&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Research and
Development
Washington, DC 20460
EPA 600/R-94/209
January 1993
Offsite Environmental
Monitoring Report
Radiation Monitoring
Around United States
Nuclear Test Areas,
Calendar Year 1992
-------
Available to DOE and DOE contractors from the
Office of Scientific and Technical Information,
P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 39831;
prices available from (615) 576-8401
Available to the public from the
National Technical Information Service,
U.S. Department of Commerce,
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, VA 22161
Price Code: Printed copy of Microfiche A01
Front and back cover:
Community Monitoring Truck (front), Polly Huff and
Radioanalysis Program (back), Kitty M. Houston
-------
Offsite Environmental Monitoring Report:
Radiation Monitoring Around United States
Nuclear Test Areas, Calendar Year 1992
Contributors:
D.J. Chaloud, A.A. Mullen, A.C. Neale, L.D. Carroll, DJ. Thome,
D.M. Daigler, M.G. Davis, and C.A. Fontana, 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 it 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. The U.S. Government has the right to retain a non-
exclusive, royalty-free license in and to any copyright covering this article.
-------
Abstract
This report describes the Offsite Radiation Safety Program conducted during 1992 by the Environmental
Protection Agency's (EPA's), Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory-Las Vegas. This laboratory
operates an environmental radiation monitoring program in the region surrounding the Nevada Test Site
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. In 1992, there were six events. 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
and using pressurized ion chambers; and by biological monitoring of animals, food crops, and humans.
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 obtain
environmental samples rapidly after any release of radioactivity.
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 no exposure above natural background to the population living in the vicinity of
the NTS that could be attributed to current NTS activities. Annual and long-term (10 year) trends were
evaluated in the Noble Gas, Tritium, Milk Surveillance, Biomonitoring, Thermoluminescent Dosimetry,
Pressurized Ion Chamber networks, and the Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program. 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 78 mrem/yr.
Worldwide fallout accounted for about 0.088 mrem/yr. Calculation of potential dose to offsite residents
based on onsite source emission measurements provided by the Department of Energy resulted in a
maximum calculated dose of 0.012 mrem/yr. These were insignificant contributors to total exposure as
compared to natural background.
in
-------
Contents
Notice ii
Abstract iii
Figures ix
Tables xi
Abbreviations, Acronyms, Units of Measure, and Conversions xii
List of Elements xiv
Acknowledgements xvi
SECTION 1
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Program Description 1
1.2 Report Description 2
SECTION 2
2 Description of the Nevada Test Site 4
2.1 Location 4
2.2 Climate 4
2.3 Hydrology 6
2.4 Regional Land Use 8
2.5 Population Distribution 8
SECTION 3
3 External Ambient Gamma Monitoring 16
3.1 Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Network 16
3.1.1 Design 16
3.1.2 Results of TLD Monitoring 16
3.1.3 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 18
3.1.4 Data Management 20
3.2 Pressurized Ion Chambers 20
3.2.1 Network Design 21
3.2.2 Procedures 21
3.2.3 Results 21
3.2.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 23
3.3 Comparison of TLD Results to PIC Measurements 24
SECTION 4
4.0 Atmospheric Monitoring 26
4.1 Air Surveillance Network 26
4.1.1 Design 26
4.1.2 Procedures 26
4.1.3 Results 29
4.2 Tritium in Atmospheric Moisture 29
4.2.1 Design 29
4.2.2 Procedures 36
4.2.3 Results .- 36
-------
Contents (continued)
4.3 Noble Gas Sampling Network 38
4.3.1 Design 38
4.3.2 Procedures 38
4.3.3 Results . . . 38
4.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 38
SECTION 5
5.0 Foodstuffs 43
5.1 Milk Surveillance Network 43
5.1.1 Design 43
5.1.2 Procedures 43
5.1.3 Results 46
5.1.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 47
5.2 Animal Investigation Program 47
5.2.1 Network Design 47
5.2.2 Sample Collection and Analysis Procedures 51
5.2.3 Sample Results for Bighorn Sheep 51
5.2.4 Sample Results for Mule Deer 54
5.2.5 Sample Results for Cattle 55
5.2.6 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 56
5.3 Fruits and Vegetables Monitoring 57
5.3.1 Network Design 57
5.3.2 Sample Collection and Analysis Procedures 57
5.3.3 Sample Results 58
5.3.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 58
SECTION 6
6.0 Internal Dosimetry 5:
6.1 Network Design 59
6.2 Procedures 59
6.3 Results 61
6.4 Quality Assurance/Quality Control 61
SECTION 7
7.0 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program 63
7.1 Network Design 63
7.1.1 Sampling Locations 63
7.1.2 Sampling and Analysis Procedures 64
7.1.3 Quality Assurance/Quality Control Samples 64
7.1.4 Data Management and Analysis 65
7.2 Nevada Test Site Monitoring 65
7.3 Offsite Monitoring in the Vicinity of the Nevada Test Site 67
7.4 Hydrological Monitoring at Other Locations 69
7.4.1 Project FAULTLESS, Nevada 72
7.4.2 Project SHOAL, Nevada 72
7.4.3 Project RULISON, Colorado 72
vi
-------
Contents (continued)
7.4.4 Project RIO BLANCO, Colorado 77
7.4.5 Project GNOME, New Mexico 77
7.4.6 Project GASBUGGY, New Mexico 81
7.4.7 Project DRIBBLE, Mississippi 82
7.4.8 Project MILROW, LONGSHOT, and CANNIKIN, Amchitka Island,
Alaska 84
7.5 SUMMARY 88
SECTION 8
8. Dose Assessment 89
8.1 Estimated Dose from Nevada Test Site Activity Data 89
8.2 Estimated Dose from Offsite Radiological Safety Program Monitoring Network
Data 91
8.3 Dose from Background Radiation 93
8.4 Summary 93
SECTION 9
9.0 Weapons Test and Liquefied Gaseous Fuels Spills Facility Support 95
9.1 Weapons Tests Support 95
9.2 Liquefied Gaseous Fuels Spills Test Facility Support 96
SECTION 10
10. Public Information and Community Assistance Programs 97
10.1 Community Radiation Monitoring Program 97
10.2 Town Hall Meetings 97
SECTION 11
11.0 Quality Assurance 100
11.1 Policy 100
11.2 Data Quality Objectives 100
11.2.1 Representativeness, Comparability, and Completeness Objective 100
11.2.2 Precision and Accuracy Objectives of Radioanalytical Analyses 101
11.2.3 Quality of Exposure Estimates 101
11.3 Data Validation 101
11.4 Quality Assessment of 1992 Data 102
11.4.1 Completeness 103
11.4.2 Precision 105
11.4.3 Accuracy 108
11.4.4 Comparability 111
11.4.5 Representativeness 111
SECTION 12
12. Sample Analysis Procedures 117
VII
-------
Contents (continued)
SECTION 13
13. Training Program 119
SECTION 14
14. Radiation Protection Standards for External and Internal Exposure 122
14.1 Dose Equivalent Commitment 122
14.2 Concentration Guides 122
14.3 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Drinking Water Guide 122
SECTION 15
15 Summary and Conclusions 124
15.1 Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Program 124
15.2 Pressurized Ion Chamber Network 124
15.3 Air Surveillance Network 124
15.4 Tritium in Atmospheric Moisture 124
15.5 Noble Gas Sampling Network 124
15.6 Foodstuffs 125
15.7 Internal Exposure Monitoring 125
15.8 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program 126
References 127
Glossary of Terms 130
Appendix A 133
Appendix B 141
Appendix C 157
viii
-------
Figures
Figure 1. Typical mid-latitude steppe climatological zone in Nevada 4
Figure 2. Location of the Nevada Test Site 5
Figure 3. Ground water flow systems around the Nevada Test Site 7
Figure 4. General land use within 180 miles (300 km) of the Nevada Test Site 9
Figure 5. Population of Arizona, California, Nevada, and Utah counties near the Nevada
Test Site 10
Figure 6. Distribution of family milk cows and goats, by county 12
Figure 7. Distribution of dairy cows, by county 13
Figure 8. Distribution of beef cattle, by county 14
Figure 9. Distribution of sheep, by county 15
Figure 10. Thermoluminescent Dosimeters fixed environmental stations - 1992 17
Figure 11. Thermoluminescent Dosimeter personnel monitoring participants - 1992 19
Figure 12. Pressurized Ion Chamber network station locations 22
Figure 13. Distribution of weekly averages from the Pressurized Ion Chamber data 25
Figure 14. Air Surveillance Network stations, 1992 27
Figure 15. Standby Air Surveillance Network stations, 1992 28
Figure 16. Distribution of gross beta values from air surveillance network stations, 1989 .... 32
Figure 17. Distribution of gross beta values from air surveillance network stations, 1990 33
Figure 18. Distribution of gross beta values from air surveillance network stations, 1991 34
Figure 19. Distribution of gross beta values from air surveillance network stations, 1992 35
Figure 20. Offsite noble gas and tritium surveillance network sampling locations, 1992 37
Figure 21. Distribution of krypton-85 data from routine sampling stations, 1992 41
Figure 22. Annual network average krypton-85 concentrations 41
Figure 23. Milk Surveillance Network stations, 1992 44
Figure 24. Standby Milk Surveillance Network stations, 1992 45
Figure 25. Collection sites for animal sampled 52
Figure 26. Average strontium levels in bighorn sheep 1955 - 1992 54
Figure 27. Average strontium levels in deer 1955 - 1992 55
Figure 28. Average strontium levels in cattle 1955 - 1992 56
Figure 29. Location of families in the Offsite Internal Dosimetry Program, 1992 60
Figure 30. Wells on the Nevada Test Site included in the Long-Term Hydrological
Monitoring Program, 1992 66
Figure 31. Tritium concentration trend in Test Well B on the Nevada Test Site 69
Figure 32. Wells outside the Nevada Test Site included in the Long-Term Hydrological
Monitoring Program, 1992 70
Figure 33. Tritium results in water from Adaven Springs, Nevada 71
Figure 34. Trend of tritium results in water from Lake Mead, Nevada 71
Figure 35. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling locations for Project
FAULTLESS, 1992 73
Figure 36. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling locations for Project
SHOAL, 1992 74
Figure 37. Tritium results for water from Smith/James Spring, Nevada 75
Figure 38. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling locations for Project
RULISON, 1992 76
Figure 39. Tritium trends in ground water, Lee Hayward Ranch, Colorado 77
Figure 40. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling locations for Project RIO
BLANCO, Colorado 78
IX
-------
(continued)
Figure 41. Tritium results in water from CER No. 4, Rio Blanco, Colorado 79
Figure 42. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling locations for Project
GNOME, 1992 80
Figure 43. Tritium results in water from Well LRL-7 near Project GNOME, New Mexico 82
Figure 44. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling locations for Project
GASBUGGY, 1992 83
Figure 45. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling locations for Project
DRIBBLE near ground zero, 1992 85
Figure 46. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program sampling locations for Project
DRIBBLE towns and residences, 1992 86
Figure 47. Tritium result trends in Baxterville, MS public drinking water supply, 1992 87
Figure 48. Tritium results in Well HM-S, Tatum Salt Dome, Project DRIBBLE 87
Figure 49. Field and spiked sample pair precision for Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring
Program conventional tritium analyses 106
Figure 50. Field and spiked sample duplicate pair precision for Long-Term Hydrological
Monitoring Program enriched tritium analyses 107
Figure 51. Field duplicate pair precision for Air Surveillance Network gross alpha analyses. . . 108
Figure 52. Field duplicate pair precision for Air Surveillance Network gross beta analyses. ... 109
Figure 53. Split sample precision for Noble Gas Network 85Kr analyses 110
Figure 54. Field duplicate pair precision for Milk Surveillance Network total potassium
analyses 111
Figure 55. The Control Room in the Plutonium Valley exercise on the NTS 119
Figure 56. Personnel suiting up for the exercise 120
Figure 57. Personnel returing with samples 121
-------
Tables
1. Characteristics of Climatic Types in Nevada (from Houghton et al., 1975) 6
2. Weeks for which Pressurized Ion Chamber Data were unavailable, 1992 23
3. Summary of Weekly Gamma Exposure Rates as Measured by Pressurized Ion
Chambers, 1992 24
4. Gross Beta Results for the Offsite Air Surveillance Network, 1992 30
5. Gross Alpha Results for the Offsite Air Surveillance, 1992 31
6. Offsite Airborne Plutonium Concentration, 1992 36
7. Offsite Atmospheric Tritium Results for Routine Samplers, 1992 39
8. Offsite Noble Gas results for Routine Samplers, 1992 40
9. Standby Milk Surveillance Network Sampling Location Changes, 1992 46
10. Summary of Radionuclides Detected in Milk Samples 47
11. Offsite Milk Surveillance 3H Results, 1992 48
12. Offsite Milk Surveillance 89Sr Results, 1992 49
13. Offsite Milk Surveillance 90Sr Results, 1992 50
14. Radiochemical Results for Animal Samples, 1992 53
15. Detectable 90Sr and 239+240pu Concentrations in Vegetables 58
16. Tritium in Urine, Offsite Internal Dosimetry Program, 1992 62
17. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Summary of Tritium Results for Nevada
Test Site Network, 1992 68
18. NTS Radionuclide Emissions, 1992 90
19. Summary of Effective Dose Equivalents from NTS Operations during 1992 91
20. Monitoring Networks Data used in Dose Calculations 92
21. Dose Calculations from Monitoring Network Data 94
22. Community Radiation Monitoring Program Outreach Presentations, 1992 98
23. Community Radiation Monitoring Program Presentation Topics 99
24. Data Completeness of Offsite Radiological Safety Program Networks 104
25. Overall Precision of Analysis 112
26. Accuracy of Analysis from EPA Intercomparison Studies 113
27. Accuracy of Analysis from DOE Intercomparison Study 114
28. Comparability of Analysis from EPA Intercomparison Studies 115
29. Summary of Analytical Procedures 117
30. Routine Monitoring Guides 123
xi
-------
Abbreviations, Acronyms, Units of Measure, and
Conversions
ABBREVIATIONS and ACRONYMS
AEC -- Atomic Energy Commission NCRP
ALARA -- As Low as Reasonably Achievable
ALI -- Annual Limit on Intake NIST
ASN — Air Surveillance Network
ANSI -- American National Standards NGTSN
Institute
BOC -- Bureau of Census NPDWR
BOMAB — Bottle Mannequin Absorber
CEDE -- Committed Effective Dose NFS
Equivalent NTS
CFR -- Code of Federal Regulations NRD
CG -- Concentration Guide
CP-1 -- Control Point One ORSP
CRMP -- Community Radiation Monitoring
Program PHS
DAC -- Derived Air Concentration PIC
DCG -- Derived Concentration Guide QA
DOE -- U.S. Department of Energy QC
DOELAP -- Department of Energy, RAWS
Laboratory Accreditation Program RCF
DQO -- data quality objective RCRA
DRI -- Desert Research Institute
ECF --Element Correction Factor SASN
EDE - Effective Dose Equivalent S.D.
EML - Environmental Monitoring Laboratory SGZ
EMSL-LV - Environmental Monitoring Systems SMSN
Laboratory-Las Vegas SOP
EPA - U.S. Environmental Protection STDMS
Agency
FDA - Food and Drug Administration TLD
FRMAC - Federal Radiological Monitoring and USGS
Assessment Center WSNSO
GOES - Geostationary Operational
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
MSN -- 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 uCi
Ib -- pound u.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, 10s curie
- microroentgen, 10s
roentgen
-- percent
-- plus or minus
-- less than
-- equals
- approximately equals
PREFIXES CONVERSIONS
a
f
P
n
H
m
k
atto =
femto =
pico
nano =
micro =
mill!
kilo =
10-ia
10'15
10''2
10 9
10 6
10'3
103
Multiply by_
Concentrations
uCi/mL 109
nCi/mL 10'2
SI Units
rad
rem
pCi
mR/yr
10'2
10 2
3.7 x 10 2
2.6 x 10 7
To Obtain
pCi/L
pCi/m3
Gray (Gy=1 Joule/kg)
Sievert (Sv)
Becquerel (Bq)
Coulomb (C)/kg-yr
XIII
-------
List of Elements
ATOMIC
NUMBER
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
SYMBOL
H
He
Li
Be
B
C
N
O
F
Ne
Na
Mg
Al
Si
P
S
Cl
Ar
K
Ca
Sc
Ti
V
Cr
Mn
Fe
Co
Ni
Cu
Zn
Ga
Ge
As
Se
Br
Kr
Rb
Sr
Y
Zr
Nb
Mo
Tc
Ru
Rh
Pd
NAME
hydrogen
helium
lithium
beryllium
boron
carbon
nitrogen
oxygen
fluorine
neon
sodium
magnesium
aluminum
silicon
phosphorus
sulfur
chlorine
argon
potassium
calcium
scandium
titanium
vanadium
chromium
manganese
iron
cobalt
nickel
copper
zinc
gallium
germanium
arsenic
selenium
bromine
krypton
rubidium
strontium
yttrium
zirconium
niobium
molybdenum
technetium
ruthenium
rhodium
palladium
ATOMIC
NUMBER
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
SYMBOL
Ag
Cd
In
Sn
Sb
Te
I
Xe
Cs
Ba
La
Ce
Pr
Nd
Pm
Sm
Eu
Gd
Tb
Dy
Ho
Er
Tm
Yb
Lu
Hf
Ta
W
Re
Os
Ir
Pt
Au
Hg
TI
Pb
Bi
Po
At
Rn
Fr
Ra
Ac
Tn
Pa
U
NAME
silver
cadmium
indium
tin
antimony
tellurium
iodine
xenon
cesium
barium
lanthanum
cerium
praseodymium
neodymium
promethium
samarium
europium
gadolinium
terbium
dysprosium
holmium
erbium
thulium
ytterbium
lutetium
hafnium
tantalum
tungsten
rhenium
osmium
iridium
platinum
gold
mercury
thallium
lead
bismuth
polonium
astatine
radon
francium
radium
actinium
thorium
protactinium
uranium
XIV
-------
List of Elements (continued)
ATOMIC
NUMBER SYMBOL NAME
93 Np neptunium
94 Pu plutonium
95 Am americium
96 Cm curium
97 Bk berkelium
98 Cf californium
99 ES einsteinium
100 Fm fermium
101 Md mendelevium
102 No nobelium
103 Lr lawrencium
xv
-------
Acknowledgements
The skill, dedication, and perseverance of Terry L. Mouck in word processing and desktop publishing
support were crucial to the production of this report. The external peer reviews were provided by Richard
D. McArthur, Desert Research Institute (Las Vegas, Nevada); John F. Heppler, Community Station Manager
(St. George, Utah); Gary M. Sandquist, Community Station Manager (Salt Lake City, Utah). Internal
reviewers in addition to the authors, included T.M. Grady and B.B. Dicey, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (Las Vegas, Nevada). The contributions of these reviewers in production of this final version of
the 1992 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 Field Monitoring Branch for collecting samples and
maintaining the equipment, and interfacing with offsite residents; and the Radioanalysis Branch for
analyzing the samples. Appreciation is also extended to Kuen Huang, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (Las Vegas, Nevada), for her preparation of graphs.
XVI
-------
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.
Before each nuclear test at the NTS, EPA radiation
monitoring technicians are stationed in offsite areas
most likely to be affected by an airborne release of
radioactive material. These technicians use trucks
equipped with radiation detectors, samplers, and
supplies and are directed by two-way radio from
the control point at the NTS.
1.1 Program Description
The EPA EMSL-LV Nuclear Radiation Assessment
Division (NRD) provides scientific and technical
support to the DOE's nuclear weapons testing
program at the NTS and other nuclear testing sites
through an IAG. The primary objective of EPA's
activities is protection of the health and safety of
the offsite resident population. This objective is
accomplished through monitoring and documenta-
tion of environmental levels of radiation in the
areas around the NTS, monitoring of people in the
offsite area, calculating committed effective
radiation dose to offsite residents most likely to be
exposed, maintaining emergency response capabil-
ities, and fostering community involvement and
education in radiation-related issues.
Emergency response capabilities are maintained in
readiness for each nuclear weapons test conduct-
ed at the NTS. Monitoring technicians are de-
ployed for each test and senior EPA personnel
serve on the Test Controller's Scientific Advisory
Panel. Tests are only conducted when meteoro-
logical conditions are such that any release would
be carried towards sparsely populated, controllable
areas. Should a release occur, EPA monitoring
technicians would deploy mobile monitoring instru-
ments, assist state and local officials in implement-
ing protective actions, and collect samples for
-------
prompt analysis. Hours before each test, Weather
Service Nuclear Support Office personnel and, if
requested, an instrumented aircraft gather meteo-
rological data for use by the Test Controller's
Advisory Panel in judging the safety of executing
the test. A second aircraft carries radiation detec-
tors. In the unlikely event of a significant release
of radioactivity following a nuclear weapons test,
the equipment on the aircraft would enable rapid
sampling and analysis of a radioactive cloud. Data
gathered by the aircraft are used to assist in
deploying field monitoring technicians to downwind
areas, to help determine appropriate protective
actions, and to perform radiation monitoring and
environmental sampling (EPA, 1988a).
The IAG also requires EPA monitoring technicians
to conduct monitoring during tests conducted at the
Liquefied Gaseous Fuels Spill Test Facility (LGFS-
TF) located on the NTS. These spills involve non-
radioactive hazardous materials.
Environmental radiation levels are continuously
monitored and documented through an extensive
environmental surveillance program conducted by
EPA in the offsite areas surrounding the NTS.
This program is an outgrowth of environmental
surveillance activities conducted by the PHS before
1970. The original PHS surveillance program,
initiated in 1954, was limited to offsite surveillance
during testing activities. Since 1954, the program
has grown and evolved to its present configuration.
Many historical sampling locations have been
retained, resulting in a continuous data record of
three decades or longer.
The ORSP consists of several networks to monitor
concentrations of radioactive materials (radioiso-
topes) in air, atmospheric moisture, milk, local
foodstuffs, and surface and ground water. Ambient
radiation levels are continuously monitored at
selected locations using PICs and TLDs. Atmo-
spheric monitoring includes air samplers, noble gas
samplers, and atmospheric moisture (tritium-in-air)
samplers. Milk, wildlife, domestic animals, and
fruits and vegetables are routinely sampled and
analyzed. Some residents in the offsite areas
participate in TLD and internal dosimetry networks.
Ground water on and in the vicinity of the NTS is
monitored in the Long-Term Hydrological Monitor-
ing Program (LTHMP); additional monitoring of
surface and ground water is conducted under the
LTHMP at sites of previous nuclear weapons tests
in Alaska, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, and
Mississippi. Results obtained from these networks
are used to calculate an annual radiation dose to
the offsite residents.
Another function of the ORSP is to conduct dairy
animal and human population censuses. This type
of information would be necessary in the unlikely
event of a release from the NTS. A dairy animal
and population census is continuously updated for
areas within 240 miles north and east, and 125
miles south and west of Control Point One (CP-1).
The location of CP-1 is shown in Figures 3 and 6,
Section 2. The remainder of the Nevada counties
and the western most Utah counties are scheduled
for dairy animal and population census updates
every two years. A partial census was done in
1992. The locations of processing plants and
commercial dairy herds in Idaho and the remainder
of Utah are obtained from the milk and food sec-
tions of the respective state governments.
Community information programs are an integral
component of the EPA activities. Town hall meet-
ings or presentations are held at the request of
various civic groups. These meetings and presen-
tations provide a forum for increasing public aware-
ness of NTS activities, disseminating radiation
monitoring results, and addressing concerns of
residents related to environmental radiation and
possible health effects. In addition, tours of the
NTS are arranged for interested parties. In nine-
teen of the communities around the NTS, Commu-
nity Radiation Monitoring Program (CRMP) stations
have been established. The CRMP stations are
established in prominent locations in the o ite
communities and include samplers for sevei. of
the surveillance networks (PIC, TLD, and air
samplers; many also include noble gas and tritium-
in-air samplers). At each CRMP location, a local
resident serves as the station manager. The
CRMP is a collaborative effort of EPA EMSL-LV,
the Desert Research Institute (DRI), the University
of Utah, and DOE.
1.2 Report Description
Beginning with Operation Upshot-Knothole in 1953,
a report summarizing the monitoring data obtained
from each test series was published by the U.S.
PHS. For the reactor tests in 1959 and the
weapons and Plowshare tests in 1962, data were
published only for the tests in which detectable
amounts of radioactivity were measured in an
offsite area. Publication of the summary data for
each six-month period was initiated in 1964. In
-------
1971, the Atomic Energy Commission implemented
a requirement (AEC71), subsequently incorporated
into Department of Energy Order 5484.1(DOE85),
that each agency or contractor involved in major
nuclear activities provide an annual comprehensive
radiological monitoring report. In 1988, DOE Order
5484.1 was superseded by the General Environ-
mental Protection Program Requirements (Order
5400.1) of the DOE (DOE88). Each annual report
summarizes the radiation monitoring activities of
the EPA in the vicinity of the NTS and at former
nuclear testing areas in the United States. This
report summarizes those activities for calendar
year 1992.
Section 2 of this report contains a physical de-
scription of the NTS and the surrounding areas.
Section 3 discusses the external ambient gamma
monitoring networks, including the TLD Network,
the PIC Network, and a comparison of the two
monitoring technologies. Section 4 discusses the
atmospheric monitoring networks including the Air
Surveillance Network, the Tritium in Atmospheric
Moisture Network, and the Noble Gas Sampling
Network. Section 5 addresses foodstuffs that
could be consumed by residents living close to the
NTS. This includes the Milk Surveillance Network,
the Animal Investigation Program, and a discussion
of fruits and vegetables. Section 6 discusses the
Internal Dosimetry Program. The LTHMP is dis-
cussed in Section 7. Each of the monitoring
network sections includes a description of the
network design, a discussion of the procedures, a
presentation of the results, and a section on quality
assurance/quality control (QA/QC) methods.
Section 8 contains a calculation of potential radia-
tion dose to residents living in the offsite area.
Section 9 contains a discussion of the support the
ORSP provides for weapons testing and liquefied
gaseous fuels spill tests. Section 10 describes the
CRMP and lists the town hall meetings and NTS
tours conducted in 1992. A detailed description of
the QA program including a discussion of data
quality objectives and of QA data analysis, is
provided in Section 11. Section 12 contains a
discussion of the sample analysis procedures.
Section 13 explains our training program. Section
14 contains radiation protection standards for
external and internal exposure. Section 15 con-
tains the summary and conclusions.
Although written to meet the terms of the IAG
between the EPA and the DOE as well as the
requirements of DOE Order 5400.1, this report also
should be of interest and use to the citizens of
Nevada, Utah, and California. State, federal, and
local agencies involved in protecting the environ-
ment and the health and well-being of the public,
and individuals and organizations concerned with
environmental quality and the possible release of
radioactive contaminants into the biosphere, also
may find this report of interest.
-------
2 Description of the Nevada Test Site
The principal activity at the NTS is the testing of
nuclear devices to aid in the development of
nuclear weapons, proof testing of weapons, and
weapons safety and effects studies. The major
activity of the EPA's ORSP is radiation monitoring
around the NTS. This section provides an over-
view of the climate, geology, hydrology, and land
uses in this generally arid and sparsely populated
area of the southwestern United States (Figure 1).
The information included should provide an under-
standing of the environment in which nuclear
testing and monitoring activities take place, the
reasons for the location of instrumentation, the
weather extremes to which both people and equip-
ment are subjected, and the distances traveled by
field monitoring technicians in collecting samples
and maintaining equipment.
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 2). 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.
Figure 1. Typical mid-latitude steppe climatological zone in Nevada.
-------
Scale in Wiles
50 100
50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 2. Location of the Nevada Test Site.
-------
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 1 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) in
July, with extremes of -15°F (-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 SOT (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 3
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
Table 1. Characteristics of Climatic Types in Nevada (from Houghton et al. 1975)
Annual
Climate Type
Alpine tundra
Humid continental
Subhumid continental
Mid-latitude steppe
Mid-latitude desert
Low-latitude desert
Temperature
°F
(°C)
Winter Summer
0 to 15
(-18to-9)
10 to 30
(-12to-1)
10 to 30
(-12to-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)
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
Pine or scrub
woodland
Sagebrush, grass,
scrub
Greasewood,
shadscale
Creosote bush
-
1
15
57
20
7
* Limits of annual precipitation overlap because of variations in temperature which affect the water balance.
-------
Pahute Mesa
Ground Water
System
Ash Meadows
Ground Water System
Flow Direction
Ground Water
System Boundaries
Silent Canyon
Caldera
Timber Mountain
Caldera
Scale in Miles
10 20
10 20 30 40
Scale in Kilometers
NELLIS
AFBRANGE
COMPLEX
LOCATION MAP
Figure 3. Ground water flow systems around the Nevada Test Site.
7
-------
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 southwest, toward
the Ash Meadows discharge area.
2.4 Regional Land Use
Figure 4 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 3 and
6). 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.
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 5 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).
-------
A. Camping &
Recreational
Areas
D Hunting
• Fishing
O Mines
A Oil Fields
w
Lake Havasu
Scale in Miles
50
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 4. General land use within 180 miles (300 km) of the Nevada Test Site.
9
-------
Figure 5. Population of Arizona, California, Nevada, and Utah counties near the Nevada Test Site.
10
-------
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
168 miles (280 km) southeast of the NTS, with a
population of 12,722 (DOC, 1990).
Figures 6 through 9 show the most recent esti-
mates of the domestic animal populations in the
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 6, showing distribution of
family milk cows and goats, are determined from
these interim surveys. The numbers in Figures 7 to
9 were compiled for Nevada and Utah from the
Nevada Agricultural Statistics 1992 report (Nevada
Agricultural Statistics Service, 1992) and from the
1992 Utah Agricultural Statistics report (Utah
Agricultural Statistics Service, 1992). The numbers
in Figures 7 to 9 pertaining to counties in California
were received orally from personnel at the Califor-
nia Agricultural Statistics Service.
11
-------
I
Washoe =
5(28)
-^H
Vvi
^ •*
San Bernardino
16(37)
N
>
100
50 100 150
Scale in Kitametefs
Figure 6. Distribution of family milk cows and goats, by county.
12
-------
Washoe •
700
Storey |
0
Carson Z
City
80
Scale in Wiles
50 100
50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
All counties total 2,700 dairy cows.
Individual county values not published
to avoid disclosure of individual operations.
Figure 7. Distribution of dairy cows, by county.
13
-------
I
m
Washoe f
31,000 ;
Storey f
300- "
Carson
City
1,700
Douglas
100
100 150
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 8. Distribution of beef cattle, by county.
14
-------
Washoe
Storey |
Carson 2
City
Elko
25,000
White Pine
19,000
NEVADA I UTAH
Clark
\_^
^— — — — ^
Jncoln
*
r
Box Elder
41,000
Tooele
12,000
Juab 4,000
Millard
7,000
Beaver
1,000
I"1""1"1
fl ARIZONA
i
D
N
Scale in Wiles
50
*.
50 100
Scale in Kilometers
100
All counties total 19,800 sheep.
Individual county values not published to avoid disclosure of individual operations.
Figure 9. Distribution of sheep, by county.
15
-------
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 weather patterns.
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 prede-
fined individuals living in areas surrounding the
NTS. Information gathered from this program
would help define possible exposures to residents
in the event of a release from the test site. 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 Li2B4O/.Cu and three elements of CaSO4:Tm.
The CaSO4:Tm elements are behind approximately
1000 mg/cm2attenuation. 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:
A network of environmental stations and monitored
personnel has been established by EMSL-LV in
locations encircling the NTS. Figure 10 shows
fixed environmental monitoring locations. Total
annual exposures were calculated by dividing all
available data by the number of days representing
each deployment period where data were avail-
able. If a deployment period overlapped the begin-
ning or end of the year, a daily rate was calculated
for that deployment period and multiplied by the
number of days that fell within 1992. The total
average daily rate is then multiplied by 365 to
show the total annual exposure for each station.
Detailed results are shown in Appendix A, Table A-
1.
Total annual exposures ranged from 57 mR at the
station located on the campus of UNLV in Las
Vegas, Nevada to 354 mR at the station in Warm
Springs, Nevada with a mean annual exposure of
113 mR for all operating locations. The Warm
Springs #2 station consistently shows exposure
levels higher than all other locations due to the
16
-------
I r~~
Seal* in Mil**
Figure 10. Thermoluminescent dosimetry fixed environmental stations • 1992.
17
-------
elevated levels of naturally occurring radioactive
materials present in the stream near the monitoring
location. The next highest annual exposure was
182 mR at Hancock, NV.
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 TLD results were
inappropriately subtracted from the station TLD
results, reducing the deployment exposure. Opera-
tional techniques for defining these transit expo-
sures have since changed to provide higher quality
data. A summary of current and past annual
exposure data is shown in Appendix A, Figure A-1.
PERSONNEL DATA:
During 1992, a total of 67 offsite personnel were
issued TLDs to monitor their annual dose equiva-
lent. Locations of program participants are shown
in Figure 11. Detailed results are displayed in
Appendix A, Table A-2. This table shows the
following information:
• Personnel ID Number: This is a
unique number given to each person
participating in the program.
• Issue and Return Dates: The actual
dates the TLD was issued to and re-
trieved from each individual.
• Shallow Dose: This represents the
dose equivalent at the depth of 0.007
cm in a sphere of soft tissue of a
density of 1 g/cm3 and a diameter of
30 cm.
• Eye Dose: This represents the dose
equivalent to the lens of the eye.
• Deep Dose: This represents the dose
equivalent at the depth of 1.0 cm in a
sphere of soft tissue of a density of 1
g/cm3 and a diameter of 30 cm.
• Total annual whole body dose equiva-
lent: This is calculated as the total
cumulative deep dose over the calen-
dar year.
• Data: This represents the percentage
of data available for the year.
• Associated Station: This is the envi-
ronmental station located nearest the
participant's residence.
Total annual whole body absorbed dose equivalent
was calculated by summing all available data for
the year. All data were used from TLDs that were
calibrated within ±15 days of the beginning or end
of the year. If data gaps occurred, all available
data were 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 days.
Annual whole body dose equivalents ranged from
a low of 103 mrem to a high of 391 mrem with a
mean of 187 mrem for all monitored personnel.
3.1.3 Quality Assurance/
Quality Control
During 1992, two calibration instruments were
available to support the program. One is a TLD
irradiator manufactured by Williston-Felin housing
a nominal 1.8 Ci 137Cs source. This irradiator
provides for automated irradiations of the TLDs.
The second calibration instrument is a nominal 10
Ci 137Cs well type irradiator. Unlike the Williston-
Felin irradiators, this well type does not provide
automated capabilities. TLD exposures accom-
plished 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 togeth-
er 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
18
-------
LAKE *.
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 11. Thermoluminescent dosimetry personnel monitoring participants - 1992.
19
-------
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
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 of the overall TLD deployment and
processing cycle 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 are adequate to detect
dose equivalent to individuals greater than 3 mrem
above background at the 95% confidence level.
This is referred to as the lower limit of detectability.
Tests using dosimeters exposed to known radiation
levels both in-house and by external organizations
have confirmed that the TLD readers exhibit linear
performance from the lower limit of detectability
through the accident range (500 rads).
3.1.4 Data Management
The TLD data base resides on a Digital Equipment
Corporation Micro VAX 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 propri-
etary package written and supported by Interna-
tional Science Associates, controls the TLD read-
ers, tracks dosimeter performance, completes
necessary calculations to determine absorbed dose
equivalent, performs automated QA/QC functions,
and generates raw data files and reports. The
second software package, locally developed,
maintains privacy act information and the identify-
ing data, generates reports in a number of prede-
fined 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
Twenty-seven PICs are stationed in communities
around the NTS and provide near real-time esti-
mates of gamma exposure rates for the ORSP.
(The stations located at Terrell's Ranch and Amar-
gosa Valley Community Center became part of the
Yucca Mountain Project in December 1991 and,
therefore, are not included in this discussion.) The
locations of the PICs are shown in Figure 12.
Eighteen of the PICs are located at CRMP stations
(Section 10.1).
20
-------
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
X
I
NEVADA
I PYRAMID
I LAKE
Austin •
i Ely
V
Nyala
Vv
~1 ^f Tonopah •
11 yo.ia
Stone Twjn * Uhaldes Rn.
Cabin Rn.Springs pn | Pioche
^r
Medlins Rn.
" ~> Alamo
VGoldfield • pr* fe| Rachel ComPlex 1
\ ^KSFpv"*"^* • Calie e
Beatty i
X,
Amargosa Valley ta ^ iJ
r- _ , _ • IT Overton I
Furnace Creek • »^ Indian Springs r, ,
Pahrump* J^LAK|_MEAD
^ Vegas
\, \
UTAH
Delta
• Milford
Cedar City
St. George
ARIZONA
ShoshoneI
Community Monitoring Stations (18)
Other PIC Locations (9)
Scale in Miles
50
50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 12. Pressurized Ion Chamber Network station locations - 1992.
21
-------
3.2.2 Procedures
The PIC Network utilizes Reuter-Stokes models
1011, 1012, and 1013PICs. 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 radiation
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.
In previous years and at the beginning of 1992, the
alarm threshold limit was 50 uR/h. During March
and April 1992, new limits were established for
each station by multiplying the normal background
rate by two. The new threshold limits range from
12 uR/h for Las Vegas, Nevada to 35 jiR/h for
Milford, Utah, and Stone Cabin Ranch, Nevada.
In addition to telemetry retrieval, PIC data are also
recorded on both magnetic tapes and hard-copy
strip charts at 25 of the 27 EPA stations and on
magnetic cards for the other two 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
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 1992, with the
exception of the weeks listed in Table 2. Data
were unavailable during these weeks due to
equipment failure.
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 6.0
U-R/hr at Las Vegas, Nevada to 19 )iR/hr at Austin,
Nevada. 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 1991. Total mR/yr measured
by this network ranged from 53 mR/yr at Las
Vegas to 169 mR/yr at Austin. Background levels
of environmental gamma exposure 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 13 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
22
-------
Table 2. 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
percentiles of the distribution of the weekly averag-
es (i.e., 50 percent of the data fell 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 Goldfield, Nevada show the largest
range. From October 1990 until the sensor unit
was exchanged in February 1992, the PIC unit at
this location had been underestimating the gamma
exposure rate. The gamma exposure rates mea-
sured from February to December 1992 closely
resemble those seen prior to October 1990.
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.
• 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.
23
-------
3.3 Comparison Of TLD ReSUltS ln Previous years, the comparison between the
and tne P'C data snowed a uniform under-
response of the TLD results. It is now believed
that this under-response was due to subtracting
A comparison was conducted between the 1992 results from transit control dosimeters from the
TLD data and the 1992 PIC data. This comparison environmental TLD results. This process was
showed only minor fluctuations between the two discussed in Section 3.1.2.
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
Appendix A, Figure A-2.
Table 3. Summary of Weekly Gamma Exposure Rates as Measured by Pressurized Ion Chamber -
1992
Gamma Exposure Rate (jiR/hr)
Number of 1991
Weekly Arithmetic Standard Total Mean
Station Averages Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation Median mR/yr (uR/hr)
Furnace Creek, CA 51 10.8 9.9 10.1 0.18 10.0 88 10.1
Shoshone, CA 52 12.5 11.5 11.9 0.24 12.0 105 11.8
Alamo, NV 49 14.1 13.1 13.7 0.30 13.7 120 13.4
Amargosa Valley, NV 52 16.6 13.7 14.4 0.54 14.2 126 14.0
Austin, NV 51 20.2 16.0 19.3 1.05 19.8 169 17.4
Beatty, NV 52 17.0 14.5 16.0 0.50 16.0 140 16.3
Caliente, NV 52 15.3 13.3 14.4 0.42 14.2 126 14.3
Complex I, NV 52 16.7 14.5 15.8 0.41 15.9 139 15.9
Ely, NV 52 13.4 11.9 12.6 0.41 12.5 110 12.3
Goldfield, NV 52 15.4 10.4 14.5 1.03 14.9 127 12.8
Indian Springs, NV 52 10.1 8.5 8.9 0.27 9.0 78 8.7
Las Vegas, NV 50 6.3 5.3 6.0 0.12 6.0 53 5.9
Medlin's Ranch, NV 51 16.0 15.0 15.8 0.28 15.9 138 15.8
Nyala, NV 48 12.7 11.2 11.9 0.36 11.9 104 12.4
Overton, NV 52 9.3 8.5 9.0 0.16 9.0 79 8.9
Pahrump, NV 48 8.1 7.0 7.7 0.39 7.9 67 7.9
Pioche, NV 52 12.9 10.8 12.0 0.35 12.0 105 11.8
Rachel, NV 52 16.9 15.0 16.2 0.37 16.1 142 15.9
Stone Cabin Ranch, NV 52 18.9 16.4 17.6 0.59 17.5 154 17.6
Tonopah, NV 52 17.8 15.0 16.9 0.51 17.0 148 16.7
Twin Springs, NV 51 17.6 16.2 16.7 0.37 16.6 146 16.7
Uhalde's Ranch, NV 52 18.8 14.6 17.4 1.15 18.0 152 17.0
Cedar City, UT 51 14.1 10.2 12.3 1.12 12.9 108 10.6
Delta, UT 51 12.8 11.3 12.1 0.24 12.0 106 11.9
Milford, UT 52 18.3 16.6 17.4 0.37 17.3 152 17.4
Salt Lake City, UT 50 11.2 10.4 11.0 0.15 11.0 96 10.9
St. George, UT 49 9.5 8.0 8.4 0.42 8.3 74 8.9
Note: Multiply u.R/hr by 2.6 x 10'° to obtain C/kg.hr
24
-------
1992 Pressurized Ion Chamber Data
Las Vegas, NV -
Pahrump, NV -
St. George, UT -
Indian Springs, NV -
Overton, NV -
Furnace Creek, CA -
Salt Lake City, UT -
Nyala, NV -
Shoshone, CA -
Pioche, NV -
Delta, UT -
Cedar City, UT -
Ely, NV -
Alamo, NV -
Amargosa Valley, NV -
Caliente, NV -
Goldfield, NV -
Medlins Ranch, NV -
Complex I, NV -
Beatty, NV -
Rachel, NV -
Twin Springs, NV -
Tonopah, NV -
Milford, UT -
Uhaldes Ranch, NV -
Stone Cabin Ranch, NV -
Austin, NV -
5.0
K3J*
i—SH
*—n«l—i
10.0
15.0
Gamma (uR/hr)
20.0
25.0
Figure 13. Distribution of the weekly averages from each Pressurized Ion Chamber Network station
- 1992.
25
-------
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 concentration
and source of airborne radioactivity and can project
the fallout patterns and durations of exposure 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
(210 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 detect-
able 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 networks
reside on a VAX computer in the Sample Tracking
Data Management System (STDMS).
4.1 Air Surveillance Network
4.1.1 Design
In 1992, the Air Surveillance Network (ASN)
consisted of 30 continuously operating sampling
stations located in areas surrounding the NTS (see
Figure 14 for sampling locations). Complementing
the ASN, the Standby Air Surveillance Network
(SASN) consisted of 77 samplers located in contig-
uous states west of the Mississippi River (see
Figure 15 for standby station locations). Each
state had at least one standby sampler which was
operated continuously for one week each quarter
by local residents or state and municipal health
department personnel. Locations of stations were
dependent upon the availability of electrical power
and the willingness of a local resident to operate
the equipment at stations distant from the NTS.
There were no changes in the ASN in 1992; the
last major network change was reassignment of
three stations to the Yucca Mountain Program on
December 1,1991. The only change in the stand-
by network was the reactivation of an air sampler
in Lida, Nevada in the second quarter of 1992.
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 stations
received complete analyses at EMSL-LV. Char-
coal cartridges are collected from the SASN sta-
tions 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 prod-
ucts. Gross beta analysis is used to detect trends
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.
26
-------
Stone
Cabin Rn. Nyala Sunnyside
Amargosa Valley J ''--OV*-! i
Furnace Creek • ^ f
*V Indian Springs
Death Valley >, _
Junction • V*P£
*
Shoshone • ^
ARIZONA
LAKE MEAD
N
Routine Air Sampling Stations (30)
Scale in Mites
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 14. Air Surveillance Network stations • 1992.
27
-------
Canada
fjf-—-«».».-.-..—F-— '^,^
North Dakota \Minnesota
Oklahoma^ (Arkansas
A
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 - 1992.
28
-------
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. Beginning January 1,1992, plutoni-
um analyses of prefilters from the ASN sampler at
Salt Lake City, Utah, were discontinued.
4.1.3 Results
The majority of ASN and SASN prefilters and
cartridges analyzed by gamma spectrometry were
gamma-spectrum negligible (i.e., no gamma-
emitting radionuclides were detected). Naturally
occurring 7Be averaging 0.29 x 10"12 fiCi/mL was
the only radionuclide occasionally detected. The
principal means of 7Be production is from spallation
(splitting) of 16O and 14N by cosmic rays in the
atmosphere.
Alpha and beta results for 64 samples were not
included in the 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 m%r 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 and are presented in
tables in this report.
As in previous years, the gross beta results from
both networks consistently exceeded the analysis
MDC. The annual average gross beta activity was
1.64 x 10'14 uCi/mL for the ASN and 1.71 x 10'u
p.Ci/mL for the SASN. Summary gross beta results
for the ASN are in Table 4 and for the SASN in
Appendix B, Table B-1.
The average annual gross alpha activities for 1992
were 9.23 x W16 u.Ci/mL for the ASN and 1.11 x
10"'5 uCi/mL for the SASN. These results indicate
a slight decrease in alpha activity as compared to
the only other alpha data available, which are for
1989. The average annual gross alpha activities in
1989 were 1.3 x 10'15 u€i/mL for the 14 ASN
stations and 1.5 x 10'15 uCi/mL for the 21 SASN
stations. Summary gross alpha results for the ASN
are presented in Table 5 and for the SASN in
Appendix B, Table B-2.
Figures 16,17, 18, and 19 show the distribution of
the gross beta values from each ASN station for
1989, 1990, 1991, and 1992 respectively. The
stations are ordered by ascending means of the
data values. The mean values are represented by
the filled circles (black dots). The left and right
edges of the box on the graph represent the 25th
and 75th percentiles of the distribution of the
values (i.e., 50% of the data falls within this re-
gion). The vertical line drawn inside the box
represents the 50th percentile or the median value.
The horizontal lines extend from the box to the
minimum and maximum values. The averages of
the quarterly gross beta values from the SASN
stations are shown in Appendix B, Table B-1.
The 23aPu and 239*240pu results from January
through December 1992 for the ASN are in Table
6; those for the SASN are listed in Appendix B,
Table B-3. The third quarter California composited
sample was lost during analysis and no samples
were received from the California SASN stations
for the first quarter. The May, August, and October
composited samples from Rachel, Nevada ex-
ceeded the MDC for 23aPu. The fourth quarter
composites for New Mexico and Wyoming exceed-
ed the MDC of 238Pu analysis. The only 239+2"0pu
result greater than the analysis MDC was for the
fourth quarter New Mexico sample, a single sample
collected in Carlsbad. The plutonium results are
consistent with data from previous years.
4.2 Tritium In Atmospheric
Moisture
4.2.1 Design
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.
At the beginning of 1992, the tritium network
consisted of 14 continuously operated and seven
standby stations. The routine stations are adjacent
to the NTS to detect atmospheric tritium which
could reach populated centers in the immediate
offsite area. In addition, a tritium sampler is
routinely operated near the nuclear research
reactor in Salt Lake City, Utah. The following five
stations were converted from routine to standby
status effective with their last sampling collection
29
-------
Table 4. Gross Beta Results for the Offsite Air Surveillance Network - 1992
Gross Beta Concentration (10'14 gCi/mL)
Arithmetic
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
MeanMDC: 2.53 x irj15nCi/mL
Number
39
49
51
50
51
43
52
48
51
51
52
52
43
51
51
51
52
52
52
52
50
45
52
51
52
52
45
48
51
52
Maximum
2.24*
3.77*
3.20*
2.91*
3.22*
5.71*
3.12*
2.90*
2.53*
5.82*
2.00*
3.39*
3.68*
2.88*
3.48*
3.81*
3.97*
3.98*
3.05*
2.89*
4.67*
2.92*
2.57*
2.68*
4.04*
2.69*
5.14*
5.03*
3.39*
4.10*
Minimum
0.37*
0.56*
0.40*
0.58*
0.48*
0.21*
0.31*
0.21
0.29*
0.28*
0.15
0.32*
0.73*
0.17
0.38*
0.43*
0.16
0.45*
0.04
0.09
0.11
0.28*
0.42*
0.19
0.36*
0.32*
0.86*
0.61*
0.79*
0.36*
Standard Deviation of Mean
Mean
1.43
1.79
1.77
1.61
1.58
1.66
1.70
1.63
1.40
1.68
1.29
1.68
1.79
1.60
1.76
1.76
1.39
1.89
1.27
1.55
1.71
1.62
1.48
1.50
1.86
1.40
1.83
1.93
1.66
1.81
MDC: 3.15 x
Standard
Deviation
0.44
0.62
0.61
0.46
0.57
0.84
0.53
0.65
0.43
0.92
0.43
0.53
0.60
0.53
0.62
0.65
0.63
0.74
0.56
0.53
0.80
0.60
0.44
0.44
0.66
0.47
0.79
0.82
0.55
0.70
10'16nCi/mL
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
= result is greater than the
MDC of analysis.
30
-------
Table 5. Gross Alpha Results for the Offsite Air Surveillance Network - 1992
Gross Alpha Concentration (10"15 uCi/mL)
Arithmetic
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: 8.07 x 10'16|aCi/mL
Number
39
49
51
50
51
43
52
48
51
51
52
52
43
51
51
51
52
52
52
52
50
45
52
51
52
52
45
48
51
52
Maximum
2.4*
2.4*
2.8*
2.8*
2.7*
2.6*
2.5*
2.4*
2.6*
8.9*
1.9*
2.5*
5.2*
2.5*
3.9*
3.1*
2.5*
4.6*
2.2*
2.4*
2.5*
4.8*
2.1*
2.8*
4.7*
2.3*
4.4*
2.9*
1.5*
2.5*
Minimum
0.1
0.1
-0.3
0.1
-0.1
0.0
0.0
-0.1
-0.2
-0.3
-0.2
0.1
0.0
-0.2
0.0
-0.2
-0.2
-0.2
-0.4
-0.2
0.0
0.0
-0.6
-0.1
0.0
0.0
-0.1
0.0
-0.3
0.0
Standard Deviation of Mean
Mean
0.96
0.95
0.81
1.1
1.0
1.1
0.91
0.98
1.1
1.2
0.73
0.80
1.4
0.86
0.83
0.89
0.66
0.86
0.68
0.60
0.97
1.2
0.67
1.0
1.0
0.98
0.84
0.94
0.65
0.77
MDC: 2.36 x
Standard
Deviation
0.57
0.57
0.61
0.58
0.68
0.59
0.60
0.64
0.58
1.5
0.45
0.50
1.0
0.61
0.70
0.75
0.52
0.72
0.60
0.48
0.69
0.85
0.50
0.72
0.80
0.55
0.75
0.65
0.39
0.55
10'16nCi/mL
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
= result is greater than the
MDC of analysis.
31
-------
Routine Air Sampling Stations -1989
Nyala, NV -
Ely, NV -
TTR, NV -
Stone Cabin Ranch, NV -
Sunnyside, NV -
Blue Eagle Ranch, NV -
Twin Springs, NV -
Pioche, NV -
Rachel, NV -
Goldfield, NV -
Amargosa Valley, NV -
Austin, NV -
Pahrump, NV -
Tonopah, NV -
Caliente, NV -
Groom Lake, NV -
Beatty, NV -
Cedar City, UT -
Hiko, NV -
Indian Springs, NV -
Salt Lake City, UT -
Shoshone, CA -
Alamo, NV -
Overton, NV -
Las Vegas, NV -
Hollowa/s Ranch, NV -
Death Valley Jet., CA -
Milford, UT -
St. George, UT -
Delta, UT -
Furnace Creek, CA -
-0.02
—GB-
i—DH-
ffl—'
>—DO-
' DTr-
0.02 0.06 0.10
BetainAir(1.0E-12uCi/ml)
0.14
Figure 16. Distribution of gross beta values from Air Surveillance Network stations, 1989. Figure shows
minimum, 25th percentile, mean, median, 75th percentile, and maximum values.
32
-------
Routine Air Sampling Stations -1990
Nyala, NV -
Coffer Ranch, NV -
Cedar City, UT -
Stone Cabin Ranch, NV -
Sunnyside, NV -
Blue Eagle Ranch, NV -
TTR, NV -
Groom Lake, NV -
Tonopah, NV -
Amargosa Valley, NV -
Austin, NV -
Ely, NV -
Death Valley Jet., CA -
Rachel, NV -
Pahrump, NV -
Goldfield, NV -
Indian Springs, NV -
Pioche, NV -
Hiko, NV -
Salt Lake City, UT -
Twin Springs, NV -
St. George, UT -
Amargosa Center, NV -
Holloway's Ranch, NV -
Beatty, NV
Shoshone, CA -
Caliente, NV -
Milford, UT -
Las Vegas, NV -
Alamo, NV -
Overton, NV -
Delta, UT -
Furnace Creek, CA -
-0.02
0.02 0.06 0.10
BetainAir(1.0E-12uCi/ml)
0.14
Figure 17. Distribution of gross beta values from Air Surveillance Network stations, 1990. Figure shows
minimum, 25th percentile, mean, median, 75th percentile, and maximum values.
33
-------
Routine Air Sampling Stations -1991
Coffer Ranch, NV -
Nyala, NV -
Ely, NV -
Austin, NV -
Sunnyside, NV -
Alamo, NV -
Tonopah, NV -
TTR, NV -
Stone Cabin Ranch, NV -
Cedar City, UT -
Pioche, NV -
Hiko, NV -
Death Valley Jet., CA -
Amargosa Valley, NV -
Groom Lake, NV -
Goldfield, NV -
Salt Lake City, UT -
Holloway's Ranch, NV -
Caliente, NV -
Pahrump, NV -
Blue Eagle Ranch, NV -
Beatty, NV -
Rachel, NV -
Indian Springs, NV -
Amargosa Center, NV -
Shoshone, CA -
St. George, UT -
Overton, NV -
Delta, UT -
Milford, UT -
Las Vegas, NV -
Terrell's Ranch, NV -
Twin Springs, NV -
Furnace Creek, CA -
-0.02
i—{B—i
^—CH-
HT»>
i—nn-
>—CH 1
0.02 0.06 0.10
Beta in Air (1.0E-12 uCi/ml)
0.14
Figure 18. Distribution of gross beta values from Air Surveillance Network stations, 1991. Figure shows
minimum, 25th percentile, mean, median, 75th percentile, and maximum values.
34
-------
Routine Air Sampling Stations -1992
Pahrump, NV -
Ely, NV -
Nyala, NV -
Cedar City, UT -
Stone Cabin Ranch, NV -
Tonopah, NV -
TTR, NV -
Pioche, NV -
Death Valley Jet., CA -
Hiko, NV -
Amargosa Valley, NV -
Sunnyside, NV -
Alamo, NV -
Caliente, NV -
Beatty, NV -
Goldfield, NV -
Blue Eagle Ranch, NV -
Salt Lake City, UT -
Austin, NV -
Rachel, NV -
Indian Springs, NV -
Groom Lake, NV -
St. George, UT -
Shoshone, CA -
Las Vegas, NV -
Overton, NV -
Delta, UT -
Twin Springs, NV -
Furnace Creek, CA -
Milford, UT -
-0.02
i—SH
i—ffi-
'—LT>
• CH-
•—CH-
' D§-
i Dsr-
0.02 0.06
BetainAir(1.0E-12uCi/mL)
i
0.1
0.14
Figure 19. Distribution of gross beta values from Air Surveillance Network stations, 1992. Figure shows
minimum, 25th percentile, mean median, 75th percentile and maximum values.
35
-------
Table 6. Offsite Airborne Plutonium Concentrations - 1992
^Pu Concentration (10'1S uCi/mL)
Composite
Sampling Location
Alamo, Nevada
Las Vegas, Nevada
Amargosa Valley, Nevada
Rachel, Nevada
Mean MDC: 1.50 x 10'17 u.Ci/mL
Arithmetic
Number Maximum Minimum Mean
Standard Mean as
Deviation %DCG
12
12
12
12
6.82
7.40
5.02
37.10*
-2.95
-5.42
-8.77
-7.21
1.98
1.57
-0.77
6.23
3.00
3.84
4.12
12.61
0.07
0.05
N/A
0.21
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 1.01 x 10'17 u.Ci/mL
DCG = derived concentration guide. Established by DOE Order as 3 x 10~15 u.Ci/mL.
23M*°Pu Concentration (1Q-18 uCi/mL)
Composite
Sampling Location
Alamo, Nevada
Las Vegas, Nevada
Amargosa Valley, Nevada
Rachel, Nevada
Mean MDC: 1.35 x 10'17 uCi/mL
Arithmetic
Number Maximum Minimum Mean
Standard Mean as
Deviation %DCG
12
12
12
12
4.97
5.68
25.70
9.88
-3.71
-4.39
-15.10
-7.42
0.389
-0.667
0.002
3.512
2.28
2.70
9.49
4.74
0.02
N/A
<0.01
0.18
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 1.05 u.Ci/mL
= result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
DCG = derived concentration guide. Established by DOE Order as 2 x 10"15
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
NA = not applicable.
periods in November 1991: Shoshone, California;
Cedar City, Utah; and Austin, Ely, and Caliente,
Nevada. Samples were collected approximately
once a week from the routine stations and once a
quarter from the standby stations. Figure 20
shows the locations of the tritium network sampling
stations in conjunction with the noble gas sampling
network stations.
4.2.2 Procedures
A column filled with molecular sieve pellets is used
to collect moisture from the air. Approximately 6
m3 (212 ft3) of air is drawn through the column
during a typical 7-day sampling period. The water
absorbed in the pellets is recovered and measured
and the concentration of 3H is determined by liquid
scintillation counting. The volume of recovered
water and the 3H concentration is then used to
calculate the concentration of HTO, the vapor form
of tritium. HTO is the most common form of tritium
encountered in the environment.
4.2.3 Results
Of the 716 routine and 15 standby samples collect-
ed in 1992, 15 samples were not analyzed: five
because of broken sieves, three were lost, and
seven contained insufficient sample (moisture). An
additional seven samples were excluded from data
analysis because of indications of operational
malfunctions affecting data reliability. These
included frozen lines, lack of pump flow, indications
of leaks, and overextended sampling interval. Two
samples exceeded the analysis MDC. Both sam-
ples were collected June 16-24; one from Las
36
-------
, PYRAMID
LAKE
Austin I
1\
«V
^t V
~ ^, Tonopah ^
'vGoldfield •
Beatty
X
Amargosa Valleyi
Amargosa Center
NEVADA
• Ely
Twin Springs
^& 1 Rachjl
link 1!!!. *Cali
y^)^,,"l •Alamo
XlPtf*
i | TsW
L ^5^sv
llevl **MU^- 4*i~ u^tfcul
"=yw XJT^ yiininn
er\» • Overton*.
UTAH
1
— ;
1 ^\st*
Lake
City
Delta •
• Milford
e • Cedar City
• St. George
ARIZONA
•^ Indian Springs M |
Pahrunip • J/LAKEMEAD
"», Us •
ShoshoneB V Vegas
\ !
\ \
\i
sy
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 20. Off site Noble Gas sampling and Tritium-in-Air Network stations - 1992.
37
-------
Vegas and the other from Overton, Nevada. The
average HTO concentration for the Las Vegas
station, located near the EPA Radioanalysis Labo-
ratory, was 1.5 x 10"6 pCi/mL. The annual HTO
network average was 6.6 x 10~7 pCi/mL. Summary
data results are given in Table 7 for the routine
stations and in Table B-4, Appendix B, for the
standby stations. The 1992 tritium data appear to
be consistent with data from previous years.
4.3 Noble Gas Sampling
Network
4.3.1 Design
At the beginning of 1992, the Noble Gas Sampling
Network consisted of 13 routine (continuously oper-
ated) and 8 standby stations. In November 1991,
the following 5 stations were converted from
routine to standby status: Austin, Caliente, and
Ely, Nevada; Shoshone, California; and Cedar City,
Utah. Samples were collected approximately once
a week from the routine stations and quarterly from
the standby stations. Samples collected were ana-
lyzed for 8SKr and 133Xe. The locations of the noble
gas sampling stations are shown in Figure 20 in
conjunction with the tritium stations.
Noble gases may be released into the atmosphere
from research and power reactor facilities, fuel
reprocessing facilities, nuclear testing, and drill-
backs and tunnel purgings which occur after
nuclear tests. Environmental levels of the xenons,
with their very short half-lives, are normally below
the 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, 8SKr results are
expected to be slightly above the MDC.
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 S5Kr 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
Table 8 summarizes the 85Kr and 133Xe results for
the routine stations and Table B-5, Appendix B,
summarizes the results for the standby stations.
The number of samples analyzed was less than 52
because samples were occasionally lost in analysis
due to equipment failure or because the sample
volume collected was insufficient to permit analy-
sis. Of the 699 samples collected in 1992, analy-
ses were not performed on 74 samples (10.6
percent) due to insufficient volume collected or
sampler malfunctions. Twelve quarterly samples
were collected from standby samplers; none were
collected from Milford and Salt Lake City, Utah. 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 2.62 x 10'11 u.Ci/mL for 85Kr and -1.77 x 10'11
uCi/mL for 133Xe and for the standby samplers,
2.58 x 10'11 uCi/mL for 85Kr and -2.74 x 10'11
uCi/mL for 133Xe.
Figure 21 shows the distribution of the 8SKr data
from each routine sampling location arranged by
ascending means. The graph, presented using the
same conventions as in Figure 16, indicates that
85Kr results are very consistent among stations.
Figure 22 shows the annual average 85Kr value
from 1972 through 1992. The graph indicates that
the levels of 85Kr have remained consistent over
the past several years. The results for 133Xe are
not graphed as all the values were below the MDC.
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.
38
-------
Table 7. Offsite Atmospheric Tritium Results for Routin.-1 Samplers - 1992
HTO Concentration (10'7 pCi/ml)
Sampling Location
Number Maximum Minimum
Arithmetic
Mean
Standard
Deviation
Mean as
%DCG
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: 5.52 x 1fJ6 pCi/mL
48
51
43.1
50.3
-35.3
-19.7
6.52
8.86
17.4
14.3
0.01
0.01
51
51
52
49
52
51
51
48
51
65.3
18.7
29.3
47.9
94.9*
57.0
64.9
22.6
49.4
-44.7
-12.7
-27.0
-43.2
-49.4
-42.1
-22.4
-22.7
-24.2
5.48
2.97
4.93
7.41
15.3
8.53
10.4
3.8
5.50
19.1
7.37
11.7
17.6
30.1
19.7
19.9
9.82
15.6
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.01
0.02
0.01
0.01
<0.01
0.01
50
38
51
56.5
24.0
88.2
-39.5
-35.3
-79.4
4.38
1.93
6.86
17.1
13.3
32.7
<0.01
<0.01
0.01
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 2.75 x 10"6 pCi/mL
DCG = derived concentration guide. Established by DOE Order as 1 x 102 pCi/mL.
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
* = result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
1 Maintaining a file of calibration records, con-
trol charts, and log books.
• Assigning unique sample numbers.
1 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 calculations,
and review reports.
Performing analysis of blanks to verify method
interferences caused by contaminants 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, spikedsamples 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
39
-------
Table 8. Offsite Noble Gas Results for Routine Samplers - 1992
e5Kr 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
Number Maximum Minimum
48
44
35
50
49
50
51
52
47
44
45
43
49
3.03*
3.01*
2.18*
2.18*
3.05*
3.08*
3.08*
3.03*
3.07*
3.12*
3.05*
3.07*
3.09*
2.95*
3.14*
2.09*
2.09*
2.13*
2.17*
2.08*
2.11*
2.23*
2.04*
2.02*
2.21*
2.01*
Arithmetic
Mean
2.62
2.59
2.64
2.62
2.61
2.62
2.61
2.63
2.67
2.57
2.63
2.61
2.59
Standard
Deviation
0.21
0.20
0.23
0.24
0.22
0.23
0.23
0.22
0.20
0.22
0.19
0.19
0.26
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
Mean MDC: 5.55 x 10~1Z uX)i/mL Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 1.25 x 10~12
DCG = derived concentration guide. Established by DOE Order as 3 x 10~7 u.Ci/mL.
133Xe Concentration (10"'2 u.Ci/mL)
Sampling Location Number
Alamo, NV 49
Amargosa Valley, NV 44
Amargosa Valley
Community Center, NV 36
Beatty, NV 51
Goldfield, NV 48
Indian Springs, NV 50
Las Vegas, NV 51
Overton, NV 52
Pahrump, NV 47
Rachel, NV 44
Tonopah, NV 46
Twin Springs, NV
Fallini's Ranch 43
St. George, UT 49
Mean MDC: 1.40 x 10'11 u.Ci/mL
Maximum
4.22
7.19
21.0
6.01
12.9
6.05
4.55
8.22
5.75
7.22
8.79
4.33
7.71
Minimum
-18.4
-14.9
-17.3
-15.4
-16.5
-12.0
-17.6
-22.2
-14.9
-15.4
-15.5
-13.0
-11.1
Arithmetic
Mean
-2.57
-2.09
-2.10
-2.11
-1.36
-1.82
-1.49
-2.63
-1.10
-2.58
-1.21
-0.935
-1.01
Standard
Deviation
4.39
3.59
7.10
4.59
4.95
3.45
4.67
5.58
3.53
5.21
5.23
3.85
4.49
Mean as
%DCG
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 5.41 x 10"12 u.Ci/mL
DCG = derived concentration guide. Established by DOE Order as 5 x 10"8 u.Ci/mL.
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
= result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
NA = not applicable.
40
-------
Amargosa Valley, NV -
Rachel, NV -
St. George, UT -
Indian Spr., NV -
Goldfield, NV -
Las Vegas, NV -
Alamo, NV -
Twin Springs, NV -
Beatty, NV -
Overton, NV -
Tonopah, NV -
Amargosa Center, NV -
Pahrump, NV -
•T
•T
20.0 22.5 25.0 27.5
Kr-85 (pCi/m3)
30.0
32.5
Figure 21. Distribution of krypton-85 data from routine sampling stations, 1992. Figure shows minimum,
25th percentile, mean, median, 75th percentile, and maximum values.
n
e
-rH
a
a
• — •
u
c
o
CJ
LO
00
45 -
35 -
30 -
25 -
20 -
15 -
10 -
5 -
n
• • • ^
~ ••*•**
•
9
. * •
•
III 1
u 1 I 1 1
1970 1975 1980 1935 1990 1995
Figure 22. Annual network average krypton-85 concentrations.
41
-------
analyzed for the ASN. Only internal laborato- • Determining bias (the difference between the
ry replicates are analyzed for the noble gas value obtained and the true or reference
and the HTO samples. value) by participating in intercomparison
studies.
Further discussion of the QA program and the data
quality assessment is given in Chapter 11.
42
-------
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 (see Section 7).
To monitor the ingestion pathways, milk surveil-
lance and biomonitoring networks are operated
within the 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 includes 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.
5.1.1 Design
At the beginning of 1992, there were 24 MSN
collection sites. Two sites were discontinued in
July: Susie Scott's Ranch (Goldfield, Nevada) and
Cedarsage Farm (Inyokern, California), which went
out of business and moved to Idaho. McKay's
Ranch (McGill, Nevada) was added to the MSN in
February. These locations are shown in Figure 23.
No samples were collected from Blue Eagle Ranch
(Currant, Nevada) nor from Susie Scott's Ranch
prior to its discontinuation.
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 1992
appear in Figure 24. Changes in SMSN sampling
locations are given in Table 9.
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 Utah counties
are surveyed approximately every other year. A
partial census, including all California counties
contiguous to Nevada, Box Elder and Tooele coun-
ties in Utah, and half of Nevada, was performed in
1992. The locations of processing plants and com-
mercial dairy herds in Idaho and the remainder of
Utah can be obtained from the agriculture depart-
ments 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.
43
-------
p.
1
f
f
I
j
f"
j%
. CSS PYRAMID
f 1| LAKE
I
I Austin •
NEVADA | UTAH '
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
McGill 1
B McKay's Rn.
j Young Rn.B * I
V • By -
•V Duckwater^^ Bradsnaw Rn m Harb"ecke Rn
^*. Manzonie Rn.B B Lund* Shoshone
S^\, Currant • R. Horsley •
<%, >, Blue Jay Springs Rn. B
^ ^ Tonopah _ Warm •
X K. Harper" Springs
Lemon Rn. Goldfield
r\\iar B (O\ • I i j • i f i:. 1_
B Blue Eagle Rn. I
B Nyala •
Sharp's Rn. 1
i
V Frayne Rn. i !;§» j R.aghel June Cox Rn. • • _ . _.
1. Brown Rn. B »^c°« Rn. Uj^^g
N>. ^Sv NEVADA
V Is TEST
* 1 -SxE^
* • Caliente
^^V • •• i •
B Brent Jones
) B Alamo §• Ivms Dairy
| n Sey : ^vid Hafen
: Dahl Rn. I
Moapa B Hafen Dairy ARIZONA
^ i • • Mesquite
Bar^-Suelln3— •t ^ n ™. B L. Marshal
John Deei\, Indian Springs H°^eswJ| Logandale
Pahrump •
Pahrump Dairy B
l/LAKE MEAD
d*^W^uy'
X i ~
• Inyokem ^ •
*B Cedarsage Farm ^ \
\ i
N* Hinkley
B Desert View Dairy
Scale in Miles
0 50 100
^^^^ ^•^T1""*
| T^^^^i 1
0 50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
N =
Rn.
• 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 23. Milk Surveillance Network stations - 1992.
44
-------
• Standby Milk Surveillance
Network Station
Scale in Miles
0 100 300 500
100 300 500 700
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 24. Standby Milk Surveillance Network stations - 1992.
45
-------
Table 9. Standby Milk Surveillance Network Sampling Location Changes - 1992
City, State
Saugus, California
North Powder, Oregon
Logandale, Nevada
Corpus Christi, Texas
Glen Rose, Texas
Huston, Louisiana
Manteca, California
Aurora, Missouri
Old Diary Name
Wayside Honor Ranch
Elmer Hill Dairy
Nevada Dairy
People's Baptist Church
Daffan Family Dairy
Technical University Dairy
A & J Foods, Inc.
Mid-America Dairymen, Inc.
City, State
Long Beach, California
Ontario, Oregon
Las Vegas, Nevada
Corpus Christi, Texas
Glen Rose, Texas
Coalgate, Oklahoma
Manteca, California
Monett, Missouri
New Dairy Name
Paul's Dairy
Eastway Dairy
Anderson Dairy
Hygeia Milk Plant
DeWayne Hankins Dairy
(no replacement)
Larry Krebs Dairy
Supremo Foods
Mid-America Dairymen, Inc.
(relocation)
Routine sampling is conducted monthly for the
MSN and annually for the SMSN, or whenever
local or worldwide radiation events such as the
Chernobyl incident or nuclear testing by foreign
nations suggest possible radiation concerns.
All samples are analyzed by high resolution gam-
ma spectroscopy to detect gamma-emitting radio-
nuclides. One sample per quarter from each MSN
location and the annual samples from two of the
SMSN locations in each western state (excluding
Nevada) are evaluated by radiochemical analysis.
These samples are analyzed for 3H by liquid
scintillation counting and for 89Sr and ^Sr by
radiochemical separation and beta counting.
5.1.3 Results
The average total potassium concentration derived
from 40K activity was 1.6 g/L. Two SMSN samples
indicated the presence of 137Cs: the Tommy Rue
Potts Dairy (Sulphur Springs, Texas) sample
collected November 13 yielded 2.43 ± 0.86 pCi/L,
and the Brown's Velvet Dairy Products (New
Orleans, Louisiana) sample collected April 9
yielded 3.46 ± 0.89 pCi/L. These values were
below the MDC of the analysis, which was approxi-
mately 5 pCi/L. No other manmade gamma-emit-
ting radionuclides were detected.
Selected MSN and SMSN milk samples were also
analyzed for 3H, 69Sr, and 90Sr, and the results are
similar to those obtained in previous years; neither
increasing or decreasing trends are evident.
Although there was a slight increase in the number
of samples whose results exceeded the MDC for
3H, 89Sr, and ^Sr in 1992, as listed in Table 10, the
average annual concentrations have, in general,
decreased slightly. A summary of the MSN results
are in Tables 11 for 3H, 12 for 89Sr, and 13 for 90Sr.
The results for the annual SMSN samples ana-
lyzed for 3H, 89Sr, and MSr are given in Table B-6,
Appendix B. Samples analyzed by gamma spec-
trometry for the SMSN are listed in Table B-7,
Appendix B.
Time series distributions of the 90Sr and 3H data for
the SMSN stations for 1982 through 1992 are
provided in Appendix B, Figures B-1 through B-6.
The information contained in these graphs is the
same as that provided for Figures 16 - 19. The
stations were divided into three regions for the
graphs: the Midwest region including Louisiana,
Texas, Arkansas, Illinois, Oklahoma, Missouri,
Kansas, Iowa, Nebraska, Minnesota, South and
North Dakota; the Mountain region including New
Mexico, Arizona, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Idaho
and Montana; and the Western region including
California, Nevada, Washington, and Oregon. It
should be noted that the data presented in these
graphs include many values which are below the
MDC. Values below the MDC were reported as
measured.
In conclusion, the MSN and SMSN data are con-
sistent with previous years and are not indicative of
increasing or decreasing trends. No radioactivity
directly related to current NTS activities was
evident.
46
-------
Table 10. Summary of Radionuclides Detected in Milk Samples
Milk Surveillance Network
No. of samples with results > MDC
(Network average concentration in pCi/L)
Standby Milk Surveillance Network
No. of samples with results > MDC
(Network average concentration in pCi/L)
1992
3H 5 (153)
89Sr 4 (-0.01)
90Sr 5 (0.65)
1991
2 (152)
1 (0.30)
4 (0.54)
1990
0 (129)
0(0.18)
4 (0.59)
1992
3H 6 (158)
89Sr 4 (0.38)
90Sr 17 (0.99)
1991
1 (153)
3 (0.42)
18 (1.24)
1990
1 (159)
0 (-0.16)
17 (1.32)
5.1.4 Quality Assurance/Quality
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 Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs).
External and internal comparison studies were per-
formed and field and internal duplicate samples
were obtained for precision and accuracy assess-
ments. Analytical results are reviewed for com-
pleteness 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 Section 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
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 1992.
5.2.1 Network Design
The objective of the animal investigation program
is to determine whether there is potential for
radionuclides to reach humans through ingesting
wild game or meat from range cattle. To that end,
the program is based upon what is considered to
be a worst-case scenario. Mule deer are migrato-
ry; 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 while on 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 radio-
nuclides, particularly plutonium and strontium iso-
topes, are still detected in soil in the area. Some
of these radionuclides may be ingested by animals.
Cattle are purchased from ranches where atmo-
spheric tests are known to have deposited radio-
nuclides. 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 4o be sold. Because the program is not
statistically based, no conclusions can or should be
47
-------
Table 11. Offsite Milk Surveillance 3H Results -1992
3H Concentration (10'7 nCi/mL)
Sampling Location
Benton, CA
Irene Brown Ranch
Hinkley, CA
Desert View Dairy
Inyokern, CA
Cedarsage 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
Goldfield, NV
Frayne Ranch
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: 2.85 x 10'7 nCi/mL
DCG = derived concentration
Number Maximum
1
4
3
2
4
2
4
4
4
4
3
3
4
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
4
4
2.53*
3.81
1.08
1.74
1.64
2.26
2.65
1.04
2.63
1.20
3.97*
2.42
1.94
1.56
2.42
4.18*
2.51
2.77
2.61
2.55
4.76*
2.99
2.64
Standard
Minimum
2.53
0.675
0.620
1.14
-0.692
1.46
0.519
0.433
1.42
0.292
0.245
0.944
-0.020
1.05
-0.186
0.090
0.377
-0.200
1.02
0.462
0.252
0.871
0.900
Deviation of
guide. Established by DOE Order as 8
Arithmetic
Mean
2.53
1.93
0.875
1.44
0.913
1.86
1.33
0.816
1.77
0.852
1.92
1.71
0.862
1.31
1.48
1.89
1.82
1.14
1.91
1.55
2.03
2.08
2.07
Standard
Deviation
—
1.33
0.234
0.424
1.08
0.564
0.937
0.288
0.572
0.418
1.89
0.739
0.913
0.255
1.15
1.95
1.00
1.53
0.662
0.873
2.40
0.919
0.789
Mean MDC: 5.70 x 10'8
x IQ-'u.Ci/mL
Mean as
%DCG
0.32
0.24
0.11
0.18
0.11
0.23
0.17
0.10
0.22
0.11
0.24
0.21
0.11
0.16
0.19
0.24
0.23
0.14
0.24
0.19
0.25
0.26
0.26
1 u.Ci/mL
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
= result is greater than
MDC of analysis.
48
-------
Table 12. Offsite Milk Surveillance 89Sr Results - 1992
89Sr Concentration (10'1° nCi/mL)
Sampling Location
Benton, CA
Irene Brown Ranch
Hinkley, CA
Desert View Dairy
Inyokern, CA
Cedarsage 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
Goldfield, NV
Frayne Ranch
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: 1.15 x 10"9 nCi/mL
Number
1
4
3
2
4
1
3
3
4
3
2
2
4
3
4
4
3
3
4
4
2
4
4
Maximum
5.10
4.07
4.57
6.29
3.00
4.42
5.58
1.46
6.79
11.5*
-3.25
3.51
4.38
1.12
-3.40
4.00
11.0*
6.95
6.30
8.25
3.74
9.74*
11.0*
Standard
Minimum
5.10
-7.60
-0.332
-14.8
-19.4
4.42
-8.09
-15.8
-0.221
-11.0
-7.26
-3.29
-7.84
-1.45
-9.13
-7.66
-3.57
3.57
-2.42
0.770
3.25
-5.26
-4.90
Deviation of
DCG = derived concentration guide. Established by DOE Order as 8
MDC = minimum detectable
= result is greater than
NA = not applicable.
concentration.
Arithmetic
Mean
5.10
-1.87
2.10
-4.25
-6.33
4.42
0.177
-4.67
3.49
-3.37
-5.26
0.110
-1.64
-0.309
-5.36
-1.93
2.48
4.97
1.83
4.71
3.49
1.85
2.76
Mean MDC:
Standard
Deviation
—
5.48
2.45
14.9
9.89
—
7.27
9.66
3.00
12.9
2.84
4.81
5.45
1.31
2.61
4.76
7.59
1.76
3.74
3.49
0.35
6.15
7.33
2.28 x 10"10
Mean as
%DCG
0.06
NA
0.03
NA
NA
0.06
<0.01
NA
0.04
NA
NA
<0.01
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.03
0.06
0.02
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.03
u.Ci/mL
x 10'7nCi/mL
the MDC of analysis.
49
-------
Table 13. Offsite Milk Surveillance ^Sr Results - 1992
90Sr Concentration (10"1° nCi/mL)
Sampling Location
Benton, CA
Irene Brown Ranch
Hinkley, CA
Desert View Dairy
Inyokern, CA
Cedarsage 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
Goldfield, NV
Frayne Ranch
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: 1.45 x 10'9 fiCi/mL
DCG = derived concentration
Number
1
4
3
2
4
2
4
3
4
4
3
3
4
3
4
4
3
4
4
4
3
4
4
Maximum
-1.23
5.65
3.74
6.94
14.2
1.88
13.1
8.60
16.0*
13.7
10.6
9.29
6.92
7.51
8.70
10.4
6.82
9.59
8.60
19.6*
22.9*
7.78
11.1
Standard
Minimum
-1.23
1.13
1.04
-1.83
-0.872
-0.094
5.18
2.59
3.24
1.24
5.46
7.55
1.75
2.25
5.12
3.48
-0.819
4.30
1.11
6.80
11.7
2.58
2.27
Deviation of
guide. Established by DOE Order as 4
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
= result is greater than
NA = not applicable.
Arithmetic
Mean
-1.23
3.57
2.28
2.55
4.99
0.89
9.60
5.00
7.68
8.27
8.55
8.14
4.39
4.01
7.18
6.44
3.51
6.77
4.87
14.1
16.8
5.49
5.85
Standard
Deviation
—
2.11
1.36
6.20
6.60
1.34
3.28
3.18
5.85
5.21
2.72
0.99
2.69
3.03
1.69
2.99
3.92
2.20
4.18
5.51
5.68
2.16
3.94
Mean MDC: 1.52x 10'10
x 10"8nCi/mL
Mean as
%DCG
NA
0.89
0.57
0.64
1.25
0.22
2.40
1.25
1.92
2.07
2.14
2.04
1.10
1.00
1.80
1.61
0.88
1.69
1.22
3.52
4.19
2.74
2.92
u.Ci/mL
MDC of analysis.
50
-------
drawn regarding average concentrations of radio-
nuclides in animals in the offstte 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 1992 are shown in Figure 25.
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 one kidney from each
bighorn sheep taken. The location where the
sheep was taken and any other available informa-
tion 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 kidney is divided into
two samples. One kidney sample is delivered to
the EPA EMSL-LV Radioanalysis Laboratory for
analysis of gamma-emitting radionuclides. The
second kidney sample and all bone samples are
shipped in a single batch to a contract laboratory
for ashing. Upon completion of ashing, both the
kidney and 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 report-
ed, 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 analyzed 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 1992, four
cattle were purchased in the spring from G.L.
Coffer's Fleurde Lis Ranch located north of Beatty,
Nevada and another four were purchased in the
fall from the Cortney Dahl ranch in Delamar Valley
(east of Alamo, Nevada). Generally, two adult
cattle and two calves are acquired in each pur-
chase. The facility at the old EPA farm on the
NTS is used for the slaughter. This facility is
designed to minimize risk of contamination. As
with the bighorn 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 ana-
lyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides; blood is
also analyzed for tritium activity. A second kidney
sample and bone samples are sent to a contract
laboratory for ashing. Ashed kidney 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 1991. The kidney
samples and one lung sample were analyzed for
gamma-emitting radionuclides and for tritium. The
bone samples were ashed prior to analysis for 90Sr,
238Pu, and 239t240Pu. A summary of results obtained
from analysis of bighorn sheep bone and kidney
are shown in Table 14. Other than naturally
occurring *°K, gamma-emitting radionuclides were
not detected, nor was tritium detected, at activities
greater than the MDC in any of the kidney or lung
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 14, were similar to those obtained
last year (DOE, 1991). The average 90Sr levels
51
-------
Nyala
Queen City Smt.
Tempiute
Coyote Hiko
NEUJS AFB
RAt*5E COMPLEX -
Hancock Smt.
- \
Medlins'Rn. +Mamo
1 NEVADA 1
Cactus
Springs springs
^Searchlight
Bighorn Sheep (winter 1990)
Mule Deer (1991)
A Cattle (1991)
Numbers below or within symbol
represent the animal identification numbers.
Figure 25. Collection sites for animals sampled - 1992.
52
-------
Table 14. Radiochemical Results for Animal Samples -
Sample Type Parameter Number Maximum
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
•rt»
% Ash
238pu(c)
239.240pu(c)
% Ash
89Sf
% Ash
238puM
23W«,pu(c>
% Ash
B9gr
-------
found in bighorn sheep bone ash since 1955 are
shown in Figure 26. None of the bone samples
yielded 238Pu results greater than the MDC of the
analysis and only one sample (Bighorn sheep No.
6) yielded a ^^Pu result greater than the MDC.
This animal was collected in Area 268, near Buff-
ington Pockets Spring south and west of Moapa,
Nevada near the Valley of Fire. Medians and
ranges of plutonium isotopes, given in Table 14,
were similar to those obtained previously (DOE,
1991).
5.2.4 Sample Results for Mule Deer
Blood samples were analyzed for gamma-emitting
radionuclides and tritium. Soft tissue samples
(lung, muscle, liver, thyroid, rumen contents, and
fetus, when available) were analyzed for gamma-
emitting radionuclides and plutonium isotopes.
Samples of bones were ashed and then analyzed
for plutonium isotopes and for 90Sr. Samples of
thyroid and fetal tissue were not ashed due to their
small size.
No deer was collected in the first quarter of 1992,
although two hunting trips were conducted. The
mule deer collected in the second quarter of 1992
was a buck in good condition obtained by hunting
in Area 18 of the NTS, near Buckboard Mesa road.
No gamma-emitting radionuclides other than
naturally occurring 40K were detected in soft tis-
sues, however, 239+240pu was detected in the lungs,
liver, and muscle. The rumen content contained
238Pu and ^^Pu. Values for 239^°pu were 0.031
± 0.006 pCi/g ash in the lungs, 0.017 ± 0.004 pCi/g
ash in the liver, 0.006 ±0.001 pCi/g ash in the
muscle, and 0.0174 ± 0.003 pCi/g ash in the ru-
men. The bone sample contained 0.74 ± 0.13
pCi/g ash of 90Sr. There was no detectable 3H in
the blood above the MDC of 1.82 x 10'7 uCi/mL
The mule deer collected in the third quarter was a
young buck in fair condition obtained by hunting in
Area 19 of the NTS. The blood sample did not
contain 3H above the MDC of 4.84 x 10'7 u.Ci/mL,
and there were no gamma-emitting radionuclides
other than 4DK in the soft tissues. Plutonium-238
was found in the lung and rumen content. Bone
contained only 90Sr, 1.4 ± 0.2 pCi/g ash. All soft
tissue samples contained 239+240pU; the lungs
contained 0.011 ± 0.002 pCi/g ash, the liver 0.002
± 0.0001 pCi/g ash, and the muscle 0.012 ± 0.002
pCi/g ash.
Bighorn Sheep
40
o 30
Q.
0)
O 20
CD
10
CO
18
1416 13 1J16
55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91
Year
* Number of samples prior to 1969 not available
Figure 26. Average strontium levels in bighorn sheep, 1955 - 1992.
54
-------
Deer
40
0)
O 30
0)
C 20
O
CD
C
E
2
'c 10
o
c/5
000
4 5 4 3 4 4 3
55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91
Year
'Number of samples prior to 1969 not available
Figure 27. Average strontium levels in mule deer, 1955 - 1992.
The final deer killed in the fall was a nonlactating
doe in good condition located in Area 19 of the
NTS on Pahute Mesa Road. There was no 3H
found in the blood above the MDC of 5.16 x 10~7
u.Ci/ml_, and no gamma-emitting radionuclides
other than 40K were detected in soft tissue or
rumen content. Liver, muscle, and rumen con-
tained 239+240Pu: 0.052 ± 0.008 (liver), 0.097 ±
0.008 (muscle), and 0.037 ± 0.005 (rumen) pCi/g
ash. Bone contained 0.008 ± 0.001 pCi/g ash
239.240pU| Q 3g ± 0 32 pCj/g ash Qf Sgg^ ^ Q QQ ±
0.07 pCi/g ash of 90Sr.
The medians and ranges of the 1992 mule deer
analyses, presented in Table 14, are similar to
those reported for mule deer collected in 1991 for
bone tissue analyses and 238Pu analyses in all
tissues (DOE, 1991). The average 90Sr levels found
in mule deer bone ash since 1955 are shown in
Figure 27. Marked differences between years are
observed in the medians of tritium activity in blood
and 239*2*°pu in ashed soft tissues. These differ-
ences are due to the fact that two contaminated
animals were collected in 1991. In past years,
none, or at most one, of the mule deer have shown
evidence of radioactive contamination and, thus, a
contaminated sample had no impact on the medi-
an.
5.2.5 Sample Results for Cattle
Blood and soft tissues (lung, muscle, liver, thyroid,
kidney, and fetal tissue, when available) were ana-
lyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides; blood was
also analyzed for tritium activity. Samples of liver,
bone, and fetal tissue were ashed and analyzed for
plutonium isotopes; bone and fetus samples were
also analyzed for 90Sr. Duplicate liver and bone
samples from two animals in each group of four
were prepared and analyzed.
The four cattle purchased in May 1992 from the
G.L. Coffer Fleur de Lis Ranch of Beatty, Nevada
had detectable concentrations of 90Sr in bone ash
samples ranging from 0.27 ± 0.08 to 0.75 ±0.13
55
-------
pCi/g ash. One bone sample contained, 0.001 ±
0.001 pCi/g ash of ^Pu and 0.003 ± 0.001 pCi/g
ash of 239+24° pu. One of the cows was pregnant.
The fetal bone contained no 90Sr above the detect-
able concentration of 0.70 pCi/g ash. The average
90Sr found in cattle bone ash since 1955 is shown
in Figure 28. All liver samples from the adult cattle
contained 239+240pu, ranging from 0.004 ± 0.001
pCi/g ash to 0.015 ± 0.004 pCi/g ash. No 3H was
detected above the MDC. These animals had
ranged from Beatty into the NTS in the Beatty
Wash area.
Four cattle were purchased in September 1992
from the Cortney Dahl ranch in Delamar Valley
(near Alamo, Nevada). The livers of three of the
animals contained 239+240pu ranging from 0.010 ±
0.004 to 0.014 ± 0.002 pCi/g ash and one liver
contained 0.008 ± 0.003 pCi/g ash of ^Pu. Only
one bone sample contained 239+240Pu, 0.018 ±
0.002 pCi/g ash, but all four contained 90Sr ranging
from 0.34 ± 0.06 to 0.88 ± 0.07 pCi/g ash. One
bone sample also contained 89Sr, 0.72 ± 0.36 pCi/g
ash. One cow was pregnant and the fetus con-
tained 0.005 ± 0.001 pCi/g ash of ™*"°pu. No 3H
was detected above the MDC. Medians and
ranges, given in Table 14, are similar to those
reported for animals collected in 1991 (DOE,
1991).
5.2.6 Quality Assurance/Quality
Control
Standard operating procedures detail sample
collection, preparation, storage, analysis, and data
review procedures to ensure comparability among
operators. Field personnel complete a standard-
ized 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, sample weights, and assigned
identification numbers. Standardized forms accom-
pany each shipment of samples sent to the con-
tract laboratory for ashing and are also used for
analyses conducted in the Radioanalysis Laborato-
ry. All information entered into the data base
Cattle
40
30
O
Q.
co
<
0) 20
O
m
10
O
•»—'
CO
I
liillikii;
3 14 484
8 8 8 7 8 8 8
55 57 59 61 63 65 67 69 71 73 75 77 79 81 83 85 87 89 91
Year
'Number of samples prior to 1969 not available
Figure 28. Average strontium levels in cattle, 1955 -1992.
56
-------
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 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 accura-
cy. This is considered adequate because the
Animal Investigation Program itself is not statistical-
ly 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 contract
laboratory. Finally, results of QA/QC samples, with
the exception of one routine duplicate pair, were
within established control limits. Although a direct
comparability study was not undertaken (i.e.,
analysis of replicate samples by both laboratories),
the results of the QA review indicate the data
obtained for 1992 analyses are comparable to data
obtained in previous years.
The QA review also resulted in recommendations
for some changes in the animal investigation
program that were 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 permit an addition-
al estimate of precision, in this case analytical
precision, to be obtained. The system blank was
a bone sample known to contain no detectable
concentrations of radionuclides (with the possible
exception of strontium). It was processed 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
1992.
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 current 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.
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
57
-------
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 ^^Pu.
5.3.3 Sample Results
In the fall of 1992, eight samples of locally grown
fruits and vegetables were donated by offsite
residents in Utah and Nevada. Fruits and vegeta-
bles sampled included apples, broccoli, cabbage,
carrots, and summer squash. All samples were
analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides and
only naturally occurring 40K was detected. All
samples were analyzed for tritium; no results
greater than the MDC of the analysis were ob-
tained. Samples were then ashed and analyzed
for 90Sr, ^Pu, and ^^Pu. Results which were
greater than the MDC of the analysis are listed in
Table 15. Four vegetable samples from Nevada
(cabbage, broccoli, and two samples of carrots with
tops) contained 90Sr greater than the MDC of the
analysis. The source of the ^Sr may have been
soil particles adhered to the vegetable. No ^Pu
was found in any of the samples. Concentrations
of 239*ZMpu greater than the analysis MDC were
found in all carrots with tops. None of the smooth-
skinned surface crops contained these radionuclid-
es.
5.3.4 Quality Assurance/Qualtiy
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 (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 duplicates. As with
the Animal Investigation Program, the QA/QC
samples provide only an estimate or indication of
the analytical precision and accuracy.
Table 15. Detectable 90Sr and Z39+240pu Concentrations in Vegetables
Collection
Location % Ash
Rachel, NV 0.45
Rachel, NV 0.31
Alamo, NV 1.61
Rachel, NV 1.03
LaVerkin, UT 1.21
MDC = minimum detectable concentration
Vegetable
Broccoli
Cabbage
Carrots with
tops
90Sr±1a
pCi/g ash
2.0 ± 0.49
(1.4)
0.78 ± 0.18
(0.62)
0.34 ± 0.05
(0.12)
0.82 ± 0.22
(0.68)
10"3 pCi/g ash
1.26 ± 0.47
(0.833)
3.40 ± 1.46
(2.26)
0.772 ± 0.409
(0.719)
58
-------
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 1992, 54 families (158 individuals) were
eligible for the program. Locations of the 27
families monitored in 1992 are shown in Figure 29.
The number of individuals participating in the
program varies as children leave home to attend
school or obtain employment. Although most
families are able to come into the laboratory as
scheduled, some are unable to participate in a
particular year due to distance, weather, or family
commitments. All families currently in residence
would presumably be available following any
accidental release of radioactivity.
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.
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
spectra 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.
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-
59
-------
J
NEVADA
CM PYRAMID
LAKE
Austin OO
UTAH
OO Delta
OO Milford
Cedar City
OO St. George
X
Amargosa Vail-, _ _ _^
Amargosa Center»O , >* • Overton' , .
V Indian Spnngs t\ |
Pahrump^^ _Q J/LAKE MEAD
Shoshone * V Vegas*~i'''^S^?
O •» • I
^Henderson"
\ I
A. •
\!
ARIZONA
N
• Offsite Family Monitored in 1992
O Not Monitored in 1992
Scale in Miles
50
100
50 100 150
Scale in Kilometers
Figure 29. Location of families in the Offsite Internal Dosimetry Program - 1992.
60
-------
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
During 1992, EPA performed whole-body and lung
counting on 281 individuals, of whom 107 were
participants in the Offsite Internal Dosimetry Net-
work. An additional 118 gamma spectra were
obtained for radiation workers, including EPA,
DOE, and contractor personnel. Special study
whole-body counts were performed for Utah State
University volunteers participating in an 59Fe uptake
study, the U.S. Army, the U.S. Navy, and con-
cerned citizens. No transuranic radionuclides were
detected in any lung counts. All of the whole-body
gamma spectra for the Offsite Internal Dosimetry
Network and Radiological Safety Program partici-
pants were representative of normal background
and showed only naturally occurring 40K. The Utah
State University volunteers, as expected, showed
uptake of 59Fe. The U.S Army specialist, wounded
by an antitank missile during Operation Desert
Storm, was found to have depleted uranium
shrapnel imbedded in his legs and in one hand.
An attempt was made to determine the amount of
235U and 238U present in the embedded shrapnel,
but the depth of most of the shrapnel was unknown
as was the self-absorption by the metal itself, so
an accurate determination was impossible.
Bioassay results for single urine samples collected
from participants in the Offsite Internal Dosimetry
Network showed only five samples at random
times with tritium concentrations greater than the
MDC. The greatest tritium concentration detected
was 3.43 x 10~7 ± 2.99 x 107 u.Ci/mL, which is 0.4
percent of the annual limit of intake for the general
public. Table 16 provides a summary of bioassay
results. Two participants from McGill, Nevada did
not participate in the bioassay portion of the pro-
gram this year.
As reported in previous years, medical examina-
tions of the offsite families revealed a generally
healthy population. The blood examinations and
thyroid profiles showed no symptoms which could
be attributed to past or present NTS testing opera-
tions.
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 u.Ci; 238Pu, 18 u.Ci; 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. The MDAs
for the whole-body counting system for 1991 were
as follows: 60Co, 10 nCi; 137Cs, 14 nCi; 134Cs, 11
nCijand131!, 13 nCi.
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).
61
-------
Table 16. Tritium in Urine, Offs'rte Internal Dosimetry Program - 1992
3H Concentration (10'7 nCi/mL)
Location
Shoshone, CA
Alamo, NV
Beatty, NV
Goldfield, NV
Henderson, NV
Indian Springs, NV
Las Vegas, NV
Lund, NV
Nyala, NV
Overton, NV
Pahrump, NV
Pioche, NV
Rachel, NV
Tonopah, NV
Cedar City, UT
Number Maximum
3
10
10
2
2
2
2
2
9
11
23
10
4
4
11
-0.0145
1.81
3.07*
2.73
1.29
1.32
2.33
1.49
3.43*
2.00
2.52
1.68
2.09*
3.02*
1.65
Mean MDC: 2.46 x 10'7 fiCi/mL
Minimum
-1.07
-0.592
-0.573
1.65
0.756
0.741
1.38
1.41
0.0432
0.839
0.000
0.306
1.19
-0.642
-0.792
Arithmetic
Mean
-0.418
0.941
0.967
2.19
1.02
1.03
1.85
1.45
1.45
1.39
1.01
0.803
1.67
1.66
0.908
Standard
Deviation
0.574
0.731
1.24
0.764
0.381
0.407
0.669
0.0551
1.05
0.424
0.773
0.546
0.373
1.60
0.714
Mean
as %DCG
NA
0.10
0.11
0.24
0.11
0.11
0.21
0.16
0.16
0.15
0.11
0.09
0.19
0.18
0.10
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 5.29 x 10~
DCG =
MDC =
* __
NA =
derived concentration guide. Established by DOE Order as 9 x 10~5 jiCi/mL.
minimum detectable concentration.
result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
not applicable.
Dose calculation is verified using ICRP and Nation-
al Council on Radiation Protection and Measure-
ments (NCRP) guidelines (NCRP, 1989). Preven-
tive maintenance and repair of analytical equip-
ment are done by the vendor service representa-
tive. 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 training programs.
62
-------
7.0 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
One of the concerns of underground nuclear
weapons testing is the possibility of radionuclide
contamination of groundwaters. Underground
nuclear weapons tests are currently conducted only
on the 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
PHS in the early 1950s. Pretest and posttest
monitoring for the locations off the NTS was
conducted by the PHS, the U.S. Geological
Survey (USGS), and Teledyne Isotopes, Inc. In
1972, the LTHMP was established by the Nevada
Operations Office of the AEC. Through an
interagency agreement between AEC (later DOE)
and the EPA, responsibility for operation of the
LTHMP was assigned to the 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 sites in Nevada, Colorado, New Mexico,
Mississippi, and Alaska locations where nuclear
weapons tests have been conducted.
7.1 Network Design
The LTHMP was instituted because the AEC
acknowledged its responsibility for obtaining and
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 radiologi-
cal contamination.
• Document compliance with existing fed-
eral, state, and local antipollution
requirements.
Another objective which has been incorporated into
the LTHMP is to, where possible, detect trends in
radionuclide activities which may indicate
migration from test cavities.
The primary radionuclide analyzed in the LTHMP
is tritium. As a product of nuclear weapons testing,
tritium is found at high levels 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 standard2 (see notes at the end of this
section).
All of the nuclear weapons tested at locations other
than the NTS were emplaced at depths of greater
than 1,200 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. Most of 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
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
63
-------
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 9CF 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 a 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 3-L
samples from wells as deep as 1,800 meters. At
the normal sample collection sites, the pH,
conductivity, water temperature, and sampling
depth are measured when the sample is collected.
When samples are first collected from a well,
89'90Sr, 238'239pu, and uranium isotopes 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 is 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. Most of the LTHMP samples are analyzed
by the enrichment method, unless past years' data
have indicated 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 SOPs. Data base management and
data analysis activities are described in the Quality
Assurance 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 QA/QC samples. The data quality
assessment results for 1992 are given in Section
11. 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 samples are spiked
samples (i.e., a water sample to which a known
amount of particular radionuclide(s) have been
added). Intercomparison study programs managed
by EMSL-LV and DOE's Environmental
Measurements Laboratory (EML) both include
water matrix samples. The EMSL-LV
intercomparison study samples are also used for
an estimate of comparability. Generally, 60 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 all
64
-------
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
In the spring of 1991, the LTHMP was selected as
the pilot program to test the use of bar code
sample labels. Bar code labels were prepared
prior to each sampling excursion. 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. This pilot program was extremely successful
and is being continued for the LTHMP and
expanded to other monitoring networks.
Analysis data were entered into the STDMS after
they had been generated and reviewed by the
analyst and Group Leader. Special software
written in Fortran (referred to as "Chemistry
Programs") was used for a majority of the
radiochemical data reduction. The Chemistry
Programs were 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
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 structure of the LTHMP for the NTS
onsite network, which includes sample locations on
the NTS and immediately outside its borders on
federally owned land, is displayed in Figure 30. 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 21 wells are sampled
twice per year, at approximately six-month
intervals. No gamma-emitting radionuclides were
detected in any of the samples collected in 1992.
The greatest tritium activity measured in the
LTHMP NTS network in 1992 was 448 ± 4 pCi/L in
a sample from Well UE-7ns. This activity is 0.5
percent of the derived concentration guide (DCG).3
Of the 37 sampling locations assigned to the
LTHMP, six could not be sampled at any time in
1992: Water Well 2, where the pump has been
inoperative since December 1990; Water Well A,
which was deactivated by DOE in October 1988;
Well USGS HTH "F", which was last successfully
sampled in 1980; Well U3cn#5, which was shut
down throughout 1992 and was last sampled in
December 1981; Well UE-6d, which has never
been successfully accessed for sampling; and Well
UE-15d where the pump was found to be
inoperative during a sampling visit in April and had
not been repaired as of the end of 1992. One new
sampling location was added, Well P.M.
Exploratory #1, and sampling was resumed at two
locations in 1992: Well 5B, which was last
sampled in July 1988, and Well UE-7ns, which had
last been sampled in September 1987. Additional
analyses were performed on the first samples
collected from the new location and from the two
wells with a long break in sampling. The May
1992 sample from Well P.M. Exploratory #1 and
65
-------
Well P.M.
Exploratory
#1
WellUE-19c ,
._._L,™,
I 12
Well Groom
Well Groom 4
WellUE-15d
• Well
Well Groom 6
Groom 5
USGSTest
I Well D
I 18
Well U3cn#-5
Water Well C
Well C-1
Water Well #4
ell UE-Sc
III
Well SB
, Water We J-13
Water WellJ-12
, 0 Well Army #1 ii!
Well Army #6A
|~| = Not Sampled this year
• = Water Sampling Location
Figure 30. Wells on the NTS included in the LTHMP, 1992.
66
-------
the August 1992 sample from Well 5B yielded no
detectable activity for 137Cs, 238Pu, 239Pu, 89Sr, or
90Sr. The Well 5B sample was also negative for
tritium while the sample from Well P.M. Exploratory
#1 yielded a tritium activity of 207 ± 3 pCi/L. The
March 1992 sample from Well UE-7ns yielded no
detectable alpha or gamma emitters; a gross beta
activity of 7.87 ± 0.96 (MDC of 2.51) pCi/L was
obtained and tritium results were 380 ± 4 pCi/L
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 20 and Well UE-19c were temporarily shut
down; i.e., power to the pump was disconnected
and the lines were drained. This measure was
later reversed, with the result that only the
November sampling period was lost. Wells UE-
16f, UE-18r, and UE-181 are located in areas with
restricted access and/or reduced maintenance (i.e.,
no snow removal) which precluded collection of
any samples after September 1992. It is expected
that access restrictions will be removed and power
restored in the spring of 1993.
Summary results of tritium analyses are presented
in Table 17. Five of the monthly sampled wells
and seven 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. Of these, six involved only
a single sample, with tritium activities less than 30
pCi/L (less than 0.03 percent of the DCG). Two of
the monthly sampled wells, Test Well B and Water
Well C, have consistently shown detectable tritium
over their sampling history. The 1992 average for
Test Well B was 105 pCi/L (range 94 to 119 pCi/L,
0.10 to 0.13 percent of the DCG) and for Water
Well C was 16.1 pCi/L (range 10.9 to 23.7 pCi/L,
0.01 to 0.03 percent of the DCG). A decreasing
trend is evident in Test Well B, as shown in Figure
31.
Both of the semiannual samples collected from
Wells UE-4t#1, P.M. Exploratory #1, and UE-7ns
contained detectable tritium, as did the single
sample obtained from Well UE-18t. Average
concentrations for these wells were less than 40
pCi/L (0.04 percent of the DCG) in Well UE-4t#1,
207 pCi/L (0.23 percent of the DCG) in Well P.M.
Exploratory #1, and 414 pCi/L (0.46 percent of the
DCG) in Well UE-7ns. The single sample obtained
from Well UE-18t yielded a tritium result of 102 ±
2 pCi/L (0.11 percent of the DCG). Three 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 2,500 pCi/L at the time
sampling ceased in September 1987.
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 32. 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 locations are routinely sampled
every month. The remaining two sites, 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.
Water samples are collected each month for
gamma spectrometric analysis. Samples for tritium
analysis are collected semiannually. One of these
semiannual tritium analyses is done by the
conventional analysis method; the other analysis is
done 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. The last time tritium concentrations for
Specie Springs were greater than the MDC was in
1990.
In 1992, four of the samples, all from sites in
Nevada, that were analyzed for tritium by the
enrichment method yielded detectable tritium
activities. The Adaven Spring January result of
32.4 ± 1.8 pCi/L (0.04 percent of the DCG) was
consistent with tritium levels noted in recent years,
as shown in Figure 33. The results for the Lake
Mead Intake May and September samples were
57.5 ± 2.2 pCi/L (0.06 percent of the DCG) and
62.2 ± 2.3_pCi/L (0.07 percent of the DCG),
respectively." These results were similar to results
obtained in 1991, as indicated in Figure 34. This
67
-------
Table 17. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Summary of Tritium Results for Nevada
Test Site Network, 1992
Tritium concentration (pCi/L)
Arithmetic Standard Mean
Location Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation as %DCG
Well 1 Army
Well Army #6A
Water Well 2
Well Groom 3
Well Groom 4
Water Well #4
Well Groom 5
Well 5B
Water Well 5C
Well Groom 6
Test Hole 7
Water Well HTH-8
Water Well 20
Well A
Test Well B
Water Well C
Well C-1
USGS Test Well D
Well USGS HTH "F"
Well HTH-1
Water Well J-12
Water Well J-13
Well P.M. Expl.#1
Well U-3cn#5
Well UE-1c
Well UE-4t#1
Well UE-Sc
Well UE-6d
Well UE-6e
Well UE-7ns
Well UE-15d
Well UE-16d
Well UE-16f
Well UE-17a
Well UE-18r
WellUE-18t
WellUE-19c
All
12 3.2 -2.5 0.2 1.8 NA
2 3.2 1.7 2.5 1.5 NA
Well shut down throughout 1992, last sampled December 1990.
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
12
12
12
12
1
12
11
2
12
8
Well
11
11
2
2
Not
1
8
12
2
6.2
3.4
2.9
3.2
3.2
3.7
1.2
3.3
10.3*
4.9
inactivated
119*
24*
17*
5.6
sampled in
-2.1
2.2
3.7
207*
-2.0
-1.9
-4.8
-3.0
3.2
-2.7
-1.9
2.8
-5.1
-3.0
2.0
-0.1
-0.6
-0.0
3.2
0.1
-0.2
3.0
0.3
1.0
by DOE, last sampled
94* 105*
11*
4.7
3.1
1992, last
-2.1
-3.9
-2.6
207*
16*
10.8*
4.3
2.6
1.6
2.1
1.9
0.0
2.0
1.0
0.5
3.6
2.7
October 1988.
7.5
4.4
12.3
2.5
sampled February 1980.
-2.1 0
-0.2
0.4
207*
2.2
2.0
0
0.12
0.02
0.01
NA
NA
NA
NA
0.23
Well shut down throughout 1992, last sampled December 1981.
2 2.5 0.0 1.2 2.5 NA
2 47* 30* 38* 17 0.04
2 -1.1 -2.9 -2.0 1.8 NA
Inaccessible throughout 1992, has never been successfully sampled.
1 26* 26* 26* 0
2 448* 380* 414* 68
Pump inoperative, well shut down by DOE.
6.8
0
4.6
0
0
2.5
2
1
2
1
1
11
2.3
7.2*
2.3
1.3
102*
5.3*
-4.6
7.2*
-2.3
1.3
102*
-2.1
-1.1
7.2*
0.0
1.3
102*
0.5
0.03
0.46
NA
0.01
NA
NA
0.11
NA
184
448
-5.1
15.5
53.5
0.02
Average MDC ± s is 5.36 ±1.11 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.
68
-------
400
300
t200
100
14DEC70 05JUN76 28NOV81 19MAY87 08NOV92 01MAY98
Sample Collection Date
Figure 31. Tritium concentration trend in Test Well B on the NTS.
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 tritium result of 5.98 ± 1.73
pCi/L for the September sample from Johnnie Mine
was only slightly higher than the MDC of 5.50
pCi/L and was the first detectable tritium activity
obtained for that site since sampling was initiated
in 1989. Tritium results for all samples are shown
in Table C-1, Appendix C. No gamma-emitting
radionuclides were detected in any sample taken
in 1992.
7.4 Hydrological Monitoring At
Other 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 last conducted in 1991. 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 1992; 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 the Project DRIBBLE ground
zero (GZ), the sampling procedure was modified.
A second sample is now taken after pumping for a
69
-------
Sharp's Ranch
Tonopah City Well
Adaven Springs
Twin Springs Ranch
NEUUS APS
COMPLEX
Spicer
RoadD
Goss Springs
Coffers 11S/48-1dd
N
X Coffers 11 S/48-1dd» I jp
Beatty Well 12S/47E-.7dbd • «T Youni.ha:
-». Specie Springs •
>»• U.S. Ecology
Union Carbide Well
Penoyer (4)
Well 7 & 8
Well 13 • Crystal Springs
Culinary Well
• Alamo
City Well 4
Nickell's Ranch
•"k. •
Amargosa Valley
Well15S/50E-18cdc Fairbanks
•% • Springs
N • Crystal Pool
*X • Spring 17S/50E-14cac
\BWell18S/51IE-7db
*^ •Johnnie Mine
\ BCalvadaWell
X.
Shoshone
Spring f
ndian 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
Figure 32. Wells outside the Nevada Test Site included in the LTHMP.
70
-------
eoo
500
400
n 300
200
100:
14DEC70 05JUN76 26NCV81 19MAY87
Sample Collection Dale
Figure 33. Tritium results in water from Adaven Springs, Nevada.
300
200
100
08NCV92
X X
26NOV81 22AUG84 19MAYB7 12FEB90
Sample Collection Date
Figure 34. Trend of Tritium results in water from Lake Mead, Nevada.
08NOV92
71
-------
specified period of time or after the well has been
pumped dry and permitted to refill with water.
These second samples may be more
representative 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
975 m (3,200 ft). A surface crater was created, but
as an irregular block along local faults rather than
as a saucer-shaped depression. The area is
characterized by basin and range topography, with
alluvium overlying tuffaceous sediments. The
working point of the test was in tuff. The ground-
water flow is generally from the highlands to the
valley and through the valley to Twin Springs
Ranch and Railroad Valley (Chapman and Hokett,
1991).
Sampling was conducted on February 24 and 25,
1992. Sampling locations are shown in Figure 35.
Routine sampling locations include one spring and
five wells of varying depths. One location, Hot
Creek Ranch spring, was not sampled this year
because the spring was dry. 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 and tritium activities were less than
the MDC and less than 0.01 percent of the DCG
(Table C-2, Appendix C). These results are
consistent with results obtained in previous years.
The consistently below-MDC results for tritium
indicate that, to date, migration into the sampled
wells has not taken place and no event-related
radioactivity has entered area drinking water
supplies.
7.4.2 Project SHOAL
Project SHOAL, a 12-kt test emplaced at 365 m
(1,200 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 created.
Samples were collected on February 11, 1992.
Four of the six routine sampling locations shown in
Figure 36 were sampled at that time. No sample
was collected from Spring Windmill because the
well was dry and no sample was collected from
Well H-3 because the pump was not operational.
The pump was replaced in the fall of 1992 and a
sample from Well H-3 was collected on October
21, 1992. 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 56 ± 2 pCi/L was
detected in the water sample from Smith/James
Spring, equivalent to 0.06 percent of the DCG(see
Table C-3, Appendix C). 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 years, as shown
in Figure 37. It is unlikely that the tritium source is
the Project SHOAL cavity; the most probable
source is considered 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
^U were detected at low levels (0.14 ± 0.02 pCi/L
of ^U and 0.042 ± 0.011 pCi/L of ^U) and are
probably of natural origin.
7.4.3 Project RULISON
Co-sponsored by the 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 2,568 m (8,426 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
72
-------
HTH2
HTH1
\
I
I
X '
,' I
Hot Creek |
Ranch
Six-Mile Well
Jim Bias Well
(Blue Jay Springs)
Blue Jay
Maintenance
Station
1 Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
Not Sampled this year
Scale in Miles
Scale in Kilometers
NYE
COUNTY
LOCATION MAP
Figure 35. LTHMP sampling locations for Project FAULTLESS - 1992.
73
-------
Fallen
Flowing Well
Hunt's Station
H-3
• HS-1
Smith/James
Spring
CHURCHILL COUNTY
Wmm •• MM 1MB ••» MB §•• •
MINERAL COUNTY
N
fyp Surface Ground Zero
• Water Sampling Locations
D Not Sampled This Year
LOCATION MAP
Scale in Miles
5
0 5 10 15
Scale in Kilometers
CHURCHILL
COUNTY
Figure 36. LTHMP sampling locations for Project SHOAL - 1992.
74
-------
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
x
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—i—r-\—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—|—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i—i
04JAN86 19MAY87 30SEP88 12FEB90 27JUIM91 08NOV92
Sample Collection Date
Figure 37. Tritum results for water from Smith/James Spring, Nevada.
and fallout from gas flaring. Soil was removed
during the cleanup operations.
Annual sampling was completed on June 9, 1992,
with collection of nine samples in the area of
Grand Valley and Rulison, Colorado. Routine
sampling locations, depicted in Figure 38, 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
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.
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 1992
samples was 48 ± 2 pCi/L at CER Test to 160 ± 3
pCi/L at Lee Hayward Ranch (see Table C-4,
Appendix C). 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 39 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
75
-------
Searcy
Ranch
Grand Valley
City Springs
^"S^
Grand Valley f^-fc- ^-f •
Potter Ranch
Sefcovic Ranch
Hayward Ranch
\
\Battlement Creek
Gardner CER
Ranch Test Well
Spring
N
LOCATION MAP
Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
Scale in Miles
0 5
0 8
Scale in Kilometers
GARFIELD
COUNTY
Figure 38. LTHMP sampling locations for Project RULISON - 1992.
76
-------
Rifle and Meeker, Colorado. Three explosives with
a total yield of 90 kt were emplaced at 1,780-,
1,920-, and 2,040-m (5,838-, 6,229-, and 6,689-ft)
depths in the Ft. Union and Mesa Verde
formations. Production testing continued to 1,976;
tritiated water produced during testing was injected
to 1,710 m (5,600 ft) in a nearby gas well.
Cleanup and restoration activities were completed
by November 1976.
Samples were collected on June 10 and 11,1992.
The sampling sites, shown in Figure 40, 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 57 pCi/L. These values are
<0.1 percent of the DCG (see Table C-5, Appendix
C). A generally decreasing trend in tritium activity
is evident in the three springs; Figure 41 depicts
tritium results from one of the springs. Neither of
the two shallow domestic wells located near the
RIO BLANCO site yielded detectable tritium
activity. All of the sampling sites along Fawn
Creek yielded tritium activities of approximately 25
pCi/L (range 21 to 29 pCi/L), less than 0.04
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-3-kt nuclear explosive was emplaced at
a depth of 1,216 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
500
400
300
200
100
x x x
14DEC70 05JUN76 26NOV81 19MAY87
Sample Collection Dale
Figure 39. Tritium trends in groundwater, Lee Hayward Ranch, Colorado.
77
08NOV92
-------
Johnson
Artesian Wei
awn Cr. No. 1
B-1 Equity
Camp
Brennan
Windmill
Fawn Cr.8400'
Downstream
Fawn Cr.500' Downstreamfl
RB-D-01 1
RB-D-03 >3
RB-S-03 J
Fawn Cr.500
Upstream
Fawn Cr. 6800'
Upstream
Fawn Cr. No. 3
Scale in Kilometers
RIO BLANCO COUNTY
LOCATION MAP
Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
RIO BLANCO
COUNTY
Figure 40. LTHMP sampling locations for Project RIO BLANCO, Colorado.
78
-------
si
1401
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
x
x
x
"^—1—i—r-r r i -i—r i—j1 i i i i—r—T—i—i i j i—i i i i i—i—r T-J r-i \ i i i1 i i i j r i—i i i i i i T |—i i i i T i—i—i—
05JUN76 02MAR79 26NOVB1 22AUG84 19MAY87 12FEB90 08NCM92
Sample Collection Date
Figure 41. Tritium results in water from CER No. 4, Rio Blanco, Colorado.
Magenta Dolomite which is above the zone of
saturation (Chapman and Hokett, 1991). The
ground water 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
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 15 and 18, 1992. The
routine sampling sites, depicted in Figure 42,
include nine monitoring wells in the vicinity of
surface GZ, the municipal supplies at Loving and
Carlsbad, New Mexico, and the Pecos River
Pumping Station well. No detectable tritium activity
was detected in the Carlsbad municipal supply or
the Pecos River Pumping Station well. A tritium
activity of 8 ± 2 pCi/L was detected in the Loving
municipal supply. An analysis by DRI (Chapman
and Hokett, 1991) indicates that this sampling
location, located on the opposite side of the Pecos
River from the Project GNOME site, is 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 nine sampling
locations in the immediate vicinity of GZ. Tritium
activities in wells DD-1, LRL-7, USGS-4, and
USGS-8 ranged from 11,700 ± 200 pCi/L in Well
LRL-7 to 6.48 x 107 ± 3.2 x 105 pCi/L in Well DD-1,
which are 13 to 720 percent of the DCG. Well DD-
1 samples water in the test cavity, Well LRL-7
samples a sidedrift, and wells USGS-4 and -8 were
79
-------
Carlsbad
Carlsbad
City |
Well 7
PHSWellQ
PHSWelMO
Loving City
Well 2
PHS Well 6 •
• PHS Well 8
Pecos River
Pumping Station
WelM
N
Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
Scale in Miles
5
0 5 10 15
Scale in Kilometers
EDDY
COUNTY
LOCATION MAP
Figure 42. LTHMP sampling locations for Project GNOME - 1992.
80
-------
used in the radionuclide tracer study conducted by
the USGS. In addition to tritium, 137Cs
concentrations ranging from 69 ± 1 pCi/L to
551,000 ± 25,600 pCi/L were observed in samples
from wells DD-1, LRL-7, and USGS-8, while 90Sr
activity ranging from 5,140 ± 16 pCi/L to 13,000 ±
1,200 pCi/L was detected in wells DD-1, USGS-4
and USGS-8. Samples from these four wells were
also analyzed for plutonium isotopes; results were
less than the MDC in all cases. The samples from
wells DD-1, LRL-7, and USGS-4 indicate
decreasing trends for all analyzed radionuclides.''
Although the tritium activity in the 1992 sample
from Well LRL-7 was greater than that observed in
the 1991 sample, the overall historical trend is
decreasing, as shown in Figure 43. An increase
was observed in 137Cs and 90Sr concentrations in
USGS-8; however, a decrease was observed in the
tritium concentration in this well.
The remaining two wells with detectable tritium
concentrations were PHS wells 6 and 8, with
results of 37 ± 2 pCi/L and 15 ± 2 pCi/L,
respectively (see Table C-6, Appendix C). These
values are less than 0.05 percent of the DCG. No
tritium was detected in the remaining Project
GNOME samples, including Well USGS-1, which
the DRI analysis (Chapman and Hokett, 1991)
indicated is possibly positioned to detect migration
of radioactivity from the cavity, should it occur.
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 1,290 m (4,240 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
possible (Chapman and Hokett, 1991).
The routine sampling locations include six wells,
one windmill, three springs, and two surface water
sites, all depicted in Figure 44. Sampling was
conducted April 14 through 16, 1992. In prior
years, samples were collected in June; an earlier
trip was scheduled this year because of the tritium
increase seen in Well EPNG 10-36 and discussed
in last year's Annual Site Environmental Report
(Black et al; DOE91). Ten samples were collected.
Samples were not collected from Arnold Ranch
due to a road washout nor from Well 28.3.33.233
(South) because the windmill was not operational.
The Old School House Well, first sampled in 1991,
was sealed by the State of New Mexico, thus
ending plans to add this station to the routine
sampling directory. The two surface water
sampling sites yielded tritium activities of 34 ± 3
pCi/L and 70 + 3 pCi/L; a comment by the
sampling technician indicated the first-listed sample
was primarily rainwater. These values are 0.04
and 0.08 percent of the DCG, respectively. The
three springs yielded tritium activities ranging from
42 ± 2 pCi/L to 75 ± 3 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 19 ± 2 pCi/L, which is
0.02 percent of the DCG. Analytical results are
presented in Table C-7, Appendix C.
Well EPNG 10-36, a gas well located 132 m (435
ft) northwest of the test cavity with a sampling
depth of approximately 1,100 m (3,600 ft), had
yielded tritium activities between 100 and 560
pCi/L in each year since 1984, except 1987. The
proximity of the well to the test cavity suggests the
possibility that the activity increases may indicate
migration from the test cavity. The sample
collected in April yielded a tritium activity of 33 ± 2
pCi/L. The area had been experiencing heavy
rainfall in the weeks prior to and during sampling.
The sampling technician had noted that one of the
surface sampling sites, a pond, was comprised
primarily of rainwater. The tritium concentration in
that sample and in Well EPNG 10-36 are identical.
Further, the pH and conductivity measured in Well
EPNG 10-36 were similar to the values obtained at
the surface sampling site and markedly different
than measurements of pH and conductivity taken
in Well EPNG 10-36 in previous years.
Consequently it is suspected that the sample may
not be representative of formation water.
81
-------
40000
30000
20000
10000
XXX
02MAR79 26NOV81 22ALIG84 19MAYB7 12FEB90 08NOV92
Sample Collection Date
Figure 43. Tritium results in water from Well LRL-7 near Project GNOME, New Mexico.
A second sample was collected from Well EPNG
10-36 on September 16, 1992. Initial results for
this sample indicated a concentration of 10.3 ± 2.6
pCi/L (MDC of approximately 7 pCi/L) of 137Cs
based on a 100-minute counting time. Presence of
137Cs was confirmed by a 1,000-minute count
which yielded results of 5.97 ± 0.85 pCi/L (MDC of
0.83 pCi/L) and a longer 5-day count which
confirmed this concentration (with an MDC of 0.1
pCi/L). The tritium activity in this sample was 364
± 4 pCi/L. No 238.239*»°pUi or «ogr was detected at
activities greater than the MDC.
The 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 comprised 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 (2,710 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, on February 2,
1969 and HUMID WATER, on April 19, 1970. The
ground surface and shallow ground water 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 45,
have been added to the area near surface GZ to
82
-------
To Dulce
Bixler Ranch
™ 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 Well 1
Arnold Ranch I
Lower Burro
Canyon
D Well 28.3.33.233 (South)
LOCATION MAP
Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
Not Sampled this year
Scale in Miles
0 5
0 8
Scale in Kilometers
RIO
ARRIBA
COUNTY
Figure 44. LTHMP sampling locations for Project GASBUGGY - 1992.
83
-------
0
Well HM-L2
HMH-161
Decontamination
Pad
HMH-12 \V
HMH-5 \Creek
\
X
HM-
Hunting Tatum
\ Half Moon Club Well
"
HMH-10
*
Half
Moon
-
AOverflow
HM-2Av«HMH-1
HM-3
• HMH-11 !
|HMH-2«HMH-9/
\
\
t
\
«
N
I Well HT-2C
Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
Not Sampled This Year
Scale in Feet
1000
2000
MISSISSIPPI
0 100 200 300 400 500
Scale in Meters
LAMAR
COUNTY
LOCATION MAP
Figure 45. LTHMP sampling locations for Project DRIBBLE, near ground zero - 1992.
84
-------
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 46.
Sampling on and in the vicinity of the Tatum Salt
Dome was conducted between April 26 and 29,
1992. A total of 109 samples were collected; five
of these were from new sampling locations in
Lumberton, Mississippi. Six routine sampling
locations were not sampled. One resident had
moved and the well is no longer in operation;
another resident was connected to city water and
no longer uses the well for drinking water. These
sampling locations have been eliminated from the
routine sampling directory. The remaining samples
not taken this year were unobtainable due to
inaccessibility of the sampling location because of
local flooding, because the resident was not home,
or because the well was dry.
In the 50 samples collected from offsite sampling
locations, tritium activities ranged from less than
the MDC to 59 ± 5 pCi/L, equivalent to less than
0.07 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 47. Low levels of uranium isotopes were
detected in four of the five new sampling locations,
ranging from 0.038 to 0.14 pCi of 234U/L and 0.018
to 0.12 pCi of 238U/L. 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. Twenty-four
locations in the vicinity of GZ were sampled using
this procedure; 19 of these yielded tritium activities
greater than the MDC in either the first or second
sample. In addition, seven locations were sampled
once; five of these samples yielded tritium
concentrations greater than the MDC. Overall,
tritium activities ranged from less than the MDC to
1.44 x 104 ± 200 pCi/L as shown in Table C-8,
Appendix C. The locations where the highest
tritium activities were measured generally
correspond to areas of known contamination.
Increases in tritium activity over previous years
were noted in REECo pits B and C and Well HMH-
10. However, decreasing trends were noted for
the wells where high tritium activities have
historically been noted, such as Well HM-S
depicted in Figure 48. Results of sampling related
to Project DRIBBLE are discussed in greater detail
in Onsite and Offsite Environmental Monitoring
Report: Radiation Monitoring around Tatum Salt
Dome, Lamar County, Mississippi, April 1992
(Thome and Chaloud).
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 overlying tertiary vol-
canics. The ground water system consists of a
freshwater lens floating on seawater; estimates of
the depth to the saline-freshwater interface range
from 3,900 to 5,250 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
supplies.
Sampling on Amchitka Island, is conducted every
other year. No samples were collected in 1992.
The next sampling trip is scheduled for September
1993.
85
-------
B. Dennis
M. Dennis
Columbia City Little Creek #1 -
Well64B Lee Anderson -
Hewle Gipson Jjm Bibo -
| Yancy Saucier
Gil Ray's Crawfish Pond
Herman Gipson _,
Lower Little Creek #2
. Thompson
Willie Burge
Joe Burge
Salt Dome Timber Co.
A!
Phil Gipson Mills
Roy Mills
B. Chambliss R King -—
Anderson's Pond?
B.R.Anderson
Howard
Smith Pond
E.J. Smith •
Sylvester Graham
Lee L. Saul
P.T. Lee
R.H. Anderson
E. Cox
W.H. Noble Jr
G.W. Anderson
Noble's Pond
Purvis City Well
^
G. Ray
D.
Rushing
Ray Hartfield
Powers and
Bond (2)
Regina Anaerson
.Andlrson, Jr.
Daniel's Fish
Pond Well #2
Baxterville
City Well
Lumberton
City Well 2
LAMAR
COUNTY
Surface Ground Zero
Water Sampling Locations
Not Sampled This Year
01234
Scale in Kilometers
LOCATION MAP
Figure 46. LTHMP sampling locations for Project DRIBBLE, towns and residences - 1992.
86
-------
100
90
60
70
60
50
40
30
20
,1
I
x x
14DEC70 05JUN76 26NOVB1 19MAY87 08NOV92
Sample Collection Date
Figure 47. Tritium result trends in Baxterville, MS public drinking water supply - 1992.
Tritiun vs Normal Tritium Decay
40000
30000
20000
10000
0
X X X X
02MAR79 26NOV81 22AUG84 19MAYB7 12FEB90 08NOV92
Sample Collection Date
Figure 48. Tritium results in Well HM-S, Tatum Salt Dome, Project DRIBBLE.
87
-------
7.5 Summary
None of the domestic water supplies monitored in
the LTHMP in 1992 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
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
Project GASBUGGY. Known areas of
contamination exist at Project GNOME where the
USGS conducted a tracer study experiment, some
areas onsite at Project DRIBBLE, and a few
surface areas near Project LONG SHOT. The
1992 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 3,600
ft in the Ojo Alamo Sandstone, an aquifer
containing nonpotable water. The tritium activity in
1992 was 10.3 ± 2.6 pCi/L and in 1991 was 484 ±
4 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.
NOTES
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 L per day for a year (40
CFR 141). Assuming tritium to be the only radioactive contaminant yields a maximum allowable
concentration of 20,000 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 DOE Order 5400.5 (DOE, 1990), which is based on the annual limit on intake given
in ICRP-30 (ICRP, 1979) for a maximum dose of 4 mrem/year for ingestion of beta/gamma emitters in
water, assuming consumption of two L 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 the standard has been proposed which will, when
enacted, raise the permissible tritium concentration to 63,000 pCi/L in U.S. drinking water.
4. 137Cs was below the MDC in the 1992 sample from Well USGS-4.
88
-------
8. Dose Assessment
Four pathways of possible radiation exposure to
the population of Nevada were monitored by EPA's
offsite monitoring networks during 1992. 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, 85Kr 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
offsite residents, based on onsite source emission
measurements provided by DOE and calculated by
EPA's CAP88-PC model, was 0.012 mrem (1.2 x
10"* mSv) to a hypothetical resident of Indian
Springs, Nevada 54 km (32 mi) southeast of the
NTS CP-I. Pressurized ion chamber data indicated
a 1992 dose of 78 mrem from normal background
radiation occurring in Indian Springs. The
calculated dose to this individual from world-wide
distributions of radioactivity as measured from
surveillance networks was 0.088 mrem. 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 0.029
person-rem (2.9 x 10"4 person-Sv). An additional
CEDE of 0.015 mrem would be received if the liver
and all of the 45 kg (100 Ib) of meat from a deer
collected on the NTS were 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 18 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 the airborne emission sources was 0.029
person-rem (2.9 x 10'4 person-Sv). Activity
concentrations in air that would cause these
calculated doses are too small to be detected by
the offsite monitoring network. Table 19
summarizes the annual contributions to the CEDEs
resulting from 1992 NTS operations as calculated
using CAP88-PC.
89
-------
Table 18. NTS Radionuclide Emissions 1992
Airborne Effluent Releases
Event or Facility Curies'"'
Name (Airborne
Releases) 3H 37Ar ^Ar "W 127Xe 129mXe 131mXe 133Xe 131I
Area 3,
DIVIDER 1.1x10''
Area 3
-------
Table 19. Summary of Effective Dose Equivalents from NTS Operations during 1992
Dose
Location
NESHAP(C)
Standard
Percentage
of NESHAP
Background
Percentage of
Background
Maximum EDE at
NTS Boundary'3'
1.7 x 10~2 mrem
(1.7x 1Cr4mSv)
Site boundary 60 km
SSE of NTS Area 12
10 mrem per year
(0.1 mSv per yr)
0.17
78 mrem
(0.78 mSv)
2.2 x 10'2
Maximum EDE to
an Individual"11
1.2 ±0.1 x 10'2 mrem
(1.2x 10'4mSv)
Indian Springs, NV, 80 km
SSE of NTS Area 12
10 mrem per year
(0.1 mSv per yr)
0.12
78 mrem
(0.78 mSv)
1.5 x 1CT
Collective EDE to
Population within 80 km
of the NTS Sources
2.9 x 10"2 person-rem
(2.9 x 10"4 person-Sv)
21,700 people within
80 km of NTS sources
not applicable
not applicable
1660 person-rem
(16.6 person-Sv)
1.6x 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 18 and
assuming all tritiated water input to the Area 12 containment ponds was evaporated.
(c) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants.
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
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 1992. The
concentrations of radioactivity detected by the
networks and used in the calculation of potential
CEDEs are shown in Table 20. Animal and
vegetable data are based on maximum
concentration in all areas regardless of sampling
location. In most cases, the analysis results used
in the dose calculations are near the MDC of the
analysis. Precision and accuracy data quality
objectives (DQOs) are less stringent for values
near the MDG; consequently, confidence intervals
around the input data are broad.
91
-------
Table 20. Monitoring Networks
Medium Radionuclide
Animals
Beef Liver 238Pu
Deer Muscle »»*»°pu
Deer Liver a»*««pu
Milk 90Sr
3H
Water 3H
Vegetables
Broccoli 90Sr
Carrots 239+240Pu
(with tops)
Air
85'
(Moisture)
Kr
3H
3H
Data used in Dose Calculations
Concentration Comment
1.01 x 1CT4pCi/g
1.97X 10'4pCi/g
8.69 x lO
6.73 x 10'4pCi/g
6.5 x 1Q-7uCi/mL
1.53x 10-7uCi/mL
3.95x10-8uCi/mL
9.00 x lO
3.50 x 1Q-5pCi/g
3.03 x10'11 uCi/mL
9.49 x 10'12uCi/mL
1.5x 10-12uCi/mL
Concentrations are the maximum
concentrations observed for each animal tissue
type, corrected to wet weight.
Concentration is the average of all
milk surveillance network results.
Average concentration of all results
above MDC for sampling locations in
the vicinity of the NTS.
Concentrations are maximum observed for
each sample type, corrected to wet
weight.
Maximum concentration for the sampling
location in Indian Springs, Nevada.
Maximum concentration for the sampling
location in Las Vegas, Nevada.
Maximum concentration for the sampling
location in Las Vegas, Nevada.
The concentrations given in Table 20 are
expressed in terms of activity per unit volume or
mass. 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 = 450
mL/day (ICRP 1975).
• Consumption of beef liver = 11.5 kg/yr.
• An average deer has 45 kg of meat.
• Water consumption for adult-reference
man = 2 L/day (approximately 1,900
mL/day [ICRP 1975]).
• Fresh vegetable consumption for North
America = 516 g/day (ICRP 1975),
assuming a four-month growing season.
The CEDE conversion factors are derived from
EPA-520/1-88-020 (Federal Guidance Report No.
92
-------
11). Those used here are:
• 3H: 6.4 x 10~2 mrem/u.Ci (ingestion or
inhalation).
90,
'Sr: 1.4 x 102 mrem/uCi (ingestion).
• 85Kr: 1.5 x 107 mrem/yr/u.Ci/mL
(submersion).
, 238,239+240p...
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
In calculating the inhalation CEDE from 3H, the
value is increased by 50 percent to account for
absorption through the skin. Dose calculations
from the ORSP data are given in Table 21, except
for the dose from consumption of a mule deer
collected on the NTS. The individual CEDEs from
the various pathways added together give a total of
3.0 mrem/yr. The additional dose from ingestion of
deer meat and liver containing the 239+240pu
activities given in Table 20 would be:
{[(8.69 x 10'4 pCi/g) x (4.5 x 104 g)] + [(6.73 x 104
pCi/g) x (280 g)]} x (3.7 x W4 mrem/pCi) = 1.5 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 1992.
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 2.91 x 10~13u.Ci/ml_. With
a dose conversion factor for inhalation of 3.2 x 101
mrem/fiCi, this equates to a dose of 7.82 x 10"4
mrem. This is a negligible quantity when
compared with the PIC Network measurements
that vary from 53 to 169 mR/year, depending on
location.
8.4 Summary
The extensive offsite environmental surveillance
system operated around the NTS by EMSL-LV
measured no radiological exposures that could be
attributed to recent NTS operations. Calculation
with the CAP88-PC model resulted in a maximum
inhalation dose of 0.012 mrem (1.2 x 10~4 mSv) to
a hypothetical resident of Indian Springs, Nevada
54 km (32 mi) southeast of the NTS CP-I. If this
individual were to additionally collect and consume
an NTS deer such as the one discussed above,
the estimated CEDE would increase by another
1.96 x 10"4 mrem to a total possible CEDE of
slightly over .027 mrem. All of these maximum
dose estimates are less than 0.1 percent of the
ICRP recommendation that an annual effective
dose equivalent for the general public not exceed
100 mrem/yr (ICRP 1985). The calculated
population dose (collective committed effective
dose equivalent) to the approximately 21,750
residents living within 80 km (50 mi) of each of the
NTS airborne emission sources was 0.029
person-rem (2.9 x 10~4 person-Sievert).
Data from the PIC Network indicated a 1992 dose
of 78 mrem from gamma radiation occurring in
Indian Springs. This gamma background value is
derived from an average PIC field measurement of
8.7 uR/hr. The 0.067 mrem CEDE calculated from
the monitoring networks discussed above is a
negligible amount by comparison.
The uncertainty (percent relative standard
deviation) for the PIC measurement at the 78
mrem exposure level is approximately 3.1 percent.
Extrapolating to the calculated annual exposure at
Indian Springs, Nevada yields a total uncertainty of
approximately 2.3 mrem. Because the estimated
dose from NTS activities is much less than 1 mrem
(the lowest level for which DQOs are defined, as
given in Section 11), no conclusions can be made
regarding the achieved data quality as compared
to the DQO for this insignificant dose.
93
-------
Table 21. Dose Calculations from Monitoring Network Data
Medium
Milk
Route of
Exposure
Ingestion
Radionuclide
90.
'Sr
3H
TOTAL FROM MILK CONSUMPTION
Foodstuffs
Beef Liver
Ingestion
238
Pu
239+240
Pu
Broccoli'3'
Carrots(a)
Ingestion
Ingestion
90,
Sr
239+240
Pu
TOTAL FROM FOODSTUFFS
Air
Submersion
TOTAL FROM AIR
TOTAL
85
Kr
Calculation
Dose (CEDE)
(mrem/yr)
(2.29 x 10'9 u,Ci/mL) x (450 mL/day)
x (365 days/yr) x
(1.4 x 102 mrem/nCi) 5.27 x 1O'2
(4.76 x 10'7 uCi/mL) x (450 mL/day)
x (365 days/yr) x
(6.4 x 10"2 mrem/uCi)
(1.01 x 10'4pCi/g)
x(11.5x103g/yr)
x (3.7 x 10'4mrem/pCi)
(1.97x10'4pCi/g)
x(11.5x103g/yr)
x (3.7 x 10'4mrem/pCi)
(9.00 x lO
x (516 g/day) x (120 days/yr)
x(1.4x 10^mrem/pCi)
(3.50x10'5pCi/g)
x (516 g/day) x (120 days/yr)
x (3.7 x 10'4mrem/pCi)
(3.09 x 1Q-11 u.Ci/mL)
x (1.5x 107 mrem/yr
per uCi/mL)
5.00 x10'3
5.77 x 10 2 mrem/yr
4.3 x 10"*
1.13x 10'4
7.8 x 10-2
7.1 x 10-4
2.372 x 10~1 mrem/yr
4.63 x 10'4
4.63 x 10'4 mrem/yr
2.95 x 10"1 mrem/yr
(a) The assumption for total vegetable consumption (516 g/day) is used in the equations for both broccoli
'and carrots. Only broccoli is included in the total for foodstuffs. One hundred twenty days was used
for consumption based on four 30-day months.
94
-------
9.0 Weapons Test and Liquefied Gaseous Fuels Spills
Facility Support
The EPA participates in the execution of every
nuclear test conducted at the NTS. For each test,
the EPA performs a pre-test census of the offsite
area population and is prepared to take protective
actions in the event they are necessary. The EPA
also provides offsite safety monitoring in support of
chemical spill tests conducted at the Liquified
Gaseous Fuels Spill Test Facility (LGFSTF) on the
NTS.
9.1 Weapons Tests Support
Two days before each nuclear test, mobile teams
of radiation monitoring technicians are dispatched
to the counties surrounding the NTS. These
technicians perform a census of the offsite areas to
determine the locations and numbers of residents,
work crews, and domestic animal herds. This
information would be essential to providing protec-
tive actions in the event of a radiation release from
a test. Additionally, the technicians monitor the
seasonal population such as hunters, campers,
and shepherds to ensure that they too can be
notified if necessary. After the census is complet-
ed, the information is presented by the EPA to the
Test Controller's Science Advisory Panel.
Senior EPA personnel serve as members of the
Test Controller's Science Advisory Panel to provide
advice on possible public and environmental
impact of each test and on feasible protective
actions if an accidental release of radioactivity
should occur.
At the time of each test, approximately 20 radiation
monitoring technicians are positioned in the areas
downwind of the test. Each technician is equipped
with a variety of radiation survey instruments,
dosimeters, portable air samplers, and supplies for
collecting environmental samples. The technicians
are in constant radio contact with CP-1 which
enables them to provide monitoring information and
to receive operational instructions from the EPA
staff. In the unlikely occurrence of a release of
radioactivity, the technicians are prepared to initiate
all manner of protective actions to ensure the
health and safety of people in the offsite areas.
They are also prepared to conduct a radiological
monitoring and sampling program to document the
radiation levels in the environment. The radiologi-
cal safety criteria, or protective action guides, used
by the EPA are based on those specified in NVO-
176 (EPA, 1991 a).
If an underground nuclear test is expected to
cause detectable ground motion offsite, EPA
monitoring technicians are stationed at locations
where hazardous situations might occur, such as
underground mines. At these locations, occupants
are notified of potential hazards so they can take
precautionary measures. Miners, for example, are
brought above ground before such a test.
Remedial actions that EPA could recommend or
implement to reduce exposures include: evacua-
tion, shelter, access control, livestock feeding
practices control, milk control, and food and water
control. Which action would be appropriate de-
pends largely upon the type of accident and the
magnitude of the projected exposures and doses,
the response time available for carrying out the
action, and local constraints associated with a
specific site.
An important factor affecting the effectiveness of
the remedial actions is the degree of credibility
EPA personnel maintain with offsite residents.
Credibility is created and maintained by routine
personal contacts made with local officials and law
enforcement personnel as well as with the ranch-
ers, miners, and others living in the offsite areas
close to the NTS.
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.
95
-------
During 1992, EMSL-LV personnel were deployed
for all nuclear tests conducted at the NTS, none of
which released radioactivity that could be detected
offsite.
9.2 Liquefied Gaseous
Fuels Spills Test Facility
Support
The EPA provides offsite safety monitoring in
support of chemical spill tests conducted at the
LGFSTF. This is one of the few non-nuclear
related activities conducted at the NTS. A scientist
from the EPA is a member of the Spill Test Adviso-
ry Panel for each test. For each test, the EPA also
conducts monitoring in the downwind direction at
the boundary of the NTS.
Prior to the initial test of any given series and
during operational trials, an EPA technician in-
spects the unmaintained jeep-trail routes to the
predetermined sampling location to assure ready
access. Since each test is contingent on compati-
ble technical and weather conditions, including
wind direction and speed, the technician remains
at the Test Facility Control Center until the
Advisory Panel authorizes initiation of the test.
The EPA Advisory Panel representative then
dispatches the technician to the sampling location,
as close as accessible to the downwind trajectory.
When the spill test is in progress, the EPA repre-
sentative, in coordination with the Advisory Panel
meteorologist, determines the travel time of gases
from the spill to the sampling location of the moni-
tor. The EPA representative then gives the techni-
cian specific clock time(s) to collect gas samples.
Samples are collected using a Model 31 Draeger
hand pump into which is inserted a Draeger tube
for the types of chemical gases to be detected.
The technician remains at the sampling location
until the Advisory Panel determines that further
offsite monitoring is no longer required for that
day's testing.
96
-------
10. Public Information and
Community Assistance Programs
In addition to its many monitoring and data anal-
ysis activities, the EMSL-LV conducts a compre-
hensive program designed to provide information
and assistance to individual citizens, organizations,
and local government agencies in communities
near the NTS. Activities in 1992 included participa-
tion in public hearings, "town hall" meetings,
continued support of the Community Radiation
Monitoring Program (CRMP), and a variety of
tours, lectures, and presentations.
10.1 Community Radiation
Monitoring Program
Beginning in 1981, DOE and EPA established a
network of CRMP stations in the offsite areas to
perform radiological sampling and monitoring, to
increase public awareness, and to disseminate the
results of radiation monitoring activities to the
public. These stations continued operation in
1992. The DOE, through an interagency agree-
ment with EPA, sponsors the program. The EPA
provides technical and scientific direction, main-
tains the instrumentation and sampling equipment,
analyzes the collected samples, and interprets and
reports the data. The DRI administers the program
by hiring the local station managers and alternates,
securing rights-of-way and utility meters, and by
providing QA checks of the data. The University of
Utah provides in-depth training for station manag-
ers and alternates twice a year on issues related to
nuclear science, radiological health, and radiation
monitoring. In each community, EPA and DRI
work with civic leaders to select and hire a local
manager and an alternate. Whenever possible,
they choose residents with some scientific training,
such as a high school or university science teach-
er.
All of the 19 CRMP stations contain one each of
the samplers for the air, noble gas, and tritium
networks discussed in the previous chapters. Each
station also contains a TLD and a PIC with a
recorder for immediate readout of external gamma
exposure, and a recording barograph. The stand-
by samplers are routinely activated for one week
each quarter to assure proper operation. Sample
collection can be initiated at any time by notifying
the station manager or alternate or by EMSL-LV
personnel.
All 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 have ready access to the PIC and
barometric data. The locations of the CRMP
stations are shown in Figure 12, Section 3. The
data from these stations were discussed in Sect-
ions 3 and 4.
Computer-generated reports for each station are
issued weekly. These reports indicate the current
weekly average gamma exposure rate as mea-
sured by the PICs, the average for the previous
week, and the average for the previous year. For
comparison these reports also show the maximum
and minimum background concentrations in the
U.S. These reports are distributed to each CRMP
station for public display.
10.2 Town Hall Meetings
These meetings provide an opportunity for the
public to meet directly with EPA, DOE, and DRI
personnel, ask questions, and express their con-
cerns regarding nuclear testing. During a typical
meeting, the procedures used and the safeguards
in place during every nuclear test are described.
The EPA's radiological monitoring and surveillance
networks are explained and the proposed High
Level Waste Repository at Yucca Mountain is
discussed.
In the fall of 1990 the focus of this outreach pro-
gram was changed. Rather than a single subject
presented at general town hall meetings, audienc-
es from schools, service clubs, and civic groups
from the various communities were targeted and
offered presentations on many different subjects.
Table 22 lists the outreach presentations conduct-
ed in 1992. A list of presentation subjects is
provided in Table 23.
The CRMP outreach program is managed by Mr.
Nate Cooper .of DRI. All inquiries regarding the
outreach program and presentations should be
directed to Mr. Cooper at (702) 895-0461. An
97
-------
annual report on the CRMP and outreach program-
is published by the DRI under the name "Commu-
nity Radiation Monitoring Program Annual Report
for PIT" 19xx," with a report number such as DOE/-
NV-10845-xx, which may be obtained from either
DRI or DOE/NV.
Table 22. Community Radiation Monitoring Program Outreach Presentations -1992
Date
Location
02/12 Adaven, NV
02/24 Tonopah, NV
02/25 Tonopah, NV
04/07 Panaca, NV
04/20 Tonopah, NV
04/24 Tonopah, NV
05/02 Beatty, NV
06/01 Coal Valley, NV
06/09 Tonopah, NV
07/14 Tonopah, NV
09/16 Indian Springs, NV
10/12 Cedar City, UT
10/13 Cedar City, UT
10/13 Cedar City, UT
11/16 Tonopah, NV
12/15 Parowan, UT
12/16 Cedar City, UT
12/16 Cedar City, UT
Audience
Subject
NTS Deer Migration Study
Uhalde Ranch County
School
Consumer Electronic Product
Alpha Sigma Phi Radiation
(women's college sorority)
Downwind Radiation and Sheep
Tonopah Junior High School Kill
Lincoln County Middle and
High Schools
Tonopah Rotary Club
Tonopah Elementary and
High Schools
Beatty High School
Complex I Residents
Tonopah Rotary Club
Tonopah Rotary Club
NTS Deer Migration Study
NTS Archaeology
ABC's of Radiation
NTS Archaeology; Archaeology
in Egypt; Career Opportunities
in Archaeology, Geology, and
Hydrology; NASA's astronaut
program
NTS Deer Migration Study
Joint Verification Experiment
NTS Deer Migration Study
Current Events and the NTS
Attendance
21
16
104
75
20
87
125
Indian Springs High School
Government Class
Consumer Electronic Product
American Legion and Auxil- Radiation
iary
Consumer Electronic Product
Radiation
Cedar City High School
Women in Business
Tonopah Rotary Club
Parowan High School
Cedar City High School
Cedar City Exchange Club
Consumer Electronic Product
Radiation
NTS Hydrology
NTS Deer Migration Study
NTS Deer Migration Study
NTS Deer Migration Study
6
19
16
35
19
122
30
19
96
78
16
Attendance Total 904
98
-------
Table 23. Community Radiation Monitoring Program Presentation Topics
1. ABC's of Radiation. Radiation explained in understandable terms; when it is dangerous and when it
is not.
2. Testing Nuclear Weapons. How nuclear weapons are tested (safely) on the NTS.
3. Joint Verification Experiments. Interaction with the USSR during exchange of weapons tests at the
NTS and the USSR.
4. 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.
5. Otfsite Radiation Monitoring and the Community Monitoring Program. The offsite monitoring
program which is performed by the EPA 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.
6. Hiroshima-Nagasaki Experience. Predicted radiation affects based on the Hiroshima-Nagasaki
data.
7. Environmental Restoration. Current environmental restoration programs on the NTS and those
planned for the future.
8. Onsite Environmental Monitoring. The NTS onsite environmental monitoring program.
9. Consumer Electronic Product Radiation. Risks and benefits of safe usage of common household
electronic products.
10. NTS Archaeology. Prehistory and cultural resources of the southern Great Basin and NTS.
11. NTS Hydrology. Groundwater flow studies and subsurface contamination on the NTS and surround-
ing areas.
12. Surficial Radioactive Contamination. Occurrence of radioactive contamination on the NTS and
surrounding area as a result of weapons testing.
13. NTS Deer Migration Study. Seven-year deer tagging study to understand migration patterns.
14. Low Level Waste. A description of how low level waste is managed and controlled at the Low Level
Waste Management Site on the NTS.
15. Emergency Response Training. The training program for Nevada policemen and firemen who are
first-on-the-scene accident responders.
99
-------
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, 1981).
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. External systems and
performance audits are conducted for the TLD
Network as part of the certification requirements for
DOE's Laboratory Accreditation Program (DOE-
LAP) (DOE, 1986, 1986b). These external inter-
comparison and audit programs are used to moni-
tor analysis accuracy.
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.
100
-------
Comparability is defined as "the confidence with
which one data set can be compared to another"
(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.
101
-------
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
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.
All 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 1992
Data
Data quality assessment is associated with the
regular QA and QC practices within the radio-
102
-------
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
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 1992.
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 1992 data is
given in Table 24. 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 96 percent for
the LTHMP exceeds the DQO of 80 percent. If the
wells which have been shut down by DOE are
included in the completeness calculation, the
achieved completeness is 86 percent for the
LTHMP overall, but only 78 percent for sites
sampled on the NTS.
Overall completeness for the routine Air Surveil-
lance Network was greater than 98 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 93 percent complete, exceed-
ing 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 five routine sampling locations.
Completeness was less than 70 percent for one
routine sampling location (Amargosa Center) and
for all of the standby station locations. Generally,
recovery of less than 75 percent of the sampling
period indicate the data cannot be considered to
be representative of that period; consequently, an
annual average for Amargosa Center cannot be
considered representative of the year.
The achieved completeness for the atmospheric
moisture network was greater than 95 percent,
exceeding the DQO of 90 percent. On an individu-
al station basis, all of the routine sampling loca-
tions achieved data recoveries greater than 80
percent; all but one were greater than 90 percent.
Data recoveries were lower for the standby sta-
tions; however, the issue of annual representation
does not apply to the standby locations, which are
operated only one week per quarter to retain
operational reliability.
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 possi-
ble number of samples were collected from seven
ranches: Dahl (Alamo, Nevada), Lemon (Dyer,
Nevada), John Deer (Amargosa Valley, Nevada),
Frayne (Goldfield, Nevada), Brown (Benton, Cali-
fornia), Blue Eagle (Currant, Nevada), and Scott
(Goldfield, 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.
103
-------
Table 24. Data Completeness of Offsite Radiological Safety Program Networks
Network
LTHMP
Air Surveillance
Noble Gas
Atmospheric
Moisture
Milk Surveillance
Animal
Investigation
No. of
Sampling
Locations
243
Total Samples
Possible
423(a)
Valid Samples
Collected
408
Percent
Completeness
96.5(a)
30
H Q /238, 239+24i
ID (
21(d)
21(e)
10,950 days(b)
°Pu) 196(c)
4,969 days(b)
5,306 days(b)
10,824
184
4,519 (8SKr)
4,545 (h3Xe)
5,054
98.8
93.9
90.9 (85Kr)
91.5 (133Xe)
95.3
PIC
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
25
3
27
288
12m
1,404 weeks'9'
225
11
1,379
78.1
91.7
98.2
(s)
Does not include wells which were shut down by DOE for part or all of the year (see Section 9.5.2),
nor unoccupied residences in Mississippi (see Section 9.6.7).
Continuous samplers with samples collected at intervals of approximately one week. Days used
as units to account for differences in sample interval length.
Includes five quarters (July 1991 through September 1992) of data for 13 standby network
locations and five routine sampling locations. Analyses of plutonium isotopes for one routine
sampling location (Salt Lake City, Utah) were discontinued at the beginning of 1992.
Thirteen stations are operated on a routine basis and another eight are operated one week per
quarter.
Fourteen stations are operated on a routine basis and another seven are operated one week per
quarter.
Includes four mule deer from the Nevada Test Site and four cows from each of two locations.
Does not include bighorn sheep, fruits and vegetables, and other animals which are "samples of
opportunity."
Continuous samplers with data summarized on a weekly basis.
104
-------
All of the animals scheduled for collection in the
AIP were collected, with the exception that no mule
deer was collected from the NTS in the first quarter
of 1992. There were no road kills in that quarter
and no deer were found on two hunting trips
conducted during the quarter. Overall complete-
ness 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 1992.
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 are 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. Animal tissue, vegeta-
ble, and bioassay (urine) samples are also split
after processing, if the volume of material is suffi-
cient. Two TLDs, each with three identical phos-
phors, are deployed to each fixed station, providing
a total of six replicates. In lieu of field duplicates,
precision for the PICs is determined by the vari-
ance of measurements over a specific time interval
when only background activities are being mea-
sured. Precision may also be determined from
repeated analyses 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 is not reported for dupli-
cate 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.
Figure 49 displays %RSDs for LTHMP field and
spiked sample duplicate pairs analyzed by the
conventional tritium method. This figure includes
48 pairs of matrix spike samples and one field
duplicate pair with means equal to or greater than
the MDC but less than ten times the MDC. All
pairs yielded %RSDs of less than 12 percent; the
DQO for precision of samples in this activity range
is 30 percent. Two field duplicate pairs with means
equal to or greater than 10 times the MDC are not
included in the figure; these two pairs had means
of 118,000 and 91,800 pCi/L and %RSDs of 0.02
and 1.1 percent, respectively. These results are
well within the DQO of ten percent for values equal
to or greater than ten times the MDC.
Figure 50 displays %RSDs for duplicate pairs
analyzed by the enriched tritium method. Of 26
field and two matrix spike sample duplicate pairs
with means equal to or greater than the MDC but
less than ten times the MDC, only one pair ex-
ceeded the DQO of 30 %RSD. The mean for this
pair was approximately two times the MDC and the
%RSD was 31.4 percent. The %RSD for all matrix
spike and field duplicate sample pairs with means
equal to or greater than 10 times the MDC was
within the DQO of 20 percent. Six of the field
duplicate pairs are not included on the figure
because the means were much higher than the
remaining values. These means of these six pairs
range from 373 to 721 pCi/L and the %RSDs
range from 1.3 to 12.6 percent. The single matrix
spike duplicate pairs analyzed for gross alpha and
for gross beta in water had means equal to or
greater than ten times the MDC and yielded
%RSDs of less than 10 percent. Duplicate analy-
ses were performed for 137Cs, however, all results
were less than the MDC.
105
-------
100
0
ODD vaue*MDC&Y*je< 10X MDC (SpicedSamples)
000 VaueiMDC&Value<10XMDC
O
D
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Mean of Duplicate Pair Results (pCi/L)
Figure 49. Field and spiked sample pair precision for LTHMP conventional tritium analyses.
In the ASM, field duplicate pairs are analyzed for
gross alpha, gross beta, and gamma-emitting
radionuclides. Figure 51 shows the %RSD distri-
bution for gross alpha field duplicate analyses. Of
55 field duplicate pairs with means greater than or
equal to the MDC but less than ten times the MDC,
36 pairs were within the DQO of 30 %RSD.
Another seven pairs yielded %RSDs between 30
and 40 percent. As shown in Figure 52, gross
beta field duplicate analyses yielded %RSDs
ranging from less than one percent to greater than
100 percent for the 117 field duplicate pairs greater
than or equal to the MDC but less than 10 times
the MDC. Of the 117 pairs, 94 yielded %RSDs
within the DQO of 30 %RSD and another eight
pairs yielded %RSDs less than 40 %RSD. There
were only three duplicate pairs with means equal
to or greater than ten times the MDC; the %RSDs
for these pairs were all within the DQO of 20
percent.
These results indicate that the true achieved
precision for these gross spectrometric analyses, at
concentrations less than 10 times the MDC, is
closer to 40 percent. The data users are currently
reevaluating the data quality required to achieve
program objectives; the DQO may be modified if it
is determined that the achieved data quality is
adequate for program needs. Of the five field
duplicate pairs with 7Be activities equal to or
greater than ten times the MDC, all yielded
%RSDs less than 20 percent and, of these, all but
one were less than 10 %RSD.
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 74 duplicate analyses for gross
alpha with results equal to or greater than the MDC
but less than 10 times the MDC, 63 yielded
%RSDs within the DQO of 30 percent and another
three yielded %RSDs of less than 40 percent. Of
106
-------
100
80
60
.1 40
o
,9 20
ana value 110 X MDC (Spted Sairptei)
O O O Value i MDC & Vdue < 10 X MDC (Sptoed Sarptee)
A A A Value a 10 X MDC
ooo Value i MDC &Vakje< 10 X MDC
0 50 100 150 200
Mean of Duplicate Pair Results (pCi/L)
Figure 50. Field and spiked sample duplicate pair precision for LTHMP enriched tritium analyses.
174 duplicate analyses for gross beta with means
equal to or greater than the MDC but less than ten
times the MDC, all but one yielded %RSDs of less
than 20 percent. In addition, 13 duplicate analyses
for gross beta yielded means equal to or greater
than ten times the MDC; the %RSDs for these
pairs were all less than ten percent. Four duplicate
gamma spectrometry analyses yielded 7Be results
with means equal to or greater than ten times the
MDC and %RSDs for the pairs were all less than
four percent.
All of the 48 noble gas sample splits analyzed for
85Kr had activities greater than or equal to the MDC
but less than ten times the MDC. All but two
%RSDs were less than 20 percent, better than the
DQO of 30 percent for sample pairs in this activity
range. The %RSDs for 85Kr are shown in Figure
53. Of 104 analyses of split sample pairs analyzed
in the atmospheric moisture network, only nine
pairs yielded results equal to or greater than the
MDC but less than ten times the MDC. With one
exception, the %RSDs for these were all less than
22 percent.
Only one of the 31 field duplicate pairs from the
MSN analyzed for tritium yielded results equal to or
greater than the MDC but less than ten times the
MDC. The %RSD for this sample pair was 5.8
percent. Total potassium was measured at con-
centrations equal to or greater than ten times the
MDC in 74 field duplicate pairs and in 36 duplicate
analyses. In all but two cases, the %RSDs for the
pairs was less than 20 percent and the remaining
two pairs were within 25 percent. The %RSD
results for the field duplicate pairs are shown in
Figure 54. Four spiked sample duplicate pairs
yielded means of 90Sr equal to or greater than the
MDC but less than ten times the MDC; the %RSDs
for these pairs were all less than 12 percent.
In the AIP, matrix (bone ash) spike sample dupli-
cates were analyzed for 90Sr and ^ * 2*°Pu. The
single pair analyzed for 90Sr yielded a mean equal
107
-------
o
••e
CO
1
*S
.s
3
O
Q
^
100
80
60
40
20-
O-
DD D Value i MDC & Value < 10 X MDC
n n'-'
n
rf]
n D D
I I I I I I—I . — .
i~\ r i
(I &I u D
^~! fflrP D
n-, L^'-^n n
DD J3D
n nan tr n a
0.000 0.001 0.002 0.003 0.004 0.005
Mean of Duplicate Pair Results (pCi/hnS)
Figure 51. Field duplicate pair precision for Air Surveillance Network gross alpha analyses.
to or greater than the MDC but less than ten times
the MDC and a %RSD of 12.9 percent. The single
pair analyzed for239 + 240Pu yielded a mean equal to
or greater than ten times the MDC and a %RSD of
2.2 percent. Vegetable sample splits were ana-
lyzed for 90Sr, but all results were less than the
MDC. Similarly, all 14 split bioassay sample pairs
yielded results less than the MDC.
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 25
presents the pooled data and estimates of overall
precision. The pooled standard deviations and
%RSD indicate that, with the exception of gross
alpha analyses, the achieved precision is better
than the DQO for the analysis and activity range.
The pooled %RSD for tritium in air is based on a
limited number of sample pairs, with the result
influenced by one outlier with a %RSD of over 40
percent.
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 spec-
troscopic and radiochemical analyses, an indepen-
dent measurement of accuracy is provided by
participation in intercomparison studies using
samples of known activities. The EMSL-LV
Radioanalysis Laboratory participates in two such
intercomparison studies. An independent verifica-
tion of the accuracy of the TLDs is performed
108
-------
120
o
o
o
D vaue*10XMDC
0
D
O
0.00 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
Mean of Duplicate Pair Results (pCi/m3)
Figure 52. Field duplicate pair precision for Air Surveillance Network gross beta analyses.
every two or three years by DOELAP, with a
"pass/fail" report given.
In the EMSL-LV Intercomparison Study program,
samples of known activities of selected radionuclid-
es 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 are 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 independent assess-
ment of accuracy for each participating laboratory.
Table 26 presents accuracy results for these
intercomparison studies. Comparison of results
among all participating laboratories provides a
measure of comparability, discussed in Section
11.4.4. Approximately 70 to 250 laboratories
participate in any given intercomparison study.
Accuracy, as percent difference or percent bias, is
calculated by: With the exception of gross alpha in
%BIAS = (Cm " C') x 100
where:
%BIAS = percent bias
Cm = measured concentration
Ca = known! theoretical concentration
water and 106Ru in the October gamma in water
intercomparison study sample, the achieved accu-
racy was better than ± 20 percent. For most
analyses, the DQOs are ± 20 percent for values
greater than 10 times the MDC and ± 30 percent
for results greater than the MDC but less than ten
times the MDC. The achieved %Bias for the alpha
activity in water samples was approximately 25 to
35 percent. The other intercomparison study in
which the EMSL-LV Radioanalysis Laboratory
participates is-the semiannual DOE QA Program
conducted by EML in New York, NY. Approximate-
ly 20 laboratories participate in this intercomparison
109
-------
100
.2 80
60
40
20
0
D D D Value*HOC&V*J8< 10XMDC
D
20
22
24
26
28
30
Mean of Duplicate Pair Results (pCi/m3)
Figure 53. Split sample precision for Noble Gas Network 8SKr analyses.
study program. Sample matrices include water, air
filters, vegetation, and soil. The EML result is
assumed to represent the known or true activity for
calculation of %Bias. Results for these perfor-
mance audit samples are given in Table 27. The
DQOs for accuracy were exceeded for a number of
analyses, primarily for gamma-emitter results in the
September air and water samples. The cause of
the evident bias is under investigation. Routine
sample data were not affected and internal QC
checks indicated the systems were in control.
Gamma spectroscopy results for the March water
and air filter samples were all well within the DQO
of ± 20 percent. The DQO was also exceeded for
239Pu in the March soil and vegetation samples and
for 90Sr in the September vegetation sample.
Routine and internal QC check samples processed
in the same time frame on the same systems are
being checked to determine if results may be
affected, requiring flagging or invalidation.
In addition to use of irradiated control samples in
the processing of TLDs, DOELAP monitors accura-
cy, precision, and bias as part of the accreditation
program. As with the intercomparison studies,
dosimeters receiving a known type and level
exposure 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 radiation
type or level to which the dosimeter has been
exposed except that dosimeters are identified as
having been exposed in either the "protection
range" or the "accident range." Individual results
are not provided to the participant laboratories by
DOELAP until the conclusion of the third round of
performance testing in each test cycle. Issuance
of the accreditation certificate indicates acceptable
accuracy, precision, and bias and successful
completion of a comprehensive onsite review by
independent DOELAP site assessors.
110
-------
§
••S
Co
1
B
1
|
100-
80-
60
40
20-
0
D D D VtfuC
D^
>i10XMDC
D D
I ' I ' I ' I I ' I
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
Mean of Duplicate Pair Results (g/L)
Figure 54. Field Duplicate Pair Precision for Milk Surveillance Network Total Potassium Analyses.
11.4.4 Comparability
The EPA Intel-comparison Study reports (EPA,
1991) provide results for all laboratories participat-
ing in each intercomparison study. A grand aver-
age is computed 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 28 displays data from the 1992 intercompari-
son studies for the variables most commonly
measured in the ORSP. Of the commonly mea-
sured variables, there were three instances in
which the Radioanalysis Laboratory results deviat-
ed from the grand average by more than three
standard normal deviate units. These were the
April intercomparison sample for total potassium in
milk, the August sample for beta emitters on an air
filter, and the September water intercomparison
sample containing 89Sr. The first two of these also
exceeded the DQO for accuracy (see Section
11.4.3, above). The third sample, 89Sr in water,
was within the DQO for accuracy. Apart from
these three, all of the normalized deviations from
the grand average were within the statistical control
limit range of -3 to +3. This indicates acceptable
comparability of the Radioanalysis Laboratory with
the 69 to 207 laboratories participating 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
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
111
-------
Table 25. Overall Precision of Analysis
Network
LTHMP
Air Surveil-
lance
Noble Gas
Tritium
in Air
Milk
Analysis
Gross Alpha
Gross Beta
Conv. Tritium
Conv. Tritium
Conv. Tritium
Enrich. Tritium
Enrich. Tritium
Enrich. Tritium
Enrich. Tritium
Gross Alpha
Gross Alpha
Gross Beta
Gross Beta
Gross Beta
Gross Beta
7Be
7Be
85
;Kr
HTO
Conv. Tritium
Potassium (total)
Potassium (total)
90Sr
Sample
Type
Spiked
Spiked
Spiked
Field
Field
Spiked
Field
Spiked
Field
Field
Lab Dup
Field
Lab Dup
Field
Lab Dup
Field
Lab Dup
Split
Split
>10xMDC 1
>10x MDC 1
>MDC,<10x MDC 48
>MDC,<10xMDC 1
>10x MDC 2
>MDC,<10x MDC 2
>MDC,<10xMDC 26
>10x MDC 16
>10x MDC 20
>MDC,<1 Ox MDC 55
>MDC,<10xMDC 74
>MDC,<10xMDC 117
>MDC,<1 Ox MDC 174
>10x MDC 3
>10x MDC 13
>10x MDC 5
>10x MDC 4
>MDC,<10xMDC 46
>MDC,<1 Ox MDC
Field >.MDC,<10x MDC
Field >10x MDC
Lab Dup >10x MDC
Spiked >MDC,<10xMDC
1
74
36
4
Pooled
Standard
Deviation
1.42
2.75
157.65
141.77
725.16
5.75
3.37
5.62
19.79
0.000
0.000
0.004
0.001
0.003
0.001
0.025
0.006
2.43
1.46
25.21
0.111
0.076
1.56
%RSD
5.8
8.7
4.3
11.8
0.7
6.8
11.9
7.2
8.6
33.8
23.6
27.6
8.3
10.4
3.8
8.8
2.4
9.5
20.9
5.8
6.8
4.7
7.5
Animal
Invest!- 90Sr (ash)
gation 239 + 240Pu (ash)
Program
Spiked
i Spiked
>MDC,<1 Ox MDC
>10x MDC
1
1
2.69
0.09
12.9
2.2
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-
112
-------
Table 26. Accuracy of Analysis from EPA Intercomparison Studies
Known Value EPA Average Percent
Nuclide Month (pCi/L)(a) (pCi/L)(a) Bias
Water Intercomparison Studies
Alpha Jan 30.0 22.67 -24.43
Alpha Apr(PE) 40.0 49.67 24.18
Alpha May 15.0 18.33 22.20
Alpha Sep 45.0 56.67 25.93
Alpha Oct (PE) 29.0 40.00 37.93
Beta Jan 30.0 31.33 4.43
•Beta Apr(PE) 140.0 130.67 -6.66
Beta May 44.0 47.00 6.82
Beta Sep 50.0 59.00 18.00
Beta Oct(PE) 53.0 48.33 -8.81
3H Feb 7,904.0 7,965.0 0.77
3H June 2,125.0 2,070.33 -2.57
3H Oct 5,962.0 5,896.67 -1.10
60Co Feb 40.0 42.00 5.00
e°Co Apr(PE) 56.0 55.3 -1.20
60Co May 20.0 19.33 -3.35
60Co Oct 10.0 10.00 0.00
60Co Oct(PE) 15.0 14.67 -2.20
65Zn Feb 148.0 165.00 11.49
^Zn May 99.0 102.67 3.71
65Zn Oct 148.0 153.00 3.38
""Sr Jan 51.0 44.33 -13.08
"Sr Apr(PE) 15.0 12.67 -15.53
^Sr May 29.0 26.33 -9.21
^Sr Sep 20.0 18.67 -6.65
89Sr Oct(PE) 8.0 8.33 4.13
90Sr Jan 20.0 20.33 1.65
""Sr Apr(PE) 17.0 16.33 -3.94
^Sr May 8.0 8.00 0.00
90Sr Sep 15.0 14.00 -6.67
^Sr Oct(PE) 10.0 11.00 10.00
106Ru Feb 203.0 182.00 -10.34
106Ru May 141.0 128.67 -8.74
106Ru Oct 175.0 135.33 -22.67
1311 Feb 59.0 60.33 2.25
131I Aug 45.0 45.00 0.00
133Ba Feb 76.0 67.00 -11.84
133Ba May 98.0 91.67 -6.46
133Ba Oct 74.0 73.67 -0.45
134Cs Feb 31.0 29.67 -4.29
134Cs Apr(PE) 24.0 23.00 -4.17
134Cs May 15.0 13.33 -11.13
(a> Values were obtained from the individual intercomparison study reports and are reported with the units
and significant figures included in those reports.
pling locations are primarily wells developed for monitoring wells have not been applied to the
purposes other than radioactivity monitoring. LTHMP sampling sites. In spite of these limita-
Guidance or requirements developed for Compre- tions, the samples are representative of the first
hensive Environmental Response, Compensation, objective, protection of drinking water supplies. At
and Liability Act and Resource Conservation all of the LTHMP monitoring areas, on and around
Recovery Act regarding the number and location of the NTS, all potentially impacted drinking water
113
-------
Table 27 Accuracy of Analysis from DOE Intercomparison Study
Nuclide Month EML Value'3' EPA Value(a>
7Be
7Be
MMn
MMn
57Co
57Co
60Co
60Co
""Sr
134Cs
134Cs
137Cs
137Cs
144Ce
144Ce
238Pu
238pu
239Pu
239pu
Mar
Sept
Mar
Sept
Mar
Sept
Mar
Sept
Mar
Mar
Sept
Mar
Sept
Mar
Sept
Mar
Sept
Mar
Sept
239
Pu
90Sr
90Sr
(a)
Sept
Mar
Sept
Mar
Sept
Mar
Sept
Mar
Sept
Air Intercomparison Studies
28.6
308
5.97
25.9
7.93
6.4
5.81
3.06
0.207
4.44
3.72
5.76
5.82
63.9
43.3
0.270
0.042
0.285
0.045
29.4
389
6.39
35.9
7.33
. 8.1
6.09
4.3
0.172
5.20
4.8
6.43
8.3
69.8
51.4
0.261
0.0346
0.254
0.0392
Soil Intercomparison Studies
21.9
25.5
7.76
20
31.6
6.98
Vegetation Intercomparison Studies
376
489
1.08
1.25
0.311
0.379
350
618
1.13
1.34
0.374
0.342
Percent
Bias
2.80
26.30
7.04
38.61
-7.57
26.56
4.82
40.52
-16.91
17.12
29.03
11.63
42.61
9.23
18.71
-3.33
-17.62
-10.88
-12.89
-8.68
23.92
-10.05
-6.91
26.38
4.63
7.20
20.26
-9.76
Values were obtained from the Environmental Measurements Laboratory (EML) and reported with the
significant figures provided by EML. Units are Bq/filter for air, Bq/L for water, and Bq/Kg for the remaining
matrices.
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 28.
Nuclide
Comparability of Analysis
EPA Lab
Average
Month (pCi/L)
from EPA Intercomparison Studies'3'
Grand Known Normalized Normalized
Value Average Deviation from Deviation from
(pCi/L) (pCi/L) Grand Average Known Value
Water Intercomparison Studies
Alpha
Alpha
Alpha
Alpha
Alpha
Beta
Beta
Beta
Beta
Beta
3H
3H
3H
60Co
60Co
60Co
60Co
60Co
65Zn
65Zn
65Zn
89Sr
89Sr
89Sr
89Sr
89Sr
90Sr
90Sr
90Sr
90Sr
90Sr
106Ru
106Ru
106Ru
131,
131,
133Ba
133Ba
133Ba
134Cs
134Cs
134Cs
134Cs
134Cs
January 23
April (PE) 50
May 18
September 57
October (PE) 40
January 31
April (PE) 130
May 47
September 59
October (PE) 48
February 8,000
June 2,100
October 5,900
February 42
April (PE) 55
June 19
October 10
October (PE) 15
February 160
June 100
October 160
January 44
April (PE) 13
May 26
September 1 9
October (PE) 8.3
January 20
April (PE) 16
May 8
September 14
October (PE) 11
February 180
June 130
October 140
February 60
August 45
February 67
June 92
October 74
February 30
April (PE) 23
June 15
October 7
October (PE) 5
24
40
14
36
28
30
118
43
49
46
7,900
2,100
6,000
40
56
21
11
15
150
100
160
47
16
28
20
8.6
19
16
7.7
14
10
190
140
160
60
46
75
96
73
29
23
15
8.1
5.3
30
40
15
45
29
30
140
44
53
53
7,900
2,120
5,960
40
56
20
10
15
148
98
148
51
15
29
20
8
20
17
8
15
10
203
141
175
59
45
76
98
74
31
24
15
8
5
-0.30
1.7
1.4
3.2
2.9
0.50
1.0
1.5
0.31
0.31
0.05
-0.16
-0.29
0.67
-0.38
-0.44
-0.33
-0.22
1.9
-0.34
0.33
-0.97
-0.99
-0.59
-0.47
-0.09
0.36
0.17
0.09
-0.17
0.17
-1.1
-1.2
-2.4
0.05
-0.26
-1.8
-0.78
0.15
0.08
-0.15
-0.49
-0.39
-0.11
-1.6
1.7
1.2
1.8
2.7
0.46
-0.77
1.0
3.1
-0.81
0.13
-0.21
-0.19
0.69
-0.23
-0.23
0
-0.12
2.0
0.64
1.4
-2.3
-0.81
-0.29
-0.46
0.12
0.12
-0.23
0
-0.35
0.35
-1.8
-1.5
-3.8
0.38
0
-2.0
-1.1
-0.08
0.46
-0.35
-0.58
-0.35
0
(a) Values were obtained from the individual, intercomparison study reports and are reported with all
values rounded to two significant figures. Continued
115
-------
Table 28. (Comparability of Analysis from EPA Intercomparison Studies'3', cont.)
EPA Lab Grand Known Normalized Normalized
Average Value Average Deviation from Deviation from
Nuclide Month (pCi/L) (pCi/L) (pCi/L) Grand Average Known Value
134Cs
137Cs
137Cs
137Cs
137Cs
137Cs
October (PE)
February
April (PE)
June
October (PE)
October
Water Intercomparison Studies (cont.)
5
51
23
15
8.3
8.7
Alpha
Alpha
Beta
Beta
90Sr
9oSr
137Cs
137Cs
U (Nat)
U (Nat)
U (Nat)
U (Nat)
U (Nat)
239pu
239pu
March
August
March
August
March
August
March
August
March
April (PE)
July
October (PE)
November
January
August
8
30
39
71
15
22
11
20
26
4.2
4
10
15
16
8.7
89Sr
89Sr
90Sr
9oSr
,31,
131,
137Cs
137Cs
K (Total)
K (Total)
April
September
April
September
April
September
April
September
April
September
32
12
26
14
78
96
40
15
1,760
1,820
5.3
51
23
16
8.9
8.7
5
49
22
15
8
8
-0.11
0.11
-0.07
-0.5
-0.18
-0.02
Air Filter Intercomparison Studies
8.3
31
42
72
15
24
11
20
24
4.3
4
10
14
16
8.6
7
30
41
69
15
25
10
18
25
4.2
4
10
15
17
9
Milk Intercomparison Studies
31
14
25
13
78
101
40
16
1,700
1,710
38
15
29
15
78
100
39
15
1,710
1,750
-0.12
-0.19
-1.0
-0.17
0.02
-0.8
-0.12
0.11
1.1
1.7
0.03
2.9
0.17
0.35
0.23
0.22
-0.48
0.35
0.41
-0.1
-0.92
-0.23
-0.27
1.1
2.2
0
0.69
0.35
-0.12
0.12
0.23
0.35
0
-0.58
0.35
-0.12
-1.0
0.23
0.69
0.21
1.7
0.02
2.7
-0.27
-0.85
-0.58
-2.2
-0.92
-1.2
-0.35
0
-0.75
0.23
0.12
0.94
1.4
(a) Values were obtained from the individual intercomparison study reports and are reported with the
significant figures included in those reports.
116
-------
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 29. 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 29. Summary of Analytical Procedures
Type of Analytical Counting Analytical
Analysis Equipment Period (min) Procedures
HpGe
Gammab
Gross alpha
and beta on
air filters
W,90S|.
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
10,000m3 for
high-volume air
filters.
560m3
1.0 L for milk
or water. 0.1
to 1 kg
for tissue.
5 to 10 mL for
water.
Approximate
Detection Limit*
ForCs-137, routine
liquids; 5x10"' |iCi/mL
(1.8x 10'' Bq/L) low-
volume airfilters;
5 x 10'14 \iC\lrc\L
(1.8x 10-'Bq/m3), high-
volume airfilters;
5 x 10'16 |iCi/mL
(1.8x ID'5 Bq/m3).
alpha: 8.0 x10"'VCi/mL
(3.0 x 10'5Bq/m3)
beta: 2.5 x 1 0'15 uCi/mL
(9.25 x 10'5 Bq/m3)
"Sr=5 x 10'9 uCi/mL
(1.85X 10-' Bq/L)
90Sr=2x10-'u.Ci/mL
(7.4x 10'2Bq/L)
300 to 700 x
10'snci/rriL
(11-26 Bq/L)c
Continued
117
-------
Table 29. (Summary of Analytical Procedures, cont.)
Type of
Analysis
Analytical
Equipment
Counting
Period (min)
Analytical
Procedures
Sample
Size
Approximate
Detection Limit3
3H Enrichment
(LTHMP
samples)
BKr, 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.
I.OLfor
water; 0.1 to
1 kg for
tissue; 5,000
to 10,000 m3
for air.
0.4 to 1.0m3
for air.
10x10''nCi/mL
(3.7X101 Bq/L)
(iCi/mL (2.9 x 10'3
Bq/L), 239*240 Pu=0.04
10'3 Bq/L) for water.
For tissue samples,
0.04pCi(1.5x 10'3
Bq) per sample
for all isotopes; 5 x
10'17to 10 x 10'17
HCi/mL(1.9x 10'6 to
3.7x10'6Bq/m3)for
plutonium on air
filters.
^Kr, 133Xe = 4x
10'12uCi/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.
118
-------
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 Plutonium Valley Exercise was conducted at
Area 11 of the NTS from November 2 through
November 6, 1992 (see Figures 55, 56, and 57).
This was a combined effort of the EPA, REECo,
EG&G and the DOE Albuquerque Field Office
Accident Response Group. The exercise included
full face respirator dress out, monitoring for alpha
contamination using Field Instruments for the
Detection of Low Energy Radiation Sources,
sample handling, health and safety, hot line, radio
communications, data control, and decontamination
procedures.
Evaluation and assessment of both laboratory and
field data were performed. Some federal
emergency response classroom training was
provided, and there was an opportunity to practice
a shift change. This provided a unique opportunity
Figure 55. The Control Room in the Plutonium Valley Exercise on the NTS.
119
-------
for hands-on practice of monitoring/sampling
operations in an aged fallout area contaminated
with 239+240pu. A weapons accident scenario was
used.
A Federal Radiological Monitoring and Assessment
Center (FRMAC) and a Joint Hazard Evaluation
Center was operational during the exercise; each
exercised technical interfaces. The FRMAC
exercised its data center, which included the
database for field monitoring and laboratory results,
Geographical Information System, and Global
Positioning System. FRMAC field teams from the
EMSL-LV, EPA/Office of Radiation and Indoor Air,
and state teams participated.
Each year the Nuclear Radiation Assessment
Division hosts a two-day Environmental Radiation
Monitoring-Monitor's Refresher course. This year
the course was conducted October 22 through
October 23, 1992.
In addition NRD hosted two Radiation Safety
Training Courses. The first course was held on
January 19. It covered risks from occupational
exposure, health effects from ionizing radiation,
regulations regarding reporting to the Radiation
Safety Officer a suspected or confirmed pregnancy,
and "Radiation Safety: Introduction, Lab
Techniques and Emergency Procedures" (video).
The second course was held on June 5; it covered
basic radiological health, including biological
effects, radiation detectors, exposure control, and
regulations.
The final course was a Quality Assurance
indoctrination course held on June 26, 1992. It
covered the "Quality Assurance Program Plan for
the Nuclear Radiation Assessment Division, Offsrte
Radiation Safety Program", Standard Operating
Procedures, each person's role in quality
assurance, rights, responsibilities and authorities,
stop work mechanisms to effect change,
surveillance, and audits.
Figure 56. Personnel suiting up for the exercise.
120
-------
Figure 57. Personnel returning with samples.
121
-------
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
5
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 (ICRP, 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 30 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
In 40 CFR 141 (CFR, 1988), the EPA set allowable
concentrations for radionuclides in drinking water
sources. Any combination of beta and gamma
emitters may not lead to exposures exceeding 4
mrem/yr. For tritium, this is 2.0 x 10"5 uCi/mL (740
Bq/L) and for 90Sr it is 8 x 109 uCi/mL (0.3 Bq/L).
122
-------
Table 30. Routine Monitoring Guides
Sampling
Nuclide Frequency
Air Surveillance Network
7Be 1/wk
95Zr 1/wk
35Nb 1/wk
"Mo 1/wk
103Ru 1/wk
131I 1/wk
13?Te 1/wk
137Cs 1/wk
140Ba 1/wk
140La 1/wk
14ICe 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
Water Surveillance Network ILTHMPJ
3H 1/mo
3H+ 1/mo
(enriched tritium)
"Sr 1st time
s°Sr 1st time
137Cs 1/mo
226Ra 1st time
234U 1st time
235U 1st time
238U 1st time
238Pu 1st time
239.24opu 1st time
Gamma 1/mo
all
all
all
all
ail
all
all
all
all
all
all
all
Milk Surveillance Network (MSN}
3H 1/mo
131I 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
Sample
Size
m3
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
560
2400
560
5
0.4
0.4
0.4
b Liters
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
Guide*
uCi/mL
4.7 x10'8
3x 10'10
3 x 10'9
3x10'9
1.5x 10-9
1 x 10'to
5 x 10-'°
3 x 10'10
3 x 10'9
3x 10'9
1.4x 10'9
3x10'"
1 x 10'14
5 x 10'13
1.2x 10-7
6.2 X 10'7
4.9 x 10'7
6.2 x 10"
uCi/mL
2 x 10'5
2 x 1Q-5
4.4 x 1Q-7
2.2 x 10 9
8.8 x 10 8
3.9 x 10'8
2.2 x 10'7
2.8 X ID'6
2.8 x 10'8
1.7x 10'e
1.1 x 10'8
--
uCi/mL
3 x 10'3
1 x 1Q-6
4 x 10'6
2x1Q-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
4x 10'2
2 X 10'3
2 x 1Q-3
3 x 10°
4x10'2
1 x 102
2x 10'2
4x 103
2 x 103
6 x 103
1.0
0.32
6 x 10'1
3x 10'3
6 x 10-'
2x10'3
2x102
1.6
5x102
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
--
2uR/hr
--
ALI and DAC values from ICRP-30 modified to 1 mSv annual effective dose equivalent for continuous exposure. Te and
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).
123
-------
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 1992, 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 1992.
15.1 Thermoluminescent
Dosimetry Program
In 1992, external exposure was monitored by a
network of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs)
at 131 fixed locations surrounding the NTS and by
TLDs worn by 67 offsite residents. No apparent
net exposures were related to NTS activities. As
discussed in Section 3, regulatory or as low as
reasonably achievable investigation limits were not
exceeded for any individual or cumulative expo-
sure. The range of exposures was similar to those
observed in other areas of the U.S.
15.2 Pressurized Ion Chamber
Network
The Pressurized Ion Chamber (PIC) network
measures ambient gamma radiation exposure
rates. The 27 PICs deployed around the NTS in
1992 showed no unexplained deviations from
background levels. The data from Goldfield,
Nevada, show the greatest range. From October
1990 until the sensor unit was exchanged in
February 1992, the PIC unit at this location had
been under-estimating the gamma exposure rate.
The gamma exposure rates measured from Febru-
ary to December 1992 closely resemble those
seen prior to October 1990. As discussed in
Section 3.2 all PIC values are within the U.S. back-
ground range and are consistent with previous
years' trends.
15.3 Air Surveillance Network
In 1992, the Air Surveillance Network (ASN)
consisted of 30 continuously operating sampling
locations surrounding the NTS. These stations
were complemented by 77 standby stations which
were operated at least one week each quarter. At
least one standby sampler is located in each state
west of the Mississippi River.
In the majority of cases, no gamma-emitting radio-
nuclides were detected by gamma spectrometry
(i.e., the results were gamma-spectrum negligible).
Naturally occurring 7Be was the only radionuclide
occasionally detected. As in previous years, the
majority of the gross beta results exceeded the
MDC. The plutonium result greater than the
analysis MDC was for the fourth quarter New
Mexico sample, a single sample collected in
Carlsbad. The plutonium results are consistent
with data from previous years. Operation of the
ASN and the data results were discussed in
Section 4.1.
15.4 Tritium In Atmospheric
Moisture
At the beginning of 1992, the tritium network
consisted of 14 continuously operating and two
standby stations. Of the 716 routine and 15
standby samples collected in 1992, 15 samples
were not analyzed: five because of broken sieves,
three were lost, and seven contained insufficient
sample (moisture). Two samples exceeded the
analysis MDC. Both samples were collected June
16-24, one from Las Vegas and the other from
Overton, Nevada. The operation of the tritium
samplers and the data results are discussed in
Section 4.2.
15.5 Noble Gas Sampling
Network
At the beginning of 1992, the Noble Gas Sampling
Network consisted of 13 routinely operated and
124
-------
three standby stations. Of the 699 samples col-
lected in 1992, analyses were not performed on 74
samples (10.6 percent) due to insufficient volume
collected or sampler malfunctions. Twelve quarter-
ly samples were collected from standby samplers;
none were collected from Milford and Salt Lake
City, Utah. As expected, all KKr results were
above the MDC and were within the range antici-
pated from sampling background levels and all
133Xe results were below the MDC.
15.6 Foodstuffs
Milk samples were collected from 24 Milk Surveil-
lance Network (MSN) and 115 Standby Milk
Surveillance Network (SMSN) stations in 1992.
Selected MSN and SMSN milk samples were
analyzed for 3H, 89Sr, and 90Sr, and the results are
similar to those obtained in previous years; neither
increasing or decreasing trends are evident.
Although there was a slight increase in the number
of samples whose results exceeded the MDC for
3H, 89Sr, and 90Sr in 1992, as listed in Table 10, the
average annual concentrations have, in general,
decreased slightly. A summary of the MSN results
are in Tables 11 for 3H, 12 for ^Sr, and 13 for 90Sr.
The results for the annual SMSN samples ana-
lyzed for 3H, 89Sr, and 90Sr are given in Table B-6,
Appendix B. Samples analyzed by gamma spec-
trometry for the SMSN are listed in Table B-7,
Appendix B. The MSN and SMSN data are con-
sistent with previous years and are not indicative of
increasing or decreasing trends. No radioactivity
directly related to current NTS activities was
evident.
Sampling under the Animal Investigation Program
in 1992 showed similar results to those reported for
mule deer collected in 1991 for bone tissue analy-
ses and ^Pu analyses in all tissues (DOE, 1992).
The average 90Sr levels found in mule deer bone
ash since 1955 are shown in Figure 27. Marked
differences between years are observed in the
medians of tritium activity in blood and ^^"Pu in
ashed soft tissues. These differences are due to
the fact that two contaminated animals were
collected in 1991. The analysis of bighorn sheep
showed only one sample with a ^^"Pu result
greater than the MDC. The four cattle purchased
in May 1992 from the G.L. Coffer Fleur de Lis
Ranch of Beatty, Nevada, had detectable concen-
trations of 90Sr in bone ash samples ranging from
0.27 ± 0.08 to 0.75 ±0.13 pCi/g ash. One bone
sample contained 0.001 ± 0.001 pCi/g ash of ^Pu
and 0.003 ± 0.001 pCi/g ash of 239+Z4° Pu. One of
the cows was pregnant. The fetal bone contained
no 90Sr above the detectable concentration of 0.70
pCi/g ash. The average 90Sr levels found in cattle
bone ash since 1955 are shown in Figure 28. All
liver samples from the adult cattle contained
239*24QpU) rangjng from 0 004 ± 0 001 pCi/g asn to
0.015 ± 0.004 pCi/g ash. No 3H was detected
above the MDC. These animals had ranged from
Beatty into the NTS in the Beatty Wash area. As
the objective of the Animal Investigation Program
is to detect worst-case conditions, the results
indicate that the component of possible radionucl-
ide ingestion from meat is small (see Chapter 8,
Dose Assessment).
In the fall of 1992, eight samples of locally grown
fruits and vegetables were donated by offsite
residents in Utah and Nevada. Fruits and vegeta-
bles sampled included apples, broccoli, cabbage,
carrots, and summer squash. All samples were
analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides and
only naturally occurring 40K was detected. All
samples were analyzed for tritium; no results
greater than the MDC of the analysis were ob-
tained. Samples were then ashed and analyzed
for 90Sr, ^Pu, and 239*240Pu. Results which were
greater than the MDC of the analysis are listed in
Table 15. Four vegetable samples from Nevada
(cabbage, broccoli, and two samples of carrots with
tops) contained 90Sr greater than the MDC of the
analysis. The source of the ^Sr may have been
soil particles adhered to the vegetable. No ^Pu
was found in any of the samples. Concentrations
of 239+240pu greater than the analysis MDC were
found in all carrots with tops samples. None of the
smooth-skinned surface crops contained these
radionuclides.
15.7 Internal Exposure
Monitoring
Internal exposure is assessed by whole body
counting using a single intrinsic coaxial germanium
detector, lung counting using six intrinsic germani-
um semiplanar detectors, and bioassay using
radiochemical procedures. During 1992, a total of
2,800 gamma spectra was obtained from whole-
body counting of 281 persons (including those
individuals who were counted twice). One hundred
and seven of the counts were on participants of the
Offsite Internaf Dosimetry Program. All spectra
were representative of normal background and
showed only naturally occurring *°K. No transu-
125
-------
ranic radionuclides were detected in any lung-
counting data. No internal exposure above appli-
cable regulatory limits was detected in either
occupationally exposed individuals or members of
the general public who participated in the Internal
Dosimetry Program at EMSL-LV.
Bioassay results for single urine samples collected
at random periods of time from participants in the
Offsite Dosimetry Network showed only five sam-
ples, from random locations and times, with tritium
concentrations greater than the MDC. The great-
est tritium concentration detected in a sample was
3.43 x 10~7 ± 2.99 x 10"7 u.Ci/ml_, which is only 0.4
percent of the annual limit of intake for the general
public. Table 16 provides a summary of bioassay
results. Two participants from McGill, Nevada, did
not participate in the bioassay portion of the pro-
gram this year. As reported in previous years,
medical examinations of the offsite families re-
vealed a generally healthy population. The blood
examinations and thyroid profiles showed no
symptoms which could be attributed to past or
present NTS testing operations.
15.8 Long-Term Hydrological
Monitoring Program
The Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
is discussed in detail in Section 7. None of the
domestic water supplies monitored in the LTHMP
in 1992 yielded tritium activities of any health
concern. The greatest tritium activity measured in
any water body which has potential to be a
drinking water supply was less than one percent of
the NPDWRs. In general, surface water and
spring samples yielded tritium 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 the USGS conducted a
tracer study experiment, some areas onsite at
Project DRIBBLE. The 1992 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 evidencing 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 10.3 ± 2.6 pCi/L
and in 1991 was 484 ± 4 pCi/L, approximately 10
times the historic background activity. An increase
in tritium activity was first observed in 1984, seven-
teen years after the test was conducted. In every
year since then, with the exception of 1987 and
1992, 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 migra-
tion from the test cavity.
126
-------
References
American National Standards Institute, 1975.
ANSI Standard N545--1975. American National
Standards Institute, New York, NY. 16pp.
ANSI75
Black, S. and A. Latham, eds. In preparation.
U.S. Department of Energy Nevada Operations
Office Annual Site Environmental Report - 1991.
U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations
Office, Las Vegas, Nevada. DOE91
Black, S.C., 1989. Memorandum to C.F. Costa,
Subject: DQO's For The Offsite Radiological
Monitoring Program, dated September 10. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas,
NV. SCB89
Bureau of the Census, 1990. Population Count
Pursuant to Public La w 94-171. U.S.
Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C.
DOC90
Bureau of the 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/NV/10845-07, UC-703.
U.S. Department of Energy, Las Vegas, Nevada.
82 pp. DOE91
Code of Federal Regulations, 1988. Drinking
Water Regulations, Title 40, part 141,
Washington D.C. CFR88
Code of Federal Regulations, 1989. National
Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Polutants;
Radionuclides; Final Rule and Notice of
Reconsideration, Title 40, part 61, Washington,
D.C. CFR89
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
Corley, J.P., D.H. Denham, R.E. Jaquish, D.E.
Michels, A.R. Olsen D. A. Waite, 1981. A Guide
for Environmental Radiological Surveillance at
U.S. Dept. of Energy Installations, DOE/EP-0023.
Office of Operational Safety Report, U.S.
Department of Energy, Washington, D.C. DOE81
Costa, C.F. , N.R. Sunderland, S.C. Black, M.W.
Chilton, B.B. Dicey, W.G. Phillips, C.A. Fontana,
R.W. Holloway, C.K. Liu, A.A. Mullen, V.E.
Niemann, C.J. Rizzardi, D.D. Smith, D.J. Thome,
E.A. Thompson, 1990. Offsite Environmental
Monitoring Report: Radiation Monitoring Around
United States Nuclear Test Areas, Calendar Year
1989, EPA/600/4-90/016. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Las Vegas, NV. EPA90
Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory
Intercomparison Studies Program, 1981. EPA-
600/4-81-004. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Las Vegas, NV. EPA81
Freund, J.E., 1962. Mathematical Statistics.
Prentice Hall Press, Englewood, NJ. FRE62
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
Interational Commission on Radiological
Protection, 1985. Quantitative Bases for
Developing a Unified Index of Harm, ICRP-45.
ICRP85
International Commission on Radiological
Protection, 1982. Limits for Intake of
Radionuclides by Workers, ICRP-30. Pergamon
Press, New York. ICRP30
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-39. ICRP39
127
-------
Jarvis, A.N., L. Siu, 1981. Environmental
Radioactivity Laboratory Intercomparison Studies
Program - FY 1981-82, EPA-600/4-81-004. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas,
NV. JA81
Johns, F., 1979. Radiochemical and Analytical
Procedures for Analysis of Environmental
Samples, EMSL-LV-0539-17-1979. U.S.
Environmental Protection /agency, Las Vegas,
NV.
Johns, F., 1979. Radiochemical and Analytical
Procedures for Analysis of Environmental
Samples, EMSL-LV-0539-17-1979. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas,
NV. EMSL79
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 Park Service, 1990. Personal
communication from Supervisor Park Ranger, R.
Hopkins, Death Valley National Monument, Death
Valley, CA. NPS90
Nelson, L., S.J. Qual, 1975. Tec/7.7 (1), January.
NEL75
Power, D.V., and C.R. Bowman. 1970. An
Evaluation of Water Production from the
GASBUGGY Reentry Well. PNE-G-58. 26pp.
Quiring, R.E., 1968. Climatological Data, Nevada
Test Site, Nuclear Rocket Development Station
(NRDS), ERLTM-ARL-7. ESSA Research
Laboratories, Las Vegas, NV. QU68
Snedecor, G.W., W.G. Cochran, 1967. Statistical
Methods, 6th edition. The Iowa State University
Press, Ames, IA. SNE67
Stanley, T.W., et al, 1983. Interim Guidelines
and Specifications for Preparing Quality
Assurance Project Plans, QAMS-005/80. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Research and Development, Washington, D.C.
40 pp. STA83
Stanley, T.W., and S.S. Vemer, 1985. 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 867,
pp. 12-19. American Society for Testing and
Materials, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. STA85
U.S. Energy Research and Development
Administration, 1977. Final Environmental
Impact Statement, Nevada Test Site, Nye
County, Nevada, Report ERDA-1551. U.S.
Department of Commerce, Springfield, VA.
ERDA77
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992.
Quality Assurance Program Plan for the Nuclear
Radiation Assessment Division Offsite Radiation
Safety Program. U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Office of Research and Development,
Las Vegas, NV. Internal document. 37 pp.
EPA92
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1991.
Onsite and Offsite Environmental Monitoring
Report: Radiation Monitoring Around Tatum Salt
Dome, Lamar County Mississippi, EPA 600/4-
91/005, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Las Vegas, NV. EPA91B
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1989.
EPA Journal. United States Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Public Affairs (A-
107), Washington, D.C. EPA89
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1988.
Monitoring Radiation from Nuclear Tests. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Environmental
Monitoring Systems Laboratory, Las Vegas, NV.
EPA88B
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1988.
Environmental Radiation Data, Draft Report 55.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Radiation Programs, Eastern Environmental
Radiation Facility, Montgomery, AL. EPA88A
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1987.
Quality Assurance Program Plan. EPA/600/X-
87/241. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Office of Research and Development, Las Vegas,
NV. Internal document. 36 pp. EPA87
128
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1980.
Plutonium -238 and Plutonium -239 Metabolism
in Dairy Cows Following Ingestion of Mised
Oxides. EPA-600/3-80-097. U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, Office of Research and
Development, Las Vegas, NV. EPA80
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1976.
Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution
Measurement Systems. EPA/600/9-76/005. U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Research and Development, Research Triangle
Park, NC. EPA76
U.S. Department of Energy, 1991.
Environmental Regulatory Guide for Radiological
Effluent Monitoring and Environmental
Surveillance, DOE/EH-0173T. U.S. Department
of Energy, Washington, D.C. DOE91
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1977.
Regulatory Guide 4.13. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Office of Standards Development,
Washington, D.C. 3pp. NRC77
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1981.
Glossary of Terms, Nuclear Power and
Radiation, NUREG-0770. U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.
NRC81
U.S. Department of Energy, 1988b. General
Environmental Protection Program, DOE Order
5400.5 U.S. Department of Energy, Washington
D.C. DOE88B
U.S. Department of Energy, 1988. General
Environmental Protection Program, DOE Order
5400.1 U.S. Department of Energy, Washington
D.C. DOE88
U.S. Department of Energy, 1986. Handbook for
the Department of Energy Laboratory
Accrediation Program for Personnel Dosimetry
Systems. DOE/EH-0027. U.S. Department of
Energy, Assistant Secretary for Environment,
Safety, and Health, 36 pp. DOE86B
U.S. Department of Energy, 1986. Handbook for
the Department of Energy Laboratory
Accrediation Program for Personnel Dosimetry
Systems. DOE/EH-0026. U.S. Department of
Energy, Assistant Secretary for Environment,
Safety, and Health, 38 pp. DOE86
U.S. Department of Energy. 1986. Long-Term
Monitoring Program, Project GASBUGGY, Rio
Arriba County, New Mexico. NVO-277. U.S.
Department of Energy, Nevada Operations
Office, Las Vegas, Nevada . 24 pp. DOE86
U.S. Department of Energy, 1985.
Environmental Protection, Safety, and Health
Protection Information Reporting Requirements.
DOE Order 5484.1. U.S. Department of Energy,
Washington, D.C. DOE85
U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1971. Effluent
and Environmental Monitoring and Reporting, jrr
U.S. Atomic Energy Commission Manual,
Chapter 0513. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission,
Washington, D.C. AEC71
Velleman, P.P., D.C. Hoaglin, 1981. Applications
Basics, and Computing of Exploratory Data
Analysis. Duxbury Press, Boston, MA. VEL81
Westinghouse Savanah River Company, 1989.
Savannah River Site Environmental Report for
1988. Westinghouse Savannah River Company.
SRS89
129
-------
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 midlatrtudes 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
when radiation ionizes gas in a
chamber.
130
-------
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 UC 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 UC
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 samples,
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
(MDC) probability of Type I and Type II
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 The determination of the degree of
monitoring radioactive contamination on individ-
uals using survey meters, or the
determination of radiation dosage
picocune
(pCi)
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 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
absorbing material.
radioisotope 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-
ing light emissions produced in the
phosphor by ionizing radiation.
131
-------
Sieved (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.
132
-------
Appendix A
Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Tables and Figures
Table A-1 Personnel Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Results -1992
Table A-2 Environmental Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Results - 1992
Figure A-1 Summary of Annual TLD Data
Figure A-2 Thermoluminescent Dosimetry versus Pressurized Ion Chamber Data -1992
133
-------
Table A-1 Personnel Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Results, 1992
Daily Deep Dose Total
# Exposure (mrem) Annual'3'
Station Name of Days
002
003
006
007
009
010
011
014
015
018
019
021
022
025
029
037
038
040
042
044
045
052
056
060
232
248
264
293
300
302
304
307
329
334
336
339
341
344
345
346
347
348
358
359
Caliente, NV
Hot Creek Ranch, NV
Indian Springs, NV
Goldfield, NV
Blue Eagle Ranch, NV
Complex I, NV
Complex I, NV
Coyote Summit, NV
Coyote Summit, NV
Nyala, NV
Goldfield, NV
Beatty, NV
Alamo, NV
American Borate, NV
Stone Cabin Ranch, NV
Indian Springs, NV
Beatty, NV
Goldfield, NV
Tonopah, NV
Cedar City, UT
ST. George, UT
Salt Lake City, UT
American Borate, NV
Shoshone, CA
Hiko, NV
Penoyer Farms, NV
Rachel, NV
Pioche, NV
Koyne Ranch, NV
Gabbs, NV
Death Valley Jet, CA
Mina, NV
Austin, NV
Rachel, NV
Caliente, NV
Tonopah, NV
Silver Peak, NV
Delta, UT
Delta, UT
Milford, UT
Milford, UT
Overton, NV
Beatty, NV
Death Valley, CA
341
237
336
376
305
341
335
343
342
320
307
275
338
262
349
302
360
337
336
309
341
339
280
297
336
239
344
342
336
337
311
354
316
335
331
337
310
340
340
339
339
303
245
285
Min
0.49
0.24
0.28
0.29
0.21
0.36
0.40
0.33
0.32
0.25
0.33
0.38
0.33
0.25
0.33
0.23
0.13
0.32
0.35
0.31
0.18
0.31
0.22
0.24
0.29
0.33
0.34
0.19
0.32
0.27
0.13
0.35
0.42
0.32
0.30
0.38
0.38
0.29
0.32
0.30
0.31
0.26
0.33
0.35
Max
0.82
1.78
0.54
0.71
2.23
0.78
0.68
0.64
0.60
1.14
0.97
0.78
0.53
0.40
1.46
0.57
0.69
0.78
0.77
0.71
0.56
0.81
1.39
0.60
0.61
0.68
0.62
0.75
0.52
0.69
0.80
1.19
0.82
0.64
0.75
0.76
0.71
0.82
0.75
0.76
0.84
0.68
0.71
0.75
Mean Exposure (mrem)
0.59
0.85
0.39
0.49
0.63
0.57
0.54
0.46
0.46
0.73
0.55
0.54
0.41
0.33
0.74
0.39
0.51
0.53
0.53
0.50
0.37
0.48
0.40
0.45
0.45
0.50
0.48
0.48
0.42
0.49
0.54
0.59
0.63
0.50
0.46
0.60
0.56
0.47
0.46
0.48
0.47
0.43
0.48
0.56
216
293
145
184
219
204
197
167
167
271
215
201
150
125
264
145
188
194
203
180
136
166
154
150
165
178
174
177
157
184
198
231
239
183
168
218
206
168
166
192
186
157
184
198
Percent
Completeness
93
65
92
103
84
93
92
94
94
88
84
75
93
72
96
83
99
92
92
85
93
93
77
81
92
65
94
94
92
92
85
97
87
92
91
92
85
93
93
93
93
83
67
78
134
-------
Table A-1 (Personnel Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Results - 1992, con't)
Daily Deep Dose Total
# Exposure (mrem) Annual'3' Percent
Station Name of Days Min Max Mean Exposure (mrem) Completeness
370 Twin Springs Ranch, NV 342 0.33 0.99 0.61 227 94
372 Pahrump, NV 327 0.12 0.63 0.40 148 90
377 Las Vegas USDI, NV 196 0.23 1.06 0.44 166 54
379 Manhattan, NV 337 0.40 0.83 0.61 231 92
380 Amargosa Valley, NV 325 0.40 1.60 1.03 370 89
404 Shoshone, CA 327 0.32 0.68 0.46 172 90
405 Indian Springs, NV 296 0.31 0.58 0.43 166 81
411 Pahrump, NV 354 0.18 0.57 0.37 130 97
426 Amargosa Center, NV 352 0.25 0.64 0.50 177 96
427 Alamo, NV 279 0.25 0.71 0.44 160 76
429 Beatty, NV 365 0.15 0.63 0.46 173 100
443 Rachel, NV 345 0.34 0.70 0.48 175 95
444 Ely, NV 343 0.32 0.62 0.46 167 94
445 Terrell's Ranch, NV 364 0.16 0.71 0.52 194 100
448 lone, NV 309 0.37 0.84 0.54 206 85
449 Round Mountain, NV 314 0.45 0.86 0.64 230 86
450 Pahrump, NV 333 0.19 0.59 0.42 154 91
453 Las Vegas USDI, NV 258 0.24 1.15 0.39 145 71
454 Cedar City, UT 305 0.33 0.70 0.45 163 84
455 Ely, NV 336 0.41 0.82 0.53 191 92
467 Las Vegas USDI, NV 251 0.19 1.29 0.43 165 69
468 Las Vegas USDI, NV 251 0.25 1.39 0.47 180 69
470 Las Vegas USDI, NV 175 0.17 0.40 0.31 121 48
Total data completeness: 86.8%
(a) Total annual exposure is calculated by multiplying the mean daily exposure rate by 365.25.
Table A-2 Environmental Thermoiuminescent Dosimetry Results - 1992
# Daily Exposure (mR) Total Exposure'3' Percent
Station Name of Days Min Max Mean (mR) Completeness
Alamo, NV 366 0.28 0.31 0.30 110 100
Amargosa Center, NV 268 0.34 0.40 0.37 135 73
Amargosa Valley, NV 269 0.31 0.40 0.35 128 74
American Borate, NV 268 0.31 0.40 0.36 131 73
Atlanta Mine, NV 275 0.20 0.29 0.24 88 75
Austin, NV 275 0.38 0.46 0.40 146 75
Baker, CA 366 0.25 0.30 0.28 102 100
Barstow, CA 366 0.30 0.36 0.33 .121 100
135
-------
Table A-2 (Environmental Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Results - 1992, con't)
# Daily Exposure (mR) Total Exposure'3' Percent
Station Name of Days Min Max Mean (mR} Completeness
Battle Mountain, NV 274 0.19 0.36 0.28 102 75
Beatty, NV 267 0.34 0.40 0.37 135 73
Bishop, NV 364 0.31 0.36 0.34 124 100
Blue Eagle Ranch, NV 359 0.21 0.26 0.24 88 98
Blue Jay, NV 360 0.37 0.46 0.41 150 99
Boulder, UT 296 0.21 0.30 0.25 91 81
Bryce Canyon, UT 296 0.20 0.29 0.24 88 81
Cactus Springs, NV 366 0.19 0.23 0.21 77 100
Caliente, NV 366 0.29 0.35 0.32 117 100
Carp, NV 366 0.28 0.34 0.30 110 100
Cedar City, UT 303 0.17 0.26 0.22 80 83
Cherry Creek, NV 272 0.25 0.35 0.30 110 75
Clark Station, NV 358 0.32 0.39 0.37 135 98
Coaldale, NV 276 0.31 0.38 0.34 124 76
Colorado City, AZ 232 0.20 0.32 0.26 95 64
Complex I, NV 365 0.09 0.38 0.30 110 100
Com Creek, NV 366 0.15 0.18 0.17 62 100
Cortez Hwy 278, NV 206 0.26 0.47 0.33 121 56
Coyote Summit, NV 364 0.36 0.48 0.42 153 100
Crescent Valley, NV 303 0.21 0.37 0.28 102 83
Currant , NV 358 0.33 0.36 0.35 128 98
Currie, NV 179 0.28 0.47 0.38 139 49
Death Valley Jet, CA 181 0.32 0.33 0.33 121 50
Delta, UT 357 0.23 0.28 0.25 91 98
Desert Co. Fty, NV 366 0.17 0.20 0.19 69 100
Diablo Well, NV 360 0.37 0.43 0.41 150 99
Duchesne, UT 359 0.20 0.26 0.23 84 98
Duckwater, NV 359 0.31 0.37 0.33 121 98
Elgin, NV 365 0.40 0.50 0.43 157 100
Elko, NV 303 0.19 0.37 0.26 95 83
Ely, NV 275 0.19 0.29 0.24 88 75
Enterprise, UT 296 0.31 0.47 0.38 139 81
Eureka, CA 359 0.07 0.41 0.29 106 98
Fallon, NV 302 0.21 0.48 0.30 110 83
Perron, UT 359 0.20 0.26 0.23 84 98
Flying Diamond, NV 366 0.06 0.29 0.23 84 100
Furnace Creek, CA 268 0.23 0.30 0.26 95 73
Gabbs, NV 274 0.25 0.30 0.27 99 75
Garrison, UT 272 0.19 0.24 0.22 80 75
Geyser Ranch, NV 275 0.18 0.28 0.23 84 75
Goldfield, NV 276 0.30 0.35 0.32 117 76
Grantsville, UT 358 0.22 0.27 0.24 88 98
Green River, UT 366 0.23 0.38 0.28 102 100
Groom Lake, NV 236 0.29 0.37 0.32 117 65
136
-------
Table A-2 (Environmental Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Results - 1992, con't)
# Daily Exposure (mR) Total Exposure'3' Percent
Station Name of Days Min Max Mean (mR) Completeness
Gunnison, UT
Hancock Summit, NV
Hiko, NV
Hot Creek Ranch, NV
Ibapah, UT
Independence, CA
Indian Springs, NV
lone, NV
Jacob's Lake, AZ
Kanab, UT
Kirkeby Ranch, NV
Koyen's Ranch, NV
Las Vegas, Apt., NV
Las Vegas, UNLV, NV
Las Vegas, USDI, NV
Lida, NV
Loa, NV
Lone Pine, CA
Lovelock, NV
Lund, NV
Lund, UT
Mammoth Geother, CA
Mammoth Lakes, CA
Manhattan, NV
Medlin's Ranch, NV
Mesquite, NV
Milford, UT
Mina, NV
Moapa, NV
Monticello, UT
Mtn Meadows Ranch, NV
Nash Ranch, NV
Nephi, UT
Nyala, NV
Olancha, CA
Overton, NV
Page, AZ
Parowan, UT
Penoyer Farms, NV
Pine Creek Ranch, NV
Pioche, NV
Price, UT
Provo, UT
Pahrump, NV
302
366
366
353
272
211
364
231
364
366
280
366
267
267
267
275
296
315
302
274
296
365
134
231
366
365
210
275
365
365
272
366
302
359
365
366
366
294
365
265
366
359
358
366
0.16
0.46
0.25
0.28
0.25
0.10
0.19
0.31
0.27
0.19
0.17
0.31
0.13
0.11
0.15
0.30
0.32
0.30
0.20
0.20
0.27
0.33
0.30
0.38
0.36
0.19
0.34
0.31
0.07
0.26
0.22
0.06
0.17
0.27
0.28
0.19
0.07
0.19
0.38
0.40
0.26
0.22
0.21
0.17
0.26
0.57
0.31
0.44
0.36
0.33
0.22
0.43
0.42
0.31
0.26
0.38
0.25
0.25
0.33
0.38
0.42
0.35
0.37
0.32
0.43
0.41
0.34
0.45
0.44
0.36
0.41
0.36
0.29
0.44
0.26
0.29
0.25
0.31
0.31
0.43
0.27
0.28
0.47
0.42
0.30
0.28
0.26
0.22
0.20
0.50
0.27
0.36
0.30
0.24
0.21
0.36
0.33
0.24
0.22
0.33
0.18
0.17
0.22
0.33
0.35
0.32
0.27
0.26
0.33
0.36
0.32
0.41
0.39
0.25
0.36
0.33
0.23
0.33
0.24
0.23
0.20
0.29
0.30
0.26
0.21
0.24
0.41
0.41
0.28
0.25
0.23
0.19
73 83
183 100
99 100
131 97
110 75
88 58
77 100
131 63
121 100
88 100
80 77
121 100
66 73
62 73
80 73
121 75
128 81
117 86
99 83
95 75
121 81
131 100
117 37
150 63
142 100
91 100
131 58
121 75
84 100
121 100
88 75
84 100
73 83
106 98
110 100
95 100
77 100
88 81
150 100
150 73
102 100
91 98
84 98
69 100
137
-------
Table A-2 (Environmental Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Results - 1992, con't)
# Daily Exposure (mR) Total Exposure'31 Percent
Station Name of Days Min Max Mean (mR) Completeness
Queen City Summit, NV 360 0.40 0.46 0.43 157 99
Rachel, NV 366 0.35 0.45 0.39 142 100
Reed Ranch, NV 360 0.35 0.43 0.39 142 99
Reno, NV 290 0.30 0.32 0.31 113 79
Ridgecrest, CA 366 0.29 0.36 0.32 117 100
Round Mountain, NV 276 0.36 0.40 0.38 139 76
Ruby Valley, NV 302 0.23 0.49 0.35 128 83
Salt Lake City, UT 358 0.23 0.28 0.25 91 98
Shoshone, CA 366 0.24 0.28 0.26 95 100
Shurz, NV 301 0.26 0.40 0.33 121 82
Silver Peak, NV 274 0.25 0.30 0.28- 102 75
Springdale, NV 267 0.35 0.47 0.41 150 73
St. George, UT 356 0.15 0.22 0.18 66 98
Steward Ranch, NV 275 0.27 0.42 0.34 124 75
Stone Cabin Ranch, NV 356 0.36 0.43 0.39 142 98
Sunnyside, NV 273 0.14 0.22 0.18 66 75
Tempiute, NV 366 0.35 0.45 0.38 139 100
Terrel's Ranch, NV 267 0.36 0.41 0.39 142 73
Tonopah Test Range, NV 358 0.38 0.47 0.41 150 98
Tonopah, NV 275 0.36 0.42 0.38 139 75
Trout Creek, UT 271 0.21 0.28 0.24 88 74
Twin Springs Ranch, NV 360 0.33 0.41 0.37 135 99
U.S. Ecology, NV 267 0.37 0.47 0.41 150 73
US Ecology, NV 268 0.36 0.43 0.40 146 73
Uhaldes Ranch, NV 366 0.33 0.43 0.38 139 100
Valley Crest, CA 268 0.19 0.23 0.21 77 73
Vernal, UT 359 0.21 0.26 0.24 88 98
Vernon, UT 358 0.22 0.27 0.24 88 98
Warm Springs #2, NV 176 0.93 1.08 1.00 365 48
Wells, NV 301 0.21 0.41 0.29 106 82
Wendover, UT 238 0.18 0.28 0.22 80 65
Willow Springs Lodge, UT 358 0.18 0.28 0.22 80 98
Winnemucca, NV 302 0.22 0.40 0.30 110 83
Young's Ranch, NV 274 0.31 0.36 0.32 117 75
Minimum total exposure is 56.5 at Las Vegas, UNLV, Nv.
Maximum total exposure is 365.6 at Warm Springs #2, Nv
Mean of total exposure is 113.4
TOTAL DATA COMPLETENESS: 85.7%
(a) Total exposure is calculated by multiplying the mean daily exposure rate 365.25.
138
-------
(MINIMUM AVERAGE MAXIMUM)
800 H
720-
640-
560-
E
1 480:
CO
IT
£ 400:
3
IS
C
320-
240 :
160 :
80-
71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93
Calendar Year 19...
Figure A-1. Summary of Annual TLD Data
139
-------
(All units are in mR/year)
1 110
Q
50-
50 60 70
1 i '
80
T-|-I T-r i | i T i r-|- -r-
90 100 110
PIC Data
-, pri i i [ i i . i | i i i i | i i i i |
120 130 140 150 160
Figure A-2. TLD vs. PIC Data - 1992
140
-------
Appendix B
Atmospheric Monitoring Tables And Figures
Gross Beta Results for the Offsite Standby Air Surveillance Network, 1992
Gross Alpha Results for the Offsite Standby Air Surveillance Network, 1992
Offsite Atmospheric Plutonium Results for Standby Samplers, 1992
Offsite Atmospheric Tritium Results for Standby Samplers, 1992
Offsite Noble Gas Results for Standby Samplers, 1992
Standby Milk Surveillance Network Radiochemical Analyses Results, 1992
Standby Milk Surveillance Network Gamma Spectrometry Results, 1992
Distribution for strontium results for the standby milk stations, Western Region 1982 -1992
Distribution for strontium results for the standby milk stations, Midwest Region 1982 -1992
Table B-1
Table B-2
Table B-3
Table B-4
Table B-5
Table B-6
Table B-7
Figure B-1
Figure B-2
Figure B-3
Figure B-4
Figure B-5
Figure B-6
Distribution for strontium results for the standby milk stations, Mountain Region 1982 -
1992
Distribution for tritium results for the standby milk stations, Western Region 1982 -1992
Distribution for tritium results for the standby milk stations, Midwest Region 1982 -1992
Distribution for tritium results for the standby milk stations, Mountain Region 1982 -1992
141
-------
Table B-1. Gross Beta Results for the Offsite Standby Air Surveillance Network - 1992
Gross Beta Concentration (1Q'U uCi/mL)
Sampling Location
Little Rock, AR
Globe, AZ
Kingman, AZ
Tuscon, AZ
Winslow, AZ
Yuma, AZ
Alturas, CA
Baker, CA
Bishop, CA
Chico, CA
Indio, CA
Lone Pine, CA
Needles, CA
Ridgecrest, CA
Santa Rosa, CA
Cortez, CO
Denver, CO
Grand Junction, CO
Mountain Home, ID
Nampa, ID
Pocatello, ID
Fort Dodge, IA
Iowa City, IA
Dodge City, KS
Monroe, LA
Minneapolis, MN
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
Number
4
4
3
4
4
3
4
3
5
3
4
3
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
2
3
2
4
3
4
4
4
3
4
2
4
3
NV 8
5
4
4
Maximum
2.75*
2.77*
2.44*
2.26*
5.51*
2.49*
1.76*
2.34*
3.00*
3.12*
4.08*
2.59*
2.37*
0.15
2.52*
2.95*
2.12*
2.52*
3.35*
2.35*
1.58*
2.22*
2.37*
2.21*
2.59*
2.38*
3.11*
3.17*
2.11*
1.59*
1.90*
2.30*
2.69*
2.83*
2.19*
2.49*
2.70*
Minimum
1.40*
1.06*
0.59*
0.84*
1.45*
1.37*
0.06*
1.74*
1.21*
1.44*
1.81*
1.24*
1.18*
0.08
0.20
2.50*
1.67*
1.63*
0.51*
0.76*
1.08*
1.30*
1.96*
1.67*
1.29*
0.91*
1.52*
0.90*
-0.06
0.98*
1.40*
1.26*
1.51*
0.52*
1.53*
1.05*
1.18*
Arithmetic
Mean
2.04
1.75
1.45
1.79
3.14
1.97
0.91
1.99
1.89
2.07
2.73
1.75
1.77
0.11
1.40
2.72
1.93
2.00
1.66
1.66
1.33
1.71
2.16
1.98
1.87
1.58
2.06
2.01
0.71
1.22
1.65
1.77
2.09
1.64
1.89
1.46
1.73
Standard
Deviation
0.63
0.76
0.93
0.65
1.79
0.56
0.81
0.31
0.69
0.91
0.96
0.73
0.84
0.05
1.16
0.22
0.23
0.46
1.50
0.75
0.35
0.47
0.29
0.26
0.66
0.73
0.74
1.04
1.21
0.26
0.35
0.52
0.59
0.80
0.24
0.69
0.69
Mean MDC: 2.50 x 1Q-15 u.Ci/mL
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 3.07 x 10'16 uCi/mL
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
= result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
142
-------
Table B-1. (Gross Beta Results for the Offsite Standby Air Surveillance Network - 1992, cont.)
Gross Beta Concentration (1Q'U uCi/mL)
Sampling Location
Currant-Angle
Worm Ranch, NV
Currie Maint. Station,
Duckwater, NV
Elko, NV
Eureka, NV
Fallon, 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
Number
NV
4
4
4
3
4
3
4
2
4
4
2
4
3
5
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
1
4
4
3
2
2
4
6
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Maximum
2.10*
1.78*
1.42*
1.28*
1.56*
3.56*
3.23*
1.77*
2.11*
1.43*
4.27*
1.73*
1.64*
1.78*
1.55*
2.52*
2.59*
1.84*
2.18*
3.35*
5.93*
Minimum
1.39*
0.76*
1.07*
0.04
0.83*
1.65*
1.28*
1.37*
1.28*
0.33*
3.40*
1.04*
1.06*
0.86*
0.89*
1.08*
0.93*
1.35*
0.94*
1.32*
1.19*
Quarterly sampling not
1.07*
2.36*
Quarterly
3.18*
1.54*
1.59*
1.60*
1.96*
2.25*
1.41*
3.13*
1.59*
2.39*
1.94*
1.37*
3.01*
3.40*
1.97*
1.07*
0.39*
sampling not
1.59*
1.06*
0.66*
1.25*
1.59*
1.61*
1.02*
1.93*
0.99*
0.57*
1.23*
0.57*
1.29*
1.56*
1.40*
Arithmetic
Mean
1.60
1.16
1.26
0.67
1.18
2.73
2.19
1.57
1.64
1.03
3.83
1.34
1.30
1.34
1.21
1.69
1.52
1.59
1.57
2.00
2.53
performed
1.07
1.26
performed
2.08
1.28
1.12
1.43
1.79
1.94
1.21
2.33
1.39
1.52
1.58
0.91
2.25
2.09
1.63
Standard
Deviation
0.34
0.44
0.15
0.62
0.31
0.98
0.81
0.28
0.39
0.50
0.62
0.30
0.30
0.38
0.37
0.67
0.79
0.24
0.56
0.92
2.27
~
1.00
0.74
0.24
0.66
0.25
0.17
0.25
0.28
0.55
0.27
0.86
0.37
0.34
0.73
0.88
0.27
Mean MDC: 2.50 x 10'15 uCi/mL
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 3.07 x 10'16 uCi/mL
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
* = result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
143
-------
Table B-2. Gross Alpha Results for the Offsite Standby Air Surveillance Network -1992
Gross Alpha Concentration (10'15 uCi/mL)
Sampling Location
Little Rock, AR
Globe, AZ
Kingman, AZ
Tuscon, AZ
Winslow, AZ
Yuma, AZ
Alturas, CA
Baker, CA
Bishop, CA
Chico, CA
Indio, CA
Lone Pine, CA
Needles, CA
Ridgecrest, CA
Santa Rosa, CA
Cortez, CO
Denver, CO
Grand Junction, CO
Mountain Home, ID
Nampa, ID
Pocatello, ID
Fort Dodge, IA
Iowa City, IA
Dodge City, KS
Monroe, LA
Minneapolis, MN
Clayton, MO
Joplin, MO
St. Joseph, MO
Great Falls, MT
Kalispell, MT
Miles Crty, 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
Mean MDC: 7.70 x 10'16 uCi/mL
Number
4
4
3
4
4
3
4
3
5
3
4
3
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
4
2
3
2
4
3
4
4
4
3
4
2
4
3
V 8
5
4
4
4
4
4
Maximum
2.1*
2.1*
2.2*
1.4*
2.8*
1.7*
1.6*
2.7*
2.3*
1.7*
1.5*
1.1*
1.5*
0.6
2.1*
2.1*
0.8*
1.9*
2.6*
1.5*
1.2*
2.0*
0.7
0.9
1.4*
1.7*
1.0*
2.3*
1.8*
2.7*
0.9
3.1*
1.3*
2.2*
1.7*
2.2*
1.3*
1.1*
1.8*
1.2*
Minimum
0.6
1.4*
0.2
0.4
0.8*
0.5
0.0
2.0*
1.4*
0.2
1.1*
1.0
1.0*
0.0
0.6
0.6*
0.5
1.1*
0.2
0.4
0.7*
1.3*
0.6
0.3
0.4
-0.1
0.5
0.5
-0.1
0.4
0.5
2.2*
0.7*
0.1
0.0
0.6
0.1
0.5
0.0
0.9*
Arithmetic
Mean
1.3
1.8
1.2
0.97
1.5
1.2
0.62
2.4
2.0
0.83
1.3
1.0
1.2
0.30
1.2
1.5
0.63
1.6
1.2
0.90
0.95
1.6
0.65
0.70
0.77
0.80
0.82
1.1
0.70
1.6
0.70
2.8
0.93
1.0
0.88
1.2
0.60
0.82
0.95
1.0
Standard
Deviation
0.72
0.40
1.0
0.43
0.92
0.62
0.69
0.35
0.37
0.78
0.17
0.06
0.35
0.42
0.78
0.81
0.15
0.44
1.2
0.53
0.35
0.36
0.07
0.27
0.55
0.77
0.24
0.82
0.98
1.2
0.28
0.39
0.32
0.83
0.71
0.71
0.50
0.25
0.84
0.14
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 2.49 x 10"1S u€i/mL
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
* = result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
144
-------
Table B-2. (Gross Alpha Results for the Offsite Standby Air Surveillance Network - 1992, cont.)
Gross Alpha Concentration (10s uCi/mL)
Sampling Location
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: 7.70 x KJ16 u€i/mL
Number
3
4
3
4
2
4
4
2
4
3
5
4
4
4
3
4
4
4
-
1
4
-
4
3
2
2
4
6
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Maximum
1.6*
1.2*
3.0*
2.3*
0.7
,1.1*
3.1*
3.9*
1.3*
1.6*
1.6*
0.6
1.6*
1.6*
1.5*
1.3*
3.8*
7.4*
1.1*
2.1*
3.6*
0.8
0.5
1.0*
1.4*
2.3*
1.3*
1.2*
1.8*
2.6*
1.5*
1.8*
1.0*
1.5*
2.1*
Minimum
0.1
0.2
1.1*
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.2
1.7*
0.1
0.4
0.2
0.1
0.4
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.4
0.8*
Quarterly sampling
1.1*
0.1
Quarterly sampling
0.7
0.4
0.5
0.4
0.9*
0.6*
0.5*
0.5
0.9*
0.0
0.4
-0.3
0.3
0.2
-0.1
Arithmetic
Mean
0.87
0.72
1.7
1.6
0.55
0.75
1.3
2.8
0.60
0.87
1.0
0.32
1.1
0.70
0.87
0.75
1.3
2.6
not performed
1.1
0.82
not performed
2.0
0.67
0.50
0.70
1.0
1.2
0.90
0.80
1.3
1.2
1.0
0.65
0.65
0.85
1.1
Standard
Deviation
0.75
0.43
1.1
0.90
0.21
0.34
1.3
1.6
0.56
0.64
0.54
0.26
0.51
0.67
0.78
0.54
1.6
3.2
-
0.88
1.3
0.23
0.00
0.42
0.24
0.63
0.57
0.32
0.39
1.2
0.46
0.89
0.31
0.53
0.91
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 2.49 x 10'16 u.Ci/mL
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
= result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
145
-------
Table B-3. Offsite Atmospheric Plutonium Results for Standby Samplers - 1 992
23aPu Concentration (10'18 uCi/ml)
Arithmetic Standard Mean as
Sampling Location Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation %DCG
AZ (Winslow & Tucson) 4 24.90 -7.30 4.400 14.093 70.15
CA (Bishop & Ridgecrest) 2 6.01 -8.48 -1.235 10.246 N/A
CO (Denver & Cortez) 4 22.50 -11.90 1.512 15.744 0.05
ID (Nampa & Mountain Home) 4 0.00 -18.50 -7.250 8.986 N/A
MO (Clayton & Joplin) 4 16.50 -11.90 0.295 11.905 0.01
MT (Great Falls & Miles City) 4 12.10 -6.60 1.820 9.515 0.06
NM (Albuquerque & Carlsbad) 4 85.70* -6.69 19.682 44.219 0.66
ND (Bismarck & Fargo) 4 0.00 -18.50 -4.625 9.250 N/A
OR (Mines & Medford) 4 6.77 -49.90 -23.132 23.668 N/A
TX (Austin & Amarillo) 4 <0.01 -38.90 -21.400 18.168 N/A
UT (Logan & Vernal) 4 <0.01 -14.50 -4.180 6.959 N/A
WA (Seattle & Spokane) 4 0.00 -4.44 -2.218 2.561 N/A
WY (Worland & Rock Springs) 4 22.20* -8.97 5.807 14.334 0.19
Mean MDC: 4.19 x 10"17 nCi/mL Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 2.62 x 10"17 u.Ci/mL
DCG = derived concentration guide. Established by DOE Order as 3 x 10~15 u,Ci/mL.
Concentration (1Q-
-18
AZ (Winslow & Tucson) 4 14.60 -6.52 2.610 9.692 0.13
CA (Bishop & Ridgecrest) 2 0.00 -8.48 -4.240 5.997 N/A
CO (Denver & Cortez) 4 9.16 -7.49 0.418 6.814 0.02
ID (Nampa & Mountain Home) 4 0.00 -10.50 -5.902 4.409 N/A
MO (Clayton & Joplin) 4 0.00 -16.50 -6.045 7.854 N/A
MT (Great Falls & Miles City) 4 13.20 1.93 6.025 5.074 0.30
NM (Albuquerque & Carlsbad) 4 120.00* -3.76 29.862 60.288 1.49
ND (Bismarck & Fargo) 4 <0.01 -9.26 -5.798 4.111 N/A
OR (Hines & Medford) 4 <0.01 -24.90 -8.750 11.772 N/A
TX (Austin & Amarillo) 4 16.90 -7.79 2.795 10.317 0.14
UT (Logan & Vernal) 4 4.82 -2.22 0.650 2.971 0.03
WA (Seattle & Spokane) 4 12.10 -5.94 3.760 8.246 0.19
WY (Worland & Rock Springs) 4 3.70 -8.97 -3.480 6.338 N/A
Mean MDC: 3.39 x m17 u.Ci/mL Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 2.02 x 1Q-17 u.Ci/mL
DCG = derived concentration guide. Established by DOE Order as 2 x 10"15 uCi/mL.
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
* = result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
N/A = not applicable.
146
-------
Table B-4. Offsite Atmospheric Tritium Results for Standby Samplers - 1992
HTO Concentration (10'7 pCi/mL)
Sampling Location
Shoshone, CA
Austin, NV
Caliente, NV
Ely, NV
Cedar City, UT
Delta, UT
Milford, UT
Mean MDC: 4.89 x 10's pCi/mL
Number Maximum Minimum
Arithmetic
Mean
4
2
1
1
3
1
1
25.8
4.90
-11.6
-5.53
8.78
-3.99
15.9
4.47
-5.22
11.6
-5.53
13.8
-3.99
15.9
14.2
-0.157
-11.6
-5.53
-3.18
-3.99
15.9
Standard
Deviation
9.03
7.15
11.3
Mean as
%DCG
0.01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.02
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 2.40 x 10'6 pCi/mL
DCG = derived concentration guide. Established by DOE Order as 1 x 10"2 pCi/mL.
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
N/A = not applicable.
Table B-5. Offsite Noble Gas Results for Standby Samplers -1992
85Kr Concentration (1Q'11 uCi/mL)
Sampling Location
Arithmetic Standard Mean as
Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation %DCG
Shoshone, CA 2 2.86*
Austin, NV 2 2.55*
Caliente, NV 2 2.76*
Ely, NV 1 2.35*
Cedar City, UT 4 2.82*
Delta, UT 1 2.80*
Milford, UT
Salt Lake City, UT
Mean MDC: 5.82 x 10-12 u.Ci/mL
2.65*
2.44*
2.34*
2.35*
2.11*
2.80*
2.75
2.50
2.55
2.35
2.55
2.80
0.14
0.08
0.30
0.33
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
Quarterly sampling was not performed
Quarterly sampling was not performed
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 1.40 x 10'12 u€i/mL
DCG = derived concentration guide. Established by DOE Order as 3 x 10"7u€i/mL.
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
* = result is greater than the MDC of analysis.
147
-------
Table B-5. (Offsite Noble Gas Results for Standby Samplers -1992, cont.)
133Xe Concentration (10'12 uCi/mL)
Sampling Location
Shoshone, CA
Austin, NV
Caliente, NV
Ely, NV
Cedar City, UT
Delta, UT
Milford, UT
Salt Lake City, UT
Mean MDC: 1.68 x 10"11 uCi/mL
Arithmetic Standard Mean as
Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation %DCG
2
2
2
1
4
1
0.880
0.000
0.328
-3.21
1.73
0.000
0.285
-12.1
-0.438
-3.21
-16.8
0.000
0.582
-6.07
-0.055
-3.21
-4.63
0.000
0.421
8.59
0.542
~
8.34
—
0.01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.00
Quarterly sampling was not performed
Quarterly sampling was not performed
Standard Deviation of Mean MDC: 6.96 x 10'12
DCG = derived concentration guide. Established by DOE Order as 5 x 10"8 \iC\lmL.
MDC = minimum detectable concentration.
N/A = not applicable.
Table B-6. Standby Milk Surveillance Network Radiochemical Analyses Results - 1992
Concentration ± 1s (MDC)(a)
Sampling
Location
Little Rock, AR
Borden's
Russellville, AR
Arkansas Tech Univ.
Taylor, AZ
Sunrise Dairy
Tucson, AZ
University of Arizona
Bakersfield, CA
Favorite Foods, Inc.
Collection
Date in
3H
1992 x 1Q-9uCi/mL(t" x 109uCi/mL(b) x 10'9 uCi/mL(b)
06/18 206+84(270) 0.59 ± 1.1 (1.1) 2.6+0.48(1.4)*
06/18 153 + 83 (271) 0.087 ± 0.85 (1.1) 0.86 ± 0.37 (1.4)
N/A -0.29 ± 0.40 (1.5)
N/A -0.40 + 0.32 (1.4)
10/18 385 ±124 (400)
10/20 296 ±130 (421)
10/05 368 ±128 (413) -0.47 ± 1.1 (1.5) 0.63 ± 0.40 (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.
148
-------
Table B-6. (Standby Milk Surveillance Network Radiochemical Analyses Results - 1992, cont.)
Concentration 11s (MDC)(a)
Collection
Sampling Date in 3H ^Sr 90Sr
Location 1992 x IP'9 uCi/mL(b) x 10'9 uCi/mL
-------
Table B-6. (Standby Milk Surveillance Network Radiochemical Analyses Results - 1992, cont.)
Concentration ± 1s (MDC)(a>
Collection
Sampling Date in 3H 89Sr 90Sr
Location 1992 x 10'9 uCi/mL(b) x 10'9 uCi/mL(b) x 1(r9 uCi/mL(b>
Fosston, MN
Land O' Lakes, Inc. 04/28 94 ± 72 (234) 1.6 ± 1.1 (1.3)* 1.7 ± 0.41 (1.3)*
Rochester, MN
Assoc Milk Prod, Inc. 05/26 53 ± 71 (234) 0.22 1 1.1 (1.4) 1.4 1 0.42 (1.4)
Monett, MO
Mid-America Dairy, Inc. 07/27 -68 ± 76 (252) N/A 1.8 ± 0.42 (1.4)*
Chillicothe, MO
Mid-America Dairymen 09/03 4131126(407)* N/A 1.6 ± 0.34 (1.3)*
Billings, MT
Meadow Gold Dairy 07/17 322 ± 86 (273)* 0.82 ± 0.77 (0.86) 1.7 ± 0.42 (1.3)*
Great Falls, MT
Meadow Gold Dairy 07/16 298185(273)* N/A 1.410.43(1.5)
Norfolk, NE
Gillette Dairy 07/14 171183(268) 2.010.80(0.93)* 1.010.42(1.3)
North Platte, NE
Mid-America Dairymen 07/27 46+78(257) N/A 1.510.40(1.4)*
Albuquerque, NM
Borden's Valley Gold 09/08 2931122(394) N/A 0.5310.42(1.5)
La Plata, NM
River Edge Dairy 07/11 298 1 90 (287)* -0.60 1 0.65 (0.93) 1.34 1 0.34 (1.3)*
Bismarck, ND
Bridgeman Creamery, Inc 04/14 -70 1 68 (227) 0.063 1 0.82 (1) 2.0 1 0.38 (1.3)*
Grand Forks, ND
Minnesota Dairy 04/22 82171(232) -0.7410.77(1) 1.610.38(1.4)*
Enid, OK
AMPI Goldspot Division 06/08 127171(231) 0.9411.1(1.3) 1.010.43(1.5)
McAlester, OK
Jackie Brannon Corr Ctr 07/16 241 1 87 (281) 0.21 1 0.70 (0.91) 1.0 1 0.37 (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.
150
-------
Table B-6. (Standby Milk Surveillance Network Radiochemical Analyses Results - 1992, cont.)
Concentration ± 1s (MDC)(a)
Collection
Sampling Date in 3H 89Sr 90Sr
Location 1992 x 10'9 uCi/mL(b) x 10'9 uCi/mL(b) x 10'9 uCi/mL(b)
Medford, OR
Dairygold Farms 07/13 171 ± 83 (268) -0.22 ± 0.59 (0.89) 0.86 ± 0.32 (1.3)
Salem, OR
Curly's Dairy 07/06 101 ± 84 (275) 0.047 ± 0.68 (0.99) 1.2 ± 0.34 (1.3)
Tillamook, OR
Tillamook Creamery 08/17 -6.4 ± 78 (257) N/A 0.81 ± 0.36 (1.4)
Rapid City, SD
Gillette Dairy - Black Hills 04/06 67 ± 69 (226) 1.010.82(1.1) -0.065 ± 0.39 (1.5)
Sioux Falls, SD
Lakeside Dairy 04/02 25 ± 70 (229) 0.66 ± 0.93 (1.2) 0.84 ± 0.43 (1.5)
Sulphur Springs, TX
Tommy Rue Potts Dairy 11/13 108 ±91 (296) 0.24 ±1(1.2) 1.7 ± 0.45 (1.4)*
Windthorst, TX
Lloyd Wolf Dairy 11/13 153 ± 118 (387) -3.3 ± 0.90 (1.2) 1.2 ± 0.39 (1.4)
Beaver, UT
Cache Valley Dairy 05/26 128 ± 74 (241) 0.80 ± 0.65 (0.91) 0.22 ± 0.33 (1.3)
Provo, UT
BYU Dairy Products Lab 06/15 92 ± 73 (238) 0.39 ± 0.80 (1.2) 0.38 ± 0.35 (1.4)
Seattle, WA
Darigold, Inc. 10/12 114 ±125 (410) 1.3 ±2.1 (3.4) 0.37 ± 0.35 (1.4)
Spokane, WA
Darigold, Inc. 10/06 437 ± 128 (412)* N/A 1.1 ± 0.39 (1.4)
Cheyenne, WY
Dairy Gold Foods 07/15 214 ± 87 (280) 0.62 ± 0.70 (0.86) 1.33 ± 0.38 (1.3)*
Sheridan, WY
Mydland Dairy 05/19 41 ± 76 (250) 1.3± 0.85 (1)* 0.99 ± 0.40 (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.
151
-------
Table B-7. Standby Milk Surveillance Network Gamma Spectrometry Results - 1992
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 09/23
Tempe, AZ
United Dairymen of Arizona 10/07
Batesville, AR
Hills Valley Foods 06/24
Fayetteville, AR
University Of Arkansas 06/10
Chino, CA
CA Institute for Men 10/27
Cresent City, CA
Rumiano Cheese Company 10/16
Fernbridge, CA
Humboldt Creamery Assn. 10/16
Fresno, CA
CA State University Creamery 10/19
Helendale, CA
Osterkamp Dairy No. 2 10/07
Holtville, CA
Schaffner & Son Dairy 10/05
Lompoc, CA
Federal Penitentiary Camp 10/27
Long Beach, CA
Paul's Dairy 10/26
Manchester, CA
Point Arena Dairies 10/14
Manteca, CA
Supremo Foods 11/20
Modesto, CA
Foster Farms - Jersey Dairy 12/03
Petaluma, CA
Point Reyes Seashore Dairy 10/14
San Jose, CA
Marquez Bros Mexican Cheese 10/07
San Luis Obispo, CA
Cal Poly University Dairy 10/27
Soledad, CA
Correction Training Industry 10/20
Tracy, CA
Deuel Vocational Institute 10/20
Colorado Springs, CO
Sinton Dairy 07/10
Greeley, CO
Meadow Gold Dairy 07/08
Ft Collins, CO
Poudre Valley Creamery 06/08
Caldwell, ID
Darigold, Inc. 08/31
Pocatello, ID
Sampling Collection
Location Date
Rowland's Meadowgold Dairy 08/06
Twin Falls, ID
Triangle Young's Dairy 08/03
Kimbalrton, IA
Assoc. Milk Pro., Inc.(AMPI) 06/10
Lake Mills, IA
Lake Mills Coop Creamery 06/01
Lemars, IA
Wells Dairy 06/10
Manhattan, KS
Kansas State University 06/11
Lafayette, LA
Borden's 04/28
New Orleans, LA
Walker Roemer Dairy 04/09
Shreveport, LA
Foremost Dairy 05/11
Fergus Falls, MN
Mid-America Dairymen 04/08
Browerville, MN
Land O' Lakes, Inc. 04/28
Nicollet, MN
Doug Schultz Farm 05/09
Jackson, MO
Mid-America Dairymen, Inc. 06/23
Jefferson City, MO
Central Dairy Company 07/23
Bozeman, MT
Country Classic-DBA-Darigold 07/28
Kalispell, MT
Equity Supply Co 07/20
Omaha, NE
Roberts Dairy, Marshall Green 07/28
Chappell, NE
Leprino Foods 07/06
Superior, NE
Mid-America Dairymen 09/08
Fargo, ND
Cass Clay Creamery 04/24
Minot, ND
Bridgemen Creamery 04/13
Las Vegas, NV
Anderson Dairy 10/07
Reno, NV
Model Dairy 10/19
Yerington, NV
Valley Dairy 10/26
Coalgate, OK
Larry Krebs Dairy 06/15
152
-------
Table B-7. (Standby Milk Surveillance Network gamma Spectrometry Results - 1992, 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
Claremore, OK
Swan Brothers Dairy
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
Myrtle Point, OR
Safeway Stores, Inc.
Ontario, OR
Eastway Dairy
Portland, OR
Darigold Farms
Redmond, OR
Eberhard's Creamery, Inc.
Ethan, SD
Ethan Dairy Products
06/17
06/17
07/07
07/20
07/22
08/03
09/01
07/27
07/14
04/07
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
Richfield, UT
Ideal Dairy
Smithfield, UT
Cache Valley Dairy
Moses Lake, WA
Safeway Stores, Inc
Riverton, WY
Western Dairymen's Co-op
Thayne, WY
Western Dairymen's Co-op
07/09
11/06
11/16
12/01
11/09
05/18
05/27
10/05
07/07
06/08
153
-------
8-
3
en
I
4-
i 1
I
_4
Figure B-1.
-a-l
| i—i i i—] i i—i i |i r i I | r—i r-. i i i—)i i i r-i- | i ' i i | i i—i—i [—i i i i—i r i i i [
82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92
Sample Collection Year
Distribution for strontium results for the standby milk stations, Western Region 1982 -1992.
8-
0- 4:
3 :
05
1
° :
I
o
a -4-
-8-
I ?
'
I | | i
82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92
Figure B-2.
Sample Collection Year
Distribution for strontium results for the standby milk stations, Midwest Region 1982 - 1992.
154
-------
8-"
b
O)
I
0-
'cr
— 8 -
I i I r—i | I i i i | r-i ! r ] i i I i | p i i i p-i i i i j i—I r—i | I I I i [ i I i i ( i i i i j
82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92
Sample Collection Year
Figure B-3. Distribution for strontium results for standby milk stations, Mountain Region 1982 -1992.
o>
|
600-
500-
400-
300
200
100-
0-
-100-
-200-
-300 -1.
Figure B-4.
82 83 84 85 86 87 88_ 89 90 91
Sample Collection Year
Distribution for tritium results for standby milk stations, Western Region 1982 - 1992.
92
155
-------
F\gure B-5.
700-
600-
500-
i 400
ID
o>
iL 300
o
= 200-
|
100
0-
-100-
-200 -I
82
83
84
85
89
90
91
86 87 88
Sample Collection Year
Distribution for tritium results for standy milk stations, Midwest Region 1982 - 1992.
92
700-
600-
500:
? 400:
o :
CD 300-
i :
LU
0
c. 200:
g 100:
1 °^
-100:
-200:
-300 :
•
I
82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92
Figure B-6.
Sample Collection Year
Distribution for tritium results for standy milk stations, Mountain Region 1982 - 1992.
156
-------
Appendix C
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Tables
Table C-1 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Locations in the NTS
Vicinity - 1992
Table C-2 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project FAULTESS -1992.
Table C-3 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project SHOAL - 1992
Table C-4 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project RULISON - 1992
Table C-5 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project RIO BLANCO -1992
Table C-6 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project GNOME - 1992
Table C-7 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project GASBUGGY - 1992
Table C-8 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project DRIBBLE - 1992
157
-------
Table C-1. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Locations in the NTS
Vicinity - 1992
Sampling
Location
Amargosa Valley, NV
Well Mary Nickell's
Shoshone, CA
Shoshone Spring
Adaven, NV
Adaven Spring
Alamo, NV
Well 4 City
Ash Meadows, NV
Crystal Pool
Fairbanks Springs
Spring-17S-50E-14cac
WelM8S-51E-7db
Beatty, NV
U.S. Ecology
Specie Springs
Tolicha Peak
Well 11S-48-1dd Coffers
Well 12S-47E-7dbd City
Collection
Date in
1992
02/06
08/04
02/04
08/05
01/14
07/01
01/16
07/02
05/07
11/02
05/07
11/02
06/08
12/14
05/07
11/02
06/08
12/08
03/04
07/09
02/05
08/05
01/08
07/09
01/07
07/09
Concentration ± 1 s
of Tritium
(pCi/L)fb)
1.3 ± 2.2
46 + 140
0.0 ± 1.8
82 + 140
32 + 2
-114 + 113
0.0 ± 1.7
-45 ± 114
4.6 ± 3.7
138 ± 145
-2.3 ± 4.6
-411 +143
-4.1 ± 1.7
374 + 142
1.9 + 3.8
52 ± 145
1.9 + 2.0
315 ± 142
-82 ± 127
4.6 + 1.6
-32 ± 127
0.21 + 1.74
111 + 126
2.7 ± 1.5
243 ± 127
3.0 + 1.5
Percent of
Concentration
Guide(a)
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.04
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
(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 C-1 . (Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Locations in the NTS
Vicinity - 1992, cont.)
Collection Concentration ± 1s Percent of
Sampling
Location
Well Road D Spicers
Younghans Ranch
(House Well)
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
Well 28 Water District
Lathrop Wells, NV
City 15S-50E-18cdc
Nyala, NV
Sharp's Ranch
Date in
1992
02/05
08/05
06/11
12/09
03/06
05/07
09/03
02/04
08/05
01/16
07/02
03/03
09/10
03/03
09/03
03/03
09/10
09/03
10/08
04/06
10/16
02/04
08/03
of Tritium
(pCi/U
85 + 127
-1.9 ± 1.7
-1.3
-81
-32
58
62
-21
1.8
-2.9
33
25
1.1
-118
1.5
96
6.0
-0.50
-1.3
1.5
-14
-92
0.81
± 1.9
± 140
± 127
± 2
+ 2
+ 127
+ 1.6
± 1.6
± 115
+ 127
± 2.6
± 126
± 1.3
± 128
+ 1 7^
+ 1.32
± 1.7
+ 2.2
+ 140
± 127
± 1.56
Concentration
Guide'3'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.06
0.07
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
0.01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
(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 C-1. (Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Locations in the NTS
Vicinity - 1992, cont.)
Sampling
Location
Oasis Valley, NV
Goss Springs
Pahrump, NV
Calvada Well
Rachel, NV
Wells 7 & 8 Penoyer
Well 13 Penoyer
Well Penoyer Culinary
Tempiute, NV
Union Carbide Well
Tonopah, NV
City Well
Warm Springs, NV
Twin Springs Ranch
Collection
Date in
1992
02/05
08/05
02/04
08/05
06/03
09/21
06/03
09/09
04/01
10/06
02/12
08/06
03/03
09/08
04/01
10/01
Concentration ± 1 s
of Tritium
aCi/L)
-11 + 127
0.0 ± 1.9
0.0 ± 1.5
107 ± 140
44 ±112
0.63 ± 1.45
-165 ± 110
-0.89 ± 1.76
39 + 133
-0.21 ± 1.65
-153 + 126
-2.0 + 1.9
121 ± 128
4.2 ± 1.4
-291 ± 132
-0.47 ± 1.25
Percent of
Concentration
Guide'3'
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
(a) Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium
(b) Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC)
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
160
-------
Table C-2. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
FAULTLESS-1992.
Sampling
Location
Blue Jay, NV
Hot Creek Ranch Spring
Maintenance Station
Well Bias
Well HTH-1
Well HTH-2
Well Six Mile
Collection
Date in
1992
02/24
02/24
02/25
02/25
02/25
02/25
Concentration ± 1 s
of Tritium
aCi/L)
Percent of
Concentration
Guide'3'
Not Sampled - Spring and well dry
0.0 ± 1.4 N/A
4.2 ± 1.8 N/A
0.73 ± 1.22 N/A
1.4 ± 1.2 N/A
0.9 ± 1.5
N/A
(a) Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium
N/A Not analyzed
Table C-3. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
SHOAL- 1992
Sampling
Location
Frenchmen Station, NV
Hunt's Station
Smith/James Springs
Spring Windmill
Well Flowing
Well H-3
Well HS-1
Collection
Date in
1992
03/11
03/11
03/11
03/11
10/21
03/11
Concentration ± 1s
of Tritium
3Ci/L)
Percent of
Concentration
Guide'3'
0.88 ± 1.50
56 ± 2(c)
Not Sampled - Well dry
-1.1 ± 1.8
-0.38 ± 1.62
0.86 ± 1.47
N/A
0.06
N/A
N/A (b>
N/A
(a) Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium
(b) Additional analyses performed on this sample and results are greater than MDC
(c) Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC)
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
Analysis
U-234
U-238
Additional analyses on Well H-3
Result 1 sigma MDC
0.14
0.042
0.02
0.011
0.03
0.020
Units
pCi/L
pCi/L
161
-------
Table C-4. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
RULISON-1992
Sampling
Location
Rulison, CO
Lee Hayward Ranch
Potter Ranch
Robert Searcy Ranch
Felix Sefcovic Ranch
Grand Valley, CO
Battlement Creek
City Springs
Albert Gardner Ranch
Spring 300 Yd. N of GZ
Well CER Test
Collection
Date in
1992
06/09
06/09
06/09
06/09
06/09
06/09
06/09
06/09
06/09
Concentration ± 1 s
of Tritium
3Ci/L)
160 ± 3(b)
67 ± 2(b)
78 ± 2(b)
57 ± 2(b)
63
0.43
98
63
1.49
3(b!
48 ± 2
.(b)
Percent of
Concentration
Guide(a)
0.18
0.07
0.09
0.06
0.07
(b)
0.11
0.07
50.05
(a) Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium
(b) Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC)
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
Table C-5.
Collection
Sampling
Location
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
RIO BLANCO - 1992
Concentration ± 1s
Date in
1992
Rio Blanco, CO
B-1 Equity Camp (spring) 06/10
CER No.1 Black Sulfur (spring) 06/10
CER No.4 Black Sulfur (spring) 06/10
Fawn Creek 1 06/10
Fawn Creek 3 06/10
Fawn Creek 500 Ft Upstream 06/10
Fawn Creek 500 Ft Downstream 06/10
Fawn Creek 6800 Ft Upstream 06/10
Fawn Creek 8400 Ft Downstream 06/10
Johnson Artesian Well 06/10
Brennan Windmill (well) 06/10
WellRB-D-01 06/11
Well RB-D-03 06/11
Well RB-S-03 06/11
Percent of
of Tritium
49
57
50
21
26
26
26
26
29
-1.8
3.7
-2.1
0.75
1.7
+ 2(b)
+ 3
-------
Table C-6. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
GNOME - 1992
Sampling
Location
Malaga, NM
Well 1 Pecos
Pumping Station
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
Collection
Date in
1992
06/17
06/16
06/16
06/15
06/15
06/15
06/15
06/15
06/16
06/16
06/18
06/17
Concentration ± 1s
of Tritium
3Ci/L)
-2.6
6.5x1 07
11,700
37
15
0.14
-2.0
-0.40
118,000
91,100
+
+
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
1.5
3.2x1 05(b)
170(b)
2^
2
N/A(d)
0.04
0.02
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A(e)
N/A(f)
N/A
<0.01
(a)
(b)
(c,d,e,f)
N/A
Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium
Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC)
Additional analyses greater than 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
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
Additional analyses greater than MDC
Analysis Result 1 sigma MDC
Cs-137
Sr-90
Cs-137
Sr-90
Cs-137
Sr-90
551,000
13,000
200
6,200
69
5,140
25,600
1,180
11
18
1
16
N/A
2,920
N/A
59
N/A
53
Units
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
163
-------
Table C-7. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
GASBUGGY- 1992
Collection
Sampling Date in
Location 1992
Gobernador, NM
Arnold Ranch 04/14
Bixler Ranch 04/16
Bubbling Springs 04/14
Cave Springs 04/14
Cedar Springs 04/14
La Jara Creek 04/15
Lower Burro Canyon 04/15
Pond N of Well
30.3.32.343 04/15
Well EPNG 10-36 04/16
09/16
Well Jicarilla 1 04/15
Well 28.3.33.233 (South) 04/16
Windmill 2 04/15
Concentration ± 1 s
of Tritium
Percent of
Concentration
Guide(al
Not Sampled - Road washed out
13
42
75
55
70
0.0
34
33
364
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
±
2(c)
2<=)
3(0
3(0)
3«4
1.8
3(0;
2
-------
Table C-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
Well HMH-2
Well HMH-3
Well HMH-4
Well HMH-5
Well HMH-6
Well HMH-7
Well HMH-8
Well HMH-9
Well HMH-10
Well HMH-11
Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
DRIBBLE- 1992
Collection
Date in
1992
Concentration ± 1 s
of Tritium
(pCi/L
\
Percent of
Concentration
Guide'3'
Onsite Sampling Locations
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/26
04/26
04/28
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/27
15
27
690
587
16
14
31
1,317
556
6.0
1.8
0.0
-2.3
-1.6
2.1
-4.5
3.3
-0.88
1,305
611
2.4
-3.0
7,073
6,724
5,835
14,395
5,115
12,841
11
27
13
15
1856
2064
72
57
Not Sampled -
Not Sampled -
13
20
87
91
298
256
23
28
± 1"
+ 2(c
± 5«
± 4(c
+ 2(c
+ 2(c)
+ 2(c>
±114(c)
+ 4(c)
± 1.8(c)
± 1.6
± 1.6
+ 2.0
± 1.5
+ 1.9
± 1.3
± 2.0
± 1.6
±114(c)
± 4
+ 2(c)
+ 1«
±117(c)
±118(c)
± 2(c)
± 3
+ 2(c)
± 3«>
± 3«>
± 4W
± 2«>
± 2(c)
0.02
0.03
0.8
0.7
0.02
0.02
0.03
1.5
0.6
0.01
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
1.5
0.7
N/A
N/A
7.9
7.5
6.5
16.0
5.7
14.2
0.01
0.03
0.01
0.02
2.1
2.3
0.08
0.06
water
water
0.01
0.02
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.3
0.03
0.03
165
-------
Table C-8.
Sampling
Location
(Long-Term Hydorlogical Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
GNOME - 1992, cont.)
Concentration ± 1s
Date in
1992
Percent of
of Tritium
DCi/L)
Concentration
Guide'3'
Onsite Sampling Locations
Well HMH-12
We!! HMH-13
Well HMH-14
Well HMH-15
Well HMH-16
Well HT-2C
Well HT-4
Well HT-5
Baxterville, MS
Little Creek #1
Lower Little Creek #2
Salt Dome Hunting Club
Salt Dome Timber Co.
Anderson Pond
Anderson, Billy Ray
Anderson, Regina
Anderson, Robert Harvey
Anderson, Robert Lowell, Sr.
Anderson, Robert Lowell, Jr.
Bilbo, Timothy
Burge, Joe
Chambliss, B.
Daniels, Ray
Daniels, Webster Jr.
Daniels Fish Pond Well #2
Kelly Gertrude
King, Rhonda
Lee, P. T.
Mills, A. C.
Mills, Roy
Nobles Pond
Noble's Quail House
Noble, W. H., Jr.
Ready, R. C.
Saucier, Dennis
Saucier, Wilma/Yancy
Smith, Rita
Well Ascot 2
City Well
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/27
04/26
04/27
04/28
04/28
04/28
12
12
11
7.6
±
±
±
±
(c)
Not Sampled - Well dry
Not Sampled - Well dry
12
9.1
75
117
9.0
6.1
±
±
±
±
±
+
2(c)
2.3(c)
2
3(0)
1.5(c)
2.5
0.99 ±
1.69
Offsite Sampling Locations
04/28
04/28
04/29
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/28
04/27
04/28
04/29
04/29
04/29
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/29
04/27
04/27
04/27
04/29
04/28
04/28
04/27
04/28
04/29
20 + 2(c)
18 + 1(c)
24 ± 2(c)
27 + 2(c>
8.5 + 1.3|c)
16 ± 2
Not Sampled - No one home
1.43
2&
1.54
1.59
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.08
0.1
0.01
N/A
N/A
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.03
0.01
0.02
17 ±
20 ±
17 ±
24 ±
18 ±
-0.85 ±
15 ±
18 ±
19 ±
-0.87 ±
20 ±
45 ±
-0.90 ±
18 ± 2(c)
18 ± 2(c)
59 + 5(c)
37 ± 2(c)
Not Sampled - Now on city water
41 ± 3(c) 0.05
3.1 ± 1.7 N/A
Not Sampled - Moved, Well Down
Not Sampled - Well In Water
26 ± 2(c) 0.03
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.03(d)
0.02
N/A
0.02
0.02
0.02
(b)
0.02
0.05
(b)
0.02
0.02
0.07
0.04
166
-------
Table C-8.
(Long-Term Hydorlogical Monitoring Program Analytical Results for Project
GNOME - 1992, cont.)
Sampling
Location
Concentration ± 1 s
Date in
1992
Percent of
of Tritium
Concentration
Guide(a)
Columbia, MS
Dennis, Buddy
Dennis, Marvin
City Well 64B
Lumberton, MS
Anderson, G. W.
Anderson, Lee L.
Bond, Bradley K.
Cox, Eddie
Gil Ray's Crawfish Pond
Gipson, Herman
Gipson, Hewie
Gipson, Phillip
Graham, Sylvester
Hartfield, Ray
Moree, Rita-House Well
Beach, Donald
Powers, Sharon
Rushing, Debra
Saul, Lee L.
Smith, E. J.
Smith, Howard
Smith, Howard-Pond
Thompson, Roswell
Well 2 City
Purvis, MS
Surge Willie Ray and Grace
City Supply
Gil, Ray-House Well
Offsite Sampling Locations (continued)
04/28
04/28
04/28
04/27
04/29
04/29
04/27
04/27
04/28
04/27
04/27
04/28
04/28
04/28
04/27
04/29
04/28
04/28
04/28
04/28
04/29
04/28
04/29
04/27
04/27
04/27
Not
Not
21
14
6.8
19
20
16
28
7.0
-1.8
23
21
-2.0
-2.8
Sampled
Sampled
13
27
0.0
18
1.5
12
28
2.2
15
2.9
-2.9
±
±
±
(c)
± 3
lc)
± 3
(c)
+ 1.5
+ 3(c)
± 1.8
± 3.8
Moved, Well Down
Moved, Well Down
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.02
0.03
0.01
N/A
0.03(b)(e)
0.02(b)(f>
N/A
±
±
±
1.7
2.2
3(c)
2.0
1.8
1.6
0.01
0.03
N/A
0.02(b)
N/A
0.01
0.03(b)(h)
N/A
0.02
N/A
N/A
* = Activity is greater than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC)
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 know to be nonpotable
(a) = Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L tritium
(b) = Formerly the residence of Talmadge S. Saucier
(c) = New sampling location
(d,e,f,g) = Additional analyses greater than MDC:
(d)
(e)
(f)
(9)
Analysis
U-234
U-238
U-238
U-234
U-238
U-234
U-238
Result
0.038
0.021
0.018
0.099
0.057
0.14
0.12
MDC
0.026
0.010
0.014
0.036
0.009
0.01
O.OJ
Units
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
pCi/L
167
-------
I
s ^_^ B UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING SYSTEMS LABORATORY-LAS VEGAS
P.O. BOX 93478
LAS VEGAS, NEVADA 89193-3478
702/798-2100
April 20, 1995
Dear Reader:
Since 1954, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
and its predecessor the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) has
conducted radiological monitoring in the offsite areas around
United States nuclear test areas. The primary objective of this
monitoring has been the protection of the health and safety of
residents in the unlikely event of release of radioactive
material into public areas. Further, the Offsite Environmental
Surveillance Program documents has provided independent
verification of the safety of the U.S. Nuclear Weapons Testing
Program.
The enclosed report documents EPA's monitoring activities
for calendar year 1992, the last year of nuclear testing prior to
the moratorium. Monitoring data are included so that you may
evaluate the contribution, if any, of nuclear testing to man's
radiation exposure. The total radiation exposure man receives
includes external exposure from naturally occurring, manmade
materials in our environment, and internal exposure from natural
and manmade radioactive materials in the air we breathe, the
water we drink, and the food we eat. In 1992, there was no
radioactivity detected offsite by the various EPA monitoring
networks and no exposure above natural background to the
population living in the vicinity of the Nevada Test Site (NTS)
that could be attributed to current NTS activities.
If you have any questions regarding EPA's monitoring of
radiation in areas around U.S. nuclear test areas, please feel
free to contact me at the above address.
Sincerely,
Paul J. Weeden
Director
Radiation Sciences Division
Enclosure
-------
------- |