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

-------