Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model Rev 03, ICN 00

ANL-MGR-MD-000001

September 2004
 
1. PURPOSE 
This analysis is one of 10 reports that support the Environmental Radiation Model for Yucca 
Mountain, Nevada (ERMYN) biosphere model. The Biosphere Model Report (BSC 2004 
[DIRS 169460]) describes in detail the conceptual model as well as the mathematical model and 
its input parameters. This report documents development of input parameters for the biosphere 
model that are related to atmospheric mass loading and supports the use of the model to develop 
biosphere dose conversion factors (BDCFs). The biosphere model is one of a series of process 
models supporting the total system performance assessment (TSPA) for a Yucca Mountain 
repository. 
Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model is one of five reports that 
develop input parameters for the biosphere model. A graphical representation of the 
documentation hierarchy for the ERMYN is presented in Figure 1-1. This figure shows the 
interrelationships among the products (i.e., analysis and model reports) developed for biosphere 
modeling, and the plan for development of the biosphere abstraction products for TSPA, as 
identified in the Technical Work Plan for Biosphere Modeling and Expert Support (BSC 2004 
[DIRS 169573]). 
This analysis report defines and justifies values of mass loading for the biosphere model. Mass 
loading is the total mass concentration of resuspended particles (e.g., dust, ash) in a volume of 
air. Mass loading values are used in the air submodel of ERMYN to calculate concentrations of 
radionuclides in air inhaled by a receptor and concentrations in air surrounding crops. 
Concentrations in air to which the receptor is exposed are then used in the inhalation submodel to 
calculate the dose contribution to the receptor from inhalation of contaminated airborne particles. 
Concentrations in air surrounding plants are used in the plant submodel to calculate the 
concentrations of radionuclides in foodstuffs contributed from uptake by foliar interception. 
Two sets of mass loading values are developed in this analysis. The first is representative of 
nominal, current and future concentrations of resuspended particles in the Yucca Mountain 
region. In this report, nominal refers to air-quality conditions in the reference biosphere not 
measurably affected by a volcanic eruption at Yucca Mountain. As displayed in Figure 1-1, this 
set of mass loading values is used in the analysis of the biosphere groundwater exposure scenario 
to calculate the dose caused by inhalation and crop interception of resuspended soil contaminated 
by irrigation water. These values also are used in the analysis of the biosphere volcanic ash 
exposure scenario to calculate the dose caused by inhalation and interception of nominal 
concentrations of resuspended, contaminated ash following a volcanic eruption. The second set 
of mass loading values is representative of the increase in mass loading expected after a volcanic 
eruption at Yucca Mountain and is used in the biosphere volcanic ash exposure scenario to 
calculate the inhalation and ingestion doses following an eruption. The biosphere exposure 
scenarios are not the same as scenario classes used in the TSPA. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 1-2 September 2004 
Figure 1-1. Documentation Hierarchy for the Environmental Radiation Model for Yucca 
Mountain, Nevada 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 1-3 September 2004 
In addition, the mass loading time function and the parameter mass loading decrease constant are 
developed in this analysis. This function describes how mass loading changes over time 
following a volcanic eruption. The decrease constant defines the rate of change in mass loading 
following an eruption. The time function and decrease constant are used directly in the TSPA 
model to account for changes in BDCFs caused by a decrease in mass loading through time 
following an eruption. 
To summarize, the following parameters are developed in this report. 
 Mass loadingreceptor environments, Sn (mg/m3)The average annual mass 
concentration of suspended particles in n environments. 
 Mass loadingcrops, S (mg/m3)The average annual mass concentration of suspended 
particles in agricultural fields and gardens to which food and forage crops are exposed. 
 Mass loading decrease constant, . (1/year)Proportion of resuspended particles 
present at the beginning of a year that are not readily resuspendable at the end of the 
year. This parameter and the associated mass loading time function are applicable only 
to the volcanic ash exposure scenario. 
These parameters support treatment of the features, events, and processes (FEPs) listed in 
Table 1-1 that are applicable to biosphere modeling. See the Biosphere Model Report 
(BSC 2004 [DIRS 169460], Section 6.2) for information on the treatment of FEPs in the 
biosphere model. Consideration of the LA FEPs List (data tracking number [DTN] 
MO0407SEPFEPLA.000 [DIRS 170760]) constitutes a deviation from the technical work plan 
(BSC 2004 [DIRS 169573]), which referred to an earlier revision of the FEPs list. 
This analysis was conducted according to AP-SIII.9Q, Scientific Analyses, and an approved 
technical work plan (BSC 2004 [DIRS 169573]). 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 1-4 September 2004 
Table 1-1. Relationship of Parameters and FEPs 
Parameter FEP Name 
FEP 
Number 
Biosphere 
Submodel 
Summary of Disposition in 
TSPAa 
Ash fall 1.2.04.07.0A 
Human lifestyle 2.4.04.01.0A 
Wild and natural land and water 
use 2.4.08.00.0A 
Agricultural land use and 
irrigation 2.4.09.01.0B 
Urban and industrial land and 
water use 2.4.10.00.0A 
Mass Loading 
 Receptor 
Environments 
Atmospheric transport of 
contaminants 3.2.10.00.0A 
Air 
The treatment of this parameter 
is described in Sections 6.1 and 
6.2 and summarized in 
Table 7-1. 
Ash fall 1.2.04.07.0A 
Agricultural land use and 
irrigation 2.4.09.01.0B Mass Loading 
 Crops 
Atmospheric transport of 
contaminants 3.2.10.00.0A 
Plant 
The treatment of this parameter 
is described in Sections 6.1.5 
and 6.2.5 and summarized in 
Table 7-1. 
Ash fall 1.2.04.07.0A 
Soil and sediment transport in 
the biosphere 2.3.02.03.0A 
Mass Loading 
Time Function 
and Decrease 
Constant Inhalation 3.3.04.02.0A 
N/Ab 
The treatment of this parameter 
is described in Section 6.3 and 
summarized in Table 7-1. 
Source: DTN MO0407SEPFEPLA.000 (DIRS 170760). 
a The effects of these FEPs are included in the TSPA through the BDCFs. See the Biosphere Model Report (BSC 
2004 [DIRS 169460], Section 6.2) for a complete description of the inclusion and treatment of FEPs in the 
biosphere model. 
b This parameter is used directly in the TSPA, not in the biosphere model. 
FEP=features, events, and processes; TSPA=total system performance assessment 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 2-1 September 2004 
2. QUALITY ASSURANCE 
Development of this report involves analysis of data to support performance assessment, as 
described in the technical work plan (BSC 2004 [DIRS 169573]) and is a quality-affecting 
activity in accordance with AP-2.27Q, Planning for Science Activities. Approved quality 
assurance procedures identified in Section 4 of the technical work plan have been used to 
conduct and document the activities described in this report. Electronic data used in this analysis 
were controlled in accordance with the methods specified in Section 8 of the technical work plan. 
The natural barriers and items identified in the Q-list (BSC 2004 [DIRS 168361]) are not 
pertinent to this analysis and a safety category per AP-2.22Q, Classification Analyses and 
Maintenance of the Q List, is not applicable. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 2-2 September 2004 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 3-1 September 2004 
3. USE OF SOFTWARE 
The only software used to manipulate or analyze data were the commercial off-the-shelf products 
Microsoft Access 97 SR-2 and Microsoft Excel 97 SR-2. All methods used within Access and 
Excel to manipulate or combine data, and associated formulas, inputs, and outputs, are described 
in the text or tables of this report. The average and standard deviation (SD) functions of Excel 
were used throughout this analysis to calculate summary statistics and Excel graphics functions 
were used to create figures. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 3-2 September 2004 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 4-1 September 2004 
4. INPUTS 
4.1 DIRECT INPUTS 
The inputs directly used to develop parameter distributions are described and justified below and 
summarized in Table 4-1. 
Table 4-1. Direct Inputs 
Input Source of Input Description 
Resuspended particle 
concentrations and ratios 
Peer-reviewed publications listed in 
Table 4-2 
External-source measurements of TSP or 
other airborne particulate concentrations 
taken in the environments considered in the 
biosphere model 
Resuspended particle 
concentrations 
EPA AIRdata database 
(MO0210SPATSP01.023 [DIRS 
160426]) 
Annual average TSP concentrations at 
monitoring sites throughout the United 
States, 1970-2001 
Resuspended particle 
concentrations 
EPA AIRdata database 
(MO0008SPATSP00.013 [DIRS 
151750]) 
24-hour concentrations of TSP at monitoring 
sites in Washington, 1979-1982 
Resuspended particle 
concentration ratios 
MO98PSDALOG111.000 (DIRS 
119501) 
TM000000000001.039 (DIRS 121386) 
TM000000000001.041 (DIRS 121396) 
TM000000000001.042 (DIRS 121405) 
TM000000000001.079 (DIRS 121410) 
TM000000000001.082 (DIRS 121416) 
TM000000000001.084 (DIRS 121419) 
TM000000000001.096 (DIRS 121421) 
TM000000000001.097 (DIRS 121426) 
TM000000000001.098 (DIRS 121429) 
TM000000000001.099 (DIRS 121435) 
TM000000000001.105 (DIRS 121440) 
TM000000000001.108 (DIRS 121442) 
24-hour concentrations of TSP and PM10 at 
two sites at Yucca Mountain, 1989-1997. 
Climate National Climatic Data Center (NCDC 
1998 [DIRS 135900; DIRS 125325]) 
Average annual precipitation and snowfall, 
and other measurements of climate at 
weather stations in the western United 
States through 1997 
EPA=U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; PM10= particles with an aerodynamic diameter =10 m; TSP=total 
suspended particles 
4.1.1 Airborne Particle Concentrations 
Measurements of airborne particle concentrations reported within the sources listed in Table 4-2 
were used to develop distributions of mass loading. These measurements were taken in settings 
consistent with the conditions in the active outdoor, active indoor, and asleep indoor 
environments in Amargosa Valley and used in the biosphere model (the environments are 
described in Section 6). To ensure that the distributions of mass loading developed from these 
measurements were consistent with conditions in the Yucca Mountain region, uncertainty about 
the influence of climate, environment, activity patterns, and other factors were considered, as 
described in Section 6. Description of these measurements, their use in this analysis, and their 
applicability to conditions in the Yucca Mountain region, is further described in Sections 5.2, 
6.1, 6.2, and 6.3. Applicable mean or other representative values from the publications included 
in this data set are presented in Tables 6-1, 6-3, 6-4, and 6-5. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 4-2 September 2004 
Table 4-2. Sources of Published Measurements of Resuspended Particle Concentrations 
Source Source 
Archer et al. 2002 (DIRS 168488) Merchant et al. 1982 (DIRS 160102) 
Baxter et al. 1999 (DIRS 150713) Molocznik and Zagorski 1998 (DIRS 154281) 
Brauer et al. 2000 (DIRS 159703) Molocznik and Zagorski 2000 (DIRS 159587) 
Brook et al. 1997 (DIRS 160254) Monn et al. 1997 (DIRS 150888) 
Buist et al. 1983 (DIRS 159738) Mozzon et al. 1987 (DIRS 159585) 
Buist et al. 1986 (DIRS 144632) Nieuwenhuijsen and Schenker 1998 (DIRS 150854) 
Buist et al. 1986 (DIRS 160308) Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 1998 (DIRS 150855) 
Clausnitzer and Singer 1997 (DIRS 160404) Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 1999 (DIRS 150711) 
Clayton et al. 1993 (DIRS 159599) Pellizzari et al. 1999 (DIRS 159702) 
Evans et al. 2000 (DIRS 159679) Quackenboss et al. 1989 (DIRS 159682) 
Howard-Reed et al. 2000 (DIRS 159680) Rojas-Bracho et al. 2000 (DIRS 159678) 
Janssen et al. 1998 (DIRS 159699) Searl et al. 2002 (DIRS 160104) 
Kullman et al. 1998 (DIRS 159586) Thatcher and Layton 1995 (DIRS 159600) 
Leaderer et al. 1999 (DIRS 160403) Wheeler et al. 2000 (DIRS 159704) 
Linn et al. 1999 (DIRS 159602) Wigzell et al. 2000 (DIRS 159729) 
Lioy et al. 1990 (DIRS 159655) Williams et al. 2000 (DIRS 159735) 
Long et al. 2000 (DIRS 159681) Yano et al. 1990 (DIRS 160112) 
Long et al. 2001 (DIRS 159733) Yocom et al. 1971 (DIRS 159654) 
To ensure that a comprehensive set of data was included in this analysis, online scientific journal 
and citation index searches were conducted and reference lists from related reports and 
publications were reviewed. The resulting data set includes original measurements of 
resuspended particle concentrations from all publications known to the author of this analysis 
that met the following requirements. The requirements were selected to ensure that the data are 
technically defensible and applicable to this analysis. 
 The information was published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. The location of 
publication of each data source is listed in Section 8.1. 
 The methods used to measure particulate concentrations were sufficiently described to 
determine whether the methods and equipment used were applicable to this analysis and 
comparable to other studies. 
 Measurements were made in a setting applicable to this analysis (e.g., outdoor settings 
during dust-disturbing activities, indoor settings with and without activity). 
In addition, because mass loading is defined as the concentration of all resuspended particles, 
most of the sources included in this data set report concentrations of total suspended particles 
(TSP) or particles with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 10 m (PM10). Because of 
the small number of measurements reported for the active outdoor environment, asleep indoor 
environment, and post-volcanic environments, sources that report concentrations of smaller 
particles (e.g., particles with an aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 4 m [PM4] or less 
than or equal to 2.5 m [PM2.5]) in those environments also were included. Sources that report 
concentrations of PM2.5 in the other environments considered in the biosphere model were not 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 4-3 September 2004 
included because sufficient measurements of TSP and PM10 were available. Also, sources that 
report concentrations for environments not considered in the biosphere model were not included. 
No requirement was included concerning the accuracy or precision of the data because the mass 
loading distributions developed in this analysis have a relatively large range and are therefore 
insensitive to the much smaller levels of error in measurement of airborne particle 
concentrations. For example, limits of detectability of equipment commonly used to measure 
mass loading are generally less than 0.01 mg/m3 and sampling precision generally is less than 
0.02 mg/m3 (Howard-Reed et al. 2000 [DIRS 159680], p. 1127; Rojas-Brancho et al. 2000 
[DIRS 159678], p. 297; Williams et al. 2000 [DIRS 159735], p. 523). 
In accordance with AP-SIII.9Q, the following information was considered to evaluate whether 
the data was collected using acceptable methodology and to evaluate whether sufficient 
confidence in the acquisition and development of results is warranted to consider the data 
suitable for use in this analysis. 
 Reliability of Data Sources-Because all data considered here came from peer-reviewed 
publications, and was thus judged to be appropriate for publication by experts in the 
associated fields of study, it is concluded that the data sources are reliable for use in this 
analysis. In addition, the methods used were described in sufficient detail to determine 
whether the results are applicable to this analysis. Four publications that report 
resuspended particle concentrations following the eruption of Mount St. Helens did not 
fully describe the methods used to measure and summarize concentrations (Buist et al. 
1983 [DIRS 159738]; Buist et al. 1986 [DIRS 144632; DIRS 160308]; and Merchant et 
al. 1982 [DIRS 160102]). However, those methods were fully described in reports 
published by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (Hewett 1980 
[DIRS 168490; DIRS 168491]; Sanderson 1982 [DIRS 168492]). 
 Extent to Which the Data Demonstrates the Properties of Interest-Measurements of 
resuspended particle concentrations are most applicable to this analysis if they are 
measurements of personal exposure to TSP taken in the environments considered in the 
biosphere model under conditions consistent with the conditions in the Yucca Mountain 
region. As described in Section 6, all measurements considered here were taken in 
settings that are consistent with the environments considered. In addition, most 
measurements were of personal exposure to particle concentrations. Measurements of 
ambient concentrations were not used for the active outdoor environment (Sections 6.1.1 
and 6.2.1), and were used for the active indoor environment only if people were active 
indoors while the measurements were taken (Section 6.1.3 and 6.2.3). Ambient 
concentrations were included for the asleep indoor environment because they are 
representative of conditions while people are inactive (Sections 6.1.4 and 6.2.4). 
Because there were too few measurements of TSP for some environments, such as active 
indoors, measurements of PM10 and smaller particles also were considered. Because 
representative ratios of large to small particles specific to each environment were used 
when considering those concentrations, they are appropriate for use in this analysis. 
Additional discussion of the applicability of the data to the conditions in the Yucca 
Mountain region is included in Sections 5.1, 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 4-4 September 2004 
 Availability of Corroborating Data-Because all applicable data on resuspended 
particle concentrations were considered in this analysis, there is no corroborating data 
available. However, all data used were plotted and compared to evaluate the 
reasonableness of the results of each study and to understand variation and uncertainty 
of concentrations within each environment (Tables 6-1, 6-3, 6-4, and 6-5). 
Measurements for each environment are similar, especially for indoor environments 
(e.g., Table 6-3). These comparisons provide confidence that the data are reliable and 
do not contain invalid or inconsistent measurements. 
Because the data considered here come from peer reviewed journals, have sufficiently described 
methods, and were from studies conducted in applicable environments, it is concluded that the 
data are suitable for the specific application in this analysis. Confidence in the reliability of the 
data is raised by corroborative comparisons. Thus, the data are considered qualified for the 
intended use in this analysis. 
4.1.2 Total Suspended Particles  United States 
Annual average concentrations of TSP measured at ambient monitoring stations located in rural, 
agricultural settings in arid to semi-arid environments in the western United States 
(DTN: MO0210SPATSP01.023 [DIRS 160426]) were used to determine mass loading in the 
outdoor inactive environment (Section 6.1.2). The data were obtained from the 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Air and Radiation AirData database 
(Ambrose 2002 [DIRS 160080; DIRS 160081]). This federal agency is responsible for 
developing programs, policies, and regulations for controlling air pollution. The AirData 
database contains measurements of air pollution concentrations collected by federal, state, and 
local air pollution control agencies to track compliance with emission standards. These data 
were collected and reported in accordance with EPA requirements for methodology and quality 
control and therefore were collected using consistent methods that meet federal quality control 
standards. These data therefore are appropriate for use in this analysis and are considered 
established fact. See Section 6.1.2 for additional information on the appropriateness of these 
data for their intended use and the applicability of the data to the conditions in the Yucca 
Mountain region. Selection of the subset of data used in this analysis is described in Section 
6.1.2.1, and those data are displayed in Appendix B. 
4.1.3 Total Suspended Particles - Washington 
Twenty-four-hour concentrations of TSP during 1979-1982 from air quality monitoring sites in 
Washington with high ash fall from the eruption of Mount St. Helens 
(DTN: MO0008SPATSP00.013 [DIRS 151750]) were used in Sections 6.2.2 and 6.3 to predict 
changes in mass loading following a volcanic eruption. These data were obtained from the EPA 
AirData database and were collected using consistent methods that meet federal quality control 
standards. Selection of the subset of data used in this analysis is described in Section 6.2.2.1. 
See Section 6.2.2 and 6.3 for additional justification on the appropriateness of these data and for 
caveats about the interpretation of the data for their intended use. Data used in this analysis is 
displayed in Appendix D and are considered established fact. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 4-5 September 2004 
4.1.4 Resuspended Particles  Yucca Mountain 
All valid 24-hour concentrations of PM10 and TSP measured concurrently using co-located 
monitoring equipment at Yucca Mountain during 1989 through 1997 were used in 
Section 6.1.3.1 to calculate a ratio of TSP to PM10 for the Yucca Mountain region. See Table 4-1 
for a list of DTNs containing these data. These data are appropriate because they were collected 
in areas with soils typical of those in Amargosa Valley (CRWMS M&O 1999 [DIRS 107736], 
Figure 1 on pp. 2 and 3) and therefore are consistent with relatively undisturbed conditions of the 
Yucca Mountain region. In addition, these measurements are comparable to data collected 
elsewhere in the United States because they were taken in accordance with EPA requirements for 
methodology and quality control. The data are displayed in Appendix E. Deletion of 24 invalid 
ratios with a TSP:PM10 ratio of less than or equal to 1 is discussed in Section 6.1.3.1. 
4.1.5 Precipitation  United States 
Measurements of average annual precipitation at weather stations in the western United States 
obtained from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Climatic Data 
Center (NCDC 1998 [DIRS 135900; DIRS 125325]) were used in Section 6.1.2 and 
Appendices B and C to aid in selecting analogue air quality monitoring sites representative of 
arid farming communities. This information also was used throughout Section 6 to describe the 
climate at weather stations analogous to future conditions predicted for Yucca Mountain. The 
National Climatic Data Center is responsible for archiving weather data obtained by the National 
Weather Service, Military Services, Federal Aviation Administration, Coast Guard, and 
voluntary cooperative observers. These measurements were collected using the standardized 
methods and equipment required by the National Climatic Data Center; therefore, they are valid 
for comparison among sites in the United States and are considered established fact. The data 
from the National Climatic Data Center used in this analysis are displayed in Appendix B. 
4.2 CRITERIA 
Table 4-3 lists the requirements from the Project Requirements Document (Canori and Leitner 
2003 [DIRS 166275]) that are applicable to this analysis. These requirements are for compliance 
with applicable portions of 10 CFR Part 63 [DIRS 156605]. In addition to the requirements 
listed in Table 4-3, definitions of terms in 10 CFR 63.2 and description of concepts in 10 CFR 
63.102 that are relevant to biosphere modeling are also applicable to this analysis. 
Listed below are the acceptance criteria from the Yucca Mountain Review Plan, Final Report 
(NRC 2003 [DIRS 163274]) that are applicable to this analysis. The list is based on meeting the 
requirements of 10 CFR 63.114, 10 CFR 63.305, and 10 CFR 63.312 [DIRS 156605], that relate 
in whole or in part to this analysis. See Section 7.2 for a summary of where the criteria are 
addressed. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 4-6 September 2004 
Table 4-3. Requirements Applicable to This Analysis 
Requirement Number Requirement Title Related Regulation 
PRD-002/T-015 Requirements for Performance Assessment 10 CFR 63.114 (DIRS 156605) 
PRD-002/T-026 Required Characteristics of the Reference 
Biosphere 
10 CFR 63.305 (DIRS 156605) 
PRD-002/T-028 Required Characteristics of the Reasonably 
Maximally Exposed Individual 
10 CFR 63.312 (DIRS 156605) 
Source: From Canori and Leitner (2003 [DIRS 166275], Table 2-3). 
Only the criteria from Section 2.2.1.3.14 (Biosphere Characteristics) of the Yucca Mountain 
Review Plan, Final Report (NRC 2003 [DIRS 163274]) apply to this analysis. The modeling of 
effects of wind erosion on the redistribution of radionuclides in soils, which is partially covered 
in Section 2.2.1.3.13 (Redistribution of Radionuclides in Soil) of the review plan, is discussed in 
other biosphere reports (e.g., BSC 2004 [DIRS 169459], Section 6.4; BSC 2004 [DIRS 169460], 
Sections 6.4.1 and 6.5.1). Section 2.2.1.3.11 (Airborne Transport of Radionuclides) of the 
review plan is interpreted to apply only to airborne transport of radionuclides to the biosphere 
following a volcanic eruption. Airborne transport of radionuclides within the biosphere is 
evaluated in the context of the review criteria in Section 2.2.1.3.14: 
Acceptance Criteria from Section 2.2.1.3.14: Biosphere Characteristics 
Acceptance Criterion 1: System Description and Model Integration are Adequate 
(3) Assumptions are consistent between the biosphere characteristics modeling 
and other abstractions. For example, the U.S. Department of Energy should 
ensure that the modeling of features, events, and processes, such as climate 
change, soil types, sorption coefficients, volcanic ash properties, and the physical 
and chemical properties of radionuclides are consistent with assumption in other 
total system performance assessment abstractions; and 
Acceptance Criterion 2: Data are Sufficient for Model Justification 
(1) The parameter values used in the license application are adequately justified 
(e.g., behaviors and characteristics of the residents of the Town of Amargosa 
Valley, Nevada, characteristics of the reference biosphere, etc.) and consistent 
with the definition of the reasonably maximally exposed individual in 10 CFR 
Part 63. Adequate descriptions of how the data were used, interpreted, and 
appropriately synthesized into the parameters are provided. 
(2) Data are sufficient to assess the degree to which features, events, and 
processes related to biosphere characteristics modeling have been characterized 
and incorporated in the abstraction. As specified in 10 CFR Part 63, the U.S. 
Department of Energy should demonstrate that features, events, and processes, 
which describe the biosphere, are consistent with present knowledge of conditions 
in the region, surrounding Yucca Mountain. As appropriate, the U.S. Department 
of Energy sensitivity and uncertainty analyses (including consideration of 
alternative conceptual models) are adequate for determining additional data needs, 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 4-7 September 2004 
and evaluating whether additional data would provide new information that could 
invalidate prior modeling results and affect the sensitivity of the performance of 
the system to the parameter value or model. 
Acceptance Criterion 3: Data Uncertainty is Characterized and Propagated 
Through the Model Abstraction 
(1) Models use parameter values, assumed ranges, probability distributions, and 
bounding assumptions that are technically defensible, reasonably account for 
uncertainties and variabilities, do not result in an under-representation of the risk 
estimate, and are consistent with the definition of the reasonably maximally 
exposed individual in 10 CFR Part 63; 
(2) The technical bases for the parameter values and ranges in the abstraction, 
such as consumption rates, plant and animal uptake factors, mass-loading factors, 
and biosphere dose conversion factors, are consistent with site characterization 
data, and are technically defensible; 
(3) Process-level models used to determine parameter values for the biosphere 
characteristics modeling are consistent with site characterization data, laboratory 
experiments, field measurements, and natural analog research; 
(4) Uncertainty is adequately represented in parameter development for 
conceptual models and process-level models considered in developing the 
biosphere characteristics modeling, either through sensitivity analyses, 
conservative limits, or bounding values supported by data, as necessary. 
Correlations between input values are appropriately established in the total system 
performance assessment, and the implementation of the abstraction does not 
inappropriately bias results to a significant degree. 
4.3 CODES, STANDARDS, AND REGULATIONS 
No codes, standards, or regulations other than those identified in the Project Requirements 
Document (Canori and Leitner 2003 [DIRS 166275], Table 2-3) and determined to be applicable 
(Table 4-3) were used in this analysis. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 4-8 September 2004 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 5-1 September 2004 
5. ASSUMPTIONS 
5.1 MASS LOADINGCROPS 
The distribution of mass loading in fields where crops are growing is assumed to be similar to or 
higher than that in the inactive outdoor environment, with a minimum value equal to the 
minimum value of the inactive outdoor environment, and a modal and maximum value twice that 
of the inactive outdoor environment. 
This assumption is used in Sections 6.1.5 and 6.2.5 to develop distributions of mass loading for 
crops for nominal and post-volcanic conditions. 
Dust concentrations during the latter part of the growing season, rather than the entire season, 
must be considered for development of the mass loading distribution for crops, because dust 
deposited on the surface of plants quickly falls off, washes off, or is otherwise removed 
relatively rapidly (Till and Meyer 1983 [DIRS 101895], pp. 5-36 and 5-37; IAEA 2001 
[DIRS 158519], p. 64), and because harvested foodstuffs and forage are not present early in the 
season. Therefore, planting, plowing, weeding, berming, and other soil-disturbing activities that 
occur early in growing seasons will have little influence on uptake of radionuclides into 
foodstuffs via dust deposition. Few soil-disturbing activities except harvesting usually occur 
during the latter part of growing seasons, especially for plants such as alfalfa, wheat, orchard 
crops, and garden vegetables commonly grown in Amargosa Valley and eastern Washington 
(the analogue site for consideration of the wettest and coolest future climatic conditions, 
BSC 2004 [DIRS 170002], Table 6-1). The increase in mass loading during harvesting will 
occur over a very short period relative to the remainder of the period for which radionuclide 
concentrations on plant surfaces are considered and much of the dust deposited during harvesting 
may be removed during field processing of crops. Because fields and gardens are infrequently 
disturbed and frequently irrigated during the latter part of the growing season, there should be 
few sources of resuspended particles in the immediate vicinity of plants and mass loading 
therefore will be influenced most by particle resuspension in the region surrounding the fields 
and gardens. 
The mass loading distribution for the nominal, inactive outdoor environment was developed 
from measurements of airborne particulate concentrations at stationary monitors in rural, 
agricultural communities with less than 20 in. of rainfall in the western United States 
(Section 6.1.2). Those measurements were influenced by resuspended dust from agricultural 
fields and agricultural activities in the general vicinity of monitoring stations, but not necessarily 
at the station locations. Therefore, they are consistent with the climatic and rural, agricultural 
conditions in the Yucca Mountain region and generally match the conditions required to estimate 
mass loading concentrations for crops. See Section 6.1.2 for additional information on the 
consistency of these data with conditions in the Yucca Mountain region. 
It is possible that mass loading concentrations in some fields are higher than measurements from 
stationary, community monitors. Crops may be located closer to sources of resuspended 
particles (e.g., dirt roads, recently plowed fields) than community monitors and some increase in 
airborne particle concentrations will occur during harvesting. Also, stationary monitors usually 
are located about 1.5 m above the ground surface, and therefore do not measure airborne 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 5-2 September 2004 
particulate concentrations where most plants grow. Mass loading near the ground surface is 
expected to be higher than at 1.5 m because it takes less force (i.e., less wind) to resuspend a 
particle a short distance off the ground. 
To account for uncertainty in these differences between the environment around crops and the 
locations where community monitors are located, it is assumed that the modal and maximum 
values of the distribution of mass loading for crops are twice that of the distribution for the 
inactive outdoor environment. A higher multiplier was not chosen for the following reasons. 
There are few soil disturbing activities, other than harvesting, that would occur late in the 
growing season. In addition, the crops commonly grown in Amargosa Valley, such as alfalfa 
and other hay, cover much of the soil surface when mature, and are irrigated regularly. The 
presence of vegetative cover and moist soil reduces soil resuspension. Also, mass loading 
rapidly returns to background levels after soil-disturbing activities cease (Pinnick et al. 1985 
[DIRS 159577], p. 104) and the influence of soil disturbing activities on mass loading generally 
is limited to less than 0.75 km (Chow et al. 1999 [DIRS 145212], p. 652). Thus, for most of the 
time, there will be few or no soil-disturbing activities or sources of readily resuspendable soil 
that would cause an increase in mass loading near crops greater than that measured at community 
monitoring sites. 
The minimum value of the distribution of mass loading for crops is assumed to be equal to the 
minimum value of the inactive outdoor environment, primarily because it is likely that some 
crops are located in situations very similar to community monitors. Therefore, concentrations 
measured by those monitors (and used to estimate mass loading in the inactive outdoor 
environment) will be similar to concentrations for those crops. In addition, some crops such as 
alfalfa cover almost the entire ground surface; therefore, there would be very little wind erosion 
in the immediate vicinity of the plants before harvesting. 
5.2 POSTVOLCANIC INDOOR CONCENTRATIONS 
It is assumed that changes in outdoor concentrations of mass loading following a volcanic 
eruption have a proportional affect on mass loading in indoor environments. 
This assumption is used in Section 6.2.3 and 6.2.4 to develop distributions of mass loading in the 
active indoor and asleep indoor environments for the first year following a volcanic eruption. 
This assumption is based on published comparisons of indoor and outdoor concentrations of 
particulate matter. The studies reviewed were selected as described in Section 4.1.1, and are the 
same as those described in Sections 6.1.3 to evaluate concentrations in the active indoor 
environments. See Section 6.1.3 for a description of the studies. 
Eleven of the 17 studies reviewed in Section 6.1.3 included correlation and some regression 
coefficients of indoor and outdoor concentrations (Table 5-1). Those coefficients ranged from 
0.08 to 0.96, and most were between 0.25 and 0.75. Five of seven studies that included 
statistical tests of correlation coefficients reported that the correlations were significant. Outdoor 
concentrations were relatively low in the two studies that reported no significant correlation 
(Leaderer et al. 1999 [DIRS 160403], Table 2; Rojas-Bracho et al. 2000 [DIRS 159678], 
Table 2). Factors such as amount of smoking, cooking, and personal activity were listed in many 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 5-3 September 2004 
studies as explanations why correlations between indoor and outdoor concentrations were 
relatively low. 
Seven studies reported the slope of the regression between indoor or personal and outdoor 
concentrations (Table 5-1). Eight of 10 slopes reported were between 0.39 and 0.55, indicating 
that in those studies, an increase in outdoor concentrations resulted in an increase of about half 
that amount in indoor concentrations. The only study reporting a slope greater than 1 
(Quackenboss et al. 1989 [DIRS 159682]) included a substantial number of smokers. It is 
expected that concentrations inside the homes of smokers would be high relative to outdoor 
concentrations because smoking generates a large concentration of particles. 
In summary, the results of these studies indicate that an increase in outdoor concentrations 
usually will result in an increase in indoor concentrations, although the magnitude of changes 
indoors likely will be less than those outdoors, and that other factors, such as the amount of 
smoking, cooking and other indoor activities also influence the relationship between indoor and 
outdoor concentrations. 
There is some uncertainty in applying the results of these studies to post-volcanic conditions that 
may occur near Yucca Mountain. It is predicted that modal TSP concentrations in the inactive 
outdoor environment would double from 0.060 mg/m3 to 0.120 mg/m3 the first year after a 
volcanic eruption (Section 6.2.2). Few of the studies listed in Table 5-1 were conducted when 
outdoor concentrations were that high, and none were conducted during a period when 
concentrations remained high for long. It is possible that a large increase in TSP outdoors, or 
high concentrations outdoors for most of the year, would result in a larger change in indoor TSP 
than indicated by the regression slopes listed in Table 5-1. For example, air-filtering systems 
could become overwhelmed or larger amounts of dust could be tracked indoors, resulting in 
higher concentrations indoors. It contrast, people may dust and vacuum more often or keep their 
windows closed to reduce dust concentrations. To account for this uncertainty, and ensure that 
indoor concentrations following a volcanic eruption are not underestimated, it is assumed that 
indoor concentrations will increase proportionally to outdoor concentrations. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 5-4 September 2004 
Table 5-1. Correlation Coefficients (R) of Indoor and Personal Versus Outdoor Concentrations of 
Airborne Particles 
Reference R Pa Slopeb Comparisonc 
0.35 - - Personal: Ambient PM10, day 
0.62 - - Personal: Ambient PM10, night 
0.46 - - Indoor: Ambient PM2.5, day 
Clayton et al. 1993 (DIRS 159599), 
Table 3 
0.65 - - Indoor: Ambient PM2.5 , night 
Lioy et al. 1990 (DIRS 159655), p. 62 0.67 <0.01 0.50 Indoor: Ambient PM10 
Quackenboss et al. 1989 (DIRS 
159682), Figure 2 
0.42 - 1.14 Indoor: Ambient PM10, includes 
smokers 
0.29 >0.10 - Indoor: Outdoor PM10 
0.11 >0.10 - Indoor: Ambient PM10 
0.53 <0.01 0.43 Indoor: Outdoor PM2.5 
Leaderer et al. 1999 (DIRS 160403), 
Table 2, Figure 2 
0.08 >0.10 - Indoor: Ambient PM2.5 
0.20 <0.001 - Indoor: Outdoor PM2.5-10, day Long et al. 2000 (DIRS 159681), 
Figure 7 0.65 <0.001 - Indoor: Outdoor PM2.5-10, night 
0.23 <0.01 - Personal: Outdoor PM2.5 
0.19 <0.01 - Personal: Ambient PM2.5 
0.33 <0.01 - Indoor: Outdoor PM2.5 
Pellizzari et al. 1999 (DIRS 159702), 
Figure 3 
0.21 <0.01 - Indoor: Ambient PM2.5 
0.71 <0.01 0.55 Personal: Ambient PM10 Janssen et al. 1998 (DIRS 159699), 
Table 3 0.75 <0.01 0.47 Indoor: Outdoor PM10 
0.75 - - Indoor: Outdoor PM10 Evans et al. 2000 (DIRS 159679), 
Table 10 0.67 - - Indoor: Ambient PM10 
0.96 <0.001 0.39 Apartment: Outdoor PM2.5 Williams et al. 2000 (DIRS 159735), 
Table 9 0.96 <0.001 0.40 Apartment: Ambient PM2.5 
0.66 - 0.87 Personal: Outdoor PM10 Linn et al. 1999 (DIRS 159602), Table 
3 and p. 112 0.54 - 0.22 Indoor: Ambient PM10 
Rojas-Bracho et al. 2000 (DIRS 
159678), Table 5 
0.41 >0.05 0.43 Personal: Ambient PM10 
a Probability of null hypothesis that there is no correlation between indoor and outdoor concentrations. 
b Slope of regression of indoor/personal on outdoor concentrations. 
c Personal concentrations were measured near head of subjects; Apartment and Indoor concentrations were 
measured at stationary indoor sites; Outdoor concentrations were measured at stationary sites outdoors near 
homes; and Ambient concentrations were measured at regional, stationary sites. 
PM 2.5 =particles with an aerodynamic diameter =2.5 m; PM10 
=particles with an aerodynamic diameter =10 m, 
dash indicates no data reported. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-1 September 2004 
6. SCIENTIFIC ANALYSIS DISCUSSION 
This section describes how mass loading distributions are used in the biosphere model to 
calculate radionuclide concentrations in air. The following sections then describe development 
of the mass loading parameters for the biosphere groundwater scenario (Section 6.1) and the 
volcanic ash scenario (Section 6.2). Use of the mass loading time function and decrease constant 
in the TSPA model, and development of that parameter, is described in Section 6.3. 
In general, mass loading distributions were developed based on concentrations of resuspended 
particles measured in environments in which the relevant conditions were consistent with present 
knowledge of conditions in the region surrounding Yucca Mountain. Alternatively, mass loading 
distributions could have been developed using a soil resuspension model (Anspaugh et al. 1975 
[DIRS 151548]). Although resuspension models were examined to select the shape of the mass 
load decay function for the volcanic eruption parameters, resuspension models were not used to 
calculate mass loading values because available models require numerous site- and 
situation-specific parameter values that are not available and the accuracy of the models is not 
well understood (Garger et al. 1997 [DIRS 124902]). 
The mass loading distributions presented in this report are intended for use in modeling of all 
climate states considered in the TSPA (BSC 2003 [DIRS 166296], p. 79; BSC 2004 
[DIRS 169674], Section 6.1.3). Average annual precipitation in northern Amargosa Valley 
currently is approximately 46 in. (CRWMS M&O 1999 [DIRS 102877], Appendix A) and 
snowfall is rare. It is forecasted that the wettest, coolest future climate that will occur at Yucca 
Mountain during next 10,000 years, the glacial transition climate, will be consistent with the 
climate in part of eastern Washington (BSC 2004 [DIRS 170002], Section 6.6.2 and Table 6-1). 
Analogue weather stations for the upper bound of the glacial transition climate are Spokane 
(average annual precipitation = 16.2 in., average annual snowfall = 42.1 in.), Rosalia 
(precipitation = 18.1 in., snowfall = 24.3 in.), and St. Johns (precipitation = 17.1 in., 
snowfall = 25.8 in.), Washington (BSC 2004 [DIRS 170002], Table 6-1). Climate data are from 
the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC 1998 [DIRS 125325]). 
To evaluate the influence of a change from present-day to predicted future climatic conditions on 
mass loading, annual average concentrations of TSP at rural, agricultural sites with annual 
average precipitation ranging from 4.1 to 53.2 in. and snowfall ranging from zero to 43.8 in. 
were compared (Appendix C). Rural, agricultural sites were selected to ensure that the level of 
human activity and surface-disturbing conditions at the sites were consistent with the conditions 
in the Yucca Mountain region. Eleven sites included in this analysis had total annual 
precipitation of less than 10 in. Some of these arid sites are within or along the northern edge of 
the Mojave Desert and have vegetation consistent with that found in the Yucca Mountain region 
(e.g., Twentynine Palms, California [site number 06-071-1101, average annual precipitation 
4.1 in.]; Moapa, Nevada [32-003-1003, 4.1 in.]; Bishop, California [06-027-0002, 5.3 in.]; 
Corcoran, California [06-031-1002, 7.2 in.]; see Table C-1). The remainder also are in areas 
with sparse native vegetation. 
The average concentration of TSP for the 11 sites having less than 10 in. of precipitation was 
0.055 mg/m3. This is similar to the average of 0.056 mg/m3 for 21 sites that have an annual 
precipitation of 10 to 20 in., and slightly higher than the average of 0.037 mg/m3 for 10 sites with 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-2 September 2004 
an annual precipitation of 21 to 53 in. (Table C-1). There also was little difference in 
TSP concentrations among 14 sites with less than 10 in. of snowfall (average = 0.058 mg/m3), 
7 sites with 10 to 20 in. of snowfall (average = 0.055 mg/m3), and 11 sites with more than 20 in. 
of snowfall (average = 0.053 mg/m3) (Table C-2). 
Based on this comparison, it is concluded that annual average concentrations of resuspended 
particles are not affected by the range of precipitation and associated change in vegetation 
expected to occur at Yucca Mountain during the 10,000-year compliance period. Therefore, the 
mass loading distributions developed in this analysis are intended for the present-day and future 
climatic conditions considered in the TSPA. 
Triangular distributions were selected for all parameters in this analysis for the following 
reasons. 
 Although distributions of dust concentrations for single activities or locations generally 
are lognormal (Morandi et al. 1988 [DIRS 159866], Section 3.2; Nieuwenhuijsen and 
Schenker 1998 [DIRS 150854], p. 10; Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 1999 [DIRS 150711], 
p. 37), little information is available about the shape of mass loading distributions that 
are representative of annual average exposure for a large group of activities such as 
those typically conducted in the environments used in the biosphere model. 
 Distributions for most environments were developed by examining all available, 
applicable measurements of mass loading taken in an environment. Because the 
measurements considered for an environment were not all equally applicable to the 
conditions in the reference biosphere, they could not be used to calculate averages and 
SDs for lognormal or normal distributions. There was, however, sufficient information 
to make informed judgments and select central tendencies and bounds for use in defining 
triangular distributions. 
 Uniform distributions are not used because those distributions convey less information 
than triangular distributions and because the minimum and maximum values of the 
distributions were selected to be reasonable bounds that have a low probability of 
occurrence. 
 Some distributions are developed based on changes in bounds or the central tendency 
relative to other environments (e.g., the upper bound of mass loading for crops is twice 
that for the inactive outdoor environment, Section 5.1). Moving one bound of a 
distribution without affecting the central tendency (i.e., mode or average) or other bound 
is possible for triangular and uniform distributions but is not possible for many other 
distributions (e.g., lognormal or normal). 
Because dust concentrations for single activities generally are lognormal, geometric mean values 
of airborne particle concentrations presented in publications are reported in this analysis if 
available; otherwise, arithmetic mean values are reported. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-3 September 2004 
Mass Loading  Receptor Environments-The radionuclide concentrations in air that are used 
to estimate inhalation doses for the groundwater exposure scenario are calculated in the ERMYN 
for a series of environments using the following equation (BSC 2004 [DIRS 169460], 
Section 6.4.2). 
n i m n enhance n i h S Cs f Ca , , , , = (Eq. 6-1) 
where: 
Cah,i,n = Activity concentration of radionuclide i in air from soil resuspension for the 
assessment of human inhalation exposure (h) in environment n (Bq/m3). 
fenhance = Enhancement factor for the activity concentration of suspended particulates 
(dimensionless), which accounts for differences between activity 
concentrations of soil and suspended particles caused by differential 
resuspension and activity concentrations on small versus large particles. 
Csm,i = Activity concentration of radionuclide i in the surface soil per unit of mass (m) 
(Bq/kg). 
Sn = Average annual concentration of TSP in air (mass loading) for evaluation of 
inhalation exposure for environment n (kg/m3). 
n = Index of environments (see below). 
The activity concentration is then combined in the inhalation submodel with 
environment-specific breathing rates, time spent in each environment by the receptor, and 
radionuclide-specific dose conversion factors to calculate an annual dose from inhalation 
exposure. Therefore, an increase in mass loading results in a proportional increase in the activity 
concentrations of radionuclides in the air, which results in an increase in the inhalation dose. 
The equation used for the volcanic ash scenario is the same except that Sn is calculated as a 
function of time (BSC 2004 [DIRS 169460], Section 6.5.2), as described in Section 6.2. 
The following receptor environments are considered in the model. They are mutually exclusive 
and represent the various behavioral and environmental combinations for which a person would 
receive a substantially different rate of exposure via inhalation or external exposure. 
1. Active Outdoors: This environment is representative of conditions that occur when a 
person is outdoors in the contaminated environment conducting dust-generating 
activities, for example while working (e.g., field preparation, excavating, livestock 
operations) or recreating (e.g., gardening, landscaping, riding horses or motorbikes). 
Because dust concentrations decrease rapidly after dust-disturbing activities cease 
(Pinnick et al. 1985 [DIRS 159577], pp. 103 and 104), this category is limited to 
conditions during and shortly after dust-generating activities. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-4 September 2004 
2. Inactive Outdoors: Conditions outdoors in the contaminated area when 
dust-generating activities are not being conducted by the receptor. This category 
includes time spent commuting within contaminated areas and time spent outdoors in 
contaminated areas conducting activities that do not resuspend soil (e.g., sitting, 
swimming, walking on turf or compacted/covered surfaces, barbecuing, equipment 
maintenance). Commute time is included in this category because major roads in 
Amargosa Valley are paved, and commuting on those roads would not resuspend soil. 
3. Active Indoors: Conditions indoors within the contaminated area when people are at 
home or at a place of business, including conditions when they are sedentary or active. 
4. Asleep indoors: Conditions indoors within the contaminated area when people are 
asleep. 
5. Away from Potentially Contaminated Area: This category is included to account 
for time spent away from the potentially contaminated agricultural area (groundwater 
scenario) or ash deposit (volcanic ash scenario). Because the concentration of 
radionuclides in this environment is zero, mass loading concentrations are not 
developed for this environment. 
Calculations described in Appendix A were conducted to evaluate the sensitivity of estimates of 
the mass of resuspended particles inhaled to changes in mass loading and other input parameter 
values. Total mass of particles inhaled was influenced most by mass loading and time spent in 
the active outdoor environment. Mass loading in the active indoor environment had a moderate 
influence on the predicted mass of particles inhaled (Appendix A, Table A-1). 
10 CFR 63.311 [DIRS 156605] expresses the dose limit for the individual protection standard as 
an annual limit and the biosphere model therefore calculates BDCFs as the annual dose to the 
reasonably maximally exposed individual (RMEI) per unit concentration of radionuclides in 
groundwater and volcanic ash. For each realization of the biosphere model, one value of each 
stochastically sampled parameter is selected and used to calculate a BDCF per radionuclide. 
These BDCFs are then used in individual TSPA realizations to calculate a predicted annual dose. 
Therefore, each stochastically sampled value used in the ERMYN model must be representative 
of average annual conditions. 
To correctly calculate the annual inhalation dose, distributions of mass loading per environment 
developed in this analysis must be representative of average annual concentrations of 
resuspended particles while the RMEI would be in the environment. Distributions of average 
annual concentrations do not include infrequent or unusually high or low concentrations, which 
could occur over short periods because such concentrations are episodic at unpredictable times 
and amounts. 
Mass LoadCrops-The equation used to calculate radionuclide concentrations in air from 
which resuspended particles are intercepted by crops is similar to that used for human inhalation 
(Eq. 6-1), but does not include an enhancement factor and only considers one environment 
(i.e., immediately around the crops). Radionuclide concentrations are combined in the plant 
submodel of ERMYN with the deposition velocity of airborne particulates, radionuclide 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-5 September 2004 
concentrations in soil, crop yield, and other variables to estimate the concentration of 
radionuclides in the edible portion of crops resulting from foliar interception of particles 
(BSC 2004 [DIRS 169460], Sections 6.4.2 and 6.5.2). In contrast to receptor environments 
(for which mass loading following a volcanic eruption is treated as a function of time), 
radionuclide concentrations in the environment surrounding crops are not treated as a function of 
time for either exposure scenario. 
6.1 MASS LOADINGNOMINAL CONDITIONS 
This section describes the development of mass loading distributions within the five 
environments (four receptor environments and the environment around crops) for nominal 
conditions; i.e., air quality conditions in the reference biosphere not measurably influenced by a 
volcanic eruption at Yucca Mountain. These values are intended for use in the groundwater 
exposure scenario. They also are intended for use in the volcanic ash exposure scenario for 
calculation of BDCFs representative of the period after mass loading concentrations have 
returned to pre-eruption conditions. See Section 6.2 for a description of that scenario. 
For the groundwater exposure scenario, the reference biosphere is a rural community with 
conditions consistent with the Yucca Mountain region and a population with a living style 
representative of the people residing in the Town of Amargosa Valley (based on requirements in 
10 CFR 63.305 and 312 [DIRS 156605]). The only common potential sources of contaminated, 
resuspended soil particles for this scenario would be agricultural fields, gardens, and landscapes 
irrigated with contaminated well water. 
For the volcanic ash exposure scenario during nominal conditions, the sources of contaminated 
resuspended particles would be ash/waste particles initially deposited during the eruption, 
ash/waste particles washed into the valley from Fortymile Wash, and ash/waste particles blown 
into the valley. By definition of the mass loading time function, the tephra deposit will have 
been stabilized by the time nominal conditions occur (see Section 6.2). Thus, resuspension on 
undisturbed sites will be similar to that before the eruption, and the main source of resuspended 
particles will be agricultural fields and other disturbed sites. 
The number and size of agricultural and other disturbed sites in Amargosa Valley is small 
relative to the size of the inhabited area. The inhabited portion of Amargosa Valley extends 
south and west of Highway 373 from the Lathrop Wells Junction of Highway 95 to the 
California border. Most people in Amargosa Valley live in the southern portion of the valley in a 
triangular area approximately 17 x 17 x 24 km (about 150 km2) in size (BSC 2003 
[DIRS 168723], Figure 1). This area, known as the farming triangle, is also where most 
agriculture in the valley occurs (CRWMS M&O 1999 [DIRS 107736], pp. 1 to 3). The U.S. 
Census Bureau estimated that only 26 of 449 employed Amargosa Valley residents 16 years old 
or older worked in agriculture (Bureau of the Census 2002 [DIRS 159728], Table P49). During 
1998, there were about 8.9 km2 (2,199 acres) of commercial agriculture in Amargosa Valley, 
8.4 km2 (2,072 acres) of which were planted at the time agricultural acreage was measured. 
About 87 percent of all acreage was planted in alfalfa and other hay (92 percent of planted 
acreage) and about 6 percent was orchards or vineyards (YMP 1999 [DIRS 158212], Table 10). 
During 1999, there were 8.2 km2 (2,015 acres), 7.3 km2 (1,798 acres) of which were planted at 
the time of the survey. Eighty-three percent was planted in alfalfa and other hay (93 percent of 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-6 September 2004 
planted acreage) and 6 percent was orchards or vineyards (YMP 1999 [DIRS 158212], Table 11). 
In spring 2004, about 85 percent of the agricultural acreage identified in the valley in 1998 was 
re-surveyed (Rasmuson 2004 [DIRS 169506]). About 8 km2 (2,000 acres) were planted for 
commercial agriculture; over 95 percent of that was planted in alfalfa and other hay. An 
additional approximately 4 km2 (1,000 acres) had recently been planted in pine trees (Rasmuson 
2004 [DIRS 169506]). Thus, only a small portion of the valley (about eight percent of the 
farming triangle and a much smaller portion of the entire inhabited valley) is planted in 
agriculture, and most of that is planted in hay, orchards, tree farms, and vineyards. Those crops 
require infrequent land preparation or other soil disturbances that would resuspend contaminated 
soil particles. There also is one large dairy near the south end of the agricultural region in 
Amargosa Valley that had about 5,000 cows (YMP 1999 [DIRS 158212], Tables 8 and 9; 
Rasmuson 2004 [DIRS 169506]). About 46 percent of 195 Amargosa Valley households 
surveyed during 1997 had a garden (DOE 1997 [DIRS 100332], Tables 2.4.2 and 3.5.1). In 
summary, Amargosa Valley has a small agricultural industry and most fields are planted in crops 
that require infrequent soil disturbances. Within the valley, large disturbed sites occupy only a 
small portion of the landscape, although small sites (e.g., gardens) may be found near about 50 
percent of residences. 
Resuspended particle concentrations measurement in northern Amargosa Valley and elsewhere 
in the Yucca Mountain region are very low. Average annual concentrations of TSP at Yucca 
Mountain monitoring site 1, which was near the Yucca Mountain Exploratory Studies Facility 
and surrounded by numerous unpaved roads and other disturbed sites, had annual average 
concentrations of TSP ranging from 0.022 to 0.027 mg/m3 during 1992 to 1997 (CRWMS M&O 
1999 [DIRS 102877], Table 2-3), the years when most construction was occurring at 
Yucca Mountain. Average concentrations of PM10 there ranged from 0.009 to 0.012 mg/m3. 
Average annual concentrations of PM10 at a monitoring site in northern Amargosa Valley 
(Yucca Mountain monitoring site 9 at the southern boundary of the Nevada Test Site) ranged 
from 0.007 to 0.010 mg/m3 during 1993 through 1997 (TSP was not measured at that site). 
Maximum 24-hour concentrations of PM10 per year at that site ranged from 0.015 to 0.057 
mg/m3. Concentrations in the farming and residential community farther south in Amargosa 
Valley probably are higher. However, concentrations there would not be substantially greater 
because the only large sources of resuspended particles in that area are about 2,000 acres of 
agricultural fields, most of which have perennial crops such as alfalfa that cover the ground 
surface and require infrequent soil-disturbing activities. 
6.1.1 Active Outdoor Environment 
Applicable literature (see Section 4.1.1) was reviewed to determine the range of average 
concentrations of particles resuspended while soil disturbing activities were being conducted. 
The relevant factors considered in evaluating the whether the conditions under which those 
studies were conducted were consistent with the present conditions in the Yucca Mountain 
region included the types of activities conducted, aridity, and soil texture. 
Applicable studies are presented below, with the most applicable results presented first. Studies 
were considered most applicable if they (1) reported particulate concentrations resulting from 
behaviors that are consistent with those conducted outdoors in Amargosa Valley while soil is 
being disturbed, (2) were conducted in arid to semi-arid environments, and (3) measured and 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-7 September 2004 
reported concentrations of TSP. Only measurements of personal exposure were considered 
applicable for analysis of this environment. Unless otherwise stated, personal exposure was 
measured by placing the inlet device of a dust sampler near the head of the person performing 
the activity (e.g., on a shirt collar); thus, measurements of personal exposure are representative of 
the concentration of resuspended particles inhaled by a person while conducting an activity. A 
summary of this review is in Table 6-1. 
Table 6-1. Particulate ConcentrationsNominal Outdoor Active Environment 
Concentration, mg/m3 
Reference x Range Comments 
1 Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 1999 
(DIRS 150711), Table 2 2.19 0.30-7.93 TSP, Farming-California, one extreme value 
excluded 
2 Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 1998 
(DIRS 150855), Table 2 19.6 0.7-98.6 TSP, Farming-California, many activities in open cab 
3 
Molocznik and Zagorski 
1998 (DIRS 154281), 
Figure 2 
9 3.5-19 TSP, Farming-Poland, midpoint of ranges for 6 
applicable activities 
4 Molocznik and Zagorski 
2000 (DIRS 159587), p. 47 7.8 2.5-14.4 TSP, Farming-Poland, midpoint of ranges for 6 
applicable activities 
5 Kullman et al. 1998 
(DIRS 159586), p. 3 1.78 GSD = 2.9 TSP, Dairy barns-Wisconsin 
6 Mozzon et al. 1987 
(DIRS 159585), p. 115 5.3 0.44-22.8 TSP, Landfill operators-Ontario 
7 
Clausnitzer and Singer 
1997 (DIRS 160404, 
Table 1) 
2.9 0.2-13.6 PM4, Farming-California, respirable concentrations 
only 
8 Archer et al 2002 
(DIRS 168488), Table I 1.31 SD = 2.87 PM4, Farming-North Carolina, respirable 
concentrations only 
x = mean or other value representative of the central tendency (see text), GSD = geometric standard deviation; 
PM4=particles with an aerodynamic diameter =4 m; SD = standard deviation 
0
5 
10 
15 
20 
25 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 
Reference No. Concentration 
Squares = TSP, circles = PM4 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-8 September 2004 
6.1.1.1 Literature Review 
Nieuwenhuijsen et al. (1999 [DIRS 150711]) recorded 142 measurements of personal exposure 
to TSP during farming activities at 10 farms near Davis and Sacramento, California over 
15 months. Cultivated soils in that area generally are silty clay loams to clays and loams, and 
annual rainfall ranges from 16 to 24 in. (Andrews 1972 [DIRS 170526]). The mean TSP 
concentrations of 23 farming activities ranged from 0.30 (scraping cattle stalls) to 45.14 mg/m3 
(machine harvesting of nut trees from an open tractor cab); the average was 4.14 mg/m3 
(Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 1999 [DIRS 150711], Table 2). The dustiest activity would be conducted 
infrequently in Amargosa Valley, in part because nut orchards occur on less than 5 percent of 
fields in Amargosa Valley (YMP 1999, [DIRS 158212] Tables 10 and 11) and because 
harvesting only occurs for a short time each year. Only three other activities (machine 
harvesting vegetables from an open cab, 7.93 mg/m3; scraping poultry houses, 6.67 mg/m3; 
mowing weeds from an open cab, 5.11 mg/m3) had geometric mean values greater than 5 mg/m3. 
The average of all activities excluding nut harvesting was 2.19 mg/m3. 
Nieuwenhuijsen et al. (1998 [DIRS 150855]) measured higher levels of personal exposure to 
TSP during a smaller-scale study of farming operations at three experimental farms near Davis, 
California, during April through November. The soils in this region have a loam to silty loam 
texture and no rainfall occurred during the study (Nieuwenhuijsen and Schenker 1998 
[DIRS 150854], p. 10). The mean TSP concentrations of 18 farming activities ranged from 
0.7 (milking) to 98.6 mg/m3 (disking from an open cab); the average was 19.6 mg/m3 
(Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 1998 [DIRS 150855], Table 2). Ten activities had geometric mean values 
greater than 10 mg/m3; all except cattle feeding and nut harvesting were field preparation or 
similar activities conducted from an open tractor cab. Concentrations measured during this study 
may be higher than those reported in the Sacramento study (Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 1999 
[DIRS 150711]), because the Davis study was conducted only during the dry season and because 
10 of the 18 activities were conducted in an open cab. Nieuwenhuijsen and Schenker 
(1998 [DIRS 150854], p. 11) reanalyzed data from the Davis study and concluded that the 
presence of an enclosed cab had a very large influence on exposure levels (e.g., exposure during 
disking was 50 times lower when conducted from an enclosed cab). Molocznik and Zagorski 
(1998 [DIRS 154281]) measured personal exposure to TSP during seven activities conducted by 
tractor drivers on large farms and by farmers on small, private farms in Poland. Figure 2 of the 
Molocznik and Zagorski report presents the results as the minimum and maximum average 
concentrations for seven types of activities (concentrations per activity are reported here as 
approximated whole numbers because the chart does not present more precise results). The 
activity with the highest concentrations, 2 to 58 mg/m3 (indoor occupations, including threshing 
of wheat indoors), does not apply to this analysis, because indoor threshing of wheat probably is 
not conducted in Amargosa Valley and because that activity would not result in exposure to a 
substantial amount of contaminated soil (i.e., only that remaining on the plant surface). The 
activity with the second highest concentrations was plant harvesting, ranging from about 3 to 35 
mg/m3. The activity with the lowest concentrations was plant protection, ranging from about 2 
to 5 mg/m3. The average of the midpoints of the six applicable values was about 9 mg/m3, with a 
range of 3.5 to 19 mg/m3. Activity budgets per farmer were also recorded and used to calculate 
average annual exposure to TSP per eight hours of work, which ranged 5.3 to 10.8 mg/m3 for 10 
tractor drivers and 3.6 to 10.7 mg/m3 for 7 private farmers. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-9 September 2004 
In a similar study of 10 females working on private farms in Poland, average personal exposure 
to TSP during six applicable activities (excluding household occupations) ranged from 1.3 to 
23.6 mg/m3. The average of the six midpoints was 7.8 mg/m3 (range 2.5 to 14.4). Average 
personal exposure while working ranged from 3.5 to 9.3 mg/m3 (Molocznik and Zagorski 2000 
[DIRS 159587], p. 47 and 48). 
Personal exposure to TSP during routine work in 85 dairy barns in Wisconsin averaged 
1.78 mg/m3 (geometric SD = 2.9). Area concentrations within barns averaged 0.74 mg/m3 
(geometric SD = 3.05) (Kullman et al. 1998 [DIRS 159586], third page). 
Personal exposure to TSP of bulldozer operators and other workers at three landfills in Ontario 
averaged 5.3 mg/m3 and ranged from 0.44 to 22.8 mg/m3. Only one measurement was greater 
than 10 mg/m3 (Mozzon et al. 1987 [DIRS 159585], p. 115). 
Clausnitzer and Singer (1997 [DIRS 160404]) measured exposure to PM4 during farming 
activities conducted in Davis, California. Sampler inlets were placed directly on farm 
implements; therefore, dust concentrations may have been higher than those experienced by 
equipment operators if the inlets were located closer to the source of dust than operators or if 
operators were within enclosed cabs. The texture of the surface soil was clay loam. Average 
(arithmetic) concentrations of respirable dust during 29 farming activities ranged from 0.2 to 
13.6 mg/m3. The average of those 29 activities was 2.9 mg/m3. Eighteen of the activities had 
average concentrations of equal to or less than 2 mg/m3. Only one activity (land planing, 
13.6 mg/m3) had an average concentration more than 10 mg/m3, and four others had 
concentrations greater than 5 mg/m3 (Clausnitzer and Singer 1997 [DIRS 160404], Table 1). 
Archer et al. (2002 [DIRS 168488], Table I) measured personal exposure to PM4 during farming 
activities in North Carolina. The soils there had a loamy sand to sandy loam texture (Archer et 
al. (2002 [DIRS 168488], p. 754). The arithmetic mean concentration of 37 measurements was 
1.31 mg/m3 (SD = 2.87). The only activity having an average concentration of more than 
1.3 mg/m3 was planting of sweet potatoes (average = 7.62). The average of all activities except 
planting of sweet potatoes was 0.32 mg/m3. 
6.1.1.2 Parameter Distribution 
The distribution recommended for use in the biosphere model must be representative of the 
average annual concentration that would be experienced by the RMEI within this environment 
(see introduction to Section 6). Therefore, extremely high or low values associated with 
activities that are conducted infrequently would be outside of the range of the distribution of the 
annual average concentration. 
Based primarily on the results of Nieuwenhuijsen et al. (1999 [DIRS 150711]), a triangular 
distribution with a mode of 5 mg/m3, minimum of 1 mg/m3, and maximum of 10 mg/m3 is 
selected. The mode is higher than the average of activities monitored by Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 
but lower than the average or midpoint of some of the other studies (Table 6-1). The minimum 
value was selected to bound possible minimum concentrations in this environment in the Yucca 
Mountain region, where there are few outdoor workers and where many soil-disturbing activities 
likely do not involve the use of farm implements or other mechanical devices. The upper bound 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-10 September 2004 
was selected to bound uncertainty in the consistency of precipitation, soil texture, and other 
conditions at the analogue study sites with the conditions in the Yucca Mountain region. 
Numerous factors, including the type of activity or operation, use of an enclosed tractor cab, 
relative humidity and other climatic factors, and soil texture have been identified that influence 
the concentrations of resuspended particles during farming activities (Clausnitzer and Singer 
1997 [[DIRS 160404]; Niewenhuijsen et al. 1998 [DIRS 150855]; Nieuwenhuijsen and Schenker 
1998 [DIRS 150854]; Archer et al. 2002 [DIRS 168488]). Based on these studies, the important 
factors identified that are relevant to evaluating uncertainty in the use of the analogue 
measurements and the consistency of the selected distributions of mass loading with the 
conditions in the Yucca Mountain region are the types of activities conducted during the studies 
and the climate and soil texture at the study sites. 
Dust concentrations were measured during a wide variety of farming activities. Activities with 
the highest dust concentrations generally were soil preparation, planting, and other activities that 
required direct disturbance of the soil and that were conducted from an open tractor cab or other 
farm implement. Activities that were conducted in an enclosed cab or did not involve intensive 
soil disturbance had much lower dust concentrations. Typical dust-generating activities 
conducted by people while working outdoors in Amargosa Valley include field preparation, 
harvesting, and other activities required to grow field crops; livestock feeding and management; 
and excavating. Because most crops grown in Amargosa Valley are perennials such as alfalfa 
and fruit and nut trees, disking, plowing, and other soil disturbing activities that generate very 
high concentrations of dust are conducted infrequently. People in Amargosa Valley would also 
generate dust while gardening, landscaping, walking on loose soil, or participating in other 
recreational activities outdoors. There are no published measurements of particulate 
concentrations associated with these activities. Gardening, home landscaping, and similar 
activities would generate less dust than the soil-disturbing agricultural activities included in the 
studies reviewed above, because large mechanical equipment usually is not used. It is estimated 
that local outdoor workers comprise 5.5 percent of the Amargosa Valley population and spend 
3.1 hours per day in the active outdoor environment. The remainder of the population is 
estimated to spend 0.3 hours active outdoors (BSC 2004 [DIRS 169671], Sections 6.3.1 
and 6.3.2). Thus, about 62 percent of the time spent outdoors by this population is spent by 
people not employed in farming or other local, outdoor occupations ([0.945 x 0.3 hours] / [0.945 
x 0.3 hours + 0.055 x 3.1 hours]). Because soil disturbing activities are conducted infrequently 
on agricultural fields in Amargosa Valley, and because much of the time spent in this 
environment by the population is during recreational and other non-occupational activities, the 
average concentration in this environment in the Yucca Mountain region will be lower than that 
that reported in the studies reviewed. The lower bound of the distribution was selected as a 
reasonable minimum estimate of conditions in the Yucca Mountain region for the population. 
This value is similar to the lower concentrations measured during farming and other activities in 
the reviewed studies. 
Soil moisture, relative humidity, wind speed, and other climate-related factors may affect mass 
loading concentrations during soil disturbing activities. Two of the analogue studies 
(Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 1998 [DIRS 150855]; Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 1999 [DIRS 150711]) were 
conducted in a semi-arid environment, but the other studies were conducted in more mesic 
regions. The lower precipitation and relative humidity (and possibly other differences such as 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-11 September 2004 
wind speed) could result in higher concentrations of resuspended particles than those measured 
in the studies reviewed. However, soil moisture during the growing and harvesting season likely 
was similar among studies because soil moisture must be maintained within the tolerance limits 
of crops. An upper bound of 10 mg/m3 was selected to account for uncertainty in differences in 
climate between the studies reviewed and the conditions in the Yucca Mountain region. This 
bound includes average concentrations from all but one activity measured by Nieuwenhuijsen 
et al. (1999 [DIRS 150711]) and all average measurements made in the other studies except 
those from cultivating, plowing, disking, or similar activities conducted from an open cab. A 
higher bound was not selected because the types of activities that would result in concentrations 
greater than 10 mg/m3 would be conducted infrequently by the population in the Yucca 
Mountain region and therefore a higher value would not be representative of average annual 
conditions in the region. 
The proportion of resuspendable material in soil (i.e., soil texture) may also influence mass 
loading during soil disturbing activities. Soils in northern Amargosa Valley are sandy to sandy 
loams and have a low proportion of readily resuspendable material in the surface layer. For 
example, the surface layer of the Shamock gravelly fine sandy loam soil type found along 
Fortymile Wash north of Highway 95 has a soil texture of more than 80 percent sand and 3 to 
8 percent clay, with 50 to 70 percent coarse fragments larger than 2 mm (CRWMS M&O 1999 
[DIRS 107736], Table 2 and Appendix B). The four studies reviewed above for which soil 
texture could be determined were conducted on soils having a similar or higher proportion of 
smaller particles (i.e., clay and silt) than those in northern Amargosa Valley. Thus, the 
measurements from those studies should bound uncertainty in the influence of soil texture on 
mass loading. 
The selected distribution of mass loading for the active outdoor environment ranges over an 
order of magnitude. This distribution was selected to bound uncertainty about the influence of 
relevant conditions in the studies reviewed to the current conditions in the Yucca Mountain 
region. Therefore, this distribution is consistent with the applicable current conditions in the 
Yucca Mountain region. This consistency supports a conclusion that the FEPs associated with 
this parameter (Table 1-1) are also consistent with the present knowledge of the conditions in the 
region surrounding the Yucca Mountain site, as required by 10 CFR 63.305(a) [DIRS 156605]. 
6.1.2 Inactive Outdoor Environment 
Averages of TSP concentrations measured over 24-hour periods at stationary, outdoor sites in 
arid to semi-arid, rural, agricultural settings in the western United States were used to develop a 
distribution of mass loading for the inactive outdoor environment. These data were selected 
because measurements taken at stationary, outdoor sites are consistent with the conditions that 
would be experienced by a person in the rural, agricultural setting of the Yucca Mountain region 
who is outdoors and not conducting activities that resuspend dust. 
Average concentrations calculated from measurements taken over 24-hour periods are 
appropriate for use in this analysis because they are representative of average conditions within 
an environment. Measurements taken over shorter periods would have greater variation because 
they would include short-term peaks in concentrations of resuspended particles. Including those 
short-term peaks in the distribution of mass loading would be invalid because they are not 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-12 September 2004 
representative of average annual concentrations. As described in the introduction to Section 6, 
distributions representative of average annual conditions are required in the biosphere model to 
calculate an annual dose to the RMEI for evaluation of compliance with the annual dose limit 
specified in 10 CFR 63.311 [DIRS 156605]. 
6.1.2.1 Selection of Data 
A database of average annual concentrations of TSP for the United States and territories for 1970 
through 2001 was obtained from the AirData database managed by the EPA Office of Air and 
Radiation (DTN MO0210SPATSP01.023 [DIRS 160426], see Section 4.1.2). All 
correspondence and data files associated with this set of data are located in the Records 
Information System and can be accessed via the link on the Automatic Technical Data 
Information Form for this DTN in the Technical Data Management System. The data were 
obtained via e-mail, rather than from the EPA AirData internet database, because that internet 
database does not provide access to TSP data. 
Two datasets received from the EPA were used in this analysis: 
1. KR450TSP.TXT, obtained from the EPA on September 6, 2002 (Ambrose 2002 
[DIRS 160080]). This dataset contains 76,220 records. Each record includes an 
annual average concentration of TSP at a monitoring site. 
2. KR380.NATION.TXT, obtained from the EPA on September 17, 2002 (Ambrose 2002 
[DIRS 160081]). This dataset contains 11,763 records. Each record contains site 
description information (e.g., address, setting, years active) for TSP monitoring sites. 
Information from these two datasets were imported into an ACCESS database and parsed 
according to the report manual (AQ1.WPD) provided by the EPA (Ambrose 2002 
[DIRS 160080]). The two files were then merged by station number to create a database labeled 
COMBINEDTSP that contains all the TSP data (from KR450TSP.TXT) for each station as well as the 
site description data (from KR380.NATION.TXT). 
The following was done to select data from sites having conditions that are consistent with the 
current conditions in the Yucca Mountain region. The database COMBINEDTSP was queried to 
obtain all records having a land use classification of agricultural (EPA code = 4), and a location 
setting of rural (EPA code = 3) for the following eight states: Arizona, California, Idaho, 
Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, Washington. These states were selected to ensure that a 
large sample of analogue sites with a climate consistent with present-day and predicted future 
conditions for Yucca Mountain would be selected. The rural, agricultural location and land use 
classifications were selected to match the setting, land use, and range of surface disturbing 
conditions in Amargosa Valley. That query resulted in a list of 486 valid annual measurements. 
Fifty-nine of those measurements from sites located west of the Cascade Range in Oregon were 
eliminated from further consideration because the climate in that region is not consistent with 
Yucca Mountain conditions. An additional 32 duplicate annual averages (included by EPA to 
present annual averages with and without unusually high 24-hour measurements) were deleted; 
the lower of the values for a year were deleted. The remaining 395 records for 68 sites are listed 
in Appendix B, Table B-1. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-13 September 2004 
To identify which sites have an arid or semi-arid climate, representative data on average annual 
precipitation and snowfall were obtained for the 68 sites from National Climatic Data Center 
reports (NCDC 1998 [DIRS 135900; DIRS 125325]) (Table B-2). Information for each site was 
then examined to select those that are appropriate analogue sites for Amargosa Valley. Sites 
were deleted or selected for the following reasons. 
 Two sites (35-006-0007 and 35-061-0007) were combined because they were in the 
same location but had different New Mexico county codes, resulting in a total of 
67 sites. 
 Ten sites were deleted because average annual precipitation exceeded 20 in. (Table B-2). 
The average TSP concentration of those sites was 0.036 mg/m3 (SD = 0.009). An 
additional 11 sites were deleted because average annual snowfall exceeded 20 in. 
(arithmetic mean concentration = 0.053 mg/m3, SD = 0.026) (Table B-2). This was done 
to ensure that only sites with a climate that is consistent with present-day and potential 
future conditions at Yucca Mountain were included. Arid sites generally are considered 
to have less than about 10 in. of precipitation per year (Brady and Weil 1999 
[DIRS 160019], p. 830) and the future climate for the next 10,000 years is predicted to 
have a maximum precipitation of 16 to 18 in. per year (BSC 2004 [DIRS 170002], 
Section 6.6.2; NCDC 1998 [DIRS 125325]). The results of this analysis show little 
sensitivity to these cutoff values. The average TSP concentration for the 20 sites with 
less than 10 in. of precipitation (mean = 0.060 mg/m3, SD = 0.036) was similar to that 
for 57 sites with less than 20 in. (mean = 0.056 mg/m3, SD = 0.029), and to all 67 sites 
(mean = 0.053 mg/m3, SD = 0.028). Likewise, the average concentration for the 42 sites 
with less than 10 in. of snowfall (mean = 0.056 mg/m3, SD = 0.031) was similar to that 
for 52 sites with less than 20 in. (mean = 0.054 mg/m3, SD = 0.030) and to all 67 sites 
(mean = 0.053 mg/m3, SD = 0.028). 
 Based on the site description information in the file KRNATIONRPT.WPD, one site 
(04-019-0009) was deleted because it was near an electrical power plant, and a second 
(04-013-0008) was deleted because it had abnormal readings due to substantial 
updraft. These two sites had average TSP concentrations of 0.081 and 0.131 mg/m3, 
respectively. 
 Twenty-three sites were deleted because there was more than one monitoring site within 
a county (Table B-2). The average concentration at those sites was 0.051 mg/m3 
(SD = 0.035). For counties with more than one monitoring station, the site with the 
greatest number of years of data was selected. If sites within a county had the same 
number of years of data, the site with the highest average TSP was chosen (because a 
higher TSP will result in a higher predicted inhalation dose, see Equation 6-1). 
The remaining 21 sites had an average TSP concentration of 0.057 mg/m3 (SD = 0.019) 
(Table 6-2). The minimum and maximum annual average concentrations were 0.025 and 0.089 
mg/m3, respectively. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-14 September 2004 
Table 6-2. Average Concentration of TSP at 21 Selected Monitoring Sites 
EPA Site IDa State City County 
Average TSP 
(mg/m3) N Years 
04-007-1902 Arizona Miami Gila 0.030 8 
04-019-0010 Arizona Tucson Pima 0.089 2 
06-013-1002 California Bethel Island Contra Costa 0.041 6 
06-019-1002 California Five Points Fresno 0.078 13 
06-027-0002 California Bishop Inyo 0.025 8 
06-031-1002 California Kettleman City Kings 0.086 9 
06-071-1101 California Twentynine Palms San Bernardino 0.049 11 
06-083-1011 California Jalama Santa Barbara 0.045 7 
06-111-3001 California El Rio Ventura 0.064 13 
06-113-4001 California Dunnigan Yolo 0.044 13 
32-003-1003 Nevada Moapa Clark 0.061 1 
32-031-1004 Nevada Sparks Washoe 0.054 12 
35-013-0004 New Mexico Sunland Park Dona Ana 0.080 17 
35-017-0002 New Mexico Hurley Grant 0.085 3 
35-045-0014 New Mexico Kirtland San Juan 0.044 14 
35-061-0007 New Mexico Bluewater Cibola/Valencia 0.071 6 
41-059-1001 Oregon Pendleton Umatilla 0.040 5 
49-015-0002 Utah Huntington Emery 0.030 4 
53-039-0002 Washington Bingen Klickitat 0.056 4 
53-071-1001 Washington Wallula Junction Walla Walla 0.066 9 
53-077-0003 Washington Sunnyside Yakima 0.062 10 
Average = 0.057 
SD = 0.019 
Source: DTN: MO0210SPATSP01.023 (DIRS 160426). Note that site ID numbers are not presented with leading 
zeros or dashes in the database. 
a See Appendix B for additional descriptions of these sites and annual average measurements. 
Average TSP=average of annual average concentrations; SD=standard deviation 
6.1.2.2 Parameter Distribution 
The TSP concentrations in Table 6-2 do not appear to be symmetrically distributed because there 
are more values near the high end of the distribution (5 values from 0.078 to 0.089 mg/m3) than 
at the low end (3 values from 0.025 to 0.036 mg/m3). Therefore, a triangular distribution is 
selected for the nominal inactive outdoor environment with a mode of 0.060 mg/m3, minimum of 
0.025 mg/m3, and maximum of 0.100 mg/m3. The mode and maximum are slightly higher than 
the average and maximum in Table 6-2 to account for the cluster of high values. This 
distribution encompasses most annual average values from rural agricultural sites in the entire set 
of EPA data. Of 426 annual average concentrations reported for rural agricultural sites in eight 
western states (range = 0.012 to 0.173 mg/m3), only 18 were less than 0.025 mg/m3 and 17 were 
greater than 0.100 mg/m3; thus, the distribution encompasses or is greater than all but about 4 
percent of the measurements from all rural, agricultural sites. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-15 September 2004 
The modal value is much higher than concentrations measured at relatively undisturbed, 
non-agricultural sites at Yucca Mountain (minimum and maximum annual TSP concentrations 
= 0.019 and 0.030 mg/m3, respectively) (CRWMS M&O 1999 [DIRS 102877], Table 2-3). This 
confirms that the measurements selected are influenced to some extent by dust-disturbing 
activities, such as those encountered in agricultural settings or by some other sources of 
resuspended particles. 
The important factors considered to evaluate uncertainty in the use of measurements from the 
stationary monitoring sites to predict the conditions in the Yucca Mountain region are the types 
and level of soil-disturbing activities, climate, vegetation, and soil. 
The measurements considered in this analysis were taken in rural, agricultural settings. This 
setting matches the land use conditions and level of soil disturbing activities in the occupied 
portion of the Yucca Mountain region (i.e., Amargosa Valley). Because the Yucca Mountain 
region has no unique sources of resuspended particles, and because the common sources of 
readily resuspendable particles there (gardens and cultivated land) would be common in rural 
agricultural monitoring settings elsewhere, the types and levels of soil-disturbing activities at the 
monitoring sites considered in this analysis are consistent with the conditions in the occupied 
portions of the Yucca Mountain region. 
Precipitation and presence of vegetation may affect the resuspendability of soil particles. 
However, there is no difference in average ambient mass loading over the range of precipitation 
predicted to occur at Yucca Mountain over the next 10,000 years (Appendix C), and, as 
described above, the results of this analysis are insensitive to the precipitation limits used to 
select data for this analysis. As a further example, the four sites listed in Appendix B, which 
have less than or equal to 6 in. of precipitation (i.e., consistent with present-day precipitation in 
northern Amargosa Valley), have an average ambient concentration of 0.053 mg/m3 
(SD = 0.022, range = 0.025 to 0.078). The sites are Twentynine Palms, Moapa, Bishop, and Five 
Points; precipitation is listed in Table B-2. This is similar to the distribution of the values listed 
in Table 6-2 for all selected sites with less than 20 in. of precipitation. Those four sites also have 
sparse desert vegetation consistent with that in the Yucca Mountain region. Thus, precipitation 
and native vegetation at the analogue sites are sufficiently consistent with the conditions in the 
Yucca Mountain region and using one distribution for all climate states will not underestimate 
mass loading for the present-day climate. 
Soil characteristics at the air-quality monitoring sites may affect mass loading but were not 
considered in the selection of data for use in this analysis for the following reason: Soils in 
northern Amargosa Valley are sandy to sandy loams and have a low proportion of readily 
resuspendable material in the surface layer and a well-developed, indurated layer of pebbles and 
cobble on the surface of most undisturbed areas. For example, the surface layer of the Shamock 
gravelly fine sandy loam soil type found along Fortymile Wash north of Highway 95 has a soil 
texture of more than 80 percent sand and 38 percent clay. Those soils also have 5070 percent 
coarse fragments larger than 2 mm (CRWMS M&O 1999 [DIRS 107736], Table 2 and 
Appendix B). Soils with a loam, silty loam, and other textures commonly found in farming areas 
have a higher percentage of readily resuspendable material than those found in northern 
Amargosa Valley (Brady and Weil 1999 [DIRS 160019], Figure 4.8). Thus, measurements of 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-16 September 2004 
mass loading taken at monitoring sites on other soils bound the soil conditions in the Yucca 
Mountain region. 
Other factors such average annual wind speed, topography, and diurnal patterns of wind speed, 
that could have an influence mass loading in the inactive outdoor environment were not 
considered, because calculations of the amount of dust inhaled in the biosphere model are not 
sensitive to changes in mass loading in the inactive outdoor environment (Appendix A). For 
example, tripling the average mass loading in this environment from 0.06 to 0.18 mg/m3 would 
increase the predicted amount of dust inhaled by about 4 percent (calculated using the methods 
described in Appendix A). This would have a similar effect on the calculation of BDCFs and 
predicted dose for those radionuclides for which inhalation is the dominant pathway (237Np, 
239Pu) (BSC 2004 [DIRS 169674], Table 6.2-10) because of the linear equations used in those 
calculations (BSC 2004 [DIRS 169460], Sections 6.4.10 and 6.5.8). It would have a smaller 
effect on the BDCFs and predicted dose of radionuclides for which inhalation is not a dominant 
pathway (e.g., 99Tc, 129I) (BSC 2004 [DIRS 169674], Table 6.2-10). Thus, differences in 
conditions between the monitoring sites and the Yucca Mountain region not considered here 
would not affect the results of the biosphere model or result in underestimation of risk in the 
TSPA calculations. 
Because the most important conditions under which the analogue measurements were taken are 
consistent with the current conditions in the Yucca Mountain region, and because the biosphere 
model is not sensitive to changes that may result from other conditions not considered here, the 
distribution of mass loading in the inactive outdoor environment is consistent with the applicable 
conditions in the Yucca Mountain region. This consistency supports a conclusion that the FEPs 
associated with this parameter (Table 1-1) are also consistent with the present knowledge of the 
conditions in the region surrounding the Yucca Mountain site, as required by 10 CFR 63.305(a) 
[DIRS 156605]. 
6.1.3 Active Indoor Environment 
A review of applicable literature (see Section 4.1.1) was conducted to identify average 
concentrations of resuspended particles measured indoors while people were present and awake. 
The results are summarized in Table 6-3. The relevant factors considered in evaluating whether 
the conditions under which those studies were taken are consistent with the present conditions in 
the Yucca Mountain region included the types of activities conducted, the types of dwellings or 
buildings within which the studies were conducted, and the ambient outdoor particle 
concentrations while the studies were being conducted. 
Studies were considered applicable to the conditions in the active indoor environment in the 
Yucca Mountain region if measurements of indoor concentrations were taken while people were 
home and active or if personal exposure (i.e., inlet of the monitoring device was located on a 
person) was measured while people were indoors and active. Because there are few public 
buildings in Amargosa Valley, and because about 40 percent of the population there does not 
work (Bureau of the Census 2002, Table P43), measurements taken in homes were considered 
more applicable than those taken in public buildings. Because concentrations of TSP were 
measured in only three of the studies reviewed, studies that measured PM10 were also included. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-17 September 2004 
Table 6-3. Particulate Concentrations-Nominal Indoor Active Environment 
Personal Exposure, 
mg/m3 
Concentration 
Indoors, mg/m3 
Reference x Range x Range Comments 
1 Wigzell et al. 2000 (DIRS 159729), 
Table 3 - - 0.041 0.026-0.118 TSP, 10 homes, England 
2 Thatcher and Layton 1995 
(DIRS 159600), Table 3 - - 0.063 - TSP, 1 home, California 
3 Yocom et al. 1971 (DIRS 159654), 
Table 1 - - 0.063 0.049-0.076 TSP, 2 homes, Connecticut 
4 Clayton et al. 1993 (DIRS 159599), 
Table 2 
0.129 0.060-0.263 0.078 0.031-0.181 PM10, 178 people, California 
5 Lioy et al. 1990 (DIRS 159655), 
Figures 4, 5, and 6 
0.066 0.030-0.130 0.042 0.028-0.058 PM10, 14 people, New Jersey 
6 Quackenboss et al. 1989 
(DIRS 159682), Table 3 - - 0.03 SD = 0.020 PM10, 43 homes, Arizona 
7 Leaderer et al. 1999 
(DIRS 160403), Table 1 - - 0.029 0.005-0.098 PM10, 49 homes, Connecticut 
and Virginia, summer, with A/C 
8 Long et al. 2000 (DIRS 159681), 
Table 2 - - 0.019 0.003-0.095 PM10, 9 homes, Massachusetts 
9 Pellizzari et al. 1999 
(DIRS 159702), Figure 2 
0.068 0.025-0.104 0.024 0.009-0.065 PM10, 881 people, Toronto 
10 Janssen et al. 1998 
(DIRS 159699), Table 1 
0.062 0.038-0.113 0.034 0.019-0.065 PM10, 37 people, Amsterdam 
11 Brauer et al. 2000 (DIRS 159703), 
Table 4 
0.107 SD = 0.002 0.063 SD = 0.002 PM10, 49 people, Slovakia, 
summer 
12 Monn et al. 1997 (DIRS 150888), 
Table 2 - - 0.024 0.011-0.033 PM10, 17 homes, Switzerland 
13 Wheeler et al. 2000 
(DIRS 159704), Table 2 
0.053 - 0.05 - PM10, 10 children, London 
14 Howard-Reed et al. 2000, 
(DIRS 159680), Table 2; Evans et 
al. 2000 (DIRS 159679), Table 8 
0.029 0.003-0.221 0.017 0.012-0.023 PM10, 51 people, retirement 
facility, California 
15 Howard-Reed et al. 2000 
(DIRS 159680), Table 2; Williams 
et al. 2000 (DIRS 159735), Table 4 
0.024 <0.001-0.249 0.013 0.007-0.030 PM10, 21 people, retirement 
facility, Maryland 
16 Linn et al. 1999 (DIRS 159602), 
Table 2 
0.035 0.005-0.085 0.033 0.009-0.105 PM10, 30 people with lung 
disease, California 
17 Rojas-Bracho et al. 2000 
(DIRS 159678), Table 2 
0.037 0.009-0.211 0.032 0.002-0.329 PM10, 18 people with 
pulmonary disease, 
Massachusetts 
x = mean or other value representative of the central tendency (see text); PM10 = Particles with an aerodynamic 
diameter =10 m; SD = standard deviation; TSP= total suspended particles, dash indicates no data reported. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-18 September 2004 
Table 6-3. Particulate Concentrations-Nominal Indoor Active Environment (Continued) 
0 
0.02 
0.04 
0.06 
0.08 
0.1 
0.12 
0.14 
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 
Reference No. 
Concentration mg/m 3 
Studies 1, 2, and 3 measured TSP, all others measured PM10 
Squares = average indoor concentrations, circles = average personal exposure concentrations 
For use in this analysis, PM10 concentrations must be converted to TSP, so applicable 
measurements of the ratio of TSP to PM10 also were reviewed. 
For many of the following studies, both personal exposure and stationary indoor concentrations 
(i.e., measured using a stationary monitor placed in a central location in the house) were 
reported. Measurements of personal exposure are most applicable to this environment if the 
people monitored spent their time indoors conducting a variety of typical activities. 
Measurements of personal exposure during indoor dust-generating activities (e.g., during 
housework and cooking) are useful for understanding maximum indoor concentrations, but are 
not representative of average concentrations while indoors. Static measurements are most 
applicable if they were taken while people were present and active. Outdoor concentrations 
measured at regional monitoring sites were also reported in most studies and are included here to 
compare levels of dustiness outdoors during the studies to those in the Yucca Mountain region 
(see Section 6.1.2). 
The only source of indoor contaminated particulates for the biosphere model is soil or ash that is 
tracked or blown indoors. Other sources of indoor, airborne particles may have contributed 
substantially to mass load concentrations in some studies. For example, smoking resulted in a 
37 percent increase in average daytime PM10 concentrations in homes in Riverside California 
(Clayton et al. 1993 [DIRS 159599], Table 6) and concentrations in homes in Tucson with 
smokers were more than twice as high as those without (Quackenboss et al. 1989 
[DIRS 159682], Table 3). Cooking, use of household cleaning products, and other activities also 
generate resuspended particles that would not be contaminated in the scenarios considered in this 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-19 September 2004 
analysis (e.g., Long et al. 2000 [DIRS 159681], pp. 1242 to 1245). Therefore, the most 
applicable studies are those that omitted homes with smokers or that present data separately for 
homes with and without smokers. 
6.1.3.1 Literature Review 
Indoor and Personal Exposure Concentrations.Wigzell et al. (2000 [DIRS 159729]) 
measured TSP and PM2.5 concentrations over 48-hour periods in the kitchens and living rooms of 
10 homes in Oxford England. Sampling devices in the living rooms were on only when residents 
were home. The average TSP concentration in living rooms was 0.041 mg/m3 (range = 0.026 to 
0.118). The average in nine homes where smoking did not occur was 0.036 mg/m3. Outdoor 
PM10 concentrations averaged 0.019 mg/m3 (Wigzell et al. 2000 [DIRS 159729], Table 3). 
Thatcher and Layton (1995 [DIRS 159600]) measured TSP and PM10 concentrations in one 
home in California during normal and staged activities. The TSP concentration while five 
residents (2 adults and 3 children) were present performing normal activities was 0.063 mg/m3. 
Outdoor PM10 concentrations at that time were 0.014 mg/m3. In one experiment, TSP 
concentrations after vigorous cleaning was about 0.2 mg/m3, and decreased to about 0.05 within 
60 minutes. Walking into a room that previously had no activity caused concentrations of 
particles with an average aerodynamic diameter equal to or more than 5 m to more than double. 
Cleaning caused an 11.4-times increase in the concentration of particles 5 to 10 m and a 
29.5-times increase in the concentration of particles equal to or greater than 10 m (Thatcher and 
Layton 1995 [DIRS 159600], Table 3, Figures 3 and 7). 
Yocom et al. (1971 [DIRS 159654]) measured TSP concentrations in two homes, two office 
buildings, and two public buildings over three seasons in Hartford Connecticut. The average 
daytime concentration in the homes was 0.063 mg/m3 (range = 0.049 to 0.076). Average 
daytime concentrations in office and public buildings were 0.073 mg/m3 (range = 0.057 to 0.087) 
and 0.046 mg/m3 (range = 0.036 to 0.060), respectively. Outdoor concentrations in the area 
averaged 0.089 mg/m3 (Yocom et al. 1971 [DIRS 159654], Table 1). 
Clayton et al. (1993 [DIRS 159599]) summarized the results of a study conducted by the EPA to 
estimate population levels of exposure to particulates in Riverside California. Indoor, outdoor, 
and personal exposure concentrations of PM10 were measured for a probability-based sample of 
178 nonsmokers 10 years old or older. Daytime personal exposure averaged 0.129 mg/m3 (10th 
and 90th percentiles = 0.060 and 0.263, respectively) (Clayton et al. 1993 [DIRS 159599], 
Table 2). Nighttime personal exposure averaged 0.068 mg/m3 (10th to 90th percentiles = 0.037 to 
0.135). The people monitored spent an average of about 50 percent of their daytime hours out of 
their house; therefore, measurements of personal exposure may not be as applicable to this 
analysis as indoor measurements. Daytime and nighttime concentrations measured at a 
stationary indoor monitor averaged 0.078 mg/m3 (0.031 to 0.181) and 0.053 mg/m3 (0.025 to 
0.117), respectively. Average indoor concentrations were 37 precent higher in homes on days 
when housework occurred (0.091 mg/m3 compared to 0.057 mg/m3 on days with no housework). 
The average indoor concentration (0.078 mg/m3) is between those values and therefore appears 
to be a reasonable estimate of homes with and without substantial dust-generating activities. 
PM10 concentrations at outdoor, regional monitoring sites averaged 0.079 mg/m3 (Clayton et al. 
1993 [DIRS 159599], Table 2). 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-20 September 2004 
Personal exposure to PM10 for 14 people in Phillipsburg, New Jersey, averaged 0.066 mg/m3 
(range approximately 0.030 to 0.130 mg/m3). Most personal exposure concentrations were 
between 0.040 and 0.080. Concentrations inside fourteen homes averaged 0.042 mg/m3 (range 
approximately 0.028 to 0.058 mg/m3). Outdoor concentrations averaged 0.048 mg/m3. There 
were no smokers living in the homes and all measurements lasted 24 hours (Lioy et al. 1990 
[DIRS 159655], Figures 4, 5, and 6). 
PM10 concentrations in 43 homes in Tucson, Arizona, without smokers averaged 0.030 mg/m3 
(SD = 0.020, 24-hour measurements). Homes with evaporative coolers had lower concentrations 
(average = 0.021) than those without (average = 0.038). Homes with smokers had much higher 
concentrations (average = 0.075) (Quackenboss et al. 1989 [DIRS 159682], Table 3). Outdoor 
concentrations were not reported. 
PM10 concentrations during summer in 49 homes in Connecticut and Virginia with air 
conditioning was 0.029 mg/m3 (range = 0.005 to 0.098, 24-hour measurements). Concentrations 
in 8 homes without air conditioning averaged 0.033 mg/m3 (range = 0.018 to 0.60). 
Concentrations during winter in 84 homes without kerosene heaters averaged 0.026 mg/m3 
(range = 0.003 to 0.182). Concentrations outside of homes averaged 0.028 and 0.024 mg/m3 
during summer and winter, respectively (Leaderer et al. 1999 [DIRS 160403], Tables 1 and 4). 
Concentrations of PM10 in nine homes without smokers in Boston, Massachusetts, averaged 
0.019 mg/m3 (range = 0.003 to 0.095, 24-hour measurements). Peak concentrations during 
dusting and vigorous walking were 0.105 and 0.041 mg/m3, respectively. Outdoor PM10 
concentrations averaged 0.013 mg/m3, lower than other studies reviewed here (Long et al. 2000 
[DIRS 159681], Tables 2 and 3). 
Personal exposure to PM10 in a stratified sample of the population in Toronto, Canada, averaged 
0.068 mg/m3 (10th and 90th percentiles approximately 0.025 and 0.104, 24-hour measurements). 
Indoor concentrations averaged 0.024 mg/m3 (10th and 90th percentiles approximately 0.009 and 
0.065). Outdoor concentrations averaged 0.024 mg/m3 (Pellizzari et al. 1999 [DIRS 159702], 
Figure 2). 
Personal exposure to PM10 for 37 nonsmokers (50-70 years old) in Amsterdam, Netherlands, 
averaged 0.062 mg/m3 (range = 0.038 to 0.113). Indoor exposure averaged 0.034 mg/m3 
(range = 0.019 to 0.065) and outdoor concentrations averaged 0.042 mg/m3. On the days they 
were monitored, subjects spent an average of 1.3 hours outdoors and 20.5 hours at home; 
therefore, personal exposure concentrations reported here likely are a good measure of 
concentrations in the active indoor environment of this sample (Janssen et al. 1998 
[DIRS 159699], Table 1). 
Brauer et al. (2000 [DIRS 159703], Table 4) measured personal exposure and PM10 
concentrations in homes of 18 office workers, 15 high school students, and 16 industrial workers 
in Slovakia. Personal exposure (24-hour) during summer and winter averaged 0.107 mg/m3 
(geometric SD = 1.7) and 0.105 mg/m3 (geometric SD = 1.7), respectively. Twenty-four hour 
average concentrations in homes during summer and winter were 0.063 (geometric SD = 2.0) 
and 0.060 mg/m3 (geometric SD = 1.6), respectively. Outdoor PM10 concentrations 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-21 September 2004 
averaged 0.033 and 0.040 mg/m3 during summer and winter. Participants of this study spent an 
average of 71 percent of their time at home (Brauer et al. 2000 [DIRS 159703], Table 1). 
PM10 concentrations in 17 homes in Switzerland averaged 0.024 mg/m3 (range 0.011 to 0.033). 
Homes where substantial activity occurred (home groups A and C) had average concentrations of 
0.029 mg/m3. Outdoor concentrations averaged 0.022 mg/m3 (Monn et al. 1997 [DIRS 150888], 
Table 2). 
Personal exposure to PM10 for 10 children in London, England, during daytime averaged 
0.053 mg/m3 (no range presented). Concentrations in homes while children were present 
averaged 0.050; smokers were present in some homes. Average concentrations in gardens, 
classrooms, and at a regional outdoor monitoring site were 0.022, 0.079, and 0.024 mg/m3, 
respectively (Wheeler et al. 2000 [DIRS 159704], Table 2). 
The lifestyles, physical conditions, and similarity between personal and indoor concentrations 
indicate that the subjects of the following studies were sedentary and therefore did not resuspend 
substantial concentrations of particles. These results therefore are applicable only for identifying 
a lower bound of the average mass loading concentration for the Amargosa Valley population. 
Personal exposure to PM10 was measured in retirement facilities in Fresno, California, and 
Baltimore, Maryland. Average exposure while awake at home indoors was 0.029 (range = 0.003 
to 0.221) and 0.024 mg/m3 (range = <0.001 to 0.249) in Fresno and Baltimore, respectively 
(Howard-Reed et al. 2000 [DIRS 159680], Table 2). Concentrations in apartments at the Fresno 
facility averaged 0.017 mg/m3 (range = 0.012 to 0.023), and outdoor ambient concentrations 
there averaged 0.021 mg/m3 (Evans et al. 2000 [DIRS 159679], Table 8). Concentrations in 
apartments in Baltimore averaged 0.013 mg/m3 (range = 0.007 to 0.030) and outdoor 
concentrations averaged 0.028 mg/m3 (Williams et al. 2000 [DIRS 159735], Table 4). 
Personal exposure to PM10 for 30 people in Los Angeles, California, with severe lung disease 
averaged 0.035 mg/m3 (range = 0.005 to 0.085). Concentrations in their homes averaged 
0.033 mg/m3 (range = 0.009 to 0.105). Outdoor concentrations averaged 0.033 mg/m3 
(Linn et al. 1999 [DIRS 159602], Tables 1 and 2). 
Personal exposure to PM10 for 18 people in Boston, Massachusetts, with chronic obstructive 
pulmonary disease averaged 0.037 mg/m3 (range = 0.009 to 0.211, winter and summer, daytime 
measurements). Concentrations in their homes averaged 0.032 mg/m3 (range = 0.002 to 0.329, 
24-hour measurements). Outdoor concentrations averaged 0.022 mg/m3 (Rojas-Bracho et al. 
2000 [DIRS 159678], Table 2). 
TSP: PM10 RatiosThe following are summaries of applicable measurements of the ratio of TSP 
to PM10 and TSP:PM2.5. The ratios measured by Brook et al. (1997 [DIRS 160254]) and at 
Yucca Mountain (Appendix E) were derived from stationary outdoor monitors and are not as 
applicable as ratios from the other studies, which were based on indoor measurements. 
However, results of the latter studies are useful for corroborating the other results. 
Thatcher and Layton (1995 [DIRS 159600], Table 3 and Figure 3) measured a TSP:PM10 ratio of 
2.7:1 during normal indoor activities, 3.2:1 immediately after vigorous cleaning, and 1.6:1, one 
hour after cleaning had ended. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-22 September 2004 
The ratio of TSP:PM10 in homes following the eruption of Mount St. Helens was 3:1 (Buist et al. 
1986 [DIRS 144632], Table 2). 
The average ratio of TSP to PM2.5 measured in nine homes in England was 2.7:1 (Wigzell et al. 
2000 [DIRS 159729], Table 3, comparison of arithmetic mean of concentrations in living 
rooms). The TSP:PM10 ratio would have been lower because the concentration of fragments 
from 2.5 to 10 m would be included in the denominator of the ratio. 
Average TSP:PM10 ratios for 19 locations in Canada was 1.8 to 2.0:1. Tenth and 90th percentiles 
were 3.3:1 and 1:1. These measurements were taken at stationary outdoor monitors (Brook et al. 
1997 [DIRS 160254], Table 3). 
The ratio of TSP to PM10 outdoors at Yucca Mountain averaged about 2.5. This value is based 
on 1,276 simultaneously collected measurements of TSP and PM10 taken during 1989 through 
1997. This data and the associated DTNs are displayed in Appendix E. Twenty-four ratios of 
less or equal to 1.0 (i.e., PM10 concentrations the same as or higher than TSP, which is very 
unlikely or not possible) were omitted from consideration. Six of these ratios had PM10 values of 
zero and 15 others had very low values of TSP and PM10 (<10 g/m3) or very small differences 
between TSP and PM10 (=2 g/m3). Thus, most of these incorrect ratios likely were the result of 
normal measurement error for the equipment used. The average TSP:PM10 ratio for the 
remaining 1,276 measurements was 2.49:1 (SD = 1.03). The median value was 2.22 and the 
ratios ranged from 1.0 to 12.57. The data were skewed toward small values; 84 percent of ratios 
were less than 4.0 and 94.3 percent were less than 5.0. 
6.1.3.2 Parameter Distribution 
Average personal exposure to PM10 in the studies reviewed ranged from 0.024 to 0.129 mg/m3. 
Average indoor concentrations of TSP and PM10 while people were active ranged from 0.041 to 
0.063 mg/m3 and from 0.013 to 0.078 mg/m3, respectively (Table 6-3). As discussed below, it is 
reasonable to conclude that these ranges include the average annual conditions in the Yucca 
Mountain region because the studies were conducted over a variety of applicable conditions, 
including some with relatively high outdoor concentrations (Clayton et al. 1993 [DIRS 159599]; 
Lioy et al. 1990 [DIRS 159655]), and because results did not vary much among studies. 
A triangular distribution with a mode of 0.100 mg/m3, minimum of 0.060 mg/m3, and maximum 
of 0.175 mg/m3 is selected for the active indoor environment. The minimum value is based on 
the three studies that measured TSP indoors (references 1, 2, and 3 in Table 6-3). The upper 
bound is based on a high PM10 concentration of 0.070 mg/m3 and a TSP:PM10 ratio of 2.5:1. The 
PM10 concentration of 0.070 mg/m3 is similar to the maximum of the average indoor 
concentrations measured in the studies reviewed (Table 6-3) and higher than all but two of the 
average personal exposure concentrations measured. It was selected to bound uncertainty in 
conditions such as types of dwellings that may differ between the analogue studies and the 
conditions in the Yucca Mountain region. The subjects of the two studies that had higher 
average levels of personal exposure (Clayton et al. 1993 [DIRS 159599]; Brauer et al. 2000 
[DIRS 159703]) spent a substantial amount of time away from their homes and therefore may 
have been exposed to excess sources of particulates or to particulates that would not be 
contaminated in the biosphere analysis scenarios (e.g., car exhaust, industrial pollutants). The 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-23 September 2004 
TSP:PM10 ratio is based on the range of 1.6:1 to 3:1 measured indoors in three studies, and 
confirmed by outdoor ratios. The modal value selected is less than the midpoint between the 
minimum and maximum, because all three applicable measurements of TSP are at the minimum 
end of the distribution. This indicates that the true average for the Amargosa Valley population 
likely is closer to the minimum than the maximum value. As shown in Appendix A, a change in 
the average mass loading from the modal to the maximum values of this distribution would 
increase the predicted amount of dust inhaled by the receptor by about 17 percent. This change 
is small relative to the approximately order-of-magnitude variation in BDCFs calculated by the 
ERMYN model (BSC 2004 [DIRS 169674], Section 6.2.3; BSC 2004 [DIRS 167287], 
Section 6.2.3). 
The important factors relevant to evaluating uncertainty in the use of the analogue measurements 
and the consistency of the selected distribution of mass loading to the conditions in the 
Yucca Mountain region are the types of indoor activities, types of dwellings, and outdoor 
ambient concentrations. Outdoor ambient concentrations would be influenced by outdoor 
conditions such as precipitation, vegetation, sources of outdoor particles, and types of outdoor 
activities; therefore, those outdoor conditions are not discussed separately. 
The types of activities that were conducted during the studies reviewed are typical of those 
expected to occur in dwellings in the Yucca Mountain region (e.g., walking, cleaning, cooking, 
sitting). Because there are no unique industries, occupations, or other conditions in the 
Yucca Mountain region (see the introduction to Section 6.1 and BSC 2004 [DIRS 169671], 
Section 6.3), there is no reason to expect that people in the region would conduct indoor 
activities that differ substantially from people elsewhere or result in higher concentrations of 
resuspended particles. Conditions during some of the studies that measured the lowest 
concentrations (e.g., Linn et al. 1999 [DIRS 159602]) may not be representative of average 
annual conditions in the Yucca Mountain region, because the subjects had medical conditions 
that would cause them to be less active than other people. The studies with the highest 
concentrations of PM10 included measurements of subjects that spent a substantial amount of 
time away from their homes (Clayton et al. 1993 [DIRS 159599]; Brauer et al. 2000 
[DIRS 159703]). The results of those studies were considered less applicable in the selection of 
the distribution of mass loading for this environment. Some of the studies took place while 
subjects were conducting activities that cause high concentrations of resuspended particles that 
would not be contaminated with radionuclides by the use of groundwater, such as smoking and 
cooking. Measurements from those studies would be higher than concentrations of 
contaminated, resuspended particles applicable to this analysis. 
The reviewed studies were conducted in a variety of dwellings and concentrations varied little 
among the studies. However, no measurements were reported to have been taken in mobile 
homes, the type of dwelling lived in by most people in Amargosa Valley (Bureau of the 
Census 2002 [DIRS 159728], Tables H30 and H31). It is possible that more resuspended dust 
from outdoors would be transferred into mobile homes than into dwellings constructed of brick 
or other building materials. The upper bound for this distribution is similar to or greater than all 
applicable measurements of indoor and personal exposure concentrations and was selected to 
account for this source of uncertainty. A higher value was not selected because no higher 
applicable average measurement was reported, indoor concentrations varied little among 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-24 September 2004 
different types of dwellings, and because a small increase in this value would have little effect on 
the predicted amount of dust inhaled by the receptor (Appendix A). 
Changes in outdoor concentrations of resuspended particles have been shown to influence indoor 
concentrations (see the studies listed in Table 5-1). Thus, differences in outdoor concentrations 
resulting from differences in the outdoor sources of resuspended particles, precipitation, 
vegetation, and other factors could affect the applicability of the studies reviewed. Average 
outdoor concentrations of PM10 at regional monitoring sites ranged from 0.013 to 0.079 in those 
studies. That range is similar to the range of concentrations in rural, agricultural sites in arid to 
semi-arid settings (Table 6-2) and similar to or higher than that measured in the Yucca Mountain 
region (see the introduction to Section 6.1 and CRWMS M&O 1999 [DIRS 102877], Table 2-3). 
Because almost all analogue studies were conducted in areas having higher outdoor 
concentrations than those expected for a rural, agricultural setting in the Yucca Mountain region, 
the distribution for this environment, which was based on the results of those studies, bounds 
conditions in the region. 
Because most relevant conditions under which the analogue measurements were taken are 
consistent with the current conditions in the Yucca Mountain region, and because the range of 
the distribution was selected to bound uncertainty in other relevant conditions that may have 
differed (e.g., type of dwelling), the distribution of mass loading in the active indoor 
environment is consistent with the applicable current conditions in the Yucca Mountain region. 
This consistency supports a conclusion that the FEPs associated with this parameter (Table 1-1) 
are also consistent with the present knowledge of the conditions in the region surrounding the 
Yucca Mountain site, as required by 10 CFR 63.305(a) [DIRS 156605]. 
6.1.4 Asleep Indoor Environment 
A review of applicable literature (see Section 4.1.1) was conducted to determine the range of 
average concentrations of resuspended particles measured while people were asleep indoors. 
The results are summarized in Table 6-4. Studies were considered most applicable if 
concentrations were measured while people were sleeping. Studies were also considered 
applicable if indoor concentrations were measured while subjects were inactive or absent. 
Because most applicable studies measured concentrations of PM10, a review of applicable 
TSP:PM10 ratios also was conducted. 
6.1.4.1 Literature Review 
Thatcher and Layton (1995 [DIRS 159600], Figure 3) reported a TSP concentration of about 
0.055 mg/m3 in a home in California one hour after all resuspension activities were stopped. The 
TSP:PM10 ratio at that time was about 1.6:1. This measurement is analogous to one hour after 
people became inactive or went to bed. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-25 September 2004 
Table 6-4. Particulate Concentrations-Nominal Asleep Indoor Environment 
Concentration, mg/m3 
Reference x Range Comments 
1 Thatcher and Layton 1995 
(DIRS 159600), Figure 3 0.055 - TSP, one hour after activities stopped, California 
2 Buist et al. 1983 (DIRS 
159738), p. 717 <0.01 - TSP, summer camp, Oregon, while sleeping 
3 Howard-Reed et al. 2000 
(DIRS 159680), Table 2 0.018 0.005-0.040 PM10, retirement facility, California, while sleeping 
4 Howard-Reed et al. 2000 
(DIRS 159680), Table 2 0.010 0.001-0.159 PM10, retirement facility, Maryland, while sleeping 
5 Clayton et al. 1993 (DIRS 
159599), Table 2 0.053 0.025-0.117 
PM10, 178 people, California, 12-hr measurements, 
40-50% of concentration from vehicles and 
secondary sulfites 
6 Long et al. 2001 (DIRS 
159733), Table 2 0.007 0.001-0.021 PM2.5, nine homes, Boston, while sleeping 
0 
0.01 
0.02 
0.03 
0.04 
0.05 
0.06 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
Reference No. 
Concentration mg/m 3 
Squares = TSP, circles = PM10, triangle = PM2.5. 
x = mean or other value representative of the central tendency (see text); PM10 = particles with an aerodynamic 
diameter =10 m; PM2.5 = particles with an aerodynamic diameter =2.5 m; TSP = total suspended particles, dash 
indicates no data reported. 
Buist et al. (1983 [DIRS 159738]) measured personal TSP exposure concentrations of children 
ages 8 to 13 that were attending a summer camp in Oregon shortly after 1.2 cm of ash had fallen 
from the eruption of Mount St. Helens. The methods used for that study are more fully described 
in Hewett (1980 [DIRS 168491]). Nighttime TSP concentrations were at or below the 
0.01-mg/m3 limit of detection of sampling equipment (Buist et al. 1983 [DIRS 159738], p. 717). 
Although the results of this study are most applicable to analysis of the volcanic ash scenario, 
they are listed here to demonstrate that dust concentrations in the asleep indoor environment can 
be very low even when conditions outdoors are very dusty. 
PM10 concentrations in retirement apartments in Fresno, California, and Baltimore, Maryland, 
while residents were asleep averaged 0.018 mg/m3 (range = 0.005 to 0.040) and 0.010 mg/m3 
(range = 0.001 to 0.159) (Howard-Reed et al. 2000 [DIRS 159680], Table 2). Concentrations 
varied little while residents were asleep (Howard-Reed et al. 2000 [DIRS 159680], 
Figures 1 and 2). 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-26 September 2004 
Indoor concentrations of PM10 at night (7:00 pm to 7:00 am) in homes of 178 people monitored 
in Riverside, California averaged 0.053 mg/m3 (10th and 90th percentiles = 0.025 and 0.117) 
(Clayton et al. 1993 [DIRS 159599], Table 2). These measurements are overestimates of 
concentrations of soil particles experienced while subjects were sleeping for two reasons. First, 
the measurement period includes times when people where active during the evening and early 
morning. Second, a portion of the mass loading concentration consists of particles that would 
not be contaminated in the groundwater or volcanic ash scenarios. Yakovleva et al. (1999 
[DIRS 159730], Figure 7) examined the source contributions in this study and concluded that 
about 40 to 50 percent of particulate concentrations at night were from motor vehicles and 
secondary sulfates. 
Long et al. (2001 [DIRS 159733]) measured PM2.5 concentrations and volume of PM2.5 and PM10 
particles in nine homes of nonsmokers in Boston at night while people were asleep and/or 
inactive. The average PM2.5 concentration was 0.007 mg/m3 (5th and 95th percentiles = <0.001 to 
0.021). Less than 10 percent of the PM10 particle volume consisted of particles 2.5 to 10 m in 
diameter (Long et al. 2001 [DIRS 159733]; Table 2). Because few of the resuspended particles 
were larger than 2.5 m, concentrations measured during this study are comparable to PM10 
concentrations reported in other studies. 
6.1.4.2 Parameter Distribution 
A triangular distribution with a mode of 0.030 mg/m3, minimum of 0.010 mg/m3, and maximum 
of 0.050 mg/m3, is selected for the asleep indoor environment. The minimum and maximum are 
based on the two measurements of TSP concentrations reported (Table 6-4). All but one 
applicable measurement of PM10 and PM2.5 (Table 6-4), if multiplied by a TSP:PM10 ratio of 
1.6:1 (Thatcher and Layton 1995 [DIRS 159600], Figure 3), are within this range. As discussed 
above, the average value of 0.053 mg/m3 measured by Clayton et al. (1993 [DIRS 159599]) is an 
overestimate of applicable concentrations by a factor of at least two because it includes 
secondary sulfates and particles generated by motor vehicles (Yakovleva et al. 1999 
[DIRS 159730]). Thus, this distribution encompasses the range of variation and uncertainty in 
measurements of mass loads in the asleep indoor environment. 
As shown in Appendix A, estimates of the amount of dust inhaled are insensitive to changes in 
dust concentrations in the asleep indoor environment. Because of the insensitivity of the 
biosphere model to changes in this distribution, and because there is very little variation in mass 
loading indoors while people are asleep, the only factor considered in evaluating whether the 
conditions in the studies reviewed were consistent with the conditions in the Yucca Mountain 
region was the type or level of human activity. All studies were conducted when people were 
asleep or inactive and it is therefore concluded that the distribution developed based on those 
studies is consistent with the applicable current conditions in the Yucca Mountain region. This 
consistency supports a conclusion that the FEPs associated with this parameter (Table 1-1) are 
also consistent with the present knowledge of the conditions in the region surrounding the 
Yucca Mountain site, as required by 10 CFR 63.305(a) [DIRS 156605]. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-27 September 2004 
6.1.5 Mass LoadingCrops 
As described and justified in Section 5.1, it is assumed that the distribution of mass loading in 
fields and gardens where crops are growing is similar to or higher than that in the inactive 
outdoor environment, with a minimum value equal to the minimum value of the inactive outdoor 
environment, and a modal and maximum value twice that of the inactive outdoor environment. 
That assumption is based on the crops grown and farming practices in Amargosa Valley and 
therefore is consistent with the current conditions in the Yucca Mountain region. 
The distribution of mass loading in the inactive outdoor environment is triangular with a mode of 
0.060 mg/m3, and a range of 0.025 to 0.100 mg/m3. Based on the above assumption, the 
distribution of mass loading for crops is predicted to have a mode of 0.120 mg/m3, and a range of 
0.025 to 0.200 mg/m3. 
6.2 MASS LOADINGVOLCANIC ASH SCENARIO 
This section describes the development of mass loading distributions within the five 
environments (four receptor environments and the environment around crops) for the volcanic 
ash exposure scenario. The representative biosphere for this scenario is the same as for the 
groundwater scenario: a rural community in an arid to semi-arid environment with conditions 
consistent with those in the Yucca Mountain region and a population with living style 
representative of the residents of the Town of Amargosa Valley today (based on requirements in 
10 CFR Part 63 [DIRS 156605], Sections 305 and 312; also, see Section 4.3). However, the 
source of radionuclides differs. For the volcanic ash scenario, the source of radionuclides is 
contaminated ash from a volcanic eruption at Yucca Mountain. Ash depths 18 km downwind 
from Yucca Mountain were predicted to range from 0.07 to 55 cm (based on 100 realizations of 
the ASHPLUME model). About 35 percent of predicted depths were less than 1 cm, 75 percent 
were less than 5 cm, and 90 percent were less than 15 cm (BSC 2004 [DIRS 170026], 
Table 6-4). Ash depths at the location of the RMEI (18 km south of Yucca Mountain) would be 
about 2 orders of magnitude or more lower under normal, variable wind conditions (CRWMS 
M&O 2000 [DIRS 153246], Section 3.10.5.1 and Figure 3.10-14) because the wind at Yucca 
Mountain blows to the south infrequently (BSC 2004 [DIRS 170026], Figure 8-1). 
Observations at volcanic sites (e.g., see Section 6.3.1 and 6.3.2) indicate that tephra is more 
readily suspended than the soil upon which it was deposited, which would result in higher mass 
loading concentrations than experienced under nominal conditions (i.e., prior to the eruption). 
Through time the ash would erode, become mixed into the soil, become buried, or otherwise 
become stabilized. That erosion or stabilization would result in a decrease in mass loading, with 
concentrations eventually returning to conditions similar to those considered in the groundwater 
scenario (i.e., nominal concentrations). Because of this change in mass loading through time, 
dose resulting from a volcanic eruption must be calculated as a function of time, as described in 
the following equation (BSC 2004 [DIRS 169460], Section 6.5.8). 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-28 September 2004 
) ( ) ( ) ( ) , ( , , , , , , , , a i p inh a i v inh i Rn ing ext a i all d g D t f d g D D t d D + + = (Eq. 6.2-1) 
where: 
Dall,i(da,t) = All-pathway annual dose from internal and external exposure to 
radionuclide i for an ash deposition thickness da at time t following a 
volcanic eruption (Sv/year). 
Dext,ing,Rn,i = Annual dose from external exposure, radon inhalation, and ingestion of 
radionuclide i following a volcanic eruption (Sv/year). 
Dinh,p,i = Annual dose from inhalation exposure to radionuclide i resulting from 
exposure to nominal (p) mass loading following a volcanic eruption 
(Sv/year). 
Dinh,v,i = Annual dose from inhalation exposure to radionuclide i resulting from 
exposure to elevated, post-volcanic (v) mass loading in addition to nominal 
concentrations (Sv/year). 
da = Thickness of the contaminated ash/soil layer (meters). 
g(da) = Function of ash thickness, representing the fraction of total activity that is 
available for resuspension 
t = Time (year) 
f(t) = Decay function describing reduction of mass loading with time. 
Three components of the BDCFs are required by this model, as shown in equation 6.2-2 
(BSC 2004 [DIRS 169460], Section 6.5.8). 
( ) ) ( ) ( ) , ( , , , , , , , a i p inh i v inh i Rn ing ext a i d g BDCF t f BDCF BDCF t d BDCF + + = (Eq. 6.2-2) 
where: 
BDCFi(da,t) = BDCF of radionuclide i for an ash deposition depth da at time t 
following a volcanic eruption (Sv/year per Bq/m2). 
BDCF ext,ing,Rn,i = BDCF of radionuclide i for external exposure, radon inhalation, and 
ingestion following a volcanic eruption (Sv/year per Bq/m2). 
BDCFinh,p,i = BDCF of radionuclide i for inhalation of resuspended particles at 
nominal mass loading following a volcanic eruption (Sv/year per 
Bq/m2). 
BDCFinh,v,i = BDCF of radionuclide i for inhalation of resuspended particles at 
concentrations in addition to nominal mass loading following a 
volcanic eruption (Sv/year per Bq/m2). 
The component BDCFext,ing,Rn,i accounts for the consequences of all exposure pathways except 
inhalation of particulate matter. This component of BDCFs is not a function of time or ash 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-29 September 2004 
depth. The parameter mass loading for crops is not treated as a function of time in the volcanic 
ash scenario because it is used in the calculation of the ingestion dose. Therefore, the equation in 
the biosphere model for the volcanic ash scenario that uses mass loading for crops is the same as 
that described in Section 6. 
The component BDCFinh,p,i accounts for the consequences of inhalation of resuspended particles 
at concentrations to be expected at some time following a volcanic eruption when mass loading 
has stabilized. Because concentrations of resuspended particles at that time will be influenced by 
the same factors considered when developing distributions for nominal conditions, the mass 
loading distributions for receptor environments developed in Section 6.1 are intended for use in 
calculating BDCFinh,p,i. This BDCF component is a function of ash depth, because the dose 
contribution may change as ash depth decreases, but is not a function of time. 
The component BDCFinh,v,i accounts for the additional dose contribution resulting from 
inhalation of elevated concentrations of resuspended contaminants following a volcanic eruption. 
This component contributes to the total dose (i.e., is greater than zero) only for the period 
starting at the end of the volcanic eruption (i.e., time = t0, which starts after the initial ash fall has 
ceased) and ending when the ash blanket has eroded or stabilized and airborne concentrations are 
equal to predisturbance, nominal conditions. 
Concentrations of resuspended particles decrease following a volcanic eruption, and therefore the 
total mass loading in receptor environments following a volcanic eruption must be calculated as 
a function of time, as shown in the following equation (BSC 2004 [DIRS 169460], 
Section 6.5.2). 
)( ) ( , t f S S t S n v n n + = (Eq. 6.2-3) 
where: 
Sn(t) = Total average annual mass loading in receptor environment n at time t 
following a volcanic eruption (mg/m3). 
Sn = Nominal average annual mass loading in receptor environment n (mg/m3) 
Sv,n = Elevated, post-volcanic (v) average annual mass loading in receptor 
environment n (i.e., in addition to or greater than Sv,n) during the first year (i.e., 
t = 0) following a volcanic eruption (mg/m3). 
f(t) = Mass loading time function, which describes the rate of change in mass loading 
after a volcanic eruption. 
Sn is used in the calculation of the BDCF component BDCFinh,p,i and Sv,n is used in the calculation 
of the BSCF component BDCFinh,v,i. The distributions of elevated mass loading concentrations, 
Sv,n are developed in the remainder of this section. Because Sv,n is combined with Sn to calculate 
the total mass loading in receptor environments following a volcanic eruption, Sv,n represents 
only the additional concentrations of resuspended ash/dust in excess of nominal conditions 
during the first year following an eruption at Yucca Mountain. Because mass loading for crops 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-30 September 2004 
is not treated as a function of time, that parameter distribution is representative of the entire 
concentration of resuspended particles following a volcanic eruption. The mass loading time 
function is developed in Section 6.3. 
6.2.1 Active Outdoor Environment 
A review of applicable literature (see Section 4.1.1) was conducted to identify the magnitude of 
change in mass loading following the deposition of ash the first year following a volcanic 
eruption. Studies were considered applicable if personal exposure to TSP or PM10 were 
measured during dust-disturbing activities, or ambient TSP concentrations were measured during 
dust-disturbing activities, in areas having a relatively recent tephra deposit (i.e., less than about 5 
years old). Summary values for each study reviewed are presented in Table 6-5. 
Table 6-5. Particulate Concentrations-Postvolcanic Active Outdoor Environment 
Concentration, mg/m3 
Reference x Range Comments 
1 Buist et al. 1986 (DIRS 
144632), Table 2 4.34 1.48-9.01 T
SP, dusty occupations, weeks following Mount St. 
Helens 
2 Merchant et al. 1982 (DIRS 
160102), Table 6 3.28 0.13-8.31 TSP, loggers, weeks following Mount St. Helens 
3 Searl et al. 2002 (DIRS 
160104), Table 11 0.5 0.2-10 PM10, during eruptive phase of Soufriere Hills 
4 Baxter et al. 1999 (DIRS 
150713), Figure 3 1 0.3-2.5 PM10, during eruptive phase of Soufriere Hills 
5 Buist et al. 1983 (DIRS 
159738), p. 717 1.35 1.24-1.46 T
SP, children at summer camp, includes all 
daytime activities. Average of 2 sessions. 
6 Hill and Connor 2000 (DIRS 
160103), p. 71 10 1 and 10 
TSP while driving (10 mg/m3) and walking 
(1 mg/m3), 4 years after Cerro Negro (note that 
data are not published) 
0
2
4
6
8 
10 
12 
1 2 3 4 5 6 
Reference No. 
Concentration mg/m3 
Squares = TSP, circles = PM10 
x = mean or other value representative of the central tendency (see text); PM10 = particles with an aerodynamic 
diameter =10 m; TSP= total suspended particles 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-31 September 2004 
6.2.1.1 Literature Review 
Buist et al. (1986 [DIRS 144632], Table 2) report personal exposure to TSP for numerous 
occupations during the weeks following the eruption of Mount St. Helens. The methods used for 
that study are described in Hewett (1980 [DIRS 168490]). Many of the people monitored were 
involved in cleanup and removal of ash. Average concentrations were 2.65 mg/m3 
(range = 0.64-6.46) for hand-shoveling and sweeping, 5.50 mg/m3 (range = 0.60-23.1) for 
sweeper-truck and broom-truck drivers, 5.96 mg/m3 (range = 0.01-31.9) for grader operators, 
1.48 mg/m3 (0.23-6.14) for water-truck drivers, 9.01 mg/m3 (range = 0.73-25.5) for rubbish 
workers, 1.42 mg/m3 (range = 0.79-3.20) for agricultural workers, and 0.57 mg/m3 
(range = 0.04-4.17) for law enforcement personnel. The average of all occupational averages 
except law enforcement (excluded because law enforcement personnel may not have been 
conducting activities that resuspend ash) is 4.34 mg/m3. 
Merchant et al. (1982 [DIRS 160102], Table 6) compared personal exposure to TSP between 
loggers working in an area in Washington covered by ash from Mount St. Helens and loggers 
working in Oregon where there was no ash. See Sanderson (1982 [DIRS 168492]) for a 
description of the methods and location of the study sites. Average TSP concentrations (and 
geometric SD) for Washington were 5.97 mg/m3 (2.95) for cutters, 8.31 mg/m3 (5.50) for choker 
setters, 0.49 for one truck driver, 0.13 mg/m3 (3.84) for yarder and loader operators, and 
1.52 mg/m3 (5.24) for landing men. The average of these five occupations was 3.28 mg/m3. 
Average concentrations for cutters in Washington were about twice those of cutters in Oregon 
(average = 2.81 mg/m3, SD = 1.46), but concentrations for yarder and loader operators 
(average = 0.17 mg/m3, SD = 1.04) were similar. 
Searl et al. (2002 [DIRS 160104]) measured ambient concentrations and personal exposure to 
PM4 and PM10 on the island of Montserrat in the British West Indies during 1996-2000. The 
Soufriere Hills volcano erupted periodically during much of this study, and was most active 
during 1996 through mid-1998. Measurements were taken throughout the island, including on 
the southern portion, where the tephra deposit was from about 5 cm to more than 30 cm thick 
(these areas were evacuated during 1996-1997 in part because of concerns about high 
concentrations of airborne particles), and to the north, where the ash was less than 1 cm to about 
5 cm thick. Average personal exposure to PM4 during 1997 was 0.825 mg/m3 
(range = 0.817-0.833) for gardeners, more than 20 mg/m3 (range = 0.077 to 71) for road 
workers, and 0.442 mg/m3 for a housekeeper (Searl et al. 2002 [DIRS 160104], Table 7). 
Concentrations of PM10 associated with mowing grass and sweeping inside were of the order of 
10 to 20 mg/m3. During 2000, personal exposure by those groups was considerably lower: 0.134 
mg/m3 (range = 0.007 to 0.444) for gardeners and 0.050 mg/m3 (range = 0.012 to 0.105) for 
housekeepers (Searl et al. 2002 [DIRS 160104], Table 8). Personal exposure to PM10 by children 
at school during 2000 was estimated to be 0.144 mg/m3 while playing outdoors, 0.098 to 
0.155 mg/m3 while indoors, and 0.272 mg/m3 while sweeping (Searl et al. 2002 [DIRS 160104], 
Table 9). To model population exposure, the authors estimated average personal exposure 
to PM10 during various activities and for four levels of ash (Searl et al. 2002 [DIRS 160104], 
Table 11). The low ash and raised ash concentrations appear to be most appropriate for this 
analysis, because alert and very high levels occurred during less than five percent of days on the 
northern and middle (i.e., Salem) portions of the island (Searl et al. 2002 [DIRS 160104], 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-32 September 2004 
Table 6). The very high and alert concentrations appear to correspond to days when the 
Soufriere Hills volcano was erupting and the wind was blowing ash toward a community. 
Estimated concentrations of PM10 during dusty work were 0.2 to 0.5 mg/m3 for low and raised 
ash conditions, and 5 to 10 mg/m3 for very high and alert concentrations. Estimated 
concentrations for outdoor play were 0.1 to 0.5 mg/m3 for low and raised ash conditions, and 5 to 
10 mg/m3 for very high and alert conditions. Estimates for active outside were 0.05 to 
0.2 mg/m3 and 1 to 3 mg/m3 for low to raised and very high to alert levels, respectively. A 
summary value of 0.5 mg/m3, based on the estimate for dusty work during raised ash conditions, 
and a range of 0.2 to 10 mg/m3 (also based on dusty work) is presented in Table 6-5 for this 
study. Assuming a TSP:PM10 ratio of about 10:1 (e.g., Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 1998 
[DIRS 150855], Table 2), an approximate TSP concentration for dusty work during this study is 
about 5 mg/m3. 
Baxter et al. (1999 [DIRS 150713], Figure 3) reported concentrations of PM10 at two outdoor 
settings during an eruptive phase of the Soufriere Hills volcano. Peak concentrations during 
human activity were about 0.5-1.5 mg/m3 outside at a primary school and 0.3 to 2.5 at a resort. 
A summary value of 1 mg/m3 is presented in Table 6-5; this value is the approximate midpoint 
between low and high peak concentrations. 
Buist et al. (1983 [DIRS 159738]) measured personal exposure to TSP during the summer of 
1980 among children ages 8 to 13 at a summer camp where about 1.2 cm of ash had fallen after 
the June 12 eruption of Mount St. Helens. The methods used for that study are described in 
Hewett (1980 [DIRS 168491]). Daytime personal exposure averaged 1.24 mg/m3 and 
1.46 mg/m3 during two sessions (Buist et al. 1983 [DIRS 159738], p. 717). No information was 
presented on the percentage of time the children were active; therefore, these values may 
underestimate exposure in the active outdoor environment. 
The following information, which is not listed as an input in Section 4.1.1 (because it has not yet 
been published in a peer-reviewed journal), is included here to corroborate results of the other 
studies. Concentrations of TSP were measured in 1999 above the tephra deposit from the 
1995 eruption of the basaltic volcano Cerro Negro in Nicaragua. Concentrations during light 
activity such as walking were on the order of 1 mg/m3, and concentrations while driving over the 
tephra deposits in an open truck were on the order of 10 mg/m3 (Hill and Connor 2000 
[DIRS 160103], p. 71). 
6.2.1.2 Parameter Distribution 
The types of activities monitored during the studies reviewed in this section include activities 
known to or expected to occur in the Yucca Mountain region, including removal of ash by hand 
and with machinery, agricultural work, gardening, and outdoor play. The measurements of 
personal exposure during those activities on tephra deposits (Table 6-5) are similar to 
measurements taken under nominal conditions in areas without tephra (Table 6-1), except that 
most maximum post-volcanic measurements are lower than those from nominal conditions. For 
example, TSP concentrations for agricultural workers after the eruption of Mount St. Helens 
(average = 1.42 mg/m3, Buist et al. 1986 [DIRS 144632], Table 2) generally were lower than 
those reported by Nieuwenhuijsen et al. (1998 [DIRS 150855], Table 2), although the 
distribution of all activities reported by Buist et al. is not substantially different from that of 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-33 September 2004 
Nieuwenhuijsen et al. In the only study where a comparison was made of personal exposure in 
areas with and without ash, average respirable and total dust concentrations were about twice as 
high or less for various groups of loggers in areas with and without ash (Merchant et al. 1982 
[DIRS 160102], Table 6). Measurements of mass loading over disturbed tephra deposits may be 
similar to those over other soil because most soils contain a reservoir of particles that are readily 
suspended when disturbed. Because measurements for nominal and post-volcanic conditions are 
very similar, and because there is a high probability that the initial tephra deposit south of 
Yucca Mountain will be very shallow (BSC 2004 [DIRS 170026], Table 6-4; CRWMS M&O 
2000 [DIRS 153246], Section 3.10.5.1), a lower bound of a distribution of mass loading in the 
post-volcanic, active outdoor environment of 1 mg/m3 is selected, the same as that for nominal 
conditions. 
The maximum post-volcanic concentrations in Table 6-5 probably are lower than those reported 
for nominal conditions (Table 6-1) because few measurements have been taken on tephra 
deposits for the types of activities expected to occur in the Yucca Mountain region that would 
create very large concentrations of mass loading, such as farming (although see Buist et al. 1986 
[DIRS 144632], Table 2). In addition, no studies were conducted in areas as arid as the current 
conditions at Yucca Mountain. The climate in the region where some measurements were taken 
following the eruption of Mount St. Helens is predicted to be consistent with that likely to occur 
at Yucca Mountain over much of the next 10,000 years. The other measurements were taken in 
more mesic areas where fine particles may be more rapidly removed from the ground surface by 
precipitation. However, because most studies reviewed were conducted shortly after eruptions 
occurred, there likely was insufficient time for resuspendable particles to be eroded from the 
tephra deposit. Also, none of the values presented above except those of Hill and Connor 
(2000 [DIRS 160103]) are from basaltic tephra deposits like those predicted to occur at 
Yucca Mountain (see Section 6.3.3 for a discussion of this uncertainty). Therefore, there is some 
uncertainty about the consistency of the study conditions to the conditions in the 
Yucca Mountain region. To account for that uncertainty, a mode of 7.5 mg/m3 and maximum 
upper bound of 15 mg/m3 are selected, 50 percent greater than that selected for nominal 
conditions. 
For use in equation 6.2-3, mass loading distributions for the first year following a volcanic 
eruption, Sv,n must be presented as the expected average annual increase in concentrations of 
resuspended particles that is greater than nominal concentrations. Thus, the recommended 
distribution of mass loading for Sv in the active outdoor environment is triangular, with a mode 
of 2.5, minimum of zero (i.e., equal to the minimum mass loading predicted for nominal 
conditions), and maximum of 5 mg/m3. Because some relevant conditions under which the 
analogue measurements were taken are consistent with the conditions in the Yucca Mountain 
region, and because the range of the distribution was selected to bound uncertainty in other 
relevant conditions that may have differed, this distribution of mass loading is consistent with the 
applicable current and predicted future conditions in the Yucca Mountain region. This 
consistency supports a conclusion that the FEPs associated with this parameter (Table 1-1) are 
also consistent with the present knowledge of the conditions in the region surrounding the Yucca 
Mountain site, as required by 10 CFR 63.305(a) [DIRS 156605]. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-34 September 2004 
6.2.2 Inactive Outdoor Environment 
Measurements of TSP before and after the eruption of Mount St. Helens were analyzed to 
evaluate changes in the inactive outdoor environment before and after a volcanic eruption. 
A literature review also was conducted to confirm the results of data analysis. 
6.2.2.1 Data Analysis 
A dataset containing 24-hour concentrations of TSP measured in the state of Washington during 
1979 through 1992 was obtained from the EPA Office of Air Quality and Standards 
(DTN: MO0008SPATSP00.013 [DIRS 151750]). The dataset was sorted by date and 
concentration, and values for May 18 to July 31, 1980, (the 10-week period during which the 
four largest eruptions occurred) (Sarna-Wojcicki et al. 1982 [DIRS 160227], Figure 350) were 
examined to identify monitoring sites where large increases in TSP were measured following the 
eruption of Mount St. Helens. Thirteen sites in six cities were identified that had at least one 
24-hour concentration greater than 0.4 mg/m3. A value of 0.4 mg/m3 was chosen as 
representative of a large increase because it is substantially higher than most other concentrations 
in this dataset. The thickness of the tephra deposit at these cities ranged from about 0.5 mm to 
about 10 mm (Sarna-Wojcicki et al. 1982 [DIRS 160227], Figures 336, 344, 345, and 346). 
Clarkston had about 0.5 mm deposited on May 18, and Richland had 0.5-1 mm deposited on that 
date. Longview had 1-2 mm deposited on May 25 and less than 1 mm on June 12. Vancouver 
had more than 1 mm deposited on May 25 and 4-5 mm deposited on June 12. Spokane had 
2.5-5 mm deposited on May 18, and Yakima had 5-10 mm on that date (Sarna-Wojcicki et al. 
1982 [DIRS 160227], Figures 336, 344, and 345). 
For this analysis, one site was selected from each city. For all cities except Vancouver, data 
from the monitoring site with the highest reading during May 18 to July 31, 1980, were selected. 
Data from the Vancouver site with the second highest reading were selected, because data from 
May 28 through September 5, 1980, were missing for the site with the highest concentration. 
The only monitoring station in Clarkston was established in September 1979. Measurements 
from the six sites are listed in Appendix D. 
Average concentrations for the six sites were calculated for the 12-month periods March 
1979-February 1980, June 1980-May 1981, and June 1981-May 1982 (Table 6-6). The first 
period ends before initial volcanic activity in March 1980, and the second period starts about 
2 weeks after the major eruption on May 18. These three periods represent average annual 
TSP concentrations the year before and the two years following the major eruption. 
Changes in concentrations the year following the eruption appear to have been influenced by ash 
thickness (Table 6-6). Average annual concentrations and SDs at the two sites with less than 
1 mm of ash (Clarkston and Richland) were lower or only slightly higher than concentrations the 
year before the eruption. Concentrations at the other four sites were about 40 to 90 percent 
higher, and variation was about two to three times higher the year following the eruption. 
Average concentrations and SDs the second year after the eruption were very similar to those 
before the eruption at all sites (Table 6-6). 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-35 September 2004 
Table 6-6. Average Concentrations of TSP (mg/m3) at Six Sites in Washington Before (Mar 79- 
Feb 80), One Year After (Jun 80-May 81), and Two Years After (Jun 81-May 82) the 
May 1980 Eruption of Mount St. Helens 
Site (EPA site #) and Ash Deptha,b 
Dates x SD Minimum Maximum n 
Clarkston (53-003-0003) 0.5 mm ash 
Mar 79  Feb 80 0.091 0.044 0.023 0.221 49 
Jun 80 - May 81 0.107 0.058 0.048 0.388 76 
Jun 81 - May 82 0.084 0.029 0.051 0.168 54 
Richland (53-005-1001) 0.5-1.0 mm ash 
Mar 79 - Feb 80 0.069 0.057 0.005 0.333 60 
Jun 80 - May 81 0.063 0.040 0.009 0.181 60 
Jun 81 - May 82 0.050 0.028 0.011 0.111 59 
Longview (53-015-0008) 1-3 mm ash 
Mar 79 - Feb 80 0.054 0.041 0.008 0.222 57 
Jun 80 - May 81 0.097 0.141 0.021 0.986 56 
Jun 81 - May 82 0.054 0.030 0.018 0.161 56 
Spokane (53-063-0016) 2.5-5 mm ash 
Mar 79 - Feb 80 0.165 0.093 0.028 0.375 57 
Jun 80 - May 81 0.226 0.155 0.024 0.743 59 
Jun 81 - May 82 0.168 0.131 0.029 0.846 55 
Vancouver (53-011-0006) 4-5 mm ash 
Mar 79 - Feb 80 0.050 0.030 0.005 0.158 61 
Jun 80 - May 81 0.076 0.075 0.014 0.474 61 
Jun 81 - May 82 0.055 0.029 0.014 0.124 61 
Yakima (53-077-1006) 5-10 mm ash 
Mar 79 - Feb 80 0.060 0.041 0.011 0.259 59 
Jun 80 - May 81 0.116 0.089 0.014 0.426 60 
Jun 81 - May 82 0.061 0.046 0.012 0.339 61 
Source: DTN: MO0008SPATSP00.013 (DIRS 151750). 
a See Appendix D for the daily concentrations upon which these values were based. 
b Initial ash depth, from Sarna-Wojcicki et al. (1982 [DIRS 160227], Figures 336, 344, 345, and 346). 
x = average, SD = standard deviation, n = Number of 24-hour measurements. 
Based on this analysis, it was concluded that, in areas having less than 1 to 10 mm of ash from 
the eruption of Mount St. Helens, average concentrations of TSP were no more than two times 
higher the year following the eruption, but returned to pre-eruption levels the following year. 
6.2.2.2 Literature Review 
Information about concentrations of resuspended particles during and after eruptions of two 
additional volcanoes was reviewed to evaluate whether the analysis of data collected following 
the eruption of Mount St. Helens produced reasonable conclusions. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-36 September 2004 
Gordian et al. (1996 [DIRS 160111]) examined the association between PM10 levels and daily 
outpatient visits in Anchorage, Alaska, after about 3 mm of ash were deposited from the 
August 1992 eruption of Mount Spurr (McGimsey et al. 2001 [DIRS 160386], p. 4). During the 
3 months before the eruption, PM10 concentrations in Anchorage ranged from about 0.010 to 
0.080 mg/m3 (Gordian et al. 1996 [DIRS 160111], Figure 1). The peak 1-hour concentration 
during the eruption was 3 mg/m3 and the 24-hour average concentration the day after the 
eruption was 0.565 mg/m3 (Gordian et al. 1996 [DIRS 160111], p. 290). Concentrations returned 
to pre-eruption levels after about 3 months, although there were occasional peaks of 
0.1-0.2 mg/m3 for about 9 months. By May 1993, PM10 concentrations had returned to preeruption 
levels. Gordian et al. (1996 [DIRS 160111], p. 293) concluded that PM10 
concentrations in Anchorage were influenced by the volcano August 18 through December 31, 
1992. Average PM10 concentrations during that period were about 0.70 mg/m3, less than twice 
the average concentration of 0.40 mg/m3 during periods not influenced by the eruption (May 1, 
1992, through August 17, 1992, and January 1, 1993, through March 1, 1994). 
Yano et al. (1990 [DIRS 160112]) compared TSP concentrations in the city of Kanoya, Japan, 
with those of Tahiro. Kanoya is 25 km from Mount Sakurajima and in the region that 
experiences the highest exposure to ash from that volcano, which erupts hundreds of times each 
year (Yano et al. 1990 [DIRS 160112], p. 368). Tashiro is 50 km from the volcano and outside 
of the affected area, and is similar to Kanoya in size and industrial development. Monthly 
average TSP concentrations (calculated as the sum of suspended particulate matter and respirable 
particulates in Table 1 of Yano et al. (1990 [DIRS 160112]) during summer 1995 were about 
twice as high in Kayona (0.030 mg/m3) than in Tashiro (0.013 mg/m3). Winter concentrations 
were about three times greater in Kayona (0.596 mg/m3) compared to Tashiro (0.196 mg/m3). 
6.2.2.3 Parameter Distribution 
Average ambient outdoor concentrations of TSP no more than doubled the year following the 
1980 eruption of Mount St. Helens, and returned to pre-eruption levels the second year. This 
information is consistent with most climatic conditions and the thickness of the tephra deposit 
predicted for the area south of Yucca Mountain. Four of the six cities included in this analysis 
are in eastern Washington and have a climate consistent with that predicted for Yucca Mountain 
for much of the next 10,000 years (BSC 2004 [DIRS 170002], p. Section 6.6.2) (Clarkston 
[average annual precipitation = 16.5 in., average annual snowfall = 15.1 in.], Richland 
[precipitation = 7.0 in., snowfall = 10.2 in.], Spokane [precipitation = 16.2 in., snowfall = 
42.14 in.], and Yakima [precipitation = 8.25 in., snowfall = 23.4 in.], NCDC 1998 
[DIRS 125325]). Therefore, the influence of precipitation and vegetation on consolidation and 
removal of ash at those sites following Mount St. Helens likely would be similar to that after an 
eruption at Yucca Mountain. Also, ash thickness at the four sites examined (1 mm to 10 mm) 
was as high or higher than about 95 percent of predicted ash depths 20 km south of Yucca 
Mountain under normal, variable wind conditions (CRWMS M&O 2000 [DIRS 153246], 
Section 3.10.5.1). Information from two other volcanoes confirms that the average annual 
ambient concentrations of TSP are about twice as high the year following an eruption compared 
to pre-eruption levels or to similar areas without ash. Therefore, a triangular distribution with a 
mode of 0.120 mg/m3 and a lower bound of 0.050 mg/m3 are selected for the post-volcanic, 
inactive outdoor environment, twice that selected for nominal conditions. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-37 September 2004 
None of the data analyzed or studies reviewed above were from areas that had tephra deposits as 
thick as the maximum predicted for 18 km downwind of Yucca Mountain (BSC 2004 
[DIRS 170026], Table 6-4). Because the thickness of the initial tephra blanket may influence 
mass loading the year following deposition, there is some uncertainty about the upper end of the 
distribution for the inactive outdoor environment. Also, none of the measurements were taken in 
areas as arid as the current conditions at Yucca Mountain. The increase in precipitation and 
vegetative cover in eastern Washington may have resulted in lower mass loading in those regions 
soon after the eruption. In addition, there is uncertainty about the influence of redistribution of 
ash from aeolian and fluvial processes on mass loading. For example, if heavy rains occur soon 
after an eruption, additional ash particles may be carried through Fortymile Wash into the region 
south of Yucca Mountain, causing a temporary increase in mass loading within and near that 
wash (see Section 6.3 for additional information). To account for this uncertainty, a maximum 
value of 0.300 mg/m3 is selected, three times the maximum selected for nominal conditions. A 
higher value is not selected, because a tephra deposit of more than 1 cm (the maximum thickness 
for which analogue data is available) would be an uncommon event south of Yucca Mountain in 
the area to be considered as the location of the receptor (CRWMS M&O 2000 [DIRS 153246], 
Section 3.10.5.1; BSC 2004 [DIRS 170026], Table 6-4) and because the influence of fluvial 
transport of ash on mass loading likely will be temporary and restricted to the vicinity of 
Fortymile Wash. 
The distribution to be used in the biosphere model, which represents the increase in mass loading 
in the inactive outdoor environment the first year following a volcanic eruption at 
Yucca Mountain, is triangular with a mode of 0.060, minimum of 0.025, and maximum of 0.200 
mg/m3. Because some relevant conditions under which the analogue measurements were taken 
are consistent with the conditions in the Yucca Mountain region, and because the range of the 
distribution was selected to bound uncertainty in other relevant conditions that may have 
differed, this distribution of mass loading is consistent with the applicable current and predicted 
future conditions in the Yucca Mountain region. This consistency supports a conclusion that the 
FEPs associated with this parameter (Table 1-1) are also consistent with the present knowledge 
of the conditions in the region surrounding the Yucca Mountain site, as required by 
10 CFR 63.305(a) [DIRS 156605]. 
6.2.3 Active Indoor Environment 
Applicable literature (see Section 4.1.1) was reviewed to evaluate mass loading concentrations 
indoors following volcanic eruptions. Because few such measurements have been taken, an 
assumption (Section 5.2) was developed and is used with the results of the literature review to 
develop a distribution for the active indoor environment. 
6.2.3.1 Literature Review 
Buist et al. (1986 [DIRS 144632], Table 2) reported concentrations of TSP measured indoors in 
the weeks following the eruption of Mount St. Helens by the National Institute of Occupational 
Safety and Health. Average TSP concentrations were 0.09 mg/m3 in homes (range = 0.03 to 
0.20), 0.30 mg/m3 in schools (range = 0.20 to 0.50), and 0.30 mg/m3 in commercial 
establishments (range = 0.1 to 0.44). Buist et al. (1986 [DIRS 144632], p. 41) concluded that 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-38 September 2004 
Generally, there were very low levels of airborne respirable dust in homes and other buildings 
and, for the most part, it is likely that the general population received a very low exposure. 
Searl et al. (2002 [DIRS 160104]) measured PM4 and PM10 concentrations during 1996-2000 in 
areas where ash was being or had been deposited by the Soufriere Hills volcano. Personal 
exposure concentrations of PM4 were 0.050 mg/m3 for housekeepers (range = 0.012 to 0.105), 
0.105 mg/m3 for shopworkers (range = 0.083 to 0.126), 0.012 mg/m3 for one housewife, and 
0.039 mg/m3 for one office worker (Searl et al. 2002 [DIRS 160104], Table 8). To model 
population exposure, the authors estimated average personal exposure to PM10 during various 
activities and for four levels of ash concentrations (Searl et al. 2002 [DIRS 160104], Table 11). 
The low ash and raised ash concentrations are the most consistent with the predicted conditions 
in the Yucca Mountain region because alert and very high concentrations occurred during less 
than five percent of days on the portions of the island where ash thickness was less than 5 cm 
(Searl et al. 2002 [DIRS 160104], Table 6). The very high and alert concentrations appear to 
correspond to days when the Soufriere Hills volcano was erupting and the winds were blowing 
ash toward a community. Estimated concentrations of PM10 while active indoors were 0.05 to 
0.15 mg/m3 for low and raised ash concentrations, and 0.5 to 2.0 mg/m3 for very high and alert 
concentrations. If the ratio of TSP to PM10 in this environment is approximately 2.5:1 
(see Section 6.1.3), then corresponding TSP ratios for the low and raised ash conditions would be 
0.125 and 0.375 mg/m3. 
6.2.3.2 Parameter Development 
Because an insufficient number of measurements of mass loading in the active indoor 
environment following a volcanic eruption have been reported, an assumption was developed 
(Section 5.2) that predicts that changes in the active indoor environment will be proportional to 
changes predicted for the inactive outdoor environment. The distribution selected for the active 
indoor environment under nominal conditions is triangular with a mode of 0.100 mg/m3 and a 
range of 0.060 to 0.175 mg/m3. Based on measurements of TSP the year following the eruption 
of Mount St. Helens, and a review of literature from Mount St. Helens, Mount Spurr, and 
Montserrat, it was predicted that outdoor mass loading would double the first year after an 
eruption at Yucca Mountain (Section 6.2.2). Thus, the predicted distribution of TSP for the 
active indoor environment the first year following a volcanic eruption at Yucca Mountain is 
triangular with a mode of 0.200 mg/m3 and a range of 0.120 to 0.350 mg/m3. 
For the inactive outdoor environment, the maximum value in the distribution was three times 
higher than that predicted for nominal conditions. The maximum for the active indoor 
environment was doubled for the following reasons. As explained in Section 5.2, the rate at 
which indoor concentrations are assumed to increase relative to outdoor concentrations is about 
twice that measured in most studies, and was selected to account for uncertainty in the 
relationship between indoor and outdoor concentrations during very dusty conditions. Increasing 
that ratio further is unreasonable because such an increase would be greater than any applicable 
measured value. Also, it is unlikely that people would allow their homes to be extremely dusty 
for a long period following an eruption. In contrast to outdoor dust concentrations, which cannot 
be controlled easily, indoor concentrations can be decreased easily by dusting, vacuuming, 
changing air filters, and keeping windows and doors shut. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-39 September 2004 
Predicted and measured concentrations of TSP indoors during and immediately following the 
eruptions of Mount St. Helens and Soufriere Hills ranged from about 0.09 mg/m3 to 
0.375 mg/m3, respectively. These values are similar to the minimum and maximum values of the 
predicted range for the indoor active environment, and this range and the assumption upon which 
it was based therefore appear to be reasonable. 
The distribution to be used in the biosphere model, which represents the increase in mass loading 
in the active indoor environment the first year following a volcanic eruption at Yucca Mountain, 
is triangular with a mode of 0.100, minimum of 0.060, and maximum of 0.175 mg/m3. Because 
the range of the distribution, and the assumption upon which it was based, was selected to bound 
uncertainty in relevant conditions in the Yucca Mountain region, this distribution of mass 
loading is consistent with the applicable current and predicted future conditions in the 
Yucca Mountain region. This consistency supports a conclusion that the FEPs associated with 
this parameter (Table 1-1) are also consistent with the present knowledge of the conditions in the 
region surrounding the Yucca Mountain site, as required by 10 CFR 63.305(a) [DIRS 156605]. 
6.2.4 Asleep Indoor Environment 
Applicable literature (see Section 4.1.1) was reviewed to evaluate mass loading concentrations in 
the asleep indoor environment following volcanic eruptions. Because few such measurements 
have been taken, an assumption (Section 5.2) was developed and is used with the results of the 
literature review to develop a distribution for this environment. 
6.2.4.1 Literature Review 
Buist et al. (1983 [DIRS 159738]) measured personal TSP exposure concentrations of children 
ages 8 to 13 that were attending a summer camp in Oregon shortly after 1.2 cm of ash had fallen 
from the eruption of Mount St. Helens. The methods used for that study are fully described in 
Hewett (1980 [DIRS 168491]). Nighttime TSP concentrations were at or below the 0.01-mg/m3 
limit of detection of sampling equipment (Buist et al. 1983 [DIRS 159738, p. 717). 
Searl et al. (2002 [DIRS 160104]) measured PM4 and PM10 concentrations during 1996-2000 in 
areas where ash was being or had been deposited by the Soufriere Hills volcano. To model 
population exposure, the authors estimated average personal exposure to PM10 during various 
activities and for four levels of ash concentrations (Searl et al. 2002 [DIRS 160104], Table 11). 
The low ash and raised ash concentrations are the most consistent with the predicted conditions 
in the Yucca Mountain region because alert and very high concentrations occurred during less 
than five percent of days on the portions of the island where ash thickness was less than 5 cm 
(Searl et al. 2002 [DIRS 160104], Table 6). The very high and alert concentrations appear to 
correspond to days when the Soufriere Hills volcano was erupting and the winds were blowing 
ash toward a community. Estimated concentrations of PM10 while inactive were 0.03 to 
0.1 mg/m3 for low and raised ash conditions, and 0.3 to 1.0 mg/m3 for very high and alert 
concentrations. If the ratio of TSP to PM10 in this environment were 1.6:1 (from Thatcher and 
Layton 1995 [DIRS 159600], Figure 3 [see Section 6.1.4]), then corresponding TSP ratios for the 
low and raised ash conditions would be about 0.048 and 0.160 mg/m3. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-40 September 2004 
6.2.4.2 Parameter Development 
Because an insufficient number of measurements of mass loading in the active indoor 
environment following a volcanic eruption have been reported, an assumption was developed 
(Section 5.2) that predicts that changes in mass loading indoors following a volcanic eruption 
will be proportional to changes predicted for the inactive outdoor environment. The distribution 
selected for the asleep indoor environment under nominal conditions is triangular with a mode of 
0.030 mg/m3 and a range of 0.010 to 0.050 mg/m3. Based on measurements of TSP the year 
following the eruption of Mount St. Helens, and a review of literature from Mount St. Helens, 
Mount Spurr, and Montserrat, it was predicted that outdoor mass loading in the Yucca Mountain 
region would double the first year after an eruption at Yucca Mountain (Section 6.2.2). Thus, the 
predicted distribution of TSP for the asleep indoor environment the first year following a 
volcanic eruption at Yucca Mountain is triangular, with a mode of 0.060 mg/m3 and a range of 
0.020 to 0.100 mg/m3. 
For the inactive outdoor environment, the maximum value in the distribution was three times 
higher than that predicted for nominal conditions. The maximum for the asleep indoor 
environment was doubled for the following reasons. As explained in Section 5.2, the rate at 
which indoor concentrations increase relative to outdoor concentrations is about twice that 
measured in most studies, and was selected to account for uncertainty in the relationship between 
indoor and outdoor concentrations during very dusty conditions. Increasing that ratio further is 
unreasonable because such an increase would be greater than any applicable measured value. 
Also, it is unlikely that people would allow their homes to be three times as dusty for a long 
period following an eruption. In contrast to outdoor dust concentrations, which cannot be 
controlled easily, indoor concentrations can be decreased easily by dusting, vacuuming, changing 
air filters, and keeping windows and doors shut. 
Predicted and measured concentrations of TSP indoors during and immediately following the 
eruptions of Mount St. Helens and Soufriere Hills ranged from less than 0.010 mg/m3 to about 
0.160 mg/m3. The high value is the predicted value of Searl et al. (2002 [DIRS 160104]) for 
raised ash conditions while inactive, and is higher than the predicted maximum for the asleep 
indoor environment. The value from Searl et al. is based on sleeping and sedentary activities 
while awake, such as watching television (Searl et al. 2002 [DIRS 160104], Table 10) and is 20 
times higher than the maximum values measured by Buist et al. (1983 [DIRS 159738]). Because 
it includes concentrations while people are awake, it likely is an overestimate of concentrations 
while asleep. Thus, the predicted range for the asleep indoor environment, and the assumption 
upon which it was based, appear to be reasonable. 
The distribution to be used in the biosphere model, which represents the increase in mass loading 
in the asleep indoor environment the first year following a volcanic eruption at Yucca Mountain, 
is triangular with a mode of 0.030, minimum of 0.010, and maximum of 0.050 mg/m3. Because 
the range of the distribution, and the assumption upon which it was based, was selected to bound 
uncertainty in relevant conditions in the Yucca Mountain region, this distribution of mass 
loading is consistent with the applicable current and predicted future conditions in the Yucca 
Mountain region. This consistency supports a conclusion that the FEPs associated with this 
parameter (Table 1-1) are also consistent with the present knowledge of the conditions in the 
region surrounding the Yucca Mountain site, as required by 10 CFR 63.305(a) [DIRS 156605]. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-41 September 2004 
6.2.5 Mass LoadingCrops 
No measurements have been taken of mass loading near crops, so it is assumed that the 
distribution of mass loading in fields where crops are growing is similar to or higher than that in 
the inactive outdoor environment, with a minimum value equal to the minimum value of the 
inactive outdoor environment, and a modal and maximum value twice that of the inactive 
outdoor environment. See Section 5.1 for justification of this assumption. As described in the 
introduction to Section 6.2, mass loading for crops is not treated as a function of time in the 
biosphere model. Therefore, this distribution of mass loading must be representative of the total 
concentration of resuspended particles following a volcanic eruption (versus the increase the first 
year following an eruption, as is done for mass loading distributions for human environments). 
The distribution of mass loading in the inactive outdoor environment the first year following a 
volcanic eruption is predicted to have a mode of 0.120 mg/m3, and a range of 0.050 to 
0.300 mg/m3. Based on the above assumption, the distribution of mass loading for crops is 
predicted to have a mode of 0.240 mg/m3, and a range of 0.050 to 0.600 mg/m3. 
6.3 MASS LOADINGTIME FUNCTION 
The mass loading time function is used within the volcanic-eruption analysis of the TSPA model 
to calculate the change in dose through time resulting from a decrease in mass loading following 
a volcanic eruption, as shown in Equation 6.2-3. 
Ash from a volcanic eruption initially would be more readily suspendable than the soil upon 
which it was deposited, and mass loading therefore would be higher than it was prior to the 
eruption (i.e., under nominal conditions defined in Section 6.1). Through time the tephra deposit 
would erode; become mixed into the soil; buried; removed from homes, yards, and other living 
areas; or otherwise become stabilized. That erosion, removal, and stabilization would result in a 
decrease in mass loading, with concentrations eventually returning to nominal conditions. 
Because of this change in mass loading through time, dose resulting from a volcanic eruption 
must be calculated in the TSPA model as a function of time. 
If mass loading decreases exponentially through time, the mass loading time function in 
Equation 6.2-3 is expressed as: 
t 
n v n v e S t f S . - = , , ) ( (Eq. 6.3-1) 
where: 
. = Mass loading decrease constant (1/years). 
t = Time (years); 0 = t = 1 is the first year after a volcanic eruption. 
The other variables in this equation are defined for Equation 6.2-3. 
An exponential decrease in mass loading following a volcanic eruption is selected for 
Equation 6.3-1 based on commonly used equations for predicting the change in concentrations of 
resuspended particles and radionuclides through time. Dahneke (1975 [DIRS 151756], p. 194) 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-42 September 2004 
developed a generalized exponential equation for particle resuspension of Nt = N0e-.t, where 
Nt = concentration at time t, N0 = initial concentration, . = resuspension factor or decrease 
constant (i.e., an estimate of how quickly the decay occurs), and t = time. Similar exponential 
decay equations have been used to calculate resuspension in dose assessment models (Till and 
Meyer 1983 [DIRS 101895], p. 5-32 through 5-33; IAEA 1982 [DIRS 103768], p. 20; 
IAEA 1992 [DIRS 103772], Figure 1 on p. 13; Napier et al. 1988 [DIRS 100953], p. 4.64). 
Inverse or inverse power functions have also been used to predict concentrations of resuspended 
radionuclides (IAEA 1992 [DIRS 103772], Figure 1 on p. 13; Garger et al., 1997 
[DIRS 124902], p. 1651). Garger et al. (1997 [DIRS 124902], Figure 3 on p. 1654) evaluated 
how eight equations (six exponential, one inverse power, and one combination) predicted 
temporal changes in radionuclide concentrations following the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear 
power plant. Equations with an inverse power function generally predicted concentrations more 
accurately than the exponential equations in that mesic environment (Garger et al. 1997 
[DIRS 124902], p. 1655) because the exponential equations overestimated concentrations 
(i.e., did not calculate a rapid enough decay). However, an inverse decay function is less 
conservative than an exponential function because it predicts a more rapid decrease in 
concentrations. 
The mass loading decrease constant controls the rate at which the mass loading concentration 
would decrease over time. Figure 6-1 is a plot of the decrease in mass loading per year for seven 
values of .. 
Figure 6-1. Examples of the Rate of Change of Mass Loading from a Hypothetical Initial Concentration of 
10 mg/m3 for Seven Values of the Mass Loading Decrease Constant (.) 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-43 September 2004 
The average annual concentration for a period of years TI (S x ,TI), and an initial concentration Sv,n 
can be calculated using the following equation, which was developed by integrating 
Equation 6.3-1 between the times of zero and the time interval TI and dividing this by the time 
interval, as shown in Equation 6.3-2. This equation is used only within this analysis to compare 
average concentrations among selected decrease constants; it is not used in the biosphere model 
report. 
( )t n v n 
TI x e 
t 
S 
dt 
dS 
S . 
. 
- -   = = 
. 
. 1 1 , 
, (Eq. 6.3-2) 
Concentrations of TSP measured before and after eruptions of Mount St. Helens were analyzed 
to predict the mass loading decrease constant for a volcanic eruption at Yucca Mountain. 
Literature from that and other volcanoes were reviewed to corroborate the rate at which mass 
loading returns to pre-eruptive conditions. 
6.3.1 Data Analysis 
Mount St. Helens TSP DataTSP measurements for 1979-1982 from six sites in Washington 
that had about 0.5 to 10 mm of ash were plotted to evaluate the rate at which ash stabilized after 
the eruption of Mount St. Helens. The dataset (DTN MO0008SPATSP00.013 [DIRS 151750]) 
and methods used to select the six sites are described in Section 6.2.2.1. 
TSP concentrations at the sites are plotted in Figure 6-2. This figure displays five-measurement 
running averages, which were calculated to smooth changes over short periods. These averages 
were calculated as the average of the concentration for a date and the four previous 
measurements (Appendix D). Concentrations returned to pre-eruption levels at Clarkston, 
Richland, Longview, and Vancouver within about three months, and within about six to eight 
months at Spokane and Yakima. Average annual concentrations two years after the eruption 
were equal to pre-eruption concentrations at all sites (Table 6-6). The corresponding . for this 
rate of decrease is at least 2.0 year-1or greater (Figure 6-1). 
6.3.2 Literature Review 
Buist et al. (1986 [DIRS 160308], p. 70) report changes in personal-exposure concentrations of 
respirable dust for loggers working in areas having substantial deposits of ash from Mount St. 
Helens. Sanderson (1982 [DIRS 168492]) gives a complete description of the methods and 
location of the study sites. Dust concentrations for cutting crews were 0.900 mg/m3 in June 1980 
(one month or less after the major eruption of Mount St. Helens) and 0.270 mg/m3 in September 
1980. This is a 70 percent decrease in mass loading over four months (maximum of 122 days), 
or 0.57 percent per day (0.7/122 days x 100), which is approximately equal to a . of 2.1 year-1 
(0.57 percent per day x 365 days). 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-44 September 2004 
DTN: MO0008SPATSP00.013 (DIRS 151750). 
NOTE: TSP is presented as the running average of 5 consecutive measurements (Appendix D). 
Figure 6-2. TSP Concentrations (mg/m3) at Six Sites in Washington Before and After the Eruption of 
Mount St. Helens in MayJune 1980 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-45 September 2004 
NOTE: TSP is presented as the running average of 5 consecutive measurements (Appendix D). 
Figure 6-2. TSP Concentrations (mg/m3) at Six Sites in Washington Before and After the Eruption of 
Mount St. Helens in May-June 1980 (Continued) 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-46 September 2004 
Buist et al. (1986 [DIRS 144632], p. 41) summarize results of monitoring of personal exposure 
to dust and ash for many other occupations and settings following the eruption of 
Mount St. Helens. Although they do not present data on how concentrations changed through 
time, they state that high occupational exposures were largely restricted to the summer months 
(i.e., 3-4 months following the eruption), and that environmental exposures were also modest 
except in the path of the plume for the few days immediately following the May 18, 1980 
eruption. They also state that In exposed areas, rain and weathering have tended to create a 
crust that has helped to reduce the aerosolization of the ash, and on farmed land, the ash has 
gradually become worked into the topsoil. 
Gordian et al. (1996 [DIRS 160111]) presents a plot of PM10 concentrations in Anchorage, 
Alaska, before and after about 3 mm of ash were deposited from the August 1992 eruption of 
Mount Spurr (McGimsey et al. 2001 [DIRS 160386], p. 4). During the three months prior to the 
eruption, PM10 concentrations in Anchorage ranged from about 0.010 to 0.080 mg/m3 
(Gordian et al. 1996 [DIRS 160111], Figure 1). The peak one-hour concentration during the 
eruption was 3 mg/m3 and the 24-hour average concentration the day after the eruption was 
0.565 mg/m3 (Gordian et al. 1996 [DIRS 160111], p. 290). Concentrations returned to 
pre-eruption levels after about three months, although there were occasional peaks of 
0.1-0.2 mg/m3 for about nine months. By May 1993, PM10 concentrations had returned to 
pre-eruption levels. The corresponding . for this rate of decrease is at least 2.0 year-1 
(Figure 6-1). 
Yano et al. (1990 [DIRS 160112], p. 373) stated although concentrations as high as 2 mg/m3 
have been measured in high-exposure areas after the eruption of Mount Sakurijima (Japan), 
these high levels of suspended particulate matter seldom last long, and they usually decrease 
rapidly to approximately 0.1 mg/m3. 
In summary, the mass loading decrease constant for six sites in Washington following the 
eruption of Mount St. Helens, and in Anchorage following the eruption of Mount Spurr, was 
about 2.0 year-1 (see Figure 6-1). The average concentration for a decrease constant of 
2 year-1and a hypothetical Sv of 10 mg/m3 is 0.5 mg/m3 over 10 years and 0.25 mg/m3 over 
20 years (using Equation 6.3-2). This rate of decrease in mass loading following eruptions is 
corroborated by other reports of conditions following Mount St. Helens and from monitoring 
following the eruptions of Mount Spurr and Mount Sakurijima. 
6.3.3 Parameter Development 
The conditions under which the data from Mount St. Helens were collected are consistent with 
the average thickness of the tephra deposit and the coolest, wettest climatic conditions predicted 
for the area south of Yucca Mountain. The climate at the four cities in eastern Washington 
examined (Clarkston [average annual precipitation = 16.5 in., average annual snowfall = 
15.1 in.], Richland [precipitation = 7.0 in., snowfall = 10.2 in.], Spokane [precipitation = 16.2 in., 
snowfall = 42.1 in.] and Yakima [precipitation = 8.3 in., snowfall = 23.4 in.], NCDC 1998 
[DIRS 125325]) is predicted to be consistent with that at Yucca Mountain for much of the next 
10,000 years (BSC 2004 [DIRS 170002], Section 6.6.2). Therefore, the influence of 
precipitation and vegetation on consolidation and removal of ash at those sites following Mount 
St. Helens likely will be consistent with that after an eruption at Yucca Mountain. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-47 September 2004 
There are, however, other differences between the conditions under which data from Mount St. 
Helens were measured and those expected at Yucca Mountain. These differences may be 
important sources of uncertainty in the use of information from Mount St. Helens and other 
volcanoes to develop a distribution of the mass load decay constant. First, the size, 
resuspendability, or other characteristics of ash from non-basaltic volcanoes such as Mount St. 
Helens and other volcanoes may differ from that of the type of basaltic volcano predicted for 
Yucca Mountain. Second, climatic conditions at Mount St. Helens are wetter and cooler than 
current conditions at Yucca Mountain. Third, no data are available on the rate of change in mass 
loading following an initial deposit of more than 1 cm. Also, all locations where changes in 
mass loading through time were measured after volcanic eruptions were outside of the 
volcanoes watersheds; therefore, the only important source of ash was the initial, airborne 
deposit. Amargosa Valley is within the watershed of Yucca Mountain and ash initially deposited 
upstream of Amargosa Valley may be washed and blown into and through that valley. 
If ash particles from non-basaltic volcanoes used as analogues in this analyses (Mount St. 
Helens, and to a lesser extent Soufriere Hills, Mount Spurr, and Mount Sakurijima) are larger 
than those from a basaltic volcano of the type predicted at Yucca Mountain, then predicted 
concentrations of resuspended ash developed from those analogues may underestimate mass 
loading following an eruption at Yucca Mountain and overestimate the rate at which 
concentrations decrease through time. All of the following measurements of particle size 
distributions are presented as percent mass. Hill and Connor (2000 [DIRS 160103], p. 71) report 
that ash 21 km from the vent of the basaltic Cerro Negro volcano had about two percent of 
particles by weight less than 10 m, 10 percent less than 60 m, and 50 percent less than 
200 m. They report that other fall deposits from larger basaltic cinder cone eruptions 
(Paricutin, Tolbachik, Sunset Crater) may contain two to five percent weight of particles less 
than 10 m at 20 km. Hill and Connor (2000 [DIRS 160103], p. 71) also state that basaltic 
volcanoes may produce unusually fine-grained deposits (greater than 40 percent of particle 
weight less than 60 m) late in an eruption during subsurface brecciation events. About 10 
percent or less of the ash from Mount St. Helens was less than 10 m (Craighead et al. 1983 
[DIRS 160338], p. 6; Buist et al. 1986 [DIRS 144632], p. 40). Ash at two sites 30 to 35 km east 
of Anchorage from the August 1992 eruption of Mount Spurr had about 30 to 35 percent of 
particles equal to or less than 63 m, 8 to 15 percent less than 15 m, and 5 to 10 percent equal 
to or less than 7.5 m (McGimsey et al. 2001 [DIRS 160386], Figure 12 [particle sizes are 
midpoints of values from bar charts]). However, ash collected at a site about 25 km west of 
Anchorage (closer to Mount Spurr) had few or no particles equal to or less than 63 m. Ash 
from Soufriere Hills had 13 to 20 percent weight of particles equal to or less than 10 m and 60 
to 70 percent weight of particles 10 to 125 m (Baxter et al. 1999 [DIRS 150713], p. 1142). 
Thus, ash from the volcanoes used as analogues in this analysis appears to have had higher 
concentrations of fine particles than that from basaltic volcanoes. In addition, Baxter (in 
McKague 1998 [DIRS 151841], Enclosure 3 - Item 17) stated For exposure estimates, the 
[PM10] results obtained from Mount St. Helens and Monsterrat will almost certainly need to be 
reduced by a factor to allow for the coarser material emitted at Cerro Negro. Thus, ash particles 
from the analogue volcanoes used in this analysis generally were similar in size or smaller than 
those from basaltic volcanoes. However, the amount of fine ash deposited at a site can be quite 
variable, depending on wind direction and speed, distance from the volcano, and possibly other 
factors (Sarna-Wojcicki et al. 1982 [DIRS 160227], pp. 585-588, McGimsey et al. 2001 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-48 September 2004 
[DIRS 160386], Figure 12). In addition, other characteristics of the ash and environment, such 
as grain adhesion and the presence of an indurated surface layer, may affect the concentrations of 
resuspended ash particles. The presence of the characteristics at the analogue sites considered in 
this analysis, and their effects on measurements of resuspended particles considered here, are 
unknown. For example, measurements of mass loading taken over the tephra deposit from the 
eruption of basaltic Cerro Negro (Hill and Conner 2000 [DIRS 160103], p. 71) are higher than 
analogous measurements taken following the eruption of the silicic Mount St. Helens (Buist et al. 
1986 [DIRS 144632], Table 2; Merchant et al. 1982 [DIRS 160102], Table 6) (see Section 
6.2.1). To account for uncertainty about the influence of differences in the characteristics of ash 
from analogue measurements considered here and the potential conditions in the reference 
biosphere following an eruption, the modal and lower bounds of the distribution of the decay 
constant described below are smaller (i.e., have a slower decay rate) than the value of about 2 
measured after eruptions of Mount St. Helens and Mount Spurr. 
The present-day, arid climate at Yucca Mountain is predicted to continue for less than 1,000 
years (BSC 2004 [DIRS 170002], Table 6-1). The rate of change in mass loading measured in 
eastern Washington under wetter and cooler conditions may not apply to current conditions. 
However, concentrations of airborne particulates currently do not differ much among arid, rural 
sites with less than 20 in. of precipitation and less than about 45 in. of snowfall (Appendix C); 
therefore, changes in mass loading through time likely would not differ greatly between presentday 
and future climates predicted for Yucca Mountain. To ensure that uncertainty in the effects 
of current, arid conditions are not underestimated, the lower bound of the distribution of the 
decay constant below is smaller than the value measured at analogue sites. 
The analogue data from Mount St. Helens used in this analysis is from ash deposits of 10 mm or 
less. Although an ash deposit greater than 10 mm is unlikely in the area south of Yucca 
Mountain at the receptor location (CRWMS M&O 2000 [DIRS 153246], Section 3.10.5.1; 
BSC 2004 [170026], Table 6-4), the influence of such a deposit on the mass loading time 
function must be included. Because there is much more uncertainty in the decay constant for ash 
deposits equal to or more than 10 mm, separate distributions of this parameter are developed 
below for deposits less than 10 and equal to or greater than 10 mm deep. 
There is also uncertainty associated with the effects of aeolian and fluvial redistribution of ash 
into northern Amargosa Valley. Large quantities of ash from an eruption at Yucca Mountain 
may be deposited in the Fortymile Wash watershed. During and after very heavy precipitation 
events, some of the ash in that watershed would be washed downstream and deposited in 
Amargosa Valley. During that fluvial transport, some of the fuel and ash may be broken down 
into smaller particles. If the quantity of resuspendable fuel and ash at or near the location of the 
receptor is greater than the quantity of resuspendable soil now washed through that area, dust 
concentrations would increase temporarily after deposition. 
The Fortymile Wash watershed starts approximately 25 miles north of Yucca Mountain, and 
continues southward along the eastern edge of Yucca Mountain before entering Amargosa 
Valley. The wash terminates at the Amargosa River in western Amargosa Valley. It drains the 
southern part of Pahute Mesa, western Jackass Flats, and the eastern slopes of Fortymile Wash. 
Just south of the southern boundary of the Nevada Test Site (i.e., about 20 km south of Yucca 
Mountain), the Fortymile Wash channel changes from a moderately confined channel to several 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-49 September 2004 
distributary channels that are poorly defined (Tanko and Glancy 2001 [DIRS 159895], Figure 1). 
Fortymile Wash flows into Amargosa Valley infrequently and flows into the Amargosa River 
have been documented only three times since 1969. During the two floods (1995 and 1998) that 
have been well studied, unusually severe or long-lasting rains combined with melting of the 
snowpack in the northern part of the watershed resulted in flows throughout all or most of the 
major tributaries of Fortymile Wash and the Amargosa River (Beck and Glancy 1995 
[DIRS 160389]; Tanko and Glancy 2001 [DIRS 159895]). Thus, any sediment from one portion 
of the watershed was mixed with and buried within sediment from throughout the watershed. 
There is little evidence of flooding over the bank in the washes in Amargosa Valley (BSC 2004 
[DIRS 169980], Section 6.3.4.2.5); therefore, most sediment transported into Amargosa Valley 
would be restricted primarily to the bottoms and sides of the channels of Fortymile Wash. 
Although Fortymile Wash consists of a series of diffuse channels in Amargosa Valley, the 
surface area of the channels is small relative to the entire valley. Tephra blankets deposited 
throughout entire regions following other volcanic eruptions resulted in increases in resuspended 
particles for only months (e.g., Figure 6-1). Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that ash 
redistributed during flooding restricted to the channels of Fortymile Wash and well-mixed with 
other sediment would affect mass loading for a much shorter period of time, likely days to at 
most weeks. In addition, any increase in mass loading would be small relative to the change 
predicted for the first year following an eruption, which were caused by widespread, undiluted 
tephra deposits. To account for uncertainty in how long mass loading would remain high after 
such flooding, how much higher than background levels it would be, changes in particle size 
distributions over time, and how frequently Fortymile Wash would flood in the future, the 
selected modal and minimum values of the mass loading decrease constant are much lower than 
those measured following other volcanic eruptions. 
For an initial ash thickness of less than 10 mm, a triangular distribution of the mass load decrease 
constant with a mode of 0.33 year-1, maximum of 2.0 year-1, and minimum of 0.2 year-1 is 
selected. 
 The maximum value of 2.0 year-1 is approximately equal to the rate measured at 
community monitoring sites following the eruption of Mount St. Helens (Figure 6-2). It 
is also similar to the change in personal exposure to resuspended particles during 
logging after Mount St. Helens erupted (Buist et al 1986 [DIRS 160308]), and to the 
decrease in mass loading following the eruptions of Mount Spurr and Mount Sakurijima 
(Gordian et al 1996 [DIRS 160111]; Yano et al. 1990 [DIRS 160112]). A rate of 2.0 
year-1 would result in a decrease in mass loading to 5 percent of the maximum 
concentrations in about 2 years and an average annual concentration over 10 years of 
about 0.5 mg/m3 for a hypothetical Sv of 10 mg/m3 (from Equation 6.3-2). 
 The modal rate of 0.33 year-1 would result in a decrease of about 96 percent over 
10 years (Figure 6-1) and an average annual concentration over 10 years of 2.9 mg/m3 
for a hypothetical Sv of 10 mg/m3 (from Equation 6.3-2). This corresponds to a rate that 
takes at least 10 times longer to approach pre-eruption levels, and an average annual 
concentration over 10 years about 6 times greater than for a . of 2 year-1 (0.5 mg/m3), 
the approximate decrease constant following the eruptions at Mount St. Helens and other 
volcanoes for which data is available. This modal rate was selected to account for 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 6-50 September 2004 
uncertainty in the effects of differences such as precipitation, vegetation, ash 
characteristics, and ash redistribution, between those sites and the reference biosphere. 
 The minimum rate of 0.2 year-1 would result in a decrease of about 86 percent in 
10 years and an average annual concentration over 10 years of 4.3 mg/m3 for a 
hypothetical Sv of 10 mg/m3, more than eight times greater than that for a . of 2 year-1. 
For this rate it would take about 15 to 16 years for mass loading to decrease to 5 percent 
of initial concentrations. Because this rate is much slower than those measured over 
tephra deposits of similar depth to those expected at the reference biosphere, it 
reasonably bounds uncertainty in the effects of differences in conditions between 
analogue sites and the reference biosphere. 
For an initial ash thickness of 10 mm or greater, a triangular distribution of the mass load 
decrease constant with a mode of 0.2 year-1, maximum of 1.0 year-1, and minimum of 
0.125 year-1 is selected. These lower (i.e., slower) rates were selected to account for the 
additional uncertainty in the effects of an initial tephra deposit greater than those measured at 
analogue sites. 
 The maximum value of this distribution is slightly larger than the decay constant of 
about 2.0 year-1 measured after other eruptions, and was selected because some predicted 
ash depths covered by this distribution are only slightly greater than the 10 mm 
maximum ash thickness for analogue data from Mount St. Helens. This rate would 
result in a decrease in mass loading to 5 percent of the maximum concentrations in 5 to 
6 years and an average annual concentration over 10 years of about 1.0 mg/m3 for a 
hypothetical Sv of 10 mg/m3 (from Equation 6.3-2). 
 The modal rate of 0.2 year-1 would result in a decrease of about 86 percent in 10 years 
and 98 percent in 20 years (Figure 6-1). The average annual concentration over 10 years 
for a . of 0.2 year-1 and a hypothetical Sv of 10 mg/m3 would be 4.3 mg/m3 (from 
Equation 6.3-2), more than eight times greater than for a . of 2.0 year-1. 
 The minimum decay constant of 0.125 year-1 would result in a decrease of 71 percent 
over 10 years, 92 percent decrease over 20 years, and 98 percent decrease over 30 years. 
It would take about 24 years for mass loading to decrease to 5 percent of the initial 
concentration. The average annual concentrations for a . of 0.125 year-1 and a 
hypothetical Sv of 10 mg/m3 would be 5.7 and 3.7 mg/m3 over 10 and 20 years, 
respectively. This is more than an order of magnitude higher than for a . of 2.0 year-1; 
therefore, this rate reasonably bounds uncertainty in the effects of differences in 
conditions between analogue sites and the reference biosphere, including the effects of 
an initial tephra deposit deeper than 1 cm. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 7-1 September 2004 
7. CONCLUSIONS 
7.1 PARAMETER DISTRIBUTIONS 
This analysis report documents the selection of distributions for mass loading and the mass 
loading decrease function for use in the biosphere model. This information is summarized in 
Table 7-1 and contained in the product output DTN MO0407SPAINEXI.002. The only 
limitation on the use of these distributions and the function is that they are intended for the 
present-day and predicted future climatic conditions for the Yucca Mountain reference biosphere 
during the next 10,000 years. They must be used with caution for other, more mesic and colder 
conditions. Uncertainties in the inputs and assumption related to use of analogue data, climate 
change, thickness of the initial tephra deposit, and redistribution of tephra by aeolian and fluvial 
transport are described in Section 6. 
Table 7-1. Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Parameter 
Environment or Condition 
Type of 
Distribution Mode Minimum Maximum 
Mass Loading - Nominal Conditions 
Active Outdoors (mg/m3) Triangular 5.000 1.000 10.000 
Inactive Outdoors (mg/m3) Triangular 0.060 0.025 0.100 
Active Indoors (mg/m3) Triangular 0.100 0.060 0.175 
Asleep Indoors (mg/m3) Triangular 0.030 0.010 0.050 
Crops (mg/m3) Triangular 0.120 0.025 0.200 
Mass Loading - Post-Volcanic Conditionsa 
Active Outdoors (mg/m3) Triangular 2.500 0.000 5.000 
Inactive Outdoors (mg/m3) Triangular 0.060 0.025 0.200 
Active Indoors (mg/m3) Triangular 0.100 0.060 0.175 
Asleep Indoors (mg/m3) Triangular 0.030 0.010 0.050 
Crops (mg/m3)b Triangular 0.240 0.050 0.600 
Mass Loading Decrease Constant (.) to be used in equation S0e- .t 
For initial ash depth <10 mm (1/year) Triangular 0.33 0.2 2.0 
For initial ash depths =10 mm (1/year) Triangular 0.20 0.125 1.0 
Output DTN: MO0407SPAINEXI.002. 
aDistributions for post-volcanic conditions for human environments represent the predicted change in 
mass loading the first year following a volcanic eruption. These values must be added to predicted 
values for nominal conditions to determine the total predicted mass load for post-volcanic conditions. 
bThe distribution for crops for post-volcanic conditions represents the total mass loading the first year 
following an eruption and should not be added to predicted values for nominal conditions. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 7-2 September 2004 
7.2 HOW THE APPLICABLE ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA ARE ADDRESSED 
The following information describes how this analysis report addresses the acceptance criteria in 
the Yucca Mountain Review Plan, Final Report (NRC 2003 [DIRS 163274], Section 2.2.1.3.14). 
Only those acceptance criteria that are applicable to this report (see Section 4.2) are discussed. 
This analysis report is one of 10 reports (Figure 1-1) that support biosphere modeling and 
describe how the acceptance criteria have been addressed by the biosphere model. A 
consideration of all 10 reports is required to understand how all applicable acceptance criteria are 
satisfied by the biosphere model. 
Acceptance Criterion 1 System Description and Model Integration are Adequate. 
 Subcriterion (3): This analysis considers information and assumptions about climate 
change, ash depth, and ash redistribution that are developed or also considered in other 
TSPA modeling abstractions. The analysis of the effects of climate change on mass 
loading is described in Appendix C and is based on the three climate states modeled in 
other TSPA abstractions (present-day, monsoon, and glacial transition) (BSC 2003 
[DIRS 166296], p. 79). The analogue weather stations representative of the future 
climatic conditions considered in Section 4.1.5, Appendix C, and elsewhere in this 
report are identified in the Future Climate Analysis (BSC 2004 [DIRS 170002], 
Table 6-1). The distribution of ash depth considered in Sections 6.2 and 6.3 was 
developed in the TSPA model abstraction that describes atmospheric dispersal of ash 
(BSC 2004 [DIRS 170026], Section 6.5). Information and assumptions about the 
redistribution of ash that were considered in the evaluation of uncertainty in the mass 
loading decrease constant (Section 6.3.3) are consistent with those considered in the 
development of the ash redistribution conceptual model (BSC 2004 [DIRS 169980], 
Section 6.3.4; BSC 2004 [DIRS 170026], Section 6.6). 
Acceptance Criterion 2 Data are Sufficient for Model Justification. 
 Subcriterion (1): The justification for the parameter distributions developed in this 
report, and the consistency of those distributions with the conditions in the Yucca 
Mountain region, are described in Section 6, with additional justification for 
assumptions in Section 5. The data identified in Sections 4.1 were used, interpreted, and 
appropriately synthesized into the parameter distributions as described in Section 6. 
 Subcriterion (2): The sufficiency of data used to develop parameter distributions is 
described in Sections 4.1 and 6. Demonstration that the parameter distributions are 
consistent with present knowledge of the conditions in the Yucca Mountain region is in 
Section 6. The relationship between the parameters developed in this report and the 
FEPs included in biosphere characteristics modeling is shown in Table 1-1. Because the 
FEPs are comprised of several parameters, the determination that the parameters 
discussed in this report are consistent with present knowledge of conditions in the region 
surrounding Yucca Mountain supports a determination that the corresponding FEPs also 
are consistent with present knowledge of conditions in that region. However, a final 
determination of whether a FEP is consistent with present knowledge of conditions in 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 7-3 September 2004 
the region surrounding Yucca Mountain can be made only after all of the parameters 
which contribute to that FEP have been evaluated for consistency with present 
knowledge of conditions in the region surrounding Yucca Mountain. Sensitivity and 
uncertainty analyses are addressed in other biosphere modeling reports listed in 
Figure 1-1. 
Acceptance Criterion 3 Data Uncertainty is Characterized and Propagated Through the 
Model Abstraction 
 Subcriterion (1): The technical defensibility of assumptions used in this analysis is 
included in Section 5. The technical defensibility of the probability distribution 
developed for each parameter is described in Section 6. The identification of 
uncertainties and variabilities, and how those uncertainties and variabilities were 
accounted for in the development of parameter bounds that do not under-represent risk, 
is also described in Section 6. 
 Subcriterion (2): The technical defensibility of the technical bases for the parameter 
distributions is described in Section 6. The consistency of the data and mass loading 
parameter distributions with site characterization data and the climate and level of 
disturbance expected to be found at the location of the RMEI during the compliance 
time period is described in Sections 4.1 and 6. 
 Subcriterion (3): No process-level models were used to determine parameter values in 
this analysis. The consistency of the parameter distributions with site characterization 
data, laboratory experiments, field measurements, and natural analogue research is 
described in Section 6. 
 Subcriterion (4): The bounding values of the parameter distributions developed in this 
analysis were selected to adequately represent uncertainty and are supported by data, as 
described in Sections 5 and 6. No correlations among biosphere model input parameters 
are identified in this analysis. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 7-4 September 2004 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 8-1 September 2004 
8. INPUTS AND REFERENCES 
8.1 DOCUMENTS CITED 
Ambrose, V. 2002. Re: AQS System AMP450 + AMP 380 ASCII Text & Report 
Files. E-mail from V. Ambrose (EPA) to K. Rautenstrauch, September 6, 2002, 
with attachment ACC: MOL.20020923.0190; MOL.20020923.0196. 
160080 
Ambrose, V. 2002. Re: Site/Monitor Information. E-mail from V. Ambrose 
(EPA) to T. Wirth, September 17, 2002, with attachment. 
ACC: MOL.20020923.0191; MOL.20020923.0196. 
160081 
Andrews, W.F. 1972. Soil Survey of Yolo County, California. Woodland, 
California: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation 
Service. Accessed July 12, 2004. ACC: MOL.20040712.0180. 
http://www.ca.nrcs.usda.gov/mlra02/yolo.html 
170526 
Anspaugh, L.R.; Shinn, J.H.; Phelps, P.L.; and Kennedy, N.C. 1975. Resuspension 
and Redistribution of Plutonium in Soils. Health Physics, 29, (4), 571-582. New 
York, New York: Pergamon Press. TIC: 248619. 
151548 
Archer, J.D.; Cooper, G.S.; Reist, P.C.; Storm, J.F.; and Nylander-French, L.A. 
2002. Exposure to Respirable Crystalline Silica in Eastern North Carolina Farm 
Workers. AIHA Journal, 63, (6), 750-755. Fairfax, Virginia: American Industrial 
Hygiene Association. TIC: 255625. 
168488 
Baxter, P.J.; Bonadonna, C.; Dupree, R.; Hards, V.L.; Kohn, S.C.; Murphy, M.D.; 
Nichols, A.; Nicholson, R.A.; Norton, G.; Searl, A.; Sparks, R.S.J.; and Vickers, 
B.P. 1999. Cristobalite in Volcanic Ash of the Soufriere Hills Volcano, 
Montserrat, British West Indies. Science, 283, 1142-1145. Washington, D.C.: 
American Association for the Advancement of Science. TIC: 248128. 
150713 
Beck, D.A. and Glancy, P.A. 1995. Overview of Runoff of March 11, 1995, in 
Fortymile Wash and Amargosa River, Southern Nevada. Fact Sheet FS-210-95. Las 
Vegas, Nevada: U.S. Geological Survey. ACC: MOL.20010524.0189. 
160389 
Brady, N.C. and Weil, R.R. 1999. The Nature and Properties of Soils. 12th Edition. 
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall. TIC: 242178. 
160019 
Brauer, M.; Hrub, F.; Mihalkov, E.; Fabinov, E.; Miskovic, P.; Plzikov, A.; 
Lendacka, M.; Vandenberg, J.; and Cullen, A. 2000. Personal Exposure to 
Particles in Bansk Bystrica, Slovakia. Journal of Exposure Analysis and 
Environmental Epidemiology, 10, 478-487. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton 
Scientific Publishing. TIC: 251299. 
159703

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 8-2 September 2004 
Brook, J.R.; Dann, T.F.; and Burnett, R.T. 1997. Relationship Among TSP, PM10, 
PM2.5, and Inorganic Constituents of Atmospheric Particulate Matter at Multiple 
Canadian Locations. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 47, (1), 
2-19. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Air & Waste Management Association. 
TIC: 243189. 
160254 
BSC 2003. Total System Performance Assessment-License Application Methods 
and Approach. TDR-WIS-PA-000006 REV 00 ICN 01. Las Vegas, Nevada: 
Bechtel SAIC Company. ACC: DOC.20031215.0001. 
166296 
BSC 2003. Yucca Mountain Project Summary of Socioeconomic Data Analyses 
Conducted in Support of the Radiological Monitoring Program, During FY 2003. 
TDR-MGR-EV-000040 REV 00. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. 
ACC: DOC.20031203.0003. 
168723 
BSC 2004. Atmospheric Dispersal and Deposition of Tephra from a Potential 
Volcanic Eruption at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. MDL-MGR-GS-000002 REV 01. 
Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. 
170026 
BSC 2004. Biosphere Model Report. MDL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 01. Las Vegas, 
Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. 
169460 
BSC 2004. Characteristics of the Receptor for the Biosphere Model. ANL-MGRMD-
000005 REV 03. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. 
169671 
BSC 2004. Characterize Eruptive Processes at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. ANLMGR-
GS-000002 REV 02. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. 
169980 
BSC 2004. Disruptive Event Biosphere Dose Conversion Factor Analysis. ANLMGR-
MD-000003 REV 03. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. 
167287 
BSC (Bechtel SAIC Company) 2004. Future Climate Analysis. ANL-NBS-GS- 
000008, Rev. 01. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. 
170002 
BSC 2004. Nominal Performance Biosphere Dose Conversion Factor Analysis. 
ANL-MGR-MD-000009 REV 03. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. 
169674 
BSC 2004. Q-List. 000-30R-MGR0-00500-000-000 REV 00. Las Vegas, Nevada: 
Bechtel SAIC Company. ACC: ENG.20040721.0007. 
168361 
BSC 2004. Soil-Related Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model. ANL-NBSMD-
000009 REV 02. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. 
169459 
BSC 2004. Technical Work Plan for Biosphere Modeling and Expert Support. 
TWP-NBS-MD-000004 REV 03. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. 
ACC: DOC.20040527.0004. 
169573

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 8-3 September 2004 
Buist, A.S.; Bernstein, R.S.; Johnson, L.R.; and Vollmer, W.M. 1986. Evaluation 
of Physical Health Effects Due to Volcanic Hazards: Human Studies. 3 American 
Journal of Public Health, (Supplement). 76. 66-75. Washington, D.C.: American 
Public Health Association. TIC: 246676. 
160308 
Buist, A.S.; Johnson, L.R.; Vollmer, W.M.; Sexton, G.J.; and Kanarek, P.H. 1983. 
Acute Effects of Volcanic Ash from Mount Saint Helens on Lung Function in 
Children. American Review of Respiratory Disease, 127, (6), 714-719. New York, 
New York: National Tuberculosis Association. TIC: 250153. 
159738 
Buist, A.S.; Martin, T.R.; Shore, J.H.; Butler, J.; and Lybarger, J.A. 1986. The 
Development of a Multidisciplinary Plan for Evaluation of the Long-Term Health 
Effects of the Mount St. Helens Eruptions. Chapter 4 of Health Effects of 
Volcanoes: An Approach to Evaluating the Health Effects of an Environmental 
Hazard. Buist, A.S. and Bernstein, R.S., eds. American Journal of Public Health, 
Volume 76, Supplement. Washington, D.C.: American Public Health Association. 
TIC: 246677. 
144632 
Bureau of the Census. 2002. 2000 Summary File 3 (SF 3) Sample Data, Amargosa 
Valley CCD, Nye County, Nevada. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of 
Commerce, Bureau of the Census. Accessed August 28, 2002. TIC: 253098. 
http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DTTable?_ts=48597952130 
159728 
Canori, G.F. and Leitner, M.M. 2003. Project Requirements Document. TER-MGRMD-
000001 REV 02. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. 
ACC: DOC.20031222.0006. 
166275 
Chow, J.C.; Watson, J.G.; Green, M.C.; Lowenthal, D.H.; DuBois, D.W.; Kohl, 
S.D.; Egami, R.T.; Gillies, J.; Rogers, C.F.; Frazier, C.A.; and Cates, W. 1999. 
Middle- and Neighborhood-Scale Variations of PM10 Source Contributions in Las 
Vegas, Nevada. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 49, 
641-654. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Air & Waste Management Association. 
TIC: 247013. 
145212 
Clausnitzer, H. and Singer, M.J. 1997. Intensive Land Preparation Emits 
Respirable Dust. California Agriculture, 51, (2), 27-30. Berkeley, California: 
University of California, California Agricultural Experiment Station. TIC: 252403. 
160404 
Clayton, C.A.; Perritt, R.L.; Pellizzari, E.D.; Thomas, K.W.; Whitmore, R.W.; 
Wallace, L.A.; Ozkaynak, H.; and Spengler, J.D. 1993. Particle Total Exposure 
Assessment Methodology (PTEAM) Study: Distributions of Aerosol and Elemental 
Concentrations in Personal, Indoor, and Outdoor Air Samples in a Southern 
California Community. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental 
Epidemiology, 3, (2), 227-250. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton Scientific 
Publishing. TIC: 250270. 
159599

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 8-4 September 2004 
Craighead, J.E.; Adler, K.B.; Butler, G.B.; Emerson, R.J.; Mossman, B.T.; and 
Woodworth, C.D. 1983. Biology of Disease, Health Effects of Mount St. Helens 
Volcanic Dust. Laboratory Investigation, 48, (1), 5-12. Baltimore, Maryland: 
Williams & Wilkins. TIC: 250154. 
160338 
CRWMS (Civilian Radioactive Waste Management System) M&O (Management 
and Operating Contractor) 1999. Environmental Baseline File for Meteorology and 
Air Quality. B00000000-01717-5705-00126 REV 00. Las Vegas, Nevada: CRWMS 
M&O. ACC: MOL.19990302.0186. 
102877 
CRWMS M&O 1999. Evaluation of Soils in the Northern Amargosa Valley. 
B00000000-01717-5705-00084 REV 00. Las Vegas, Nevada: CRWMS M&O. 
ACC: MOL.19990224.0268. 
107736 
CRWMS M&O 2000. Total System Performance Assessment for the Site 
Recommendation. TDR-WIS-PA-000001 REV 00 ICN 01. Las Vegas, Nevada: 
CRWMS M&O. ACC: MOL.20001220.0045. 
153246 
Dahneke, B. 1975. Resuspension of Particles. Journal of Colloid and Interface 
Science, 50, (1), 194-196. Orlando, Florida: Academic Press. TIC: 224931. 
151756 
DOE (U.S. Department of Energy) 1997. The 1997 Biosphere Food 
Consumption Survey Summary Findings and Technical Documentation. Las Vegas, 
Nevada: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste 
Management. ACC: MOL.19981021.0301. 
100332 
Evans, G.F.; Highsmith, R.V.; Sheldon, L.S.; Suggs, J.C.; Williams, R.W.; 
Zweidinger, R.B.; Creason, J.P.; Walsh, D.; Rodes, C.E.; and Lawless, P.A. 2000. 
The 1999 Fresno Particulate Matter Exposure Studies: Comparison of Community, 
Outdoor, and Residential PM Mass Measurements. Journal of the Air & Waste 
Management Association, 50, 1887-1896. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Air & Waste 
Management Association. TIC: 250561. 
159679 
Garger, E.K.; Hoffman, F.O.; and Thiessen, K.M. 1997. Uncertainty of the Long- 
Term Resuspension Factor. Atmospheric Environment, 31, (11), 1647-1656. 
Oxford, United Kingdom: Elsevier. TIC: 246785. 
124902 
Gordian, M.E.; Ozkaynak, H.; Xue, J.; Morris, S.S.; and Spengler, J.D. 1996. 
Particulate Air Pollution and Respiratory Disease in Anchorage, Alaska. 
Environmental Health Perspectives, 104, (3), 290-297. Research Park Triangle, 
North Carolina: National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National 
Institutes of Health. TIC: 250157. 
160111 
Hewett, P. 1980. Technical Assistance Report, Gales Creek Diabetic Camp, 
Glenwood, Oregon. MTA 80-116-34M. Morgantown, West Virginia: National 
Institute for Occupational Safety & Health, Division of Respiratory Disease Studies. 
ACC: MOL.20040311.0042. 
168491

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 8-5 September 2004 
Hewett, P. 1980. Technical Assistance Report, State of Washington and Region X 
Office of the Department of Health and Human Services. M-TA-80-111(b). 
Morgantown, West Virginia: National Institute for Occupational Safety & Health, 
Division of Respiratory Disease Studies. ACC: MOL.20040311.0015. 
168490 
Hill, B.E. and Connor, C.B. 2000. Technical Basis for Resolution of the Igneous 
Activity Key Technical Issue. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission. TIC: 253022. 
160103 
Howard-Reed, C.; Rea, A.W.; Zufall, M.J.; Burke, J.M.; Williams, R.W.; Suggs, 
J.C.; Sheldon, L.S.; Walsh, D.; and Kwok, R. 2000. Use of a Continuous 
Nephelometer to Measure Personal Exposure to Particles During the U.S. 
Environmental Protection Agency Baltimore and Fresno Panel Studies. Journal of 
the Air & Waste Management Association, 50, 1125-1132. Pittsburgh, 
Pennsylvania: Air & Waste Management Association. TIC: 250562. 
159680 
IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) 1982. Generic Models and 
Parameters for Assessing the Environmental Transfer of Radionuclides from 
Routine Releases -- Exposures of Critical Group. IAEA SS-57. Vienna, Austria: 
International Atomic Energy Agency. TIC: 232649. 
103768 
IAEA 1992. Modelling of Resuspension, Seasonality and Losses During Food 
Processing. First Report of the VAMP Terrestrial Working Group. IAEATECDOC-
647. Vienna, Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency. 
TIC: 243498. 
103772 
IAEA 2001. Generic Models for Use in Assessing the Impact of Discharges of 
Radioactive Substances to the Environment. Safety Reports Series No. 19. Vienna, 
Austria: International Atomic Energy Agency. TIC: 251295. 
158519 
Janssen, N.A.H.; Hoek, G.; Brunekreef, B.; Harssema, H.; Mensink, I.; and 
Zuidhof, A. 1998. Personal Sampling of Particles in Adults: Relation Among 
Personal, Indoor, and Outdoor Air Concentrations. American Journal of 
Epidemiology, 147, (6), 537-547. Baltimore, Maryland: Johns Hopkins University, 
School of Hygiene and Public Health. TIC: 250565. 
159699 
Kullman, G.J.; Thorne, P.S.; and Waldron, P.F. 1998. Organic Dust Exposures 
from Work in Dairy Barns. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 59, 
(6), 403-413. Fairfax, Virginia: American Industrial Hygiene Association. 
TIC: 252362. 
159586 
Leaderer, B.P.; Naeher, L.; Jankun, T.; Balenger, K.; Holford, T.R.; Toth, C.; 
Sullivan, J.; Wolfson, J.M.; and Koutrakis, P. 1999. Indoor, Outdoor, and Regional 
Summer and Winter Concentrations of PM10, PM2.5, SO4
2-, H+, NH4
+, NO3
-, NH3, 
and Nitrous Acid in Homes with and without Kerosene Space Heaters. 
Environmental Health Perspectives, 107, (3), 223-231. Washington, D.C.: U.S. 
Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service. TIC: 250573. 
160403

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 8-6 September 2004 
Linn, W.S.; Gong, H., Jr.; Clark, K.W.; and Anderson, K.R. 1999. Day-to-Day 
Particulate Exposures and Health Changes in Los Angeles Area Residents with 
Severe Lung Disease. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 49, 
108-115. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Air & Waste Management Association. 
TIC: 250575. 
159602 
Lioy, P.J.; Waldman, J.M.; Buckley, T.; Butler, J.; and Pietarinen, C. 1990. The 
Personal, Indoor and Outdoor Concentrations of PM-10 Measured in an Industrial 
Community During the Winter. Atmospheric Environment, 24B, (1), 57-66. New 
York, New York: Pergamon Press. TIC: 251308. 
159655 
Long, C.M.; Suh, H.H.; and Koutrakis, P. 2000. Characterization of Indoor Particle 
Sources Using Continuous Mass and Size Monitors. Journal of the Air & Waste 
Management Association, 50, 1236-1250. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Air & Waste 
Management Association. TIC: 250576. 
159681 
Long, C.M.; Suh, H.H.; Catalano, P.J.; and Koutrakis, P. 2001. Using Time- and 
Size-Resolved Particulate Data to Quantify Indoor Penetration and Deposition 
Behavior. Environmental Science & Technology, 35, (10), 2089-2099. 
Washington, D.C.: American Chemical Society. TIC: 250579. 
159733 
McGimsey, R.G.; Neal, C.A.; and Riley, C.M. 2001. Areal Distribution, Thickness, 
Mass, Volume, and Grain Size of Tephra-Fall Deposits from the 1992 Eruptions of 
Crater Peak Vent, Mt. Spurr Volcano, Alaska. Open-File Report 01-370. 
Anchorage, Alaska: U.S. Geological Survey. TIC: 253361. 
160386 
McKague, H.L. 1998. Transmittal of Administrative Item, Summary of CNWRA 
Workshop on the Consequences of Volcanic Activity (AI 20-1402-461-831). 
Letter from H.L. McKague (CNWRA) to J. Trapp (NRC), August 17, 1998, NRC- 
02-97-009, with enclosures. ACC: MOL.19981106.0154; MOL.19981106.0155; 
MOL.19981106.0156; MOL.19981106.0157. 
151841 
Merchant, J.A.; Baxter, P.; Bernstein, R.; McCawley, M.; Falk, H.; Stein, G.; Ing, 
R.; and Attfield, M. 1982. Health Implications of the Mount St. Helens Eruption: 
Epidemiological Considerations. Annals of Occupational Hygiene, 26, (1-4), 
911-919. New York, New York: Pergamon Press. TIC: 253237. 
160102 
Molocznik, A. and Zagorski, J. 1998. Exposure to Dust Among Agriculture 
Workers. Annals of Agricultural and Environmental Medicine, 5, (2), 127-130. 
Lublin, Poland: Institute of Agricultural Medicine. TIC: 248132. 
154281 
Molocznik, A. and Zagrski, J. 2000. Exposure of Female Farmers to Dust on 
Family Farms. Annals of Agricultural and Environmental Medicine, 7, 43-50. 
Lublin, Poland: Institute of Agricultural Medicine. TIC: 252372. 
159587

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 8-7 September 2004 
Monn, Ch.; Fuchs, A.; Hgger, D.; Junker, M.; Kogelschatz, D.; Roth, N.; and 
Wanner, H.-U. 1997. Particulate Matter Less Than 10 Microns (PM10) and Fine 
Particles Less Than 2.5 Microns (PM2.5): Relationships Between Indoor, Outdoor 
and Personal Concentrations. The Science of the Total Environment, 208, (1-2), 
15-21. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier. TIC: 248133. 
150888 
Morandi, M.T.; Stock, T.H.; and Contant, C.F. 1988. A Comparative Study of 
Respirable Particulate Microenvironmental Concentrations and Personal 
Exposures. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 10, (2), 105-122. 
Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. TIC: 251310. 
159866 
Mozzon, D.; Brown, D.A.; and Smith, J.W. 1987. Occupational Exposure to 
Airborne Dust, Respirable Quartz and Metals Arising from Refuse Handling, 
Burning and Landfilling. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 48, 
(2), 111-116. Akron, Ohio: American Industrial Hygiene Association. 
TIC: 252363. 
159585 
Napier, B.A.; Peloquin, R.A.; Strenge, D.L.; and Ramsdell, J.V. 1988. GENII - The 
Hanford Environmental Radiation Dosimetry Software System. Three volumes. 
PNL-6584. Richland, Washington: Pacific Northwest Laboratory. 
ACC: NNA.19920626.0034; NNA.19920626.0036; NNA.19920626.0041. 
100953 
NCDC (National Climatic Data Center) 1998. Summary of the Day Observations: 
West 1 for Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and 
Wyoming. Boulder, Colorado: EarthInfo. TIC: 245534. 
135900 
NCDC 1998. Summary of the Day Observations: West 2 for Alaska, Hawaii, Idaho, 
Kansas, Montana, North Dakota, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pacific Islands, 
South Dakota, Texas, Washington. Boulder, Colorado: EarthInfo. TIC: 245534. 
125325 
Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J. and Schenker, M.B. 1998. Determinants of Personal Dust 
Exposure During Field Crop Operations in California Agriculture. American 
Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 59, 9-13. Fairfax, Virginia: American 
Industrial Hygiene Association. TIC: 248135. 
150854 
Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J.; Kruize, H.; and Schenker, M.B. 1998. Exposure to Dust 
and Its Particle Size Distribution in California Agriculture. American Industrial 
Hygiene Association Journal, 59, 34-38. Fairfax, Virginia: American Industrial 
Hygiene Association. TIC: 248134. 
150855 
Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J.; Noderer, K.S.; Schenker, M.B.; Vallyathan, V.; and 
Olenchock, S. 1999. Personal Exposure to Dust, Endotoxin and Crystalline Silica 
in California Agriculture. Annals of Occupational Hygiene, 43, (1), 35-42. Oxford, 
England: Elsevier. TIC: 248271. 
150711

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 8-8 September 2004 
NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission) 2003. Yucca Mountain Review Plan, 
Final Report. NUREG-1804, Rev. 2. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. TIC: 254568. 
163274 
Pellizzari, E.D.; Clayton, C.A.; Rodes, C.E.; Mason, R.E.; Piper, L.L.; Fort, B.; 
Pfeifer, G.; and Lynam, D. 1999. Particulate Matter and Manganese Exposures in 
Toronto, Canada. Atmospheric Environment, 33, 721-734. New York, New York: 
Elsevier. TIC: 250596. 
159702 
Pinnick, R.G.; Fernandez, G.; Hinds, B.D.; Bruce, C.W.; Schaefer, R.W.; and 
Pendleton, J.D. 1985. Dust Generated by Vehicular Traffic on Unpaved 
Roadways: Sizes and Infrared Extinction Characteristics. Aerosol Science and 
Technology, 4, (1), 99-121. New York, New York: Elsevier. TIC: 252364. 
159577 
Quackenboss, J.J.; Lebowitz, M.D.; and Crutchfield, C.D. 1989. Indoor-Outdoor 
Relationships for Particulate Matter: Exposure Classifications and Health Effects. 
Environment International, 15, 353-360. New York, New York: Pergamon Press. 
TIC: 251313. 
159682 
Rasmuson, K.E. 2004. Summary of 2004 Agricultural Activities, Businesses, and 
Community Services and Organizations in Amargosa Valley. Interoffice 
memorandum from K.E. Rasmuson (BSC) to K.R. Rautenstrauch, May 20, 2004, 
0520041667, with enclosures. ACC: MOL.20040519.0033. 
169506 
Rojas-Bracho, L.; Suh, H.H.; and Koutrakis, P. 2000. Relationships Among 
Personal, Indoor, and Outdoor Fine and Coarse Particle Concentrations for 
Individuals with COPD. Journal of Exposure Analysis and Environmental 
Epidemiology, 10, (3), 294-306. Princeton, New Jersey: Princeton Scientific 
Publishing. TIC: 250599. 
159678 
Sanderson, W.T. 1982. Techncial Assistance Report, Forest Serivce, USDA, 
Spokane, Washington. TA 80-000-105. Morgantown, West Virginia: National 
Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Division of Respiratory Disease 
Studies. ACC: MOL.20040311.0040. 
168492 
Sarna-Wojcicki, A.M.; Shipley, S.; Waitt, R.B., Jr.; Dzurisin, D.; and Wood, S.H. 
1982. Areal Distribution, Thickness, Mass, Volume, and Grain Size of Air-Fall 
Ash from the Six Major Eruptions of 1980. The 1980 Eruptions of Mount St. 
Helens, Washington. Professional Paper 1250. 577-600. Reston, Virginia: U.S. 
Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey. TIC: 218260. 
160227 
Searl, A.; Nicholl, A.; and Baxter, P.J. 2002. Assessment of the Exposure of 
Islanders to Ash from the Soufriere Hills Volcano, Montserrat, British West Indies. 
Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 59, (8), 523-531. Clifton, New Jersey: 
BMJ Publishing Group. TIC: 253212. 
160104

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 8-9 September 2004 
Tanko, D.J. and Glancy, P.A. 2001. Flooding in the Amargosa River Drainage 
Basin, February 23-24, 1998, Southern Nevada and Eastern California, Including 
the Nevada Test Site. Fact Sheet 036-01. Carson City, Nevada: U.S. Geological 
Survey. ACC: MOL.20010924.0092. 
159895 
Thatcher, T.L. and Layton, D.W. 1995. Deposition, Resuspension, and Penetration 
of Particles within a Residence. Atmospheric Environment, 29, (13), 1487-1497. 
New York, New York: Elsevier. TIC: 251319. 
159600 
Till, J.E. and Meyer, H.R. 1983. Radiological Assessment, A Textbook on 
Environmental Dose Analysis. NUREG/CR-3332. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission. TIC: 223809. 
101895 
Wheeler, A.J.; Williams, I.; Beaumont, R.A.; and Hamilton, R.S. 2000. 
Characterisation of Particulate Matter Sampled During a Study of Children's 
Personal Exposure to Airborne Particulate Matter in a UK Urban Environment. 
Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 65, (1-2), 69-77. Dordrecht, The 
Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers. TIC: 250607. 
159704 
Wigzell, E.; Kendall, M.; and Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J. 2000. The Spatial and 
Temporal Variation of Particulate Matter within the Home. Journal of Exposure 
Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology, 10, (3), 307-314. Princeton, New 
Jersey: Princeton Scientific Publishing. TIC: 252367. 
159729 
Williams, R.; Suggs, J.; Zweidinger, R.; Evans, G.; Creason, J.; Kwok, R.; Rodes, 
C.; Lawless, P.; and Sheldon, L. 2000. The 1998 Baltimore Particulate Matter 
EpidemiologyExposure Study: Part 1. Comparison of Ambient, Residential 
Outdoor, Indoor and Apartment Particulate Matter Monitoring. Journal of 
Exposure Analysis and Environmental Epidemiology, 10, (6), 518-532. Princeton, 
New Jersey: Princeton Scientific Publishing. TIC: 250608. 
159735 
Yakovleva, E.; Hopke, P.K.; and Wallace, L. 1999. Receptor Modeling 
Assessment of Particle Total Exposure Assessment Methodology Data. 
Environmental Science & Technology, 33, (20), 3645-3652. Washington, D.C.: 
American Chemical Society. TIC: 250612. 
159730 
Yano, E.; Yokoyama, Y.; Higashi, H.; Nishii, S.; Maeda, K.; and Koizumi, A. 1990. 
Health Effects of Volcanic Ash: A Repeat Study. Archives of Environmental 
Health, 45, (6), 367-373. Washington, D.C.: Heldref Publications. TIC: 250162. 
160112 
YMP (Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project) 1999. Yucca Mountain Site 
Characterization Project: Summary of Socioeconomic Data Analyses Conducted in 
Support of the Radiological Monitoring Program, April 1998 to April 1999. North 
Las Vegas, Nevada: Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Office. 
ACC: MOL.19991021.0188. 
158212

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 8-10 September 2004 
Yocom, J.E.; Clink, W.L.; and Cote, W.A. 1971. Indoor/Outdoor Air Quality 
Relationships. Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, 21, (5), 251-259. 
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Air Pollution Control Association. TIC: 253031. 
159654 
8.2 CODES, STANDARDS, REGULATIONS, AND PROCEDURES 
10 CFR Part 63. Energy: Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in a Geologic 
Repository at Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Readily available. 
156605 
AP-2.22Q, Rev. 1, ICN 1. Classification Analyses and Maintenance of the Q-List. Washington, 
D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. 
ACC: DOC.20040714.0002. 
AP-2.27Q, Rev. 1, ICN 4. Planning for Science Activities. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department 
of Energy, Office of Civilian Radioative Waste Management. ACC: DOC.20040805.0003. 
AP-SIII.9Q, Rev. 1, ICN 6. Scientific Analyses. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Energy, 
Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management. ACC: DOC.20040805.0003. 
8.3 SOURCE DATA, LISTED BY DATA TRACKING NUMBER 
MO0008SPATSP00.013. Total Suspended Particle Concentrations - Washington 
1979-1982. Submittal date: 08/02/2000. 
151750 
MO0210SPATSP01.023. Total Suspended Particulate Matter Concentrations, 
United States. Submittal date: 10/01/2002. 
160426 
MO98PSDALOG111.000. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight 
Logs, Oct. - Dec. 97. Submittal date: 01/29/1998. 
119501 
MO0407SEPFEPLA.000. LA FEP List. Submittal date: 07/20/2004. 170760 
TM000000000001.039. Particulate Matter Air Quality Data - January 1992 through 
September 1992. Submittal date: 07/27/1993. 
121386 
TM000000000001.041. Particulate Air Quality Data Forms, January thru June 
1991. Submittal date: 07/27/1993. 
121396 
TM000000000001.042. Particulate Air Quality Forms, July thru September 1991. 
Submittal date: 01/23/1992. 
121405 
TM000000000001.079. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight Logs 
for 1992 through 1995. Submittal date: 03/11/1996. 
121410 
TM000000000001.082. Particulate Air Quality Data Forms, April 1989 thru 
December 1990. Submittal date: 03/12/1996. 
121416

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 8-11 September 2004 
TM000000000001.084. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight Logs, 
January - March 1996. Submittal date: 05/07/1996. 
121419 
TM000000000001.096. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight Logs, 
April - June 1996. Submittal date: 01/18/1997. 
121421 
TM000000000001.097. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight Logs, 
July - September 1996. Submittal date: 04/18/1997. 
121426 
TM000000000001.098. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight Logs, 
October - December 1996. Submittal date: 04/18/1997. 
121429 
TM000000000001.099. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight Logs, 
January - March 1997. Submittal date: 04/18/1997. 
121435 
TM000000000001.105. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight Logs, 
April - June 1997. Submittal date: 07/21/1997. 
121440 
TM000000000001.108. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight Logs, 
July - September 1997. Submittal date: 10/22/1997. 
121442 
8.4 OUTPUT DATA, LISTED BY DATA TRACKING NUMBER 
MO0407SPAINEXI.002. Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model. 
Submittal date: 07/12/2004. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 8-12 September 2004 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 September 2004 
APPENDIX A 
MASS LOAD SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 September 2004 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 A-1 September 2004 
APPENDIX A 
MASS LOAD SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS 
The analysis described in this appendix was conducted to evaluate the sensitivity of calculations 
of mass of inhaled particles to changes in the input parameter values. 
The mass of inhaled particles was calculated in this analysis using the following equation. 
. = 
n 
n n n S BR t Inhalation (Eq. A-1) 
where: 
Inhalation = total mass of inhaled particles (mg). 
n = environment. 
tn = time spend in environment n (hours). 
BRn = breathing rate in environment n (m3/hour). 
Sn = Mass loading concentration in environment n (mg/m3). 
This analysis was conducted by holding all parameters at an expected value except one 
parameter being examined (Table A-1). The ranges of parameter values used in this analysis 
were selected only to evaluate sensitivity and are intended to be reasonable estimates of the 
range of average annual values for the Amargosa Valley population and of average annual 
conditions in Amargosa Valley. They are not intended to represent the recommended values for 
calculating BDCFs. Nor is it necessary that the values used in this analysis match those used to 
calculate BDCFs, because the goal here is only to understand the relative importance of each 
parameter to the calculation of mass of inhaled particles. 
ResultsThe mass of inhaled particles is most sensitive to changes in mass load in the active 
outdoor environment, primarily because mass loading concentrations are one to two orders of 
magnitude higher during dust-generating activities outdoors than in other environments 
(Table A-1). Changes in mass loading in the active indoor environment have the third largest 
effect, primarily because of the large amount of time spent in that environment. Changes in mass 
loading in the inactive outdoor and asleep indoor environments have little effect on inhalation of 
particulates. 
Changes in time spent in the outdoor active environment have the second largest effect on the 
mass of particulates inhaled. This is due primarily to the large concentrations of particulates in 
that environment, but also to uncertainty in estimates of time spent outdoors. Changes in time 
spent in other environments have little influence on inhalation, in part because of the narrow 
range of values. Ranges of time spent in each environment are narrow because they represent 
variation and uncertainty around the average of the living style of the population in the town of 
Amargosa Valley, as required by 10 CFR 63.312(b) [DIRS 156605]. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 A-2 September 2004 
Breathing rates have little influence on the rate of inhalation of particulates, primarily because 
variation in those rates is low. 
Table A-1. Mass Loading Sensitivity Analysis 
Minimum Values Maximum Values 
Environment 
Parameter 
Expected 
Value Min 
Inhalation 
(mg)b % Changec Max 
Inhalation 
(mg)b % Changec 
Active Outdoors 
Time (hours) 0.5 0.3 3.831 -29.2% 0.8 7.776 43.8% 
Breathing Rate (m3/hr) 1.6 1.4 4.909 -9.2% 1.8 5.909 9.2% 
Mass Load (mg/m3) 5.0 1.0 2.209 -59.2% 10.0 9.409 74.0% 
Inactive Outdoors 
Time 1.5 1 5.431 0.4% 2.0 5.387 -0.4% 
Breathing Rate (m3/hr) 1.1 0.95 5.395 -0.2% 1.25 5.422 0.2% 
Mass Load (mg/m3) 0.06 0.025 5.351 -1.1% 0.100 5.475 1.2% 
Active Indoors 
Time 11.0 10 5.365 -0.8% 12 5.453 0.8% 
Breathing Rate (m3/hr) 1.1 0.95 5.244 -3.1% 1.25 5.574 3.1% 
Mass Load (mg/m3) 0.1 0.060 4.925 -8.9% 0.175 6.316 16.8% 
Asleep Indoors 
Time 8.3 8.1 5.428 0.4% 8.5 5.389 -0.4% 
Breathing Rate (m3/hr) 0.4 0.35 5.396 -0.2% 0.45 5.421 0.2% 
Mass Load (mg/m3) 0.03 0.010 5.342 -1.2% 0.050 5.475 1.2% 
Total Dust Inhaled (mg) 5.409a 
a Calculated as the sum over four environments of the expected values of (time x breathing rate x mass load). 
b Total dust inhaled with all values held at the expected value except one, calculated using the equation in footnote a. 
c Percent change in total dust inhaled from the expected value (5.409 mg). Time added or subtracted from the active 
and inactive outdoor environments was accounted for in the active indoor environment. Time added or subtracted 
from the active indoor environment was accounted for in the inactive outdoor environment. The total time does not 
add to 24 hours because an average of 2.7 hours per day spent away from contaminated areas is not shown. 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 September 2004 
APPENDIX B 
TSP CONCENTRATIONACTIVE OUTDOOR ENVIRONMENT 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 September 2004 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 B-1 September 2004 
APPENDIX B 
TSP CONCENTRATIONACTIVE OUTDOOR ENVIRONMENT 
This appendix summarizes information on TSP concentrations from rural, agricultural sites 
obtained from the EPA (DTN MO0210SPATSP01.023 [DIRS 160426]) and used in this 
analysis. Table B-1 is a list of average annual TSP concentrations for all rural agricultural sites 
in Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon (excluding those sites west of the 
Cascade Mountains), Utah, and Washington. Note that TSP concentrations are in units of 
micrograms per cubic meter (g/m3), the unit of measure reported by the EPA. Particulate 
concentrations in the remainder of this analysis are in units of milligrams per cubic meter 
(mg/m3). 
Table B-2 lists descriptive information about each rural, agricultural TSP monitoring site, 
including average annual precipitation and snowfall from the U.S. National Climatic Data Center 
(NCDC 1998 [DIRS 135900; DIRS 125325]). 
Table B-1. Average Annual Concentrations of TSP (g/m3) from Rural, Agricultural Monitoring Sites in 
the Western United States 
Monitoring Site g/m3 
Site ID State City County Year 
Annual 
Average 
Overall 
Average 
04-007-0003 Arizona Miami Gila 1974 62.3 49.8 
1975 37.2 
04-007-1902 Arizona Miami Gila 1975 24.5 29.6 
1976 36.6 
1977 45.8 
1978 20 
1979 29.5 
1980 16.5 
1981 49.2 
1982 15 
04-013-0008 Arizona Guadalupe Maricopa 1973 25.9 130.9 
1974 153.1 
1975 172.7 
1976 172 
04-019-0006 Arizona Tucson Pima 1971 132.5 132.5 
04-019-0009 Arizona Tucson Pima 1973 118 81.3 
1974 74.7 
1975 63.8 
1976 68.5 
04-019-0010 Arizona Tucson Pima 1974 92.4 88.7 
1975 84.9 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table B-1. Average Annual Concentrations of TSP (g/m3) from Rural, Agricultural Monitoring Sites in the 
Western United States (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 B-2 September 2004 
Monitoring Site g/m3 
Site ID State City County Year 
Annual 
Average 
Overall 
Average 
06-013-1002 California Bethel Island Contra 
Costa 1986 40.8 41.1 
1988 48.4 
1989 41.5 
1990 39.7 
1991 42.5 
1994 33.8 
06-019-1002 California Five Points Fresno 1972 62.9 77.7 
1973 67.9 
1974 88.4 
1975 75.7 
1976 90.1 
1977 93.1 
1978 87.8 
1979 89.5 
1980 83.8 
1981 80 
1982 62.6 
1983 59.9 
1984 68.4 
06-019-3001 California Parlier Fresno 1972 82.7 94.3 
1973 66 
1974 104.8 
1975 94.2 
1976 132.6 
1977 121.7 
1978 57.8 
06-027-0002 California Bishop Inyo 1980 32.3 25.4 
1981 29.9 
1982 17.4 
1983 16 
1984 31.8 
1985 26.1 
1986 24.9 
1987 24.5 
06-027-0011 California Olancha Inyo 1986 15.8 22.6 
1987 25.8 
1988 26.3 
06-031-0002 California Corcoran Kings 1980 131.2 120.2 
1981 153.9 
1982 101.2 
1983 94.6 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table B-1. Average Annual Concentrations of TSP (g/m3) from Rural, Agricultural Monitoring Sites in the 
Western United States (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 B-3 September 2004 
Monitoring Site g/m3 
Site ID State City County Year 
Annual 
Average 
Overall 
Average 
06-031-1002 California Kettleman City Kings 1980 107.3 86.4 
1981 99.7 
1982 65 
1983 68.6 
1984 90.6 
1985 91.4 
1986 95.4 
1987 84.1 
1988 75.2 
06-033-0002 California Kelseyville Lake 1980 39.3 33.8 
1981 36 
1982 45 
1983 28.7 
1984 28.6 
1985 32.1 
1986 27.2 
1987 33.3 
06-033-0003 California Upper Lake Lake 1980 18 19.0 
1981 20.4 
1982 18 
1983 19.6 
06-049-1001 California Cedarville Modoc 1980 22.1 16.9 
1981 24.6 
1982 15.1 
1983 15.3 
1984 11.8 
1985 12.3 
06-061-0001 California Auburn Placer 1980 41.5 39.8 
1981 46.6 
1982 33.6 
1983 34.3 
1984 43.1 
06-071-1101 California Twentynine 
Palms 
San 
Bernardino 1979 51.1 48.7 
1980 50.1 
1981 53 
1982 40.7 
1983 45.1 
1984 56.4 
1985 49.9 
1986 49.2 
1987 47.7 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table B-1. Average Annual Concentrations of TSP (g/m3) from Rural, Agricultural Monitoring Sites in the 
Western United States (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 B-4 September 2004 
Monitoring Site g/m3 
Site ID State City County Year 
Annual 
Average 
Overall 
Average 
1988 55.1 
1989 37 
06-083-1011 California Jalama Santa 
Barbara 1987 44.4 45.2 
1988 47.1 
1989 41.1 
1990 46 
1991 46 
1992 44.9 
1993 46.9 
06-083-1012 California Concepcion Santa 
Barbara 1987 42.5 43.1 
1988 43 
1989 47.6 
1990 38 
1991 59.5 
1992 36.7 
1993 34.1 
06-083-1015 California Gaviota Santa 
Barbara 1988 28.5 24.1 
1989 24.3 
1990 23.6 
1991 25.1 
1992 25.9 
1993 17.4 
06-083-1016 California Gaviota Santa 
Barbara 1988 28 25.3 
1989 26.2 
1990 24.7 
1991 28.2 
1992 27.9 
1993 16.7 
06-083-1017 California Gaviota Santa 
Barbara 1987 36.2 38.5 
1988 35.7 
1989 39.6 
1990 38.6 
1991 38 
1992 39.6 
1993 42 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table B-1. Average Annual Concentrations of TSP (g/m3) from Rural, Agricultural Monitoring Sites in the 
Western United States (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 B-5 September 2004 
Monitoring Site g/m3 
Site ID State City County Year 
Annual 
Average 
Overall 
Average 
06-083-1019 California Gaviota Santa 
Barbara 1987 23.5 29.9 
1988 27.1 
1989 33.7 
1990 32.1 
1991 29.2 
1992 34.6 
1993 29.1 
06-083-1020 California Isla Vista Santa 
Barbara 1988 43.9 42.7 
1989 46.3 
1990 47.1 
1991 40.8 
1992 42.2 
1993 36 
06-083-1030 California Concepcion Santa 
Barbara 1987 42.7 38.0 
1988 38.5 
1989 36.3 
1990 37.3 
1991 37.5 
1992 35.9 
06-083-4003 California Vandenburg 
AFB 
Santa 
Barbara 1987 34 31.2 
1988 35.1 
1989 33 
1990 31.3 
1991 27.5 
1992 25.7 
1993 31.5 
06-083-5001 California Vandenburg 
AFB 
Santa 
Barbara 1986 29.9 36.9 
1987 36.5 
1988 44.2 
06-089-1002 California Burney Shasta 1985 40.7 33.5 
1986 26.3 
06-103-1001 California Los Molinos Tehama 1980 57.9 46.8 
1981 48.2 
1982 44.6 
1983 42.8 
1984 45.9 
1985 49.3 
1986 43.3 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table B-1. Average Annual Concentrations of TSP (g/m3) from Rural, Agricultural Monitoring Sites in the 
Western United States (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 B-6 September 2004 
Monitoring Site g/m3 
Site ID State City County Year 
Annual 
Average 
Overall 
Average 
1987 42.7 
1983 43.9 
06-111-0004 California Piru Ventura 1982 50.4 46.8 
1984 53.6 
1985 51 
1986 45.3 
1987 45.1 
1988 38.5 
06-111-0005 California Oak View Ventura 1983 33.1 37.6 
1984 45.1 
1985 41.8 
1986 32.5 
1987 35.6 
06-111-1101 California Piru Ventura 1979 65.3 64.3 
1980 63.3 
06-111-3001 California El Rio Ventura 1979 79.3 63.5 
1980 63 
1981 70.2 
1982 47.2 
1983 45.7 
1984 65.6 
1985 68.8 
1986 64 
1987 60 
1988 61.5 
1989 67.5 
1990 68.6 
1991 64.4 
06-113-4001 California Dunnigan Yolo 1979 48.2 44.2 
1980 55.9 
1981 48.8 
1982 44.5 
1983 33.2 
1984 43 
1985 42.8 
1986 39 
1987 43.7 
1988 49.8 
1989 46.1 
1990 44.9 
1991 35.2 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table B-1. Average Annual Concentrations of TSP (g/m3) from Rural, Agricultural Monitoring Sites in the 
Western United States (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 B-7 September 2004 
Monitoring Site g/m3 
Site ID State City County Year 
Annual 
Average 
Overall 
Average 
06-115-0002 California Smartsville Yuba 1980 38.3 26.6 
1983 14.8 
16-001-0001 Idaho Boise Ada 1972 39.3 44.0 
1973 52.3 
1974 61.3 
1975 41.2 
1976 45.3 
1977 58.9 
1978 50.4 
1979 49.4 
1980 38.3 
1981 42.4 
1982 37.2 
1983 32.4 
1984 38.7 
1985 49.4 
1986 45.2 
1987 46.2 
1988 39.2 
1989 44.4 
1990 38.1 
1991 29.9 
16-005-1003 Idaho Pocatello Bannock 1970 87.8 67.5 
1971 55.9 
1972 58.9 
16-011-0001 Idaho Grandview Bingham 1971 49.3 49.3 
16-029-0001 Idaho Soda Springs Caribou 1971 69.5 69.5 
16-029-0002 Idaho Conda Caribou 1971 33.6 38.1 
1972 36.3 
1973 43.1 
1976 61.7 
1977 57.7 
1978 38.1 
1979 26.7 
1980 37.6 
1981 45.8 
1982 34.8 
1983 27.9 
1984 29 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table B-1. Average Annual Concentrations of TSP (g/m3) from Rural, Agricultural Monitoring Sites in the 
Western United States (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 B-8 September 2004 
Monitoring Site g/m3 
Site ID State City County Year 
Annual 
Average 
Overall 
Average 
1985 36.3 
1986 25.3 
1987 30 
1988 45.3 
16-053-0001 Idaho Jerome Jerome 1975 57.9 47.0 
1976 41.9 
1977 65.8 
1978 29.6 
1979 35.3 
1980 48.9 
1981 49.4 
16-055-1002 Idaho Coeur D'Alene Kootenai 1970 49.1 51.5 
1971 43.3 
1972 45.9 
1973 69 
1977 51.8 
1978 44.3 
1979 45.2 
1980 63.6 
16-077-0005 Idaho Pocatello Power 1970 164.9 118.0 
1971 71.1 
16-083-0003 Idaho Twin Falls Twin Falls 1986 49.7 47.3 
1987 48.3 
1988 44 
16-083-0004 Idaho Hansen Twin Falls 1989 32 38.2 
1990 39.2 
1991 41.2 
1992 40.2 
16-083-1001 Idaho Twin Falls Twin Falls 1971 49.5 44.7 
1972 45.6 
1973 38.9 
32-003-1003 Nevada Moapa Clark 1972 61.2 61.2 
32-031-1004 Nevada Sparks Washoe 1974 65.8 54.2 
1975 48.1 
1976 43.1 
1977 45 
1978 46.3 
1979 82.9 
1980 70.7 
1981 53.7 
1982 43.1 
1983 41.9 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table B-1. Average Annual Concentrations of TSP (g/m3) from Rural, Agricultural Monitoring Sites in the 
Western United States (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 B-9 September 2004 
Monitoring Site g/m3 
Site ID State City County Year 
Annual 
Average 
Overall 
Average 
1984 53.3 
1985 56.5 
32-031-2003 Nevada Wadsworth Washoe 1973 39 41.4 
1974 39.2 
1975 45.9 
35-006-0007 New Mexico Bluewater Cibola 1981 91.3 75.2 
1982 59 
35-013-0004 New Mexico Sunland Park Dona Ana 1973 57.4 80.4 
1974 65.5 
1975 63.1 
1976 80.7 
1977 76.3 
1978 91.1 
1979 81.5 
1980 82.7 
1981 97.5 
1982 84.1 
1983 77.6 
1984 77.9 
1985 71.5 
1986 74.5 
1987 92.9 
1988 103.3 
1989 90 
35-013-0006 New Mexico Afton Dona Ana 1973 75.1 44.9 
1974 28.6 
1975 30.9 
35-013-0016 New Mexico Anthony Dona Ana 1988 132.3 137.5 
1989 142.6 
35-017-0002 New Mexico Hurley Grant 1973 115.9 84.8 
1974 49.8 
1975 88.7 
35-045-0013 New Mexico La Plata San Juan 1973 33.9 33.5 
1974 34.2 
1975 32.4 
35-045-0014 New Mexico Kirtland San Juan 1974 39 43.9 
1975 26.3 
1976 72 
1977 47.2 
1978 47.1 
1979 60.8 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table B-1. Average Annual Concentrations of TSP (g/m3) from Rural, Agricultural Monitoring Sites in the 
Western United States (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 B-10 September 2004 
Monitoring Site g/m3 
Site ID State City County Year 
Annual 
Average 
Overall 
Average 
1980 57.8 
1981 46.1 
1982 40.1 
1983 29.9 
1984 40.9 
1985 39 
1987 31.6 
1988 36.1 
35-045-0015 New Mexico San Juan 1974 35.6 28.9 
1975 22.1 
35-045-0021 New Mexico None San Juan 1977 36.3 36.3 
35-061-0007 New Mexico Bluewater Valencia 1977 64.5 70.9 
1978 64.5 
1979 73.4 
1980 72.5 
1981 79.5 
41-059-1001 Oregon Pendleton Umatilla 1972 35.5 40.4 
1973 39.4 
1974 65.6 
1975 30.3 
1976 31.4 
49-015-0002 Utah Huntington Emery 1975 23.6 29.6 
1976 27.8 
1977 34.3 
1978 32.8 
49-027-0002 Utah Delta Millard 1979 41 41.0 
53-039-0002 Washington Bingen Klickitat 1975 50.3 56.2 
1976 59.8 
1977 58 
1978 56.8 
53-071-1001 Washington Wallula 
Junction Walla Walla 1983 48.7 65.6 
1984 59.7 
1985 56.1 
1986 51.2 
1987 71 
1988 84.8 
1989 70.7 
1990 80.5 
1991 67.8 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table B-1. Average Annual Concentrations of TSP (g/m3) from Rural, Agricultural Monitoring Sites in the 
Western United States (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 B-11 September 2004 
Monitoring Site g/m3 
Site ID State City County Year 
Annual 
Average 
Overall 
Average 
53-075-0002 Washington Pullman Whitman 1975 22.6 37.6 
1976 41.8 
1977 48.3 
53-077-0003 Washington Sunnyside Yakima 1982 61.9 61.7 
1983 56.5 
1984 53.3 
1985 56.2 
1986 54.2 
1987 69.5 
1988 60.2 
1989 61.1 
1990 70.6 
1991 73.6 
Source: DTN: MO0210SPATSP01.023 (DIRS 160426) (note that site ID numbers are not presented with leading 
zeros or dashes in the database). 
TSP=total suspended particles 

ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 B-12 September 2004 
Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table B-2. Average Concentration of TSP (mg/m3) at Rural, Agricultural Monitoring Sites in the Western United States 
Monitoring Site Inches 
EPA Site ID State City County 
x 
Snowfall 
x 
Precipitation 
Weather 
Station 
x TSP 
(mg/m3) N Years Comments 
04-007-0003 Arizona Miami Gila 2.9 19.3 25512 0.050 2 Duplicate with 04-007-1902 
04-007-1902 Arizona Miami Gila 2.9 19.3 25512 0.030 8 Selected 
04-013-0008 Arizona Guadalupe Maricopa 0.0 8.9 28499 0.131 4 Has atypical values due to updraft 
04-019-0006 Arizona Tucson Pima 0.0 13.9 28795 0.133 1 Duplicate with 04-019-0010 
04-019-0009 Arizona Tucson Pima 0.0 13.9 28795 0.081 4 Near power plant substation 
04-019-0010 Arizona Tucson Pima 0.0 13.9 28795 0.089 2 Selected 
06-013-1002 California Bethel Island Contra Costa 0.0 12.7 45232 0.041 6 Selected 
06-019-1002 California Five Points Fresno 0.2 6.6 43083 0.078 13 Selected 
06-019-3001 California Parlier Fresno 0.1 10.9 43257 0.094 7 Duplicate with 06-031-1002 
06-027-0002 California Bishop Inyo 8.0 5.3 40822 0.025 8 Selected 
06-027-0011 California Olancha Inyo 4.2 6.7 43710 0.023 3 Duplicate with 06-027-0002 
06-031-0002 California Corcoran Kings 0.1 7.2 42012 0.120 4 Duplicate with 06-031-1002 
06-031-1002 California Kettleman City Kings 0.1 7.2 42012 0.086 9 Selected 
06-033-0002 California Kelseyville Lake 0.5 29.1 44701 0.034 8 Precipitation >20 in. 
06-033-0003 California Upper Lake Lake 0.5 29.1 44701 0.019 4 Precipitation >20 in. 
06-049-1001 California Cedarville Modoc 32.6 13.1 41614 0.017 6 Snowfall > 20 in. 
06-061-0001 California Auburn Placer 1.2 35.3 40383 0.040 5 Precipitation >20 in. 
06-071-1101 California Twentynine 
Palms 
San Bernardino 1.0 4.1 49099 0.049 11 Selected 
06-083-1011 California Jalama Santa Barbara 0.0 14.6 45064 0.045 7 Selected 
06-083-1012 California Concepcion Santa Barbara 0.0 14.6 45064 0.043 7 Duplicate with 06-083-1011 
06-083-1015 California Gaviota Santa Barbara 0.0 14.6 45064 0.024 6 Duplicate with 06-083-1011 
06-083-1016 California Gaviota Santa Barbara 0.0 14.6 45064 0.025 6 Duplicate with 06-083-1011 
06-083-1017 California Gaviota Santa Barbara 0.0 14.6 45064 0.039 7 Duplicate with 06-083-1011 
06-083-1019 California Gaviota Santa Barbara 0.0 14.6 45064 0.030 7 Duplicate with 06-083-1011 
06-083-1020 California Isla Vista Santa Barbara 0.0 17.8 47902 0.043 6 Duplicate with 06-083-1011 
06-083-1030 California Concepcion Santa Barbara 0.0 14.6 45064 0.038 6 Duplicate with 06-083-1011 

Table B-2. Average Concentration of TSP (mg/m3) at Rural, Agricultural Monitoring Sites in the Western United States (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 B-13 September 2004 
Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Monitoring Site Inches 
EPA Site ID State City County 
x 
Snowfall 
x 
Precipitation 
Weather 
Station 
x TSP 
(mg/m3) N Years Comments 
06-083-4003 California Vandenburg AFB Santa Barbara 0.0 14.6 45064 0.031 7 Duplicate with 06-083-1011 
06-083-5001 California Vandenburg AFB Santa Barbara 0.0 12.6 47946 0.037 3 Duplicate with 06-083-1011 
06-089-1002 California Burney Shasta 50.6 27.5 41214 0.034 2 Precipitation >20 in. 
06-103-1001 California Los Molinos Tehama 2.3 22.8 47292 0.047 8 Precipitation >20 in. 
06-111-0004 California Piru Ventura 0.0 17.0 46940 0.047 7 Duplicate with 06-111-3001 
06-111-0005 California Oak View Ventura 0.1 21.2 46399 0.038 5 Precipitation >20 in. 
06-111-1101 California Piru Ventura 0.0 17.0 46940 0.064 2 Duplicate with 06-111-3001 
06-111-3001 California El Rio Ventura 0.1 14.4 46569 0.064 13 Selected 
06-113-4001 California Dunnigan Yolo 0.1 18.6 49781 0.044 13 Selected 
06-115-0002 California Smartsville Yuba 10.2 53.2 43573 0.027 2 Precipitation >20 in. 
16-001-0001 Idaho Boise Ada 20.9 11.9 101022 0.044 20 Snowfall > 20 in. 
16-005-1003 Idaho Pocatello Bannock 41.8 11.8 107211 0.068 3 Snowfall > 20 in. 
16-011-0001 Idaho Grandview Bingham 22.4 11.4 103297 0.049 1 Snowfall > 20 in. 
16-029-0001 Idaho Soda Springs Caribou 43.8 16.1 108535 0.070 1 Snowfall > 20 in. 
16-029-0002 Idaho Conda Caribou 95.0 22.1 104230 0.038 16 Precipitation >20 in. 
16-053-0001 Idaho Jerome Jerome 23.2 10.3 104670 0.047 7 Snowfall > 20 in. 
16-055-1002 Idaho Coeur D'Alene Kootenai 51.3 25.4 101956 0.052 8 Precipitation >20 in. 
16-077-0005 Idaho Pocatello Power 41.8 11.8 107211 0.118 2 Snowfall > 20 in. 
16-083-0003 Idaho Twin Falls Twin Falls 28.2 10.8 109303 0.047 3 Snowfall > 20 in. 
16-083-0004 Idaho Hansen Twin Falls 28.2 10.8 109303 0.038 4 Snowfall > 20 in. 
16-083-1001 Idaho Twin Falls Twin Falls 28.2 10.8 109303 0.045 3 Snowfall > 20 in. 
32-003-1003 Nevada Moapa Clark 0.4 4.1 265846 0.061 1 Selected 
32-031-1004 Nevada Sparks Washoe 6.9 8.1 267697 0.054 12 Selected 
32-031-2003 Nevada Wadsworth Washoe 0.3 5.7 268838 0.041 3 Duplicate with 32-031-1004 
35-013-0004 New Mexico Sunland Park Dona Ana 4.5 9.4 298535 0.080 17 Selected 
35-013-0006 New Mexico Afton Dona Ana 4.5 9.4 298535 0.045 3 Duplicate with 35-013-0004 
35-013-0016 New Mexico Anthony Dona Ana 4.5 9.4 298535 0.137 2 Duplicate with 35-013-0004 
35-017-0002 New Mexico Hurley Grant 10.0 15.8 293265 0.085 3 Selected 

Table B-2. Average Concentration of TSP (mg/m3) at Rural, Agricultural Monitoring Sites in the Western United States (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 B-14 September 2004 
Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Monitoring Site Inches 
EPA Site ID State City County 
x 
Snowfall 
x 
Precipitation 
Weather 
Station 
x TSP 
(mg/m3) N Years Comments 
35-045-0013 New Mexico La Plata San Juan 7.8 8.8 293134 0.034 3 Duplicate with 35-045-0014 
35-045-0014 New Mexico Kirtland San Juan 11.5 8.1 293340 0.044 14 Selected 
35-045-0015 New Mexico San Juan 16.4 10.1 290692 0.029 3 Duplicate with 35-045-0014 
35-045-0021 New Mexico San Juan 7.8 8.8 293134 0.036 1 Duplicate with 35-045-0014 
35-061-0007 
35-006-0007 
New Mexico Bluewater Valencia/Cibola 14.8 10.8 293682 0.071 6 Selected. Data from 2 sites at 
same location were combined. 
41-059-1001 Oregon Pendleton Umatilla 17.1 12.2 356546 0.040 5 Selected 
49-015-0002 Utah Huntington Emery 17.8 7.7 421214 0.030 4 Selected 
49-015-0003 Utah Emery 17.8 7.7 421214 0.017 4 Duplicate with 49-015-0002 
49-027-0002 Utah Delta Millard 25.2 7.8 422090 0.041 1 Snowfall > 20 in. 
53-039-0002 Washington Bingen Klickitat 19.8 13.7 451968 0.056 4 Selected 
53-071-1001 Washington Wallula Junction Walla Walla 7.7 10.1 453883 0.066 9 Selected 
53-075-0002 Washington Pullman Whitman 28.3 21.5 456789 0.038 3 Precipitation >20 in. 
53-077-0003 Washington Sunnyside Yakima 11.5 7.0 458207 0.062 10 Selected 
Source: DTN: MO0210SPATSP01.023 (DIRS 160426); NCDC 1998 (DIRS 135900; DIRS 125325). 
EPA=U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; ID=identification; N= Number of years; x TSP= average of annual average total suspended particle concentrations 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 September 2004 
APPENDIX C 
INFLUENCE OF CLIMATE CHANGE 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 September 2004 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 C-1 September 2004 
APPENDIX C 
INFLUENCE OF CLIMATE CHANGE 
This appendix documents a comparison of TSP concentrations in areas with lower and higher 
amounts of precipitation and snowfall to determine whether separate distributions of mass 
loading should be used for the present-day and future climatic conditions predicted to occur in 
the Yucca Mountain region over the next 10,000 years. 
Average annual precipitation at Yucca Mountain currently is approximately 46 in. 
(CRWMS M&O 1999 [DIRS 102877], Appendix A) and snowfall is rare. It is predicted that the 
coolest, wettest conditions during the next 10,000 years will be consistent with that currently 
found in parts of eastern Washington. Analogue weather stations for the coolest, wettest 
conditions are Spokane (average annual precipitation = 16.2 in., average annual 
snowfall = 42.1 in.), Rosalia (precipitation = 18.1 in., snowfall = 24.3 in.), and St. Johns 
(precipitation = 17.1 in., snowfall =25.8 in.) (BSC 2004 [DIRS 170002], Table 6-1). Climate data 
are from National Climatic Data Center reports (NCDC 1998 [DIRS 135900; DIRS 125325]). 
To determine whether mass loading may differ due to a change in climate, average annual 
concentrations of TSP measured at rural, agricultural sites in the western United States were 
compared among sites with different amounts of precipitation and snowfall. The data used in 
this comparison were obtained from the EPA AirData database (DTN MO0210SPATSP01.023 
[DIRS 160426]) and the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC 1988 [DIRS 135900; DIRS 
125325]) and are listed in Tables B-1 and B-2. See Section 6.1.2 for a description of how the 
data were obtained and processed. See Table B-2 for a description of each site. Because the 
sites have comparable land uses and settings, sources of resuspended particulate matter should be 
similar among sites. 
To evaluate the influence of precipitation on concentrations of resuspended particles, the average 
TSP for sites with less than 10, 10 to 20, and more than 20 in. of precipitation per year was 
calculated (Table C-1). For this comparison, 25 duplicate sites within a county and 2 sites with 
conditions that may not be typical for rural agricultural settings were deleted from consideration 
(see Section 6.1.2). To evaluate the influence of snowfall, the average TSP for sites with less 
than 10, 1020, and more than 20 in. of snowfall per year was calculated (Table C-2). To 
eliminate the influence of high precipitation, the 10 sites listed in Table C-1 that have more 
than 20 in. of precipitation were not included in this analysis. 
Average TSP concentrations differed little between 11 sites with less than 10 in. of precipitation 
(average = 0.055, SD = 0.020) and 21 sites with 10 to 20 in. (average = 0.056, SD = 0.023). Ten 
sites with more than 20 in. of precipitation per year had much lower concentrations 
(average =0.037, SD = 0.009). There was little difference in TSP concentrations among 14 sites 
with less than 10 in. of snowfall (average = 0.058, SD = 0.020), 7 sites with 10 to 20 in. of 
snowfall (average = 0.055, SD = 0.019), and 11 sites with more than 20 in. of snowfall 
(average = 0.053, SD = 0.026). 
The conclusion of this analysis is that rural agricultural sites with less than 20 in. of precipitation 
and less than approximately 45 in. of snowfall have similar concentrations of resuspended 
particles. Therefore, separate distributions of mass loading are not required for present-day and 
future climatic states predicted to occur in the Yucca Mountain region during the next 10,000 
years.

ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 C-2 September 2004 
Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table C-1. Average Annual Snowfall (in.), Precipitation (in.), and TSP (mg/m3) at Rural, Agricultural Sites in the Western United States with Less 
Than 10, 10-20, and More Than 20 in. of Precipitation 
<10 in. Precipitation 10-20 in. Precipitation >20 in. Precipitation 
EPA Site ID Snow Precip TSP EPA Site ID Snow Precip TSP EPA Site ID Snow Precip TSP 
06-071-1101 1.0 4.1 0.049 53-071-1001 7.7 10.1 0.066 06-111-0005 0.1 21.2 0.038 
32-003-1003 0.4 4.1 0.061 16-053-0001 23.2 10.3 0.047 53-075-0002 28.3 21.5 0.038 
06-027-0002 8.0 5.3 0.025 35-061-0007 14.8 10.8 0.071 16-029-0002 95.0 22.1 0.038 
06-019-1002 0.2 6.6 0.078 16-083-0003 28.2 10.8 0.047 06-103-1001 2.3 22.8 0.047 
53-077-0003 11.5 7.0 0.062 16-083-0004 28.2 10.8 0.038 16-055-1002 51.3 25.4 0.052 
06-031-1002 0.1 7.2 0.086 16-083-1001 28.2 10.8 0.045 06-089-1002 50.6 27.5 0.034 
49-015-0002 17.8 7.7 0.030 16-011-0001 22.4 11.4 0.049 06-033-0002 0.5 29.1 0.034 
49-027-0002 25.2 7.8 0.041 16-005-1003 41.8 11.8 0.068 06-033-0003 0.5 29.1 0.019 
32-031-1004 6.9 8.1 0.054 16-077-0005 41.8 11.8 0.118 06-061-0001 1.2 35.3 0.040 
35-045-0014 11.5 8.1 0.044 16-001-0001 20.9 11.9 0.044 06-115-0002 10.2 53.2 0.027 
35-013-0004 4.5 9.4 0.080 41-059-1001 17.1 12.2 0.040 N = 10 
N = 11 06-013-1002 0.0 12.7 0.041 x 
= 0.037 
x = 0.055 06-049-1001 32.6 13.1 0.017 SD = 0.009 
SD = 0.020 53-039-0002 19.8 13.7 0.056 
04-019-0010 0.0 13.9 0.089 
06-111-3001 0.1 14.4 0.064 
06-083-1012 0.0 14.6 0.043 
35-017-0002 10.0 15.8 0.085 
16-029-0001 43.8 16.1 0.070 
06-113-4001 0.1 18.6 0.044 
04-007-1902 2.9 19.3 0.030 
N = 21 
x = 0.056 
SD = 0.023 
Source: DTN: MO0210SPATSP01.023 (DIRS 160426); NCDC 1998 (DIRS 135900; DIRS 125325). See Table B-2 for list of data. 
EPA=U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; ID=identification; N=number of sites; SD=standard deviation; TSP=average total suspended particle 
concentration 

ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 C-3 September 2004 
Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table C-2. Average Annual Snowfall (in.), Precipitation (in.), and TSP (mg/m3) at Rural, Agricultural Sites in the Western United States with Less 
Than 10, 10-20, and More Than 20 in. of Snowfall 
<10 in. Snowfall 10-20 in. Snowfall >20 in. Snowfall 
EPA Site ID Snow Precip TSP EPA Site ID Snow Precip TSP EPA Site ID Snow Precip TSP 
06-013-1002 0.0 12.7 0.041 35-017-0002 10.0 15.8 0.085 16-001-0001 20.9 11.9 0.044 
04-019-0010 0.0 13.9 0.089 35-045-0014 11.5 8.1 0.044 16-011-0001 22.4 11.4 0.049 
06-083-1012 0.0 14.6 0.043 53-077-0003 11.5 7.0 0.062 16-053-0001 23.2 10.3 0.047 
06-031-1002 0.1 7.2 0.086 35-061-0007 14.8 10.8 0.071 49-027-0002 25.2 7.8 0.041 
06-111-3001 0.1 14.4 0.064 41-059-1001 17.1 12.2 0.040 16-083-0003 28.2 10.8 0.047 
06-113-4001 0.1 18.6 0.044 49-015-0002 17.8 7.7 0.030 16-083-0004 28.2 10.8 0.038 
06-019-1002 0.2 6.6 0.078 53-039-0002 19.8 13.7 0.056 16-083-1001 28.2 10.8 0.045 
32-003-1003 0.4 4.1 0.061 N = 7 06-049-1001 32.6 13.1 0.017 
06-071-1101 1.0 4.1 0.049 x = 0.055 16-005-1003 41.8 11.8 0.068 
04-007-1902 2.9 19.3 0.030 SD = 0.019 16-077-0005 41.8 11.8 0.118 
35-013-0004 4.5 9.4 0.080 16-029-0001 43.8 16.1 0.070 
32-031-1004 6.9 8.1 0.054 N = 11 
53-071-1001 7.7 10.1 0.066 x = 0.053 
06-027-0002 8.0 5.3 0.025 SD = 0.026 
N = 14 
x = 0.058 
SD = 0.020 
Source: DTN: MO0210SPATSP01.023 (DIRS 160426);]NCDC 1998 (DIRS 135900; DIRS 125325). See Table B-2 for list of data. 
EPA=U.S. Environmental Protection Agency; ID=identification; N= number of sites; SD=standard deviation; TSP= average total suspended particle 
concentration 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 C-4 September 2004 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 September 2004 
APPENDIX D 
TSP CONCENTRATIONSMOUNT ST. HELENS, 1979-1982 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 September 2004 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 D-1 September 2004 
APPENDIX D 
TSP CONCENTRATIONSMOUNT ST. HELENS, 1979-1982 
Table D-1 contains measurements of 24-hour concentrations of TSP taken at Clarkston, 
Richland, and Longview, Washington, during 1979 through 1982. Table D-2 contain TSP 
measurements for the same period from Spokane, Vancouver, and Yakima, Washington. 
The data were obtained from the EPA AirData database (DTN: MO0008SPATSP00.013 
[DIRS 151750]). The running average is the average of the measurements for a day and the four 
previous measurements. 
Table D-1. Twenty-Four-Hour and Running Average Concentrations (mg/m3) of TSP at Clarkston, 
Richland, and Longview, Washington, 1979-1982 
Clarkston (53-003-0003) Richland (53-005-1001) Longview (53-015-0008) 
Date TSP x a Date TSP x a Date TSP x a 
9/25/79 0.221 1/3/79 0.072 1/15/79 0.116 
9/27/79 0.212 1/9/79 0.059 1/21/79 0.074 
9/30/79 0.096 1/15/79 0.043 1/27/79 0.074 
10/6/79 0.172 1/21/79 0.046 2/2/79 0.128 
10/9/79 0.155 0.1712 1/27/79 0.066 0.0572 2/8/79 0.054 0.089 
10/12/79 0.203 0.1676 2/2/79 0.102 0.0632 2/14/79 0.089 0.084 
10/16/79 0.066 0.1384 2/8/79 0.037 0.0588 2/22/79 0.020 0.073 
10/18/79 0.063 0.1318 2/14/79 0.043 0.0588 2/26/79 0.040 0.066 
10/21/79 0.023 0.102 2/20/79 0.042 0.058 3/4/79 0.032 0.047 
10/24/79 0.047 0.0804 2/26/79 0.031 0.051 3/10/79 0.100 0.056 
10/27/79 0.076 0.055 3/4/79 0.03 0.0366 3/16/79 0.062 0.051 
10/30/79 0.078 0.0574 3/10/79 0.067 0.0426 3/22/79 0.092 0.065 
11/1/79 0.079 0.0606 3/16/79 0.043 0.0426 3/28/79 0.037 0.065 
11/6/79 0.069 0.0698 3/22/79 0.1 0.0542 4/3/79 0.050 0.068 
11/8/79 0.107 0.0818 3/28/79 0.038 0.0556 4/9/79 0.023 0.053 
11/11/79 0.083 0.0832 4/3/79 0.066 0.0628 4/15/79 0.025 0.045 
11/14/79 0.074 0.0824 4/9/79 0.036 0.0566 4/21/79 0.041 0.035 
11/17/79 0.074 0.0814 4/15/79 0.053 0.0586 4/27/79 0.057 0.039 
11/20/79 0.087 0.085 4/25/79 0.03 0.0446 5/3/79 0.055 0.040 
11/23/79 0.044 0.0724 4/27/79 0.069 0.0508 5/9/79 0.029 0.041 
11/28/79 0.058 0.0674 5/3/79 0.072 0.052 5/15/79 0.021 0.041 
12/2/79 0.069 0.0664 5/9/79 0.059 0.0566 5/21/79 0.051 0.043 
12/8/79 0.078 0.0672 5/15/79 0.101 0.0662 5/27/79 0.029 0.037 
12/11/79 0.108 0.0714 5/21/79 0.097 0.0796 6/2/79 0.044 0.035 
12/13/79 0.101 0.0828 5/27/79 0.061 0.078 6/8/79 0.038 0.037 
12/17/79 0.047 0.0806 6/2/79 0.079 0.0794 6/14/79 0.039 0.040 
12/20/79 0.121 0.091 6/8/79 0.093 0.0862 6/20/79 0.008 0.032 
12/23/79 0.079 0.0912 6/14/79 0.065 0.079 6/26/79 0.037 0.033 
12/27/79 0.064 0.0824 6/20/79 0.043 0.0682 7/2/79 0.027 0.030 
12/29/79 0.059 0.074 6/26/79 0.333 0.1226 7/8/79 0.025 0.027 
1/4/80 0.065 0.0776 7/2/79 0.063 0.1194 7/14/79 0.025 0.024 
1/8/80 0.033 0.06 7/8/79 0.055 0.1118 7/20/79 0.047 0.032 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table D-1. Twenty-Four-Hour and Running Average Concentrations (mg/m3) of TSP at Clarkston, 
Richland, and Longview, Washington, 1979-1982 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 D-2 September 2004 
Clarkston (53-003-0003) Richland (53-005-1001) Longview (53-015-0008) 
Date TSP x a Date TSP x a Date TSP x a 
1/13/80 0.062 0.0566 7/14/79 0.089 0.1166 7/26/79 0.031 0.031 
1/15/80 0.095 0.0628 7/20/79 0.126 0.1332 8/1/79 0.024 0.030 
1/17/80 0.068 0.0646 7/26/79 0.25 0.1166 8/7/79 0.034 0.032 
1/19/80 0.157 0.083 8/1/79 0.116 0.1272 8/13/79 0.033 0.034 
1/22/80 0.097 0.0958 8/7/79 0.141 0.1444 8/19/79 0.013 0.027 
1/24/80 0.093 0.102 8/13/79 0.191 0.1648 8/25/79 0.023 0.025 
1/28/80 0.082 0.0994 8/19/79 0.082 0.156 8/31/79 0.026 0.026 
1/30/80 0.145 0.1148 8/25/79 0.072 0.1204 9/6/79 0.040 0.027 
2/3/80 0.086 0.1006 8/31/79 0.051 0.1074 9/12/79 0.049 0.030 
2/6/80 0.073 0.0958 9/6/79 0.068 0.0928 9/18/79 0.059 0.039 
2/9/80 0.083 0.0938 9/12/79 0.09 0.0726 9/24/79 0.072 0.049 
2/12/80 0.068 0.091 9/18/79 0.112 0.0786 9/30/79 0.038 0.052 
2/15/80 0.077 0.0774 9/24/79 0.116 0.0874 10/6/79 0.064 0.056 
2/20/80 0.08 0.0762 9/30/79 0.066 0.0904 10/12/79 0.098 0.066 
2/22/80 0.154 0.0924 10/6/79 0.143 0.1054 10/18/79 0.034 0.061 
2/26/80 0.071 0.09 10/12/79 0.146 0.1166 10/24/79 0.037 0.054 
2/28/80 0.058 0.088 10/18/79 0.041 0.1024 10/30/79 0.036 0.054 
3/1/80 0.093 0.0912 10/24/79 0.027 0.0846 11/5/79 0.027 0.046 
3/4/80 0.041 0.0834 10/30/79 0.037 0.0788 11/11/79 0.046 0.036 
3/6/80 0.059 0.0644 11/5/79 0.02 0.0542 11/29/79 0.069 0.043 
3/28/80 0.082 0.0666 11/14/79 0.031 0.0312 12/5/79 0.062 0.048 
4/1/80 0.073 0.0696 11/17/79 0.031 0.0292 12/11/79 0.034 0.048 
4/3/80 0.056 0.0622 11/23/79 0.024 0.0286 12/17/79 0.052 0.053 
4/6/80 0.047 0.0634 11/29/79 0.038 0.0288 12/23/79 0.026 0.049 
4/8/80 0.068 0.0652 12/5/79 0.009 0.0266 12/29/79 0.160 0.067 
4/12/80 0.094 0.0676 12/19/79 0.037 0.0278 1/16/80 0.066 0.068 
4/15/80 0.071 0.0672 12/23/79 0.02 0.0256 1/22/80 0.187 0.098 
4/17/80 0.144 0.0848 12/29/79 0.018 0.0244 1/28/80 0.222 0.132 
4/21/80 0.054 0.0862 1/4/80 0.023 0.0214 2/3/80 0.080 0.143 
4/24/80 0.129 0.0984 1/16/80 0.005 0.0206 2/9/80 0.157 0.142 
4/27/80 0.113 0.1022 1/18/80 0.022 0.0176 2/15/80 0.085 0.146 
4/30/80 0.037 0.0954 1/22/80 0.049 0.0234 2/21/80 0.075 0.124 
5/3/80 0.081 0.0828 1/31/80 0.038 0.0274 2/27/80 0.052 0.090 
5/6/80 0.043 0.0806 2/3/80 0.039 0.0306 3/4/80 0.072 0.088 
5/9/80 0.029 0.0606 2/9/80 0.024 0.0344 3/16/80 0.036 0.064 
5/13/80 0.061 0.0502 2/15/80 0.051 0.0402 3/22/80 0.048 0.057 
5/15/80 0.032 0.0492 2/21/80 0.025 0.0354 3/28/80 0.061 0.054 
5/18/80 0.678 0.1686 2/27/80 0.017 0.0312 4/3/80 0.107 0.065 
5/21/80 0.601 0.2802 3/4/80 0.024 0.0282 4/9/80 0.026 0.056 
5/24/80 0.423 0.359 3/13/80 0.028 0.029 4/15/80 0.035 0.055 
6/2/80 0.089 0.3646 3/16/80 0.022 0.0232 4/21/80 0.037 0.053 
6/20/80 0.149 0.388 3/22/80 0.095 0.0372 4/27/80 0.066 0.054 
6/24/80 0.062 0.2648 3/28/80 0.033 0.0404 5/3/80 0.050 0.043 
6/26/80 0.044 0.1534 4/3/80 0.057 0.047 5/9/80 0.026 0.043 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table D-1. Twenty-Four-Hour and Running Average Concentrations (mg/m3) of TSP at Clarkston, 
Richland, and Longview, Washington, 1979-1982 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 D-3 September 2004 
Clarkston (53-003-0003) Richland (53-005-1001) Longview (53-015-0008) 
Date TSP x a Date TSP x a Date TSP x a 
6/29/80 0.094 0.0876 4/9/80 0.202 0.0818 5/15/80 0.036 0.043 
7/2/80 0.076 0.085 4/21/80 0.017 0.0808 5/21/80 0.017 0.039 
7/14/80 0.05 0.0652 4/27/80 0.065 0.0748 5/27/80 1.420 0.310 
7/23/80 0.526 0.158 5/3/80 0.067 0.0816 6/2/80 0.526 0.405 
8/1/80 0.147 0.1786 5/9/80 0.023 0.0748 6/8/80 0.986 0.597 
8/4/80 0.089 0.1776 5/15/80 0.05 0.0444 6/14/80 0.071 0.604 
8/7/80 0.128 0.188 5/23/80 0.611 0.1632 6/26/80 0.168 0.634 
8/13/80 0.167 0.2114 5/29/80 0.099 0.17 7/2/80 0.143 0.379 
8/16/80 0.133 0.1328 6/2/80 0.083 0.1732 7/8/80 0.097 0.293 
8/19/80 0.054 0.1142 6/10/80 0.109 0.1904 7/14/80 0.053 0.106 
8/21/80 0.085 0.1134 6/14/80 0.049 0.1902 7/20/80 0.106 0.113 
8/25/80 0.102 0.1082 6/20/80 0.093 0.0866 7/26/80 0.067 0.093 
8/27/80 0.104 0.0956 6/26/80 0.074 0.0816 8/1/80 0.044 0.073 
8/31/80 0.039 0.0768 7/2/80 0.091 0.0832 8/7/80 0.181 0.090 
9/6/80 0.119 0.0898 7/8/80 0.133 0.088 8/13/80 0.046 0.089 
9/10/80 0.109 0.0946 7/14/80 0.15 0.1082 8/19/80 0.054 0.078 
9/12/80 0.106 0.0954 7/20/80 0.065 0.1026 8/25/80 0.048 0.075 
9/16/80 0.077 0.09 7/26/80 0.181 0.124 8/31/80 0.025 0.071 
9/18/80 0.087 0.0996 8/1/80 0.171 0.14 9/6/80 0.056 0.046 
9/22/80 0.076 0.091 8/7/80 0.077 0.1288 9/12/80 0.036 0.044 
9/24/80 0.091 0.0874 8/13/80 0.128 0.1244 9/18/80 0.055 0.044 
9/28/80 0.094 0.085 8/19/80 0.103 0.132 9/24/80 0.093 0.053 
9/30/80 0.144 0.0984 8/25/80 0.081 0.112 9/30/80 0.053 0.059 
10/7/80 0.18 0.117 9/6/80 0.091 0.096 10/6/80 0.062 0.060 
10/9/80 0.182 0.1382 9/12/80 0.071 0.0948 10/12/80 0.077 0.068 
10/12/80 0.105 0.141 9/18/80 0.085 0.0862 10/18/80 0.119 0.081 
10/15/80 0.055 0.1332 9/24/80 0.086 0.0828 10/24/80 0.118 0.086 
10/18/80 0.114 0.1272 9/30/80 0.076 0.0818 10/30/80 0.103 0.096 
10/21/80 0.114 0.114 10/7/80 0.146 0.0928 11/5/80 0.059 0.095 
10/24/80 0.13 0.1036 10/12/80 0.049 0.0884 11/11/80 0.078 0.095 
10/28/80 0.123 0.1072 10/18/80 0.094 0.0902 11/17/80 0.037 0.079 
10/30/80 0.148 0.1258 10/24/80 0.075 0.088 11/23/80 0.078 0.071 
11/2/80 0.063 0.1156 10/30/80 0.052 0.0832 11/29/80 0.026 0.056 
11/5/80 0.139 0.1206 11/5/80 0.033 0.0606 12/5/80 0.040 0.052 
11/7/80 0.049 0.1044 11/11/80 0.025 0.0558 12/11/80 0.088 0.054 
11/11/80 0.04 0.0878 11/17/80 0.037 0.0444 12/17/80 0.028 0.052 
11/13/80 0.082 0.0746 11/23/80 0.023 0.034 12/23/80 0.046 0.046 
11/17/80 0.143 0.0906 11/29/80 0.048 0.0332 12/29/80 0.055 0.051 
11/20/80 0.075 0.0778 12/5/80 0.019 0.0304 1/4/81 0.145 0.072 
11/23/80 0.052 0.0784 12/11/80 0.046 0.0346 1/10/81 0.182 0.091 
11/25/80 0.086 0.0876 12/17/80 0.013 0.0298 1/16/81 0.133 0.112 
11/29/80 0.048 0.0808 12/23/80 0.022 0.0296 1/22/81 0.053 0.114 
12/3/80 0.105 0.0732 12/29/80 0.028 0.0256 1/28/81 0.065 0.116 
12/9/80 0.133 0.0848 1/4/81 0.028 0.0274 2/3/81 0.110 0.109 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table D-1. Twenty-Four-Hour and Running Average Concentrations (mg/m3) of TSP at Clarkston, 
Richland, and Longview, Washington, 1979-1982 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 D-4 September 2004 
Clarkston (53-003-0003) Richland (53-005-1001) Longview (53-015-0008) 
Date TSP x a Date TSP x a Date TSP x a 
12/11/80 0.08 0.0904 1/10/81 0.015 0.0212 2/9/81 0.066 0.085 
12/14/80 0.102 0.0936 1/16/81 0.027 0.024 2/15/81 0.027 0.064 
12/18/80 0.036 0.0912 1/22/81 0.031 0.0258 2/21/81 0.106 0.075 
12/20/80 0.065 0.0832 1/28/81 0.009 0.022 2/27/81 0.103 0.082 
12/23/80 0.175 0.0916 2/3/81 0.024 0.0212 3/5/81 0.095 0.079 
12/29/80 0.081 0.0918 2/9/81 0.08 0.0342 3/11/81 0.066 0.079 
1/4/81 0.073 0.086 2/15/81 0.014 0.0316 3/17/81 0.065 0.087 
1/11/81 0.109 0.1006 2/21/81 0.024 0.0302 3/23/81 0.040 0.074 
1/16/81 0.072 0.102 2/27/81 0.024 0.0332 3/29/81 0.028 0.059 
1/22/81 0.08 0.083 3/5/81 0.023 0.033 4/4/81 0.052 0.050 
2/3/81 0.085 0.0838 3/11/81 0.086 0.0342 4/10/81 0.036 0.044 
2/9/81 0.047 0.0786 3/17/81 0.043 0.04 4/16/81 0.041 0.039 
2/15/81 0.055 0.0678 3/23/81 0.052 0.0456 4/22/81 0.021 0.036 
2/21/81 0.097 0.0728 3/29/81 0.073 0.0554 5/22/81 0.038 0.038 
2/27/81 0.118 0.0804 4/4/81 0.046 0.06 5/28/81 0.053 0.038 
3/5/81 0.059 0.0752 4/10/81 0.036 0.05 6/3/81 0.046 0.040 
3/11/81 0.123 0.0904 4/16/81 0.038 0.049 6/9/81 0.026 0.037 
3/17/81 0.046 0.0886 4/22/81 0.057 0.05 6/15/81 0.048 0.042 
3/23/81 0.053 0.0798 4/28/81 0.066 0.0486 6/21/81 0.021 0.039 
3/29/81 0.025 0.0612 5/4/81 0.052 0.0498 7/15/81 0.050 0.038 
4/10/81 0.053 0.06 5/10/81 0.072 0.057 7/21/81 0.018 0.033 
4/16/81 0.074 0.0502 5/16/81 0.037 0.0568 7/27/81 0.052 0.038 
4/22/81 0.055 0.052 5/22/81 0.046 0.0546 8/2/81 0.028 0.034 
4/28/81 0.066 0.0546 5/28/81 0.064 0.0542 8/8/81 0.071 0.044 
5/5/81 0.046 0.0588 6/3/81 0.065 0.0568 8/14/81 0.044 0.043 
5/10/81 0.033 0.0548 6/9/81 0.024 0.0472 8/20/81 0.034 0.046 
5/22/81 0.039 0.0478 6/15/81 0.046 0.049 8/26/81 0.048 0.045 
5/28/81 0.097 0.0562 6/21/81 0.041 0.048 9/1/81 0.019 0.043 
6/3/81 0.063 0.0556 6/27/81 0.061 0.0474 9/7/81 0.098 0.049 
6/9/81 0.028 0.052 7/3/81 0.111 0.0566 9/13/81 0.054 0.051 
6/15/81 0.053 0.056 7/9/81 0.064 0.0646 9/19/81 0.036 0.051 
6/21/81 0.032 0.0546 7/15/81 0.083 0.072 9/25/81 0.037 0.049 
6/27/81 0.078 0.0508 7/21/81 0.084 0.0806 10/1/81 0.053 0.056 
7/3/81 0.065 0.0512 7/27/81 0.08 0.0844 10/7/81 0.025 0.041 
7/9/81 0.058 0.0572 8/2/81 0.102 0.0826 10/13/81 0.062 0.043 
7/15/81 0.066 0.0598 8/8/81 0.107 0.0912 10/19/81 0.025 0.040 
7/21/81 0.092 0.0718 8/20/81 0.068 0.0882 10/25/81 0.076 0.048 
7/27/81 0.081 0.0724 8/23/81 0.098 0.091 10/31/81 0.083 0.054 
8/2/81 0.097 0.0788 8/26/81 0.099 0.0948 11/6/81 0.161 0.081 
8/8/81 0.111 0.0894 9/1/81 0.085 0.0914 11/12/81 0.038 0.077 
8/15/81 0.108 0.0978 9/7/81 0.077 0.0854 11/18/81 0.059 0.083 
8/20/81 0.123 0.104 9/13/81 0.094 0.0906 11/24/81 0.103 0.089 
8/26/81 0.139 0.1156 9/19/81 0.057 0.0824 12/6/81 0.041 0.080 
9/1/81 0.278 0.1518 9/25/81 0.04 0.0706 12/12/81 0.064 0.061 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table D-1. Twenty-Four-Hour and Running Average Concentrations (mg/m3) of TSP at Clarkston, 
Richland, and Longview, Washington, 1979-1982 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 D-5 September 2004 
Clarkston (53-003-0003) Richland (53-005-1001) Longview (53-015-0008) 
Date TSP x a Date TSP x a Date TSP x a 
9/7/81 0.126 0.1548 10/1/81 0.041 0.0618 12/18/81 0.048 0.063 
9/13/81 0.108 0.1548 10/7/81 0.02 0.0504 12/24/81 0.033 0.058 
9/19/81 0.191 0.1684 10/13/81 0.05 0.0416 12/30/81 0.059 0.049 
9/26/81 0.048 0.1502 10/19/81 0.066 0.0434 1/5/82 0.069 0.055 
10/1/81 0.083 0.1112 10/25/81 0.083 0.052 1/11/82 0.088 0.059 
10/8/81 0.056 0.0972 10/31/81 0.036 0.051 1/17/82 0.028 0.055 
10/14/81 0.121 0.0998 11/12/81 0.023 0.0516 1/23/82 0.024 0.054 
10/21/81 0.118 0.0852 11/18/81 0.011 0.0438 1/29/82 0.053 0.052 
10/25/81 0.159 0.1074 11/24/81 0.024 0.0354 2/4/82 0.156 0.070 
10/31/81 0.041 0.099 11/30/81 0.017 0.0222 2/10/82 0.122 0.077 
11/6/81 0.134 0.1146 12/6/81 0.012 0.0174 2/16/82 0.030 0.077 
11/12/81 0.044 0.0992 12/12/81 0.016 0.016 2/22/82 0.035 0.079 
11/18/81 0.032 0.082 12/24/81 0.032 0.0202 2/28/82 0.063 0.081 
11/24/81 0.047 0.0596 12/30/81 0.025 0.0204 3/6/82 0.058 0.062 
11/30/81 0.032 0.0578 1/5/82 0.033 0.0236 3/12/82 0.049 0.047 
12/6/81 0.127 0.0564 1/11/82 0.052 0.0316 3/18/82 0.086 0.058 
12/12/81 0.104 0.0684 1/17/82 0.012 0.0308 3/24/82 0.075 0.066 
12/19/81 0.048 0.0716 1/23/82 0.029 0.0302 4/5/82 0.026 0.059 
12/24/81 0.036 0.0694 1/29/82 0.019 0.029 4/11/82 0.031 0.053 
12/30/81 0.061 0.0752 2/4/82 0.032 0.0288 4/17/82 0.049 0.053 
1/5/82 0.069 0.0636 2/10/82 0.038 0.026 4/23/82 0.051 0.046 
1/11/82 0.067 0.0562 2/16/82 0.021 0.0278 4/29/82 0.056 0.043 
1/17/82 0.057 0.058 2/22/82 0.015 0.025 5/5/82 0.071 0.052 
1/23/82 0.031 0.057 2/28/82 0.02 0.0252 5/11/82 0.029 0.051 
2/4/82 0.07 0.0588 3/6/82 0.035 0.0258 5/17/82 0.029 0.047 
2/10/82 0.084 0.0618 3/12/82 0.067 0.0316 5/23/82 0.045 0.046 
2/17/82 0.081 0.0646 3/18/82 0.044 0.0362 5/29/82 0.064 0.048 
2/22/82 0.071 0.0674 3/24/82 0.066 0.0464 6/4/82 0.047 0.043 
2/28/82 0.065 0.0742 3/30/82 0.027 0.0478 6/10/82 0.064 0.050 
3/6/82 0.073 0.0748 4/5/82 0.023 0.0454 6/16/82 0.096 0.063 
3/12/82 0.095 0.077 4/11/82 0.016 0.0352 6/22/82 0.041 0.062 
4/18/82 0.09 0.0788 4/17/82 0.091 0.0446 6/28/82 0.025 0.055 
4/24/82 0.101 0.0848 4/23/82 0.083 0.048 7/4/82 0.031 0.051 
4/30/82 0.099 0.0916 4/29/82 0.04 0.0506 7/10/82 0.028 0.044 
5/6/82 0.104 0.0978 5/5/82 0.053 0.0566 7/16/82 0.029 0.031 
5/12/82 0.095 0.0978 5/11/82 0.057 0.0648 7/22/82 0.044 0.031 
5/17/82 0.064 0.0926 5/17/82 0.029 0.0524 7/28/82 0.044 0.035 
5/29/82 0.062 0.0848 5/23/82 0.053 0.0464 8/3/82 0.031 0.035 
6/10/82 0.072 0.0794 5/29/82 0.046 0.0476 8/9/82 0.023 0.034 
6/16/82 0.104 0.0794 6/4/82 0.096 0.0562 8/15/82 0.039 0.036 
6/22/82 0.059 0.0722 6/10/82 0.084 0.0616 8/21/82 0.049 0.037 
6/28/82 0.045 0.0684 6/16/82 0.062 0.0682 8/27/82 0.041 0.037 
7/16/82 0.036 0.0632 6/22/82 0.056 0.0688 9/2/82 0.068 0.044 
7/22/82 0.098 0.0684 7/10/82 0.054 0.0704 9/8/82 0.045 0.048 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table D-1. Twenty-Four-Hour and Running Average Concentrations (mg/m3) of TSP at Clarkston, 
Richland, and Longview, Washington, 1979-1982 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 D-6 September 2004 
Clarkston (53-003-0003) Richland (53-005-1001) Longview (53-015-0008) 
Date TSP x a Date TSP x a Date TSP x a 
7/28/82 0.075 0.0626 7/16/82 0.031 0.0574 9/14/82 0.051 0.051 
7/30/82 0.129 0.0766 7/22/82 0.063 0.0532 9/20/82 0.031 0.047 
8/3/82 0.04 0.0756 7/26/82 0.094 0.0596 9/26/82 0.038 0.047 
8/9/82 0.129 0.0942 7/28/82 0.087 0.0658 10/2/82 0.041 0.041 
8/15/82 0.034 0.0814 8/3/82 0.041 0.0632 10/8/82 0.048 0.042 
8/21/82 0.072 0.0808 8/9/82 0.146 0.0862 10/14/82 0.130 0.058 
8/27/82 0.16 0.087 8/15/82 0.031 0.0798 10/20/82 0.135 0.078 
9/8/82 0.135 0.106 8/21/82 0.077 0.0764 10/26/82 0.040 0.079 
9/14/82 0.036 0.0874 8/27/82 0.085 0.076 11/1/82 0.107 0.092 
9/20/82 0.036 0.0878 9/2/82 0.121 0.092 11/7/82 0.115 0.105 
9/26/82 0.018 0.077 9/8/82 0.073 0.0774 11/13/82 0.072 0.094 
10/2/82 0.076 0.0602 9/14/82 0.065 0.0842 11/19/82 0.054 0.078 
10/8/82 0.051 0.0434 9/20/82 0.014 0.0716 11/25/82 0.097 0.089 
10/14/82 0.122 0.0606 9/26/82 0.017 0.058 12/1/82 0.046 0.077 
10/20/82 0.108 0.075 10/2/82 0.041 0.042 12/7/82 0.065 0.067 
10/26/82 0.039 0.0792 10/8/82 0.034 0.0342 12/13/82 0.060 0.064 
11/1/82 0.053 0.0746 10/14/82 0.081 0.0374 12/19/82 0.046 0.063 
11/7/82 0.046 0.0736 10/20/82 0.087 0.052 12/25/82 0.050 0.053 
11/13/82 0.042 0.0576 10/26/82 0.032 0.055 12/31/82 0.139 0.072 
11/19/82 0.065 0.049 11/1/82 0.018 0.0504 
11/25/82 0.051 0.0514 11/7/82 0.011 0.0458 
12/1/82 0.057 0.0522 11/13/82 0.027 0.035 
12/7/82 0.034 0.0498 11/19/82 0.01 0.0196 
11/25/82 0.026 0.0184 
12/1/82 0.023 0.0194 
12/7/82 0.019 0.021 
12/13/82 0.024 0.0204 
12/19/82 0.011 0.0206 
12/25/82 0.033 0.022 
12/31/82 0.018 0.021 
Source: DTN: MO008SPATSP00.013 (DIRS 151750). 
a Running average of the measurement for a day and the four previous measurements 
TSP=total suspended particles 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 D-7 September 2004 
Table D-2. Twenty-Four-Hour and Running Average Concentrations (mg/m3) of TSP at Spokane, 
Vancouver, and Yakima, Washington, 1979-1982 
Spokane (53-063-0016) Vancouver (53-011-0006) Yakima (53-077-1006) 
Date TSP x a Date TSP x a Date TSP x a 
1/3/79 0.146 1/3/79 0.072 1/3/79 0.083 
1/9/79 0.122 1/9/79 0.025 1/9/79 0.103 
1/15/79 0.106 1/15/79 0.159 1/15/79 0.048 
1/21/79 0.055 1/21/79 0.041 1/21/79 0.026 
1/27/79 0.121 0.110 1/27/79 0.034 0.0662 1/27/79 0.117 0.075 
2/2/79 0.100 0.101 2/2/79 0.096 0.071 2/2/79 0.183 0.095 
2/8/79 0.044 0.085 2/8/79 0.016 0.0692 2/8/79 0.038 0.082 
2/14/79 0.210 0.106 2/14/79 0.048 0.047 2/14/79 0.048 0.082 
2/21/79 0.045 0.104 2/20/79 0.039 0.0466 2/21/79 0.022 0.082 
2/27/79 0.026 0.085 2/26/79 0.016 0.043 2/26/79 0.026 0.063 
3/4/79 0.028 0.071 3/4/79 0.019 0.0276 3/4/79 0.059 0.039 
3/10/79 0.233 0.108 3/10/79 0.067 0.0378 3/10/79 0.067 0.044 
3/16/79 0.060 0.078 3/16/79 0.031 0.0344 3/16/79 0.036 0.042 
3/23/79 0.285 0.126 3/22/79 0.094 0.0454 3/22/79 0.115 0.061 
3/28/79 0.093 0.140 3/28/79 0.039 0.05 3/28/79 0.057 0.067 
4/9/79 0.133 0.161 4/3/79 0.019 0.05 4/9/79 0.094 0.074 
4/15/79 0.082 0.131 4/9/79 0.047 0.046 4/15/79 0.027 0.066 
4/21/79 0.141 0.147 4/15/79 0.018 0.0434 5/5/79 0.045 0.068 
4/27/79 0.230 0.136 4/21/79 0.057 0.036 5/9/79 0.063 0.057 
5/3/79 0.188 0.155 4/27/79 0.075 0.0432 5/15/79 0.119 0.070 
5/9/79 0.140 0.156 5/3/79 0.055 0.0504 5/17/79 0.119 0.075 
5/15/79 0.210 0.182 5/9/79 0.025 0.046 5/21/79 0.098 0.089 
5/21/79 0.173 0.188 5/15/79 0.083 0.059 5/27/79 0.073 0.094 
5/27/79 0.054 0.153 5/21/79 0.089 0.0654 6/2/79 0.084 0.099 
6/8/79 0.126 0.141 5/27/79 0.03 0.0564 6/8/79 0.059 0.087 
6/14/79 0.126 0.138 6/2/79 0.108 0.067 6/14/79 0.048 0.072 
6/20/79 0.116 0.119 6/8/79 0.083 0.0786 6/20/79 0.043 0.061 
6/26/79 0.234 0.131 6/14/79 0.055 0.073 6/26/79 0.067 0.060 
7/2/79 0.089 0.138 6/20/79 0.053 0.0658 7/2/79 0.037 0.051 
7/8/79 0.129 0.139 6/26/79 0.083 0.0764 7/8/79 0.040 0.047 
7/14/79 0.125 0.139 7/2/79 0.046 0.064 7/14/79 0.039 0.045 
7/20/79 0.195 0.154 7/8/79 0.051 0.0576 7/20/79 0.083 0.053 
7/26/79 0.209 0.149 7/14/79 0.072 0.061 7/26/79 0.075 0.055 
8/7/79 0.262 0.184 7/20/79 0.057 0.0618 8/1/79 0.059 0.059 
8/13/79 0.366 0.231 7/26/79 0.067 0.0586 8/7/79 0.068 0.065 
8/19/79 0.091 0.225 8/1/79 0.043 0.058 8/13/79 0.259 0.109 
8/25/79 0.123 0.210 8/7/79 0.054 0.0586 8/19/79 0.020 0.096 
8/31/79 0.082 0.185 8/13/79 0.049 0.054 8/25/79 0.042 0.090 
9/6/79 0.165 0.165 8/19/79 0.015 0.0456 8/31/79 0.027 0.083 
9/12/79 0.235 0.139 8/25/79 0.045 0.0412 9/6/79 0.055 0.081 
9/18/79 0.281 0.177 8/31/79 0.041 0.0408 9/12/79 0.094 0.048 
9/24/79 0.307 0.214 9/6/79 0.044 0.0388 9/18/79 0.151 0.074 
9/30/79 0.122 0.222 9/12/79 0.064 0.0418 9/24/79 0.115 0.088 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table D-2. Twenty-Four-Hour and Running Average Concentrations (mg/m3) of TSP at Spokane, 
Vancouver, and Yakima, Washington, 1979-1982 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 D-8 September 2004 
Spokane (53-063-0016) Vancouver (53-011-0006) Yakima (53-077-1006) 
Date TSP x a Date TSP x a Date TSP x a 
10/6/79 0.277 0.244 9/18/79 0.104 0.0596 9/30/79 0.062 0.095 
10/12/79 0.315 0.260 9/24/79 0.11 0.0726 10/6/79 0.099 0.104 
10/18/79 0.105 0.225 9/30/79 0.061 0.0766 10/12/79 0.100 0.105 
10/24/79 0.081 0.180 10/6/79 0.112 0.0902 10/18/79 0.050 0.085 
10/30/79 0.193 0.194 10/12/79 0.158 0.109 10/24/79 0.023 0.067 
11/11/79 0.214 0.182 10/18/79 0.028 0.0938 10/30/79 0.041 0.063 
11/17/79 0.055 0.130 10/24/79 0.015 0.0748 11/5/79 0.011 0.045 
11/23/79 0.046 0.118 10/30/79 0.021 0.0668 11/11/79 0.015 0.028 
11/29/79 0.315 0.165 11/5/79 0.012 0.0468 11/17/79 0.046 0.027 
12/5/79 0.036 0.133 11/11/79 0.069 0.029 11/23/79 0.062 0.035 
12/11/79 0.123 0.115 11/17/79 0.027 0.0288 11/29/79 0.080 0.043 
12/17/79 0.092 0.122 11/23/79 0.019 0.0296 12/5/79 0.027 0.046 
12/23/79 0.090 0.131 11/29/79 0.018 0.029 12/11/79 0.053 0.054 
12/29/79 0.221 0.112 12/5/79 0.053 0.0372 12/17/79 0.032 0.051 
1/4/80 0.132 0.132 12/11/79 0.038 0.031 12/23/79 0.013 0.041 
1/10/80 0.074 0.122 12/17/79 0.016 0.0288 12/29/79 0.035 0.032 
1/16/80 0.048 0.113 12/23/79 0.005 0.026 1/4/80 0.036 0.034 
1/22/80 0.375 0.170 12/29/79 0.04 0.0304 1/10/80 0.062 0.036 
1/28/80 0.357 0.197 1/4/80 0.03 0.0258 1/16/80 0.057 0.041 
2/3/80 0.047 0.180 1/10/80 0.038 0.0258 1/22/80 0.074 0.053 
2/9/80 0.120 0.189 1/16/80 0.026 0.0278 1/28/80 0.029 0.052 
2/15/80 0.229 0.226 1/22/80 0.082 0.0432 2/3/80 0.055 0.055 
2/21/80 0.297 0.210 1/28/80 0.03 0.0412 2/9/80 0.020 0.047 
2/27/80 0.142 0.167 2/3/80 0.054 0.046 2/15/80 0.020 0.040 
3/4/80 0.178 0.193 2/9/80 0.021 0.0426 2/21/80 0.016 0.028 
3/10/80 0.113 0.192 2/15/80 0.04 0.0454 2/27/80 0.011 0.024 
3/16/80 0.041 0.154 2/21/80 0.053 0.0396 3/4/80 0.076 0.029 
3/22/80 0.163 0.127 2/27/80 0.022 0.038 3/10/80 0.055 0.036 
3/28/80 0.145 0.128 3/4/80 0.047 0.0366 3/16/80 0.013 0.034 
4/3/80 0.261 0.145 3/10/80 0.042 0.0408 3/22/80 0.101 0.051 
4/9/80 0.063 0.135 3/16/80 0.018 0.0364 3/28/80 0.051 0.059 
4/15/80 0.197 0.166 3/22/80 0.037 0.0332 4/3/80 0.055 0.055 
4/21/80 0.118 0.157 3/28/80 0.054 0.0396 4/9/80 0.010 0.046 
4/27/80 0.093 0.146 4/3/80 0.058 0.0418 4/15/80 0.092 0.062 
5/10/80 0.072 0.109 4/9/80 0.014 0.0362 4/21/80 0.033 0.048 
5/27/80 0.461 0.188 4/15/80 0.063 0.0452 4/27/80 0.057 0.049 
6/2/80 0.699 0.289 4/21/80 0.036 0.045 5/3/80 0.075 0.053 
6/8/80 0.521 0.369 4/27/80 0.102 0.0546 5/9/80 0.114 0.074 
6/14/80 0.299 0.410 5/3/80 0.137 0.0704 5/15/80 0.062 0.068 
6/20/80 0.520 0.500 5/9/80 0.024 0.0724 5/28/80 0.172 0.096 
6/26/80 0.228 0.453 5/15/80 0.041 0.068 6/2/80 0.426 0.170 
7/2/80 0.449 0.403 5/21/80 0.196 0.1 6/8/80 0.289 0.213 
7/8/80 0.743 0.448 5/27/80 0.093 0.0982 6/14/80 0.105 0.211 
7/14/80 0.253 0.439 6/3/80 0.044 0.0796 6/20/80 0.422 0.283 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table D-2. Twenty-Four-Hour and Running Average Concentrations (mg/m3) of TSP at Spokane, 
Vancouver, and Yakima, Washington, 1979-1982 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 D-9 September 2004 
Spokane (53-063-0016) Vancouver (53-011-0006) Yakima (53-077-1006) 
Date TSP x a Date TSP x a Date TSP x a 
7/20/80 0.220 0.379 6/8/80 0.046 0.084 6/26/80 0.180 0.284 
7/27/80 0.335 0.400 6/15/80 0.474 0.1706 7/2/80 0.315 0.262 
8/1/80 0.402 0.391 6/21/80 0.233 0.178 7/8/80 0.176 0.240 
8/7/80 0.266 0.295 6/26/80 0.239 0.2072 7/14/80 0.130 0.245 
8/13/80 0.185 0.282 7/1/80 0.206 0.2396 7/20/80 0.093 0.179 
8/19/80 0.114 0.260 7/8/80 0.134 0.2572 7/26/80 0.295 0.202 
8/25/80 0.247 0.243 7/15/80 0.095 0.1814 8/1/80 0.205 0.180 
8/31/80 0.232 0.209 7/20/80 0.216 0.178 8/7/80 0.075 0.160 
9/6/80 0.299 0.215 7/29/80 0.118 0.1538 8/13/80 0.119 0.157 
9/18/80 0.354 0.249 8/1/80 0.087 0.13 8/19/80 0.107 0.160 
9/24/80 0.285 0.283 8/7/80 0.193 0.1418 8/25/80 0.104 0.122 
9/30/80 0.224 0.279 8/13/80 0.105 0.1438 8/31/80 0.036 0.088 
10/6/80 0.431 0.319 8/19/80 0.117 0.124 9/6/80 0.171 0.107 
10/12/80 0.111 0.281 8/25/80 0.088 0.118 9/12/80 0.227 0.129 
10/18/80 0.192 0.249 8/31/80 0.026 0.1058 9/18/80 0.058 0.119 
10/24/80 0.213 0.234 9/6/80 0.069 0.081 9/24/80 0.091 0.117 
10/30/80 0.371 0.264 9/12/80 0.053 0.0706 9/30/80 0.245 0.158 
11/5/80 0.139 0.205 9/18/80 0.031 0.0534 10/6/80 0.196 0.163 
11/11/80 0.098 0.203 9/24/80 0.06 0.0478 10/12/80 0.055 0.129 
11/17/80 0.159 0.196 9/30/80 0.033 0.0492 10/18/80 0.066 0.131 
11/23/80 0.087 0.171 10/6/80 0.084 0.0522 10/24/80 0.120 0.136 
11/29/80 0.069 0.110 10/12/80 0.039 0.0494 10/30/80 0.160 0.119 
12/5/80 0.057 0.094 10/18/80 0.123 0.0678 11/5/80 0.041 0.088 
12/11/80 0.095 0.093 10/24/80 0.053 0.0664 11/11/80 0.035 0.084 
12/23/80 0.050 0.072 10/30/80 0.058 0.0714 11/17/80 0.085 0.088 
12/29/80 0.249 0.104 11/5/80 0.035 0.0616 11/23/80 0.052 0.075 
1/4/81 0.079 0.106 11/11/80 0.057 0.0652 11/29/80 0.037 0.050 
1/10/81 0.191 0.133 11/17/80 0.03 0.0466 12/5/80 0.029 0.048 
1/16/81 0.296 0.173 11/23/80 0.034 0.0428 12/11/80 0.105 0.062 
1/22/81 0.160 0.195 11/29/80 0.014 0.034 12/23/80 0.056 0.056 
1/28/81 0.072 0.160 12/5/80 0.017 0.0304 12/30/80 0.056 0.057 
2/3/81 0.205 0.185 12/11/80 0.096 0.0382 1/4/81 0.045 0.058 
2/9/81 0.357 0.218 12/17/80 0.032 0.0386 1/16/81 0.076 0.068 
2/15/81 0.024 0.164 12/23/80 0.065 0.0448 1/20/81 0.040 0.055 
2/21/81 0.113 0.154 12/29/80 0.02 0.046 1/22/81 0.030 0.049 
2/27/81 0.289 0.198 1/4/81 0.058 0.0542 1/28/81 0.014 0.041 
3/5/81 0.184 0.193 1/10/81 0.036 0.0422 2/3/81 0.082 0.048 
3/11/81 0.450 0.212 1/16/81 0.038 0.0434 2/9/81 0.094 0.052 
3/17/81 0.112 0.230 1/22/81 0.044 0.0392 2/15/81 0.036 0.051 
3/23/81 0.198 0.247 1/28/81 0.04 0.0432 2/21/81 0.043 0.054 
3/29/81 0.098 0.208 2/3/81 0.062 0.044 2/27/81 0.037 0.058 
4/4/81 0.080 0.188 2/9/81 0.043 0.0454 3/5/81 0.076 0.057 
4/10/81 0.147 0.127 2/15/81 0.015 0.0408 3/11/81 0.091 0.057 
4/16/81 0.252 0.155 2/21/81 0.065 0.045 3/17/81 0.084 0.066 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table D-2. Twenty-Four-Hour and Running Average Concentrations (mg/m3) of TSP at Spokane, 
Vancouver, and Yakima, Washington, 1979-1982 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 D-10 September 2004 
Spokane (53-063-0016) Vancouver (53-011-0006) Yakima (53-077-1006) 
Date TSP x a Date TSP x a Date TSP x a 
4/22/81 0.053 0.126 2/27/81 0.046 0.0462 3/23/81 0.148 0.087 
4/28/81 0.122 0.131 3/5/81 0.075 0.0488 3/29/81 0.116 0.103 
5/4/81 0.122 0.139 3/11/81 0.077 0.0556 4/4/81 0.086 0.105 
5/10/81 0.088 0.127 3/17/81 0.066 0.0658 4/10/81 0.115 0.110 
5/16/81 0.069 0.091 3/23/81 0.028 0.0584 4/16/81 0.097 0.112 
5/22/81 0.107 0.102 3/29/81 0.018 0.0528 4/22/81 0.146 0.112 
5/28/81 0.298 0.137 4/4/81 0.035 0.0448 4/28/81 0.093 0.107 
6/3/81 0.176 0.148 4/10/81 0.021 0.0336 5/4/81 0.138 0.118 
6/9/81 0.072 0.144 4/16/81 0.038 0.028 5/10/81 0.092 0.113 
6/15/81 0.105 0.152 4/22/81 0.031 0.0286 5/16/81 0.054 0.105 
6/21/81 0.050 0.140 4/28/81 0.037 0.0324 5/22/81 0.050 0.085 
6/27/81 0.194 0.119 5/4/81 0.031 0.0316 5/28/81 0.111 0.089 
7/3/81 0.192 0.123 5/10/81 0.05 0.0374 6/3/81 0.112 0.084 
7/9/81 0.167 0.142 5/16/81 0.035 0.0368 6/9/81 0.018 0.069 
7/15/81 0.217 0.164 5/22/81 0.05 0.0406 6/15/81 0.053 0.069 
7/21/81 0.216 0.197 5/28/81 0.159 0.065 6/21/81 0.030 0.065 
7/27/81 0.169 0.192 6/3/81 0.039 0.0666 6/27/81 0.083 0.059 
8/2/81 0.173 0.188 6/9/81 0.019 0.0604 7/3/81 0.074 0.052 
8/8/81 0.163 0.188 6/15/81 0.056 0.0646 7/9/81 0.059 0.060 
8/14/81 0.456 0.235 6/21/81 0.025 0.0596 7/15/81 0.060 0.061 
8/20/81 0.245 0.241 6/27/81 0.096 0.047 7/21/81 0.055 0.066 
8/26/81 0.213 0.250 7/3/81 0.071 0.0534 7/27/81 0.084 0.066 
9/1/81 0.276 0.271 7/9/81 0.068 0.0632 8/2/81 0.054 0.062 
9/7/81 0.131 0.264 7/15/81 0.095 0.071 8/8/81 0.075 0.066 
9/13/81 0.226 0.218 7/21/81 0.054 0.0768 8/14/81 0.085 0.071 
9/19/81 0.846 0.338 7/27/81 0.096 0.0768 8/20/81 0.041 0.068 
9/25/81 0.090 0.314 8/2/81 0.054 0.0734 8/26/81 0.099 0.071 
10/1/81 0.204 0.299 8/8/81 0.124 0.0846 9/2/81 0.044 0.069 
10/7/81 0.039 0.281 8/14/81 0.085 0.0826 9/7/81 0.077 0.069 
10/13/81 0.367 0.309 8/20/81 0.07 0.0858 9/13/81 0.048 0.062 
10/19/81 0.202 0.180 8/26/81 0.073 0.0812 9/19/81 0.045 0.063 
10/25/81 0.156 0.194 9/1/81 0.036 0.0776 9/25/81 0.062 0.055 
10/31/81 0.111 0.175 9/7/81 0.085 0.0698 10/1/81 0.076 0.062 
11/12/81 0.083 0.184 9/13/81 0.072 0.0672 10/7/81 0.021 0.050 
11/18/81 0.097 0.130 9/19/81 0.042 0.0616 10/13/81 0.050 0.051 
11/24/81 0.199 0.129 9/25/81 0.035 0.054 10/19/81 0.084 0.059 
11/30/81 0.102 0.118 10/1/81 0.044 0.0556 10/25/81 0.102 0.067 
12/6/81 0.041 0.104 10/7/81 0.019 0.0424 10/31/81 0.033 0.058 
12/12/81 0.188 0.125 10/13/81 0.028 0.0336 11/6/81 0.079 0.070 
12/18/81 0.057 0.117 10/19/81 0.042 0.0336 11/13/81 0.031 0.066 
12/30/81 0.041 0.086 10/25/81 0.109 0.0484 11/19/81 0.027 0.054 
1/5/82 0.147 0.095 10/31/81 0.036 0.0468 11/24/81 0.016 0.037 
1/29/82 0.029 0.092 11/6/81 0.064 0.0558 11/30/81 0.071 0.045 
2/4/82 0.291 0.113 11/12/81 0.023 0.0548 12/6/81 0.027 0.034 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table D-2. Twenty-Four-Hour and Running Average Concentrations (mg/m3) of TSP at Spokane, 
Vancouver, and Yakima, Washington, 1979-1982 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 D-11 September 2004 
Spokane (53-063-0016) Vancouver (53-011-0006) Yakima (53-077-1006) 
Date TSP x a Date TSP x a Date TSP x a 
2/10/82 0.278 0.157 11/18/81 0.034 0.0532 12/12/81 0.062 0.041 
2/16/82 0.047 0.158 11/24/81 0.075 0.0464 12/18/81 0.026 0.040 
2/22/82 0.101 0.149 11/30/81 0.024 0.044 12/24/81 0.065 0.050 
2/28/82 0.081 0.160 12/6/81 0.018 0.0348 12/30/81 0.028 0.042 
3/6/82 0.205 0.142 12/12/81 0.028 0.0358 1/5/82 0.045 0.045 
3/12/82 0.115 0.110 12/18/81 0.023 0.0336 1/11/82 0.082 0.049 
3/24/82 0.312 0.163 12/24/81 0.03 0.0246 1/17/82 0.027 0.049 
3/30/82 0.084 0.159 12/30/81 0.066 0.033 1/23/82 0.021 0.041 
4/5/82 0.121 0.167 1/5/82 0.064 0.0422 1/29/82 0.052 0.045 
4/11/82 0.040 0.134 1/11/82 0.109 0.0584 2/4/82 0.108 0.058 
4/17/82 0.083 0.128 1/17/82 0.025 0.0588 2/10/82 0.134 0.068 
4/23/82 0.370 0.140 1/23/82 0.014 0.0556 2/16/82 0.019 0.067 
4/29/82 0.116 0.146 1/29/82 0.051 0.0526 2/22/82 0.038 0.070 
5/5/82 0.175 0.157 2/4/82 0.039 0.0476 2/28/82 0.019 0.064 
5/11/82 0.161 0.181 2/10/82 0.071 0.04 3/6/82 0.050 0.052 
5/17/82 0.066 0.178 2/16/82 0.019 0.0388 3/12/82 0.030 0.031 
5/23/82 0.057 0.115 2/22/82 0.024 0.0408 3/18/82 0.060 0.039 
5/29/82 0.097 0.111 2/28/82 0.044 0.0394 3/24/82 0.091 0.050 
6/4/82 0.167 0.110 3/6/82 0.099 0.0514 3/30/82 0.034 0.053 
6/10/82 0.182 0.114 3/12/82 0.036 0.0444 4/5/82 0.031 0.049 
6/16/82 0.148 0.130 3/18/82 0.089 0.0584 4/11/82 0.012 0.046 
6/22/82 0.119 0.143 3/24/82 0.104 0.0744 4/17/82 0.105 0.055 
6/28/82 0.081 0.139 3/30/82 0.018 0.0692 4/23/82 0.339 0.104 
7/4/82 0.032 0.112 4/5/82 0.025 0.0544 4/29/82 0.099 0.117 
7/10/82 0.081 0.092 4/11/82 0.023 0.0518 5/5/82 0.096 0.130 
7/16/82 0.067 0.076 4/17/82 0.038 0.0416 5/11/82 0.054 0.139 
7/22/82 0.121 0.076 4/23/82 0.083 0.0374 5/17/82 0.027 0.123 
7/28/82 0.260 0.112 4/29/82 0.072 0.0482 5/23/82 0.036 0.062 
8/3/82 0.133 0.132 5/5/82 0.075 0.0582 5/29/82 0.040 0.051 
8/9/82 0.453 0.207 5/11/82 0.061 0.0658 6/4/82 0.169 0.065 
8/15/82 0.091 0.212 5/17/82 0.026 0.0634 6/10/82 0.068 0.068 
8/21/82 0.152 0.218 5/23/82 0.089 0.0646 6/16/82 0.052 0.073 
8/27/82 0.286 0.223 5/29/82 0.084 0.067 6/22/82 0.062 0.078 
9/2/82 0.213 0.239 6/4/82 0.034 0.0588 6/28/82 0.024 0.075 
9/8/82 0.183 0.185 6/10/82 0.108 0.0682 7/4/82 0.016 0.044 
9/14/82 0.166 0.200 6/16/82 0.068 0.0766 7/10/82 0.038 0.038 
9/20/82 0.132 0.196 6/22/82 0.081 0.075 7/16/82 0.032 0.034 
9/26/82 0.035 0.146 6/28/82 0.036 0.0654 7/22/82 0.039 0.030 
10/2/82 0.048 0.113 7/4/82 0.032 0.065 8/3/82 0.038 0.033 
10/8/82 0.149 0.106 7/10/82 0.05 0.0534 8/9/82 0.060 0.041 
10/14/82 0.205 0.114 7/16/82 0.053 0.0504 8/15/82 0.029 0.040 
10/20/82 0.267 0.141 7/22/82 0.089 0.052 8/21/82 0.059 0.045 
10/26/82 0.030 0.140 7/28/82 0.063 0.0574 8/27/82 0.059 0.049 
11/1/82 0.104 0.151 8/3/82 0.051 0.0612 9/2/82 0.066 0.055 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table D-2. Twenty-Four-Hour and Running Average Concentrations (mg/m3) of TSP at Spokane, 
Vancouver, and Yakima, Washington, 1979-1982 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 D-12 September 2004 
Spokane (53-063-0016) Vancouver (53-011-0006) Yakima (53-077-1006) 
Date TSP x a Date TSP x a Date TSP x a 
11/7/82 0.067 0.135 8/9/82 0.037 0.0586 9/8/82 0.044 0.051 
11/13/82 0.120 0.118 8/15/82 0.031 0.0542 9/20/82 0.021 0.050 
11/19/82 0.029 0.070 8/21/82 0.08 0.0524 9/26/82 0.024 0.043 
11/25/82 0.137 0.091 8/27/82 0.076 0.055 9/30/82 0.030 0.037 
12/1/82 0.123 0.095 9/2/82 0.068 0.0584 10/2/82 0.036 0.031 
12/7/82 0.178 0.117 9/8/82 0.05 0.061 10/8/82 0.045 0.031 
12/13/82 0.039 0.101 9/14/82 0.061 0.067 10/14/82 0.083 0.044 
12/19/82 0.082 0.112 9/20/82 0.023 0.0556 10/20/82 0.072 0.053 
12/25/82 0.073 0.099 9/26/82 0.022 0.0448 10/26/82 0.011 0.049 
12/31/82 0.110 0.096 10/2/82 0.044 0.04 11/1/82 0.028 0.048 
10/8/82 0.032 0.0364 11/7/82 0.030 0.045 
10/14/82 0.107 0.0456 11/13/82 0.052 0.039 
10/20/82 0.056 0.0522 11/19/82 0.031 0.030 
10/26/82 0.022 0.0522 11/25/82 0.043 0.037 
11/1/82 0.053 0.054 12/2/82 0.066 0.044 
11/7/82 0.024 0.0524 12/7/82 0.022 0.043 
11/13/82 0.063 0.0436 12/13/82 0.093 0.051 
11/19/82 0.025 0.0374 12/19/82 0.028 0.050 
11/25/82 0.064 0.0458 12/25/82 0.067 0.055 
12/1/82 0.029 0.041 12/31/82 0.014 0.045 
12/7/82 0.056 0.0474 
12/13/82 0.046 0.044 
12/19/82 0.03 0.045 
12/25/82 0.036 0.0394 
12/31/82 0.075 0.0486 
Source: DTN: MO008SPATSP00.013 (DIRS 151750). 
a Running average of the measurement for a day and the four previous measurements. 
TSP=total suspended particles 
.

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 September 2004 
APPENDIX E 
TSP:PM10 RATIOSYUCCA MOUNTAIN

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 September 2004 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 E-1 September 2004 
APPENDIX E 
TSP:PM10 RATIOSYUCCA MOUNTAIN 
Table E-1 presents 1,276 measurements of PM10 and TSP concentrations (g/m3) taken 
simultaneously at three sites at Yucca Mountain from 1989 through 1997 (no measurements 
were take from October through December 1991), and the TSP:PM10 ratio of those 
measurements. Measurements resulting in 24 ratios of less than or equal to 1.0 are not shown 
(see Section 6.1.3.1 for justification). 
Table E-1. TSP:PM10 RatiosYucca Mountain, 1989-1997 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1 4/22/89 17 37 2.2 TM000000000001.082 
1C 4/22/89 18 35 1.9 TM000000000001.082 
1C 4/28/89 6 12 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
1 5/4/89 8 12 1.5 TM000000000001.082 
1C 5/4/89 10 11 1.1 TM000000000001.082 
1 5/10/89 12 24 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
5 5/10/89 15 34 2.3 TM000000000001.082 
1C 5/10/89 12 23 1.9 TM000000000001.082 
1 5/16/89 9 12 1.3 TM000000000001.082 
5 5/16/89 10 18 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
1C 5/16/89 7 11 1.6 TM000000000001.082 
1 5/22/89 15 27 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
5 5/22/89 16 32 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
1 6/3/89 11 17 1.5 TM000000000001.082 
5 6/3/89 11 23 2.1 TM000000000001.082 
1C 6/3/89 13 16 1.2 TM000000000001.082 
1 6/9/89 13 26 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
5 6/9/89 18 62 3.4 TM000000000001.082 
1C 6/9/89 12 23 1.9 TM000000000001.082 
1 6/15/89 16 24 1.5 TM000000000001.082 
5 6/15/89 17 30 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
1C 6/15/89 15 24 1.6 TM000000000001.082 
5 6/21/89 8 21 2.6 TM000000000001.082 
1 6/27/89 13 25 1.9 TM000000000001.082 
5 6/27/89 15 39 2.6 TM000000000001.082 
1C 6/27/89 12 26 2.2 TM000000000001.082 
1 7/3/89 10 15 1.5 TM000000000001.082 
1 7/9/89 41 88 2.1 TM000000000001.082 
5 7/9/89 38 90 2.4 TM000000000001.082 
1C 7/9/89 38 86 2.3 TM000000000001.082 
5 7/15/89 18 34 1.9 TM000000000001.082 
1 7/21/89 26 52 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
5 7/21/89 26 50 1.9 TM000000000001.082 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1 7/27/89 27 50 1.9 TM000000000001.082 
1C 7/27/89 27 48 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
1 8/8/89 23 42 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
5 8/8/89 22 58 2.6 TM000000000001.082 
1 8/20/89 16 34 2.1 TM000000000001.082 
5 8/20/89 13 27 2.1 TM000000000001.082 
1 8/26/89 14 30 2.1 TM000000000001.082 
5 8/26/89 14 23 1.6 TM000000000001.082 
1C 8/26/89 19 34 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
1 9/1/89 10 24 2.4 TM000000000001.082 
1 9/7/89 17 41 2.4 TM000000000001.082 
5 9/7/89 16 40 2.5 TM000000000001.082 
1 9/13/89 9 17 1.9 TM000000000001.082 
5 9/13/89 10 21 2.1 TM000000000001.082 
1C 9/13/89 9 13 1.4 TM000000000001.082 
1C 9/19/89 8 13 1.6 TM000000000001.082 
1 9/25/89 9 20 2.2 TM000000000001.082 
1C 9/25/89 9 15 1.7 TM000000000001.082 
1 10/7/89 7 11 1.6 TM000000000001.082 
1C 10/7/89 6 9 1.5 TM000000000001.082 
5 10/13/89 11 22 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
1 10/19/89 7 88 12.6 TM000000000001.082 
1 10/25/89 4 19 4.8 TM000000000001.082 
5 10/25/89 5 16 3.2 TM000000000001.082 
5 10/31/89 5 11 2.2 TM000000000001.082 
1 11/6/89 8 23 2.9 TM000000000001.082 
5 11/6/89 9 17 1.9 TM000000000001.082 
1 11/12/89 7 15 2.1 TM000000000001.082 
5 11/12/89 8 14 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
1 11/18/89 3 10 3.3 TM000000000001.082 
5 11/18/89 5 9 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
1 11/24/89 16 29 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
1 11/30/89 2 8 4.0 TM000000000001.082 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table E-1. TSP:PM10 Ratios  Yucca Mountain, 1989-1997 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 E-2 September 2004 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1 12/6/89 3 9 3.0 TM000000000001.082 
5 12/6/89 4 14 3.5 TM000000000001.082 
1 12/12/89 5 9 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
5 12/12/89 3 5 1.7 TM000000000001.082 
1 12/18/89 4 12 3.0 TM000000000001.082 
5 12/18/89 5 11 2.2 TM000000000001.082 
1 12/24/89 2 4 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
5 12/24/89 2 3 1.5 TM000000000001.082 
5 12/30/89 2 10 5.0 TM000000000001.082 
1 1/5/90 2 4 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
5 1/5/90 2 4 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
1 1/11/90 4 7 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
5 1/11/90 4 6 1.5 TM000000000001.082 
1C 1/11/90 4 7 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
1 1/17/90 3 4 1.3 TM000000000001.082 
1C 1/17/90 2 3 1.5 TM000000000001.082 
1 1/23/90 3 6 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
1C 1/23/90 3 5 1.7 TM000000000001.082 
1 1/29/90 4 9 2.3 TM000000000001.082 
1C 1/29/90 3 9 3.0 TM000000000001.082 
1 2/4/90 5 10 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
1C 2/4/90 5 10 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
1 2/10/90 2 4 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
1C 2/28/90 7 12 1.7 TM000000000001.082 
1 3/6/90 2 5 2.5 TM000000000001.082 
1C 3/6/90 2 4 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
1 3/12/90 1 9 9.0 TM000000000001.082 
1C 3/12/90 1 9 9.0 TM000000000001.082 
1 3/18/90 4 6 1.5 TM000000000001.082 
1C 3/18/90 4 5 1.3 TM000000000001.082 
1 3/24/90 6 9 1.5 TM000000000001.082 
1C 3/24/90 6 8 1.3 TM000000000001.082 
1 3/30/90 6 11 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
1C 3/30/90 6 11 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
1 4/5/90 7 12 1.7 TM000000000001.082 
1C 4/5/90 8 14 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
1 4/11/90 7 8 1.1 TM000000000001.082 
1C 4/11/90 7 8 1.1 TM000000000001.082 
1 4/17/90 5 8 1.6 TM000000000001.082 
1C 4/17/90 5 10 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
1 4/23/90 25 56 2.2 TM000000000001.082 
1 4/29/90 8 17 2.1 TM000000000001.082 
1 5/11/90 24 40 1.7 TM000000000001.082 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1 5/23/90 31 64 2.1 TM000000000001.082 
1 5/29/90 5 7 1.4 TM000000000001.082 
1 6/4/90 12 19 1.6 TM000000000001.082 
1 6/10/90 7 21 3.0 TM000000000001.082 
1 6/16/90 8 30 3.8 TM000000000001.082 
1 6/22/90 13 48 3.7 TM000000000001.082 
1 6/28/90 10 38 3.8 TM000000000001.082 
1 7/4/90 15 24 1.6 TM000000000001.082 
1 7/10/90 12 21 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
1 7/16/90 9 19 2.1 TM000000000001.082 
1 7/28/90 14 29 2.1 TM000000000001.082 
1 8/3/90 41 80 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
1 8/21/90 15 26 1.7 TM000000000001.082 
1 9/8/90 14 23 1.6 TM000000000001.082 
1 9/14/90 11 21 1.9 TM000000000001.082 
1 9/20/90 9 18 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
1 9/26/90 12 20 1.7 TM000000000001.082 
1 10/8/90 9 14 1.6 TM000000000001.082 
5 10/8/90 7 18 2.6 TM000000000001.082 
1C 10/8/90 8 13 1.6 TM000000000001.082 
1 10/14/90 9 13 1.4 TM000000000001.082 
5 10/14/90 8 12 1.5 TM000000000001.082 
1C 10/14/90 8 11 1.4 TM000000000001.082 
1 10/20/90 4 8 2.0 TM000000000001.082 
5 10/20/90 5 9 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
1C 10/20/90 4 6 1.5 TM000000000001.082 
5 10/26/90 8 11 1.4 TM000000000001.082 
1C 10/26/90 6 11 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
1 11/1/90 6 18 3.0 TM000000000001.082 
1 11/7/90 2 9 4.5 TM000000000001.082 
5 11/7/90 6 13 2.2 TM000000000001.082 
1C 11/7/90 3 8 2.7 TM000000000001.082 
1 11/13/90 8 9 1.1 TM000000000001.082 
5 11/13/90 5 8 1.6 TM000000000001.082 
1C 11/13/90 6 8 1.3 TM000000000001.082 
1 11/19/90 11 19 1.7 TM000000000001.082 
5 11/19/90 12 18 1.5 TM000000000001.082 
1C 11/19/90 11 17 1.5 TM000000000001.082 
1 11/25/90 62 152 2.5 TM000000000001.082 
1 12/1/90 4 11 2.8 TM000000000001.082 
1C 12/1/90 3 13 4.3 TM000000000001.082 
1 12/7/90 4 13 3.3 TM000000000001.082 
5 12/7/90 4 7 1.8 TM000000000001.082 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table E-1. TSP:PM10 Ratios  Yucca Mountain, 1989-1997 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 E-3 September 2004 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
5 12/13/90 9 16 1.8 TM000000000001.082 
1C 12/13/90 10 15 1.5 TM000000000001.082 
1 12/19/90 49 145 3.0 TM000000000001.082 
5 12/25/90 1 6 6.0 TM000000000001.082 
1 12/31/90 1 7 7.0 TM000000000001.082 
5 12/31/90 2 10 5.0 TM000000000001.082 
1 1/6/91 1 4 4.0 TM000000000001.041 
1 1/12/91 1 6 6.0 TM000000000001.041 
5 1/12/91 4 11 2.8 TM000000000001.041 
1 1/30/91 6 27 4.5 TM000000000001.041 
5 1/30/91 3 24 8.0 TM000000000001.041 
1C 1/30/91 6 27 4.5 TM000000000001.041 
1 2/5/91 5 14 2.8 TM000000000001.041 
5 2/11/91 6 11 1.8 TM000000000001.041 
1 2/17/91 4 10 2.5 TM000000000001.041 
5 2/17/91 5 14 2.8 TM000000000001.041 
1C 2/17/91 4 9 2.3 TM000000000001.041 
1 2/23/91 7 13 1.9 TM000000000001.041 
1C 2/23/91 7 10 1.4 TM000000000001.041 
1 3/1/91 1 4 4.0 TM000000000001.041 
5 3/1/91 2 4 2.0 TM000000000001.041 
1C 3/1/91 1 4 4.0 TM000000000001.041 
1 3/7/91 2 4 2.0 TM000000000001.041 
5 3/7/91 3 5 1.7 TM000000000001.041 
1C 3/7/91 2 4 2.0 TM000000000001.041 
1 3/13/91 6 14 2.3 TM000000000001.041 
5 3/13/91 5 14 2.8 TM000000000001.041 
1C 3/13/91 6 13 2.2 TM000000000001.041 
1 3/19/91 4 14 3.5 TM000000000001.041 
5 3/19/91 5 16 3.2 TM000000000001.041 
1C 3/19/91 5 14 2.8 TM000000000001.041 
1 3/25/91 9 21 2.3 TM000000000001.041 
5 3/25/91 10 23 2.3 TM000000000001.041 
1C 3/25/91 9 20 2.2 TM000000000001.041 
1 3/31/91 7 13 1.9 TM000000000001.041 
1C 3/31/91 7 12 1.7 TM000000000001.041 
5 4/6/91 16 41 2.6 TM000000000001.041 
1C 4/6/91 22 49 2.2 TM000000000001.041 
1 4/12/91 6 12 2.0 TM000000000001.041 
5 4/12/91 4 13 3.3 TM000000000001.041 
1C 4/12/91 5 18 3.6 TM000000000001.041 
1 4/18/91 6 10 1.7 TM000000000001.041 
1 4/24/91 18 33 1.8 TM000000000001.041 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
5 4/24/91 20 33 1.7 TM000000000001.041 
1C 4/24/91 19 33 1.7 TM000000000001.041 
1 4/30/91 10 20 2.0 TM000000000001.041 
5 4/30/91 10 19 1.9 TM000000000001.041 
1C 4/30/91 10 19 1.9 TM000000000001.041 
1 5/6/91 9 18 2.0 TM000000000001.041 
5 5/6/91 10 14 1.4 TM000000000001.041 
1C 5/6/91 9 16 1.8 TM000000000001.041 
5 5/12/91 11 20 1.8 TM000000000001.041 
1C 5/12/91 10 21 2.1 TM000000000001.041 
1 5/18/91 8 21 2.6 TM000000000001.041 
1C 5/18/91 9 21 2.3 TM000000000001.041 
1 5/24/91 11 18 1.6 TM000000000001.041 
5 5/24/91 11 17 1.5 TM000000000001.041 
1C 5/24/91 11 18 1.6 TM000000000001.041 
1 5/30/91 22 63 2.9 TM000000000001.041 
5 5/30/91 33 103 3.1 TM000000000001.041 
1 6/5/91 20 37 1.9 TM000000000001.041 
5 6/5/91 22 41 1.9 TM000000000001.041 
1C 6/5/91 17 37 2.2 TM000000000001.041 
1 6/11/91 21 40 1.9 TM000000000001.041 
1C 6/11/91 21 41 2.0 TM000000000001.041 
1 6/17/91 12 28 2.3 TM000000000001.041 
1 6/23/91 15 27 1.8 TM000000000001.041 
1C 6/23/91 15 24 1.6 TM000000000001.041 
5 6/29/91 11 26 2.4 TM000000000001.041 
1 7/5/91 25 62 2.5 TM000000000001.042 
5 7/5/91 26 54 2.1 TM000000000001.042 
1C 7/5/91 27 59 2.2 TM000000000001.042 
5 7/11/91 12 24 2.0 TM000000000001.042 
1C 7/11/91 13 19 1.5 TM000000000001.042 
1 7/17/91 10 15 1.5 TM000000000001.042 
5 7/17/91 9 18 2.0 TM000000000001.042 
1 7/23/91 9 17 1.9 TM000000000001.042 
5 7/23/91 9 16 1.8 TM000000000001.042 
1C 7/23/91 9 18 2.0 TM000000000001.042 
1 7/29/91 14 35 2.5 TM000000000001.042 
5 7/29/91 15 38 2.5 TM000000000001.042 
1C 7/29/91 14 38 2.7 TM000000000001.042 
1 8/4/91 10 20 2.0 TM000000000001.042 
5 8/4/91 31 53 1.7 TM000000000001.042 
1 8/10/91 33 61 1.8 TM000000000001.042 
5 8/10/91 45 87 1.9 TM000000000001.042 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table E-1. TSP:PM10 Ratios  Yucca Mountain, 1989-1997 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 E-4 September 2004 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1C 8/10/91 31 63 2.0 TM000000000001.042 
5 8/16/91 15 24 1.6 TM000000000001.042 
1C 8/16/91 15 26 1.7 TM000000000001.042 
5 8/22/91 10 20 2.0 TM000000000001.042 
1C 8/22/91 16 29 1.8 TM000000000001.042 
1 8/28/91 11 28 2.5 TM000000000001.042 
5 8/28/91 11 28 2.5 TM000000000001.042 
1C 8/28/91 14 26 1.9 TM000000000001.042 
1 9/3/91 17 45 2.6 TM000000000001.042 
5 9/3/91 16 45 2.8 TM000000000001.042 
1C 9/3/91 17 44 2.6 TM000000000001.042 
1 9/9/91 14 33 2.4 TM000000000001.042 
5 9/9/91 17 41 2.4 TM000000000001.042 
1 9/15/91 6 15 2.5 TM000000000001.042 
5 9/15/91 6 16 2.7 TM000000000001.042 
1C 9/15/91 6 20 3.3 TM000000000001.042 
1 9/21/91 18 35 1.9 TM000000000001.042 
5 9/21/91 17 33 1.9 TM000000000001.042 
1C 9/21/91 17 48 2.8 TM000000000001.042 
1 9/27/91 12 22 1.8 TM000000000001.042 
1C 9/27/91 9 28 3.1 TM000000000001.042 
1 1/1/92 3 7 2.3 TM000000000001.039 
5 1/1/92 3 5 1.7 TM000000000001.039 
1C 1/1/92 3 7 2.3 TM000000000001.039 
1 1/7/92 3 5 1.7 TM000000000001.039 
5 1/7/92 3 7 2.3 TM000000000001.039 
1C 1/7/92 2 6 3.0 TM000000000001.039 
1 1/13/92 2 7 3.5 TM000000000001.039 
1C 1/13/92 3 6 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
1 1/19/92 3 6 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
5 1/19/92 3 6 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
1C 1/19/92 3 5 1.7 TM000000000001.039 
5 1/25/92 5 14 2.8 TM000000000001.039 
1C 1/25/92 4 8 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
1 1/31/92 5 10 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
5 1/31/92 15 38 2.5 TM000000000001.039 
1C 1/31/92 6 10 1.7 TM000000000001.039 
1 2/6/92 5 11 2.2 TM000000000001.039 
5 2/6/92 5 10 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
1C 2/6/92 5 10 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
1 2/12/92 2 5 2.5 TM000000000001.039 
5 2/12/92 3 5 1.7 TM000000000001.039 
1C 2/12/92 2 5 2.5 TM000000000001.039 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
5 2/19/92 4 9 2.3 TM000000000001.039 
1C 2/19/92 5 10 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
1 2/24/92 3 8 2.7 TM000000000001.039 
5 2/24/92 7 21 3.0 TM000000000001.039 
1C 2/24/92 3 9 3.0 TM000000000001.039 
5 3/1/92 7 16 2.3 TM000000000001.039 
1 3/7/92 3 7 2.3 TM000000000001.039 
5 3/7/92 3 6 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
1C 3/7/92 2 7 3.5 TM000000000001.039 
1 3/13/92 9 14 1.6 TM000000000001.039 
5 3/13/92 10 20 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
1C 3/13/92 8 15 1.9 TM000000000001.039 
1 3/19/92 8 14 1.8 TM000000000001.039 
5 3/19/92 11 22 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
1C 3/19/92 8 15 1.9 TM000000000001.039 
1 3/25/92 5 9 1.8 TM000000000001.039 
5 3/25/92 5 13 2.6 TM000000000001.039 
1C 3/25/92 5 8 1.6 TM000000000001.039 
1 3/31/92 2 5 2.5 TM000000000001.039 
5 3/31/92 3 6 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
1C 3/31/92 3 6 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
1 4/6/92 15 24 1.6 TM000000000001.039 
5 4/6/92 18 31 1.7 TM000000000001.039 
1C 4/6/92 15 25 1.7 TM000000000001.039 
1 4/12/92 11 21 1.9 TM000000000001.039 
5 4/12/92 13 24 1.8 TM000000000001.039 
1C 4/12/92 11 23 2.1 TM000000000001.039 
1 4/18/92 12 30 2.5 TM000000000001.039 
5 4/18/92 14 39 2.8 TM000000000001.039 
1C 4/18/92 12 30 2.5 TM000000000001.039 
1 4/24/92 12 21 1.8 TM000000000001.039 
5 4/24/92 14 25 1.8 TM000000000001.039 
1C 4/24/92 12 22 1.8 TM000000000001.039 
5 4/30/92 49 130 2.7 TM000000000001.039 
1C 4/30/92 23 61 2.7 TM000000000001.039 
1 5/6/92 6 14 2.3 TM000000000001.039 
1C 5/6/92 6 15 2.5 TM000000000001.039 
1 5/12/92 15 27 1.8 TM000000000001.039 
5 5/12/92 15 31 2.1 TM000000000001.039 
1C 5/12/92 15 28 1.9 TM000000000001.039 
1 5/18/92 13 24 1.8 TM000000000001.039 
5 5/18/92 14 27 1.9 TM000000000001.039 
1C 5/18/92 12 25 2.1 TM000000000001.039 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table E-1. TSP:PM10 Ratios  Yucca Mountain, 1989-1997 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 E-5 September 2004 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1 5/24/92 10 18 1.8 TM000000000001.039 
5 5/24/92 9 20 2.2 TM000000000001.039 
1 5/30/92 13 26 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
5 5/30/92 12 31 2.6 TM000000000001.039 
1C 5/30/92 13 28 2.2 TM000000000001.039 
1 6/5/92 24 59 2.5 TM000000000001.039 
5 6/5/92 24 61 2.5 TM000000000001.039 
1C 6/5/92 24 58 2.4 TM000000000001.039 
1 6/11/92 23 42 1.8 TM000000000001.039 
5 6/11/92 22 41 1.9 TM000000000001.039 
1C 6/11/92 22 45 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
1 6/17/92 10 23 2.3 TM000000000001.039 
5 6/17/92 9 24 2.7 TM000000000001.039 
1C 6/17/92 10 24 2.4 TM000000000001.039 
1 6/23/92 18 37 2.1 TM000000000001.039 
5 6/23/92 17 32 1.9 TM000000000001.039 
1C 6/23/92 17 40 2.4 TM000000000001.039 
1 6/29/92 21 67 3.2 TM000000000001.039 
5 6/29/92 21 73 3.5 TM000000000001.039 
1C 6/29/92 20 68 3.4 TM000000000001.039 
1 7/5/92 12 32 2.7 TM000000000001.039 
5 7/5/92 8 24 3.0 TM000000000001.039 
1C 7/5/92 11 30 2.7 TM000000000001.039 
1 7/11/92 21 50 2.4 TM000000000001.039 
5 7/11/92 19 41 2.2 TM000000000001.039 
1C 7/11/92 21 49 2.3 TM000000000001.039 
1 7/17/92 16 39 2.4 TM000000000001.039 
5 7/17/92 14 31 2.2 TM000000000001.039 
1 7/23/92 18 43 2.4 TM000000000001.039 
5 7/23/92 17 37 2.2 TM000000000001.039 
1 7/29/92 16 36 2.3 TM000000000001.039 
5 7/29/92 14 30 2.1 TM000000000001.039 
1 8/4/92 30 73 2.4 TM000000000001.039 
5 8/4/92 26 62 2.4 TM000000000001.039 
1 8/10/92 14 35 2.5 TM000000000001.039 
5 8/10/92 12 27 2.3 TM000000000001.039 
1 8/16/92 19 41 2.2 TM000000000001.039 
5 8/16/92 18 47 2.6 TM000000000001.039 
5 8/22/92 19 63 3.3 TM000000000001.039 
1C 8/22/92 18 54 3.0 TM000000000001.039 
1 8/28/92 17 39 2.3 TM000000000001.039 
5 8/28/92 15 37 2.5 TM000000000001.039 
1 9/3/92 20 53 2.7 TM000000000001.039 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
5 9/3/92 20 52 2.6 TM000000000001.039 
1 9/9/92 15 28 1.9 TM000000000001.039 
5 9/9/92 13 25 1.9 TM000000000001.039 
1 9/15/92 14 28 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
1 9/21/92 14 28 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
1 9/27/92 12 24 2.0 TM000000000001.039 
5 9/27/92 11 24 2.2 TM000000000001.039 
1 10/3/92 9 20 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/3/92 8 25 3.1 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/3/92 7 22 3.1 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/9/92 12 23 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/9/92 11 20 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/9/92 12 24 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/15/92 24 41 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/15/92 27 48 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/15/92 24 42 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/21/92 24 42 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/21/92 19 31 1.6 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/21/92 23 43 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/27/92 5 13 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/27/92 5 10 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/27/92 5 13 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
1 11/2/92 22 56 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
5 11/2/92 15 51 3.4 TM000000000001.079 
1C 11/2/92 16 54 3.4 TM000000000001.079 
5 11/8/92 11 16 1.5 TM000000000001.079 
1 11/14/92 1 3 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 11/14/92 5 11 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1 11/20/92 21 45 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
5 11/20/92 19 69 3.6 TM000000000001.079 
1C 11/20/92 14 45 3.2 TM000000000001.079 
1 12/2/92 15 35 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 12/2/92 7 22 3.1 TM000000000001.079 
1C 12/2/92 14 34 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1 12/8/92 11 13 1.2 TM000000000001.079 
1C 12/8/92 9 12 1.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 12/16/92 9 25 2.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 12/26/92 4 15 3.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 12/26/92 11 15 1.4 TM000000000001.079 
1C 12/26/92 5 6 1.2 TM000000000001.079 
5 1/7/93 9 11 1.2 TM000000000001.079 
5 1/13/93 4 14 3.5 TM000000000001.079 
1C 1/13/93 6 11 1.8 TM000000000001.079 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table E-1. TSP:PM10 Ratios  Yucca Mountain, 1989-1997 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 E-6 September 2004 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
5 1/25/93 1 5 5.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 1/25/93 10 29 2.9 TM000000000001.079 
1 1/31/93 4 6 1.5 TM000000000001.079 
1C 1/31/93 3 5 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
1 2/6/93 5 10 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 2/6/93 6 8 1.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 2/12/93 2 6 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 2/18/93 6 12 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 2/18/93 5 10 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 2/18/93 5 11 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1 2/24/93 2 7 3.5 TM000000000001.079 
5 2/24/93 2 9 4.5 TM000000000001.079 
1C 2/24/93 2 11 5.5 TM000000000001.079 
5 3/2/93 3 10 3.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 3/3/93 3 11 3.7 TM000000000001.079 
1C 3/3/93 4 10 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
1 3/8/93 6 21 3.5 TM000000000001.079 
5 3/8/93 4 11 2.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 3/8/93 7 19 2.7 TM000000000001.079 
1 3/14/93 7 14 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 3/14/93 6 14 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 3/14/93 6 13 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1 3/20/93 7 19 2.7 TM000000000001.079 
5 3/20/93 6 14 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 3/20/93 7 17 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1 3/26/93 6 18 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 3/26/93 6 53 8.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 3/26/93 7 15 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1 4/1/93 8 18 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 4/1/93 7 17 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1C 4/1/93 7 19 2.7 TM000000000001.079 
1 4/7/93 10 30 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 4/7/93 5 12 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1C 4/7/93 11 30 2.7 TM000000000001.079 
1 4/13/93 5 20 4.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 4/13/93 4 13 3.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 4/13/93 5 19 3.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 4/19/93 7 24 3.4 TM000000000001.079 
5 4/19/93 7 24 3.4 TM000000000001.079 
1C 4/19/93 8 24 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 4/25/93 7 21 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 4/25/93 7 22 3.1 TM000000000001.079 
1C 4/25/93 7 18 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1 5/1/93 18 33 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 5/1/93 19 33 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
1C 5/1/93 18 34 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
5 5/7/93 13 28 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1 5/13/93 19 42 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
5 5/13/93 20 49 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
1C 5/13/93 19 42 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1 5/19/93 16 28 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 5/19/93 15 27 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 5/19/93 16 28 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 5/25/93 13 33 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
5 5/25/93 9 30 3.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 5/25/93 11 35 3.2 TM000000000001.079 
1 5/31/93 15 39 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
5 5/31/93 19 56 2.9 TM000000000001.079 
1C 5/31/93 15 39 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
1 6/6/93 4 14 3.5 TM000000000001.079 
5 6/6/93 4 16 4.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 6/6/93 4 13 3.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 6/12/93 15 31 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
5 6/12/93 14 32 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 6/12/93 15 32 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1 6/18/93 8 18 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 6/18/93 8 16 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 6/24/93 8 21 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
1C 6/24/93 9 27 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 6/30/93 15 36 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
5 6/30/93 12 28 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 6/30/93 14 35 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
1 7/7/93 20 37 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
5 7/7/93 19 36 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1C 7/7/93 20 38 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1 7/12/93 21 46 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
5 7/12/93 21 46 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1C 7/12/93 21 44 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1 7/18/93 16 29 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 7/18/93 16 31 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1C 7/18/93 13 30 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 7/24/93 9 22 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
5 7/24/93 8 25 3.1 TM000000000001.079 
1C 7/24/93 9 22 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1 7/30/93 11 25 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 7/30/93 9 21 2.3 TM000000000001.079 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table E-1. TSP:PM10 Ratios  Yucca Mountain, 1989-1997 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 E-7 September 2004 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1C 7/30/93 12 25 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1 8/5/93 14 40 2.9 TM000000000001.079 
5 8/5/93 11 28 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
1 8/11/93 30 86 2.9 TM000000000001.079 
5 8/11/93 12 32 2.7 TM000000000001.079 
1C 8/11/93 32 82 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
1 8/17/93 16 36 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 8/17/93 10 16 1.6 TM000000000001.079 
1C 8/17/93 16 35 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
5 8/23/93 12 25 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1C 8/23/93 14 29 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
5 8/29/93 12 27 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 8/29/93 13 29 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1 9/4/93 9 25 2.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 9/4/93 9 21 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 9/4/93 8 27 3.4 TM000000000001.079 
5 9/10/93 8 20 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
1C 9/10/93 11 28 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
1 9/16/93 22 45 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 9/16/93 20 45 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 9/16/93 20 46 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 9/22/93 15 27 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 9/22/93 14 26 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1C 9/22/93 15 27 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 9/28/93 12 24 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 9/28/93 10 20 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 9/28/93 11 24 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/4/93 17 46 2.7 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/4/93 20 54 2.7 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/4/93 18 43 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/10/93 10 20 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/10/93 8 16 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/10/93 9 19 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/16/93 7 17 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/16/93 6 15 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/16/93 6 17 2.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/22/93 8 19 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/22/93 6 15 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/22/93 8 19 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/28/93 10 27 2.7 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/28/93 6 13 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/28/93 10 28 2.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 11/3/93 12 20 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
5 11/3/93 8 15 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1C 11/3/93 13 19 1.5 TM000000000001.079 
1C 11/9/93 12 22 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 11/15/93 6 14 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 11/15/93 5 10 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 11/15/93 6 14 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 11/21/93 5 12 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
5 11/21/93 6 14 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 11/27/93 4 8 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 11/27/93 1 6 6.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 11/27/93 4 7 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 12/3/93 3 6 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 12/3/93 6 12 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 12/9/93 9 16 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 12/9/93 10 19 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1 12/15/93 2 8 4.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 12/15/93 2 7 3.5 TM000000000001.079 
1C 12/15/93 2 7 3.5 TM000000000001.079 
1 12/21/93 3 9 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 12/21/93 2 6 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 12/21/93 3 6 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 12/27/93 5 11 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1C 12/27/93 4 9 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 1/2/94 3 9 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 1/2/94 3 11 3.7 TM000000000001.079 
1C 1/2/94 2 8 4.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 1/8/94 2 8 4.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 1/8/94 2 5 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
1 1/14/94 5 16 3.2 TM000000000001.079 
5 1/14/94 1 7 7.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 1/14/94 5 15 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 1/20/94 5 13 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
5 1/20/94 3 9 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 1/20/94 5 10 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 1/26/94 3 12 4.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 1/26/94 1 5 5.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 1/26/94 2 12 6.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 2/1/94 4 18 4.5 TM000000000001.079 
5 2/1/94 1 4 4.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 2/1/94 5 16 3.2 TM000000000001.079 
1 2/7/94 4 8 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 2/7/94 5 7 1.4 TM000000000001.079 
1C 2/7/94 3 8 2.7 TM000000000001.079 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table E-1. TSP:PM10 Ratios  Yucca Mountain, 1989-1997 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 E-8 September 2004 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
5 2/13/94 2 6 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 2/15/94 10 21 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1C 2/15/94 10 21 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1 2/19/94 1 7 7.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 2/19/94 3 8 2.7 TM000000000001.079 
1 2/25/94 3 13 4.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 2/25/94 3 7 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 2/25/94 3 11 3.7 TM000000000001.079 
1 3/3/94 6 11 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 3/3/94 5 9 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 3/3/94 5 12 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1C 3/9/94 5 12 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1 3/15/94 7 17 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
5 3/15/94 9 18 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 3/15/94 6 19 3.2 TM000000000001.079 
1 3/21/94 7 14 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 3/21/94 9 18 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 3/21/94 9 16 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 4/2/94 2 14 7.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 4/2/94 2 11 5.5 TM000000000001.079 
1C 4/2/94 2 12 6.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 4/8/94 11 26 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
5 4/8/94 8 25 3.1 TM000000000001.079 
1C 4/8/94 9 26 2.9 TM000000000001.079 
1 4/14/94 24 44 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 4/14/94 21 35 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
1C 4/14/94 24 42 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 4/20/94 13 30 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 4/20/94 14 30 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1C 4/20/94 15 29 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1 4/26/94 5 20 4.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 4/26/94 2 20 10.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 4/26/94 4 19 4.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 5/2/94 12 19 1.6 TM000000000001.079 
5 5/2/94 13 21 1.6 TM000000000001.079 
1C 5/2/94 13 18 1.4 TM000000000001.079 
1 5/8/94 3 9 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 5/8/94 2 13 6.5 TM000000000001.079 
1C 5/8/94 2 9 4.5 TM000000000001.079 
1 5/14/94 16 25 1.6 TM000000000001.079 
5 5/14/94 15 26 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
1C 5/14/94 16 24 1.5 TM000000000001.079 
1 5/20/94 2 13 6.5 TM000000000001.079 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
5 5/20/94 2 10 5.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 5/20/94 3 10 3.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 5/26/94 11 26 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1 6/1/94 12 20 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
1C 6/1/94 12 19 1.6 TM000000000001.079 
1 6/7/94 8 22 2.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 6/7/94 10 24 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1C 6/7/94 9 22 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
5 6/13/94 14 31 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1C 6/13/94 13 29 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1 6/19/94 13 21 1.6 TM000000000001.079 
5 6/19/94 11 19 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
1C 6/19/94 12 21 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 6/25/94 15 24 1.6 TM000000000001.079 
5 6/25/94 13 22 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
1C 6/25/94 14 22 1.6 TM000000000001.079 
1 7/1/94 26 43 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
5 7/1/94 23 41 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 7/1/94 26 43 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
1 7/7/94 10 20 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 7/7/94 5 14 2.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 7/13/94 14 24 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
5 7/13/94 11 20 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 7/13/94 12 23 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1 7/19/94 39 99 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
5 7/19/94 42 98 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 7/19/94 40 102 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
1 7/25/94 19 32 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
5 7/25/94 9 20 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1C 7/25/94 19 38 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 7/29/94 26 50 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1C 7/29/94 25 51 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 7/31/94 12 24 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 8/6/94 16 28 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 8/6/94 11 19 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
1C 8/6/94 16 28 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 8/12/94 15 31 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
5 8/12/94 14 27 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1C 8/12/94 15 31 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1 8/18/94 17 28 1.6 TM000000000001.079 
5 8/18/94 17 32 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1C 8/18/94 16 29 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 8/24/94 12 25 2.1 TM000000000001.079 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table E-1. TSP:PM10 Ratios  Yucca Mountain, 1989-1997 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 E-9 September 2004 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1C 8/24/94 11 24 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1 8/30/94 14 31 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
5 8/30/94 10 17 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
1 9/5/94 14 25 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 9/5/94 14 27 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1 9/11/94 13 26 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 9/11/94 14 31 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1C 9/11/94 14 27 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1C 9/17/94 11 25 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 9/23/94 20 36 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 9/23/94 11 18 1.6 TM000000000001.079 
1C 9/23/94 20 37 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1 9/29/94 6 17 2.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 9/29/94 5 17 3.4 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/5/94 8 13 1.6 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/5/94 2 9 4.5 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/5/94 6 14 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/11/94 12 24 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/11/94 10 23 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/11/94 12 25 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/17/94 2 15 7.5 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/17/94 2 8 4.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/17/94 3 17 5.7 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/23/94 7 16 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/23/94 10 18 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/23/94 10 17 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/29/94 4 11 2.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/29/94 6 13 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1 11/4/94 8 21 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
5 11/4/94 7 16 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 11/10/94 8 15 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
5 11/10/94 7 18 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
1C 11/10/94 3 16 5.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 11/16/94 7 20 2.9 TM000000000001.079 
5 11/16/94 11 41 3.7 TM000000000001.079 
1C 11/16/94 6 20 3.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 11/22/94 5 21 4.2 TM000000000001.079 
5 11/22/94 3 9 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 11/28/94 4 18 4.5 TM000000000001.079 
1 11/29/94 6 16 2.7 TM000000000001.079 
1C 11/29/94 6 20 3.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 12/4/94 6 12 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 12/4/94 7 17 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1C 12/4/94 7 14 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 12/10/94 9 15 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
5 12/10/94 3 10 3.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 12/10/94 6 18 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 12/16/94 5 18 3.6 TM000000000001.079 
1C 12/16/94 6 11 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 12/22/94 8 21 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
5 12/22/94 17 35 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1C 12/22/94 9 12 1.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 12/28/94 8 10 1.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 12/28/94 6 12 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 1/3/95 4 8 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 1/3/95 4 7 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 1/3/95 4 8 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 1/9/95 2 4 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 1/15/95 2 3 1.5 TM000000000001.079 
5 1/15/95 1 4 4.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 1/15/95 1 5 5.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 1/21/95 7 10 1.4 TM000000000001.079 
5 1/21/95 7 12 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
1C 1/21/95 7 12 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
1 1/27/95 3 7 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 1/27/95 2 6 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 1/27/95 2 4 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 2/2/95 6 18 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 2/2/95 5 16 3.2 TM000000000001.079 
1C 2/2/95 7 21 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 2/8/95 7 16 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 2/8/95 6 15 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
1C 2/8/95 6 14 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 2/14/95 5 13 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
1C 2/14/95 4 14 3.5 TM000000000001.079 
1 2/20/95 3 9 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 2/20/95 4 9 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 2/20/95 4 11 2.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 2/26/95 7 12 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
5 2/26/95 9 16 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 2/26/95 8 13 1.6 TM000000000001.079 
1 3/4/95 4 11 2.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 3/4/95 3 13 4.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 3/4/95 4 7 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 3/10/95 8 14 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 3/10/95 7 17 2.4 TM000000000001.079 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table E-1. TSP:PM10 Ratios  Yucca Mountain, 1989-1997 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 E-10 September 2004 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1C 3/10/95 7 15 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1 3/16/95 10 19 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
5 3/16/95 8 16 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 3/16/95 10 21 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
5 3/22/95 5 16 3.2 TM000000000001.079 
1C 3/22/95 5 13 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
1 3/28/95 7 17 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
5 3/28/95 8 18 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 3/28/95 7 18 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
1 4/3/95 9 30 3.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 4/3/95 12 37 3.1 TM000000000001.079 
1C 4/3/95 10 30 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 4/9/95 13 56 4.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 4/9/95 67 310 4.6 TM000000000001.079 
1C 4/9/95 9 51 5.7 TM000000000001.079 
1 4/15/95 4 21 5.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 4/15/95 9 32 3.6 TM000000000001.079 
1C 4/15/95 9 20 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1 4/21/95 14 39 2.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 4/21/95 11 69 6.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 4/21/95 10 25 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
1 4/27/95 15 35 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 4/27/95 12 36 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 4/27/95 12 37 3.1 TM000000000001.079 
1 5/3/95 7 18 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
5 5/3/95 20 41 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1C 5/3/95 8 18 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 5/9/95 11 24 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
5 5/9/95 11 24 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1C 5/9/95 12 25 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1 5/15/95 7 19 2.7 TM000000000001.079 
5 5/15/95 3 12 4.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 5/15/95 3 18 6.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 5/21/95 15 25 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
5 5/21/95 16 28 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 5/21/95 15 27 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 5/27/95 8 15 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1C 5/27/95 9 22 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1 6/2/95 10 43 4.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 6/2/95 10 31 3.1 TM000000000001.079 
1C 6/2/95 10 41 4.1 TM000000000001.079 
1 6/8/95 10 34 3.4 TM000000000001.079 
5 6/8/95 6 26 4.3 TM000000000001.079 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1C 6/8/95 9 33 3.7 TM000000000001.079 
1 6/14/95 14 35 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
5 6/14/95 17 50 2.9 TM000000000001.079 
1C 6/14/95 15 34 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 6/20/95 11 37 3.4 TM000000000001.079 
1C 6/20/95 9 26 2.9 TM000000000001.079 
1 6/26/95 11 30 2.7 TM000000000001.079 
5 6/26/95 11 36 3.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 6/26/95 11 31 2.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 7/2/95 12 21 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 7/2/95 8 19 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1 7/8/95 14 31 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
5 7/8/95 15 36 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1C 7/8/95 14 33 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1 7/14/95 14 30 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
5 7/14/95 12 30 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
1C 7/14/95 13 43 3.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 7/20/95 14 20 1.4 TM000000000001.079 
5 7/20/95 14 25 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 7/20/95 9 26 2.9 TM000000000001.079 
1 7/26/95 13 27 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
5 7/26/95 12 27 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 7/26/95 12 34 2.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 8/1/95 20 46 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 8/1/95 18 38 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1C 8/1/95 19 45 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1 8/7/95 15 41 2.7 TM000000000001.079 
5 8/7/95 16 36 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1C 8/7/95 15 43 2.9 TM000000000001.079 
1 8/13/95 17 36 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
5 8/13/95 14 28 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 8/13/95 16 36 2.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 8/19/95 14 28 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 8/19/95 14 18 1.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 8/25/95 9 26 2.9 TM000000000001.079 
5 8/25/95 10 21 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1C 8/25/95 9 19 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1 8/31/95 12 23 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
5 8/31/95 12 23 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1C 8/31/95 13 26 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 9/6/95 13 27 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1 9/12/95 9 22 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1C 9/12/95 10 26 2.6 TM000000000001.079 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table E-1. TSP:PM10 Ratios  Yucca Mountain, 1989-1997 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 E-11 September 2004 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1 9/18/95 21 53 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
5 9/18/95 18 35 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
1C 9/18/95 21 50 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1 9/24/95 16 25 1.6 TM000000000001.079 
1C 9/24/95 12 24 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 9/30/95 5 14 2.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 9/30/95 5 15 3.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 9/30/95 5 14 2.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/6/95 9 18 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/6/95 13 23 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/6/95 9 20 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/12/95 13 33 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/12/95 14 34 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/18/95 16 31 1.9 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/18/95 11 23 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/18/95 14 31 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/24/95 7 18 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/24/95 8 13 1.6 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/24/95 8 19 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1 10/30/95 7 15 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
5 10/30/95 6 12 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 10/30/95 6 16 2.7 TM000000000001.079 
1 11/5/95 5 10 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
5 11/5/95 5 11 2.2 TM000000000001.079 
1C 11/5/95 5 13 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
1 11/11/95 3 13 4.3 TM000000000001.079 
5 11/11/95 4 8 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 11/11/95 4 11 2.8 TM000000000001.079 
1 11/17/95 16 34 2.1 TM000000000001.079 
5 11/17/95 8 16 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 11/17/95 14 35 2.5 TM000000000001.079 
1 11/23/95 7 18 2.6 TM000000000001.079 
5 11/23/95 6 24 4.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 11/23/95 7 27 3.9 TM000000000001.079 
5 11/29/95 5 12 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1 12/5/95 14 25 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
5 12/5/95 9 14 1.6 TM000000000001.079 
1C 12/5/95 13 26 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 12/11/95 9 22 2.4 TM000000000001.079 
1C 12/11/95 9 14 1.6 TM000000000001.079 
1 12/17/95 2 4 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 12/17/95 1 4 4.0 TM000000000001.079 
1 12/23/95 6 11 1.8 TM000000000001.079 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
5 12/23/95 6 12 2.0 TM000000000001.079 
1C 12/23/95 6 10 1.7 TM000000000001.079 
1 12/29/95 3 13 4.3 TM000000000001.079 
1 1/4/96 4 9 2.3 TM000000000001.084 
1C 1/4/96 5 10 2.0 TM000000000001.084 
1 1/10/96 5 13 2.6 TM000000000001.084 
5 1/10/96 4 9 2.3 TM000000000001.084 
1C 1/10/96 5 13 2.6 TM000000000001.084 
1 1/16/96 10 28 2.8 TM000000000001.084 
5 1/16/96 7 25 3.6 TM000000000001.084 
1C 1/16/96 10 28 2.8 TM000000000001.084 
1 1/22/96 3 8 2.7 TM000000000001.084 
5 1/22/96 2 5 2.5 TM000000000001.084 
1C 1/22/96 2 8 4.0 TM000000000001.084 
1 1/28/96 5 17 3.4 TM000000000001.084 
5 1/28/96 5 16 3.2 TM000000000001.084 
1C 1/28/96 5 17 3.4 TM000000000001.084 
1 2/3/96 5 11 2.2 TM000000000001.084 
5 2/3/96 4 8 2.0 TM000000000001.084 
1C 2/3/96 5 11 2.2 TM000000000001.084 
1 2/9/96 7 14 2.0 TM000000000001.084 
5 2/9/96 7 13 1.9 TM000000000001.084 
1C 2/9/96 7 14 2.0 TM000000000001.084 
1 2/15/96 6 15 2.5 TM000000000001.084 
5 2/15/96 8 17 2.1 TM000000000001.084 
1C 2/15/96 7 14 2.0 TM000000000001.084 
1 2/21/96 3 8 2.7 TM000000000001.084 
1C 2/21/96 4 7 1.8 TM000000000001.084 
1 2/27/96 3 8 2.7 TM000000000001.084 
5 2/27/96 3 5 1.7 TM000000000001.084 
1C 2/27/96 3 7 2.3 TM000000000001.084 
1 3/4/96 8 28 3.5 TM000000000001.084 
5 3/4/96 9 35 3.9 TM000000000001.084 
1C 3/4/96 10 26 2.6 TM000000000001.084 
1 3/10/96 5 12 2.4 TM000000000001.084 
5 3/10/96 6 13 2.2 TM000000000001.084 
1C 3/10/96 6 12 2.0 TM000000000001.084 
1 3/16/96 6 12 2.0 TM000000000001.084 
5 3/16/96 5 17 3.4 TM000000000001.084 
1C 3/16/96 6 12 2.0 TM000000000001.084 
1 3/22/96 22 51 2.3 TM000000000001.084 
5 3/22/96 27 65 2.4 TM000000000001.084 
1C 3/22/96 21 48 2.3 TM000000000001.084 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table E-1. TSP:PM10 Ratios  Yucca Mountain, 1989-1997 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 E-12 September 2004 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1 3/28/96 23 77 3.3 TM000000000001.084 
5 3/28/96 35 126 3.6 TM000000000001.084 
1C 3/28/96 22 72 3.3 TM000000000001.084 
1 4/3/96 5 11 2.2 TM000000000001.096 
1C 4/3/96 5 8 1.6 TM000000000001.096 
1 4/9/96 9 21 2.3 TM000000000001.096 
1C 4/9/96 10 21 2.1 TM000000000001.096 
1 4/15/96 7 20 2.9 TM000000000001.096 
5 4/15/96 7 34 4.9 TM000000000001.096 
1C 4/15/96 8 18 2.3 TM000000000001.096 
1 4/21/96 5 11 2.2 TM000000000001.096 
5 4/21/96 5 16 3.2 TM000000000001.096 
1C 4/21/96 5 10 2.0 TM000000000001.096 
1 4/27/96 13 30 2.3 TM000000000001.096 
5 4/27/96 15 38 2.5 TM000000000001.096 
1C 4/27/96 14 27 1.9 TM000000000001.096 
1 5/3/96 7 13 1.9 TM000000000001.096 
5 5/3/96 8 26 3.3 TM000000000001.096 
1C 5/3/96 7 12 1.7 TM000000000001.096 
1 5/9/96 9 19 2.1 TM000000000001.096 
5 5/9/96 10 23 2.3 TM000000000001.096 
1C 5/9/96 10 19 1.9 TM000000000001.096 
1 5/15/96 20 55 2.8 TM000000000001.096 
1C 5/15/96 22 52 2.4 TM000000000001.096 
1 5/21/96 15 25 1.7 TM000000000001.096 
5 5/21/96 15 32 2.1 TM000000000001.096 
1C 5/21/96 15 24 1.6 TM000000000001.096 
1 5/27/96 12 25 2.1 TM000000000001.096 
5 5/27/96 14 36 2.6 TM000000000001.096 
1C 5/27/96 12 25 2.1 TM000000000001.096 
1 6/2/96 11 17 1.5 TM000000000001.096 
5 6/2/96 11 17 1.5 TM000000000001.096 
1C 6/2/96 11 15 1.4 TM000000000001.096 
1 6/8/96 18 27 1.5 TM000000000001.096 
5 6/8/96 18 29 1.6 TM000000000001.096 
1C 6/8/96 17 27 1.6 TM000000000001.096 
1 6/14/96 17 28 1.6 TM000000000001.096 
5 6/14/96 16 104 6.5 TM000000000001.096 
1C 6/14/96 17 26 1.5 TM000000000001.096 
1 6/20/96 19 34 1.8 TM000000000001.096 
5 6/20/96 19 37 1.9 TM000000000001.096 
1C 6/20/96 19 33 1.7 TM000000000001.096 
1 6/26/96 7 15 2.1 TM000000000001.096 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1C 6/26/96 7 15 2.1 TM000000000001.096 
1 7/2/96 15 25 1.7 TM000000000001.097 
5 7/2/96 15 23 1.5 TM000000000001.097 
1C 7/2/96 17 24 1.4 TM000000000001.097 
5 7/8/96 15 30 2.0 TM000000000001.097 
1C 7/8/96 16 26 1.6 TM000000000001.097 
1 7/14/96 10 23 2.3 TM000000000001.097 
5 7/14/96 10 24 2.4 TM000000000001.097 
1C 7/14/96 10 22 2.2 TM000000000001.097 
1 7/20/96 10 21 2.1 TM000000000001.097 
5 7/20/96 9 19 2.1 TM000000000001.097 
1 7/26/96 60 147 2.5 TM000000000001.097 
5 7/26/96 57 148 2.6 TM000000000001.097 
1 8/1/96 11 21 1.9 TM000000000001.097 
5 8/1/96 11 22 2.0 TM000000000001.097 
1C 8/1/96 11 20 1.8 TM000000000001.097 
5 8/7/96 13 24 1.8 TM000000000001.097 
1C 8/7/96 14 25 1.8 TM000000000001.097 
1 8/13/96 12 28 2.3 TM000000000001.097 
5 8/13/96 13 26 2.0 TM000000000001.097 
1C 8/13/96 12 27 2.3 TM000000000001.097 
1 8/19/96 21 35 1.7 TM000000000001.097 
5 8/19/96 21 34 1.6 TM000000000001.097 
1C 8/19/96 22 34 1.5 TM000000000001.097 
1 8/25/96 13 26 2.0 TM000000000001.097 
5 8/25/96 13 29 2.2 TM000000000001.097 
1C 8/25/96 14 26 1.9 TM000000000001.097 
1 8/31/96 15 23 1.5 TM000000000001.097 
1C 8/31/96 14 22 1.6 TM000000000001.097 
1 9/6/96 10 20 2.0 TM000000000001.097 
5 9/6/96 9 18 2.0 TM000000000001.097 
1 9/12/96 9 24 2.7 TM000000000001.097 
5 9/12/96 9 24 2.7 TM000000000001.097 
1C 9/12/96 10 23 2.3 TM000000000001.097 
1 9/18/96 6 18 3.0 TM000000000001.097 
5 9/18/96 3 10 3.3 TM000000000001.097 
1C 9/18/96 6 17 2.8 TM000000000001.097 
1 9/24/96 9 17 1.9 TM000000000001.097 
5 9/24/96 10 19 1.9 TM000000000001.097 
1C 9/24/96 10 18 1.8 TM000000000001.097 
1 9/30/96 10 20 2.0 TM000000000001.097 
5 9/30/96 7 16 2.3 TM000000000001.097 
1C 9/30/96 10 20 2.0 TM000000000001.097 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table E-1. TSP:PM10 Ratios  Yucca Mountain, 1989-1997 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 E-13 September 2004 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
5 10/6/96 8 14 1.8 TM000000000001.098 
1C 10/6/96 7 14 2.0 TM000000000001.098 
5 10/12/96 8 16 2.0 TM000000000001.098 
1C 10/12/96 7 14 2.0 TM000000000001.098 
1C 10/18/96 11 26 2.4 TM000000000001.098 
1 10/24/96 9 27 3.0 TM000000000001.098 
5 10/24/96 7 48 6.9 TM000000000001.098 
1C 10/24/96 8 25 3.1 TM000000000001.098 
1 10/30/96 5 13 2.6 TM000000000001.098 
5 10/30/96 5 14 2.8 TM000000000001.098 
1 11/5/96 8 13 1.6 TM000000000001.098 
5 11/5/96 7 14 2.0 TM000000000001.098 
1C 11/5/96 8 12 1.5 TM000000000001.098 
1 11/11/96 3 10 3.3 TM000000000001.098 
5 11/11/96 4 9 2.3 TM000000000001.098 
1C 11/11/96 4 8 2.0 TM000000000001.098 
5 11/17/96 7 21 3.0 TM000000000001.098 
1C 11/17/96 8 21 2.6 TM000000000001.098 
5 11/23/96 3 5 1.7 TM000000000001.098 
1 11/26/96 6 20 3.3 TM000000000001.098 
1C 11/26/96 6 20 3.3 TM000000000001.098 
1 11/29/96 6 16 2.7 TM000000000001.098 
5 11/29/96 4 13 3.3 TM000000000001.098 
1C 11/29/96 6 16 2.7 TM000000000001.098 
1 12/5/96 10 33 3.3 TM000000000001.098 
5 12/5/96 6 22 3.7 TM000000000001.098 
1C 12/5/96 10 31 3.1 TM000000000001.098 
1 12/11/96 2 6 3.0 TM000000000001.098 
5 12/11/96 2 8 4.0 TM000000000001.098 
1C 12/11/96 2 4 2.0 TM000000000001.098 
1 12/17/96 6 21 3.5 TM000000000001.098 
5 12/17/96 2 7 3.5 TM000000000001.098 
1C 12/17/96 5 17 3.4 TM000000000001.098 
1 12/23/96 5 29 5.8 TM000000000001.098 
5 12/23/96 4 25 6.3 TM000000000001.098 
1C 12/23/96 5 27 5.4 TM000000000001.098 
1 12/29/96 3 11 3.7 TM000000000001.098 
5 12/29/96 3 8 2.7 TM000000000001.098 
1C 12/29/96 3 7 2.3 TM000000000001.098 
1 1/4/97 4 14 3.5 TM000000000001.099 
5 1/4/97 2 7 3.5 TM000000000001.099 
1C 1/4/97 4 14 3.5 TM000000000001.099 
1 1/10/97 8 23 2.9 TM000000000001.099 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
5 1/10/97 5 15 3.0 TM000000000001.099 
1C 1/10/97 8 22 2.8 TM000000000001.099 
1 1/16/97 4 10 2.5 TM000000000001.099 
1C 1/16/97 4 8 2.0 TM000000000001.099 
1C 1/22/97 4 7 1.8 TM000000000001.099 
5 1/25/97 4 11 2.8 TM000000000001.099 
1 1/28/97 5 11 2.2 TM000000000001.099 
5 1/28/97 6 17 2.8 TM000000000001.099 
1C 1/28/97 5 11 2.2 TM000000000001.099 
1 2/3/97 4 15 3.8 TM000000000001.099 
5 2/3/97 2 11 5.5 TM000000000001.099 
1C 2/3/97 4 14 3.5 TM000000000001.099 
1 2/9/97 3 6 2.0 TM000000000001.099 
5 2/9/97 3 9 3.0 TM000000000001.099 
1C 2/9/97 3 5 1.7 TM000000000001.099 
1 2/15/97 2 6 3.0 TM000000000001.099 
5 2/15/97 4 11 2.8 TM000000000001.099 
1C 2/15/97 2 6 3.0 TM000000000001.099 
1 2/21/97 2 12 6.0 TM000000000001.099 
5 2/21/97 2 10 5.0 TM000000000001.099 
1C 2/21/97 2 11 5.5 TM000000000001.099 
5 2/27/97 8 20 2.5 TM000000000001.099 
1C 2/27/97 8 18 2.3 TM000000000001.099 
1 3/5/97 4 9 2.3 TM000000000001.099 
5 3/5/97 3 14 4.7 TM000000000001.099 
1C 3/5/97 3 12 4.0 TM000000000001.099 
1 3/11/97 10 22 2.2 TM000000000001.099 
5 3/11/97 11 18 1.6 TM000000000001.099 
1C 3/11/97 11 22 2.0 TM000000000001.099 
1 3/17/97 10 18 1.8 TM000000000001.099 
5 3/17/97 8 20 2.5 TM000000000001.099 
1C 3/17/97 8 19 2.4 TM000000000001.099 
1 3/23/97 11 24 2.2 TM000000000001.099 
5 3/23/97 11 21 1.9 TM000000000001.099 
1C 3/23/97 11 23 2.1 TM000000000001.099 
1 3/29/97 6 14 2.3 TM000000000001.099 
5 3/29/97 6 16 2.7 TM000000000001.099 
1C 3/29/97 5 15 3.0 TM000000000001.099 
1 4/4/97 9 22 2.4 TM000000000001.105 
5 4/4/97 11 43 3.9 TM000000000001.105 
1C 4/4/97 9 21 2.3 TM000000000001.105 
1 4/10/97 6 16 2.7 TM000000000001.105 
5 4/10/97 5 18 3.6 TM000000000001.105 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table E-1. TSP:PM10 Ratios  Yucca Mountain, 1989-1997 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 E-14 September 2004 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1C 4/10/97 7 16 2.3 TM000000000001.105 
1 4/16/97 11 21 1.9 TM000000000001.105 
5 4/16/97 11 23 2.1 TM000000000001.105 
1C 4/16/97 12 22 1.8 TM000000000001.105 
5 4/22/97 12 40 3.3 TM000000000001.105 
1C 4/22/97 11 21 1.9 TM000000000001.105 
1 4/28/97 14 30 2.1 TM000000000001.105 
5 4/28/97 16 41 2.6 TM000000000001.105 
1C 4/28/97 14 30 2.1 TM000000000001.105 
1 5/4/97 9 17 1.9 TM000000000001.105 
5 5/4/97 7 24 3.4 TM000000000001.105 
1C 5/4/97 8 17 2.1 TM000000000001.105 
1 5/10/97 12 33 2.8 TM000000000001.105 
5 5/10/97 13 31 2.4 TM000000000001.105 
1C 5/10/97 13 31 2.4 TM000000000001.105 
1 5/16/97 14 31 2.2 TM000000000001.105 
5 5/16/97 13 30 2.3 TM000000000001.105 
1C 5/16/97 15 31 2.1 TM000000000001.105 
1 5/22/97 17 34 2.0 TM000000000001.105 
5 5/22/97 19 36 1.9 TM000000000001.105 
1 5/28/97 12 28 2.3 TM000000000001.105 
5 5/28/97 10 21 2.1 TM000000000001.105 
1C 5/28/97 13 25 1.9 TM000000000001.105 
1 6/3/97 19 36 1.9 TM000000000001.105 
5 6/3/97 19 37 1.9 TM000000000001.105 
1C 6/3/97 18 35 1.9 TM000000000001.105 
1 6/9/97 16 33 2.1 TM000000000001.105 
5 6/9/97 14 33 2.4 TM000000000001.105 
1C 6/9/97 14 32 2.3 TM000000000001.105 
1 6/15/97 4 12 3.0 TM000000000001.105 
5 6/15/97 3 9 3.0 TM000000000001.105 
1C 6/15/97 3 9 3.0 TM000000000001.105 
1 6/21/97 18 35 1.9 TM000000000001.105 
5 6/21/97 16 41 2.6 TM000000000001.105 
1C 6/21/97 18 34 1.9 TM000000000001.105 
1 6/27/97 19 38 2.0 TM000000000001.105 
1C 6/27/97 20 37 1.9 TM000000000001.105 
1 7/3/97 9 20 2.2 TM000000000001.108 
5 7/3/97 8 19 2.4 TM000000000001.108 
1C 7/3/97 7 19 2.7 TM000000000001.108 
1 7/9/97 10 19 1.9 TM000000000001.108 
5 7/9/97 9 18 2.0 TM000000000001.108 
1C 7/9/97 10 17 1.7 TM000000000001.108 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1 7/15/97 21 41 2.0 TM000000000001.108 
5 7/15/97 13 21 1.6 TM000000000001.108 
1C 7/15/97 21 36 1.7 TM000000000001.108 
5 7/21/97 16 34 2.1 TM000000000001.108 
1 7/27/97 10 23 2.3 TM000000000001.108 
1C 7/27/97 11 22 2.0 TM000000000001.108 
1 8/2/97 9 18 2.0 TM000000000001.108 
5 8/2/97 8 15 1.9 TM000000000001.108 
1C 8/2/97 10 16 1.6 TM000000000001.108 
1 8/8/97 31 78 2.5 TM000000000001.108 
5 8/8/97 26 57 2.2 TM000000000001.108 
1C 8/8/97 34 76 2.2 TM000000000001.108 
1 8/14/97 12 25 2.1 TM000000000001.108 
5 8/14/97 12 21 1.8 TM000000000001.108 
1C 8/14/97 12 23 1.9 TM000000000001.108 
1 8/20/97 13 24 1.8 TM000000000001.108 
5 8/20/97 10 17 1.7 TM000000000001.108 
1 8/26/97 11 26 2.4 TM000000000001.108 
5 8/26/97 9 16 1.8 TM000000000001.108 
1C 8/26/97 13 26 2.0 TM000000000001.108 
1 9/1/97 14 29 2.1 TM000000000001.108 
5 9/1/97 14 28 2.0 TM000000000001.108 
1C 9/1/97 14 28 2.0 TM000000000001.108 
1 9/7/97 12 19 1.6 TM000000000001.108 
5 9/7/97 12 18 1.5 TM000000000001.108 
1C 9/7/97 12 19 1.6 TM000000000001.108 
1 9/13/97 11 25 2.3 TM000000000001.108 
5 9/13/97 10 23 2.3 TM000000000001.108 
1C 9/13/97 10 24 2.4 TM000000000001.108 
1 9/19/97 13 31 2.4 TM000000000001.108 
5 9/19/97 13 29 2.2 TM000000000001.108 
1C 9/19/97 14 30 2.1 TM000000000001.108 
5 9/25/97 8 17 2.1 TM000000000001.108 
1C 9/25/97 8 21 2.6 TM000000000001.108 
1 10/1/97 8 19 2.4 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
5 10/1/97 9 14 1.6 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1C 10/1/97 12 20 1.7 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1 10/7/97 21 50 2.4 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1C 10/7/97 21 50 2.4 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1 10/13/97 3 18 6.0 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1C 10/13/97 4 17 4.3 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1 10/19/97 10 22 2.2 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
5 10/19/97 10 17 1.7 MO98PSDALOG111.000 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
Table E-1. TSP:PM10 Ratios  Yucca Mountain, 1989-1997 (Continued) 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 E-15 September 2004 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1C 10/19/97 11 21 1.9 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1 10/25/97 3 11 3.7 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
5 10/25/97 3 9 3.0 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1C 10/25/97 4 10 2.5 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1 10/31/97 6 15 2.5 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
5 10/31/97 4 9 2.3 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1C 10/31/97 5 13 2.6 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1 11/6/97 11 31 2.8 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
5 11/6/97 5 11 2.2 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1C 11/6/97 12 30 2.5 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1 11/12/97 5 12 2.4 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
5 11/12/97 5 8 1.6 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1C 11/12/97 5 12 2.4 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1 11/18/97 5 12 2.4 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1C 11/18/97 4 9 2.3 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1 11/24/97 10 29 2.9 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
5 11/24/97 5 9 1.8 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1C 11/24/97 10 28 2.8 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
Site Date PM10 TSPa Ratiob DTN 
1 11/30/97 3 7 2.3 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
5 11/30/97 3 7 2.3 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1C 11/30/97 3 7 2.3 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1 12/6/97 2 6 3.0 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
5 12/6/97 3 5 1.7 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1C 12/6/97 2 6 3.0 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1 12/12/97 1 5 5.0 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
5 12/12/97 1 5 5.0 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1C 12/12/97 1 5 5.0 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1 12/18/97 4 12 3.0 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
5 12/18/97 3 10 3.3 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1C 12/18/97 4 13 3.3 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1 12/24/97 2 6 3.0 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
5 12/24/97 1 7 7.0 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1C 12/24/97 1 5 5.0 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1 12/30/97 4 10 2.5 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
5 12/30/97 8 17 2.1 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
1C 12/30/97 4 10 2.5 MO98PSDALOG111.000 
a g/m3 
b TSP  PM10 
DTN=data tracking number, PM10 =particles with an aerodynamic diameter =10 m, TSP=total suspended particles 

Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model 
ANL-MGR-MD-000001 REV 03 E-16 September 2004 
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK