
3.9
4.1
6.9
4.9
5.8
1.1 x 10'10
'mL
1.0
1.1
1.9
1.1
0.2
1.3
2.1
4.3
1.5
1.7
0.5
1.2
1.8
1.5
1.1
2.9
1.4
7.0
4.0
2.4
2.2
|aCi/mL
47
-------
Queen City Smt.
Tempiute
:oyot
Smt.
I Hancock Smt.
NELLIS AFB
RANGE COMPLEX
\ Scotty's
V Jet
\
DESERT
NATIONAL
WILDLIFE
RANGE
^ Springdale
NEVADA
TEST
SITE
Furnace
Creek
Cactus
Springs Springs
Death
Valley
Jet.
Shoshone ^
Bighorn Sheep (winter 1992)
A Cattle (1993)
Numbers below or within symbol,
represents the animal identification numbers
Figure 19. Collection Sites for Animals Sampled Off site 1993.
48
-------
laboratory for ashing. Upon completion of ashing,
the bone samples are analyzed for plutonium
isotopes and the bone samples are additionally
analyzed for strontium. All results are reported in
units of pCi/g of ash. The ash weight to wet
weight ratios (percent ash) are also reported, to
permit conversion of radionuclide activity to a wet
weight basis for use in dose calculations.
Each year, attempts are made to collect four mule
deer from the NTS, on a one per quarter schedule.
If a deer is killed on the road, that animal is used.
If road kills are not available, a deer is hunted by
personnel with a special permit to carry weapons
on the NTS. The deer is usually sampled in the
field, with precautions taken to minimize risk of
contamination. The location of the deer, weight,
sex, condition, and other information are recorded
on a field data form. Organs are removed,
weighed, and sealed in labeled sample bags. Soft
tissue organs, including lung, liver, muscle, and
rumen contents are divided into two samples, one
for analysis of gamma-emitting radionuclides and
one which is ashed prior to analysis for plutonium
isotopes. Thyroid and fetus (when available),
because of their small size, are analyzed only for
gamma-emitting radionuclides. Samples of blood
are analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides
and tritium. Bone samples are ashed and ana-
lyzed for plutonium isotopes and strontium. The
samples requiring ashing are shipped in a single
batch each quarter to a contract laboratory.
Analyses are completed in the EPA EMSL-LV
Radioanalysis Laboratory.
Four cattle are purchased from ranches in the
offsite area around the NTS each spring and
another four are purchased each fall. In 1993,
four cattle were purchased from the Steve Medlins
Ranch in Tickaboo Valley and another four were
purchased in the fall from Oran Nash Ranch on
Mt. Irish near Hiko. Generally, two adult cattle and
two calves are acquired in each purchase. The
facility at the NTS farm facility on the NTS is used
for the slaughter. This facility is designed to
minimize risk of contamination. As with the big-
horn sheep and mule deer, sampling information
and sample weights are recorded on a field data
form and samples are sealed in labeled sample
bags. Samples of blood and soft tissues (lung,
muscle, liver, thyroid, and kidney) are analyzed for
gamma-emitting radionuclides; blood is also ana-
lyzed for tritium activity. Liver and bone samples
are sent to a contract laboratory for ashing. Ashed
liver samples are analyzed for plutonium isotopes;
bone ash samples are analyzed for plutonium
isotopes and strontium. A sample of the water
used in processing the samples is also collected
and analyzed.
5.2.3 Sample Results for Bighorn
Sheep
The sheep hunt takes place in November and
December, hence, the data presented here are
from animals hunted in late 1992. The kidney
samples were analyzed for gamma-emitting
radionuclides and for tritium. The bone samples
were ashed prior to analysis of 90Sr, 238Pu, and
239+240pu A summary Of resu|ts obtained from
analysis of bighorn sheep bone and kidney is
shown in Table 15. Other than naturally occurring
40K, gamma-emitting radionuclides were not detect-
ed, nor was tritium detected, at activities greater
than the MDC in any of the kidney samples. All of
the bone tissue samples, however, yielded 90Sr
activities greater than the MDC of the analysis.
The range and median values for 90Sr, shown in
Table 15, were similar to those obtained last year
(DOE, 1993). The average 90Sr levels found in
bighorn sheep bone ash since 1955 are shown in
Figure 20. None of the bone samples yielded
238Pu results greater than the MDC of the analysis
and only one sample (Bighorn sheep No. 5)
yielded a 239+240pu result greater than the MDC.
This animal was collected in Area 281, north of
Indian Springs, Nevada, in the Pintwater Range.
Medians and ranges of plutonium isotopes, given
in Table 15, were similar to those obtained previ-
ously (DOE, 1993).
5.2.4 Sample Results for Mule Deer
Blood samples are analyzed for gamma-emitting
radionuclides and tritium. Soft tissue samples
(lung, kidney, muscle, liver, thyroid, rumen con-
tents, and fetus, when available) are analyzed for
gamma-emitting radionuclides. Additionally, sam-
ples of soft tissues and bones were ashed and
then analyzed for plutonium isotopes; ashed bone
samples are also analyzed for 90Sr. Samples of
kidney, thyroid, and fetal tissue are not ashed due
to their small size. Duplicate bone samples from
three animals were prepared and analyzed.
The mule deer collected in the first quarter of 1993
was a yearling female in fair to good condition.
Collection was made in Area 16 about 1.5 miles
49
-------
Table 15. Radiochemical Results for Animal Samples -
Sample Type Parameter
Cattle Blood
Cattle Liver
Cattle Bone
Cattle Fetus
Deer Blood
Deer Liver
Deer Lung
Deer Muscle
Deer Rumen
Content
Deer Bone
Bighorn
Sheep Bone
Bighorn
Sheep Kidney
Chukar
Internal Organs
Muscle
Chukar Bone
Quail
Whole Body
3H(b)
% Ash
238pu(c)
239*240pu(c)
% Ash
90Sr«
238pu(c)
239*240pu(c)
% Ash
gog^d)
238pu(c)
239pu(c)
3H(b,
% Ash
238pu(c)
239+240pu(c)
% Ash
238pu(c)
23S+240pu(c)
% Ash
238pu(c)
239+240pu(c)
% Ash
238pu(c)
239+240pu(c)
% Ash
•"Si*"
236pu(c)
239*240pu(c)
% Ash
"Si*0
238pu(c)
239+240pu(o)
3H(b)
3H(b)
3H(b)
% Ash
90Sr<(l)
238pu(c)
239*240pu(c)
3H(b)
* Result is greater than the
(a) Median used
Number Maximum
8 3.16
8 1.4
2.54*
52.7*
8 37.4
1.6*
1.31*
16.5*
1
..
„
--
4 3.90*
4 1.4
3.24
72.9*
4 1.2
2.33*
130.*
4 4.7
3.73
120.*
4 2.6
7.31*
98.7*
4 33.6
1.6*
5.24*
2.94*
4 41.9
1.9*
1.19
63.7*
7 2.38
4 38,700.*
4 32,800.*
3 19.0
3.5*
10.1*
490.*
1
Minimum
-1.11
1.2
-0.577
2.88
18.9
0.29*
-0.838
0.00
__
—
-
--
0.52
1.3
-0.0005
8.06*
1.0
-0.392
0.640
1.14
-1.41
4.85*
1.9
-1.77
2.83
27.8
0.59*
-0.267
0.771
8.8
0.67*
-0.308
0.444
-1.33
-0.61
1.33
4.2
0.24
1.30
8.70*
--
1993
Median1"'
0.32
1.3
0.254
5.72
29.6
0.89*
0.327
0.854
2.4
0.32*
-1.63
11.8*
229
1.3
0.773
24.3*
1.1
-0.392
10.7*
1.2
1.07
13.8*
2.2
2.32*
20.1*
30.9
0.85*
1.34
2.38
36.3
1.25*
0.443
1.05
1.18
3.23
3.64
5.8
2.2*
2.46*
20.7*
556
Standard
Deviation
1.46
--
1.21
17.1
-
0.37
0.64
5.53
-
-
--
-
1.54
-
1.44
28.7
--
1.47
61.5
__
2.12
54.8
__
3.79
42.96
„
0.48
2.47
0.98
0.50
0.71
31.4
1.50
19,349
16,398
1.64
4.78
274.5
--
^^^^^^^^— ^^
Median MDC
+ std
3.85
6.15
4.46
0.26
2.56
2.41
0.28
4.29
0.885
3.92
4.65
1.79
4.21
5.23
5.53
4.15
3.57
4.83
0.28
2.40
1.90
__
0.26
2.04
2.04
4.37
4.42
436
0.35
3.21
1.34
439
. dev.
±0.93
--
±3.42
±2.20
--
±0.01
± 1.69
± 1.41
-
± --
± --
+ --
± 1.59
-
±4.73
±5.19
--
±3.00
±3.16
__
±3.63
±5.29
_.
±2.41
±2.12
..
±0.02
± 1.00
±0.78
±0.03
±1.44
±1.44
±2.02
+ 0.04
±0.01
±0.15
± 1.65
±0.27
± -
minimum detectable concentration.
instead of mean because small number of samples
and large range.
50
-------
east of U16a site.
The mule deer collected in the second quarter of
1993 was a mature male in good condition.
Collection was made in Area 19 along the Pahute
Mesa Road 0.5 miles north of U19ar.
The mule deer collected in the third quarter of
1993 was a mature male in excellent condition.
Collection was made in Area 20 along the Pahute
Mesa Road 0.5 miles east of the Area 20 water
reservoir. A female deer was also collected during
the third quarter in the offsite area of Cherry Creek
Camp ground approximately three miles west of
Adaven, Nevada.
No deer was collected on the NTS during the
fourth quarter. Attempts were made but due to
sudden weather changes during this period of time
no collection was possible.
Naturally occurring 40K was detected in all soft
tissue samples. In addition, 137Cs was detected in
the kidney sample of the mule deer collected in the
first quarter (result = 0.0516 ± 0.014 pCi/L) and in
the muscle sample of the deer collected offsite
(result = 0.0164 ± 0.005 pCi/L) and 7Be was
detected in the rumen contents of the first quarter-
collected deer (result = 0.35 ± 0.08 pCi/L).
The only blood sample yielding a tritium result
slightly greater than the detection limit was a value
of 390 ± 120 pCi/L detected in the deer collected
in the second quarter. In the past, one or more
deer collected on the NTS have evidenced signifi-
cant levels of tritium in blood. The low results for
1993 are probably due to the fact that no deer
were collected in the vicinity of the Area 12 ponds,
thought to be the source of tritium in past years'
results.
All bone samples yielded 90Sr results greater than
the MDC. The average 90Sr found in mule deer
bone ash since 1955 is shown in Figure 21. The
range and median results are similar to those
obtained in recent years. Plutonium-238 was
detected at concentrations greater than the MDC
in the lung sample from the third quarter deer, the
bone sample of the offsite deer, and in the rumen
contents samples of all deer except the one col-
Sheep 1993
o
Q.
C/3
<
O>
c
o
CD
I
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
18
.hl.lll... .-
55 ' 59 ' 63 67 '71 ' 75 ' 79 ' 83 ' 87 ' 91
57 61 65 69 73 77 81 85 89 93
Year
Figure 20. Average Strontium levels in bighorn sheep, 1955 - 1993.
51
-------
lected in the third quarter from Area 20. The same
three rumen contents samples yielded detectable
concentrations of 239+240Pu. Greater-than-MDC
239+240pu resu|ts were a|so obtained in the lung
samples of all three deer collected on the NTS and
the muscle and liver samples of all four deer
collected in 1993. The highest 239+240pu results in
muscle, lung, and rumen contents were found in
the deer collected in the first quarter from Area 16
of the NTS.
5.2.5 Sample Results for Cattle
Blood and soft tissues (lung, muscle, liver, thyroid,
kidney and fetal tissue, when available) are ana-
lyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides; blood is
also analyzed for tritium activity. Samples of liver,
bone, and fetal tissue are ashed and analyzed for
plutonium isotopes; bone and fetus samples are
also analyzed for 90Sr. Duplicate liver and bone
samples from two animals in each group of four
are prepared and analyzed.
The four cattle purchased in May 1993 from Steve
Medlin in Tickapoo Valley, Nevada, had detectable
concentrations of 90Sr in bone ash samples ranging
from 0.29 ±0.15 pCi/g ash to 0.85 ± 0.21 pCi/g
ash. One bone sample contained 0.00413 ±
0.0031 pCi/g ash of 238Pu. The livers of all four
cattle contained 239+240pu ranging from 0.00211 ±
0.000839 pCi/g ash to 0.0527 ± 0.0126 pCi/g ash.
These cattle lived their entire life in the Tickapoo
Valley area.
The four cattle purchased from the Orrin Nash
Ranch near Hiko, Nevada in October 1993 includ-
ed two adult females in fair to poor condition and
two yearling females in good to very good condi-
tion. All had lived their entire lives on the Nash
Ranch range. No gamma-emitting radionuclides
other than 40K were detected in any soft tissue
samples or blood. Tritium concentrations greater
than the MDC were not detected in the blood
samples. Strontium-90 was detected in all four
bone samples and in the fetus sample, ranging
from 0.93 ± 0.10 pCi/L to 1.6 ± 0.12 pCi/L The
average 90Sr found in cattle bone ash since 1955
is shown in Figure 22. None of the liver, bone, or
fetus samples yielded 238Pu activity greater than
the MDC. Activities of 239+240pu greater than the
MDC were found in three liver samples, one bone
sample, and in the fetus sample. The 239+24° Pu
result for the bone sample from one of yearling
cows was 0.0165 ± 0.003 pCi/L, the result for the
0
CO
0)
o
CO
1
o
CO
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
—
—
—
-IJ-JL
IT
55 ' 59 ' 63
Hll,
Deer 1993
4 4
Illllllllll. 1......
T"T"-| r — T"T — T — J-T 1 1 T ~T~T ;
67 71 75 79 83 87 ' 91
o' 61 65 69
73 77 81 85 89 93
Year
52
-------
fetus sample was 0.0118 ± 0.002 pCi/L, and
results for the liver samples ranged from 0.0034 ±
0.0023 pCi/L to 0.0076 + 0.0021 pCi/L. Results for
all cattle analyzed in 1993 are summarized in
Table 15.
5.2.6 Sample Results for Chukar
and Quail
During the third quarter of 1993 chukar and quail
were collected at the following locations on the
NTS shown in Figure 23. In the area adjacent to
the "T" tunnel, Tub Spring, Tippipah Spring, and
Topopah Spring. In addition, a quail was collected
in the vicinity of White Rock Spring. Samples of
chukar muscle tissue and internal organs were
checked for gamma-emitting radionuclides and 3H.
Chukar bone samples were analyzed for 238Pu,
239+240pu and 90S|. Because Qf jfg sma|| sjze] tne
whole body of the quail was only analyzed for
gamma-emitting radionuclides and 3H.
In addition to naturally occurring 40K, 137Cs was
detected in three of the four chukar internal organ
samples, ranging from 0.0295 ± 0.009 pCi/L in the
chukar collected near Tippipah Spring to 0.19 ±
0.02 pCi/L in the sample from the bird collected
near Tub Springs. Cesium-137 was also detected
in the muscle samples of chukars collected near
"T" tunnel and near Tub Springs, ranging from
0.0279 ± 0.006 pCi/L to 0.0558 ± 0.008 pCi/L. The
quail whole-body sample also evidenced 137Cs
activity.
Tritium was detected at activities greater than the
MDC in chukar muscle and samples from birds
collected near "T" tunnel and near Tub Springs and
in the internal organ samples from the bird collect-
ed near "T" tunnel. Results are given in Table 15.
The tritium concentrations in the samples from the
chukar collected near "T" tunnel exceeded 3 x 106
pCi/L. Tritium activity greater than the MDC was
also found in the quail whole-body sample.
Bone samples were analyzed from three of the
chukar samples (excluding Topopah Spring).
Strontium-90,238 Pu, and 239+240pu were detected at
activities greater than the MDC in the samples
from birds collected near "T" tunnel and Tub
Springs, while only 239+240pu was detected at
concentrations greater than the MDC in the bone
sample of the bird collected in the vicinity of Tippi-
Cattle 1993
0
55 59 63 67 71 75 79 83 87 91
57 61 65 69 73 77 81 85 89 93
Year
Figure 22. Average Strontium levels in cattle, 1955 - 1993
53
-------
KILOMETERS
= Deer (1993)
= Chukar and Quail (1993)
Figure 23. Collection Sites for Animals Sampled on the NTS - 1993
54
-------
pah Springs. The median concentrations of all
three parameters are shown in Table 15.
5.2.7 Quality Assurance/Quality
Control
Standard operating procedures (SOPs) detail
sample collection, preparation, storage, analysis,
and data review procedures to ensure comparabili-
ty among operators. Field personnel complete a
standardized necropsy protocol form to ensure that
all relevant information is recorded, such as date
and location of collection, history and condition of
the animals and tissues, and sample weights and
assigned identification numbers. Standardized
forms accompany each shipment of samples sent
to the contract laboratory for ashing and are also
used for analyses conducted in the Radioanalysis
Laboratory. All information entered into the data
base management system by Sample Control and
the radioanalysis chemists is checked and verified
by the Group Leader and assigned media expert.
An estimate of system precision is obtained from
results of duplicate samples. Matrix spike samples
are used to verify analytical accuracy. Matrix
blank samples monitor any contamination resulting
from sample preparation and analysis. The entire
sample set analyzed in any given year is quite
small (usually four or five sample batches) and, as
a consequence, the quality assurance/quality
control (QA/QC) sample results set contains fewer
values than is considered minimal for statistical
uses. Therefore, the results of QA/QC samples
are considered to provide only an indication or
estimate of true precision and accuracy. This is
considered adequate because the animal investi-
gation program itself is not statistically based.
Prior to 1991, analyses of animal tissue samples
were performed by a contract laboratory. The
EPA EMSL-LV Radioanalysis Laboratory assumed
responsibility for sample analysis beginning with
the results contained in this report. The change of
laboratories raised concerns about comparability of
analyses, so a special QA review was conducted.
The procedures used by each laboratory are
comparable, as are results of matrix spike sam-
ples. Generally, the result ranges obtained in
1991 were similar to those obtained in previous
years when samples were analyzed by the con-
tract laboratory. Finally, results of QA/QC sam-
ples, with the exception of one routine-duplicate
pair, were within established control limits. Al-
though a direct comparability study was not under-
taken (i.e., analysis of replicate samples by both
laboratories), the results of the QA review indicate
the data obtained for 1993 analyses are compara-
ble to data obtained in previous years.
The QA review also resulted in recommendations
for some changes in the animal investigation
program to be implemented in 1992. These
recommendations included preparation of a large
stock of matrix spike and blank sample material
and addition of a system blank. The single stock
of matrix spike sample material will permit an
additional estimate of precision, in this case analyt-
ical precision, to be obtained. The system blank
will be a bone sample known to contain no detect-
able concentrations of radionuclides (with the
possible exception of strontium). It will be pro-
cessed with each tissue sample batch to provide
a check of possible contamination during the
ashing and sample preparation processes.
5.3 Fruits And Vegetables
Monitoring
Another possible pathway of radionuclide ingestion
is through produce: fruits, vegetables, and grains.
Commercial farming, other than alfalfa, is not a
major industry in the offsite area around the NTS.
Therefore, monitoring is limited to fruits and vege-
tables grown in local gardens for family consump-
tion. In the event of a release of radioactivity from
the NTS, monitoring of produce would be extended
to include alfalfa, forage grasses, and feed grain
supplies. No extensive monitoring was required in
1993.
5.3.1 Network Design
Like the animal investigation program, fruit and
vegetable monitoring is based on a worst-case
scenario. Local residents living in areas known to
have received fallout from past atmospheric testing
are asked to donate produce from their family
gardens. These areas which received fallout are
also the areas in the preferred downwind direction
during past underground testing. As sample
collection is not statistically based, no inference
should be drawn regarding the representativeness
of the sampled materials to concentrations of
radionuclides in produce as a whole, nor should
any conclusions be drawn regarding the average
consumption of radionuclides from produce.
55
-------
5.3.2 Sample Collection and
Analysis Procedures
Fruit and vegetable contribution of samples is
voluntary by the offsite residents. Sampling is
done only once per year, in the late summer.
Fruits and vegetables harvested at that time
generally include root crops (onions, carrots,
potatoes), melons and squash, and some leafy
vegetables (e.g., cabbage).
Samples are processed by washing the material as
it would be done by residents prior to eating or
cooking. This washing procedure introduces an
element of variability, as the thoroughness of
washing varies by individual. Potatoes and carrots
are not peeled. Further processing generally
includes cutting the material into small pieces
and/or blending in a mixer or food processor.
Splits are prepared for analysis of gamma-emitting
radionuclides and tritium. Other sample splits are
ashed and analyzed for 90Sr, 238Pu, and 239+240pu.
5.3.3 Sample Results
In the fall of 1993,16 samples of fruits and vegeta-
bles were donated by residents of Utah and Neva-
da. The samples included apples, potatoes,
kohlrabi, turnips, carrots, pears, green onions, and
squash. All samples were analyzed for gamma-
emitting radionuclides and only naturally occurring
40K was detected. All samples were analyzed for
tritium; two samples had results greater than the
MDC: pears from Adaven, Nevada and turnips
from Warm Springs, Nevada. Samples were
ashed and analyzed for 90Sr, 238Pu and 239+240Pu.
One sample, broccoli from Rachel, Nevada, yielded
a 90Sr activity greater than the MDC. Three sam-
ples were above the MDC for 239+240pU: green
onions from Alamo, Nevada, carrots without tops
from Rachel, and potatoes from Hiko, Nevada.
This is possibly due to soil adhering to the surface
of the vegetables. None of the smooth-skinned
crops contained radionuclides above MDC. Re-
sults are listed in Table 16.
5.3.4 Quality Assurance/Quality
Control
The fruits and vegetables are considered to be a
batch within the animal investigation program. The
same QA/QC samples are used, including matrix-
spikes and matrix blanks (NOTE: animal bone ash
is the matrix). If sufficient material is received, at
least one of the samples may be analyzed in
duplicate, however, in many years not enough of
any one type of material is received from any one
source to permit preparation of replicates. As with
the animal investigation program, the QA/QC
samples provide only an estimate or indication of
the analytical precision and accuracy.
Table 16. Detectable'3' 3H, 90Sr, 238Pu and 239+24°pu Concentrations in Vegetables
Collection
Vegetable Location
Broccoli Rachel, NV
Green Onions Alamo, NV
Carrots
without tops
Potatoes
Pears
Turnips
Rachel, NV
Hiko, NV
Adaven, NV
% Ash
0.805
0.598
0.527
0.700
0.511
Twin Springs, NV 0.522
3H ± 1a(b)
(MDC)
'°Sr±1a«>
(MDC)
0.60 ±0.17 (.56)
pu ±
(MDC
7.59 ± 4.39 (6.86)
18.7 + 6.65 (6.34)
2.59 ± 1.50 (2.34)
525 ± 137 (443)
503 + 138 (443)
(a) Detectable is defined as results greater than the minimum detectable concentration.
(b) Units are pCi/L
(c) Units are pCi/g ash.
(d) Units are 10'3 pCi/g ash.
56
-------
6.0 Internal Dosimetry
Internal exposure is caused by ingested, absorbed,
or inhaled radionuclides that remain in the body
either temporarily or for longer periods of time
because of storage in tissues. At EMSL-LV, two
methods are used to detect body burdens: whole-
body counting and urinalysis.
6.1 Network Design
The Internal Dosimetry Program consists of two
components, the Offsite Internal Dosimetry Pro-
gram and the Radiological Safety Program.
The Offsite Internal Dosimetry Program is designed
to (1) measure radionuclide body burdens in a
representative number of families who reside in
areas that were subjected to fallout during the early
years of nuclear weapons tests, and (2) provide a
biological monitoring system for present nuclear
testing activities. A few families who reside in
areas not affected by fallout were selected for
comparative study. Members of the general public
concerned about possible exposure to radionuclid-
es are also counted periodically as a public ser-
vice.
The program was initiated in December 1970 to
determine levels of radionuclides in some of the
families residing in communities and ranches
surrounding the NTS. For these families, counting
is performed in the spring and fall of each year.
This program started with 34 families (142 individ-
uals). In 1993, there were a total of 54 families
(158 individuals) in the program. Not all individuals
participated in the program in 1993. The locations
and number of individuals taking part in the
program in 1993 are shown in Figure 24. Bian-
nually, .participants travel to EMSL-LV for a whole-
body and lung count, and submission of a urine
specimen. At 18-month intervals, a medical labo-
ratory examination is performed and the participant
is examined by a physician.
The Radiological Safety Program is designed to
assess internal exposure for EPA employees, DOE
contractor employees, and by special request, em-
ployees of companies or government agencies who
may have had an accidental exposure to radioac-
tive material. Individuals with potential for occupa-
tional exposure are counted at the request of their
employers. Counting is done routinely for DOE
contractors. EPA personnel in radiation programs
or those who work with radioactive materials
undergo a whole body count and a urinalysis
annually.
In 1993, internal dosimetry monitoring was also
performed on participants in the Radiological
Safety Program, and other workers who might
have been occupationally exposed. In 1992 and
1993, by special request, whole body counting was
performed on Desert Storm soldiers who were
injured with shrapnel possibly containing depleted
uranium. In addition, counts and urinalysis were
performed on members of the public who contact-
ed EMSL-LV with concerns about radiation expo-
sures.
6.2 Procedures
The whole-body counting facility has been main-
tained at EMSL-LV since 1966 and is equipped to
determine the identity and quantity of gamma-
emitting radionuclides that may have been inhaled,
absorbed, or ingested. Routine examinations
consist of a 2,000-second count in each of the two
shielded examination vaults. In one vault, a single
intrinsic germanium coaxial detector positioned
over an adjustable chair allows detection of gamma
radiation with energies ranging from 60 keV to 2.0
meV in the whole body. The other vault contains
an adjustable chair with six intrinsic germanium
semiplanar detectors mounted above the chest
area. The semiplanar array is designed to detect
gamma- and X-ray-emitting radionuclides with
energy ranges from 10 to 300 keV. Specially
designed software allows individual detector spec-
tra to be analyzed to obtain a summation of left- or
right-lung arrays and of the total lung area. This
provides much greater sensitivity for the
transuranic radionuclides while still maintaining the
ability to pinpoint "hot spots." Custom-designed
detector mounts allow maximum flexibility for the
placement of detectors in various configurations for
skull, knee, ankle, or other geometries.
To complete the evaluation, a urine sample is
collected for 3H analysis. Not all participants in the
Radiological Safety Program submit urine samples
for 3H analysis.
57
-------
NEVADA
iMcGill
(2)
Pioche
(7)
I Alamo
(12)
UTAH
i Cedar City
(6)
(2)
i St. George
Overton <
Indian Springs
(4)
i Logandale
LAKE MEAD
ARIZONA
() Number of Off-Site Participants Monitored
• Location of Participants
O Cities for Reference Only
50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 24. Number and Location of Participants in the Off site Dosimetry Program - 1993
58
-------
Before the Offsite Internal Dosimetry Program
participants leave the facility, results of the whole-
body and lung counts are made available and are
discussed with the subjects. Results of the urine
3H analysis are reported later if the result is abnor-
mal. At 18-month intervals, a physical exam,
health history, and the following are performed:
complete urinalysis, complete blood count, serolo-
gy, chest X-ray (three-year intervals), sight screen-
ing, audiogram, vital capacity, EKG (for individuals
over 40 years old), and thyroid panel. The results
of the examination can be requested for use by the
individual's family physician.
6.3 Results
In 1993, whole-body and lung counts were per-
formed on 144 individuals, of whom 56 were
participants in the Offsite Internal Dosimetry
Network (see Section 4.1.2.7). An additional 88
gamma-ray spectra were obtained for radiation
workers, including EPA, DOE, and contractor
personnel. In none of the spectra were transuranic
radionuclides detected. The spectra for the Offsite
Dosimetry Network and Radiological Safety
Program participants showed only low-level
activities on the same order of intensity of those
observed in normal background measurements.
As in 1992, depleted uranium shrapnel was
detected in participating Desert Storm soldiers, but
the absolute amounts could not be determined by
whole body counting alone.
Of the analytical results of the urine samples
available at the time of this publication, two
showed tritium concentrations exceeding the MDC
and were not related in location or collection time,
see Table 17. The highest concentration was 8.3
x 10"7±2.14x 10"7u.Ci/mL, which if assumed to be
equal to the average intake concentration, corre-
sponds to four percent of the drinking water
regulation (2.0 x 10~5 u.Ci/ml_) for tritium.
6.4 Quality Assurance/Quality
Control
Quality Assurance procedures consist of daily
equipment operations checks using QA software
obtained specifically for this facility. Some of the
parameters monitored daily include energy calibra-
tion of each detector using a NIST-traceable point
source to check for zero, gain shift, and resolution
over a wide range of energies. A background
measurement is also taken once or twice daily
depending on the count schedule.
The whole-body detector efficiency is calibrated
annually using a Bottle Mannequin Absorber
(BOMAB) phantom containing a NIST-traceable
mixed radionuclide source. The lung counter is
also calibrated annually with a male realistic lung
phantom. A separate set of efficiency calibration
data is kept for each combination of sample
shape/organ geometry.
The following MDCs were calculated after recali-
bration of the lung counting system in February
1992:241Am, 0.2 uCi; 238Pu, 18 uCi; and 239Pu, 130
u,Ci. There were no significant differences from
previous MDC's. These were calculated for a
standard chest wall thickness of 3 cm.
All efficiency curves are generated by the vendor-
supplied whole-body counting and lung counting
software. QA software is used to monitor the
systems by performing out-of-range tests for
predetermined parameters. Results are plotted
and reports are generated daily and monthly. All
data are stored in the computer. Replicate count-
ing of the standard BOMAB phantom provides a
measure of consistency. Replicate counts of blind
intercalibration phantoms and of people counted
previously in other facilities provide additional
measurements of precision and accuracy. Verifi-
cation and validation are completed before results
are entered into a data base. Calculation of
internal dose is done utilizing software based on
the International Commission on Radiological
Protection (ICRP) methodology (ICRP, 1979).Dose
calculation is verified using ICRP and National
Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements
(NCRP) guidelines (NCRP, 1989). Preventive
maintenance and repair of analytical equipment are
done by the vendor service representative. Data
are retained permanently. Subject confidentiality
and data security are maintained through well-
established procedures. EPA whole-body counting
technicians participate in DOE and EPA QA train-
ing programs.
59
-------
Table 17. Tritium in Urine, Offsite Internal Dosimetry Program - 1993
3H Concentration (10'7 uCi/mL)
Location
Alamo, NV 12
Amargosa
Valley, Nv 4
Beatty, NV 9
Indian Springs, NV 2
McGill, NV 2
Nyala, NV 2
Overton, NV 3
Pahrump, NV 6
Pioche, NV 10
Cedar City, UT 6
Mean MDC: 3.0 x 10"7 u.Ci/mL
Number Maximum Minimum
2.9
0.6
2.6
1.0
3.4
-1.1
2.0
1.7
0.5
8.3
-0.7
-0.8
-1.0
0.9
1.6
-1.7
0.3
-0.2
-1.1
-0.0
Arithmetic
Mean
1.1
-0.1
0.4
0.9
2.5
-1.4
1.1
0.9
-0.5
2.1
Standard
Deviation
1.1
0.6
1.1
0.0
1.3
0.4
0.9
0.7
0.5
3.1
Mean as
% DCG
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 0.39 x 10'7 u,Ci/mL
DCG Derived Concentration Guide; Established by DOE Order as 9 x 10"5 u.Ci/ml_
NA Not applicable; mean is less than MDC.
60
-------
7.0 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
One of the concerns of underground nuclear
weapons testing is the possibility of radionuclide
contamination of groundwaters. Since 1973,
underground nuclear weapons tests were
conducted only on the Nevada Test Site (NTS),
but between 1961 and 1973, eleven tests were
conducted in eight other locations in the United
States. The initial ground and surface water
monitoring program was established by the U.S.
Public Health Service (USPHS) in the early 1950s.
Pretest and posttest monitoring for the locations
off the NTS was conducted by USPHS, the U.S.
Geological Survey (USGS), and Teledyne
Isotopes, Inc. In 1972, the Long-Term
Hydrological Monitoring Program (LTHMP) was
established by the Nevada Operations Office (NV)
of the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC), a
predecessor agency to DOE. Through an
interagency agreement between AEC (later DOE)
and EPA, responsibility for operation of the
LTHMP was assigned to the U.S. EPA's
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory in
Las Vegas, Nevada (EMSL-LV). The LTHMP is
only one component of the total surface and
ground water monitoring program conducted under
the auspices of DOE/NV.
The LTHMP conducts routine monitoring of
specific wells on the NTS and of wells, springs,
and surface waters in the offsite area around the
NTS. In addition, sampling for the LTHMP is
conducted at other locations in the U.S. where
nuclear weapons tests have been conducted.
These locations include sites in Nevada, Colorado,
New Mexico, Mississippi, and Alaska.
7.1 Network Design
The LTHMP was instituted because AEC (later
DOE/NV) acknowledged its responsibility for
obtaining and for disseminating data acquired from
all locations where nuclear devices have been
tested. The three objectives originally established
for the LTHMP were to:
• Assure public safety.
Inform the public, news media, and
scientific community about any
radiological contamination.
Document compliance with existing fed-
eral, state, and local antipollution require-
ments.
Another objective which has been incorporated into
the LTHMP is to, where possible, detect trends in
radionuclide activities which may be indicative of
migration from test cavities.
The primary radionuclide analyzed in the LTHMP
is tritium. As a product of nuclear weapons
testing, high levels of tritium are found in test
cavities. Because tritium can be incorporated into
water molecules, it is expected to be the first
radionuclide to migrate from a test cavity.
Therefore, tritium serves as an indicator of
radionuclide migration. Atmospheric tritium may
also be deposited into water, primarily by
precipitation scavenging. Tritium from this source
is primarily found in surface waters, surficial
aquifers, and springs closely connected to surficial
aquifers.
7.1.1 Sampling Locations
In order to meet the objective of assuring public
safety, EMSL-LV monitors drinking water supply
wells and springs around the NTS and in the
vicinity of surface ground zero (SGZ) at the other
locations. The majority of these sampling sites are
privately owned and participation in the LTHMP is
voluntary. Municipal drinking water supplies are
also represented. Regardless of the number of
individuals served by a particular water supply, the
National Primary Drinking Water Regulation1
(NPDWR) pertaining to radioactivity is used as the
compliance standard.2
All of the nuclear weapons tested at locations
other than the NTS were emplaced at depths of
greater than 1200 feet. Nuclear weapons tested
on the NTS are also emplaced at great depths,
with the exception of some shallow underground
tests conducted in the early 1960s. The drinking
water supply wells tap shallow aquifers and,
consequently, do not represent groundwater in the
geologic strata containing the test cavities. There-
fore, wherever possible, deep wells are included in
the monitoring program. These wells include
some which were drilled soon after a nuclear test
specifically to monitor activities in or near the test
61
-------
cavity and others which can be considered only as
"targets of opportunity"; e.g., existing wells for
which sampling permission has been obtained.
Most of the deep wells tap non-potable water
sources. Monitoring design standards, such as
those in the Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA), did not become available until long
after the LTHMP deep wells had been drilled. Cost
has delayed emplacement of new wells, although
a program to drill more than 90 new wells on the
NTS was initiated in 1990. The sampling locations
not associated with the NTS are defined by DOE
as inactive hazardous waste sites and are exempt
from the RCRA monitoring design requirements.
7.1.2 Sampling and Analysis
Procedures
At nearly all LTHMP locations, the standard
operating procedure is to collect three samples
from each source. Two samples are collected in
500-mL glass bottles to be analyzed for tritium.
The results from analysis of one of these samples
are reported while the other sample serves as a
backup in case of loss or as a duplicate sample.
The remaining sample is collected in 3.8-L plastic
container (Cubitainer). At LTHMP sites other than
the NTS and vicinity, two Cubitainer samples are
collected. One of these is analyzed by gamma
spectrometry and the other is stored as a backup
or for duplicate analysis. At a few locations,
because of limited water supply, only 500-mL
samples are collected for tritium analysis.
For wells with operating pumps, samples are
collected at the nearest convenient outlet. If the
well has no pump, a truck-mounted sampling rig is
used. With this rig it is possible to collect three-
liter samples from wells as deep as 1800 meters.
At the normal sample collection sites, the pH,
conductivity, water temperature, and sampling
depth are measured when the sample is collected.
The first time samples are collected from a well,
89,9oSr 238,239pu and uranjum jsotopes are
determined by radiochemistry. Prior to 1979, the
first samples from a new location were analyzed
for 15 stable elements; anions, nitrates, ammonia,
silica; uranium, plutonium and strontium isotopes;
and 226Ra. Most of these analyses can still be
completed by special request. At least one of the
Cubitainer samples from each site are analyzed by
gamma spectrometry, using a 100-minute counting
time. One of the 500-mL samples from each site
is analyzed for tritium. When sample results are
close to or less than the MDC for the conventional
tritium analysis (approximately 400 to 700 pCi/L),
the sample is concentrated by electrolysis. The
MDC for this method (referred to as the enrichment
method in the following text) is approximately 5 to
7 pCi/L, as compared to the MDC for the
conventional method of approximately 250 to 700
pCi/L. Most of the LTHMP samples are analyzed
by the enrichment method, unless past years' data
have indicted activities are within the detectable
range of the conventional method. Additionally,
semiannually sampled wells on and in the vicinity
of the NTS are analyzed once per year by the
enrichment method and once per year by the
conventional method.
7.1.3 Quality Assurance/Quality
Control Samples
Sample collection and analysis procedures are
described in standard operating procedures
(SOPs). Data base management and data analy-
sis activities are described in the Quality Assur-
ance Plan (EPA, 1992). Use of standardized
procedures ensures comparability of operations
and data among monitoring locations and across
temporal intervals.
Annual data quality assessments of precision,
accuracy, and comparability are based on the
results of quality assurance/quality control samples.
The data quality assessment results for 1993 are
given in Section 11.0. Overall system precision is
estimated from the results of field duplicates. A
field duplicate is a second sample collected from a
sampling location immediately following collection
of the routine sample using identical procedures.
Field duplicates are collected from sampling
locations on the NTS and in the vicinity of the NTS
according to a schedule established by the LTHMP
Technical Leader. Generally, all samples from the
other locations are collected in duplicate; the
second sample may be used as a duplicate or may
be used as a replacement for the routine sample,
if necessary.
Accuracy is estimated from results of intercompari-
son study samples. These intercomparison study
samples are spiked samples (i.e., a water sampje
to which a known amount of particular radio-
nuclide(s) have been added). Intercomparison
study programs managed by EMSL-LV and DOE's
Environmental Monitoring Laboratory (EML) both
62
-------
include water matrix samples. The EMSL-LV
intercomparison study samples are also used as
an estimate of comparability. Generally, sixty to
more than 300 laboratories participate in a given
intercomparison study. Results for each laboratory
are reported, as are pooled results (mean, stan-
dard deviation). Comparison of the EMSL-LV
Radioanalysis Laboratory result to the mean for ail
laboratories provides an estimate of the
comparability of results.
In addition to the above-described QA/QC samples
which are used in annual data quality assess-
ments, the Radioanalysis Laboratory employs a
number of internal QC samples and procedures to
ensure data quality on a day-to-day basis. Internal
QC samples include blanks, regular calibrations,
matrix spike samples, and duplicate analyses
(gamma spectroscopy only). If results of these
internal QC samples fall outside prescribed control
limits, corrective actions are implemented; analysis
is stopped until the cause of the discrepant data is
found and resolved.
7.1.4 Data Management and
Analysis
The bar code pilot program was extremely
successful and is being continued for the LTHMP
and expanded to other monitoring networks. Bar
code labels were prepared prior to each sampling
excursion, based on the sampling schedule
prepared by the LTHMP Technical Leader. Upon
receipt of samples in Sample Control, the bar code
label was read and the information transferred into
the Sample Tracking Data Management System
(STDMS), along with information from the field data
card.
Analysis data were entered into STDMS after they
had been generated and reviewed by the analyst
and Group Leader. Special software written in
Fortran (referred to as "Chemistry Programs") is
used for a majority of the radiochemical data
reduction. The Chemistry Programs are used for
calculating final data such as activity per unit
volume, MDC and 2-sigma error terms. All hand-
entered data were checked for transcription errors.
Once data had been entered and checked, they
were transferred from a "review" data base to a
permanent data base, where further changes may
be made only by authorized personnel.
Periodically, the assigned media expert reviewed
the data base and checked for completeness of
sample collection, transcription errors, completion
of sample analysis and QA/QC samples, and
accuracy of information input. All discrepancies
were resolved and corrected. Once the data base
was complete for a given location, time series plots
were generated. Any discernable trends were
discussed at an annual data review attended by
management and scientific personnel. Another
data review of the LTHMP was held with DOE and
Desert Research Institute (DRI) hydrology
personnel. The time series plots which indicated
consistent data trends are included as figures in
the subsections which follow. The filled circles on
the time series plots represent the result values,
the error bars indicate ± one standard deviation of
the result, and the (x) represents the MDC value.
7.2 Nevada Test Site
Monitoring
The present makeup of the LTHMP for the NTS
onsite network, which includes sample locations on
the NTS or immediately outside its borders on
federally owned land, is displayed in Figure 25. All
sampling locations are selected by DOE and
primarily represent drinking water supplies. All
samples are analyzed by gamma spectrometry and
for tritium by the enrichment method. Sixteen wells
are sampled monthly and twenty wells are sampled
twice per year, at approximately six-month
intervals. Of the 36 sampling locations assigned to
the LTHMP, eight could not be sampled at any
time in 1993 as noted in Table 18.
No gamma-emitting radionuclides were detected in
any of the samples collected in 1993 and analyzed
by gamma spectrometry. The greatest tritium
activity measured in the LTHMP NTS network in
1993 was 317 ± 4 pCi/L in a sample from Well UE-
7ns. This activity is 0.4 percent of the derived
concentration guide (DCG)3
In the fall of 1992, DOE elected to restrict access
and reduce maintenance to certain portions of the
NTS. As part of this cost-saving measure, Water
Well UE-19c was temporarily shut down; i.e.,
power to the pump disconnected and the lines
were drained. The last sample collected from this
well was taken in October 1992.
63
-------
Well P.M.
Exploratory
#1
LIB j
L1 _ \JEz_6dI TestWeH B _
iV"
Water Well C
Well C-1
IB Water Well #4
ell UE-Sc
III
Well 5B
Well 5C
Well Groom
We!! Groom 51_
Well Groom 6
• Well Groom 4
sir
Well U3cn#-5
KILOMETERS
= Not Sampled this year
= Water Sampling Location
Figure 25. Wells on the NTS Included in the LTHMP -1993
64
-------
Table 18. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Summary of Tritium Results for Nevada
Test Site Network, 1993
Tritium concentration (pCi/L)
Location
Arithmetic Standard
Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation
Mean
as %DCG
Test Well B
Test Well D
Test Well 7
Well Army #1
Well Army #6A
Water Well C
Well C-1
Well Groom 3
Well Groom 4
Water Well #4
Well Groom 5
Well 5B
Water Well 5C
Well Groom 6
Well HTH #8
Water Well 20
Well HTH #1
Well J-12
Well J-13
Well P.M. Expl. #1
Well UE-1c
Well UE-5c
Well UE-7ns
Well UE-16d
Well UE-16f
Well UE-17a
Well UE-18r
Well UE-18t
Well A
Water Well 2
Well USGS HTH "F"
Well U-3cn #5
Well UE-4t #1
Well UE-6e
Well UE-15d
Well UE-19c
Mean MDC: 5.38 pCi/L
11 111.0* 82.0* 98.0* 9.0
2 3.9 2.5 3.2 1.0
2 6.6* 4.3 5.5* 1.6
12 2.5 -3.7 -0.5 1.6
2 3.0 0.1 1.5 2.0
12 25.0* 5.5* 12.0* 5.3
2 11.0* 8.2* 9.8* 2.2
12 3.3 -1.0 1.0 1.3
12 4.0 -2.0 0.1 2.1
12 3.2 -3.9 -0.3 2.2
12 1.5 -3.0 -0.2 1.5
3 1.4 -2.4 -1.0 2.1
10 3.8 -2.5 0.1 2.0
12 0.3 -2.2 -0.7 0.9
12 5.5* -2.0 0.0 2.1
2 2.1 -1.0 0.6 2.2
2 13.0* 10.0* 12.0* 2.2
12 3.0 -2.9 -0.5 1.8
12 1.7 -3.8 -0.5 1.9
2 221.0* 215.0* 218.0* 4.2
2 7.4* 2.8 5.1 3.2
3 1.8 -3.7 -1.7 3.0
2 317.0* 273.0* 295.0* 31.0
2 2.6 2.3 2.4 0.2
2 6.2* 6.0* 6.1* 0.2
2 2.4 1.5 1.9 0.7
2 5.4* -0.3 2.5 4.0
2 166.0* 156.0* 161.0* 7.0
Well inactivated by DOE, last sampled October 1988
Well shut down, last sampled December 1990
Not sampled in 1993, last sampled February 1980
Well shut down, last sampled December 1981
Instrument in well, couldn't sample 1993
Drill rig over hole, couldn't sample 1993
Pump inoperative, last sampled 1992
Road closed, (winter), pump inoperative, couldn't sample 1993
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC:
0.11
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.01
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.24
<0.01
<0.01
0.33
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.18
0.72 pCi/L
DCG = derived concentration guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L
= Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC).
NA = Not applicable;
the MDC or the
Percent of concentration guide is not applicable: the tritium result
water is known to be nonpotable.
is less than
65
-------
Summary results of tritium analyses are presented
in Table 18. Three of the monthly sampled wells
and nine of the wells sampled semiannually yielded
tritium results greater than the MDC of the
enrichment analysis (approximately 5 to 7 pCi/L) in
one or more samples. Two of the monthly
sampled wells, Test Well B and water Well C, have
consistently shown detectable tritium over their
sampling history. The 1993 average for Test Well
B was 98 ± 9 pCi/L (range 82 to 111 pCi/L, 0.09 to
0.12 percent of the DCG) and for water Well C was
12.0 ± 5.3 pCi/L (range 5.5 to 25.0 pCi/L, 0.01 to
0.03 percent of the DCG). A decreasing trend is
evident in Test Well B, as shown in Figure 26.4
As shown in Table 18, both of the semiannual
samples collected from the following wells showed
tritium results above the MDC: Well C-1, HTH #1,
UE-7ns, UE-16f, P.M. Exploratory #1, and UE-18t.
Four of these sampling locations do not have
sufficient data to discern any trends, as they have
been added to the sampling network in recent
years. Well UE-7ns was routinely sampled
between 1976 and 1987; an increasing trend was
evident, with tritium concentrations in excess of
2500 pCi/L at the time sampling ceased in
September 1987. Results obtained for Well C-1
indicate a decreasing trend in tritium concentration
over the period 1970 through 1979; since 1979,
tritium concentrations have been generally stable.
7.3 Offsite Monitoring In The
Vicinity Of The Nevada
Test Site
The monitoring sites located in the offsite area
around the NTS are shown in Figure 27. Most of
the sampling locations represent drinking water
sources for rural residents in the offsite area and
public drinking water supplies in most of the
communities in the area. The sampling sites
include 23 wells, seven springs, and two surface
water sites. Thirty of the locations are routinely
sampled every month. The remaining two sites,
NTS Test Well B
400 H
300-
'
200-
100-
\t
• V
JAN74
JAN78
JAN82 JAN86
Sample Collection Date
Figure 26. Tritium Concentration Trends in Test Well B on the NTS.
JAN90
JAN94
66
-------
Sharp's Ranch
Tonopah City Well
Adaven Springs
Twin Springs Rn.
Union Carbide Well
Penoyer (4)
Well 7 & 8
Well 13 • Crystal Springs
Culinary Well
• Alamo
City Weil 4
Beatty Well 12S/47E-7dbd
Specie Springs
,• U.S. Ecology
VB
Nickell's Rn.
-v •
Amargosa Valley
WelM5S/50E-18cdc
\
Shoshone
Spring g
Fairbanks
I Springs
B Crystal Pool
B Spring 17S/50E-14cac
• Well18S/51IE-7db
^ • Johnnie Mine
X, BcalvadaWell
\
• Indian Springs
Sewer Co. Well 1
Las Vegas
Well 28
Lake Mead
Intake •
Scale in Miles
10 20 30
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Scale in Kilometers
|= Water Sampling Location
LOCATION MAP
NEV.
TEST
SITE
NELUS
AFB RANGE
COMPLEX •
Figure 27. Wells Outside the Nevada Test Site Included in the LTHMP.
67
-------
Penoyer Well 13 and Penoyer Wells 7 and 8, are
in operation only part of the year; samples are
collected whenever the wells are in operation. One
sampling location, the Johnnie Mine well in
Johnnie, Nevada, was deleted from the sampling
network when the mine was sold in August 1993.
This site had been sampled since 1989; the only
tritium result greater than the MDC was a
concentration of 6.0 ± 1.7 pCi/L observed in 1992.
Water samples are collected each month for
gamma spectrometric analysis. Samples for tritium
analysis are collected on a semiannual basis. In
the past, one of these semiannual tritium analyses
was done by the conventional analysis method; the
other analysis was done by the enrichment
method. In April 1993 this procedure was changed
so that both annual tritium analyses are completed
by the enrichment method.
Over the last decade, only three sites have
evidenced detectable tritium activity on a consistent
basis. These three sites are in Nevada, namely
Lake Mead Intake (Boulder City), Adaven Spring
(Adaven), and Specie Springs (Beatty). In all three
cases, the tritium activity represents environmental
levels that have been generally decreasing over
time.
In 1993, five of the samples analyzed for tritium by
the enrichment method yielded detectable tritium
activities. The January result for Adaven Spring of
31 ± 2 pCi/L and the July result of 36 ± 2 pCi/L
were consistent with tritium levels noted in recent
years as shown in Figure 28. The September
result for Lake Mead Intake was 54 ± 2 pCi/L as
indicated in Figure 29. These results were similar
to results obtained in 1992. This surface water site
may be impacted by rainfall containing scavenged
atmospheric tritium to a greater extent than the
well and spring sites in the offsite network. The
sample collected in July from Species Springs
yielded a tritium concentration of 18 ± 2 pCi/L and
the December sample was 20 + 2 pCi/L. Tritium
results for all samples are shown in Table D-1,
Appendix D. No gamma-emitting radionuclides
were detected in any sample taken in 1993 from
the network.
7.4 Hydrological Monitoring At
Other United States
Nuclear Device Testing
Locations
In addition to the groundwater monitoring
conducted on and in the vicinity of the NTS,
monitoring is conducted under the LTHMP at sites
of past nuclear device testing in other parts of the
U.S. Annual sampling of surface and ground
waters is conducted at the Projects SHOAL and
FAULTLESS sites in Nevada, the Projects
GASBUGGY and GNOME sites in New Mexico,
the Projects RULISON and RIO BLANCO sites in
Colorado, and the Project DRIBBLE site in
Mississippi. Additionally, sampling is conducted
every two years on Amchitka Island, Alaska, site of
Projects CANNIKIN, LONG SHOT, and MILROW;
sampling was conducted in 1993. The primary
purposes of this portion of the LTHMP are to
ensure the safety of public drinking water supplies
and, where suitable sampling points are available,
to monitor any migration of radionuclides from the
test cavity. The following subsections summarize
results of sampling conducted in 1993; analytical
results for all samples are provided in Appendix C.
The sampling procedure is the same as that used
for sites on the NTS and offsite areas (described in
Section 7.1.2), with the exception that two 3.8-L
samples are collected in Cubitainers. The second
sample serves as a backup or as a duplicate
sample. Because of the variability noted in past
years in samples obtained from the shallow
monitoring wells near Project DRIBBLE ground
zero (GZ), the sampling procedure was modified.
A second sample is now taken after pumping for a
specified period of time or after the well has been
pumped dry and permitted to refill with water.
These second samples may be more representa-
tive of formation water, whereas the first samples
may be more indicative of recent area rainfall.
7.4.1 Project FAULTLESS
Project FAULTLESS was a "calibration test"
conducted on January 19, 1968, in a sparsely
populated area near Blue Jay Maintenance Station,
Nevada. The test had a yield of less than 1 Mt
and was designed to test the behavior of seismic
waves and to determine the usefulness of the site
for high-yield tests. The emplacement depth was
68
-------
Adaven Springs
600:
500:
400:
300
200
100
0
x x X XX
JAN74 JAN78 JAN82 JAN86
Sample Collection Date
Figure 28. Tritium Results in Water from Adaven Springs, Nevada.
JAN90
JAN94
Lake Mead Intake
300
200-
E
s
100
0
* *
i
X X<
XX
X
JAN82 JAN85 JAN88
Sample Collection Date
Figure 29. Trend of Tritium Results in Water from Lake Mead, Nevada.
JAN91
JAN94
69
-------
975 m (3200 ft). A surface crater formed, but as
an irregular block along local faults rather than as
a saucer-shaped depression.
Sampling was conducted on March 16,17, and 23,
1993. Sampling locations are shown in Figure 30.
Routine sampling locations include one spring and
five wells of varying depths. Six Mile Well was not
sampled this year because the pump motor was
missing. All of the sampling locations are being
used as, or are suitable for, drinking water
supplies. At least two wells (HTH-1 and HTH-2)
are positioned to intercept migration from the test
cavity, should it occur (Chapman and Hokett,
1991). All samples yielded negligible gamma
activity. The only sample with tritium activity
greater than the MDC was from Blue Jay
Maintenance Station, 7.3 ±1.8 pCi/L, which is less
than 0.01 percent of the DCG (Table D-2,
Appendix D). These results for tritium indicate
that, to date, migration of radioactivity into the
sampled wells, and into the area drinking water
supplies, has not occurred.
7.4.2 Project SHOAL
Project SHOAL, a 12-kt test emplaced at 365 m
(1200 ft), was conducted on October 26, 1963, in
a sparsely populated area near Frenchman Station,
Nevada. The test, a part of the Vela Uniform
Program, was designed to investigate detection of
a nuclear detonation in an active earthquake zone.
The working point was in granite and no surface
crater was formed.
Samples were collected on February 24 and 25,
1993. Five of the six routine sampling locations
shown in Figure 31 were sampled at that time. No
sample was collected from Spring Windmill
because the well has been removed. Samples and
sites deleted from the routine sampling locations
include one spring, one windmill, and four wells of
varying depths. At least one location, Well HS-1,
should intercept radioactivity migration from the
test cavity, should it occur (Chapman and Hokett,
1991).
No gamma activity was detected in any of the
samples. A tritium result of 62 + 2 pCi/L was
detected in the water sample from Smith/James
Spring, equivalent to 0.07 percent of the DCG
(see Table D-3, Appendix D). All of the remaining
samples yielded tritium results less than the MDC.
The result for Smith/James Springs is consistent
with values obtained in previous samples shown in
Figure 32. It is unlikely that the tritium source is
the Project SHOAL cavity; the most probable
source is assumed to be rainwater infiltration.
Because Well H-3 had not been sampled since
1986, analyses of 89'90Sr and Pu and U isotopes
were completed in addition to tritium analysis.
Results were less than the MDC of the analysis for
strontium, plutonium, and 235U. Uranium-234 and
238U were detected at low levels (0.14 ± 0.02 pCi/L
of 234U and 0.042 ± 0.011 pCi/L of 238U) and are
probably of natural origin.
7.4.3 Project RULISON
Co-sponsored by AEC and Austral Oil Co. under
the Plowshare Program, Project RULISON was
designed to stimulate natural gas recovery in the
Mesa Verde formation. The test, conducted near
Rifle, Colorado on September 10, 1969, consisted
of a 43-kt nuclear explosive emplaced at a depth
of 2568 m (8426 ft). Production testing began in
1970 and was completed in April 1971. Cleanup
was initiated in 1972 and wells were plugged in
1976. Some surface contamination resulted from
decontamination of drilling equipment and fallout
from gas flaring. Soil was removed during the
cleanup operations.
Sampling was completed on June 16, 1993, with
collection of nine samples in the area of Grand
Valley and Rulison, Colorado. Routine sampling
locations, depicted in Figure 33, include the Grand
Valley municipal drinking water supply springs,
water supply wells for five local ranches, and three
sites in the vicinity of GZ, including one test well, a
surface-discharge spring, and a surface sampling
location on Battlement Creek. An analysis of the
sampling locations performed by Desert Research
Institute (DRI) indicated that none of the sampling
locations are likely to detect migration of
radionuclides from the test cavity (Chapman and
Hokett, 1991).
Tritium has never been observed in measurable
concentrations in the Grand Valley City Springs.
The sample collected in 1993 from Potter's Ranch
was invalidated following analysis. All of the
remaining sampling sites show detectable levels of
tritium, which have generally exhibited a
decreasing to stable trend over the last two
decades. The range of tritium activity in the 1993
samples was 116 ± 3 pCi/L at Lee Hayward Ranch
70
-------
,• HTH2
'• HTH1
s
Hot Creek
Ranch
Six-Mile Well
Jim Bias Well
(Blue Jay Springs)
Blue Jay
Maintenance
Station
Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
Scale in Miles
10
Scale in Kilometers
NYE
COUNTY
LOCATION MAP
Figure 30. LTHMP Sampling Locations for Project FAULTLESS - 1993
71
-------
Fallon
Flowing Well
Hunt's Station
H-3
• HS-1
Smith/James
Spring
CHURCHILL COUNTY
MINERAL COUNTY
Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
Not Sampled This Year
LOCATION MAP
Scale in Miles
5
0 5 10 15
Scale in Kilometers
CHURCHILL
COUNTY
Figure 31. LTHMP Sampling Location for Project SHOAL 1993
72
-------
Smith/James Spring
80 :
70
60 H
& 50H
40 H
30-
20-
10-
0-
X
X
X
X
X
01/01/86
01/01/88
01/01/90
Sample Collection Date
Figure 32. Tritium Results for Water from Smith/James Spring, Nevada.
01/01/92
01/01/94
to 49 ± 2 pCi/L in the sample from Battlement
Creek (see Table D-4, Appendix D). These values
are less than one percent of the DCG. The
detectable tritium activities are probably a result of
the natural high background in the area. This is
supported by the DRI analysis, which indicated that
most of the sampling locations are shallow,
drawing water from the surficial aquifer which is
unlikely to become contaminated by any
radionuclides arising from the Project RULISON
cavity (Chapman and Hokett, 1991). Figure 34
displays data for the last 20 years for Lee Hayward
Ranch. The low value obtained in 1990 may be
attributed to analytical bias and was observed
consistently for all Project RULISON sampling
locations.
7.4.4 Project RIO BLANCO
Like Project RULISON, Project RIO BLANCO was
a joint government-industry test designed to
stimulate natural gas flow and was conducted
under the Plowshare Program. The test was
conducted on May 17, 1973, at a location between
Rifle and Meeker, Colorado. Three explosives with
a total yield of 90 kt were emplaced at 1780-,
1920-, and 2040-m (5838-, 6229-, and 6689-ft)
depths in the Ft. Union and Mesa Verde
formations. Production testing continued to 1976;
tritiated water produced during testing was injected
to 1710 m (5600 ft) in a nearby gas wells.
Cleanup and restoration activities were completed
by November 1976.
Samples were collected on June 17 and 18, 1993.
The sampling sites, shown in Figure 35, include
two shallow domestic water supply wells, six
surface water sites along Fawn Creek, three
springs, and three monitoring wells located near
the cavity. At least two of the monitoring wells
(wells RB-D-01 and RB-D-03) are suitable for
monitoring possible migration of radioactivity from
the cavity. Tritium activity in the three springs
ranged from 49 to 58 pCi/L. These values are
<0.1 percent of the DCG (see Table D-5, Appendix
73
-------
Searcy
Ranch
Grand Valley
City Springs
><
Grand Valley •* -
Potter Ranch
S
Rulison
Sefcovic Ranch
Gardner
Ranch Test Well
Hayward Ranch
\
•\BattlementCreek
Spring
N
Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
Scale in Miles
0 5
LOCATION MAP
0 8
Scale in Kilometers
GARFIELD
COUNTY
Figure 33. LTHMP Sampling Locations for Project RULISON - 1993
74
-------
Lee Hayward Ranch
50CH
400-
5 300
g
E
13
|E 200 :
100-
o-
x x x x x
JAN74
JAN78
JAN82 JAN86
Sample Collection Date
Figure 34. Tritium Trends in Groundwater, Hayward Ranch, Colorado.
JAN90
JAN94
D). A generally decreasing trend in tritium activity
is evident in the three springs; Figure 36 depicts
tritium results from one of the three springs. Only
one of the two shallow domestic wells located near
the Project RIO BLANCO site yielded detectable
tritium (7.0 ± 2.0 pCi/L from the Brennan Windmill
sample). Two of the Fawn Creek surface sites
were analyzed by the conventional tritium method,
yielding results less than the MDC. The tritium
activity observed in the remaining four sites ranged
from 28 to 39 pCi/L, less than 0.1 percent of the
DCG. There is no statistically significant difference
between sites located upstream and downstream
of the cavity area. The three monitoring wells all
yielded no detectable tritium activity, indicating that
migration from the test cavity has not yet been
detected. No gamma activity was detected in any
sample.
7.4.5 Project GNOME
Project GNOME, conducted on December 10,
1961, near Carlsbad, New Mexico, was a multipur-
pose test conducted in a salt formation. A slightly
more than three kiloton nuclear explosive was
emplaced at a depth of 1216 ft in the Salado salt
formation. Oil and gas are produced from the
geologic units below the working point. The
overlying Rustler formation contains three water-
bearing zones: brine located at the boundary of
the Rustler and Salado formations, the Culebra
Dolomite which is used for domestic and stock
supplies, and the Magenta Dolomite which is
above the zone of saturation (Chapman and
Hokett, 1991). The groundwater flow is generally
to the west and southwest.
Radioactive gases were unexpectedly vented
during the test. In 1963, USGS conducted a tracer
study involving injection of 20 Ci tritium, 10 Ci
137Cs, 10 Ci 90Sr, and 4 Ci 131I in the Culebra
75
-------
Johnson
Artesian Well
fii i|/Fawn Cr. No. 1
ER-1* H
B-1 Equity
Camp
Brennan
Windmill
Fawn Cr.8400'
Downstream
Fawn Cr.500 Downstream
RB-D-01
RB-D-03 > 3
RB-S-03
Fawn Cr.500'
Upstream
Fawn Cr. 6800
Upstream m JM Fawn Cr. No. 3
Scale in Kilometers
RIO BLANCO COUNTY
GARFI ETD*Co"u NTY
LOCATION MAP
Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
RIO BLANCO
COUNTY
Figure 35. LTHMP Sampling Locations for Project RIO BLANCO, Colorado.
76
-------
CER No. 4, RIO BLANCO
140-
130
120 -
110-
100
90-
80-
70-
60-
50
30
20:
10-
0-
X
X
X
X
JAN76 JAN79 JAN82 JAN85 JAN88
Sample Collection Date
Figure 36. Tritium Results in Water from CER No. 4, RIO BLANCO, Colorado.
JAN91
JAN94
Dolomite zone; wells USGS 4 and 8 were used for
this tracer study. During remediation activities in
1968-69, contaminated material was placed in the
test cavity and shaft up to within 7 ft of the surface.
More material was slurried into the cavity and drifts
in 1979. There is a potential for discharge of this
slurry to the Culebra Dolomite and to Rustler-
Salado brine. This potential may increase as the
salt around the cavity will compress, forcing con-
tamination upward and distorting and cracking the
concrete stem and grout.
Annual sampling at Project GNOME was
completed between June 26 and 28, 1993. The
routine sampling sites, depicted in Figure 37,
include nine monitoring wells in the vicinity of
surface GZ, the municipal supplies at Loving and
Carlsbad, New Mexico. The Pecos River Pumping
Station well is no longer sampled. A new sampling
location added in 1993 is the J. Mobley Ranch
located near Loving, New Mexico. The sampling
site is a 50m (165 ft) deep well used to supply
drinking water. No tritium activity above the MDC
was detected in the Carlsbad municipal supply.
Tritium concentrations of 9.1 ± 1.7 pCi/L in the
Loving municipal supply and of 4.9 ± 1.5 pCi/L in
the J. Mobley Ranch well were detected. An
analysis by DRI (Chapman and Hokett, 1991)
indicates these three sampling locations, located
on the opposite side of the Pecos River from the
Project GNOME site, are not connected
hydrologically to the site and, therefore, cannot
become contaminated by Project GNOME
radionuclides except via surface pathways.
Tritium results greater than the MDC were detected
in water samples from six of the water samples
taken in the immediate vicinity of GZ. Tritium
activities in wells DD-1, LRL-7. USGS-4, and
USGS-8 ranged from 7300 ± 150 pCi/L in Well
LRL-7 to 7.4 x 107 ± 3.2 x 10s pCi/L in Well DD-1.
These wells all sample nonpotable water. Well
DD-1 collects water from the test cavity. Well LRL
7 collects water from a side drift. Wells USGS-4
and USGS-8 were used in the radionuclide tracer
study conducted by USGS. In addition to tritium,
77
-------
Carlsbad
Carlsbad
City |
Well?
PHSWellQ
PHSWelMO
Loving City
Well 2
PHS Well 6 •
• PHS Well 8
Pecos River
Pumping Station
Well!
N
Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
Scale in Miles
5 10
0 5 10 15
Scale in Kilometers
EDDY
COUNTY
LOCATION MAP
Figure 37. LTHMP Sampling Locations for Project GNOME - 1993
78
-------
samples from wells DD-1, LRL-7, and USGS-8,
were analyzed for several radionuclides, with
results obtained as shown in (Table D-6, Appendix
D). With the exception of Well DD-1, the
concentrations of these radionuclides decreased
from 1992 results (see Figure 38). Results for both
cesium-137 and strontium-90 increased in Well
DD-1 over 1992 results. Wells PHS-6 and PHS-8
also showed detectable tritium concentrations
above the MDC. Observed results were 30 ± 2
and 9.0 ± 1.7 pCi/L, respectively. These results
were less than 0.04 percent of the DCG.
7.4.6 Project GASBUGGY
Project GASBUGGY was a Plowshare Program
test co-sponsored by the U.S. Government and El
Paso Natural Gas Co. Conducted near
Gobernador, New Mexico on December 10, 1967,
the test was designed to stimulate a low
productivity natural gas reservoir. A nuclear
explosive with a 29-kt yield was emplaced at a
depth of 1290 m (4240 ft). Production testing was
completed in 1976 and restoration activities were
completed in July 1978.
The principal aquifers are the Ojo Alamo Sand-
stone, an aquifer containing non-potable water
located above the test cavity, the San Jose
formation and Nacimiento formation, both surficial
aquifers containing potable water. The flow regime
of the San Juan Basin is not well known, although
it is likely that the Ojo Alamo Sandstone discharg-
es to the San Juan River 50 miles northwest of the
Gasbuggy site. Hydrologic gradients in the vicinity
are downward, but upward gas migration is possi-
ble (Chapman and Hokett, 1991).
Sampling was conducted June 20 through 25,
1993. Twelve samples were collected. No sample
was collected from Well 30.3.32.343 N as the
pump has been removed. The Old School House
Well, first sampled in 1991, was sealed by the
state of New Mexico in 1992, thus ending plans to
add this station to the routine sampling directory.
Well LRL-7
40000-
30000-
20000-
10000-
0
X X X X X
JAN74 JAN78 JAN82 JAN86 JAN90
Sample Collection Date
Figure 38. Tritium Results in Water from Well LRL-7 near Project GNOME, New Mexico.
JAN94
79
-------
The routine sampling locations include six wells,
one windmill, three springs, and two surface water
sites, depicted in Figure 39. The two surface water
sampling sites yielded tritium activities of 36 ± 1.8
pCi/L and 41 ± 1.8 pCi/L. These values are 0.04 to
0.05 percent of the DCG. The three springs
yielded tritium activities ranging from 20 ± 1.9 pCi/L
to 49 ± 1.9 pCi/L, which are less than 0.1 percent
of the DCG and similar to the range seen in
previous years. Tritium activities in three shallow
wells which were sampled this year varied from
less than the MDC to 40 ± 1.9 pCi/L, which is 0.04
percent of the DCG. The sample collected from
the windmill was less than the MDC. Analytical
results are presented in Table D-7, Appendix D.
Well EPNG 10-36, a gas well located 132 m (435
ft) northwest of the test cavity with a sampling
depth of approximately 1100 m (3600 ft), had
yielded tritium activities between 100 and 560
pCi/L in each year since 1984, except 1987. The
sample collected in 1993 yielded a tritium activity
of 330 ± 3.5 pCi/L and cesium-137 activity of 16 ±
3.9 pCi/L. The tritium activity is roughly the same
as observed in 1992, but the cesium-137 activity
represents an increase over results obtained in
previous years.
The continued presence of fission products in
samples collected from EPNG 10-36 confirms that
migration from the Project GASBUGGY cavity is
occurring. The migration mechanism and route are
not currently known, although an analysis by DRI
indicated two feasible routes, one through the
Painted Cliffs sandstone and the other through the
Ojo Alamo sandstone, one of the principal aquifers
in the region (Chapman, 1991). In either case,
fractures extending from the cavity may be the
primary or a contributing mechanism.
7.4.7 Project DRIBBLE
Project DRIBBLE was comprised of four explosive
tests, two nuclear and two gas, conducted in the
Tatum Salt Dome area of Mississippi under the
Vela Uniform Program. The purpose of Project
DRIBBLE was to study the effects of decoupling on
seismic signals produced by explosives tests. The
first test, SALMON, was a nuclear device with a
yield of about 5 kt, detonated on October 22, 1964,
at a depth of 826 m (2710 ft). This test created
the cavity used for the subsequent tests, including
STERLING, a nucleartest conducted on December
3, 1966, with a yield of about 380 tons, and the
two gas explosions, DIODE TUBE, conducted on
February 2,1969, and HUMID WATER, conducted
on April 19,1970. The ground surface and shallow
groundwater aquifers were contaminated by
disposal of drilling muds and fluids in surface pits.
The radioactive contamination was primarily limited
to the unsaturated zone and upper, non-potable
aquifers. Shallow wells, labeled HMH wells on
Figure 40, have been added to the area near
surface GZ to monitor this contamination. In
addition to the monitoring wells surrounding GZ,
extensive sampling is conducted in the nearby
offsite area. Most private drinking water supply
wells are included, as shown in Figure 41.
Sampling on and in the vicinity of the Salmon Test
Site was conducted between April 18 through 21,
1993. A total of 109 samples were collected; two
of these were from new sampling locations in
Lumberton, Mississippi. One offsite resident
withdrew from the sampling program (Johnny
Hudson Quail House), and one residence changed
owners (the B. Chambliss location is now identified
as Billy Hibley).
In the 52 samples collected from offsite sampling
locations, tritium activities ranged from less than
the MDC to 37 ± 1.8 pCi/L, equivalent to 0.04
percent of the DCG. These results do not exceed
the natural tritium activity expected in rainwater in
the area. In general, results for each location were
similar to results obtained in previous years. Long-
term decreasing trends in tritium concentrations are
evident only for a few locations, such as the
Baxterville City Well, depicted in Figure 42. Low
levels of uranium isotopes were detected in both of
the two new sampling locations with greater than
MDC values for 234U at one location and for 235U
and 238U at both locations. Results are listed in the
footnotes of Table D-8, Appendix D. These low
levels are probably of natural origin.
Due to the high rainfall in the area, the normal
sampling procedure is modified for the shallow
onsite wells. Following collection of a first sample,
the well is pumped for a set period of time or until
dry and a second sample is collected the next day.
The second samples are thought to be more
representative of the formation water. Of 32
locations sampled onsite, (7 sites sampled once,
the remainder sampled twice) 26 yielded tritium
activities greater than the MDC in either the first or
second sample. Of these, eleven yielded results
higher than normal background (approximately 60
pCi/L). Overall, tritium activities ranged from less
80
-------
To Dulce
Bixler Ranch I
64
• Pond N. of
Well 30.3.32.343N
To Blanco &
Gobernador
Bubbling
Springs
EPNG Well 10-36
Cedar Springs •
Cave Springs •
La Jara Creek
Windmill 2 Jicarilla WeN
Arnold Ranch D
Lower Burro
Canyon
Well 28.3.33.233 (South)
LOCATION MAP
Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
Not Sampled this year
Scale in Miles
0 5
Scale in Kilometers
RIO
ARRIBA
COUNTY
NEW
MEXICO
Figure 39. LTHMP Sampling Locations for Project GASBUGGY 1993
81
-------
HMH-16
Former
Decontamination
Pad Location
HMH-12 '.Bridge
\
Hunting
Club Well
Half
HMH-10 M Mc?eek
Overflow
HM-2
HM-3
HMH-1
HM-2B
HHMH-11
HMH-2 BHMH-9
Scale in Meters
100
Location/water sample
Surface Ground Zero
Figure 40. LTHMP Sampling Locations for Project DRIBBLE, Near Ground Zero - 1993
82
-------
• B. Dennis
• M. Dennis
• Columbia City Little Creek #1 -
Well64B Lee Anderson-i
Hewle Gipson Jim Bilbo-,
| Yancy Saucier
Herman Gipson
Lower Little Creek #2 •
Gil Ray's Crawfish Pond
. Thompson
Willie Surge
Joe Burge
Salt Dome Timber Co.
Howard
Smith Pond
E. J. Smith!
Sylvester Graham
Lee L. Saul
Phil Gipson Mills
Roy Mills
B. Chambliss R King
Anderson's Pond
B.R.Anderson
P.T. Lee
R.H.Anderson
E.Cox
W.H. Noble Jr.
G.W. Anderson
Noble's Pond
Tatum Hunting
Club
D.
Rushing
Ray Hartfield
S. Powers and
Bond (2)
Regiha Anlerson
. Jr.
Daniel's Fish
Pond Well #2
Baxterville
City Well
Lumberton
City Well 2
Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
Not Sampled This Year
Scale in Miles
1 2
MISSI
01234
Scale in Kilometers
LAMAR
COUNTY
LOCATION MAP
Figure 41. LTHMP Sampling Locations for Project DRIBBLE, Towns and Residences 1993
83
-------
than the MDC to 7.79 x 103 ± 150 pCi/L, as shown
in Table D-8, Appendix D. The locations where the
highest tritium activities were measured generally
correspond to areas of known contamination.
Decreasing trends were noted for the wells where
high tritium activities have historically been noted,
such as Well HM-S depicted in Figure 43. Results
of sampling related to Project DRIBBLE are
discussed in greater detail in Onsite and Offsite
Environmental Monitoring Report: Radiation
Monitoring around Salmon Test Site, Lamar
County, Mississippi, April 1993 (Max G. Davis).
7.4.8 AMCHITKA ISLAND, ALASKA
Three nuclear weapons tests were conducted on
Amchitka Island in the Aleutian Island chain of
Alaska. Project LONG SHOT, conducted on
October 29,1965, was an 85-kt test under the Vela
Uniform Program, designed to investigate seismic
phenomena. Project MILROW, conducted on
October 2, 1969, was an approximately 1-Mt
"calibration test" of the seismic and environmental
responses to the detonation of large-yield nuclear
explosives. Project CANNIKIN, conducted on
November 6,1971, was a proof test of the Spartan
antiballistic missile warhead with less than a 5-Mt
yield. Project LONG SHOT resulted in some
surface contamination, even though the chimney
did not extend to the surface.
Amchitka Island is composed of several hundred
feet of permeable tundra overlaying tertiary vol-
canics. The groundwater system consists of a
freshwater lens floating on seawater; estimates of
the depth to the saline freshwater-interface range
from 3900 to 5250 ft (Chapman and Hokett, 1991).
It is likely that any migration from the test cavities
would discharge to the nearest salt water body,
Project MILROW to the Pacific Ocean and Projects
LONG SHOT and CANNIKIN to the Bering Sea
(Chapman and Hokett, 1991). The sampling
locations on Amchitka Island are shallow wells and
surface sampling sites. Therefore, the monitoring
network for Amchitka Island is restricted to monitor-
ing of surface contamination and drinking water
Baxterville, MS Public Drinking Water Supply
100-
90-
80-
70-
60-
50-
40-
30-
20-
10-
0:
I U
5
I *
II
x
x
X
X
~^ ' ' ' ' ' ' I ' ' I—I I' I—I—i—I—i—i—i—i—i—'—i—i—'—I—I—I—I—I—\—r—i—i—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—I—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—
i i i ' '.«
JAN70 JAN74 JAN78 JAN82 JAN86 JAN90 JAN94
Sample Collection Date
Figure 42. Tritium Result Trends in Baxterville, MS Public Drinking Water Supply - 1993
84
-------
Well HM-S, Salmon Site, Project DRIBBLE
Tritium vs Normal Tritium Decay
40000-
30000-
O 20000
10000-
0-
X
X X X X
JAN79 JAN82 JAN85 JAN88
Sample Collection Date
Figure 43. Tritium Results in Well HM-S, Salmon Site, Project DRIBBLE.
JAN91
JAN94
supplies.
Sampling on Amchitka Island, Alaska, is conducted
every other year. Results for samples taken July
29 to Aug 1, 1993 are shown in Table D-9,
Appendix D. All samples were above the MDC for
tritium. The water from the background sites had
tritium concentrations ranging from 4.5 ± 1.7 in a
rain sample collected at the Base Camp to 30 ±
1.7 pCi/L at Constantine Spring Pump House,
corresponding to 0.01 to 0.03 of the DCG.
Samples from Project Cannikin site yielded tritium
concentrations ranging from 16 ± 1.6 pCi/L to 23 ±
1.8 pCi/L; 0.02 to 0.03 percent of the DCG.
Project Milrow samples yielded tritium
concentrations ranging from 13 ± 1.6 pCi/L to 36 ±
2.0 pCi/L, corresponding to 0.01 to 0.04 percent of
the DCG.
The highest tritium concentrations were observed
in samples collected from Project Long Shot sites,
ranging from 10 ± 1.1 pCi/L to 1.4 x 103 ± 130
pCi/L, equivalent to 0.01 to 1.6 percent of the
concentration guide. The highest tritium result was
obtained from well GZ No. 1, located near the
Project Long Shot cavity. Figure 44 depicts the
decreasing trend in tritium activity in this well.
An analysis of the monitoring locations by DRI
indicated that none of the sites are suitable for
detection of migration (Chapman and Hoketl,
1991). Migration from the Project Milrow cavity
would likely discharge to the Pacific Ocean, while
the Bering Sea is the likely discharge area for
migration from Projects Long Shot and Cannikin.
7.5 Summary
None of the domestic water supplies monitored in
the LTHMP in 1993 yielded tritium activities of any
health concern. The greatest tritium activity mea-
sured in any water body which has potential to be
a drinking water supply was less than one percent
of the limit prescribed by the NPDWRs. In general,
surface water and spring samples yielded tritium
85
-------
Well GZ No.1
£
8000-
7000-
6000-
5000-
4000 :
3000 -
2000 :
1000 :
o
* *
X
v
X
T
JAN74
JAN94
Figure 44.
JAN78 JAN82 JAN86 JAN90
Sample Collection Date
Tritium Results in Water from Well GZ No. 1 near Project LONGSHOT, Amchitka
Island, Alaska.
activities greater than those observed in shallow
domestic wells in the same area. This is probably
due to scavenging of atmospheric tritium by
precipitation. Where suitable monitoring wells
exist, there were no indications that migration from
any test cavity is affecting any domestic water
supply.
In most cases, monitoring wells also yielded no
radionuclide activity above the MDC. Exceptions
include wells into test cavities, wells monitoring
known areas of contamination, and one well at
GASBUGGY. Known areas of contamination exist
at Project GNOME where USGS conducted a
tracer study experiment, some areas onsite at
Project DRIBBLE, and a few surface areas near
Project LONG SHOT. The 1993 results for these
monitoring wells are consistent with decreasing
trends observed over time. Monitoring well EPNG
10-36 at Project GASBUGGY was a notable
exception to wells showing decreasing trends.
This well is a former gas well located 435 feet
northwest of SGZ. The sampling depth of this well
is approximately 3600 ft in the Ojo Alamo Sand-
stone, an aquifer containing nonpotable water.
The tritium activity in 1992 was 364 ± 3.4 pCi/L
and in 1991 was 484 ± 4.2 pCi/L, approximately 10
times the historic background activity. An increase
in tritium activity was first observed in 1984,
seventeen years after the test was conducted. In
every year since then, with the exception of 1987,
tritium activities have been between 100 and 560
pCi/L, with wide variability sometimes noted
between consecutive years. The proximity of the
well to the test cavity suggests the possibility that
the increased activity may be indicative of
migration from the test cavity.
86
-------
1. The NPDWR states that the sum of all beta/gamma emitter concentrations in drinking water cannot
lead to a dose exceeding 4 mrem/year, assuming a person were to drink two liters per day for a year
(40 CFR 141). Assuming tritium to be the only radioactive contaminant yields a maximum allowable
concentration of 2 x 104 pCi/L.
2. The NPDWR applies only to public systems with at least 15 hookups or 25 users. Although many of
the drinking water supplies monitored in the LTHMP serve fewer users and are therefore exempt, the
regulations provide a frame of reference for any observed radionuclide activity.
3. The derived concentration guide (DCG) used in this report is 90,000 pCi/L of tritium in water. This
DCG is taken from the ALI for 3H in ICRP-30 modified for a maximum dose of 4 mrem/year for
ingestion of beta/gamma emitters in water, assuming consumption of two liters of water per day and
assuming tritium to be the only radioactive contaminant. The current U.S. standard given in the
National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (40 CFR 141), although based on the same maximum
dose and assumptions, specifically limits tritium to 20,000 pCi/L in drinking water. A revision of
standard has been proposed which will, when enacted, raise the permissible tritium concentration to
63,000 pCi/L in U.S. drinking water.
4. In the time series plots used as figures in this section and the one that follows, the filled circles
represent the result value, the error bars indicate ± one standard deviation of the analysis, and the (x)
represents the MDC value.
87
-------
8. Dose Assessment
Four pathways of possible radiation exposure to
the population of Nevada were monitored by EPA's
offsite monitoring networks during 1993. The four
pathways were:
• Background radiation due to natural sourc-
es such as cosmic radiation, natural radio-
activity in soil, and 7Be in air.
• Worldwide distributions of radioactivity,
such as 90Sr in milk, 8SKr in air, and plu-
tonium in soil.
• Operational releases of radioactivity from
the NTS, including those from drillback
and purging activities.
• Radioactivity accumulated in migratory
game animals during their residence on
the NTS.
8.1 Estimated Dose From
Nevada Test Site Activity
Data
The potential Committed Effective Dose Equivalent
(CEDE) to the offsite population due to NTS
activities is estimated annually. Two methods are
used to calculate the CEDE to a resident of the
community potentially most impacted by airborne
releases of radioactivity from the NTS. In the first
method, effluent release estimates and
meteorological data are used as inputs to EPA's
CAP88-PC model. The second method uses data
from the ORSP with documented assumptions and
conversion factors to calculate the CEDE. Both
methods provide an estimate of the CEDE to a
hypothetical person who would have to have been
continuously present in one outdoor location. In
addition, a collective CEDE is calculated by the
first method for the total offsite population residing
within 80 km (50 mi) of the NTS. Background
radiation measurements are used to provide a
comparison with the calculated CEDEs. In the
absence of detectable releases of radiation from
the NTS, the PIC Network provides a
measurement of background gamma radiation in
the offsite area.
The extensive offsite environmental surveillance
system operated around the NTS by EPA
EMSL-LV measured no radiation exposures that
could be attributed to recent NTS operations. The
Committed Effective Dose Equivalent (CEDE) to
the maximally exposed offsite residents resulted in
a maximum dose of 3.8 x 10'3 mrem (3.8 x 10'5
mSv) to a hypothetical resident of Indian Springs,
Nevada 54 km (32 mi) southeast of the NTS CP-I.
This value was based on onsite source emission
measurements and estimates provided by DOE
and calculated by EPA's CAP88-PC model. The
calculated population dose (collective effective
dose equivalent) to the approximately 21,750
residents living within 80 km (50 mi) from each of
the NTS airborne emission sources was 1.2 x 102
person-rem (1.2 x 10~4 person-Sv). Monitoring
network data indicated a 1993 dose of 97 mrem
(0.97 mSv) from normal background radiation
occurred in Indian Springs. The calculated dose to
this individual from world-wide distributions of
radioactivity as measured from surveillance
networks was 0.054 mrem (5.4 x 10~4 mSv). An
additional CEDE of 0.56 mrem (5.6 x 10~3 mSv)
would be received if edible tissues from a chukar
and contaminated deer collected on the NTS were
to be consumed. All of these maximum dose
estimates are about one percent of the most
restrictive standard.
Onsite source emission measurements, as
provided by DOE, are listed in Table 19 and
include tritium, radioactive noble gases, and
radioiodine. These are estimates of releases made
at the point of origin. Meteorological data collected
by the Weather Service Nuclear Support Office
(WSNSO) were used to construct wind roses,
indicating the prevailing winds for the following
areas: Desert Rock, Area 12, Area 20, Yucca Flat,
and RWMS in Area 5. A calculation of estimated
dose from NTS effluents was performed using
EPA's CAP88-PC model (EPA 1992). The
population living within a radius of 80 km (50 mi)
from each of the sources was estimated to be
21,750 individuals, based on 1991 DOC. The
collective population dose within 80 km (50 mi)
from these sources was calculated to be 1.2 x 10"2
person-rem (1.2 x 10'4 person-Sv). Activity
concentrations in air that would cause these
calculated doses are much higher than actually
detected by the offsite monitoring network. For
88
-------
Table 19. NTS Radionuclide Discharges and Releases - 1993
Onsite Liquid Discharges
Curies(a)
Containment Ponds
Gross Beta
3H
90,
Sr
137,
Cs
238
Pu
239+240
Pu
Area 12, E Tunnel
Area 12, N Tunnel
Area 12, T Tunnel
2.8X1Q-3 6.0 X 101 2.0
3.6 X 10'1
4.1 X1CT3 6.5 X102
7.8 X 10'4 1.8X 10'5 1.6 X 1Q-4
2.6 X 107
3.9 X 10'7 1.2 X 10'5
TOTAL
6.9 X10'3 7.1 X 102 2.0X10-" 7.8 X10'4
1.8X1Q-5 1.7X10-'
Facility Name
(Airborne Releases)
Airborne Effluent Releases
Curies'5
239+240
Pu
Area 3(0)
Area 5, RWMS(C>
Area 9 Bunked
Area 12, P Tunnel Portal(d)
Areas 19 and 20, Pahute Mesa(c)
2.9 X 10'1
3.7X10°
1.6X10t2
1.0X10-3
7.5 X10'4
TOTAL
4.0X10° 1.6X10+2
1.8X
(a) Multiply by 3.7 X 1010 to obtain Bq. Calculated releases of transuranics from laboratory spills and
losses are shown in Table 20.
(b) In the form of tritiated water vapor, primarily HTO.
(c) Calculated from air sampler data.
(d) From measurements of air exhausted through ventilation duct.
example, 3.4 x 10-3mrem of the calculated CEDE
to the maximally exposed individual is due to
tritium. The annual average HTO in air
concentration that would cause this CEDE is 14
times that actually measured in Indian Springs.
Table 21 summarizes the annual contributions to
the CEDEs due to 1993 NTS operations as
calculated using CAP88-PC and the radionuclides
listed in Table 19 and Table 20.
Input data for the CAP88-PC model include
meteorological data from WSNSO and effluent
release data reported by DOE. The effluent
release data are estimates and the meteorological
89
-------
Table 20. Radionuclide Emissions on the NTS - 1993(a)
Radionuclide
3H
133Xe
239+240D..
Half-Life (years)
Airborne Releases
12.35
10.72
0.022
0.0144
24065
Quantity Released (Ci)
(c)3.7
160
(C)2.0X 10'6
0.04
(0)1.8X 10'3
(b)
Tunnel Ponds
3H
238pu
239+240 pu
90S|.
137Cs
Gross Beta
12.35
87.743
24065.
29
30.17
(d>710.
1.8 X 10'5
1.7X10-4
2.OX 104
7.8 X 10'4
6.9 X 10'3
(a) Assumes worst case point and diffuse source releases
(b) Multiply by 37 to obtain Gbq
(c) Includes calculated data from air sampling results and/or postulated loss of laboratory standards
(d) This amount is assumed to evaporate to become an airborne release
data are mesoscale; i.e., representative of an area
approximately 40 km (25 mi) or less around the
point of collection. However, these data are
considered sufficient for model input, primarily
because the model itself is not designed for
complex terrain such as that on and around the
NTS. Errors introduced by the use of the effluent
and meteorological data are small compared to the
errors inherent in the model. Results obtained by
using the CAP88-PC model are considered only
estimates of the dose to offsite residents although
these results are consistent with the data obtained
by offsite monitoring.
8.2 Estimated Dose From
ORSP Monitoring Network
Data
Potential CEDEs to individuals may be estimated
from the concentrations measured by the EPA
monitoring networks during 1993. Actual results
obtained in analysis are used; the majority of which
are less than the reported MDC. Data quality
objectives for precision and accuracy are, by
necessity, less stringent for values near the MDC
so confidence intervals around the input data are
90
-------
Table 21. Summary of Effective Dose Equivalents from NTS Operations during 1993
Dose
Location
NESHAP'01
Standard
Percentage
of NESHAP
Background
Percentage of
Background
Maximum EDE at
NTS Boundary'3'
4.8 x 10"3 mrem
(4.8 x 10'5mSv)
Site boundary 58 km
SSE of NTS Area 12
10 mrem per year
(0.1 mSv per yr)
0.05
97 mrem
(0.97 mSv)
5.Ox 1Q-3
Maximum EDE to
an Individual'111
Collective EDE to
Population within 80 km
of the NTS Sources
3.8 ± 0.57 x 10"3 mrem 1.2x10"2 person-rem
(3.8 x 10-6mSv)
(1.2 x 10'4 person-Sv)
Indian Springs, 80 km 21,750 people within
SSE of NTS Area 12 80 km of NTS Sources
10 mrem per year
(0.1 mSv per yr)
0.04
97 mrem
(0.97 mSv)
4.0 x 10'!
1747 person-rem
(17.5 person Sv)
6.9 x 10"
(a) The maximum boundary dose is to a hypothetical individual who remains in the open continuously
during the year at the NTS boundary located 60 km SSE from the Area 12 tunnel ponds.
(b) The maximum individual dose is to a person outside the NTS boundary at a residence where the
highest dose-rate occurs as calculated by CAP88-PC (Version 1.0) using NTS effluents listed in
Table 20 and assuming all tritiated water input to the Area 12 containment ponds was evaporated.
(c) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants.
broad. The concentrations of radioactivity detected
by the monitoring networks and used in the
calculation of potential CEDEs are shown in Table
22. The concentrations given in Table 22 are
expressed in terms of activity per unit volume,
weight, or time. These concentrations are
converted to a dose by using the assumptions and
dose conversion factors described below. The
dose conversion factors assume continuous
presence at a fixed location and no loss of
radioactivity in meat and vegetables through
storage and cooking.
• Adult respiration rate = 8,400 m3/yr (2.3 x
104L/day [ICRP 1975]).
Milk intake for a 10-year old child = 164
L/yr(ICRP 1975).
Consumption of beef liver = 0.5 Ib/wk (11.5
kg/yr).
An average deer has 100 Ib (45 kg) of
meat.
Water consumption for adult-reference man
= 2 L/day (approximately 1,900 mL/day
[ICRP 1975]).
91
-------
Table 22. Monitoring Networks Data used in Dose Calculations
Medium
Animals
Beef Liver
Radionuclide
Milk
Carrots
Pears
Turnips
Air
239+240
Pu
Deer Muscle 239+24opu
Deer Liver 239+24opu
Chukar 3H
90Sr
3H
Drinking Water 3H
Vegetables
Broccoli
239+240r
3H
3H
3H
7Be
85Kr
238pu
239+2401
Pu
Concentration
6.8 x 10'4pCi/g
(2.5 x 1CTsBo/g)
1.44x 10'3pCi/g
(5.3 x 1Q-5Bq/g)
9.48 x 1Q-4pCi/g
(3.5 x 1Q-5Bq/g)
3.3 x 103pCi/g
(1.2x 105Bq/g)
0.55 pCi/L
(0.020 Bq/L)
120 pCi/L
(4.4 Bq/L)
1.2 pCi/L
4.8 x 103pCi/g
(1.8x10-4Bq/g)
1 x 10'4pCi/g
(3.7x10-6Bq/g)
0.52 pCi/g
(0.019 Bq/g)
0.5 pCi/g
(0.019 Bq/g)
0.3 pCi/m3
(0.011 Bq/m3)
0.3 pCi/m3
(0.011 Bq/m3)
28 pCi/m3
(0.99 Bq/m3)
6.8x10-6pCi/m3
(2.5 x 1Q-7Bq/m3)
3.7x10-6pCi/m3
(1.4x 10-7Bq/m3)
Comment
Concentrations are the maximum
concentrations observed for each
animal tissue type
Maximum measured in one bird
Concentration is the average of
all network strontium results
Concentration is the average of
all network tritium results
Concentration is the average of
(0.04 Bq/L) results from the two
wells in Indian Springs, Nevada
Concentrations are maximum
observed for each sample type
Concentrations are average of
all results from the air network
92
-------
• Fresh vegetable consumption for North
America = 516 g/day (1.1 Ib/day) for a four-
month growing season (ICRP 1975).
The CEDE conversion factors are derived from
EPA-520/1-88-020 (Federal Guidance Report No.
11). Those used here are:
3H: 6.4 x 10'8 mrem/pCi (ingestion or
inhalation).
90Sr: 1.4 x 10'4 mrem/pCi (ingestion).
85Kr: 1.5x 10'5 mrem/yr/pCi/m3
(submersion).
. 238,239+240pu.
3.7 x 10~4 mrem/pCi (ingestion).
3.1 x 10"1 mrem/pCi (inhalation).
The algorithm for the dose calculation is:
(concentration) x (assumption in volume/unit time)
x (CEDE conversion factors) = CEDE
As an example calculation, the following is the
result of breathing tritium in air:
(3 x 10 "1 pCi/m3) x (8400 m3/yr) x (6.4 x 10'8
mrem/pCi) = 1.61 x 10"4 mrem/yr
However, in calculating the inhalation CEDE from
3H, the value is increased by 50 percent to account
for absorption through the skin. The total dose in
one year, therefore, is 1.61 x 10"4 mrem/yr x 1.5 =
2.4 x 10"4 mrem/yr. Dose calculations from ORSP
data are in Table 22.
The dose from consumption of a mule deer and
chukar collected on the NTS is not included in
Table 21. The individual CEDEs from the various
pathways added together give a total of 0.053
mrem/yr. The additional dose from ingestion of
deer meat and liver containing the 239+240pu
activities given in Table 20 would be:
{[(1.44 x 10'3 pCi/g) x (4.5 x 104 g)] + [(9.48 x 10 4 pCi/g) x
(280 g)]}
x (3.7 x 10'4 mrem/pCi) = 2.41 x 10'2 mrem
The weight of the liver (280 g) used in the above
equation is the median weight of the livers from the
three mule deer obtained in 1993. For the chukar,
assume 250 g edible meat and 10 chukar
consumed per individual during the hunting
season. The CEDE would be:
3.3 x 103 pCi/g x 250 g x 10 x 6.4 x 1O"8 mrem/pCi
= 0.53 mrem
Total CEDEs can be calculated based on different
combinations of data. If an individual were
interested in just one area, for example, the
concentrations from those stations closest to that
area could be substituted into the equation.
8.3 Dose from Background
Radiation
In addition to external radiation exposure due to
cosmic rays and gamma radiation from naturally
occurring radionuclides in soil (e.g., 40K, uranium
and thorium daughters), there is a contribution from
7Be that is formed in the atmosphere by cosmic ray
interactions with oxygen and nitrogen. The annual
average 7Be concentration measured by the offsite
surveillance network was 0.3 pCi/m3 With a dose
conversion factor for inhalation of 2.6 x 10'7
mrem/pCi, and an annual breathing volume of
8400 m3/yr, this equates to a dose of 6.6 x 10'4
mrem as calculated in Table 23. This is a
negligible quantity when compared with the PIC
network measurements that vary from 66 to 166
mR/year, depending on location.
8.4 Summary
The extensive offsite environmental surveillance
system operated around the NTS by EPA
EMSL-LV detected no radiological exposures that
could be attributed to recent NTS operations, but
a calculated EDE of 0.053 mrem can be obtained
if certain assumptions are made. Calculation with
the CAP88-PC model, using estimated or
calculated effluents from the NTS during 1993,
resulted in a maximum inhalation dose of 3.8 x 10"3
mrem (3.8 x 10~5 mSv) to a hypothetical resident of
Indian Springs, NV, 54 km (32 miles) SE of the
NTS CP-I. Based on monitoring network data, this
dose is calculated to be 0.054 mrem. This latter
EDE is about 14 times the dose obtained from
CAP88-PC calculation, and is mostly due to
inhalation of plutonium. If this individual were also
to collect and consume a NTS deer such as the
one discussed above, the estimated EDE would
increase by another 2.4 x 10"2 mrem (2.4 x 10"4
mSv) to a total possible EDE of about 0.078 mrem
(7.8 x 10~4 mSv), and consumption of 10 chukar
93
-------
Table 23. Dose Calculations from
Route of
Medium Exposure
Milk Ingestion
Water Ingestion
Total from Liquid Ingestion
Foodstuffs
Beef Liver Ingestion
Broccoli'3' Ingestion
Carrots'3' Ingestion
Pears'3' Ingestion
Turnips'3' Ingestion
Total from Foodstuff Consumption
Air Submersion/
Inhalation
Submersion
Inhalation
Inhalation
Total from Air
i rtt^l rff\m 1 nni^o+ij^n lmL-ml
-------
with the maximum 3H content would add 0.53
mrem for a total of 0.61 mrem. This maximum
dose estimate is less than 1 percent of the
International Commission on Radiological
Protection (ICRP) recommendation that an annual
effective dose equivalent for the general public not
exceed 100 mrem/yr (ICRP 1985). The calculated
population dose (collective effective dose
equivalent) to the approximately 21,750 residents
living within 80 km (50 mi) of each of the NTS
airborne emission sources was 1.2 x 10"2
person-rem (1.2 x 10~4 person-Sv). Background
radiation would yield a CEDE of 1747 person-rem
(17.5 person-Sv).
Data from the PIC gamma monitoring indicated a
1993 dose of 97 mrem from background gamma
radiation measured in Indian Springs. This gamma
background value is derived from an average PIC
field measurement of 8.9 u,R/hr. The 0.054 mrem
CEDE calculated from the monitoring networks
and model as discussed above is a negligible
amount by comparison.
The uncertainty (2o) for the PIC measurement at
the 97 mrem exposure level is approximately 6
percent. Extrapolating to the calculated annual
exposure at Indian Springs, Nevada, yields a total
uncertainty of approximately 4.5 mrem. Because
the estimated dose from NTS activities is less than
1 mrem (the lowest level for which DQOs are
defined, as given in Chapter 11) no conclusions
can be made regarding the achieved data quality
as compared to the DQO for this insignificant dose.
95
-------
9.0 Weapons Test and Liquefied Gaseous Fuels Spills
Facility Support
Nonradiological monitoring was conducted in 1993
for four tests conducted at the Liquified Gaseous
Fuels Spill Test Facility (LGFSTF) on the NTS.
9.1 Weapons Tests Support
For each test the EMSL-LV provided an advisor on
offsite public health and safety for the Operations
Controller's Test Safety Review Panel. At the
beginning of each test series and at other tests
depending on projected need, a field monitoring
technician from the EPA with appropriate air
sampling equipment was deployed downwind of
the test at the NTS boundary to measure chemical
concentrations that may have reached the offsite
area. Based on wind direction and speed, the
boundary monitor was instructed to collect samples
at the time of projected maximum concentration.
Samples were collected with a hand-operated
Drager pump and sampling tube appropriate for
the chemical being tested. Not all tests were
monitored by EPA if professional judgement
indicated that, based on previous experience with
the chemical and the proposed test parameters,
NTS boundary monitoring was unnecessary.
The EPA field monitoring technicians at the NTS
boundary, in contact by two-way radio, were placed
at the projected cloud center line at the time when
the cloud was expected at the boundary, so the air
samples would be collected at the time and place
of maximum concentration. The exact location of
the boundary monitor was adjusted during the test
by use of two-way radio to ensure that monitoring
was performed at the projected cloud center line.
To determine the feasible remedial actions for an
area, EPA uses its best judgment based on experi-
ence gained during atmospheric tests and from
those tests conducted in the 1960s that contami-
nated offsite areas. No remedial actions have
been necessary since 1970. However, through
routine contact with offsite residents and through
continuing population and road surveys, EPA
maintains a sense of the degree to which it could
implement remedial actions and the kind of cooper-
ation that would be provided by officials and
residents of the area.
9.2 Liquefied Gaseous
Fuels Spills Test Facility
Support
The LGFSTF in Area 5 is a source of potential
release of nonradiological contaminants to the
environment, depending on the individual tests
conducted. In 1993 there were four tests all
involving carbon dioxide conducted at this facility.
Monitoring was performed at the NTS boundary by
the EMSL-LV to assure these contaminants did not
move to offsite areas.
The LGFSTF was established in the Frenchman
Basin in Area 5 as a basic research tool for study-
ing the dynamics of accidental releases of various
hazardous materials and the effectiveness of
mitigation procedures. The LGFSTF was designed
and equipped to: (1) discharge a measured volume
of a hazardous fluid at a controlled rate on a
specially prepared surface; (2) monitor and record
down-wind gaseous concentrations, operating data,
and close-in/down-wind meteorological data; and
(3) provide a means to control and monitor these
functions from a remote location.
DOE/NV provides the facilities, security, and
technical support, but all costs are borne by the
organization conducting the tests. In 1993 four
tests were conducted involving carbon dioxide.
The plans for each test series were examined by
an Advisory Panel that consisted of DOE/NV and
EMSL-LV professional personnel augmented by
personnel from the organization performing the
tests.
96
-------
10. Public Information and Community Assistance
Programs
10.1 Community Radiation
Monitoring Program
Because of the successful experience with the
Citizen's Monitoring Program during the purging of
the TMI containment in 1980, the Community
Radiation Monitoring Program (CRMP) consisting
of 15 monitoring stations located in the states of
California, Nevada and Utah was begun. Today
there are 18 stations located in these three states
(see Figure 45). The CRMP is a cooperative
project of the DOE, EPA, DRI, and University of
Utah.
The DOE sponsors the program. The EPA pro-
vides technical and scientific direction, maintains
the instrumentation and sampling equipment,
analyzes the collected samples, and interprets and
reports the data. The DRI administers the pro-
gram by hiring the local station managers and
alternates, securing rights-of-way, providing utili-
ties, and performing additional quality assurance
checks of the data. The University of Utah pro-
vides detailed training twice a year for the station
managers and alternates on all issues related to
nuclear science, radiological health, and radiation
monitoring.
Each station is operated by a local resident, in
most cases a high-school science teacher. Sam-
ples are analyzed at the EMSL-LV Radioanalysis
Laboratory. Data interpretation is provided by DRI
to the communities involved. All of the 18 CRMP
stations have one of the samplers for the ASM,
NGTSN, on either routine or standby status, and
TLD networks. In addition a PIC and recorder for
immediate readout of external gamma exposure
and a recording barograph are located at the
station.
All of the equipment is mounted on a stand at a
prominent location in each community so the
residents are aware of the surveillance and, if
interested, can check the data. Also, computer-
generated reports of the PIC data are issued
weekly for each station as explained above.
10.2 Community Education
Outreach Program
DOE sponsors Public Information Presentations
which are forums for increasing the public's aware-
ness of NTS activities, disseminating radiation
monitoring results, and addressing concerns of
residents related to environmental radiation and
possible health effects. These public information
presentations were initiated in February of 1982 in
the form of town hall meetings. Between 1982 and
1990, 95 town hall meetings were held in the
communities surrounding the NTS in the states of
Arizona, California, Nevada, and Utah.
In the fall of 1990 the focus of this outreach
program was changed. Rather than a single
subject presented at general town hall meetings,
audiences from schools, service clubs, and civic
groups from the various communities were target-
ed and offered presentations on many different
subjects. Table 24 lists the outreach presentations
conducted in 1993. A list of presentation subjects
is provided in Table 25. An annual report on the
CRMP and outreach program is published by the
DRI under the name "Community Radiation
Monitoring Program Annual Report for FY 19xx,"
with a report number such as DOE/NV-10845-xx,
which may be obtained from either DRI or
DOE/NV.
97
-------
NEVADA
• Ely
techel
J* • Calie
L,,~^ • Alamo
sSSs
^
HDA
ST
re
pi .
wij —
• Overton •,
UTAH
t-'Salt
1 oL'o
LaK6
City
Delta •
• Milford
te • Cedar City
• St. George
ARIZONA
W "->
Indian Springs
h
% Las • x?s?
Shoshone* \ Vegas ^
\ '-
\ \
*A. •
kKEMEAD
^a»_>
Community Monitoring Stations (18)
Scale in Miles
50
100
50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 45. Community Monitoring Station Locations - 1993
98
-------
Table 24.
Date
01/16
01/29
01/29
02/25
04/27
06/13
11/17
11/17
11/19
11/23
12/13
Community Radiation Monitoring Program
Location
Henderson,
Nevada
St. George,
Utah
St. George,
Utah
Ely, Nevada
Beatty,
Nevada
Tonopah,
Nevada
Cedar City,
Utah
Cedar City,
Utah
Alamo,
Nevada
Las Vegas,
Nevada
Beatty,
Nevada
Audience
lota Chapter of
Beta Sigma Phi
Utah State
Teachers Assn.
Utah State
Teachers Assn.
Ely Middle School
Beatty High
School
Tonopah Rotary
Club
Cedar City
High School
Exchange Club
Alamo High School
Bonanza High
School
Beatty High School
Outreach Presentations - 1993
Subject
NTS Deer Migration
Study
NTS Activities and
Related Matters
ABC's of Radiation
ABC's of Radiation
Careers in Science
and Engineering
Consumer Electronic
Product Radiation
Pack Rat Midden
Pack Rat Midden
Hydrology
Archaeology at
the NTS
Photography
Attendance
20
36
20
94
22
22
38
20
94
516
21
Attendance Total
903
99
-------
Table 25. Community Radiation Monitoring Program Presentation Topics
ABC's of Radiation. Radiation explained in understandable terms; when it is dangerous and when it is not.
Testing Nuclear Weapons. How nuclear weapons are tested (safely) on the Nevada Test Site (NTS).
Joint Verification Experiment. Interaction with the USSR during exchange of weapons tests at the NTS and
the USSR.
Downwind Radiation Exposures and Legislation. The different studies that have been done to calculate
the radiation exposures to people who were living in the downwind area during atmospheric testing.
Offsite Radiation Monitoring and the Community Monitoring Program. The offsite monitoring program which
is performed by the Environmental Protection Agency in areas and communities surrounding the NTS. The
Community Radiation Monitoring Program details how science teachers and local residents in Nevada,
California, and Utah have been and are involved in understanding activities on the NTS.
Hiroshima-Nagasaki Experience. Predicted radiation effects based on the Japanese data.
Environmental Restoration. Current environmental restoration programs on the NTS and those planned
for the future.
Onsite Environmental Monitoring. The NTS onsite environmental monitoring program.
Consumer Electronic Product Radiation. Risks and benefits of safe usage of common household electronic
products.
NTS Archaeology. Prehistory and cultural resources of the southern great basin and NTS
that also includes studies of pack rat middens.
NTS Hydrology. Groundwater flow studies and subsurface contamination on the NTS and surrounding
areas.
Surficial Radioactive Contamination. Occurrence of radioactive contamination on the NTS and surrounding
area as a result of weapons testing.
NTS Deer Migration Study. Seven year deer tagging study to understand migration patterns.
Low Level Waste. A description of how low level waste is managed and controlled at the Low Level Waste
Management Site on the NTS.
Emergency Response Training. The training program for Nevada policemen and firemen who are first-on-
the-scene accident responders.
100
-------
11 Quality Assurance
11.1 Policy
One of the major goals of the EPA is to ensure
that all agency decisions which are dependent on
environmental data are supported by data of
known quality. Agency policy initiated by the
Administrator in memoranda of May 30, 1979, and
June 14, 1979, requires participation in a centrally
managed QA Program by all EPA Laboratories,
Program Offices, Regional Offices, and those
monitoring and measurement efforts supported or
mandated through contracts, regulations, or other
formalized agreements. Further, by EPA Order
5360.1, Agency policy requires participation in a
QA Program by all EPA organizational units in-
volved in environmental data collection.
The QA policies and requirements of EPA's EMSL-
LV are summarized in the Quality Assurance
Program Plan (EPA, 1987). Policies and require-
ments specific to the ORSP are documented in the
Quality Assurance Program Plan for the Nuclear
Radiation Assessment Division Offsite Radiation
Safety Program (EPA, 1992). The requirements of
these documents establish a framework for consis-
tency in the continuing application of quality assur-
ance standards and procedures in support of the
ORSP Administrative and technical procedures
based on these QA requirements are maintained in
appropriate manuals or are described in SOPs. It
is NRD policy that personnel adhere to the require-
ments of the QA Plan and all SOPs applicable to
their duties to ensure that all environmental radia-
tion monitoring data collected by the EMSL-LV in
support of the ORSP are of adequate quality and
properly documented for use by the DOE, EPA,
and other interested parties.
11.2 Data Quality Objectives
Data quality objectives (DQOs) are statements of
the quality of data a decision maker needs to
ensure that a decision based on that data is
defensible. Data quality objectives are defined in
terms of representativeness, comparability, com-
pleteness, precision, and accuracy. Representa-
tiveness and comparability are generally qualitative
assessments while completeness, precision, and
accuracy may be quantitatively assessed. In the
ORSP, representativeness, comparability, and
completeness objectives are defined for each
monitoring network. Precision and accuracy are
defined for each analysis type or radionuclide.
Achieved data quality is monitored continuously
through internal QC checks and procedures. In
addition to the internal QC procedures, NRD
participates in external intercomparison programs.
One such intercomparison program is managed
and operated by a group within EMSL-LV. These
external performance audits are conducted as
described in and according to the schedule con-
tained in "Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory
Intercomparison Studies Program" (EPA, 1992a).
The analytical laboratory also participates in the
DOE Environmental Measurements Laboratory
(EML) Quality Assurance Program in which real or
synthetic environmental samples that have been
prepared and thoroughly analyzed are distributed
to participating laboratories. Periodically (every
two or three years) external systems and perfor-
mance audits are conducted for the TLD network
as part of the certification requirements for DOE's
Laboratory Accreditation Program (DOELAP).
11.2.1 Representativeness,
Comparability, and
Completeness Objectives
Representativeness is defined as "the degree to
which the data accurately and precisely represent
a characteristic of a parameter, variation of a
property, a process characteristic, or an operation
condition" (Stanley and Vemer, 1985). In the
ORSP, representativeness may be considered to
be the degree to which the collected samples
represent the radionuclide activity concentrations in
the offsite environment. Collection of samples
representative of all possible pathways to human
exposure as well as direct measurement of offsite
resident exposure through the TLD and internal
dosimetry monitoring programs provides assurance
of the representativeness of the calculated expo-
sures.
Comparability is defined as "the confidence with
which one data set can be compared to another"
101
-------
(Stanley and Verner, 1985). Comparability of data
is assured by use of SOPs for sample collection,
handling, and analysis; use of standard reporting
units; and use of standardized procedures for data
analysis and interpretation. In addition, another
aspect of comparability is examined through long-
term comparison and trend analysis of various
radionuclide activity concentrations, and TLD, and
PIC data. Use of SOPs, maintained under a
document control system, is an important compo-
nent of comparability, ensuring that all personnel
conform to a unified, consistent set of procedures.
Completeness is defined as "a measure of the
amount of data collected from a measurement
process compared to the amount that was expect-
ed to be obtained under the conditions of measure-
ment" (Stanley and Verner, 1985). Data may be
lost due to instrument malfunction, sample destruc-
tion, loss in shipping or analysis, analytical error, or
unavailability of samples. Additional data values
may be deleted due to unacceptable precision,
accuracy, or detection limit or as the result of
application of statistical outlier tests. The com-
pleteness objective for all networks except the
LTHMP is 90%. The completeness objective for
the LTHMP is 80%; a lower objective has been
established because dry wells or access restric-
tions occasionally preclude sample collection.
11.2.2 Precision and Accuracy
Objectives of Radioanalytical
Analyses
Measurements of sample volumes should be
accurate to ± 5% for aqueous samples (water and
milk) and to ± 10% for air and soil samples. The
sensitivity of radiochemical and gamma spectro-
metric analyses must allow no more than a 5% risk
of either a false negative or false positive value.
Precision to a 95% confidence interval, monitored
through analysis of duplicate and blind samples,
must be within ± 10% for activities greater than 10
times the minimum detectable concentration (MDC)
and ± 30% for activities greater than the MDC but
less than 10 times the MDC. There are no preci-
sion requirements for activity concentrations below
the MDC, which by definition cannot be distin-
guished from background at the 95% confidence
level. Control limits for accuracy, monitored with
matrix spike samples, are required to be no greater
than ± 20% for all gross alpha, gross beta, and
gamma spectrometric analyses, depending upon
the media type.
At concentrations greater than 10 times the MDC,
precision is required to be within ± 10% for:
• Conventional Tritium Analyses
• Uranium
• Thorium (all media)
• Strontium
and within ± 20% for:
• Enriched Tritium Analyses
• Strontium (in milk)
• Noble Gases
• Plutonium.
At concentrations less than 10 times the MDC,
both precision and accuracy are expressed in
absolute units, not to exceed 30% of the MDC for
all analyses and all media types.
11.2.3 Quality of Dose Estimates
The allowable uncertainty of the effective dose
equivalent to any human receptor is ± 0.1 mrem
annually. This uncertainty objective is based solely
upon the precision and accuracy of the data
produced from the surveillance networks and does
not apply to uncertainties in the model used,
effluent release data received from DOE, or dose
conversion factors. Generally, effective dose
equivalents must have an accuracy (bias) of no
greater than 50% for annual doses greater than or
equal to 1 mrem but less than 5 mrem and no
greater than 10% for annual doses greater than or
equal to 5 mrem.
11.3 Data Validation
Data validation is defined as "A systematic process
for reviewing a body of data against a set of
criteria to provide assurance that the data are
adequate for their intended use." Data validation
consists of data editing, screening, checking,
auditing, verification, certification, and review
(Stanley et al; 1983). Data validation procedures
are documented in SOPs. All data are reviewed
and checked at various steps in the collection,
analysis, and reporting processes.
The first level of data review consists of sample
tracking; e.g., that all samples planned to be
collected are collected or reasons for noncollection
are documented; that all collected samples are
delivered to Sample Control and are entered into
102
-------
the appropriate data base management system;
and that all entered information is accurate. Next,
analytical data are reviewed by the analyst and by
the laboratory supervisor. Checks at this stage
include verifying that all samples received from
Sample Control have been analyzed or reasons for
nonanalysis have been documented; that data are
"reasonable" (e.g., within expected range), and that
instrumentation operational checks indicate the
analysis instrument is within permissible toleranc-
es. Discrepancies indicating collection instrument
malfunction are reported to the Field Operations
Branch. Analytical discrepancies are resolved;
individual samples or sample batches may be
reanalyzed if required.
Raw data are reviewed by a designated media
expert. A number of checks are made at this level,
including:
1. Completeness - all samples scheduled to
be collected have, in fact, been collected
and analyzed or the data base contains
documentation explaining the reasons for
noncollection or nonanalysis.
2. Transcription errors - checks are made of
all manually entered information to ensure
that the information contained in the data
base is accurate.
3. Quality control data - field and analytical
duplicate, audit sample, and matrix blank
data are checked to ensure that the col-
lection and analytical processes are with-
in specified QC tolerances.
4. Analysis schedules - lists of samples
awaiting analysis are generated and
checked against normal analysis sched-
ules to identify backlogs in analysis or
data entry.
5. Unidentified malfunctions - sample results
and diagnostic graphics of sample results
are reviewed for reasonableness. Condi-
tions indicative of instrument malfunction
are reported to Field and/or Laboratory
Operations.
Once the data base has been validated, the data
are compared to the DQOs. Completeness,
accuracy, and precision statistics are calculated.
The achieved quality of the data is reported at
least annually. If data fail to meet one or more of
the established DQOs, the data may still be used
in data analysis; however, the data and any inter-
pretive results are to be qualified.
A1I sample results exceeding the natural back-
ground activity range are investigated. If data are
found to be associated with a non-environmental
condition, such as a check of the instrument using
a calibration source, the data are flagged and are
not included in calculations. Only data verified to
be associated with a non-environmental condition
are flagged; all other data are used in calculation
of averages and other statistics, even if the condi-
tion is traced to a source other than the NTS (for
example, higher-than-normal activities were ob-
served for several radionuclides following the
Chernobyl accident). When activities exceeding
the expected range are observed for one network,
the data for the other networks at the same loca-
tion are checked. For example, higher-than-nor-
mal-range PIC values are compared to data ob-
tained by the air, noble gas, TLD, and tritium-in-air
samplers at the same location.
Data are also compared to previous years' data for
the same location using trend analysis techniques.
Other statistical procedures may be employed as
warranted to permit interpretation of current data
as compared to past data. Trend analysis is made
possible due to the length of the sampling history,
which in some cases is 30 years or longer.
Data from the offsite networks are used, along with
NTS source emission estimates prepared by DOE,
to calculate or estimate annual committed effective
dose equivalents to offsite residents. Surveillance
network data are the primary tools for the dose
calculations. Additionally, EPA's CAP88-PC model
(EPA, 1992) is used with local meteorological data
to predict doses to offsite residents from NTS
source term estimates. An assessment of the
uncertainty of the dose estimate is made and
reported with the estimate.
11.4 Quality Assessment Of 1993
Data
Data quality assessment is associated with the
regular QA and QC practices within the radio-
analytical laboratory. The analytical QC plan,
documented in SOPs, describes specific proce-
dures used to demonstrate that data are within
prescribed requirements for accuracy and preci-
sion. Duplicate samples are collected or prepared
103
-------
and analyzed in the exact manner as the regular
samples for that particular type of analysis. Data
obtained from duplicate analyses are used for
determining the degree of precision for each
individual analysis. Accuracy is assessed by
comparison of data from spiked samples with the
"true" or accepted values. Spiked samples are
either in-house laboratory blanks spiked with
known amounts of radionuclides, or QC samples
prepared by other organizations in which data are
compared between several laboratories and as-
sessed for accuracy.
Achieved data quality statistics are compiled on a
quarterly and annual basis. This data quality
assessment is performed as part of the process of
data validation, described in Section 11.3. The
following subsections describe the achieved data
quality for 1993.
11.4.1 Completeness
Completeness is calculated as:
%C = (—) x 100
n
where:
%C percent completeness
V = number of measurementsjudgedvalid
n = total number of measurements
The percent completeness of the 1993 data is
given in Table 26. Reasons for sample loss
include instrument malfunction, inability to gain site
access, monitoring technician error, or laboratory
error. Completeness is not applicable to the
Internal Dosimetry Network, as all individuals who
request a whole body or lung count receive one,
resulting in a completeness of 100 percent by
definition.
The achieved completeness of over 93 percent for
the LTHMP exceeds the DQO of 80 percent. If the
wells which have been shut down by DOE are
included the completeness becomes 85 percent
overall but only 75 percent for onsite wells.
Overall completeness for the routine Air Surveil-
lance Network was greater than 97 percent, ex-
ceeding the DQO of 90 percent. Individually, all
stations exceeded 95 percent data recovery and
four stations achieved completeness of 100 per-
cent. Plutonium analyses, conducted on com-
posited filters from selected routine and standby air
stations, were over 97 percent complete, exceeding
the DQO of 90 percent.
Overall, the noble gas network met the DQO of 90
percent completeness. On an individual station
basis, data recovery was over 90 percent for seven
routine sampling locations, and greater than 80
percent for another nine routine sampling locations,
and greater than 79 percent for another four routine
sampling locations. The achieved completeness for
the atmospheric moisture network was 88 percent,
slightly below the DQO of 90 percent.
Overall data recovery for the MSN was less than the
DQO of 90 percent. Many of the milk sampling
locations consist of family-owned cows or goats that
can provide milk only when the animal is lactating.
Less than 75 percent of the total possible number of
samples were collected from six ranches: Dahl
(Alamo, Nevada), Lemon (Dyer, Nevada), John
Deer (Amargosa Valley, Nevada), Frayne (Goldfield,
Nevada), Brown (Benton, California), and Blue
Eagie (Currant, Nevada). Annual means for these
locations individually cannot be considered to be
representative of the year. However, the milkshed
may be adequately represented if an alternate
location in the area was sampled when the primary
station could not supply milk.
All of the animals scheduled for collection in the AIP
were collected, with the exception of a mule deer
from the NTS in the fourth quarter of 1993. No deer
were found that could be collected on two separate
hunting trips. Overall completeness exceeded the
DQO of 90 percent.
The achieved completeness of over 98 percent for
the PIC Network exceeds the DQO of 90 percent.
The redundant data systems used in the PIC
Network (i.e., satellite telemetry, magnetic tape or
card data acquisition systems, and strip charts) are
responsible for the high rates of recovery. Gaps in
the satellite transmissions are filled by data from the
magnetic tape or card media. If necessary, strip
charts would be digitized to fill gaps if data were not
available from either of the other two sources;
however, no digitized data were needed in 1993.
104
-------
Table 26. Data Completeness of Offsite Radiological Safety Program Networks
Network
LTHMP(b)
Air Surveillance
Noble Gas
Atmospheric
Moisture
Milk Surveillance
Animal
Investigation
PIC
Number of
Sampling
Locations
271
30
17 /23
13"'
21'"
24
(g)
27
-------
11.4.2 Precision
Precision is monitored through analysis of duplicate
samples. Field duplicates (i.e., a second sample
collected at the same place and time and under
the same conditions as the routine sample) are
collected in the ASN, LTHMP, and MSN. For the
ASN, a duplicate sampler is collocated with the
routine sampler at randomly selected sites for a
period of one to three months to provide the field
duplicate. A total of four samplers is used; these
second samplers are moved to various site loca-
tions throughout the year. Noble gas and atmo-
spheric moisture samples are split to provide
duplicate samples for analysis; the number of
duplicates is limited by the number of routine
samples which contain sufficient volume to permit
division into two samples. In 1993, an experiment
was conducted to see if a composite sample
composed of the three noble gas bottles collected
over 56-hour increments could be used as a
"duplicate" sample for comparison to the fourth
bottle, collected over the entire one-week sampling
period. Animal tissue, vegetable, and bioassay
(urine) samples are also split after processing, if
the volume of material is sufficient. Two TLDs,
each with three identical phosphors, are deployed
to each fixed station, providing a total of six repli-
cates. In lieu of field duplicates, precision for the
PICs is determined by the variance of measure-
ments over a specific time interval when only
background activities are being measured. Preci-
sion may also be determined from repeated analy-
ses of routine or laboratory spiked samples. The
spiked QC samples are generally not blind to the
analyst; i.e., the analyst both recognizes the
sample as a QC sample and knows the expected
(theoretical) activity of the sample.
Precision is expressed as percent relative standard
deviation (%RSD), also known as coefficient of
variation, and is calculated by:
%RSD = std
mean
x 100
The precision or %RSD (also called Coefficient of
Variation) is not reported for duplicate pairs in
which one or both results are less than the MDC of
the analysis. For most analyses, the DQOs for
precision are defined for two ranges: values
greater than or equal to the MDC but less than ten
times the MDC and values equal to or greater than
ten times the MDC. The %RSDs is partially de-
pendent on statistical counting uncertainty so it is
expected to be more variable for duplicate analy-
ses of samples with low activities.
Figure 46 displays %RSDs for LTHMP field and
spiked sample duplicate pairs analyzed by the
conventional tritium method. This figure includes
one matrix spike sample pair with a mean equal to
or greater than ten times the MDC and 54 pairs of
matrix spike samples and two field duplicate pairs
with means equal to or greater than the MDC but
less than ten times the MDC. The %RSD for the
one pair with mean equal to or greater than 10
times the MDC was less than one percent, well
within the DQO of ten percent. All pairs with
means greater than the MDC but less than ten
times the MDC yielded %RSDs of less than 15
percent; the DQO for precision of samples in this
activity range is 30 percent.
Figure 47 displays %RSDs for duplicate pairs
analyzed by the enriched tritium method. All 31
matrix spike sample duplicate pairs .had means
equal to or greater than ten times the MDC; all
%RSDs were within the DQO of 20 percent. In
addition, eight field duplicate pairs had means
equal to or greater than ten times the MDC. The
%RSDs of these pairs were all less than 8 percent.
Of 19 field duplicate pairs with means equal to or
greater than the MDC but less than ten times the
MDC, all were within the DQO of 30 %RSD, and
only two %RSDs were greater than 20 percent.
In the ASN, field duplicate pairs are analyzed for
gross alpha, gross beta, and gamma-emitting
radionuclides. Figure 48 shows the %RSD distri-
bution for gross alpha field duplicate analyses. Of
52 field duplicate pairs with means greater than or
equal to the MDC but less than ten times the MDC,
44 pairs had %RSD of less than 40 percent. Figure
49 displays %RSDs for gross beta analyses of the
17 field duplicate pairs with means equal to or
greater than ten times the MDC and the 125 field
duplicate pairs with means equal to or greater than
the MDC but less than ten times the MDC. All but
one of the pairs with means equal to or greater
than ten times the MDC yielded %RSDs of less
than 20 percent. Of the 125 pairs with means
equal to or greater than the MDC but less than ten
times the MDC, the %RSDs for 113 pairs was less
than 30 percent. Of the nine field duplicate pairs
with 7Be activities greater than or equal to 10 MDC,
all yielded %RSDs less than 20 percent and, of
these, all but one were less than 10 %RSD.
106
-------
o
'"§
I
c
-------
100-
80-
.g
J eC-
lS
-i— >
o
i 40-
o
O
20-
D n D Value £ MDC & Value < 10 X MDC
D
D
DD D
4^° q^
n Q^| ^ n n D
n n r-J? D n
u Pn n
0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004
Mean of Duplicate Pair Results (pCi/m3)
Figure 48. Precision results for alpha in air.
0.005
.9
IS
100
80-
60-
03
:Q 40-
I
20
0.00
o
o o
°
o
o
0
ODD Value i 10 X MDC
O O O Value t MDC & Value < 10 X MDC
D
0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
Mean of Duplicate Pair Results (pCi/m3)
Figure 49. Precision results for beta in air.
0.05
108
-------
In addition to analysis of field duplicate pairs,
selected routine sample filters are analyzed twice
for gross alpha, gross beta, and gamma-emitting
radionuclides. Of 80 duplicate analyses for gross
alpha with results greater than or equal to MDC but
less than 1 0 MDC, 68 yielded %RSDs of less than
40 percent. Of 168 duplicate analyses for gross
beta with means greater than or equal to MDC but
less than 10 MDC, all but five yielded %RSDs of
less than 20 percent. In addition, nine duplicate
analyses for gross beta yielded means greater than
or equal to 10 MDC; the %RSDs for these pairs
were all less than 10 percent. Seven duplicate
gamma spectrometry analyses yielded 7Be results
with means greater than or equal to 10 MDC and
the %RSDs for these pairs were less than 20
percent.
In 1 993, precision estimates for noble gas samples
were made by two methods. As an experiment,
the three bottles collected over consecutive 56-
hour increments were composited; results were
compared to the results obtained for Bottle 4 which
collected samples over the entire one-week sam-
pling period. As in previous years, estimates of
precision were obtained from sample splits. The
range of %RSDs for the 44 composited sample
pairs was 0.1 to 20.3 percent while the range for
the 23 split sample pairs was 0.8 to 19.5 percent.
All duplicate sample pairs had means greater than
or equal to MDC but less than 1 0 MDC. The DQO
for this activity range is 30 percent; all %RSDs for
both methods were well within this DQO. Figure
50 displays the %RSDs for the composited sample
pairs and Figure 51 displays %RSDs for the split
sample pairs.
All split samples analyzed for the atmospheric
moisture network yielded means that were less
than the MDC. By definition, no DQOs are estab-
lished for activities less than the MDC.
None of the field duplicate pairs from the MSN and
SMSN analyzed for tritium or 90Sr yielded results
equal to or greater than the MDC. Total potassium
was measured at concentrations >10 MDC in 68
field duplicate pairs and in 39 duplicate analyses.
All but one pair had %RSD of less than 25 percent
and 93 pairs yielded %RSD of less than 10 per-
cent. The %RSD results for the field duplicate
pairs are shown in Figure 52. The DQO for these
Duplicate samples of mule deer and cattle bone
and cattle liver were prepared and analyzed to
estimate precision for the AIP The bone and liver
ash samples were analyzed for 238Pu and 239*240pu;
bone ash samples were additionally analyzed for
90Sr. None of the three mule deer bone ash
sample pairs, four cattle bone ash, or four cattle
liver ash samples yielded results greater than or
equal to MDC in both samples for 238Pu. One mule
deer bone, two cattle liver, and one cattle bone ash
samples yielded valid results for 239+240pu that were
greater than or equal to MDC but less than 10
MDC in both samples; the %RSD was less than 10
percent for each pair. Except for one mule deer
bone ash sample, all of the bone ash duplicate
sample pairs yielded results greater than or equal
to MDC but less than 10 MDC for 90Sr. The
%RSDs for these pairs were all less than the DQO
of 30%, and all but one were less than 20%.
There were no splits of vegetable samples ana-
lyzed in 1993.
Seven bioassay samples were split for duplicate
tritium analysis; all yielded results less than the
MDC by conventional method.
In addition to examination of %RSDs for individual
duplicate pairs, an overall precision estimate was
determined by calculating the pooled standard
deviation, based on the algorithm given in (Taylor
1987). To convert to a unitless value, the pooled
standard deviation was divided by the grand mean
and multiplied by 100 to yield a %RSD. Table 27
presents the pooled data and estimates of overall
precision. The pooled standard deviations and
%RSD indicate the estimated achieved precision
for 1993 samples.
11.4.3 Accuracy
The accuracy of all analyses is controlled through
the use of approved or NIST-traceable standards
in instrument calibrations. Internal checks of
instrument accuracy may be periodically
performed, using spiked matrix samples. These
internal QC procedures are the only control of
accuracy for whole body and lung counts and
PICs. For spectroscopic and radiochemical analy-
ses, an independent measurement of accuracy is
provided by participation in intercomparison studies
using samples of known activities. The EPA
EMSL-LV Radioanalysis Laboratory participates in
two such intercomparison studies. An independent
verification of the accuracy of the TLDs is per-
formed every two or three years by DOELAP. This
involves a three-part, single blind, performance
109
-------
100-
80-
1
|j 60-
B
0)
'o 40 -
1
O
20-
o-
D D D Value * MDC & Value < 10 X MDC
D
n n
D DTI igrj jp n
° °n EBaatffl™Sff[SIn
20 22 24 26 28
Mean of Duplicate Pair Results (pCi/m3)
Figure 50. Precision results from composite samples for 8SKr in noble gas.
30
"cS
1
"o
1
;l
1
100-
80-
60-
40-
20-
o-
D D D Value i MDC & Value < 10 X MDC
n
n jn D
n n „ nnn
n n n d~-^ ^ ^ n n
20 22 24 26 28
Mean of Duplicate Pair Results (pCi/m3)
Figure 51. Precision results from split samples for BSKr in noble gas.
110
30
-------
g
'"§
100 -i
80
60-
CD
o 4o^
O
20-
n
D
D
Value * 10
X
MDC
n
n
n
n
n
D
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0
Mean of Duplicate Pair Results (g/L)
Figure 52. Precision results for K (total) in milk.
2.5
Table 27. Overall Precision of Analysis
Network
LTHMP
ASN
Noble Gas
Milk
Analysis
Conv. Tritium
Conv. Tritium
Conv. Tritium
Enrich. Tritium
Enrich. Tritium
Enrich. Tritium
Gross Alpha
Gross Alpha
Gross Beta
Gross Beta
Gross Beta
Gross Beta
7Be
7Be
85Kr
85Kr
Potassium (total)
Potassium (total)
Sample
Type
Spiked
Field
Spiked
Field
Spiked
Field
Field
Lab Dup
Field
Lab Dup
Field
Lab Dup
Field
Lab Dup
Comp.
Split
Field
Lab Dup
Range
>MDC, <10x MDC
>MDC, <10x MDC
>10x MDC
>MDC, <10x MDC
>10x MDC
>10x MDC
>MDC, <10x MDC
>MDC, <10x MDC
>MDC, <10x MDC
>MDC, <10xMDC
>10x MDC
>10x MDC
>10x MDC
>10x MDC
>MDC, <10x MDC
>MDC, <10xMDC
>10x MDC
>10x MDC
n
54
2
1
19
31
8
52
80
125
168
17
9
9
7
44
23
68
39
Pooled
Standard
Deviation
176
69
5.0
2.0
7.3
7.7
0.0003
0.0004
0.0028
0.0017
0.0032
0.0011
0.0599
0.0641
1.84
2.56
0.12
0.12
%RSD
5.1
9.6
0.2
8.5
6.8
3.0
26.1
28.3
19.6
12.1
11.1
3.9
18.6
19.3
6.7
9.7
7.8
7.3
111
-------
testing program followed by an independent onsite
assessment of the overall program.
In the EPA EMSL-LV Intercomparison Study
program, samples of known activities of selected
radionuclides are sent to participating laboratories
on a set schedule throughout the year. Water,
milk, and air filters are used as the matrices for
these samples. Results from all participating
laboratories are compiled and statistics computed
comparing each laboratory's results to the known
value and to the mean of all laboratories. The
comparison to the known value provides an inde-
pendent assessment of accuracy for each partici-
pating laboratory.
Table 28 presents accuracy (referred to therein as
Percent Bias) results for these intercomparison
studies. Comparison of results among all partici-
pating laboratories provides a measure of compa-
rability, discussed in Section 1 1 .4.4. Approximately
70 to 290 laboratories participate in any given
intercomparison study. Accuracy, as percent
difference or percent bias is calculated by:
%BIAS =
100
where
%BIAS = percent bias
Cm = measured sample activity
Ce = known sample activity
With the exception of B9Sr in January and in the
April blind PE water sample, 134Cs in the October
blind PE water sample, and 137Cs in the single air
filter intercomparison study sample, the achieved
accuracy was better than ± 20 percent. For most
analyses, the DQOs are ± 20 percent for values
greater than ten times the MDC and ± 30 percent
for results greater than the MDC but less than ten
times the MDC.
The other intercomparison study in which the EPA
EMSL-LV Radioanalysis Laboratory participates is
the semiannual DOE QA Program conducted by
EML in New York, NY. Approximately 20 labora-
tories participate in this performance evaluation
program. Sample matrices include water, air
filters, vegetation, and soil. Results for these
performance audit samples are given in Table 29.
The DQOs for accuracy were exceeded for 90Sr
and 60Co in the March air sample, 144Ce in the
September air sample, 239+240pu in the September
soil sample, and 90Sr in the March water sample.
In addition to use of irradiated control samples in
the processing of TLDs, DOELAP monitors accura-
cy as part of the accreditation program. As with
the intercomparison studies, samples of known
activity are submitted as single blind samples. The
designation "single blind" indicates the analyst
recognizes the sample as being other than a
routine sample, but does not know the concentra-
tion or activity contained in the sample. Individual
results are not provided to the participant laborato-
ries by DOELAP; issuance of the accreditation
certificate indicates that acceptable accuracy
reproducibility has been achieved as part of the
performance testing process and that an onsite
independent review has indicated conformance
with established accreditation standards. No
DOELAP samples were received in 1993.
11.4.4 Comparability
The EPA Performance Evaluation Program pro-
vides results to each laboratory participating in
each study that includes a grand average for all
values, excluding outliers.
A normalized deviation statistic compares each
laboratory's result (mean of three replicates) to the
known value and to the grand average. If the
value of this statistic (in multiples of standard
normal deviate, unitless) lies between control limits
of -3 and +3, the accuracy (deviation from known
value) or comparability (deviation from grand
average) is within normal statistical variation.
Table 30 displays data from the 1993
intercomparison studies for all variables measured.
There were three instances in which the EPA
EMSL-LV Radioanalysis Laboratory results deviat-
ed from the grand average by more than three
standard normal deviate units. These were the
gross alpha in the January and 89Sr in the April
water intercomparison study samples and total
potassium in the single milk intercomparison study
sample. The gross alpha and total potassium
results were within the DQO for accuracy. All
other analyses were within three standard normal
deviate units of the grand mean. This indicates
acceptable comparability of the Radioanalysis
Laboratory with the 73 to 262 laboratories partici-
pating in the EPA Intercomparison Study Program.
11.4.5 Representativeness
Representativeness cannot be evaluated quantita-
tively. Rather, it is a qualitative assessment of the
ability of the sample to model the objectives of the
112
-------
Table 28.
Nuclide
Alpha
Alpha
Alpha
Alpha
Alpha
Beta
Beta
Beta
Beta
Beta
B9Sr
89Sr
"Sr
89Sr
90Sr
90Sr
90Sr
90Sr
239Pu
13.,
131i
U-Nat
U-Nat
U-Nat
3H
3H
60Co
60Co
60Co
60Co
134Cs
134Cs
134Cs
1MCs
137Cs
137Cs
137Cs
137Cs
65Zn
65Zn
106Ru
106Ru
133Ba
133Ba
Accuracy of Analysis from EPA Performance Evaluation
Month
Water
Jan
Apr"
Jul
Oct
Ocf
Jan
Apr®
Jul
Oct
Oct(b)
Jan
Apr
-------
Table 28. (Accuracy of Analysis from EPA Performance Evaluation, cont.)
Nuclide Month
Known Value
DCi/L)(a)
Alpha
Beta
137Cs
89Sr
90Sr
131i
137Cs
K(total)
Aug
Aug
Aug
Sept
Sept
Sept
Sept
Sept
EPA Average
Ci/L)(a)
Air Filter Performance Evaluation Studies
19 19
47 47
9 12
Milk Performance Evaluation Studies
30 24
25 23
120 117
49 50
1679 1452
Percent
Bias
o.o
o.o
33.3
-20.0
-8.0
-2.5
2.0
-13.5
(a) The grand average of all participating laboratories that are non-outliers
(b) Refers to Blind Perfotmance Evaluation (PE) Study
program. The primary objective of the ORSP is to
protect the health and safety of the offsite resi-
dents. Therefore, the DQO of representativeness
is met if the samples are representative of the
radiation exposure of the resident population.
Monitoring stations are located in population
centers. Siting criteria specific to radiation sensors
are not available for many of the instruments used.
Existing siting criteria developed for other pollut-
ants are applied to the ORSP sensors as available.
For example, siting criteria for the placement of air
sampler inlets are contained in Prevention of
Significant Deterioration guidance documents
(EPA, 1976). Inlets for the air samplers at the
ORSP stations have been evaluated against these
criteria and, in most cases, meet the siting require-
ments. Guidance or requirements for handling,
shipping, and storage of radioactivity samples are
followed in program operations and documented in
SOPs. Standard analytical methodology is used
and guidance on the holding times for samples,
sample processing, and results calculations are
followed and documented in SOPs.
In the LTHMP, the primary objectives are protec-
tion of drinking water supplies and monitoring of
any potential cavity migration. Sampling locations
are primary "targets of opportunity", i.e., the sam-
pling locations are primarily wells developed for
purposes other than radioactivity monitoring.
Guidance or requirements developed for Compre-
hensive Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act and Resource Conservation
Recovery Act regarding the number and location of
monitoring wells have not been applied to the
LTHMP sampling sites. In spite of these limita-
tions, the samples are representative of the first
objective, protection of drinking water supplies. At
all of the LTHMP monitoring areas, on and around
the NTS, all potentially impacted drinking water
supplies are monitored, as are many supply sourc-
es with virtually no potential to be impacted by
radioactivity resulting from past or present nuclear
weapons testing. The sampling network at some
locations is not optimal for achieving the second
objective, monitoring of any migration of radio-
nuclides from the test cavities. An evaluation
conducted by DRI describes, in detail, the monitor-
ing locations for each LTHMP location and the
strengths and weaknesses of each monitoring
network (Chapman and Hokett, 1991). This evalu-
ation is cited in the discussion of the LTHMP data
in Section 7.
114
-------
Table 29. Accuracy of Analysis from DOE Performance Evaluation Studies
Nuclide Month EML Value'3' EPA Value
Percent
Bias
7Be
MMn
MMn
57Co
"Co
60Co
60Co
MSr
mCs
134Cs
137Cs
137Cs
144Ce
239+240p,.
239+240p..
U-Nat
239+240p..
239+240p..
U-Nat
90Sr
90Sr
238pu
23Bpu
239+240p.j
239+240pu
3H
3H
54
'Mn
March
March
September
March
September
March
September
March
March
September
March
September
March
September
March
September
March
September
September
March
September
March
March
September
March
September
March
September
March
September
March
Air Intercomparison Studies
28. 27
12 12
16 15
2.6 2.7
16 17
.94 1.7
21 20
.54 .76
2.2 2
13 12
3.4 3.1
19 19
18 19
28 40
.033 .036
.12 .13
.022 .023
.072 .080
.15 .14
Soil Intercomparison Studies
11 11
2.2 1.5
42 50.3
Vegetation Intercomparison Studies
280. 240
200. 220.
1.2 1.1
.42 .46
0.33 0.32
0.91 0.96
Water Intercomparison Studies
110 97
260 270
110 100
-3.6
0
-6.2
3.8
6.2
81
-4.8
41
-9.1
-7.7
-8.8
0
5.6
43
9.1
8.3
4.5
11
-6.7
9.1
-32
19
-14
10
-8.3
9.5
-3.00
5.5
-12
3.8
-9.1
(a) Values were obtained from the Environmental Measurements Laboratory (EML) with all values rounded to two significant
figures. Units are Bo/filter for air, Bq/L for water, and Bo/Kg for the remaining matrices.
115
-------
Table 29. (Accuracy of Analysis from DOE Performance Evaluation Studies, cont.)
Percent
Nuclide Month EML Value'3' EPA Value Bias
Water Intercomparison Studies
MMn September 120 110 -8.3
60Co March 47 45 -4.2
60Co September 100 100 0
90Sr March 1.5 1.0 -33
90Sr September 2.7 2.5 -7.4
134Cs March 48 42 -12
134Cs September 63 56 -11
137Cs March 55 51 -7.3
137Cs September 83 76 -8.4
144Ce March 91 84 -7.7
144Ce September 170 170 0
238Pu March 0.48 0.49 2.1
238Pu September 1.1 1.1 0
239+240Pu March 0.84 0.83 -1.2
239*240Pu September 0.32 0.34 6.2
U-Nat September 2.2 2.1 -4.5
(a) Values were obtained from the Environmental Measurements Laboratory (EML) with all values rounded to two
significant figures. Units are Bq/filter for air, Bq/L for water, and Bq/kg for the remaining matrices.
116
-------
Table 30. Comparability of Analysis from EPA Performance Evaluation Studies'3'
Normalized
Known EPA Lab Grand Dev. of EPA
Value Average Average Expected Average from
Nuclide Month pCi/L pCi/L pCi/L Precision Grand Average
Alpha
Alpha
Alpha
Alpha
Alpha
Beta
Beta
Beta
Beta
Beta
89Sr
89Sr
89Sr
89Sr
90Sr
90Sr
90Sr
90Sr
239+240 p
131|
131i
U-Nat
U-Nat
U-Nat
3H
3H
60Co
60Co
60Co
60Co
134Cs
134Cs
134Cs
134Cs
137Cs
137Cs
137Cs
137Cs
Jan
Apr(b)
Jul
Oct
Oct(b)
Jan
Apr(b)
Jul
Oct
Oct(b)
Jan
Apr(b)
Jul
Oct(b)
Jan
Apr(b)
Jul
Oct(b)
Jan
Feb
Oct
Apr(b)
Aug
Oct
Jun
Nov
Apr(b>
Jun
Oct(b)
Nov
Apr(b)
Jun
Oct(b)
Nov
Apr(b)
Jun
Oct(b)
Nov
34
95
15
20
40
44
177
43
15
58
15
41
34
15
10
29
25
10
20
100
117
29
25
15
9800
7400
39
15
10
30
27
5
12
59
32
5
10
40
Water Performance
37
110
17
17
41
44
166
41
18
52
11
26
37
17
9
26
26
10
19
95
114
28
26
15
9300
7000
39
14
8
32
24
5
9
58
31
5
11
45
17
97
12
14
41
42
155
38
17
53
15
38
34
14
10
28
24
10
19
101
118
28
25
14
9600
7200
39
15
10
30
25
5
10
54
33
6
11
42
Normalized
Dev. of EPA
Average from
Known Value
Evaluation Study
9.0
24.0
5.0
5.0
10.0
5.0
27.0
6.9
5.0
10.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
2.0
10.0
12.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
984.0
740.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
5.0
3.8
0.92
1.6
1.1
-0.02
0.58
0.67
0.75
0.34
-0.18
-1.2
-4.0
1.1
1.1
-0.23
-0.63
0.69
-0.09
0.18
-1.2
-0.53
0.34
0.55
0.25
-0.51
-0.60
-0.24
-0.20
-0.72
0.91
-0.37
-0.13
-0.27
1.2
-0.44
-0.15
0.02
.99
0.58
1.0
0.58
-0.92
0.12
-0.12
-0.71
-0.58
1.0
-0.98
-1.4
-5.2
1.2
0.69
-0.35
-1.0
0.35
0.0
-1.1
-0.92
-0.43
-0.38
0.33
-0.17
-0.96
-1.3
-0.12
-0.23
-0.58
0.81
-0.92
0.0
-1.0
-0.35
-0.23
0.12
0.35
1.7
117
-------
Table 30. (Comparability of Analysis from EPA
Known EPA Lab
Value Average
Nuclide
65Zn
65Zn
106Ru
106Ru
133Ba
133Ba
Month
Jun
Nov
Jun
Nov
Jun
Nov
pCi/L
103
150
119
201
99
79
pCi/L
112
173
107
190
94
82
Performance Evaluation
Grand
Average
pCi/L
108
156
104
175
97
76
Expected
Precision
10.0
15.0
12.0
20.0
10.0
8.0
Studies'3', cont.)
Normalized Normalized
Dev. of EPA Dev. of EPA
Average from
Grand Average
0.71
2.0
.50
.88
-0.48
1.1
Average from
Known Value
1.5
2.7
-1.7
-1.4
0.87
0.58
Air Filter Performance Evaluation Study(c)
Alpha
Beta
137Cs
89Sr
9oSr
131 1
137Cs
K(d) (Total)
Aug
Aug
Aug
Sep
Sep
Sep
Sep
Sep
19
47
9
Milk
30
25
120
49
1679
19
47
12
20
49
10
5.0
5.0
5.0
-0.46
-0.69
-0.69
-0.12
0.12
1.0
Performance Evaluation Study
24
23
120
50
1452
24
20
120
50
1674
5.0
5.0
12.0
5.0
84.0
-0.11
1.2
-0.40
-0.12
-4.6
-2.0
-0.58
-0.38
0.23
-4.7
(a) The grand average of all participating laboratories that are non-outliers
(b) Refers to Blind Performance Evaluation (PE) Study
(c) pCi/filter
(d) mg/liter
118
-------
12. Sample Analysis Procedures
The procedures for analyzing samples collected for
this report are described in Radiochemical and
Analytical Procedures for Analysis of
Environmental Samples (Johns, 1979) and are
summarized in Table 31. These include gamma
analysis, gross beta on air filters, strontium, tritium,
plutonium, and noble gas analyses. These
procedures outline standard methods used to
perform given analytical procedures.
Table 31. Summary of Analytical Procedures
Type of Analytical Counting Analytical
Analysis Equipment Period (min) Procedures
HpGe
Gammab
Gross alpha
and beta on
air filters
99,»oSr
3H
HpGe Air charcoal
detector- cartridges and
calibrated at individual air
0.5 keV/ filters, 30; 100
channel for milk, water,
(0.04 to 2 suspended
meV range) solids.
individual
detector
efficiencies
ranging from
15 to 35%.
Low-level end 30
windows, gas
flow pro-
portional
counter with a
5-cm diameter
window.
Low 50
background
thin-window,
gas-flow,
proportional
counter.
Automatic 300
liquid
scintillation
counter
with output
printer.
Radionuclide concen-
tration quantified from
gamma spectral data
by online computer
program.
Samples are
counted after decay
of naturally occurring
radionuclides.
Chemical separation
by ion exchange.
Separated sample
counted succes-
sively; activity calcu-
lated by simulta-
neous solution of
equations.
Sample prepared by
distillation.
Sample
Size
1.0 and 3.5 L for
routine liquids;
560 m3 for low-
volume air
filters, and
approximately
10,000 m3for
high-volume air
filters.
560 m3
1.0 L for milk
or water. 0.1
to 1 kg
for tissue.
5 to 10 mL for
water.
Approximate
Detection Limit8
For Cs-137, routine
liquids; 5 x 10'" (iCi/mL
(1.8 x 10'1 Bq/L) low-
volume airfilters;
5 x 10"'" nCi/mL
(1.8 x 10'3 Bq/m3), high-
volume airfilters;
5 x 10'16 nCi/mL
(1.8 x 10'5 Bq/m3).
alpha: 8.0 x 10"'VCi/mL
(3.0 x 10'5 Bq/m3)
beta: 2.5 x 10'15nCi/mL
(9.25 x 10'5 Bq/m3)
89Sr=5x 10'>Ci/mL
(1.85x 10'1 Bq/L)
90Sr=2x lO'VCi/mL
(7.4 x 10'2Bq/L)
300 to 700 x
10'VCi/mL
(11-26 Bq/L)c
Continued
119
-------
Table 31. (Summary of Analytical Procedures, cont.)
Type of
Analysis
Analytical
Equipment
Counting
Period (min)
Analytical
Procedures
Sample
Size
Approximate
Detection Limit"
3H Enrichment
(LTHMP
samples)
°Pu
t5Kr, 133Xe
Automatic
liquid
scintillation
counter
with output
printer.
Alpha
spectrometer
with silicon
surface
barrier
detectors
operated in
vacuum
chambers.
300
1,000
Automatic
liquid scin-
tillation counter
with output
printer.
200
Sample concen-
trated by electrolysis
followed by
distillation.
Water sample,
acid-digested filter or
tissue samples
separated by ion
exchange and electro-
plated on stainless
steel planchet.
Separation by gas
chromatography;
dissolved in
toluene "cocktail" for
counting.
250 mL for
water.
1.0 Lfor
water; 0.1 to
1 kg for
tissue; 5,000
to 10,000 m3
for air.
0.4 to 1 .Om3
for air.
10x10'8u.Ci/mL
(3.7 X 10-' Bq/L)
238Pu=0.08x ID'9
u.Ci/mL (2.9 x 1Q-3
Bq/L), 239*24° Pu=0.04
x 10'9u.Ci/mL(1.5x
10'3Bq/L) for water.
For tissue samples,
0.04 pCi (1.5 x 10'3
Bq) per sample
for all isotopes; 5 x
10'" to 10 x 10'17
u,Ci/mL(1.9 x 10'6 to
3.7 x 10'6 Bq/m3) for
plutonium on air
filters.
"6Kr, 133Xe = 4x
10-'2u.Ci/mL(1.5x
10'1 Bq/m3)
The detection limit is defined as the smallest amount of radioactivity that can be reliably detected, i.e., probability of Type I and Type
II error at 5 percent each (DOE81).
Gamma spectrometry using a high purity intrinsic germanium (HpGe) detector.
Depending on sample type.
120
-------
13 Training Program
Proper and efficient performance of radiological
health functions by qualified personnel is required to
ensure protection from radiological hazards. The
purpose of the training program is to provide well-
trained, qualified personnel to safely and efficiently
perform their assigned duties at a predetermined
level of expertise.
The training program includes; tracking training
requirements, maintaining training records,
developing in-house training, and documenting
personnel qualifications and accomplishments.
Systematic determination of job requirements
promotes consistent training activities and develops
or improves knowledge, skills, and abilities that can
be utilized in the work environment.
-A two day radiological monitoring course was
completed in June 1993 by the Environmental
Monitoring Systems Laboratory in Las Vegas (EMSL-
LV) radiation monitoring personnel. This course
covered classroom, practical, and emergency
response exercise preparation through actual field
sampling, surveys, documentation, and collection.
In addition, EMSL-LV radiation monitors participated
in a one day EG&G Energy Measurements, Federal
Radiological Monitoring and Assessment Center
(FRMAC) exercise preparation training. A full
contingent of environmental radiation monitoring
technicians participated in a FRMAC Federal Field
Exercise, Fort Calhoun in Omaha, Nebraska.
Figure 53. FRMAC Field Team members set up a hi-volume air sampler.
121
-------
In August there was a FRMAC Hanford Exercise
Preparation Course put on by the EMSL-LV that was
attended by various state and Radiological
Assistance Program team members. Field
monitoring methods were discussed, and the course
covered instrumentation (including the use of a
FIDLER), sample collection, hotline procedures,
documentation and included a field exercise.
Three EMSL-LV staff members attended a week
long Basic Instructor Training (BIT) course and were
awarded certifications. These same staff members
taught Radiation Worker I and II at the NTS.
Most of the EMSL-LV monitoring personnel
completed a Transportation Emergency Training and
Radiological Assistance (TEP Module), Hazardous
Material Awareness, and a Hazard Communication
Standard course.
Figure 54. FRMAC Team members collect a representative vegetation sample.
122
-------
14. Radiation Protection Standards For External and
Internal Exposure
Design and operation of the ORSP are based on cable legislation and literature. A summary of
requirements and guidelines contained in appli- applicable regulations and guidelines follows.
14.1 Dose Equivalent Commitment
For stochastic effects in members of the public, the following limits are used:
Effective
Dose
mrem/yr
Dose
Equivalent3
mSv/yr
Occasional annual exposures'3
Prolonged period of exposure
500
100
1
a Includes both effective dose equivalent from external radiation and committed effective dose equivalent
from ingested and inhaled radionuclides.
b Occasional exposure implies exposure over a few years with the provision that over a lifetime the
average exposure does not exceed 100 mrem (1 mSv) per year (ICRP, 1983).
14.2 Concentration Guides
ICRP-30(\CRP, 1979) lists Derived Air Concentra-
tions (DAC) and Annual Limits on Intake (ALI).
The ALI is the secondary limit and can be used
with assumed breathing rates and ingested vol-
umes to calculate concentration guides. The
concentration guides (CGs) in Table 32 were
derived in this manner and yield the committed
effective dose equivalent (50 year) of 100 mrem/yr
for members of the public.
14.3 U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency
Drinking Water Guide
The EPA has set allowable concentrations for
continuous controlled releases of radionuclides to
drinking water sources. These were published in
40 CFR 141 (CFR 1988). These limits are based
on the standard that exposure to any single or
combination of beta and gamma emitters in
drinking water should not lead to exposures
exceeding 4 mrem/year. For tritium, this is 2.0 X
10'5 nCi/mL (740 Bq/L). For 90Sr, the limit is 8.0 X
10'VCi/mL (0.3 Bq/L).
123
-------
Table 32. Routine Monitoring Guides
Sampling
Nuclide Frequency
Air Surveillance Network
7Be 1/wk
95Zr 1/wk
95Nb 1/wk
"Mo 1/wk
103Ru 1/wk
131 1 1/wk
132Te 1/wk
137Cs 1/wk
14°Ba 1/wk
140La 1/wk
141Ce 1/wk
144Ce 1/wk
238Pu 1/mo
Gross Beta 1/wk
3H 1/wk
85Kr 1/wk
133Xe 1/wk
135Xe 1/wk
Locations
(ASN)
all
all
all
all
all
all
all
all
all
all
all
all
all
all
19
16
16
16
Sample
Size
m3
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
2400
560
5
0.4
0.4
0.4
Water Surveillance Network (LTHMP)b Liters
3H 1/mo
3H+ 1/mo
(enriched tritium)
69Sr 1st time
90Sr 1st time
137Cs 1/mo
226Ra 1st time
234U 1st time
235U 1st time
23BU 1st time
238Pu 1st time
239+240Pu 1st time
Gamma 1/mo
all
all
all
all
all
all
all
all
all
all
all
all
Milk Surveillance Network (MSN)
3H 1/mo
13'l 1/mo
137Cs 1/mo
89Sr 1/mo
90Sr 1/mo
Dosimetry Networks
TLD 1/mo
(Personnel)
TLD 1/quarter
(Station)
PIC weekly
all
all
all
all
all
Locations
72
130
29
1
0.25
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3.5
Liters
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
Number
1
3 to 6
Continuous
Count
Time
Minutes
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
30
1000
30
150
200
200
200
Minutes
300
300
50
50
100
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
1000
30
Minutes
300
100
100
50
50
Concentrations
Bq/m3
1700
12
110
110
58
4
17
12
120
120
52
1.2
5x 10-"
2 x 10'2
4.6 x 103
2.2 x 10"
1.8 x 104
2.3 x 103
Bq/L
740
740
16
0.8
3.3
1.4
8.2
10
10
6.2
4.1
--
Bq/L
12 x 104
41
160
820
40
Exposure Guide MDC
100mR
Guide8
uCi/mL
4.7 x 10'8
3X10'10
3 x 10'9
3 x 10'9
1.5x ID'9
1 x 10'10
5 x 10'10
3X10'10
3 x 10'9
3x10'9
1.4x 10'9
3x ID'1'
1 x 10'14
5 x ID'13
1.2x 10'7
6.2 x 10'7
4.9 x 10'7
6.2 x 10'e
uCi/mL
2x10-5
2 x 105
4.4 x 10'7
2.2 x 10'8
8.8 x ID'8
3.9 x 10'"
2.2 x 10'7
2.8 x 1Q-6
2.8 x 10-B
1.7x 10'"
1.1 x 10'8
--
uCi/mL
3 x 1Q-3
1 x We
4x 1Q-6
2x10'5
1 x 10'6
MDC(%CG)
MDC
mBq/m3
17
4.1
1.8
1.5
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.8
4.8
2.6
3.0
12
1.5x 10'3
0.11
148
148
370
370
Bq/L
12
0.37
0.18
0.074
0.33
0.037
0.0035
0.0035
0.0035
0.003
0.002
0.18
Bq/L
12
0.18
0.33
0.18
0.074
MDC
(%CG)
1 x 10'3
4x10'2
2x 10'3
2 x 1Q-3
3x 1Q-3
4x 10'2
1 x 10'2
2x 10-2
4x10°
2x 1Q-3
6x10'3
1.0
0.32
6x 10-'
3 x 10'3
6x 10'4
2x10'3
2x102
1.6
5 x 10*
1.1
9.2
10
2.6
0.04
0.035
0.035
0.05
0.05
<0.2
0.01
0.44
0.2
0.02
0.18
3.01 mrem 2
5.10mrem
--
2u.R/hr
-
ALI and DAC values from ICRP-30 modified to 1 mSv annual effective dose equivalent for continuous exposure. TeaYid
I data corrected to 2 g thyroid, greater milk intake, and smaller volume of air breathed annually (1 year-old infant).
For tritium, Sr, and Cs the concentration guide is based on Drinking Water Regs, (4 mrem/yr) (CFR, 1988).
124
-------
15 Summary and Conclusions
The primary functions of the ORSP are to conduct
routine environmental monitoring for radioactive
materials in areas potentially impacted by nuclear
tests and, when necessary, to implement actions to
protect the public from radiation exposure. Com-
ponents of the ORSP include surveillance networks
for air, noble gases, atmospheric tritium, and milk;
biomonitoring of meat, game animals, and vegeta-
bles; exposure monitoring by thermoluminescent
dosimetry, pressurized ion chambers, and whole
body counting; and long-term hydrological monitor-
ing of wells and surface waters. In 1993, data
from all networks and monitoring activities indicat-
ed no radiation directly attributable to current
activities conducted at the NTS. Therefore, protec-
tive actions were not required. The following
sections summarize the ORSP activities for 1993.
15.1 Thermoluminescent
Dosimetry Program
In 1993, external exposure was monitored by a
network of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs)
at 127 fixed locations surrounding the NTS and by
TLDs worn by 69 offsite residents. No apparent
net exposures were related to NTS activities.
Neither administrative, ALARA, nor regulatory
investigation limits were exceeded for any individu-
al or fixed location cumulative exposure. The
range of exposures was similar to those observed
in other areas of the United States. Details of this
program may be found in Section 3.1 of this
Report.
15.2 Pressurized Ion Chamber
Network
The Pressurized lonization Chamber (PIC) network
measures ambient gamma radiation exposure rates
on a near real-time basis. The 27 PICs deployed
around the NTS in 1993 showed no unexplained
deviations from background levels. Based on
average exposure rates recorded at each PIC
location, the maximum annual exposure was at
Milford, Utah and Stone Cabin Ranch. The mini-
mum annual exposure was at Pahrump, Nevada.
These values are within the U.S. background range
and are consistent with previous years' trends.
Details of this program may be found in Section
3.2 of this Report.
15.3 Air Surveillance Network
In 1993, the Air Surveillance Network (ASN)
included 30 continuously operating sampling
stations at locations surrounding the NTS. In the
majority of cases, no gamma emitting radionuclides
were detected by gamma spectrometry (i.e., the
results were gamma-spectrum negligible). Natural-
ly occurring 7Be was the only radionuclide occa-
sionally detected. As in previous years, the
majority of the gross beta results exceeded the
MDC. Analysis of air samples for gross alpha
showed results to be either below or very slightly
above (i.e. statistically indistinguishable from) the
MDC. Plutonium results from two composite
samples from Alamo, NV exceeded the MDC for
238Pu. The MDC for 239+240Pu was exceeded for
one sample from Rachel, NV. Details of the
Atmospheric Monitoring program, including the Air
Surveillance Network, Standby Air Surveillance
Network, Special sampling, Tritium in Atmospheric
Moisture, and Noble Gas Sampling networks may
be found in Section 4 of this Report.
15.3.1 Standby Air Surveillance
Network
In 1993, the Standby Air Surveillance Network
(SASN) included 77 stations that were scheduled
to be activated one week per quarter. These
stations are located in each of the contiguous
states west of the Mississippi River. Results of
gamma spectroscopy, gross beta, and gross alpha
were consistent with those obtained from the ASN.
The composite sample from the New Mexico
standby stations exceeded the MDC for 238Pu.
Four composite samples from the SASN exceeded
the MDC for 239+240pu.
15.3.2 Special Monitoring
TOMSK-7 Incident
Samplers at 24 SASN stations were activated over
a three week period during April, 1993 immediately
following the TOMSK-7 incident in Russia. No
125
-------
alpha or beta activity was detected in any of these
special samples.
15.4 Tritium In Atmospheric
Moisture
A total of 14 routine and 7 standby sampling
locations was evaluated for tritium in atmospheric
moisture during 1993. Of the 686 routine and 26
standby samples analyzed, three showed results
that exceeded the analysis MDC, but this could
represent normal statistical variation. The opera-
tion of the tritium samplers and the data results
are discussed in Section 4.2.
15.5 Noble Gas Sampling
Network
Samples from 13 routine air sampling locations
were analyzed for 85Kr and 133Xe. As in previous
years, all of the results for 133Xe were below the
MDC. All 85Kr samples were above the MDC and
were within the range anticipated from sampling
background levels.
15.6 Foodstuffs
Milk samples were collected from 24 Milk Surveil-
lance Network (MSN) and 110 Standby Milk Sur-
veillance Network (SMSN) stations in 1993. For
both MSN and SMSN samples, the average total
potassium concentration derived from 40K was
consistent with results obtained in previous years.
No manmade gamma-emitting radionuclides were
detected in any of the milk samples. Results of
analyses for 3H, 89Sr, and 90Sr were similar to
those obtained in previous years. Neither increas-
ing nor decreasing trends were evident.
Sampling under the animal investigation program
continued in 1993. Detectable concentrations of
3H were found in four mule deer collected from the
NTS. Detectable concentrations of 239+240pu were
found in one or more tissues from the four mule
deer collected. The median 23SH240pu concentration
in the cattle liver samples was also above the
MDC of the analysis. Each of the bone samples
from the various species collected showed detect-
able amounts of 90Sr. No gamma-emitting
radionuclides other than naturally occurring 40K
were detected in tissue samples. Medians and
ranges of radionuclides in bighorn sheep and
cattle tissues were generally similar to those
obtained in previous years.
Sixteen samples of locally grown fruits and vegeta-
bles were collected in the fall of 1993. All were
analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides, with
only naturally occurring 40K being detected. All
were also analyzed for tritium. Two samples were
found to be greater than the MDC. Two samples
were also found to be above the MDC for 9°Sr,
238Pu, and 239+240pu. None of the smooth skinned
crops or root crops without tops contained
radionuclides above the MDC. The observed
Plutonium may be contained in the fruit or vegeta-
ble material or may be contained in soil or dust
being trapped in the leafy portion of the vegeta-
bles. In the later case, residents could reduce the
potential for radionuclide ingestion by thorough
washing of vegetables prior to eating and by
peeling of root crops such as potatoes and carrots.
The worst-case dose that could potentially result
from eating these fruits and vegetables is dis-
cussed in Section 8 of this Report, Dose Assess-
ment.
Detailed discussion of the collection and analysis
of foodstuffs may be found in Section 5 of this
Report.
15.7 Internal Dosimetry
Internal radiation exposure is caused by
radionuclides that are ingested, absorbed, or
inhaled and retained within the body for varying
amounts of time. The EMSL-LV Internal Dosime-
try Program assesses this internal deposition by
whole body counting, lung counting, and bioassay
(urinalysis). During 1993, whole body and lung
counts were performed on 144 individuals, of
whom 56 were participants in the offsite internal
dosimetry network. The spectra obtained showed
only low-level activities on the same order of
intensity as those observed in normal background
measurements.
Special whole body counting was conducted on
soldiers who had incurred shrapnel wounds during
Operation Desert Storm. These evaluations were
conducted to detect the presence of depleted
uranium.
Bioassay results showed that the concentration of
tritium in single urine samples for participants in
the Offsite Internal Dosimetry Program varied from
126
-------
below the MDC to 8.3 X 10'7 //Ci/mL (3.1 X 10*
Bq/L). This can be accounted for by random
statistical fluctuation. The highest value is less
than 1% of the applicable derived concentration
guide.
Details of the internal dosimetry program may be
found in Section 6 of this Report.
15.8 Long-Term Hydrological
Monitoring Program
15.8.1 Nevada Test Site
Monitoring
Sixteen wells on the NTS or immediately outside
its borders on federally owned land are scheduled
to be sampled monthly. An additional twenty wells
are scheduled for sampling at approximately six
month intervals. All samples collected during 1993
were analyzed by gamma spectrometry and for
tritium by the enrichment method. No gamma-
emitting radionuclides were detected. The highest
tritium level, detected in a sample from Well UE-
7ns, was less than 1% of the derived concentration
guide for tritium. There were no indications that
migration from any test cavity is affecting any
domestic water supply.
15.8.2 Offsite Monitoring in the
Vicinity of the Nevada Test
Site
These sampling locations represent drinking water
sources for rural residents and for communities in
the area. Sampling locations include 23 wells,
seven springs, and two surface water sites. Thirty
locations are routinely sampled monthly. Gamma
spectrometric analysis is completed on monthly
samples. Tritium analysis is performed on a
semiannual basis.
None of the 1993 samples analyzed for tritium
using the conventional method had results above
the MDC. Five that were analyzed for tritium by
the enrichment method showed detectable activity.
These results were felt to represent scavenged
atmospheric tritium by precipitation.
15.8.3 LTHMP at Off-NTS
Nuclear Device Test
Locations
-Annual sampling of surface and ground waters is
conducted at Projects SHOAL and FAULTLESS
sites in Nevada, Projects GASBUGGY and
GNOME sites in New Mexico, Projects RULISON
and RIO BLANCO sites in Colorado, and the
Project DRIBBLE site in Mississippi. Routine
biennial sampling was conducted in 1993 at the
Projects CANNIKIN, LONG SHOT, and MILROW
sites on Amchitka Island, Alaska.
As in previous years, monitoring of well EPNG 10-
36 at Project GASBUGGY was a notable exception
to wells evidencing decreasing trends. The mech-
anism and route of migration from the Project
GASBUGGY cavity is not currently known.
Details of the on-site, near NTS, and off-NTS
hydrological monitoring programs may be found in
Section 7 of this Report.
15.9 Dose Assessment
The extensive offsite environmental surveillance
system detailed in this Report measured no radia-
tion exposures that could be attributed to recent
NTS operations. The potential Effective Dose
Equivalent (EDE) to the maximally exposed offsite
resident resulted in a maximum dose of 3.8 X 10~3
mrem (3.8 X 10~5 mSv) to a hypothetical resident
of Indian Springs, NV located 54 km (32 mi) SE of
the NTS control point. This value was based on
onsite source emission measurements and esti-
mates provided by DOE and calculated by EPA's
CAP88-PC model. The calculated population dose
(collective effective dose equivalent) to the approx-
imately 21,750 residents living within 80 km (50
mi) from each of the NTS airborne emission
sources was 1.2 X 10"2 person-rem (1.2 X 10"4
person-Sv). Monitoring network data indicated a
1993 dose of 97 mrem (0.97 mSv) from normal
background radiation occurred in Indian Springs.
The calculated dose to this individual from world-
wide distributions of radioactivity as measured
from surveillance networks was 0.054 mrem (5.4
X 10" mSv). An additional EDE of 0.56 mrem (5.6
X 10~3 mSv) would be received if edible tissues
from a chukar and contaminated deer collected on
the NTS were to be consumed. All of these maxi-
mum dose estimates are < 1% of the most restric-
tive standard.
127
-------
Details of the dose assessment calculations may Detailed discussion of EMSL-LV activities in sup-
be found in Section 8 of this Report. port of this facility may be found in Section 9 of this
Report.
15.10 Weapons Test and Liquified
Gaseous Fuels Spills Test
Facility
Nonradiological monitoring was conducted in 1993
for four tests conducted at the Liquified Gaseous
Fuels Spill Test Facility (LGFSTF), located in Area
5 of the NTS.
128
-------
References
Bureau of the Census, 1990, Population Count
Pursuant to Public Law 94-171. Department of
Commerce, Washington, D.C. DOC90
Bureau of Census, 1986. 1986 Population and
1985 Per Capita Income Estimates for Counties
and Incorporated Places, Publication Number P-
26. U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington,
D.C. DOC86
Chapman, J.B. and S.L. Hokett, 1991,
Evaluation of Groundwater Monitoring at Offsite
Nuclear Test Areas, DOE Nevada Field Office
Report DOE/NV/10845-07, Las Vegas, NV. CHA
1991
Code of Federal Regulations, 1988. Drinking
Water Regulations, Title 40, part 141,
Washington D.C. CFR88
Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing
Radiation 1980. The Effects on Populations of
Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation.
National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
BEIR80
Davis, Max, 1993, Annual Water Monitoring on
and around the SALMON Test Site Area, Lamar
County, Mississippi, April 1993, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Report
EPA/600/R-94/118, Las Vegas, NV. DAV 1993
Houghton, J.G., C.M. Sakamoto, R.O. Gifford,
1975. Nevada Weather and Climate, Special
Publication 2. Nevada Bureau of Mines and
Geology, University of Nevada, Mackay School
of Mines, Reno, NV. HO75
International Commission on Radiological
Protection, 1983. Principles for Limiting
Exposure of the Public to Natural Sources of
Radiation, Annual Limit on Intake (ALI) and
Derived Air Concentrations (DAC) for Members
of the Public, ICRP Publication 39, Pergamon
Press, New York. ICRP 1983
International Commission on Radiological
Protection, 1979, Limits for Intake by Workers,
ICRP Publication 30, Supplement to Part 1,
Pergamon Press, New York. ICRP 1979
Johns, F , 1979. Radiochemical and Analytical
Procedures for Analysis of Environmental
Samples, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Las Vegas, Nevada, report EMSL-LV-0539-17-
1979, Las Vegas, NV. JOH 1979
National Council on Radiation Protection and
Measurement, 1989. Screening Techniques for
Determining Compliance with Environmental
Standards: Releases of Radionuclides to the
Atmosphere, NCRP Commentary No 3
Washington D.C. NCRP89
National Council on Radiation Protection and
Measurements, 1975, Krypton-85 in the
Atmosphere, NCRP Report No. 44, Washington,
D.C. NCRP 1975
National Park Service, 1990. Personal
Communication from Supervisor Park Ranger,
R. Hopkins, Death Valley Nation Monument,
Death Valley, CA. NPS90
Quiring, R.E., 1968, Climatological Data, Nevada
Test Site, Nuclear Rocket Development Station,
ESSA Research Laboratory Report ERLTM-ARL
7, Las Vegas, NV. QUI 1968
Stanley, T.W. and S.S. Verner, 1975, The U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency's Quality
Assurance Program, in J.K. Taylor and T.W.
Stanley (eds.), Quality Assurance for
Environmental Measurements, ASTM STP-865,
Philadelphia, PA. STA 1985
Taylor, J.K., 1987, Quality Assurance of
Chemical Measurements, Chapter 4, Lewis
Publications. TAY 1987
U.S. Department of Agriculture. Nevada 1994
Agricultural Statistics. Carson City, Nevada.
U.S. Energy Research and Development
Administration, 1977. Final Environmental
Impact Statement, Nevada Test Site, A/ye
County, Nevada, Report ERDA-1551. U.S.
Department of Commerce, Springfield, VA.
ERDA77
129
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1993,
Quality Management Plan, Environmental
Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas,
Nevada, Report EPA/600/X-93-024. Las Vegas,
NV. EPA 1993
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992,
Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory
Intercomparison Studies Program,
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory,
Las Vegas, Nevada, Report EPA/600/R-92/xxx,
Las Vegas, NV. EPA 1992
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992,
Offsite Environmental Monitoring Report:
Radiation Monitoring Around United States
Nuclear Test Areas, Calendar Year 1991.
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory,
Las Vegas, Nevada, Report EPA/600/R-93/141,
Las Vegas, NV. EPA 1992
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992,
User's Guide for Cap88-PC, Version 1.0, Office
of Radiation Programs, Las Vegas Facility,
Report 402-B-92-001, Las Vegas, NV. EPA
1992
U.S. Department of Energy, 1992, Announced
United States Nuclear Tests, Report DOE/NV/-
209 (Revision 12), Nevada Field Office, Las
Vegas, NV. DOE 1992
U.S. Department of Energy, 1993, Nevada
Operations Office Annual Site Environmental
Report 1992, DOE/NV10630-66, Nevada
Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV. DOE 1993
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1981.
Glossary of Terms, Nuclear Power and
Radiation, NUREG-0770. U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
NRC81
Utah Agricultural Statistics 1994, Utah
Department of Agriculture Annual Report. State
Statistical Division, Salt Lake City, Utah.
130
-------
Glossary of Terms
Definitions of terms given here are modified from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Glossary of
terms (NRC81).
background The radiation in man's natural envir-
radiation onment, including cosmic rays and
radiation from the naturally radioac-
tive elements, both outside and
inside the bodies of humans and
animals. It is also called natural
radiation. The usually quoted aver-
age individual exposure from back-
ground radiation is 125 millirem per
year in midlatitudes at sea level.
becquerel A unit, in the International System
(Bq) of Units, of measurement of radio-
activity equal to one nuclear trans-
formation per second.
beta A charged particle emitted from a
particle (B) nucleus during radioactive decay,
with a mass equal to 1/837 that of a
proton. A positively charged beta
particle is called a positron. Large
amounts of beta radiation may
cause skin burns, and beta emitters
are harmful if they enter the body.
Beta particles are easily stopped by
a thin sheet of metal or plastic.
blind A spiked sample, the composition
samples of which is unknown to the techni-
cian, which has been introduced
into the laboratory as a separate
sample. These samples are used
for the verification of analytical ac-
curacy. Approximately one percent
of the sample load shall be blind
samples.
Committed The summation of Dose Equivalents
Effective to specific organs or tissues that
Dose would be received from an intake of
Equivalent radioactive material by an individual
during a 50-year period following
the intake, multiplied by the appro-
priate weighting factor.
cosmic Penetrating ionizing radiation, both
radiation particulate and electromagnetic,
originating in space. Secondary
cosmic rays, formed by interactions
in the earth's atmosphere, account
for about 45 to 50 millirem of the
125 millirem background radiation
that an average individual receives
in a year.
curie (Ci) The basic unit used to describe the
rate of radioactive disintegration.
The curie is equal to 37 billion disin-
tegrations per second, which is
approximately the rate of decay of 1
gram of radium; named for Marie
and Pierre Curie, who discovered
radium in 1898.
dosimeter A portable instrument for measuring
and registering the total accumulat-
ed dose of ionizing radiation.
duplicate A second aliquot of a sample which
is approximately equal in mass or
volume to the first aliquot and is
analyzed for the sample parame-
ters. The laboratory performs dupli-
cate analyses to evaluate the preci-
sion of an analysis.
half-life The time in which half the atoms of
a particular radioactive substance
disintegrate to another nuclear form.
Measured half-lives vary from mil-
lionths of a second to billions of
years. Also called physical half-life.
ionization The process of creating ions
(charged particles) by adding one or
more electrons to, or removing one
or more electrons from, atoms or
molecules. High temperatures,
electrical discharges, nuclear radia-
tion, and X-rays can cause ioniza-
tion.
ionization An instrument that detects and mea-
chamber sures ionizing radiation by measur-
ing the electrical current that flows
131
-------
when radiation ionizes gas in a
chamber.
isotope One of two or more atoms with the
same number of protons, but differ-
ent numbers of neutrons in their
nuclei. Thus, 12C, 13C, and 14C are
isotopes of the element carbon, the
numbers denoting the approximate
atomic weights. Isotopes have very
nearly the same chemical proper-
ties, but often different physical
properties (for example, 13C and 14C
are radioactive).
matrix spike An aliquot of a sample which is
spiked with a known concentration
of the analyte of interest. The pur-
pose of analyzing this type of sam-
ple is to evaluate to the effect of the
sample matrix upon the analytical
methodology.
method blank A method blank is a volume of de-
mineralized water for liquid sam-
ples, or an appropriate solid matrix
for soil/sediment samples, carried
through the entire analytical proce-
dure. The volume or weight of the
blank must be approximately equal
to the volume or weight of the sam-
ple processed. Analysis of the
blank verifies that method interfer-
ences caused by contaminants in
solvents, reagents, glassware, and
other sample processing hardware
are known and minimized.
minimum The smallest amount of radioactivity
detectable that can be reliably detected with a
concentration probability of Type I and Type II
(MDC) error at five percent each (DOE81).
millirem A one-thousandth part of a rem.
(mrem) (See rem.)
milliroentgen A one-thousandth part of a roent-
(mR) gen. (See roentgen.)
noble gas A gaseous element that does not
readily enter into chemical combina-
tion with other elements. An inert
gas.
personnel
monitoring
picocune
(pCi)
The determination of the degree of
radioactive contamination on indi-
viduals using survey meters, or the
determination of radiation dosage
received by means of internal or
external dosimetry methods.
One trillionth part of a curie.
quality factor The factor by which the absorbed
dose is to be multiplied to obtain a
quantity that expresses, on a com-
mon scale for all ionizing radiations,
the biological damage to exposed
persons. It is used because some
types of radiation, such as alpha
particles, are more biologically dam-
aging than other types.
rad
radioisotope
Acronym for radiation absorbed
dose. The basic unit of absorbed
dose of radiation. A dose of one
rad means the absorption of 100
ergs (a small but measurable
amount of energy) per gram of ab-
sorbing material.
An unstable isotope of an element
that decays or disintegrates sponta-
neously, emitting radiation.
radionuclide A radioisotope.
rem Acronym for roentgen equivalent
man. The unit of dose of any ioniz-
ing radiation that produces the
same biological effect as a unit of
absorbed dose of ordinary X-rays.
(See quality factor.)
roentgen (R) A unit of exposure to ionizing radia-
tion. It is that amount of gamma or
X-rays required to produce ions
carrying one electrostatic unit of
electrical charge in one cubic centi-
meter of dry air under standard
conditions. Named after Wilhelm
Roentgen, German scientist who
discovered X-rays in 1895.
scintillation The combination of phosphor,
(dectector or photomultiplier tube, and associated
counter) counter electronic circuits for count-
132
-------
ing light emissions produced in the
phosphor by ionizing radiation.
Sievert (Sv) A unit, in the International System of
Units (SI), of dose equivalent which
is equal to one joule per kilogram (1
Sv equals 100 rem).
terrestrial The portion of natural radiation
(background) that is emitted by
naturally occurring radiation radioac-
tive materials in the earth.
tritium A radioactive isotope of hydrogen
that decays by beta emission. It's
half-life is about 12.5 years.
verification/ A prepared sample of known con-
reference centration of a purchased standard
standard reference material. These samples
are analyzed in triplicate and the
results are used to verify accuracy
and precision of the procedure.
X-rays Penetrating electromagnetic radia-
tion (photon) having a wavelength
that is much shorter than that of
visible light. These rays are usually
produced by excitation of the elec-
tron field around certain nuclei. In
nuclear reactions, it is customary to
refer to photons originating in the
nucleus as gamma rays, and to
those originating in the electron field
of the atom as X-rays. These rays
are sometimes called roentgen rays
after their discoverer, Wilhelm K.
Roentgen.
133
-------
Appendix A
Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Tables and Figures
Table A-1 Environmental Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Results - 1993
Table A-2 Personnel Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Results - 1993
134
-------
Table A.I. Environmental Thermoluminescent Dosimetry
Station Name
Alamo, NV
Amargosa Valley, NV
American Borate, NV
Angleworm Ranch, NV
Atlanta Mine, NV
Austin, NV
Baker, CA
Barstow, CA
Battle Mountain, NV
Beatty, NV
Bishop, CA
Blue Eagle Ranch, NV
Blue Jay, NV
Boulder, UT
Bryce Canyon, UT
Cactus Springs, NV
Caliente, NV
Carp, NV
Cedar City, UT
Cherry Creek, NV
Clark Station, NV
Coaldale, NV
Complex 1, NV
Corn Creek, NV
Cortez Hwy 278, NV
Coyote Summit, NV
Crescent Valley, NV
Currie, CA
Death Valley Jet, C
Delta, UT
Diablo Wells, NV
Duchesne, UT
Duckwater, NV
Elgin, NV
Elko, NV
Ely, NV
Enterprise, UT
Eureka, NV
Fallen, NV
Ferron, UT
Flying Diamond, NV
Furnace Creek, NV
Gabbs, NV
#
of Days
365
365
365
365
365
365
134
181
296
365
180
365
365
312
365
290
365
355
365
365
365
365
365
359
225
365
365
365
365
365
365
365
365
355
365
365
304
365
365
202
365
365
365
Results '
1 993
Daily Exposure (mR) Total Exposure'3' Percent
Min
0.22
0.20
0.25
0.29
0.20
0.33
0.23
0.28
0.20
0.28
0.29
0.18
0.33
0.20
0.18
0.16
0.21
0.23
0.17
0.24
0.30
0.29
0.27
0.13
0.26
0.31
0.23
0.29
0.21
0.15
0.35
0.13
0.27
0.31
0.20
0.20
0.34
0.28
0.21
0.14
0.19
0.17
0.20
Max
0.25
0.32
0.33
0.33
0.31
0.39
0.23
0.34
0.22
0.34
0.34
0.23
0.39
0.25
0.23
0.20
0.27
0.26
0.21
0.27
0.33
0.32
0.33
0.16
0.30
0.38
0.25
0.31
0.29
0.22
0.38
0.20
0.33
0.37
0.24
0.24
0.57
0.40
0.23
0.69
0.23
0.22
0.23
Mean
0.24
0.25
0.29
0.31
0.26
0.35
0.23
0.30
0.21
0.31
0.32
0.20
0.36
0.23
0.21
0.18
0.25
0.24
0.19
0.26
0.31
0.30
0.30
0.15
0.29
0.34
0.24
0.30
0.25
0.20
0.36
0.18
0.30
0.35
0.22
0.22
0.45
0.34
0.22
0.29
0.21
0.19
0.22
(mR)
88
94
108
115
94
131
86
109
76
115
114
77
130
102
76
68
90
89
70
95
113
112
109
55
105
128
86
108
94
72
131
65
110
126
80
81
164
122
93
87
80
74
82
Completeness
100
100
100
100
100
100
37
50
81
100
49
100
100
85
100
79
100
97
100
100
100
100
100
98
62
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
97
100
100
83
100
100
55
100
100
100
(a) Total annual exposure is calculated by multiplying the mean daily exposure rate for each quarterly
deployment period by the number of days in that deployment period and then summing the values.
135
-------
Table A-1. (Environmental Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Results - 1993, con't)
# Daily Exposure (mR) Total Exposure'31 Percent
Station Name of Days Min Max Mean (mR) Completeness
Garrison, UT 365 0.18 0.21 0.20 88 100
Geyser Ranch, NV 365 0.19 0.24 0.21 79 100
Goldfield, NV 365 0.25 0.27 0.26 97 100
Grantsville, UT 296 0.13 0.29 0.20 66 81
Green River, UT 295 0.18 0.21 0.19 71 81
Groom Lake, NV 365 0.21 0.29 0.24 88 100
Gunnison, UT 310 0.16 0.19 0.18 64 85
Hancock Summit, NV 365 0.39 0.45 0.42 153 100
Hiko, NV 365 0.19 0.24 0.21 77 100
Hot Creek Ranch, NV 359 0.30 0.44 0.35 123 98
Ibapah, UT 365 0.27 0.28 0.28 101 100
Independence, CA 88 0.19 0.32 0.25 95 24
Indian Springs, NV 346 0.17 0.27 0.22 85 95
lone, NV 315 0.29 0.33 0.31 111 86
Jacob Lake, AZ 295 0.23 0.29 0.27 127 81
Kanab, UT 295 0.14 0.18 0.17 62 81
Kirkby Ranch, NV 365 0.18 0.22 0.21 75 100
Koyens, NV 365 0.24 0.30 0.27 97 100
Las Vegas Airport, NV 355 0.14 0.17 0.16 57 97
Las Vegas UNLV, NV 355 0.16 0.21 0.19 68 97
Las Vegas USD I, NV 355 0.17 0.20 0.19 68 97
Lida, NV 365 0.27 0.30 0.28 106 100
Loa, UT 289 0.28 0.33 0.31 148 79
Lone Pine, CA 358 0.10 0.30 0.23 95 98
Lovelock, NV 365 0.21 0.22 0.22 78 100
Lund, NV 365 0.20 0.24 0.23 82 100
Lund, UT 365 0.26 0.31 0.29 106 100
Mammoth Geothermal, CA 180 0.30 0.34 0.32 116 49
Mammoth Lake, CA 272 0.23 0.36 0.30 94 75
Manhattan, NV 365 0.28 0.46 0.36 175 100
Medlins Ranch, NV 365 0.29 0.35 0.31 113 100
Mesquite, NV 365 0.15 0.18 0.16 61 100
Milford, UT 365 0.29 0.34 0.31 114 100
Mina, NV 365 0.28 0.30 0.28 105 100
Moapa, NV 127 0.20 0.22 0.21 80 35
Monticello, UT 296 0.21 0.26 0.24 89 81
Mtn Meadows Ranch, NV 270 0.21 0.21 0.21 83 74
Nash Ranch, NV 365 0.20 0.27 0.23 120 100
Nephi, UT 312 0.17 0.66 0.31 79 85
Nyala, NV 365 0.22 0.26 0.24 89 100
Olancha, CA 345 0.24 0.28 0.25 123 95
Overton, NV 365 0.15 0.17 0.16 61 100
(a) Total annual exposure is calculated by multiplying the mean daily exposure rate for each quarterly
deployment period by the number of days in that deployment period and then summing the values.
136
-------
Table A-1. (Environmental Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Results
Station Name
Page, AZ
Pahrump, NV
Parowan, UT
Penoyer Farms, NV
Pine Creek, NV
Pioche, NV
Price, UT
Provo, UT
Youngs Ranch, NV
Queen City Summ., NV
Rachel, NV
Reed Ranch, NV
Reno, NV
Ridgecrest, CA
Round Mountain, NV
Ruby Valley, NV
Desert Cor. Center, NV
Salt Lake City, UT
Shoshone, CA
Shurz, NV
Silver Peak, CA
Springdale, NV
St. George, UT
Steward Ranch, NV
Stone Cabin, NV
Sunnyside, NV
Tempuite, NV
Tonopah Test Range, NV
Tonopah, NV
Trout Creek, NV
Twin Springs, NV
U.S. Ecology, NV
Uhalde's Ranch, NV
Valley Crest, CA
Vernal, UT
Vernon, UT
Warm Springs #1, NV
Warm Springs #2, NV
Well, CA
Wendover, CA
#
of Days
295
291
289
365
203
365
365
365
365
365
365
365
365
134
365
365
365
364
324
365
364
365
365
365
365
365
278
364
364
365
365
365
364
365
365
296
365
270
365
365
- 1993, con't)
Daily Exposure (mR) Total Exposure'3' Percent
Min
0.16
0.13
0.14
0.29
0.32
0.21
0.15
0.23
0.12
0.36
0.28
0.28
0.20
0.26
0.32
0.24
0.13
0.14
0.20
0.27
0.22
0.27
0.14
0.25
0.32
0.15
0.27
0.33
0.31
0.20
0.29
0.30
0.27
0.13
0.14
0.15
0.36
0.81
0.21
0.20
Max
0.19
0.17
0.22
0.37
0.86
0.24
0.23
0.26
0.25
0.37
0.32
0.34
0.24
0.27
0.36
0.32
0.17
0.22
0.29
0.30
0.33
0.37
0.17
0.33
0.37
0.18
0.30
0.37
0.34
0.24
0.34
0.36
0.34
0.20
0.22
0.33
1.17
0.85
0.25
0.22
Mean
0.18
0.15
0.19
0.33
0.52
0.22
0.19
0.24
0.19
0.37
0.30
0.32
0.22
0.27
0.34
0.29
0.16
0.19
0.24
0.29
0.25
0.31
0.16
0.29
0.33
0.16
0.29
0.35
0.32
0.22
0.32
0.32
0.30
0.16
0.20
0.23
0.53
0.84
0.23
0.21
(mR)
67
57
68
117
158
81
72
88
70
133
109
116
80
97
124
106
60
70
90
105
86
119
59
111
117
59
107
127
120
81
115
121
108
62
70
77
145
305
85
76
Completeness
81
80
79
100
56
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
37
100
100
97
100
89
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
76
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
81
100
74
100
100
(a) Total annual exposure is calculated by multiplying the mean daily exposure rate for each quarterly
deployment period by the number of days in that deployment period and then summing the values.
137
-------
Table A-1. (Environmental Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Results - 1993, con't)
# Daily Exposure (mR) Total Exposure'3' Percent
Station Name of Days Min Max Mean (mR) Completeness
Willow Springs, UT 296 0.11 0.28 0.18 62 81
Winnemucca, NV 365 0.25 0.28 0.26 97 100
Minimum total exposure is 55 mR at Corn Creek, NV
Maximum total exposure is 305 mR at Warm Springs #2, NV
Mean of total exposure is 98 mR
TOTAL DATA COMPLETENESS: 91.4%
(a) Total annual exposure is calculated by multiplying the mean daily exposure rate for each quarterly
deployment period by the number of days in that deployment period and then summing the values.
Table A-2. Personnel Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Results, 1993
Daily Deep Dose Total
# Exposure (mrem) Annual'3' Percent
Station Name of Days Min Max Mean Exposure (mrem) Completeness
427 Alamo, NV. 361 0.16 0.31 0.24 95 99
022 Alamo, NV. 358 0.12 0.36 0.24 91 98
426 Amargosa Center, NV. 358 0.20 0.32 0.27 100 98
380 Amargosa Valley, NV. 358 0.20 0.50 0.30 104 98
025 American Borate, NV. 365 0.09 0.20 0.14 62 100
056 American Borate, NV. 365 0.10 0.35 0.18 81 100
329 Austin, NV. 325 0.11 0.37 0.31 112 89
555 Beatty, NV. 321 0.24 0.35 0.30 113 88
429 Beatty, NV. 109 0.19 0.33 0.26 103 30
038 Beatty, NV. 296 0.20 0.64 0.36 115 81
556 Beatty, NV. 266 0.29 0.34 0.31 112 73
021 Beatty, NV. 361 0.14 0.44 0.31 117 99
009 Blue Eagle Ranch, NV. 347 0.22 0.41 0.30 117 95
002 Caliente, NV. 361 0.22 0.50 0.33 114 99
336 Caliente, NV. 361 0.18 0.30 0.24 91 99
044 Cedar City, UT. 361 0.07 0.40 0.26 117 99
454 Cedar City, UT. 361 0.04 0.32 0.21 96 99
011 Complex I, NV. 361 0.30 0.39 0.33 124 99
010 Complex I, NV. 361 0.17 0.39 0.31 117 99
014 Coyote Summit, NV. 361 0.22 0.35 0.28 108 99
015 Coyote Summit, NV. 361 0.26 0.46 0.33 120 99
304 Death Valley Jet, CA. 354 0.26 0.45 0.36 133 97
(a) Total annual exposure is calculated by multiplying the mean daily exposure rate for each quarterly
deployment period by the number of days in that deployment period and then summing the values.
138
-------
Table A-2. (Personnel Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Results
Daily Deep Dose
# Exposure (mrem)
Station Name of Days
359
345
344
444
455
302
019
040
007
232
405
006
037
448
580
300
379
346
347
307
018
348
372
450
411
248
293
264
334
443
449
052
060
404
341
045
029
445
042
339
370
Death Valley, CA.
Delta, UT.
Delta, UT.
Ely, NV.
Ely, NV.
Gabbs, NV.
Goldfield, NV.
Goldfield, NV.
Goldfield, NV.
Hiko, NV.
Indian Springs, NV.
Indian Springs, NV.
Indian Springs, NV.
lone, NV.
lone, NV.
Koyne Ranch, NV.
Manhattan, NV.
Milford, UT.
Milford, UT.
Mina, NV.
Nyala, NV.
Overton, NV.
Pahrump, NV.
Pahrump, NV.
Pahrump, NV.
Penoyer Farms, NV.
Pioche, NV.
Rachel, NV.
Rachel, NV.
Rachel, NV.
Round Mountain, NV.
Salt Lake City, UT.
Shoshone, CA.
Shoshone, CA.
Silver Peak, NV.
St. George, UT.
Stone Cabin Ranch, NV
Terrell's Ranch, NV.
Tonopah, NV.
Tonopah, NV.
Twin Springs Ranch, NV.
354
358
310
361
361
354
350
350
259
361
354
354
361
266
91
358
350
358
358
255
339
361
208
263
354
358
361
336
358
350
350
358
354
354
266
361
288
358
325
354
91
Min
0.26
0.10
0.11
0.25
0.22
0.20
0.26
0.22
0.23
0.19
0.18
0.21
0.15
0.21
0.34
0.19
0.28
0.10
0.13
0.12
0.21
0.03
0.25
0.03
0.08
0.21
0.11
0.18
0.22
0.24
0.31
0.05
0.20
0.23
0.18
0.04
0.29
0.28
0.32
0.28
0.23
Max
0.39
0.32
0.31
0.39
0.29
0.33
0.62
0.49
0.45
0.40
0.30
0.37
0.27
0.54
0.34
0.31
0.57
0.36
0.36
0.47
0.85
0.23
0.42
0.31
0.29
0.35
0.30
0.35
0.36
0.31
0.84
0.33
0.54
0.43
0.37
0.25
0.42
0.38
0.55
0.36
0.52
1993, con't)
Total
Annual(a)
Mean Exposure (mrem)
0.32
0.22
0.18
0.29
0.25
0.28
0.41
0.38
0.34
0.28
0.23
0.28
0.21
0.37
0.34
0.26
0.36
0.26
0.28
0.28
0.51
0.17
0.32
0.20
0.22
0.27
0.23
0.27
0.29
0.28
0.48
0.22
0.34
0.30
0.28
0.18
0.32
0.34
0.39
0.32
0.37
113
102
81
100
91
106
133
131
106
106
89
99
76
131
124
96
127
108
110
131
190
72
123
76
90
105
94
105
112
107
152
85
139
115
106
74
114
123
137
114
126
Percent
Completeness
97
98
85
99
99
97
96
96
71
99
97
97
99
73
25
98
96
98
98
70
93
99
57
72
97
98
99
92
98
96
96
98
97
97
73
99
79
98
89
97
25
(a) Total annual exposure is calculated by multiplying the mean daily exposure rate for each quarterly
deployment period by the number of days in that deployment period and then summing the values.
139
-------
Table A-2. (Personnel Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Results - 1993, con't)
Daily Deep Dose Total
# Exposure (mrem) Annual(a) Percent
Station Name of Days Min Max Mean Exposure (mrem) Completeness
470 USDI 365 0.12 0.21 0.15 65 100
557 USDI 189 0.13 2.73 1.00 98 52
582 USDI 91 0.23 0.23 0.23 83 25
453 USDI 365 0.11 0.27 0.17 75 100
467 USDI 365 0.13 0.23 0.17 80 100
468 USDI 281 0.03 0.18 0.13 61 77
Total data completeness: 88.8%
(a) Total annual exposure is calculated by multiplying the mean daily exposure rate for each quarterly
deployment period by the number of days in that deployment period and then summing the values.
140
-------
Appendix B
Atmospheric Monitoring Tables And Figures
Table B-1 Gross Alpha Results for the Offsite Standby Air Surveillance Network, 1993
Table B-2 Gross Alpha Results for the TOMSK 1993
Table B-3 Offsite Atmospheric Plutonium Results for Standby Samplers, 1993
Table B-4 Offsite Atmospheric Tritium Results for Standby Samplers, 1993
Table B-5 Gross Beta Results for the Offsite Standby Air Surveillance Network, 1993
Table B-6 Gross Beta Results for the TOMSK 1993
141
-------
Table B-1. Gross Alpha Results for the Offsite Standby Air Surveillance Network 1993
Sampling Location
Little Rock, AR
Globe, AZ
Kingman, AZ
Tucson, AZ
Winslow, AZ
Yuma, AZ
Alturas, CA
Baker, CA
Bishop, CA
Chico, CA
Indio, CA
Lone Pine, 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
Clayton, MO
Joplin, MO
St. Joseph, MO
Great Falls, MT
Kalispell, MT
Miles City, MT
North Platte, NE
Adaven-Uhalde Ranch,
Battle Mountain, NV
Blue Jay, NV
Clark Station, NV
Currant-Angle
Worm Ranch, NV
Mean MDC: 8.41 x 1CT16//Ci/mL
NV
Gross Alpha Concentration (10'15 f/Ci/mL)
Number Maximum
3
3
3
1
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
1
3
3
2
3
2
2
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
3
4
3
3
1.6
2.3
0.8
1.2
1.0
1.4
0.4
0.8
1.5
0.9
1.7
1.5
2.8
1.4
0.6
0.7
1.1
0.3
1.4
3.6
2.2
1.6
0.9
0.6
0.5
0.8
1.5
0.9
1.2
1.0
0.9
1.0
1.0
1.4
1.1
0.6
2.4
Minimum
0.6
Arithmetic
Mean
0.3
1.2
0.3
1.2
0.7
0.8
0.1
0.3
1.2
0.0
0.7
1.5
1.1
0.6
0.2
0.3
1.0
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.8
0.8
0.3
0.5
0.1
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.1
0.0
0.1
0.8
1.7
0.5
1.2
0.8
1.1
0.3
0.5
1.3
0.4
1.3
1.5
1.8
0.9
0.4
0.5
1.1
0.3
0.4
1.8
1.4
1.2
0.7
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.7
0.5
0.9
0.2
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.7
0.5
0.4
1.4
Standard
Deviation
0.7
0.6
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.5
0.5
0.9
0.5
0.3
0.2
0.1
0.0
0.7
1.6
0.7
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.3
0.5
0.9
0.4
0.4
0.8
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.6
0.3
0.9
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 2.29 x 10~16 //Ci/jnL
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
= result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
142
-------
Table B-1. (Gross Alpha Results for the Offsite Standby Air Surveillance Network - 1993, cont.)
Gross Alpha Concentration (10'15 uCi/mL)
Sampling Location
Currie Maint. Station,
Duckwater, NV
Elko, NV
Eureka, NV
Fallen, NV
Geyser Ranch, NV
Lida, NV
Lovelock, NV
Lund, NV
Mesquite, NV
Reno, NV
Round Mountain, NV
Wells, NV
Winnemucca, NV
Albuquerque, NM
Carlsbad, NM
Shiprock, NM
Bismarck, ND
Fargo, ND
Williston, ND
Muskogee, OK
Burns, OR
Medford, OR
Rapid City, SD
Amarillo, TX
Austin, TX
Midland, TX
Tyler, TX
Bryce Canyon, UT
Enterprise, UT
Garrison, UT
Logan, UT
Parowan, UT
Vernal, UT
Wendover, UT
Seattle, WA
Spokane, WA
Rock Springs, WY
Worland, WY
Mean MDC: 8.41 x 10'16 u,Ci/mL
Number
NV 3
3
4
3
4
2
3
3
3
1
4
3
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
4
3
1
3
1
2
3
1
3
3
3
3
1
3
4
3
3
3
3
Maximum
2.4
1.0
1.7
2.0
2.0
0.6
2.3
0.9
1.5
1.4
1.4
0.7
1.7
1.3
1.4
1.3
1.7
0.6
0.8
4.4
0.9
0.8
0.0
0.3
1.6
2.7
3.8
0.5
0.3
1.2
1.4
0.7
2.6
1.3
1.8
1.1
0.3
1.9
0.6
Minimum
0.8
0.0
0.5
-0.1
-0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
-0.2
1.4
0.2
-0.4
-0.2
0.2
0.2
-0.2
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.8
0.4
0.5
0.0
-0.5
1.6
2.4
1.1
0.5
-0.2
0.3
0.8
0.1
2.6
0.6
0.4
0.3
-0.2
0.6
0.1
Arithmetic
Mean
1.5
0.6
0.9
1.0
0.7
0.4
1.0
0.6
0.6
1.4
0.9
0.2
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.9
0.5
0.5
2.2
0.6
0.6
0.0
0.0
1.6
2.6
2.1
0.5
0.1
0.6
1.1
0.5
2.6
1.0
1.0
0.6
0.1
1.1
0.4
Standard
Deviation
0.8
0.6
0.6
1.1
0.9
0.3
1.2
0.4
0.9
—
0.6
0.6
0.8
0.5
0.6
0.8
0.7
0.2
0.4
2.0
0.3
0.2
—
0.4
—
0.2
1.5
--
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.3
-
0.4
0.6
0.5
0.3
0.7
0.3
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 2.29 x 10'16 u€i/mL
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
* = result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
143
-------
Table B-2. Gross Alpha Results for the TOMSK - 1993
Gross Alpha Concentration (10 f/Ci/mL)
Sampling Location
Yuma, AZ
Alturas, CA
Baker, CA
Bishop, CA
Lone Pine, CA
Ridgecrest, CA
Santa Rosa, CA
Mountain Home, ID
Pocatello, ID
Kalispell, MT
Equity Supply Co.
Miles City, MT
Adaven, NV
Uhalde Rranch
Battle Mountain, NV
Blue Jay, NV
Elko, NV
Phillips 66 Truck Stop
Geyser Ranch, NV
Lovelock, NV
Lund, NV
Reno, NV
Round Mountain, NV
Winnemucca, NV
Medford, OR
Seattle, WA
Spokane, WA
Number
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
1
3
1
1
1
3
1
1
3
1
1
1
4
3
3
1
Maximum
1.2
0.4
2.1
0.5
0.4
0.9
-0.2
0.6
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.4
0.4
1.6
0.7
0.9
0.7
0.7
0.5
0.4
2.2
0.3
-0.3
0.3
Minimum
1.2
0.4
2.1
0.5
0.4
0.9
-0.9
-0.9
0.2
-1.9
0.1
0.4
0.4
0.1
0.7
0.9
-0.9
0.7
0.5
0.4
0.0
-0.6
-1.6
0.3
Arithmetic
Mean
1.2
0.4
2.1
0.5
0.4
0.9
-0.5
0.1
0.2
-0.8
0.1
0.4
0.4
0.8
0.7
0.9
-0.3
0.7
0.5
0.4
0.7
-0.2
-0.9
0.3
Standard
Deviation
-
-
—
~
-
0.4
0.9
—
1.1
—
--
0.8
__
—
0.9
—
—
—
1.0
0.5
0.7
__
Mean MDC: 2.19 x 10'15 //Ci/mL
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 1.21 x 10'15 /i/Ci/mL
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
= result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
144
-------
Table B-3. Offsite Atmospheric Plutonium Results for Standby Samplers - 1993
23sPu Concentration (1CT18 uC\lmU
Sampling Location
Arithmetic Standard Mean as
Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation %DCG
AZ (Winslow & Tucson)
CA (Bishop & Ridgecrest)
CO (Denver & Cortez)
ID (Nampa & Mountain Home)
MO (Clayton & Joplin)
MT (Great Falls & Miles City)
NM (Albuquerque & Carlsbad)
ND (Bismarck & Fargo)
OR (Burns & Medford)
TX (Austin & Amarillo)
UT (Logan & Vernal)
WA (Seattle & Spokane)
WY (Worland & Rock Springs)
Mean MDC: 4.15 x 10'17 //Ci/mL
3
3
3
0 3
3
3
) 3
3
2
2
3
3
;) 3
26
3.9
19
16
0.0
36
11.0*
5.9
7.6
7.9
16
12
33
-9.9
-1.0
-8.3
1.9
-9.6
-13.0
-1.5
-18.0
-12.0
5.4
-44.0
-65.0
5.2
5.3
1.3
3.5
7.3
-4.6
7.4
4.4
-5.1
-2.3
6.6
-13.0
-19.0
21
18
2.5
14
7.9
4.8
25
6.1
12
14
1.8
30
40
14
1.8
0.4
1.2
2.4
-1.8
2.5
1.5
1.7
-0.8
2.2
-4.3
-6.3
7
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 4.30 x 10~17 //Ci/mL
DCG = derived concentration guide. Established by DOE Order as 3 x 10"15//Ci/mL.
239+240
Pu Concentration (10 f/Ci/mL)
AZ (Winslow & Tucson)
CA (Bishop & Ridgecrest)
CO (Denver & Cortez)
ID (Nampa & Mountain Home)
MO (Clayton & Joplin)
MT (Great Falls & Miles City)
NM (Albuquerque & Carlsbad)
ND (Bismarch & Fargo)
OR (Burns & Medford)
TX (Austin & Amarillo)
UT (Logan & Vernal)
WA (Seattle & Spokane)
WY (Worland & Rock Springs)
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
2
3
3
3
8.6
-2.3
0.0
16
2.1
1.9
11.0*
8.9
4.1
7.2*
2.9
12
34.0*
2.5
-3.9
-4.1
0.0
-1.7
0.0
-2.0
1.6
-7.6
-7.9
-11.0
0.0
0.0
5.3
-3.1
-1.4
6
0.1
0.6
2.9
5
-5.8
-0.4
-3.8
4.4
18
3.1
0.8
2.4
8.9
1.9
1.1
6.8
3.7
2.5
11
6.9
6.3
17
2.6
-1.5
-0.7
3
0.0
0.3
1.4
2.5
-2.9
-0.2
-1.9
2.2
9
Mean MDC: 2.89 x 10'1' //Ci/mL
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 3.0 x 10~17 //Ci/mL
DCG
MDC
*
NA
Note
derived concentration guide. Established by DOE Order as 2 x 10~15 //Ci/mL.
minimum detectable concentration.
result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
not applicable.
these data are from 1st, 2nd and 3rd quarters only.
145
-------
Table B-4. Offsite Atmospheric Tritium Results for Standby Samplers - 1993
Sampling Location
Shoshone, CA
Austin, NV
Caliente, NV
Ely, NV
Cedar City, UT
Delta, UT
Milford, UT
Mean MDC: 4.3 x ICT6 pCi/mL
HTO Concentration (10'7 pCi/mL)
Arithmetic Standard
Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation
3
3
3
4
5
4
4
3
11
20
16
21
8
13
-13
-17
-3
-2
-13
-2
-1
-7
-5
7
5
1
2
5
9
14
12
8
13
4
7
Mean as
%DCG
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 5.0 x 10"8 pCi/mL
DCG = derived concentration guide. Established by DOE Order as 1 x 10~2 pCi/mL.
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
NA = not applicable.
Table B-5. Gross Beta Results for the Offsite Standby Air Surveillance Network - 1993
Gross Beta Concentration (10'14 uCi/mL)
Sampling Location Number
Little Rock, AR 3
Globe, AZ 3
Kingman, AZ 3
Tucson, AZ 1
Winslow, AZ 3
Yuma, AZ 3
Alturas, CA 2
Baker, CA 3
Bishop, CA 3
Chico, CA 3
Indio, CA 3
Lone Pine, CA 1
Mean MDC: 2.32 x 1Q-16 u,Ci/mL
Maximum
2.4
1.7
1.8
1.7
2.0
1.5
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.3
3.0
1.6
Minimum
1.5
1.6
0.3
1.7
1.1
0.1
0.5
1.0
1.4
1.0
1.6
1.6
Arithmetic
Mean
1.8
1.7
1.1
1.7
1.6
1.0
1.0
1.2
1.6
1.5
2.3
1.6
Standard
Deviation
0.5
0.1
0.8
—
0.5
0.7
0.6
0.3
0.2
0.7
0.7
__
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 2.99 x 10"16 u,Ci/mL
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
= result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
146
-------
Table B-5. (Gross Beta Results for the Offsite Standby Air Surveillance Network - 1993, cont.)
Gross Beta Concentration (1Q'U uCi/mL)
Sampling Location
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
Clayton, MO
Joplin, MO
St. Joseph, MO
Great Falls, MT
Kalispell, MT
Miles City, MT
North Platte, NE
Adaven-Uhalde Ranch, NV
Battle Mountain, NV
Blue Jay, NV
Clark Station, NV
Currant-Angle
Worm Ranch, NV
Currie Maint. Station, NV
Duckwater, NV
Elko, NV
Eureka, NV
Fallen, NV
Geyser Ranch, NV
Lida, NV
Lovelock, NV
Lund, NV
Mesquite, NV
Mean MDC: 2.32 x 10'15 (iCi/mL Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 2.99 x 10'16 u,Ci/mL
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
= result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
Number
3
3
2
3
2
2
4
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
JV 3
4
3
3
3
' 3
3
4
3
4
2
3
3
3
1
Maximum
2.1
1.2
1.8
1.8
3.7
0.6
2.2
2.4
3.4
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.2
1.8
3.3
1.2
0.9
1.4
3.7
1.7
1.9
2.9
1.6
1.4
1.8
1.8
1.5
2.5
1.5
2.7
2.5
1.8
2.6
1.9
1.6
Minimum
1.4
1.0
1.2
1.0
2.1
0.3
0.8
0.8
1.5
1.2
1.4
1.3
0.8
0.9
1.2
0.0
0.6
0.7
0.9
1.2
1.0
0.9
0.9
0.5
1.2
1.2
0.6
0.4
0.5
1.3
1.2
1.0
0.4
1.2
1.6
Arithmetic
Mean
1.7
1.1
1.5
1.4
2.9
0.4
1.4
1.6
2.2
1.5
1.6
1.5
1.0
1.4
2.2
0.6
0.8
1.1
1.9
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.4
1.1
1.5
1.4
1.2
1.5
1.1
1.8
1.8
1.3
1.4
1.6
1.6
Standard
Deviation
0.4
0.1
0.5
0.4
1.1
0.3
0.7
0.8
1.0
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.5
1.1
0.6
0.2
0.3
1.6
0.3
0.5
0.9
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.3
0.5
0.9
0.6
0.6
0.9
0.4
1.1
0.3
--
147
-------
Table B-5. (Gross Beta Results for the Offsite Standby Air Surveillance Network - 1993, cont.)
Gross Beta Concentration (10'14 uCi/mL)
Sampling Location
Reno, NV
Round Mountain, NV
Wells, NV
Winnemucca, NV
Albuquerque, NM
Carlsbad, NM
Shiprock, NM
Bismarck, ND
Fargo, ND
Williston, ND
Muskogee, OK
Burns, OR
Medford, OR
Rapid City, SD
Amarillo, TX
Austin, TX
Midland, TX
Tyler, TX
Bryce Canyon, UT
Enterprise, UT
Garrison, UT
Logan, UT
Parowan, UT
Vernal, UT
Wendover, UT
Seattle, WA
Spokane, WA
Rock Springs, WY
Worland, WY
Number
4
3
4
4
4
3
3
3
3
3
4
3
1
3
1
2
3
1
3
3
3
3
1
3
4
3
3
3
3
Maximum
2.4
1.9
1.8
2.2
2.1
2.2
1.6
2.0
2.5
4.1
1.5
1.0
0.9
1.6
1.1
3.6
3.3
1.2
1.4
1.7
2.4
1.3
2.1
4.8
1.8
1.5
2.1
3.5
2.7
Minimum
1.2
1.0
0.1
0.9
0.2
1.3
1.3
0.9
0.5
1.4
0.5
0.6
0.9
0.7
1.1
2.2
0.8
1.2
0.1
1.2
1.2
1.1
2.1
0.9
1.1
0.3
0.6
1.3
0.2
Arithmetic
Mean
1.6
1.5
1.2
1.4
1.2
1.7
1.5
1.3
1.3
2.3
1.1
0.8
0.9
1.1
1.1
2.9
1.7
1.2
0.6
1.5
1.7
1.2
2.1
2.2
1.4
0.8
1.1
2.1
1.1
Standard
Deviation
0.5
0.5
0.7
0.6
0.8
0.5
0.2
0.6
1.1
1.6
0.5
0.2
--
0.5
-
0.9
1.4
—
0.7
0.3
0.6
0.1
—
2.2
0.3
0.7
0.8
1.2
1.4
Mean MDC: 2.32 x 1Q-15 u.Ci/mL
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 2.99 x 10~16 u.Ci/mL
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
= result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
148
-------
Table B-6. Gross Beta Results for the TOMSK - 1993
Sampling Location
Number
Gross Beta Concentration (10'14 z/Ci/mL)
Maximum
Minimum
Arithmetic
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Yuma, AZ 1 0.9
Alturas, CA 1 0.4
Baker, CA 1 1.3
Bishop, CA 1 0.9
Lone Pine, CA 1 1.2
Ridgecrest, CA 1 1.4
Santa Rosa, CA 3 0.6
Mountain Home, ID 3 0.2
Pocatello, ID 1 0.6
Kalispell, MT
Equity Supply Co. 3 1.1
Miles City, MT 1 0.6
Adaven, NV
Uhalde Rranch 1 0.7
Battle Mountain, NV 1 1.1
Blue Jay, NV 3 1.4
Elko, NV
Phillips 66 Truck Stop 1 1.3
Geyser Ranch, NV 1 0.9
Lovelock, NV 3 1.1
Lund, NV 1 0.9
Reno, NV 1 0.9
Round Mountain, NV 1 0.8
Winnemucca, NV 4 1.2
Medford, OR 3 0.7
Seattle, WA 3 0.3
Spokane, WA 1 1.0
Mean MDC: 5.17 x 10'15 //Ci/mL
0.9
0.4
1.3
0.9
1.2
1.4
0.3
-0.4
0.6
0.2
0.6
0.7
1.1
1.0
1.3
0.9
-0.1
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.2
0.5
0.1
1.0
0.9
0.4
1.3
0.9
1.2
1.4
0.4
-0.1
0.6
0.6
0.6
0.7
1.1
1.3
1.3
0.9
0.6
0.9
0.9
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.2
1.0
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.6
0.4
0.1
0.1
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 2.88 x 10~15 //Ci/mL
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
* = result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
149
-------
Appendix C
Milk Surveillance Network Tables
Table C-1 Standby Milk Surveillance Network Radiochemical Analyses Results - 1993
Table C-2 Standby Milk Surveillance Network Gamma Spectrometry Results - 1993
150
-------
Table C-1 . Standby Milk Surveillance
Collection
Sampling Date in
Location 1993
Little Rock, AR
Borden's
Russellville, AR
Arkansas Tech Univ
Taylor, AZ
Sunrise Dairy
Tucson, AZ
University of Arizona
Delta, CO
Meadow Gold Dairy
Denver, CO
Safeway Dairy Plant
Quincy, IL
Prairie Farms Dairy
Boise, ID
Meadow Gold Dairies
Idaho Falls, ID
Reed's Dairy
07/06
08/25
09/19
08/26
06/09
06/15
06/23
10/29
10/26
Network Radiochemical Analyses Results - 1993
Concentration ± 1s (MDC)(a)
3H
x 10-9uCi/ml_(b)
382 ± 143 (462)
-33 ± 117 (386)
N/A
75 ± 116 (380)
271 ± 144 (469)
134± 142 (466)
121 ± 141 (462)
N/A
N/A
x 1 0'9 uCi/mL(b) x 1 0'9 uCi/mL(b)
N/A 2.1 ± 0.41 (1.4)*
N/A 0.73 ± 0.45 (1.5)
N/A 0.18 ± 0.28 (1.2)
N/A 0.28 ± 0.31 (1.4)
0.98 ± 1.1 (1.7) 0.29 ± 0.35 (1.5)
-0.49 ± 0.99 (1.5) 0.80 ± 0.34 (1.5)
0.081 ± 1.1 (1.4) 1.4± 0.40 (1.5)
0.49 ± 0.68(1.1) 0.30 ± 0.27 (1.3)
-0.050 ± 0.71 (1.2) 0.59 ± 0.27(1.3)
Dubuque, IA
Swiss Valley Farms, Inc 08/31
Ellis, KS
Mid-America Dairymen 08/18
Sabetha, KS
Mid-America Dairymen 07/14
-24 ± 116 (382)
356 ± 118 (382)
153± 137 (449)
N/A
-1.3± 1 (1.4)
-1.5± 1.3(1.8)
Baton Rouge, LA
Borden's
05/17 1171140(457) -0.39±1(1.3)
1.8± 0.34 (1:3)*
1.5± 0.37 (1.4)*
1.6 ± 0.39 (1.5)*
1.9 ± 0.41 (1.5)*
(a) = minimum detectable concentration (MDC).
(b) = multiply the results by 3.7 x 10"7 to obtain Bq/L.
* = result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
N/A = not analyzed.
151
-------
Table C-1. (Standby Milk Surveillance Network Radiochemical Analyses Results - 1993, cont.)
Concentration ± 1s (MDC)(a)
Collection
Sampling
Location
Monroe, LA
Borden's Dairy
New Orleans, LA
Brown's Velvet Dairy
Rochester, MN
Assoc Milk Prod Inc
Thief River Falls, MN
Bridgeman Dairy
Date in
1993 x 10'!
3H
05/17 325 ± 139 (451)
04/22
05/10
x109uCi/mL(b)
N/A
9oSr
x 1Q-9uCi/mL(b)
1.3+ 0.38 (1.5)
338 ± 141 (457) -1.1± 1.5(1.9) 2.4 ± 0.44(1.5)*
279 + 138 (449) -0.73 + 0.99 (1.4) 1.6 ± 0.37 (1.4)*
09/09
Monett, MO
Mid-America Dairy Inc 11/01
58 ± 113 (370)
N/A
N/A
1 ± 0.35 (1.3)
0.14 ± 0.88 (1.2) 1.7+0.35(1.3)*
Chillicothe, MO
Mid-America Dairymen 07/15 312 ± 119(386) N/A 1.7 ± 0.41(1.3)*
Billings, MT
Meadow Gold Dairy
Norfolk, NE
Gillette Dairy
11/03 N/A
07/30 32 ± 113(370)
North Platte, NE
Mid-America Dairymen 07/30 261 + 119(387)
Albuquerque, NM
Borden's Valley Gold
La Plata, NM
River Edge Dairy
08/23 101 ±119 (392)
0.24 ± 0.77(1.1) 1.2 ± 0.32(1.3)
0.52 + 1.6(1.9) 1.8 ± 0.44(1.4)*
0.68 ± 1.5 (1.9) 1.4 ± 0.42 (1.4)
N/A 0.65 ± 0.35(1.4)
08/27 221 ± 118(386) -0.20+ 1.0(1.2) 1.4+ 0.41(1.4)
Bismarck, ND
Bridgeman Creamery, Inc 06/21 420 + 141(455) 1 + 1.3(1.5) 1.9 ± 0.45(1.5)*
Grand Forks, ND
Minnesota Dairy
06/01 301 + 144 (469)
N/A
0.64+ 0.31 (1.3)
(a) = minimum detectable concentration (MDC).
(b) = multiply the results by 3.7 x 10"7 to obtain Bq/L.
* = result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
N/A = not analyzed.
152
-------
Table C-1. (Standby Milk Surveillance Network Radiochemical Analyses Results - 1993, cont.)
Concentration ± 1s (MDC)(a)
Collection
Sampling Date in 3H 89Sr 90Sr
Location 1993 x 10'9 uCi/ml(b) x 10"9 uCi/mL(b) x 10'9 uCi/mL(b)
Medford, OR
Dairygold Farms 10/18 N/A N/A 0.62± 0.35(1.3)
Redmond, OR
Eberhard's Creamery Inc 12/09 N/A N/A N/A
Salem, OR
Curly's Dairy 11/01 N/A 0.38 ± 0.76(1.1) 0.73± 0.30(1.3)
Tillamook, OR
Tillamook Creamery 10/27 N/A -0.75 ± 0.80(1.2) 1.5 ± 0.31(1.3)*
Rapid City, SD
Gillette Dairy - 07/23 -8 ± 115(380) N/A 1.4 ± 0.35(1.3)*
Black Hills
Sulphur Springs, TX
Tommy Rue Potts Dairy 11/30 N/A 1.1 ± 8.85 (1)* 1.5 ± 0.42 (1.4)*
Windthorst, TX
Lloyd Wolf Dairy 09/28 N/A N/A 0.97 ± 0.31 (1.2)
Seattle, WA
Darigold Inc. 09/28 N/A N/A 1.1 ± 0.34 (1.3)
Spokane, WA
Darigold Inc. 10/28 N/A 0.063 ± 0.90 (1.3) 1.5 ± 0.35 (1.3)*
Cheyenne, WY
Dairy Gold Foods 09/01 -23 ±116 (383) N/A 0.95 ± 0.31 (1.3)
Sheridan, WY
Mydland Dairy 06/04 1511139(453) N/A 1.6 ± 0.41 (1.5)*
(a) = minimum detectable concentration (MDC).
(b) = multiply the results by 3.7 x 10"7 to obtain Bq/L.
= result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
N/A = not analyzed.
153
-------
Table C-2. Standby Milk Surveillance Network Gamma Spectrometry Results 1993
Samples from the following locations were analyzed by gamma spectrometry only: in all cases only
naturally occuring radionuclides were detected.
Sampling Collection
Location Date
Duncan, AZ
Lunt Dairy 09/29
Taylor, AZ
Sunrise Dairy 09/19
Tempe, AZ
United Dairymen of Arizona 09/29
Tucson, AZ
University of Arizona 08/26
Batesville, AR
Hills Valley Foods 08/16
Fayetteville, AR
University Of Arkansas 08/17
Little Rock, AR
Bordens 07/06
Russellville, AR
Arkansas Tech University 08/25
Chino, CA
CA Institute for Men 09/27
Crescent City, CA
Rumiano Cheese Company 09/07
Fernbridge, CA
Humboldt Creamery Assn 09/08
Fresno, CA
CA State University Creamery 09/27
Helendale, CA
Osterkamp Dairy No. 2 09/27
Holtville, CA
Schaffner & Son Dairy 09/21
Lancaster, CA
High Desert Dairy 09/21
Lompoc, CA
Federal Penitentiary Camp 12/07
Manchester, CA
Point Arena Dairies 09/14
Manteca, CA
Supremo Foods 09/26
Modesto, CA
Foster Farms Jersey Dairy 12/07
Petaluma, CA
Point Reyes Seashore Dairy 09/14
Redding, CA
McColl's Dairy Produce 12/09
San Jose, CA
Marquez Bros Mexican Cheese 10/04
San Luis Obispo, CA
Cal Poly University Dairy 10/14
Soledad, CA
Correction Training Industry 09/27
Sampling Collection
Location Date
Tracy, CA
Deuel Vocational Institute 12/07
Tulare, CA
Dairymen's Co-Op Cream 10/25
Willows, CA
Mid-America Dairies 12/15
Colorado Springs, CO
Sinton Dairy 06/06
Delta, CO
Meadow Gold Dairy 06/09
Denver, CO
Safeway Dairy Plant 06/15
Ft Collins, CO
Poudre Valley Creamery 06/07
Boise, ID
Meadow Gold Dairies 10/29
Buhl, ID
Smiths Dairy Products 09/20
Caldwell, ID
Darigold Inc. 10/30
Pocatello, ID
Rowland's Meadowgold Dairy 10/27
Dubuque, IA
Swiss Valley Farms, Inc 08/31
Lake Mills, IA
Lake Mills Coop Creamery 07/16
Lemars, IA
Wells Dairy 07/19
Marion, IA
Mid-America Dairymen 12/03
Ellis, KS
Mid-America Dairy 08/18
Sabetha, KS
Mid-America Dairymen 07/14
Manhattan, KS
Kansas State University 07/27
Baton Rouge, LA
Borden's Dairy 05/17
Lafayette, LA
Borden's Dairy 09/15
Monroe, LA
Borden's Dairy 05/17
New Orleans, LA
Brown's Velvet Dry Produce 04/22
New Orleans, LA
Walker Roemer Dairy 04/22
Shreveport, LA
Foremost Dairy 06/01
154
-------
Table C-2. (Standby Milk Surveillance Network Gamma Spectrometry Results - 1993, cont.)
Samples from the following locations were analyzed by gamma spectrometry only: in all cases only naturally
occuring radionuclides were detected.
Sampling
Location
Collection
Date
Sampling
Location
Collection
Date
Fergus Falls, MN
Mid-America Dairymen
Browerville, MN
Land O' Lakes, Inc.
Nicollet, MN
Doug Schultz Farm
Rochester, MN
Association Milk Produce Inc.
Thief River Falls, MN
Bridgeman Dairy
Monett, MO
Mid-America Dairy Inc.
Chillicothe, MO
Mid-America Dairymen Inc.
Jackson, MO
Mid-America Dairymen Inc
Jefferson City, MO
Central Dairy Company
Billings, MT
Meadow Gold Dairy
Bozeman, MT
Country Classic-DBA-Darigold
Great Falls, MT
Meadow Gold Dairy
Kalispell, MT
Equity Supply Co
Bismarck, ND
Bridgeman Creamery, Inc
Fargo, ND
Cass Clay Creamery
Grand Forks, ND
Minnesota Dairy
Minot, ND
Bridgemen Creamery
Chappell, NE
Leprino Foods
Norfolk, NE
Gillette Dairy
North Platte, NE
Mid-America Dairymen
Omaha, NE
Roberts Dairy, Marshall Green
Superior, NE
Mid-America Dairymen
Albuquerque, NM
Borden's Valley Gold
La Plata, NM
River Edge Dairy
Las Vegas, NV
05/12
06/17
05/27
05/10
09/09
11/01
07/15
12/30
12/10
11/03
11/03
12/08
12/06
06/21
06/21
06/01
06/15
07/28
07/30
07/30
11/03
07/29
08/23
08/27
Anderson Dairy
Reno, NV
Model Dairy
Yerington, NV
Valley Dairy
Coalgate, OK
Larry Krebs Dairy
Claremore, OK
Swan Brothers Dairy
Mcalester, OK
Jackie Brannon Corr Center
Stillwater, OK
OK State University Dairy
Grants Pass, OR
Valley Of Rouge Dairy
Junction City, OR
Lockmead Farms Inc
Klamath Falls, OR
Klamath Dairy Products
Medford, OR
Dairygold Farms
Myrtle Point, OR
Safeway Stores Inc
Ontario, OR
Eastway Dairy
Portland, OR
Darigold Farms
Redmond, OR
Eberhard's Creamery Inc
Salem, OR
Curly's Dairy
Tillamook, OR
Tillamook Company Creamery
Ethan, SD
Ethan Dairy Products
Rapid City, SD
Gillette Dry-Black Hills
Sioux Falls, SD
Lakeside Dairy
Volga, SD
Land O'Lakes Inc
Canyon, TX
West Texas State Dairy
Corpus Christi, TX
Hygeia Milk Plant
Fabens, TX
Island Dairy - El Paso County
Glen Rose, TX
Dewayne Hankins Dairy
10/01
09/24
11/29
11/29
11/19
12/10
11/22
09/13
10/25
09/20
10/18
09/14
12/13
12/31
12/09
11/01
10/27
06/29
07/23
12/13
06/14
10/11
11/30
12/08
10/21
155
-------
Table C-2. (Standby Milk Surveillance Network Gamma Spectrometry Results 1993, cont.)
Samples from the following locations were analyzed by gamma spectrometry only: in all cases only naturally
occuring radionuclides were detected.
Sampling Collection Sampling Collection
Location Date Location Date
Sulphur Springs, TX Seattle, WA
Tommy Rue Potts Dairy 11/30 Darigold, Inc 09/28
Windthorst, TX Spokane, WA
Lloyd Wolf Dairy 09/28 Darigold, Inc 10/28
Beaver, UT Cheyenne, WY
Cache Valley Dairy 12/30 Dairy Gold Foods 09/01
Provo, UT Riverton, WY
BYU Dairy Products Laboratory 12/30 Western Dairymen's Co-op 06/03
Richfield, UT Sheridan, WY
Ideal Dairy 12/17 Mydland Dairy 06/04
Smithfield, UT Thayne, WY
Cache Valley Dairy 12/13 Western Dairymen's Co-op 06/17
Moses Lake, WA
Safeway Stores, Inc 10/28
156
-------
Appendix D
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Tables
Table D-1 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Locations in the NTS
Vicinity 1993
Table D-2 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project FAULTESS 1993.
Table D-3 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project SHOAL 1993
Table D-4 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project RULISON 1993
Table D-5 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project RIO BLANCO 1993
Table D-6 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project GNOME 1993
Table D-7 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project GASBUGGY 1993
Table D-8 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project DRIBBLE 1993
Table D-9 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Amchitka Island, Alaska -1993
157
-------
Table D-1. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Locations in the Vicinity
of the Nevada Test Site - 1993
Sampling
Location
Shoshone, CA
Shoshone Spring
Amargosa Valley, NV
Well Mary Nickell's
Adaven, NV
Adaven Spring
Alamo, NV
Well 4 City
Ash Meadows, NV
Crystal Pool
Fairbanks Springs
Spring-17S-50E-14cac
Well 18S-51E-7db
Beatty, NV
U.S. Ecology
Specie Springs
Tolicha Peak
Well 1lS-48-1dd Coffers
Well 12S-47E-7dbdCity
Well Road D Spicers
Younghans Ranch
(House Well)
Collection
Date in
1993
02/08
08/16
02/02
08/10
01/06
07/07
01/06
07/08
05/12
11/09
05/12
11/09
06/17
10/06
12/14
05/12
11/09
03/03
09/16
02/04
07/21
12/15
02/10
04/08
02/03
07/15
01/13
07/21
02/10
06/08
06/24
12/15
Concentration ± 1 s
of Tritium
-0.18
1.4
1.5
0.38
31
36.
-0.59
-0.08
-1.6
1.1
2.0
-0.92
-0.83
1.4
-3.1
2.3
1.4
-0.19
1.5
-85
18
20
62
0.67
-121
0.61
37.
0.1
209
0.76
3.8
2.0
± 1.6
+ 1.5
+ 1.5
+ 1.6
± 2.0*
± 2.0*
+ 1.6
+ 1.3
± 1.4
± 1.5
+ 1.7
+ 2.1
+ 1.4
+ 1.5
+ 1.7
+ 1.5
+ 1.5
± 1.7
+ 1.7
± 137.'b>
+ 1.6*
+ 1.9*
+ 137.(b)
± 1.6
± 136
± 1.4
+ 140.
+ 1.6
± 138.(b)
+ 1.4
± 1.6
+ 2.8
Percent of
Concentration
Guide(a)
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.03
0.04
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.02
0.02
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(a) Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium
(b) Multiply the results by 3.7 x 107 to obtain Bq/L
N/A Not applicable. Percent of concentration guide is not applicable either because the tritium result is less than the
MDC or because the water is known to be nonpotable
158
-------
Table D-1. (Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results
Vicinity 1993, cont.)
Collection Concentration ± 1s
Sampling Date in of Tritium
Location 1 993 (oCi/U
Boulder City, NV
Lake Mead Intake
Clark Station, NV
Well 6 TTR
Hiko, NV
Crystal Springs
Indian Springs, NV
Well 1 Sewer Company
Well 2 US Air Force
Johnnie, NV
Well Johnnie Mine
Las Vegas, NV
(Alt. Well 23A)
Well 28 Water District
Lathrop Wells, NV
City 15S-50E-18cdc
Nyala, NV
Sharp's Ranch
Oasis Valley, NV
Goss Springs
Pahrump, NV
Calvada Well
Rachel, NV
Wells 7 & 8 Penoyer
Well 13 Penoyer
03/08
09/07
02/02
08/12
01/06
07/13
03/15
09/13
03/15
09/13
03/15
09/15
04/05
10/01
04/09
10/06
02/02
08/12
02/09
08/20
02/08
08/16
05/10
10/05
04/28
10/05
37
54
0.41
-0.92
1.6
2.5
11
-1.4
137
3.7
-159
2.1
-1.7
-0.24
4.1
-1.3
-11
1.7
74
0.29
0.40
0.65
3.8
-1.4
-0.30
-1.4
± 138.(b)
+ 2.0*
+ 1.75
± 1.50
± 1.6
+ 1.9
+ 138.(b>
± 1.6
± 139.(b)
± 1.8
± 137.(b)
+ 1.8
+ 1.6
± 1.9
± 1.6
± 1.9
± 137.(b)
± 1.6
± 137.(b)
± 1.55
± 1.40
+ 1.35
± 1.4
+ 1.5
+ 1.70
± 1.7
for Locations in the NTS
Percent of
Concentration
Guide'3'
NA
<0.01
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.18
<0.01
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(a) Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium
(b) Multiply the results by 3.7 x 107 to obtain Bq/L
N/A Not applicable. Percent of concentration guide is not applicable either because the tritium result is less than the
MDC or because the water is known to be nonpotable
159
-------
Table D-1. (Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Locations in the NTS
Vicinity - 1993, cont.)
Sampling
Location
Well Penoyer Culinary
Tempiute, NV
Union Carbide Well
Tonopah, NV
City Well
Warm Springs, NV
Twin Springs Ranch
Mean MDC: 5.3 pCi/L
Collection
Date in
1993
07/13
12/07
05/05
Concentration ± 1 s
of Tritium
(pCi/U
-1.7 ± 1.4
-2.2 + 1.6
3.1 + 1.4
03/01
09/15
04/07
10/05
-48
1.1
-4.1
1.1
+ 138.(b)
± 1.3
+ 1.7
± 1.9
Percent of
Concentration
Guide'3'
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 0.8 pCi/L
* = Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC)
NA = Not applicable. Percent of concentration guide is not applicable either because the tritium result is less
than the MDC or because the water is known to be nonpotable.
(a) = Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium.
(b) = Analysis by conventional method (Mean MDC: 454 pCi/L Std. Dev. of Mean MDC: 3 pCi/L).
160
-------
Table D-2. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
FAULTLESS 1993.
Sampling
Location
Blue Jay, NV
Hot Creek Ranch Spring
Maintenance Station
Well Bias
Well HTH-1
Well HTH-2
Well Six Mile
Mean MDC: 5.4 pCi/L
Collection
Date in
1993
03/17
03/16
03/17
03/23
03/23
03/17
Concentration ± 1s
of Tritium
(PCi/L)
-2.0 ± 1.4
7.3 ± 1.8*
-0.78 ± 1.6
3.8 ± 1.8
-4.5 ± 1.7
Percent of
Concentration
Guide(a)
NA
<0.01
NA
NA
NA
Not Sampled, Pump motor removed
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 0.5 pCi/L
* = Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC).
NA = Not applicable. Percent of concentration guide is not applicable either because
the tritium result is less than the MDC or because the water is known to be
nonpotable.
(a) = Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium.
Table D-3. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
SHOAL 1993
Sampling
Location
Frenchmen Station, NV
Hunt's Station
Smith/James Springs
Spring Windmill
Well Flowing
Well H-3
Well HS-1
Mean MDC: 5.6 pCi/L
Collection
Date in
1993
02/24
02/25
02/24
02/25
02/24
02/25
Concentration ± 1 s
of Tritium
(PCi/L)
Percent of
Concentration
Guide'3'
-2.6 ±1.6 NA
62 ± 2.1* 0.07
Not Sampled - Well removed
-2.5 ±1.8 NA
0.92 ± 1.60 NA
2.7 ±1.8 NA
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 0.5 pCi/L
* = Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC).
NA = Not applicable. Percent of concentration guide is not applicable either because
the tritium result is less than the MDC or because the water is known to be
nonpotable.
(a) = Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium.
161
-------
Table D-4. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
RULISON - 1993
Collection
Sampling Date in
Location 1993
Rulison, CO
Lee Hayward Ranch 06/16
Potter Ranch 06/16
Robert Searcy Ranch 06/16
Felix Sefcovic Ranch 06/16
Grand Valley, CO
Battlement Creek 06/16
City Springs 06/16
Albert Gardner Ranch 06/16
Spring 300 Yd. N of GZ 06/16
Well CER Test 06/16
Concentration ± 1 s
of Tritium
DCi/U
116 ± 3.*
Sample Invalid
57 ± 2.1*
100 ± 2.4*
49
-1.6
80
57
51
1.9*
1.5
2.2*
2.1*
± 2.1*
Percent of
Concentration
Guide(a)
0.13
NA
0.06
0.11
0.05
NA
0.09
0.06
0.06
Mean MDC: 5.1 pCi/L
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 0.3 pCi/L
* - Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC).
NA = Not applicable. Percent of concentration guide is not applicable either
because the tritium result is less than the MDC or because the water is known
to be nonpotable.
(a) = Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium.
Table D-5. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
RIO BLANCO - 1993
Collection
Sampling Date in
Location 1993
Rio Blanco, CO
B-1 Equity Camp (spring) 06/18
CER No. 1 Black Sulfur (spring) 06/18
CER No.4 Black Sulfur (spring) 06/18
Fawn Creek 1 06/17
Fawn Creek 3 06/17
Fawn Creek 500 Ft Upstream 06/17
Fawn Creek 500 Ft Downstream 06/17
Fawn Creek 6800 Ft Upstream 06/17
Fawn Creek 8400 Ft Downstream 06/17
Johnson Artesian Well 06/17
Brennan Windmill (well) 06/17
Well RB-D-01 06/17
Well RB-D-03 06/17
Well RB-S-03 06/17
Concentration ±
of Tritium
(pCi/L)
1s
58
49
55
179
28
75
39
34
39
1.8
7.0
-0.48
2.5
-0.80
± 2.5*
± 1.9*
± 2.2*
±114.(b)
± 1.7*
±113.(b)
± 2.2*
2.1*
1.9*
1.8
2.0*
1.60
1.8
± 1.60
Percent of
Concentration
Guide'3'
0.06
0.05
0.06
NA
0.03
NA
0.04
0.04
0.04
NA
<0.01
NA
NA
NA
Mean MDC: 5.7 pCi/L
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 0.6 pCi/L
= Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC).
NA = Not applicable. Percent of concentration guide is not applicable either
because the tritium result is less than the MDC or because the water is known
to be nonpotable.
(a) = Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium.
(b) = Analysis by conventional method (Mean MDC = 373 Std. Dev. of Mean MDC-
0 pCi/L
162
-------
Table D-6. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
GNOME 1993
Sampling
Location
Malaga, NM
Well DD-1
Well LRL-7
Well PHS 6
Well PHS 8
Well PHS 9
Well PHS 10
Well USGS 1
Well USGS 4
Well USGS 8
Carlsbad, NM
Well 7 City
Loving, NM
Well 2 City
J. Mobley Ranch
Mean MDC: 5.5 pCi/L
Collection
Date in
1993
Concentration ± 1 s
of Tritium
(PCi/L)
Percent of
Concentration
Guide(a)
06/27
06/27
06/26
06/26
06/26
06/26
06/27
06/27
06/27
7.4E+07
7300
30
9.0
1.8
0.0
0.87
140,000
88,000
± 3.2E05*
± 150.*
± 1.8*
± 1.7*
± 1.8
± 1.8
± 1.70
± 400.*
± 350.*
NA(b,o
NA(b,d>
0.03
0.01
NA
NA
NA
NA(b.e)
NA(W)
06/28
1.9 ± 1.7
NA
06/26 9.1 ± 1.7* 0.01
06/27 4.9 ± 1.5* 0.01(9)
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 0.4 pCi/L
* = Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC).
NA = Not applicable. Percent of concentration guide is not applicable either because
the tritium result is less than the MDC or because the water is known to be
nonpotable.
(a) = Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium.
(b) = Analysis by conventional method (Mean MDC = 373 ± 0 pCi/L)
(c,d,e,f,g) = Additional analyses greater than MDC:
Analysis
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(9)
Cs-137
Sr-90
Cs-137
Sr-90
Cs-137
Sr-90
U-234
U-235
U-238
Result
821,000
17,000
112
4,000
59
2,400
11
0.21
4.4
1 sigma
39,800
1400
7
12
5
10
0.4
0.02
0.18
MDC Units
NA pCi/L
4700 pCi/L
NA pCi/L
1.4 pCi/L
NA pCi/L
1.5 pCi/L
0.03 pCi/L
0.02 pCi/L
0.02 pCi/L
163
-------
Table D-7. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
GASBUGGY 1993
Sampling
Location
Collection
Date in
1993
Concentration ± 1 s
of Tritium
jCi/L)
Percent of
Concentration
Guide03'
Gobernador, NM
Arnold Ranch
Bixler Ranch
Bubbling Springs
Cave Springs
Cedar Springs
La Jara Creek
Lower Burro Canyon
Pond N of Well 30.3.32.343
Well EPNG 10-36
Well Jicarilla 1
Well 28.3.33.233 (South)
Windmill 2
06/20
06/22
06/21
06/22
06/21
06/20
06/20
06/21
06/25
06/20
06/20
06/20
14 ±
11 ±
34 ±
20 ±
49 ±
41 ±
0.0 ±
36 ±
327 ±
14 ±
40 ±
0.26 ±
1.9*
1.7*
1.7*
1.9*
1.9*
1.8*
1.9
1.8*
3.5*
1.5*
1.9*
1.4
0.02
0.01
0.04
0.02
0.05
0.05
NA
0.04
0.36(b)
0.02
0.04
NA
Mean MDC: 5.1 pCi/L
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 0.5 pCi/L
* = Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC).
NA = Not applicable. Percent of concentration guide is not applicable either because
the tritium result is less than the MDC or because the water is known to be
nonpotable.
(a) = Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium.
(b) = Additional analyses greater than MDC:
Analysis
Result
1 sigma
MDC
Units
Cs-137
16
3.9
NA
pCi/L
164
-------
Table D-8.
Sampling
Location
Baxterville, MS
Half Moon Creek
Half Moon Creek Overflow
Pond West Of GZ
REECO Pit Drainage-A
REECO Pit Drainage-B
REECO Pit Drainage-C
Well E-7
Well HM-1
Well HM-2A
Well HM-2B
Well HM-3
Well HM-L
Well HM-L2
Well HM-S
Well HMH-1
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
DRIBBLE (Salmon Test Site) - 1993
Concentration ± 1s
of Tritium
Collection
Date in
1993
Onsite Sampling Locations
04/18
04/19
04/18
04/19
04/18
04/19
04/22
04/22
04/22
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/18
04/19
04/18
04/19
Percent of
Concentration
Guide(a>
20
486
492
26
17
19
15
22
159
2.2
-0.83
-0.67
-0.09
-0.61
-0.94
-0.17
0.82
0.70
896
660
1.9
1.4
6240
5750
2760
3340
± 1.6*
± 4.2*
± 4.7*
+ 2.4*
+ 1.6*
+ 2.1*
± 1.5*
± 1.9*
± 2.6*
+ 1.6
± 1.5
+ 1.4
± 1.5
+ 1.4
± 1.5
± 1.4
± 1.5
± 1.4
± 113.*
+ 4.9*
± 1.6
± 2.2
± 150*
+ 140*
± 130*
± 130*
0.02
0.54
0.54
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.18
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.0(b)
0.73
NA
NA
6.9(b)
6.4(b)
3.1(b)
3.7(b)
* = Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC).
NA = Not applicable. Percent of concentration guide is not applicable either because the tritium
result is less than the MDC or because the water is known to be nonpotable.
(a) = Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium.
(b) = Analysis by conventional method (Mean MDC: 379.4 pCi/L, Std. Deviation of Mean MDC:
7.7 pCi/L
(c) = Rain sample.
(d) = Formerly the residence of Talmadge S. Saucier.
(e) = Formerly the residence of B. Chambliss.
(f) = New Sampling location.
(g,h) = Additional analyses greater than MDC:
(g)
(h)
U-235
U-238
U-234
U-235
U-238
Result
0.049
0.0485
0.013
0.0194
0.0323
0.008
0.015
0.017
0.006
0.017
MDC
0.010
0.027
0.016
0.0058
0.0058
Units
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
165
-------
Table D-8.
Sampling
Location
(Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
DRIBBLE (Salmon Test Site) - 1993, con't)
Collection
Date in
1993
Concentration ± 1 s
of Tritium
3Ci/Lj
Percent of
Concentration
Guide(a)
Onsite Sampling Locations (continued)
Well HMH-2
Well HMH-3
Well HMH-4
Well HMH-5
Well HMH-6
Well HMH-7
Well HMH-8
Well HMH-9
WellHMH-10
Well HMH-11
Well HMH-12
Well HMH-13
04/18
04/19
04/18
04/19
04/18
04/19
04/18
04/19
04/18
04/19
04/18
04/19
04/18
04/19
04/18
04/19
04/18
04/19
04/18
04/19
04/18
04/19
04/18
04/19
3640
7790
36
37
13
13
1770
2970
100
57
Not Sampled
Not Sampled
17 +
14 +
39 +
40 +
74 ±
66 +
21 +
23 ±
17 +
25 +
14 +
13 +
130*
150*
2.2*
2.0*
1.6*
1.7*
130*
130*
2.5*
2.0*
- Well under
- Well under
1.9*
1.4*
1.9*
1.9*
2.6*
1.9*
1.8*
1.7*
2.0*
1.8*
1.9*
1.8*
4.0
8.7(b)
0.04
0.04
0.01
0.01
2.0(b)
3.3(b)
0.11
0.06
water
water
0.02
0.02
0.04
0.04
0.08
0.07
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.01
* = Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC).
NA = Not applicable. Percent of concentration guide is not applicable either because the tritium
result is less than the MDC or because the water is known to be nonpotable.
(a) = Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium.
(b) = Analysis by conventional method (Mean MDC: 379.4 pCi/L, Std. Deviation of Mean MDC:
7.7 pCi/L
(c) = Rain sample.
(d) = Formerly the residence of Talmadge S. Saucier.
(e) = Formerly the residence of B. Chambliss.
(f) = New Sampling location.
(g,h) = Additional analyses greater than MDC:
(g)
(h)
U-235
U-238
U-234
U-235
U-238
Result
0.049
0.0485
0.013
0.0194
0.0323
0.008
0.015
0.017
0.006
0.017
MDC
0.010
0.027
0.016
0.0058
0.0058
Units
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
166
-------
Table D-8.
Sampling
Location
(Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
DRIBBLE (Salmon Test Site) - 1993, con't)
Collection
Date in
1993
Concentration ± 1s
of Tritium
3Ci/L)
Percent of
Concentration
Guide'3'
Well HMH-14
Well HMH-15
WellHMH-16
Well HT-2C
Well HT-4
Well HT-5
Onsite Sampling Locations (continued)
04/18
04/19
04/18
04/19
04/18
04/19
04/21
04/20
04/19
18
17
15
17
57
113
15
6.7
-0.40
±
±
+
±
+
+
+
+
±
2.0*
1.6*
1.6*
2.1*
1.9*
2.8*
1.6*
1.7*
1.7
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.06
0.13
0.02
0.01
NA
Offsite Sampling Locations
Baxterville, MS
Little Creek #1
Lower Little Creek #2
Salt Dome Hunting Club
Salt Dome Timber Co.
Anderson Pond
Anderson, Billy Ray
Anderson, Robert Harvey
Anderson, Robert Lowell, Sr.
Anderson, Robert Lowell, Jr.
Bilbo, Timothy
04/20
04/20
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/20
04/19
04/19
04/20
20
21
21
23
17
16
16
15
19
18
23
1.7
2.0*
1.9*
1.9*
2.0*
1.8*
1.9
2.0*
1.8*
1.8*
2.0*
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.02(c)
0.02
0.02
0.03(d)
NA =
(a) =
(b) =
(c) =
(d) =
(e) =
(f) =
(9,h) =
(g)
(h)
Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC).
Not applicable. Percent of concentration guide is not applicable either because the tritium
result is less than the MDC or because the water is known to be nonpotable.
Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium.
Analysis by conventional method (Mean MDC: 379.4 pCi/L, Std. Deviation of Mean MDC:
7.7 pCi/L
Rain sample.
Formerly the residence of Talmadge S. Saucier.
Formerly the residence of B. Chambliss.
New Sampling location.
Additional analyses greater than MDC:
U-235
U-238
U-234
U-235
U-238
Result
0.049
0.0485
0.013
0.0194
0.0323
0.008
0.015
0.017
0.006
0.017
MDC
0.010
0.027
0.016
0.0058
0.0058
Units
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
167
-------
Table D-8.
Sampling
Location
(Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
DRIBBLE (Salmon Test Site) 1993, con't)
Collection
Date in
1993
Concentration ± 1s
of Tritium
(pCi/L)
Percent of
Concentration
Guide'3'
Offsite Sampling Locations (continued)
Baxterville,MS (cont.)
Surge, Joe
Daniels, Ray
Daniels, Webster Jr.
Daniels Fish Pond Well #2
Hibley, Billy
Kelly, Gertrude
Napier, Denise
Lee, P. T.
Mills, A. C.
Mills, Roy
Nobles Pond
Noble, W. H., Jr.
Saucier, Dennis
Saucier, Wilma/Yancy
Well Ascot 2
City Well
Columbia, MS
Dennis, Buddy
Dennis, Marvin
City Well 64B
04/19
04/21
04/21
04/21
04/20
04/20
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/19
04/20
04/20
04/22
04/21
04/21
04/21
04/19
13
19
22
19
-2.7
-0.47
16
37
-2.3
14
18
32
29
1.6
+
±
±
+
+
+
+
±
±
+
+
+
+
±
2.0*
1.7*
1.9*
1.8*
1.7
1.6
1.9*
1.8*
1.7
1.7*
2.0*
2.1*
1.9*
1.7
Not Sampled - Inaccessable
23 ± 1.8*
17
19
9.7
1.6*
1.6*
1.7*
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
NA(e)
NA
0.02
0.04
NA
0.02
0.02
0.04
0.03
NA
0.03
0.02
0.02
0.01
NA =
(a) =
(b) =
(c) =
(d) =
(e) =
(f) =
(g,n) =
(g)
(h)
Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC).
Not applicable. Percent of concentration guide is not applicable either because the tritium
result is less than the MDC or because the water is known to be nonpotable.
Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium.
Analysis by conventional method (Mean MDC: 379.4 pCi/L, Std. Deviation of Mean MDC:
7.7 pCi/L.
Rain sample.
Formerly the residence of Talmadge S. Saucier.
Formerly the residence of B. Chambliss.
New Sampling location.
Additional analyses greater than MDC:
U-235
U-238
U-234
U-235
U-238
Result
0.049
0.0485
0.013
0.0194
0.0323
0.008
0.015
0.017
0.006
0.017
MDC
0.010
0.027
0.016
0.0058
0.0058
Units
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
168
-------
Table D-8.
Sampling
Location
(Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
DRIBBLE (Salmon Test Site) 1993, con't)
Collection
Date in
1993
- Concentration ±
of Tritium
(pCi/L)
1s
Percent of
Concentration
Guide(a)
Lumberton, MS
Anderson, G. W.
Anderson, Lee L.
Bond, Bradley K.
Cox, Eddie
Gil Ray's Crawfish Pond
Gipson, Herman
Gipson, Hewie
Gipson, Michael
Gipson, Phillip
Graham, Sylvester
Hartfield, Ray
Powers, Shannon
Rushing, Debra
Saul, Ola
Saul, Lee L.
Smith, E. J.
Smith, Howard
Smith, Howard-Pond
Thompson, Roswell
Well 2 City
Offsite Sampling Locations (continued)
04/19
04/21
04/21
04/19
04/20
04/20
04/20
04/20
04/20
04/20
04/20
04/21
04/20
04/20
04/20
04/20
04/20
04/20
04/20
04/21
Purvis, MS
Burge, Willie Ray and Grace
City Supply
Gil, Ray-House Well
Mean MDC: 5.4 pCi/L
04/19
04/21
04/20
21
21
21
23
20
-0.83
21
15
13
5.2
0.79
21
20
24
-1.9
14
6.3
24
20
-1.8
+
±
+
+
+
+
+
±
+
+
+
+
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
1.6*
2.1*
2.1*
1.7*
1.5*
1.8
1.6*
1.7*
1.8*
1.5*
1.5
1.6*
1.4*
1.8*
1.5
2.1*
1.4*
1.8*
2.2*
1.7
18
-1.4
4.3
1.7*
1.6
1.4
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.02
NA
0.02
0.02(f'g)
0.01
0.01
NA
0.02
0.02
0.03(flh)
NA
0.02
0.01
0.03
0.02
NA
0.02
NA
NA
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 0.6 pCi/L
NA =
(a) =
(b) =
(c) =
(d) =
(e) =
(f) =
(g.h) =
(g)
(h)
Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC).
Not applicable. Percent of concentration guide is not applicable either because the tritium
result is less than the MDC or because the water is known to be nonpotable.
Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium.
Analysis by conventional method (Mean MDC: 379.4 pCi/L, Std. Deviation of Mean MDC-
7.7 pCi/L.
Rain sample.
Formerly the residence of Talmadge S. Saucier.
Formerly the residence of B. Chambliss.
New Sampling location.
Additional analyses greater than MDC:
U-235
U-238
U-234
U-235
U-238
Result
0.049
0.0485
0.013
0.0194
0.0323
0.008
0.015
0.017
0.006
0.017
MDC
0.010
0.027
0.016
0.0058
0.0058
Units
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
169
-------
Table D-9. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program 1993 Analytical Results for Amchitka Island,
Alaska- 1993
Sampling
Location
Concentration ± 1 s
Collection Tritium
Date (pCi/L)
Percent of
Concentration
Guide'3'
BACKGROUND SITES
Clevenger Lake
Constantine Spring
Constantine Spring-Pump House
RX-Site Pump House
TX-Site Springs
TX-Site Water Tank House
Dove Cove Creek
Jones Lake
Rain Base Camp
Rain Base Camp
Site D Hydro Exploratory Hole
Site E Hydro Exploratory Hole
Well 1 Army
Well 2 Army
Well 3 Army
Well 4 Army
07/30
07/30
07/30
07/30
07/30
07/30
07/31
07/30
07/31
08/01
07/30
07/30
08/01
07/30
07/30
07/30
20 ± 1.6*
26 ± .3*
30 ± .7*
14 ± .4*
19 + .7*
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.02
0.02
Not Sampled - Tank Dry, Pump Removed
16 ± .4*
13 ± .2*
6.5 ± 1.7*
4.5 ± 1.7*
Not Sampled
Not Sampled
16 ± 1.6*
6.6 ± 1.5*
Not Sampled
24 ± 1.8*
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.01
- Well Plugged
- Well Plugged
0.02
0.01
- Well Plugged
0.03
PROJECT CANNIKIN
Cannikin Lake (North End)
Cannikin Lake (South End)
DECON Pond
DECON Sump
DK-45 Lake
Ice Box Lake
Pit South of Cannikin GZ
Well HTH-3
White Alice Creek
Long Shot Pond 1
Long Shot Pond 2
Long Shot Pond 3
Mud Pit No.1
Mud Pit No.2
Mud Pit No.3
Reed Pond
Stream East-Longshot
Well EPA-1
Well GZ No.1
07/29
07/29
07/29
07/29
07/30
07/29
07/29
07/29
07/29
PROJECT
08/01
08/01
08/01
08/01
08/01
08/01
08/01
08/01
08/01
19 ± 1.7*
21 ± 1.8*
Not Sampled
Not Sampled
17 ± 1.7*
20 ± 1.8*
16 ± 1.6*
23 ± 1.8*
19 ± 1.6*
LONG SHOT
13 ± 1.5*
12 ± 1.6*
21 ± 1.7*
102 ± 1.9*
140 ± 2.3*
152 ± 2.0*
10 ± 1.1*
184 ± 2.8*
11 ±1.7*
08/01 1350 ±130.*(b)
0.02
0.02
- Discontinued
- Discontinued
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.02
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.11
0.16
0.17
0.01
0.20
0.01
1.5
170
-------
Table D-9. (Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program 1993 Analytical Results for Amchitka Island,
Alaska - 1993, cont.)
Concentration ± 1 s Percent of
Sampling Collection Tritium Concentration
Location Date (pCi/L) Guide'3'
PROJECT LONG SHOT (Continued)
WellGZNo.2 08/01 51 ±1.5* 0.06
WellWL-1 08/01 12 ±1.3* 0.01
Well WL-2 08/01 67 ± 1.6* 0.07
PROJECT MILROW
Clevenger Creek 07/31 22 ± 1.6* 0.02
Heart Lake 07/31 16 ±1.5* 0.02
WellW-2 07/31 19 ±1.8* 0.02
WellW-3 07/31 15 ±1.7* 0.02
Well W-4 07/31 Not Sampled - Well Dry
WellW-5 07/31 18 ±1.6* 0.02
WellW-6 07/31 18 ±1.7* 0.02
WellW-7 07/31 16 ±1.7* 0.02
WellW-8 07/31 24 ±2.1* 0.03
Well W-9 07/31 Not Sampled - Well Under Water
WellW-10 07/31 18 ±1.5* 0.02
Well W-11 07/31 36 ± 2.0* 0.04
Well W-12 07/31 Not Sampled - Well Under Water
Well W-13 07/31 18 ±2.0* 0.02
Well W-14 07/31 13 ± 1.6* 0.10
Well W-15 07/31 19 ±1.8* 0.02
Well W-16 07/31 Not Sampled - Well Under Water
Well W-17 07/31 Not Sampled - Well Under Water
Well W-18 07/31 24 ± 1.8* 0.03
Well W-19 07/31 Not Sampled - Well Under Water
Mean MDC: 4.7 pCi/L Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 0.7 pCi/L
* = Concentration is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC).
(a) = Derived from the 3H ALI in ICRP-30 as 90,000 pCi/L tritium
(b) = Analysis by conventional method (MDC = 421)
t, U.S. GOVETOWENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1996-781-334 171
------- |