Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model Rev 02, ICN 00 Errata 001
ANL-MGR-MD-000001
June 2003
1. PURPOSE
This analysis is one of the nine reports that support the Environmental Radiation Model for
Yucca Mountain Nevada (ERMYN) biosphere model. The Biosphere Model Report (BSC
2003a) describes in detail the conceptual model as well as the mathematical model and its input
parameters. This report documents a set of input parameters for the biosphere model, 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.
This report, Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model, is one of the 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
2003b). It should be noted that some documents identified in Figure 1-1 may be under
development at the time this report is issued and therefore not available at that time. This figure
is included to provide an understanding of how this analysis report contributes to biosphere
modeling in support of the license application, and is not intended to imply that access to the
listed documents is required to understand the contents of this analysis report.
This analysis report defines and justifies values of mass loading, which is the total mass
concentration of resuspended particles (e.g., dust, ash) in a volume of air. Measurements of mass
loading are used in the air submodel of ERMYN to calculate concentrations of radionuclides in
air surrounding crops and concentrations in air inhaled by a receptor. 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. This set of mass loading values
is used in the biosphere groundwater exposure scenario to calculate the dose caused by inhalation
and crop interception of resuspended soil contaminated by well water. This set is also used in 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. Note that
biosphere exposure scenarios are not equivalent to scenario classes used in the TSPA.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 11 June 2003
Figure 1-1. Documentation Hierarchy for the Environmental Radiation Model for
Yucca Mountain Nevada
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 12 June 2003
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. They 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 loading  receptor environments, Sn (mg/m3). The average annual mass concentration
of suspended particles in n environments.
Mass loading  crops, 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. See the Biosphere Model Report (BSC 2003a, Section 6.2) for information on the
inclusion and exclusion of FEPs in the biosphere model.
This report includes part of the technical justification required to address four issues related to
the consequences of igneous activities (Crump 2001, Attachment 1). First, information is
included in Sections 5 and 6 to document the relationship between static measurements of mass
loading used in this analysis (i.e., measurements from stationary monitoring sites) and expected
types and durations of surface-disturbing activities associated with the habits and lifestyles of the
receptor. Static measurements are used in this analysis primarily to develop distributions of mass
loading for the inactive outdoor environment. The applicability of those measurements to the
reference biosphere and habits and lifestyles of the receptor are discussed in Sections 6.1.2 and
6.2.2. Those measurements also were extrapolated to develop mass loading concentrations for
crops, as described in Sections 5.1, 6.1.5, and 6.2.5. Static measurements of mass loading were
used to a lesser extent to develop distributions of mass loading in the active indoor environment
(Sections 6.1.3 and 6.2.3) and asleep indoor environment (Sections 6.1.4 and 6.2.4).
Second, information is provided to clarify how concentrations of particles with a mass median
aerodynamic diameter =10 m (PM10) have been extrapolated to concentrations of total
suspended particles (TSP), including considerations of the difference in behavior between PM10
and TSP particulates under static and disturbed conditions. In this analysis, concentrations of
PM10 (or smaller particles) were converted to TSP concentrations if too few measurements of
TSP were available to fully understand the range of variation of mass loading within an
environment. When that was done, a ratio of TSP to PM10 was selected based on the activities
and levels of disturbance expected to occur within the environment, as described throughout
Section 6 (e.g., Sections 6.1.3.2 and 6.1.4.2).
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 13 June 2003
The third issue is related to whether methods used in the TSPA to sample BDCFs for postvolcanic
conditions are conservative in evaluating long-term ash remobilization processes. The
influence of remobilization of ash on changes in mass loading following a volcanic eruption is
discussed in Section 6.3.3. Additional information on how the influence of remobilization will be
incorporated into the TSPA for the license application is discussed in other documents, such as
the Biosphere Model Report (BSC 2003a).
The fourth issue is related to the method used in TSPA to calculate how tephra thickness affects
mass loading during the post-volcanic period. Development of a mass loading time function and
decrease constant that incorporates uncertainty about the influence of ash depth on mass loading
is discussed in Section 6.3.3.
Two climate states are considered in this analysis, modern interglacial (current) and glacial
transition (future). These climates and their predicted occurrence at Yucca Mountain in the
future are described in Future Climate Analysis (USGS 2001). The modern interglacial climate
includes current conditions, which are characterized by hot, dry summers; warm winters; and
low precipitation (USGS 2001, pp. 66 to 67). This climate state is referred to as current climate
in this report. The glacial transition climate is characterized by cool, wet winters and warm to
cool dry summers relative to current conditions (USGS 2001, p. 73) and is referred to as future
climate in this report. As described in Section 6, the same parameter distributions are
recommended for both climate states.
Table 1-1. Parameters and Related FEPsa
Parameter Related FEPs
FEP
Number
Biosphere
Submodel
Summary of Disposition in
TSPAb
Ashfall 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.
Ashfall 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.
Ashfall 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/Ac
The treatment of this parameter
is described in Sections 6.3 and
summarized in Table 7-1.
Notes: a FEPs (features, events, and processes) are listed in DTN MO0301SEPFEPS1.000.
b The effects of the related FEPs are included in the TSPA through the BDCFs. See BSC (2003, Section 6.2)
for a complete description of the inclusion and treatment of FEPs in the biosphere model.
c This parameter is used directly in the TSPA, not in the biosphere model.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 14 June 2003
This analysis was conducted according to AP-SIII.9Q (Scientific Analyses), and an approved
development plan (BSC 2003b).
2. QUALITY ASSURANCE
Development of this report involves analysis of data to support performance assessment, as
described in the Technical Work Plan (BSC 2003b), and thus is a quality affecting activity in
accordance with AP-2.27Q. Approved quality assurance procedures identified in the Technical
Work Plan (BSC 2003b, Section 4) 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 the Technical Work Plan (BSC 2003b, Section 8).
This analysis did not require classification of the quality level of natural barriers or other items in
accordance with AP-2.22Q, Classification Criteria and Maintenance of the Monitored Geologic
Repository Q List,, or other applicable implementing procedures.
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 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.
4. INPUTS
4.1 DATA AND OTHER TECHNICAL PRODUCT INPUTS
The technical product inputs directly relied upon to develop values for each parameter are
described and justified below and summarized in Table 4-1.
4.1.1 Airborne Particle Concentrations
Measurements of airborne particle concentrations reported within the external sources listed in
Table 4-2 were used to develop distributions of mass loading in the active outdoor, inactive
outdoor, active indoor, and asleep indoor environments applicable to the biosphere model. These
measurements were not collected in the rural, arid environment of Amargosa Valley; therefore,
uncertainty about the influence of climate, environment, activity patterns, and other factors must
be considered when applying these data to the biosphere model. Description of these
measurements, their use in this analysis, and uncertainty associated with their use, 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 6.1.1-1, 6.1.3-1, and 6.1.4-1.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 15 June 2003
This data set includes original measurements of resuspended particle concentrations from all
publications known to the author of this analysis that met the following requirements; therefore,
it is a comprehensive collection of applicable information. These 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 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 TSP or PM10. Because of
the small number of measurements reported for the active outdoor environment, asleep indoor
environments, and post-volcanic environments, sources that report concentrations of smaller
particles (e.g., particles with a mass median aerodynamic diameter =4 m [PM4] or =2.5 m
[PM2.5]) in those environments also were included. Sources that report concentrations of PM2.5
Table 4-1. Technical Product Inputs
Input Source of Input Parametera Description
Resuspended particle
concentrations and
ratios
Peer-reviewed
publications listed in Table
4-2
N/A 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)
 Particle
Characteristics
Annual average TSP concentrations
at monitoring sites throughout the
United States, 1970-2001
Resuspended particle
concentrations
EPA AIRdata database
(MO0008SPATSP00.013)
 Particle
Characteristics
24-hour concentrations of TSP at
monitoring sites in Washington,
1979-1982
Resuspended particle
concentration ratios
MO98PSDALOG111.000
TM000000000001.039
TM000000000001.041
TM000000000001.042
TM000000000001.043
TM000000000001.079
TM000000000001.082
TM000000000001.084
TM000000000001.096
TM000000000001.097
TM000000000001.098
TM000000000001.099
TM000000000001.105
TM000000000001.108
 Particle
Characteristics
24-hour concentrations of TSP and
PM10 at two sites in Yucca
Mountain, 1989-1997.
Climate National Climatic Data
Center (NCDC 1998a,
1998b)
N/A Average annual precipitation and
snowfall, and other measurements
of climate at weather stations in the
United States through 1997
a Applicable parameter in the Technical Data Parameter Dictionary
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 16 June 2003
in the other environments considered in the biosphere model were not 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, p. 1127; Rojas-Brancho et al. 2000, p. 297; Williams et
al. 2000, p. 523).
4.1.2 Total Suspended Particles  United States
Annual average concentrations of TSP for sites throughout the United States during 1970
through 2001 (DTN MO0210SPATSP01.023) 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 Quality Planning and Standards AirData
database (Ambrose 2002a,b). This database contains measurements of air pollution
concentrations collected by federal, state, and local government 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. See Section 6.1.2 for additional information
on the appropriateness of these data for their intended use. 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.
Table 4-2. Sources of Published Measurements of Resuspended Particle Concentrations
Source Source
Baxter et al. 1999 Molocznik and Zagorski 1998
Brauer et al. 2000 Molocznik and Zagorski 2000
Brook et al. 1997 Monn et al. 1997
Buist et al. 1983 Mozzon et al. 1987
Buist et al. 1986a Nieuwenhuijsen and Schenker 1998
Buist et al. 1986b Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 1998
Clausnitzer and Singer 1997 Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 1999
Clayton et al. 1993 Pellizzari et al. 1999
Evans et al. 2000 Quackenboss et al. 1989
Howard-Reed et al. 2000 Rojas-Bracho et al. 2000
Janssen et al. 1998 Searl et al. 2002
Kullman et al. 1998 Thatcher et al. 1995
Leaderer et al. 1999 Wheeler et al. 2000
Linn et al. 1999 Wigzell et al. 2000
Lioy et al. 1990 Williams et al. 2000
Long et al. 2000 Yano et al. 1990
Long et al. 2001 Yocom et al. 1971
Merchant et al. 1982
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 17 June 2003
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) 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
therefore 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.
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 1999a, 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 U.S obtained
from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Climatic Data Center
(NCDC 1998a,b) were used in Section 6.1.2 and Appendices B and C to aid in selecting analog
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. 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. Data 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
2003a) that are applicable to this analysis. These requirements are for compliance with
applicable portions of 10 CFR 63, which is described in more detail in Section 4.3.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 18 June 2003
Table 4-4 lists the acceptance criteria from Section 4.2.1.3.14 (Biosphere Characteristics) of the
Yucca Mountain Review Plan, Draft Final Report (NRC 2003) based on meeting the
requirements of 10 CFR 63.114, 63.305, and 63.312 as they relate to biosphere characteristics
modeling. These criteria are listed to further describe how the requirements referenced in Table
4-3 should be met. Only those bulleted items from Section 4.2.1.3.14 of the Yucca Mountain
Review Plan that apply to this analysis are included here. Similar acceptance criteria and
descriptions from Sections 4.2.1.3.11 (Airborne Transport of Radionuclides) and 4.2.1.3.13
(Redistribution of Radionuclides in Soil) of the plan also apply to portions of this analysis.
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
PRD-002/T-026 Required Characteristics of the Reference Biosphere 10 CFR 63.305
PRD-002/T-028 Required Characteristics of the Reasonably Maximally
Exposed Individual
10 CFR 63.312
Notes: From Canori and Leitner (2003, Table 2-3).
Table 4-4. Acceptance Criteria from the Yucca Mountain Review Plan (NRC 2003) Applicable to this
Analysis.
Acceptance Criterion 1 - System Description and Model Integration Are Adequate.
1. Total system performance assessment adequately incorporates important site features, physical phenomena,
and couplings, and consistent and appropriate assumptions throughout the biosphere characteristics modeling
abstraction process;
2. The total system performance assessment model abstraction identifies and describes aspects of the biosphere
characteristics modeling that are important to repository performance, and includes the technical bases for
these descriptions. For example, the reference biosphere should be consistent with the arid or semi-arid
conditions in the vicinity of Yucca Mountain;
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 assumptions in other total system performance assessment
abstractions;
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; and
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, 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.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 19 June 2003
4.3 CODES AND STANDARDS
The following section of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.s regulations for disposal of spent
nuclear fuel and high level radioactive wastes in the proposed geologic repository at Yucca
Mountain (10 CFR 63) are most relevant to this analysis.
.63.305 Required characteristics of the reference biosphere.
(a) Features, events, and processes that describe the reference biosphere must be consistent
with present knowledge of the conditions in the region surrounding the Yucca Mountain
site.
(b) DOE should not project changes in society, the biosphere (other than climate), human
biology, or increases or decreases of human knowledge or technology. In all analyses
done to demonstrate compliance with this part, DOE must assume that all of those
factors remain constant as they are at the time of submission of the license application.
(c) DOE must vary factors related to the geology, hydrology, and climate based upon
cautious, but reasonable assumptions consistent with present knowledge of factors that
could affect the Yucca Mountain disposal system over the next 10,000 years.
(d) Biosphere pathways must be consistent with arid or semi-arid conditions.
Table 4-4. (Continued)
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 underrepresentation
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;
5. Where sufficient data do not exist, the definition of parameter values and conceptual models is based on
appropriate use of expert elicitation, conducted in accordance with appropriate guidance, such as NUREG-
1563. If other approaches are used, the U.S. Department of Energy adequately justifies their uses; and
6. Parameters or models that most influence repository performance, based on the performance measure and
time period of compliance specified in 10 CFR Part 63, are identified.
Notes: From NRC 2003 (Section 4.2.1.3.14, Biosphere Characteristics). Only those acceptance criteria and
related explanations that apply to this analysis are listed. Note that similar acceptance criteria in Sections
4.2.1.3.11 (Airborne Transport of Radionuclides) and 4.2.1.3.13 (Redistribution of Radionuclides in Soils)
also apply to this analysis.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 20 June 2003
.63.312 Required characteristics of the reasonably maximally exposed individual.
The reasonably maximally exposed individual is a hypothetical person who meets the
following criteria: .
(b) Has a diet and living style representative of the people who now reside in the Town of
Amargosa Valley, Nevada. DOE must use projections based upon surveys of the people
residing in the Town of Amargosa Valley, Nevada, to determine their current diets and living
styles and use the mean values of these factors in the assessments conducted for ..63.311
and 63.321.
5. ASSUMPTIONS
5.1 MASS LOADING.CROPS
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.
This assumption is used in Sections 6.1.5 and 6.2.5 to develop distributions of mass loading for
crops. This assumption is necessary because concentrations of resuspended particles have not
been measured in fields with growing crops. See Section 6 for a description of environments.
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, pp. 5-36 and 5-37; IAEA 2001, p. 64), and because
harvested foodstuffs and forage usually 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 analog site for consideration
of future climates, USGS 2001, pp. 62-75). 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 farming
communities in the western United States (Section 6.1.2). Those measurements were influenced
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 21 June 2003
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 generally match
the conditions required to estimate mass loading concentrations for crops.
For the following reasons it is likely 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 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 of 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 because mass loading rapidly returns to
background levels after soil-disturbing activities cease (Pinnick et al. 1985, p. 104) and because
the influence of soil disturbing activities on mass loading generally is limited to less than 0.75
km (Chow et al. 1999, p.652). Thus, for most of the time, there will be few or no soil-disturbing
activities influencing mass loading near crops.
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 prior to harvesting.
This assumption does not need to be confirmed because it is based on a reasonable, cautious
interpretation of conditions that accounts for uncertainty in mass loading for crops.
5.2 POST-VOLCANIC 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 necessary because there are few measurements of mass loading indoors
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.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 22 June 2003
Eleven of the seventeen studies reviewed in Section 6.1.3 included correlation or regression
coefficients of indoor and outdoor concentrations (Table 5-1). These 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, Table 2; Rojas-Bracho et al. 2000, Table 2). Factors such as amount of
smoking, cooking, and personal activity were listed in many studies as explanations why indoor
and outdoor correlations were relatively low.
Seven studies reported the slope of the regression between indoor or personal and outdoor
concentrations (Table 5-1). Eight of ten 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
Table 5-1. Correlation Coefficients (R) of Indoor and Personal versus Outdoor Concentrations of
Airborne Particles
Reference R Pa Slopeb Comparisonc
Clayton et al. 1993, Table 3 0.35 Personal:Ambient PM10, day
0.62 Personal:Ambient PM10, night
0.46 Indoor:Ambient PM2.5, day
0.65 Indoor:Ambient PM2.5 , night
Lioy et al. 1990, p. 62 0.67 <0.01 0.50 Indoor:Ambient PM10
Quackenboss et al. 1989, Figure 2 0.42 1.14 Indoor:Ambient PM10, includes smokers
Leaderer et al. 1999, Table 2, Figure 2 0.29 >0.10 Indoor:Outdoor PM10
0.11 >0.10 Indoor:Ambient PM10
0.53 <0.01 0.43 Indoor:Outdoor PM2.5
0.08 >0.10 Indoor:Ambient PM2.5
Long et al. 2000, Figure 7 0.20 <0.001 Indoor:Outdoor PM2.5-10, day
0.65 <0.001 Indoor:Outdoor PM2.5-10, night
Pellizzari et al. 1999, Figure 3 0.23 <0.01 Personal:Outdoor PM2.5
0.19 <0.01 Personal:Ambient PM2.5
0.33 <0.01 Indoor:Outdoor PM2.5
0.21 <0.01 Indoor:Ambient PM2.5
Janssen et al. 1998, Table 3 0.71 <0.01 0.55 Personal:Ambient PM10
0.75 <0.01 0.47 Indoor:Outdoor PM10
Evans et al. 2000, Table 10 0.75 Indoor:Outdoor PM10
0.67 Indoor:Ambient PM10
Williams et al. 2000, Table 9 0.96 <0.001 0.39 Apartment:Outdoor PM2.5
0.96 <0.001 0.40 Apartment:Ambient PM2.5
Linn et al. 1999, Table 3 and p. 112 0.66 0.87 Personal:Outdoor PM10
0.54 0.22 Indoor:Ambient PM10
Rojas-Bracho et al. 2000, Table 5 0.41 >0.05 0.43 Personal:Ambient PM10
Notes: a Probability of null hypothesis that there is no correlation between indoor and outdoor concentrations.
b Slope of regression of indoor/personal and 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.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 23 June 2003
that amount in indoor concentrations. The only study reporting a slope greater than 1
(Quackenboss et al. 1989) 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 outdoors 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.
This assumption does not require further confirmation because it is based on a reasonable,
cautious interpretation of a sufficient quantity of published, accepted information that accounts
for important sources of uncertainty.
6. ANALYSIS
This section describes how mass loading values are used in the biosphere model to calculate
inhalation doses. 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 or conditions analogous to those considered in the biosphere
model. Alternatively, mass loading distributions could have been developed using a soil
resuspension model (e.g., Anspaugh et al. 1975). 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 generally are not available
and the accuracy of the models is not well understood (Garger et al. 1997). In addition, mass
loading values based on representative measurements of resuspended particles are more
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 24 June 2003
conservative than soil resuspension models because it is assumed that all resuspended soil
particles (groundwater scenario) or resuspended ash (volcanic ash scenario) are contaminated.
This would not be true, especially for nominal conditions, because some airborne particulate
matter is generated over a large up-wind area, and most of the soil in that area would not be
contaminated.
The mass loading distributions presented in this report are intended for use in modeling of both
current (modern interglacial) and future (glacial transition) climatic conditions. Average annual
precipitation at Yucca Mountain currently is about four to six inches (CRWMS M&O 1999b,
Appendix A) and snowfall is rare. It is predicted that the future, glacial transition climate that
will occur at Yucca Mountain during most of the next 10,000 years will be similar to or drier
than that currently found in parts of eastern Washington (USGS 2001, pp. 62 to 75). Analog
weather stations for the upper bound of the glacial transition climate state are Spokane (0 annual
precipitation = 16.2 inches, 0 annual snowfall = 42.1 inches), Rosalia (0 precipitation = 18.1
inches, 0 snowfall = 24.3 inches), and St. Johns (0 precipitation = 17.1 inches, 0 snowfall = 25.8
inches), Washington (USGS 2001, Table 2) (climate data are from NCDC 1998b). To evaluate
the influence of a change from current to predicted future climatic conditions on mass loading,
annual average concentrations of TSP at rural agricultural sites with varying amounts of
precipitation and snowfall were compared (Appendix C). Sites with less than 20 inches of
precipitation and less than about 45 inches of snowfall had very similar concentrations of TSP.
Based on this comparison, it is concluded that separate distributions for current and future
climatic conditions are not required.
Triangular distributions were selected for all parameters in this analyses for the following
reasons.
 Although distributions of dust concentrations for single activities or locations generally are
lognormal (Morandi et al. 1988, Section 3.2; Nieuwenhuijsen and Schenker 1998, p. 10;
Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 1999, 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
 There is insufficient information to calculate a mean and standard deviation of a lognormal
distribution for most parameters.
 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, Assumption 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).
 Uniform distributions are not used because the minimum and maximum values of the
distributions were selected to be reasonable end points that have a low probability of
occurrence.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 25 June 2003
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.
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 2003a, Section 6.4.2).
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 environmentspecific
breathing rates, time spent in each environment by the receptor, and radionuclidespecific
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
2003a, 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 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 (e.g., Pinnick et al. 1985, pp. 103 and 104), this
category is limited to conditions during and shortly after dust-generating activities.
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 the contaminated areas
conducting activities that do not resuspend soil (e.g., sitting, swimming, walking, barbecuing,
Eq. 6-1 n i m enhance n i h S Cs f Ca , , , =
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 26 June 2003
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 much 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
blanket (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).
Distributions of mass loading used in the biosphere model must be representative of average
exposure over one year as influenced by the full range of reasonable conditions within the
biosphere and the average lifestyle characteristics of the receptor. A period of one year is
considered because the TSPA calculates annual doses based on time steps of =1 year. Because
average annual concentrations at a site do not vary much among years (for example see
Appendix B, Table B-1), annual concentrations also are representative of exposure over periods
of >1 year.
Concentrations of resuspended particles in the receptor environments considered in the model are
influenced in part by characteristics of the biosphere, such as soil moisture, the amount of
agriculture, and wind conditions. In the biosphere model, parameter distributions are to be
representative of all reasonable conditions of the biosphere.
Concentrations of resuspended particles are also influenced by characteristics of the receptor,
such as the occupation of Amargosa Valley residents, and typical behaviors of residents within
those environments. Therefore, lifestyle characteristics that influence mass loads must be
considered in this analysis. 10 CFR 63.312(b) requires that average values of the lifestyle
characteristics of the people in the Town of Amargosa Valley be used in the TSPA. For this
analysis, these requirements have been interpreted qualitatively to mean that only typical or
common behaviors and other lifestyle characteristics should be represented in distributions of
mass loads. For example, people with a physical handicap may experience very low
concentrations of particulates indoors if they are very sedentary and cannot participate in
housework. Because behavioral modifications resulting from such health conditions are not
representative of average lifestyle characteristics, associated mass loads should not be included
in the distribution of average annual concentrations in the active indoor environment. Also,
although most farm workers will do many jobs with a variety of associated concentrations of
resuspended particles, a few may specialize in activities that resuspend extreme amounts of dust,
such as leveling of fields, a majority of the time. The distribution of annual average
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 27 June 2003
concentrations in the outdoor environment should not include the exposure rates of these few
workers because they are not representative of average lifestyle characteristics.
Mass Load  Crops-The equation used to calculate radionuclide concentrations in air from
which resuspended particles are intercepted by crops is very 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
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
2003a, 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 LOADING  NOMINAL 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 representative biosphere is a rural community in an
arid to semi-arid environment with conditions similar to those in the Yucca Mountain region and
a population with lifestyle characteristics similar to those in the Town of Amargosa Valley today
(based on requirements in 10 CFR 63.305 and 312, see Section 4.3). 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 and feedlots, agricultural fields,
and other areas where manure and urine from livestock that were fed contaminated forage and
water are deposited.
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 and particles redistributed into the area will be well mixed with other soil by the time
nominal conditions occur (see Section 6.2 ). Thus, resuspension on undisturbed sites will be
similar to that prior to 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 395 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 (~150 km2) in size (BSC 2001, Figure 1). This
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 28 June 2003
area, known as the farming triangle, is also where most agriculture in the valley occurs
(CRWMS M&O 1999a, pp. 1 to 3). The U.S. Census Bureau estimated that only 26 of 862
Amargosa Valley residents =16 years old were employed in agriculture (Bureau of the Census
2002, 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 was planted at the time
agricultural acreage was measured. About 87 percent of all acreage was planted in hay (92
percent of planted acreage) and about 6 percent was orchards or vineyards (YMP 1999, Table
10). During 1999, there were 8.2 km2 (2,015 acres), 7.3 km2 (1,798 acres) of which was planted
at the time of the survey. Eighty-three percent was planted in hay (93 percent of planted
acreage) and 6 percent was orchards or vineyards (YMP 1999, Table 11). Thus, only a small
portion of the valley (about six 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, and
vineyards, crops that 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 4,400 cows in 1998 and 5,000 cows in
1999 (YMP 1999, Tables 8 and 9). About 46% of 195 Amargosa Valley households surveyed
during 1997 had a garden (DOE 1997, Tables 2.4.2 and 3.5.1). In summary, Amargosa Valley
has a small agricultural industry. 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% of
residences.
6.1.1 Active Outdoor Environment
A review of applicable literature (See Section 4.1.1) was conducted to determine the range of
average concentrations of particles resuspended while soil disturbing activities were being
conducted. 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 similar to those expected by the biosphere model receptor in the active
outdoor environment (e.g., farming, excavating), (2) measured and reported concentrations of
TSP, and (3) were conducted in arid to semi-arid environments. Only measurements of personal
exposure were considered applicable for analysis of this environment. Unless otherwise stated,
personal exposure in this and other studies 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 that person. A summary of this review is in Table 6.1.1-1.
6.1.1.1 Literature Review
Nieuwenhuijsen et al. (1999) recorded 142 measurements of personal exposure to TSP during
farming activities at 10 farms near Sacramento California over 15 months. 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, Table 2). The dustiest activity would be conducted infrequently in
Amargosa Valley, in part because nut orchards occur on <5% of fields in Amargosa Valley
(YMP 1999, 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
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 29 June 2003
geometric mean values >5 mg/m3. The average of all activities excluding nut harvesting was
2.19 mg/m3.
Nieuwenhuijsen et al. (1998) 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 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, 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) 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. p. 11) reanalyzed data from the
Davis study and concluded that the presence of an enclosed cab had a very large influence on
Table 6.1.1-1. Particulate Concentrations-Nominal Outdoor Active Environment
Concentration,
mg/m3 Reference
0 Range
Comments
1 Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 1999,
Table 2 2.19 0.30-7.93 Farming-California, one extreme value excluded
2 Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 1998,
Table 2 19.6 0.7-98.6 Farming-California, many activities in open cab
3 Molocznik and Zagorski
1998, Figure 2 9 3.5-13 Farming-Poland, midpoint of ranges for 6 applicable
activities
4 Molocznik and Zagorski
2000, p. 47 7.8 2.5-14.4 Farming-Poland, midpoint of ranges for 6 applicable
activities
5 Kullman et al. 1998, p. 3 1.78 GSD = 2.9 Dairy barns-Wisconsin
6 Mozzon et al. 1987, p. 115 5.3 0.44-22.8 Landfill operators-Ontario
7 Clausnitzer and Singer
1997, Table 1 2.9 0.2-13.6 Farming-California, respirable concentrations only
0
5
10
15
20
25
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Reference No.
Concentration mg/m3
Squares = TSP, circle = PM4
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 30 June 2003
exposure levels (e.g., exposure during disking was 50 times lower when conducted from an
enclosed cab).
Molocznik and Zagorski (1998) measured personal exposure to TSP during seven activities
conducted by tractor drivers on large farms and by farmers on small, private farms in Poland.
Results are presented in a bar chart (Figure 2 of Molocznik and Zagorski, 1998) 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 13 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.
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 range from 3.5 to 9.3 mg/m3 (Molocznik and Zagorski 2000, 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, third page).
Personal exposure to TSP of bulldozer operators and other workers at three landfills in Ontario
average 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, p. 115).
Clausnitzer and Singer (1997) 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.
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 =2 mg/m3. Only one activity (land planing, 13.6 mg/m3) had an
average concentration >10 mg/m3, and four others had concentrations >5 mg/m3 (Clausnitzer and
Singer 1997, Table 1).
6.1.1.2 Parameter Distribution
The distribution recommended for use in the biosphere model must be representative of the
average concentration experienced over a one-year period and it must be representative of the
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 31 June 2003
average of the lifestyle characteristics of the people in Amargosa Valley (see Section 6.0).
Therefore, the distribution should not encompass extremely high or low values associated with
activities that are conducted infrequently.
Typical dust-generating activities likely conducted by people while working in Amargosa Valley
include field preparation, harvesting, and other activities required to grow field crops; livestock
feeding and management; and excavating. Because most field 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 not conducted frequently. People in
Amargosa Valley would also generate dust while gardening, landscaping, riding horses, or
participating in other recreational activities outdoors. There are no published measurements of
particulate concentrations associated with these activities. Gardening and landscaping would
generate less dust than the soil-disturbing agricultural activities included in the studies reviewed
above because large mechanical equipment usually is not used.
Calculations of the total amount of dust inhaled by a receptor are sensitive to estimates of mass
loading in the active outdoor environment (Appendix A), so a full range of average values that
encompass uncertainty in this parameter must be included in the recommended distribution.
There is uncertainty in the use of the studies reviewed above, associated primarily with the
following three factors. First, the studies were conducted in environments that are different than
the Yucca Mountain region. The studies by Nieuwenhuijsen et al. (1998, 1999) are most
applicable because they were conducted in semi-arid conditions, and because fields there and in
Amargosa Valley are irrigated. Second, the activities for which mass loading concentrations
have been measured do not include all typical dust-generating activities conducted in Amargosa
Valley. For example, there are no measurements associated with gardening and other outdoor
recreational activities. Finally, there is no information on the relative amount of time people in
Amargosa Valley spend conducting various dust-generating activities while in the active outdoor
environment.
Based primarily on the results of Nieuwenhuijsen et al. (1999), 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. (1999), but lower than
the average or midpoint of some of the other studies (Table 6.1.1-1). The one-order-ofmagnitude
range covers the majority of the values measured in the studies described above and
therefore adequately encompasses the uncertainty associated with those studies.
6.1.2 Inactive Outdoor Environment
TSP concentrations measured 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 values
for the inactive outdoor environment. These data were selected because measurements taken at
stationary, outdoor sites are representative of mass loading concentrations that would be
experienced by a person in a rural agricultural setting who is outdoors and not conducting
activities that resuspend substantial amounts of dust.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 32 June 2003
6.1.2.1 Selection of Data
A database of average annual concentrations of TSP for the United States and territories for
years 1970 through 2001 was obtained from the AirData database managed by the EPA Office of
Air Quality and Standards (DTN MO0210SPATSP01.023, 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 was
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 2002a). This dataset
contains 76,220 records. Each record includes an annual geometric mean concentration of
TSP at a monitoring site.
2. KR380.NATION.TXT, obtained from the EPA on September 17, 2002 (Ambrose 2002b). 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 2002a). 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 database COMBINEDTSP was then 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 analog sites with an arid
or semi-arid climate similar to that predicted for Yucca Mountain in the future would be selected.
The rural, agricultural location and land use classification were selected to match the setting and
land use 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 arid or semi-arid.
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.
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 NCDC (1998a, b) (Table B-2).
Information for each site was then examined to select those that are appropriate analog 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.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 33 June 2003
 Ten sites were deleted because average annual precipitation exceeded 20 inches (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 inches per year (0
concentration = 0.053 mg/m3, sd = 0.026) (Table B-2). This was done to ensure that only
sites with an arid or semi-arid climate representative of current and potential future climates
at Yucca Mountain were included. Arid sites generally are considered to have less than
about 10 inches of precipitation (Brady and Weil 1999, p. 830) and the semiarid future
climate for the next 10,000 years is predicted to have a maximum precipitation of 16 to 18
inches (USGS 2001, Table 2; NCDC 1998b). The results of this analysis show little
sensitivity to these cutoff values. The average TSP concentration for the 20 sites with <10
inches of precipitation (0 = 0.060 mg/m3, sd = 0.036) was similar to that for 57 sites with <20
inches (0 = 0.056 mg/m3, sd = 0.029), and to all 67 sites (0 = 0.053 mg/m3, sd = 0.028).
Likewise, the average concentration for the 42 sites with <10 inches of snowfall (0 = 0.056
mg/m3, sd = 0.031) was similar to that for 52 sites with <20 inches (0 = 0.054 mg/m3, sd =
0.030) and to all 67 sites (0 = 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
6.1.2-1). The minimum and maximum annual average concentrations were 0.025 and 0.089
mg/m3, respectively.
6.1.2.2 Parameter Distribution
The TSP concentrations in Table 6.1.2-1 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 6.1.2-1 to account for the cluster of high values.
The modal value is much higher than concentrations measured at relatively undisturbed, nonagricultural
sites at Yucca Mountain (minimum and maximum annual TSP concentrations =
0.019 and 0.030 mg/m3, respectively [CRWMS M&O 1999b, Table 2-3]), which 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.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 34 June 2003
This distribution adequately encompasses uncertainty and variation associated with dust
concentrations in this environment for the following reasons. First, the distribution is based on a
large set of data from a variety of applicable sites. Therefore, it encompasses variation
associated with land use, climate, soil type, and other site specific conditions. Second, the
distribution encompasses most annual average values from rural agricultural sites in that set of
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. Third, 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).
6.1.3 Active Indoor Environment
A review of applicable literature (See Section 4.1.1) was conducted to identify applicable
average concentrations of resuspended particles measured indoors while people were present and
awake. The results are summarized in Table 6.1.3-1. Studies were considered applicable if
measurements of indoor concentrations were taken while people were home and active or if
personal exposure was measured while people were indoors and active. Because there are few
public buildings in Amargosa Valley, and because a large portion of the population there does
not work (Bureau of the Census 2002, Table P43), measurements taken in homes were
Table 6.1.2-1. Average Concentration of TSP at 21 Selected Monitoring Sitesa
EPA Site ID State City County
0 TSP
(mg/m3) N Years
04-007-1902 Arizona Miami Gila 0.030 8
04-019-0010 Arizona Tuscon 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 Pendelton Umatilla 0.040 5
49-015-0002 Utah Hunington 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
Notes: DTN: MO0210SPATSP01.023
a See Appendix B for additional descriptions of these sites and annual average measurements.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 35 June 2003
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. 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 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
general levels of dustiness outdoors during the studies to those expected in a rural, agricultural
community (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% increase in average daytime PM10 concentrations in homes in Riverside California (Clayton
et al. 1993, Table 6) and concentrations in homes in Tucson with smokers were more than twice
as high as those without (Quackenboss et al. 1989, 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 analysis (e.g., Long et al. 2000, 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) 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 occurr was 0.036 mg/m3. Outdoor PM10
concentrations averaged 0.019 mg/m3 (Wigzell et al. 2000, Table 3).
Thatcher and Layton (1995) 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 =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 =10 m (Thatcher and Layton 1995, Table 3, Figures 3 and 7).
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 36 June 2003
Table 6.1.3-1. Particulate Concentrations-Nominal Indoor Active Environment
Personal Exposure,
mg/m3
Concentration
Indoors, mg/m3
Reference 0 Range 0 Range Comments
1 Wigzell et al. 2000, Table 3 0.041 0.026-0.118 TSP, 10 homes, England
2 Thatcher and Layton 1995, Table 3 0.063 TSP, 1 home, California
3 Yocom et al. 1971, Table 1 0.063 0.049-0.076 TSP, 2 homes, Connecticut
4 Clayton et al. 1993, Table 2 0.129 0.060-0.263 0.078 0.031-0.181 PM10, 178 people, California
5 Lioy et al. 1990, Figures 4, 5, 6 0.066 0.030-0.130 0.042 0.028-0.058 PM10, 14 people, New Jersey
6 Quackenboss et al. 1989, Table 3 0.03 sd = 0.020 PM10, 43 homes, Arizona
7 Leaderer et al. 1999, Table 1 0.029 0.005-0.098 PM10, 49 homes, Connecticut
and Virginia, summer, with A/C
8 Long et al. 2000, Table 2 0.019 0.003-0.095 PM10, 9 homes, Massachusetts
9 Pellizzari et al. 1999, Figure 2 0.068 0.025-0.104 0.024 0.009-0.065 PM10, 881 people, Toronto
10 Janssen et al. 1998, Table 1 0.062 0.038-0.113 0.034 0.019-0.065 PM10, 37 people, Amsterdam
11 Brauer et al. 2000, Table 4 0.107 sd = 0.002 0.063 sd = 0.002 PM10, 49 people, Slovakia,
summer
12 Monn et al. 1997, Table 2 0.024 0.011-0.033 PM10, 17 homes, Switzerland
13 Wheeler et al. 2000, Table 2 0.053 0.05 PM10, 10 children, London
14 Howard-Reed et al. 2000, Table 2
Evans et al. 1999, 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, Table 2
Williams et al. 2000, 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, 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, Table 2 0.037 0.009-0.211 0.032 0.002-0.329 PM10, 18 people with
pulmonary disease,
Massachusetts
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
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 37 June 2003
Yocom et al. (1971) 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, Table 1).
Clayton et al. (1993) 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. Daytime personal exposure averaged 0.129 mg/m3 (10th and 90th
percentiles = 0.060 and 0.263, respectively) (Clayton et al. 1993, 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% 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% 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, Table 2).
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,
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, 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, 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
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 38 June 2003
concentrations averaged 0.013 mg/m3, lower than other studies reviewed here (Long et al. 2000,
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, 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, Table 1).
Brauer et al. (2000, 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 = 0.002) and
0.105 mg/m3 (geometric sd = 0.002), respectively. Twenty-four hour average concentrations in
homes during summer and winter were 0.063 (geometric sd = 0.02) and 0.060 mg/m3 (geometric
sd = 0.002), respectively. Outdoor PM10 concentrations averaged 0.033 and 0.040 mg/m3 during
summer and winter. Participants of this study spent an average of 71% of their time at home
(Brauer et al. 2000, 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, 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; 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 a population estimate for Amargosa Valley.
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, 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. 1999, 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; Table 4).
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 39 June 2003
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, 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, Table 2).
TSP:PM10 Ratios.The 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) 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, 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.
The ratio of TSP:PM10 in homes following the eruption of Mount St. Helens was 3:1 (Buist et al.
1986a, Table 2).
The average ratio of TSP to PM2.5 measured in nine homes in England was 2.7:1 (Wigzell et al.
2000, 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 1.8-2.0:1. Tenth and 90th percentiles
were 3.3:1 and 1:1. These measurements were taken at stationary outdoor monitors (Brook et al.
1997, 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) 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% of ratios were <4.0 and 94.3% were <5.0.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 40 June 2003
6.1.3.2 Parameter Distribution
Average personal exposure to PM10 ranged from 0.024 to 0.129 mg/m3 and indoor
concentrations ranged from 0.013 to 0.078 mg/m3 (Table 6.1.3-1). These ranges likely include
the true average concentration for the Amargosa Valley population because the studies reviewed
were conducted over a variety of conditions, including some with relatively high outdoor
concentrations (e.g., Clayton et al. 1993; Lioy et al. 1990), and because results did not vary much
among studies. As shown in Appendix A, this range of variation and uncertainty will have a
moderate influence on the amount of dust inhaled by a receptor.
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 6.1.3-1). 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 average indoor concentrations
measured in the studies reviewed (Table 6.1.3-1) and higher than all but two of the average
personal exposure concentrations measured. The subjects of the two studies that had higher
average levels of personal exposure (Clayton et al. 1993; Brauer et al. 2000) 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 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, which indicates that
the true average for the Amargosa Valley population likely is closer to the minimum than the
maximum value.
This selected distribution has an approximately three-fold range from a minimum of 0.060
mg/m3 to a maximum of 0.175 mg/m3. This is less than the approximately five-fold and six-fold
ranges of values for personal exposure and indoor concentrations, respectively, in the literature
reviewed (Table 6.1.3-1). The range of the average TSP concentration for the Amargosa Valley
population is expected to be smaller because the highest literature values were based on people
that spent a substantial amount of time out of the environment and the lowest were based on very
sedentary people. Thus, the recommended distribution adequately encompasses the applicable
uncertainty and variation associated with those studies.
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 6.1.4-1. 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 was also conducted.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 41 June 2003
6.1.4.1 Literature Review
Thatcher and Layton (1995, 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.
Buist et al. (1983) 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. Nighttime TSP concentrations were at or below the 0.01-mg/m3 limit of
detection of sampling equipment (Buist et al. 1983, 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, Table 2). Concentrations varied little while
residents were asleep (Howard-Reed et al. 2000, Figures 1 and 2).
Table 6.1.4-1. Particulate Concentrations-Nominal Indoor Asleep Environment
Concentration, mg/m3
Reference 0 Range Comments
1 Thatcher and Layton 1995,
Figure 3 0.055 TSP, one hour after activities stopped, California
2 Buist et al. 1983, p. 717 <0.01 TSP, summer camp, Oregon, while sleeping
3 Howard-Reed et al. 2000,
Table 2 0.018 0.005-0.040 PM10, retirement facility, California, while sleeping
4 Howard-Reed et al. 2000,
Table 2 0.010 0.001-0.159 PM10, retirement facility, Maryland, while sleeping
5 Clayton et al. 1993, Table 2 0.053 0.025-0.117 PM10, 178 people, California, 12-hr measurements
6 Long et al. 2001, 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.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 42 June 2003
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, Table 2). These measurements probably 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 load concentration consists of particles that would not be
contaminated in the groundwater or volcanic ash scenarios. Yakovleva et al. (1999, Figure 7)
examined the source contributions in this study and concluded that about 40 to 50% of
particulate concentrations at night were from motor vehicles and secondary sulfates.
Long et al. (2001) 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% of the particle volume consisted of particles 2.5 to 10 m in diameter (Long et al.
2001; 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 6.1.4-1). All but one
applicable measurement of PM10 and PM2.5 (Table 6.1.4-1), if multiplied by a TSP:PM10 ratio of
1.6:1 (from Thatcher and Layton 1995, Figure 3), are within this range. As discussed above, the
average value of 0.053 mg/m3 measured by Clayton et al. (1993) likely is an overestimate of
applicable concentrations by a factor of at least two because it includes secondary vsulfates and
particles generated by motor vehicles (Yakovleva et al. 1999). Thus, this distribution
encompasses the range of variation and uncertainty in measurements of mass loads in the indoor
asleep environment. As shown in Appendix A, estimates of the amount of dust inhaled are
relatively insensitive to changes in dust concentrations in the indoor asleep environment.
6.1.5 Mass Loading .Crops
No measurements have been taken of mass loading near crops so 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. See Section 5.1 for justification of this assumption.
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.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 43 June 2003
6.2 MASS LOADING - VOLCANIC ERUPTION 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
similar to those in the Yucca Mountain region and a population with lifestyle characteristics
similar to those in the Town of Amargosa Valley today (based on requirements in 10 CFR 63,
Sections 305 and 312, 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. Under normal, variable wind conditions, the initial, predicted thickness of
the tephra deposit 20 km south of Yucca Mountain, calculated for the Total System Performance
Assessment for the Site Recommendation (CRWMS M&O 2000, Section 3.10.5.1), ranged from
less than 1 x 10-8 cm to about 10 cm. About 66 percent of predicted depths were less than 0.1
mm, about 80 percent were less than 1 mm, and about 95 percent were less than 1 cm. The
location of the receptor considered for the TSPA analysis in support of a license application may
differ from that used for the site recommendation (based on requirements in 10 CFR 63.302).
Thus, ash thickness at the receptor location may be slightly different than that reported in the
Total System Performance Assessment for the Site Recommendation (CRMWS M&O 2000,
Section 3.10.5.1).
Initially, the tephra would be more readily suspendable 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 2003a,
Section 6.5.8).
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).
Dall,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).
Eq. 6.2-1 ) ( ) ( ) ( ) , ( , , , , , , t f d f D d f D D t d D a i v inh a i p inh i all a i all + + =
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 44 June 2003
da = Thickness of the contaminated ash/soil layer (meters).
t = Time (year).
Three sets of BDCFs are required by this model, as shown in equation 6.2-2 (BSC 2003a,
Section 6.5.8).
where:
BDCF i(da,t) = BDCF of radionuclide i for an ash deposition depth da at time t
following a volcanic eruption (Sv/y per Bq/m2).
BDCFi = BDCF of radionuclide i for external exposure, radon inhalation, and
ingestion following a volcanic eruption (Sv/y per Bq/m2).
BDCFinh,p,i = BDCF of radionuclide i for inhalation of resuspended particles at
nominal mass loading following a volcanic eruption (Sv/y 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/y per Bq/m2).
The set BDCFi includes the consequences of all exposure pathways except inhalation. This set
of BDCFs is not a function of time or ash 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.
BDCFinh,p,i includes 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 set of BDCFs is a function of ash depth (because the dose
contribution may change as ash depth decreases), but is not a function of time.
The set BDCFinh,v,i includes the additional dose contribution resulting from inhalation of elevated
concentrations of resuspended contaminants following a volcanic eruption. This set 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 ashfall 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 change during this period, 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 2003a, Section 6.5.2).
Eq. 6.2-2 ( ) ) ( ) ( ) , ( , , , , a i p inh i v inh i a i d f BDCF t f BDCF BDCF t d BDCF + + =
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 45 June 2003
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.
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 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
five years old). Summary values for each study reviewed are presented in Table 6.2.1-1.
6.2.1.1 Literature Review
Buist et al. (1986a, Table 2) report personal exposure to TSP for numerous occupations during
the weeks following the eruption of Mount St. Helens. 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.
Eq. 6.2.-3 ) ( ) ( , t f S S t S n v n n + =
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 46 June 2003
Merchant et al. (1982, 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 Buist et al. (1986b, Figure 6) for the location of 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 (0 = 2.81 mg/m3, sd = 1.46), but concentrations for yarder/loader
operators (0 = 0.17 mg/m3, sd = 1.04) were similar.
Searl et al. (2002) 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 5 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 to 5 cm thick. Average personal exposure to PM4
during 1997 was 0.825 mg/m3 (range = 0.817-0.833) for gardeners, >20 mg/m3 (range = 0.077
to 71) for road workers, and 0.442 mg/m3 for a housekeeper (Searl et al. 2002, Table 7).
Concentrations of PM10 associated with mowing grass and sweeping inside were of the order
Table 6.2.1-1. Particulate Concentrations-Post Volcanic Active Outdoor Environment
Concentration, mg/m3
Reference
0 Range
Comments
1 Buist et al. 1986a, Table 2 4.34 1.48-9.01 TSP, dusty occupations, weeks following Mount St.
Helens
2 Merchant et al. 1982, Table 6 3.28 0.13-8.31 TSP, loggers, weeks following Mount St. Helens
3 Searl et al. 2002, Table 11 0.5 0.2-10 PM10, during eruptive phase of Soufriere Hills
4 Baxter et al. 1999, Figure 3 1 0.3-2.5 PM10, during eruptive phase of Soufriere Hills
5 Buist et al. 1983, p. 717 1.35 1.24-1.46 TSP, children at summer camp, includes all
daytime activities. Average of 2 sessions.
6 Hill and Connor 2000, p. 71 10 1-10 TSP while driving and walking, 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
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 47 June 2003
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, 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, 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, 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, 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 6.2.1-1 for this study. Assuming a TSP:PM10 ratio of about 10:1 (e.g.,
Nieuwenhuijsen et al. 1998, Table 2), an approximate TSP concentration for dusty work during
this study is about 5 mg/m3, with a range of about 2 to 100 mg/m3.
Baxter et al. 1999 (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 6.2.1-1 for this report; this value is the approximate midpoint
between low and high peak concentrations.
Buist et al. (1983) 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. Daytime personal exposure averaged 1.24 mg/m3 and 1.46 mg/m3
during two sessions (Buist et al. 1983, p. 717). No information was presented on the percentage
of time the children were active; therefore, these values likely 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, p. 71).
6.2.1.2 Parameter Distribution
The measurements of personal exposure during outdoor, dust-generating activities on tephra
deposits (Table 6.2.1-1) are similar to measurements taken under nominal conditions in areas
without tephra (Table 6.1.1-1), except that most maximum post-volcanic measurements are
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 48 June 2003
lower than those from nominal conditions. For example, TSP concentrations for agricultural
workers after the eruption of Mount St. Helens (0 = 1.42 mg/m3, Buist et al. 1986a, Table 2)
generally were lower than those reported by Nieuwenhuijsen et al. (1998, Table 2), although the
distribution of all activities reported by Buist et al. is not substantially different from that of
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,
Table 6). Measurements of mass loading over disturbed tephra deposits probably are 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 (CRWMS M&O 2000, 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 6.2.1-1 probably are lower than those
reported for nominal conditions (Table 6.1.1-1) because few measurements have been taken on
tephra deposits for the types of activities that create very large concentrations of mass loading,
such as farming (although see Buist et al. 1986a, Table 2). In addition, none of the values
presented above except those of Hill and Connor (2000) 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 upper bound of this distribution. To
account for that uncertainty, a mode of 7.5 mg/m3 and maximum upper bound of 15 mg/m3 are
selected, 50% 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.
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). The dataset was sorted by date and concentration, and values for the
period May 18 to July 31, 1980, (the ten-week period during which the four largest eruptions
occurred, Sarna-Wojcicki et al. 1982, 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
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 49 June 2003
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 to about 10 mm (Sarna-Wojcicki et al. 1982,
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
<1 mm on June 12. Vancouver had <1 mm deposited on May 25 and 4-5 mm deposited on
June 12. Spokane had 2.5-5 mm deposited on June 12, and Yakima had 5-10 mm on that date
(Sarna-Wojcicki et al. 1982, 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 periods March 1979-February
1980, June 1980-May 1981, and June 1981-May 1982 (Table 6.2.2-1). The first period ends
prior to initial volcanic activity in March 1980, and the second period starts about 2 weeks after
the major eruption on May 18; thus, 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 6.2.2-1). Average annual concentrations and standard deviations at the two
sites with <1 mm of ash (Clarkston and Richland) were lower or only slightly higher than
concentrations the year prior to the eruption. Concentrations at the other four sites were about 40
to 90 percent higher, and variation was about two to three times, the year following the eruption.
Average concentrations and standard deviations the second year after the eruption were very
similar to those prior to the eruption at all sites (Table 6.2.2-1).
Based on this analysis, it was concluded that, in areas having <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.
Gordian et al. (1996) 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
Mt. Spurr (McGimsey et al. 2001, 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,
Figure 1). The peak one-hour concentrations during the eruption was 3 mg/m3 and the 24-hour
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 50 June 2003
average concentration the day after the eruption was 0.565 mg/m3 (Gordian et al. 1996,
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. Gordian et al. (1996, p. 293) concluded that
PM10 concentrations in Anchorage were influenced by the volcano during 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-August 17, 1992 and January 1, 1993-March 1, 1994).
Yano et al. (1990) 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.
Table 6.2.2-1. 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 Eruption
of Mount St. Helens.a
Site (EPA site #) and ash depthb
Dates 0 sd Minimum Maximum nc
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 (52-015-0008) 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 (53-11-0006) 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
Notes: DTN: MO008SPATSP00.013
a See Appendix D for the daily concentrations upon which these values were based.
b Initial ash depth, from Sarna-Wojcicki et al. 1982, Figures 336, 344, 345, and 346.
c Number of 24-hour measurements.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 51 June 2003
1990, 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 nonrespirable particulates in Table 1 of Yano et
al.) 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 analogous to 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 similar to that predicted for Yucca Mountain for
much of the next 10,000 years (USGS 2001, p. 67 and 74) (Clarkston [0 annual precipitation =
16.5 inches, 0 annual snowfall = 15.1 inches], Richland [0 precipitation = 7.0 inches, 0 snowfall
= 10.2 inches], Spokane [0 precipitation = 16.2 inches, 0 snowfall = 42.14 inches], and Yakima
[0 precipitation = 8.25 inches, 0 snowfall = 23.4 inches], NCDC 1998b). 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 to 10 mm) was as high or higher than about 95
percent of predicated ash depths 20 km south of Yucca Mountain (CRWMS M&O 2000,
Section 3.10.5.1). Information from two other volcanoes confirm that average annual ambient
concentrations of TSP are about twice as high the year following an eruption compared to preeruption
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.
None of the data analyzed or studies reviewed above were from areas that had tephra deposits as
thick as the maximum of about 10 cm predicted for 20 km south of Yucca Mountain (CRWMS
M&O 2000, Section 3.10.5.1). 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. 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 the first year 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 analog 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, Section 3.10.5.1) 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.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 52 June 2003
6.2.3 Active Indoor Environment
A review of applicable literature (See Section 4.1.1) was conducted 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. (1986a, 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. (1986a, p. 41) concluded that .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) 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, 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, Table 11). The low ash and raised ash concentrations
are the most analogous for this analysis 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, 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, Mt. 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 in 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.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 53 June 2003
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.
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.
6.2.4 Asleep Indoor Environment
A review of applicable literature (See Section 4.1.1) was conducted 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) 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. Nighttime TSP concentrations were at or below the 0.01-mg/m3 limit of
detection of sampling equipment (Buist et al. 1983, p. 717).
Searl et al. (2002) 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, Table 11). The low ash and raised ash
concentrations are the most analogous for this analysis, 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, 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 was 1.6:1 (from
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 54 June 2003
Thatcher and Layton 1995, 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.
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,
Mt. 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 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) 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, Table 10) and is 20 times higher than the
maximum values measured by Buist et al. (1983). 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 0.060 mg/m3,
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 55 June 2003
6.2.5 Mass Loading .Crops
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.
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. As described in Section 6.2,
this distribution is representative of the total concentration of resuspended particles following a
volcanic eruption because mass loading for crops is not treated as a function of time in the
biosphere model.
6.3 MASS LOADING TIME 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:
where:
. = Mass loading decrease constant (1/years).
t = Time (years); t = 0 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, p. 194) developed a
generalized exponential equation for particle resuspension of Nt = N0e-.t, where Nt =
Eq. 6.3-1 t
n v n v e S t f S . - = , , ) (
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 56 June 2003
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. Anspaugh et al. (1975, p. 577-
578) used a similar equation to predict resuspension of plutonium in desert soils on the Nevada
Test Site. Similar exponential decay equations have been used to calculate resuspension in dose
assessment models (Till and Meyer 1983, p. 5-32 through 5-33; IAEA, 1982, p. 20; 1992, Figure
1 on p. 13; Napier et al. 1988, p. 4.64).
Inverse or inverse power functions have also been used to predict concentrations of resuspended
radionuclides (e.g., IAEA 1992, Figure 1 on p. 13; Garger et al., 1997, p. 1651). Garger et al.
(1997, 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 predicated concentrations more accurately than the exponential equations in that mesic
environment (Garger et al. 1997, 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) and may not apply to arid regions such as the Nevada Test Site,
where an exponential equation has proven to be effective (Anspaugh et al. 1975).
The mass loading decrease constant is the proportion of the mass loading concentration at the
beginning of a year that is no longer readily available for resuspension at the end of that year.
For example, a . of 0.1 year-1 indicates that about 90 percent (e-0.1) of resuspendable ash present
at the beginning of a year still is unstabilized and available for resuspension at the end of that
year. Figure 6.3-1 is a plot of the decrease in mass loading per year for seven arbitrarily chosen
values of ..
The average annual concentration for a period of years TI (S 0,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.
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 Data.TSP 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) and methods
used to select the six sites are described in Section 6.2.2.1.
Eq. 6.3-2 ( )t n v n
TI x e
t
S
dt
dS
S .
.
- -   = =
.
. 1 1 ,
,
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 57 June 2003
TSP concentrations at the sites are plotted in Figure 6.3-2. This figure displays fivemeasurement
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 C). 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 6.2.2-1). The corresponding
. for this rate of decrease is at least 2.0 year-1or greater (see Figure 6.3-1).
6.3.2 Literature Review
Buist et al. (1986b, 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. 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%
decrease in mass loading over four months (maximum of 122 days), or 0.57% per day (0.7/122
days x 100), which is approximately equal to a . of 2.1 year-1 (0.57% per day x 365 days).
Buist et al. (1986a, 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
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
Years
Mass Loading (mg/m 3)
. = 2
. = 1
. = 0.5
. = 0.33
. = 0.2
. = 0.125
. = 0.1
Figure 6.3-1. 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 (.)
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 58 June 2003
Figure 6.3-2. TSP concentrations (mg/m3) at six sites in Washington before and after the
eruption of Mount St. Helens in May-June 1980. TSP is presented as the running average of
5 consecutive measurements (Appendix D) (DTN: MO0008SPATSP00.013).
Clarkston (0.5 mm ash)
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
Jan-79
Apr-79
Jul-79
Oct-79
Jan-80
Apr-80
Jul-80
Oct-80
Jan-81
Apr-81
Jul-81
Oct-81
Jan-82
Apr-82
Jul-82
Oct-82
TSP
Richland (0.5-1 mm ash)
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
Jan-79
Apr-79
Jul-79
Oct-79
Jan-80
Apr-80
Jul-80
Oct-80
Jan-81
Apr-81
Jul-81
Oct-81
Jan-82
Apr-82
Jul-82
Oct-82
TSP
Longview (1-3 mm ash)
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
Jan-79
Apr-79
Jul-79
Oct-79
Jan-80
Apr-80
Jul-80
Oct-80
Jan-81
Apr-81
Jul-81
Oct-81
Jan-82
Apr-82
Jul-82
Oct-82
TSP
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 59 June 2003
Vancouver (4-5 mm ash)
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
Jan-79
Apr-79
Jul-79
Oct-79
Jan-80
Apr-80
Jul-80
Oct-80
Jan-81
Apr-81
Jul-81
Oct-81
Jan-82
Apr-82
Jul-82
Oct-82
TSP
Figure 6.3-2. Continued.
Spokane (2.5-5 mm ash)
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
Jan-79
Apr-79
Jul-79
Oct-79
Jan-80
Apr-80
Jul-80
Oct-80
Jan-81
Apr-81
Jul-81
Oct-81
Jan-82
Apr-82
Jul-82
Oct-82
TSP
Yakima (5-10 mm ash)
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
Jan-79
Apr-79
Jul-79
Oct-79
Jan-80
Apr-80
Jul-80
Oct-80
Jan-81
Apr-81
Jul-81
Oct-81
Jan-82
Apr-82
Jul-82
Oct-82
TSP
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 60 June 2003
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) 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 Mt. Spurr (McGimsey
et al. 2001, 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, Figure 1). The peak
one-hour concentrations 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, 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 6.3-1).
Yano et al. (1990, 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 Mt. Spurr, was about
2.0 year-1 (see Figure 6.3-1). 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 rapid decrease in mass loading following eruptions is corroborated by
other reports of conditions following Mount St. Helens and from monitoring following the
eruptions of Mt. Spurr and Mount Sakurijima.
6.3.3 Parameter Development
The data from Mount St. Helens is analogous to most climatic conditions and the thickness of the
tephra deposit predicted for area south of Yucca Mountain. The climate at the four cities in
eastern Washington examined (Clarkston [0 annual precipitation = 16.5 inches, 0 annual
snowfall = 15.1 inches], Richland [0 precipitation = 7.0 inches, 0 snowfall = 10.2 inches],
Spokane [0 precipitation = 16.2 inches, 0 snowfall = 42.1 inches] and Yakima [0 precipitation =
8.3 inches, 0 snowfall = 23.4 inches], NCDC 1998b) is predicted to be similar to that at Yucca
Mountain for much of the next 10,000 years (USGS 2001, p. 67 and 74); therefore, the influence
of precipitation and vegetation on consolidation and removal of ash at those sites following
Mount St. Helens likely will be similar to that after an eruption at Yucca Mountain. A
There are, however, four 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 and
resuspendability 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
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 61 June 2003
Yucca Mountain. Third, no data are available on the rate of change in mass loading following an
initial deposit of more than 1 cm. And fourth, 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 analogs in this analyses (Mount St. Helens,
and to a lesser extent Soufriere Hills, Mt. 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 analogs 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, p. 71) report that ash 21 km from the vent of the basaltic Cerro
Negro volcano had about two percent of particles by weight <10 m, 10 percent <60 m, and 50
percent <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 <10 m
at 20 km. Hill and Connor (2000, p. 71) also state that basaltic volcanoes may produce unusually
fine-grained deposits (>40 percent of particle weight <60 m) late in an eruption during
subsurface brecciation events. About 10 percent or less of the ash from Mount St. Helens was
<10 m (Craighead et al. 1983. p. 6; Buist et al. 1986a, p. 40). Ash at two sites 30 to 35 km east
of Anchorage from the August 1992 eruption of Mt. Spurr had about 30 to 35% of particles =63
m, 8 to 15% <15 m, and 5 to 10% =7.5 m (McGimsey et al. 2001, 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 Mt. Spurr) had few or no particles =63 m. Ash from Soufriere Hills had
13 to 20 percent weight of particles =10 m and 60 to 70 percent weight of particles 10 to 125
m (Baxter et al. 1999, p. 1142). Thus, ash from the volcanoes used as analogs in this analysis
appear to have had higher concentrations of fine particles than that from basaltic volcanoes. In
addition, Baxter (in McKague 1998, Enclosure 3 - Item 17) stated that .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 analog 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, pp. 585-588, McGimsey et al. 2001, Figure 12). To
account for this variability, the lower bound of the distribution of the decay constant described
below is smaller (i.e., has a slower decay rate) than the value of about 2 measured after eruptions
of Mount St. Helens and Mt. Spurr.
The current, arid climate at Yucca Mountain is predicted to continue for less than 1,000 years
(USGS 2001, Table 2). 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 inches of precipitation and less than about 45 inches of snowfall (Appendix C);
therefore, changes in mass loading through time likely would not differ greatly between current
and future climates predicted for Yucca Mountain. To ensure that uncertainty in the effects of
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 62 June 2003
current, arid conditions are not underestimated, the lower bound of the distribution of the decay
constant below is smaller than the value measured at analog sites.
The analog 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, Section 3.10.5.1), 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 =10 mm, separate distributions of this
parameter are developed below for deposits <10 and =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. If the quantity of resuspendable 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
distributary channels that are poorly defined (Tanko and Glancy 2001, 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 that have been well studied
(1995 and 1998), 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; Tanko and
Glancy 2001). Thus, any sediment from one portion of the watershed was mixed with and buried
within sediment from throughout the watershed.
Any materials that wash 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 6.3-1);
therefore, it is reasonable to expect that ash redistributed during flooding that is 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 likely 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, 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.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 63 June 2003
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 modal rate decreases about 96 percent over 10 years (Figure 6.3-1) and has 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 preeruption
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. The maximum value selected for this
distribution is approximately equal to the rate measured following Mount St. Helens. The
minimum decreases about 86 percent in 10 years and has 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. If the TSPA analysis uses a 10-year time step, the increase in mass loading at
10 years (the second time step after the eruption) for an initial tephra deposit <10 mm will range
from about zero to 14 percent of Sv (calculated as Sve- .10, from equation 6.3-1), with a mode of
about four percent.
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. The modal rate decreases about 86 percent in 10 years and 98 percent in 20
years (Figure 6.3-1). The average annual concentration over 10 years for a . of 0.2 year-1 and a
hypothetical Sv of 10 mg/m3 is 4.3 mg/m3 (from Equation 6.3-2), more than eight times greater
than for a . of 2.0 year-1. 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 analog data from Mount St. Helens. The minimum decay constant
of 0.125 year-1 results in a decrease of 71% over 10 years, 92% decrease over 20 years, and 98%
decrease over 30 years. The average annual concentrations for a . of 0.125 year-1 and a
hypothetical Sv of 10 mg/m3 are 5.7 and 3.7 mg/m3 over 10 and 20 years, respectively, more than
an order of magnitude higher than for a . of 2.0 year-1. If the TSPA analysis uses a 10-year time
step, the increase in mass loading at 10 years for an initial tephra deposit of =10 mm will range
from about zero to 29 percent of Sv (calculated as Sve- .10, from equation 6.3-1), with a mode of
about 14 percent.
7. CONCLUSIONS
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 DTN MO0305SPAINEXI.001. The only limitation on the use of
these distributions and the function is that they are intended for the current and glacial transition
(equals intermediate glacial) climatic conditions in the Yucca Mountain reference biosphere.
They must be used with caution for other, more mesic and colder conditions. Uncertainties in
the inputs and assumption related to use of analog data, climate change, thickness of the initial
tephra deposit, and redistribution of tephra by aeolian and fluvial transport are described in
Section 6.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 64 June 2003
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 0.060
Crops (mg/m3) Triangular 0.240 0.050 0.600
Mass Loading Decrease Constant = S0e- .t,, with . =
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
Notes: DTN: MO0305SPAINEXI.001.
a Distributions 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 postvolcanic
conditions. The distribution for crops represents the total mass loading the first year
following an eruption and should not be added to predicted values for nominal conditions.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 65 June 2003
8. REFERENCES
8.1 DOCUMENTS CITED
Ambrose, V. 2002a. "Re: AQS System [AMP450 + AMP 380 ASCII Text & Report Files]." Email
from V. Ambrose (EPA) to K. Rautenstrauch, September 6, 2002, with attachment ACC:
MOL.20020923.0190; MOL.20020923.0196.
Ambrose, V. 2002b. "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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
BSC (Bechtel SAIC Company) 2001. Yucca Mountain Site Characterization Project Summary of
Socioeconomic Data Analyses Conducted in Support of the Radiological Monitoring Program,
During FY 2001. TDR-MGR-EV-000021 REV 00. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company.
ACC: MOL.20020124.0218.
BSC (Bechtel SAIC Company) 2003a. Biosphere Model Report. MDL-MGR-MD-000001 REV
00. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. ACC: MOL.20030124.0246.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 66 June 2003
BSC (Bechtel SAIC Company) 2003b. Technical Work Plan for: Biosphere Modeling and
Expert Support. TWP- NBS-MD-000004 REV 01. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company.
ACC: DOC.20030604.0001.
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.
Buist, A.S.; Martin, T.R.; Shore, J.H.; Butler, J.; and Lybarger, J.A. 1986a. "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.
Buist, A.S.; Bernstein, R.S.; Johnson, L.R.; and Vollmer, W.M. 1986b. "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.
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
Canori, G.F. and Leitner, M.M. 2003. Project Requirements Document. TER-MGR-MD-000001
REV 01. Las Vegas, Nevada: Bechtel SAIC Company. ACC: DOC.20030404.0003.
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.
Clausnitzer, H. and Singer, M.J. 1997. "Intensive Land Preparation Emits Respirable Dust."
California Agriculture, 51, (2), 27-30. [Berkeley, California: California Agricultural Experiment
Station]. TIC: 252403.
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.
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
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 67 June 2003
Investigation, 48, (1), 5-12. [Baltimore, Maryland]: United States-Canadian Division of the
International Academy of Pathology. TIC: 250154.
Crump, T. 2001. "Igneous Activity TE Meeting Summary." E-mail from T. Crump to J.
McNeish, June 25, 2001, with attachment. ACC: MOL.20010723.0094; MOL.20010723.0095.
CRWMS M&O 1999a. Evaluation of Soils in the Northern Amargosa Valley. B00000000-
01717-5705-00084 REV 00. Las Vegas, Nevada: CRWMS M&O. ACC: MOL.19990224.0268.
CRWMS M&O 1999b. Environmental Baseline File for Meteorology and Air Quality.
B00000000-01717-5705-00126 REV 00. Las Vegas, Nevada: CRWMS M&O. ACC:
MOL.19990302.0186.
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.
Dahneke, B. 1975. "Resuspension of Particles." Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 50,
(1), 194-196. Orlando, Florida: Academic Press. TIC: 224931.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 68 June 2003
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.
IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) 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.
IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) 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.
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.
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.
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.
[Research Triangle Park], North Carolina: Public Health Service, U.S. Dept. of Health and
Human Services. TIC: 250573.
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.
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.
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.
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.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 69 June 2003
McGimsey, R.G.; Neal, C.A.; and Riley, C.M. 2001. Areal Distribution, Thichness, 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: Requested. Cataloging
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.
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." Annual Occupational Hygiene, 26, (Nos. 1-4), 911-919. [New York, New
York]: Pergamon Press. TIC: 253237.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 Assoc iation. TIC: 252363.
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. A CC: NNA.19920626.0034; NNA.19920626.0036;
NNA.19920626.0041.
NCDC (National Climatic Data Center) 1998a. Summary of the Day Observations: West 1 for
Arizona, California, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and Wyoming. Boulder, Colorado:
EarthInfo. TIC: 245534.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 70 June 2003
NCDC (National Climatic Data Center) 1998b. 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.
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.
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.
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.
NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission) 2003. Yucca Mountain Review Plan, Information
Only. NUREG-1804, Draft Final Revision 2. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. TIC: 254002.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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. Denver, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey. TIC: 218260.
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.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 71 June 2003
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.
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.
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.
USGS (U.S. Geological Survey) 2001. Future Climate Analysis. ANL-NBS-GS-000008 REV 00
ICN 01. Denver, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey. ACC: MOL.20011107.0004.
Wheeler, A.J.; Williams, I.; Beaumont, R.A.; and Hamilton, R.S. 2000. "Characterisation of
Particulate Matter Sampled During a Study of Childrens 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.
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.
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 Epidemiology.Exposure
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 72 June 2003
8.2 CODES, STANDARDS, AND REGULATIONS
10 CFR 63. Energy: Disposal of High-Level Radioactive Wastes in a Geologic Repository at
Yucca Mountain, Nevada. Readily available.
8.3 DATA TRACKING NUMBERS CITED
MO0008SPATSP00.013. Total Suspended Particle Concentrations - Washington 1979-1982.
Submittal date: 08/02/2000.
MO0210SPATSP01.023. Total Suspended Particulate Matter Concentrations, United States.
Submittal date: 10/01/2002.
MO0301SEPFEPS1.000. LA FEP List. Submittal date: 01/21/2003.
MO98PSDALOG111.000. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight Logs, Oct. - Dec.
97. Submittal date: 01/29/1998.
TM000000000001.039. Particulate Matter Air Quality Data - January 1992 through September
1992. Submittal date: 07/27/1993.
TM000000000001.041. Particulate Air Quality Data Forms, January thru June 1991. Submittal
date: 07/27/1993.
TM000000000001.042. Particulate Air Quality Forms, July thru September 1991. Submittal
date: 01/23/1992.
TM000000000001.043. Particulate Air Quality Forms, October thru December 1991. Submittal
date: 03/09/1992.
TM000000000001.079. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight Logs for 1992
through 1995. Submittal date: 03/11/1996.
TM000000000001.082. Particulate Air Quality Data Forms, April 1989 thru December 1990.
Submittal date: 03/12/1996.
TM000000000001.084. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight Logs, January -
March 1996. Submittal date: 05/07/1996.
TM000000000001.096. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight Logs, April - June
1996. Submittal date: 01/18/1997.
TM000000000001.097. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight Logs, July -
September 1996. Submittal date: 04/18/1997.
TM000000000001.098. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight Logs, October -
December 1996. Submittal date: 04/18/1997.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 73 June 2003
TM000000000001.099. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight Logs, January -
March 1997. Submittal date: 04/18/1997.
TM000000000001.105. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight Logs, April - June
1997. Submittal date: 07/21/1997.
TM000000000001.108. Particulate Sampler Data Records and Filter Weight Logs, July -
September 1997. Submittal date: 10/22/1997.
8.4 DEVELOPED DATA
MO0305SPAINEXI.001. Inhalation Exposure Input Parameters for the Biosphere Model.
Submittal date: 5/27/03.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 74 June 2003
APPENDIX A. MASS LOAD SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS
The analysis described in this appendix was conducted to evaluate the sensitivity of calculations
of mass of resuspended particles that are inhaled to changes in the input parameter values.
The mass of inhaled particles was calculated in this analysis using the following equation.
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.
Results.The 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 is the third-most-important
parameter, primarily because 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 mean of the Amargosa Valley population, as required by 10
CFR 63.312(b).
Breathing rates have little influence on the rate of inhalation of particulates, primarily because
variation in those rates is low.
. =
n
n n n S BR t Inhalation
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 75 June 2003
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 0.2 3.874 -39.7% 1 10.674 66.2%
Breathing Rate (m3/hr) 1.7 1.5 5.924 -7.8% 1.9 6.924 7.8%
Mass Load (mg/m3) 5.0 1.0 3.024 -52.9% 10.0 10.674 66.2%
Inactive Outdoors
Time 1.0 0.8 6.402 -0.3% 2.0 6.534 1.7%
Breathing Rate (m3/hr) 1.1 0.95 6.409 -0.2% 1.25 6.439 0.2%
Mass Load (mg/m3) 0.1 0.05 6.369 -0.9% 0.3 6.644 3.4%
Active Indoors
Time 11.5 10 6.176 -3.9% 12.5 6.589 2.6%
Breathing Rate (m3/hr) 1.1 0.95 6.165 -4.0% 1.25 6.682 4.0%
Mass Load (mg/m3) 0.15 0.05 5.159 -19.7% 0.3 8.321 29.5%
Asleep Indoors
Time 8.3 8.1 6.420 -0.1% 8.5 6.428 0.1%
Breathing Rate (m3/hr) 0.4 0.35 6.403 -0.3% 0.45 6.444 0.3%
Mass Load (mg/m3) 0.05 0.01 6.291 -2.1% 0.1 6.590 2.6%
Total Dust Inhaled (mg) 6.424a
Notes: 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 (6.424mg).
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 76 June 2003
APPENDIX B. TSP CONCENTRATION.ACTIVE OUTDOOR ENVIRONMENT
This appendix summarizes information on TSP concentrations from rural, agricultural
sites obtained from the EPA (DTN MO0210SPATSP01.023) 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 g/m3, the unit of measure reported by the EPA. Particulate concentrations in the
remainder of this analysis are in units of 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 1998a,b).
Table B-1. Average Annual Concentrations of TSP (g/m3) from Rural, Agricultural Monitoring
Sites in the Western United States.
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 Tuscon Pima 1971 132.5 132.5
04-019-0009 Arizona Tuscon Pima 1973 118 81.3
1974 74.7
1975 63.8
1976 68.5
04-019-0010 Arizona Tuscon Pima 1974 92.4 88.7
1975 84.9
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
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 77 June 2003
g/m3
Site ID State City County Year Annual
Average
Overall
Average
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
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
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 78 June 2003
g/m3
Site ID State City County Year Annual
Average
Overall
Average
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
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
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 79 June 2003
g/m3
Site ID State City County Year Annual
Average
Overall
Average
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
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
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 80 June 2003
g/m3
Site ID State City County Year Annual
Average
Overall
Average
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
1987 42.7
06-111-0004 California Piru Ventura 1982 50.4 46.8
1983 43.9
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
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 81 June 2003
g/m3
Site ID State City County Year Annual
Average
Overall
Average
1984 43
1985 42.8
1986 39
1987 43.7
1988 49.8
1989 46.1
1990 44.9
1991 35.2
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
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 82 June 2003
g/m3
Site ID State City County Year Annual
Average
Overall
Average
1983 27.9
1984 29
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 DAlene 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 Pocotello 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
1984 53.3
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 83 June 2003
g/m3
Site ID State City County Year Annual
Average
Overall
Average
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
1980 57.8
1981 46.1
1982 40.1
1983 29.9
1984 40.9
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 84 June 2003
g/m3
Site ID State City County Year Annual
Average
Overall
Average
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 Pendelton Umatilla 1972 35.5 40.4
1973 39.4
1974 65.6
1975 30.3
1976 31.4
49-015-0002 Utah Hunington Emery 1975 23.6 29.6
1976 27.8
1977 34.3
1978 32.8
49-015-0003 Utah Emery 1974 12.6 16.9
1977 23.8
1978 19.5
1979 11.8
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
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
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 85 June 2003
g/m3
Site ID State City County Year Annual
Average
Overall
Average
1986 54.2
1987 69.5
1988 60.2
1989 61.1
1990 70.6
1991 73.6
Notes: DTN: MO0210SPATSP01.023
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 86 June 2003
Table B-2. Average concentration of TSP (mg/m3) at Rural, Agricultural Monitoring Sites in the Western United States.
Inches
EPA Site ID State City County
0 Snowfall
0 Precipitation
Weather
station
0 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 Tuscon Pima 0.0 13.9 28795 0.133 1 Duplicate with 04-019-0010
04-019-0009 Arizona Tuscon Pima 0.0 13.9 28795 0.081 4 Near power plant substation
04-019-0010 Arizona Tuscon 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 inches
06-033-0003 California Upper Lake Lake 0.5 29.1 44701 0.019 4 Precipitation >20 inches
06-049-1001 California Cedarville Modoc 32.6 13.1 41614 0.017 6 Snowfall > 20 inches
06-061-0001 California Auburn Placer 1.2 35.3 40383 0.040 5 Precipitation >20 inches
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
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 87 June 2003
Inches
EPA Site ID State City County
0 Snowfall
0 Precipitation
Weather
station
0 TSP
(mg/m3) N Years Comments
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
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 inches
06-103-1001 California Los Molinos Tehama 2.3 22.8 47292 0.047 8 Precipitation >20 inches
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 inches
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 inches
16-001-0001 Idaho Boise Ada 20.9 11.9 101022 0.044 20 Snowfall > 20 inches
16-005-1003 Idaho Pocatello Bannock 41.8 11.8 107211 0.068 3 Snowfall > 20 inches
16-011-0001 Idaho Grandview Bingham 22.4 11.4 103297 0.049 1 Snowfall > 20 inches
16-029-0001 Idaho Soda Springs Caribou 43.8 16.1 108535 0.070 1 Snowfall > 20 inches
16-029-0002 Idaho Conda Caribou 95.0 22.1 104230 0.038 16 Precipitation >20 inches
16-053-0001 Idaho Jerome Jerome 23.2 10.3 104670 0.047 7 Snowfall > 20 inches
16-055-1002 Idaho Coeur DAlene Kootenai 51.3 25.4 101956 0.052 8 Precipitation >20 inches
16-077-0005 Idaho Pocotello Power 41.8 11.8 107211 0.118 2 Snowfall > 20 inches
16-083-0003 Idaho Twin Falls Twin Falls 28.2 10.8 109303 0.047 3 Snowfall > 20 inches
16-083-0004 Idaho Hansen Twin Falls 28.2 10.8 109303 0.038 4 Snowfall > 20 inches
16-083-1001 Idaho Twin Falls Twin Falls 28.2 10.8 109303 0.045 3 Snowfall > 20 inches
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
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 88 June 2003
Inches
EPA Site ID State City County
0 Snowfall
0 Precipitation
Weather
station
0 TSP
(mg/m3) N Years Comments
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
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 Pendelton Umatilla 17.1 12.2 356546 0.040 5 Selected
49-015-0002 Utah Hunington 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 inches
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 inches
53-077-0003 Washington Sunnyside Yakima 11.5 7.0 458207 0.062 10 Selected
Notes: DTN: MO0210SPATSP01.023 and NCDC 1998a,b
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 89 June 2003
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 current and future climatic conditions.
Average annual precipitation at Yucca Mountain currently is about four to six inches
(CRWMS M&O 1999b, Appendix A) and snowfall is rare. It is predicted that the future
climate for most of the next 10,000 years will be similar to that currently found in parts of
eastern Washington. Analog weather stations for the upper bound of the dominant future
climate are Spokane (0 annual precipitation = 16.2 inches, 0 annual snowfall = 42.1
inches), Rosalia (0 precipitation = 18.1 inches, 0 snowfall = 24.3 inches), and St. Johns (0
precipitation = 17.1 inches, 0 snowfall = 25.8 inches), (USGS 2001, Table 2) (climate
data are from NCDC 1998a,b).
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) and the U.S. National Climatic Data Center (NCDC 1988a,b)
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 <10, 10 to 20, and >20 inches 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 <10, 10 to 20, and >20 inches of snowfall per year was
calculated (Table C-2). To eliminate the influence of high precipitation, the ten sites
listed in Table C-1 that have >20 inches of precipitation were not included in this
analysis.
Average TSP concentrations differed little between 11 sites with <10 inches of
precipitation (0 = 0.055, sd = 0.020) and 21 sites with 10 to 20 inches (0 = 0.056, sd =
0.023). Ten sites with >20 inches of precipitation per year had much lower
concentrations (0 = 0.037, sd = 0.009). There was little difference in TSP concentrations
among 14 sites with <10 inches of snowfall (0 = 0.058, sd = 0.020), 7 sites with 10 to 20
inches of snowfall (0 = 0.055, sd = 0.019), and 11 sites with >20 inches of snowfall (0 =
0.053, sd = 0.026).
Based on this analysis it is concluded that rural agricultural sites with less than 20 inches
of precipitation and less than about 45 inches of snowfall have similar concentrations of
resuspended particles; therefore, separate distributions of mass loading are not required
for current and future climatic states.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 90 June 2003
Table C-1. Average Annual Snowfall (inches), Precipitation (inches), and TSP (mg/m3) at Rural, Agricultural Sites in the Western United States
with <10, 10-20, and >20 Inches of Precipitation.
<10 inches Precipitation 10-20 inches Precipitation >20 inches 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 0 = 0.037
0 = 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
0 = 0.056
sd = 0.023
Notes: DTN MO0210SPATSP01.023 and NCDC 1998a,b (see Table B-2 for list of data).
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 91 June 2003
Table C-2. Average Annual Snowfall (inches), Precipitation (inches), and TSP (mg/m3) at Rural, Agricultural Sites in the Western United States
with <10, 10-20, and >20 Inches of Snowfall.
<10 inches Snowfall 10-20 inches Snowfall >20 inches 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 0 = 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 0 = 0.053
06-027-0002 8.0 5.3 0.025 sd = 0.026
N = 14
0 = 0.058
sd = 0.020
Notes: DTN MO0210SPATSP01.023 and NCDC 1998a,b (see Table B-2 for list of data).
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 92 June 2003
APPENDIX D. TSP CONCENTRATIONS-MOUNT 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).
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 0a Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a
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
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
Table D-1. Continued
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 93 June 2003
Clarkston (53-003-0003) Richland (53-005-1001) Longview (53-015-0008)
Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a
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
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
Table D-1. Continued
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 94 June 2003
Clarkston (53-003-0003) Richland (53-005-1001) Longview (53-015-0008)
Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a
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
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
Table D-1. Continued
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 95 June 2003
Clarkston (53-003-0003) Richland (53-005-1001) Longview (53-015-0008)
Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a
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
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
Table D-1. Continued
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 96 June 2003
Clarkston (53-003-0003) Richland (53-005-1001) Longview (53-015-0008)
Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a
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
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
Table D-1. Continued
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 97 June 2003
Clarkston (53-003-0003) Richland (53-005-1001) Longview (53-015-0008)
Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a
12/31/82 0.018 0.021
Notes: DTN: MO008SPATSP00.013
a Running average of the measurement for a day and the four previous measurements.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 98 June 2003
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 (53-77-1006)
Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a
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
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
Table D-2. Continued
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 99 June 2003
Spokane (53-063-0016) Vancouver (53-011-0006) Yakima (53-77-1006)
Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a
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
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
Table D-2. Continued
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 100 June 2003
Spokane (53-063-0016) Vancouver (53-011-0006) Yakima (53-77-1006)
Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a
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
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
Table D-2. Continued
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 101 June 2003
Spokane (53-063-0016) Vancouver (53-011-0006) Yakima (53-77-1006)
Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a
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
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
Table D-2. Continued
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 102 June 2003
Spokane (53-063-0016) Vancouver (53-011-0006) Yakima (53-77-1006)
Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a Date TSP 0a
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
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
Notes: DTN: MO008SPATSP00.013
aRunning average of the measurement for a day and the four previous measurements.
APPENDIX E. TSP:PM10 RATIOS  YUCCA MOUNTAIN
Table E-1 presents 1,276 measurements of PM10 and TSP concentrations (g/m3) taken
simultaneously at three sites at Yucca Mountain during 1989 through 1997, and the TSP:PM10
ratio of those measurements. Measurements resulting in 24 ratios of =1.0 are not shown (see
Section 6.1.3.1 for justification).
Table E-1. TSP:PM10 Ratios . Yucca Mountain, 1989-1997.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 103 June 2003
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
1C 7/21/89 27 54 2.0 TM000000000001.082
1 7/27/89 27 50 1.9 TM000000000001.082
5 7/27/89 26 52 2.0 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 8/14/89 13 22 1.7 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
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
5 11/30/89 3 5 1.7 TM000000000001.082
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
1 12/30/89 2 8 4.0 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
Table E-1. Continued.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 104 June 2003
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
1 5/17/90 22 44 2.0 TM000000000001.082
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 8/27/90 16 23 1.4 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
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
1C 12/7/90 5 13 2.6 TM000000000001.082
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
5 2/23/91 5 14 2.8 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
Table E-1. Continued.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 105 June 2003
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
1C 4/18/91 5 9 1.8 TM000000000001.041
1 4/24/91 18 33 1.8 TM000000000001.041
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
1C 6/17/91 11 23 2.1 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
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
1C 8/10/91 31 63 2.0 TM000000000001.042
1 8/16/91 15 24 1.6 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
5 1/13/92 12 45 3.8 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
Table E-1. Continued.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 106 June 2003
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
1 2/19/92 4 9 2.3 TM000000000001.039
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
1 4/30/92 23 59 2.6 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
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
1 5/24/92 10 18 1.8 TM000000000001.039
5 5/24/92 9 20 2.2 TM000000000001.039
1C 5/24/92 9 21 2.3 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
1 8/22/92 19 55 2.9 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
5 9/3/92 20 52 2.6 TM000000000001.039
Table E-1. Continued.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 107 June 2003
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
1C 9/3/92 21 53 2.5 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
1C 1/19/93 2 5 2.5 TM000000000001.079
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
5 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
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
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
1 5/7/93 18 41 2.3 TM000000000001.079
5 5/7/93 13 28 2.2 TM000000000001.079
1C 5/7/93 18 39 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
Table E-1. Continued.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 108 June 2003
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
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
1C 8/5/93 14 39 2.8 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
1 8/23/93 14 30 2.1 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
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
5 11/3/93 8 15 1.9 TM000000000001.079
1C 11/3/93 13 19 1.5 TM000000000001.079
1 11/9/93 12 22 1.8 TM000000000001.079
5 11/9/93 10 18 1.8 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
1 12/9/93 10 33 3.3 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
Table E-1. Continued.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 109 June 2003
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
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
5 2/19/94 2 6 3.0 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
5 3/27/94 4 9 2.3 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
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
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
5 5/26/94 11 23 2.1 TM000000000001.079
1C 5/26/94 11 27 2.5 TM000000000001.079
1 6/1/94 12 20 1.7 TM000000000001.079
5 6/1/94 9 15 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
1C 7/7/94 10 22 2.2 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
Table E-1. Continued.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 110 June 2003
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
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
5 9/5/94 13 22 1.7 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
1 10/29/94 6 14 2.3 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
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
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
1 12/16/94 6 16 2.7 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
5 2/14/95 3 13 4.3 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
Table E-1. Continued.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 111 June 2003
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
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
1 3/22/95 5 12 2.4 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
1 5/27/95 9 21 2.3 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
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
5 6/8/95 6 26 4.3 TM000000000001.079
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
1 6/20/95 9 26 2.9 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
5 9/6/95 14 30 2.1 TM000000000001.079
1 9/12/95 9 22 2.4 TM000000000001.079
1C 9/12/95 10 26 2.6 TM000000000001.079
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
Table E-1. Continued.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 112 June 2003
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
5 9/24/95 11 23 2.1 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
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
5 12/29/95 4 14 3.5 TM000000000001.079
1C 12/29/95 4 9 2.3 TM000000000001.079
1 1/4/96 4 9 2.3 TM000000000001.084
5 1/4/96 6 12 2.0 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
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
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
5 4/3/96 4 11 2.8 TM000000000001.096
1C 4/3/96 5 8 1.6 TM000000000001.096
1 4/9/96 9 21 2.3 TM000000000001.096
5 4/9/96 11 28 2.5 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
Table E-1. Continued.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 113 June 2003
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
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
1 7/8/96 15 28 1.9 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
1C 7/20/96 10 22 2.2 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
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
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
5 10/18/96 13 31 2.4 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
1 11/17/96 8 22 2.8 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
Table E-1. Continued.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 114 June 2003
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
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
1 1/22/97 4 7 1.8 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
1 2/27/97 8 18 2.3 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
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
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
1 4/22/97 11 23 2.1 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
Table E-1. Continued.
ANL-MGR-MD-000001REV 02 / ICN 00 115 June 2003
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
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
5 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
1 9/25/97 8 18 2.3 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
Site Date PM10
a TSPa Ratiob DTNc
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
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
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
Notes:
a g/m3
b TSP  PM10
c No TSP measurements were collected from
October through December 1991
(TM000000000001.043).