EMSL-LV-539-4 EMSL-LV-539-4
May 1976
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT FOR THE NEVADA TEST SITE
AND OTHER TEST AREAS USED FOR UNDERGROUND NUCLEAR DETONATIONS
January through December 1975
by
Monitoring Operations Division
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
APRIL 1976
This work performed under a Memorandum of
Understanding No. AT(26-l)-539
for the
U.S. ENERGY RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
-------
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United
States Government. Neither the United States nor the United States Energy
Research and Development Administration, nor any of their employees, nor any
of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, make any warranty,
express or implied, or assume any legal liability or responsibility for the
accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product
or process disclosed, or represent that its use would not infringe privately-
owned rights.
This document is available to the public through the National Technical
Information Service, U.S. Department of Commerce, Springfield, Virginia 22161.
-------
11913
EMSL-LV-539-4 EMSL-LV-539-4
May 1976
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT FOR THE NEVADA TEST SITE
AND OTHER TEST AREAS USED FOR UNDERGROUND NUCLEAR DETONATIONS
January through December 1975
by
Monitoring Operations Division
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Las Vegas, Nevada 89114
APRIL 1976
This work performed under a Memorandum of
Understanding No. AT(26-l)-539
for the
U.S. ENERGY RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
-------
PREFACE
The Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) used the Nevada Test Site (NTS) from
January 1951 through January 19, 1975, as an area for conducting nuclear
detonations, nuclear rocket-engine development, nuclear medicine studies, and
miscellaneous nuclear and non-nuclear experiments. Beginning on January 19,
1975, these responsibilities were transferred to the newly-formed U.S. Energy
Research and Development Administration (ERDA). Atmospheric nuclear tests
were conducted periodically from 1951 through October 30, 1958, at which time
a testing moratorium was implemented. Since September 1, 1961, in accordance
with the limited test ban treaty, all nuclear detonations have been conducted
underground with the expectation of containment except for four slightly above-
ground or shallow underground tests of Operation Dominic II and five nuclear
earth-cratering experiments conducted under the Plowshare program.
The U.S. Public Health Service (PHS), from 1953 through 1970, and the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), from 1970 to the present, have
maintained facilities at the NTS or in Las Vegas, Nevada, for the purpose of
providing an Off-Site Radiological Safety Program for the nuclear testing
program. In addition, off-site surveillance has been provided by the PHS/EPA
for nuclear explosive tests at places other than the NTS. Prior to 1953, the
surveillance program was performed by the Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory
and U.S. Army personnel.
The objective of the Program since 1953 has been to measure levels and
trends of radioactivity in the off-site environment surrounding testing areas
to assure that the testing is in compliance with existing radiation protection
standards. To assess off-site radiation levels, routine sampling networks for
milk, water, and air are maintained along with a dosimetry network and special
sampling of food crops, soil, etc., as required. For the purpose of implement-
ing protective actions, providing immediate radiation monitoring, and obtain-
ing environmental samples rapidly after a release of radioactivity, mobile
monitoring personnel are also placed in areas downwind of NTS or other test
areas prior to each test.
In general, analytical results showing radioactivity levels above natu-
rally occurring levels have been published in reports covering a test series
or test project. Beginning in 1959 for reactor tests, and in 1962 for weapons
tests, surveillance data for each individual test which released radioactivity
off-site were reported separately. Commencing in January 1964, and continuing
through December 1970, these individual reports for nuclear tests were also
summarized and reported every 6 months. The individual analytical results for
all routine or special milk samples were also included in the 6-month summary
reports.
In 1971, the AEC implemented a requirement (ERDA Manual, Chapter 0513)
for a comprehensive radiological monitoring report from each of the several
contractors or agencies involved in major nuclear activities. The compilation
iii
-------
of these various reports since that time and their entry into the general
literature serve the purpose of providing a single source of information
concerning the environmental impact of nuclear activities. To provide more
rapid dissemination of data, the monthly report of analytical results of all
air data collected since July 1971, and all milk and water samples collected
since January 1972, were submitted to the appropriate state health depart-
ments involved, and were also published in Radiation Data and Reports, a
monthly publication of the EPA which was discontinued at the end of 1974.
Beginning with the first quarter of 1975, air and milk sample data have
been reported quarterly. Dosimetry data were included beginning with the
third quarter 1975.
Since 1962, PHS/EPA aircraft have also been used during nuclear tests to
provide rapid monitoring and sampling for releases of radioactivity. Early
aircraft monitoring data obtained immediately after a test are used to posi-
tion mobile radiation monitoring personnel on the ground, and the results of
airborne sampling are used to quantitate the inventories, diffusion, and
transport of the radionuclides released. Beginning in 1971, all monitoring
and sampling results by aircraft have been reported in effluent monitoring
data reports in accordance with the ERDA Manual, Chapter 0513.
iv
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
PREFACE iii
LIST OF FIGURES vi
LIST OF TABLES vii
INTRODUCTION 1
NEVADA TEST SITE 1
Site Location 1
Climate • 2
Geology and Hydrology 3
Land Use of NTS Environs 4
Population Distribution 5
OTHER TEST SITES 6
SUMMARY 7
MONITORING DATA COLLECTION, ANALYSIS, AND EVALUATION 9
AIR SURVEILLANCE NETWORK 10
NOBLE GAS AND TRITIUM SURVEILLANCE NETWORK 11
DOSIMETRY NETWORK 13
MILK SURVEILLANCE NETWORK 16
WATER SURVEILLANCE NETWORK 17
LONG-TERM HYDROLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM 17
Nevada Test Site 18
Other Test Sites 19
WHOLE-BODY COUNTING 20
DOSE ASSESSMENT 21
REFERENCES 23
APPENDIX A. RADIATION PROTECTION STANDARDS FOR OFF-NTS 90
EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL EXPOSURE
APPENDIX B. DOSE ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS 92
APPENDIX C. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS 94
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Number Page
1 Nevada Test Site Location 25
2 Nevada Test Site Road and Facility Map 26
3 Groundwater Flow Systems - Nevada Test Site 27
4 General Land Use, Nevada Test Site Vicinity 28
5 Location of Family Milk Cows and Goats 29
6 Location of Dairy Cows 30
7 Population of Arizona, California, Nevada, and Utah 31
Counties Near the Nevada Test Site
8 Air Surveillance Network 32
9 Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network 33
10 Dosimetry Network 34
11 Milk Surveillance Network 35
12 On-Site Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program, 36
Nevada Test Site
13 Off-Site Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program, 37
Nevada Test Site
14 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, 38
Carlsbad, New Mexico, Project Gnome/Coach
15 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, 39
Fallon, Nevada, Project Shoal
16 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, 40
Project Dribble/Miracle Play (vicinity of Tatum
Salt Dome, Mississippi)
17 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, 41
Project Dribble/Miracle Play (Tatum Salt Dome, Mississippi)
18 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, 42
Rio Arriba County, New Mexico, Project Gasbuggy
19 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, 43
Rulison, Colorado, Project Rulison
20 Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, 44
Central Nevada Test Area, Faultless Event
vi
-------
LIST OF TABLES
Number Page
1 Characteristics of Climatic Types in Nevada 2
2 Underground Testing Conducted Off the Nevada Test Site 45
3 Summary of Analytical Procedures 47
4 1975 Summary of Analytical Results for the Noble Gas 50
and Tritium Surveillance Network
5 1975 Summary of Radiation Doses for the Dosimetry Network 53
6 1975 Summary of Analytical Results for the Milk Surveillance 56
Network
7 Analytical Criteria for Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring 60
Program Samples
8 1975 Summary of Analytical Results for the Nevada Test Site 61
Monthly Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
9 1975 Summary of Analytical Results for the Nevada Test Site 64
Semi-Annual Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
10 1975 Summary of Analytical Results for the Nevada Test Site 70
Annual Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
11 1975 Summary of Analytical Results for the Off-NTS Long-Term 73
Hydrological Monitoring Program
vii
-------
INTRODUCTION
Under a Memorandum of Understanding, No. AT(26-l)-539, with the U.S.
Energy Research and Development Administration (ERDA), the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory-Las
Vegas (EMSL-LV), continued its Off-Site Radiological Safety Program within
the environment surrounding the Nevada Test Site (NTS) and at other sites
designated by the ERDA during 1975. This report, prepared in accordance with
the ERDA Manual, Chapter 0513, contains summaries of EMSL-LV sampling methods,
analytical procedures, and the analytical results of environmental samples
collected in support of ERDA nuclear testing activities. Where applicable,
sampling data are compared to appropriate guides for external and internal
exposures to ionizing radiation. In addition, a brief summary of pertinent
and demographical features of the NTS and the NTS environs is presented for
background information.
NEVADA TEST SITE
The major programs conducted at the NTS in the past have been nuclear
weapons development, proof-testing and weapons safety, testing for peaceful
uses of nuclear explosives (Project Plowshare), reactor/engine development
for nuclear rocket and ram-jet applications (Projects Pluto and Rover), basic
high-energy nuclear physics research, and seismic studies (Vela-Uniform).
During this report period these programs were continued with the exception of
Project Pluto, discontinued in 1964, and Project Rover, which was terminated
in January 1973. No Plowshare nuclear tests were conducted at the NTS or any
other site during this period. All nuclear weapons tests were conducted under-
ground to minimize the possibility of the release of fission products to the
atmosphere.
Site Location
The Nevada Test Site (Figures 1 and 2) is located in Nye County, Nevada,
with its southeast corner about 90 km northwest of Las Vegas. The NTS has an
area of about 3500 km2 and varies from 40-56 km in width (east-west) and from
64-88 km in length (north-south). This area consists of large basins or flats
about 900-1200 m above mean sea level (MSL) surrounded by mountain ranges
1800-2100 m MSL.
The NTS is nearly surrounded by an exclusion area collectively named the
Nellis Air Force Range. The Range, particularly to the north and east, pro-
vides a buffer zone between the test areas and public lands. This buffer zone
varies from 24-104 km between the test area and land that is open to the public.
Depending upon wind speed and direction, this provides a delay of from 1/2 to
more than 6 hours before any accidental release of airborne radioactivity could
pass over public lands.
X
-------
Climate
The climate of the NTS and surrounding area Is variable, primarily due to
altitude and the rugged terrain. Generally, the climate is referred to as
Continental Arid. Throughout the year there is not sufficient water to sup-
port tree or crop growth without irrigation.
The climate may be classified by the types of vegetation which grow under
these conditions. According to Houghton et al., this method, developed by
KBppen in 1918, recognizes five basic climatic conditions as humid tropical,
dry, humid meso thermal, humid microthermal, and polar (five-sixths of Nevada
falls in the dry category). KOppen's classification of dry conditions is fur-
ther subdivided on the basis of temperature and severity of drought. Table 1,
from Houghton et al., summarizes the different characteristics of these cli-
matic types in Nevada.
TABLE 1. CHARACTERISTICS OF CLIMATIC TYPES IN NEVADA
Mean Temperature
»C
Climatic
Type
Winter
Summer
Annual Precipitation
cm
(inches)
Total* Snowfall
Dominant Percent
Vegetation of Area
Alpine -18°
tundra ( 0°
Humid -12°
Continental (10°
Subhumid -12°
continental (10°
Mid-lati- -7°
tude steppe (20°
Mid-lati- -7°
tude desert (20°
Low-lati- 4°
+•*•»!** *4**«*j"k«*4- //. A°
_ -9°
- 15°)
- -1°
- 30°)
- -1°
- 30°)
- 4°
- 40°)
- 4°
- 40°)
- 10°
_ an°\
4°
(40°
10°
(50°
10°
(50°
18°
(65°
18°
(65°
27°
/on0
- 10°
- 50°
- 21°
- 70°
- 21°
- 70°
- 27°
- 80°
- 27°
- 80°
- 32°
_ Q(\°
38 - 114 Medium to Alpine
(15 - 45) heavy meadows
64 - 114 Heavy
(25 - 45)
30 - 64 Moderate
(12 - 25)
15 - 38 Light to
(6-15) moderate
8-20 Light
(3-8)
Pine-fir
forest
Pine or scrub
woodland
Sagebrush,
grass, scrub
Greasewood,
shadscale
15
57
20
5-25 Negligible Creosote
(2-10) bush
*Limits of annual precipitation overlap because of variations in temperature
which affect the water balance.
As pointed out by Houghton et al., 90 percent of Nevada's population
lives in areas with less than 25 cm of rain per year or in areas which would
be classified as mid-latitude steppe to low-latitude desert regions.
-------
According to Quiring, 1968, the NTS average annual precipitation ranges
from about 10 cm at the 900-m altitude to around 25 cm on the plateaus. During
the winter months, the plateaus may be snow-covered for periods of several
days or weeks. Snow is uncommon on the flats. Temperatures vary considerably
with elevation, slope, and local air currents. The average daily high (low)
temperatures at the lower altitudes are around 10° (-4°) C in January and 35°
(12°) C in July, with extremes of 44° and -26° C. Corresponding temperatures
on the plateaus are 2° (-4°) C in January and 26° (18°) C in July with ex-
tremes of 38° and -29° C. Temperatures as low as -34° C and higher than 46° C
have been observed at the NTS.
The direction from which winds blow, as measured on a 30-m tower at the
Yucca observation station, is predominantly northerlv_ except for the months
of May through August when winds from the south-southwest predominate. Be-
cause of the prevalent mountain/valley winds in the basins, south to south-
west winds predominate during daylight hours during most months. During the
winter months southerly winds have only a slight edge over northerly winds
for a few hours during the warmest part of the day. These wind patterns may
be quite different at other locations on the NTS because of local terrain
effects and differences in elevation (Quiring, 1968).
Geology and Hydrology
Geological and hydrological studies of the NTS have been in progress by
the U.S. Geological Survey and various other institutions since 1956. Be-
cause of this continuing effort, including subsurface studies of numerous bore-
holes, the surface and underground geological and hydrological characteristics
for much of the NTS are known in considerable detail. This is particularly
true for those areas in which underground experiments are conducted. A com-
prehensive summary of the geology and hydrology of the NTS was published in
1968 as Memoir 110 by the Geological Society of America, entitled "Nevada Test
Site."
There are two major hydrologic systems on the NTS (Figure 3). Ground-
water in the northwestern part of NTS or,in the Pahute Mesa has been reported
(WASH-DRAFT, 1975) to travel somewhere between 2 and 80 m per year to the south
and southwest toward the Ash Meadows discharge area in the Amargosa Desert.
It is estimated that the groundwater to the east of the NTS moves from north
to south at a rate not less than 2 nor greater than 220 m per year. Carbon-
14 analyses of this eastern groundwater indicate that the lower velocity is
nearer the true value. At Mercury Valley, in the extreme southern part of the
NTS, the groundwater flow direction shifts to the southwest toward the Ash
Meadows discharge area in the southeastern Amargosa Valley.
Depths of water on the NTS vary from about 100 m beneath the valleys in
the southeastern part of the site to more than 600 m beneath the highlands to
the north. Although much of the valley fill is saturated, downward movement
of water is extremely slow. The primary aquifer in these formations is the
Paleozoic carbonates which underlie the more recent tuffs and alluviums.
-------
Land Use of NTS Environs
Figure 4 is a map of the off-NTS area showing general land use. A wide
variety of uses, such as farming, mining, grazing, camping, fishing, and
hunting, exists due to the variable terrain. For example, within a 300-km
radius west of the NTS, elevations range from below sea level in Death Valley
to 4420 m above MSL in the Sierra Nevada Range. Additionally, parts of two
valleys of major agricultural importance (the Owens and San Joaquin) are in-
cluded. The areas south of the NTS are more uniform since the Mojave Desert
ecosystem (mid-latitude desert) comprises most of this portion of Nevada,
"California, and Arizona. The areas east of the NTS are primarily mid-latitude
steppe with some of the older river valleys, such as the Virgin River Valley
and Moapa Valley, supporting small-scale but intensive farming of a variety
of crops by irrigation. 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-related activity is grazing of both cattle and sheep.
Only areas of minor agricultural importance, primarily the growing of alfalfa
hay, are found in this portion of the State within a distance of 300 km.
In the summer of 1974, a brief survey of home gardens around the NTS
found that a majority of the residents grow or have access to locally grown
fruits and vegetables. Approximately two dozen of the surveyed gardens within
30-80 km of the NTS boundary were selected for sampling. These gardens pro-
duce a variety of root, leaf, seed, and fruit crops.
The-OStiy^industrial enterprises within the immediate off-NTS area.ai?e--Z!>
active mines ,yas shown in Figure 4, and several chemical processing plants
locateo-aeaffHenderson, Nevada. The number of employees for theses«nexa.tions
varies from one person at several small mines to several hundred workers for
the chemical plants at Henderson. Most of the individual mining operations
involve less than 10 workers per mine; however, a few operations employ up
to 100-150 workers.
The major body of water close to the NTS is Lake Meady' a man-made lake
supplied by water from the Colorado River. Lake^Maad-stfpplies about 60 per-
cent of the water used for domestic, recreational, and industrial purposes in
the Las Vegas Valley and a portion of the water used by Southern California.
Smaller reservoirs and lakes located in the area are primarily for irrigation
and for livestock. In California, the Owens River and Haiwee Reservoir feed
into the Los Angeles Aqueduct and are the major sources of domestic water for
the Los Angeles area.
As indicated by Figure 4, there are many places scattered in all direc-
tions from the NTS where such recreational activities as hunting, fishing, and
camping are enjoyed by both local residents and tourists. In general, the
camping and fishing sites to the northwest, north, and northeast of the NTS
are utilized throughout the year except for the winter months. Camping and
fishing at locations southeast, south, and southwest are utilized throughout
the year with the most extensive activities occurring during all months except
the hot summer months. All hunting is generally restricted to various times
during the last 6 months of the year.
-------
I Dairy farming is not extensive within the 300-km-radius area under dis-
cussion^- -Froma survey of milk cows during this report period, 8700 dairy
cows, 370 family goats, and 600 family cows were located. The family cows
and goats are found in all directions around the test site (Figure 5), where-
as the dairy cows (Figure 6) are located southeast of the test site (Moapa
River Valley, Nevada; Virgin River Valley, Nevada; and Las Vegas, Nevada),
northeast (Hiko and Alamo, Nevada, area), west-northwest (near Bishop, Cali-
fornia), and southwest (near Barstow, California).
Population Distribution
The populated area of primary concern around the NTS is shown in Figure
7 as the area within a 300-km radius of the NTS Control Point (CP-1), except
for the areas west of the Sierra Nevada Mountains and in the southern portion
of San Bernardino County. Based upon the 1970 census and the projections for
1973 and 1974 by the U.S. Census Bureau, Figure 7 shows the population of
counties in Nevada and pertinent portions of the States of Arizona, California,
and Utah. Las Vegas and vicinity are the only major population centers within
the inscribed area of Figure 7. With the assumption that the total populations
of the counties bisected by the 300-fcm radius lie within the inscribed area,
there is a population of about 520,000 people living within the area of pri-
mary concern, about 50 percent of which lives in the Las Vegas urbanized area.
If the urbanized area is not considered in determining population density,
there are about 0.7 people per km2 (2 people per mi2). For comparison, the
United States (50 states, 1970 census) has a population density of 22 people
per km2, and the overall Nevada average is 1.5 people per km.
The off-site areas within about 80 km of NTS are predominantly rural.
Several small communities are located in the area, the largest being in the
Pahrump Valley. This rural community, with an estimated population of about
1800, is located about 72 km south of the NTS. The Amargosa Farm area has a
population of about 300 and is located about 50 km southwest of the center of
the NTS. The Spring Meadows Farm area is a relatively new development con-
sisting of approximately 4000 m2 with a population of about 60. This
area is about 55 km south-southwest of the NTS. The largest town in the near
off-site area is Beatty with a population of about 500; it is located about
65 km to the west of the site.
In the adjacent states, the Mojave Desert of California, which includes
Death Valley National Monument, lies along the southwestern border of Nevada.
The population in the Monument boundaries varies considerably from season to
season with fewer than 200 permanent residents and tourists in the area during
any given period in the summer months. However, during the winter as many as
12,000 tourists and campers can be in the area on any particular day during
the major holiday periods. The largest town in this general area is Barstow,
located 265 km south-southwest of the NTS, with a population of about 18,200.
The Owens Valley, where numerous small towns are located, lies about 50 km
west of Death Valley. The largest town in Owens Valley is Bishop, located
225 km west-northwest of the NTS, with a population of about 3600.
-------
The extreme southwestern region of Utah is more developed than the adja-
cent part of Nevada. The largest town, Cedar City, with a population of 9900,
is located 280 km east-northeast of the NTS. The next largest community is
St. George, located 220 km east of the NTS, with a population of 8000.
The extreme northwestern region of Arizona is mostly undeveloped range
land with the exception of that portion in the Lake Mead Recreation Area.
Several small retirement communities are found along the Colorado River,
primarily at Lake Mojave and Lake Havasu. The largest town in the area is
Kingman, located 280 km southeast of the NTS, with a population of about 7500.
OTHER TEST SITES
Table 2 lists the names, dates, locations, yields, depths, and purposes
of all underground nuclear tests conducted at locations other than the NTS.
No off-NTS nuclear tests were conducted during this report period.
-------
SUMMARY
During 1975, the monitoring of gamma radiation levels in the environs of
the NTS was continued through the use of an off-site network of radiation do-
simeters and gamma-rate recorders. Concentrations of radionuclides in pertinent
environmental media were also continuously or periodically monitored by estab-
lished air, milk, and water sampling networks. Before each underground nuclear
detonation, mobile radiation monitors, equipped with radiation monitoring in-
struments and sampling equipment, were on standby in off-NTS locations to re-
spond to any accidental release of airborne radioactivity. An airplane was
airborne near the test area at detonation time to undertake tracking and sam-
pling of any release which might occur.
A total of about 22 curies (Ci) of radioactivity, primarily radioxenon,
was reported by ERDA/NV as being released intermittently throughout the year.
The only off-NTS indications of this radioactivity from test operations were
low concentrations of xenon-133, krypton-85, and tritium (hydrogen-3) in
various combinations, measured in air samples collected at Beatty, Diablo, Hiko,
Indian Springs, and Las Vegas, Nevada. The concentrations at these locations
when averaged_over the year were less than 0.01 percent of the Concentration
Guide of 1x10 7 microcuries per millilitre (yCi/ml) as listed in the ERDA
Manual, Chapter 0524, for exposure to a suitable sample of the population.
Based upon time-integrated concentrations of the nuclides at these locations,
dose calculations, and population information, the whole-body gamma dose
commitment to persons within 80 km of the NTS Control Point for test operations
during this year was estimated to be 0.00065 man-rem. The highest dose com-
mitment,* 0.062 man-rem occurred beyond 80 km of NTS at Las Vegas, Nevada, a
location with a much higher population density than any within 80 km of NTS.
All other measurements of radioactivity made by the Off-Site Radiological
Safety Program were attributed to naturally occurring radioactivity or atmo-
spheric fallout and not related to underground nuclear test operations during
this report period. Due to the absence of atmospheric tests by the People's
Republic of China during 1975 and the reduction in fallout from all previous
atmospheric tests, no radionuclides were detected in samples of the Air Sur-
veillance Network (ASN). A decrease in the range and average of gamma radi-
ation levels monitored by thermoluminescent dosimeters of the off-NTS Dosim-
etry Network was observed as compared to previous years. The decrease in
average exposures was attributed to a combination of factors: the slightly
lower response of the new 2271-G2 dosimeters which replaced the TL-12 dosim-
eters used previously; the unusually low levels of world-wide fallout observed
during the year by the ASN; and the continuing decay of old fallout from
atmospheric testing at the NTS during 1951 - 1958.
*The dose commitment (product of estimated average dose and population) at
Las Vegas from 1 year's exposure to natural background radiation is about 9700
man-rem.
-------
The Long-Tenn Hydrological Monitoring Program used for the monitoring of
radionuclide concentrations in surface and groundwaters which are down the
hydrologic gradient from sites of past underground nuclear tests was continued
for the NTS and six other sites located elsewhere in Nevada, Colorado, New
Mexico, and Mississippi. Naturally occurring radionuclides, such as uranium
isotopes and radium-226, were detected in samples collected at most locations
at levels which were comparable to concentrations measured for previous years.
Tritium was measured in all surface water samples at levels less than 2.5x10 6
yCi/ml, a concentration considered from past experience to be the highest one
would expect from atmospheric fallout. Except for samples collected at wells
known to be contaminated by the injection of high concentrations of radio-
activity for tracer studies, no radioactivity related to past underground
tests or to the contaminated wells was identified.
-------
MONITORING DATA COLLECTION, ANALYSIS, AND EVALUATION
The major portion of the Off-Site Radiological Safety Program for the NTS
consisted of continuously-operated dosimetry and air sampling networks and
scheduled collections of milk and water samples at locations surrounding the
NTS. Before each nuclear test, mobile monitors were positioned in the off-
site areas most likely to be exposed to a possible release of radioactive
material. These monitors, equipped with radiation survey instruments, rate
recorders, thermoluminescent dosimeters, portable air samplers, and supplies
for collecting environmental samples, were prepared to conduct a monitoring
program directed from the NTS Control Point via two-way radio communications.
In addition, for each event at the NTS, a U.S. Air Force aircraft with two
Reynolds Electrical and Engineering Company monitors equipped with portable
radiation survey instruments was airborne near surface ground zero to detect
and track any radioactive effluent. Two EMSL-LV cloud sampling and tracking
aircraft were also available to obtain in-cloud samples, assess total cloud
volume, and provide long-range tracking in the event of a release of airborne
radioactivity.
During this report period, only underground nuclear detonations were con-
ducted. All detonations were contained. However, during re-entry drilling
operations, occasional low level releases of airborne radioactivity, pri-
marily radioxenon, did occur. According to information provided by the Nevada
Operations Office, ERDA, the following quantities of radionuclides were re-
leased into the atmosphere during CY 1975:
Quantity Released
Radionuclide (Ci)
13 3Xe 19 6
133mXe o'.3
3H 2.2
Total 22.1
Continuous low-level releases of 3H and 85Kr occur on the NTS. Tritium
is released primarily from the Sedan crater and by evaporation from ponds
formed by drainage of water from tunnel test areas in the Rainier Mesa.
Krypton-85 slowly seeps to the surface from underground test areas. The
quantities of radioactivity from seepage are not quantitated, but are detected
at on-site sampling locations.
Contained within the following sections of this report are descriptions
for each surveillance network and interpretations of the analytical results
which are summarized (maximum, minimum, and average concentrations) in tables.
Where appropriate, the average values in the tables are compared to the appli-
cable Concentration Guides (CG's) listed in Appendix A.
-------
For "grab" type samples, radionuclide concentrations were extrapolated to
the appropriate collection date. Concentrations determined over a period of
tine were extrapolated to the midpoint of the collection period. Concentration
averages were calculated assuming that each concentration less than the minimum
detectable concentration (MDC) was equal to the MDC.
All radiological analyses referred to within the text are briefly described
in Table 3 and listed with the minimum detectable concentrations (MDC's). To
assure validity of the data, analytical personnel routinely calibrate equipment,
split selected samples (except for the Air Surveillance Network) for replicate
analyses, and analyze spiked samples prepared by the Quality Assurance Branch,
EMSL-LV, on a bi-monthly basis. All quality assurance checks for the year
identified no problems which would affect the results reported here.
For the purpose of routinely assessing the total error (sampling replica-
tion error plus analytical/counting errors) associated with the collection and
analysis of the different types of network samples, plans were made during this
report period to initiate a duplicate sampling program for all sample types
during CY 1976. The program was initiated in some of the networks near the end
of this report period; but the data generated are not sufficient to be included
in this report. Information on the total error associated with the different
sample types will allow more complete analysis of variance in sample results
and develop greater confidence in identifying results which are higher than
normal.
AIR SURVEILLANCE NETWORK
The Air Surveillance Network, operated by the EMSL-LV, consisted of 48
active and 73 standby sampling stations located in 21 Western States (Figure 8).
Samples of airborne particulates were collected continuously at each active
station on 10-cm-diameter, glass-fiber filters at a flow rate of about 350 m3
of air per day. The filters were collected three times per week, resulting in
48- or 72-hour samples from each active station. Activated charcoal cartridges
directly behind the glass-fiber filters were used regularly for the collection
of gaseous radioiodines at 21 stations near the NTS. Charcoal cartridges could
have been added to all other stations, if necessary, by a telephone request to
station operators. All air samples (filters and cartridges) were mailed to the
EMSL-LV for analysis. Special retrieval could have been arranged at selected
locations in the event a release of radioactivity was believed to have occurred.
From gamma spectrometry results, no radionuclides were identified on any
filters or charcoal cartridges during this report period. Normally, radio-
nuclides from the atmospheric testing of nuclear devices by the People's
Republic of China are detected by the ASN; however, no tests were conducted
during CY 1975 and apparently the atmospheric concentrations from previous
tests were below the minimum detectable concentration for gamma spectrometry
analyses.
10
-------
NOBLE GAS AND TRITIUM SURVEILLANCE NETWORK
The Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network, which was first estab-
lished in March and April 1972, was operated to monitor the airborne levels of
radiokrypton, radioxenon, and tritium (3H) in the forms of tritiated hydrogen
(HT), tritiated water (HTO), and tritiated methane (CH3T). Originally, the
Network consisted of four on-NTS and six off-NTS stations. For the purpose of
ensuring that the sampling locations on or near the NTS are situated at
population centers, a station was added at Indian Springs, Nevada, on April 1,
1975, and starting at the beginning of the year, the stations at Desert Rock
and Gate 700 were moved to Mercury and Area 51, respectively (Figure 9).
The equipment used in this Network is composed of two separate systems, a
compressor-type air sampler and a molecular sieve sampler. The compressor-
type equipment continuously samples air over a 7-day period and stores it in
two pressure tanks. The tanks together hold approximately 2 m3 of air at atmo-
spheric pressure. They are replaced weekly and returned to the EMSL-LV where
the tank contents are separated and analyzed for 85Kr, radioxenons, and CH^T
by gas chromatography and liquid-scintillation counting techniques (Table 3).
The molecular sieve equipment samples air through a filter to remove particu-
lates and then through a series of molecular sieve columns. Approximately 5
m of air are passed through each sampler over a 7-day sampling period. From
the HTO absorbed on the first molecular sieve column, the concentration of 3H
in yCi/ml of recovered moisture and in yCi/ml of sampled air is determined by
liquid-scintillation counting techniques. The 3H, passing through the first
column as free hydrogen (HT), is oxidized and collected on the last molecular
sieve column. From the concentration of 3H for the moisture recovered from the
last column, the 3H (in yCi/ml of sampled air) as HT is determined.
Table 4 summarizes the results of this Network by listing the maximum,
minimum, and average concentrations for 85Kr, total Xe or 133Xe, 3H as CH3T,
3H as HTO, and 3H as HT. The annual average concentrations for each station
were calculated over the time period sampled assuming that all values less than
MDC were equal to the MDC. All concentrations of 85Kr, Xe or 133Xe, 3H as
CHaT, 3H as HTO, and 3H as HT are expressed in the same unit, yCi/ml of air.
Since the H concentration in air may vary by factors of 15-20 while the con-
centration in atmospheric water varies by factors up to about 7, the H concen-
tration in yCi/ml of atmospheric moisture is also given in the table as a more
reliable indicator in cases when background concentrations of HTO are exceeded.
As shown by Table 4, the average 85Kr concentrations for the year were
nearly the same for all stations, ranging from 1.7xlO~11 yCi/ml to Z.OxlO"11
yCi/ml, with an overall average of 1.81x10"11 yCi/ml. This compares with
overall averages of 1.60X10"1* yCi/ml in 1972, the first year of network
operation, and 1.76X10"11 yCi/ml in 1974. The ambient concentration is in-
creasing world-wide, primarily as a result of nuclear reactor operations. The
maximum concentrations for all stations ranged from 2.3X10"11 yCi/ml to
S.SxlO^11 yCi/ml. Based upon a review of all past 85Kr data, those concen-
trations equal to or greater than 2.5x10"-11 yCi/ml were considered to be above
ambient background concentrations and attributable to some outside source or
to anomalous variations. The sampling locations and dates for all concen-
trations above this level during CY 1975 are as follows:
11
-------
Collection Period 85Kr Concentration
Location Start Stop (10~n yCi/ml)
Death Valley Jet., California
Beatty, Nevada
Diablo, Nevada
Indian Springs, Nevada
Las Vegas, Nevada
NTS, Nevada (Mercury)
NTS, Nevada (Area 51)
NTS, Nevada (BJY)
NTS, Nevada (Area 12)
06/17
12/09
12/10
06/02
12/08
12/15
04/02
12/10
12/17
05/19
12/08
05/05
06/02
03/03
03/10
12/08
12/15
12/08
06/24
12/16
12/17
06/09
12/15
12/22
04/09
12/17
12/24
05/27
12/15
05/12
06/09
03/10
03/17 •
12/15
12/22
12/15
2.7
2.5
2.5
2.7
2.8
3.0
2.6
2.9
3.0
2.6
3.4
2.5
2.5
2.5
3.4
3.8
2.6
2.7
As shown by these data, higher than normal 85Kr concentrations for the
sampling stations at Beatty, Diablo, Indian Springs, Las Vegas, Mercury, BJY,
and Area 12 occurred during the period December 8-24. The highest of the
concentrations, occurring at the NTS, were at BJY (3.8xlO-11 yCi/ml) and
Mercury (3.4x10"n yCi/ml). These concentrations, and the 3.4xlO-H yCi/ml
sample from March 10-17 at BJY, are attributed to current testing operations
or seepage from the ground around the sites of past underground nuclear deto-
nations. The highest concentration averages, either on-NTS or off-NTS, were
less than 0.01 percent of the Concentration Guides for on- and off-site ex-
posures (see Appendix A). Since all the other higher than normal 85Kr concen-
trations in the above table occurred at different times during the year, they
do not appear to be associated with NTS operations.
The concentrations of 3H as HTO were at background levels at all locations
except for the off-NTS stations at Beatty and Diablo and at the on-NTS stations
at Area 51, BJY, and Area 12. Concentrations of % as HT were above normal
background levels only occasionally at the on-NTS station at Area 12. The
concentrations of 3H as CH3T at all locations were less than the MDC. The
higher than normal concentrations of 3H as HT and HTO were probably the result
of seepage from the ground near the sites of past tests, such as the Sedan
cratering test and the Area 12 tunnel tests. The total of the average 3H
concentrations (HTO+HT+CH3T) for either of the off-NTS locations identified
with above background concentrations was less than 0.01 percent of the Concen-
tration Guide for 3H in air.
Concentrations of radioxenon greater than the MDC were detected at all
Network locations during the year except for Death Valley Junction, Beatty,
12
-------
and Tonopah. Since all off-NTS concentrations occurred in November at the
same time that on-NTS concentrations were measured, they were attributable to
NTS operations. The maximum concentration of radioxenon, identified as 133Xe,
was 3.1xlO-n pCi/ml at the on-NTS station at BJY. In the off-NTS area, the
highest concentration was 2.5X10"11 yCi/ml at Diablo. At any of the off-NTS
locations, the 133Xe concentrations, when averaged over the total sampling
times for the year, were less than 0.01 percent of the Concentration Guide
for this nuclide.
DOSIMETRY NETWORK
The Dosimetry Network during 1975 consisted of 69 locations surrounding
the Nevada Test Site which were monitored continuously with thermoluminescent
dosimeters (TLD's). The locations of these stations, shown in Figure 10, are
all within a 270-km radius of the center of the NTS and include both inhabited
and uninhabited locations. Each Dosimetry Network station was routinely
equipped with three Harshaw Model 2271-G2 (TLD-200) dosimeters which replaced
the EG&G TL-12 dosimeters previously used. These dosimeters were exchanged
on a quarterly basis. Within the general area covered by the dosimetry sta-
tions, 25 cooperating off-site residents each wore a dosimeter which was ex-
changed at the same time as the station dosimeters.
The 2271-G2 dosimeters consist of two small "chips" of dysprosium-activated
calcium fluoride, designated TLD-200 by Harshaw, mounted within a window of
Teflon plastic and attached to an aluminum card. The card is 4.4 by 3.2 cm and
is about the size of the standard personnel dosimetry film packet. An energy
compensation shield of about 1.2-mm-thick cadmium metal is placed over the
chips and the whole card is sealed in an opaque plastic container. These do-
simeters have no source of self-exposure and exhibit both sensitivity and pre-
cision superior to dosimeter types previously used by the EMSL-LV.
The smallest exposure in excess of background radiation which may be
determined from these dosimeter readings depends primarily on variations in the
natural background at the particular station location. Experience has shown
these variations to be significant from one monitoring period to another and
greater than the precision of the dosimeters themselves. Typically, however,
the smallest net exposure observable for a 90-day monitoring period would be
5-15 mR in excess of background. The term "background," as used in this con-
text, refers to naturally occurring radioactivity plus a contribution from
residual man-made fission products.
After appropriate corrections were made for background exposure accumulated
during shipment between the Laboratory and the monitoring location, the dosimeter
readings for each station were averaged. This average value for each monitoring
period and station was compared to values from the past 3 years to determine if
the new value was within the range of previous background values for that sta-
tion. Any values significantly greater than previous values would have led to
calculations of net exposure, while values significantly less than previous
values would have been examined to determine possible reader or handling errors
producing invalid data. The results from each of the personnel dosimeters
were compared to the background value of the nearest station to determine if
a net exposure had occurred.
13
-------
Table 5 lists the maximum, minimum, and average dose equivalent rate
(mrem/y) measured at each station in the network during 1975. All doses are
due to environmental background radiation. As noted in the summary of
environmental radiation doses below, the average environmental background
dose for all stations for 1975 is significantly lower than in previous years.
This is believed to be due to three factors: the lesser response to low
energy photons of the new 2271-G2 dosimeters relative to the older TL-12
dosimeters used previously, the unusually low levels of world-wide radiation
fallout observed during 1975, and the continuing decay of old fallout from
atmospheric testing at NTS. Each of these factors, while small in themselves,
has had an effect which in summary is significant.
Environmental Radiation Dose (mrem/y)
Year Maximum Minimum
1975
1974
1973
1972
1971
130
160
180
200
303
44
62
80
84
102
-=
90
114
123
144
163
Independent measurements of the photon energy response to the 2271-G2
dosimeters (with the cadmium shield) and the TL-12 dosimeters reveal a rela-
tively decreased sensitivity of the new dosimeters to photons less than 80 keV.
In a year long side-by-side comparison, the 2271-G2 dosimeters showed a small,
consistently lower average dose than did the TL-12. This is to be expected,
since a significant fraction of the photon spectrum comprising environmental
background is due to scattered photons of relatively low energy. Since the
data from 1971 through 1974 were obtained with the older dosimeters, this
effect tends to depress the apparent average for 1975. Although a small dif-
ference has been observed between the two TLD types, it is not known yet which
measurement is a truer measure of background exposure dose. Both types give a
similar response for net exposures above background. A more thorough inves-
tigation of the background response of the TLD's will be conducted by making
comparisons to field measurements obtained with a pressurized ionization
chamber.
During 1975 the Air Surveillance Network reported unusually low levels of
radioactivity in air attributable to worldwide fallout from previous atmo-
spheric tests. While it is difficult to quantify the external gamma-ray dose
from this source, its decrease during 1975 undoubtedly contributed to the lower
overall average dose measured by the Dosimetry Network, just as the occurrence
of fallout from nuclear tests by the People's Republic of China in 1973 and
1974 tended to raise the network average in those years.
Probably the most significant effect in decreasing the average dose
measured by the Dosimetry Network is the decay of old fallout from atmospheric
testing at NTS. Figure 10 clearly shows that most network stations are con-
centrated in areas which received fallout from these tests, particularly to
the north and northeast of NTS, and thus the network average is significantly
affected by changes at those stations. As was noted in the previous summary of
14
-------
environmental radiation doses, the average annual dose for the Dosimetry Net-
work has steadily decreased over the last 4 years by an average of nearly 20
mrem per year.
It is difficult to make comparisons of Dosimetry Network data with other
dose estimates, as these are usually population dose estimates, weighted by
geographic location and population. For example, one report (ORP/CSD 7201,
1972) estimated the population doses for Nevada, California, and Utah to be
125, 90, and 155 mrem/y per person, respectively. The average doses for the
Dosimetry Network stations in these States are 90, 80, and 72 mrem/y, and it
is felt that this discrepancy is the result of locating the network stations
by criteria other than population density. A study conducted by the Lawrence
Livermore Laboratory (LLL) in March-June 1971 (Lindeken et al., 1972) may be
more applicable for comparison. In this study, TLD's were placed at 107
weather stations around the United States for roughly 3 months. Several of
these locations were close to Dosimetry Network stations and thus a direct
comparison is possible. The locations monitored and the dose estimates .are
as follows:
Total Ionizing Radiation Dose at Selected Locations
Annual Dose Equivalent (mrem/y)
Location (LLL.1971) (EPA,1971) (EPA,1975)
Las Vegas, Nevada
Ely, Nevada
Elko, Nevada
Bishop, California
57.8
109
110
174
110
150*
180
150
52
91
(not monitored)
88
*1970 value; 1971 value invalid due to check source
left in place.
Although an annual exposure based on a 3-month exposure dose measurement
is not directly comparable to a measured 1-year exposure, the results show the
large variation in exposure rates that occur in the NTS environs. Considerable
variations may occur in different parts of the same city, as shown by the Las
Vegas results in Table 5.
The function of the Dosimetry Network is to monitor for radiation expo-
sures due to releases of radioactivity from the NTS. It is necessary to
establish an accurate baseline for each monitoring station so that net expo-
sure doses can be determined. This important function is served by the
Dosimetry Network. The ability to measure the true background exposure rate
or the average population exposure to background radiation is an added benefit
derived from the use of TLD's and is of secondary importance.
A network of 30 stationary gamma exposure rate recorders placed at selected
air sampling locations was used to document gamma exposure rates at fixed loca-
tions (Figure 8). These recorders use a 2.5- by 30.5-cm constant-current
ionization chamber detector filled with methane, and operate on either 110 V
a.c. or on a self-contained battery pack. They have a range of 0.004 mR/h to
15
-------
40 mR/h with an accuracy of about ±10 percent. During this report period, no
increase in exposure rates attributable to NTS operations was detected by the
network of gamma rate recorders.
MILK SURVEILLANCE NETWORK
Milk is only one of the sources of dietary intake of environmental radio-
activity. However, it is a very convenient indicator of the general popula-
tion's intake of biologically significant radionuclide contaminants. For this
reason it is monitored on a routine basis. Few of the fission product radio-
nuclides become incorporated into the milk due to the selective metabolism of
the cow. However, those that are incorporated are very important from, a
radiological health standpoint. The amount transferred to milk is a very
sensitive measure of their concentrations in the environment. The six most
common fission product radionuclides which can occur in milk are 3H, 89»90Sr,
131I, 137Cs, and lit0Ba. A seventh radionuclide, lf°K. also occurs in milk at
a reasonably constant concentration of about 1.2x10"^ yCi/ml. Since this is a
naturally occurring radionuclide, it was not included in the analytical results
summarized in this section.
The milk surveillance networks operated by the EMSL-LV were the routine
Milk Surveillance Network (MSN) and the Standby Milk Surveillance Network (SMSN)
The MSN, during 1975 (Figure 11), consisted of 24 different locations where
3.8-litre milk samples were collected from family cows, commercial pasteurized
milk producers, Grade A raw milk intended for pasteurization, and Grade A raw
milk for local consumption. In the event of a release of activity from the
NTS, intensive sampling would have been conducted in the affected area within
a 480-km radius of CP-1, NTS, to assess the radionuclide concentrations in
milk, the radiation doses that could result from the ingestion of the milk,
and the need for protective action. Samples are collected from milk suppliers
and producers beyond 480 km within the SMSN.
During 1975, 87 milk samples were collected from the MSN on a quarterly
collection schedule. Usually milk could not be obtained at all locations at
any one collection time. Cows not lactating, no one home, or no milk on the
day that field personnel arrived at the ranch were some of the reasons why
some of the samples were not collected. During the year, milk sampling points
also changed as dairies were closed, cows were sold, or cows were otherwise
unavailable for regular milkings.
The SMSN consisted of about 175 Grade A milk processing plants in all
States west of the Mississippi River. Managers of these facilities could be
requested by telephone to collect raw milk samples representing milk sheds
supplying milk to the plants. Since there were no releases of radioactivity
from the NTS or other test locations, this network was not activated except
to request one sample from each location to check the readiness and reliability
of the network. Each sample was analyzed for 3H and 89»90Sr for the purpose
of comparing the results with the results of the MSN.
Each MSN milk sample was analyzed for gamma-emitters and 89»^°Sr. Samples
collected at six locations from the MSN were also analyzed for 3H. Table 3
16
-------
lists the general analytical procedures and detection limits for these
analyses.
The analytical results of milk samples collected from the MSN during 1975
are summarized in Table 6. The maximum, minimum, and average concentrations
of the Cs, 89>90Sr, and 3H in samples collected during the year are shown
for each sampling location. Although 137Cs and 90Sr were observed in the
samples, the concentrations of these radionuclides were similar to levels
found in samples collected for the SMSN. Therefore, they were attributed to
world-wide fallout and not to NTS operations.
Shown below are the maximum, minimum, and average concentrations of 3H,
90Sr, and 13 Cs in the area surrounding the NTS and other areas of the
Western United States. As indicated by this table, the concentrations of
these radionuclides for both the MSN and the SMSN are commensurate.
Network
MSN
SMSN
Radionuclide
137Cs
9°Sr
3H
137Cs
90Sr
3H
No. of
Samples
86
87
24
124
33
36
Concentration (10~9
C C
Max • Min
18
8.7
1000
20
9.2
4100
<3
<0.6
<200
<3
<1
<200
yCi/ml)
Avg
<6
<3
<400
<7
<4
<700
WATER SURVEILLANCE NETWORK
Beginning January 1, 1975, the routine Water Surveillance Network (WSN)
was discontinued. Ten locations (Figure 13) near the NTS were selected from
the WSN, added to the Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program for the NTS,
and sampled on an annual basis.
LONG-TERM HYDROLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM
During this reporting period, EMSL-LV personnel continued the collection
and analysis of water samples from wells, springs, and spring-fed surface water
sources which are down the hydrologic gradient of the groundwater at the NTS
and at off-NTS sites of underground nuclear detonations to monitor for any
migration of test-related radionuclides through the movement of groundwater.
The water samples were collected from well heads or spring discharge points
wherever possible. If pumps were not available, an electrical-mechanical
water sampler capable of collecting 3-litre samples at depths to 1800 m was
used.
17
-------
Nevada Test Site
For the NTS, attempts were made to sample 12 stations monthly and 17 sta-
tions semi-annually (Figures 12 and 13). Additionally, samples were also
collected annually from 10 locations selected from the discontinued WSN. Not
all stations could be sampled with the desired frequency because of inclement
weather conditions and inoperative pumps.
For each sampled location, samples of raw water, filtered water, and
filtered and acidified water were collected. The raw water samples were
analyzed for 3H. Portions of the filtered and acidified samples were given
radiochemical analyses by the criteria summarized in Table 7. Table 3 sum-
marizes the analytical techniques used. Each filter was also analyzed by
gamma spectrometry.
Tables 8, 9, and 10 list the analytical results for all samples collected
and analyzed during this reporting period. As in the past, 3H was detected in
NTS Wells C and C-l due to tracer experiments conducted prior to the commence-
ment of this surveillance program. All 3H concentrations were below 0.01 per-
cent of the Concentration Guide for an occupationally-exposed person.
The 226Ra and 23S235»238u detected in most of the water samples occur
naturally in groundwater. The concentrations of these radionuclides for this
reporting period were similar to the concentrations reported for previous years.
Tables 8, 9, and 10 show concentrations of 90Sr, 238Pu, and 239Pu which
were above their respective MDC's. These concentrations, with a two-sigma
counting error and percentage of the appropriate Concentration Guide, are as
follows:
Location
Well A
Crystal Spring
Wen C
Radionuclide
238pu
239pu
9°Sr
90Sr
Concentration
(10~9 yCi/ml)
0.092 ± 0.024
0.031 ± 0.022
1.1 ± 1.0
2.6 ± 1.4
% of
Cone.
Guide
<0.01
<0.01
0.37
<0.01
Since these concentrations are either below or near the three-sigma counting
error of each measurement, the concentrations are considered to be due to
statistical error.
Due to the absence of information on background 'levels of 3H in deep
wells, the 3H concentrations measured by the program can only be compared to
previous determinations. Such a comparison for each location indicated that
there are no significant increases in concentrations which could be the result
of 3H migration from the sites of underground nuclear detonations.
18
-------
Other Test Sites
The annual collection and radiological analysis of water samples were
continued for this program at all off-NTS sites of underground nuclear deto-
nations except for Project Cannikin on Amchitka Island, Alaska, and Project
Rio Blanco near Meeker, Colorado. The latter two sites are the responsibility
of other agencies. The project sites at which samples were collected are
Project Gnome near Carlsbad, New Mexico; Project Faultless in Central Nevada;
Project Shoal near Fallen, Nevada; Project Gasbuggy in Rio Arriba County, New
Mexico; Project Rulison near Rifle, Colorado; and Project Dribble at Tatum
Dome, Mississippi. Figures 14 through 20 identify the sampling locations,
and Table. 2 lists additional information on the location of each site and tests
performed at these locations.
A contaminated well, Well HT-2M, at the Project Dribble site was plugged
from total depth to surface in July 1975. No contaminated fluid was released
to the environment during the plugging operation. As a result of the plugging
operation, the sample collection at all other wells at Project Dribble will be
quarterly for 1 year from July 1975, semi-annually for the second year, and
annually thereafter unless the analytical results of samples indicate more
frequent sampling is necessary.
All samples were analyzed using the same criteria (Table 7) as for samples
from the NTS Programs. The analytical results of all water samples collected
during CY 1975 are summarized in Table 11.
The only sample results showing radioactivity concentrations significantly
above background levels were for USGS Wells Nos. 4 and 8 near Malaga, New
Mexico. As mentioned in previous reports, these wells, which are fenced, posted,
and locked to prevent their use by unauthorized personnel, were contaminated by
the injection of high concentrations of radioactivity for a radioactive tracer
study. All surface water samples had 3H concentrations below 2.5xlO~6 yCi/ml,
a level considered from past experience to be the highest one would expect from
atmospheric fallout. All 3H concentrations in well samples were similar to
concentrations measured during previous years.
Several samples had concentrations of 90Sr and 239Pu above their respective
MDC. The locations, concentrations with two-sigma counting errors, and per-
centages of the Concentration Guides for these samples are as follows:
% of
Concentration Cone.
Location Radionuclide (10~9 yCi/ml) Guide
Malaga, New Mexico
USGS Well No. 1
Malaga, New Mexico
USGS Well No. 8
Malaga, New Mexico
PHS Well No. 6
Baxterville, Mississippi
Well HT-1
Blanco, New Mexico
9°Sr
239Pu
239pu
239pu
9°Sr
1.3 ± 0.9
0.047 + 0.040
0.024 ± 0.023
0.048 ± 0.019
1.9 ± 1.1
0.4
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.6
San Juan River
19
-------
All of the preceding concentrations are less or only slightly greater than
their respective three-sigma counting errors; therefore, all the concentrations
are considered to be the result of statistical error and not necessarily true
indications of above background measurements.
WHOLE-BODY COUNTING
During 1975, the measurements of body burdens of radioactivity in selected
off-site residents were continued. The whole-body counting facility was de-
scribed previously (NERC-LV-539-31, 1974).
One hundred and eleven individuals from 14 locations were examined. These
locations were Pahrump, Springdale, Beatty, Moapa, Caliente, Pioche, Nyala,
Diablo, Goldfield, Lathrop Wells, Ely, Tonopah, Twin Springs, and Spring
Meadows Farms, Nevada. When possible, all members of a family are included.
The minimum detectable concentrations for 137Cs by whole-body counting was
5xlO~9 yCi/g for a body weight of 70 kg and a 40-minute count. Each individual
was also given a complete hematological examination and a thyroid profile. A
urine sample was collected from each individual for 3H analysis and composite
urine samples from each family were analyzed for 238»239Pu.
From the results of whole-body counting, the fission product 137Cs was
detected above the detection limit in 82 individuals. The maximum, minimum,
and average concentrations for this radionuclide were 4.3xlO~8, 5.0xlO~9, and
1.4xlO~8 yCi/g body weight, respectively.
These concentrations are comparable to those found by the Los Alamos
Scientific Laboratory (LASL), Albuquerque, New Mexico. According to LASL
personnel (Smale and Dmbarger, 1976), the average body burden of 137Cs
measured in workers at that Laboratory was 1 nCi. Based upon the 70-kg body
weight of a standard man, this is equivalent to 1.4xlO~8 yCi/g.
In regard to the hematological examinations and thyroid profiles, no
abnormal results were observed which could be attributed to past or present
NTS testing operations. The concentrations of 238Pu and 239Pu in all urine
samples were <3xlO~10 yCi/ml and
-------
DOSE ASSESSMENT
The only radionuclides ascribed to NTS operations detected in off-NTS
areas were 133Xe (at Beatty, Diablo, Hiko, Indian Springs, and Las Vegas),
3H (at Beatty and Diablo), and 85Kr (at Beatty, Diablo, Indian Springs, and
Las Vegas) in air samples. From the analytical results of samples collected
at these locations and the dose calculations described in Appendix B, the
whole-body gamma dose equivalents (D.E.) to off-NTS residents and the 80-km
dose commitment in man-rem were calculated. The results, shown below, indi-
cate that the D.E.'s at these locations were 2.1 yrem or less, which is
Location
Beatty
Diablo
Hiko
Indian Springs
Las Vegas
Total
Whole-Body
Dose (yrem)
0.15
2.1
0.97
0.34
0.32
Percent of
Radiation
Protection
Standard
0.00009
0.002
0.0006
0.0002
0.0002
Population
500
5
52
1670
194,000
Total
Dose
Commitment
Within 80 km
(man-rem)
0.000075
0*
0*
0.00057
0*
0.00065
*Diablo, Hiko, and Las Vegas are beyond 80 km. The dose commitments
for these locations are 0.000011 man-rem, 0.000050 man-rem, and
0.062 man-rem, respectively.
0.002 percent of the Radiation Protection Standard of 170 mrem/y (Appendix A)
or 0.04-0.07 percent of the dose one could receive from cosmic radiation
(3-5 mrem) during a round-trip flight between Washington, D.C. and the West
Coast at 11,000 m above mean sea level (ERDA, 1973).
The dose commitment, which is the product of the estimated D.E. at a
given location and the exposed population, was determined as a gross measure-
ment of potential biological damage from radiation exposure, assuming that the
calculated D.E. was the average dose to the population and that the relation-
ship between dose and effects is linear. Although the maximum dose commitment
occurred at Las Vegas, the dose commitment within 80 km of NTS is reported as
required by the ERDA Manual, Chapter 0513. For comparison, the dose commitment
at Las Vegas from 1 year's exposure to natural background radiation (about
50 mrem/y, Table 5), would be 9700 man-rem.
Since the critical organ for persons exposed to °5Kr is the skin of the
total body, the D.E.'s calculated from the "Kr concentrations were excluded
from the whole-body gamma D.E. estimates and the 80-km, man-rem dose esti-
mates. The skin D.E.'s for the four off-NTS locations, Beatty, Diablo, Indian
Springs, and Las Vegas, were all <3xlO~1+ percent of the Radiation Protection
Standard of 0.5 rem/y for a suitable sample of the exposed population.
21
-------
In the derivation of the Concentration Guide for 85Kr listed in the ERDA
Manual, Chapter 0524, the exposure to airborne 85Kr is assumed to result in a
whole-body gamma dose equivalent instead of a total body skin D.E. If one
applies this assumption to the previous D.E. estimates for Beatty, Diablo,
Indian Springs, and Las Vegas (locations where above background ®5Kr concen-
trations were detected), the 80-km dose commitment estimate would be increased
to 0.0022 man-rem, a factor of 3.4 times the first estimate. The dose commit-
ments at Diablo, Hiko, and Las Vegas (beyond 80-km of NTS) would also be in-
creased to 0.000037 man-rem, 0.00017 man-rem, and 0.21 man-rem, respectively.
22
-------
REFERENCES
"Effluent and Environmental Monitoring and Reporting." U.S. Energy Research
and Development Administration Manual, Chapter 0513. U.S. Energy Research
and Development Administration. Washington, D.C. March 20, 1974.
Houghton, J. G., C. M. Sakamoto, R. 0. Gifford, Nevada's Weather and Climate.
Special Publication 2. Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology, Mackay School of
Mines, University of Nevada-Reno. Reno, Nevada, pp 69-74. 1975.
Quiring, Ralph E., "Climatological Data, Nevada Test Site, Nuclear Rocket
Development Station (NRDS)." ERLTM-ARL-7. ESSA Research Laboratories.
August 1968.
Eckel, E. B., ed. Nevada Test Site. Memoir 110. The Geological Society of
America, Inc. Boulder, Colorado. 1968.
"Preliminary Draft Environmental Statement, Nevada Test Site FY-78 and Beyond."
WASH- Draft Copy. U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration.
March 1975.
"1973 Population and 1972 Per Capita Income Estimates for Counties and
Incorporated Places in Nevada." Population and Estimates and Projections.
Series P-25, No. 573. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census.
Washington, D.C. May 1975.
"Estimates of Population of Arizona and Utah Counties, July 1, 1973, and
July 1, 1974." Information provided by Mr. Donald Starsinic, U.S. Department
of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Reno, Nevada. February 1976.
"Estimates of Population of California Counties, January 1, 1974, and January
1, 1975." Information provided by Mr. Donald Starsinic, U.S. Department of
Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Reno, Nevada. February 1976.
"Estimates of Ionizing Radiation Doses in the United States, 1960-2000."
ORP/CSD 7201. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Rockville, Maryland.
August 1972.
Lindeken, C. L., et al. "Geographical Variations in Environmental Radiation
Background in the United States." The Natural Radiation Environment II.
CONF-720805-P1. U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration. Houston,
Texas, pp 317-332. August 1972.
"Environmental Monitoring Report for the Nevada Test Site and Other Test
Areas Used for Underground Nuclear Detonation, January through December
1973." NERC-LV-539-31. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Las Vegas,
Nevada. May 1974.
23
-------
Smale, R. S., and C. J. Umbarger, "Discussion with Mr. D. M. Wood, Environ-
mental Monitoring and Support Laboratory-Las Vegas (EMSL-LV), U.S. Environ-
mental Protection Agency, during visit to EMSL-LV." H-l Health Physics Sec-
tion, Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory. Albuquerque, New Mexico. February 6,
1976.
"Estimated Average Annual Whole-Body Radiation Doses in U.S. (1973) and
Comparative Information on Annual Radiation Doses." Office of Information
Services, U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration, Washington,
D.C. 20545. 1973.
24
-------
NELLIS
AIR FORCE
RANGE
Figure 1. Nevada Test Site Location
25
-------
EXPERIMENTAL FARM
BUR ER ZONE
I
1
Nuclear Rocket Development
Station
SCALE IN FEET ' SCALE IN METRES
•^^•~lMMHHr^^==^MMBMI
1OOOO O 30OOO O 5OOO 1OOOO
Figure 2. Nevada Test Site Road and Facility Map
26
-------
SCALE IN MILES
10 20 30 40
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
SILENT CANYON CALDERA
TIMBER MOUNTAIN CALDERA
FLOW DIRECTION
GROUND WATER
Figure 3. Groundwater Flow Systems - Nevada Test Site
27
-------
\
* CAMPING
AREAS
•£ MINE
O HUNTING
• FISHING
SO 100
KILOMETRES
LAKE flAVASU
Figure 4. General Land Use, Nevada Test Site Vicinity
28
-------
FAMILY MILK COWS
F. FAMILY COWS
G. FAMILY GOATS
C. COMBINATIONS OF
COWS & GOATS
Figure 5. Location of Family Milk Cows and Goats
29
-------
MILK DAIRIES
A. GRADE A MILK COWS
B. GRADE B MILK COWS
C. GRADE A&B MILK
COWS
Figure 6. Location of Dairy Cows
-------
RAL\
(6.811) /\
\DOUG LAS\ / \
ORMSBY T9-569NESMERALDA
SAN BERNARDINO
(18.200)
Figure 7. Population of Arizona, California, Nevada, and
Utah Counties Near the Nevada Test Site
31
-------
WYOMING
"UTAH"
r -TIC. >
—-•ft J^O
UMOI
*°">!V**Vl
f[*U» 01 l.S t*M*"StOw © |AMARtLO| >Cf© » • _..,
/*'-»-OljeRCHjE © I GORMAN© ! LITTUROCK,
V*^- ® /
NEW MEXICO •' *"• S
• e . l-----^
| CAR.SBADQj "-ENt© F°"T WO"T1H I MO,^® /
. ^ki itf^lAhl&V
^ IOWA
OWA cn-v ©,'
OfH-oe
I PREFLTER CHARCOAL CARTROGE
GAMMA RATE RECORDER
ummviM n« i c "C^wnL^c"
Q PREFITER GAMMA RATE RECORDER
Q PREFILTER CHARCOAL CARTROGE
Q PREFLTER ONLY
(?) STANDBY STATIONS
TEXAS
© ALIS
•
MEXICO \
Figure 8. Air Surveillance Network
32
-------
CURRANT MAINT. STA.-%
CURRANT
' \ GEYSERf
MAINT. STA.
1
FURNACE
CREEK
DEATH
VALLEY JCT.
I NOBLE GAS & TRITIUM
SAMPLMG LOCATIONS
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
0 10 20 30 40
SCALE IN MILES
^^/7i
SHOSHONE
Figure 9. Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network
33
-------
DUCKAAIIF
CURRANT
OU1EN CITY SMT /
KOTNIS
CEDAR
ENTERPRISER
scorn
JC
SPRINGOAU
BEATTY
NElllS
AIR (ORCI
RAftGI
ST CtORCi
MfSQUl
NUCLEAR EMC
IATMROP WIll
10NE PINE
OlANCHA
SPAING MEADOWS
TtNNECO
PAHRUMP v •DESERT GAME RANGE
IAS VEGAS
TLD STATION LOCATION
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
0 10 20 30 40 50 100
SCALE IN MILES
Figure 10. Dosimetry Network
34
-------
ST GtOHGi
R COX OAIfl>
MtSQUIH
Figure 11. Milk Surveillance Network
35
-------
WELL WATERTOWN 3
A WELL UE19g-s
iWELL U19
A WELL 2OA-2
WELL UE15d
BUFFER ZONE
I
I
Nuclear RocKel Development
WELL UEScB
WELL 5BI
WELL 5c A
A MONTHLY
• SEMI-ANNUAL
Figure 12. On-Site Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program,
Nevada Test Site
36
-------
• TWIN SPGS RN. \
NYALA
GOSS SPGS.
COFFER'S 11S/48 -Idd
BEATTY
NECO
NELLIS
AIR FORCE RANGE
or-1 -i p
MERnjRYLusAF
01
DEATH VALLEY JUNCT
MONTHLY
SEMI ANNUAL
ANNUAL
• FAIRBANKS SPGS.
• 17S/50E-14CAC
•CRYSTAL POOL
>ASH MEADOWS
•INDIAN SPGS. AFB
SEWER CO. #1
30 40 50 60 70 80
^^M M
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
0 10 20 30 40 50|
SCALE IN MILES
rib
SHOSHONE \
Figure 13. Off-Site Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program,
Nevada Test Site
37
-------
SGZ0 NEW MEXICO
EDDY COUNTY
CARLSBAD CITY WELL #7
A ON-SITE WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS
• OFF SITE WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS
SCALE IN MILES
0 5 10
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
CARLSBAD
USGS WEI
LOVING CITY
•
WELL #2
MALAGA
CITY WATER
PHS WEI
PHS WELL 9 • -
PHS WELL 10" pHS WE|
• PECOS RIVER
PUMPING STATION WELL #1
7 76
Figure 14. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, Carlsbad,
New Mexico, Project Gnome/Coach
38
-------
FALLON
\
Cx
/CON
../.*
FRENCHMAN
FLOWING WELL
• H-3
HUNTS STATIONI
S6Z
HS-1
CHURCHILL COUNTY
MINERAL COUNTY
WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS
SCALE IN MILES
0 5
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
Figure 15. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations,
Fallen, Nevada, Project Shoal
39
-------
LOWER LITTLE CREEK
T SPEIGHTS. ffiSGZ R L ANDERSQN
M LOWE™ •„ /^ PURVIS
W. DANIEL^ JR
BAXTERVILLE^^XR READY
WELL ASCOT 2
NORTH LUMBERTON
LUMBERTON
LAMAR
CO
SGZ®
TATUM DOME t I LAMAR
<^__C
LOCATION MAPS
WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
O 5 1O 15 2O 25 3O 35 4O
SCALE IN MILES
Figure 16. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, Project
Dribble/Miracle Play (Vicinity of Tatum Salt Dome,
Mississippi)
40
-------
HALF MOON CREEK
HALF MOON CREEK
OVERFLOW
WELL HT-2C
WATER SAMPLINS LOCATIONS
/ SGZ ©
TATUM DOME L .1 LA
I -^T-T" I^___COUNTY
LOCATION MAPS
SCALE IN FEET
0 400 800 IJOO 1*00 iOOO
SCALE IN METRES
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Figure 17. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, Project
Dribble/Miracle Play (Tatum Salt Dome, Mississippi)
-------
TO DULCE CITY WATER
RIO ARRIBA COUNTY
LOCATION MAPS
• BIXLER RN
BUBBLING SPG.
EPNG WELL 1O-36
TO BLANCO
(SAN JUAN RIVER)
I WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
0
SCALE IN MILES
0 5
LOWER BURROW
CANYON
• CAVE SPG.
ARNOLD RN.
Figure 18. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, Rio Arriba
County, New Mexico, Project Gasbuggy
42
-------
GRAND VALLEY
CITY WATER
A GARDNER RN1*. '
^BATTLEMENT CREEK
•'CER TEST WELL
SPRING
sez
i
-
VEGA RES
WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
8
GARFIELD COUNTY
sez
Figure 19. Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Locations, Rulison,
Colorado, Project Rulison
43
-------
I
I
NEVADA
RENO
^TONOPAH
®sez
CENTRAL NEVADA
AREA
LAS VEGAS
•
HOT CREEK RANCH
I WATER SAMPLING LOCATIONS
SCALE IN KILOMETRES
O1 2345678
SCALE IN MILES
O 1 2 3 4 5
J/76
/
I
6 MILE WELL
BLUE JAY SPRING
BLUE JAY
MAINT STA
Figure 20. Long-Term Hydrologlcal Monitoring Locations Central Nevada
Test Area, Faultless Event
44
-------
Table 2. Underground Testing Conducted Off the Nevada Test Site
Name of Test,
Operation or
Project
Project Gnome/
Coach
b
Project Shoal
Project Dribbleb
(Salmon Event)
Date
12/10/61
10/26/63
10/22/64
Location
48 km (30 mi) SE of
Carlsbad, N.M.
45 km (28 mi) SE of
Fallen, Nev.
34 km (21 mi) SW of
Hattiesburg, Miss.
Yieldd
(kt)
3.1f
12
5.3
Depth
m
(ft)
360
(1184)
366
(1200)
823
(2700)
Purpose of
the Event
Multi-purpose
experiment.
Nuclear test
detection re-
search experi-
ment
Nuclear test
detection re-
Operation Long 10/29/65 Amchitka Island,
Shot Alaska
Project Dribble 12/03/66 34 km (21 mi) SW of
(Sterling Event) Hattiesburg, Miss.
Project Gasbuggy 12/10/67 88 km (55 mi) E of
Farmington, N.M.
Faultless Event° 01/19/68 Central Nevada Test
Area 96 km (60 mi) E
of Tonopah, Nev.
Project Miracle 02/02/69 34 km (21 tni) SW of
Play (Diode Tube) Hattiesburg, Miss.
Project Rulison3 09/10/69 19 km (12 mi) SW of
Rifle, Colorado
Operation MilrowC 10/02/69 Amchitka Island,
Alaska
Project Miracle 04/19/70 34 km (21 mi) SW of
Play (Humid Hattiesburg, Miss.
Water)
^80 716
(2350)
0.38 823
(2700)
29 1292
(4240)
200-
1000
914
(3000)
Non- 823
nuclear (2700)
explosion
40
viOOO
2568
(8425)
1219
(4000)
Non- 823
nuclear (2700)
explosion
search experi-
ment.
DOD nuclear
test detection
experiment.
Nuclear test
detection re-
search experi-
ment.
Joint Government-
Industry gas
stimulation ex-
periment.
Calibration
test.
Detonated in
Salmon/Sterling
cavity. Seismic
studies.
Gas stimulation
experiment.
Calibration test.
Detonated in
Salmon/Sterling
cavity. Seismic
studies.
45
-------
Table 2. (continued)
Name of Test,
Operation or
Proj ect
Operation
Cannikin0
Project Rio
Blanco
Date Location
11/06/71 Amchitka Island,
Alaska
05/17/73 48 km (30 mi) SW of
Meeker, Colorado
d Depth
Yield m
(kt) (ft)
<5000 1829
(6000)
3x30 1780
to
2040
(5840
to
6690)
Purpose of
the Event >e
Test of war-
head for
Spartan
missle.
Gas stimula-
tion experi-
ment.
aPlowshare Events
Vela Uniform Events
°Weapons Tests
Information from "Revised Nuclear Test Statistics," distributed on September 20, 1974,
by David G. Jackson, Director, Office of Information Services, U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission, Las Vegas, Nevada.
TJews release AL-62-50, AEC Albuquerque Operations Office, Albuquerque, New Mexico.
December 1, 1961
"The Effects of Nuclear Weapons" Rev. Ed. 1964.
46
-------
Table 3. Summary of Analytical Procedures
Type of
Analysis
Gamma
Spectroscopy
89-90SrC
3HC
3H Enrich-
ment (Long-
Term Hydro-
logical
Samples)
238,239pu
234,235,
238uc
Analytical
Equipment
Gamma spectro-
meter with
10-cm-thick
by 10-cm-diam-
eter Nal (Tl-
activated)
crystal with
input to 200
channels (0-2
MeV) of 400-
channel, pulse-
height analyzer,
Low-background
thin-window,
gas-flow pro-
portional
counter with a
5.7-cm diameter
window (80 vg/
cm2).
Automatic
liquid
scintillation
counter with
output printer.
Automatic
scintillation
counter with
output printer.
Alpha spectro-
meter with 45
mm2, 300-um
depletion depth
Counting
Period
(Min)
100 min for
milk, water,
Long-Term
Hydro, sus-
pended sol-
ids and air
filters; 10
min for air
charcoal
cartridges.
50
200
200
1000 -
1400
Analytical
Procedures
Rad ionuc 1 id e
concentra-
tions quan-
titated from
gamma spec-
trometer
data by com-
puter using
a least
squares
technique.
Chemical
separation by
ion exchange .
Separated sam-
ple counted
successively;
activity cal-
culated by
simultaneous
equations.
Sample pre-
pared by
distillation.
Sample concen-
trated by
electrolysis
followed by
distillation.
Sample is
digested with
acid, separ-
ated by ion
Sample
Size
(Litre)
0.4-3.5 for
routine milk
and water
samples;
700-1050m3
for air fil-
ter samples;
7.3 litre
for Long-
Term Hydro.
Water sus-
pended
solids.
1.0
0.005
0.25
1
Detection
Limit
For routine milk
and water gen-
erally - IxlO"8
uCi/ml for most
common fallout
radionuclides in
a simple spectrum.
For air filters,
* 3xlO~ltt pCi/ml.
For Long-Term
Hydro, sus-
pended solids,
* 3.0xlO~9
UCi/ml.
89Sr = 2xlO~9uCi/ml
90Sr = 1x10 9yCi/ml
=2xlO~7 yCi/ml
=6xlO~9 yd/ml
2 3 8p.j ~ 4x10
vCifml
239Pu, 23^ 235u
238U * 2xlO~u
silicon surface
barrier detectors
operated in
vacuum chambers.
exchange,
electroplated
on stainless
steel planchet
and counted by
alpha spectro-
meter.
47
-------
Table 3. (continued)
Type of
Analysis
Analytical
Equipment
Counting
Period
(Min)
Analytical
Procedures
Sample
Size
(Litre)
Detection
Limit
Gross alpha
Gross beta
in liquid
samples
Gross beta
on air
filters3
Single channel 30
analyzer
coupled to
P.M. tube
detector.
Low-background 50
thin-window,
gas-flow pro-
portional
counter with a
5.7-cm-diameter
window (80 yg/
cm2).
Low-level end 20
window, gas
flow propor-
tional counter
with a 12.7-
cm-diameter
window (100
mg/cm2).
Precipitated 1.5
with Ba, con-
verted to
chloride.
Stored for
30 days for
222Ra 226Ra to
equilibrate.
Radon gas
pumped into
scintillation
cell for alpha
scintillation
counting.
Sample eva- 0.2
porated;
residue
counted.
=1x10"10 yCi/ml
a = 3xlO~9 yCi/ml
6 = 2xlO~9 yCi/ml
Filters
counted upon
receipt and
at 5 and 12
days after
collection;
last two
counts used
to extra-
polate con-
centration
to mid-col-
lection time
assuming T l•2
decay or using
experimentally
derived decay.
10-cm
diameter
glass fiber
filter; sam-
ple collected
from 700-
1050m3.
=3x10"14 yCi/ml
48
-------
Table 3. (continued)
Type of
Analysis
Counting Sample
Analytical Period Analytical Size
Equipment (Min) Procedures (Litre)
Detection
Limit
85Kr
Xe
CH3T
Automatic
liquid scintil-
lation counter
with output
printer.
200
Physical 400-
separation by 1000
gas chroma-
tography; dis-
solved in
toluene "cock-
tail" for count-
ing.
85Kr = 2xlO~J2
pCi/ml
Xe = 2x10-12
yCi/ml
CH3T = 2x10-12
aLem, P. N. and Snelling, R. N. "Southwestern Radiological Health Laboratory Data
Analysis and Procedures Manual," SWRHL-21. Southwestern Radiological Health Laboratory,
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas, NV. March 1971
The detection limit for all samples is defined as that radioactivity which equals
the 2-sigma counting error.
CJohns, F. B. "Handbook of Radiochemical Analytical Methods," EPA 680/4-75-001.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, NERC-LV, Las Vegas, NV. February 1975.
49
-------
Table 4. 1975 Summary of Analytical Results
for the Noble Gas and Tritium Surveillance Network
Sampling
Location
Death
Valley
^r », /"» A
Jet., CA
Beatty,
NV
Diablo,
NV
Hiko,
NV
No. Days Radio-
Sampled nuclide
340
340
326
340
318
326
368
368
348
368
348
341
346
346
347,
346.
347.
347,
.2
.2
.0
.2
.9
.0
.4
.4
.4
.4
.4
.5
.2
.3
.4
.2
,4
,4
346.5
353.4
313.6
353.
313.
313.
4
6
6
85Kr
Total
3H'as
3H as
3H as
3H as
85^
Total
3H as
3H as
3H as
3H as
85Kr
133Xe
3H as
3H as
3H as
3H as
85Kr
133Xe
3H as
3H as
3H as
3H as
Xe
HTO
CH3T
HTO
HT
Xe
HTO
CH3T
HTO
HT
HTO
CH3T
HTO
HT
HTO
CH3T
HTO
HT
Radioactivity Concentrations
Units Siax CMin CAvg
10"12yCi/ml
10"12yCi/ml
air
air
10-6yCi/ml H20
10~12yCi/ml
10~12uCi/ml
10~12yCi/ml
10~12yCi/ml
10~12yCi/ml
air
air
air
air
air
10~6uCi/ml H20
10~12yCi/ml
10~12yCi/ml
10~12yCi/ml
10~12yCi/ml
10~12vCi/ml
air
air
air
air
air
10~6yCi/ml H20
10~12yCi/ml
10~12yCi/ml
10~I2yCi/ml
10~12uCi/ml
10~12uCi/ml
air
air
air
air
air
10"6uCi/ml H20
10~12yCi/ml
10"12yCi/ml
10~12uCi/ml
air
air
air
27
< 7
0.97
< 3
6.1
9.4
25
< 7
2.2
< 3
8.4
9.3
29
25
2.4
< 3
22
8.2
23
20
1.4
< 3
11
6.7
11
< 4
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.4
< 0.4
11
< 4
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.5
< 0.4
11
< 4
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.2
< 0.4
10
< 4
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.4
< 0.3
17
< 5
< 0.4
< 2 ,
< 2 >
<3
19
< 5
< 0.5
< 2 ^
< 3 >
< 3 '
18
< 6
< 0.5
< 2 ,
<3
<2 '
17
< 5
< 0.4
< 2 ^
< 2 >
< 2 '
% of
Cone.
Guide'-
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
50
-------
Table 4. (continued)
Sampling No. Days
Location Sampled
Indian
Springs,
NV **
Las Vegas,
NV-NVOO
NTS, NV
Bldg,
790
NTS, NV
Area 51
252.7
259.7
259.7
259.7
259.7
259.7
361.4
361.5
354.6
361.4
354.6
354.6
343.2
349.3
341.3
349.3
341.3
341.3
328.3
328.3
342.2
321.3
342.2
342.2
Radio-
nuclide
85Kr
*33Xe
3H as HTO
3H as CH3T
3H as HTO
3H as HT
85Kr
133Xe
3H as HTO
3H as CH3T
'3H as HTO
3H as HT
85Kr
133Xe
3H as HTO
3H as CH3T
3H as HTO
3H as HT
85Kr
133Xe
3H as HTO
3H as CH3T
3H as HTO
3H as HT
Radioactivity Concentration
c c c
Units Max Min Avg
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~6yCi/ml H20
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~6yCi/ml H20
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~6yCi/ml H20
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~6yCi/ml H20
10~12uCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
30
12
1.4
< 3
7.5
6
30
11
1.2
< 3
4.4
4.7
34
13
1.4
< 3
6.3
5.4
25
12
7.3
< 3
20 '
4.5
9
< 4
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.2
0.42
9.6
< 4
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.4
< 0.3
8.2
< 4
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.4
0.23
12
< 4
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.2
< 0.2
20
< 5
< 0.4
<2 )
<3
2.5 I
18
< 5
< 0.4
<2 I
<2
< 1 >
18
< 5
< 0.5
<3 )
<2
<2 1
18
< 5
< 0.6
<2 1
<3'
<2 '
% of
Cone.
Guide*
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
•
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
51
-------
Table 4. (continued)
Sampling
Location
NTS, NV
BJY
NTS, NV
Area 12
Tonopah,
NV
No. Days
Sampled
363.4
363.4
363.4
363.4
363.4 '
363.4
335.2
335.2
363.2
342.2
363.2
363.2
355.4
361.3
368.3
361.3
368.3
368.3
Radio-
nuclide
85Kr
133Xe
3H as HTO
3H as CH3T
3H as HTO
3H as HT
85Kr
*33Xe
3H as HTO
3H as CH3T
3H as HTO
3H as HT
85Kr
Total Xe
3H as HTO
3H as CH3T
3H as HTO
3H as HT
Radioactivity Concentration
c c c
Units Max Min Avg
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~6yCi/ml H20
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~6yCi/ml H20
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~6yCi/ml H20
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
10~12yCi/ml air
38
31
3.6
< 3
20
9.2
27
13
58
< 3
210
25
24
< 9
1.3
< 3
5.6
4.2
9.8
< 4
< 0.3
< 2
< 1
< 0.4
12
• < 4
0.25
< 2
0.71
< 0.2
10
< 4
< 0.2
< 2
< 0.4
< 0.2
19
< 6
< 2
<2 )
'
-------
Table 5. 1975 Summary of Radiation Doses
for the Dosimetry Network
Station
Location
Adaven , NV
Alamo, NV
Baker, CA
Bars tow, CA
Beatty, NV
Bishop, CA
Blue Eagle Rch. , NV
Blue Jay, NV
Cactus Springs, NV
Caliente, NV
Casey's Ranch, NV
Cedar City, UT
Clark Station, NV
Coyote Summit , NV
Currant, NV
Death Valley Jet. , CA
Desert Game Range, NV
Desert Oasis, NV
Diablo Maint. Sta., NV
Duckwater, NV
Elgin, NV
Ely, NV
Enterprise, UT
Furnace Creek, CA
Geyser Maint. Sta., NV
Goldfield, NV
Groom Lake, NV
Dose
Measurement Equivalent Rate
Period Max. Min.
1/08/75
1/06/75
1/06/75
1/06/75
1/14/75
1/08/75
1/07/75
1/08/75
1/13/75
1/08/75
1/07/75
1/13/75
1/08/75
1/06/75
1/07/75
1/15/75
1/13/75
1/13/75
1/09/75
1/07/75
1/08/75
1/06/75
1/15/75
1/08/75
1/06/75
1/13/75
1/06/75
- 1/21/76
- 1/13/76
- 1/12/76
- 1/12/76
- 1/20/76
- 1/14/76
- 1/22/76
- 1/21/76
- 1/19/76
- 1/14/76
- 1/21/76
- 1/21/76
- 1/21/76
- 1/20/76
- 1/22/76
- 1/15/76
- 1/19/76
- 1/19/76
- 1/20/76
- 1/22/76
- 1/14/76
- 1/20/76
- 1/21/76
- 1/15/76
- 1/20/76
- 1/20/76
- 1/20/76
0.36
0.25
0.22
0.25
0.31
0.24
0.17
0.33
0.17
0.28
0.21
0.23
0.31
0.33
0.25
0.22
0.16
0.18
0.38
0.29
0.30
0.27
0.30
0.19
0.26
0.26
0.19
0.32
0.23
0.19
0.23
0.26
0..21
0.15
0.27
0.14
0.26
0.16
0.18
0.29
0.28
0.23
0.20
0.12
0.14
0.30
0.23
0.28
0.23
0.23
0.17
0.23
0.23
0.18
(mrem/d)
Avg.
0.34
0.24
0.21
0.25
0.28
0.24
0.16
0.31
0.16
0.27
0.19
0.19
0.30
0.31
0.23
0.21
0.13
0.16
0.33
0.27
0.27
0.25
0.24
0.18
0.24
0.24
0.18
Annual
Adjusted
Dose
Equivalent*
(mrem/ y)
120
88
77
91
100
88
58
110
58
99
69
69
110
110
84
77
48
58
120
99
110
91
88
66
88
88
66
53
-------
Table 5. (continued)
Annual
Adjusted
Dose Dose
Station
Location
Hancock Summit, NV
Hiko, NV
Hot Creek Ranch, NV
Independence , CA
Indian Springs, NV
Kirkeby Ranch, NV
Koynes, NV
Las Vegas (McCarran) , NV
Las Vegas (Placak) , NV
Las Vegas (USDI), NV
Lathrop Wells, NV
Lida, NV
Lone Pine, CA
Lund, NV
Manhattan, NV
Mesquite, NV
Nevada Farms, NV
Nuclear Eng . Co . , NV
Nyala, NV
Olancha, CA
Pahrump, NV
Pine Creek Ranch, NV
Pioche, NV
Queen City Summit, NV
Reed Ranch, NV
Ridgecrest, CA
Round Mountain, NV
Measurement Equivalent Rate
Period Max. Min.
1/06/75
1/06/75
1/08/75
1/07/75
1/13/75
1/06/75
1/09/75
1/10/75
1/10/75
1/10/75
1/15/75
1/13/75
1/07/75
1/08/75
1/14/75
1/13/75
1/06/75
1/15/75
1/07/75
1/07/75
1/16/75
1/08/75
1/07/75
1/06/75
1/06/75
1/07/75
1/14/75
- 1/20/76
- 1/13/76
- 1/21/76
- 1/14/76
- 1/19/76
- 1/20/76
- 1/20/76
- 1/08/76
- 1/08/76
- 1/08/76
- 1/20/76
- 1/19/76
- 1/13/76
- 1/21/76
- 1/21/76
- 1/19/76
- 1/20/76
- 1/20/76
- 1/21/76
- 1/13/76
- 1/22/76
- 1/21/76
- 1/14/76
- 1/20/76
- 1/20/76
- 1/13/76
- 1/21/76
0.40
0.23
0.25
0.26
0.18
0.21
0.25
0.13
0.14
0.17
0.27
0.29
0.24
0.22
0.37
0.21
0.33
0.37
0.24
0.24
0.19
0.32
0.32
0.36
0.31
0.22
0.32
0.33
0.18
0.21
0.23
0.16
0.19
0.22
0.11
0.12
0.15
0.23
0.26
0.23
0.21
0.28
0.15
0.27
0.30
0.19
0.20
0.17
0.29
0.28
0.30
0.25
0.18
0.26
(mrem/d)
Avg.
0.35
0.20
0.20
0.24
0.18
0.20
0.24
0.12
0.13
0.16
0.24
0.27
0.23
0.21
0.31
0.17
0.29
0.34
0.22
0.22
0.18
0.30
0.29
0.34
0.28
0.20
0.29
Equivalent*
(mrent/y)
130
73
84
88
66
73
88
44
48
58
88
99
84
77
110
62
110
120
80
80
66
110
106
120
102
73
106
54
-------
Table 5. (continued)
Annual
Adjusted
Dose Dose
Station
Location
Scotty's Junction, NV
Selbach Ranch, NV
Sherri's Bar, NV
Sho shone , CA
Spring Meadows , NV
Springdale, NV
St. George, UT
Sunnyside, NV
Tempiute, NV
Tenneco, NV
Tonopah Test Range, NV
Tonopah, NV
Twin Springs Ranch, NV
Warm Springs, NV
Young's Ranch, NV
Measurement
Period
1/10/75 -
1/16/75 -
1/06/75 -
1/15/75 -
1/16/75 -
1/14/75 -
1/13/75 -
1/08/75 -
1/06/75 -
1/16/75 -
1/09/75 -
1/09/75 -
1/08/75 -
1/08/75 -
1/14/75 -
1/19/76
1/21/76
1/13/76
1/15/76
1/21/76
1/21/76
1/22/76
1/21/76
1/20/76
1/21/76
1/20/76
1/20/76
1/21/76
1/21/76
1/21/76
Equivalent Rate
Max . Min .
0.31
0.30
0.19
0.27
0.18
0.32
0.20
0.25
0.31
0.29
0.28
0.31
0.31
0.32
0.26
0.27
0.26
0.15
0.25
0.13
0.28
0.15
0.18
0.27
0.24
0.24
0.25
0.25
0.25
0.21
(mrem/d)
Avg.
0.29
0.27
0.18
0.26
0.15
0.30
0.16
0.22
0.28
0.25
0.26
0.28
0.28
0.27
0.23
Equivalent*
(mrem/y)
106
99
66
95
55
110
58
80
100
91
95
100
102
99
84
* Annual adjusted dose equivalent is average dose equivalent rate (mrem/d)
times 365 d.
55
-------
Table 6. 1975 Summary of Analytical Results for the Milk Surveillance Network
Radioactivity Cone.
1-9
Sampling Sample
Location Type
Bishop, CA 11
Sierra Creamery
Hinkley, CA 12
Bill Nelson Dairy
Keough Hot Spgs., CA 13
Yribarren Ranch
Olancha, CA 13
Hunter Ranch
Olancha, CAC 13
Riley Ranch
Alamo, NV 12
Alamo Dairy
Austin, NV 13
Young's Ranch
No. of
Samples
1
1
1
4
4
4
2
2
2
1
1
1
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
Radio-
nuclide
137Cs
89Sr
9°Sr
137Cs
89Sr
9°Sr
137Cs
89Sr
90Sr
137Cs
89Sr
9°Sr
137Cs
89Sr
9°Sr
137Cs
89Sr
9°Sr
137Cs
89Sr
9°Sr
3H
\j.\j
CMax
<4
<3
4.3
<6
<4
4.9
<5
<2
2.2
<4
<4
4.0
<5
<2
2.7
<8
<4
4.5
<7
<3
5.3
1000
(J\M« J./ 1UX/
CMin
<4
<3
4.3
<4
<1
<*
<4
<1
<2
<4
<4
4.0
<4
<2
2.0
<4
<1
-------
Table 6.
(continued)
Radioactivity Cone.
Sampling Sample
Location . Type
Currant, NV 13
Blue Eagle Ranch
Currant, NV 13
Manzonie Ranch
Hiko, NV 12
Schofield Dairy
Las Vegas, NV 12
IDS Dairy Farms
Lathrop Wells, NV 13
Kirker Ranch
Lida, NV 13
Lida Livestock Company
Logandale, NV 12
Vegas Valley Dairy
No. of
Samples
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
3
3
3
4
4
4
4
4
4
Radio-
nuclide
137Cs
89Sr
9°Sr
137Cs
89Sr
9°Sr
137Cs
89Sr
9°Sr
3H
137Cs
89Sr
90Sr
3H
137Cs
89Sr
90Sr
>37Cs
89Sr
9°Sr
137Cs
83Sr
9°Sr
VJ-<-
CMax
18
<5
5.2
<8
<4
2.4
<8 .
<4
2.4
450
5
<3
3.8
740
<5
<2
1.5
<5
<3
3.8
<7
<3
4.5
/ (J \J JU / 1U-L /
CMin
<4
<2
<1
<3
<2
<1
<4
<1
<1
<300
<3
<1
<0.9
<300
<4
<1
<0.7
<3
<1
<2
<4
<1
<0.8
Avg
<10
<3
<3
<5
<2
<2
<5
<2
<2
<400
<^
<2
<2
<400
<5
<2
<2
<4
<2
<2
<5
<2
<3
57
-------
Table 6.
(continued)
Radioactivity Cone.
Sampling
Location
Lund, NV
McKenzie Dairy
Mesquite, NV
Hughes Bros. Dairy
Moapa, NV
Searles Dairy
Nyala, NV
Sharp's Ranch
Pahrump, NV
Burson Ranch
Panaca, NV
Kenneth Lee Ranch
Round Mountain, NV
Berg Ranch
Sample No. of
Type Samples
12 4
4
4
4
12 4
4
4
4
12 4
4
4
13 4
4
4
4
13 4
4
4
13 3
3
3
13 4
4
4
Radio-
nuclide
!37cS
89Sr
9°Sr
3H
137Cs
89Sr
9°sr
3H
137Cs
89Sr
9°Sr
137Cs
89Sr
90Sr
3H
137Cs
89Sr
9°Sr
137Cs
89Sr
9°Sr
137Cs
89Sr
9°Sr
VJ-'
CMax
<7
<4
2.9
490
<7
<3
3.9
360 .
<8
<3
5.7
<6
<2
4.2
700
<7
<3
2.2
<6
<4
5.1
<10
<4
8.7
L/ n «-. J- / luj. y
Slin
<4
<2
1.4
<300
<4
<1
<2
<300
<4
<2
1.3
<4
<1
<0.1
<300
<4
<2
<1
<4
<2
1.5
<4
<2
2.8
Avg
<5
<2
2^0
<400
<5
<2
<3
<300
<6
<2
2.7
<5
<2
<2
<400
<5
<2
<2
<5
<2
2.8
<7
<2
4.7
58
-------
Table 6. (continued)
Radioactivity Cone.
Sampling
Location
Shoshone, NV
Kirkeby Ranch
Springdale, NV
Siedentopf Ranch
Cedar City, UT
Western Gold Dairy
St. George, UT
R. Cox Dairy
Sample No . of
Type Samples
13 4
4
4
13 4
4
4
12 3
3
3
12 4
4
4
Radio-
nuclide
137Cs
89Sr
9°Sr
137Cs
89Sr
90Sr
137Cs
89Sr
9°Sr
137Cs
89Sr
90Sr
U
Max
<4
<3
5.5
<7
<4
<2
<9
<3
4.5
<5
<3
4.5
LO-J yCi/ml)
CMin
<4
<1
<0.9
<4
<2
<1
<4
<2
1.2
<3
<1
<1
Avg
<4
<2
<3
<5
<2
<2
<6
<2
2.5
<4
<2
<2
11 = Pasteurized Milk
12 = Raw Milk from Grade A Producer(s)
13 = Raw Milk from family cow(s)
b
New sampling location; the Sierra Creamery closed.
New sampling location; replaces the Hunter Ranch
59
-------
Table 7. Analytical Criteria for Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring
Program Samples
Monthly
Samples
Semi-Annual
Samples
Annual
Samples
Gross alpha
Gross beta
Gamma scan
89.90
Sr
226
Ra
U
238,239^
All samples
All samples
All samples
All samples
Jan. and July sam-
ples. Any other
sample if gross
beta exceeds 1 x
10~8 uCi/ml.
Any sample if gross
alpha exceeds 3 x
10 9 yCi/ml.
Jan. and July sam-
ples in CY75.
Jan. and July sam-
ples in CY75.
All samples
All samples
All samples
All samples
Jan. sample only.
July sample if gross
beta exceeds 1 x 10 8
yCi/ml.
Any sample if gross
algha exceeds 3 x
10 9 yCi/ml.
Jan. sample only in
CY75.
Jan. sample only in
CY75.
All samples
All samples
All samples
All samples
All samples col-
lected at loca-
tions for the
first time with-
in CY75. Subse-
quent samples if
gross beta exceeds
1 x 10~8 yCi/ml.
Any sample if gross
algha exceeds 3
10 9 yCi/ml.
x
Only samples col-
lected at loca-
tions for the first
time during CY75.
Only samples col-
lected at loca-
tions for the first
time during CY75.
Starting in January 1975, all samples were first analyzed by the conventional
technique (MDO2 x 10~7 yCi/ml) as a screening method to determine if a sam-
ple should be analyzed by the enrichment technique (MDC^6 x 10 9 yCi/ml).
60
-------
Table 8. 1975 Summary of Analytical Results for the NTS Monthly Long-Term
Hydrological Monitoring Program
Sampling
Location
NTS
Well 20 A-2
NTS
Well 8
NTS
Well J-12
NTS
Well U3CN-5
No . No .
Samples Samples
Collected3 Analyzed
11 11
2
2
11
2
2
2
2
2
10 10
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
6 6
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5 4b
5
5
5
2
2
2
2
2
Radio-
nuclide
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226Ra
2 3^TT
2 3 SIT
238U
238pu
239pu
3H
89Sr
9<>Sr
23tfu
235U
238U
238pu
239pu
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226Ra
231fu
235u
238U
238pu
239pu
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226Ra
23^
235U
238U
238pu
239pu
Radioactivity Cone.
10"9 yCi/ml
CMax
<10
<2
<2
0.32
4.1
0.049
0.99
<0.04
<0.04
<9
<2
<10
0.52
<0.04
0.13
<0.03
<0.03
<9
<2
<1
0.27
1.1
<0.01
0.18
<0.06
<0.04
10
<2
<2
2.4
1,7
0.02
0.37
<0.06
<0.05
CMin
<6
<2
<1
0.031
3.8
0.023
0.98
<0.03
<0.04
<6
<2
<2
0.35
<0.02
<0.07
<0.02
<0.02
<6
<2
<1
0.27
1.1
<0.01
0.18
<0.06
<0.04
<7
<2
<0.8
0.78
0.39
<0.02
0.11
<0.05
<0.03
Avg
<8
<2
<1
0.12
4.0
0.036
0.99
<0.04
<0.04
<8
<2
<6
0.44
<0.03
<0.1
<0.03
<0.03
<8
<2
<1
0.27
1.1
<0.01
0.18
<0.06
<0.04
<9
<2
<0.9
1.8
1.0
<0.02
0.24
<0.05
<0.04
% of
Cone.
Guide
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.05
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.5
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
61
-------
Table 8. (continued)
Sampling
Location
NTS
Well J-13
NTS
Well UE 19g-s
Beatty, NV
Well llS/48-ldd
No. No.
Samples Samples
Collected Analyzed
5 5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
10 10
2
2
10
2
2
2
2
2
9 9
2
2
8
2
2
2
2
2
Radio-
nuclide
3H
89Sr
90Sr
226Ra
23ttu
235U
238u
238pu
239pu
3H
89Sr
90Sr
226Ra
23"u
235D
238U
238pu
239pu
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226Ra
23*»u
235U
238U
238pu
239pu
Radioactivity Cone.
10" 9 yCi/ml
CMax
8
<2
<0.9
0.067
1.7
<0.02
0.22
<0.03
<0.04
18
<2
<2
0.3
14
0.16
4
<0.03
<0.07
14
<2
<1
0.32
9
0.088
1.8
<0.04
<0.03
Min
<7
<2
<0.9
0.067
1.7
<0.02
0.22
<0.03
<0.04
<6
<2
<0.9
0.056
9.1
0.089
2.2
<0.03
<0.02
<6
<2
<0.9
0.056
9
0.081
1.7
<0.02
<0.03
Avg
<8
<2
<0.9
0.067
1.7
<0.02
0.22
<0.03
<0.04
<9
<2
<1
0.14
12
0.12
3.1
<0.03
<0.05
<8
<2
<1
0.17
9
0.085
1.8
<0.03
<0.03
% of
Cone.
Guide
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.017
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.035
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.043
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
NTS
Well U 19-c
3H
<0.01
62
-------
Table 8.
(continued)
Sampling
Location
NTS
Well A
NTS
Well C
NTS
Well 5C
~
NTS
Well Army No. 1
No. No.
Samples Samples
Collected Analyzed
11 10b
4
4
11
2
2
2
2
2
11 11
10
10
12
2
2
2
2
2
11 11
3
3
11
2
2
2
2
2
9 8b
3
3
8
2
2
2
2
2
Radio-
nuclide
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226Ra
231+u
235U
238U
238pu
239pu
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226Ra
231*U
235n
238U
238pu
239pu
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226Ra
23£fu
235n
238U
238pu
239pu
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226Ra
23Uy
235U
238U
238pu
239pu
Radioactivity Cone.
10~9 yCi/ml
CMax
<10
<2
<0.9
0.50
5.4
0.067
1.7
0.092
0.031
150
<3 •
3
1.3
9.2
0.10
2.6
<0.05
<0.08
15
<3
<1
0.29
5.4
0.093
2.7
<0.05
<0.05
18
<2
0.59
2.4
0.031
0.78
<0.03
<0.06
CMin
<7
<0.8
0.017
5.1
0.048
1.5
<0.04
<0.03
40
<1
<1
0.062
8.7
0.099
2.4
<0.03
<0.03
<6
<1
<0.9
0.061
2.4
<0.08
1.2
<0.04
<0.04
<7
^
0.0094
2.4
<0.02
0.72
<0.03
<0.02 ,
Avg
<8
<2
<0.9
0.13
5.3
0.058
1.6
<0.07
<0.03
90
<2
<1
0.83
9
0.01
2.5
<0.04
<0.05
<9
<2
<1
0.14
3.9
<0.09
2
<0.04
<0.04
clO
<2
0.30
2.4
<0.03
0.75
<0.03
<0.04
% of
Cone.
Guide
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.2
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.035
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
< 0.01
<0.01
<0.02
0.075
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
aSamples could not be collected every month due to weather conditions or
inoperative pumps.
Sample lost in analysis.
63
-------
Table 9. 1975 Summary of Analytical Results
for the NTS Semi-Annual Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
Sampling
Location
NTS
Well UE 15d
NTS
Well UE 15d
NTS
Well 2
Sample Radio-
Date Type3 nuclide
1/15 23 3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226Ra
23t*u
238JJ
238pu
239pu
7/08 23 3H
89Sr
9°Sr
1/14 23 3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226Ra
23«*u
235U
238pu
239pu
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10~9 pCi/ml)
<7
<2
<2
1.5
4.7
0.026
1.2
<0.05
<0.04
<7
<0.9
<9
<0.08
0.21
1.7
<0.01
0.34
<0.04
<0.04
% of
Cone.
Guide
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.4
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.05
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
NTS
Well 2
7/08 23
8.3
<0.01
NTS
Well C-l
1/14 23
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
Ra
226
23«t
235
238
238pu
239pu
70
<1
<0.8
0.067
7.7
0.23
2
<0.04
<0.03
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
64
-------
Table 9. (continued)
Sampling
Location
NTS
Well C-l
NTS
Well UE 5c
NTS
Well 5B
NTS
Well 5B
NTS
Watertown No. 3
Sample Radio-
Date Typea nuclide
7/08 23 3H
89Sr
9°Sr
1/14° 23 3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226Ra
23^
235U
238jj
238pu
239pu
1/15 23 3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226Ra
23^
235U
238U
238pu
239pu
7/09 23 3H
89Sr
90Sr
1/14 23 3H
89Sr
90Sr
23^
235U
238U
238pu
239pu
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10-9 uCi/ml)
51
<1
-------
Table 9. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Sample
Date Type8
Radio-
nuclide
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10~9 yCi/ml)
% of
Cone.,
Guide
NTS
Watertown No. 3
7/08 23
<7
<0.01
Ash Meadows, NV
Crystal Pool
1/22 27
'H
Sr
9°Sr
89
226
Ra
238
238
239
U
Pu
Pu
<8
<2
<1
0.22
11
0.23
4.5
<0.04
<0.04
<0.01
<0.07
<0.3
0.7
0.04
<0.01
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Ash Meadows, NV
Crystal Pool
7/15 27
89
90
Sr
Sr
<8
<1
<0.9
<0.01
<0.03
<0.3
Ash Meadows, NV
Well 17S/50E-14CAC
1/22 23
3H
89Sr
90Sr
226Ra
235
D
238pu
239pu
<8
<2
<2
0.089
2.4
0.033
0.89
<0.03
<0.04
<0.01
<0.07
<0.4
0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Ash Meadows, NV
Well 17S/50E-14CAC
7/15 23
3H
226Ra
11
0.47
<0.01
2
Ash Meadows, NV
Fairbanks Springs
1/22 27
3H
89Sr
90
226t
Sr
5Ra
*U
235D
238
239
Pu
Pu
<9
<2
<1
0.44
2.2
0.029
0.89
<0.03
<0.03
<0.01
<0.07
<0.3
2
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
66
-------
Table 9. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Sample
Date Typec
Ash Meadows, NV
Fairbanks Springs
7/15 27
Radio-
nuclide
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10~9 pCi/ml)
<8
% of
Cone.,
Guide
<0.01
Beatty, NV
City Supply
1/21 23
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226
Ra
238PU
239pu
17
<2
0.16
8.2
0.18
2.6
<0.04
<0.02
<0.01
<0.07
<0.3
0.5
0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Beatty, NV
City Supply
7/15 23
89Sr
9°Sr
226Ra
<7
<2
<0.8
0.13
<0.01
<0.05
<0.3
0.43
Beatty, NV
Nuclear
Engineering Co.
1/21 23
3H
89Sr
226Rl
23^
235U
238y
238pu
239pu
<7
<2
0.078
6.1
0.95
2.3
<0.04
<0.03
<0.01
<0.07
<0.3
0.3
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Beatty, NV
Nuclear
Engineering Co.
7/14 23
<8
0.033
<0.01
0.1
Indian Springs, NV
USAF No. 1
1/23 23
3H
89Sr
90Sr
226Ra
23**U
235U
238U
238pu
239pu
11
<7
<1
0.22
4.2
0.034
0.75
<0.04
<0.04
<0.01
<0.2
<0.3
0.7
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
67
-------
Table 9. (continued)
Sampling
Location Date
Indian Springs, NV 7/14
USAF No. 1
Indian Springs, NV 1/23
Sewer Co. Inc.
Well No. 1
Indian Springs, NV 7/14
Sewer Co. Inc.
Well No. 1
Lathrop Wells, NV 1/22
City Supply
Lathrop Wells, NV 7/14
City Supply
Springdale, NV 1/21
Goss Springs
Sample Radio-
Type nuclide
23 3H
226Ra
23 3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226Ra
231*U
235U
238pu
239pu
23 3H
226Ra
23 3H
89Sr
9°Sr
23 5D
238pu
239pu
23 3H
226Ra
27 3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226Ra
23^
235U
238pu
239pu
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10~9 yCi/ml)
35
0.23
<7
<2
0.095
3.4
0.021
0.73
<0.04
<0.02
<40
0.072
<8
1.1
<0.01
0.44
<0.03
<0.03
<7
4.6
<8
<2
0.15
3.6
0.057
1.1
<0.03
<0.03
% of
Cone.
Guideb
<0.01
0.8
<0.01
<0.07
<0.3
0.32
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.2
<0.01
<0.03
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
15
<0.01
<0.07
<0.3
0.5
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
68
-------
Table 9. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Sample
Date Type
Radio-
nuelide
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10~9 yCi/ml)
% of
Cone.
Guide
Springdale, NV
Goss Springs
7/14 27
<7
<0.01
Springdale, NV
Road D Windmill
1/21 23
3H
90
23«t
235
238
Sr
U
U
U
238pu
239
Pu
<6
<2
<2
1.9
0.062
1.1
<0.04
<0.03
<0.01
<0.07
<0.4
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Springdale, NV
Road D Windmill
7/14 23
<7
<0.01
Shoshone, CA
Shoshone Spring
1/22 27
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226
Ra
238
239
Pu
Pu
<8
0.17
3.3
0.041
1.2
<0.05
<0.06
<0.01
<0.03
<0.3
0.6
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Shoshone, CA
Shoshone Spring
7/15 27
89
90
Sr
Sr
<8
<1
<0.9
<0.01
<0.03
<0.3
23 - Well
27 - Spring
All on-NTS percentages are for radiation workers. All off-NTS percentages are
for an individual in an uncontrolled area.
•»
"Only one sample was collected during the year due to an inoperative pump.
69
-------
Table 10. 1975 Summary of Analytical Results
for the NTS Annual Long Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
Sampling
Location
Hiko, NV
Crystal Springs
Alamo, NV
City Supply
Warm Springs, NV
Twin Springs Ranch
Diablo, NV
Highway Maint.
Station
Sample Radio-
Date Type3 nuclide
8/25 27 3H
89Sr
90Sr
226Ra
23tu
235D
238u
238pu
239pu
8/25 23 3H
89Sr
90Sr
23^u
235W
238^
238pu
239pu
8/25 27 3H
89Sr
90Sr
226Ra
23^
235jj
238jj
238pu
239pu
8/25 23 3H
89Sr
90Sr
23^
235|j
238y
238pu
239pu
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10~9 uCi/ml)
300
<2
1.1
0.79
4.3
0.059
1.3
<0.03
<0.04
17
<2
<1
3.6
0.016
1.8
<0.03
<0.02
<8
<2
<0.9
0.22
4.6
0.087
1.8
<0.04
<0.03
10
<2
<1
1.7
0.034
0.78
<0.04
<0.04
% of
Cone.
Guide
0.01
<0.06
0.4
2.6
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.05
<0.3
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.05
<0.3
0.7
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.05
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
70
-------
Table 10. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Nyala, NV
Sharp Ranch
Sample Radio-
Date Type3 nuclide
9/03 23 3H
89Sr
90Sr
23l*u
235u
238pu
239pu
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10~9 uCi/ml)
22
<2
1.9
0.02
0.6
<0.03
<0.03
% of
Cone.
Guide
<0.01
<0.04
<0.7
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Adaven, NV
Adaven Spring
8/26
27
3H
9°Sr
226Ra
23^
238
Pu
239pu
130
<2
<0;05
3.3
0.087
1.2
<0.03
<0.02
<0.01
<0,Q6
<0.4
<0.2
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Pahrump, NV 8/27
Calvada Well No. 3
23
dH
89Sr
90Sr
226
23*t
Ra
U
238
239
Pu
Pu
16
<2
0.31
6.9
0.15
2.2
<0.03
<0.02
<0.01
<0,05
<0.3
1.0
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Tonopah, NV
City Supply
8/27
23
3H
89Sr
9°
Sr
238
Pu
239pu
10
<2
2.9
0.088
1.1
<0.05
<0,03
<0.01
<0.06
<0.4
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
71
-------
Table 10. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Sample
Date Typea
Radio-
nuclide
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10~9 yCi/ml)
% of
Cone.
Guide
Clark Station, NV
Tonopah Test Range
Well No. 6
8/27 23
89Sr
9°Sr
238pu
239pu
12
<2
<1
3.4
0.062
1.9
<0.03
<0.02
<0.01
<0.06
<0.4
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Las Vegas, NV
Well No. 28
8/27 23
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
238pu
239pu
16
<2
<2
2:i
0.032
0.61
<0.03
<0.04
<0.01
<0.07
<0.5
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
23 - Well
27 - Spring
72
-------
Table 11. 1975 Summary of Analytical Results
for the Off-NTS Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program
Sampling
Location
Date
Sample
Typec
Depth
(Metres*)
Radioactivity % of
Radio- Cone. Cone.
nuclide (10~9 yCi/ml) Guide
PROJECT GNOME
Malaga, NM
USGS Well No. 1
3/23
23
161
Malaga, NM
USGS Well No. 4
3/23
23
148
Malaga, NM
USGS Well No.
3/23
23
144
Malaga, NM
PHS Well No. 6
3/22 23
3H
89Sr
90Sr
?26Ra
238pu
239pu
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226Ra
238
pu
239pu
3H
89Sr
90Sr
137
226
Cs
Ra
235U
238JJ
238pu
239pu
3H
89Sr
90Sr
235JJ
238pu
239pu
<8
<2
1.3
6
5.5
0.055
1.8
<0.6
<2
960,000
<1,800
11,000
0.13
2.9
0.055
0.74
<0.6
<2
1,200,000
<900
11,000
<20
1.6
2.7
<0.1
0.88
<0.05
0.047
<200
<2
<0.9
1.2
0.045
0.99
<0.04
0.024
<0.01
<0.07
0.4
20
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.04
30
<60
4000
0.4
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.05
40
<30
4000
<0.1
5
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.05
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
73
-------
Table 11. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Malaga, NM
PHS Well No. 8
Sample
Date Type
3/22 23
Depth Radio-
(Metresa) nuclide
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
23ltu
235U
238U
238pu
239pu
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10~9 yCi/ml)
<8
<3
<0.9
3.9
0.092
1.8
<0.5
<0.9
% of
Cone.
Guide
<0.01
<0.09
<0.3
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.02
Malaga, NM
PHS Well No. 9
3/22 23
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
238
239
Pu
Pu
<8
<3
<0.9
1.4
0.046
0.62
<0.03
<0.04
<0.01
<0.1
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Malaga, NM
PHS Well No. 10
3/22 23
3H
89
90
Sr
Sr
238
239
Pu
Pu
<8
<2
<0.7
9.6
0.079
1.5
<0.6
<1
<0.01
<0.07
<0.2
0.03
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.02
Malaga, NM
City Water
3/21 23
3H
89Sr
9°
Sr
2350
238pu
239pu
<7
<2
<0.9
0.04
<0.01
0.056
<0.04
<0.04
<0.01
<0.06
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
74
-------
Table 11. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Malaga, NM
Pecos River
Pumping Station
Well No. 1
Loving, NM
City Well No. 2
Carlsbad, NM
City Well No. 7
Sample Depth Radio-
Date Type ^Metres3} nuclide
3/21 23 3H
23°^
235U
238pu
239pu
3/21 23 3H
89Sr
90Sr
23
-------
Table 11. (continued)
Sampling Sample
Location Pate Type
Frenchman, NV 2/20 23
Flowing Well
Frenchman, NV 2/20 23
Hunts Station
Frenchman, NV 2/19 23
Frenchman Station
Frenchman, NV 2/19 23
Well HS-1
Radio-
nuclide
3H
89Sr
ft n
90Sr
226Ra
23I*U
235U
238U
238pu
239pu
3H
89Sr
90Sr
23J*U
235y
238U
238pu
239pu
3H
89Sr
90gr
226Ra
23**U
235U
238D
238pu
239pu
3H
89gr
9°Sr
226Ra
23^ri
235rj
238U
238pu
239pu
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10-9 yCi/ml)
<9
<5
<4
0.26
0.36
<0.02
0.23
<0.2
<0.09
<8
<6
<4
0173
0.035
0.41
<0.05
<0.02
<7
<6
<4
0.17
23
0.55
11
<0.05
<0.05
<7
<6
<4
0.067
3.3
0.098
2.2
<0.04
<0.02
% of
Cone.
Guide
<0.01
<0.2
<1
0.9
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.2
<1
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.2
<1
0.6
0.08
<0.01
0.03
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.2
<2
0.2
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
76
-------
Table 11. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Date
Sample
Typec
Depth
(Metres )
Radio-
nuclide
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10~ 9 yCi/ml)
% of
Cone.
Guide
PROJECT DRIBBLE
Baxterville, MS
City Supply
7/18
23
Baxterville, MS
Lower Little
Creek
10/17
7/21
23
22
Baxterville, MS
Well HT-1
10/19
7/03
22
23 399
89Sr
90Sr
23k
235
238pu
239pu
3H
3H
38
<1
<0.9
0.034
<0.01
<0.03
<0.03
<0.02
93
130
<6
<0.01
<0.05
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
dH
89Sr
90Sr
23tfu
235U
238y
238pu
239pu
110
<2
<1
0.032
<0.009
0.03
<0.03
<0.04
<0.01
<0.06
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
7/20
23
358
89
90
226
23»f
235
238
Sr
Sr
Ra
U
U
U
10/15
23
389
238pu
239pu
3H
8.6
<2
<1
15
17
1.1
29
<0.03
0.048
74
<0.01
<0.05
<0.4
0.5
0.06
<0.01
0.07
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
77
-------
Table 11. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Date
Sample Depth
Type (Metresa)
Radioactivity % of
Radio- Cone. Cone.
nuclide (10~9 yCi/ml) Guide
Baxterville, MS 7/03
Well HT-2c
23
108
3H
15
<0.01
7/20
23
108
Baxterville, MS
Well HI-4
10/18
7/02
23 108
23 122
89Sr
9°Sr
235,;
238U
238pu
239
Pu
3H
29
<2
<1
0.045
<0.009
0.025
<0.03
<0.02
35
16
<0.01
<0.05
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
7/20
23
122
Baxterville, MS
Well HT-5
10/18
7/02
23
23
122
183
*H
89Sr
90Sr
231*11
235U
238pu
239pu
9.3
<2
0.032
<0.01
<0.01
<0.04
<0.02
<0.01
<0.05
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
20
8.3
<0.01
<0.01
7/20
23
183
10/18
23 183
78
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
23 By
2380
238pu
24
<2
<1
0.027
0.02
<0.03
<0.04
<0.03
12
<0.01
<0.06
<0.4
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
-------
Table 11. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Date
Radioactivity % of
Sample Depth Radio- Cone. Cone.
Type0 (Metres3) nuclide (10~9 yCi/ml) Guide
Baxterville, MS 7/03
Well E-7
23
282
<7
<0.01
7/20
23
282
Baxterville, MS
Well Ascot No. 2
10/18
7/19
23 282
23 638
10/15
23
651
89
Sr
235
238
238pu
239pu
3H
<8
<1
<0.9
<0.02
<0.01
0.017
<0.03
<0.02
<7
<0.01
<0.04
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
23^
235u
238u
238pu
239pu
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
18
<2
<0.8
0.026
<0.01
0.017
<0.03
<0.02
20
<3
<2
<0.01
<0.05
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.1
<0.5
Baxterville, MS
Half Moon Creek
7/01
7/19
22
22
10/19
22
3H
3H
90
64
<0.01
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
23^
23 5^
238u
238pu
239Pu
67
<2
<1
<0.02
<0.01
<0.02
<0.04
<0.04
0.01
<0.05
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
79
-------
Table 11. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Sample Depth Radio-
Date Typec (Metres j nuclide
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10~9 yCi/ml)
% of
Cone.
Guide
Baxterville, MS
Half Moon
Creek Overflow
7/02
7/19
22
22
Baxterville, MS
T. Speights
Residence
10/19
7/01
7/18
22
23
23
Baxterville, MS
R. L. Anderson
Residence
10/20
7/01
7/21
23
23
23
3H
3H
89Sr
90Sr
23 5D
238pu
239pu
3H
3H
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
Ra
226
234
235
238
239:
Pu
'Pu
480
2200
<2
<2
<0.02
<0.01
<0.02
<0.04
<0.02
380
110
10/20
23
3H
96
58
93
<2
<1
0.53
0.044
<0.01
<0.01
<0.03
<0.02
74
0.02
0.07
<0.05
<0.4
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.01
<0.01
=>H
89Sr
9l)Sr
23ltu
235U
238U
238pu
239pu
48
<2
<1
0.048
<0.01
0.036
<0.02
<0.03
<0.01
<0.06
<0.4
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.06
<0.4
2
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
80
-------
Table 11. (continued)
Sampling
Location Date
Baxterville, MS 7/22
Mark Lowe Residence
10/17
Baxterville, MS 7/22
R. Ready Residence
Sample Depth Radio-
Type0 (Metres8) nuclide
23 3H
89Sr
90Sr
23'tu
235U
238y
238pu
239pu
23 3H
23 3H
89Sr
9°Sr
23"^
235U
238U
238pu
239pu
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10~9 uCi/ml)
220
<2
<0.8
<0.01
<0.007
0.012
<0.04
<0.03
160
64
. <2
<1
0.034
<0.02
<0.03
<0.01
<0.01
% of
Cone.
Guide
<0.01
<0.05
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.05
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Baxterville, MS
W. Daniels, Jr.
Residence
10/20
7/01
7/22
23
23
23
Lumberton, MS
City Supply
Well No. 2
10/17
7/21
23
23
3H
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
23^
238pu
239pu
3H
64
130
80
<2
<1
0.029
<0.01
0.031
<0.04
<0.03
80
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.06
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
234U
23 5n
238u
238pu
239pu
<7
<2
<1
<0.02
<0.02
<0.02
<0.04
<0.03 '
<0.01
<0.06
<0.4
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
81
-------
Table 11. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Date
Sample Depth
Typec (Metres )
Radioactivity
Radio- Cone.
nuclide (10~9 pCi/ml)
% of
Cone.
Guide
Lumberton, MS
City Supply
Well No. 2
(continued)
10/20
23
3H
<6
<0.01
Purvis, MS
City Supply
Columbia, MS
City Supply
7/18
23
10/17
7/22
23
23
Lumberton, MS
North Lumberton
City Supply
10/17
7/21
23
23
Baxterville, MS
Pond W of GZ
10/17
7/02
23
21
3H
89Sr
90Sr
23^
235u
238u
238pu
239pu
<8
<1
<0.9
<0.02
<0.008
<0.01
<0.03
• <0.02
<0.01
<0.04
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
3H
89Sr
3H
14
Lost Sample
35
Lost Sample
<0.01
<0.05
90Sr
231*U
235U
238y
238pu
239pu
<0.9
0.027
<0.007
0.029
<0.04
<0.04
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
3H
89Sr
90Sr
23^u
235JJ
238U
238pu
239pu
3H
<7
<2
<1
<0.02
<0.01
0.018
<0.03
<0.02
<7
<0.01
<0.05
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
82
-------
Table 11. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Baxterville, MS
Pond W of GZ
(continued)
Sample Depth Radio-
Date Type0 (Metresa) nuclide
7/22 21 3H
"Sr
90Sr
23^
235u
238u
238pu
239pu
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10~9 yCi/ml)
120
<1
<0.8
0.023
<0.01
0.019
-------
Table 11. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Blanco, NM
San Juan River
Gobernador, NM
Cave Springs
Gobernador, NM
Windmill No. 2
Gobernador, NM
Bubbling Springs
Sample Depth Radio-
Date Typec (Metres ) nuclide
5/26 22 3H
89Sr
90Sr
231tu
235U
238Pu
239pu
5/25 27 3H
89Sr
90Sr
226Ra
231*U
235U
238pu
239pu
5/24 23 3H
89Sr
9°Sr
235U
238pu
239pu
5/24 27 3H
9°Sr
226Ra
23£»u
238JJ
238pu
239pu
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10~9 pCi/ml)
510
<2
1.9
0.50
0.018
0.30
<0.03
-------
Table 11. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Dulce, NM
City Water
Dulce, NM
La Jara Lake
2obernador, NM
EPNG Well 10-36
Lulison, CO
>ee L. Hayward
Ranch
Sample Depth Radio-
Date Type0 (Metres3) nuclide
5/24 21 3H
89Sr
9°Sr
23^
235U
238pu
239pu
5/24 21 3H
89Sr
9°Sr
23^
235U
238pu
239pu
5/26 23 1097 3H
89Sr
90Sr
226Ra
23ifu
235U
238pu
239pu
PROJECT RUL1SON
5/21 23 3H
89Sr
9°Sr
226Ra '
235n
238U
239Pu
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10"9 yCi/ml)
260
<0.8
0.28
<0.01
0.15
<0.03
<0.02
280
<2
<0.9
0.91
0.03
0.59
<0.09
<0.05
13
<0.9
<0.8
0.25
0.042
<0.007
0.027
<2
<6
350
<2
<0.8
<0.05
8.1
0.14
3.9
<0.04
<0.03
% of
Cone.
Guide
<0.01
<0.04
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.06
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.03
<0.3
0.8
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.05
0.01
<0.06
<0.3
<0.2
0.03
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
85
-------
Table 11. (continued)
Sampling Sample
Location Date Type
Rulison, CO 5/22 23
Glen Schwab
Ranch
Grand Valley, CO 5/21 23
Albert Gardner
Ranch
Grand Valley, CO 5/22 27
City Water
Supply
Grand Valley, CO 5/21 27
Spring 300 Yds.
NW of GZ
Depth Radio-
(Metres ) nuclide
3H
89Sr
90Sr
226Ra
23^
235u
238lJ
238pu
239pu
3fi
89Sr
9°Sr
23«fD
235u
238u
238pu
239pu
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
2340
235u
238u
238pu
239pu
%
89Sr
9°sr
23fu
235u
2380
238pu
239pu
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10~9 pCi/ml)
380
<2
<1
0.13
12
0.25
6
<0.03
<0.02
510
<2
<1
2.4
0.056
1.1
<0.03
<0.02
130
<2
<1
2.5
0.059
0.92
<0.03
<0.04
480
<2
<0.9
1.3
0.037
0.66
<0.03
<0.04
% of
Cone.
Guide
0.01
<0.08
<0.4
0.4
0.04
<0.01
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
0.02
<0.07
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.07
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.02
<0.05
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
86
-------
Table 11. (continued)
Sampling Samplg
Location Date Type
Rulison, CO 5/22 23
Felix Sefcovic
Ranch
Anvil Points, CO 5/21 27
Bernklau Ranch
Grand Valley, CO 5/21 22
Battlement Creek
Grand Valley, CO 5/22 23
CER Well
Rulison, CO 5/21 27
Potter Ranch
Depth Radio-
(Metres ) nuclide
3H
90Sr
2 3*+TT
2 3 5rj
238pu
239pu
3H
89Sr
90Sr
234u
235U
238pu
239pu
3H
90Sr
23^
235U
238pu
239pu
13.6 3H
"Sr
9°Sr
2 3 5"
238pu
239pu
3H
89Sr
90Sr
226Ra
234U
235U
238pu
239pu
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10~9 yCi/ml)
580
<2
<0.8
0.49
0.017
0.26
<0.04
<0.03
510
<0.8
2.4
0.039
1.0
<0.03
<0.02
300
<2
0.36
0.024
0.18
<0.02
<0.02
540
<2
0.24
<0.009
0.18
<0.04
<0.02
420
<2
0.089
4.7
0.13
3.1
<0.04
<0.02
% of
Cone.
Guide
0.02
<0.06
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.02
<0.04
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.01
<0.05
<0.4
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.02
<0.07
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
0.01
<0.07
<0.3
0.3
0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
87
-------
Table 11. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Date
Sample
Type0
Depth
(Metres3)
Radio-
nuclide
Radioactivity
Cone.
(10~9 pCi/ml)
% of
Cone.
Guide
Blue Jay, NV
Highway Maint.
Station
3/11
FAULTLESS EVENT
23
89Sr
90Sr
U
238pu
239pu
<8
<2
<1
3.3
0.07
1.3
<0.03
<0.04
<0.01
<0.07
<0.4
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Warm Springs, NV 3/11
Hot Creek Ranch
27
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
238pu
239pu
26
<2
<1
1.8
0.035
1.1
<0.02
<0.02
<0.01
<0.07
<0.4
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Blue Jay, NV 3/11
Blue Jay Spring
27
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
23^
235U
238U
238pu
239pu
11
<1
<1
3.9
0.073
2.1
<0.03
<0.05
<0.01
<0.03
<0.3
0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
Blue Jay, NV
Sixmile Well
3/11
23
3H
89Sr
238pu
239pu
<8
<2
<0.9
1.9
0.019
0.74
<0.02
<0.02
<0.01
<0.05
<0.3
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
88
-------
Table 11. (continued)
Sampling
Location
Date
Sample Depth
Typec (Metres3)
Radioactivity % of
Radio- Cone. Cone.
nuclide (10~9 yCi/ml) Guide
Well HTH-1
3/12
23
259
Well HTH-2
8/14
3/12
23
23
259
184
8/14
23
184
89Sr
90
Sr
235
238
238pu
239pu
3
H
3H
89
Sr
9°Sr
234
235
238
238
U
U
U
Pu
239pu
<7
<2
<1
1.7
0.059
1.0
<0.05
<0.03
<7
<8
<2
<0.7
2.5
<0.02
0.75
<0.04
<0.03
<8
<0.01
<0.08
<0.4
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.05
<0.2
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.01
If depth not shown, water was collected at surface.
Sample collected from tap in Malaga. Water originates from Loving City Well
No. 2.
°21 - Pond, Lake, Reservoir, Stock Tank, Stock Pond
22 - Stream, River, Creek
23 - Well
27 - Spring
89
-------
APPENDIX A. RADIATION PROTECTION STANDARDS
FOR EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL EXPOSURE*
ANNUAL DOSE COMMITMENT
Type of Exposure
Dose Limit to
Critical Individuals
in Uncontrolled Area
at Points of Maximum
Probable Exposure (rem)
Dose Limit to
Suitable Sample
of the Exposed
Population in an
Uncontrolled Area (rem)
Whole Body, gonads
or bone marrow
Other organs
CONCENTRATION GUIDES (CG's)
Sampling
Network or Program Medium
Air Surveillance Network air
Noble Gas and Tritium air
Surveillance Network,
On-NTS
Noble Gas and Tritium air
Surveillance Network,
Off -NTS
Water Surveillance water
Network
0.5
1.5
Radio-
nuclide
7Be
95Zr
103Ru
106Ru
1It0Ba
^Ce
!^Ce
85Kr
3H
133Xe
85Kr
%
133Xe
3H
89Sr
9°Sr
238pu
239pu
226Ra
CG
(uCi/ml) .
l.lxlO-8
3.3xlO-10
l.OxlO-9
6. 7x10- n
3.3xlO-10
1.7xlO-9
6. 7x10- u
l.OxlO-5
5. 0x10- 6
l.OxlO-5
1.0xlO~7
6. 7x10- 8
l.OxlO-7
l.OxlO-3
l.OxlO-6
1.0x10" 7
1.7xlO-6
1.7xlO-6
l.OxlO-8
0.17
0.5
Basis of Exposure
Suitable sample
of the exposed
population in
uncontrolled area.
Individual in
controlled area.
Suitable sample
of the exposed
population in
uncontrolled area.
Suitable sample of
the exposed popula-
tion in an uncon-
trolled area.
*"Radiation Protection Standards," ERDA Manual, Chapter 0524.
90
-------
CONCENTRATION GUIDES (CG's) continued
Network or program
Long-Term Hydrological
Program
Sampling Radio-
Medium nuclide
water 3H
89Sr
90 Sr
238PU
239pu
23«*u
235u
238u
226Ra
' 137Cs
89Sr
90Sr
238PU
239pu
23^
CG
(yCi/ml) Basis of Exposure
3. OxlO-3 Individual in
3 OxlO-6 uncontrolled area.
3. OxlO-7
5. OxlO-6
5. OxlO-6
3. OxlO-5
3. OxlO-5
4. OxlO-5
3. OxlO-8
2. OxlO-5
l.OxlO-1 Individual in
3. OxlO-1* controlled area.
l.DxlO'5
l.OxlO-4*
l.OxlO-1*
9. OxlO-1*
1.0x10
4.0x10
-3
_7
91
-------
APPENDIX B. DOSE ASSESSMENT CALCULATIONS
METHOD
The radionuclides detected in off-NTS air samples and attributed to NTS
operations were 133Xe, 85Kr, and 3H. Based upon the time-integrated concen-
trations of 133Xe and 3H at each location where the nuclide(s) were detected,
whole-body dose estimates were calculated from the following equations.
D.E. = 0.25 EI|J*, where D.E. is the whole-body dose equivalent resulting
from exposure to airborne 133Xe, rem;
E is the effective energy of the radiations released per disintegration
of 133Xe, 0.19 MeV/dis;
i|> is the time-integrated concentration of 133Xe, Ci-sec/m3.
D.E. = 0.47 EX**, where D.E. is the whole-body dose equivalent resulting
from exposure to airborne 3H, rem;
E is the effective energy released per disintegration of 3H, 0.010 MeV/ dis;
X is the time-integrated concentration of 3H in air, yCi-d/m3.
The 80-km, man-rem dose was calculated from the product of these dose equivalents
and the population at each sampling location.
Since the gamma radiation per disintegration of 85Kr is negligible (0.514 MeV,
0.41 percent abundance) the major hazard from this nuclide is beta radiation to the
skin of the total body. Skin dose equivalents were calculated from the time-
integrated concentration of 85Kr at each sampling location where 85Kr was detected
and the same equation for 133Xe, except an effective energy of 0.24 MeV/dis was
used instead of the 0.19 MeV/dis which was for 133Xe.
* "Meteorology and Atomic Energy," U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Division of
Technical Information, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, p 339. July 1968
** Based upon the assumptions of "Report of Committee IV on Evaluation of
Radiation Doses to Body Tissues from Internal Contamination Due to Occupational
Exposures." Recommendation of the International Committee on Radiological Pro-
tection, ICRP Publication 10. Pergamon Press, New York, pp 29-30. 1968
92
-------
RESULTS
The results of the whole-body dose calculations are summarized, as follows:
Location
Beatty
Diablo
Hiko
Indian Springs
Las Vegas
Time- Integrated Whole-Body
Radio- Concentration Dose
nuclide (yCi-s/m3) (yrem)
3H
3H
133Xe
133Xe
133Xe
133Xe
2.7
8.6
34
20
7.2
6.6
0.15
0.46
1.6
0.97
0.34
0.32
Dose
Commitment
Within 80 km
Population (man-rem)
500
5
52
1670
194,000
Total
0.000075
0*
0*
0.000570*
0.00057
0*
0.00065
* Diablo, Hiko, and Las Vegas are beyond 80 km. Dose commitments at these
locations were calculated as 0.000010 man-rem, 0.000050 man-rem, and 0.062
man-rem, respectively.
Although the total body skin dose equivalents calculated from the 85Kr
concentrations are not appropriate for inclusion with the 80-km dose commit-
ment estimates, the results of this calculation are summarized as follows for
comparison to the Radiation Protection Standard of 0.5 rem/y for exposures to
the skin at a suitable sample of the population.
Location
Beatty
Diablo
Indian Springs
Las Vegas
Time-Integrated
Concentration of 85Kr
(uCi-s/m3)
4.8
12
15
15
Total Body
Skin Dose
(yrem)
0.29
0.72
0.87
0.90
Percent of
Radiation
Protection
Standard
6x10- 5
lKW~k
2x10- k
2x10-^
If one used the conservative assumption of the ERDA Manual, Chapter 0524, that
exposure to airborne 85Kr results in a whole-body gamma exposure, the doses at
Beatty, Diablo, Indian Springs, and Las Vegas would be increased by the doses
above. This would result in a 80-km dose commitment of 0.0022 man-rem, a factor
of 3.4 times the first estimate, and dose commitments at Diablo and Las Vegas of
0.000014 man-rem and 0.22 man-rem, respectively.
93
-------
lirem
pCi/ml
AEC
ASN
C
CG
Ci
cm
CP-1
CY
D.E.
EMSL-LV
EPA
ERDA
ERDA/NV
ft
kg
kt
LLL
m
MDC
mrem/y
mrem/d
APPENDIX C. LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS
Micro-roentgen-equivalent-man.
Microcurie per gram.
Microcurie per millilitre.
Atomic Energy Commission.
Air Surveillance Network.
Temperature in Celsius.
Concentration Guide.
Curie.
Centimetre.
Control Point One.
Calendar year.
Dose Equivalent.
Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory-Las Vegas.
Environmental Protection Agency.
Energy Research and Development Administration.
Energy Research and Development Administration/Nevada
Operations Office.
Feet.
Kilogram.
Kiloton.
Lawrence Livermore Laboratory
Metre.
Minimum detectable concentration.
Milli-roentgen-equivalent-man per year.
Milli-roentgen-equivalent-man per day.
94
-------
mR Milli-roentgen.
mR/h Milli-roentgen per hour.
MSL Mean sea level.
MSN Milk Surveillance Network.
nCi Nanocurie.
NTS Nevada Test Site.
PHS Public Health Service.
SMSN Standby Milk Surveillance Network.
TLD Thermoluminescent dosimeter.
USGS United States Geological Society.
WSN Water Surveillance Network.
3H Tritium or Hydrogen-3.
HT Tritiated Hydrogen.
HTO Tritiated Water.
CH3T Tritiated Methane.
Ba Barium.
Cs Cesium.
K Potassium.
Kr Krypton.
Pu Plutonium.
Ra Radium.
Sr Strontium.
U Uranium.
Xe Xenon.
95
-------
DISTRIBUTION
1-25 Environmental Monitoring & Research Laboratory, Las Vegas, NV
26 Mahlon E. Gates, Manager, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
27 Troy E. Wade, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
28 David G. Jackson, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
29 Paul B. Dunaway, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
30 - 31 Bruce W. Church, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV (2)
32 Mary G. White, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
33 Roger Ray, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
34 Chief, NOB/DNA, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
35 - 36 Robert R. Loux, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV (2)
37 A. J. Whitman, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
38 Elwood M. Douthett, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
39 Shed R. Elliott, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
40 Ernest D. Campbell, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
41 Thomas M. Humphrey, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
42 - 43 Peter K. Fitzsimmons, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV (2)
44 Robert W. Newman, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
45 Harold F. Mueller, ARL/NOAA, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
46 Virgil Quinn, ARL/NOAA, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
47 - 49 Technical Library, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV (3)
50 Mail and Records, ERDA/NV, Las Vegas, NV
51 R. S. Brundage, CER Geonuclear Corporation, P.O. Box 15090,
Las Vegas, NV 89114
52 Leslie Estep, ERDA/SAN, San Francisco Operation Office,
1333 Broadway, Oakland, CA 94616
53 - 57 Martin B. Biles, DSSC, ERDA, Washington, D.C. (5)
58 Major General J. K. Bratton, AGMMA, ERDA, Washington, D.C.
59 A. J. Hodges, DMA, ERDA, Washington, D.C.
60 Gordon Facer, MA, ERDA, Washington, D.C.
61 Andrew J. Pressesky, ROD, ERDA, Washington, D.C.
62 James L. Liverman, BER, ERDA, Washington, D.C.
63 P. L. Randolph, El Paso Natural Gas Co., P.O. Box 1492,
El Paso, TX 79978
64 Gilbert J. Ferber, ARL/NOAA, Silver Springs, MD
65 William Horton, Bureau of Environmental Health, State of Nevada
505 E. King St., Carson City, NV 89710
96
-------
66 Dr. Wilson K. Talley, Assistant Administrator for Research &
Development, EPA, Washington, D.C.
67 William D. Rowe, Deputy Assistant Administrator for Radiation
Programs, EPA, Washington, D.C.
68 Dr. William A. Mills, Director, Division of Criteria & Standards,
ORP, EPA, Washington, D.C.
69 David S. Smith, Director, Division of Technology Assessment,
ORP, EPA, Washington, D.C.
70 Bernd Kahn, Chief, Radiochemistry & Nuclear Engineering, NERC,
EPA, Cincinnati, OH
71- 72 Floyd L. Galpin, Director, Environmental Analysis Division, ORP, EPA,
Washington, D.C. (2)
73 Dr. Gordon Everett, Director, Office of Technical Analysis, EPA,
Washington, D.C.
74 Regional Administrator, EPA, Region IV, Atlanta, GA
75 Regional Radiation Representative, EPA, Region IV, Atlanta, GA
76 State of Mississippi
77 Regional Administrator, EPA, Region VI, Dallas, TX
78 Regional Radiation Representative, EPA, Region VI, Dallas, TX
79 State of New Mexico
80 Regional Administrator, EPA, Region VIII, Denver, CO
81 Regional Radiation Representative, EPA, Region VIII, Denver, CO
82 State of Colorado
83 State of Utah
84 Regional Administrator, EPA, Region IX, San Francisco, CA
85 Regional Radiation Representative, EPA, Region IX, San Francisco, CA
86 State of Arizona
87 State of California
88 State of Nevada
89 Eastern Environmental Radiation Facility, EPA, Montgomery, AL
90 Library, EPA, Washington, D.C.
91 Kenneth M. Oswald, LLL, Mercury, NV
92 Roger E. Batzel, LLL, Livermore, CA
93 James E. Carothers, LLL, Livermore, CA
97
-------
94 John Hopkins, LASL, Los Alamos, NM
95 Jerome E. Dummer, LASL, Los Alamos, NM
96 Arden E. Bicker, REECo, Mercury, NV
97 A. W. Western, REECo, Mercury, NV
98 Savino W. Cavender, M.D., REECo, Mercury, NV
99 Carter D. Broyles, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM
100 George Tucker, Sandia Laboratories, Albuquerque, NM
101 Albert E. Doles, Eberline Instrument Co., Santa Fe, NM
102 Robert H. Wilson, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY
103 Richard S. Davidson, Battelle Memorial Institute, Columbus, OH
104 J. P. Corley, Battelle Memorial Institute, Richland, WA
105 John M. Ward, President, Desert Research Institute, University of
Nevada, Reno, NV
106 ERDA/HQ Library, Attn: Eugene Rippeon, ERDA, Washington, D.C.
107 - 134 Technical Information Center, Oak Ridge, TN (for public availability)
135 T. F. Cornwell, DMA, ERDA, Washington, D.C.
98
------- |