This report has been reproduced directly from the best available copy. 

Available to the public from: 

U.S. Department of Commerce 

N a t i o na I Tech n i ca I Information Service 

5285 Port Royal Road 

Springfield, VA 22161-0002 

(703) 487-4650 

Ava i I a b I e e I e ct r o n i c a I I y at h tt p ://w w w . do e. a ov/b r i d a e. Ava i I ab I e to 

U.S. Department of Energy and its contractors in paper from: 

U.S. Department of Energy 

Office of Scientific and Technical Information 

P.O. Box 62 

Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062 

(423) 576-8401 
DOE/NV/11718--231 

NEVADA TEST SITE 

ANNUAL SITE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT 

FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1997 

Editors: Stuart C. Black and Yvonne E. Townsend 

October 1998 

Work Performed Under 

Contract No. DE-AC08-96NV11718 

Prepared for: 

U.S. Department of Energy 

Nevada Operations Office n 

Prepared by: 

MASTER 

Bechtel Nevada 

Post Off ice Box 9852 1 

Las Vegas, Nevada 891 93-8521 
This page intentionally left blank 
DISCLAIMER 

This =port was prcpared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the 

United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency 

thereof, nor any of their employees. makes any warranty, expnss or implied, or 

ayumes~any legal liability or nsponsibiby for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or proctss disclosed, or represents 

that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or hcc by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. 

The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or 

reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. 
DISCLAIMER 

Portions of this document may be illegible 

in electronic image products. Images are 

produced from the best available original 

document. 
AUTHORS AND CONTRIBUTORS . 

7.0 Summarv 

Stuart C. Black, BN 

2.0 Introduction 

Colleen M. Beck, DRI 

Stuart C. Black, BN 

James W. Kesler, BN 

3.0 Compliance Summarv 

Colleen M. Beck, DRI 

Gina M. Cook, BN 

Orin L. Haworth, BN 

James W. Kesler, BN 

Cathy A. Wills, BN 

4.0 Air Surveillance Activities 

Stuart C. Black, BN 

Christopher A. Fontana, EPA 

Robert F. Grossman, BN 

Orin L. Haworth, BN 

Anita A. Mullen, EPA 

Elizabeth C. Calman, BN 

James W. Kesler, BN 

5.0 Water Surveillance Activities 

Max G. Davis, EPA 

Sigmund L. Drellack, BN 

Robert F. Grossman, BN 

Anita A. Mullen, EPA 

6.0 Other Reportable Activities 

Colleen M. Beck, DRI 

Stuart C. Black, BN 

Brian L. Dozier, BN 

Deron Linkenheil, BN 

Anita A. Mullen, EPA 

Cathy A. Wills, BN 

7.0 Dose Assessment 

Stuart C. Black, BN 

Anita A. Mullen, EPA 

8.0 Laboratov Qualitv Assurance 

Stuart C. Black, BN 

Mark D. Sells, EPA 

iii 
This page intentionally left blank 

iv 
FOREWORD 

Prior to 1989, annual reports of environmental monitoring and assessment results for the Nevada 

Test Site (NTS) were prepared in two separate parts. Onsite effluent monitoring and 

environmental monitoring results were reported in an onsite report prepared by the U.S. 

Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office (DOE/NV). Results of the Offsite Radiological 

Surveillance and Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring programs conducted by the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency's (EPAs) Laboratory (various names) in Las Vegas, Nevada, 

were reported separately by that Agency. 

Beginning with the 1989 Annual Site Environmental Report for the NTS, these two documents 

were combined into a single report to provide a more comprehensive annual documentation of 

the environmental protection activities conducted for the nuclear testing program and other 

nuclear and non-nuclear operations at the NTS. The two agencies have coordinated preparation 

of this ninth combined onsite and offsite report through sharing of information on environmental 

surveillance and releases as well as meteorological, hydrological, and other supporting data used 

in dose-estimation calculations. 

V 
This page intentionally left blank 

vi 
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 

The skill, dedication, and perseverance of Angela L. McCurdy in text processing and graphics 

support were crucial to the production of this report. Also, very crucial to the production of this 

report was the graphics support provided by Larry R. Tinney and David W. Breckey of the 

Geographical Information System Group. The review and advice offered by the DOE/NV’s 

Environment, Safety and Health Division (ESHD) and the EPAs Radiation & Indoor 

Environments National Laboratory, Las Vegas (R&IE-LV) reviewers were invaluable. The efforts 

of N. George McNeill in coordinating the review of the 1997 ASER by the ESHD was greatly 

appreciated. Compilation and verification of onsite data were provided by Robert F. Grossman 

and Orin L. Haworth. Compilation and verification of Bechtel Nevada’s offsite data were provided 

by James W. Kesler. Statistical analyses of data were provided by Robert R. Kinnison. The 

cooperative support of Anita A. Mullen and Terry L. Mouck of the RUE-LV in production of this 

combined onsite and offsite environmental report is greatly appreciated. 

vii 
This page intentionally left blank 

viii 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Paae 

Authors and Contributors ..................................................... iii 

Foreword ................................................................. v 

Acknowledgements ......................................................... vii 

Tableofcontents .......................................................... ix 

ListofFigures ............................................................ xv 

ListofTables ............................................................. xvii 

Measurement Units and Nomenclature ......................................... xix 

List of Acronyms and Expressions ............................................ xxi 

1.0 Summary .......................................................... 1-1 

1.1 Environmental Management ....................................... 1-1 

1.2 Radiological Environment ......................................... 1-2 

Onsite Environmental Surveillance ........................... 1-2 

Offsite Environmental Surveillance ........................... 1-3 

Ecological Studies ........................................ 1-4 

Low-Level Waste Disposal ................................. 1-5 

Radiological Monitoring at Offsite Support Facilities ............... 1-5 

1.3 Nonradiological Monitoring ........................................ 1-5 

1.4 Compliance Activities ............................................ 1-6 

1.5 Groundwater Protection .......................................... 1-7 

1.6 Radioactive and Mixed Waste Storage and Disposal ..................... 1-7 

1.7 Quality Assurance .............................................. 1-8 

Onsite Nonradiological Quality Assurance ...................... 1-8 

Onsite Radiological Quality Assurance ........................ 1-8 

Offsite Radiological Quality Assurance ........................ 1-8 

1.8 Issues and Accomplishments ...................................... 1-8 

1.9 Conclusion ................................................... 1-10 

2.0 Introduction ......................................................... 2-1 

NTS Description ......................................... 2-7 

Mission and Nature of Operations ............................ 2-4 

1997 Activities ........................................... 2-6 

Nuclear Tests ................................... 2-6 

NTS-Related Activities ............................ 2-6 

Hazardous Materials Spill Center (HSC) ............... 2-6 

Topography and Terrain ................................... 2-6 

Geology ............................................... 2-8 

Hydrogeology ........................................... 2-8 

Climate and Meteorology .................................. 2-13 

FloraandFauna ........................................ 2-15 

Cultural Resources ...................................... 2-15 

Demography ........................................... 2-16 

Surrounding Land Use .................................... 2-16 

2.2 Non-NTS Facilities ............................................. 2-18 

Amador Valley Operations (AVO) ........................... 2-18 

Special Technologies Laboratory (STL) ....................... 2-18 

2.1 NTS Operations ................................................ 2-1 

ix 
Table of Contents . cont . Paae 

2.3 

Las Vegas Area Operations (LVAO) ......................... 2-18 

Los Alamos Operations (LAO) .............................. 2-19 

Washington Aerial Measurements Operations (WAMO) ........... 2-19 

Non-NTS Underground Test Sites .................................. 2-19 

3.0 Compliancesummary ................................................. 3-1 

3.1 Compliance Status .............................................. 3-2 

National Environmental Policy Act ........................... 3-2 

Clean Air Act ............................................ 3-3 

NTS NESHAP Asbestos Compliance .................. 3-3 

Radioactive Emissions on the NTS ................... 3-3 

NTS Air Quality Permit Compliance ................... 3-4 

Non-NTS Operations .............................. 3-4 

Clean Water Act ......................................... 3-4 

NTS Operations ................................. 3-4 

Non-NTS Operations .............................. 3-5 

Safe Drinking Water Act ................................... 3-5 

NTS Operations ................................. 3-5 

NTS Water Haulage .............................. 3-5 

Non-NTS Operations .............................. 3-5 

NTS RCRA Compliance ........................... 3-6 

Hazardous Waste Reporting for Non-NTS Operations .... 3-6 

underground Storage Tanks ........................ 3-6 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation. 

and Liability AcVSuperfund Amendments and 

Reauthorization Act (SARA) ............................... 3-7 

Emergency Reporting and Community 

Right-To-Kinow Act (EPCRA) ...................... 3-7 

Non-NTS Tier II Reporting Under SARA Title Ill .......... 3-8 

Toxic Substances Control Act ............................... 3-8 

.............. 3-8 

Historic Preservation ...................................... 3-8 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ...................... 3-6 

State of Nevada Chemical Catastrophe Prevention Act ............ 3-8 

Federal Insecticide. Fungicide. and Rodenticide Act 

Threatened and Endangered Species Protection ................. 3-9 

Executive Order 1 1988. Floodplain Management ................ 3-10 

Executive Order 11 990. Protection of Wetlands ................. 3-10 

................. 3-10 

Current Environmental Compliance Issues and Actions ................. 3-10 

CleanAirAct ........................................... 3-11 

Clean Water Act ........................................ 3-12 

.................................. 3-12 

Comprehensive Envircnmental Response. 

Historic Preservation .................................... 3-13 

Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization .................. 3-13 

Implementation ................................. 3-13 

Pollution Prevention Opportunity Assessments 

Executive Order 12856;. Federal Compliance With Right-To-Know 

Laws and Pollution Pi-evention Requirements 

Safe Drinking Water Al:t 

Compensation. and L-iability Act ............................ 3-13 

Goals and Descriptions ........................... 3-14 

(PPOAS) ..................................... 3-15 

3.2 

X 
Table of Contents . cont . Paae 

4.0 

5.0 

Solid/Sanitary Waste .................................... 3-18 

Federal Facilities Agreement and Consent Order ................ 3-18 

Remedial Activities-Surface Areas ................... 3-18 

Radiation Protection ..................................... 3-21 

NTS Operations ................................ 3-21 

Non-NTS BN Operations .......................... 3-21 

Environmental Compliance Audits ........................... 3-22 

Occurrence Reporting .................................... 3-22 

LegalActions .......................................... 3-22 

3.3 Permit Summary ............................................... 3-22 

Air Surveillance Activities .............................................. 4-1 

4.1 

4.2 

4.3 

4.4 

Onsite Radiological Monitoring ..................................... 4-1 

Criteria ................................................ 4-1 

Airborne Effluent Monitoring ................................ 4-4 

Environmental Surveillance ................................. 4-4 

Offsite Radiological Monitoring ..................................... 4-5 

Air Surv&llance Network (ASN) .............................. 4-6 

Thermoluminescent Dosimetry (TLD) Network ................... 4-6 

Pressurized Ion Chamber (PIC) Network ....................... 4-8 

Community Technical Liaison Program 

(CTLP) .............................................. 4-10 

Nonradiological Monitoring ....................................... 4-10 

Monitoring of NTS Operations .............................. 4-10 

Routine Monitoring .............................. 4-10 

NTS Air Quality Permit Compilance .................. 4-11 

Offsite Monitoring ....................................... 4-11 

Non-NTS Facility Monitoring ............................... 4-11 

Air Quality Permits ....................................... 4-12 

Air Surveillance Program Results .................................. 4-12 

Onsite Radiological Monitoring ............................. 4-12 

Airborne Effluents ................................. 4-12 

Offsite Radiological Results ................................ 4-18 

Air Sampling Results ............................. 4-12 

Air Sampling Results ............................. 4-18 

Water Surveillance Activities ............................................ 5-1 

5.1 Water Monitoring Program Information ............................... 5-1 

Onsite Environmental Monitoring ............................. 5-1 

5.2 Long Term Hydrological Monitoring Program (LTHMP) ................... 5-5 

Sampling and Analysis Procedures ........................... 5-5 

Groundwater Near the Nevada Test Site ............... 5-5 

Groundwater at Other Test Areas .................... 5-7 

5.3 Groundwater Protection Program ................................... 5-7 

Hydrogeology of the NTS .................................. 5-7 

Hydrogeology of Non-NTS Underground Test Sites .............. 5-70 

NTS Areas of Possible Groundwater Contamination ............. 5-10 

Activities Protective of Groundwater ......................... 5-12 

xi 
Table of Contents . cont . Paae 

5.4 Environmental Restoration ....................................... 5-14 

Underground Test Area (UGTA) Sites ........................ 5-14 

Industrial Sites and Decontamination and Decommissioning ....... 5-17 

Offsite Locations ........................................ 5-17 

Water Surveillance Program Results ................................ 5-18 

Onsite Water Monitoring Results ............................ 5-18 

Radioactivity in Surface Water ...................... 5-18 

Radioactivity in Supply Wells and Drinking Water ....... 5-19 

LTHMP Monitoring on and Around the Nevada Test Site .......... 5-21 

LTHMP Monitoring at Other Test Sites ....................... 5-21 

Groundwater Quantity ............................ 5-35 

5.6 Nonradiological Monitoring ....................................... 5-36 

Clean Water Act Results .................................. 5-37 

NTS Operalions ................................ 5-37 

Non-NTS Operations ............................. 5-37 

5.5 

Groundwater Monitoring .................................. 5-35 

Groundwater Quality ............................. 5-35 

Safe Drinking Water Act Results ............................ 5-37 

Bacteriological Sampling .......................... 5-37 

Chemical Analysis ............................... 5-37 

Characterization and Monitoring of NTS Springs ........ 5-38 

5.7 Water Quality Permits ........................................... 5-38 

Onsite Water Permit .................................... 5-38 

Non-NTS Sewage Permits ................................. 5-39 

6.0 Other Reportable Activities ............................................ 6-1 

6.1 Test Related Activities ........................................... 6-1 

6.2 Radiological Surveillance ......................................... 6-1 

Offsite Milk Surveillance Network (MSN) ....................... 6-1 

6.3 Nonradiological Monitoring ........................................ 6-3 

Environmental Surveillance ................................. 6-3 

Ecological Monitoring ..................................... 6-3 

Historic Preservation ...................................... 6-6 

Hazardous Material Spill Center (HSC) ............................... 6-7 

Waste Management Activities ...................................... 6-7 

Radioactive Waste ....................................... 6-7 

RWMS-5 Waste Management Operations ...................... 6-8 

RWMS-5 Performance Assessment (PA) ....................... 6-9 

RWMS-3 Waste Management Operations ...................... 6-9 

RWMS-3 Performance Assessment .......................... 6-10 

Hazardous Wastes ...................................... 6-10 

Sanitary Waste ......................................... 6-11 

6.4 

6.5 

6.6 Permits for NTS Operations ...................................... 6-11 

7.0 DoseAssessment ..................................................... 7-1 

7.1 Estimated Dose from NTS Activities ................................. 7-1 

Estimated Dose Usinq Reported NTS Emissions ................. 7-2 

Estimated Dose Using Monitoring Network Data ................. 7-2 

xii 
Table of Contents . cont . Paae 

8.0 

7.2 Dose (EDE) from Offsite Exposures ................................ 7-3 

7.3 Summary .................................................... 7-4 

Laboratory Quality Assurance .......................................... 8-1 

8.1 Policy ....................................................... 8-1 

8.2 Overview of the Laboratory QA Program ............................ 8-2 

8.3 Data and Measurement Quality Objectives ........................... 8-3 

Data Quality Objectives ................................... 8-3 

Decision to be Made ................................ 8-3 

Range of Sampling Possibilities ........................ 8-3 

Measurements to be Made ........................... 8-3 

Sampling Locations ................................. 8-4 

Use of the Measurements ............................ 8-4 

Calculations to be Performed .......................... 8-4 

Measurement Quality Objectives ............................. 8-4 

Representativeness ................................. 8-4 

Comparability ..................................... 8-5 

Completeness ..................................... 8-5 

Precision ......................................... 8-5 

Accuracy ......................................... 8-5 

Completeness ........................................... 8-6 

Precision ............................................... 8-7 

Accuracy ............................................... 8-7 

............. 8-7 

.................. 8-8 

Comparability ........................................... 8-8 

8.4 Results for Completeness, Precision. and Accuracy .................... 8-6 

Radiological Performance Evaluation Results 

Corrective Actions Implemented in Response 

to Performance Evaluation Programs 

Spike and Reagent Blank Data .............................. 8-8 

References .............................................................. R-1 

Distribution List ........................................................... D-1 

xiii 
This page intentionally left blank 
LIST OF FIGURES 

Paae 

Figure 2.1 

Figure 2.2 

Figure 2.3 

Figure 2.4 

Figure 2.5 

Figure 2.6 

Figure 2.7 

Figure 2.8 

Figure 2.9 

Figure 4.1 

Figure 4.2 

Figure 4.3 

Figure 4.4 

Figure 4.5 

Figure 4.6 

Figure 4.7 

Figure 4.8 

Figure 4.9 

Figure 4.10 

Figure 5.1 

Figure 5.2 

Figure 5.3 

Figure 5.4 

Figure 5.5 

Figure 5.6 

Figure 5.7 

Figure 5.8 

Figure 5.9 

Figure 5.1 0 

Figure 5.1 1 

Figure 5.12 

Figure 5.1 3 

Figure 5.14 

Figure 5.1 5 

Figure 5.1 6 

NTS Location in Nevada ......................................... 2-2 

NTS Area Numbers. Principal Facilities. and Testing Areas .............. 2-3 

Location of Safety Tests on the NTS and the Nellis Air Force 

Rangecomplex .............................................. 2-5 

Topography of the NTS ......................................... 2-7 

Basic Lithologic Structure of the NTS ............................... 2-9 

Drill Hole Locations on the NTS .................................. 2-10 

Groundwater Hydrologic Units of the NTS and Vicinity ................. 2-12 

1992 Wind Rose Patterns for the NTS (Courtesy of Air Resource 

Laboratory. Special Operations & Research Division) ................. 2-14 

Land Use Around the NTS ...................................... 2-17 

Air Sampling Stations on the NTS . 1997 ............................ 4-2 

TLD Stations on the NTS . 1997 ................................... 4-3 

CTLP. PIC. and Air Sampling Locations Around the NTS ................ 4-7 

Locations of Offsite Station and Personnel TLDs ...................... 4-9 

Annual Average Gross Beta from Air Sampling . 1997 ................. 4-13 

Air Monitoring Results for RWMS-5 . 1997 .......................... 4-14 

Trend in Annual Average Gross Beta Concentration in Air on the NTS ..... 4-14 

Annual Average 239+240Pu in Air on the NTS . 1997 .................... 4-16 

Trend in Annual Averages for Plutonium Concentration on the NTS ....... 4-17 

Trend in Annual Averages for HTO Concentration on the NTS ........... 4-17 

Supply Well and Potable Water Sampling Stations on the NTS . 1997 ...... 5-3 

Surface Water Sampling Locations on the NTS . 1997 .................. 5-4 

Wells on the NTS Sampled by R&IE-LV . 1997 ........................ 5-6 

Wells and Springs Outside the NTS Included in the LTHMP . 1997 ......... 5-8 

Areas of Potential Groundwater Contamination on the NTS ............. 5-11 

Trends in Tritium Concentration, Test Well B on the NTS ............... 5-23 

Sampling Locations at the FAULTLESS Site . 1997 ................... 5-25 

Sampling Locations at the SHOAL Site . 1997 ....................... 5-26 

Sampling Locations at the RULISON Site . 1997 ..................... 5-27 

Sampling Locations at the RIO BLANC0 Site . 1997 .................. 5-29 

Sampling Locations at the GNOME Site . 1997 ....................... 5-30 

Sampling Locations at the GASBUGGY Site . 1997 ................... 5-32 

Sampling Locations Near GZ at the SALMON Site . 1997 ............... 5-34 

Sampling Locations Offsite at the SALMON Site . 1997 ................ 5-35 

Tritium Results Trends in Baxterville, Public Drinking Water Supply . 1997 . . 5-36 

Tritium Results in Well HM.S, SALMON Site, Project DRIBBLE . 1997 ..... 5-36 

Figure 6.1 MSN Stations . 1997 ............................................ 6-2 

xv 
This page intentionally left blank 
LIST OF TABLES 

Paae 

Table 1.1 Radionuclide Emissions on the NTS . 1997" ......................... 1-11 

During1997 ................................................. 1-11 

Table 1.2 Summary of Effective Dose Equivalents from NTS Operations 

Table 2.1 Non-NTS Nuclear Underground Test Sites ........................... 2-20 

Table 3.1 Environmental Permit Summary . 1997 .............................. 3-23 

Table 3.2 NTS Recycling Activities . 1997 .................................... 3-24 

Table 3.3 Off-Normal Occurrences at NTS Facilities ............................ 3-24 

Table 4.1 

Table 4.2 

Table 4.3 

Table 4.4 

Table 4.5 

Table 4.6 

Table 4.7 

Table 4.8 

Table 4.9 

Table 4.10 

Table 4.1 1 

Table 4.12 

Table 4.1 3 

Table 4.1 4 

Table 4.1 5 

Table 4.1 6 

Table 4.1 7 

Table 4.1 8 

Table 4.1 9 

Table 5.1 

Table 5.2 

Table 5.3 

Table 5.4 

Table 5.5 

Table 5.6 

Table 5.7 

Table 5.8 

Table 5.9 

Table 5.1 0 

Table 5.1 1 

Table 5.1 2 

Summary of the NTS Air and Direct Radiation Surveillance Program . 1997 . . 4-20 

Analytical Procedure. Air and TLD . 1997 ............................ 4-21 

NTS Active Air Quality Permits . 1997 ............................... 4-22 

Active Air Quality Permits for Non-NTS Facilities . 1997 ................. 4-23 

NTS Radionuclide Emissions . 1997 ................................ 4-24 

Summary Data (pCi/mL) for Gross Alpha. Gross Beta. 

'Be and Plutonium in Air . 1997 ................................... 4-25 

Summary of NTS 85Kr Concentrations . 1997 .......................... 4-26 

Airborne Tritium Concentrations on the NTS . 1997 ..................... 4-26 

Mean Air Monitoring Results for Various Radionuclides 

at the RWMS.3. 1994 to 1997 .................................... 4-26 

Mean Air Monitoring Results for Various Radionuclides 

at the RWMS.5. 1994 . 1997 ..................................... 4-27 

NTS Boundary Gamma Monitoring Results Summary . 1997 .............. 4-27 

NTS TLD Historical Station Comparisons. 1991 -1 997 ................... 4-27 

Gross Alpha Results for the Offsite Air Surveillance Network . 1997 ........ 4-28 

Gross Beta Results for the Offsite Air Surveillance Network . 1997 ......... 4-28 

Plutonium Results for the Offsite Hi-Volume Air Surveillance Network . 1997 . 4-29 

Gamma Monitoring Results for Offsite Stations . 1997 ................... 4-29 

Gamma Monitoring Results for Offsite Personnel . 1997 ................. 4-31 

Summary of Gamma Exposure Rates as Measured by PIC . 1997 ......... 4-31 

BN Offsite Boundary Monitoring Data . 1997 .......................... 4-32 

Summary of Analytical Procedures for Water Samples . 1997 ............. 5-42 

Summary of the Water Surveillance Program . 1997 .................... 5-43 

Groundwater Monitoring Parameters at the RWMS-5 ................... 5-43 

NTS Facilities with RCRA Closure Plans ............................. 5-44 

Locations with Detectable Man-Made Radioactivity . 1 997(a) .............. 5-44 

Radioactivity in NTS Surface Waters . 1997 .......................... 5-45 

NTS Open Reservoir Gross Beta Analysis Results . 1997 ................ 5-46 

NTS Drinking Water Sources . 1997 ................................ 5-46 

NTS Supply Well Radioactivity Averages . 1997 ....................... 5-46 

Radioactivity Averages for NTS Tap Water Samples . 1997 .............. 5-47 

Radium Analysis Results for NTS Potable Water Supply Wells . 1997 ....... 5-48 

Summary of Tritium Results for NTS Wells Sampled by R&IE-LV . 1997 ..... 5-48 

xvi i 
List of Tables . cont . Paae 

Table 5.1 3 

Table 5.14 

Table 5.1 5 

Table 5.1 6 

Table 5.17 

Table 5.18 

Table 5.19 

Table 5.20 

Table 5.21 

Table 5.22 

Table 5.23 

Table 5.24 

Table 5.25 

Table 5.26 

Table 5.27 

Table 5.28 

Table 5.29 

Table 6.1 

Table 6.2 

Table 6.3 

Table 6.4 

Table 6.5 

Table 6.6 

Table 6.7 

Table 7.1 

Table 7.2 

Table 8.1 

Table 8.2 

Table 8.3 

Table 8.4 

Table 8.5 

Table 8.6 

LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Wells Near the NTS . 1997 ........ 5-49 

LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project FAULTLESS . 1997 ........ 5-50 

LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project SHOAL . 1997 ............ 5-51 

LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project RULISON . 1997 .......... 5-51 

LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project RIO BLANC0 . 1997 ....... 5-52 

LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project GNOME . 1997 

LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project GASBUGGY . 1997 ........ 5-53 

LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project SALMON . April 1997 ....... 5-54 

Pond Water Depths in Infiltration Basins . 1997 ........................ 5-59 

Sampling Data for Infiltration Ponds Containing 30 cm or More . 1997 ....... 5-62 

Nitrate Analyses of Well Water !Samples (mg/L), First Quarter . 1997 

NTS Drinking Water System Permits . 1997 

Sewage Discharge Permits . 1997 .................................. 5-63 

Permits for NTS Septic Waste Hauling Trucks . 1997 

........... 5-52 

Influent Quality . 1997 ........................................... 5-58 

Organic Loading Rates . 1997 ..................................... 5-58 

Influent Toxics for Facilities that Received Industrial Wastewater . 1997 5-60 

....... 5-62 

.......................... 5-62 

................... 5-63 

..... 

Summary of Radionuclides Detected in Milk Samples . 1997 .............. Low-Level Waste Disposed of at the RWMS.5. 1993 . 1997 

Inventory of Radionuclides (>0.’1 Ci) Disposed of at the RWMS-5 in 1997 .... 6-12 

Low-Level Waste Disposed of at the RWMS.3. 1993 . 1997 

Inventory of Radionuclides (>I inCi) Disposed of at the RWMS-3 in 1997 .... 6-13 

Quantity of Wastes Disposed of in Landfills . 1997 

6-12 

.............. 6-12 

.............. 6-13 

..................... 6-13 

Permits Required for NTS Operations . 1997 .......................... 6-14 

Summary of Effective Dose Equivalents from NTS Operations . 1997 ........ 7-5 

Monitoring Networks Data Usecl in Dose Calculations . 1997 ............... 7-5 

Precision Objectives Expressed as Percents ........................... 8-9 

Accuracy Objectives Expressed as Percent Bias ........................ 8-9 

Analysis Completeness Data for Calendar Year 1997 ................... 8-10 

Precision Estimates from Replicate Sampling . 1997 .................... 8-10 

Accuracy of R&IE-LV Radioanalyses (EML QAP and PESP) . 1997 ........ 8-11 

Accuracy of ASL Radioanalyse:; (EPA PESP and EML QAP) . 1997 ....... 8-11 

~ 

xviii 
MEASUREMENT UNITS AND NOMENCLATURE 

Radioactivity data in this report are expressed in both traditional units (e.g., pCi/L) and 

International System (abbreviated SI) units. These units are explained below. 

background Ambient background radiation to which people are exposed. Naturally occurring 

radioactive elements contained in the body, in the ground, and in construction 

materials, cosmic radiation, and radioactivity in the air all contribute to an 

average radiation dose equivalent to humans of about 350 mrem per year. In 

laboratory measurements of radioactivity in samples, background is the activity 

determined when a sample of distilled water is processed through the system 

(also called a blank). 

becquerel 

concentration Usually expressed as pCi/mL, or pCi/m3. 

Abbreviation Bq. The Bq is the SI unit for disintegration rate. 

1 Bq = 1 disintegration per second. 

curie 

EDE 

rem 

roentgen 

Abbreviation Ci. The historic unit for disintegration rate. 1 Ci = 3.7 x 10“ 

disintegrations per second = 3.7 x IO” Bq. The usual submultiples of Ci are mCi 

(1 0-l‘ or one trillionth Ci). 

Ci or one thousandth Ci), pCi Ci or one millionth Ci), and pCi 

Effective dose equivalent - radiation dose corrected by various weighting factors 

that relate dose to the risk of serious effects. 

Rem (for roentgen gquivalent man) is the unit for expressing dose equivalent, or 

the energy imparted to a person when exposed to radiation. The commonly used 

subunit is the millirem (1 0-3 rem or one thousandth rem), abbreviated mrem. 

Abbreviation R. A unit expressing the intensity of X or yradiation at a point in air. 

The usual unit is mR for IO” R (one thousandth R). 

volume The SI unit for volume is m3 (cubic meter). Other units used are liter (L) and mL 

L or one thousandth liter). One cubic meter = 1,000 L, 1 L = 1.06 quarts. 

The elements and corresponding symbols used in this report are: 

Element Symbol 

Aluminum AI 

Americium Am 

Argon Ar 

Arsenic As 

Barium Ba 

Beryllium Be 

Boron B 

Cadmium Cd 

Calcium Ca 

Carbon C 

Cesium cs 

Chlorine CI 

Chromium Cr 

Fluorine F 

Germanium Ge 

Hydrogen H 

Iodine I 

Copper C 

Element 

Iron 

Krypton 

Lit hi u m 

Mercury 

Nitrogen 

Oxygen 

Plutonium 

Radium 

Radon 

Selenium 

Sulfur 

Strontium 

Technetium 

Thorium 

Thulium 

Tritium 

Uranium 

Xenon 

Symbol 

Fe 

Kr 

Li 

Hg 

N 

0 

Pu 

Ra 

Rn 

Se 

S 

Sr 

Tc 

Th 

Tm 

3H I 

U 

Xe 

xix 
This page intentionally left blank 

xx 
-- 

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS 

AEC 

AlRFA 

ARUSORD 

ASER 

ASL 

ASN 

AVO 

BN 

BOD 

BoFF 

CA 

CAA 

CADD 

CAP 

CEDE 

CEI 

CERCLA 

CFR 

CP 

CRMP 

CTLP 

CWA 

cx 

CY 

DAF 

DCG 

DDR 

DOD 

DOE 

DOE/HQ 

DOELAP 

DOE/NV 

DQO 

DRI 

DSWA 

EA 

EDE 

EGIS 

EHS 

EIS 

ELU 

EMAC 

EML 

EMP 

EOD 

EPA 

EPCRA 

EPD 

CAP88-PC 

E-MAD 

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission 

American Indian Religious Freedom Act 

Air Resource Laboratory, Special Operations and Research Division 

Annual Site Environmental Report 

Analytical Services Laboratory 

Air Surveillance Network 

Amador Valley Operations 

Bechtel Nevada 

Biochemical Oxygen Demand 

Bureau of Federal Facilities, State of Nevada 

Composite Analysis 

Clean Air Act 

Corrective Action Decision Document 

Corrective Action Plan 

Clean Air Package 1988 (EPA software program for estimating doses) 

Committed Effective Dose Equivalent 

Compliance Evaluation Inspection 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act 

Code of Federal Regulations 

Control Point 

Community Radiation Monitoring Program 

Community Technical Liaison Program 

Clean Water Act 

Categorical Exclusion 

Calendar Year 

Device Assembly Facility 

Derived Concentration Guide 

Data Discrepancy Report 

U.S. Department of Defense 

U.S. Department of Energy 

DOE Headquarters 

DOE Laboratory Accreditation Program 

DOE Nevada Operations Office 

Data Quality Objectives 

Desert Research Institute, University and Community College System, Nevada 

Defense Special Weapons Agency 

Environmental Assessment 

Effective Dose Equivalent 

Ecological Geographic Informational System 

Extremely Hazardous Substances 

Environmental Impact Statement 

Ecological Landform Unit 

Ecological Monitoring and Compliance 

Engine Maintenance, Assembly and Disassembly (on the NTS) 

Environmental Measurements Laboratory (DOE) 

Environmental Monitoring Plan 

Explosive Ordnance Disposal (NTS) 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Emergency Reporting and Community Right-to-Know Act 

DOE Environmental Protection Division 

xxi 
List of Acronyms and Expessons. cont. 

ERP 

ESA 

ESHD 

ESS&H 

FFACO 

FFCA 

FY 

gal 

GBq 

GIS 

GZ 

HRMP 

HSC 

HTO 

HWSU 

ICRP 

ID 

IT 

I uc 

J IT 

keV 

LANL 

LAO 

LDR 

LLN L 

LLW 

LTHMP 

LVAO 

M&O 

MAPEP 

MCL 

MDC 

ME1 

MQO 

MSDS 

MSL 

MSN 

NAC 

NAFB 

NAFRC 

NAGPRA 

NEPA 

NEPD 

NESHAP 

NHPA 

NIST 

NLVF 

NPDES 

NR 

NRS 

NSHPO 

Environmental Restoration Project 

Endangered Species Act 

Environment, Safety and Health Division (DOE/NV) 

Environment, Safety, Security, and Health 

Federal Facilities Agreement and Consent Order 

Federal Facilities Compliance Act 

Fiscal Year 

Gallon 

Gigabequerel (1 O9 bequerels) 

Geographical Information System 

Ground Zero 

Hydrologic Resources Management Program 

Hazardous Materials Spill Center 

Tritiated Water 

Hazardous Waste Storage Unit 

International Commission cln Radiological Protection 

Identification 

International Technology Corporation 

International Uranium Corporation 

Just-in-Time 

Kilo-electronvolt 

Los Alamos National Laboratory 

Los Alamos Operations (BN) 

Land Disposal Restrictions 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory 

Low-Level (Radioactive) Waste 

Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program 

Las Vegas Area Operation (BN) 

Management and Operation 

Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program 

Maximum Contaminant Level 

Minimum Detectable Concentration 

Maximally Exposed Individual 

Measurement Quality Objectives 

Material Safety Data Sheet 

Mean Sea Level 

Milk Surveillance Network i(R&IE-LV) 

Nevada Administrative Code 

Nellis Air Force Base 

Nellis Air Force Range Cornplex 

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act 

National Environmental Policy Act 

Nevada Environmental Prcitection Division 

National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

National Historic Preservation Act 

National Institute of Standards and Technology 

North Las Vegas Facility (13N) 

National Pollution Discharge Elimination System 

National Register of Historic Places 

Nevada Revised Statutes 

Nevada State Historical PrLeservation Office 

xxii 
List of Acron-vms and Exoressions. cont, 

NTS 

ORNL 

ORSP 

PA 

PCB 

PE 

PEIS 

PESP 

PH 

PHS 

PIC 

PPOA 

PPm 

QA 

QAP 

RCRA 

REECo 

RMP 

ROD 

ROI 

RSD 

RSL 

RWMS 

R&IE-LV 

RWMS-3 

RWMS-5 

S 

SAFER 

SARA 

SDWA 

SGZ 

SMSY 

SOP 

STL 

TCE 

TDS 

TLD 

TRU 

TSCA 

lTR 

UGTA 

UNLV 

us. 

USFWS 

USGS 

UST 

voc 

WAC 

WAMO 

WEF 

WlPP 

WI 

Nevada Test Site 

Oak Ridge National Laboratory 

Offsite Radiological Safety Program 

Performance Assessment 

Polychlorinated Biphenyl 

Performance Evaluation 

Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement 

Performance Evaluation Studies Program 

Hydrogen ion concentration 

U.S. Public Health Service 

Pressurized Ion Chamber 

Pollution Prevention Opportunity Assessments 

Parts per Million 

Quality Assurance 

Quality Assessment Program 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act 

Radiation & Indoor Environment National Laboratory - Las Vegas 

Reynolds Electrical & Engineering Company, Inc. 

Resource Management Plan 

Record of Decision 

Return on Investment 

Relative Standard Deviation 

Remote Sensing Laboratory (BN) 

Radioactive Waste Management Site 

Radioactive Waste Management Site, Area 3 

Radioactive Waste Management Site, Area 5 

Sample Standard Deviation 

Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration 

Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act 

Safe Drinking Water Act 

Surface Ground Zero 

Strategic Materials Storage Yard 

Standard Operating Procedure 

Special Technologies Laboratory (BN) 

Trichloroethane 

Total Dissolved Solids 

Thermoluminescent Dosimeter 

Transuranic 

Toxic Substances Control Act 

Tonopah Test Range 

Underground Test Area 

University of Nevada, Las Vegas 

United States of America 

United States Fish and Wildlife Service 

U.S. Geological Survey 

Underground Storage Tank 

Volatile Organic Compound 

Waste Acceptance Criteria 

Washington Aerial Measurements Operations (BN) 

Waste Examination Facility 

Waste Isolation Pilot Plant 

Work Instructions 

xxiii 
This page intentionally left blank 
SUMMARY 

1.0 SUMMARY 

Monitoring and surveillance, on and around the Nevada Test Site, (NTS) by 

US. Department of Energy (DOE) contractors and NTS user organizations 

during 1997, indicated that operations on the NTS were conducted in 

compliance with applicable DOE, state, and federal regulations and 

guidelines. All discharges of radioactive liquids remained onsite in 

containment ponds, and there was no indication of potential migration of 

radioactivity to the offsite area through groundwater. Surveillance around 

the NTS indicated that airborne radioactivity from diffusion, evaporation of 

liquid effluents, or resuspension of soil was not detectable offsite, and 

exposure above existing background to members of the offsite population 

was not measured by the offsite monitoring program. Using the U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Clean Air Package 1988 

(CAP88)-PC model and NTS radionuclide emissions and environmental 

monitoring data, the calculated effective dose equivalent (EDE) to the 

maximally exposed individual offsite would have been 0.089 mrem. This 

value is less than 1 percent of the federal dose limit prescribed for 

radionuclide air emissions. Any person receiving this dose would also have 

received 144 mrem from natural background radiation. There were no 

nonradiological releases to the offsite area. Hazardous wastes were shipped 

offsite to approved disposal facilities. Compliance with the various 

regulations stemming from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) is 

being achieved and, where mandated, permits for air and water effluents and 

waste management have been obtained from the appropriate agencies. 

Cooperation with other agencies has resulted in seven different consent 

orders and agreements. 

Support facilities at off-NTS locations have complied with the requirements 

of air quality permits and state or local wastewater discharge and hazardous 

waste permits as mandated for each location. 

1 .I ENVIRONMENTAL 

MANAGEMENT 

of nuclear explosive devices. DOE/NV 

management has vigorously promoted the 

practice of pollution prevention, including 

waste minimization and material recycling. 

he DOE Nevada Operations Office T (DOE/NV) is committed to increasing 

the quality of its management of NTS 

environmental resources. This has been 

promoted by the establishment of an 

Environmental Protection Division under the 

purview of Assistant Manager of Technical 

Services and upgrading the Environmental 

Management activities to the Assistant 

Manager level to address those 

environmental issues that have arisen in the 

course of performing the original primary 

mission of the DOE/NV, underground testing 

Operational releases and seepage of 

radioactivity are reported soon after their 

occurrence. In compliance with the National 

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants (NESHAP), as set forth in Title 40 

Code of Federal Regulations Part 61, the 

accumulated annual emissions are used as 

part of the input to the EPAs CAP88-PC 

software program to calculate potential 

EDEs to people living beyond the 

boundaries of the NTS and the surrounding 

exclusion areas. 

1-1 
1.2 RADIOLOGICAL 

ENVIRONMENT 

Radiological effluents in the form of air 

emissions and liquid discharges are normally 

released into the environment as a routine 

part of operations on the NTS. Radioactivity 

in liquid discharges released to onsite waste 

treatment or disposal systems (containment 

ponds) is monitored to assess the efficacy of 

treatment and control and to provide a 

quantitative and qualitative annual summary 

of released radioactivity. Air emissions are 

monitored for source characterization and 

operational safety as well as for 

environmental surveillance purposes. 

Air emissions in 1997 consisted primarily of 

small amounts of tritium, radioactive noble 

gases, and plutonium released to the 

atmosphere that were attributed to: 

0 Diffusion of tritiated water (HTO) vapor in 

atmospheric moisture from evaporation 

of HTO from tunnel and characterization 

well containment ponds. 

0 Diffuse emissions calculated from the 

results of environmental surveillance 

activities. 

0 Resuspension of plutonium as measured 

with air sampling equipment or 

calculated by use of resuspension 

equations. 

0 Release of 85Kr from tests under Pahute 

Mesa when atmospheric pressure 

changes occur. Such releases were 

statistically undetectable in 1997. 

Diffuse emissions included HTO, only 

slightly above detection limits, from the 

Radioactive Waste Management Site in 

Area 5 (RWMS-5) and the SEDAN crater in 

Area 10 and resuspended 239+240Pu from 

areas on the NTS where it was deposited by 

atmospheric nuclear tests or device safety 

tests in earlier years. Table 1.1 shows the 

quantities of radionuclides released from all 

sources, including postulated loss of 

laboratory standards. None of the 

radioactive materials listed in this table were 

detected in the offsite area above ambient 

levels. 

Onsite liquid discharges to containment 

ponds included approximately 20 Ci (740 

GBq) of tritium. This was much less than 

last year's tritium releases. Evaporation of 

this material could have contributed HTO to 

the atmosphere, but the amounts were too 

small to be detected by the tritium monitors 

onsite. No liquid effluents were discharged 

to offsite areas. 

ONSITE ENVIRONMENTAL 

SURVEILLANCE 

Environmental surveillance on the 3,500-km2 

(1 ,350-mi2) NTS is designed to cover the 

entire area with some emphasis on areas of 

past nuclear testing and present operational 

activities. In 1997, samplers were operated 

at 48 locations to collect air particulate 

samples, at 13 locations to collect HTO in 

atmospheric moisture, and at 3 locations to 

collect air for analysis of noble gas content. 

Grab samples were collected frequently from 

water supply wells, water taps, springs, open 

reservoirs, containment ponds, and sewage 

lagoons. Thermoluminescent dosimeters 

(TLDs) were placed at 166 locations on the 

NTS to measure ambient gamma exposures. 

Data from these networks are summarized 

as annual averages for each monitored 

location. Those locations with 

concentrations above the NTS average are 

assumed to reflect onsite emissions. These 

emissions arise from diffuse (areal) sources 

and from particular operational 

activities (e.g., radioactivity buried in the 

low-level radioactive waste [LLW] site). 

Approximately 2,400 air samples were 

analyzed by gamma spectroscopy. All 

isotopes detected by gamma spectroscopy 

were naturally occurring in the environment 

(40K, 7Be, and members of the uranium and 

thorium series), except for a few instances 

where very low levels of 137Cs were 

1-2 
SUMMARY 

detected. Gross beta analysis of the air 

samples yielded an annual average for the 

network of 2.0 x 1 O-I4 pCi/mL (0.74 mBq/m3). 

Plutonium analyses of monthly or quarterly 

composited air filters indicated an annual 

arithmetic average below 1 0-l6 pCi/mL 

(4 pBq/m3) of 239+240Pu and below 

pCi/mL (0.04 pBq/m3) of 238Pu for all 

locations during 1997, with the majority of 

results for both isotopes being on the order 

of 1 0-l8 pCi/mL (0.04 pBq/m3). A slightly 

higher average was found in samples in 

certain areas, but that level was calculated 

to be only 0.01 percent of the Derived 

Concentration Guide (DCG) for exposure to 

the public. Higher than background levels of 

plutonium are to be expected in some air 

samples because atmospheric testing in the 

1950s, and nuclear safety tests dispersed 

plutonium over a small portion of the surface 

of the NTS. 

The annual average concentration of 85Kr 

from the three noble gas monitoring stations 

was 27 x 1 O-’* pCi/mL (1 Bq/m3). This 

concentration is similar to that reported in 

previous years and is attributed to worldwide 

distribution of 85Kr from the use of nuclear 

technology. 

Throughout the year atmospheric moisture 

was collected for two-week periods at 13 

locations on the NTS and analyzed for HTO 

content. The annual arithmetic average of 

(4.7 * 9.7) x pCi/mL (0.17 * 0.36 Bq/m3) 

was similar to last year’s average. The 

highest annual average concentrations were 

at the E Tunnel pond, the SEDAN crater, 

and RWMS-5 locations, in that order. The 

primary radioactive liquid discharge to the 

onsite environment in 1997 was 16 Ci 

(0.6 TBq) of tritium (as HTO) in seepage 

from E Tunnel. Also, effluent produced 

during pumping from wells in Area 3 

contained about 4.2 Ci (0.1 6 GBq) of HTO. 

For dose calculations, all of the HTO was 

assumed to have evaporated. 

Surface water sampling was conducted 

quarterly at eight open reservoirs, seven 

springs, two containment ponds and an 

effluent, and nine sewage lagoons. A grab 

sample was taken from each of these 

surface water sites for analysis of gross 

beta, tritium, gamma-emitters, and plutonium 

isotopes. Strontium-90 was analyzed once 

per year for each location. Water samples 

from the springs, reservoirs, and lagoons 

contained background levels of gross beta, 

tritium, plutonium, and strontium. Samples 

collected from the tunnel containment pond 

and characterization well effluent ponds 

contained detectable levels of radioactivity, 

as would be expected. 

Water samples from onsite supply wells and 

drinking water distribution systems were 

analyzed for radionuclides. The supply well 

average gross beta activity of 7.0 x 1 0-’ 

pCi/mL (0.26 Bq/L) was 3 percent of the 

DCG for 40K (used for comparison 

purposes); gross alpha was 6.2 x 10‘’ 

pCi/mL (0.23 Bq/L), which was about 40 

percent of the drinking water standard; the 

maximum ’OSr measured was 1.7 x 

pCi/mL (6.3 mBq/L), about 2 percent of the 

DCG; 3H averaged about 3.4 x lo-’ pCi/mL 

(0.12 Bq/L), less than 0.002 percent of the 

DCG; 239+240Pu and 238Pu were both below 

their minimum detectable levels of about 

2 x IO-” pCi/mL (0.074 mBq/L). 

Analysis of the TLD network showed that the 

16 boundary station locations had an annual 

average exposure of 127 mR, and the 9 

historic stations annual average was 95 mR, 

both within the range of values previously 

reported. 

OFFSITE ENVIRONMENTAL 

SURVEILLANCE 

The offsite radiological monitoring program 

is conducted around the NTS by the EPAs 

Radiation & Indoor Environments National 

Laboratory-Las Vegas (R&IE-LV), under an 

Interagency Agreement with DOE. This 

program consists of several environmental 

sampling, radiation detection, and dosimetry 

networks as described below. These 

networks operated continuously during 

1997. 

1-3 
The Air Surveillance Network (ASN) was 

made up of 20 continuously operating 

sampling locations surrounding the NTS, 6 

of which also had high-volume air samplers. 

The ASN stations included I6 sampling 

locations, at Community Technical Liaison 

Program (CTLP) stations, described below. 

During 1997, no airborne radioactivity 

related to current activities at the NTS was 

detected on any sample from the ASN. 

Other than naturally occurring 7Be, the only 

specific radionuclide detected by this 

network was 238Pu or 239+240Pu on highvolume air-filter samples. 

The Milk Surveillance Network consisted of 

11 sampling locations within 300 km (186 

mi) of the NTS. Samples were analyzed for 

'OSr, which averaged 0.7 pCi/L. The data 

from this network are consistent with 

previous data and indicate little or no 

change. 

In 1997, external exposure was monitored 

by a network of 38 TLDs and 27 pressurized 

ion chambers (PICs) located in towns and 

communities around the NTS. There was 

also a PIC located at the SALMON site near 

Baxterville, Mississippi. The PIC network in 

the communities surrounding the NTS 

indicated background exposures, ranging 

from 71 to 156 mR/yr, that were consistent 

with previous data and well within the range 

of background data in other areas of the 

United States. The exposures measured by 

the TLDs were slightly less, as has been 

true in the past. 

Sampling of Long-Term Hydrological 

Monitoring Program (LTHMP) wells and 

surface waters around the NTS showed only 

background radionuclide concentrations. 

The LTHMP also included groundwater and 

surface water monitoring at locations in 

Alaska, Colorado, Mississippi, New Mexico, 

and Nevada where underground nuclear 

tests were conducted. The results obtained 

from analysis of samples collected at those 

locations were consistent with previous data, 

except for a sample from a deep well at 

Project GASBUGGY, where the 3H and 137Cs 

has been detected the last few years. No 

concentrations of radioactivity that were 

detected in air, water, or milk samples posed 

any significant health risk to nearby 

residents. 

A network of 17 CTLP stations was operated 

by local residents, one without an air 

sampler. Each station was an integral part 

of the ASN and TLD networks. In addition, 

they were equipped with a PIC connected to 

a gamma-rate recorder. Samples and data 

from these CTLP stations were analyzed 

and reported by R&IE-LV and also 

interpreted and reported by the Desert 

Research Institute, University of Nevada 

System. All measurements for 1997 were 

consistent with previous years and were 

within the normal background range for the 

United States. 

Although no radioactivity attributable to 

current NTS operations was detected by any 

of the offsite monitoring networks, based on 

the NTS releases reported in Table 1.1, an 

atmospheric dispersion model calculation 

(CAP88-PC) indicated that the maximum 

potential EDE to any offsite individual would 

have been 0.089 mrem (8.9 x 1 O'4 mSv), and 

the dose to the population within 80 km of 

the several emission sites on the NTS would 

have been 0.26 person-rem (2.6 x 1 O'3 

person-Sv), both of which were less than 

last year. The hypothetical person receiving 

this dose would also have been exposed to 

144 mrem from natural background 

radiation. A summary of the potential EDEs 

due to operations at the NTS is presented in 

Table 1.2. 

ECOLOGICAL STUDIES 

The Ecological Monitoring and Compliance 

Program monitoring tasks, which were 

selected for 1997, included habitat mapping 

on the northern portion of the NTS, 

characterizing the natural springs on the 

NTS, conducting a census of the horse 

population, and periodically monitoring manmade water sources to assess their effects 

on wildlife. Ecological monitoring of certain 

spill tests at the Hazardous Materials Spill 

Center (HSC) (formerly Liquefied Gaseous 

Fuels Spill Test Facility) was also 

conducted. 

1-4 
Field surveys were conducted from June 

1996 through February 1997 to identify 

those natural NTS springs, seeps, tanks, 

and playas, which could be designated by 

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as 

jurisdictional wetlands. A summary report of 

the survey findings entitled “NTS Wetlands 

Assessment” has been published. 

LOW-LEVEL WASTE DISPOSAL 

Environmental monitoring at the RWMS, 

Area 3 (RWMS-3) has detected plutonium 

in air samples. However, the 

upwind/downwind sampler results were 

equivalent, and plutonium was detected in 

other air samples from Area 3 indicating that 

the source is resuspended plutonium. 

Elevated levels of plutonium have been 

detected in air samples from several areas 

on the NTS where operational activities and 

vehicular traffic resuspend plutonium for 

detection by air sampling. The presence of 

plutonium on the NTS is primarily due to 

atmospheric and safety tests conducted in 

the 1950s and 1960s. These tests spread 

plutonium in the eastern and northeastern 

areas of the NTS (Figure 2.3, Chapter 2 

displays these locations). 

Environmental monitoring at and around 

RWMS-5 indicated that HTO in air was 

detectable at, but not beyond, the waste site 

boundaries. This monitoring included air 

sampling, water sampling, and external 

gamma exposure measurement. Vadose 

zone monitoring for hazardous constituents 

has been installed in the mixed waste 

disposal pit (Pit 3) in RWMS-5, as a method 

of detecting any downward migration of 

mixed waste. Also, three monitoring wells, 

installed to satisfy Resource Conservation 

and Recovery Act (RCRA) requirements for 

a mixed-waste disposal operation, have not 

yet detected migration of hazardous 

materials. 

RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING AT 

OFFSITE SUPPORT FACILITIES 

Fence line monitoring, using Panasonic UD81 4 TLDs, was conducted at offsite DOE/NV 

support facilities in North Las Vegas, 

Nevada; Santa Barbara, California; and at 

the Washington Aerial Measurements 

Operation. The 1997 results indicated that 

only background radiation was detected at 

the fence line of these facilities. In 1995, a 

small amount of tritium was accidently 

released from a calibration range building in 

North Las Vegas that was still detectable 

this year in the room where the release 

occurred. Monitoring of the release provided 

data for input into the CAP88-PC program 

for calculating offsite exposures. The 

maximum offsite exposure was calculated to 

be only 0.00025 mrem, which is far below 

the EPA permissible limit of 10 mrem. 

1.3 NONRADIOLOGICAL 

MONITORING 

Nonradiological environmental monitoring of 

NTS operations involved only onsite 

monitoring because there were no 

discharges offsite that involved 

nonradiological hazardous materials. The 

primary environmental permit areas for the 

NTS were monitored to verify compliance 

with ambient air quality and the RCRA 

requirements. Air emissions sources 

common to the NTS included particulates 

from construction, aggregate production, 

surface disturbances, fugitive dust from 

unpaved roads, fuel burning equipment, 

open burning, and fuel storage facilities. 

NTS environmental permits active during 

1997, which were issued by the state of 

Nevada or by federal agencies, included one 

comprehensive air quality permit covering 

emissions from construction of facilities, 

boilers, storage tanks, and open burning; 

four permits for surface disturbance 

(environmental restoration activities); seven 

permits for onsite drinking water distribution 

systems; one permit for sewage discharges 

to lagoon collection systems; six permits for 

septage hauling; one incidental take permit 

for the threatened desert tortoise; and one 

permit for the scientific collection and study 

of various species on the NTS. Further, a 

RCRA permit has been obtained for general 

NTS operations and for two specific facilities 

on the NTS. 

1-5 
Permits at non-NTS operations included 12 

air pollution control permits, 2 sewage 

discharge permits, and 2 hazardous material 

storage permits. Three EPA Generator 

Identification numbers were issued to NTS 

operations, and three local RCRA-related 

permits were required at two of those 

operations. 

The only nonradiological air emission of 

regulatory concern under the Clean Air Act 

(CAA) has been due to asbestos removal 

during building renovation projects and from 

insulated piping at various locations on the 

NTS. During 1997, there were no projects 

that required state of Nevada notifications. 

The annual estimate for non-scheduled 

asbestos demolition/renovation for fiscal 

year 1997 was sent to EPA Region 9 in 

December 1997. 

RCRA requirements were met through an 

operating permit for hazardous waste 

storage, mixed waste storage, and explosive 

ordnance disposal operations. A Federal 

Facilities Agreement and Consent Order 

(FFACO) has been signed with the state that 

exempts the NTS from potential enforcement 

action related to mixed waste storage 

prohibition under RCRA. 

The state’s annual Compliance Evaluation 

Inspection during September 1997 found 

only minor deficiencies. 

As there are no liquid discharges to 

navigable waters, offsite surface water 

drainage systems, or publicly owned 

treatment works, no Clean Water Act (CWA) 

National Pollution Discharge Elimination 

System (NPDES) permits were required for 

NTS operations. Under the conditions of the 

state of Nevada operating permits, liquid 

discharges to onsite sewage lagoons are 

regularly tested for biochemical oxygen 

demand, pH, and total suspended solids. In 

addition to the state-required monitoring, 

these influents were also tested for RCRArelated constituents as an internal initiative 

to further protect the NTS environment. 

In January and June of 1997, the state 

inspected all NTS equipment regulated by 

the state air quality permit. There were no 

findings as a result of these inspections. 

In compliance with the Safe Drinking Water 

Act (SDWA) and seven state of Nevada 

drinking water supply system permits, the 

onsite distribution systems supplied by 

onsite wells are sampled monthly for 

residual chlorine, pH, bacteria, and, less 

frequently, for other water quality indicators. 

No exceedances have been found. 

Monitoring for polychlorinated biphenyls as 

required by the Toxic Substances Control 

Act (TSCA) was done and was reported to 

the EPA and the state in June 1997. 

At the HSC, 2 series of spill tests using 38 

different chemicals were conducted during 

1997. None of the tests generated enough 

airborne contaminants to be detected at the 

NTS boundary during or after the tests. 

Boundary monitoring was performed by 

R&IE-LV personnel. 

1.4 COMPLIANCE ACTIVITIES 

DOE/NV is required to comply with various 

environmental laws and regulations in the 

conduct of its operations. Monitoring 

activities required for compliance with the 

CAA, CWA, SDWA, TSCA, and RCRA are 

summarized above. Endangered Species 

Act activities include compliance with the 

USFWS Biological Opinion on NTS Activities 

and the Biological Opinion on Fortymile 

Canyon Activities. NEPA activities included 

action on 3 Environmental Impact 

Statements (EISs), 5 Environmental 

Assessments (EAs), and 44 Categorical 

Exclusions. The Record of Decision on the 

sitewide EIS for the NTS and other test 

locations within the state of Nevada was 

published in December 1996. 

Wastewater discharges at the NTS are not 

regulated under NPDES permits, because all 

such discharges are to onsite sewage 

1-6 
SUMMARY 

lagoons. Discharges to these lagoons are 

permitted under the Nevada Water Pollution 

Control Act. Wastewater discharges from 

the non-NTS support facilities were within 

the regulated levels established by city or 

county publicly owned treatment works. 

Underground storage tank activities were 

limited to continued remediation of sites from 

previous tank removals. 

In 1997, 13 surveys were conducted for 

historical and archaeological sites that 

identified 25 prehistoric and historic 

archeological sites. Four of these are 

considered candidates for listing on the 

National Register of Historic Places. 

The American Indian Religious Freedom Act 

(AIRFA) directs federal agencies to consult 

with Native Americans to protect their right 

to exercise their traditional religions. In 

1997, work continued on a summary report, 

site records, and an artefact inventory of 

materials in the DOE/NV Curatorial Facility 

in preparation for an AIRFA consultation. 

Waste minimization and pollution prevention 

activities conducted at the NTS and its 

offsite facilities involve an intensive recycling 

program and active product substitution 

projects. 

1.5 GROUNDWATER 

PROTECTION 

A LTHMP was instituted in 1972 to be 

operated by the EPA under an Interagency 

Agreement. In 1997 surface waters and 

groundwaters were monitored on and around 

the NTS, at five sites in other states, and at 

two off-NTS locations in Nevada to detect 

the presence of any radioactivity that may 

be related to nuclear testing activities. No 

radioactivity was detected above 

background levels in the groundwater 

sampling network surrounding the NTS. 

Low levels of tritium, in the form of HTO, 

were detected in onsite wells, as has 

occurred previously. None exceeded 33 

percent of the National Primary Drinking 

Water Regulation level. 

HTO was detected in samples from wells at 

formerly utilized sites, such as the SALMON 

(Mississippi), GNOME (New Mexico), and 

GASBUGGY (New Mexico), at levels 

consistent with previous experience. The 

HTO in water from Well EPNG 10-36 at 

GASBUGGY that began to be detected in 

1984, was detected for the sixth year in a 

row. 

Because wells that were drilled for water 

supply or exploratory purposes are used in 

the NTS monitoring program, rather than 

wells drilled specifically for groundwater 

monitoring, a program of well drilling for 

groundwater characterization is underway. 

The design of the program is for installation 

or recompletion of groundwater 

characterization wells at strategic locations 

on and near the NTS. Through 1997,15 of 

these wells have been drilled on the NTS 

and 10 existing wells recompleted, while 16 

wells have been drilled or completed in the 

near offsite area, downgradient of the NTS. 

Other activities in this program included 

studies of groundwater transport of 

contaminants (radionuclide migration 

studies) and nonradiological monitoring for 

water quality assessment and RCRA 

requirements. 

1.6 RADIOACTIVE AND 

MIXED WASTE STORAGE 

AND DISPOSAL 

Two RVI Ss are operated on the NTS, one 

each in Areas 3 and 5. During 1997, the 

RWMSs received LLW generated at the NTS 

and other DOE facilities. Waste is disposed 

of in shallow pits and trenches in RWMS-5 

and in selected craters in RWMS-3. 

Transuranic (TRU) and TRU mixed wastes 

are stored on a curbed asphalt pad on 

pallets in overpacked 55-gal drums and 

assorted steel boxes pending 

1-7 
characterization and shipment to the Waste 

Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico. The 

RWMS-3 is used for disposal of bulk LLW 

waste and LLW that is contained in 

packages that are larger than the specified 

standard size used at RWMS-5. 

Environmental monitoring at both sites 

included air sampling for radioactive 

particulates and HTO in air and external 

exposure measurements using TLDs. Water 

sampling and vadose zone monitoring for 

moisture and hazardous constituents are 

conducted at the RWMS-5. Environmental 

monitoring results for 1997 indicated that 

measurable radioactivity from waste 

disposal operations was detectable only in 

the immediate vicinity of the facilities. 

Because the NTS is not a RCRA-permitted 

disposal facility, RCRA regulations require 

the shipment of nonradioactive hazardous 

waste to licensed disposal facilities offsite so 

there is no disposal of hazardous waste on 

the NTS. 

Pit 3 in RWMS-5 has interim status for 

mixed waste generated on the NTS. 

LLW will only be accepted for disposal from 

generators (onsite and offsite) that have 

submitted a waste application that meets the 

requirements of the Waste Acceptance 

Criteria document (NTS 1996) and that have 

received DOE/NV approval of the waste 

stream(s) for disposal at the NTS. 

1.7 QUALITY ASSURANCE 

The quality assurance (QA) program 

covering NTS activities has three 

components. There are QA programs for 

nonradiological analyses, for onsite 

radiological analyses, and for offsite 

radiological analyses conducted by EPAs 

R&IE-LV. 

ONSITE NONRADIOLOGICAL 

QUALITY ASSURANCE 

The onsite nonradiological QA program was 

not operative during 1997, because stable 

chemical analyses are done by offsite 

contract laboratories. These contract 

laboratories are monitored for their 

participation and performance in various 

performance evaluation programs. 

ONSITE RADIOLOGICAL QUALITY 

ASSURANCE 

The onsite radiological QA program includes 

conformance to best laboratory practice and 

implementation of the provisions of DOE 

Order 5700.6C. The external QA 

intercomparison program for radiological 

data QA consists of participation in the DOE 

Quality Assessment Program administered 

by the DOE Environmental Measurements 

Laboratory and the Performance Evaluation 

Studies Program conducted by the EPA's 

National Exposure Research Laboratory. 

OFFSITE RADIOLOGICAL 

QUALITY ASSURANCE 

The policy of the EPA requires participation 

in a centrally managed QA program by all 

EPA organizational units involved in 

environmental data collection. The QA 

program developed by the R&lE-LV for the 

Offsite Radiological Safety Program meets 

all requirements of EPA policy and also 

includes applicable elements of the DOE QA 

requirements and regulations. The program 

defines data quality objectives (DQOs), 

which are statements of the quality of data a 

decision maker needs to ensure that a 

decision based on those data is defensible. 

Achieved data quality may then be 

evaluated against these DQOs. 

1.8 ISSUES AND 

ACCOMPLISHMENTS 

PRINCIPAL COMPLIANCE PROBLEMS 

FOR 1997 

On June 28, 1994, the state of Nevada 

filed a Complaint for Declaratory 

Judgement and Injunction in the U.S. 

1-8 
District Court against DOE. Nevada 

claimed that the DOE failed to comply 

with NEPA requirements at the NTS and 

must initiate a single, sitewide EIS for all 

major federal actions at the NTS. The 

state was seeking to halt shipments of 

LLW from Fernald and all other 

transportation, receipt, storage, and 

disposal of all kinds of waste and was 

also seeking to enjoin DOE from 

pursuing any “Weapons Complex” 

activities until publication of the EIS. In 

January 1995, the U.S. District Court 

dismissed the claims regarding Fernald 

waste and the sitewide EIS. As of the 

end of 1997, the remaining claim, 

regarding disposal of LLW from offsite 

facilities is still unsettled. 

0 A notification letter was received 

regarding alleged potentially responsible 

party status connected with a 

commercial disposal site in California. 

The state notified DOE/NV that Omega 

Chemical Co., a hazardous waste 

treatment and storage facility, 

possessed documents indicating that 

DOE/NV had shipped hazardous waste 

to the site between 1988 and 1992. The 

company has declared bankruptcy and is 

unable to clean up the site. Jurisdiction 

of this site has been transferred to the 

EPA, which so far, has made no contact. 

0 

0 

0 

0 

ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR 1997 

0 

0 One EIS and three EAs were initiated 

during 1997. 

0 Throughout 1997, DOE/NV continued to 

maintain and update the “DOE/NV 

Compliance Guide” (Volume Ill), a 

handbook containing procedures, 

formats, and guidelines for personnel 

responsible for NEPA compliance 

activities. 

The Nevada Operations 1997 Site 

Pollution Prevention Program Plan, was 

completed and submitted to DOE 

Headquarters. 

0 

0 

Continued use of a Just-in-Time supply 

system allowed NTS contractors to 

reduce product stock and control 

potentially hazardous products. 

Progress continued on the NTS 

groundwater characterization program. 

Fifteen special wells have been 

completed and ten existing wells have 

been recompleted to meet program 

requirements. 

Environmental Restoration Program 

activities were conducted at some 29 

sites during 1997. 

DOE/NV has entered into several 

consent orders and agreements. These 

are (1) a Memorandum of Understanding 

with the state covering radiological 

releases, (2) an Agreement in Principle 

with Nevada and Mississippi covering 

oversight of environment safety and 

health activities, (3) a Cooperative 

Agreement with Alaska’s Fish and 

Wildlife Service, (4) a Settlement 

Agreement with the state to manage 

mixed TRU waste, (5) a FFACO for 

providing storage of low-level mixed 

waste generated at the NTS and for 

environmental restoration of 

contaminated areas, and (6) a 

Programmatic Agreement with the state 

covering archaeological and historic 

preservation activities. 

The Cotter concentrate, consisting of 

1,148 barrels of material stored in Area 5 

for many years, was shipped to an 

offsite contractor for recycling of the 

contained material. 

The last deficiency from a 1993 

Environmental Compliance Audit was 

closed this year. This audit, by the 

Reynolds Electrical & Engineering Co. 

(the previous M&O contractor), was 

conducted at all facilities and work sites 

on the NTS. 

The following offsite remedial actions 

were completed in 1997: 

1-9 
1) Plutonium-contaminated soil was 

removed from the site of the 1963 

CLEAN SLATE I nuclear device 

storage-transportation test on the 

NAFRC, and the site was 

revegetated. The soil was disposed 

of in the LLW site in Area 3, NTS. 

2) At the SHOAL site in Nevada, four 

monitoring wells were installed to a 

depth of 396 m (1,300 ft), Desert 

Research Institute DRI conducted 

aquifer tests, and SAFER closure of 

one mud pit was completed. 

3) At the RULISON site in Colorado, 

quarterly sampling for hazardous 

waste at four wells, a two year 

program required by the state, was 

completed. No migration of 

hazardous wastes has been 

detected. 

4) At the FAULTLESS site in Nevada, 

surface characterization of mudpits 

at wells UC-1, UC-3, and UC-4 was 

performed. 

5) At the SALMON site in Mississippi, 

14 new shallow groundwater 

monitoring wells were installed, 

pumps were refurbished and 

installed in four existing wells, and 

one seismic check hole was plugged. 

1.9 CONCLUSION 

The environmental monitoring results 

presented in this report document that 

operational activities on the NTS in 1997 

were conducted so that no measurable 

radiological exposure occurred to the offsite 

public. Calculation of the highest individual 

dose that could have been received by an 

offsite resident (based on estimation of 

onsite worst-case radioactive releases 

obtained by measurement or engineering 

calculation and assuming the person 

remained outside all year) equated to 0.09 

mrem to a person living in Springdale, 

Nevada. This may be compared to that 

individual's exposure to 144 mrem from 

natural background radiation as measured 

by the PIC instrument at Beatty, Nevada. 

There were no major incidents of 

nonradiological contaminant releases to the 

environment in 1997. Many contaminated 

sites are on schedule for remediation, and 

intensive efforts to characterize and protect 

the NTS environment, implemented in 1990, 

were continued in 1997. 

1-10 
SUMMARY ’>hw%w*=*-?Fa-k&-? 3&x 

Table 1 .I Radionuclide Emissions on the NTS - 1 997(a) 

Radionuclide Half-life (vears) Quantity Released (Ci) (b) 

Airborne Releases: 

3H 

239+240 p 

12.35 

24065. 

(‘)I 40 

‘‘’0.28 

Containment Ponds: 

3H 

238Pu 

‘Osr 

l3’CS 

239+240pu 

‘d’20 

1.5 x 

3.4 x 10-5 

I .5 x I 0-5 

I .7 x I 0-3 

12.35 

87.743 

24065. 

29. 

30.1 7 

(a) Assumes worst-case point and diffuse source releases. 

(b) Multiply by 37 to obtain GBq. 

(c) Includes calculated data from air sampling results, postulated loss of laboratory standards, 

and calculated resuspension of surface deposits. 

(d) This amount is assumed to evaporate to become an airborne release. 

Table 1.2 Summary of Effective Dose Equivalents from NTS Operations During 1997 

Collective EDE to 

Population within 80 km 

of the NTS Sources 

Maximum EDE at 

NTS 

Maximum EDE to 

an 

Dose 0.12 mrem 

(I .2 x 10” mSv) 

0.089 mrem 

(8.9 x 1 Om4 mSv) 

0.26 person-rem 

(2.6 x IO” person Sv) 

Location Site boundary 40 km 

WNW Of NTS CP-1 

Springdale, NV 58 Rm 

WNW of NTS CP-1 

31,000 people within 

80 km of NTS Sources 

NESHAP 

Standard 

10 mrem per yr 

(0.1 mSv per yr) 

10 mrem per yr 

(0.1 mSv per yr) 

Percentage 

of NESHAP 1.2 0.89 

Background 144 mrem 

(1.44 mSv) 

144 mrem 

(1.44 mSv) 

3064 person-rem 

(30.6 person Sv) 

Percentage of 

Background 8.0 x 6.0 x 8 x 1 0-3 

(a) The maximum boundary dose is to a hypothetical individual who remains in the open 

continuously during the year at the NTS boundary located 40 km (25 mi) west northwest 

from the NTS Control Point 1. 

(b) The maximum individual dose is to an individual outside the NTS boundary at a residence 

where the highest dose-rate occurs as calculated by CAP88-PC (Version 1 .O) using NTS 

effluents listed in Table 5.1, assuming all HTO input to containment ponds was evaporated, 

assuming resuspended plutonium was carried offsite, and summing the contributions from 

each NTS source. 

1-11 
View of Mercury, the Main Base Camp at the NTS 

1-12 
2.0 INTRODUCTION 

The Nevada Test Site (NTS), located in southern Nevada, was the primary 

location for testing of nuclear explosives in the continental U.S. from 

1951 to 1992. Historically, nuclear testing has included, (1) atmospheric 

testing in the 1950s and early 1960s; (2) underground testing in drilled, 

vertical holes and horizontal tunnels; (3) earth-cratering experiments; (4) 

open-air nuclear reactor and engine testing; and (5) eleven underground 

tests for various purposes at other locations in the U.S. No nuclear tests 

were conducted in 1997. Nonnuclear testing included controlled spills of 

hazardous material at the Hazardous Materials Spill Center (HSC). Low-level 

radioactive and mixed waste disposal and trankuranic (TRU) and hazardous 

waste storage facilities for defense waste are also operated on the NTS. 

The NTS environment is characterized by desert valley and Great Basin 

mountain terrain and topography, with a climate, flora, and fauna typical of 

the southern Great Basin deserts. Restricted access and extended wind 

transport times are notable features of the remote location of the NTS and 

adjacent U.S. Air Force lands. Also, characteristic of this area are the great 

depths to slow-moving groundwater and little or no surface water. These 

features afford protection to the inhabitants of the adjacent areas from 

potential exposure to radioactivity or other contaminants resulting from 

operations on the NTS. Population density within 150 km of the NTS is only 

0.5 persons/km2 versus approximately 29 persons/km2 in the 48 contiguous 

states. The predominant use of land surrounding the NTS is open range for 

livestock grazing with scattered mining and recreational areas. 

In addition to the NTS operation$, the US. Department of Energy, Nevada 

Operations Office (DOUNV) is accountable for six non-NTS Bechtel Nevada 

(BN) facilities in five different cities. These BN operations support DOUNV 

programs with activities ranging from aerial measurements and aircraft 

maintenance to electronics and heavy industrial fabrication. All of these 

latter operations are in metropolitan areas. 

2.1 NTS OPERATIONS 

NTS DESCRIPTION 

he NTS has been operated by the T DOE as the on-continent test site for 

nuclear weapons testing. It is located 

in Nye County, Nevada, with the southeast 

corner lying about 105 km (65 mi) northwest 

of the city of Las Vegas, Nevada, as shown 

in Figure 2.1. The NTS encompasses about 

3,500 km2 (1,350 mi2), an area larger than 

the state of Rhode Island. The dimensions 

of the NTS vary from 46 to 56 km (28 to 35 

mi) in width (eastern to western border) and 

from 64 to 88 km (40 to 55 mi) in length 

(northern to southern border). The NTS is 

surrounded on the east, north, and west 

sides by public exclusion areas, called the 

Nellis Air Force Range Complex (NAFRC) 

and the Tonopah Test Range(TTR) (see 

Figure 2.1). These two areas provide a 

buffer zone varying from 24 to 104 km (15 to 

65 mi) between the NTS and public lands. 

The combination of the NAFRC and the NTS 

is one of the larger unpopulated land areas 

in the United States, comprising some 

14,200 km2 (5,470 mi2), Figure 2.2 shows 

the general layout of the NTS, including the 
0 Community 

,A+,-* State line 

/V Nevada Test Site (NTS) 

NTS Operational Area 

A/ Nellis Air Force Flange 

25 -- 0 25 50 75 100 125 150 

Miles 

50 0 50 100 150 200 

ISELKllomters 

I 

Figure 2.1 NTS Location in Nevada 

2-2 
,q!z;s Nuclear Test Area ,<.:<:x?*. (2000 meter buffer around nuclear tests) 

Principal Fadlity 

ActiieCamp 

0 Community 

.4 3' State Line l* 

Nevada Test Site (NTS) 

NTS Operational Area 

5 0 5 IO 15 20 

Miles 

10 

!-

0 10 20 30 

1 

Kilometers 

Figure 2.2 NTS Area Numbers, Principal Facilities, and Testing Areas 

2-3 
location of major facilities and area numbers 

referred to in this report. The areas outlined 

in green in Figure 2.2 indicate the principal 

geographical areas used recently for 

underground nuclear testing. Mercury, 

Nevada, at the southern end of he NTS, is 

the main base camp for worker housing and 

administrative operations for the NTS. 

MISSION AND NATURE OF 

OPERATIONS 

The NTS has been the primary location for 

testing the nation's nuclear explosive 

devices since January 1951. Tests 

conducted through the 1950s were 

predominantly atmospheric tests. These 

tests involved a nuclear explosive device 

detonated, while on the ground surface, on a 

steel tower suspended from tethered 

balloons or dropped from an aircraft. 

Several tests were categorized as "safety" 

experiments, involving the destruction of a 

nuclear device with nonnuclear explosives. 

Some surface safety tests resulted in 

dispersion of plutonium in the test vicinity. 

One of these test areas lies just north of the 

NTS boundary, and four others, involving 

transportktorage safety, lie at the north end 

of the NAFRC (see Figure 2.3). All nuclear 

tests are listed in DOUNV Report NVO-209 

(DOE 1994a). 

Underground nuclear tests were first 

conducted in 1957. Testing was 

discontinued during a moratorium that began 

in November 1958, but was resumed in 

September 1961 after tests by the Union Of 

Soviet Socialist Republics began. Since late 

1962, nearly all tests were conducted in 

sealed vertical shafts drilled into Yucca Flat 

and Pahute Mesa or in horizontal tunnels 

mined into Rainier Mesa. Five earthcratering (shallow-burial) tests were 

conducted over the period of 1962 through 

1968 as part of the Plowshare Program, that 

explored peaceful uses of nuclear 

explosives. The first and largest test, 

SEDAN (PHS 1963) was detonated at the 

northern end of Yucca Flat. There have 

been no US. nuclear explosive tests since 

September 1992. 

Other nuclear testing over the history of the 

NTS has included the Bare Reactor 

Experiment - Nevada series in the 1960s. 

These tests were performed with a 14-MeV 

neutron generator mounted on a 465-m 

(1,530-ft) steel tower, used to conduct 

neutron and gamma-ray interaction studies 

on various materials. From 1959 through 

1973, a series of open-air nuclear reactor, 

nuclear engine, and nuclear furnace tests 

was conducted in Area 25, and a series of 

tests with a nuclear ramjet engine was 

conducted in Area 26. 

Limited nonnuclear testing has also occurred 

at the NTS, including spills of hazardous 

materials at the HSC in Area 5. The tests 

conducted at the HSC, from the latter half of 

the 1980s to date, involved controlled 

spilling of liquid materials to study both spill 

control and mitigation measures and the 

resultant dispersion and transport of 

airborne clouds. These tests are 

cooperative studies involving private 

industry, the U.S. Department of 

Transportation, and the DOE. At the 

Explosive Ordnance Disposal in Area 11 , explosive materials are destroyed, generally 

by detonation, with the amounts destroyed 

being limited in order to maintain downwind 

air concentrations within state limits. 

Waste storage and disposal facilities for 

defense low-level radioactive waste (LLW) 

and mixed waste are located in Areas 3 and 

5. At the Area 5 Radioactive Waste 

Management Site (RWMSd), LLW from 

DOE-affiliated onsite and offsite generators 

is disposed of using standard shallow land 

disposal techniques. A greater confinement 

disposal technique was once used for 

disposal of wastes that had high specific 

activity, high mobility, or were not 

acceptable for normal disposal. This 

method of disposal is no longer used. 

r 

r 

2-4 
INTRODUCTION 

safetyTest site 

8 Storage=lransportation Test site 

e Community 

rt. ,-* State Line #V 

Nevada Test Site (NTS) 

NTS Opmtional Area 

10 0 10 20 30 

Miles 

10 0 10 20 30 40 50 

Ki fometers 

N 

Figure 2.3 Location of Safety Tests on the NTS and the Nellis Air Force Range Complex 

2-5 
TRU wastes are retrievably stored in surface 

containers at the RWMS-5 pending shipmeni 

to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) 

facility in New Mexico. Nonradioactive 

hazardous wastes are accumulated at a 

special accumulation site before shipment to 

a licensed offsite disposal facility. 

At the Area 3 RWMS (RWMS-3), bulk LLW 

(such as debris from atmospheric nuclear 

test locations) and LLW in large nonstandard packages are emplaced and buried 

in selected surface subsidence craters 

(formed as a result of prior underground 

nuclear tests). 

1997 ACTIVITIES 

NUCLEAR TESTS 

No nuclear explosives tests were conducted 

during 1997, due to the moratorium 

announced in late 1992. However, 

continuous environmental surveillance for 

radioactivity and radiation was conducted 

both onsite and offsite, because of the large 

number of potential effluent sources that 

exist on the NTS as a result of the prior 

nuclear tests. The surveillance program and 

results are described in Chapters 4, 5, 

and 6. 

NTS-RELATED ACTIVITIES 

LLW and mixed waste handling and 

disposal, TRU waste storage and monitoring 

prior to shipment to the WlPP in New 

Mexico, and remedial actions related to sites 

contaminated by tests of nuclear devices art! 

some of the activities that occurred in 1997. 

Compliance with state and federal 

environmental laws and regulations was 

another principal activity during 1997. 

Specifically included were actions related to 

(1) National Environmental Policy Act 

documentation preparation, such as 

Environmental Impact Statements, 

Environmental Assessments, etc.; (2) Clean 

Air Act compliance for asbestos renovation 

projects, radionuclide emissions, and state 

air quality permits; (3) Clean Water Act 

compliance involving state wastewater 

permits; (4) Safe Drinking Water Act 

compliance involving monitoring of drinking 

water distribution systems; (5) Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act 

management of hazardous wastes; (6) 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, 

Compensation, and Liability Act reporting; 

and (7) Toxic Substances Control Act 

management of polychlorinated biphenyls. 

Also included were preactivity surveys to 

detect and document archaeological and 

historic sites on the NTS. Compliance with 

the Endangered Species Act involved 

conducting pre-operation surveys to 

document the status of state of Nevada and 

federally listed endangered or threatened 

plant and animal species. 

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SPILL CENTER 

WC) 

DOE/NV’s HSC is a research and 

demonstration facility available on a user-fee 

basis to private and public sector test and 

training sponsors concerned with the safety 

aspects of hazardous chemicals. The site is 

located in Area 5 of the NTS and is 

maintained by BN. The HSC is the basic 

research tool for studying the dynamics of 

accidental releases of various hazardous 

materials. This is described more 

completely in Chapter 6. 

TOPOGRAPHY AND TERRAIN 

The topography of the NTS is typical of the 

Great Basin Section of the Basin and Range 

physiographic province of Nevada, Arizona, 

and Utah. North-south-trending mountain 

ranges are separated by broad, flat-floored, 

and gently-sloped valleys. The topography 

is depicted in Figure 2.4. Elevations range 

from about 910 m (3,000 ft) above mean sea 

level (MSL) in the south and east, rising to 

2,230 m (7,300 ft) in the mesa areas toward 

the northern and western boundaries. The 

slopes on the upland surfaces are steep and 

2-6 
Figure 2.4 Topography of the NTS I 2-7 
dissected, whereas the slopes on the lower 

surfaces are gentle and alluviated with rock 

debris from the adjacent highlands. 

The principal effect upon the terrain from 

nuclear testing has been the creation of 

numerous dish-shaped surface subsidence 

craters, particularly in Yucca Flat. Most 

underground nuclear tests conducted in 

vertical shafts produced surface subsidence 

craters that occurred when the overburden 

above a nuclear cavity collapsed and formed 

a rubble "chimney" to the surface. A few 

craters have been formed as a result of tests 

conducted on or near the surface by shallow 

depth-of-burial cratering experiments, or 

following some tunnel events. 

There are no continuously flowing streams 

on the NTS. Surface drainages for Yucca 

and Frenchman Flats closed-basin systems 

are onto the dry lake beds (playas) in each 

valley. The remaining areas of the NTS 

drain via arroyos and dry stream beds that 

carry water only during unusually intense or 

persistent storms. Rainfall or snow melt 

typically infiltrates quickly into the moisturedeficient soil or runs off in normally dry 

channels, where it evaporates and seeps 

into permeable sands and gravels. During 

extreme conditions, flash floods may occur. 

GEOLOGY 

The basic lithologic structure of the NTS is 

depicted in Figure 2.5. Investigations of the 

geology of the NTS, including detailed 

studies of numerous drill holes and tunnels, 

have been in progress by the U.S. 

Geological Survey (USGS) and other 

organizations since 1951. Because of the 

large number of drilled holes, see Figure 2.6, 

the NTS is probably one of the better 

geologically characterized large areas within 

the United States. 

In general, the geology consists of three 

major rock units. These rock units are 

(1) complexly folded and faulted 

sedimentary rocks of Paleozoic age overlain 

at many places by; (2) volcanic tuffs and 

lavas of Tertiary age, which (in the valleys) 

are covered by; (3) alluvium of late Tertiary 

and Quaternary age. The sedimentary rocks 

of Paleozoic age are many thousands of feet 

thick and are comprised mainly of carbonate 

rocks (dolomite and limestone) with clastic 

rocks (shale and quartzite) near the top and 

at the bottom of the section. The volcanic 

rocks in the valleys are down-dropped and 

tilted along steeply dipping normal faults of 

late Tertiary age. The alluvium is rarely 

faulted and is derived from erosion of 

Tertiary and Paleozoic rocks. Compared to 

the Paleozoic rocks, the Tertiary rocks are 

relatively undeformed, and dips are 

generally gentle. The volcanic rocks of the 

Tertiary age are predominantly rhyolitic tuffs 

and lavas, which erupted from various 

volcanic centers. The aggregate thickness 

of the volcanic rocks is many thousands of 

feet, but in most places the actual thickness 

of the section is far less because of erosion 

or nondeposition. These materials erupted 

before the collapse of large volcanic centers 

known as calderas. Alluvial materials fill the 

intermountain valleys and cover the adjacent 

slopes. These sediments attain thicknesses 

of 600 to 900 m (2,000 to 3,000 ft) in the 

central portions of the valleys. The alluvium 

in Yucca Flat is vertically offset along the 

prominent north-south-trending Yucca fault. 

HYDROGEOLOGY t 

The deep aquifers, slow groundwater 

movement, and exceedingly slow downward 

movement of water in the overlying 

unsaturated zone serve as significant 

barriers to transport of radioactivity from 

unsaturated zone sources via groundwater, 

greatly limiting the potential for transport of 

radioactivity to offsite areas. Some historic 

nuclear tests were conducted below the 

groundwater table; others were at varying 

depths above the groundwater table. 

Nuclear tests below the groundwater table 

have a greater potential for offsite migration. 

However, the great distance to offsite water 

supply wells or springs makes it unlikely that 

contaminants will be transported in 

significant quantities. 

2-8 
1 

C3 Alluvial Deposits 

Basalt Flows 

GrRnit& Rocks 

El Rhyolitic intrusive Rocks Rocks 

4 Carbonate and Clastic Rocks 

Tuffaceous Sedimentary Rocks 

W Volcanic & Shallow Intrusive 

10 5 0 5 IO 

MILES 

KILOMETERS 

0 5 10 

Figure 2.5 Basic Lithologic Structure of the NTS 

2-9 
Drill Hole Location 

0 Community 

,.'\+*,-' State Line 

Nevada Test Site (NTS) 

NTS Operational Area 

5 0 5 10 15 20 

Miles 

10 0 10 20 30 

Figure 2.6 Drill Hole Locations on the NTS 
I 

Depths to groundwater under the NTS vary 

from about 21 0 m (690 ft) beneath the 

Frenchman Flat playa (Winograd and 

Thordarson 1975) in the southern part of the 

NTS to more than 700 m (2,300 ft) beneath 

part of Pahute Mesa. In the eastern 

portions, the water table occurs generally in 

the alluvium and volcanic rocks above the 

regional carbonate aquifer, and, in the 

western portions, it occurs predominantly in 

volcanic rocks. The flow in the shallower 

parts of the groundwater is generally toward 

the major valleys (Yucca and Frenchman), 

where it may deflect downward to join the 

regional drainage to the southwest in the 

carbonate aquifer. 

The hydrogeology of the underground 

nuclear testing areas on the NTS (Figure 

2.7) has been summarized by the Desert 

Research Institute, University of Nevada 

System and the USGS (Russell 1990, and 

Laczniak et al., 1996). Yucca Flat is 

situated within the Ash Meadows 

groundwater subbasin. Groundwater occurs 

within the valley-fill, volcanic and carbonate 

aquifers, and in the volcanic and clastic 

aquitards. The depth to water generally 

ranges from 210 m (690 ft) to about 580 m 

(1,900 ft) below the ground surface. The tuff 

aquitard forms the principal Cenozoic 

hydrostratigraphic unit beneath the water 

table in the eastern two-thirds of the valley 

and is unconfined over most of its extent. 

The valley-fill aquifer is saturated in the 

central part of the valley and is unconfined 

(Winograd and Thordarson 1975). 

Some underflow, past all of the subbasin 

discharge areas, probably reaches springs 

in Death Valley. Recharge for all of the 

subbasins most likely occurs by precipitation 

at higher elevations and infiltration along 

ephemeral stream courses and in playas. 

Regional groundwater flow is from the 

upland recharge areas in the north and east, 

towards discharge areas at Ash Meadows 

and Death Valley, southwest of the NTS. 

Due to the large topographic changes 

across the area and the importance of 

fractures to groundwater flow, local flow 

directions can be radically different from the 

regional trend. 

Groundwater is the only local source of 

drinking water in the NTS area. Drinking 

and industrial water supply wells, for the 

NTS, produce from the lower and upper 

carbonate aquifers and the volcanic and the 

valley-fill aquifers. Although a few springs 

emerge from perched groundwater lenses at 

the NTS, discharge rates are low, and spring 

water is not currently used for DOE 

activities. South of the NTS, private and 

public supply wells are completed in a 

valley-fill aquifer. 

Frenchman Flat is also within the Ash 

Meadows subbasin. Regional groundwater 

flow in this valley occurs within the major 

Cenozoic and Paleozoic hydrostratigraphic 

units at depths ranging from 210 to 350 m 

(690 to 1 ,I 50 ft) below the ground surface. 

Perched water is found as shallow as 20 m 

(66 ft) within the tuff and lava-flow aquitards 

in the western part and older Tertiary 

sedimentary rocks in the southwestern part 

of the valley. In general, the depth to water 

is at least 21 0 m (690 ft) beneath 

Frenchman playa and increases to nearly 

360 m (1 ,I 80 ft) near the margins of the 

valley (Winograd and Thordarson 1975). 

The water table beneath Frenchman Flat is 

considerably shallower than beneath Yucca 

Flat. Consequently, the areal extent of 

saturation in the valley-fill and volcanic 

aquifers is correspondingly greater. 

Winograd and Thordarson (1 975) 

hypothesized that groundwater within the 

Cenozoic units of Yucca and Frenchman 

Flats probably can not I eave these basins 

without passing through the underlying and 

surrounding tuff confining unit. In addition, 

lateral gradients within the saturated 

volcanic units exist and may indicate 

groundwater flow toward the central areas of 

Yucca and Frenchman Flats prior to vertical 

drainage. 

The only hydrostratigraphic units 

encountered at Pahute Mesa are the 

volcanic aquifers and aquitards. Pahute 

2-1 1 
a Dischargeb 

@g$ Hydrologic Basin 

0 Hydrologic Subbasin 

,.;\.,.' State tine 

0 Community 

NevadaTastSite (MS) 

NTS Operational ma 

10 0 10 20 30 40 

PiaESFir 

Miles 

10 

5- 

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 

Kllometers 

Figure 2.7 Groundwater Hydrologic Units of the NTS and Vicinity 

2-1 2 
INTRODUCTION 

Mesa is thought to be a part of both the 

Oasis Valley and Alkali Flat/Furnace Creek 

Ranch subbasins (Fig. 2.7). The location of 

the inter-basin boundary is uncertain. 

Groundwater is thought to move towards the 

south and southwest, through Oasis Valley, 

Crater Flat, and western Jackass Flats. 

Points of discharge are thought to include 

the springs in Oasis Valley, Alkali Flat, and 

Furnace Creek. The amount of recharge 

to Pahute Mesa and the amount of 

underflow, which moves to the various 

points of discharge, are not accurately 

known. Vertical gradients within Pahute 

Mesa suggest that flow may be downward in 

the eastern portion of the mesa but upward 

in the western part (Blankennagel and Weir 

1 973). 

The hydrostratigraphic units beneath Rainier 

Mesa consist of the welded and bedded tuff 

aquifer, tuff confining unit, the lower 

carbonate aquifer, and the lower clastic 

aquitard. The volcanic aquifer and aquitards 

support a semiperched groundwater lens. 

Nuclear testing at Rainier Mesa was 

conducted within the tuff aquitard. Work by 

Thordarson (1 965) indicates that the 

perched groundwater is moving downward 

into the underlying regional aquifer. 

Depending on the location of the subbasin 

boundary, Rainier Mesa groundwater may 

be part of either the Ash Meadows or the 

Alkali FlaYFurnace Creek Ranch subbasin. 

The regional flow from the mesa may be 

directed either towards Yucca Flat or, 

because of the intervening upper clastic 

aquitard, towards the Alkali Flat discharge 

area in the south. The nature of the regional 

flow system beneath Rainier Mesa requires 

further investigation. 

CLIMATE AND METEOROLOGY 

Precipitation levels on the NTS are low, 

runoff is intermittent, and the majority of the 

active testing areas onsite drain into closed 

basins on the NTS. Topography contributes 

to temporal and spatial variability of 

precipitation. For example, on the NTS the 

mesas receive an average annual 

precipitation of 23 cm (9 in), which includes 

wintertime snow accumulations. The lower 

elevations receive approximately 15 cm 

(6 in) of precipitation annually, with 

occasional snow accumulations lasting only 

a matter of days (Quiring 1968). 

Elevation also influences temperatures on 

the NTS. At an elevation of 2,000 m (6,560 

ft) above MSL in Area 20 on Pahute Mesa, 

the average daily maximum temperatures 

range from 40 to 80 ' F, and minimum 

temperatures from 21 to 57' F (4 to 270 C 

and -6 to 14' C, respectively). In Area 6 

(Yucca Flat, 1,200 m [3,940 ft MSL]), the 

average daily maximum temperatures range 

from 51 to 96' F and the minimum 

temperatures from 28 to 62' F (1 1 to 36' C 

and -2 to 17' C, respectively). 

Wind direction and speed are important 

aspects of the environment at the NTS. The 

movements of large-scale pressure systems 

control the seasonal changes in the wind 

direction frequencies. Predominating winds 

are southerly from the south during summer 

and northerly during winter. The general 

downward slope in the terrain from north to 

south results in an intermediate scenario 

that is reflected in the characteristic diurnal 

wind reversal from southerly winds during 

the day to northerly winds at night. This 

north to south reversal is strongest in the 

summer and, on occasion, becomes intense 

enough to override the wind regime 

associated with large-scale pressure 

systems. This scenario is very sensitive to 

the orientation of the mountain slopes and 

valleys. At higher elevations such as Area 

20, the average annual wind speed is 17 

km/h (1 0 mi/h) but is only 11 km/h (7 mi/h) in 

the valleys, such as Yucca Flat. The 

prevailing wind direction during winter 

months is from the north-northeast and 

north-northwest, but it reverses in the 

summer months. The 1992 10-m wind roses 

for the NTS are shown in Figure 2.8. 

2-1 3 
N 

of that wind direction. 

Figure 2.8 1992 Wind Rose Patterns for the NTS (Courtesy of Air Resources Laboratory, Special 

Operations and Research Divisioii) 

2-1 4 
FLORA AND FAUNA 

The vegetation on most of the NTS includes 

various associations of desert shrubs typical 

of the Mojave or Great Basin Deserts or the 

zone of transition between these two. 

Extensive floral collection has yielded 71 1 

taxa of vascular plants within or near the 

boundaries of the NTS (O'Farrell and Emery 

1976). Associations of creosote bush, 

Larrea tridentata, which are characteristic of 

the Mojave Desert, dominate the vegetation 

mosaic on the bajadas of the southern NTS. 

Between 1,220 and 1,520 m (4,000 and 

5,000 ft) in elevation in Yucca Flat, 

transitional associations are dominated by 

Grayia spinosa- Lycium andersonii 

(hopsage/desert thorn) associations, while 

the upper alluvial fans support Coleogyne 

types. Above 1,520 m (5,000 ft), the 

vegetation mosaic is dominated by 

sagebrush associations of Artemisia 

tridentata and Artemisia arbuscula 

subspecies nova. Above 1,830 m (6,000 ft), 

piAon pine and juniper mix with the 

sagebrush associations, where there is 

suitable moisture for these trees. No plant 

species located on the NTS is currently on 

the federal endangered species list; 

however, the state of Nevada has placed 

Astragalus beatleyae on its critically 

endangered species list. 

Most mammals on the NTS are small and 

secretive (often nocturnal in habitat), hence 

not often seen by casual observers. 

Rodents are the most important group of 

mammals on the NTS, based on distribution 

and relative abundance. Larger mammals 

include feral horses, mule deer, mountain 

lions, bobcats, coyote, kit foxes, and rabbits, 

among others. Among other taxa, the 

reptiles include the desert tortoise, over 

12 lizards, and 17 snakes; 4 of which are 

venomous. Bird species are mostly 

migrants or seasonal residents. Most 

nonrodent mammals have been placed in 

the "protected" classification by the state of 

Nevada. The Mojave population of the 

desert tortoise, Gopherus agassizii, is listed 

as threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife 

Service. The habitat of the desert tortoises 

on the NTS is found in the southern third of 

the NTS outside the recent areas of nuclear 

explosive test activities. 

CULTURAL RESOURCES 

Human habitation of the NTS area began at 

least as early as 10,000 years ago. Various 

indigenous cultures occupied the region in 

prehistoric times. The survey of less than 

5 percent of the NTS area has located more 

than 2,000 archaeological sites, which 

contain the only information available 

concerning the prehistoric inhabitants. The 

site types identified include rock quarries, 

tool-manufacturing areas, plant-processing 

locations, hunting locales, rock art, 

temporary camps, and permanent villages. 

The prehistoric people's lifestyle was 

sustained by a hunting and gathering 

economy, which utilized all parts of the NTS. 

While major springs provided perennial 

water, the prehistoric people developed 

strategies to take advantage of intermittent 

fresh water sources in this arid region. In 

the nineteenth century, at the time of initial 

contact, the area was occupied by Paiute 

and Shoshone Indians. Prior to 1940, the 

historic occupation consisted of ranchers, 

miners, and Native Americans. Several 

natural springs were able to sustain 

livestock, ranchers, and miners. Stone 

cabins, corrals, and fencing stand today as 

testaments to these early settlers. The 

mining activities included two large mines: 

one at Wahmonie, the other at Climax Mine. 

Prospector claim markers are found in these 

and other parts of the NTS. Native 

Americans coexisted with the settlers and 

miners, utilizing the natural resources of the 

region and, in some cases, working for the 

new arrivals. They also maintained a 

connection with the land, especially areas 

important to them for religious and historical 

reasons. These locations, referred to as 

traditional cultural properties, continue to be 

significant to the Paiute and Shoshone 

Indians. 

2-1 5 
Between 1940 and 1950, the area now 

known as the NTS was under the jurisdiction 

of NAFB and was part of the Nellis Bombing 

and Gunnery Range. Very few locations 

associated with this time period have been 

identified. In 1950, the NTS was selected as 

the continental nuclear testing ground. 

Surveys have located and recorded many 

structures associated with nuclear testing. 

These structures are significant because of 

the importance of the nuclear testing 

program in the history of the United States, 

as well as its effects on the rest of the world. 

DEMOGRAPHY 

The population of the area surrounding the 

NTS has been estimated based on the 199 

Bureau of Census estimates (Department 01 

Commerce 1990). Excluding Clark County, 

the major population center (over 1,000,000 

in 1996), the population density within a 150- 

km (90-mi) radius of the NTS is about 0.5 

persons/km2. In comparison, the 48 

adjoining states (1 990 census) had a 

population density near 29 persons/km2. 

The offsite area within 80 km (50 mi) of the 

NTS Control Point (CP) is predominantly 

rural. CP-1 (a building at the Control Point) 

historically has been the point from which 

distances from the NTS were determined. 

Several small communities are located in the 

area, the largest being in the Pahrump 

Valley. This growing rural community, with 

an estimated population of nearly 20,000, is 

about 50 mi (80 km) south of CP-1. The 

Amargosa Farm area, which has a 

population of about 1,200, is approximately 

50 km (30 mi) southwest of CP-1. The 

largest town in the near offsite area is 

Beatty, which has a population of about 

1,500 and is approximately 65 km (40 mi) tcl 

the west of CP-1. 

The Mojave Desert of California, which 

includes Death Valley National Monument, 

lies along the southwestern border of 

Nevada. The National Park Service 

estimated that the population within the 

boundaries ranges from 200 permanent 

residents during the summer months to as 

many as 5,000 tourists and campers on any 

particular day during holiday periods in the 

winter months. As many as 30,000 are in 

the area during "Death Valley Days" in 

November. The largest nearby population in 

this desert is in the Ridgecrest-China Lake 

area about 190 km (1 18 mi) southwest of the 

NTS, containing about 28,000 people. The 

next largest is in the Barstow area located 

265 km (1 65 mi) south-southwest of the NTS 

with a population of 24,000. The Owens 

Valley, where many small towns are located, 

lies west of Death Valley. The largest town 

in Owens Valley is Bishop, 225 km (140 mi) 

west-northwest of the NTS, with a population 

of 3,500. 

The extreme southwestern region of Utah is 

more developed than the adjacent portion of 

Nevada. The largest community is St. 

George, located 220 km (1 37 mi) east of the 

NTS, with a population of 29,000. The next 

largest town, Cedar City, with a population of 

14,000, is located 280 km (1 74 mi) eastnortheast of the NTS. 

The extreme northwestern region of Arizona 

is mostly rangeland, except for that portion 

in the Lake Mead recreation area. In 

addition, several small communities lie along 

the Colorado River. The largest towns in the 

area are Bullhead City, 165 km (1 03 mi) 

south-southeast of the NTS, with a 

population estimate of 22,000, and Kingman, 

located 280 km (174 mi) southeast of the 

NTS, with a population of about 13,000. 

SURROUNDING LAND USE 

Figure 2.9 is a map of the offsite area 

showing a wide variety of land uses such as 

farming, mining, grazing, camping, fishing, 

and hunting within a 300-km (1 80-mi) radius 

of the CP-1. West of the NTS, elevations 

range from 85 m (280 ft) below MSL in 

Death Valley to 4,400 m (1 4,500 ft) above 

MSL in the Sierras, including parts of the 

Owens and San Joaquin agricultural valleys. 

The areas south of the NTS are more 

uniform, since the Mojave Desert ecosystem 

(mid-latitude desert) comprises most of this 

portion of Nevada, California, and Arizona. 

2-1 6 
I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I Wlnnernucca 

I 

I 

, 

I 

I 

I 

0 Communities 0 Mines 

ACamping & iH Hunting 

0 Fishing il Fields 

Recreational Areas + 

*le in Miles 

0 50 100 150 

Scele in Kilometers 

Lake Havasu 

Figure 2.9 Land Use Around the NTS 

N 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

1 

I 

i 

i 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

, 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

1 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

1 

I 

I 

LI 

I 

I 

I 
The areas east of the NTS are primarily midlatitude steppe with some of the older river 

valleys, such as the Virgin River and Moapa 

Valleys, supporting irrigation for small-scale 

but intensive farming of a variety of crops. 

Grazing is also common in this area, 

particularly towards the northeast. The area 

north of the NTS is also mid-latitude steppe 

where the major agricultural activity is 

grazing of cattle and sheep, and a minor 

agricultural activity is the growing of alfalfa 

hay. Many of the residents cultivate home 

gardens. 

Recreational areas lie in all directions 

around the NTS and are used for such 

activities as hunting, fishing, and camping. 

In general, the camping and fishing sites to 

the north of the NTS are not utilized in the 

winter months. Camping and fishing 

locations to the south are utilized throughout 

the year. The peak hunting season is from 

September through January. 

2.2 NON-NTS FACILITIES 

Under a contract with DOE/NV, BN has 

several offsite operations that support 

activities at the NTS. Each of these facilities 

is located in a metropolitan area. 

City, county, and state regulations govern 

emissions, waste disposal, and sewage. No 

independent BN systems exist for sewage 

disposal or for supplying drinking water, and 

hazardous waste is moved off the facility 

sites for disposal. Radiation sources are 

sealed, and no radiological emissions above 

a small fraction of federal guidelines are 

expected during normal facility operations. 

AMADOR VALLEY OPERATIONS 

(AVO) 

The AVO facility in Pleasanton, California, 

occupies a 5,520-m2 (59,445-ft') two-story 

combination office/laboratory building. AVO 

is located near the Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratory (LLNL) in Livermore, 

California, to simplify logistics and 

communications associated with BN support 

of LLNL programs. Although most of the 

work has been in support of NTS 

underground weapons testing, AVO also 

supports LLNL with optical alignment 

systems and a variety of mechanical and 

electrical engineering activities associated 

with energy research and development 

programs. Areas of environmental interest 

include two small chemical cleaning 

operations. 

SPECIAL TECHNOLOGIES 

LABORATORY (STL) 

STL is located in Santa Barbara, California. 

The current facilities occupy approximately 

4,608 m2 (49,600 ft') and consist of 

combination office/lab areas used primarily 

for engineering and electronic research. 

The research is conducted to develop a 

suite of sensor systems for testing and field 

deployment in support of DOE Headquarters 

and DOE/NV. Areas of environmental 

interest include a small printed circuit board 

operation, minor solvent cleaning 

operations, neutron activation, and pulsed Xray system experiments. 

LAS VEGAS AREA OPERATIONS 

(LVAO) 

The LVAO includes the North Las Vegas 

Facility (NLVF) and the Remote Sensing 

Laboratory (RSL) on the NAFB in North Las 

Vegas, Nevada. These facilities provide 

technical support for the DOE/NV activities. 

The NLVF includes multiple structures 

totaling about 53,820 m2 (585,000 ft'). At 

the facility there are numerous areas of 

environmental interest, including metal 

finishing operations, a radiation source 

range, an X-ray laboratory, solvent and 

chemical cleaning operations, small amounts 

of pesticide and herbicide application, photo 

laboratories, and hazardous waste 

generation and accumulation. 

The RSL is an 11 ,000-m2 (1 1 8,000-ft2) 

facility located on a 14-ha (35-acre) site 

within the confines of the NAFB. The facility 

2-1 8 
includes space for aircraft maintenance and 

operations, mechanical and electronics 

assembly, computer operations, photo 

processing, a light laboratory, warehousing, 

and emergency operations. Areas of 

environmental interest are photo processing, 

aircraft maintenance, and operations. 

LOS ALAMOS OPERATIONS (LAO) 

The LAO resides in an engineering and 

laboratory office complex of approximately 

4,645 m2 (50,000 ft2). It is located near the 

Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) 

facility to provide local support for LANL's 

programs. The work performed includes 

direct support to the LANL Science-Based 

Stockpile Stewardship program, the DOE 

Research and Development Program, and 

miscellaneous DOE cash-order work. LAO'S 

primary activities are twofold: the design, 

fabrication, and fielding of data acquisition 

systems used in underground and above 

ground testing diagnostics; and the analysis 

of data from prior experiments. Areas of 

environmental interest include small solvent 

cleaning, metal machining operations, and a 

small photo laboratory. 

WASHINGTON AERIAL 

MEASUREMENTS OPERATIONS 

(WAMO) 

The WAMO, located at Andrews Air Force 

Base, consists of five buildings: a 1 86-m2 

(2,000-ft2) Butler Building used as office 

space; a 1 ,I 1 0-m2 (12,000-ft2) hangar, 

combination electronics laboratory, aircraft 

maintenance, and office complex; a 37-m2 

(400-ft2) equipment service and storage 

building; and 186 m2 (2,000 ft2) in each of 

two other joint tenant buildings. WAMO 

provide an effective east coast emergency 

response capability and an eastern aerial 

survey capacity to the DOE/NV. Areas of 

environmental interest include minor solvent 

cleaning operations, used fuels, and oils. 

2.3 NON-NTS 

UNDERGROUND TEST SITES 

Nuclear explosive tests have been 

conducted underground for a variety of 

purposes at eight different non-NTS sites in 

the US. The tests and their locations 

appear in Table 2.1 (AEC 1964, 1965, 1966, 

l970,1972,1973a, 1973b; DOE 1978, 

1984, 1986; PHS 1966). Activities at these 

locations generally are limited to annual 

sampling of surface and groundwater at over 

200 wells, springs, etc., at locations near the 

sites where tests were conducted. However, 

a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study 

has begun at the Mississippi test location, 

which will include significant new 

characterization activities. Sampling near 

three test sites on Amchitka Island, Alaska, 

occurs only periodically. Sampling results 

for these sites appear in Chapter 5 of this 

report. 

2-1 9 
~XW~P~~XX 

Table 2.1 Non-NTS Underground Nuclear Test Sites 

Test 

Name 

GNOME 

SHOAL 

SALMON (DRIBBLE) 

LONG SHOT 

STERLING (DRIBBLE) 

GASBUGGY 

FAULTLESS 

RULISON 

MILROW 

CANNl KI N 

RIO BLANC0 

Location 

Carlsbad, New Mexico 

Fallon, Nevada 

Hattiesburg, Mississippi 

Amchitka Island, Alaska 

Hattiesburg, Mississippi 

Farmington, New Mexico 

Central Nevada, Nevada 

Grand Valley, Colcrado 

Amchitka Island, Alaska 

Amchitka Island, Alaska 

Rifle, Colorado 

Date of 

Purpose Test 

Multi-purpose in salt 1 a1016 1 

Test detection research 10126163 

Test detection research 10122/64 

Test detection research 10129165 

Test detection research 12/03/66 

Gas stimulation experiment 12/10167 

Seismic calibration 0 1 I1 9/68 

Gas stimulation experiment 09/10/69 

Seismic calibration 10/02169 

Spartan missile warhead test 11/06/71 

Gas stimulation experiment 0511 7/73 

2-20 
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY 

3.0 COMPLIANCE SUMMARY 

Environmental compliance activities at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) during 

calendar year (CY) 1997 involved the permitting and monitoring 

requirements of numerous state of Nevada and federal regulations. Primary 

activities included the following: (1) National Environmental Policy Act 

(NEPA) documentation preparation; (2) Clean Air Act (CAA) compliance for 

asbestos renovation projects, radionuclide emissions, and state air quality 

permits; (3) Clean Water Act (CWA) compliance involving state wastewater 

permits; (4) Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) compliance involving 

monitoring of drinking water distribution systems; (5) Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) management of hazardous wastes; 

(6) Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability 

Act (CERCLA) reporting; (7) Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) 

management of polychlorinated biphenyls; (8) Endangered Species Act 

(ESA) compliance involving the conduct of pre-construction surveys and 

site-wide surveys to document the status of state and federally listed 

endangered or threatened plant and animal species; and (9) National Historic 

Preservation Act (NHPA) compliance for the protection of Cultural and Native 

American Resources. There were no activities requiring compliance with 

Executive Orders on Flood Plain Management or Protection of Wetlands. 

Throughout 1997, the NTS was subject to several formal compliance 

agreements with regulatory agencies, including a Memorandum of 

Understanding with Nevada covering releases of radioactivity; a Federal 

Facilities Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) with Nevada; Agreements 

in Principle with Nevada and Mississippi covering environment, safety, and 

health activities; and a Settlement Agreement to manage mixed transuranic 

(TRU) waste. Emphasis on waste control and minimization at the NTS 

continued in 1997. 

In June 1994, the state of Nevada filed a Complaint for Declaratory 

Judgement and Injunction against the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 

This action seeks a judgement that DOE has failed to comply with NEPA 

requirements at the NTS. In January 1995, three of the claims in this case 

were dismissed by the US. District Court, the remainder are yet unresolved. 

Compliance activities at the DOE Nevada Operations Office (DOUNV) nonNTS facilities involved the permitting and monitoring requirements of (1) the 

CAA for airborne emissions, (2) the CWA for wastewater discharges, 

(3) SDWA regulations, (4) RCRA disposal of hazardous wastes, and 

(5) hazardous substance reporting. Pollution prevention and waste 

minimization efforts continued at all locations. 

3- 1 
3.1 COMPLIANCE STATUS 

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL 

POLICY ACT 

ection 102 of the 1969 NEPA requires S all federal agencies to consider 

environmental effects, values, and 

reasonable alternatives before making a 

decision to implement any major federal 

action that may have a significant impact on 

the human environment. 

Since November 1994, DOE/NV has had full 

delegation of authority from DOE 

Headquarters (DOE/HQ) for Environmental 

Assessments (EAs), issuing Findings of No 

Significant Impact and associated floodplain 

and wetland action documentation related tci 

DOE/NV proposed actions. 

DOE uses three levels of documentation to 

demonstrate compliance with NEPA: (1) an 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is a 

full disclosure of the potential environmental 

effects of proposed actions and the 

reasonable alternatives to those actions; 

(2) an EA is a concise discussion of a 

proposed action and alternatives and the 

potential environmental effects to determine 

if an EIS is necessary; and (3) a Categorical 

Exclusion (CX) is used for classes of 

activities, which have been found to have nci 

adverse environmental impacts, based on 

similar, previous activities. During 1997, 

DOE/NV activities involved all three of these 

categories. 

During fiscal year (FY) 1996 and FY97, a 

draft NEPA Environmental Evaluation 

Checklist was circulated by DOE/NV 

Environmental Protection Division (EPD). lni 

October 1997, the Checklist was formally 

issued by EPD. Completion of the Checklist 

is required under the DOE/NV Work 

Acceptance Process Procedural Instructions 

(DOE 1997d) for all proposed projects or 

activities. The Checklist is reviewed by the 

DOE/NV NEPA Compliance Officer to 

determine whether the project or activity is 

included in the NTS/EIS and record of 

decision (ROD) or other previously 

completed NEPA analysis. During FY97 

Checklists were completed for 44 proposed 

projects or activities. Nineteen of these 44 

were exempted from further NEPA analysis 

by being a CX; twenty were exempted due 

to previous analysis in the NTS/EIS and 

ROD; one is still pending; three resulted in 

further analysis required in EAs (one of 

which was later withdrawn); and one 

required further analysis in an EIS. 

, 

One EIS was initiated during 1997 for the 

withdrawal of public lands for range safety 

and training purposes at the Naval Air 

Station in Fallon, Nevada. Still pending are 

the following documents: 

0 Nellis Air Force Range Complex EIS. 

0 Los Alamos National Laboratory 

Sitewide EIS. 

0 Land Surface Research and 

Development EA. 

0 Kistler Aerospace Corp. in Areas 18 and 

19 EA. 

Work was conducted on two EAs, including: 

0 Defense Special Weapons Agency, 

Johnston Atoll Pilot-Scale Technology 

Demonstrations and the Transport and 

Disposal of Contaminated Rubble and 

Soil. 

0 Southern California/Southern Nevada 

lntermodal Transportation of Low Level 

Radioactive Waste to the NTS. 

Throughout CY97, the staff of the EPD 

continued to maintain and update the NEPA 

Compliance Guide (Volume Ill), a quick 

reference handbook containing procedures, 

formats, and guidelines for those personnel 

responsible for NEPA compliance activities. 

The staff of the EPD prepared Volume Ill to 

supplement the NEPA Compliance Guides, 

Volumes I and 11, prepared and distributed 

by the Office of NEPA Policy and 

Assistance, DOE/H Q. 

3-2 
COMPLlANCE SUMMARY 

CLEAN AIR ACT 

The CAA and the state of Nevada air quality 

control compliance activities were limited to 

asbestos abatement, radionuclide 

monitoring, and reporting under the National 

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants (NESHAP), and air quality permit 

compliance requirements. There were no 

criteria pollutant or prevention of significant 

deterioration monitoring requirements for 

NTS operations. 

NTS NESHAP ASBESTOS COMPLIANCE 

The state of Nevada Division of 

Occupational Safety and Health regulations 

(Nevada Administrative Code [NAC] 

61 8.760-805) require that all asbestos 

abatement projects in Nevada, involving 

friable asbestos in quantities greater than or 

equal to three linear feet or three square 

feet, submit a Notification Form. 

Notifications are also required to be made to 

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) Region 9 for projects, which disturb 

greater than 260 linear ft or 160 ft2 of 

asbestos-containing material, in accordance 

with Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations 

(CFR) 61.145-146 (CFR 1989). 

During 1997, there were no projects that 

required state of Nevada notifications be 

made. The annual estimate for nonscheduled asbestos demolition/renovation 

for FY98 was sent to EPA Region 9 in 

December 1997. 

RADIOACTIVE EMISSIONS ON THE NTS 

NTS operations were conducted in 

compliance with the NESHAP radioactive air 

emission standards of Subpart H, of Title 40 

CFR 61. In compliance with those 

requirements, a report on airborne 

radioactive effluents is provided to DOE/HQ 

for submission to EPA. 

There are two locations on the NTS where 

airborne radioactive effluents may be 

emitted from permanent stacks: (1) the 

tunnels in Rainier Mesa, and (2) the 

analytical laboratory hoods in the community 

of Mercury. Based on the amount of 

radioactivity handled, the exhaust from the 

analytical laboratories is considered 

negligible compared to other sources on the 

NTS and the tunnels have been sealed 

(although water still seeps from one). 

Present sources are gases from the ground 

caused by barometric pressure variations, 

evaporation of tritiated water (HTO) from 

containment ponds, diffusion of HTO vapor 

from the Area 5 Radioactive Waste 

Management Site (RWMS-5), and 

resuspension of plutonium contaminated soil 

from nuclear safety test and atmospheric 

test locations. 

In the 1997 NTS NESHAP report for 

airborne radioactive effluents (Black 1998), 

airborne emission of HTO vapor from the 

containment ponds was conservatively 

reported as if all the liquid discharge into the 

ponds had evaporated and become 

airborne. For HTO vapor diffusing from the 

RWMS-5, plutonium particulate 

resuspension from Areas 3 and 9, and 

various other areas on and near the NTS, 

the airborne effluents were conservatively 

estimated as follows. The monitoring station 

with the maximum annual average 

concentration for the radionuclide in 

question was selected from among the 

surrounding sampling stations. An effective 

dose equivalent (EDE) was then calculated 

for that concentration. EPA's Clean Air 

Package 1988 (CAP88-PC) software 

program was used to determine what total 

activity would have to have been emitted 

from the geometric center of the region in 

question in order to produce that EDE. 

Resuspended radioactivity was estimated by 

employing a published formula and 

confirming with offsite data. 

Using these conservative estimates of air 

emissions in 1997 as input to the CAP88-PC 

computer model, the EDE would have been 

only 0.09 mrem, much less than the 10- 

mrem limit that is specified in Title 40 

CFR 61. 

3-3 
NTS AIR QUALITY PERMIT COMPLIANCE 

Compliance with air quality permits is 

accomplished through permit reporting and 

renewals and ongoing verification of 

operational compliance with permit specified 

limitations. A summary of NTS permits is in 

Table 3.1. (See Chapter 4 for a listing of 

active permits.) Common air pollution 

sources at the NTS include aggregate 

production, stemming activities, surface 

disturbances, fugitive dust from unpaved 

roads, fuel burning equipment, open burning, 

and fuel storage facilities. The 1996 Air 

Quality Permit Data Report was sent to the 

state of Nevada on February 21, 1997. This 

report includes aggregate production, 

operating hours of permitted equipment, and 

a report of all surface disturbances of five 

acres or greater. In order to provide 

consistency in responses, the state provided 

forms, which required calculation of actual 

emissions. During 1996, approximately six 

tons of pollutants were emitted from 

operations at the NTS. 

NTS air quality permits limit particulate 

emissions to 20 percent opacity. 

Certification of personnel to perform valid 

visible emission opacity evaluations is 

required by the state, with recertification 

required every six months. During 1997, 

one Bechtel Nevada (BN) Environmental 

Compliance Department employee was 

recertified. In 1997, several visible emission 

evaluations of permitted air quality point 

sources were conducted. When visual 

evaluations determine that an emission 

exceeds the opacity requirement, corrective 

action is initiated. No exceedances of the 

opacity limit were noted in 1997. 

During 1997, state of Nevada personnel 

conducted two inspections of NTS 

equipment regulated by air quality operating 

permits. In January 1997, the state 

conducted an inspection to verify process 

flow diagrams for all permitted facilities prior 

to issuance of the NTS Class II Air Quality 

Operating Permit. In June 1997, a state 

inspector returned to conduct an annual 

inspection of permitted facilities. There were 

no findings as a result of that inspection. 

NON-NTS OPERATIONS 

Under normal conditions, the six non-NTS 

facilities operated by the DOE/NV do not 

produce radioactive effluents. The six are 

(1) the North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF); (2) 

the Remote Sensing Laboratory (RSL) in 

North Las Vegas; (3) the Special 

Technologies Laboratory (STL) in Santa 

Barbara, California; (4) the Amador Valley 

Operation (AVO) in Livermore, California; (5) 

the Los Alamos Operation (LAO) in Los 

Alamos, New Mexico; and (6) the 

Washington Aerial Measurements Operation 

(WAMO) in Washington, DC. 

CLEAN WATER ACT 

The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as 

amended by the CWA, establishes ambient 

water quality standards and effluent 

discharge limitations, which are generally 

applicable to facilities, which discharge any 

materials into the waters of the United 

States. Discharges from DOE/NV facilities 

are primarily regulated under the laws and 

regulations of the facility host states. 

Monitoring and reporting requirements are 

typically included under state or local permit 

requirements. A summary of NTS permits is 

displayed in Table 3.1, and a complete 

listing of applicable permits appears in 

Chapter 5. There are no National Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System permits for 

the NTS, as there are no wastewater 

discharges to onsite or offsite surface 

waters. 

NTS OPERATIONS 

Discharges of wastewater are regulated by 

the state of Nevada under the Nevada Water 

Pollution Control Act (NRS 445A .I 31 -354). 

The state of Nevada also regulates the 

design, construction, and operation of 

wastewater collection systems and 

treatment works. Wastewater monitoring at 

the NTS was limited to sampling wastewater 

influents to sewage lagoons and 

containment ponds. 

3-4 
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY 

State general permit GNEV93001, which 

regulates the ten usable sewage treatment 

facilities on the NTS, was issued by the 

Nevada Environmental Protection Division 

(NEPD) and became effective on February 

1, 1994. Hydrogeological modeling utilizing 

site-specific soil characteristics, vadose 

zone monitoring, groundwater monitoring, or 

lining an adequate portion of the 

impoundments at a specific facility were all 

accepted by NEPD as methods to comply 

with the permit requirements for protection of 

the groundwater. 

The following actions were taken in 1997 to 

remain in compliance with sewage lagoon 

discharge permit requirements: 

0 A pump, cable, control box, level 

monitoring piping, and discharge piping 

were installed in the Area 23 Infiltration 

Basin Groundwater Monitoring Well in 

August. 

NEPD concurred with studies conducted 

at the Area 6 LANL Camp system and 

the Area 6 Yucca Lake system, which 

demonstrated that liners installed in 

these systems met the groundwater 

protection standards required by the 

operating permit. 

By January 31,1999, one method of 

groundwater protection must be installed or 

demonstrated at three remaining systems to 

maintain permit compliance and renewal. 

The three systems are the Area 6 Device 

Assembly Facility (DAF), Area 25 Central 

Support, and the Area 25 Reactor Control 

Point. 

NON-NTS OPERATIONS 

Four permits for wastewater discharges 

were held by non-NTS facilities. One permit 

is required for the NLVF, one for the RSL, 

and the STL holds wastewater permits for 

the Botello Road and Ekwill Street locations. 

No wastewater permits were required for the 

AVO, LAO, or WAMO facilities in 1997. 

SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT 

NTS OPERATIONS 

The SDWA primarily addresses quality of 

potable water supplies through sampling and 

monitoring requirements for drinking water 

systems. The state of Nevada has enacted 

and enforces SDWA regulations including 

system operations such as operation and 

maintenance, water haulage, operator 

certification, permitting, and sampling 

requirements. A list of state potable water 

permits is shown in Chapter 5. 

As required under state health regulations 

(NAC 445A.244 ff.), potable water 

distribution systems at the NTS are 

monitored for residual chlorine content and 

coliform bacteria. NTS potable water 

distribution systems are also monitored for 

volatile organic compounds, inorganic 

compounds, synthetic organic compounds, 

and other water quality parameters. All 

monitoring results for 1997 were within 

regulatory limits, and are discussed in 

Chapter 5. 

NTS WATER HAULAGE 

To accommodate the diverse and often 

transient field work locations at the NTS, a 

water haulage program is used. To ensure 

potability of hauled water, water is obtained 

from potable water fill stands and chlorinated 

to obtain a residual of at least one part per 

million (ppm) in the hauling tank. Water in 

the hauling tank is sampled periodically for 

coliform bacteria. The state of Nevada 

decided in 1994 that water hauling trucks 

should be permitted as water distribution 

systems. Permits were obtained again in 

1997 for the three trucks used in the 

program. There were no positive coliform 

bacteria sample results in 1997. 

NON-NTS OPERATIONS 

All non-NTS operations are on municipal 

water systems and have no compliance 

activities under the SDWA. 

3-5 
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND 

RECOVERY ACT 

The RCRA of 1976 and Hazardous and Solid 

Waste Amendments of 1984 (Title 40 CFR 

260-281) constitute the statutory basis for 

the regulation of hazardous waste and 

underground storage tanks (USTs). 

Under Section 3006 of RCRA, the EPA may 

authorize states to administer and enforce 

hazardous waste regulations. Nevada has 

received such authorization and acts as the 

primary regulator for many DOE/NV 

facilities. The Federal Facilities Compliance 

Act (FFCA) of 1992 extends the full range oi’ 

enforcement authorities in federal, state, and 

local laws for management of hazardous 

wastes to federal facilities, including the 

NTS. 

NTS RCRA COMPLIANCE 

In 1995, DOE/NV received a RCRA 

Hazardous Waste Operating Permit for the 

Area 5 Hazardous Waste Storage Unit 

(HWSU) and the Area 11 Explosive 

Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Unit. In addition, 

the Part B Permit application was revised to 

include the Mixed Waste Storage Pad (now 

under interim status) and updated 

information concerning general facility 

conditions. During 1996, the permit was 

modified to include the change in contractor 

and operational changes concerning the 

EOD and HWSU. The permit application 

modification for the Pit 3 Mixed Waste 

Disposal Unit was completed and submitted 

to the state in 1997. Several other minor 

modifications were made to the permit 

during 1997, mostly relating to updated 

personnel and training records. 

No biennial report for hazardous waste 

generation was required to be submitted in 

1997. 

On January 5, 1994, the state of Nevada 

and DOE/NV entered into a Mutual Consent 

Agreement, which allowed low-level 

radioactive mixed wastes generated on the 

NTS to be moved into storage at the RWMS5 TRU pad. This was amended in June 

1994 to include environmental restoration 

mixed waste generated in Nevada. Waste 

was already in storage at this facility and will 

continue to be held in storage until a final 

determination of the proper treatment and 

disposal technology is established by the 

EPA. Under the FFCA, these mixed wastes 

were exempt from storage prohibitions in the 

Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) until 

October 6, 1995. The NEPD specified that 

this exemption would be extended through 

February 1996, pending negotiations 

towards a signed FFCA Consent Order. A 

Consent Order was signed, effective March 

27, 1996, requiring compliance with a Site 

Treatment Plan (DOE 1996a), which was 

also finalized in March 1996. Compliance 

with the Consent Order exempts the NTS 

from potential enforcement action resulting 

from the mixed waste storage prohibition 

under RCRA. 

The NEPD conducted its annual Compliance 

Evaluation Inspection (CEI) in September 

1997. A few minor areas of concern were 

identified. At the end of 1997 NEPD, DOE, 

and BN were still resolving the issues and 

coming to common agreement on the 

corrective actions. It is unlikely that NEPD 

will pursue any formal enforcement actions 

as a result of the CEI. 

HAZARDOUS WASTE REPORTING FOR 

NON-NTS OPERATIONS 

In 1996, at contract transition, the existing 

EPA ID numbers for the AVO, STL, and LAO 

locations were terminated. BN obtained new 

numbers for AVO and STL and will operate 

the LAO facility as a conditionally exempt 

small quantity generator. In 1997, it was not 

required to submit the state of Nevada 

Hazardous Waste Generator biennial report 

for hazardous wastes generated at the 

NLVF under EPA Identification Number 

NVD097868731. 

UNDERGROUNDSTORAGETANKS 

NTS OPERATIONS 

The NTS UST program continues to meet 

regulatory compliance schedules for the 

reporting, upgrading, or removal of 

3-6 
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY - 

documented USTs. Efforts are continuing to 

identify undocumented USTs at the NTS. 

Once identified, undocumented USTs are 

reported to the NEPD to satisfy state 

regulatory reporting requirements. 

During 1997, there were no USTs that were 

required to be removed in accordance with 

state and federal regulations. Remedial 

activities continued at previous tank removal 

sites during 1997 as funding became 

available. 

NON-NTS OPERATIONS 

There were no issues involving USTs at nonNTS locations during 1997. 

COMPREHENSIVE 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, 

CO M PE NSATlO N, AND Ll AB I LlTY 

ACTBUPERFUND AMENDMENTS 

AND REAUTHORIZATION ACT 

(SARA) 

In April 1996, the DOE/NV, Department of 

Defense, and the NEPD entered into an 

FFACO pursuant to Section 120(a)(4) of 

CERCLA and Sections 6001 and 3004(u) of 

RCRA to address the environmental 

restoration of historic contaminated sites at 

the NTS, parts of Tonopah Test Range 

(TTR), parts of the Nellis Air Force Range 

Complex (NAFRC), the Central Nevada Test 

Area, and the Project SHOAL Area. 

Appendix VI of the FFACO describes the 

strategy that will be employed to plan, 

implement, and complete environmental 

corrective action at facilities where nuclearrelated operations were conducted. 

EMERGENCY REPORTING AND 

(EPCRA) 

COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW ACT 

Compliance with this Act is discussed in the 

paragraphs below and summarized in the 

following checklist: 

SARA Title Ill Reports 

EPCRA 

Section 

NTS Compliance 

-- Yes No Required 

Not 

302-3021 

Planning Notification X 

304: 

EHS Release Notification 

31 1-31 2: 

MSDSEhemical Inventory x 

31 3: 

TRI Reporting 

X 

X 

Additional compliance activities under 

CERCWSARA for 1997 included the 

Nevada Combined Agency Report, which 

combines reporting under SARA Section 

312, Tier I1 and Nevada Chemical 

Catastrophe Prevention Program 

requirements. The latter program covers 

extremely hazardous substances (EHSs). 

The 1997 Nevada Combined Agency 

Hazardous Substances Reports for the NTS 

and other Nevada operations (NLVF and 

RSL) were submitted to the state as 

required. Due to the low reporting 

thresholds established by the Fire Marshall 

(many at one pound) the reports included 

many chemicals, both mixtures and single 

constituents. There were no reportable 

EHSs for 1996 so a report was not required 

in 1997. 

The Nevada Combined Agency Reports for 

the Area 5 Hazardous Materials Spill Center 

and Areas 5 and 6 were also submitted as 

required. 

In compliance with Executive Order 12856, a 

Toxic Release Inventory Report required by 

Section 313 of the SARA Title Ill must be 

provided if the facility, any time in the prior 

calendar year, exceeds any section 3 13 

threshold for manufacture, process, or other 

use. In CY96 no thresholds were exceeded, 

so no report was required in 1997. 

3-7 
NON-NTS TIER II REPORTING UNDER 

SARA TITLE 111 

The reports for the off-NTS Nevada facilities, 

RSL and NLVF, are described under EPCRA 

above. 

Other non-Nevada operations either had no 

chemicals above reporting thresholds or 

submitted their chemical inventories to the 

citieskounties as part of their business 

plans. 

STATE OF NEVADA CHEMICAL 

CATASTROPHE PREVENTION 

ACT 

The state of Nevada Chemical Catastrophe 

Prevention Act of 1992 contains regulations 

for facilities defined as Highly Hazardous 

Substance Regulated Facilities. This law 

requires registration of facilities storing 

highly hazardous substances above listed 

thresholds. Reporting for this program is 

also covered by the Nevada Combined 

Agency Report discussed under EPCRA 

above. There were no reportable chemicals 

for 1996, and therefore no reports were 

submitted to the state in 1997. 

TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL 

ACT 

State of Nevada regulations implementing 

the TSCA require submittal of an annual 

report describing polychlorinated biphenyl 

(PCB) control activities. The 1996 NTS PCB 

annual report was transmitted to EPA and 

the state of Nevada in June 1997. The 

report included the quantity and status of 

PCB and PCB-contaminated transformers 

and electrical equipment at the NTS. Also 

reported were the number of shipments of 

PCBs and PCB-contaminated items from the 

NTS to an EPA-approved disposal facility. 

Fifty-two large and four small low volume 

PCB capacitors remain under the 

management of the LANL in Area 27 of the 

NTS. One PCB-containing transformer was 

repaired and put in service at the NTS in 

1996, but was later found to stili contain 

PCBs so it was removed from service again. 

In 1997, this transformer was successfully 

retrofitted so now there are no known PCB 

or PCB-containing transformers in-service at 

the NTS. 

FEDERAL INSECTICIDE, 

FUNGICIDE, AND RODENTICIDE 

ACT 

Pesticide usage included insecticides, 

herbicides, and rodenticides. Insecticides 

were applied twice a month at the food 

service and storage areas. Herbicides were 

applied once or twice a year at NTS sewage 

lagoon berms. All other pesticide 

applications were on an as-requested basis. 

General-use pesticides were preferred, 

although restricted-use herbicides and 

rodenticides were used. Contract 

companies applied pesticides at all non-NTS 

facilities in 1997. 

Records were maintained on all pesticides 

used, both general and restricted. These 

records will be held for at least three years. 

State-sponsored training materials are 

available for all applicators. No unusual 

environmental activities occurred in 1997 at 

the NTS relating to the Federal Insecticide, 

Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. 

HISTORIC PRESERVATION 

The NHPA (36 CFR 79,1966) requires 

federal agencies to consider any impact of 

their actions on cultural resources 

(archaeological sites, historic sites, historic 

structures, and traditional cultural properties) 

eligible for listing in the National Register 

(NR) of Historic Places. Accordingly, 

cultural resource surveys and other studies 

are conducted to assess any impacts NTS 

operations may have on such resources. 

When cultural resources eligible for the NR 

are found in a project area and they cannot 

be avoided, plans are written for programs to 

recover data to mitigate the effects of the 

3-8 
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY 

projects on these sites. Technical reports 

contain the results of these data recovery 

programs. A data recovery plan was 

developed for one archaeological site and a 

field data recovery program was completed 

last October. Great Basin Indian tribal 

representatives visited this site before and 

after the fieldwork. The data recovery plan 

included three monitors from the major 

tribes. For those historic properties, which 

can be avoided by NTS activities, a 

monitoring program has been developed to 

field verify the condition of these sites 

through time. 

The NHPA also requires that federal 

agencies inventory the cultural resources 

under their jurisdiction. In 1994, a survey of 

archaeological sites near four springs on the 

NTS was conducted. The results of this 

inventory were presented in a 1997 technical 

report. Also, a survey report on the second 

phase of the Fortymile Canyon rock art 

inventory was completed. Last spring, 

DOE/NV conducted interviews with Great 

Basin Indian tribal cultural experts at the 

Fortymile rock art locale. 

The American lndian Religious Freedom Act 

directs federal agencies to consult with 

Native Americans to protect their right to 

exercise their traditional religions. The 

Native American Graves Protection and 

Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) requires federal 

agencies to consult with Native Americans 

regarding items in their artifact collections, 

which may be associated funerary items, 

human remains, sacred objects, or objects 

of cultural patrimony. A collection of 

DOE/NV archaeological materials, which 

had been housed at the Harry Reid Center 

at University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV), 

was transferred to the DOUNV Curatorial 

Facility along with the data for the 

archaeological sites. A summary report, site 

records, and an artifact inventory were 

completed for this collection. NAGPRA 

consultation on these artifacts will be 

conducted in the near future. 

THREATENED AND ENDANGERED 

SPECIES PROTECTION 

The €SA (Title 50 CFR 17.1 1) requires 

federal agencies to insure that their actions 

do not jeopardize the continued existence of 

federally listed endangered or threatened 

species or their critical habitat. The 

American peregrine falcon is the only 

endangered species and the desert tortoise 

and bald eagle are the only threatened 

species, which occur on the NTS. No 

threatened or endangered plants are known 

to occur on the site. A non-jeopardy 

Programmatic Biological Opinion was issued 

by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services 

(USFWS) to DOE/NV in August 1996 for 

planned activities at the NTS for a ten-year 

period. 

The Desert Tortoise Compliance Program 

implemented the terms and conditions of the 

Programmatic Biological Opinion and 

documented compliance actions taken by 

DOWNV. The terms and conditions, which 

were implemented in 1997, included the 

following: (1) tortoise clearance surveys for 

two projects (conducted within 24 hours from 

the start of project construction); (2) onsite 

monitoring of construction for two projects 

when heavy equipment was being used; 

(3) quarterly monitoring of tortoise-proof 

fencing around the ER-5-2 Well and at 

sewage treatment ponds in Areas 6, 22,23, 

and 25; (4) zone-of-Influence transect 

surveys around two proposed underground 

testing area well sites near Beatty, Nevada 

believed to be outside suitable tortoise 

habitat; and (5) preparation of an annual 

compliance report to the USFWS for NTS 

activities that were conducted in CY97. 

A total of 339 transects totaling 902 km (559 

mi) were surveyed on the NTS over the last 

half of CY97 and the first quarter of CY98 for 

the presence of desert tortoises or their sign 

in areas of unknown tortoise abundance. 

3-9 
Areas of “none to very low” tortoise 

abundance were identified by the sample 

transect data. According to the 1996 

Biological Opinion, tortoise clearance 

surveys are optional for new projects located 

in these areas. A GIS-generated map of the 

“none to very low” tortoise abundance areas 

was submitted to the USFWS for their 

concurrence, and a draft document of the 

survey results was prepared and will be 

finalized in CY98. 

There is one bird (mountain plover 

[Charadrius rnontanus]) and two plant 

species (Clokey’s eggvetch [Astragalus 

oophorus var. clokeyanus] and Blue 

Diamond cholla [Opuntia whipplei var. 

rnultigenicu/ata]), which are known, or are 

expected to exist on the NTS, that are 

candidates for listing by the USFWS under 

the ESA. There are ten plant, one reptile, 

one bird, and six bat species that occur on 

the NTS, which the USFWS has removed 

from the list of candidate species for listing. 

These species are now considered by the 

USFWS to be “species of concern” 

belonging to a group of species from which 

new candidates will be selected, if 

warranted. In 1997, preconstruction 

biological surveys were conducted at four 

proposed construction sites to determine the 

presence of these species. Survey results 

and mitigation recommendations were 

documented in survey reports. Field 

surveys to determine the presence and 

distribution of the reptile, bird, and bat 

species, which are “species of concern” on 

the NTS, were started in 1996 and were 

completed in 1997. Field survey results 

were summarized in a report titled 

“Distribution of the Chuckwalla, Western 

Burrowing Owl, and Six Bat Species on the 

Nevada Test Site” (Steen et al., I997), 

which was prepared and published as a 

DOE topical report in May. Field surveys for 

Clokey’s eggvetch were conducted in 1997 

and will be completed in 1998. 

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11988, 

FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT 

There were no projects in 1997, which 

required consultation for floodplain 

management. NTS design criteria do not 

specifically address floodplain management; 

however, all projects are reviewed for areas 

which would be affected by a 1 OO-year flood 

pursuant to DOE Order 6430.1A. 

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11990, 

PROTECTION OF WETLANDS 

There were no projects in 1997, which 

required consultation for protection of 

wetlands. NTS design criteria do not 

specifically address protection of wetlands; 

however, all projects are reviewed pursuant 

to the requirements of DOE Order 5400.1. 

Field surveys were conducted under the 

Ecological Monitoring and Compliance 

program from June 1996 through February 

1997 to identify those natural NTS springs, 

seeps, tanks, and playas, which could be 

designated by the U.S. Army Corps of 

Engineers as jurisdictional wetlands. A 

summary report of survey findings titled 

“Nevada Test Site Wetlands Assessment” 

(Hansen et at., 1997) was completed and 

distributed as a DOE topical report in May. 

EXECUTIVE ORDER 12856, 

FEDERAL COMPLIANCE WITH 

RIGHT-TO-KNOW LAWS AND 

POLLUTION PREVENTION 

REQUIREMENTS 

Actions taken to comply with the 

requirements of this Order are discussed in 

Section 3.2. 

3.2 CURRENT 

ENVIRONMENTAL 

COMPLIANCE ISSUES AND 

ACTIONS 

There were numerous activities and actions 

relating to environmental compliance issues 

in 1997. These activities and actions are 

discussed below, grouped by general area 

of applicability. 

3-1 0 
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY 

CLEAN AIR ACT 

Under Title V, Part 70 of the CAA 

Amendments, all owners or operators of Part 

70 sources must pay annual fees that are 

sufficient to cover costs of state operating 

permit programs. The Nevada 

Administrative Code (NAC) determines 

annual fees based on tons of actual 

emissions. Annual fees for facilities 

generating less than 25 tons of emissions 

are $0. The fee is $3.75 per ton for facilities 

that produce more than 25 tons of emissions 

in a calendar year. From the 1996 annual 

report, which was submitted in February 

1997, it was determined that approximately 

six tons of emissions were produced, so that 

no annual fee was required. 

An application to obtain a Class II air quality 

operating permit for the NTS was submitted 

in April 1996 and then revised and 

resubmitted in November 1996. In February 

1997, the state issued a Class II Air Quality 

Operating Permit AP9711-0549 for the NTS. 

The permit replaced all existing air quality 

permits on the NTS except for the 

Hazardous Material Spill Center (HSC) and 

the open burn permits. The new permit 

omitted the Area 5 and Area 23 portable 

slant screens, which are no longer required 

to be permitted. In April 1997, the permit 

was modified to include a Cambilt conveyor, 

which was relocated to the TTR to be used 

in conjunction with the CLEAN SLATES 

environmental restoration projects (See NonNTS Air Quality Permits). 

The five-year operating permit for the HSC 

was renewed in October 1997. The new 

permit, AP9711-0556, contains several new 

requirements, including weekly monitoring 

and recording of throughput amounts and 

hours of operation of emission units, and a 

20 percent opacity restriction. DOUNV EPD 

is currently working with the state to modify 

these restrictions. 

Two open burn permits were renewed by the 

state in 1997. These include Permit 97-34, 

for the Area 27 burn box, and Permit 97- 20, 

for fire and radiological emergency response 

training exercises. Notification and reporting 

requirements previously listed in the Area 27 

burn permit were deleted from the 1997 

renewal. These requirements were also 

deleted from the other burn permit during the 

preceding year. In January 1997, the state 

determined that it was not necessary to 

permit activities that didn’t meet the 

definition of open burning as it appears in 

the NAC. Therefore, because activities such 

as high explosives tests are not included in 

the NAC definition, the Big Explosives 

Experiment Facility open burn permit was 

not renewed. 

The NTS also has a Nevada Hazardous 

Materials Storage Permit Number 13-97- 

0034-X, issued by the state Fire Marshall, 

and is renewed annually when a facility 

makes a report required by the state’s 

Chemical Catastrophe Prevention Act. 

Table 3.1 contains a permit summary. 

NON-NTS AIR QUALITY PERMITS 

In April 1997, a permit was issued for the 

CLEAN SLATES environmental restoration 

project, located on the TTR. The permit 

consisted of a General Air Quality Operating 

Permit (AP9711-0549), which included 

surface disturbance restrictions and an 

Approval of Location, which granted 

approval to operate 16 pieces of permitted 

equipment that had been relocated from the 

DOUBLE TRACKS project at the NAFRC to 

the TTR. A report documenting production 

amounts and operating hours was submitted 

to the state upon completion of the CLEAN 

SLATE I project in June 1997. 

The state issued a permit for the CLEAN 

SLATE II environmental restoration project, 

also located on the TTR, in June 1997. The 

permit included a Surface Area Disturbance 

Permit 971 1-0549 and a Site Specific Permit 

Attachment 1574 to reflect the change of 

location of 15 pieces of permitted equipment 

from the CLEAN SLATE I project location. 

The CLEAN SLATE II project has not yet 

been initiated. 

3-1 1 
Twelve air pollution control permits were 

active for emission units at the Las Vegas 

Area Operations. These permits were 

issued through the Clark County Health 

District. Annual renewal is contingent upon 

payment of permit fees. Permits are 

amended and revised only if the situation 

under which the permit has been issued 

changes. STL had one air pollution control 

permit for a degreasing operation, but the 

permit was terminated in December 1997 

when a nontoxic degreaser was substituted. 

For the other non-NTS operations, no 

permits have been required, or the facilities 

have been exempted. 

CLEAN WATER ACT 

Dewatering of septage and wintertime 

portable toilet waste was conducted in the 

Area 25 Engine Test Stand No. 1 sewage 

lagoon and two Area 12 sewage lagoon 

secondary infiltration basins during 1 997 and 

will be used again in 1998 for this 

application. 

A total of 12 active septic tank systems are 

in service on the NTS. Two active holding 

tanks, which require replacement with an 

approved system, are still in service on the 

NTS. Nine additional septic tank systems 

serve unoccupied buildings, but will remain 

on active status until permanently closed. 

Facility Managers have been informed of 

deficiencies noted during inspections. 

Construction of the Area 23 Infiltration Basin 

Groundwater Monitoring Well was completed 

on February 27, 1996. Installation of a 

pump with cable and discharge piping and 

development of a completion report were 

completed during 1997 to finish the project. 

The monitoring well is now functional and in 

compliance with groundwater protection 

requirements contained in state general 

permit GNEV93001. 

The Area 25 Test Cell C was taken out of 

service during the first quarter of 1997 to 

comply with SDWA regulations. No system 

action will be required at the sewage 

lagoons to comply with the permit 

requirements at this time. Improvements will 

be implemented if use of the facility is 

needed in the future. 

A bypass sewer line for the Area 25 Central 

Support primary sewage lagoon was 

constructed from November 12 through 

November 18 as a result of joint efforts 

between the BN Waste Management 

Projectrrechnical Support and DOENucca 

Mountain Site Characterization Office staffs. 

This line will provide for operational flexibility 

and in situ primary lagoon infiltration rate 

measurements. The effectiveness of 

biological clogging on the existing soils was 

determined in 1997 to be inadequate for 

compliance with the groundwater protection 

program, so conceptual designs on options 

have been initiated. 

Funding for design of engineered liner 

installation within the Area 25 Reactor 

Control Point sewage lagoons was received 

from DOE/Asset Management Division in 

October of 1996. Engineering drawings for 

this installation have been drafted, and a 

cost estimate for the installation of a 

geosynthetic liner was completed during the 

first quarter 1997. A second project cost 

estimate depicting the installation of a liner 

mix developed from soils readily available at 

the Area 1 Batch Plant has also been 

prepared. Both of these options are being 

considered, as well as suspending the 

intermittent use of the facility. 

Funding for design of an engineered liner in 

the Area 6 DAF primary sewage lagoon was 

obtained in FY97. The most feasible and 

cost effective method to comply with 

groundwater protection requirements at this 

site is to line the primary lagoon to attain full 

containment with existing flow rates. 

Funding has been requested for FY98 to 

install the liners by the permit deadline date. 

SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT 

Engineering design has been completed on 

approximately 50 buildings or facilities at the 

NTS requiring retrofit through installation of 

3-1 2 
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY 

backflow prevention devices on water 

service lines. These facilities required over 

1 10 separate installations; the last one was 

completed this year. 

During 1997, a ten-inch water line was 

installed leading to the Area 5 HSC. Plans 

were also finalized to replace the Army Well 

tank and to recoat four other existing tanks. 

This tank work will begin in 1998. 

The Operations and Maintenance Manual for 

the NTS water distribution systems was 

updated to incorporate some recently 

passed state of Nevada regulations. 

There was no sanitary survey of the water 

distribution systems by the Nevada Bureau 

of Health Protection Services during 1997. 

COMPREHENSIVE 

ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, 

COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY 

ACT 

Other than the reporting covered in Section 

3.1, there is no formal CERCLA program at 

the NTS. The FFACO, with the state, may 

preclude the NTS from being placed on the 

National Priority List. More of a RCRA 

approach in remediating environmental 

problems will be taken by the FFACO. 

HISTORIC PRESERVATION 

Historic preservation studies and surveys 

are conducted by the Desert Research 

Institute (DRI), University and Community 

College System of Nevada. In 1997, 13 

surveys were conducted for historic - 

properties on the NTS, and unpublished 

reports on the findings were prepared. 

These surveys identified 25 prehistoric and 

historic archaeological sites. Through 

consultation with the Nevada State Historical 

Preservation Office, four of these sites were 

considered eligible for the NR. Work 

continued on historic structures associated 

with early NTS activities. Impacts planned 

to the Engineering Maintenance Assembly 

and Disassembly Facility in Area 25 required 

the preparation of Historic American 

Engineering Records documentation for the 

facility. This documentation will reside in the 

Library of Congress. Historic American 

Building Survey documentation is in 

preparation for the EPA Farm. 

Other efforts in 1997, included 

administration of the cultural resources 

program on the NTS, preparing management 

objectives and plans and promoting public 

relations and communications concerning 

the NTS archaeology and cultural resources 

program. 

To comply with federal regulations in Title 36 

CFR 79, a multi-phase program is in 

progress to upgrade the NTS archaeological 

collection and archives. In 1997, DRI 

continued and completed the piece-by-piece 

inventory of the lithic artifacts in the 

collection. Approximately 500,000 artifacts 

in the collection have been inventoried and 

repackaged according to federal 

requirements. 

POLLUTION PREVENTION AND 

WASTE MINIMIZATION 

IMPLEMENTATION 

BN published the Nevada Operations Site 

Pollution Prevention Program Plan in 1997 

for the Nevada Operations Office in 

accordance with DOUNV and DOUHQ 

requirements. This plan is a guidance 

document, utilized to reduce waste 

generation and any potential pollutant 

releases to the environment. BN reviews 

the plan annually and revises it every three 

years, or as needed, to incorporate the most 

current pollution prevention and waste 

minimization requirements and Executive 

Orders. This provides a means of 

establishing ongoing goals for further 

improvements and increased protection to 

public health and the environment by: 

0 Reducing employee exposure. 

0 Reducing resource usage. 
0 Reducing inventories of chemicals that 

require reporting under the SARA and 

the EPA 33/50 Pollution Program. 

0 Reducing exposure to civil and criminal 

liabilities under environmental laws. 

0 Reducing waste management and 

compliance costs. 

0 Reducing overhead costs and increasing 

productivity through improved work 

processes and greater awareness. 

GOALS AND DESCRIPTIONS 

The site-specific quantitative goals and 

deliverables for 1997 were satisfied. These 

goals include reducing of hazardous and 

sanitary waste generation, increasing 

sanitary waste recycling and increasing 

Affirmative Procurement of EPA-Designated 

Recycled Products. The goals are based on 

the 1993 baseline quantities for routine 

waste. 

The BN Just-in-Time (JIT) supply system 

continues to account for nearly 90 percent of 

all procurement actions, providing the most 

commonly used items (e.g., cleansers and 

lubricants) to all NTS agencies. This 

program has significantly reduced on-hand 

stores, thereby reducing administrative and 

handling costs, and significantly reducing 

waste generation due to expiration of shelf 

life or overstock conditions. All parties 

benefit in reduced waste disposal and 

increased productivity. 

PROCUREMENT CONTROLS 

The purchase of any item that requires a 

Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS), 

including JIT purchase requisitions, is 

screened by Environmental, Safety, and 

Health personnel and Waste Management 

Projects/Nonradioactive Waste Operations 

personnel. They determine the need for the 

hazardous material requested and review 

MSDSs for products purchased outside the 

BN JIT system. These products may be 

approved or disapproved. The approval 

process relies on the health, safety, and 

environmental issues related to the product. 

If the waste generated by these materials 

has the potential to be regulated under the 

1980 CERCWRCRA, or has a potential of 

causing harm to individuals or the 

environment, the reviewers will approve that 

purchase only if there is no approved 

substitute for the product, and the use of the 

product cannot be prevented by process 

modification. 

AFFIRMATIVE PROCUREMENT 

The DOWNV and BN established an 

Affirmative Procurement Program to comply 

with the requirements of Executive Order 

12873 to procure products containing 

recovered materials. This program focuses 

on seven major categories, including 

construction materials, landscape, nonpaper office, paper office, park and 

recreation, transportation and vehicular 

products. Under each category are a 

number of specific products. In FY97, 100 

percent of construction materials, 96 percent 

of paper office products, 80 percent of nonpaper office products, and 64 percent of 

vehicle re-refined lubricating oil, procured by 

BN, contained recovered materials. 

Additionally, BN increased procurement of 

retread tires by 12 percent. There were no 

new purchases in FY97 for the remaining 

major categories. 

COTTER CONCENTRATE 

In 1987, the material known as “Cotter 

Concentrate,” which had been designated by 

DOE/HQ as strategic material, was shipped 

to the DOE NTS from the DOE Mound 

Facility. It was to eventually undergo 

additional uranium extraction for use in the 

DOE nuclear weapons program. In January 

1995, due to the decline in demand for raw 

materials for the production of nuclear 

weapons, DOE/HQ determined that there 

was no longer a-use for the Cotter 

Concentrate as strategic material and 

declared the material mixed waste. 

Responsibility for performing treatment of 

the waste to meet the LDR requirements and 

3-1 4 
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY 

disposal of the material was assigned to the 

DOUNV. In 1997, this waste was 

redesignated as a feedstock material and 

shipped to a uranium processing facility 

known as International Uranium Corporation 

(IUC), formerly Energy Fuels Nuclear, 

located in southeastern Utah. IUC 

performed additional uranium extraction, 

followed by disposal of the residue 

generated by their reprocessing. 

destined for disposal as waste as a result of 

process modification, discontinued use, or 

shelf life expiration are returned to the 

vendor or transferred to another government 

contractor or agency to be utilized. This is a 

substantial cost savings for both BN and 

DOUNV. Examples of chemical and 

material exchanges made during 1997 are 

listed below: 

The benefits to DOE/NV were cost savings 

of approximately three million dollars, due to 

reprocessing as feedstock material rather 

than having to perform treatment and 

disposal. In addition, the material, 

approximately 197 m3, was recycled and 

used as a resource, instead of being 

discarded as a waste. The extracted 

uranium will be used in the production of 

energy by commercial nuclear power plants. 

TRAINING 

BN is committed to implementing effective 

pollution prevention, waste minimization, and 

recycling awareness. Every practical effort 

is implemented to educate all employees in 

pollution prevention. Employee education is 

accomplished through formal training, 

articles published in BN newsletters, and 

other awareness program strategies. A 

Pollution Prevention home page will be 

developed and placed on the BN lntranet 

during FY98. 

Management and employees working in the 

environmental arena are instructed in BN 

pollution prevention and waste minimization 

policies and procedures. The level of 

instruction qualifies personnel to perform 

pollution prevention tasks. Environmental 

awareness training is presented to 

managers and employees on an as needed 

basis. 

CHEMICAL AND MATERIAL EXCHANGE 

BN continues to coordinate chemical and 

material exchanges whenever possible. 

Virgin chemicals and materials that are 

Returned an estimated 91 gallons of 

unused chemicals, destined for disposal, 

to the vendor. 

Coordinated redistribution of 32 different 

chemicals that were destined to be 

disposed of. The estimated cost saving 

was $30,000. 

Assisted in transferring 73 pounds of 

virgin mercury, destined for disposal, 

from the BN Material Testing Laboratory 

to U.S. Geological Survey in Area 25. 

Coordinated with BN Redistribution and 

Sales Group on the Energy-Related 

Laboratory Equipment Program to 

donate miscellaneous laboratory 

equipment, estimated at $9,000, to the 

UNLV Physics Laboratory. 

A BN Procurement representative took a 

pro-active pollution prevention approach 

to return 4,700 expired and 11,850 soonto-expire Celtite resin cartridges to the 

vendor for reuse. These cartridges were 

previously disposed of as hazardous 

waste, so the estimated cost savings 

was $8,751. 

POLLUTION PREVENTION 0 P PORTUN ITY 

ASSESSMENTS (PPOAs) 

BN implements pollution prevention and 

waste minimization options involving source 

reduction and elimination via product 

substitution, reuse, and recycle. These 

efforts reduce the total volume of hazardous, 

radioactive, mixed, and nonhazardous solid 

waste streams generated and disposed of. 

Waste streams are carefully reviewed to 

3-1 5 
identify opportunities for reducing or 

eliminating the volume and toxicity of wastes 

generated through the use of PPOAs. 

BN implements pollution prevention options 

in accordance with the Pollution Prevention 

Act hierarchy that states the following 

criteria should be implemented to prevent or 

reduce pollution at the source wherever 

feasible: 

0 Recycle wastes in an environmentally 

acceptable manner. 

0 Reuse if applicable. 

0 Treat wastes that cannot feasibly be 

prevented or recycled. 

0 Dispose of wastes only as a last resort. 

Pollution prevention is the DOE’S preferred 

approach to environmental management. 

BN’s activities have reduced or eliminated 

hazardous chemicals and generated cost 

savings/avoidance in disposal, product, 

energy, and labor costs. Progress toward 

meeting mission objectives poses continuing 

challenges and opportunities for pollution 

prevention to reduce future risks and costs 

associated with managing wastes and 

pollutants. 

The sitewide (NTS and NLVFs) waste 

reduction results have come from formal 

processes such as PPOAs, a Return on 

Investment (ROI) Project, solid and liquid 

waste recycling , affirmative procure men t , 

and from employees knowledgeable with 

processes which generate waste or use 

hazardous chemicals. 

A PPOA is a systematic, planned, and 

documented procedure with the objective of 

identifying methods that reduce energy 

consumption or eliminate waste streams. 

The technical and economical feasibility of 

options are evaluated, and the most 

promising options are selected for 

implementation. Options include product 

substitution, cross contamination control, 

process change (i.e., the use of alternate 

equipment or procedure), and onsite 

recycling. During 1997, one PPOA was 

conducted at the RSL Photography 

Laboratory located on the NAFB. This 

pollution prevention opportunity was 

selected as having the greatest potential for 

waste stream reduction. 

This PPOA analyzed the feasibility of 

combining two processors; the Hope roller 

transport E-6 processor and Kodak RT-1811 

roller transport film processor, in order to 

eliminate the E-6 film process. The PPOA 

investigated the opportunity to eliminate the 

prehardener and neutralizer stages of the 

RT-1811 process. The goal of the PPOA 

was to reduce the chemical usage, thereby 

minimizing associated waste and worker 

exposure to the hazardous components of 

the chemicals. The most viable 

recommendation was to upgrade the 

equipment to Kodak Aerial Color Processor, 

Model RT-1611, a durable, high speed, selfthreading roller transport processor 

designed for the latest Kodak color aerial 

films. This option eliminated the need for 

the prehardener and neutralizer chemicals 

and associated safety and health hazards 

and waste products. Additionally, the 

RT-1611 will most likely accommodate E-6 

film products, eliminating the need for that 

process. The feasibility is good, with an 

estimated annual cost saving of $38,405 and 

an anticipated annual reduction in the 

quantity of chemicals of 2,150 gallons. 

RETURN ON INVESTMENT (ROI) 

The ROI program was initiated to 

demonstrate the economic benefit of 

implementing pollution prevention projects 

and focus on those with the potential for 

reducing operational costs. The ROI 

program is based upon total cost savings 

achieved across all DOE organizations 

compared to the dollars spent to implement 

the project. The ROI project listed below was 

identified and implemented in FY97 with an 

estimated payback period of 1.01 years. 

The ROI project consists of replacing of 

expired tritium powered EXIT signs with 

nonhazardous photoluminescent EXIT signs. 

3-1 6 
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY 

Implementation of this ROI successfully 

eliminates future use of EXIT signs 

containing tritium and also diverts expired 

signs from a low level waste landfill. 

Seventy-six tritium powered EXIT signs have 

been shipped offsite to one of the original 

manufacturers for disposal. The 

manufacturer will recover the remaining 

tritium in the EXIT signs for reuse in other 

products. Replacement, nonhazardous 

photoluminescent EXIT signs have been 

procured and installed to replace the signs 

containing tritium. The photoluminescent 

EXIT signs can be disposed of in a sanitary 

landfill, effectively eliminating the costs of 

disposal offsite. Through product 

substitution, future use of a hazardous 

radioactive material and generation of a 

hazardous radioactive waste will be avoided. 

This ROI for replacing tritium powered EXIT 

signs is high, with a short payback period of 

just over one year. 

PUBLIC AND COMMUNITY OUTREACH 

PROGRAM 

The BN Pollution Prevention Project Office, 

along with DOE/NV and Wackenhut 

Services Incorporated, continue to 

participate in public and community outreach 

programs. These activities include the Earth 

Fair, JASON Foundation for Education, 

Nevada Regional Science Bowl, open house 

for employees at the NLVF and NTS, and 

presentations related to pollution prevention 

and waste minimization at local schools. 

SOLID WASTE RECYCLING 

The solid waste recycling project (high-grade 

paper, mixed paper, cardboard, and 

aluminum cans) continues at all BN 

locations. During 1997, the solid waste 

recycling project at the NTS improved with 

the installation of recycling stations 

(collection containers) in all occupied 

buildings. 

BN improved the following recycling projects 

during 1997: 

Onsite recycling of antifreeze from heavy 

equipment and light duty vehicles. This 

project was initiated by an employee of 

Fleet Operations. 

The lead weights were removed from 

vehicle tires during scheduled routine 

maintenance and collected for recycling 

offsite. 

0 The retread tire project began in late 

1996. The project consists of sending 

old tires from heavy equipment and light 

duty vehicles offsite to be recapped; if 

the tires are beyond use, they are sent 

offsite to be salvaged or recycled. 

Recapped tires are purchased for limited 

types of vehicles. 

0 The NTS Reproduction Shop was closed 

during 1997. An estimated 25,000 

sheets of various forms were made into 

scratch pads, an alternative use 

suggested by an employee from the 

Reproduction Shop. 

Table 3.2 contains the amount of various 

items recycled during 1997. 

REPORTS 

The BN CY96 pollution prevention 

accomplishments, to be published in the 

Annual Report of Waste Generation and 

Pollution Prevention Progress Report, were 

completed and transmitted to DOE/HQ on 

February 25, 1997. 

The SARA Section 31 3 chemical usage 

report and the 33-50 TRI Program Priority 

chemical usage report for CY96 were 

submitted to DOE/NV on March 27, 1997. 

The Nevada Operations Site Pollution 

Prevention Program Plan, 1997, was 

submitted and approved by DOE/NV and 

transmitted to DOE/HQ on July 8, 1997. 

The Affirmative Procurement Report was 

submitted and approved by DOE/NV on 

December 18, 1997, and forwarded to 

DOE/HQ, in accordance with RCRA, Section 

6002(d) and Executive Order 12873. 

3-1 7 
Quarterly pollution prevention reports were 

submitted to DOE/HQ during 1997. 

SOLID/SANITARY WASTE 

During 1997, landfills were operated in 

Areas 6, 9, and 23. The amount of material 

disposed of in each is provided in Chapter 

6.0. 

EPA regulations promulgated in 1991 

required that Class I1 municipal solid waste 

landfills (Le., those receiving less than 20 

tons per day of waste) be closed by October 

5, 1995 (later delayed by two years). As the 

result of an agreement with the NEPD 

Bureau of Federal Facilities (NEPD/BoFF), 

the Class II landfill at U-lOc Crater in Area 9 

was closed on October 5, 1995, for retrofit 

as a Class Ill Site. The retrofit consisted of 

the installment of a barrier layer of at least 

four feet of native soil to segregate the 

different waste types and to inhibit leachate 

transport to the lower waste zone. In 

addition, five neutron monitoring tubes were 

installed in the barrier layer to monitor 

possible leachate production and water 

activity. Upon the NEPD approval of the 

installed barrier and operating plan, U-1 Oc 

Crater was reopened in January 1996 as a 

Class 111 Site for the disposal of industrial 

solid waste and other inert waste. An 

application for a permit to operate the U-1 Oc 

Crater as a Class 111 industrial solid waste 

disposal site was submitted to the 

NEPD/BoFF in May 1996. The Class 111 

permit application was revised and 

resubmitted in August 1996 in response to 

informal comments provided by the 

NEPD/BoFF. Operating Permit SW 13 097 

03 was issued by NEPD with an effective 

date of July 17, 1997. 

An application for a permit to operate the 

Area 23 landfill as a Class II Municipal and 

Industrial Solid Waste Disposal Site was 

submitted to the NEPD/BoFF in October 

1996. This was approved by NEPD issuing 

Operating Permit SW 13 097 04, with an 

effective date of December 12, 1997. 

Chapter 6 also gives the amount of 

hydrocarbon contaminated soil disposed of 

in the Area 6 landfill in 1997. An application 

for a permit to operate the Area 6 

hydrocarbon landfill as a Class Ill solid 

waste disposal site was submitted to the 

NEPD/BoFF in March 1996. Upon receipt of 

verbal comments from the NEPD/BoFF, a 

revised application was submitted in April 

1996, followed by the receipt of a 

Notification of Completeness from the 

NEPD/BoFF in May 1996. An evaluation of 

the merits of the application was conducted 

and, as a result, minor changes were 

incorporated in the application document. A 

copy of the revised permit application was 

submitted to the NEPD/BoFF in August 

1996. Operating Permit SW 13 097 02 was 

then issued by NEPD with an effective date 

of May 23,1997. 

The NTS Cleanup Project, initiated in 1994, 

is an activity devised to remove and dispose 

of or recycle, where applicable, 

nonhazardous debris and material and 

readily identify hazardous debris and 

material. In 1997, cleanup activities were 

completed in Area 2, as confirmed in a 

September 15, 1997, letter to DOE/NV from 

NEPD. During this cleanup approximately 

131,260 pounds of solid waste were 

removed from Area 2 and properly disposed 

of in UlOc Landfill. Also, 9,048 pounds of 

lead materials and 17,000 pounds of 

electrical cable were delivered to the NTS 

Salvage Yard for recycling and reclamation. 

FEDERAL FACILITIES 

AGREEMENT AND CONSENT 

ORDER 

REMEDIAL ACTIVITIES - SURFACE 

AREAS 

Environmental restoration activities 

continued at the NTS and TTR in 1997. 

Activities followed the agreements specified 

in the FFACO signed between the DOE/NV 

and the NEPD. 

These activities follow a formal work process 

beginning with a Data Quality Objectives 

(DQO) meeting between DOE, NEPD, and 
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY 

contractors. The purpose of the DQO 

meeting is to define the scope of work, how 

the site characterization is to be done 

(sampling strategy), and to develop the 

conceptual model for the site. The 

conceptual model defines the nature and 

extent of waste in the subsurface and guides 

the investigation. A Corrective Action 

Investigation Plan is prepared providing the 

information on how the site is to be 

characterized. 

Site characterization is carried out and 

documented in the Corrective Action 

Decision Document (CADD). This report 

provides the information that either confirms 

the conceptual model or modifies it. If 

suitable information is available to make a 

decision, a remedial alternative is selected 

from several identified for analysis that best 

provides site closure. (In some instances, 

additional site characterization may be 

required before the CADD can be prepared). 

The CADD may also include a risk 

assessment to better define the risk to 

humans and the environment. 

If a site requires remediation, a Corrective 

Action Plan (CAP) is prepared that provides 

the necessary design and other information 

on how the remediation is to be performed. 

A CAP includes the proposed methods to be 

used to close a site, quality control 

measures, waste management strategy, 

design drawings (when appropriate), 

verification sampling strategies (for clean 

closures) and other information necessary to 

perform the closure. Some sites also 

require a Post Closure Plan as the site or 

parts of the site are closed in place. 

Information on inspections and monitoring 

are provided in an Annual Post Closure 

Monitoring Report. 

Once the closure has been completed, a 

Closure Report is prepared. This document 

provides information on the work performed, 

results of verification sampling, as-built 

drawings (if appropriate), waste 

management, etc. 

The NEPD is a participant throughout the 

remediation process. The Community 

Advisory Board is also kept informed by 

DOE/NV of the progress made. 

Some small sites are closed under the 

Streamlined Approach for Environmental 

Restoration (SAFER) process. These sites 

typically have small amounts of 

contamination and can be remediated by 

simple excavation and sampling to verify 

that the Remediation Level has been 

reached. A SAFER plan is prepared 

providing the methods to be used to close 

the site. After closure a SAFER closure 

report is prepared documenting the work 

performed. 

Work performed in 1997 is summarized 

below: 

0 The Area 6 Decontamination Pond 

RCRA Closure Unit characterization was 

completed. Additional geotechnical 

sampling and testing was completed for 

the Corrective Measures Study. Design 

and field testing for the engineered cover 

was started and will be completed in 

1998. Closure activities are anticipated 

to be completed in 1998. 

0 

0 

0 

An annual report was submitted to 

comply with the conditions of the RCRA 

Part B Permit for the Area 2 Bitcutter 

Shop and LLNL Post Shot Containment 

Building Injection Wells RCRA Closure 

Unit that was closed in 1996. 

The closure of the Area 25 Jr. Hot Cell 

was completed by the disposal of the 

radiological waste in the Area 3 

Radiological Waste Management 

Facility. 

The expedited closure of the Area 15 

EPA Farm was completed in October 

1997. The facility was decontaminated 

and dismantled. Waste disposal and 

closure documentation will be completed 

in 1998. 

3-1 9 
0 

Characterization of portions of the Area 

25 Engine Maintenance Assembly and 

Disassembly (E-MAD) Building was 

completed in 1997. Two characterization 

reports were issued. No 

decontamination activities were 

conducted because the facility end-use 

requirements would be determined in the 

future. 

Closure of the Area 12 Fleet Operations 

Steam Cleaning Discharge Area was 

completed by excavation and removal of 

approximately 61 m3 (80 yd3) of 

petroleum hydrocarbon soil. Biennial 

monitoring (every two years) for the next 

six years of undisturbed impacted areas 

will be required to evaluate whether or 

not sufficient degradation of the 

petroleum hydrocarbons has been 

demonstrated. 

Clean closure of the Area 6 Steam 

Cleaning Effluent Ponds RCRA Closure 

Unit was completed by excavation and 

disposal of approximately 41 2 m3 

(540 yd3) of soil as a RCRA hazardous 

waste and 534 m3 (700 yd3) of 

nonhazardous petroleum hydrocarbon 

impacted soil. The Closure Report will 

be prepared and transmitted to the 

NEPD for concurrence during 1998. 

The Area 23 Building 650 Leachfield 

RCRA Closure Unit characterization was 

completed. The Closure Plan and field 

work will be completed in 1998. 

The contents of the aboveground tanks 

located at the Area 23 Fire Training Pit 

were characterized and disposed of as a 

RCRA hazardous waste (approximately 

3,000 gal [I 1.4 m3]). Site debris and 

materials were sampled for 

disposaVreuse. Some materials were 

removed from the site and disposed of 

as nonhazardous construction debris. 

The site characterization activities and 

additional site debridmaterial 

disposallreuse are anticipated to be 

completed in 1998. 

e 

0 

0 

The SAFER Closure Plan for the Area 5 

and 6 Aboveground Tanks was 

prepared, completed, and approved by 

the NEPD. Closure activities are 

anticipated to be completed in 1998. 

The Area 2 Photo Skid site 

characterization was completed and the 

results indicated that no remediation 

activities were required. The site was 

restored by backfilling and grading. No 

Closure Report was required for site 

closure. 

Characterization activities were 

completed for the TTR Area 3 Landfill 

Complex and Area 9 UXO Landfill. The 

Corrective Action Decision Document 

and Corrective Action Plan will be 

prepared and transmitted to the NEPD 

for concurrence during 1998. Remedial 

activities are planned for 1998. 

Fencing of the TTR Five Points Landfill 

and Bomblet Pit was completed to 

support the revegetation activities. Both 

sites were seeded with native plant 

species, and site inspections will be 

completed in the following years to 

evaluate the progress of the revegetation 

activities. 

Characterization of the TTR Second Gas 

Station was completed. Based upon the 

results, the NEPD has concurred with 

the recommended closure in-place of the 

petroleum impacted soils. The Closure 

Report will be prepared and transmitted 

to the NEPD for concurrence during 

1998. 

Characterization activities were started 

at the TTR Building 360 Underground 

Discharge Point and Areas 2 and 6 

Septic Systems. The Corrective Action 

Decision Document and Corrective 

Action Plan will be prepared and 

transmitted to the NEPD for concurrence 

during 1998. 

An expedited closure in-place of the TTR 

Roller Coaster Sewage Lagoons and 

North Disposal Trench was completed by 

3-20 
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY 

constructing an engineered vegetative 

cover over the sites. The construction 

activities were designed and 

successfully implemented to eliminate 

the generation of any waste during the 

closure activities since the site was 

impacted with pesticides above the EPA 

Preliminary Remediation Goals. The site 

is located approximately 56 km (35 mi) 

northwest of the NTS. The Closure 

Report will be prepared and transmitted 

to the NEPD for concurrence during 

1998. 

An expedited closure in-place of the lTR 

Cactus Spring Waste Trenches was 

completed by constructing an 

engineered vegetative cover over the 

site. The site is also located 

approximately 56 km (35 mi) northwest 

of the NTS. The Closure Report will be 

prepared and transmitted to the NEPD 

for concurrence during 1998. 

0 An expedited closure of the Project 

SHOAL area mud pit was completed by 

the SAFER, which resulted in the 

excavation and disposal of 

approximately 184 m3 (240 yd3) of 

petroleum hydrocarbon impacted drilling 

muds. The mud pit area was regraded 

to the approximate original topography. 

The Project SHOAL Area is located 

about 274 km (170 mi) northwest of the 

NTS. 

Remediation of the CLEAN SLATE I site was 

completed. Approximately 12,382 m3 

(1 6,220 yd3) of plutonium contaminated soil 

was shipped to the NTS for disposal. A 

Closure Report was prepared and 

transmitted to DOE. 

An aerial radioactivity survey of the Project 

57 site was completed. Completion of site 

characterization activities is planned for 

1999. 

Reclamation success at the DOUBLE 

TRACKS site was monitored, and the data 

were included as part of the annual 

Reclamation Progress report. 

The Building A-1 (Atlas) tritium 

decontamination was completed. All 

decontaminated areas have been freereleased with the condition that a weekly 

long-term monitoring program be conducted 

for a least one year. 

There were also two Housekeeping Sites 

(CAU 344 & 349) in the FFACO, at the NTS, 

that were cleaned up during 1997. 

RADIATION PROTECTION 

NTS OPERATIONS 

Redesign of the environmental surveillance 

networks on the NTS during 1997 will result 

in a reduction of monitoring costs while 

maintaining necessary and sufficient 

coverage. Results of monitoring, during 

1997, indicated full compliance with the 

radiation exposure guidelines of DOE Order 

5400.5, "Radiation Protection of the Public 

and the Environment", and the Title 40 CFR 

141 National Primary Drinking Water 

Regulations. Onsite air monitoring results 

showed average annual concentrations 

ranging from 0.008 percent of the DOE 

Order 5400.5 guidelines for 85Kr in air to 2.6 

percent of the guidelines for 239+240Pu in air. 

Drinking water supplies on the NTS 

contained less than 0.001 percent of the 

DOE Order 5400.5 guideline and less than 

0.004 percent of the National Primary 

Drinking Water Regulation for tritium. 

Supply wells contained 0.0 percent of the 

DOE Order 5400.5 guideline for 239+240Pu. 

NON-NTS BN OPERATIONS 

Results of environmental monitoring at the 

off-NTS operations performing radiological 

work during 1997 indicate full compliance 

with the radiation exposure guidelines of 

DOE Order 5400.5 and Title 10 CFR 835. 

No radioactive or nonradioactive surface 

watedliquid discharges, subsurface 

discharges through leaching, leaking, or 

seepage into the soil column, well disposal, 

or burial occurred at any of the BN 

operations. Use of radioactive materials is 

primarily limited to sealed sources; however, 

unsealed tritium is used in some operations. 

3-2 1 
A small seepage of tritium into the air at the 

NLVF Atlas Building (reported in 1995) 

continued during 1997. Facilities, which use 

radioactive sources or radiation producing 

equipment, with the potential to expose the 

general population outside the property line 

to direct radiation, are the WAMO in 

Washington, DC, the Atlas, NLVF A-1 

Source Range, and the STL during the 

operation of the sealed tube neutron 

generator or during operation of the 

Febetron. Sealed sources are tested every 

six months to assure there is no leakage of 

radioactive material. Operation of any 

radiation generating devices is controlled by 

BN procedures. At least two 

thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) are at 

the fence line on each side of these facilities 

that are exchanged quarterly with additional 

control TLDs kept in a shielded safe. The 

TLD results were consistent with previous 

data indicating no exposures to the public 

from any of the monitored facilities. 

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE 

AUDITS 

In March 1993, an environmental 

compliance assessment was conducted by 

Reynolds Electrical & Engineering Co., Inc. 

(REECo) of all active REECo facilities and 

work sites at the NTS. Numerous 

deficiencies were corrected at the time of 

the assessment. Those deficiencies, which 

were not correctable, were assigned a 

system deficiency number and are being 

formally tracked by BN, the successor to 

REECo. The assessment identified 

approximately 55 of these system 

deficiencies. During 1997, the last of the 

identified deficiencies was closed. 

OCCURRENCE REPORTING 

Occurrences are environmental, health, 

andlor safety-related tests, which are 

reported in several categories in accordance 

with the requirements of DOE Order 

5000.38, "Occurrence Reporting and 

Processing of Operations Information." The 

' two reportable environmental occurrences 

for 1997 on NTS facilities appear in Table 

3.2. An analysis of occurrences for 1997 as 

required by the Order showed that there 

were four main reasons for them: (1) 

management problems - 25 percent, (2) 

personnel error - 21 percent, (3) procedural 

problems - 12 percent, and (4) external 

phenomena - 38 percent. 

LEGAL ACTIONS 

DOE/NV was not involved with any legal 

actions during 1997. 

3.3 PERMIT SUMMARY 

For facilities used in the operation and 

maintenance of the NTS and non-NTS 

facilities, the contractors providing such 

operation and support activities for the 

DOE/NV have been granted numerous 

permits by the appropriate regulatory 

authorities. In addition to the existing 

number of permits in 1997 (Table 3.1), the 

EOD Facility and the Area 5 Storage Facility 

of the RCRA Part B permit application were 

permitted, while the other units in the 

application are in various stages of the 

NEPD review for permission to construct or 

operate. 

3-22 
Table 3.1 Environmental Permit Summary - 1997 

NTS 

Las Vegas Area 

Operations Office 

Amador Valley 

Operations 

Los Alamos 

Operations 

Special Technologies 

Laboratory (Santa 

Barbara) 

TOTAL 

Number of 

EPA Hazardous 

Air Drinking Waste Generator Materials Endangered 

Pollution Wastewater Water Disposal User IDS Storage Permit Species Act 

5 7 7 4 1 (a) 3 2 

I 2(b) 1 1 (a) 2 

1 1 

1 2 2 1 ~~ 

18 10 7 4 5 7 2 

(a) Biennial Report Required. 

(b) Routine Monitoring of Emissions is Not Required. 
.. ~~~~ 

Table 3.2 NTS Recycling Activities ~ 1997 

Material Quantity 

Office Paper 

Aluminum (bulk) 

Aluminum cans 

Used Motor Oil 

Cable and copper 

Iron and steel 

Batteries 

Lead 

Toner Cartridges 

Silver Recovery 

Tritium 

Tires 

Chemical and material exchanges 

(a) mt - metric ton (1,000 kg) 

278.63 mt(a) 

35.9 mt 

7.39 mt 

29.9 mt 

22.68 mt 

183.19 mt 

38.66 mt 

2.56 mt 

2.80 mt 

.01 mt 

874 curies 

48.1 mt 

212.12 mt 

Table 3.3 Off-Normal Occurrences at NTS F'acilities 

- Date 

0 1 /22/97 

0412 8 /97 

Report Number Description 

NVOO-BNLV-NTS1997-0002 A small fuel leak under a piece of 

heavy equipment was discovered in 

August 1!396. After the equipment was 

removed and remediation started in 

January '1 997, the extent of the cleanup 

was sufficient for required notification. 

NVOO-BNLV-NTS1997-0006 

A drum of compressor oil leaked 

about 35 gallons on the ground 

Status 

Complete 

Complete 

3-24 
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

4.0 AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

The air surveillance activities consist of monitoring and compliance 

programs for the Nevada Test Site (NTS), near offsite areas, and support 

facilities. These activities include radiological and nonradiological 

monitoring and environmental permit and operations compliance. There are 

two radiological monitoring programs associated with the NTS, one onsite 

and the other offsite. The onsite program is conducted by Bechtel Nevada 

(BN), the operations & maintenance contractor for the NTS. BN is 

responsible for NTS air surveillance, effluent monitoring, and ambient 

gamma radiation monitoring. The offsite program is conducted by the 

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Center for Environmental 

Restoration, Monitoring and Emergency Response of the Radiation & Indoor 

Environments National Laboratory in Las Vegas, Nevada (R&IE-LV). Nonradiological air monitoring is primarily for permit compliance. 

4.1 ONSITE RADIOLOGICAL 

t the NTS, radiological effluents may 

originate from tunnels, underground 

test sites (at or near surface ground 

zeros), resuspension of surface 

deposits, and facilities where radioactive 

materials are either used, processed, stored, 

or discharged. All of these sources have the 

potential to, or are known to, discharge 

radioactive effluents into the environment. 

Two types of monitoring operations are used 

for these sources: (1) effluent monitoring, 

which measures radioactive material 

collected at the point of discharge; and (2) 

environmental surveillance, which measures 

radioactivity in the general environment. 

Table 4.1 is a summary of the routine air 

surveillance program, as of the end of 1997. 

Air sampling was conducted for radioactive 

particulates, noble gases, and tritiated water 

(HTO) vapor. The air sampling locations are 

shown in Figure 4.1 and Figure 4.2 shows 

the locations where ambient gamma 

radiation monitoring is conducted on the 

NTS using thermoluminescent dosimeters 

(TLDs) 

A 

CRITERIA 

Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 

50, "National Primary and Secondary 

Ambient Air Quality Standards" (CFR 1971) 

and Title 40 CFR 61 ,"National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants," 

Subpart H, "Emission of Radionuclides Other 

Than Radon from Department of Energy 

Facilities" (CFR 1989) issued by the EPA are 

the primary drivers for air monitoring 

programs. In turn, the U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE) published DOE Order 5400.1, 

"General Environmental Protection 

Program," (DOE 1990b) which establishes 

environmental protection program 

requirements, authorities, and 

responsibilities for DOE operations. These 

mandates require compliance with 

applicable federal, state, and local 

environmental protection regulations. Other 

DOE directives applicable to environmental 

monitoring include DOE Order 5480.1 1, 

"Radiation Protection for Occupational 

Workers" (DOE 1990e), DOE Order 

5480.1 B, "Environment, Safety, and Health 

Program for DOE Operations" (DOE 1990d); 

DOE Order 5484.1, "Environmental 

Protection, Safety, and Health Protection 

Information Reporting Requirements" (DOE 

1990f); DOE Order 5400.5, "Radiation 

Protection of the Public and the 

Environment" (DOE 1990~); and 

DOE/EH-O173T, "Environmental Regulatory 

Guide for Radiological Effluent Monitoring 

and Environmental Surveillance" 

(DOE 1991d). 

4- 1 
I I 

Figure 4.1 Air Sampling Stations on the NTS - 1997 

4-2 
N 

@ Boundary TLD Stations 

+ TLD Stations 

io 5 0 5 10 

MILES 

10 5 0 5 10 

KILOMETERS 

I I -.- - - 

11-1,- 

Figure 4.2 TLD Stations on the NTS - 1997 

4-3 
AIRBORNE EFFLUENT 

MONITORING 

Airborne radioactive effluents are the 

emissions on the NTS with the greatest 

potential for reaching members of the public. 

For all activities on the NTS, the estimated 

effective dose equivalent to any member of 

the public offsite from all airborne 

radionuclide emissions continues to be 

much less than one mrem/yr (~10% ofthe 

guideline). Compliance with the regulations 

listed above requires periodic measurements 

of effluents to confirm the low emission 

levels. The estimated effluents for 1997 are 

shown in Table 4.5 and include measured 

and calculated effluents, evaporated liquids, 

and resuspension of contaminated soils. 

An increase in efforts to monitor radioactive 

air emissions at the NTS began in November 

1988 as a result of requirements in DOE 

Order 5400.1. Known and potential effluent 

sources throughout the NTS were assessed 

for their potential to contribute to public dose 

and were considered in designing the “Site 

Effluent Monitoring Plan”, which forms part 

of the “Environmental Monitoring Plan, 

Nevada Test Site and Support Facilities’’ 

published in November 1991 (DOE 1991~). 

This plan was updated in 1992 and 1993, 

but will be superseded by a “Routine 

Radiological Environmental Monitoring Plan” 

that is in review and will be completed in 

1998. 

ENVIRONMENTAL 

SURVEILLANCE 

Air surveillance was conducted onsite 

throughout the NTS. Equipment at fixed 

locations continuously sampled the ambient 

air to monitor for radioactive material 

content. Ambient gamma exposures were 

measured with TLDs placed at fixed 

locations. 

AIR MONITORING 

The air surveillance program operated 

samplers that were designed to detect 

airborne radioactive particles, radioactive 

noble gases, and 3H, as water vapor in the 

form of 3H3H0 or 3HH0 (HTO). 

The air sampling units used to measure 

radioactive particulates were operated at 48 

stations on the NTS (Figure 4.1 ) and Nellis 

Air Force Range Complex (NAFRC) during 

1997, These stations included 13 at 

radioactive waste management facilities. 

Access, worker population, geographical 

coverage, presence of radioactivity, and 

availability of electrical power were 

considerations in site selection for air 

samplers. During 1996, air samplers 

powered by solar photovoltaichattery 

systems were acquired for operation in 

contaminated areas where commercial 

power was not available and were in use 

during 1997. 

An air sampling unit consisted of a constant 

volume pump drawing approximately 85 

Umin (3 cfm) of air through a 9-cm (3.5-in) 

diameter Whatman GF/A glass-fiber filter 

that trapped air particulates. Due to the 

moratorium on nuclear explosives testing, 

charcoal cartridges are no longer used in the 

air sampler. The particulate filter was 

mounted in a plastic, cone-shaped sample 

holder that faced downward at a height of 

1.5 rn (5 ft) above ground. A run-time clock 

measured the operating time. The clock 

time multiplied by 85 Umin yields the volume 

of air sampled, which was about 860 m3 

(30,000 ft3) during the typical 7-day sampling 

period. 

The filters were analyzed for gross alpha, 

gross beta, and for gamma-emitting 

radionuclides. The filters from the Area 5 

Radioactive Waste Management Site 

(RWMS-5) samplers were not analyzed for 

gross alpha. The filters from 13 weeks of 

sampling were composited and analyzed for 

plutonium isotopes. Noble gases were 

continuously sampled at three locations and 

analyzed for *’Kr. These sampling units 

were housed in a metal tool box and 

consisted of three metal air bottles attached 

to the sampling unit with short hoses. A 

vacuum was maintained on the first bottle by 

pumping the sample into the other two 

bottles. The two collection bottles were 

exchanged weekly and contained a sample 

volume of about 400 L (14 ft3) each at 

standard conditions. 

4-4 
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES . ........................................... ...................................................... .. . .. ..... ........... . ............................................................................................................................ __..___II_____.____......~........ 

Airborne HTO vapor was monitored at 13 

locations throughout the NTS. For this 

monitoring, a small pump continuously drew 

air into the sampler at approximately 0.4 

Umin, the total volume being measured with 

a dry-gas meter. The HTO vapor was 

removed from the air stream by a silica-gel 

drying column followed by a drierite column, 

for detection of breakthrough. These 

columns were exchanged biweekly. 

The analytical procedures used on all these 

air samples are summarized in Table 4.2. 

AMBIENT GAMMA MONITORING 

Ambient gamma monitoring was conducted 

at 166 stations within the NTS (Figure 4.2) 

by use of TLDs. The dosimeter used was 

the Panasonic UD-814AS environmental 

dosimeter, consisting of four elements 

housed in an air-tight, water-tight, 

ultraviolet-light-protected case. One 

element, made of lithium borate, was only 

slightly shielded in order to measure lowenergy radiation. The other three elements, 

made of calcium sulfate, were shielded by 

1,000 mg/cm2 of plastic and lead to monitor 

penetrating gamma radiation only. TLDs 

were deployed in a holder placed about one 

meter above the ground and were 

exchanged quarterly. Locations were 

chosen at the site boundary, at locations 

where historical monitoring has occurred, or 

where operations or ground contamination 

have occurred. 

The TLD network at the NTS in 1997 began 

with 160 TLDs at fixed locations. During the 

year, two new stations were established 

near the U3co crater in Area 3, four new 

stations were established outside the fenced 

area of the RWMS-3 and 18 stations around 

the Mounds Strategic Materials storage 

compounds in Area 5 were terminated after 

the radioactive materials were shipped out to 

a uranium reprocessing facility to recover 

uranium. Throughout the year, TLDs were 

used at a total of 166 locations. At the end 

of the year, 63 stations were terminated and 

15 new stations were added reducing the 

total to 100 stations. 

WASTE MANAGEMENT SITE 

MONITORING 

Environmental surveillance on the NTS 

included monitoring of RWMSs. These sites 

are used for the disposal of low-level 

radioactive waste from the NTS and other 

DOE facilities. Shallow-land disposal in 

trenches and pits was done at the RWMS-5 

and in subsidence craters at the 

RWMS-3. 

There were 17 air particulate sampling 

stations, 9 HTO vapor sampling stations, 

and 48 TLD stations placed inside and 

around RWMS-5 at the beginning of 1997. 

The site was assessed using site specific 

monitoring data, and it was determined that 

the facility could be adequately monitored 

with 7 air particulate and 4 HTO samplers, 

with no change in TLDs. The RWMS-3 was 

monitored by four air particulate stations, 

one HTO sampling station, and by nine TLD 

stations. 

4.2 OFFSITE RADIOLOGICAL 

MONITORING 

Under the terms of an Interagency 

Agreement between DOE and EPAs Off ice 

of Radiation and Indoor Air, the R&IE-LV 

conducts an Offsite Radiation Safety 

Program (ORSP) around the NTS. The 

primary activity of the ORSP is routine 

monitoring of potential human exposure 

pathways. Secondary activities include 

maintaining readiness to monitor during 

nuclear testing, emergency response, public 

information, and community assistance. 

Maintaining readiness was exercised during 

two subcritical experiments conducted in 

1997, REBOUND and HOLOG. For each of 

the two experiments, R&lE-LV senior 

personnel served on the Test Controller's 

Scientific Advisory Panel and on the EPA 

offsite radiological safety staff. 

4-5 
Routine offsite environmental monitoring for 

compliance with National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

(NESHAPs) and with DOE orders 5400.1 

and 5400.5 continued throughout 1997. 

9 

Environmental monitoring networks, 

described in following Chapters, measure 

radioactivity in air (this chapter), 

groundwater (Chapter 5), and milk (Chapter 

6). These networks monitor the major 

potential pathways for transfer of 

radionuclides to man. Ambient gamma 

radiation levels are monitored using ReuterStokes pressurized ion chambers (PICs) and 

Panasonic TLDs. Data from these networks 

are used to calculate an annual exposure to 

the offsite residents. 

The Community Technical Liaison Program 

(CTLP), formerly Community Radiation 

Monitoring Program (CRMP), stations that 

were established at prominent locations in a 

number of communities around the NTS, 

continued to operate. The CTLP stations 

are managed by local residents and contain 

air samplers, PICs, and TLDs. The Desert 

Research Institute (DRI), University and 

Community College System of Nevada, is a 

cooperator with R&lE-LV in the CTLP. 

AIR SURVEILLANCE NETWORK 

(ASW 

The inhalation of radioactive airborne 

particles can be a major pathway for human 

exposure to radiation. The atmospheric 

monitoring networks are designed to detect 

environmental radioactivity from both NTS 

and non-NTS activities. Data from 

atmospheric monitoring can be used to 

determine the concentration and source of 

airborne radioactivity and to project the 

fallout patterns and durations of exposure to 

man. 

The ASN is currently designed to monitor 

the areas within approximately 130 km (80 

mi) of the NTS. During calendar year (CY) 

1997, the ASN consisted of 20 continuously 

operating sampling stations. High-volume 

air samplers were operational at six of the 

stations. The current network is shown in 

Figure 4.3. Station location depends in part 

on the availability of electrical power and a 

resident willing to operate the equipment. 

The low-volume air samplers at each station 

are equipped to collect particulate 

radionuclides on 5-cm (2.0-in) diameter 

glass-fiber filters at a flow rate of about 80 

m3 (2,800 ft3) per day. Filters are changed 

weekly (approximately 560 m3 or 20,000 ft3 

of air sampled). Activated charcoal 

cartridges placed directly behind the filters to 

collect gaseous radioiodine are changed at 

the same time as the fiber filters. Highvolume air samplers collect particulates on 

20- x 25-cm (8- x 1 O-in) glass-fiber filters at 

a flow rate of approximately 1,600 m3 

(58,000 ft3) per day. High-volume samples 

are collected monthly (approximately 

48,000 m3, or 1.7 million ft3 of air sampled). 

Duplicate air samples are collected from two 

routine ASN stations each week. The 

duplicate samplers are operated at randomly 

selected stations for three months and then 

moved to new locations. One duplicate 

high-volume sampler is operated in the same 

manner as the duplicate low-volume samplers. 

At the R&IE-LV, both the glass-fiber filters 

and the charcoal cartridges from low-volume 

samplers are analyzed by high-resolution 

gamma spectrometry. Each of the glassfiber filters is then analyzed for gross alpha 

and gross beta activity 7 to 14 days after 

sample collection to allow time for the decay 

of naturally occurring radon progeny. Filters 

from high-volume air samplers are analyzed 

using high-resolution gamma spectrometry 

and are then analyzed for plutonium 

isotopes using wet chemistry methods. 

THERMOLUMINESCENT 

DOSIMETRY (TLD) NETWORK 

An essential component of environmental 

radiological assessments is external 

dosimetry, which is used to determine both 

individual and population exposure to 

ambient radiation, natural or otherwise. 

4-6 
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTlVlTlES 

1 

T-------- ----------_________ I--- 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

NEVADA I UTAH I 

I 1 1 I 

I 1 I I 

I I I I 

I I I I 

I I 1 I 

I I 

I Delta I 

I I I I 

I I I I 

I 

1 

I 

I 

I PYRAMID 

LAKE 

I 

I 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ Stone 

\ 

Milford I 

I 

I 

Furnace Creek$ \ ARIZONA 

\ 

\I 

\ 

UCTLP (Lo-Volume Air, PIC, TLD) (IO) 

CTLP + Hi-Volume Air Sampler (6) 

* PIC Station (6) 

+Lo-Volume Air Sampler & PIC (3) 

0 Lo-Volume Air Sampler (1) 

A CTLP (PIC & TLD Only) (1) \1. \ 

\ 

Scale in Miles 

0 50 100 150 

Scale in Kilometers 

dote: Real time data transmittal. 

Figure 4.3 CTLP, PIC, and Air Sampling Locations Around the NTS 

4-7 
The primary purpose of EPA’s offsite 

environmental dosimetry program is to 

establish dose estimates to populations 

living in the areas surrounding the NTS. 

Panasonic Model UD-814 TLDs are used for 

environmental monitoring. The UD-814 

consists of one element of Li,B,O,:Cu and 

three elements of CaS0,:Tm phosphors. 

The CaS0,:Tm elements are behind a filter 

of approximately 1,000 mg/cm2. An average 

of the corrected values for the latter three 

elements gives the total exposure for each 

TLD. For quality assurance purposes, two 

UD-814 TLDs are deployed at each fixed 

environmental station location. The TLDs 

are exchanged quarterly. 

In addition to a fixed environmental TLD, 

EPA deploys personnel TLDs to individual 

volunteers, predominantly CTLP station 

managers and their alternates, living in 

areas surrounding the NTS. 

Panasonic Model UD-802 TLDs are used for 

personnel monitoring. The UD-802 consists 

of two elements, each of Li,B,O,:Cu and 

CaS0,:Tm phosphors. The phosphors are 

behind filters of approximately 17,300,300 

and 1,000 mg/cm2 respectively. With the 

use of different phosphors and filtrations, a 

dose algorithm can be applied to ratios of 

the different element responses. This 

process defines the radiation type and 

energy and provides data for assessing an 

absorbed dose equivalent to the 

participating individuals. These TLDs are 

also exchanged quarterly. 

An average daily exposure rate was 

calculated for each quarterly exposure 

period and the average of the four values 

was multiplied by 365.25 to obtain the total 

annual exposure for a station. New 

computers and software were installed to 

increase report options, and further 

hardware upgrades were completed in 1997. 

In 1997, the TLD program consisted of 39 

fixed environmental monitoring stations and 

18 offsite personnel. Figure 4.4 shows the 

fixed environmental TLD monitoring stations 

and the location of personnel monitoring 

participants. 

PRESSURIZED ION CHAMBER 

(PIC) NETWORK 

The PIC network uses Reuter-Stokes 

models 101 1, 1012, and 101 3 PES. The 

PIC is a spherical shell filled with argon gas 

at 25 times atmospheric pressure. In the 

center of the shell is a spherical electrode 

with an electrical charge opposite to the 

shell. When gamma radiation penetrates the 

sphere, ionization of the gas occurs and the 

negative ions are collected by the center 

electrode. The current generated is 

proportional to the radiation exposure. 

The PIC measures gamma radiation 

exposure rates and because of its 

sensitivity, may detect low-level exposures 

not detected by other monitoring methods. 

The primary function of the PIC network is to 

detect changes in ambient gamma radiation 

due to human activities. In the absence of 

such activities, ambient gamma radiation 

rates naturally differ among locations as 

they may change with altitudes (cosmic 

radiation), with radioactivity in the soil 

(terrestrial radiation), and may vary slightly 

within a location due to weather patterns. 

Data are currently recorded on magnetized 

recorder tapes, memory data cartridges, and 

strip chart recorders. Previously, data 

collection was performed by satellite 

telemetry for immediate access to the PIC 

data. In October 1997, the funding for 

support and maintenance of the Los Alamos 

National Laboratory (LANL) satellite 

telemetry system, which allowed EPA 

access to near real-time data, was 

discontinued. Currently, the PlCs are visited 

weekly at the stations immediately adjacent 

to the NTS and monthly at the other stations 

to retrieve data. €PA stations in Boulder 

City, Henderson, Las Vegas, and 

Mississippi, display gamma and 

4-8 
Personnel (18) 

0 Stations (39) 

Smle in Miles 

OM 0 50 100 150 

Scale in Kilometers I 

- 

I 

I 

1 

I 

I 

I 

t 

i 

1 

t 

I 

I 

I 

I 

il 

I 

Figure 4.4 Locations of Offsite Station and Personnel TLDs 

4-9 
meteorological data near real-time on the 

LANL NEWNET web page which is updated 

every 24 hours. 

There are 26 PlCs located in communities 

around the NTS and 1 in Mississippi. The 

Boulder City station was relocated and 

returned to operation on August 19, 1997, at 

St. Judes Ranch, approximately a quarter 

mile northeast of the previous site. The 

locations of the PIC stations around the NTS 

are shown in Figure 4.3. 

COMMUNITY TECHNICAL LIAISON 

PROGRAM (CTLP) 

Because of the successful experience with 

the Citizen's Monitoring Program during the 

purging of the Three Mile Island containment 

in 1980, the CRMP was begun. Because of 

reductions in the scope of monitoring, the 

CRMP was changed to the CTLP. It now 

consists of stations located in the states of 

Nevada and Utah. In 1997, there were 17 

stations located in these two states. The 

CTLP is a cooperative project of the DOE, 

EPA, and DRI. 

DOE/NV sponsors the program. The EPA 

provides technical and scientific direction, 

maintains the instrumentation and sampling 

equipment, analyzes the collected samples, 

and interprets and reports the data. The 

DRI administers the program by hiring the 

local station managers and alternates, 

securing rights-of-way, providing utilities, 

and pedorming additional quality assurance 

checks of the data. Shown in Figure 4.3 are 

the locations of the CTLP stations. 

Each station is operated by a local resident. 

In most cases, this resident is a high-school 

science teacher. Samples are analyzed at 

the R&IE-LV. Data interpretation is provided 

by DRI to the communities involved. All of 

the 17 CTLP stations had one of the 

samplers for the ASN and Noble Gas and 

Tritium Surveillance Network, on either 

routine or standby status, and a TLD. In 

addition, a PIC and recorder for immediate 

readout of external gamma exposure and a 

recording barograph are located at all 

stations. All of the equipment is mounted on 

a stand at a prominent location in each 

community so the residents can become 

aware of the surveillance and, if interested, 

can check the data. Also, computergenerated reports of the PIC data are issued 

monthly for each station. 

4.3 NONRADIOLOGICAL 

MON IT0 RING 

The 1997 nonradiological monitoring 

program for the NTS included onsite 

sampling of various environmental media 

and substances for compliance with federal 

and state regulations or permits and for 

ecological studies as discussed in Chapters 

5 and 6. Air quality monitoring is not 

required for the NTS. The air permits issued 

by the state of Nevada do require opacity 

and material throughput measurements. In 

1997, nonradiological monitoring was 

conducted for two series of tests conducted 

at the Hazardous Material Spill Center 

(HSC) on the NTS. 

MONITORING OF NTS 

OPERATIONS 

ROUTINE MONITORING 

As there were no industrial-type production 

facility operations on the NTS, there was no 

significant production of nonradiological air 

emissions or liquid discharges to the 

environment. Sources of potential 

contaminants were limited to construction 

support and NTS operational activities. This 

included motor pool facilities; large 

equipment and drill rig maintenance areas; 

cleaning, warehousing, and supply facilities; 

and general worker support facilities 

(including lodging and administrative offices) 

in the Mercury Base Camp, Area 12 Camp, 

and to a lesser extent in Area 20 and the 

NTS Control Point (CP) Complex in Area 6. 

4-1 0 
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

The HSC in Area 5 is a source of potential 

release of nonradiological contaminants to 

the environment, depending on the individual 

tests conducted. In 1997, there were two 

series of tests, involving 38 different 

chemicals, conducted at this facility. 

Routine nonradiological environmental 

monitoring on the NTS in 1997 was limited to 

Nevada operating permit requirements, and 

asbestos sampling in conjunction with 

asbestos removal and renovation projects 

and in accordance with occupational safety 

and NESHAPs compliance. 

NTS AIR QUALITY PERMIT COMPLIANCE 

Compliance with air quality permits is 

accomplished through permit reporting and 

renewals, and ongoing verification of 

operational compliance with permit specified 

limitations. Common air pollution sources at 

the NTS include aggregate production, 

stemming activities, surface disturbances, 

fugitive dust from unpaved roads, fuel 

burning equipment, open burning, and fuel 

storage facilities. The 1996 Air Quality 

Permit Data Report was sent to the state of 

Nevada on February 21,1997. During 1996, 

approximately six tons of pollutants were 

emitted from operations at the NTS. This 

report includes aggregate production, 

operating hours of permitted equipment, and 

a report of all surface disturbances of five 

acres or greater. In order to provide 

consistency in responses, the state provided 

forms to be completed, which also required 

calculation of actual emissions. 

NTS air quality permits limit particulate 

emissions to 20 percent opacity. 

Certification of personnel to perform valid 

visible emission opacity evaluations is 

required by the state, with recertification 

required every six months. During 1997, 

one BN Environmental Compliance 

Department employee was recertified. In 

1 997, several visible emission evaluations 

were conducted of permitted air quality point 

sources. When visual evaluations determine 

that an emission exceeds the opacity 

requirement, corrective action is initiated. 

No exceedances of the opacity limit were 

noted in 1997. 

During 1997, state of Nevada personnel 

conducted two inspections of NTS 

equipment regulated by air quality operating 

permits. In January 1997, the state 

conducted an inspection to verify process 

flow diagrams for all permitted facilities prior 

to issuance of the NTS Class II Air Quality 

Operating Permit. In June 1997, a state 

inspector returned to conduct an annual 

inspection of permitted facilities. There were 

no findings reported as a result of these 

inspections. 

OFFSITE MONITORING 

The HSC was established in the Frenchman 

Basin in Area 5 as a basic research tool for 

studying the dynamics of accidental 

releases of various hazardous materials and 

the effectiveness of mitigation procedures. 

At the beginning of each HSC test series 

and at other tests in the series depending on 

projected need, a field monitoring technician 

from the EPA with appropriate air sampling 

equipment is deployed downwind of the test 

at the NTS boundary to measure chemical 

concentrations that may have reached the 

offsite area. No such monitoring occurred in 

1997. 

NON-NTS FACILITY MONITORING 

Under normal conditions, the operations at 

the six non-NTS facilities operated by BN for 

DOE/NV do not produce radioactive 

effluents. The six are, (1) the North Las 

Vegas Facility (NLVF), (2) the Remote 

Sensing Laboratory (RSL), (3) the Special 

Technologies Laboratory (STL), (4) the 

Amador Valley Operation (AVO), (5) the Los 

Alamos Operation (LAO), and (6) the 

Washington Aerial Measurements Operation 

(WAMO) . 

Air quality operating permits were required 

for three of the six non-NTS operations. 

4-1 1 
There were no effluent monitoring 

requirements associated with these permits. 

Nineteen emission units at the Las Vegas 

Area Operation (LVAO), which includes the 

NLVF and the RSL, were regulated during 

1997 under conditions of 13 permits issued 

by the Clark County Health District in Las 

Vegas, Nevada. 

The STL of Santa Barbara, California, holds 

a permit, issued by the county of Santa 

Barbara, to operate a vapor degreaser. The 

Air Pollution Control District Permit 

conditions include throughput limitations and 

record keeping requirements. 

No air permits were held or required for the 

AVO, LAO, or WAMO facilities in 1997. 

AIR QUALITY PERMITS 

Air quality permits were required for 

numerous locations at the NTS and at two 

non-NTS facilities in Las Vegas. The 

permits required for 1997 are listed in Table 

4.3. The permits required in 1997 for other 

non-NTS facilities that support the work of 

DOE/NV are listed in Table 4.4. 

4.4 AIR SURVEILLANCE 

PROGRAM RESULTS 

ONSITE RADIOLOGICAL 

MONITORING 

AIRBORNE EFFLUENTS 

During 1997, effluent monitoring at the NTS 

involved several operational facilities and 

some inactive locations. Due to the 

continuation of the moratorium on nuclear 

testing throughout 1997, effluent monitoring 

for nuclear tests was not required. The 

results of effluent monitoring, calculated or 

measured, are set forth in Table 4.5. The 

total curies of radioactivity included in Table 

4.5 are less than were reported in the “1996 

Annual Site Environmental Report” because 

of smaller tritium emissions. 

AIR SAMPLING RESULTS 

GROSS ALPHA 

The annual average gross alpha results for 

each air sampling station are shown in Table 

4.6. The NTS average gross alpha result 

was 1.7 x 1 0-15 pCi/mL (63 pBq/m3), only 

7 percent higher than the median minimum 

detectable concentration (MDC). This 

average was slightly lower than the 1996 

value. The samples from the NAFRC were 

all higher than the NTS average at 

2.2 x I O-I5 pCi/mL (81 pBq/m3). 

The samples collected from the air samplers 

at the low-level radioactive waste disposal 

facility in RWMS-3 had gross alpha levels 

slightly above the NTS average. Previous 

investigations have not discovered the 

source for gross alpha radioactivity in air. 

The air samples from RWMS-5 were not 

analyzed for gross alpha radioactivity. 

GROSS BETA 

The annual average gross beta results for 

each air sampling station are shown in 

Figure 4.5 and Figure 4.6 indicates the 

distribution of this radioactivity. The NTS 

average this year is the same as for 1996 at 

2.0 x I 0-14 pCi/mL (0.74 mBq/m3). The air 

samples from the NAFRC had the same 

average value. This is consistent with the 

results for the past few years. Figure 4.7 

depicts the trend in concentration for the 

past few years, but expressed as percent 

Derived Concentration Guide (DCG) (set by 

the EPA as 10 mrem per year for inhaled 

radioactivity). Note that the levels are only . about 2 percent of the DCG. This guide is 

for public exposure and is based on ”Sr, 

once a common beta emitting isotope in the 

environment. The basic data are in 

Table 4.6. 

Air samples from RWMS-3 had gross beta 

levels that were consistent with the NTS 

average value, while those from RWMS-5 

were slightly higher than the average. 

PLUTONIUM 

The annual average 238Pu result of 6.7 x 

1 O-” pCi/mL (2.5 pBq/m3) is less than the 

median MDC for this isotope and less than 

4-1 2 
Figure 4.5 Annual Average Gross Beta from Air Sampling - 1997 

N 

4-1 3 
e 2.2 

N 

I 

i 

10.22 

11.5 

Pit No. ! 

m0.18 

'-----__ Pit No. 3 

TRU Pad Building 

2.4 0 0.14 

0 2.2 

I 0.3 

@ 3.7 

2.2 

0.25 0 Annual Average Gross Beta (1Q'4pCi/mL) 

6 Annual Average HTO in Air (10'' pCiimL Air) 

6 8.5 Annual Average Pu (1 O-"pCi/rnL) 

Figure 4.6 Air Monitoring Results for RWMS-5 - 1997 

on the NTS as a percent dose [base on 

Strontium-90) to members of the public 

assuming they could live onsite all year. 

............................................................................................ ~ IO 

t3 

8 

B 

id 

t a P) P 4, 

-1 

,o 

................................................ 

- 

1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1990 1997 

Cailendar Year I Figure 4.7 Trend in Annual Average Gross Beta Concentration in Air on the NTS 

4-1 4 
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

the 1996 average. The results from the 

NAFRC were similar. Only 5 of the 45 

stations had results slightly greater than the 

MDC. The annual averages for 238Pu and for 

239+240Pu are included in Table 4.6. 

The 239+240Pu network average of 1.9 x 1 O-I7 

pCi/mL (0.7 pBq/m3) was about eight times 

the MDC but was less than the 1996 

average value. To indicate the distribution 

of this nuclide over the NTS, the annual 

average concentration for each station is 

plotted in Figure 4.8 (see Figure 4.6 for 

RWMS-5). The elevated values in Area 3 

are evident therein. The maximum offsite 

concentration, at Rachel, Nevada, (see 

Table 4.1 5) was 1.8 x 10"' pCi/mL (0.7 

pBq/m3), about equal to the onsite average 

and much less than the onsite maximum 

concentrations. Of the NAFRC samples, the 

set from CLEAN SLATE I had the highest 

concentration of any station on- or offsite, 

perhaps because of cleanup activities at that 

location in the summer of 1997. The trend 

of the NTS site-wide 239+240Pu concentration 

with time for the past few years is shown on 

Figure 4.9. There the data are plotted as a 

percent of the DCG for the general 

population as was done for the gross beta 

data above. The peak in the curve in 1992 

was due to increased concentrations during 

the summer of 1992 in Area 3, which was 

probably due to increased vehicular traffic 

and construction activities. 

Air samples from RWMS-3 have 

concentrations of plutonium generally above 

the NTS average, while those from RWMS-5 

are generally lower than the NTS average, 

as they are this year. 

GAMMA 

Gamma spectral analyses of the glass-fiber 

filters indicated only naturally occurring 

radioactive materials. The predominant one 

was 'Be formed by cosmic ray interaction 

with nitrogen'in the atmosphere. The annual 

average values for this isotope are shown in 

Table 4.6 and the NTS average of 2.1 x 

pCi/mL (7.8 mBq/m3) is similar to the value 

for 1996. The concentrations in samples 

from the NAFRC were all much lower at 

1.2 x 10 -I3 pCi/mL (4.4 mBq/m3). 

Concentrations of 7Be in air samples from 

both RWMS-3 and RWMS-5 were about 10 

percent higher than the NTS average value. 

NOBLE GASSES 

There were only three locations on the NTS 

where samples were collected for analysis of 

radioactive noble gasses. There is a 

sampler at the BJY location, one in Area 19, 

and one in Area 20. Only 85Kr is detected in 

these samples at present. The annual 

average of these three stations was 

27 x 1 O-I2 pCi/mL (1 Bq/m3), consistent with 

previous results for this isotope. The 

analytical data are summarized in Table 4.7. 

TRITIATED WATER VAPOR (HTO) 

The annual average value for the 13 stations 

in this network was 4.2 x 1 0-6 pCi/mL (0.2 

Bq/m3). This concentration is slightly higher 

than it was in 1996 as each station had a 

slightly higher concentration. All of the data 

are displayed in Table 4.8 and are plotted as 

a trend over the last several years in Figure 

4.1 0. The data plotted in Figure 4.1 0 are the 

network average concentration of HTO in 

each year expressed as a percent of the 

DCG for the general offsite population. 

Although there has been a slight downward 

trend over the period plotted, all values are 

less than 0.2 percent of the DCG. 

The HTO concentrations for the two stations 

near RWMS-3 were less than the network 

average. However, two of the four stations 

around the RWMS-5 had concentrations 

exceeding the network average, as has 

generally occurred. This is related to the 

tritium disposed of at this site. 

TREND AT THE WASTE MANAGEMENT 

SITES 

The trends in air concentrations of HTO in 

atmospheric moisture and plutonium at 

RWMS-3 and RWMS-5 are set forth in 

4-1 5 
N 

c 

Ill 

iii 

Ill 

111 

111 

I I 

i 

I r 26 

Figure 4.8 Annual Average 239+240Pu in Air on the NTS - 1997 

5.1 

0 

4-1 6 
E a, 

6 

I o3 

f Note: Atmospheric Plutonium Concentration 

on the NTS as a percent dose to members 

of the public assuming they could live 

onsite all year. - 

n 

1 OL 

IO' 

1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 

Calendar Year 

Figure 4.9 Trend in Annual Averages for Plutonium Concentration on the NTS 

100 

Note: Atmospheric Tritium Concentration 

IO2 I 

on the NTS as a percent dose to members 

of the public assuming they could live 

onsite all year. 4 --I 

IO' 

1 oo 

10 

(3 

0 

n 

'E 

2 

a 

a, 

a, 

0.01 

1989 1990 1.991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 

Calendar Year 

Figure 4.1 0 Trend in Annual Averages for HTO Concentration on the NTS 

4-1 7 
Tables 4.9 and 4.1 0, respectively. There 

appears to be a trend of decreasing 239+240Pu 

and HTO concentration at RWMS-5 but not 

at RWMS-3. 

ONSITE TLD RESULTS 

The 1997 average exposure for the 16 

boundary monitoring stations was 127 

mR/year, essentially the same as the 

average value of 124 mR/yr for these 

stations in 1996 (see Table 4.1 1). Also, the 

1997 average exposure for the nine 

historically monitored stations was 0.26 

mR/day (95 mR/yr), as shown in Table 4.12. 

The results for these stations for the last 

four years have been almost identical. 

Both sets of results indicate that external 

radiation measured by TLDs has not 

changed to any measurable extent, at least 

for the last few years. 

OFFSITE RADIOLOGICAL 

RESULTS 

AIR SAMPLING RESULTS 

This section describes results for the offsite 

ASN. This atmospheric monitoring network 

measures the major radionuclides which 

could potentially be emitted from activities 

on the NTS, as well as naturally occurring 

radionuclides. The ASN represents the 

possible inhalation exposure pathway for the 

general public. 

Gamma spectrometry was performed on all 

samples from the ASN high and low volume 

air samplers. The majority of the samples 

were gamma-spectrum negligible (i.e., no 

gamma-emitting radionuclides detected). 

Naturally occurring 7Be was detected 

occasionally by the low-volume network of 

samplers. It was detected consistently by 

the high-volume sample method with an 

average annual activity of 1.5 x 1 

slightly less then the onsite average. 

pCi/mL! 

GROSS ALPHA 

Gross alpha analysis was performed on all 

low-volume network samples. The average 

annual gross alpha activity was 2.0 x 1 O-I5 

pCi/mL (73 pBq/m3), slightly higher than the 

onsite results. Summary results for the ASN 

are shown in Table 4.1 3. 

GROSS BETA 

As in previous years, the gross beta results 

from the low-volume sampling network 

consistently exceeded the analytical MDC. 

The annual average gross beta activity was 

1.5 f 0.60 x 1 O-I4 pCi/mL (5.5 * 2.2 x 1 O'4 

Bq/m3), somewhat lower than the results for 

the onsite network. Summary gross beta 

results for the ASN are in Table 4.14. 

PLUTONIUM 

High-volume samples were collected 

monthly and analyzed for plutonium 

isotopes. Due to a low limit of detection for 

high-volume sampling and analysis 

methods, environmental levels of 239+240Pu 

were consistently detected at all six of the 

sampling sites. A total of 66 samples were 

analyzed during the CY, of which 52 were 

above the MDC for 239+240Pu, and 13 were 

above the MDC for 238Pu. The average 

annual activity was 0.1 8 x 1 0-l8 pCi/mL (7 

nBq/m3) for 238Pu and 4.2 x 1 O"* pCi/mL 

(0.1 6 pBq/m3) for 239+240Pu, about one-fourth 

the activity detected in the onsite air 

network. Summary results of the highvolume data are shown in Table 4.1 5. 

TLD RESULTS FOR STATIONS 

There were 39 offsite environmental stations 

monitored with TLDs in 1997. Figure 4.4 

shows current fixed environmental 

monitoring locations. Total annual exposure 

for 1997 ranged from 61 mR (0.61 mSv) per 

year at Pahrump, Nevada, to 161 mR (1.6 

mSv) per year at Blue Jay, Nevada, with a 

mean annual exposure of 99 mR (0.99 mSv) 

per year for all operating locations. The next 

highest annual exposure was 130 mR (1.3 

mSv) per year at Queen City Summit, 

Nevada. All results are shown in Table 4.1 6. 

These results are consistent with those for 

1996. 

~ 

4-1 8 
AIR SURVElLLANCE ACTIVITIES .................................... .................. .. .._..._._ _............... .. .. .. . ...... ....................... . ................................... . .. ._..._.__.. 

TLD RESULTS FOR PERSONNEL 

Eighteen offsite residents were issued TLDs 

to monitor their annual dose equivalent. 

Locations of personnel monitoring 

participants are also shown in Figure 4.4. 

Annual whole body dose equivalents ranged 

from a low of 74 mrem (0.74 mSv) to a high 

of 147 mrem (1.5 mSv) with a mean of 98 

mrem (0.98 mSv) for all monitored personnel 

during 1997. A summary of the results is 

shown in Table 4.17. These results are also 

similar to those for 1996. 

PRESSURIZED ION CHAMBER NETWORK 

The PIC data presented in this section are 

based on daily averages of gamma 

exposure rates from each station. Table 

4.1 8 contains the number of daily averages 

available from each station and the 

maximum, minimum, mean, standard 

deviation, and median of the averages. The 

mean ranged from 8.1 pR/hr at Pahrump, 

Nevada, to 17.7 pRhr at Milford, Utah, or 

annual exposures from 71 to 155 mR (18 to 

40 pC/kg). The table shows the total mR/yr 

and the average gamma exposure rate for 

each station. Background levels of 

environmental gamma exposure rates in the 

United States (from the combined effects of 

terrestrial and cosmic sources) vary between 

49 and 247 mR/yr (13 to 64 pC/kg-yr) (BEIR 

111 1980). The annual exposure levels 

observed at each PIC station are well within 

these United States background levels. The 

data from the Milford, Stone Cabin Ranch, 

and Tonopah stations show the greatest 

range and the most variability. All of these 

data are within a few tenths pR/hr from 

those of last year. 

NON-NTS BN FACILITY MONITORING 

BN facilities that use radioactive sources or 

radiation producing equipment with the 

potential to expose the general population 

outside the property line to direct radiation 

are the Special Technologies Laboratory 

(STL), during operation of the Sealed Tube 

Neutron Generator and operation of the 

Febetron; the Washington Aerial 

Measurements Operation (WAMO) during 

storage of sealed sources; and the Atlas 

North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF) A-1 Source 

Range. Sealed sources are tested every six 

months to assure there is no leakage of 

radioactive material. The data from sealed 

source testing are kept in the BN Radiation 

Protection Records. Operation of radiation 

generating devices is controlled by BN 

procedures. 

Fence line radiation monitoring at STL, 

WAMO, and NLV was conducted during 

1997 using Panasonic Type UD-814 TLDs. 

At least two TLDs were at the fence line on 

each side of any facility. TLDs were 

exchanged on a quarterly basis with 

additional control TLDs kept in a shielded 

safe. These TLD results are given in 

Table 4.19. The range of results, 52 to 115 

mFUyr, is within the background range in the 

continental U.S. 

4-1 9 
Table 4.1 Summary of the NTS Air and Direct Radiation Surveillance Program - 1997 

Onsite Monitorina 

Sample 

TvPe 

Collection 

Frequency 

Type of 

Analvsis 

Number of 

Locations(a) 

45 

1 (a) 

DescriDtion 

Sampling through Weekly 

Whatman GFIA glass 

fiber filter, 85 Umin. Monthly 

Air Gamma spectroscopy, 

gross a & 13,(~~~~~~~

quarterly composite). 

Low-volume sampling Biweekly 

through silica gel 

13 HTO (tritiated water) 

Low-volume 

sampling 

Weekly 3 85Kr 

External 

Gamma 

Radiation 

Levels 

Quarterly 166 Total quarterly 

exposure 

UD-814AS 

thermoluminescent 

dosimeters 

Offsite Monitorina 

Air Sampling through 5-cm \Meekly 

glass-fiber filter and 

a charcoal cartridge, 

56 Umin 

20 Gamma spectroscopy, 

gross a & I3 

Sampling through 500- Monthly 

cm2 glass-fiber filter at 

1 100 Umin 

6 Gamma spectroscopy 

238,239+240pu 

External 

Gamma 

Radiation 

Levels 

Cuarterl y 39 Quarterly exposure at 

deployed location 

UD-814AS 

thermoluminescent 

dosimeters 

U D-802 

thermoluminescent 

dosimeters 

Ciuarterly 18 Quarterly exposure 

of offsite personnel 

External 

Gamma 

Radiation 

Rate 

26 Continuous rate 

recording summarized 

hourly 

Reuter-Stokes 

Pressurized 

Ion Chambers 

Continuous 

(a) This sampler was operated on a monthly schedule until September 1997 then changed to 

weekly. 

4-20 
Table 4.2 Analytical Procedures, Air and TLD - 1997 

BN Analytical Procedures 

Count 

Time 

(mln) 

20 

Sample -Type 

Nominal Size 

Analytical 

Procedure 

Estimated 

Analvsis MDC 

Gross a 

EauiPment 

Air, 860 m3 74 pBq/m3 

(2 x 1 0-3 pCi/m3) 

After 5 - 7 days, 

place in planchet 

Gas-flow 

proportional 

counter 

Gross p Air, 860 m3 Continue count. Gas-flow 

proportional 

counter 

150 pBq/m3 

(4 x lo3 pCi/m3) 

20 

Gamma 

spectrometry Air, 860 m3 Move planchet to 

Gamma Spec 

HpGe, calibrated 1 20 

keV per channel, 

20 to 2000 keV 

370 pBq/m3 

(1 x lo2 pCi/m3) 

for 137Cs 

Pu 

Quarterly 

composite 

236.239+240 Acid dissolution, 

ion-exchange, ppt 

with 242Pu tracer, 

collect on filter 

0.1 pBq/m3 

(3 x lo6 pCi/m3) 

Alpha spectrometer 333 

with solid-state PIP 

detector 

Tritium Air, 8 m3 0.07 Bq/m3 

(2 pCi/m3) 

Moisture trapped on 5 mL in cocktail 70 

silica gel, removed 

with heat scintillation counter 

counted in liquid 

65Kr Air, 0.4 m3 Cryogenic Liquid scintillation 20 

separation, collect counter 

in cocktail 

0.37 Bq/m 

(1 0 pCi/m3) 

Ambient 

gamma 

10 mR per 

quarter 

TLD, UD81 4AS Expose in field, 3 

months reader 

Automatic TL 

EPA Analvtical Procedures 

Gross a Air, 560 m3 After 7-1 4 days 

place in 

planchet 

Gas-flow 

proportional 

counter 

30 30 pBq/m3 

(8 x 1 O4 pCi/m3) 

Gross p 30 90 pBq/m3 

(2.5 x IO9 pCi/m3) 

Air, 560 m3 After 7-1 4 days 

place in 

planchet 

Gas-flow 

proportional 

counter 

Gamma 

spectrometry 

2 mBq 

(0.05pCi)/m3 

20 pBq (5 x 

pCi) per m3 

(Hi-vol), 137Cs 

Air, 560 m3 Place on detector, HpGe detector, 30 

Low-vol has online calibrated 0.5 

10,000 m3 analytical program kevkhannel from 

Hig h-vol 40 to 2000 keV 

4-2 1 
Table 4.2 (Analytical Procedures, Air and TLD - 1997, cont.) 

EPA Analflical Procedures 

Analvsis 

238,239+240pu 

Ambient 

gamma 

Ambient 

gamma 

Gamma 

rate 

Sample Type 

Nominal Size 

Analytical 

-- Procedure 

Acid dissolution, 

separate by ion 

exchange, 

electroplate 

TLD, UD-814 Expose in field, 

3 months 

TLD, UD-802 Personnel wear 3 

months 

Pressurized Expose in field 

ion chamber 

Equipment 

Alpha 

spectrometer, 

silicon surface 

barrier detector 

Automatic TL 

reader 

Automatic TL 

reader 

Online display 

and data 

storage 

systems 

Count 

Time 

Imln) 

1000 

Estimated 

- MDC 

2 vBq/m3 

pCi/m3) 

(5 x 10-5 

5 mR per 

quarter 

5 mR per 

quarter 

5 @/hr 

Table 4.3 NTS Active Air Quality Permits - 1997 

Permit No. 

AP9711-0549 

Area 1 Facilities 

Area 3 Facilities 

Area 5 Facilities 

Area 6 Facilities 

Area 12 Facilities 

Facilitv or Opixation 

Shaker Plant Circuit 

Rotary Dryer Circuit 

Wet Aggregate Plant 

Concrete Batch Plant 

Sandbag Facility 

Cedar Rapids Screen 

Cambilt Conveyer 

Mud Plant 

Naval Thermal Treatment Unit 

Cementing Equip. (silos) 

Decontamination Facility Boiler 

Diesel Fuel Tank 

Gasoline Fuel Tank 

Portable Field Bins 

Portable Stemming System 1 & 2 

Diesel Engines (13) 

Two-Part Epoxy Batch Plant 

Cafeteria Boillsr 

Concrete Batch Plant 

Expiration 

- Date 

02/07/02 

4-22 
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

Table 4.3 (NTS Active Air Quality Permits - 1997, cont.) 

Permit No. 

AP9711-0549, cont. 

Area 23 Facilities 

AP9711-0556 

AP9611-0683 

AP9711-0549 

AP9711-0549 

OP 97-20 

OP97-34 

Facilitv or ODeration 

Expiration 

Building 753 Boiler 

Cafeteria Boilers (2) 

Diesel Fuel Tank 

Gasoline Fuel Tank 

NTS Surfaces Disturbances 

WSI Incinerator 

Area 5 HSC 10/20/02 

DOUBLE TRACKS Surface Disturbance (TTR) 06/12/01 

CLEAN SLATE I Environmental Restoration Project 04/04/02 

CLEAN SLATE II Environmental Restoration Project 06/30/02 

NTS Open Burn - Training 02/06/98 

Area 27 Burn Box 02/06/98 

Table 4.4 Active Air Quality Permits for Non-NTS Facilities - 1997 

Permit No. 

Las Vegas Area Operation(a) 

Facility or Operation 

A38702 

A06505 

A06507 

A38701 

A06503 

A38703 

A34801 

A34802 

A34803 

A34804 

A34805 

A00348 1 1 

Hamada Offset Press, NLVF 

Time Saver Aluminum Sander, NLVF 

Trinco Dry Blast with Dry Bag Dust Filters, NLVF 

Spray Paint Booth, NLVF 

Three Emergency Generators, and 

Emergency Generator, NLVF 

Columbia Boiler Model WL-180, Penthouse #I, RSL 

Columbia Boiler Model WL-90, Penthouse #I, RSL 

4.0 MM BTU Water Heater #2, RSL 

Cummins Emergency Generator and Emergency 

Spray Paint Booth, RSL 

Excimer Laser, RSL 

Emergency Fire Control Equipment, NLVF 

Fire Control Pump, RSL 

Special Technologies Laboratory") 

8477 Permit to Operate a 12 Gallon Capacity Vapor Degreaser 

Expiration 

- Date 

Indef. 

I ndef. 

Indef. 

lndef. 

Indef. 

Indef. 

I ndef. 

I ndef. 

I ndef. 

Indef. 

Indef. 

Indef. 

lndef. 

(a) An annual fee is paid on these permits. 

4-23 
Table 4.5 NTS Radionuclide Emissions - 1997 

Onsite Liauid Discharaes 

Curieda) 

Containment 

Ponds 

Area 12, E Tunnel 

Area 3, Well U-3cn PS#2 

Area 3, Well U-3cn#5 

TOTAL 

- 'OS r - 137cs 

1.6 x 10' 1.5 x lo5 1.7 x 

3.7 x loo 

5.5 x 10-I 

2.0 x 10' 

Airborne Effluent Releases 

Facility Name 

Areas 3 and 9(") 

Area 5, RWMS" 

Atlas Facility(d) 

SEDAN Crater (dl 

Other Areas@) 

2.4 x 10-1 

1.1 x lo-' 

1.4~10~ 

TOTAL 1.4 x lo2 

- 238Pu 

1.5 x 10' 

23Q+240pu 

3.4 105 

1.5 x 1 0-' 

239+240p 

0.036 

0.24 

0.28 

3.4 x 105 

(a) Multiply by 3.7 x 10" to obtain Bq. Calculated releases from laboratory spills and losses are included in Table 1.1. 

(b) In the form of tritiated water vapor, primarily HTO. 

(c) Resuspension from known surface deposits. 

(d) Calculated from air sampler data. 
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

Table 4.6 Summary Data (pCi/mL) for Gross Alpha, Gross Beta, 7Be and Plutonium in Air - 1997 

Location 

Area 1, BJY 

Area 2, Complex 

Area 2, 2-1 Substation 

Area 3, Mud Plant 

Area 3, U-3ah/at E 

Area 3, U-3ah/at N 

Area 3, U3ah/at S 

Area 3, U-3ah/at W 

Area 3, U-3bh S 

Area 3, U-3bg N 

Area 3, Well ER-3-1 

Area 4, Bunker T-4 

Area 5, RWMS No. 1 

Area 5, RWMS No. 4 

Area 5, RWMS No. 6 

Area 5, RWMS No. 8 

Area 5, RWMS Pit 5 

Area 5, TP Building N 

Area 5, TP Building S 

Area 5, WEF S 

Area 5, WEF N 

Area 5, DOD 

Area 5, Well 5B 

Area 6, YUCCA 

Area 6, CP-6 

Area 6, Well 3 

Area 7, UE-7ns 

Area 9, 9-300 

Area IO, Gate 700 S 

Area 10, SEDAN Crater 

Area 11, Gate 293 

Area 12, Complex 

Area 15, EPA Farm 

Area 16, 3545 Substation 

Area 18, Well UE-18t 

Area 20, SCHOONER 

Area 20, CABRIOLET 

Area 20, Complex 

Area 23, Bldg 790 No. 2 

Area 23, H&S Building 

Area 25, E-MAD N 

Area 25, NRDS 

Area 27, Complex 

Average 

Area 13, Project 57 

Area 52, CLEAN SLATE I 

Area 52, CLEAN SLATE 111 

Area 52, DOUBLE TRACKS 

Average 

Median MDC 

Gross a 

1.5 x 1045 

I .7 x 1045 

I .5 x 1045 

1.7 x I 0-15 

I .9 x 1045 

2.0 x 1045 

I .9 x 1045 

2.2 x IOi5 

1.5 x 1 Oi5 

1.6 x 1 Oi5 

2.0 x 10-15 

1.9 x io45 

1.8 x 10-l5 

1.7 x 10-15 

I .6 x 10-15 

I .5 x I 045 

2.2 x 10-1~ 

I .6 x 1045 

I .4 x I 045 

I .I x 10-15 

I .5 x I 0-15 

I .4 x I 045 

I .5 x I o-f5 

I .5 x 10-l~ 

I .7 x I 045 

1.4 x I 045 

1.5 x 10-1~ 

I .5 x I 045 

I .3 x I 045 

2.0 x 10-15 

2.5 x 10-15 

2.3 x 10-15 

2.2 x 10-15 

1.5 x I 0-15 

1.6 x 1 O-I5 

1.8 x 1 O-I5 

1.6 x 1 O-I5 

1.6 x 1 O-I5 

1.8 x 

1.6 x 1 0-15 

2.0 x IOi5 

Gross I3 

I .9 x I 0-14 

2.0 x I 044 

I .9 x I 0-74 

1.9 x io44 

2.0 x 10-14 

1 .9 x io44 

1.7 x 10-l4 

2.1 x 10-14 

1.9 x I 044 

1.9 x io44 

2.1 x 1044 

2.2 x 10-14 

2.2 x 10-14 

2.2 x 10-14 

2.1 x 1044 

2.4 x 10-l4 

2.3 x 10-14 

2.0 x 10-l~ 

2.0 x 10-14 

I .9 x 10-14 

2.2 x 10-14 

2.1 x 10-l4 

2.0 x 10-14 

I .9 x 10-14 

I .8 x 10-14 

1.9 x ioi4 

I .9 x 1044 

2.0 x I 0-14 

1.6 x 10-l4 

I .8 x 1 0-14 

I .8 x 1 0-14 

I .9 x I 044 

2.1 x 10-14 

I .9 x I 044 

I .8 x 10-1~ 

I .9 x 1 0-14 

I .7 x I 0-14 

2.0 x 10-14 

1.9 x I 044 

2.1 x 10-1~ 

2.0 x I 044 

2.0 x 10-14 

2.0 x I 044 

4.1 x 10-1~ 

1.8 x 1 O-I4 

1.8 x 1 O-I4 

1.8 x 1 O-I4 

1.8 x 1 O-I4 

1.8 x 1 O-I4 

1.6 x 1 O*I4 

Beryllium-7 =Pu - 

2.0 x 1043 7.9 x 1049 

2.4 x io43 2.8 x I 049 

2.2 x 1043 5.2 x 10-19 

2.1 x 10-13 5.8 x 10-19 

2.3 x 1043 I .o x 10-18 

2.3 x 10-l~ 6.5 x 10-l~ 

2.3 x 1043 7.3 x 1049 

2.0 x 1043 -2.0 x 1049 

1.5 x 1043 -I .9 x 1049 

2.3 x 10-13 4.1 x 10-~9 

2.5 x 10-13 4.3 x I 0-20 

2.2 x 10-13 9.9 x 10-20 

2.3 x 10-13 I .9 x 1049 

2.0 x 10-13 -I .I x 10-1~ 

I .4 x 10-13 3.9 x 10-79 

I .9 x 10-13 5.0 x 10-20 

2.3 x 10-13 5.3 x 10-20 

I .5 x 10-1~ 2.3 x 10-1~ 

2.5 x 1043 8.0 x 10-19 

I .5 x 10-13 3.1 x 10-19 

I .7 x 1013 7.6 x 10-20 

2.1 x 1043 I .9 x 10-19 

2.1 x 10-l~ 2.1 x 10-l~ 

1.3 x 10-13 3.9 x 10-20 

2.3 x 10-13 6.0 x 10-19 

2.0 x 10-13 1.5 x 10-20 

1.6 x 1043 1.5 x 1019 

2.6 x I 043 2.0 x 1018 

2.0 x 10-13 2.8 x io-I8 

1.9 x 1013 1.0 x 10-19 

2.7 x 1043 -7.2 x 10-20 

2.2 x 10-1~ 1.1 x ioi9 

2.3 x 1 O-I3 -4.6 x 1 Om20 

1.8 x 1 O-I3 4.4 x IO-” 

2.6 x 1 O-I3 6.9 x 1 0-l8 

2.3 x 2.6 x 

2.5 x 6.1 x IOa2’ 

1.8 x -7.4 x IO2’ 

1.6 x loi3 4.2 x 

1.8 x 3.0 x IO-” 

2.2 x 6.6 x loe2’ 

2.3 x 7.0 x 

1.2 x 1043 1 .I x 1019 

2.1 x 10-13 6.5 x 10-1~ 

I .2 x I 043 7.7 x io49 

1.2 x 10-13 2.2 x I o-’8 

I .2 x 1043 -8.0 x 1 O-~O 

I .2 x 10-13 7.0 x 1049 

1.2 x 1 O-I3 -6.8 x 1 O-20 

I .I x 10-1~ 8.3 x 10-1~ 

239+240p 

2.1 x 10-17 

4.9 x 10-l8 

2.1 x 10-17 

4.1 x 10-l~ 

I .9 x io47 

4.9 x 10-17 

7.3 x 10-17 

1.2 x 10-l7 

2.0 x 10-17 

6.4 x 10-17 

1.1 x 10-17 

3.7 x 10-1~ 

3.2 x 

3.0 x 

2.2 x 10-l8 

2.5 x IO-’’ 

1.8 x 

1.4 x 1 0-l8 

1.6 x 1 0-l8 

2.7 x 1 0-l8 

2.0 x 

4.4 x 

2.7 x 

6.6 x 1 Oei8 

7.1 x 

2.6 x 

6.6 x IOei8 

1.5~10~~ 

I .4 x 10-1~ 

1 .o x I 047 

4.6 x 10-17 

I .I x 1 0-17 

2.9 x I 047 

I .9 x I 0-19 

2.0 x 10-17 

4.3 x 10-19 

5.4 x 10-19 

3.4 x I 049 

7.1 x 1049 

1.9 x IO-‘’ 

2.0 x 

8.6 x IO‘” 

1.3 x 

1.6 x 

5.1 x 10-17 

4.0 x 

3.3 x 1 0-l8 

4.5 x 10-l8 

1.6 x 1 0-l6 

2.5 x 

4-25 
-- 

Table 4.7 Summary of NTS 85Kr Concentrations ~ 1999 

- 85Kr Concentration (1 0-l2 uCi/mL) 

Arithmetic Standard Mean as 

Location Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation Yo DCG 

Area 1, BJY 48 38 6.2 28 7.5 <0.01 

Area 19, Pahute Substation 43 40 -9.2 24 9.1 co.01 

Area 20, Dispensary 46 49 4.4 29 9.2 co.01 

All Stations 137 49 -9.2 27 8.8 co.01 

Median MDC was 8.7 x 1 0-l2 pCi/mL 

Table 4.8 Airborne Tritium Concentrations on the NTS - 1997 

- 3H Concentration (loe6 pCi/mL) 

Location 

Arithmetic Standard Mean as 

Number Maxirrium Minimum Mean Deviation %DCG 

Area 1, BJY 26 

Area 3, Mud Plant 25 

Area 3, USah/at N 25 

Area 5, RWMS No. 1 26 

Area 5, RWMS No. 4 26 

Area 5, RWMS No. 6 25 

Area 5, RWMS No. 8 21 

Area 6, Decon Pad 14 

Area 10, SEDAN Crater 25 

Area 12, Complex 25 

Area 12, E Tunnel Pond No.2 26 

Area 15, EPA Farm 25 

Area 23, H&S Building 26 

All Stations 31 5 

22! 

4.Z! 

3.4 

3.6 

3.2) 

7.4 

15 

56 

29 

39 

20. 

56 

7.6 

1 .If 

-0.4 0.84 

-0.64 1.2 

-1.4 1.2 

-0.2 1.3 

0.30 3.7 

-0.33 1.5 

-0.1 8 1.5 

4.1 21 

0.001 9.6 

-2.3 0.40 

-0.14 13 

1.9 6.4 

-1.1 -0.03 

-2.3 4.2 

0.74 

1.3 

1.2 

0.86 

3.5 

1.1 

1.1 

8.6 

1.7 

3.9 

0.60 

7.2 

12 

11 

co.01 

0.01 3 

0.012 

0.013 

0.037 

0.01 5 

0.085 

0.21 

0.095 

co.01 

0.13 

0.064 

<0.01 

0.047 

~ 

Median MDC was 2.7 x 1 0-6 pCi/mL 

Table 4.9 Mean Air Monitoring Results for Various Radionuclides at the RWMS-3, 1994 to 1997 ~ 

239+240 Pu 238Pu Tritium 

x IO-" uCi/ra 1 x 1 uCi/mL) 1. x uCi/mL) 

I Arithmetic Mean 1997 3.8 0.06 1.2 

Arithmetic Mean 1996 16 0.25 0.5 

Arithmetic Mean 1995 8.8 0.1 6 NA 

Arithmetic Mean 1994 13 0.25 NA 

Mean MDC 0.25 0.083 2.8 

Derived Concentration Guide 2,000 3,000 100,000 

I 4-26 
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

Table 4.10 Mean Air Monitoring Results for Various Radionuclides at the.RWMS-5, 1994 - 1997 

- Year 

239+240pu 238Pu 

x uCi/mL) x uCi/mL) 

Arithmetic Mean 1997 0.23 

Arithmetic Mean 1996 0.51 

Arithmetic Mean 1995 0.6 

Arithmetic Mean 1994 1.1 

Mean MDC 0.25 

Derived Concentration Guide 2,000 

0.03 

0.02 

0.01 

0.04 

0.083 

3,000 

Tritium 

x 1 0-l' uCi/mL) 

3.7 

3.2 

5.7 

4.9 

2.8 

100,000 

Table 4.1 1 NTS Boundary Gamma Monitoring Results Summary - 1997 

Location 

First Second Third Fourth Annual 

Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter Average 

[mR/dav) {mR/dav) ImRldav) ImRldav) ImRld) (mR/vr\ 

310 U-15E Substation 0.27 

342 Stake C-31 0.40 

355 Gold Meadows 0.29 

365 Stake R-29 0.38 

382 Stake J-41 0.35 

383 Stake LC-4 0.44 

384 Stake A-1 18 0.39 

386 Papoose Lake Road 0.22 

387 Gate 19-3P 0.39 

388 Hill Top 0.35 

389 Eastof U11B 0.32 

400 Army Well No. 1 0.24 

402 3.3 Miles SE of Aggregate Pit 0.17 

403 Guard Station 510 0.34 

404 Yucca Mountain 0.42 

405 Cat Canyon/Buggy Rd 0.44 

(a) Missing TLD. 

0.27 

0.45 

0.30 

0.44 

0.40 

0.49 

0.43 

0.23 

0.43 

0.36 

0.33 

(a) 

0.18 

0.39 

0.41 

0.50 

0.27 

0.44 

0.30 

0.43 

0.40 

0.48 

0.43 

0.22 

0.45 

0.37 

0.35 

0.23 

0.18 

0.34 

0.38 

0.50 

0.25 

0.38 

(a) 

0.37 

0.34 

0.43 

0.40 

0.21 

(a) 

0.41 

0.32 

0.22 

0.1 7 

0.33 

0.35 

0.45 

0.27 97 

0.42 150 

0.29 107 

0.40 150 

0.37 140 

0.46 170 

0.41 150 

0.22 81 

0.41 150 

0.38 140 

0.33 120 

0.23 83 

0.17 63 

0.35 130 

0.39 140 

0.47 170 

Table 4.1 2 NTS TLD Historical Station Comparisons, 1991 -1 997 

Exposure Rate fmR/dav) 

-- Area Station 19911992- 1993 

5 Well 5B 0.36 0.31 

6 CP-6 0.24 0.23 

6 Yucca Oil Storage 0.33 0.31 

23 Building 650 Dosimetry 0.19 0.18 

23 Building 650 Roof 0.19 0.18 

23 Post Office 0.24 0.23 

25 HENRESite 0.40 0.36 

25 NRDS Warehouse 0.39 0.37 

27 Cafeteria 0.42 0.39 

Network Average 0.31 0.28 

0.39 

0.30 

0.37 

0.26 

0.25 

0.30 

0.45 

0.46 

0.46 

0.36 

0.34 

0.19 

0.27 

0.15 

0.14 

0.21 

0.32 

0.33 

0.33 

0.25 

1995- 1996 1997 

0.30 0.30 0.30 

0.19 0.21 0.20 

0.26 0.28 0.28 

0.15 0.14 0.16 

0.15 0.14 0.1 6 

0.20 0.18 0.20 

0.33 0.34 0.32 

0.36 0.32 0.33 

0.33 0.34 0.37 

0.25 0.25 0.26 

4-27 
Table 4.13 Gross Alpha Results for the Offsite Air Surveillance Network - 1997 

Sampling Standard 

Location Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation 

Alamo, NV 52 5.3 0.0 2.2 1.2 

Amargosa Center, NV 50 5.9 -0.1 1.8 1.3 

Beatty, NV 52 5.4 0.3 2.4 1.3 

Boulder City, NV 23 6.6 0.3 2.7 1.5 

Goldfield, NV 52 6.8 0.3 2.2 1.4 

Henderson, NV 51 6.3 -0.6 2.0 1.4 

Indian Springs, NV 51 3.4 0.2 1.3 0.73 

Las Vegas, NV 51 4.4 0.1 2.0 0.95 

Overton, NV 51 6.0 0.2 1.8 1.3 

Pahrump, NV 50 3.6 -0.4 1.6 0.93 

Pioche, NV 50 3.3 0.2 1.4 0.72 

Rachel, NV 51 7.3 0.2 2.9 1.6 

Stone Cabin, NV 52 4.3 0.9 2.4 0.88 

Twin Springs, NV 52 12 -0.4 2.5 1.8 

Cedar City, UT 52 4.8 0.7 2.4 0.98 

Delta, UT 52 5.5 0.3 1.2 0.93 

Milford, UT 47 3.8 0.3 1.5 0.78 

St. George, UT 21 6.6 0.7 2.5 1.5 

Mean MDC = 7.5 x 1 0-l6 pCi/mL 

Concentration (1 O-l5 uCi/mL r37 yBa/m31) 

Sunnyside, NV 35 4.3 -0.2 1.3 0.91 

Tonopah, NV 51 4.1 0.0 1 .8 1 .o 

Standard Deviation of Mean MDC = 2.3 x 1 0-l6 pCi/mL 

Table 4.14 Gross Beta Results for the Offsite Air Surveillance Network - 1997 

-ion I1 O-I4 uCi/mL r0.37 mBa/m4, 

Sampling Standard 

Location Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation 

Alamo, NV 52 6.9 0.46 1.5 0.85 

Amargosa Center, NV 50 2.7 0.20 1.5 0.52 

Beatty, NV 52 3.1 0.51 1.5 0.50 

Boulder City, NV 23 3.0 0.13 1.8 0.71 

Goldfield, NV 52 2.4 0.20 1.4 0.51 

Henderson, NV 51 3.0 0.39 1.5 0.52 

Indian Springs, NV 51 3.1 0.27 1.4 0.54 

Las Vegas, NV 51 3.0 0.00 1.4 0.60 

Overton, NV 51 3.5 0.65 1.7 0.57 

Pahrump, NV 50 2.4 0.47 1.4 0.40 

Pioche, NV 50 2.4 0.08 1.4 0.51 

Rachel, NV 51 4.2 0.36 1.5 0.60 

Stone Cabin, NV 52 2.6 0.1 0 1.3 0.47 

Sunnyside, NV 35 2.6 0.63 1.3 0.42 

Tonopah, NV 51 3.1 0.28 1.3 0.48 

Twin Springs, NV 52 5.3 0.41 1.6 0.78 

Cedar City, UT 52 2.3 0.48 1.4 0.45 

Delta, UT 52 3.8 0.69 1.6 0.72 

Milford, UT 47 3.0 0.21 1.6 0.56 

St. George, UT 21 3.7 0.91 2.2 0.71 

Mean MDC = 2.43 x 1 O-I5 vCi/mL Standard Deviation of Mean MDC = 3.89 x 1 O-I6 pCi/mL 

4-28 
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

Table 4.1 5 Plutonium Results for the Offsite Hi-Volume Air Surveillance Network - 1997 

238~u Concentration (1 O-I8 uCi/mL) 

Sampling Standard 

Location Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation %DCG(') 

Alamo, NV 12 0.34 -0.10 0.04 0.09 (b) 

Amargosa Center, NV 11 0.74 0.00 0.14 0.21 (b) 

Goldfield, NV 9 0.28 -0.17 0.12 0.08 (b) 

Tonopah, NV 10 0.49 0.00 0.1 3 0.1 4 (b) 

Las Vegas, NV 12 0.24 -0.24 -0.01 0.07 (b) 

Rachel, NV 12 1.8 -0.1 6 0.64 0.67 0.03 

Mean MDC = 0.51 x yCi/mL Standard Deviation of Mean MDC = 0.39 x 1 0-l8 pCi/mL 

(a) Derived Concentration Guide; Established by DOE Order as 2 x 

(b) Not applicable, result less than MDC 

Note: To convert pCi/mL to Bq/m3 multiply by 3.7 x 10'' (e.g., [0.64 x 1 0-l8] x [37 x 1 09] = 24 

pCi/mL 

nBq/m3). 

239+240~u Concentration (1 O-'* uCi/mL) 

Sampling Standard 

Location Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation %DCG(") 

Alamo, NV 12 4.3 0.00 1 .l 1.1 0.06 

Amargosa Center, NV 11 8 .O 0.21 1.5 2.2 0.08 

Goldfield, NV 9 5.0 0.17 1.3 1.4 0.06 

Las Vegas, NV 12 1.5 -0.1 9 0.56 0.36 0.03 

Rachel, NV 12 77 0.49 18 25 0.90 

Tonopah, NV 10 2.3 0.25 0.91 0.60 0.05 

Mean MDC = 0.35 x loi8 yCi/mL Standard Deviation of Mean MDC = 0.24 x 1 0-l8 pCi/mL 

(a) Derived Concentration Guide; Established by DOE Order as 3 x 1 Oi5 pCi/mL 

(b) Not applicable, result less than MDC 

Note: To convert pCi/mL to Bq/m3 multiply by 3.7 x 10'' (e.g., [1.1 x 1 0-l8] x [37 x 1 09] = 41 

nBq/m3). 

Table 4.16 Gamma Monitoring Results for Offsite Stations - 1997 

Station DaiIv Exposure (mR) Total (mR) Percent 

Name - Min - Max Mean Exposure Complete 

Alamo, NV 0.23 0.25 0.24 113 100 

Amargosa Center, NV 0.20 0.23 0.21 76 75 

Beatty, NV 0.30 0.32 0.31 112 100 

Blue Jay, NV 0.32 0.46 0.36 131 100 

4-29 
Table 4.1 6 (Gamma Monitoring Results for Offsite Stations - 1997, cont.) 

Station 

Name 

Boulder City, NV 

Caliente, NV 

Cedar City, UT 

Complex I, NV 

Coyote Summit, NV 

Delta, UT 

Ely, NV 

Furnace Creek, CA 

Goldfield, NV 

Groom Lake, NV 

Henderson (CCSN), NV 

Hiko, NV 

Indian Springs, NV 

Las Vegas UNLV, NV 

Lund, NV 

Lund, UT 

Medlins Ranch, NV 

Mesquite, NV 

Milford, UT 

Moapa, NV 

Nyala, NV 

Overton, NV 

Pahrump, NV 

Pioche, NV 

Queen City Summit, NV 

Rachel, NV 

Sacorbatus Flats, NV 

St. George, UT 

Stone Cabin, NV 

Sunnyside, NV 

Tonopah Test Range, NV 

Tonopah, NV 

Twin Springs, NV 

Uhaldes Ranch, NV 

Warm Springs #1, NV 

Dailv ExDosure (mR) 

- Min 

0.23 

0.26 

0.1 9 

0.29 

0.33 

0.22 

0.20 

0.20 

0.26 

0.24 

0.23 

0.19 

0.20 

0.13 

0.27 

0.29 

0.29 

0.1 9 

0.23 

0.22 

0.23 

0.1 9 

0.1 6 

0.23 

0.33 

0.30 

0.20 

0.17 

0.29 

0.17 

0.33 

0.32 

0.31 

0.30 

0.27 

-- M ax

0.26 

0.28 

0.21 

0.30 

0.35 

0.33 

0.20 

0.21 

0.28 

0.26 

0.28 

0.22 

0.21 

0.20 

0.29 

0,32 

0.31 

0,21 

0 33 

0,24 

0.25 

0,20 

0,18 

0 -25 

0 -38 

0.32 

0.35 

0.1 9 

0.33 

0.24 

0.37 

0.35 

0.33 

0 -31 

0.29 

Mean 

0.24 

0.27 

0.20 

0.29 

0.34 

0.25 

0.20 

0.21 

0.27 

0.25 

0.25 

0.20 

0.21 

0.17 

0.28 

0.30 

0.30 

0.20 

0.30 

0.24 

0.24 

0.20 

0.17 

0.24 

0.36 

0.31 

0.30 

0.1 8 

0.31 

0.19 

0.34 

0.33 

0.32 

0.31 

0.28 

Total (mR) 

Exposure 

86 

97 

72 

107 

122 

87 

72 

75 

99 

91 

90 

72 

74 

61 

100 

111 

111 

72 

112 

86 

89 

71 

61 

85 

130 

113 

111 

64 

114 

69 

125 

120 

116 

111 

103 

Percent 

Complete 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

50 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

100 

4-30 
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

Table 4.17 Gamma Monitoring Results for Offsite Personnel - 1997 

Personnel Associated 

- ID# Station Name 

Daily Deep Dose 

Number of Exposure (mrem) 

,Davs - Min Max Mean 

Total 

Annual Percent 

Exposure Complete 

022 

038 

042 

293 

344 

345 

346 

347 

348 

427 

592 

593 

595 

596 

607 

608 

61 0 

Alamo, NV 

Beatty, NV 

Tonopah, NV 

Pioche, NV 

Delta, UT 

Delta, UT 

Milford, UT 

Milford, UT 

Overton, NV 

Alamo, NV 

Rachel, NV 

Cedar City, UT 

Las Vegas, NV 

Las Vegas, NV 

Tonopah, NV 

Logandale, NV 

Caliente, NV 

358 0.21 0.25 0.22 

300 0.37 0.46 0.41 

357 0.25 0.36 0.32 

357 0.22 0.27 0.24 

301 0.21 0.23 0.22 

301 0.27 0.31 0.28 

317 0.24 0.31 0.27 

317 0.28 0.30 0.30 

300 0.20 0.27 0.22 

336 0.20 0.30 0.25 

298 0.21 0.35 0.28 

358 0.26 0.35 0.31 

328 0.20 0.27 0.23 

328 0.17 0.25 0.23 

335 0.26 0.41 0.33 

300 0.17 0.26 0.21 

357 0.27 0.40 0.31 

83 100 

147 100 

116 100 

86 100 

80 100 

103 1 00 

100 100 

108 100 

82 100 

95 100 

103 100 

113 100 

84 100 

84 100 

120 100 

79 100 

112 100 

62 1 Indian Springs, NV 358 0.20 0.21 0.20 74 100 

Table 4.1 8 Summary of Gamma Exposure Rates as Measured by PIC - 1997 

Gamma Exposure Rate @R/hr) 

Number of 1997 

Mean 

Station Averaaes Maximum Minimum Deviation Median mR/vr &R/hr) 

Daily Standard 

Alamo, NV 364 

Amargosa Center, NV 365 

Boulder City, NV 70 

Caliente, NV 304 

Complex I, NV 365 

Delta, UT 303 

Furnace Creek, CA 297 

Goldfield, NV 359 

Henderson, NV 286 

Indian Springs, NV 356 

Las Vegas, NV 294 

Medlin’s Ranch, NV 365 

Milford, UT 304 

Beatty, NV 334 

Cedar City, UT 335 

15.0 

14.0 

19.0 

12.3 

16.0 

12.6 

18.9 

12.9 

11.0 

17.1 

19.0 

14.0 

12.7 

18.7 

19.0 

11.9 

10.0 

15.3 

10.6 

13.0 

9.0 

14.0 

10.5 

8.6 

14.0 

12.0 

10.7 

8.3 

15.0 

16.3 

0.25 

0.76 

0.24 

0.27 

0.28 

0.47 

0.43 

0.35 

0.28 

0.34 

0.42 

0.32 

0.27 

0.38 

0.50 

12.8 

11.0 

12.8 

11.4 

14.2 

10.5 

15.3 

11.9 

9.7 

15.3 

13.7 

11.5 

10.2 

16.4 

17.6 

111 

97 

143 

99 

125 

91 

134 

103 

86 

135 

119 

101 

89 

143 

155 

12.7 

11.1 

16.3 

11.3 

14.3 

10.4 

15.3 

11.8 

9.8 

15.4 

13.6 

11.5 

10.2 

16.4 

17.7 

Note: Multiply @/hr by 2.6 x to obtain VC - kg-’ hr-’. 

4-31 
Table 4.1 8 (Summary of Gamma Exposure Rates as Measured by PIC - 1997, cont.) 

Station 

Nyala, NV 

Overton, NV 

Pahrump, NV 

Pioche, NV 

Rachel, NV 

St. George, UT 

Stone Cabin Ranch, NV 

Terrell’s Ranch, NV 

Tonopah, NV 

Twin Springs, NV 

Uhalde’s Ranch, NV 

- Gamma ExDosure Rate [uR/hr) 

Number of 1997 

Daily Standard Mean 

Averaaes Maximum Minimum Deviation Median mR/vr @R/hr) 

304 

334 

358 

364 

350 

360 

328 

365 

358 

364 

304 

17.0 

12.0 

10.6 

13.9 

19.0 

10.0 

20.0 

19.0 

19.3 

20.0 

19.0 

11.0 

9.0 

7.0 

10.9 

15.2 

7.8 

15.4 

15.0 

16.5 

15.0 

12.8 

Note: Multiply pR/hr by 2.6 x to obtain iIC kg-I hr-’. 

0.38 

0.27 

0.18 

0.27 

0.33 

0.16 

0.43 

0.29 

0.45 

0.47 

0.84 

12.3 108 12.3 

10.1 88 10.0 

8.0 71 8.1 

11.9 105 12.0 

16.4 145 16.5 

8.3 73 8.3 

17.0 150 17.1 

16.0 141 16.1 

17.6 154 17.6 

16.4 146 16.6 

17.4 149 17.0 

Table 4.1 9 BN Offsite Boundary Monitoring Data - 1997 

Station 

- I.D.# Descrirstion 

WA-006 

WA-007 

WA-020 

WA-021 

WA-022 

WA-023 

WA-012 

WA-012 

LV-055 

LV-056 

LV-057 

LV-058 

LV-059 

LV-060 

LV-061 

LV-062 

LV-063 

1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr 

b7R) (mR) [mR) 

Washinaton Aerial Measurements ODeration 

Calibra Lab Door, Bldg 1794 34.8 

Work Area Wall, Bldg 1794 3!5.1 

Background Station 33.7 

Background Station 34.5 

Background Station 3!3 

Background Station 3!3.8 

Control - 1 32.5 

Control - 2 32.2 

14.5 22.6 17.4 

16.4 23.4 16.2 

13.9 22.9 14.1 

16.8 23.8 18 

17.4 26.7 17.7 

20.4 26.7 18.9 

29.2 19 12.3 

29.2 (a) 13.2 

North L;as Veaas Facility 

NW Corner Fence/Gate C6 

NW Corner Fence/Gate C6 

N Fence--West End A-12 

N Fence--West End A-12 

N Fence--West End A-4 

N Fence--West End A-4 

NE Corner Fence/A-12 

NE Corner Fence/A-l2 

E FenceKenter A-Complex 

21.8 19.4 19.8 19.8 

21.2 19.5 19.35 19.35 

16.7 15.1 14.95 14.95 

16.4 14.8 15.1 15.1 

113.4 15.4 14.35 14.35 

16.1 14.8 15.2 15.2 

15.8 13.6 13.9 13.9 

15.5 13.4 14.2 14.2 

1,5.2 12.8 14.05 14.05 

1997 

0 

89.3 

91.1 

84.6 

93.1 

100.8 

105.8 

93 

99.5 

80.8 

79.4 

61.7 

61.4 

60.5 

61.3 

57.2 

57.3 

56.1 

(a) Missing data. 

4-32 
rnK@:W. AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

Table 4.1 9 (BN Offsite Boundary Monitoring Data - 1997, cont.) 

Station 

- I.D.# Description 

1st Qtr 2nd Qtr 3rd Qtr 4th Qtr 1997 

(mR)(mR')(mR)(mR)m 

North Las Veaas Facilitv. cont. 

LV-064 

LV-065 

LV-066 

LV-067 

LV-068 

LV-069 

LV-070 

LV-071 

LV-072 

LV-075 

LV-076 

LV-077 

LV-078 

LV-079 

LV-080 

LV-098 

LV-099 

STI 97 

STI 98 

STI 99 

ST200 

ST201 

ST202 

ST205 

ST206 

ST207 

ST208 

ST209 

ST21 0 

ST21 1 

ST21 2 

ST21 3 

ST21 4 

ST1 41 

ST-C1 

ST-C2 

E Fence/Center A-Complex 

NLV Badge Off (A-7)/A-2 

NLV Badge Off (A-7)/A-2 

E Fence/North End B-Complex 

E Fence/North End B-Complex 

E Fence/South End B-Complex 

E Fence/South End B-Complex 

S Fence/Center 

S FenceKenter 

C-1 W End Guard Gate 

C-1 W End Guard Gate 

W Fence/Gate C-3 

W Fence/Gate C-3 

NW End A-l3/Double G 

NW End A-l3/Double G 

Control - 1 

Control - 2 

14.3 14.2 13.45 13.45 55.4 

14 13.1 13 13 53.1 

14 13.1 13.05 13.05 53.2 

16 13.9 14.35 14.35 58.6 

16.7 14.2 14.5 14.5 59.9 

17 14.5 14.9 14.9 61.3 

16.1 15.1 14.9 14.9 61 

17.3 15.1 19.05 19.05 70.5 

17.3 14.8 15.25 15.25 62.6 

20 17.1 18.45 18.45 74 

20.9 17.7 17.85 17.85 74.3 

17 (a) (a) (a) 

17.3 (a) (a) (a) 

17 16 16.1 16.1 65.2 

17.3 14.8 15.2 15.2 62.5 

(a) 9.9 9.5 9.5 38 

(a) 10.1 9.4 9.4 38 

Special Technoloaies Laboratory 

Bldg. 226, West Fence 

Bldg. 226, West Fence 

Bldg. 229-C, Left Side 

Bldg. 229-C, Left Side 

Bldg. 227, E Fence tBldg. 227, E Fence 

Bldg. 227, NE Corner Step 

Bldg. 227, NE Corner Step 

Bldg. 227, NE Fence 

Bldg. 227, NE Fence 

Bldg. 227, Behind CF Shed 

Bldg. 227, Behind CF Shed 

Bldg. 227, E Fence Center 

Bldg. 227, E Fence Center 

Bldg. 227, SE Fence Corner 

Bldg. 227, SE Fence Corner 

Bldg. 227, Rear on Fence 

Control 1 

Control 2 

20 16.2 

21.2 16.5 

20.9 18.8 

21.2 18.2 

21.2 17.6 

20.3 16.8 

20.4 16.2 

20.6 17.1 

23.6 17.4 

20.9 17.9 

21.8 17.6 

20.9 16.7 

(a) (a) 

(a) (a) 

23 17.9 

21.6 17.9 

25.1 19.9 

(a) 13 

(a) 13.6 

21 

19.9 

21.9 

21.3 

21 

21 

21 

20.7 

21.5 

21.6 

22.2 

22.8 

(a) 

(a) 

22.5 

23.6 

23.4 

(a) 

(4 

76.3 

76.8 

79.6 

79 

79.7 

77.5 

76.8 

77.9 

83.3 

80.5 

80.5 

78.7 

81.2 

80.6 

87.8 

54.4 

54 

(a) Missing data. 

4-33 
PE-P 

.. 

, ‘. 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

5.0 WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

The primary mission of the U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations 

Office (DOUNV) at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) has been the testing of 

nuclear devices and their components. The DOUNV's Environmental 

Protection Policy Statement outlines a general policy of preventing 

pollutants generated by such tests from reaching groundwater, but it also 

recognizes that some options for groundwater protection are precluded by 

an increased risk of atmospheric releases and potential violation of 

international agreements. Therefore, the DOUNV groundwater protection 

policy represents a balance between strict compliance with atmospheric 

release agreements and minimization of groundwater impacts. Groundwater 

protection is implemented by various programs that address compliance 

with regulatory requirements, minimization of waste streams, closure and 

monitoring of waste facilities, remedial investigations, groundwater 

monitoring, and environmental research. 

The Nevada Environmental Restoration Project (ERP) goals are to safeguard 

the public's health and safety and to protect the environment. This involves 

the assessment and cleanup of contaminated sites and facilities to meet 

standards required by federal and state environmental laws. In 1996, DOE 

formalized an agreement with the state for implementing corrective actions 

based on public health and environmental considerations in a cost-effective 

and cooperative manner. Investigation and cleanup activities continued on 

the NTS and Nellis Air Force Range Complex and at offsite locations in the 

state of Nevada and other states. 

DOE/NV instituted a Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program (LTHMP) in 

1972 to be operated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

under an Interagency Agreement. In 1997, groundwater was monitored on 

and around the NTS, at five sites in other states, and at two off-NTS 

locations in Nevada to detect any radioactivity that may be related to 

previous nuclear testing activities. Although tritium initially seeped from 

two of the offsite tests, the tritium levels in wells at both sites have been 

decreasing and were well below the National Primary Drinking Water 

Regulation levels. NTS supply wells were monitored for specific radioactive 

constituents and for permit compliance. 

5.1 WATER MONITORING 

PROGRAM INFORMATION 

ater monitoring activities conducted W on the NTS and related facilities 

involve surveillance of surface and 

groundwaters, drinking water systems, 

sewage treatment ponds, and actions 

protective of groundwater resources. 

ONSITE ENVIRONMENTAL 

MONITORING 

CRITERIA 

DOE Order 5400.1, "General Environmental 

Protection Program," establishes 

environmental protection program 

requirements, authorities, and 

responsibilities for DOE operations. These 

mandates require compliance with 
applicable federal, state, and local 

environmental protection regulations. Other 

DOE directives applicable to environmental 

monitoring include DOE Order 5480.1 1, 

"Radiation Protection for Occupational 

Workers"; DOE Order 5480.1 B, 

"Environment, Safety, and Health Program 

for DOE Operations"; DOE Order 5484.1, 

"Environmental Protection, Safety, and 

Health Protection Information Reporting 

Requirements"; DOE Order 5400.5, 

"Radiation Protection of the Public and the 

Environment"; and DOE/EH-O173T, 

"Environmental Regulatory Guide for 

Radiological Effluent Monitoring and 

Environmental Surveillance." 

WATER EFFLUENT MONITORING 

Radiologically contaminated water continueol 

to be discharged from E Tunnel in Rainier 

Mesa (Area 12) despite efforts to seal that 

tunnel. A grab sample was collected 

quarterly from the tunnel's effluent discharge 

point and from the tunnel's containment 

pond. These samples were analyzed for 

tritium (3H), gross beta, 238Pu, 239+240Pu and 

gamma emitters. In addition, an annual 

sample was analyzed for 'OSr. Tritium was 

the radionuclide most consistently detected 

at the tunnel sites. Other radionuclides were 

detected infrequently. Flow data obtained 

from the Defense Special Weapons Agency 

(formerly the Defense Nuclear Agency) were 

used to calculate the total volume 

discharged. Annual average radioactivity 

concentrations were calculated from the 

quarterly measurements. From these, the 

total amount of radioactivity in the effluent 

was obtained. 

Water pumped from wells drilled, or 

recompleted, to obtain data for 

characterization of the NTS groundwater 

was discharged into containment ponds. In 

1997, two wells were recompleted at 

emplacement hole U3cn. These wells were 

purged and the purge water placed in lined 

containment ponds. The total volume and 

the tritium concentration of water in each 

pond were available. 

Analytical procedures are summarized in 

Table 5.1 for both Bechtel Nevada (BN) and 

Radiation and Indoor Environment National 

Laboratory - Las Vagas (R&IE-LV). 

WATER ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 

Environmental monitoring was conducted 

onsite throughout the NTS and the near 

offsite area. Surface water and groundwater 

samples were routinely collected at 

preestablished locations and analyzed for 

radioactivity. 

Water samples were collected from selected 

potable tap water points, water supply wells, 

natural springs, open reservoirs, sewage 

lagoons, and containment ponds. The 

frequency of collection and types of 

analyses done for these types of samples is 

shown in Table 5.2. Sampling locations are 

shown on Figures 5.1 and 5.2. 

A 500-mL aliquot was taken from the water 

sample, placed in a plastic bottle, and 

counted for gamma activity with a 

germanium detector. A 2.5-mL aliquot was 

used for 3H analysis by liquid scintillation 

counting. The remainder of the original 

sample was evaporated to 15 mL, 

transferred to a stainless steel counting 

planchet, and evaporated to dryness after 

the addition of a wetting agent. Alpha and/or 

beta analyses were accomplished by 

counting the planchet samples for 100 

minutes in a gas-flow proportional counter. 

Tritium enrichment analyses were done on 

samples from the water supply wells by 

concentrating the volume and tritium content 

of a 250-mL sample aliquot to 10 mL by 

electrolysis of a basic solution and analyzing 

a 5-mL portion of the concentrate by liquid 

scintillation counting. 

The 226,228Ra con cent rat ions were 

determined from low-background gamma 

spectrometric analyses of radium sulfate. 

The samples were prepared by adding a 

barium carrier and 225Ra tracer to 800 mL of 

a sample, precipitating the barium and 

radium as a sulfate, separating the 

precipitate, and analyzing it by counting for 

500 minutes in a low-level gamma 

spectroscopy facility. 

5-2 
WA TER SUR VEIL LANCE ACT1 VlTlES 

N 

Supply Well Stations 

Tap Water Sampling Stations I 10 5 0 5 10 

MILES 

10 5 0 5 10 

KILOMETERS 

- -l 

w-1-1- I 

Figure 5.1 Supply Well and Potable Water Sampling Stations on the NTS - 1997 

5-3 
Figure 5.2 Surface Water Sampling Locations on the NTS - 1997 

5-4 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

The radiochemical procedure for plutonium 

was similar to that described in Section 4.1. 

Alpha spectroscopy was used to measure 

any 23apu, 239+240 

present in the samples. 

Pu, and the 242Pu tracer 

The present R&lE-LV sampling locations on 

the NTS, or immediately outside its borders 

on federally owned land are shown in Figure 

5.3. All sampling locations are selected by 

DOE and primarily represent potable water 

supplies. R&IE-LV samples onsite wells 

without pumps and, for quality assurance 

purposes, collects samples from some 

potable wells sampled by BN. A total of 22 

wells was sampled. All samples were 

analyzed by gamma spectrometry and for 

tritium. 

5.2 LONG-TERM 

HYDROLOGICAL 

MONITORING PROGRAM 

(LTH M P) 

The EPA's R&IE-LV is responsible for 

operation of the LTHMP, including sample 

collection, analysis, and data reporting. 

Until implementation of the LTHMP in 1972, 

monitoring of ground and surface waters 

was done by the U.S. Public Health Service 

(PHS), the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 

and the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission 

(AEC) contractor organizations. The LTHMP 

consists of routine radiological monitoring, 

analysis, and reporting of samples collected 

from specific wells on the NTS and of wells, 

springs, and surface waters in the offsite 

area around the NTS. Samples are also 

collected from sites in Nevada, Colorado, 

New Mexico, Mississippi, and Alaska where 

nuclear tests have been conducted. In 

1965, tritium escaped from the LONG SHOT 

test on Amchitka Island and contaminated 

the shallow groundwater, and during cleanup 

and disposal operations, shallow 

groundwater at the Tatum Dome Test Site in 

Mississippi was contaminated with tritium. 

Summaries of the 1997 sampling results for 

each of the offsite LTHMP locations are 

provided in Section 5.5. 

SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS 

PROCEDURES 

The procedures for the analysis of samples 

collected for this report are described by 

Johns et al., 1979 and are summarized in 

Table 5.1. These include gamma spectral 

analysis and radiochemical analysis for 

tritium. The procedures are based on a 

standard methodology for the stated 

analytical procedures. Two methods for 

tritium analysis were performed; 

conventional and electrolytic enrichment. 

The samples were initially analyzed for 

tritium by the conventional method followed 

by enrichment analysis if the results were 

less than 800 pCi/L (30 Bq/t). In late 1995, 

it was decided that only 25 percent of the 

samples would be analyzed by the 

electrolytic enrichment method. The 

samples selected have a tritium result of 

less than 800 pCi/L by the conventional 

method and are from locations that are in 

position to show possible migration. Two 

250-mL glass bottles and a 1 -gal plastic 

container are filled at each sampling 

location. At the sample collection sites, the 

pH, conductivity, water temperature, and 

sampling depth are measured and recorded 

when the sample is collected. For wells with 

operating pumps, the samples were 

collected at the nearest convenient 

outlet. If the well has no pump, a truckmounted sampling unit is used. With this 

unit, it is possible to collect 3-L samples 

from wells as deep as 1,800 m (5,900 ft). 

The first time samples are collected from a 

well, ag*goSr, 238Pu, 239+240Pu, and uranium 

isotopes are determined by radiochemical 

analysis, in addition to analysis mentioned 

above. The 250-mL samples are analyzed 

for tritium and the 1 -gal sample from each 

site is analyzed by gamma spectrometry. 

GROUNDWATER NEAR THE NEVADA 

TEST SITE 

Water sampling around the NTS is 

conducted by R&IE-LV under an interagency 

agreement with DOE to ensure the 

5-5 
Not Sampled This Year 

Water Sampling Location 

0 Community 

,A,/* state Line 

/+./ Nevada Test Site (NTS) 

NTS Operational Area 

Miles 

10 0 10 20 30 

esil5-S- Kilometers 

Figure 5.3 Wells QI-I the NTS Sampled by R&IE-LV - 1997 
WATER SUR VEILLANCE ACT1 VlTlES 

radiological safety of public drinking water 

supplies, and representative water sources 

of rural residents and, where suitable, to 

monitor any migration of radionuclides from 

the NTS. This water monitoring is 

conducted within the LTHMP. R&lE-LV 

personnel lroutinely collect and analyze 

water samples from locations in the offsite 

areas surrounding the NTS. Due to the 

scarcity of surface waters in the region, most 

of the samples are groundwater, collected 

from existing wells. Samples from specific 

locations are collected monthly, biannually, 

annually, or biennially in accordance with a 

preset schedule. Many drinking water 

supplies used by the offsite population are 

represented in the LTHMP samples. Figure 

5.4 is a map of the locations sampled. 

GROUNDWATER AT OTHER TEST AREAS 

Sampling for the LTHMP is also conducted 

at sites of past nuclear device testing in 

other parts of the United States to ensure 

the radiological safety of public drinking 

water supplies and, where suitable sampling 

points are available, to monitor any 

migration of radionuclides from the test 

cavity. Annual sampling of surface and 

groundwaters is conducted at the Projects 

SHOAL and FAULTLESS sites in Nevada, 

the Projects GASBUGGY and GNOME sites 

in New Mexico, the Projects RULISON and 

RIO BLANC0 sites in Colorado, and the 

Project DRIBBLE (SALMON) site in 

Mississippi. Sampling is normally conducted 

in odd numbered years on Amchitka Island, 

Alaska, at the site of Projects CANNIKIN, 

LONG SHOT, and MILROW. 

5.3 GROUNDWATER 

PROTECTION PROGRAM 

HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE NTS 

The NTS has three general water-bearing 

units: the lower carbonate aquifer, volcanic 

aquifers, and valley-fill aquifers. The water 

table occurs variably in the latter two units, 

while groundwater in the lower carbonate 

aquifer occurs under confined conditions. 

The depth to the saturated zone is highly 

variable, but is generally at least 21 0 m 

(approximately 690 ft) below the land 

surface and is often more than 300 m 

(approximately 1,000 ft). The hydrogeologic 

units, at the NTS, occur in three 

groundwater subbasins in the Death Valley 

Groundwater Basin (see Chapter 2, Figure 

2.7, for a diagram of these systems). The 

actual subbasin boundaries are poorly 

defined, but what is known about the basin 

hydrology is summarized below. 

Groundwater beneath the eastern part of the 

NTS is in the Ash Meadows Subbasin and 

discharges along a spring line in Ash 

Meadows, south of the NTS. Most of the 

western NTS is in the ASkaSi Flat-Furnace 

Creek Subbasin, with discharges occurring 

by evapotranspiration at Alkali Flat and by 

spring flow near Furnace Creek Ranch. 

Groundwater beneath the far northwestern 

corner of the NTS may be in the Oasis 

Valley Subbasin, which discharges by 

evapotranspiration in Oasis Valley. Some 

underflow from the subbasin discharge 

areas probably travels to springs in Death 

Valley. Regional groundwater flow is from 

the upland recharge areas in the north and 

east toward discharge areas in Ash 

Meadows and Death Valley, southwest of 

the NTS. Because of large topographic 

changes across the area and the importance 

of fractures to groundwater flow, local flow 

directions may be radically different from the 

regional trend (Laczniak et al., 1996). 

HYDROGEOLOGY OF NON-NTS 

UNDERGROUND TEST SITES 

The following descriptions of the 

hydrogeology of non-NTS underground test 

sites are summarized from Chapman and 

Hokett, 1991. 

FALLON, NEVADA 

The Project SHOAL site is located in the 

granitic uplift of the Sand Spring Range. 

5-7 
Water Sampling Location 

Community 10 0 IO 20 30 40 50 

Miles 

20 -- 0 20 40 60 80 

F!Sesn=C~ .4 ,-' State Line tv 

Nevada Test Site (NTS) 

NTS Operational Area Kilometers 

/" Nellis Air Force Range 

Figure 5.4 Wells and Springs Outside the NTS Included in the LTHMP - 1997 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

The highland area around the site is a 

regional groundwater recharge area, with 

regional discharge occurring to the west in 

Fourmile Flat and Eightmile Flat and to the 

northeast in Dixie Valley. Evidence 

suggests that a groundwater divide exist 

northwest of the site and that the main 

component of lateral movement of 

groundwater near the site is southeast 

toward Fairview Valley. Groundwater in 

Fairview Valley moves north to the 

discharge areas in Dixie Valley. 

Groundwater in Fairview Valley occurs in 

three separate alluvial aquifers separated by 

clay aquitards. Ground-water flow velocities 

through the granite to the alluvial aquifers of 

Fairview Valley are calculated to be very low 

(Chapman and Hokett 1991). 

CENTRAL, NEVADA 

The Project FAULTLESS site is located in a 

thick sequence of alluvial material underlain 

by volcanic rocks in the northern portion of 

Hot Creek Valley. Recharge to the alluvial 

aquifer and volcanic aquifer occurs in the 

higher mountain ranges to the west, with 

groundwater flowing toward the east-central 

portion of the valley, and discharging by 

evapotranspiration and underflow to Railroad 

Valley. 

AMCHITKA ISLAND, ALASKA 

The groundwater system of Amchitka Island 

is typical of an island-arc chain with a 

freshwater lens floating on seawater in 

fractured volcanic rocks. Active freshwater 

circulation occurs by precipitation, 

recharging the water table with a curving 

flow path downward in the interior of the 

island and upward flow near the coast. 

Generally, the hydraulic gradient is from the 

axis of the island toward the coast. 

Groundwater travel times have been 

estimated to be between 23 and 103 years 

from the test cavities to the Bering Sea. 

RIFLE, COLORADO 

Project RIO BLANC0 is located in the Fort 

Union and Mesa Verde sandstones in the 

Piceance Creek Basin, Three aquifers 

comprise most of the groundwater 

resources: a shallow alluvial aquifer, the 

upper "A potable aquifer, and the lower "B" 

saline aquifer. The "A" and "B" aquifers are 

separated by the Mahogany Oil Shale 

aquitard. These aquifers lie well above the 

test depth. The alluvial aquifer is the 

primary source of groundwater in the area 

with flow to the northeast toward the 

Piceance Creek. Recharge to the alluvial 

aquifer occurs by downward infiltration of 

precipitation and surface water and by 

upward leakage from underlying aquifers. 

The "A" aquifer is larger in areal extent than 

the overlying alluvial aquifer with the 

permeability in the "A" aquifer controlled by 

a vertical fracture system, The "B" aquifer 

exhibits minimal communication with the "A" 

aquifer. 

GRAND VALLEY, COLORADO 

Project RULISON is located in the Mesa 

Verde Sandstone, which is overlain by 

alluvium, the Green River Formation (shale 

and marlstone), the Wasatch Formation 

(clay and shale), and the Ohio Creek 

Formation (conglomerate). The direction of 

groundwater flow is thought to be northward. 

The principal groundwater resources of the 

area are in the alluvial aquifer, which is 

separated from the test horizon by great 

thicknesses of low-permeability formations. 

Pressure tests of deep water-bearing zones 

indicated very little mobile water. 

HATTIESBURG, MISSISSIPPI 

Project DRIBBLE and the Miracle Play 

Program were conducted in the Tatum Salt 

Dome (also known as the SALMON Site). 

The Tatum Salt Dome interrupts and 

deforms the lower units of coastal marine 

deposits in the area, has low permeability, 

and allows little water movement. Seven 

hydrologic units are recognized in the area, 

exclusive of the salt dome and its anhydrite 

caprock. These are, from the surface 

downward, the Surficial Aquifer, the Local 

Aquifer, and Aquifers 1 , 2, 3, 4, and 5. 

5-9 
These aquifers consist of sands and gravels, 

sandstones, shales, and limestones with 

low-permeability clay beds acting as 

aquitards. The natural flow has been 

disrupted by pumping from the upper 

aquifers and by injection of oil-field brines 

into Aquifer 5. The transient conditions and 

lack of data results in uncertainties in 

groundwater flow directions. 

FARMINGTON, NEW MEXICO 

Project GASBUGGY is located on the 

eastern side of the San Juan Basin. The 

direction of groundwater movement is not 

well known, but is thought to be to the 

northwest in the Ojo Alamo sandstone 

toward the San Juan River. The test was 

conducted in the underlying Pictured Cliffs 

sandstone and Lewis Shale, which are not 

known to yield substantial amounts of water. 

The rate of groundwater movement in the 

Ojo Alamo sandstone is estimated to be 

approximately 0.01 mlyr. 

CARLSBAD, NEW MEXICO 

The Project GNOME site is located in the 

northern part of the Delaware Basin, which 

contains sedimentary rocks and a thick 

sequence of evaporites. The test was 

conducted in the halites of the Salado 

Formation, which is overlain by the Rustler 

Formation, the Dewey Lake Redbeds, and 

alluvial deposits. The Rustler Formation 

contains three water-bearing zones: a 

dissolution residue at its base, the Culebra 

Dolomite, and the Magenta Dolomite. The 

Culebra Dolomite is the most regionally 

extensive aquifer in the area. The 

groundwater in the Culebra is saline, but is 

suitable for domestic and stock uses. 

Groundwater in the Culebra flows to the 

west and southwest toward the Pecos River. 

NTS AREAS OF POSSIBLE 

GROUNDWATER 

CONTAMINATION 

In 1996, DOE/NV analyzed and confirmed 

the location of 908 underground tests in 878 

holes at the NTS that are included in areas 

of possible groundwater contamination as 

indicated on Figure 5.5. Approximately one 

third (259) of these tests were at or below 

the water table (DOE 1996a). The principal 

by-products from these tests were heavy 

metals and a wide variety of radionuclides 

with differing half-lives and decay products. 

Detonations within, or near, the regional 

water table have contaminated the local 

groundwater with over 60 radionuclides 

being present in significant quantities. 

Tritium is the most abundant radionuclide, 

with an estimated 300 million curies present 

in or near the water table (DOE 1996c). 

Surface activities associated with 

underground testing and other NTS activities 

such as disposal of low-level radioactive 

waste (LLW) and mixed wastes, spill testing 

of hazardous liquefied gaseous fuels, and 

transport of radioactive materials, also pose 

potential soil and groundwater contamination 

risks. The types of possible contaminants 

found on the surface of the NTS include 

radionuclides, organic compounds, metals, 

and residues from plastics, epoxy, and 

drilling muds. A wide variety of surface 

facilities, such as former injection wells, 

leach fields, sumps, waste storage facilities, 

tunnel containment ponds and muck piles, 

and storage tanks, may have contaminated 

the soil and shallow unsaturated zone of the 

NTS. The known sites are categorized by 

type and listed in Appendices II, Ill, and IV 

of the Federal Facility Agreement and 

Consent Order (FFACO), jointly agreed to by 

the DOE, U. S. Department of Defense 

(DOD), and Nevada Environmental 

Protection Division (NEPD). The great 

depths to groundwater and the arid climate 

mitigate the potential for mobilization of 

surface and shallow subsurface 

contamination. However, contaminants 

entering the carbonate bedrock from Rainier 

Mesa tunnel ponds, contaminated wastes 

injected into deep wells, underground tests 

near the water table, and wastes disposed of 

into subsidence craters have the potential to 

reach groundwater. 

5-1 0 
WATER SURVElLLANCE ACTIVITIES 

Underground Nuclear Test 

a Undergmund Test Area 

/’-,./ state Line 

Community 

Nevada Test site (NTS) 

NTS Operational Area 

5 0 5 IO 15 20 

Miles 

10 0 10 20 

Kilometers 

Figure 5.5 Areas of Potential Groundwater Contamination on the NTS 

5-1 1 
ACTIVITIES PROTECTIVE OF 

GROUNDWATER 

DOHNV has instituted a policy regarding 

protection of the environment. This policy 

states: “A principal objective of the DOE/NV 

policy is to assure the minimization of 

potential impacts on the environment, 

including groundwater, from underground 

testing.” An ongoing program to monitor and 

assess the effectiveness of groundwater 

protection efforts will be enhanced so that 

resources are allocated based on current 

understanding of the effectiveness of 

groundwater protection programs. 

Groundwater protection activities contained 

within DOE/NV programs are described 

below. 

STORM WATER RUN-OFF 

At this time, the state of Nevada does not 

require storm water Runoff Permits for the 

NTS. Storm water, at the NTS, primarily 

follows the natural terrain and after a large 

storm will temporarily collect on low spots, 

including dry lake beds. With the depth to 

groundwater that exists at the NTS, this 

occasional pooling of storm water runoff 

presents no hazard to groundwater. 

WASTE MINIMIZATION AND POLLUTION 

PREVENTION AWARENESS PROGRAM 

The Waste Minimization and Pollution 

Prevention Awareness Program is designed 

to reduce waste generation and possible 

pollutant releases to the environment, 

increasing the protection of employees and 

the public. All DOE/NV contractors and NTS 

users who exceed the EPA criteria for srnallquantity generators have established 

implementation plans in accordance with 

DOE/NV requirements. Contractor 

programs ensure that waste minimization 

activities are in accordance with federal, 

state, and local environmental laws and 

regulations and DO€ Orders. A discussion 

of 1997 activities is given in Chapter 3. 

There are three closed-loop recirculating 

steam cleaning units that are used to clean 

equipment prior to servicing. These units 

not onfy minimize the water that is needed to 

operate, but also prevent the wastewater 

from running onto the ground and potentially 

contaminating the soil. These hydrocarbon 

materials are instead captured in a filter and 

properly disposed of or recycled. 

SITING FOR UNDERGROUND NUCLEAR 

TESTS 

The DOE/NV Procedural Instruction “Siting 

Criteria for Protection of Groundwater at the 

Nevada Test Site” (NV PI 97-001) defines 

five criteria for siting underground nuclear 

tests, based upon the current understanding 

of the effects of testing on the groundwater 

environment. Before an emplacement hole 

or emplacement drift can be used for a test, 

documentation must be submitted by the 

sponsoring user to the DOE/NV Assistant 

Manager for National Security to show 

compliance with these criteria, which are as 

follows: 

a Future testing should utilize previously 

used test areas. 

Tests with working points at or below the 

water table should be minimized. Testing 

within perched water conditions is 

excluded from this criterion. 

0 Working points should be placed no 

closer than two cavity radii from any 

regional carbonate aquifer. 

a Emplacement holes should not be sited 

within 1,500 m of the NTS boundary 

where groundwater leaves the NTS. 

a Emplacement holes, which extend more 

than two cavity radii or 30 m, whichever is 

greater, beneath the working point, should 

be plugged to prevent the open borehole 

from becoming a preferential pathway for 

groundwater contamination. 

5-1 2 
WASTE TREATMENT, STORAGE, AND 

DISPOSAL 

DOE/NV currently operates disposal 

facilities in Areas 3 and 5 at the NTS for 

LLW generated by DOE and the DOD 

facilities. All hazardous wastes generated at 

the NTS are stored at a Hazardous Waste 

Accumulation Site in Area 5 until shipped 

offsite to EPA-approved commercial 

disposal facilities. 

In accordance with Title 40 Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) 265 - Subpart F, 

operators of interim status treatment, 

storage, and disposal facilities are required 

to collect quarterly samples for one year 

from one upgradient and three downgradient 

wells for characterization of back 

groundwater quality. Sampling protocols for 

characterization and detection data 

collection were based on the Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 

Groundwater Monitoring Technical 

Enforcement Guidance Document (EPA 

1986). Groundwater elevation was 

measured prior to each sampling event. The 

first collections of these characterization 

data were performed in 1993. Subsequent 

semi-annual sampling was continued 

through 1997 and results were statistically 

compared with the initial characterization 

data. No chemical or radiological 

constituents attributable to DOE weapon 

testing or waste disposal activities have 

been detected. The uppermost aquifer 

meets current water quality standards for 

drinking water sources. The analyses 

performed are shown in Table 5.3. 

Groundwater monitoring results for 1997 

can be found in the “1 997 Groundwater 

Monitoring Report” (Bechtel 1997). 

At the NTS there are three nonhazardous 

waste landfills that have state of Nevada 

Operating Permits. The permitting process 

considers groundwater protection at these 

location. At the Area 23 Class II Municipal 

and Industrial Solid Waste Disposal Site, 

there in no groundwater monitoring well. 

However, Well SM-23-1 described below is 

considered (informally) by the state as a 

supplement to vadose monitoring at the 

landfill. 

VADOSE ZONE MONITORING 

The moisture content of the vadose zone is 

monitored at Pits 1 through 4 at the Area 5 

Radioactive Waste Management Site 

(RWMS-5) and is under the U3ahlat and U3ax/bl disposal units at Area 3 RWMS 

(RWMS-3). Moisture content is monitored 

quarterly to detect the downward movement 

of wetting fronts from precipitation. Moisture 

content monitoring may provide an early 

warning of contaminant migration and allows 

testing of conceptual models of site 

performance. At the RWMS-5, monitoring is 

conducted using neutron moisture meters in 

access tubes penetrating the operational 

cover (approximately 8 ft), the waste zone 

(20 - 30 ft), and the vadose zone below the 

pit floor. No wetting fronts were observed to 

pass through the operational covers at the 

RWMS-5 in 1997. At the RWMS-3, moisture 

monitoring is conducted in cased boreholes 

angled under the U-3ah/at and U-3ax/bl 

disposal units. Soil moisture content below 

the RWMS-3 remained unchanged in 1997. 

WELLHEAD RECONSTRUCTION AND 

WELL REHABILITATION 

The Hydrologic Resources Management 

Program (HRMP) began an active borehole 

surface rehabilitation program. The 

rehabilitation of 16 boreholes was 

completed. Rehabilitation activities include 

either the extension or shortening of the 

well’s casing to approximately one-half 

meter aboveground level. Locking caps are 

installed on each well along with the hole 

designation inscribed on the outside of the 

casing extension using a weld bead and the 

painting of casings for easy identification. 

The holes identified for rehabilitation are 

suitably located for potential utilization in the 

monitoring network. Video logging will be 

used to determine the integrity of the hole 

and accessability to the water table. 

All of the wells associated with the state 

permitted drinking water distribution systems 

at the NTS have been inspected by the state 

and meet current wellhead protection 

regulations. 

5-1 3 
SEWAGE LAGOON COMPLIANCE 

State Water Pollution Control Permit 

GNEV93001 requires that one of four 

methods of groundwater protection be 

established at active sewage lagoons on the 

NTS by January 31,1999. The four 

acceptable groundwater protection methods 

identified in the permit include groundwater 

monitoring, vadose zone monitoring, 

engineered liner installation, and 

hydrogeological site characterization. 

Over the past four years, groundwater 

protection permit compliance has been 

attained at nine of the NTS facilities. 

Groundwater protection permit compliance 

has not been attained at two remaining 

facilities: (1) the Area 6 Device Assembly 

Facility, and (2) the Area 25 Reactor Control 

Point. Full compliance will be attained at all 

sites by the expiration date of the permit. 

Initial groundwater sampling at the Area 23 

Infiltration Basin Groundwater Monitoring 

Well SM-23-1 was performed in August 

1997, and compliance monitoring will begin 

in 1998. Results indicate that the 

groundwater adjacent to and beneath the 

infiltration basin meets drinking water 

standards. Information on improvements 

to the monitoring well is contained in 

Chapter 3. 

5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL 

RESTORATION 

The Nevada ERP was begun in the late 

1980s to address contamination resulting 

primarily from nuclear weapons testing and 

related support operations. The goals of the 

project are to safeguard the public’s health 

and safety and to protect the environment. 

This involves the assessment and cleanup 

of contaminated sites and facilities to meet 

standards required by federal and state 

environmental laws. Approximately 878 

sites used for historic underground nuclear 

tests will be investigated, along with areas 

where more than 100 aboveground tests 

were conducted. Additionally, 1,500 other 

sites that were used for support operations 

will potentially require environmental 

remediation. 

The DOE/NV is working closely with 

representatives of the state of Nevada to 

ensure compliance with applicable 

environmental regulations. A FFACO was 

signed by the DOE, DOD, and NEPD in May 

1996. The FFACO provides a mechanism 

for implementing corrective actions based on 

public health and environmental 

considerations in a cost-effective and 

cooperative manner. It also establishes a 

framework for identifying, prioritizing, 

investigating, remediating, and monitoring 

contaminated DOE sites in Nevada. The 

FFACOs corrective action requirements 

supersede some portions of the NTS RCRA 

Permit issued in May 1995. 

Investigations and remediations follow a 

strategy for investigation and remediation 

outlined in Appendix VI, Corrective Action 

Strategy, of the FFACO. The strategy is 

based on four steps: (1) identifying 

corrective action sites, (2) grouping the sites 

into corrective action units, (3) prioritizing 

the units for funding and work, and 

(4) implementing investigations or actions as 

applicable. The sites are broadly organized 

into underground test area sites, industrial 

sites, soil sites, and off sites. Information 

related to investigation and cleanup 

activities as it relates to groundwater 

protection follows. 

UNDERGROUND TEST AREA 

(UGTA) SITES 

The UGTA subproject focused on well 

development, testing, and sampling wells 

near underground nuclear tests. Some of 

this work was also supported by the HRMP. 

These activities were conducted in order to 

determine radiochemical and hydrogeologic 

conditions near tests in support of modeling 

at the scale of Corrective Action Units. 

5-1 4 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

Contaminated fluid produced during drilling 

and sampling was managed in accordance 

with the UGTA Waste Management Plan 

(DOE 1996d) to prevent degradation of 

groundwater. Evaporation of tritiated water 

from the drilling operations is included in the 

calculations for compliance with the National 

Emissions Standard for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants. 

Accomplishments of the UGTA project in 

1997 include the sampling of two wells at the 

TYBO underground nuclear test and a 

“Forced Gradient Experiment” at the 

BULLION test on Pahute Mesa. Other 

activities included the development and 

sampling of three zones in Well UE-1 Oj 

located in northern Yucca Flat and two wells 

near the BILBY site in south central Yucca 

Flat. Three post-shot wells “hot wells” were 

also sampled, including U-3cn PS#2 

(BILBY), U-4u PS2A (DALHART), and U-20n 

PSPS1 ddh (CHESHIRE). In general, 

results show no evidence of man-made 

radionuclides in the regional carbonate 

aquifer beneath Yucca Flat, and expected 

levels of contamination in the post shot and 

near-event wells at Yucca Flat and on 

Pahute Mesa. These activities are 

summarized below. Results are scheduled 

for publication in 1998. 

BULLION FORCED-GRADIENT 

EXPERIMENT 

The BULLION Forced-Gradient Experiment 

was conducted from June 2 to August 28, 

1997, at Well Cluster ER-20-6 on Pahute 

Mesa in the northwestern corner of the NTS. 

This well cluster consists of three wells: a 

production well (ER-20-6 #3) and two 

injection/sampling wells located 88.7 m (ER20-6 #2) and 130.1 m (ER-20-6 #1) from the 

production well. The wells are 

approximately aligned with the local 

groundwater gradient and the major fracture 

system, a short distance downgradient from 

the BULLION test. Well #3 was pumped at 

1 16 gal/ min to induce a groundwater 

gradient towards this well. A selection of 

tracers was injected into the other two wells, 

and breakthrough curves for the tracers 

were determined by analyzing samples from 

Wells #2 and #3. 

The experiment was designed to 

characterize transport parameters in 

fractured volcanic rocks, specifically 

effective porosity, matrix diffusion, and 

dispersivity. The tracers used are 

conservative, but have significantly different 

diffusion coefficients. The wells were also 

sampled for water chemistry and 

radiochemistry parameters. During the 

experiment, onsite monitoring of tritium 

concentration at all three wells found that 

concentration declined to the low thousands 

of picocuries per liter, rather than the 

substantial increases expected from 

transport of radionuclides from the BULLION 

test cavity. Radionuclides were variously 

analyzed by IT, Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratory (LLNL), Desert 

Research Institute (DRI), and Los Alamos 

National Laboratory (LANL 1998). Additional 

information and analytical results will be 

reported by the respective organizations 

during 1998. 

POST-SHOT WELLS (“HOT WELLS”) 

Two post-shot cavity holes were sampled in 

1997 by a joint LANL-LLNL-USGS team. 

Drill-back hole U-4u PS#2A (for the 

DALHART test) was sampled this year, 

because it is one of the “hot holes” 

monitored periodically, and because it is a 

candidate for a test of a new pumping 

methodology. The DALHART test was fired 

on October 13, 1988, in central Yucca Flat. 

U-4u PS#2A was drilled into the cavity 

region in 1990. Analyses of water samples 

collected in July 1997, indicated a tritium 

activity of 26 pCi/L (9.7 x 1 O5 Bq/L) (LANL 

1998). 

Post-shot Well U-20n PS#1 DDH was drilled 

to support studies of radionuclide migration 

from the cavitykhimney region of the 

CHESHIRE underground test that was 

conducted on Pahute Mesa in February of 

1976. Radionuclide migration studies at this 

site have been intermittent since 1976. 

Water samples collected from this well in 

July 1997 had a tritium activity of about 

150 pCi/L (5.7 x lo6 Bq/L) (LANL 1998). 

5-1 5 
WELL UE-1 OJ 

Well UE-1Oj is located in northern Yucca Flat 

and is completed in the lower carbonate 

aquifer (regional aquifer) (DOE 1995). Well 

development, groundwater sampling, and 

data compilation for Well UE-1 Oj were 

pelformed in 1997 (IT 1997). 

Well development of the three completion 

zones, which are equipped with sliding 

sleeves, was conducted in March 1997. 

Groundwater characterization samples were 

collected from each completion zone and 

analyzed by Lockheed Analytical Services 

for general chemistry, principal cations and 

anions, metals, and radionuclides. Gamma 

scan analytical results include actinium-228, 

bismuth-214, cobalt-57/60, cesium-l34/137, 

potassium-40, lead-212/214, thorium-234, 

thallium-208, uranium-235, and tritium. 

Bismuth-214 was the only radionuclide 

detected in the middle interval, at 25 pCi/L, 

compared to a laboratory minimum 

detectable concentration (MDC) of 19 pCi/L, 

LLNL analyzed groundwater samples from 

each of the completion zones for 

radiochemistry and isotopic analyses. The 

analytical results revealed the groundwater 

samples contain natural levels of all the 

isotopes measured. The DRI collected 

groundwater samples from each completion 

zone for stable isotopic analyses. Static 

water-level measurements for Well UE-1 Oj 

were taken quarterly by the USGS. The 

above data was reported in IT 1997. 

BILBY 

Two wells, located at the NTS BILBY site in 

south-central Yucca Flat, were refurbished 

and sampled by the UGTA Subproject in 

1997. The purpose of this work was to 

restore and/or replace the existing 

submersible pumps that were installed 

approximately 20 years ago in Hydrologic 

Test Hole U-3cn#5 and Post-Shot Hole U3cn PS#2. U-3cn#5 was completed below 

the BILBY cavity in the lower carbonate 

aquifer, and U-3cn PS#2 accesses the 

BILBY cavity and rubble chimney. Analysis 

of groundwater samples collected on 

January 22, 1997, at U3cn PS#2 showed 

tritium (1.33 x 10’ pCi/L), cesium-137 

(1 .I pCi/L), and barium-133 (0.26 pCi/L). 

Cesium-137 is an expected component of 

groundwater close to a nuclear test, while 

barium-I33 is unexpected. Tritium activity 

for groundwater samples from U-3cn#5, 

collected on January 29, 1997, remained 

low, ranging between 1,600 and 3,080 pCi/L. 

No gamma emitters, other than those 

naturally present in groundwater, were 

detected (LANL 1998). The low tritium 

activity observed at U-3cn#5 is believed to 

be the result of poor hydraulic conductivity of 

the zeolitized-bedded tuffs (tuff confining 

unit) between the test cavity and the 

underlying lower carbonate aquifer 

(LLNL 1997). 

TYBO/BENHAM 

From 1995 to early 1996, the UGTA 

subproject drilled two holes, ER-20-5 #1 and 

#3, adjacent to the site of the underground 

nuclear test, code named TYBO (DOE 

1997~). Water samples from these wells 

were analyzed at LANL and LLNL and were 

found to contain radionuclides not often 

measured in similar sites (LANL 1998). 

The purpose of drilling at Well Cluster ER20-5 was to characterize the nature and 

extent of radionuclide migration adjacent to 

a relatively large yield test conducted below 

the water table. The TYBO test was 

conducted on Pahute Mesa on May 14, 

1975, at a depth of 765 m (2,509 ft), well 

below the static water level of 630 m 

(2,066 ft). Well ER-20-5 #I was completed 

and screened in a transmissive aquifer at a 

depth comparable to the working point of the 

TYBO test. Well ER-20-5 #3 was completed 

and screened in a deeper transmissive 

aquifer at a depth comparable to the working 

point of the 1968 BENHAM test, located 

1,300 m (4,265 ft) to the north (DOE 1997~). 

The BENHAM test was fired on December 

19, 1968, at a depth of 1,402 m (4,599 ft) 

well below the static water table of 641 m 

(2,102 ft). Both ER-20-5 #I and #3 were 

believed to be sited hydrologically 

downgradient of the TYBO test. 

5-1 6 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES ........................... .. .........I ........................................................................... ” ..................... ........... 

Radionuclides detected include 137Cs, 6oCo, 

152s154s155E~, and 239+240Pu. Except for tritium, 

the activity levels measured in the ER-20-5 

groundwater are well below the drinking 

water limits calculated by EPA standards. 

Groundwater samples collected in April 1997 

at ER-20-5 #I had a tritium activity of 6.89 x 

1 O7 pCi/L (2.55 MBq/L) and 1.42 x 1 O5 pCi/L 

(5.3 kBq/L) at ER-20-5 #3. Prefiltering of the 

water samples indicates that, except for 

tritium, the radionuclides are associated with 

particulates and colloids. Furthermore, 

isotopic ratios for 239+240Pu are relative to the 

BENHAM test 1,300 m (4,265 ft) to the 

north, and not to the closer TYBO test, as 

expected (Thompson et ai., 1997). 

INDUSTRIAL SITES AND 

DECONTAMINATION AND 

DECOMMISSIONING 

The Area 6 Decontamination Pond RCRA 

Closure Unit characterization was 

completed. Additional geotechnical 

sampling and testing was completed for the 

Corrective Measures Study. Design and 

field testing for the engineered cover was 

started and will be completed in 1998. 

Closure activities are anticipated to be 

completed in 1998. 

An annual report was submitted to comply 

with the conditions of the RCRA Part B 

Permit for the Area 2 Bitcutter Shop and 

LLNL Post Shot Containment Building 

Injection Wells RCRA Closure Unit that was 

closed in 1996. These facilities and other 

NTS facilities with RCRA closure plans are 

listed in Table 5.4. 

ABANDONEDUNDERGROUNDSTORAGE 

TANKS 

The NTS underground storage tank (UST) 

program continues to meet regulatory 

compliance schedules for the reporting, 

upgrading, or removal of documented USTs. 

Efforts are continuing to identify 

undocumented USTs at the NTS. Once 

identified, undocumented USTs are reported 

to the NEPD to satisfy state regulatory 

reporting requirements. 

During 1997, there were no USTs that were 

required to be removed in accordance with 

state and federal regulations. Remedial 

activities continued at previous tank removal 

sites during 1997 as funding became 

available. 

SOIL SITES 

In 1 997, radiologically contaminated soils 

from the CLEAN SLATE I site, on the 

NAFRC, northwest of the NTS were 

removed and disposed of in Area 3 on the 

NTS. However, these contaminated soils 

were at the ground surface and did not 

contaminate the subsurface or groundwater. 

Therefore, they are not discussed further 

here. 

OFFSITE LOCATIONS 

The offsite areas are described in Section 

5.2 of this chapter. Activities related to 

groundwater protection at these sites are 

conducted as part of the ERP. Investigation 

and cleanup at these sites are being 

conducted in accordance with the FFACO, 

with the state of Nevada, for the two sites in 

Nevada, SHOAL and FAULTLESS. In the 

remainder of the states, agreements will be 

developed as the restoration activities 

proceed. Following is a summary of 

activities at sites where activities were 

conducted during 1997. 

At the Project SHOAL site, an investigation 

plan was completed and approved; four 

monitoring wells were installed to a total 

depth of 396 m (1,300 ft); DRI conducted 

aquifer testing, and SAFER closure of one 

mudpit was completed. 

At the Project RULISON site, following 

mudpit cleanup in 1995, quarterly sampling 

was done at four groundwater wells for 

hazardous waste during the second and final 

year, as required by the state of Colorado. 

No migration of hazardous wastes has been 

detected so far. IT Corporation is writing a 

closure report on this project. 

5-1 7 
Surface characterization of mudpits at wells 

UC-1 , UC-3, and UC-4 was conducted at the 

FAULTLESS site. 

At the SALMON site, 14 new shallow 

groundwater monitoring wells were installed, 

pumps were rehabilitated and installed in 4 

existing wells, and 1 seismic check hole was 

plugged. 

5.5 WATER SURVEILLANCE 

PROGRAM RESULTS 

The analytical results obtained for water 

samples collected onsite and offsite are 

described in this Section. Only a few 

samples contained detectable 

concentrations of radionuclides. Table 5.5 

lists the routine sampling locations, onsite 

and offsite, where well water samples 

contained concentrations greater than 0.2 

percent of the National Primary Drinking 

Water Standards. 

ONSITE WATER MONITORING 

RESULTS 

RADIOACTIVITY IN SURFACE WATER 

Surface water sampling at the NTS was 

conducted at eight open reservoirs, seven 

natural springs, a containment pond and an 

effluent, and nine sewage lagoons. The 

locations of these sources are shown in 

Figure 5.2. When water was available and 

the weather permitted, a grab sample was 

taken using the schedule in Table 5.2. The 

sample was analyzed for 3H, gross beta, 

gamma activity, 238Pu, 239+240Pu, and 'OSr 

according to the schedule shown in 

Table 5.2. Sources of surface water were, 

for the most part, man-made; Le., created 

for or by NTS operations. 

The annual average for each radionuclide 

analyzed in surface waters is presented in 

Table 5.6, along with the results from 

analysis of tunnel effluents. The annual 

averages for open reservoirs and natural 

springs are compared to the Derived 

Concentration Guide (DCGs) for ingested 

water. The results from gamma 

spectrometry were non-detectable for all 

sample locations. Most radionuclide levels 

were below the detection limit, except for 

samples from the E Tunnel effluent and 

ponds, which had tritium concentrations 

ranging up to 1 .1 x yCi/mL. 

With the exception of containment ponds, no 

annual average concentration in surface 

waters was found to be statistically different 

from any other at the 5 percent significance 

level. The analytical results from the Area 

12 containment ponds showed measurable 

quantities of radioactivity as has been noted 

previously. 

OPEN RESERVOIRS 

Open reservoirs have been established at 

various locations on the NTS for industrial 

uses. The annual average concentrations of 

gross beta were compared to the DCGs for 

ingested water listed in DOE Order 5400.5, 

even though there was no known 

consumption of these waters. The 

appropriate data are shown in Table 5.7. 

NATURAL SPRINGS 

Of the nine natural springs found onsite, 

(Le., spring-supplied pools located within the 

NTS), only seven had enough water to be 

sampled. These springs are a source of 

drinking water for wild animals on the NTS. 

The annual average gross beta results for all 

spring are shown in Table 5.6 and compared 

to the 'OSr DCG for drinking water, although 

the water is not used for drinking. The 

highest result was for Area 7 Reitman Seep, 

but it was still below the DCG. 

CONTAINMENT PONDS 

Due to the sealing of the tunnels at the close 

of 1993, liquid effluents ceased at all except 

E Tunnel. The E Tunnel containment ponds 

were fenced and posted with radiological 

warning signs. During each sampling, a 

grab sample was taken from the E Tunnel 

5-1 8 
WATER SURVEiL.L.ANCE ACTiVlTlES 

containment pond and at the effluent 

discharge point. The samples were 

analyzed for 3H, gOSr, 238PuJ 239+240Pu, gross 

beta, and gamma activity in accordance with 

the schedule in Table 5.2. The annual 

average of gross beta analyses from the two 

sampling locations is listed in Table 5.6. 

The effluent from characterization wells in 

Area 3 was discharged into containment 

ponds. The total liquid discharged was 

measured. By multiplying that volume by 

the average concentration of 3H in collected 

samples, shown in Table 5.6, the total 

amount of tritium discharged (4.2 Ci or 0.1 6 

TBq) was calculated. 

SEWAGE LAGOONS 

Samples were collected quarterly during this 

year from nine sewage lagoons on the 

network at the end of 1997. Each of the 

lagoons is part of a closed system used for 

evaporative treatment of sanitary waste. 

The lagoons are located in Areas 5,6, 12, 

22,23, and 25. The annual gross beta 

concentration averages for all lagoons 

ranged between 7.7 and 33 x 1 O-' pCi/mL 

(0.28 to 1.2 Bq/L). No radioactivity was 

detected above the MDCs for 3H or "Sr. No 

test-related radioactivity was detected by 

gamma spectrometric analyses. 

RADIOACTIVITY IN SUPPLY WELLS AND 

DRINKING WATER 

The principal water distribution system on 

the NTS is potentially the critical pathway for 

ingestion of waterborne radionuclides. 

Consequently, the water distribution system 

is sampled and evaluated frequently. The 

NTS water system consisted of 11 supply 

wells, 10 of which supplied potable water to 

onsite distribution systems. The drinking 

water is pumped from the wells to the points 

of consumption. The supply wells were 

sampled on a quarterly basis. Drinking 

water is sampled at taps on the end-points 

of the distribution systems to provide a 

constant check of the radioactivity and to 

allow end-use activity comparisons to the 

radioactivity of the water in the supply wells. 

In this section, analytical results are 

presented from samples taken at the 11 

supply wells. Each well was sampled and 

analyzed as noted in the schedule in 

Table 5.2. 

The locations of the supply wells are shown 

in Figure 5.1. Water from these wells (ten 

potable and one nonpotable) was used for a 

variety of purposes during 1997. Samples 

were collected from those wells which could 

potentially provide water for human 

consumption. These data were used to help 

document the radiological characteristics of 

the NTS groundwater system. The sample 

results are maintained in a database so that 

long-term trends and changes can be 

studied. Table 5.8 lists the drinking water 

sources, and Table 5.9 lists the potable and 

nonpotable supply wells and their respective 

radioactivity averages. No test-related 

radionuclides were detected by gamma 

spectrometry. Included in the table are the 

median MDCs for each of the measurements 

for comparison to the concentration 

averages for each location. For various 

operational reasons, samples could not be 

collected from all locations every sampling 

period. 

As a check on any effect the water 

distribution system might have on water 

quality, samples were taken from seven 

water distribution system end-points (tap 

water samples). To ensure that all of the 

water available for consumption was being 

considered, each drinking water system was 

identified. The drinking water network at the 

NTS consists of five drinking water systems. 

The components of the five are shown in 

Table 5.8. These systems, fed by ten 

potable supply wells, are the source of the 

water for the seven end-points. Table 5.1 0 

lists the annual concentration averages for 

all the analyses performed on tap water 

samples. No test-related radionuclides were 

detected by gamma spectrometry. 

5-1 9 
GROSS BETA PLUTONIUM 

As shown in Table 5.9, the gross beta 

concentration averages for all the supply 

wells were above the median MDC of the 

measurement. The highest average gross 

beta activity occurred at Well 5B and was 

1 .I x IO' pCi/mL (0.41 Bq/L), which was 3.7 

percent of the DCG for 40K and 28 percent oi: 

the DCG for 'OSr based upon 4 mrem 

effective dose equivalent (EDE) per year. In 

earlier reports (Scoggins 1983 and Scoggins 

1984), it was noted that the majority of gross' 

beta activity was attributable to naturally 

occurring 40K. All concentration averages 

were comparable to those reported last year. 

As in previous years, the gross beta 

concentration averages for all tap water 

samples were above the median MDC of the 

measurements, The highest annual average 

occurred in the Area 23 Cafeteria, 10 x IO' 

pCi/mL (0.37 Bq/L), similar to the supply well 

water. The annual EDE is also equivalent to 

that from the supply well water. 

TRITIUM 

As shown in Table 5.9, the average tritium 

concentrations at all locations was below the 

average MDC of the measurement (note that 

the MDC was 13 x IO-' pCi/mL, based on 

tritium enrichment analysis). 

The annual average tritium concentrations in 

tap water samples, as shown in Table 5.1 0, 

were all less than the median MDC of 7.2 x 

lo-' pCi/mL. The tritium concentrations for 

all end-point water samples, which were 

determined by a conventional liquid 

scintillation counting method, are expected 

to be lower than the MDC, because the 

levels of tritium in the potable supply wells 

were near the median tritium enrichment 

MDC of 1.4 x 1 Oe8 pCi/mL (0.52 Bq/L). 

These MDC values are 0.9 percent and 

0.01 8 percent, respectively, of the drinking 

water DCG adjusted to a 4 mrem (0.04 mSv) 

EDE. 

All supply water samples analyzed for 238Pu 

Pu had concentrations below their 

MDC's of about 2.0 x lo-'' pCi/mL, which are 

about 2.0 percent of their respective DCGs 

adjusted to a 4 mrem EDE per year. Table 

5.9 lists the concentration averages for 

these nuclides for each location. 

and 239+240 

The annual averages of 239+240Pu and 238Pu 

for each tap water sample were below the 

median MDC of the measurements, which 

were both less than 2 percent of the 4 mrem 

DCG. These isotopes are not normally 

detected in drinking water. 

GROSS ALPHA 

In accordance with the National Primary 

Drinking Water Regulations (Title 40 CFR 

141), gross alpha measurements were made 

on quarterly samples from the drinking water 

systems, namely the potable supply wells. 

As shown in Table 5.9, the average gross 

alpha concentration for all of the supply 

wells, except Well J-12 and Well 8, was 

above the median MDC of 1.4 x 10' pCi/mL. 

The highest concentration occurred in 

samples from Well C-1 in Area 6 and was 

17 x lo-' pCi/mL (0.63 Bq/L). This is 

acceptable according to the EPA drinking 

water standard (Title 40 CFR 141) as long 

as the combined concentration of 226Ra and 

228Ra is less than 5 x 1 O-' pCi/mL (0.1 8 

Bq/L). The combined Ra concentration, for 

these two wells, was less than the combined 

MDC of 4.5 x 1 0-' pCi/mL (0.1 7 Bq/L), as 

shown in Table 5.1 1. 

As added assurance that no radioactivity 

gets into the systems between the supply 

wells and end-point users, measurements of 

gross alpha are also made on quarterly 

samples from the tap water samples. As 

shown in Table 5.1 0, the annual 

concentration averages for gross alpha 

radioactivity in tap water samples collected 

at five locations, exceeded the screening 

level at which 226Ra analysis is required, 

5 pCi/L (0.19 Bq/L). Samples from the 

5-20 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

supply wells were collected and analyzed for 

both 226Ra and "'Ra. As shown by the 

radium results in Table 5.1 1, the sum of the 

average concentrations for 226Ra and 228Ra 

were all less than 5 pCi/L, so the onsite 

systems were in compliance with drinking 

water regulations. 

STRONTIUM 

Beginning in 1994, gost' analyses were 

changed from annually to quarterly on 

samples collected from the potable supply 

wells, but analyses on non-potable supply 

wells remained on an annual basis. The 

concentration averages of 'OSr for each 

location, as shown in Table 5.9, were below 

the median MDC. 

(2.2 kBq/L) in a sample from Well UE-5n. 

This activity is less than 70 percent of the 

DCG for tritium established in DOE Order 

5400.5 for comparison with the dose limit (4 

mrem) in the National Primary Drinking 

Water Regulations. Six of the wells sampled 

yielded tritium results greater than the MDC. 

The trend in tritium concentration in samples 

from Test Well B is shown in Figure 5.6 and 

is typical of a well with decreasing tritium 

concentrations. Well UE-7ns was routinely 

sampled between 1978 and 1987 and 

sampling began again in 1992. An 

increasing trend in tritium activity was 

evident at the time sampling ceased in 1987. 

OFFSITE MONITORING IN THE VICINITY 

OF THE NEVADA TEST SITE 

As indicated by Table 5.1 0, the 90Sr results 

for samples collected from all the selected 

tap water samples had concentrations that 

were less than the median MDC of the 

measurements. 

LTHMP MONITORING ON AND 

AROUND THE NEVADA TEST SITE 

NEVADA TEST SITE MONITORING 

The present R&IE-LV sampling locations on 

the NTS, or immediately outside its borders 

on federally owned land are shown in Figure 

5.3. All sampling locations are selected by 

DOE and primarily represent potable water 

supplies. Since 1995, R&IE-LV has only 

sampled wells without pumps and, for quality 

assurance purposes, collected samples from 

some of the potable wells sampled by BN. A 

total of 22 wells was sampled. 

All samples were analyzed by gamma 

spectrometry and for tritium. No gammaemitting radionuclides were detected in any 

of the NTS samples collected in 1997. 

Summary results of tritium analyses are 

given in Table 5.1 2. The highest average 

tritium activity was 6.0 x 1 O4 pCi/L 

Water sampling around the NTS is 

conducted by the EPA's R&lE-LV, under an 

interagency agreement with DOE, to ensure 

the radiological safety of public drinking 

water supplies and representative water 

sources or rural residents and, where 

suitable, to monitor any migration of 

radionuclides from the NTS. The sampling 

locations are shown on Figure 5.4 and the 

analytical results are in Table 5.13. No manmade gamma-emitting radionuclides were 

detected in any sample. Adaven Spring 

showed detectable tritium activity, while the 

sample from the low-level waste site south 

of Beatty had barely detectable activity. 

LTHMP MONITORING AT OTHER 

TEST SITES 

Annual sampling of surface and 

groundwaters is conducted at the Projects 

SHOAL and FAULTLESS sites in Nevada, 

the Projects GASBUGGY and GNOME sites 

in New Mexico, the Projects RULISON and 

RIO BLANC0 sites in Colorado, and €he 

Project DRIBBLE (SALMON) site in 

Mississippi. Sampling is normally conducted 

in odd numbered years on Amchitka Island, 

Alaska, at the site of Projects CANNIKIN, 

LONG SHOT, and MILROW. 

5-21 
0 

4 1.0 IO 

1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 

Year 

Figure 5.6 Trends in Tritium Concentration, Test Well B on the NTS 

The sampling procedure is the same as that 

used for sites on the NTS and offsite areas 

(described above) with the exception that 

two 3.8-L samples are collected in 

Cubitainers. The second sample serves as 

a backup or as a duplicate sample. 

PROJECT FAULTLESS 

Project FAULTLESS was a "calibration test" 

conducted on January 19, 1968, in Central 

Nevada, in a sparsely populated area near 

Blue Jay Maintenance Station, Nevada. The 

test had a yield between 200 and 1,000 kt 

and was designed to test the behavior of 

seismic waves and to determine the 

usefulness of the site for high-yield tests. 

The emplacement depth was 975 m (3,199 

ft). A surface crater was created, but as an 

irregular block along local faults rather than 

as a saucer-shaped depression. The area is 

characterized by basin and range 

topography, with alluvium overlying 

tuffaceous sediments. The working point of 

the test was in tuff. 

Sampling was conducted on February 26, 

1997, at locations shown in Figure 5.7. 

Routine sampling locations include one 

spring and five wells of varying depths. All 

routine samples were collected. At least two 

wells (HTH-1 and HTH-2) are positioned to 

intercept migration from the test cavity, 

should it occur (Chapman and Hokett 1991). 

Gamma-ray spectral analysis results 

indicated that no man-made gamma-emitting 

radionuclides were present in any sample 

above the MDC. Tritium concentrations 

were less then the MDC (see Table 5.14). 

These results are all consistent with results 

obtained in previous years. The results for 

tritium indicate that, to date, migration into 

the sampled wells has not taken place and 

no test-related radioactivity has entered area 

drinking water supplies. 

5-22 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITES 

I 

I 

I 

N 

I 

/ 

/ 

, 

/ 

/ 

/ 

, I ,/-.-- , / 

I ‘. \--- / 

/ 

/ ‘\ 

I1 , 

\ Hot Creek ‘-?d I 

Ranch Spring , 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I Jim Bias Well I (Blue Jay Springs) 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I i 

I 

I 

I 

/ 

I 

/ 

I 

/ 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

\ 

\ 

I\ 

\ 

Slx-Mile Well 

Maintenance 

Site C Complex 

*Surface Ground Zero 

I Water Sampling Locations 

I ow Not Sampled 

0 5 10 

Scale in Kilometers 

COUNTY 

,/- 

*..e 

__.” 

LOCATION MAP 

Figure 5.7 Sampling Locations at the FAULTLESS Site - 1997 

5-23 
PROJECT SHOAL 

Project SHOAL, a 12-kt test emplaced at 

365 m (1 ,I 98 ft), was conducted on October 

26, 1963, in Fallon Nevada, in a sparsely 

populated area near Frenchman Station, 

Nevada. The test, part of the Vela Uniform 

Program, was designed to investigate 

detection of a nuclear detonation in an 

active earthquake zone. The working point 

was in granite and no surface crater was 

created. 

Samples were collected on February 24 and 

25, 1997. The sampling locations are shown 

in Figure 5.8. Only nine of the ten routine 

wells were sampled. Spring Windmill, and 

Smith and James Spring have been deleted. 

In 1997, four new wells were added to the 

LTHMP at this site, which are positioned 

near ground zero (GZ). Well HC-3 was dry 

and will have to be reworked. It will be 

sampled in 1998. At least one location, Well 

HS-I , should intercept radioactivity migrating 

from the test cavity, should it occur 

(Chapman and Hokett 1991). 

Gamma-ray spectral analysis results 

indicated that no man-made gamma-emitting 

radionuclides were present in any samples 

above the MDC. One of the new wells, 

HC-4 drilled in 1996, had a tritium 

concentration of 860 -t- 160 pCi/L 

(320 f 6 Bq/L). Tritium concentrations at all 

the other locations were below the MDC 

(see Table 5.1 5). 

PROJECT RULlSON 

Cosponsored by the AEC and Austral Oil 

Company under the Plowshare Program, 

Project RULISON was designed to stimulate 

natural gas recovery in the Mesa Verde 

formation. The test, conducted near Grand 

Valley, Colorado, on September 10, 1969, 

consisted of a 40-kt nuclear explosive 

emplaced at a depth of 2,568 rn (8,425 ft). 

Production testing began in 1970 and was 

completed in April 1971. Cleanup was 

initiated in 1972 and !he welfs were plugged 

in 1976. Some surface contamination 

resulted from decontamination of drilling 

equipment and fallout from gas flaring. 

Contaminated soil was removed during the 

cleanup operations. 

Sampling was conducted May 6, 1997, with 

collection of samples from all sampling 

locations in the area of Grand Valley and 

Ruljson, Colorado. Routine sampling 

locations are shown in Figure 5.9 and 

include five local ranches, five sites in the 

vicinity of surface GZ (SGZ), including one 

test well, a surface-discharge spring, and a 

surface sampling location on Battlement 

Creek. Seven new monitoring wells were 

completed at the RULISON site in 1995. 

Wells RU-1 and RU-2 were added to the 

LTHMP in 1997, as part of the Remedial 

Investigation and Feasibility Study. 

Tritium has never been observed in 

measurable concentrations in the Grand 

Valley City Springs. All of the remaining 

sampling sites show detectable levels of 

tritium, which have generally exhibited a 

stable or decreasing trend over the last 

two decades. The range of tritium activity in 

1997 was from 42 f 5 pCilL (2 f 0.2 Bq/L) at 

Well RU-I , to 100 f 5.9 pCi/L (4 & 0.2 Bq/L) 

at Lee Hayward Ranch. All values were less 

than 1 percent of the DCG (see Table 5.1 6). 

The detectable tritium activities were 

probably a result of the high natural 

background in the area. This was supported 

by the DRI analysis, which indicated that 

most of the sampling locations were shallow, 

drawing water from the surficial aquifer, 

which was unlikely to become contaminated 

by any radionuclides arising from the Project 

RUllSON cavity (Chapman and Hokett 

1991). Gamma-ray spectral analysis results 

indicated that man-made gamma-emitting 

radionuclides were not detectable. 

PROJECT RIO BLANCO 

Project RIO BLANCO, a joint governmentindustry test designed to stimulate natural 

gas flow, was conducted under the 

Plowshare Program. The test was 

conducted on May 17, 1973, at a location 

between Rifle and Meeker Colorado. Three 

nuclear explosives, with a total yield of 99 kt, 

were emplaced at 1780-, 1920-, and 2040-m 

(5840-, 6299-, and 66.934) depths in the 

Fort Union and Mesa Verde formations. 

Production testing continued to 1976 when 

5-24 
WA TER SUR VEILLA NCE ACTIVITIES 

Flowing Well I I Well H-2 

H-3 Well HC-2 

Well HC-4 I 

Hunt's Station Well E 

well HC-1 e well HS-1 

E Well HC-3 

Smlth/James 

Spring 

IN 

c 1 

CHUJCJLC COUr\NTY ------_I 

MINERAL COUNTY- 

*Surface Ground Zero 

E Water Sampling Locations 

Not Sampled 

Scale in Miles 

0 5 

b lb 1; 

Scale in Kilometers 

Figure 5.8 Sampling Locations at the SHOAL Site - 1997 

5-25 
d 

I /--- 

Potter Ranch -- 

Rothgery 

Ranch I 

Rulis6n 1 / 

Grand Valley \ / -.e --r - - d’ 

City Sprlnc ,s---- . -- WJacobs Ranch 

m\Battleinent Creek 

Gardner ’!’ CER a\ 

Ranch Test Well -illll;Prlng 

N 

I Water Sampling Locations 

Communities 

o-ina 

Scale in Kilometers 

LOCATION MAP 

GARFl E LD 

COUNTY 

Figure 5.9 Sampling Locations at the RULISON Site - 1997 

’ 5-26 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

cleanup and restoration activities were 

completed. Tritiated water produced during 

testing was injected to 1,710 m (5,610 ft) in 

a nearby gas well. 

Samples were collected May 7 and 8, 1997, 

from the sampling sites shown in Figure 

5.10. Only 13 of the 14 routine wells were 

sampled. No sample was collected from 

CER #4, which was not accessible due to 

heavy rainfall. The routine sampling 

locations included three springs and six 

wells. Three of the wells are located near 

the cavity and at least two of the wells 

(Wells RB-D-01 and RB-D-03) were suitable 

for monitoring possible migration of 

radioactivity from the cavity. 

No radioactive materials attributable to the 

RIO BLANC0 test were detected in samples 

collected in May 1997. The range of tritium 

activity, using the enrichment method, was 

from 36 +. 5.2 (1.3 rt 0.2 Bq/L) at the B-1 

Equity Camp to 25 2 3.7 (1 kO.1 Bq/L) at 

Fawn Creek, 8,400 ft downstream (see 

Table 5.1 7). The tritium concentrations are 

well below 20,000 pCi/L level defined in the 

EPA National Primary Drinking Water 

Regulations (Title 40 CFR 141). A13 samples 

were analyzed for presence of gamma-ray 

emitting radionuclides, and none were 

detected. 

PROJECT GNOME 

Project GNOME, conducted on December 

10, 1961, near Carlsbad, New Mexico, was a 

multipurpose test performed in a salt 

formation. A 3-kt nuclear explosive was 

emplaced at 371 m (1,217 ft) depth in the 

Salado salt formation. Radioactive gases 

were unexpectedly vented during the test. 

The USGS conducted a tracer study in 

1963, involving injection of 20 Ci 3H, 10 Ci 

I3'Cs, 10 Ci ''ST, and 4 Ci I3'l (740, 370, 

370, and 150 GBq, respectively) into Well 

USGS-8 and pumping water from Well 

USGS-4. During cleanup activities in 1968- 

69, contaminated material was placed in the 

test cavity access well. More material was 

slurried into the cavity and drifts in 1979. 

Sampling at Project GNOME was conducted 

June 25 through 27, 1997. The routine 

sampling sites, depicted in Figure 5.1 1, 

include nine monitoring wells in the vicinity 

of GZ and the municipal water supplies at 

Loving and Carlsbad, New Mexico. 

Tritium results greater than the MDC were 

detected in water samples from 6 of the 12 

sampling locations in the immediate vicinity 

of GZ. Tritium activities in Wells DD-1, LRL7, USGS-4, and USGS-8 ranged from 6.1 6 x 

lo7 to 2.46 x IO3 pCi/L (2.29 x lo6 to 91 

Bq/l), as shown in Table 5.18. Well DD-1 

collects water from the test cavity; Well LRL7 collects water from a side drift; and Wells 

USGS-4 and -8 were used in the 

radionuclide tracer study conducted by the 

USGS. None of these wells are sources of 

potable water. 

In addition to tritium, 137Cs and 'OSr 

concentrations were observed in samples 

from Wells DD-1, LRL-7, and USGS-8 and 

'OSr activity was detected in Well USGS-4 as 

in previous years (see Table 5.1 8). No 

tritium was detected in the remaining 

sampling locations, including Well USGS-1, 

which the DRI analysis (Chapman and 

Hokett 1991) indicated is positioned to 

detect any migration of radioactivity from the 

cavity. All other tritium results were below 

the MDC. 

PROJECT GASBUGGY 

Project GASBUGGY was a Plowshare 

Program test co-sponsored by the U.S. 

Government and El Paso Natural Gas. 

Conducted near Farmington, New Mexico, 

on December 10, 1967, the test was 

designed to stimulate a low productivity 

natural gas reservoir. A nuclear explosive 

with a 29-kt yield was emplaced at a depth 

of 1,290 m (4,240 ft). Production testing 

was completed in 1976, and restoration 

activities were completed in July 1978. 

Sampling at GASBUGGY was conducted 

during May 10 through 12, 1997. Only 12 

samples were collected at the designated 

sampling locations shown in Figure 5.12. 

5-27 
N 

RIO BIANCO COUNTY 

S Not Sampled 

*Surface Ground Zero 

Water Sampling Locations 

0 Scale in Miles 25 

' Scale in Kilometers 

LOCATION MAP 

._ ':

RiO 

W 

BLANCO 

COUNTY 

Figure 5.1 0 Sampling Localions at the RIO BLANCO Site - 1997 

5-28 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

Carlsbad 

Well 7 

CW 

N 

i 

Well USGS-1 W 

PHS Well 10 PHS Well 6 

W PHS Well 8 

$?Surface Ground Zero 

W Water Sampling Locations 

Scale in Miles 

0 5 10 15 

Scale in Kilometers 

Figure 5.1 1 Sampling Locations at the GNOME Site - 1997 

5-29 
Bixler Ranch H 

of Well Below 

swell 30,3,32.343N 

Io La Jura Creek 

EPNG Well 10-36 Windmill 2 Well q 

1 

Cedar Springs I 

Cave Springs I 

Arnold Ranch 111 

Arnold Ranch Well I 

N 

i 

To Dulce Y 

Bixler Ranch H 

of Well Below 

swell 30,3,32.343N 

Io La Jura Creek 

EPNG Well 10-36 Windmill 2 Well 

Cedar Springs I 

Jlcarllla Well 1 

Cave Springs I 

Arnold Ranch 111 

Arnold Ranch Well I 

N 

i 

Lower Burro H 

Canyon Well 

I Well 28.3.33.2338 4 

*Surface Ground Zero 

111 Water Sampling Locations 

H Not Sampled 

Scale in Miles 

0-5 8 

O Scale in Kilometers 

LOCATION MAP 

Figure 5.1 2 Sampling Locations at the GASBUGGY Site - 1997 

5-30 
WATER SUR VEILLA NCE ACTIVITIES 

The Bixler Ranch Well has been sealed up 

and the Well 28.3.33.233 south had the 

pumps removed and no samples could be 

obtained. 

The Cedar Springs sampling site yielded a 

tritium activity of 46 A 5.8 pCi/L 

(1.7 f 0.2 Bq/L). For Lower Burro Canyon, 

the tritium activity was 93 A 5.5 pCi/L (3.4 f 

0.2 Bq/L), which was less than 0.2 percent 

of the DCG and similar to the range seen in 

previous years (see Table 5.19). Tritium 

samples from the other locations were all 

below the average MDC. Well EPNG 10-36, 

a gas well located 132 m (435 ft) northwest 

of the test cavity, with a sampling depth of 

approximately 1 ,I 00 m (3,600 ft), has 

yielded detectable tritium activities since 

1984. The sample collected in May 1997 

contained tritium at a concentration of 122 f 

5.9 pCi/L (4.5 -r- 0.2 Bq/L), as shown in Table 

5.19. The migration mechanism and route is 

not currently known, although an analysis by 

DRI indicated two feasible routes: one 

through the Printed Cliffs sandstones and 

the other one through the Ojo Alamo 

sandstone, one of the principal aquifers in 

the region (Chapman et al., 1996b). In 

either case, fractures extending from the 

cavity may be the primary or a contributing 

mechanism. 

All gamma-ray spectral analysis results 

indicated that no man-made gamma-emitting 

radionuclides were present in any offsite 

samples. Tritium concentrations of water 

samples collected onsite and offsite are 

consistent with those of past studies at the 

GASBUGGY site. 

PROJECT DRIBBLE 

Project DRIBBLE was comprised of two 

nuclear and two gas explosive tests, 

conducted in the SALMON test site area 

near Hattiesburg, Mississippi, under the Vela 

Uniform Program. The purpose of Project 

DRIBBLE was to study the effects of 

decoupling on seismic signals produced by 

nuclear explosives tests. The first test, 

SALMON, was a nuclear device with a yield 

of about 5.3 kt, detonated on October 22, 

1964, at a depth of 826 m (2,710 ft). This 

test created the cavity used for the 

subsequent tests, including STERLING, a 

nuclear test conducted on December 3, 

1966, with a yield of 380 tons, and the two 

gas explosions, DIODE TUBE (on February 

2, 1969) and HUMID WATER (on April 19, 

1970). The ground surface and shallow 

groundwater aquifers were contaminated by 

disposal of drilling muds and fluids in surface 

pits. The radioactive contamination was 

primarily limited to the unsaturated zone and 

upper, nonpotable aquifers near SGZ. 

Shallow wells, labeled HMH wells on Figure 

5.1 3, have been added to the area near 

SGZ to monitor this contamination. Fifteen 

new wells were completed in 1996 and first 

sampled by the EPA LTHMP Program in 

1997. These wells are shallow, between 9 

m to 12 m (30 ft to 40 ft) in depth. In 

addition to the monitoring of wells near GZ, 

extensive sampling of water wells is 

conducted in the nearby offsite area as 

shown in Figure 5.14. 

Because of the variability noted in past 

years in samples from the shallow 

monitoring wells near the SALMON GZ, the 

sampling procedure was modified several 

years ago. A second sample is taken after 

pumping for a specified period of time or 

after the well has been pumped dry and 

permitted to recharge. These second 

samples may be representative of formation 

water, whereas the first samples may be 

more indicative of recent rainfall. 

Sampling on and in the vicinity of the 

SALMON site was conducted between April 

20 through 24,1997. 

Long-term decreasing trends in tritium 

concentrations are evident for those 

locations that had detectable tritium activity 

at the beginning of the LTHMP, such as in 

the samples from the Baxterville City Well 

depicted in Figure 5.15 and Well HM-S 

shown in Figure 5.16. Due to the high 

rainfall in the area, the normal sampling 

5-31 
I 

If 

It 

tJ 

It 

I' 

I1 

I' 

\\ 

\' '' 

REECo Pits 

@HM-L2 

* SA4-1 -M 

----____ 

---_____ 

HM-2b 

4500 ft, from HT-4 

*Surface Ground Zero LOCATION MAP 

Q Wells 

W Surface Water 

AHMH Holes * Shallow Aquifer Wells 

180 O Scale in Meters 

Figure 5.13 Sampling Locations Near GZ at the SALMON Site - 1997 

5-32 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

B. Dennis 

BM. Dennis 

I Columbia City Little Creek #1 

Well648 Lee Anderson 

Gil Ray's Crawfish Pond 

,-Willie Burge A 

Salt Dome Timber Co. 

N 

f Lumberton 

/ 

&-Surface Ground Zero 

I Water Sampling Locations 

0 Salmon Site Area 

Scale in Miles 

01234 

Scale in Kilometers 

LOCATION MAP / 

Figure 5.1 4 Sampling Locations Offsite at the SALMON Site - 1997 

5-33 
10' 0.11 

lo" 

I ...... ............................................................................................................................................. bv 0 

0 

Q 

0.011 5 

u, 

n 

Q) 

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 

Year 

Figure 5.1 5 Tritium Results Trends in Elaxterville, Public Drinking Water Supply - 1997 

I o5 

C 

.- 0 3 IO4 .................................................. ............................................. E 

C 

a, 

3 

10 

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 

Year 

Figure 5.1 6 Tritium Results in Well HM-S, SALMON Site, Project DRIBBLE - 1997 

5-34 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

procedure is modified for the shallow onsite 

wells as described above. Of the 45 

locations sampled onsite, 20 sites were 

sampled twice (pre-and post-pumping), and 

8 yielded tritium activities greater than the 

MDC in either the first or second sample. Of 

these, eight yielded results higher than 

normal background (approximately 60 pCi/L 

[2.2 Bq/L]), as shown in Table 5.20. The 

locations where the highest tritium activities 

were measured generally correspond to 

areas of known contamination. No tritium 

concentrations above normal background 

values were detected in any offsite samples. 

Man-made gamma-ray emitting 

radionuclides were not detected in any 

sample collected in this study. 

Six of the previously sampled locations 

regularly have tritium values above those 

expected in surface water samples. Of the 

15 new wells, tritium values ranged from 3.4 

x104t014~3.2pCi/L(1.3x103t00.5~ 

0.2 Bq/L) as shown in Table 5.20. Only one 

well was above the MDC in the 36 samples 

collected from the offsite sampling locations. 

Tritium activity ranged from less than the 

MDC to 26 pCi/L (1 Bq/L), 0.01 percent of 

the DCG. These results do not exceed the 

natural tritium activity expected in rain water 

in this area. 

Results of sampling related to Project 

DRIBBLE are discussed in greater detail in 

the Onsite and Offsite Environmental 

Monitoring Report, 'Radiation Monitoring 

around SALMON Test Site," Lamar County, 

Mississippi, April 1997 (Davis 1997, 

available from R&IE-LV). 

AMCHITKA ISLAND, ALASKA 

Sampling was conducted June 3 through 17, 

1997. The sampling locations on Amchitka 

Island are shallow wells and surface 

sampling sites. Therefore, the monitoring 

network for Amchitka Island is restricted to 

monitoring of surface contamination and 

drinking water supplies. 

All gamma-ray spectral analysis results 

indicated that no man-made gamma-emitting 

radionuclides were present in any samples 

collected onsite. Tritium concentrations of 

water samples collected onsite are 

consistent with those of past studies at the 

three sites, MILROW, CANNIKIN, and 

LONG SHOT. Results are discussed in 

greater detail in the "Amchitka Alaska 

Special Sampling Report" (Faller 1997 

available from R&lE-LV). 

GROUNDWATER MONITORING 

GROUNDWATER QUANTITY 

Water levels are monitored annually by the 

USGS on and around the NTS at 

approximately 156 measurement locations. 

Data for the 1995 water year are reported in 

Bauer et al., 1996, the most recent 

publication. Results are used in regional 

and local groundwater models, but are not 

routinely analyzed for water level trends. 

However, no significant water level impacts 

associated with groundwater usage were 

detected in 1996. 

The USGS has begun to compile historic 

water-level and water-withdrawal data to 

evaluate trends of water withdrawal and 

water levels in the southern NTS area. The 

purpose of the study is to determine whether 

correlations exist that may indicate short- or 

long-term effects of water use in Frenchman 

Flat and Mercury Valley. Ten wells have 

been used as production wells and 11 wells 

have been used for observation. 

Water-level data were evaluated for all the 

observation wells and production wells 

having sufficient water-level data. 

Water usage on the NTS is monitored by the 

both the USGS and BN. The data are 

reported in Bauer et al., 1996. Water use at 

the NTS continues to decline, due to the 

cessation of underground nuclear testing in 

1992 and was about 1.33 x 1 O6 m3 

(351 x lo6 gal) in 1997. 

GROUNDWATER QUALITY 

LLNL collaborated with LANL and USGS to 

collect fluid samples from post-shot wells at 

the NTS. In addition to radionuclides more 

5-35 
commonly found in cavity fluids, the 

presence of low-levels of plutonium 

(0.22 pCi/L at collection time) were 

confirmed in one of the wells. Results from 

this sampling event will be included in the 

LLNL Hot Well Database, which compiles 

new and historical radiochemical data from 

cavity and near cavity wells on the NTS. 

Isotopic and chemical data from 107 

samples of southern Nevada waters were 

compiled and published (Rose et al., 1997). 

LLNL continues to investigate the 

occurrence, distribution, and potential 

mobility of radionuclides in the sub-surface 

through investigation of archival post-shot 

debris. Static leaching experiments of glass 

and crystalline samples commenced to 

elucidate controls on the solubility of 

radionuclides. 

Regional-scale groundwater investigations 

concentrated on determining recharge 

locations and flow paths for the groundwater 

flow systems in southern Nevada. This 

included two separate sampling trips, during 

which approximately 50 samples were 

collected. Geochemical and 

isotopic measurements included cation and 

anion chemistry, oxygen, hydrogen and 

carbon stable isotopes, and radiocarbon. 

Groundwater quality was determined by 

monitoring wells and springs, both onsite 

and offsite, for radioactive constituents as 

discussed above. The remainder of this 

chapter summarizes analyses of water for 

chemical constituents, radioisotopes, and 

stable isotopes in order to comply with 

environmental permits, better characterize 

NTS groundwater quality, and support 

regional groundwater flow and transport 

models. 

DOE continued efforts to create a long-term 

monitoring program for wells in or near 

underground nuclear test cavities. The 

program objectives are to characterize the 

hydrologic source term and evaluate the 

decay and potential migration of 

radionuclides through monitoring at or near 

the source. LANL and LLNL monitored 

water at the TYBO, BULLION, and 

CHESHIRE tests on Pahute Mesa and the 

DALHART and DILBY tests in Yucca Flat 

(LANL 1998). A LLNL summary report will 

be released in 1998. 

5.6 NONRADIOLOGICAL 

MONITORING 

The 1997 nonradiological monitoring 

program for the NTS included onsite 

sampling of various environmental media 

and substances for compliance with federal 

and state regulations or permits and for 

ecological studies. The Ecological 

Monitoring and Compliance Program 

performed habitat mapping in the southern 

third of the NTS, characterized NTS springs, 

monitored man-made water sources, 

conducted wild horse and chukar surveys, 

prepared a biological monitoring plan for the 

Hazardous Materials Spill Center (HSC), and 

surveyed for several former candidate 

species for federal listing under the 

Endangered Species Act. In 1997, 

nonradiological monitoring was conducted 

for two series of tests conducted at the HSC 

on the NTS. 

Nonradiological monitoring of non-NTS 

DOE/NV facilities was conducted at three 

offsite facilities. This monitoring was limited 

to wastewater discharges to publicly owned 

treatment works. 

Routine nonradiological environmental 

monitoring on the NTS in 1997 was limited 

to: 

0 Sampling of drinking water distribution 

systems and water haulage trucks for 

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and 

state of Nevada compliance. 

a Sewage lagoon influent and E Tunnel 

discharge sampling for compliance with 

state of Nevada operating permit 

requirements. 

5-36 
WA TER SUR VEILLA NCE ACT1 VITIES 

CLEAN WATER ACT RESULTS 

NTS OPERATIONS 

The NTS General Permit requires quarterly 

reporting for biochemical oxygen demand 

(BOD) and specific conductance, organic 

loading rates, and water depths in infiltration 

basins. It also requires reporting of second 

quarter influent toxics sampling. The results 

of this sampling are shown in Tables 5.21, 

5.22, 5.23, and 5.24, respectively. All 

values in these tables are in compliance with 

the permit requirements. 

The permit also requires monitoring of the 

infiltration basins, which attain a depth of 30 

cm or more in January and June for 

parameters listed in Appendix II of the 

permit. Sampling is required as soon as any 

other system exceeds the 30 cm. Three 

secondary ponds at the Area 23 facility 

usually contain the required depth, but are 

excluded as needing the sampling in Part 

lll.C.4 of the permit. During 1997, the Yucca 

Lake system exceeded the 30 cm in the first 

quarter, and these sampling results are 

given in Table 5.25. All values in this table 

are in compliance with the permit 

requirements. 

NON-NTS OPERATIONS 

Only the North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF) 

and the Remote Sensing Laboratory (RSL) 

are required by permit to sample and 

analyze wastewater effluent and submit selfmonitoring reports. The NLVF selfmonitoring report consists of two outfalls and 

the burn pit batch discharge being 

monitored. The Clark County Sanitation 

District wastewater permit for the RSL 

requires biannual monitoring of two outfalls, 

quarterly pH, and monthly septage reports. 

All sampling results for 1997 were within 

permit limits. 

SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT 

RESULTS 

Water sampling was conducted for analysis 

of bacteria, volatile organic compounds 

(VOCs), inorganic constituents, and water 

quality as required by the SDWA and state 

of Nevada regulations. Samples were taken 

at various locations throughout all drinking 

water distribution systems on the NTS. 

Common sampling points were restroom and 

cafeteria sinks. All samples were collected 

according to accepted practices, and the 

analyses were performed by state approved 

laboratories. Analyses were performed in 

accordance with Nevada Administrative 

Code 445A and Title 40 CFR 141. 

BACTERIOLOGICAL SAMPLING 

Samples were submitted to the stateapproved Associated Pathologists 

Laboratories in Las Vegas, Nevada, for 

coliform analyses. All water distribution 

systems were tested once a month, with the 

number of people being served determining 

the number of samples collected. If coliform 

bacteria are present, the system must be 

shut down and chlorinated. In order to 

reopen the system, three or four consecutive 

samples must meet state requirements, 

depending again on the number of people 

served. There were no incidents of positive 

coliform results during 1997. 

Residual chlorine and pH levels were 

determined at the collection point by using 

colorimetric methods approved by the state. 

The results were recorded in BN’s drinking 

water sample logbook, and the chlorine 

residual level was recorded on an analysis 

form. 

Samples from trucks, which hauled potable 

water from NTS wells to work areas, were 

also analyzed for coliform bacteria. During 

1996, the state relaxed the requirement to 

test every truck load of water, to testing 

each of the three trucks weekly. There were 

no positive coliform sample results in 1997 

that required superchlorination and 

resampling. 

CHEMICAL ANALYSIS 

Chemical analysis in 1997 consisted of 

VOCs, metals, and inorganics. 

5-37 
ORGANIC COMPOUND ANALYSIS 

Samples for VOCs were collected during the 

first quarter of 1997 from potable water wells 

4A and 5B and during the third quarter from 

well 5B. The samples were analyzed by a 

state-approved laboratory. None of the 

results were above quantitation limits. 

METAL ANALYSIS 

In compliance with a state agreement, 

samples were collected in the first and third 

quarters and analyzed for lead and copper. 

These samples were taken from faucets and 

a fill stand at 37 separate locations at the 

NTS, covering all the potable water 

distribution systems. All results were below 

the method detection limits of 0.5 mg/L for 

copper and 0.01 mg/L for lead. 

INORGANIC COMPOUND ANALYSIS AND 

WATER QUALITY 

To comply with a 1991 variance to the Area 

25 water system permit, fluoride samples 

need to be taken annually before July 31 to 

confirm that the fluoride concentration is less 

than four parts per million. Samples taken 

from Area 25 wells J-12 and J-13 in the first 

quarter of 1997 confirmed that the fluoride 

concentration was acceptable. 

During the first quarter of 1997, all systems 

(ten water wells) were sampled and 

analyzed for nitrates. The results of these 

analyses are shown in Table 5.26. Since 

the samples from wells J-12 and J-13 had 

nitrate concentrations at one half the 

maximum contaminant level of 10 mg/L, 

repeat analyses were required for the next 

four consecutive quarters. Samples from 

these two wells in the second, third, and 

fourth quarters of 1997 have all been 

satisfactory, at less than half of the 

maximum contaminant level. 

CHARACTERIZATION AND MONITORING 

OF NTS SPRINGS 

From June 1996 through February 1997, 

biologists visited 25 natural water sources ai[ 

the NTS to determine if these mesic habitats 

qualify for jurisdictional wetlands protection. 

A summary report of all findings titled 

“Nevada Test Site Wetlands Assessment” 

(Hansen et al., 1997) was completed and 

distributed as a DOE/NV topical report in 

May. The report identifies 16 NTS natural 

water sources that may be classified as 

jurisdictional wetlands and 8 water sources 

that may be classified as waters of the 

United States. The report also identifies and 

summarizes previous studies on NTS natural 

water sources; describes their known 

physical, chemical, and biological features; 

identifies the current DOE management 

practices related to the protection of NTS 

wetlands; and identifies the information 

needed to develop and implement resource 

management objectives for NTS wetlands. 

Periodic monitoring of selected NTS natural 

water sources was continued in 1997. Nine 

water sources were visited between June 

and August. They included Cane, Captain 

Jack, Gold Meadows, Tippipah, Topopah, 

Tub, and Whiterock Springs; Reitmann 

Seep; and Yucca Playa Pond. Selected 

hydrology, water quality, and wildlife usage 

data were collected. These data were 

summarized and presented in an annual 

report titled “Ecological Monitoring and 

Compliance Program Fiscal Year 1997 

Report,” submitted to DOE/NV in 

September. 

5.7 WATER QUALITY 

PERM ITS 

Water quality permits were required by the 

state for onsite drinking water systems. 

Other types of water permits were required 

for onsite and offsite sewage-related 

activities. 

ONSITE WATER PERMITS 

DRINKING WATER SYSTEM PERMITS 

Four NTS drinking water system permits 

issued by the state of Nevada, as shown in 

Table 5.27 were renewed with new 

expiration dates. During 1994, the state of 

Nevada determined that the trucks used for 

5-38 
WATER SUR VEIL LANCE ACT1 VlTlES 

hauling potable water should also have 

permits, so three additional permits were 

obtained. These permits were also 

renewed. No drinking water systems were 

maintained by non-NTS facilities. 

SEWAGE DISCHARGE PERMITS 

Sewage discharge permits from the state of 

Nevada, Division of Environmental 

Protection are listed in Table 5.28 and 

require submission of quarterly discharge 

monitoring reports. 

NTS SEWAGE HAULING PERMITS 

Permits issued by the state of Nevada 

Division of Health for six sewage hauling 

trucks for the NTS were renewed in 

November 1995 and are listed in Table 5.29. 

NON-NTS SEWAGE PERMITS 

Sewage permits were required for four 

locations at non-NTS operations. These 

included two permits at the LVAO facilities 

and two at the Special Technologies 

Laboratory (STL) as shown in Table 5.28. 

Each was issued by the county or local 

municipality in which the facility was located 

as follows: 

0 

a 

NLVF - The NLVF self-monitoring report 

was submitted in October 1997. Two 

outfalls and the burn pit batch discharge 

are monitored. 

RSL - The Clark County Sanitation 

District wastewater permit for the RSL 

required biannual monitoring of two 

outfalls, quarterly pH, and monthly 

septage reports. RSL monitoring reports 

were submitted in May and December 

1997. 

STL - The STL holds wastewater permits 

for the Botello Road and Ekwill Street 

locations. There is no required selfmonitoring. 

5-39 
Table 5.1 Summary of Analytical Procedures for Water Samples - 1997 

Type of 

Analvsis 

Approxi mate 

MDC 

Analytical Count Analytical 

Equipment Ti me-min Procedure 

Sample 

Size-mL 

BN Procedures 

Gas-flow 

Proportional 

Counter 

100 Boil down. Place 

on planchet and 

heat to dryness 

Gross a 900 2 pCi/L 

Gross p Gas-flow 900 2 pCi/L 

Proportional 

Counter 

100 Boil down. Place 

on planchet and 

heat to dryness 

Gamma HpGe detector 100 

calibrated at 1 

keV/channel 

Online computer 500 

analysis 

Tritium Liquid scintilConvent. lation counter 

70 Distillation of 

100 mL 

2.5 

5 

300-700 pCi/L 

Tritium Liquid scintilEnrichment lation counter 

Electrolysis of 250 

mL basic solution 

300 20 pCi/L 

Plutonium Alpha 900 0.02 pCi/L 

Spectrometer 

1000 Tracer, ion 

exchange] collect 

ppt on filter 

Radium Gamma 

Spectrometer 

500 Tracer, ppt as 90 

sulfate, collect 

on filter 

1 pCi/L for 228Ra 

3 pCi/L for 226Ra 

Strontium Gas-f low 

Proportional 

Counter 

100 ppt as carbonate, 900 0.3 pCi/L 

count yttrium in 

growth 

R&l E-LV Procedures 

Gamma Online computer 

analysis 

3500 Varies with 

nuclide/detector 

'37Cs: 7 pCi/L 

HpGe detector 100 

calibrate at 0.5 

keV/chan ne1 

Distillation of 

sample 

Tritium Liquid scintil- 300 5-1 0 

Convent. lation counter 

300-700 pCi/L 

Tritium Liquid scintilEnrichment lation counter 

300 250 mL 

concentrate by 

electrolysis, 

dist i I I 

5 5 pCi/L 

5-40 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

Table 5.2 Summary of the Water Surveillance Program - 1997 

Sample 

TvDe 

Tap 

Water 

Potable 

Supply Wells 

Nonpotable 

Supply Wells 

Open 

Reservoirs 

Natural 

Springs 

Containment 

Ponds 

Sewage 

Lagoons 

Description 

Grab sample 

Grab sample 

Grab sample 

Grab sample 

Grab sample 

Grab sample 

Grab sample 

Number 

Collection of Sampling Type of 

Freauencv Locations(a) Analvsis 

Onsite Monitorinq 

Monthly 7 

Quarterly 10 

Quarterly 2 

Annually 15 

Annually 8 

Quarterly 1 

Quarterly 9 

(a) All locations were not sampled for various reasons. 

Gamma spectroscopy, 

gross 0, 3H, 

(238*239+240Pu, gross a 

quarterly), 

('"Sr annually). 

Gamma spectroscopy, 

gross a & 0, 3H, ("ST 

annual Iy) 238923g+240P u. 

Gamma spectroscopy, 

gross 0, 3H, "Sr 

238,239+240p 

Gamma spectroscopy, 

gross R, 3H, 'OSr 

238,239+240p 

Gamma spectroscopy, 

gross 0, 3H, 2383239+240Pu 

(90Sr annually). 

Gamma spectroscopy, 

I Pu 

(90Sr annually). 

gross 0, 3H 238,239~240 

Table 5.3 Groundwater Monitoring Parameters at the RWMS-5 

Parameters Determinina Suitabilitv of Groundwater 

Total and Dissolved Metals - As, Ba, Cd, Cr, Hg, Ag, Pb, Se 

Total and Dissolved Gross AlphdBeta 

Parameters Establishina Water Qualitv 

Chloride 

Total and Dissolved Fe, Mn, Na 
Table 5.3 (Groundwater Monitoring Parameters at the RWMS-5, cont.) 

Parameters Establishina Water Qualitv. cont. 

Phenols 

Sulfate 

Indicators of Contamination 

PH 

Conductivity 

Total Organic Carbon 

Total Organic Halogen 

Additional Selected Parameters 

Volatile Organics 

Tritium 

Table 5.4 NTS Facilities with RCRA Closure Plans 

Location Desianation 

Area 2 

Area 2 

Area 3 

Area 6 

Area 6 

Area 23 

Area 23 

Area 27 

Bitcutter Shop & LLNL Post Shot Shop 

U-2bu Subsidence Crater 

U-3fi Injection Well (closed) 

Decontamination Facility Evaporation Pond 

Steam Cleaning Effluent Pond 

Building 650 Leachfield 

Hazardous Waste Trenches (closed) 

Explosive Ordnance Disposal Facility (closed) 

Table 5.5 Locations with Detectable Man-Made Radioactivity - 1 997(a) 

Location - Radionuclide 

NTS Onsite Network 

Well UE-5n 

Well UE-6d 

Well UE-7ns 

Project DRIBBLE, Mississippi 

Well HMH-2 

Well HMH-5 

Well HMH-10 

Well HM-L 

3H 

3H 

3H 

3H 

3H 

3H 

3H 

Concentration 

x 1 o-9 uCi/mL 

60,000 

540 

530 

290 

880 

160 

960 

(a) Only 3H concentrations greater than 0.2 percent of the 4 mrem DCG are shown (i.e., 

greater than 1.6 x I 0-7 @/mL [I 60 pCi/l- (6 Bq/L)]). Detectable levels of other manmade radioisotopes are also shown. 

5-42 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

..._.....I I ..I......." .............................. .................................. " .I...." "" ^...... I.^ ........^.....I.... "." I I........ ".,I^ " "" .,.. .,...- ___ ..-.....,_ 

Table 5.5 (Locations with .Detectable Man-Made Radioactivity - 1 997(a), cont.) 

Location 

(Project DRIBBLE, Mississippi, cont.) 

Well HM-S 

Half Moon Creek Overflow 

REECo Pit B 

REECo Pit C 

SAI-1 -H 

SAI-2-H 

SAI-4-H 

SAI-5-H 

SAI-6-H 

GNOME, New Mexico 

Well DD-1 

Well LRL-7 

Well USGS-4 

Well USGS-8 

Radionuclide 

3H 

3H 

3H 

3H 

3H 

3H 

3H 

3H 

3H 

Concentration 

x 10-'UCi/mL 

3300 

200 

590 

320 

34,000 

3200 

340 

1300 

160 

6.2 x io7 

6.9 x 105 

13,000 

2500 

2.5 

160 

74,000 

4800 

<5.0 

68,000 

4000 

100 

(a) Only 3H concentrations greater than 0.2 percent of the 4 mrem DCG are shown (i.e., 

greater than 1.6 x I 0-7 pCi/mL [I 60 pCi/L (6 Bq/L}]). Detectable levels of other manmade radioisotopes are also shown. 

Table 5.6 Radioactivity in NTS Surface Waters - 1997 

Annual Averaae Concentrations (1 OVg uCi/mLl 

Source of Number of 

Water Locations Gross I3 Tritium 238Pu Pu 239+240 

Open Reservoirs 

Natural Springs 

Containment Ponds 

E Tunnel 

U-3cn Wells 

Sewage Lagoons 

Mean MDC 

8 

7 

203 

2 

8 

10 -1 59 -0.001 6 -0.008 

9.8 -32 -0.001 0 0.01 2 

76 10 x 105 0.38 3.1 

-- 13~10~ -- -- 

20 31 -0.001 0.01 6 

1.2 740 0.01 5 0.01 8 

% DCG 

- 'OSr Ranae'") 

-0.060 ~0.01-0.1 

-0.084 <0.01-0.1 

1.1 (c) 

-- (C) 

-0.080 (a 

0.34 

(a) DCG based on vue for L ., iking water (4 mrem EDE). 

(b) A pond and an effluent. 

(c) Not a potable water source. 

5-43 
Table 5.7 NTS Open Reservoir Gross Beta Analysis Results - 1997 

Location 

Area 2, Mud Plant Reservoir 

Area 2, Well 2 Reservoir ('I 

Area 3, Mud Plant Reservoir(') 

Area 3, Well A Reservoir 

Area 5, UE-5c Reservoir 

Area 5, Well 5B Reservoir 

Area 6, Well 3 Reservoir 

Area 6, Well C1 Reservoir 

Area 18, Camp 17 Reservoir 

Area 18, Well 8 Reservoir(b) 

Area 19, UE-19c Reservoir(') 

Area 20, Well 20A Reservoir(') 

Area 23, Swimming Pool(') 

Area 25, Well J-11 Reservoir 

Area 25, Well J-12 Reservoit"') 

Gross Beta Concentration (1 0-' uCi/mL) 

Concentration 

9.7 

1 '4 

18 

12 

13 

8,,0 

3,,2 

4.4 

(a) DCG based on 'OSr value for drinking water (4 mrem EDE - 40 pCi/L) 

(b) Reservoir was dry. 

Concentration 

as %DCG(=) 

24 

- 

- 

35 

45 

30 

32 

20 

8.0 

- 

- 

11 

- 

Table 5.8 NTS Drinking Water Sources - 1997 

Svstem Supply Wells End-Point 

No. 1 

No. 2 

No. 3 

No. 4 

No. 5 

Wells (21, 4, 4A Area 6, Cafeteria 

Area 6, Building 6-900 

Well 8 Area 2, Restroom 

Area 12, Building 12-23 

Well UE-16d Area 1, Building 101 

Wells fjB, 5C, 

and Army No. 1 Area 23, Cafeteria 

Wells .I-1 2, J-13 Area 25, Building 4221 

Table 5.9 NTS Supply Well Radioactivity Averages - 1997 

Annual Averaae !Concentrations - 1 0-' uCi/mL 

238Pu Gross AlDha 'OST(~) 2H 239+240pu Descriotion Gross Beta -- 

Potable Water Suo~lv Wells 

Area 5, Well 5C 6.7 3.5 0.00005 -0.0006 9.5 -0.036 

Area 6, Well 4A 7.2 4.2 -0.0003 -0.0021 11 -0.097 

Area 6, Well 4 6.6 0.6 -0.0008 -0.0016 9.8 - 0.000 1 

5-44 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

Table 5.9 (NTS Supply Well Radioactivity Averages - 1997, cont.) 

Annual Averaae Concentrations - to-' uCi/mL 

Description Gross Beta - 3H 239+240pu - 238Pu Gross Alpha goSr(a) 

Potable Water SuooIV Wells 

Area 5, Well 56 

Area 6, Well C1 

Area 16, Well U E-1 6d 

Area 18, Well 8 

Area 22, Army Well No.1 

Area 25, Well J-12 

Area 25, Well J-13 

11. 

9.8 

7.6 

3.2 

5.8 

4.7 

4.7 

5.3 

11 

7.4 

0.8 

4.3 

1.4 

2.0 

-0.004 

0.049 

0.17 

0.01 5 

0.082 

0.051 

0.17 

4.7 

2.6 

4.1 

0.4 

0.2 

5.3 

3.9 

0.0008 

-0.0018 

-0.0017 

-0.001 2 

-0.0005 

-0.0004 

-0.0009 

-0.001 9 

-0.0033 

-0.001 4 

0.01 2 

0.0033 

0.01 7 

-0.0021 

Non-Potable Water Supolv Wells 

Area 5, Well UE-5c 

Median MDC 

8.6 

1.2 

1.4 -0.0007 -0.0001 9.0 

1.4 

0.08 

13 0.01 7 0.021 0.34 

Table 5.1 0 Radioactivity Averages for NTS Tap Water Samples - 1997 

Annual Averaae Concentrations -1 0-' uCi/mL 

Gross Alpha 239+240pu Description Gross Beta 238Pu 

6.8 

3.4 

6.2 

6.8 

3.8 

7.3 

5.6 

-0.0027 -0.0004 

-0.0020 -0.0007 

-0.001 a 0.0002 

-0.001 4 -0.0005 

-0.0054 -0.001 2 

-0.0033 -0.001 1 

-0.0033 -0.0014 

7.7 

0.7 

9.2 

9.7 

0.7 

5.8 

2.4 

-0.1 2 

-0.16 

-0.083 

-0.055 

-0.036 

-0.051 

0.009 

Area 1, Bldg. 1 O1(b) 

Area 2, Restroom 

Area 6, Cafeteria 

-39 

250 

-59 

-50 

80 

17 

128 

Area 6, Bldg. 6-900 

Area 12, Bldg. 12-23 

Area 23, Cafeteria 

Area 25, Bldg. 4221 

Median MDC 1.2 740 0.020 0.01 6 1.4 0.31 

(a) 'OSr values are for one sample. 

(b) One sample collected from Area 1 Ice House when Building 101 inaccessible. 

5-45 
Table 5.1 1 Radium Analysis Results for Nl’S Potable Water Supply Wells - 1997 

Concentrations (1 0’ uCi/mL) 

Number 

Location of SamDles 

Area 5, Well 5B 

Area 5, Well 5C 

Area 6, Well 4 

Area 6, Well 4A 

Area 6, Well C-1 

Area 16, Well UE-16d 

Area 18, Well 8 

Area 23, Army Well No. 

Area 25, Well J-12 

Area 25, Well J-13 

Median MDC 

4 

4 

4 

3 

4 

4 

4 

14 

4 

4 

2%Ra 

Arithmetic 

-- Mean 

0.27 

I .6 

0.086 

0.83 

1.9 

1.1 

1.4 

0.85 

0.28 

0.49 

3.5 

Standard 

Deviation 

1.1 

1.4 

2.0 

0.62 

2.2 

1.7 

1.6 

0.88 

0.67 

1.5 

**%a 

Arithmetic 

Mean 

0.45 

0.38 

0.40 

0.29 

0.76 

0.09 

0.1 0 

0.18 

0.42 

-0.01 

0.97 

Standard 

Deviation 

0.31 

0.46 

0.31 

0.17 

0.34 

0.43 

0.70 

0.82 

0.40 

0.54 

Table 5.12 Summary of Tritium Results for NTS Wells Sampled by R&lE-LV - 1997 

Tritium Concentration (pCi/L) 

Number 

Location of Samdes Maximum 

Test Well B 

Test Well D 

Test Well F 

Well C-1 

Well HTH-1 

Well PM-1 

Well UE-lc 

Well UE-5n 

Well UE-6d 

Well UE-6e 

Well UE-7ns 

Well UE-16d 

Well UE-16f 

Well UE-18r 

Well UE-18t 

Well 1 Army 

Well 2 

Well 4 

Well 56 

Well 5C 

Well 6A Army 

Well 8 

1 

1 

2 

1 

1 

1 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

1 

1 

2 

1 

2 

1 

1 

1 

1 

I 

1 

Arithmetic 

-- Minimum - Mean 1 Siama 

46 

--- 3.0 

26 29 

--- 0.46 

--- 180 

__- 180 

-77 32 

54000 60000 

5’10 520 

-5 1 13 

310 420 

66 

58 

-2.9 0.4 

--- 21 0 

-26 -4 

19 

--_ 

--- 

___ 

--- 

___ -3.1 

___ -3.0 

--- -1 00 

--- 6.8 

--- -I 2 

2.2 

1.6 

2.4 

1.7 

70 

70 

70 

400 

68 

100 

70 

69 

70 

95 

69 

6.6 

2.2 

1.8 

1.6 

1.8 

65 

69 

Mean 

MDC 

5.6 

5.3 

4.9 

5.6 

230 

230 

220 

230 

230 

230 

230 

230 

230 

220 

230 

5.5 

5.2 

6.0 

5.8 

4.2 

220 

230 

(a) 

(b) 

Note: Italic indicates enrichment analysis, regular font indicates conventional analysis. 

DCG - Derived Concentration Guide; established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L for water. 

Not applicable because the result is lcass than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable. 

5-46 
WATER SURVEiLLANCE ACTlViTlES 

Table 5.13 LTHMP Summary of Tritium 

1 

Results for Wells Near the NTS - 1997 

Number 1 Standard %of Mean 

of Samples jv& Min Mean Deviation DCG‘”) MDC I Location 

Adaven 

Adaven Spring 3 

4 

24 

27 

17 

-29 

21 

9 

2.9 

1 40 

0.02 6.6 

(b) 220 

Alamo 

Well 4 City 2 27 -140 -55 95 220 

Amargosa Valley 

Bar-B-Q Ranch 1 

1 

1 

1.1 

-26 

11 

4.8 

220 

Ponderosa Dairy Well 2 220 

Ash Meadows 

Big Spring 

Crystal Pool 

1 

3 

4 

1 

1 

2 

2 

2 

4.9 -2.3 

4.5 -3.7 

88 -1 70 

-- _- 

1.3 

0.3 

0.7 

1.7 

-1 20 

20 

-57 

-1 9 

5.8 

6.9 

6.5 

5.3 

230 

220 

220 

220 

Fairbanks Spring 

Longstreet Spring -- 

66 

-51 

-1 2 

-- 

-26 

-64 

-26 

17S-50E-14cac 

Well 18s-51 E-7db 

Beatty 

Low Level Waste Site 3 

4 

4 

4 

2 

7.5 2.5 4.6 2.9 (b) 

180 -29 28 140 (b) 

27 -150 -59 140 (b) 

66 -68 9 140 (4 

66 -100 -17 95 (b) 

4.8 

230 

230 

230 

220 

Tolicha Peak 

1 1 S-48E-1 dd Coffer’s 

12S-47E-7dbd City 

Clark Station 

TTR Well 6 2 -26 -5 1 -38 95 220 

Goldfield 

Klondike #2 Well 2 49 -1 2 18 95 220 

Hiko 

Crystal Springs 2 -1 2 -26 -1 9 95 220 

Indian Springs 

Sewer Co. Well 1 

Air Force Well 2 

2 

2 

220 

220 

49 

66 

-1 2 

-26 

18 

20 

95 

95 

Lathrop Wells 

15S-50E-18cdc City 2 11 -1 2 -0.5 95 220 

(a) 

(b) 

Note: ltalic indicates enrichment analysis, regular font indicates conventional analysis. 

DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L. 

Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable. 

5-47 
Table 5.13 (LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Wells Near the NTS - 1997, cont.) 

Tritium Concentration (DCVL) 

Location 

Number 1 Standard %of Mean 

of Samples Max Min Mean Deviation DCG(’) MDC 

Nyala 

Sharp’s Ranch 

Oasis Valley 

Goss Springs 

Pah ru mp 

Calvada City Well 

2 27 11 19 95 220 

1 -1 3- 68 230 

4 66 -68 9 140 230 

Rachel 

Penoyer Culinary 

Tonopah 

City Well 

Warm Springs 

Twin Springs Ranch 

4 -49 -64 0 140 (b) 230 

2 100 -26 37 95 220 

3 

4 

2.5 -2.5 0.4 

-26 -130 -69 

3. I 

140 

5.9 

230 

(b) 

(c) 

Note: ltalics indicate enrichment analysis, normal font conventional analysis. 

DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L. 

Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable. 

(a) 

(b) 

Note: ltalic indicates enrichment analysis, regular font indicates conventional analysis. 

DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L. 

Not applicable because result is less tlian the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable. 

5-48 

DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L. 

Not applicable because result is less tlian the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable. 

ltalic indicates enrichment analysis, regular font indicates conventional analysis. 

5-48 

Table 5.1 4 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Reslults for Project FAULTLESS - 1997 

Tritium Concentration bCi/L) 

Location 

Hot Creek Ranch 

Number 

of Samples 

1 Standard 

Deviation 

Yo of 

DCG‘”) 

1 

Blue Jay Maintenance 1 

Base Camp Well 1 

Well HTH-1 

Well HTH-2 

Well Six Mile 

,431 

22 

,451 

4.0 

2.1 

‘-1 2 

70 

70 

70 

3.6 

4.0 

70 

Mean 

- MDC 

230 

230 

230 

5.9 

6.5 

230 
Table 5.1 5 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project SHOAL - 1997 

Tritium Concentration (pCi/L) 

Location 

Hunts' Station 

Well Flowing 

Well H-2 

Well H-3 

Well HS-1 

Well HC-1 

Well HC-2 

Well HC-3 

Well HC-4 

Number 

of SamPIes 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Well Dry 

1 

Result 

-5 1 

-51 

-1 18 

3.6 

1.4 

-78 

0.44 

860 

1 Standard 

Deviation 

70 

70 

70 

4.0 

3.4 

70 

2.9 

80 0.96 

Mean 

- MDC 

230 

230 

240 

6.5 

6.4 

240 

4.7 

240 

(a) 

(b) 

Note: ltalic indicates enrichment analysis, regular font indicates conventional analysis. 

DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L. 

Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable. 

Table 5.1 6 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project RULISON - 1997 

Location 

Battlement Creek 

City Springs 

Gardner Ranch 

Well CER Test 

Hayward Ranch 

Potter Ranch 

Jacobs Ranch 

Rothgery Ranch 

Spring 300 Yards N 

Well RU-1 

Well RU-2 

Tritium Concentration (DCi/L) 

Number Yo of 

of Samples Result 1 Siama DCG (a) 

I 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

36 

80 

40 

55 

100 

200 

280 

200 

30 

42 

33 

3.7 

70 

70 

4.5 

5.9 

70 

70 

70 

3.8 

5.0 

3.8 

0.04 

(b) 

(b) 

0.06 

0.11 

(b) 

0.31 

(b) 

0.03 

0.05 

0.03 

Mean 

MDC 

5.0 

230 

230 

5.7 

6.8 

230 

230 

230 

5.3 

6.9 

5.3 

(a) 

(b) 

Note: ltalic indicates enrichment analysis, regular font indicates conventional analysis. 

DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L. 

Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable. 

5-49 
Table 5.17 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project RIO BLANC0 - 1997 

Tritium Concentration (pCi/L) 

Yo of 

1 Siama DCG(~) 

5.2 

3.2 

70 

0.04 

(b) 

0) 

Location 

Number 

of Samples -- Result 

8-1 Equity Camp 

Bren nan Wind mi I I 

CER 1 Black Sulpher 

CER 4 Black Sulpher 

Fawn Creek 1 

Fawn Creek 500' Up 

Fawn Creek 500' Down 

Fawn Creek 6800' Up 

Fawn Creek 8400' Down 

Fawn Creek 3 

Johnson Artesian 

Well RB-D-01 

Well RB-D-03 

Well RB-S-03 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

36 

80 

No Access 

120 

i30 

40 

-40 

25 

41.0 

130 

130 

40 

3.2 

1.4 

70 

70 

70 

70 

70 

70 

70 

70 

3.7 

4.0 

Mean 

MDC 

7.4 

5.7 

230 

230 

230 

230 

230 

230 

230 

230 

230 

5.3 

6.6 

(a) 

(b) 

Note: /talk indicates enrichment andysis, regular font indicates conventional analysis. 

DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L. 

Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable. 

Table 5.1 8 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project GNOME - 1997 

Location 

Tritium Concentration (pCi/L) 

Number % of 

of Samples -- Result 1 Siama DCG(~) 

Mean 

MDC 

Carlsbad City Well 

Loving City Well 2 

Well DD-P 

Well LRL-7(d) 

Well PHS 6 

Well PHS 8 

Well PHS 9 

Well PHS 10 

Well USGS 1 

Well USGS 4(e) 

Well USGS 8(O 

J. Mobley Ranch 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

7 

1 

1 

1 

10 

5.7 

6.2 x I 07 

2.5 x 103 

-2!9 

-2!9 

-2!9 

10 

- 12 

7.4 x io4 

6.8 x lo4 

7.9 

70 (b) 

3. 1 co.01 

5.8 x 105 6.9 x I 05 

220 2.8 

70 (b) 

70 (b) 

70 (b) 

70 (b) 

3.8 (b) 

320 82 

300 76 

3.6 (b) 

230 

220 

220 

230 

230 

230 

230 

230 

230 

6.4 

6.3 

5.7 

(a) 

(b) 

Note: Italic indicates enrichment analysis, regular font indicates conventional analysis. 

DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L. 

Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable. 

5-50 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTlVlTlES 

Table 5.1 8 (LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project GNOME = 1997, cont.) 

1 Standard 

Nuclide Result Deviation MDC - Units 

(c) 'Osr 1.3 x io4 1.3 x IO3 pCi/L 

137e 6,g x io5 4.8 x lo4 6.5 pCi/L 

(d) ?3r 2.5 1.2 pCi/L 

l3'CS 160 10 6.5 pCi/L 

(e) 90Sr 4800 1.2 pCi/L 

(f) 90Sr 4000 

137c 99 10 

1.2 

4.6 

pCi/L 

pCi/L 

Table 5.19 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project GASBUGGY - 1997 

Tritium Concentration fDCi/L) 

Number 

Location of SamDles Result 

La Jara Creek 

Lower Burro Canyon 

Pond N of 30.3.32.3 

Arnold Ranch Spring 

Arnold Ranch Well 

Bixler Ranch 

Bubbling Springs 

Cave Springs 

Cedar Springs 

Well Jicarilla 

Well 28.3.33.233 

Well 30.3.32.343 

Windmill 2 

Well EPNG 10-36 

1 120 

I 93 

1 80 

1 40 

1 -0.45 

1 120 

1 190 

1 43 

1 40 

I -2, I 

1 80 

I 120 

Ranch Abandoned 

Pump Out 

1 Siama 

70 

70 

70 

5.5 

3.6 

70 

70 

70 

4.5 

3.3 

5.9 

70 

Yo of Mean 

- DCG (a) MDC 

(b) 5.5 

(b) 230 

0.13 6.3 

(a) 

(b) 

Note: ltalic indicates enrichment analysis, regular font indicates conventional analysis. 

DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L. 

Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable. 

5-51 
Table 5.20 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project SALMON - April 1997 

Location 

Baxtetville, MS 

Well HM-26 

Well HM-3 

Anderson, Billy Ray 

Anderson Pond 

Anderson, Robert Harvey 

Anderson, Robert Lowell, Jr. 

Anderson, Robert Lee 

Anderson, Tony 

Burge, Joe 

Cockerham, Steve 

Daniels, Webster, Jr. 

Daniels - Well No. 2 Fish Pond 

Hilbey, Billy 

Salt Dome Hunting Club 

Salt Dome Timber Co. 

Saucier, Dennis 

Well Ascot 2 

Baxterville Well City 

Well E-7 

Well HM-1 Pre pump 

% hr pump 

1 hr pump 

Post 

Pre pump 

% hr pump 

1 hr pump 

Post pump 

Pre pump 

% hr pump 

1 hr pump 

Post pump 

Pre pump 

% hr pump 

1 hr pump 

1 % hr pump 

Post pump 

Tritium Concentration (DCi/L) 

Date %of Mean 

Collected Result 1 Siama MDC 

4/22/97 

4/22/97" 

4/23/97 

412 1 I9 7") 

412 1 I9 7(') 

412219 7 

412 1 I9 7 

412419 7 

4/23/97'" 

412319'7 

4/22/97 

4/23/97'c' 

4/22/97 

4/22/97 

4/23/97(') 

4/22/9'7'c) 

4/21 /9:7(') 

4/22/9:P 

412 1/97 

412 1 197 

4/21 /97'(') 

412 1 /97(') 

412 1 197 

4/2 1 197 

412 1 /9;'(c) 

4/21 /9i7'c' 

4/21 /9i7 

412 1/97' 

412 1 /9i"c) 

412 1 /9i'(c) 

412 1 197 

412 1 197 

4/21 197' 

4/21 /95'(') 

55 71 

11 3.4 

Sample lost in lab 

1.1 3.4 

1.1 3.8 

-63 70 

-23 70 

-23 70 

-9.6 4.4 

16 70 

-23 70 

17 3.4 

16 70 

16 70 

26 4.1 

17 4.0 

3.5 3.7 

16 3.8 

-23 70 

-23 70 

-1.1 3.1 

-1.1 2.8 

-23 70 

16 70 

-1.4 3.0 

-0.96 3.0 

-63 70 

-23 70 

2.2 3.2 

2.0 3.3 

-23 70 

-23 70 

-1 00 70 

2.4 3.0 

(b) 230 

0.01 5.2 

DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L. 

Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable. 

Enrichment analysis. 

Pre indicates sampling prior to pumpirig the well, Dup indicates a duplicate sample, Post 

indicates sampling after pumping the well, and Post Dup is a duplicate sample after pumping 

the well. 

5-52 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

Table 5.20 (LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project SALMON - April 1997, cont.) 

Tritium Concentration bCi/L) 

Location 

(Baxterville, MS, cont.) 

Half Moon Creek 

Half Moon Creek 

Overflow 

Pre 

Post 

Pre(d) 

Post 

Post Dup 

Well HM-L2 

Well HM-S 

Well HMH-1 

Well HMH-2 

Well HMH-3 

Well HMH-4 

Lee, P. T. 

Little Creek No. 1 

Lower Little Creek No. 2 

Mills, Roy 

Napier, Denice 

Noble's Pond 

Noble, W. H., Jr. 

Pond West of GZ Pre 

Post 

REECo Pit Drainage-A 

REECo Pit Drainage-B 

REECo Pit Drainage-C 

DUP 

Well HM-L Pre pump(d) 

'/2 hr pump 

1 hr pump 

1% hr pump 

Post pump 

P re(d) 

Post 

Pre 

Post 

Pre 

Post 

Pre 

Post 

Pre 

Post 

DUP 

Pre 

Post 

Date 

Collected 

4/20/97(") 

4/22/97(") 

4/20/97(") 

4/20/97(") 

4/20/97(") 

412 1 I97 

412 1 197 

412 1 197 

412 1 197 

4/22/97(") 

412 1 197 

4/25/97 

4/20/97(") 

412 1 197" 

412 1 197 

412 1 /97@) 

412 1 /97(") 

412 1 /97(") 

412 1 197 

412 1/97 

412 1 197 

412 1 197 

412 1 197 

4/22/97 

4/22/97 

4/20/97 

412 1 197 

41 20197 

412 1 197 

4/20/97(') 

4/22/97'"' 

4/20/97'") 

412 1 197'") 

412 1 /97(") 

4120197 

412 1 I97 

Result 

0.17 

21 

-1.4 

200 

190 

130 

-23 

94 

94 

12 

-1 3 

-23 

0.12 

13 

590 

320 

340 

920 

960 

720 

960 

880 

-1 00 

-23 

3400 

3300 

1600 

21 00 

220 

290 

14 

12 

14 

130 

No Sample 

-63 

%of Mean 

1 Siama - DCG")MDC 

2.7 

4.4 

2.7 

6.4 

6.9 

72 

70 

72 

72 

70 

70 

3.8 

3.7 

3.3 

9.6 

6.6 

7.7 

76 

79 

76 

79 

78 

70 

70 

97 

96 

84 

88 

5.7 

6.3 

3.3 

3.3 

3.3 

72 

70 

(b) 4.4 

0.02 6.5 

(b) 4.5 

0.22 5.7 

0.21 6.5 

(b) 230 

(b) 230 

(b) 230 

(b) 230 

0.01 5.8 

(b) 230 

(b) 230 

(b) 6.0 

0.01 5.0 

(b) 6.4 

(b) 5.1 

(b) 6.2 

1 .o 230 

1.1 230 

0.8 230 

1.1 230 

1 .o 230 

(b) 230 

(b) 230 

3.8 230 

3.7 230 

1.8 230 

2.3 230 

0.24 4.5 

0.32 5.1 

0.02 5.0 

0.01 5.1 

0.02 5.1 

(b) 230 

(b) 230 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) Enrichment analysis. 

(d) 

DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L. 

Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable. 

Pre indicates sampling prior to pumping the well, Dup indicates a duplicate sample, Post 

indicates sampling after pumping the well, and Post Dup is a duplicate sample after pumping 

the well. 

5-53 
Table 5.20 (LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project SALMON - April 1997, cont.) 

Locat ion 

(Baxterville, MS, cont.) 

Well HMH-5 

Well HMH-6 

Well HMH-7 

Well HMH-8 

Well HMH-9 

Well HMH-10 

Well HMH-11 

Well HMH-12 

Well HMH-13 

Well HMH-14 

Well HMH-15 

Well HMH-16 

Well HT-2C 

Well HT-4 

Well HT-5 

SA1 -1 -H 

SA1 -2-H 

SA1 -4-H 

SA1 -5-H 

SA1 -6-H 

SA1 -7-H 

Pre 

Post 

Pre 

Post 

DUP 

Pre 

Post 

Pre 

Post 

Pre 

Post 

Pre 

Post 

Pre 

Post 

Pre 

Post 

Pre 

Post 

Pre 

Post 

Dale 

-- Collected 

4/20/97 

4/21/97 

4/21/97 

4120197 

412019 7 

412019 7 

4120197 

412019 7 

4/21/97 

412019 7(" 

412 1 /97(") 

4/20/97(") 

412 1 /9'7(") 

4/20/9'7 

412 1/97 

4120197 

412 1/97 

4/20/97 

412 1 19.7 

4/20/9:7 

412 1/97 

4/20/97 

412 1/97 

4/23/9;7'") 

4/24/9;7(c) 

4/24/9;7'"' 

Tritium Concentration (pCi/L) 

%of Mean 

Result 1 Siama DCG(a) . MDC 

41 0 74 0.46 230 

880 76 0.98 230 

250 73 0.28 230 

55 71 (b) 230 

-63 70 (b) 230 

No Sample, well under water 

No Sample, well under water 

130 72 (b) 230 

-63 70 (b) 230 

110 4.6 0.12 4.6 

160 5.0 0.18 5.0 

55 3.7 0.06 4.5 

110 4.5 0.12 5.0 

55 71 (b) 230 

-63 70 (b) 230 

-23 70 (b) 230 

-23 70 (b) 230 

-23 70 (b) 230 

-63 70 (b) 230 

16 70 (b) 230 

-63 70 (b) 230 

55 71 (b) 230 

55 71 (b) 230 

0.3 2.9 (b) 4.7 

1.6 3.2 (b) 5.2 

0.59 3.4 (b) 5.6 

New Monitorina Wells 

4/23/97 

4/23/97 

4/23/9;"") 

412319;' 

4/23/9i"") 

4/23/9i'(") 

34.500 450 38 230 

No Sample, lost in lab 

340 7.0 0.38 5.5 

1300 160 1.4 230 

1 60 5.0 0.1 8 4.4 

33 3.7 0.04 5.2 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) Enrichment analysis. 

(d) 

DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L. 

Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable. 

Pre indicates sampling prior to pumpirig the well, Dup indicates a duplicate sample, Post 

indicates sampling after pumping the well, and Post Dup is a duplicate sample after pumping 

the well. 

5-54 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES 

Table 5.20 (LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project SALMON - April 1997, cont.) 

Tritium Concentration (DCVL) 

Location 

Date 

Coliected 

(Baxierville, MS, New Monitoring Wells, cant-) 

SA3-4-H 

SA3-5-H 

SA3-1 -M 

SA3-3-M 

SA4-1 -M 

SA5-1 -M 

SA5-2-M 

SA5-3-M 

Columbia, MS 

Dennis, Buddy 

Dennis, Marvin 

Well 64B City 

Lumberfon, MS 

Anderson, Arleene 

Anderson, Lee L 

Boren Crawfish Pond 

Hartfield, Ray 

Ladner, Rushing, Debra 

Powell, Sliannon 

Rogers, Robert 

Saul, Ola 

Smith, Howard - Pond 

Thompson, Roswell 

Well 2 City 

4/23/97'") 

4/23/97'") 

4/23/97'"' 

4/23/97(") 

4/23/97'"' 

4/23/97(") 

4/23/97'"' 

4/23/97'c) 

4/22/97 

4/22/97 

4/22/97(" 

4/22/97 

4/22/97 

4/21/97 

4/21 197 

412 1 197 

4/23/97 

4/24/97 

4/21 197 

4/22/97 

412 1 197 

4/22/97'"' 

Purvis, MS 

Boren, Ron 4/22/97 

City Supply 4/22/97'") 

Rain Sample 

IT Compound (Baxterville) 4/22/97 

Burge, Willie Ray & Grace 412 1 197 

Result 

25 

22 

9 

15 

4.8 

15 

20 

14 

-23 

-63 

12 

16 

94 

55 

-23 

55 

16 

170 

16 

16 

-23 

1.7 

-63 

-63 

0.8 

-23 

1 Siama 

5.8 

4.9 

3.3 

3.5 

3.4 

4.0 

3.8 

3.2 

70 

70 

4.0 

70 

72 

71 

70 

71 

70 

72 

70 

70 

70 

3.4 

70 

70 

3.7 

70 

YO of Mean m(") MDC 

8.8 

7.5 

5.2 

5.4 

5.4 

6.2 

5.7 

4.8 

230 

230 

6.3 

230 

230 

230 

230 

230 

230 

230 

230 

230 

230 

5.5 

230 

230 

6.1 

230 

(a) 

(b) 

(c) Enrichment analysis. 

(d) 

DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L. 

Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable. 

Pre indicates sampling prior to pumping the well, Dup indicates a duplicate sample, Post 

indicates sampling after pumping the well, and Post Dup is a duplicate sample after pumping 

the well. 

5-55 
Table 5.21 Influent Quality - 1997 

1st Quarter - 2ncjQuarter 

80D5(a) S.C.(b) 80D5 S.C. 

Facilitv ImalL) @mhos/cm) ImalL) @mhoslcm) 

Gate 100 

Mercury 

Yucca Lake 

Tweezer 

CP-6 

CP-72 

DAF 

Reactor Control 

Test Stand 1 

Base Camp 25 

Base Camp 12 

Test Cell C 

RWMS Site 5 

257 2.7 

360 3.8 

148 1.81 

375 4.1 

0 0 

0 0 

1 35 1.58 

0 0 

0 0 

192 1.65 

<6 0.28 

0 0 

66 1.35 

472 1.38 

514 0.97 

50 0.63 

1 35 1.15 

106 1.31 

0 0 

0 0 

124 0.85 

8 0.36 

0 0 

40 0.65 

(a) Biochemical Oxygen Demand - 5-day Incubation. 

(b) Specific Conductance. 

Note: CP-6 and CP-72 not in use after first quarter. 

3rd Quarter 4th Quarter 

BOD5 S.C. BOD5 S.C. 

ImalL) @mhos) {ma/L) &mhoslcm) 

c60 0.64 454 1.65 

99 1.15 242 0.88 

109 0.76 296 0.88 

188 0.84 266 1 .I6 

20 0.95 

00 

00 

41 0.98 

e6 0.23 

86 0.75 

00 

- 30 1.03 

0 0 

0 0 

161 1.61 

c6 0.21 

0 0 

309 1.63 

Table 5.22 Organic Loading Rates - 1997 

- Mistered Rates 

Limit (Jan-Mar) ( Apr-J u ne) (Jul-Sept) (Oct-Dec) 

Facility (Ka/dav) Mean Dailv Load man Dailv Load Mean Dailv Load Mean Dailv Load 

Mercury 172 77.05 120.91 27.387 41.36 

LANL 

on Tweezer 5.0 3.52 1.01 0.770 0.84 

Yucca Lake 8.6 3.32 2.30 3.367 1 2.45'a) 

Base Camp 12 54 0.04 0.08 0.125 0.04 

RWMS Site 5 0.995 0.32 0.36 0.1 17 0.45 

CP-6 

CP-72 

DAF 

Reactor Control 

Eng Test Stand 

Test Cell C 

Base Camp 25 

Gate 100 

8.7 

1 .I 

7.6 

4.2 

2.3 

1.3 

7.4 

2.4 

0 

0 

0.67 

0 

0 

0 

1.29 

0.54 

- Cal'zulated Rates 

3.21 

0 

0 

0 

1.43 

1.72 

0.345 

0 

0 

0 

0.594 

0.386 

0.21 

0 

0 

0 

1.08 

0.84 

(a) Erroneous result due to problem with auiomatic sampler, will resample in January. 

Note: CP-6 and CP-72 not in service after the first quarter. 

5-56 
Table 5.23 Pond Water Depths in Infiltration Basins - 1997 

Impound 

Gate 100, Basin 

Mercury, Basin 

Yucca Lake 

North Basin 

South Basin 

East Basin 

West Basin 

East Basin 

West Basin 

Tweezer 

CP-6 

CP-72 

DAF 

Basin 1 

Basin 2 

Reactor Control, Basin 

Test Stand 1 , Basin 

Test Cell C, Basin 

Base Camp 25, Basin 

Base Camp 12, Basin 1 

Base Camp 12, Basin 2 

Base Camp 12, Basin 3 

Base Camp 12, Basin 4 

Base Camp 12, Basin 5 

Maximum 

Operating 

Depth. cm 

90 

180 

140 

140 

244 

244 

90 

90 

90 

150 

150 

130 

90 

90 

100 

120 

120 

120 

120 

120 

Average 

Depth, cm 

[lst Quarter) 

40 

0 

126 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Note: CP-6 and CP-72 were not in service after the first quarter. 

Average 

Depth, cm 

/2nd Quarter) 

0.7 

0 

127 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Average 

Depth, cm 

(3rd Quarter) 

53 

0 

110 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Average 

Depth, crn 

(4th Quarter) 

59 

0 

0 

115 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 
Table 5.24 Influent Toxics for Facilities that Received Industrial Wastewater - 1997 

Compliance 

Parameter Limit [mu/L) 

Arsenic 

Barium 

Cadmium 

Chromium 

Lead 

Mercury 

Silver 

Benzene 

Carbon Tertachloride 

Chlorobenzene 

Chloroform 

1 ,4-dichlorobenzene 

1,2-dichIorobenzene 

1 ,I -dichloroethylene 

Methyl et hy I Ketone 

CAI-.-.:. .- VGIGI IlUlll 

5.0 

100 

1 .o 

5.0 

5.0 

0.2 

dn 

I .u 

5.0 

0.5 

0.5 

100 

6.0 

7.5 

0.5 

0.7 

200 

Mercury 

Measurement 

img/L) 

Area 25 

Base Camp 

Measurement 

fma/L) 

Area 6 DAF Area 5 RWMS 

Measurement Measurement 

ima/L) ImalL) 

Area 6 LANL 

Measurement 

[mu/L) 

0.01 27 

0.61 8 

(a) 

Area 6 

Yucca Lake 

Measure men t 

{ma/L) 

(a) Not Detected. 

Note: VOC samples were taken from each primary lagoon as they can not be composited. No VOCs were detected during this 

reporting period. Future measurements for volatile samples from facilities with multiple primary lagoons will be average values. 
Table 5.24 (Influent Toxics for Facilities that Received Industrial Wastewater - 1997, cont.) 

Compliance 

Limit !ma/L) 

Pyridine 5.0 

Tetrachloroethylene 0.7 

Trichloroethylene 0.5 

Vinyl Chloride 0.2 

Cresol, total 200 

2,4-dinitrotoluene 0.1 3 

Hexachlorobenzene 0.1 3 

Hexachlorobutadiene 0.5 

Nitrobenzene 2.0 

Pentachlorophenol 100 

2,4,5-trichlorophenoI 400 

2,4,6-trichlorophenoI 2.0 

Chlorodane 0.03 

Endrin 0.02 

Heptachlor 0.008 

Lindane 0.4 

Methoxychlor 10.0 

Toxaphene 0.5 

2,4-D 10.0 

2,4,5-TP (Si Ivex) 1 .o 

Area 25 

Base Camp 

Measurement 

ImalL) 

Area 6 DAF 

Measurement 

imu/LI 

Area 6 LANL 

Measurement 

ImalL) 

(a) Not Detected. 

Note: VOC samples were taken from each primary lagoon as they can not be composited. No VOCs were detected during this 

reporting period. Future measurements for volatile samples from facilities with multiple primary lagoons will be average values. 
Table 5.25 Sampling Data for Infiltration Pclnds Containing 30 cm or More - 1997 

Parameter 

Arsenic 

Cadmium 

Chromium 

Lead 

Selenium 

Silver 

Nitrate Nitrogen 

Sulfate 

Chloride 

Fluoride 

Tritium(") 

(a) Unit for tritium is io-' vCi/cc. 

(b) Not Detected. 

Action Level 

ma/L 

0.5 

0.1 

0.5 

0.5 

0.1 

0.5 

100 

5000 

1000 

40 

Monitor' Only 

A-6 Yucca Lake 

Q1 Result ma/L 

Table 5.26 Nitrate Analyses of Well Water Samples (mg/L), First Quarter - 1997 

Well Name - Limit Result Well Name Limit Result 

Well 5C 10 <I Well J-12 10 5 

Well 5B 10 3 Well J-13 10 5 

Well 4 10 2 Well 8 10 <1 

Well C-I 10 4 Well UE-16d 10 <I 

Well 4-A 10 4 Well Army 1 10 <I 

Table 5.27 NTS Drinking Water System Permits - 1997 

Permit No. Areakl 

NY-5024-12NC 

NY-4099-12C 

NY-360-12C 

NY-4098-12NCNT 

NY-835-12NCNT 

NY-836-12NCNT 

NY-841-12NCNT 

Area 1 

Area 2 & 12 

Area 23 

Area 25 

Sitewide Truck 

Sitewide Truck 

Sitewide Truck 

ExDiration Date 

09/30/98 

09/30198 

09/30/9 8 

0913Ol98 

09/30/98 

0 9130198 

09/30/98 
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES Z%W&*WA?& 'GBS 3m.T 

Table 5.28 Sewage Discharge Permits - 1997 

NTS Permits 

Areas 

NTS General Permit 

Perm it No ./Location 

GN EV9300 1 (a) 

Expiration Date 

01 I3 1 I99 

Off-NTS Permits 

Las Vegas Area Operations 

VEH-I 12 

Special Technologies Laboratory 

AII-2041 Santa Barbara, California 

111-3311 Santa Barbara, California 

NLVF (Sewage Contribution)(a) 

(a) OwnerIOperator effluent monitoring required by permit. 

1 2/31 I99 

1 2/3 1 I98 

12/31 I98 

Table 5.29 Permits for NTS Septic Waste Hauling Trucks - 1997 

Permit Number 

NY-I 7-0331 1 

NY-I 7-0331 3 

NY-17-03314 

NY-17-03315 

NY-I 7-0331 7 

NY-17-03318 

Vehicle Identification Number 

Septic Tank Pumper E-104573 

Septic Tank Pumper E-105293 

Septic Tank Pumper E-105299 

Septic Tank Pumper E-105919 

Septic Tank Pumper E-105918 

Septic Tank Pumping Subcontractor 

Vehicle 

Expiration 

- Date 

1 1/30/98 

1 1/30/98 

11/30/98 

1 1 130198 

1 1/30/98 

1 If30198 
* -- 

p 

U12N Overview of All Ponds from the Top of Muck Pile 

5-62 
ENVlRONMENTAL PROGRAM INFORMATION 

6.0 OTHER REPORTABLE ACTIVITIES 

Reported in this section are environmental surveillance activities other than 

those in air and water. Activities reported are those related to the Nevada 

Test Site (NTS) missions and special studies under the purview of the 

Environmental Protection Division of the U.S Department of Energy Nevada 

Operations Office (DOWNV). 

6.1 TEST-RELATED 

ACTIVITIES 

U nder the terms of an Interagency 

Agreement between the DOE and the 

U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA), the EPA's Office of Radiation 

and Indoor Environment National 

Laboratory-Las Vegas (R&IE-LV) conducts 

the Offsite Radiation Safety Program 

(ORSP). The primary activity of the ORSP 

is routine monitoring of potential human 

exposure pathways. Maintaining readiness 

to conduct nuclear testing, public 

information, and community assistance 

constitutes secondary activities. 

Two subcritical experiments were conducted 

in 1997, REBOUND and HOLOG. For each 

of the two tests, R&lE-LV senior personnel 

served on the Test Controller's Scientific 

Advisory Panel and on the EPAs offsite 

radiological safety staff. 

No radioactive materials were released to 

the ambient environment as a result of these 

two experiments. 

6.2 RADIOLOGICAL 

SURVEILLANCE 

OFFSITE MILK SURVEILLANCE 

NETWORK (MSN) 

Milk is an important source for evaluating 

potential human exposures to radioactive 

material. It is one of the most universally 

consumed nutrients, and certain 

radionuclides are readily traceable through 

the food chain from feed or forage to the 

consumer. This is particularly true of 

radioiodine isotopes, which, when consumed 

in sufficient quantities, can cause 

impairment of thyroid function. Because 

dairy animals consume vegetation 

representing a large area and because many 

radionuclides are transferred to milk, 

analysis of milk samples yields information 

on the deposition of small amounts of 

radionuclides over a relatively large area. 

The MSN includes commercial dairies and 

family-owned milk cows and goats 

representing the major milksheds within 300 

km (1 86 miles) of the NTS. This network 

was designed to monitor areas adjacent to 

the NTS, which could be affected by a 

release of activity, as well as from areas 

unlikely to be affected. There were 11 

locations comprising the MSN at the 

beginning of 1997. Samples were collected 

from only ten of these locations, as shown in 

Figure 6.1, because the Hafen Ranch in 

Ivins, Utah, was not milking during the 

collection period. 

Raw milk was collected in 3.8-L (1 -gal) 

Cubitainers from each MSN location in July 

and preserved with formaldehyde. The 

samples were analyzed by high-resolution 

gamma spectrometry for gamma emitters 

and for "Sr by radiochemical separation and 

beta counting. 

The average total potassium concentration 

derived from naturally occurring 40K activity 

was 1.5 glL for samples analyzed by gamma 

spectrometry. No other gamma-ray emitters 

were detected. Selected MSN milk samples 

were analyzed for ''ST, and the results are 

similar to those obtained in previous years. 

6-1 
d? PYRAMID 

I 

I 

I 

\ 

\ 

\ 

. 

N 

i 

Austin 

Young Rn.0 

DuckwctebCl Bradshaw Rn. 

Karen Epperiy 

0 

Tonopah 

T-- ------- 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

UTAH 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

Cedar CIW I 0 Brent Jones I 

I 

I 

\ 

\ 

I Dalry 

I 

-_--------I 

I 

Mesquite I 

Moapa e 8Bunker Dalry n 

\ 

\ 

Pahrumpahrudip8 Dairy 

\ 

\ \ \ 

Hinkley 

UDesett View Dairy 

Nearest Town 

0 Milk Sampling Locations (IO) 

Scale in Miles 

0 50 100 150 

Scale in Kilometers : 

~~ 

NOTE: When sampling location 

occurred in city or town, the 

sampling location symbol 

was used for showing both 

town and sampling location. 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM INFORMATION 

Only Rockview Dairies, Inc., located in 

Moapa, Nevada, had a 'OSr result above the 

MDC (1.9 A 0.44 pCi/L). The MSN network 

average 90Sr values are shown in Table 6.1. 

6.3 NONRADIOLOGICAL 

MONITORING 

The 1997 nonradiological monitoring 

program for the NTS included onsite 

sampling of various environmental media 

and substances for compliance with federal 

and state regulations or permits and for 

ecological studies. The Ecological 

Monitoring and Compliance (EMAC) program 

performed habitat mapping in northern NTS 

areas, characterized springs, monitored 

man-made water sources, conducted wild 

horse surveys, and prepared a biological 

monitoring plan for the Hazardous Material 

Spill Center (HSC). In 1997, nonradiological 

monitoring was performed for two series of 

tests involving 38 chemicals that were 

conducted at the HSC. 

ENVIRONMENTAL 

SURVEILLANCE 

Routine nonradiological environmental 

monitoring on the NTS in 1997 was limited 

to: 

0 Nevada operating permit requirements. 

0 Sampling of electrical equipment oil, soil, 

water, surfaces, and waste oil for the 

presence of polychlorinated biphenyls as 

part of Toxic Substance Control Act 

compliance. 

Sampling of soil, water, sediment, waste 

oil, and other media for Resource 

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 

constituents. 

Two facilities at the NTS that are listed in the 

NTS Hazardous Waste Management Permit 

have undergone RCRA Closure and require 

post-closure monitoring. 

a 

e 

Post-closure monitoring of the Mercury 

Landfill Hazardous Waste Trenches 

RCRA Closure Unit was conducted on a 

monthly and quarterly basis for soil 

moisture. Monthly monitoring during the 

last quarter of calendar year (CY) 1997 

was required because the 30-day 

cumulative rainfall exceeded the permit 

requirements of one inch. The covers 

are performing as designed, with no 

releases occurring. Sealing the neutron 

tubes outside of the covers to prevent 

infiltration of water was completed. 

Post Closure monitoring of the U-3fi 

Injection Well RCRA Closure Unit was 

conducted on a quarterly basis. 

Downward movement of moisture was 

not detected during the CY; therefore, 

the conditions of the permit have not 

been exceeded. 

In support of facility operations at the NTS, 

samples are collected and analyzed from 

various waste streams in order to show 

compliance with operational requirements, or 

to properly dispose of the wastes generated. 

Most of the nonradiological analyses are 

performed at approved offsite laboratories. 

During 1997, 138 bulk or air samples were 

collected for asbestos determination, 85 oil 

samples collected for polychlorinated 

biphenyl (PCBs) determination, and 1,412 

samples of various kinds collected for 

chemical characterization. 

ECOLOGICAL MONITORING 

The ecological monitoring tasks conducted 

under the EMAC program in 1997 included 

habitat mapping within the northern part of 

the NTS, characterizing and monitoring 

hydrologic and biotic parameters of the 

natural springs on the NTS, conducting a 

census of the NTS horse population, 

monitoring man-made water sources to 

6-3 
assess their affects on wildlife, necessary 

monitoring of spill tests at the HSC in Area 

5, and surveying control plots at the HSC 

annually. 

HABITAT MAPPING 

From April through September 1997, the 

northeastern third of the NTS was 

partitioned into 500 Ecological Landform 

Units (ELUs) using regular and multispectral 

aerial photographs of the NTS and Satellite 

Pour I’Observation de la Terre (SPOT) 

satellite imagery. ELUs were then visited to 

confirm unit boundaries, describe vegetation 

and other physical and biological 

characteristics of the unit, and photograph 

the site vegetation. The majority of the 

ELUs sampled were within the Yucca Flat 

drainage basin. Much of the area sampled 

had been previously disturbed by ground 

clearing and historic nuclear testing 

activities, creating great diversity in habitats. 

No Geographical Information System (GIS) 

spatial coverages were developed for ELUs 

sampled in 1997, because emphasis was 

placed on conducting field work. Habitats in 

the remaining one-third of the NTS 

(mountains and mesas in the northwest 

portion of the NTS) will be sampled, and GIS 

spatial coverages and Resource 

Management Plan (RMP) map products will 

be completed in 1998. Habitat and species 

range maps will also be prepared for 

inclusion in Bechtel Nevada’s (BN’s) 

Ecological GIS (EGIS). 

The GIS-based map products and database 

produced by this activity will facilitate 

ecosystem management of the NTS, the 

analysis of NTS species distribution and 

abundance, the preparation of future 

environmental assessments and impact 

statements, and siting of new NTS projects 

and facilities. The map products to be 

completed in 1998 will be the base 

vegetation and species habitat maps used in 

the NTS RMP. 

CHARACTERIZING AND MONITORING 

NTS SPRINGS 

From June 1996 through February 1997, 

biologists visited 25 natural water sources at 

the NTS to determine if these mesic habitats 

qualify for jurisdictional wetlands protection. 

A summary report of all findings titled 

“Nevada Test Site Wetlands Assessment” 

(Hansen et al., 1997) was completed and 

distributed as a DOE/NV topical report in 

May. The report identifies 16 NTS natural 

water sources that may be classified as 

jurisdictional wetlands and 8 water sources 

that may be classified as waters of the 

United States. The report also identifies and 

summarizes previous studies on NTS natural 

water sources; describes their known 

physical, chemical, and biological features; 

identifies the current DOE management 

practices related to the protection of NTS 

wetlands; and identifies the information 

needed to develop and implement resource 

management objectives for NTS wetlands. 

Periodic monitoring of selected NTS natural 

water sources was continued in 1997. Nine 

water sources were visited between June 

and August. They included Cane, Captain 

Jack, Gold Meadows, Tippipah, Topopah, 

Tub, and Whiterock Springs; Reitmann 

Seep; and Yucca Playa Pond. Selected 

hydrology, water quality, and wildlife usage 

data were collected. These data were 

summarized and presented in an annual 

report titled “Ecological Monitoring and 

Compliance Program Fiscal Year 1997” 

submitted to DOE/NV in September. Cane, 

Gold Meadows, and Reitmann Seep had no 

visible surface flow, while the other springs 

exhibited some surface flow. Three 

locations had some limited physical 

disturbance (Cane, Captain Jack, and Gold 

Meadows Springs), notably from horse 

activity (grazing and trampling of vegetation) 

at the latter two. Most water quality 

parameters varied moderately between 

sites, particularly water temperature (range 

of 1.7” to 26°C [35” to 79”FI) and dissolved 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM INFORMATION 

oxygen, which was low (< 3.0 parts per 

million [ppm]) at six springs and higher 

(> 6 ppm) at eight other natural water 

sources. Total dissolved solids (TDS) were 

moderately low at most springs (within a 

range of 33 to 435 ppm), compared to TDS, 

at the Yucca Playa Pond (> 1,000 ppm), 

probably due to evaporation and 

concentration of salts at Yucca Playa Pond. 

The surface area of water at this ephemeral 

pond was greatly reduced during early June 

(3,000 m' [32,292 ft']) from the surface area 

measured in January (23,000 m2 [247,000 ft?) 

when TDS was much lower (162 ppm). 

Three species of mammals and 18 species 

of birds were detected at 10 water sources. 

The most abundant and widely distributed 

species was the mourning dove, observed at 

eight sites. The highest number of individual 

birds was observed at Topopah Spring and 

included chukar and mourning doves, 

predominantly. The most abundant 

passerine species were ravens, observed at 

Gold Meadows Spring and house finches, 

which were found at four water sources. 

Hydrobiid springsnails were present at Cane 

Spring inside the cave pool. 

HORSE SURVEYS 

Horse abundance surveys were conducted 

from July through September. A standard 

road course on the NTS was driven to locate 

and identify horses. Horses were not 

marked, but were identified by their unique 

physical features. Individual horses 

observed more than one time during the 

sampling period were considered 

recaptures. The population estimate based 

on sampling was 40 animals. The 95 

percent confidence interval for this 

population estimate, based on the Capture 

Program (White et al., 1982), was 40 to 47 

animals. Three foals were observed during 

the summer. Six horses observed in 1996 

were missing in 1997, representing a 13 

percent decline in the population. One 

horse, which was not observed in 1996, 

drowned in Camp 17 pond in October 1996. 

This is the first known occurrence of horse 

drowning on the NTS. Over the past three 

years, the feral horse population at the NTS 

has declined about 29 percent, from 56 to 40 

horses. Natural processes (e.g., predation, 

emigration) may be the cause of this 

population decline, but data to verify this 

have not been collected. 

The annual population census of horses has 

routinely been conducted in the summer 

when horses are nearer to water sources 

and thus easier to find. These census 

surveys provide an adequate estimate of the 

summer range, but are not useful for 

estimating their annual range. Efforts were 

made in 1997 to collect data on horse and 

horse sign sightings to better estimate their 

annual range. Horse sign sightings were 

recorded in each ELU sampled as part of the 

habitat mapping task and during surveys for 

sensitive plant species. Selected roads 

were also driven within the suspected 

annual horse range and all fresh signs 

(estimated to be < 1 year old) observed 

adjacent to the roads were recorded. Data 

collected indicated that the 1997 NTS horse 

range includes Kawich Canyon, Gold 

Meadows, Rainier Mesa, Big Burn Valley, 

Buckboard Mesa, Redrock Valley, the 

Eleana Range, the southwestern foothills of 

the Eleana Range, and northwest Yucca 

Flat. Most roads on Pahute Mesa were not 

driven, so horse use in most of Areas 19 

and 20 could not be determined. In 1998, 

horse sign data will be entered into BN's 

EGIS and analyzed to characterize those 

vegetation communities used by horses and 

to map their annual range. 

Selected water sources on the NTS were 

surveyed to evaluate their effect on the 

distribution of horses. Only two natural 

water sources (Captain Jack Spring in Area 

12 and Gold Meadows Spring in Area 19) 

and one man-made pond (Camp 17 Pond in 

Area 18) were used by horses in the 

summer of 1997. Two man-made ponds, 

Well 2 Pond and the Mud Plant Pond, both 

in Area 2, were used by horses in the past. 

Well 2 Pond was heavily used by horses in 

1995, but has been dry since then. The Mud 

Plant Pond was used in 1996, but its water 

surface area dropped by half to 400 m2 

6-5 
(4,305 ft2) in August 1997, making it 

unusable by horses. As a result, 11 to 13 

horses relied completely on Captain Jack 

Spring for summer water. An estimated 25 

to 29 horses appeared to be dependent on 

Camp 17 pond during the summer and fall 

and Gold Meadows Spring during the 

summer until it dried up in late August 1997. 

Field surveys indicate that the 1997 summet’ 

distribution of horses has not changed 

significantly from that observed in previous 

years because of their dependence on water 

sources in Areas 12 and 18. 

MONITORING MAN-MADE WATER 

SOURCES 

In 1997, only one animal mortality (ground 

squirrel) was observed and attributed to 

entrapment in a plastic lined sump. No 

animal mortalities at unlined or cement-lined 

ponds were observed. Soil placed in 

mounds over plastic lining in the corners of 

sumps was determined to be the most 

practical and effective way to limit animal 

mortalities 

HSC MONITORING 

Biologists reviewed chemical spill test plans 

for two experiments at the HSC. It was 

determined that all experiments would 

represent minimal risk and no field biological 

monitoring of treatment transects for these 

experiments would be required. Letters 

documenting these reviews were submitted 

to DOUNV’s Environment Safety and Health 

Division in April and September 1997. 

Control and treatment transects surrounding 

the HSC were established in 1997. 

Treatment transects are each 1,000 m 

(3,280 ft) long and at three distances (1, 3, 

and 5 km [0.6, 1.9, and 3.1 mi]) downwind 

from the spill site. Control transects are 

similar lengths and are at similar distances 

upwind. The control transects were selected 

to contain similar plant species as the 

treatment transects. Seasonal baseline 

sampling of the transects was conducted in 

March and September. Data collected 

included the presence of any dead animals, 

observations of wildlife or their sign (i.e., 

scat, burrows, nests, tracks), and any 

damage to vegetation. No evidence of 

damage to wildlife or vegetation was 

observed. The sampling periods for this 

baseline monitoring of the transects will 

correspond with periods of maximum plant 

growth such as spring, periods of declining 

growth and increasing plant stress such as 

summer, and periods of dormancy such as 

winter. Sampling of these transects 

throughout each year will document any 

long-term or cumulative impacts of testing 

that would not be detected otherwise. 

HISTORIC PRESERVATION 

Historic preservation studies and surveys 

are conducted by the Desert Research 

Institute (DRI), University and Community 

College System of Nevada. In 1997, 13 

surveys were conducted for historic 

properties on the NTS, and reports on the 

findings were prepared (Beck; Dubarton and 

Drollinger; Holz and Beck; Jones and 

Drolllinger; McCarty and Drollinger [I 9971). 

These surveys identified 25 prehistoric and 

historic archaeological sites. Through 

consultation with the Nevada State Historical 

Preservation Office, four of these sites were 

considered eligible for the National Register 

of Historic Places. Work continued on 

historic structures associated with early NTS 

activities. Impacts planned to the Engine 

Maintenance Assembly and Disassembly 

Facility in Area 25 required the preparation 

of Historic American Engineering Records 

documentation for the facility. This 

documentation will reside in the Library of 

Congress. Historic American Building 

Survey documentation is in preparation for 

the EPA Farm. 

Other efforts in 1997, included 

administration of the cultural resources 

program on the NTS, preparing management 

objectives and plans and promoting public 

relations and communications concerning 

the NTS archaeology and cultural resources 

program. 

To comply with 36 CFR 79, “Protection of 

Historic and Cultural Properties” (CFR 

1966), a multi-phase program is in progress 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM INFORMA TlON 

to upgrade the NTS archaeological collection 

and archives. In 1997, DRI completed the 

piece-by-piece inventory of lithic artifacts in 

the collection. About 500,000 artifacts have 

been inventoried and repackaged according 

to federal requirements. 

6.4 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL 

SPILL CENTER (HSC) 

The HSC was established in the Frenchman 

Basin in Area 5 as a basic research tool for 

studying the dynamics of accidental 

releases of various hazardous materials and 

the effectiveness of mitigation procedures. 

The HSC was designed and equipped to 

(1) discharge a measured volume of a 

hazardous fluid at a controlled rate on a 

specially prepared surface; (2) monitor and 

record downwind gaseous concentrations, 

operating data, and close-in/downwind 

meteorological data; and (3) provide a 

means to control and monitor these 

functions from a remote location. 

The Facility has the capability of releasing 

large volumes of cryogenic and noncryogenic liquids at rapid rates through a 

152 m (500-ft) spill line to the experimental 

area supporting the tank farm. Spill rates for 

the cryogenic system range from 1,000 to 

26,000 gallons per minute (gpm) with the 

capability to release the entire contents of 

both tanks in two minutes. The noncryogenic system can be released at rates 

of 500 to 5,000 gpm (1.9 to 19 m3/min), with 

the entire 90.8 m3 (24,000 gal) capable of 

being released in five minutes. 

Test sponsors can vary intake air 

temperature, humidity, release rate, and 

release volume in a 2.4- x 4.8- x 25.3- m 

(8-ft x 16-ft x 96-ft) wind tunnel. There are 

two spill pads available for use in contained 

open air releases of volumes of 0.19 to 3.8 

m3 (50 to 1,000 gal). Test Area 4 has been 

added primarily to provide the testing 

capability for determining the efficacy of 

totally encapsulated chemical protective 

suiting materials when exposed to high 

concentrations of toxic and hazardous 

gaseous materials. 

DOWNV provides the facilities, security, and 

technical support, but all costs are borne by 

the organization conducting the tests. The 

plans for each test series were examined by 

an Advisory Panel that consisted of DOE/NV 

and EPA's R&IE-LV professional personnel 

augmented by personnel from the 

organization performing the tests. 

For each test, the R&IE-LV provides an 

advisor on offsite public health and safety for 

the Operations Controller's Test Safety 

Review Panel. At the beginning of each test 

series and, at other tests depending on 

projected need, a field monitoring technician 

from the EPA with appropriate air sampling 

equipment is deployed downwind of the test 

at the NTS boundary to measure chemical 

concentrations that may have reached the 

offsite area. Samples are collected with a 

hand-operated Drager pump and sampling 

tube appropriate for the chemical being 

tested. Not all tests are monitored by R&IELV, if professional judgement indicates that, 

based on previous experience with the 

chemical and the proposed test parameters, 

NTS boundary monitoring is unnecessary. 

The EPA monitors at the NTS boundary, in 

contact by two-way radio, are always placed 

at the projected cloud center line. 

During 1997, there were two experiments, 

each consisting of a series of spill tests: (1) 

Remote Sensor Test Range - Lynx Episode 

using 28 materials, and (2) Effluent Tracking 

Experiment using ten materials. Biological 

monitoring of these experiments is 

discussed above. No offsite air monitoring 

was performed by R&lE-LV personnel in 

1997. 

6.5 WASTE MANAGEMENT 

ACTlVlTl ES 

RADIOACTIVE WASTE 

Low-level radioactive waste (LLW) from the 

DOE-approved generators is disposed of at 

two locations on the NTS. Packaged LLW is 

6-7 
disposed of at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste 

Management Site (RWMS-5), in shallow pits 

and trenches. LLW in large containers and 

unpackaged bulk waste from NTS 

environmental restoration projects are buried 

in selected subsidence craters at the Area 3 

RWMS (RWMS-3). Hazardous, transuranic 

(TRU), and mixed TRU wastes are stored 

aboveground pending shipment to offsite 

permitted disposal facilities. 

RWMS-5 WASTE MANAGEMENT 

OPERATIONS 

The RWMS-5 is used for the disposal of 

radioactive waste generated at the NTS and 

at offsite DOE and U.S. Department of 

Defense facilities. LLW is accepted for 

disposal from generators that have received 

approval from DOE Headquarters and 

DOE/NV. Disposal of mixed waste is still 

restricted to waste generated on the NTS. 

LLW, mixed waste, and small quantities of 

TRU waste have been disposed of in 22 

shallow pits and trenches since disposal 

operations began in 1961. The shallow pits 

and trenches range in depth from 4.6 to 14.6 

m (1 5 to 48 ft). Filled pits and trenches are 

covered by a 2.4 m (8 ft) alluvium cap 

pending final closure of the site. 

LLW disposed of prior to DOE’S 

implementation of RCRA (Title 40 CFR 

260-281) in 1986 may contain low levels of 

hazardous constituents. A single disposal 

unit, Pit 3, has interim status as a mixed 

waste disposal unit for NTS generated 

wastes that meet the RCRA Land Disposal 

Restrictions (LDR) requirements. Low-level 

mixed waste generated on the NTS is stored 

on the TRU waste storage pad until 

characterization is complete. If the waste 

meets or has been treated to meet LDR 

requirements, it may be disposed of in Pit 3. 

Transuranic mixed waste is stored in a 

covered building on a specially constructed 

RCRA-designed pad. The Waste 

Examination Facility (WEF) was designed 

and constructed to characterize and certify 

TRU mixed waste for disposal at the Waste 

Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico. In 1997, 

the WEF began pilot testing and is expected 

to begin operations in 1998. Low-level 

radioactive mixed waste is also currently 

stored on the TRU waste storage pad. 

In 1997, uranium ore residues from the 

Mound Plant in Miamisburg, Ohio, which 

were stored north of the RWMS-5 in the 

Strategic Material Storage Yard (SMSY), 

were transferred to an out-of-state facility. 

Waste is no longer stored in the SMSY. 

In 1997, the RWMS-5 received 9.76 x I O3 m3 

(3.45 x 1 o5 ft3) of waste containing a total of 

2.6 x 1 O5 Ci (9.6 x 1 O3 TBq) of reportable 

radionuclides. This is a small increase in 

volume but a large increase in activity from 

the previous year (see Table 6.2). Tritium 

accounted for approximately 99.9 percent of 

total radioactivity disposed of in 1997 and 

accounted for the increase in activity over 

1996 (see Table 6.3). Natural uranium and 

thorium contributed the majority of the 

remaining activity. 

Radioactivity in air, groundwater, 

vegetation, gamma and neutron radiation 

fields, and soil moisture content were 

monitored at the RWMS-5 in 1997. 

Radioactivity in air, gamma radiation fields, 

and soil moisture content were monitored at 

the RWMS-3. Air samples were analyzed 

for gross alpha radiation, gross beta 

radiation, photon-emitting radionuclides, 

plutonium, and tritium. All airborne 

radionuclide concentrations were a small 

fraction of DOE allowable limits. Tritium was 

the only man-made airborne radionuclide 

detected at the RWMS-5 and probably 

originates from LLW disposed of there. 

Plutonium was the only man-made airborne 

radionuclide detected at the RWMS-3. The 

airborne plutonium likely originates from the 

resuspension of soils contaminated by 

atmospheric nuclear weapons tests. 

Groundwater samples were analyzed for 

RCRA parameters, gross alpha, gross beta, 

tritium, and photon emitting radionuclides. 

No man-made radionuclides or hazardous 

chemicals were detected. Gamma radiation 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM iNFORMATiON 

fields were monitored by thermoluminescent 

dosimeters. Neutron radiation fields at the 

perimeter of the TRU waste storage pad 

were monitored by proton recoil dosimeters. 

Dose equivalents greater than background 

were measured at the RWMS-3 and 

RWMS-5, at locations where radioactive 

waste is stored or remained exposed in 

active disposal units. Contamination from 

atmospheric nuclear weapons tests 

contributed to the dose equivalent measured 

at the RWMS-3. Soil moisture monitoring 

did not detect the infiltration of wetting fronts 

below the depth of waste disposal units at 

either site. The results of air monitoring are 

described in Chapter 4 and of water 

monitoring in Chapter 5. 

RWMS-5 PERFORMANCE 

ASSESSMENT (PA) 

The DOE assesses the long-term 

performance of LLW disposal sites by 

conducting a PA. This is a systematic 

analysis of the potential risks posed by a 

waste disposal site to the public and to the 

environment and a comparison of those 

risks to established performance objectives. 

A PA identifies the processes that could 

cause detectable releases of radioactive 

materials to the accessible environment 

during operation of the site. The only 

release pathway expected in the near term 

is diffusion of volatile radionuclides through 

the operational cap to the atmosphere. 

Tritium is the most abundant volatile 

radionuclide disposed of at the RWMS-5. 

PA models indicate that nonvolatile 

radionuclides may eventually be detected in 

soil excavated by burrowing animals and in 

deep-rooted vegetation growing on disposal 

unit covers, Site characterization data and 

modeling studies indicate that transport of 

nonvolatile radionuclides from the waste to 

the uppermost aquifer is extremely unlikely 

because of the thick dry vadose zone, low 

precipitation, and high potential 

evapotranspiration at the site. 

RWMS-5 monitoring results are generally 

consistent with PA results. Tritium is the 

volatile radionuclide with the largest 

inventory and is routinely detected in air 

samples at the RWMS-5 at levels that are a 

small fraction of DOE allowable limits. Since 

maintenance operations keep operational 

covers vegetation free, deep-rooted 

vegetation samples are not routinely 

available for analysis. Tritium is the only 

radionuclide that has been detected in 

previous analyses of cap vegetation. 

Groundwater monitoring results confirm that 

after 37 years of operations, groundwater 

beneath the RWMS-5 remains 

uncontaminated. Monitoring of soil moisture 

content confirms that infiltrating precipitation 

does not percolate through the disposal unit 

operational caps before it evaporates and 

returns to the atmosphere. 

RWMS-3 WASTE MANAGEMENT 

OPERATIONS 

The RWMS-3 is used for the disposal of bulk 

waste. Packaged bulk LLW is accepted 

from approved onsite and offsite generators. 

Unpackaged bulk LLW from NTS 

environmental restoration projects also has 

been accepted and disposed of. Disposal is 

in subsidence craters formed by 

underground nuclear tests. The subsidence 

craters range in depth from 15 to 24 m 

(49 to 78 ft) and are filled by alternating 

layers of stacked waste packages and 1 m 

(3 ft) of clean alluvium. Waste disposed of 

at the RWMS-3 tends to have a lower 

activity concentration than waste disposed 

of at the RWMS-5 because bulk waste tends 

to be generated by environmental 

restoration projects. 

Waste disposal operations at the RWMS-3 

began in the U-3ax crater in 1968. The 

U3ax crater was eventually joined with 

U-3bl to form the U-3ax/bl disposal unit. 

This unit received mostly unpackaged LLW 

from NTS nuclear testing operations. The 

U-3ax/bl disposal unit was filled in 1987 and 

covered with a 2.4-m (84) thick temporary 

closure cap. This disposal unit is a mixed 

waste management unit as mixed waste is 

known to have been disposed of. Waste 

disposal operations moved to the U-3at 
crater in 1988 and was joined with the U-3ah 

crater to form the U-3ah/at disposal unit. 

This disposal unit remained open in 1997 

and contains LLW only. During 1997, 

disposal of unpackaged plutonium 

contaminated soil from the CLEAN SLATE I 

site on the Nellis Air Force Range Complex 

about 14 mi (22 km) east of Goldfield, 

Nevada began in the U-3bh crater. 

During 1997, the RWMS-3 received 

1.49 x 1 O4 m3 (5.26 x 1 O5 ft3) of waste 

containing 6.5 Ci (0.24 GBq) of activity (see 

Table 6.4). This was an increase in volume 

and a slight increase in the activity disposed 

of, compared to the previous year. Isotopes 

of plutonium and 241Am from the cleanup of 

the CLEAN SLATE I site accounted for 

approximately 95 percent of the total 

radioactivity disposed of during 1997 (see 

Table 6.5). 

RWMS-3 PERFORMANCE 

ASSESSMENT 

A PA has been conducted for the RWMS-3 

(Shott et al., 1997b). Release pathways at 

the RWMS-3 are expected to be the same 

as at the RWMS-5 because of the similar 

site conditions and disposal operations. 

However, the inventory of radioactive 

materials disposed of at the RMWS-3 is 

much less than that disposed of at the 

RWMS-5. The RWMS-3 inventory of 3H, the 

most likely radionuclide to be released, is 

significantly less than at the RWMS-5, so 

the potential for detecting releases of 

radioactivity is also significantly less. 

Moreover, the interpretation of 

environmental monitoring results at the 

RWMS-3 is confounded by the presence of 

significant soil contamination from 

aboveground testing. The small RWMS-3 

inventory combined with the existing soil 

contamination from aboveground testing 

makes interpretation of environmental 

monitoring data from the RWMS-3 difficult. 

HAZARDOUS WASTES 

NTS OPERATIONS 

Hazardous wastes generated on the NTS 

are accumulated at a location east of the 

RWMS in Area 5, the Hazardous Waste 

Accumulation Site, before shipment to an 

offsite Treatment, Storage, and Disposal 

facility. Hazardous waste generation 

activities at the NTS are performed under 

EPA Identification (ID) Number 

NV3890090001. The NTS continues to be 

regulated by the 1995 NTS RCRA 

Hazardous Waste Operating Permit (No. 

NEV HW009) for the general operation of 

the facility and the specific operation of the 

Hazardous Waste Storage Unit (HWSU) and 

the Explosive Ordnance Disposal Unit. 

Three permit modifications have occurred 

since October 1, 1996. These modification 

include changes in the NTS training program 

and personnel changes in the Area 5 and 

Area 11 Emergency Management Plans. 

The Pit 3 Mixed Waste Disposal Unit located 

in the Area 5 RWMS continues to operate 

under RCRA Interim Status. 

The NTS also has a Nevada Hazardous 

Materials Storage Permit Number 13-94- 

0034-X, issued by the state Fire Marshall. 

This permit is renewed annually when a 

report required by the state’s Chemical 

Catastrophe Prevention Act is submitted. 

CHEMICAL ANALYSES 

In support of facility operations at the NTS, 

samples are collected and analyzed from 

various waste streams in order to show 

compliance with operational requirements or 

to properly dispose of the wastes generated. 

Most of the nonradiological analyses are 

performed at offsite approved laboratories. 

During 1997, there were 138 bulk or air 

samples collected for asbestos 

determination, 85 oil samples collected for 

PCBs determination, and 1,412 samples 

collected for chemical characterization. 

6-1 0 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM INFORMA TlON 

NON-NTS OPERATIONS 

Four EPA Generator ID numbers have been 

issued to five non-NTS operations. In 

addition, three local ID numbers were 

required at one operation. Hazardous waste 

is managed at all locations, by using satellite 

accumulation areas. Three operations have 

centralized accumulation areas. All 

hazardous and industrial wastes are 

transported offsite to RCRA-permitted 

facilities for approved treatment and/or 

disposal. 

SANITARY WASTE 

At the NTS there are three nonhazardous 

waste landfills that have state of Nevada 

Operating Permits, Le., the Area 6 

Hydrocarbon Disposal Site, the Area 9 

U-lOc Solid Waste Disposal Site, and the 

Area 23 Solid Waste Disposal Site. There 

are no monitoring requirements for nonhazardous solid waste disposed of at the 

NTS in the three landfills; however, before 

the waste is disposed of, it is weighed. 

During 1997, there were approximately 

12,500 tons of waste disposed of at the 

NTS, as shown in Table 6.6. 

there was a release to the soil during 

container handling, there is spill containment 

present to control the release. 

6.6 PERMITS FOR NTS 

OPERATIONS 

Federal and state permits have been issued 

to DOE/NV and to BN (Table 6.7). These 

permits are required for the conduct of such 

DOE/NV activities as hazardous and 

sanitary waste storage and disposal for 

certain ecological studies and for operations 

involving endangered species. All BN nonNTS facilities are located in existing 

metropolitan areas and are not subject to the 

Endangered Species Act. Annual reports 

associated with these permits are filed as 

stipulated in each permit. 

The only RCRA permit in use at the NTS is 

the Hazardous Waste Management Permit 

NEV HW009. With this permit, hazardous 

waste generated at the NTS can be stored 

at the Area 5 HWSU for up to one year. It is 

then shipped offsite for treatment and/or 

disposal. During 1997, the total amount of 

hazardous waste shipped offsite was 

1,022,360 pounds, 2,900 gallons, and 60 

cubic yards (464 T, 766 L, and 46 m3). 

The permitting process considers 

groundwater protection at these locations. 

At the Area 23 Class II Municipal and 

Industrial Solid Waste Disposal Site, a 

groundwater monitoring well has been 

installed. This well also serves to satisfy 

monitoring requirements for the Mercury 

sewage lagoon system. An initial baseline 

water sample was collected in August 1997, 

and compliance monitoring will begin in 1998. 

The RCRA-permitted Area 5 HWSU also had 

groundwater protection considered in the 

permitting process. The facility has 

impervious cement floor compartments with 

adequate spill containment capacity to store 

containers of hazardous waste. In the event 

The North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF) has a 

Waste Generator number of NVD09786831 

that covers generation and a 90-day 

accumulation of hazardous waste. The 

waste is shipped offsite for final treatment 

and/or disposal. During 1997, there were 

2,910 kg (6,415 Ib) of hazardous waste 

shipped offsite from the NLVF. 

DOE/NV activities on the NTS comply with 

all terms and conditions of a desert tortoise 

incidental take authorization issued in a 

Biological Opinion (File Number 1 -5-96-F-33) 

from the United States Fish and Wildlife 

Service (USFWS). 

The Nevada Division of Wildlife issued a 

scientific collection permit, SI 5842, to BN 

that allows collection of wildlife samples. 

6-1 1 
Table 6.1 Summary of Radionuclides Detected in Milk Samples - 1997 

Number of samples with results > MDC 

(Network averalge concentration in pCi/L) 

- 1997 - 1996 - 1995 

3H Not Analyzed Not Analyzed Ot37) 89Sr Not Analyzed O(O.01) O(0.03) 

gost- l(0.70) 0 (0.63) O(0.61) 

Table 6.2 Low-Level Waste Disposed of at the RWMS-5, 1993 - 1997 

Calendar Year Volume of LLW Disposed of (m31 Activitv of LLW Disposed of (Cil 

1993 8,327 3.0 x io4 

1994 12,30CI 5.2 x io4 

1996 7,298 7.7 x io3 

1997 9,762 2.6 x 105 

1995 9,171 5.6 x 10‘ 

Table 6.3 Inventory of Radionuclides (>0.1 Ci) Disposed of at the RWMS-5 in 1997 

Radionuclide - Activitym Percent of Total Activitv 

3H 

232Th 

=8Th 

228Ra 

241Pu 

230Th 

23gPu 

TC 

240Pu 

24’ Am 

2’0Pb 

137cs 

226Ra 

133Ba 

‘%PU 

238~ 

234u 

23511 

23611 

2.8 x 105 

7.0 x 10’ 

2.5 x 10’ 

2.4 x 10’ 

2.2 x 10’ 

2.1 x 10’ 

6.9 x IO’ 

5.7 x 10’ 

3.9 x loo 

3.1 x 10’ 

1.4~ 10’ 

8.3 x lo-’ 

6.2 x 10‘’ 

4.2 x 10‘’ 

2.7 x lo-’ 

2.3 x lo-’ 

1.8 x 1 0-’ 

1.7 x 10” 

1.7 x lo-’ 

-- 1 .o x 1 0-’ 

1.0 x lo2 

2.5 x lo2 

8.6 x 

9.1 x 10-3 

8.0 x 10-3 

7.5 x 10-3 

2.5 x 10-3 

2.1 x 103 

1.4 x 10-3 

1.1 x 10-3 

5.0 x 

2.2 x I 0-4 

1.5 x 10-4 

9.9 x 10-5 

8.1 x 10-5 

6.5 x 10-5 

6.1 x 10-5 

6.0 x 10-5 

3.6 x 10-5 

3.0 x lo4 

Total 2.8 x 105 1.0 x lo2 

, 

6-1 2 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM lNF0 RMA TlON 

Table 6.4 Low-Level Waste Disposed of at the RWMS-3, 1993 - 1997 

Calendar Year Volume of LLW Disoosed (m3\ Activity of LLW Disposed (Cil 

1993 

1994 

1995 

1996 

1997 

9,848 

10,550 

1 1,073 

7,033 

14,910 

0.24 

0.21 

3.1 

5.7 

6.5 

Table 6.5 Inventory of Radionuclides (>I mCi) Disposed of at the RWMS-3 in 1997 

Radionuclide Activitv (Ci) Percent of Total Activitv 

239Pu 3.7 x 10' 5.7 x 10' 

241 Pu 1.8 x 10' 2.8 x 10' 

240Pu 3.5 x 10'' 5.4 x 10' 

241Am 2.5 x IO-' 3.8 x 10' 

238u 9.4 x 1.5 x 10' 

234U 7.6 x lo-' 1.2 x IO0 

228Ra 5.9 x lo-' 9.1 x 10-1 

228Th 4.4 x lo-2 6.8 x 10-I 

l3'CS 1.6 x 1 0-2 2.5 x lo-' 

230Th 8.4 x 10-3 1.3 x lo-' 

99Tc 5.5 x 103 8.4 x 1 0-2 

235u 5.4 x 103 8.3 x 1 O-' 

236u 5.3 x 10-3 8.2 x IO" 

232Th 1.4 x 2.2 x lo-' 

=%a 6.7 x 10-3 1.0 x 10-1 

Total 6.5 x IO' 1.0 x 10' 

____I" _____I__II 

Table 6.6 Quantity of Wastes Disposed of in Landfills - 1997 

Month Area 9 Area 23 Area 6 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

1,870,110 

367,340 

21 7,520 

1,157,870 

1,02!9,180 

1,451,190 

427,600 

130,300 

190,000 

124,400 

300,350 

155,980 

260,990 

94,480 

12,400 

340 

4,170 

300 

6-1 3 
Table 6.6 (Quantity of Wastes Disposed of in Landfills - 1997, cont.) 

Quant ity (in DOU rids) 

Month 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December 

Area 9 

183,070 

878,160 

1,432,890 

1 ,157,890 

1 17,420 

162.560 

Area 23 

21 6,460 

51 3,640 

381,240 

239,520 

240,820 

240,820 

Area 6 

1,001,220 

10,360,360 

33,640 

8,140 

17,440 

50 

Total 10,025,200 3,161,l 30 11,793,530 

Table 6.7 Permits Required for NTS Operations - 1997 

NV3890090001 

NVD097868731 

Permit No. 

NEV HW009 

SW 13 097 02 

SW 13 097 03 

SW 13 097 04 

13-97-0034-X 

13-97-0037-X 

S 1 5482 

File 1 -5-96-F-33 

Interim Status 

13-94-0034-X 

- EPA Generator ID 

NTS Activities 

NLV Activities 

- N'TS Permits 

Areas 

NTS Hazardous Waste Management (RCRA) 

Area 6 Hydrocarbon Disposal Site 

Area 9 U-1 Oc Solid Waste Disposal Site 

Area 23 Solid Waste Disposal Site 

NTS Hazardous Materials 

HSC Hazardous Materials 

Scientific Collection of 'Wildlife Samples 

USFWS -- Desert Tortoise Incidental Take Authorization 

RCRA Part B -- Pit 3 Mixed Waste Disposal Operation 

State Chemical Catastrophe Prevention Act Compliance 

- Off-IVTS Permits 

Las Vegas Area Operations 

03-97-0265-X 

03-97-0266-X 

NLV Hazardous Materi'als 

RSL Hazardous Materials 

Extiration Date 

05/01 100 

On Closure 

On Closure 

On Closure 

12/31/97 

12/31 197 

1 2/31 /98 

08/00/06 

On Permit 

Approval 

Renewal on 

report submission 

1 213 1 /97 

1 2/31 197 

6-1 4 
7.0 DOSE ASSESSMENT 

The off site environmental surveillance system, operated around the Nevada 

Test Site (NTS) by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) 

Radiation and Indoor Environments National Laboratory in Las Vegas 

(R&IE-LV), measured no radiation exposures attributable to recent NTS 

operations. However, using onsite emission measurements and calculated 

resuspension data as input to the EPA's Clean Air Package 1988 (CAP88-PC) 

model, a potential effective dose equivalent (EDE) to the maximally exposed 

individual (MEI) was calculated to be 0.089 mrem (8.9 x 1 O4 mSv) to a 

hypothetical resident of Springdale, Nevada, located 58 km (36 mi) westnorthwest of Control Point 1 (CP-1) on the NTS. The calculated population 

dose (collective EDE) to the approximately 31,000 residents living within 80 

km (50 mi) from each of the NTS airborne emission sources was 0.26 

person-rem (2.6 x 1 O4 person-Sv). Monitoring network data indicated an 

exposure to the ME1 of 144 mrem (1.44 mSv) from normal background 

radiation. The calculated dose to this individual from worldwide 

distributions of radioactivity as measured from surveillance networks was 

0.015 mrem (1.5 x 

background, are less than 1 percent of the most restrictive standard. 

mSv). These maximum dose estimates, excluding 

7.1 ESTIMATED DOSE FROM 

NTS ACTIVITIES 

he potential EDE to the offsite T population due to NTS activities is 

estimated annually. Two methods are 

used to estimate the EDE to residents in the 

offsite area in order to determine the 

community potentially most impacted by 

airborne releases of radioactivity from the 

NTS. In the first method, effluent release 

estimates, based on monitoring data or 

calculated resuspension of deposited 

radioactivity, and meteorological data are 

used as inputs to EPA's CAP88-PC model 

which then produces estimated EDEs. The 

second method entails using data from the 

Offsite Radiological Safety Program (ORSP) 

monitoring networks with documented 

assumptions and conversion factors to 

calculate the committed EDE (CEDE). The 

latter method provides an estimate of the 

EDE to a hypothetical individual 

continuously present outdoors at the 

location of interest that includes both NTS 

emissions and worldwide fallout. In addition, 

a collective EDE is calculated by the first 

method for the total offsite population 

residing within 80 km (50 mi) of each of the 

NTS emission sources. Background 

radiation measurements are used to provide 

a comparison with the calculated EDEs. In 

the absence of detectable releases of 

radiation from the NTS, the Pressurized Ion 

Chamber (PIC) network provides a 

measurement of background gamma 

radiation in the offsite area. 

There are four sources of possible radiation 

exposure to the population of Nevada, some 

of which were monitored by EPA's offsite 

monitoring networks during 1997. These 

were: 

0 Background radiation due to natural 

sources such as cosmic radiation, 

radioactivity in soil, and 7Be in air. 

0 Worldwide distributions of man-made 

radioactivity, such as 90Sr in milk and 

plutonium in soil. 

Operational releases of radioactivity from 

the NTS, including those from drill-back 

and purging activities when they occur. 

7- 1 
0 Radioactivity that was accumulated in 

migratory game animals during their 

residence on the NTS. 

Operational releases and calculated sources 

of radioactive emissions from the NTS are 

used as input data for CAP88-PC to provide 

estimates of exposures to offsite 

populations. The other three sources of 

exposure listed above are discussed below. 

ESTIMATED DOSE USING 

REPORTED NTS EMISSION§ 

Onsite source emission measurements, as 

provided by Department of Energy (DOE), 

are listed in Chapter 4, Table 4.5, and 

include tritium and plutonium. These are 

estimates of releases made at the point of 

origin. Meteorological data collected by the 

Air Resources Laboratory, Special 

Operations and Research Division 

(ARUSORD) were used to construct wind 

roses and stability arrays for the following 

areas: Mercury, Area 12, Area 20, Yucca 

Flat, and the Radioactive Waste 

Management Site in Area 5. A calculation of 

estimated dose from NTS effluents was 

performed using EPAs CAP88-PC model 

(EPA 1992a). The results of the model 

indicated that the hypothetical individual with 

the maximum calculated dose from airborne 

NTS radioactivity would reside at Springdale, 

Nevada, 58 km (36 mi) west-northwest of 

CP-1. The maximum dose to that individual 

could have been 0.089 mrem (8.9 x 

msv). For comparison, data from the PIC 

monitoring network indicated an exposure of 

144 mrem (1.44 mSv) from background 

gamma radiation occurring in that area. The 

population living within a radius of 80 km 

(50 mi) from the airborne sources on the 

NTS was estimated to be 31,000 individuals, 

based on estimated population data. The 

collective population dose within 80 km 

(50 mi) from each of these sources was 

calculated to be 0.26 person-rem (2.6 x 1 0-3 

person-%). Activity concentrations in air 

that would cause these calculated doses are 

much higher than actually detected by the 

offsite monitoring network. For example, 

0.088 mrem of the calculated EDE to the 

ME1 is due to plutonium. The annual 

average plutonium concentration in air that 

would cause this EDE is 3.4 x pCi/mL. 

This is about 20 times the annual average 

plutonium in air measured in Goldfield, 

Nevada, (nearest community) of 0.14 x IOd7 

pCi/mL (Chapter 4, Table 4.1 5). Table 7.1 

summarizes the annual contributions to the 

EDEs due to 1997 NTS operations as 

calculated by use of CAP88-PC and the 

radionuclides listed in Chapter 4, Table 4.5. 

Input data for the CAP88-PC model included 

meteorological data from ARUSORD and 

effluent release data calculated from 

monitoring results and from resuspension 

estimates. These release data are known to 

be estimates and the meteorological data 

are mesoscale, e.g., representative of an 

area approximately 40 km (25 mi) or less 

around the point of collection. However, 

these data are considered sufficient for 

model input, primarily because the model 

itself is not designed for complex terrain 

such as that on and around the NTS. Errors 

introduced by the use of the effluent and 

meteorological data are small compared to 

the errors inherent in the model. The model 

results are considered over-estimates of the 

dose to offsite residents. This has been 

confirmed by comparison with the offsite 

monitoring results. 

ESTIMATED DOSE USING 

MONITORING NETWORK DATA 

Potential CEDES to individuals may be 

estimated from the concentrations of 

radioactivity, as measured by the EPA 

monitoring networks during 1997. Actual 

results obtained in analysis are used: the 

majority of which are less than the reported 

minimum detectable concentration (MDC). 

No krypton or tritium in air data were 

collected offsite, so the onsite krypton for 

this year, and an average value for previous 

year's offsite tritium were used. No 

vegetable or animal samples were collected 

in 1997 so calculations for these intakes are 

not done. 

7-2 
DOSE ASSESSMENT 

Data quality objectives (DQOs) for precision 

and accuracy are, by necessity, less 

stringent for values near the MDC, so 

confidence intervals around the input data 

are broad. The concentrations of 

radioactivity detected by the monitoring 

networks and used in the calculation of 

potential CEDEs are shown in Table 7.2. 

The concentrations given in Table 7.2 are 

expressed in terms of activity per unit 

volume. These concentrations are 

converted to a dose by using the 

assumptions and dose conversion factors 

described below. The dose conversion 

factors assume continuous presence at a 

fixed location and no loss of radioactivity in 

storage or handling of ingested materials. 

0 Adult respiration rate = 8,400 m3/yr from 

International Commission on 

Radiological Protection Publication 21 

(ICRP 1975) 

0 Milk intake (average for 20 and 40 yr old) 

= 1 10 Uyr (ICRP 1975) 

0 Water consumption = 2 Uday (ICRP 

1975) 

The EDE conversion factors are derived 

from Federal Guidance Report No. 11 (EPA 

1988). Those used here are: 

0 3H: 6.4 x 1 0-8 mrern/pCi (ingestion or 

in halation) 

0 7Be: 2.6 x 1 0-7 mrem/pCi (inhalation) 

0 QOSr: I .4 x IO-" mrem/pCi (ingestion) 

0 85Kr: 1.5 x 1 0-5 mrem/yr per pCi/m3 

(submersion) 

0 238,23Q+240~u: 3.7 x mrem/pCi 

(ingestion, f,=10-4) 3.1 x IO'" mrem/pCi 

(inhalation, Class Y) 

The algorithm for the internal dose 

calculation is: 

0 (concentration) x (intake in volume 

[mass]/unit time) x (CEDE conversion 

factors) = CEDE 

As an example calculation, the following is 

the result of breathing a concentration of 

tritium in air of 0.2 pCi/m3: 

0 (2 x IO-' pCi/m3) x (8400 m3/yr) x (6.4 x 

10" mrem/pCi) = 1.1 x 1 o-4 mrem/yr 

However, in calculating the inhalation CEDE 

from 3H, the value must be increased by 50 

percent to account for skin absorption (ICRP 

1979). The total dose in one year, therefore, 

is 1.1 x 10-4x 1.5 = 1.6~ mrem/yr. 

Dose calculations from ORSP data are 

summarized in Table 7.2. 

The individual CEDEs, from the various 

pathways, added together give a total of 

0.015 mremlyr. Total EDEs can be 

calculated based on different combinations 

of data. If the interest was in just one area, 

for example, the concentrations from those 

stations closest to that area could be 

substituted into the equations used herein. 

In 1997, because of budget cuts and the 

standby status of nuclear device testing, 

samples of game animals and garden 

vegetables were not collected. Also, the 

noble gas and tritium sampling network was 

discontinued in the offsite locations, and the 

air sampling network was reduced. In order 

to calculate an EDE for a resident of 

Springdale, Nevada, using the ME1 from the 

CAP88-PC operation, it is necessary to 

make some assumptions as shown in the 

next section. 

7.2 DOSE (EDE) FROM 

OFFSITE EXPOSURES 

The NTS average 85Kr concentration is 

representative of statewide levels, so it can 

be used in this calculation. Also, tritium in 

air does not change much from year to year, 

so previous data for that can be used. 

Finally, Goldfield, Nevada, has the nearest 

air sampler to Springdale, Nevada, so its 

plutonium concentration is used to calculate 

the EDE. In addition, there is a contribution 

from 7Be that is formed in the atmosphere by 

cosmic ray interactions with oxygen and 

nitrogen. The annual average 7Be 
concentration measured by the NTS 

surveillance network was 0.12 pCi/m3. With 

a dose conversion factor for inhalation of 

2.6 x 1 0-7 mrem/pCi, and a breathing volume 

of 8,400 m3/yr, this equates to a dose of 

2.6 x 1 0-4 mrem. Also, assume the network 

average of 'OSr in milk and the average of 

tritium in water for sources near Springdale 

apply. All of the calculations that use these 

assumptions are shown in Table 7.2 and 

lead to an EDE at that location of 0.015 

mrem, which is about 16 percent of the EDE 

calculated by use of CAP88-PC. Both of 

these calculated EDEs are negligible, 

compared to the PIC measurement of 144 

mR at Beatty in 1997. 

The maximum offsite EDE would have been 

at Rachel, Nevada, because the network's 

highest annual average 239+240Pu 

concentration of 1.8 x 1 Omi7 vCi/mL 

(0.7 pBq/m3) occurred there. A resident of 

Rachel would thus receive an inhalation 

exposure leading to 0.047 mrem 

(4.7 x 1 0-4 mSv) EDE for 1997. When 

exposure to the other radionuclides listed in 

Table 7.2 is added, the total becomes 0.059 

mrem. 

Therefore, based on offsite monitoring data, 

the ME1 would live in Rachel, Nevada, and 

the EDE would be 0.059 mrem as contrasted 

with the CAP88-PC result that the ME1 would 

live in Springdale, Nevada, and the EDE 

would be 0.089 mrem. 

7.3 SUMMARY 

The offsite environmental surveillance 

system operated around the NTS by EPA's 

R&lE-LV detected no radiological exposures 

that could be attributed to recent NTS 

operations, but a calculated EDE of 0.01 5 

mrem can be obtained, if certain 

assumptions are made, as shown in Table 

7.2. Calculation with the CAP88-PC model, 

using estimated or calculated effluents from 

the NTS during 1997, resulted in a maximum 

dose of 0.089 mrem (8.9 x 

hypothetical resident of Springdale, Nevada, 

14 km (9 mi) west of the NTS boundary. 

Based on monitoring network data, this dose 

is calculated to be 0.015 mrem. This latter 

EDE is about 17 percent of the dose 

obtained from CAP88-PC calculation. This 

maximum dose estimate is less than 1 

percent of the International Commission of 

Radiological Protection (ICRP) 

recommendation that an annual EDE for the 

general public not exceed 100 mrem/yr 

(ICRP 1985). The calculated population 

dose (collective EDE) to the approximately 

31,000 residents living within 80 km (50 mi) 

of each of the NTS airborne emission 

sources was 0.26 person-rem (2.6 x 1 0-3 

person-SV). Background radiation yielded 

an EDE of 3,064 person-rem (30.6 person-Sv). 

mSv) to a 

Data from the PIC gamma monitoring 

indicated a dose of 144 mrem from 

background gamma radiation measured in 

the Springdale area. The CEDE calculated 

from the monitoring networks or the model, 

as discussed above, is a negligible amount 

by comparison. The uncertainty (20) for the 

PIC measurement at the 144 mrem 

exposure level is approximately 5 percent. 

Extrapolating to the calculated annual 

exposure at Springdale, Nevada, yields a 

total uncertainty of approximately 7 mrem 

which is greater than either of the calculated 

EDEs. Because the estimated dose from 

NTS activities is less than 1 mrem (the 

lowest level for which DQOs are defined, as 

given in Chapter 8), no conclusions can be 

made regarding the achieved data quality as 

compared to the DQOs for this insignificant 

dose. 

7-4 
Table 7.1 Summary of Effective Dose Equivalents from NTS Operations - 1997 

Maximum EDE at 

NTS 

Maximum EDE to 

an 

Collective EDE to 

Population within 80 km 

of the NTS Sources 

Dose 

Location 

NESHAP'~) 

Standard 

Percentage 

of NESHAP 

Background 

0.12 mrem 

(1.2 x msv) 

0.089 mrem 

(8.9 x 1 O4 mSv) 

0.26 person-rem 

(2.6 x 1 O3 person-Sv) 

Site boundary 40 km 

WNW Of NTS CP-1 Springdale, NV 58 km 

WNW Of NTS CP-1 

31,000 people within 80 km of NTS Sources 

10 mrem per yr 

(0.1 mSv per yr) 

10 mrem per yr (0.1 mSv per yr) 

1.2 0.89 

144 mrem 

(1.44 mSv) 

144 mrem 

(1.44 mSv) 

3064 person-rem (30.6 person-Sv) 

Percentage of 

Background 0.08 0.06 0.008 

(a) The maximum boundary dose is to a hypothetical individual who remains in the open continuously during the year at the NTS boundary located 40 km (25 mi) west-northwest from CP-1. 

(b) The maximum individual dose is to a person outside the NTS boundary at a residence where the highest dose-rate occurs as calculated by CAP88-PC (Version 1 .O) using NTS effluents listed in Table 4.5 and 

assuming all tritiated water input to the Area 12 containment ponds was evaporated. 

(c) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. 

TOTAL (Air = 4.2 x 

(a) Units are pCi/L and Bq/L. 

(b) Units are pCi/m3 and Bq/m3. 

Liquids = 1.1 x IO") = 1.5 x IO-' mrem/yr 

7-5 

Table 7.2 Monitoring Networks Data Used in Dose Calculations - 1997 

Medium Radionuclide Concentration Mrem\Year 

Meat 

Milk 0.7 (a) 

Comment 

Not collected this year 

Concentration is the average 

of all network results 

Not Analyzed 

*Sr 

3H 

Drinking Water 3H 

(0.023) 

0 

1.8 (a) 

(0.07) 

1.1 x lo-* 

0 

8.4 x 1 0-5 

Vegetables 

Air 3H 

'Be 

@Kr 

239+24Op 

0.2 (b) 

(0.007) 

0.12 (b) 

(0.0044) 

27.(b) 

1.6 x 1 0-4 

2.6 x 10-4 

4.1 x 10-4 

(0.93) 

1.3 x lo6 (') 

(4.8 x 10') 

3.4 x 

Concentration is average 

from 4 wells in the area 

Not collected this year 

Concentration is average 

network result (1 994 data) 

Annual average for 

NTS area 

NTS network average 

Annual average for 

Goldfield, Nevada 
TLD Components 

7-6 
LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE .................... ............................................ ~ ~ ............. ~ . ..~~ 

8.0 LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE 

It is the policy of US. Department of Energy Nevada Operations Off ice 

(DOUNV) that all data produced for its environmental surveillance and 

effluent monitoring programs be of known quality. Therefore, a quality 

assurance (QA) program is used for collection and analysis of samples for 

radiological and nonradiological parameters to ensure that data produced by 

the laboratory meets customer- and regulatory-defined requirements. Data 

quality is assured through process-based QA, procedure-specific QA, data 

quality objectives (DQOs), and performance evaluation (PE) programs. The 

external QA program for radiological data consists of participation in the 

DOE Quality Assessment Program (QAP) administered by the DOE 

Environmental Measurements Laboratory (EML), and the Performance 

Evaluation Studies Program (PESP) conducted by the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) National Exposure Research Laboratory in Las 

Vegas. The radiological external QA program also consists of participation 

in the Oak Ridge National Laboratories (ORNL) radiobioassay study 

conducted by ORNL in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. External radiation 

measurement QA for the onsite program and EPA's Radiation & Indoor 

Environments National Laboratory-Las Vegas (R&IE-LV) offsite 

Thermoluminescent Dosimeter (TLD) programs consists of participation in 

EML's DOE Laboratory Accreditation Program (DOELAP). The 

nonradiological data QA program was accomplished by using commercial 

laboratories with appropriate certification or accreditation by state or 

government agencies. 

The environmental surveillance program off the Nevada Test Site (NTS) was 

performed by R&IE-LV. The QA program developed by R&IE-LV for the 

Offsite Radiological Safety Program (ORSP) meets all requirements of EPA 

policy, and also includes applicable elements of the requirements and 

regulations of DOE/NV QA. The ORSP QA program defines DQOs, which are 

statements of the quality of data a decision maker needs to ensure that a 

decision based on that data is defensible. 

8.1 POLICY 

nvironmental surveillance, conducted E onsite by Bechtel Nevada (BN) and 

offsite by EPA's R&IE-LV, is governed 

by the DOE QA policy as set forth in DOE 

Order 5700.6C, "Quality Assurance". The 

Order outlines ten specific elements that 

must be considered for compliance with the 

QA policy. These elements are: 

1. Program 

2. Personnel Training & Qualification 

3. Quality Improvement 

4. Documents and Records 

5. Work Processes 

6. Design 

7. Procurement 

8. Data Acceptance and Review 

9. Management Assessment 

10. Independent Assessment 

In addition, R&lE-LV meets the EPA policy 

which states that all decisions which are 

dependent on environmental data must be 

supported by data of known quality. The 

EPAs policy requires participation in a 

centrally managed QA Program by all EPA 

elements as well as those monitoring and 

measurement efforts supported or mandated 

8-1 
through contracts, regulations, or other 

formalized agreements. Further, the EPAs 

policy requires participation in a QA Program 

by all EPA organizational units involved in 

environmental data collection. The QA 

policies and requirements of R&lE-LV are 

summarized in the "Quality Management 

Plan" (EPNORIA 1996). The QA policies 

and requirements specific to the ORSP are 

documented in the "Quality Assurance 

Program Plan for the Nuclear Radiation 

Assessment Division Offsite Radiation 

Safety Program," (unpublished). The 

requirements of these documents establish 

a framework for consistency in the 

continuing application of QA standards and 

implementing procedures in support of the 

ORSP. Administrative and technical 

implementing procedures based on these 

QA requirements are maintained in 

appropriate manuals or are described in 

standard operating procedures of the 

R&IE-LV. 

8.2 OVERVIEW OF THE 

LABORATORY QA PROGRAM 

The BN Analytical Services Laboratory 

(ASL) implements the requirements of the 

DOE Order 5700.6C through integrated 

quality procedures. The quality of data and 

results is ensured through both processbased and procedure-specific QA. 

Procedure-specific QA begins with the 

development and implementation of work 

instructions (Wls) which contain the 

analytical methodologies and required 

quality control samples for a given analysis. 

Personnel performing a given analysis are 

trained and qualified for that analysis, 

including the successful analysis of a quality 

control sample. Analysis-specific 

operational checks and calibration standards 

traceable to either the National Institute of 

Standards and Technology (NET) or the 

EPA are required. Quality control samples, 

e.g., spikes, blanks, and replicates, are 

included for each analytical procedure. 

Compliance to analytical procedures is 

measured through procedure-specific 

assessments or surveillances. 

An essential component of process-based 

QA is data review and verification to assess 

data usability. Data review requires a 

systematic, independent review against preestablished criteria to verify that the data are 

valid for their intended use. Initial data 

processing is performed by the analyst or 

health physicist generating the data. An 

independent review is then performed by 

another analyst or health physicist to ensure 

that data processing has been correctly 

performed and that the reported analytical 

results correspond to the data acquired and 

processed. Data checks are made for 

internal consistency, proper identification, 

transmittal errors, calculation errors, and 

transcription errors. Supervisory review of 

data is required prior to release of the data 

to sample management personnel for data 

verification. Data verification ensures that 

the reported results correctly represent the 

sampling and/or analyses performed, and 

includes assessment of quality control 

sample results. Data processing by sample 

management personnel ensures that 

analytical results meet project requirements. 

Data discrepancies identified during the data 

review and verification process are 

documented on data discrepancy reports 

(DDRs). DDRs are reviewed and compiled 

quarterly to discern systematic problems. 

Process-based QA programs also include 

periodic operational checks of analytical 

parameters such as reagent water quality 

and storage temperatures. Periodic 

calibration is required for all measuring 

equipment such as analytical balances, 

analytical weights, and thermometers. The 

overall effectiveness of the QA program is 

determined through systematic assessments 

of analytical activities. Systematic problems 

are documented and corrective actions 

tracked through System Deficiency Reports. 

Similar procedures and methodologies are 

used by R&IE-LV to ensure the quality of 

environmental radiological data collected off 

the NTS. 

8-2 
8.3 DATAAND 

MEASUREMENT QUALITY 

OBJECTIVES 

DATA Q U ALlTY OBJECTIVES 

DQOs delineate the circumstances under 

which measurements are made and define 

the acceptable variability in the measured 

data. DQOs are based on the decision(s) to 

be made, the range of sampling possibilities, 

what measurements will be made, where the 

samples will be taken, how the 

measurements will be used, and what 

calculations will be performed on the 

measurement data to arrive at the final 

desired result(s). Associated measurement 

quality objectives (MQO), which define 

acceptable variability in the measured data, 

are established to ensure the quality of the 

measurements. 

DECISIONS TO BE MADE 

The primary decisions to be made, based on 

radiological environmental surveillance 

measurements, are whether, due to NTS 

activities (1) any member of the general 

public, outside the site boundaries, receives 

an effective dose equivalent (EDE) that 

exceeds regulatory limits; (2) there is 

detectable contamination of the 

environment; or (3) there is a biological 

effect. A potential EDE to a member of the 

public from NTS activities is much more 

likely to be due to inhalation or ingestion of 

radionuclides which have reached the 

person through one or more pathways, such 

as transport through the air (inhalation 

exposure), or through water and/or 

foodstuffs (ingestion exposure), than to be 

due to external exposure. A pathway may 

be quite complex; e.g., the food pathway 

could include airborne radioactivity falling on 

soil and plants, also being absorbed by 

plants, which are eaten by an animal, which 

is then eaten by a member of the public. At 

the NTS, because of the depth of aquifers, 

negligible horizontal or vertical transport, 

lack of surface water flows and little rain, 

very sparse vegetation and animal 

populations, lack of food grown for human 

consumption, and large distances to the 

nearest member of the public, the airborne 

pathway is by far the most important for a 

possible EDE to a member of the public. 

Decisions made based on nonradiological 

data are related to waste characterization, 

extent and characterization of spills, 

compliance with regulatory limits for 

environmental contaminants, and possible 

worker exposure(s). 

RANGE OF SAMPLING POSSIBILITIES 

Determination of the numbers, types, and 

locations of radiological sampling stations is 

based on factors such as the location of 

possible sources, isotopes of concern, wind 

and weather patterns, the geographical 

distribution of human populations, the levels 

of risk involved, the desired sensitivity of the 

measurements, physical accessibility to 

sampling locations, and financial constraints. 

The numbers, types, and location of 

nonradiological samples are typically defined 

by regulatory actions on the NTS and are 

determined by environmental compliance or 

waste operations activities. Workplace and 

personnel monitoring to determine possible 

worker exposures is conducted by Industrial 

Hygienists and Health Physicists from the 

Environment, Safety, Security, and Health 

Division of BN. 

MEASUREMENTS TO BE MADE 

Radioanalyses are made of air, water, or 

other media samples to determine the types 

and amounts of radioactivity in them. These 

measurements are then converted to 

radioactivity concentrations by dividing by 

the sample volume or weight, which is 

measured separately. Nonradiological 

inorganic or organic constituents in air, 

water, soil, and sludge samples are 

analyzed and reported by commercial 

laboratories under contract to BN. Methods 

and procedures used to measure possible 

worker exposures to nonradiological hazards 

8-3 
are defined by Occupational Safety and 

Health Administration or National Institute of 

Occupational Safety and Health protocols. 

Typical contaminants for which ES&H 

personnel collect samples and request 

analyses are asbestos, solvents, and 

welding metals. Sample media, which are 

analyzed, include urine, blood, air filters, 

charcoal tubes, and bulk asbestos. 

SAMPLING LOCATIONS 

The locations of routine radiological 

environmental surveillance sampling both on 

and off the NTS are described in Chapters 4 

and 5 of this report. Onsite sampling 

methodologies are described in BN's 

Environmental Management Procedures, 

and offsite methodologies by similar R&IELV procedures. The locations of 

nonradiological environmental sampling and 

monitoring are determined through site 

remediation and characterization activities 

and by permit requirements. 

USE OF THE MEASUREMENTS 

There are several techniques to estimate the 

EDE to a member of the public. One 

technique is to measure the radionuclide 

concentrations at the location(s) of interest 

and use established methodologies to 

estimate the EDE a person at that location 

could receive. Another technique is to 

measure radionuclide concentrations at 

specific points within the site and to use 

established models to calculate 

concentrations at other, offsite locations of 

interest. The potential EDE to a person at 

such a location could then be estimated. 

This second technique is the one used for 

most of the environmental surveillance data 

measured at the NTS. 

CALCULATIONS TO BE PERFORMED 

The EDE of greatest interest is the EDE to 

the maximally exposed individual (MEI). The 

ME1 is located where, based on measured 

radioactivity concentrations and distances 

from all contributing NTS sources, the 

calculational model gives the greatest 

potential EDE for any member of the public. 

The assumptions used in the calculational 

model are conservative; Le., the calculated 

EDE to the ME1 most certainly exceeds the 

EDE any member'of the public would 

actually receive. The model used at the 

NTS is EPAs CAP88-PC, a wind dispersion 

model approved for this purpose. 

MEASUREMENT QUALITY 

OBJECTIVES 

MQOs are commonly described in terms of 

representativeness, comparability, 

completeness, precision, and accuracy. 

Although the assessment of the first two 

characteristics must be essentially 

qualitative, definite numerical goals may be 

set and quantitative assessments performed 

for the latter three. 

REPRESENTATIVENESS 

Representativeness is the degree to which a 

sample is truly representative of the sampled 

medium, Le., the degree to which measured 

analytical concentrations represent the 

concentrations in the medium being sampled 

(Stanley and Verner 1985). 

Representativeness also refers to whether 

the locations and frequency of sampling are 

such that calculational models will lead to a 

correct estimate of potential EDE to a 

member of the public when measured 

radioactivity concentrations are put into the 

model. An environmental monitoring plan for 

the NTS, "Environmental Monitoring Plan, 

Nevada Test Site and Support Facilities" 

(DOE, 1991~) has been established to 

achieve representativeness for 

environmental data. Factors which were 

considered in designing this monitoring plan 

include locations of known and potential 

sources, historical and operational 

knowledge of isotopes and pathways of 

concern, hydrological, and topographical 

data, and locations of human populations. 

8-4 
LABORATORY QUALlN ASSURANCE 

COMPARABILITY 

Comparability refers to the degree of 

confidence and consistency we have in our 

analytical results, or defined as "the 

confidence with which one data set can be 

compared to another" (Stanley and Verner 

1985). To achieve comparability in 

measurement data, sample collection and 

handling, laboratory analyses, and data 

analysis and validation are performed in 

accordance with established Wls. Standard 

reporting units and a consistent number of 

significant digits are used. Instruments are 

calibrated using N IST-traceable sources. 

Each batch of field samples is accompanied 

by a spiked sample with a known quantity of 

the compound(s) of interest. Extensive QA 

measures are used for all analytical 

processes. In addition, comparability is 

attained through comparison of external 

performance audit results to those achieved 

by other laboratories participating in the EPA 

PESP. 

COMPLETENESS 

Completeness is defined as the percentage 

of samples collected versus those which had 

been scheduled to be collected, or the 

percentage of valid analysis results versus 

the results which would have been obtained 

if all samples had been obtained and 

correctly analyzed. Realistically, samples 

can be lost during shipping, handling, 

preparation, and analysis, or not collected 

as scheduled. Also data entry or 

transcription errors can be made. The BN 

completeness objectives for all radiological 

samples and analyses have been set at 90 

percent for sample collection and 85 percent 

for analyses, or 75 percent overall. R&lELV's completeness objective for the LongTerm Hydrological Monitoring Program is 80 

percent and for the other networks is 90 

percent. 

Completeness for inorganic and organic 

analyses is based on the number of valid 

results received versus the number 

requested. 

PRECISION 

Precision refers to "the degree of mutual 

agreement characteristic of independent 

measurements as the result of repeated 

application of the process under specified 

conditions" (Taylor 1987). Practically, 

precision is determined by comparing the 

results obtained from performing the same 

analysis on split samples, or on duplicate 

samples taken at the same time from the 

same location, maintaining sampling and 

analytical conditions as nearly identical as 

possible. Precision for samples is 

determined by comparing results for 

duplicate samples of particulates in air, 

tritiated water vapor, noble gases, and some 

types of water samples. For TLDs, precision 

is assessed from variations in the three 

CaSO, elements of each environmental 

TLD. Precision is expressed 

quantitatively as the percent relative 

standard deviation (%RSD), i.e., the ratio of 

the standard deviation of the measurements 

being compared to their mean converted to 

percent. The smaller the value of the 

YoRSD, the greater is the precision of the 

measurement. The precision objectives are 

shown in Table 8.1. They are a function of 

the concentration of radioactivity in the 

samples; Le., the analysis of samples with 

concentrations near zero will have low 

precision, while samples with higher 

concentrations will have proportionately 

higher precision. 

ACCURACY 

Accuracy refers to how well we can measure 

the true value of a given quantity and can be 

defined as "the degree of agreement of a 

measured value with the true or expected 

value of the quantity of concern" (Taylor 

1 987). For practical purposes, assessments 

of accuracy for ASL are done by performing 

measurements on special QA samples 

prepared, using stringent quality control, by 

laboratories which specialize in preparing 

such samples. The values of the activities 

of these samples are not known by the staff 

of the ASL until several months after the 

measurements are made and the results 

8-5 
sent back to the QA laboratory. These 

sample values are unknown to the analysts 

and serve to measure the accuracy of the 

analytical procedures. The accuracy of 

these measurements, which is assumed to 

extend to other similar measurements 

performed by the laboratory, may be defined 

as the ratio of the measured value divided 

by the true value, expressed as a percent. 

Percent bias is the complement of percent 

accuracy, i.e., %Bias = 100 - % accuracy. 

The smaller the percent bias, the more 

accurate are the measurements. Table 8.2 

shows the accuracy objectives of the ASL 

and of the R&IE-LV. 

Measurements of sample volumes should be 

accurate to * 5 percent for aqueous samples' 

(water and milk) and to * 10 percent for air 

and soil samples. The sensitivity of 

radiochemical and gamma spectrometric 

analyses must allow no more than a 5 

percent risk of either a false negative or 

false positive value. Control limits for 

accuracy, monitored with matrix spike 

samples, are required to be no greater than 

20 percent for all gross alpha and gross 

beta analyses and for gamma spectrometric 

analyses. 

Both the R&IE-LV and ASL participate in 

several interlaboratory PE programs such as 

EPAs PESP and EML's QAP and the 

DOELAP for TLDs. The ASL also 

participates in two bioassay programs, 

DOELAP and ORNL. 

The accuracy of the TLDs is tested every 

two or three years by DOELAP. This 

involves a three-part, single blind, 

performance testing program followed by an 

independent onsite assessment of the 

overall program. Both BN and R&IE-LV 

participate in this program. 

Once the data have been finalized, they are 

compared to the MQOs. Completeness, 

accuracy, and precision statistics are 

calculated. If data fail to meet one or more 

of the established MQOs, they may still be 

used in data analysis; however, the data and 

any interpretive results must be qualified. 

Current and historical data are maintained in 

an access-controlled database. 

All sample results exceeding the traditional 

natural background activity range are 

investigated. If data are found to be 

associated with a non-environmental 

condition, e.g., a check of the instrument 

using a calibration source, the data are 

flagged and are not included in calculations 

of averages, etc. Only data verified to be 

associated with a non-environmental 

condition are flagged; all other data are used 

in calculation of averages and other 

statistics, even if the condition is traced to a 

source other than the NTS. 

8.4 RESULTS FOR 

COMPLETENESS, 

PRECISION, AND ACCURACY 

Summary data for completeness, precision, 

and accuracy are provided in Tables 8.3 to 

8.6, respectively. Complete data used in 

these MQO's for 1997 may be found in the 

associated document, "Environmental Data 

Report for the Nevada Test Site - 1997" 

(DOE/NV/I 171 8-232). 

COMPLETENESS 

The analysis completeness data for calendar 

year 1997 are shown in Table 8.3. These 

percentages represent all analyses which 

were carried to completion, and include 

some analyses for which the results were 

found to be invalid for other reasons. Had 

objectives not been met for some analyses, 

other factors would be used to assess 

acceptability, e.g., fit of the data to a trend or 

consistency with results from samples 

collected before and after. 

The completeness of MQOs for the onsite 

networks were met or exceeded in all cases. 

For the offsite networks, the MQOs were 

met or exceeded except for the high volume 

and pressurized ion chamber networks, 

where field equipment malfunction prevented 

complete collections. 

8-6 
LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE 

PRECISION RADIOLOGICAL PERFORMANCE 

EVALUATION RESULTS 

From replicate samples collected and 

analyzed throughout the year, the %RSD 

was calculated for various types of analyses 

and sampling media. The results of these 

calculations are shown in Table 8.4 for both 

the onsite and offsite networks. In addition 

to examination of %RSDs for individual 

duplicate pairs, an overall precision estimate 

was determined by calculating the pooled 

standard deviation, based on the algorithm 

given in Taylor (1987). To convert to a 

unitless value, the pooled standard deviation 

was divided by the grand mean and 

multiplied by 100 to yield a %RSD. The 

table presents the pooled data and 

estimates of overall precision. The pooled 

standard deviations and %RSD indicate the 

estimated achieved precision for samples. 

For the R&lE-LV, the analysis for gross 

alpha in air and a few low-activity air 

samples, in which 7Be was detected, did not 

meet the precision MQO. Activity barely 

exceeds the minimum detectable 

concentration (MDC) for most of these 

samples resulting in a decrease in precision 

for the analysis group. The precision data 

for all other analyses were well within their 

respective MQOs. The R&lE-LV data 

presented in Table 8.4 include only duplicate 

pairs that exceeded the MDC. 

For the ASL, the reason for the low precision 

in some of the analyses was the low activity 

in these environmental samples as noted by 

R&lE-LV above, e.g., for tritium in air, the 

few that were useful for calculation of 

precision barely exceeded the MDC. 

ACCURACY 

The ASL and R&IE-LV accuracy objectives 

were measured through participation in the 

interlaboratory comparison and QAPs 

discussed below. 

The external radiological PESP consisted of 

participation in the QAP conducted by 

DOE/EML and the PESP conducted by EPA. 

These programs serve to evaluate the 

performance of the radiological laboratory 

and to identify problems requiring corrective 

actions. 

Summaries of the 1997 results of the 

interlaboratory PE and QAPs conducted by 

the EPA and DOVEML are provided in 

Tables 8.5 and 8.6. The column or section 

in each table labeled percent Bias is the 

accuracy of analysis and may be compared 

to the objectives listed in Table 8.2. The 

individual radionuclide recoveries are listed 

in tables which may be found in the 

associated document, "Environmental Data 

Report for the Nevada Test Site - 1997" 

(DOE/NV/11718-232). 

Accuracy, as percent difference or percent 

bias is calculated by: 

%BIAS - c") 100 = ( 

'a 

where: 

%BIAS = percent bias 

cm = measured sample activity 

'a = known sample activify 

The R&IE-LV failed the accuracy MQO in 

only 1 of the 20 analyses attempted in the 

EPA PE Study. In the EML QAP, 8 of the 29 

analyses performed exceeded the DQO of * 

20 percent. In 1997, R&lE-LV maintained 

accreditation by DOELAP for the personnel 

TLD program. QA checks are routinely 

performed to ensure compliance with 

applicable performance standards. 

BN's ASL results exceeded the 3 normalized 

deviation limits in 2 of the 56 analyses 

attempted. The MQOs for accuracy in 

analysis of DOE/EML samples were not met 

in only 3 of the 85 analyses attempted. 

8-7 
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS IMPLEMENTED 

IN RESPONSE TO PERFORMANCE 

EVALUATION PROGRAMS 

BN results were generally within the control 

limits determined by the program sponsors. 

Results which were not within acceptable 

performance limits were investigated and 

corrective actions taken to prevent 

reoccurrence. Corrective actions included a 

new process for preparing and including 

quality control samples, training of analysts, 

and an improved tracking system for PE 

samples. 

In the R&IE-LV, the 1997 results that did no1 

meet analysis criteria were investigated to 

determine the cause of the reported error. 

Corrective actions were implemented. 

COMPARABI LlTY 

The EPA PESP and the EMUQAP provide 

results to each laboratory participating in 

each study that include a grand average for 

all values, excluding outliers. A normalized 

deviation statistic compares each 

laboratory's result (mean of three replicates) 

to the known value and to the grand 

average. If the value of this statistic (in 

multiples of standard normal deviate, 

unitless) lies between control limits of -3 and 

i-3, the accuracy (deviation from known 

value) or comparability (deviation from grand 

average) is within normal statistical variation. 

Data from the 1997 intercomparison studies 

for all variables measured were compared 

with the grand average to calculate a 

normalized deviation for the R&IE-LV 

results. With the exception of one gamma 

spectroscopy sample, all analyses were 

within three standard normal deviate units of 

the grand mean, and most were within two 

normalized deviate units. This indicates 

acceptable comparability of the R&IE-LV 

results with the 188 laboratories participatinsi 

in the EPA PESP. 

One of the two EML studies for 1997 was 

reported outside of acceptable limits for 

gamma spectroscopy in both air and water 

matrices. The problem with the air filters 

was traced to incorrect spiking (i.e., 

preparation) of the air filters. The samples 

were successfully re-analyzed to 

demonstrate that the analyst could meet the 

objectives of the study. 

R&lE-LV continued to participate in the DOE 

Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation 

Program (MAPEP) during 1997. Analysis of 

water and soil matrix samples was 

performed with all analytical, results within 

the acceptable bias limit of 220 percent. 

The onsite ASL's results in the EML QAP 

were acceptable. There were only three 

instances in which the ASL results were 

greater than the MQO. Corrective actions 

were made and the results from the next 

semi-annual PE sample were acceptable. 

The EPA PESP includes a grand average 

(average result from all participating 

laboratories, less outliers) in its report to 

participants. Using the formula for percent 

bias described above, the percent bias of 

the ASL results as compared to the grand 

average was calculated for each analysis. 

The outcome for this calculation did not 

differ from the accuracy results reported 

above. Thus comparability of the ASL 

results is the same as its accuracy on PE 

samples as reported above. 

SPIKE AND REAGENT BLANK 

DATA 

Reagent blanks prepared by ASL were 

analyzed for the same radionuclides as the 

samples. Only 4 of 212 reagent blank 

results exceeded the MDC of the analysis 

for which the blanks were prepared. 

A similar number of spike samples were 

prepared by ASL. The accuracy (as percent 

recovery) varied from 70 to 122 percent for 

the eight different analyses. The standard 

deviations of these percent recoveries is a 

measure of precision. These ranged from 

3.5 to 15.1 percent for eight of the analyses. 

8-8 
LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE 

."___I I_.I 

Table 8.1 Precision Objectives Expressed as Percents 

ASL 

Analysis Conc. > 10 MDC 4 MDC Conc.5 10 MDC 

Gross Alpha +30 rt60 

Gross Beta *30 *60 

Gamma Spectrometry k30 rt60 

Scintillation Counting *30 k60 

Alpha Spectrometry A20 k50 

Noble Gas Analysis *30 240 

Note: The precision objective for TLDs at environmental levels is 10 percent. 

R&IE-LV 

Conventional Tritium *lo 

Strontium (in milk) 21 0 

Thorium *lo 

Uranium *lo 

Enriched Tritium i-20 

Strontium (in other media) *20 

Plutonium *20 

k30 

rt30 

rt30 

rt30 

k30 

k30 

rt30 

Table 8.2 Accuracy Objectives Expressed as Percent Bias 

ASL 

Analvsig 

Gross Alpha 

Gross Beta 

Gamma Spectrometry 

Scintillation Counting 

Alpha-Spectrometry 

Noble Gas Analysis 

Conc. > 10 MDC 

*20 

*20 

*20 

*20 

*20 

*30 

4 MDC 5 Conc. I 10 MDC 

k50 

k50 

k50 

250 

rt50 

k60 

Note: The objective for TLDs is 20 percent for exposures <I 0 mR and 10 percent for 21 0 mR. 

R&lE-LV 

Tritium, Conventional -11 0 k30% 

Strontium (Milk) *l 0 *30% 

Uranium *l 0 *30% 

Strontium (other media) A20 *30% 

Plutonium *20 *30% 

Thorium *lo *30% 

Tritium, Enriched 220 *30% 

TLDs Meet DOELAP Criteria 

8-9 
Table 8.3 Analysis Completeness Data for Calendar Year - 1997 

Analvsis 

Gross Alpha/Beta 

Plutonium 

Plutonium 

Gamma Spectrometry 

Gamma Spectrometry 

Gamma Spectrometry 

Tritiated Water 

Krypton-85 

Gross Alpha 

Gross Beta 

Gamma Spectrometry 

Tritiated Water I Plutonium 

Gross Beta 

Plutonium 

Gamma Spectrometry 

Tritiated Water 

Strontium-90 

Gross Alpha 

Tritium 

Strontium 

Pressurized Ion Chamber 

TLDs, Environmental 

TLDs, Personnel 

(a) Analyses not performed. 

-- Medium 

Low Volurne Particulate Air Filter 

High Volume Particulate Air Filter 

Low Volurne Particulate Air Filter 

Low Volurne Particulate Air Filter 

Low Volurne Charcoal Air Filter 

High Volume Particulate Air Filter 

Air 

Air 

Potable Water Taps 

Potable Vl'ater Taps 

Potable Water Taps 

Potable Water Taps 

Potable Water Taps 

Wells, Reservoirs, Springs, Ponds 

Wells, Reservoirs, Springs, Ponds 

Wells, Reservoirs, Springs, Ponds 

Wells, Reservoirs, Springs, Ponds 

Wells, Reservoirs, Springs, Ponds 

Potable h'ells and Taps 

Milk 

Milk 

Ambient Fladiation 

Ambient Fladiation 

Ambient Fladiation 

Completeness 

Percent 

- BN R&IE-LV 

93.6 95.5 

(a) 85.3 

97.0 -- 

98.0 95.5 

(a) 95.5 

85.3 (a) 

90.6 (a) 

87.6 (a) 

96.6 

96.6 (a) 

96.6 (a) 

96.6 (*) 

96.6 

100 (a) 

100 (a) 

100 98.0 

100 97.8 

98.5 (a) 

97.5 (a) 

(a) 93.5 

(a) 93.5 

(a) 91.7 

(a) 100 

90.2 98.7 

~ 

Table 8.4 Precision Estimates from Replicale Sampling - 1997 

I ASL 

Analvsis Number of Replicate Analvses 

Gross Beta in Air 47 

Gamma in Air 35 

Gross Alpha in Air 41 

Tritium in Air 21 

Gross Alpha in Potable Water 28 

Gross Beta in Potable Water 35 

HTO in Tunnel Effluent 8 

Pu in Tunnel Effluent 16 

~ R&IE-LV 

Gross Alpha in Air 84 

Gross Beta in Air 145 

Gamma Spectrometry (Low-Vol 7Be) 14 

Gamma Spectrometry (Hi-Vol 7Be) 11 

Tritium in Water (enriched) 12 

Tritium in Water (unenriched) 2 

Precision Estimate %RSD 

15.9 

23.1 

46.5 

27.2 

5.1 

15.1 

3.6 

8.5 

28.5 

18.0 

36.2 

46.8 

7.9 

26.2 

8-1 0 
LABORATORY QUALlN ASSURANCE 

Table 8.5 Accuracy of R&IE-LV Radioanalyses (EML QAP and PESP) - 1997 

Water Samples Ranae of Results - pCi/L 

Analvsis - No. PESP R&lE-LV % BiaS 

Gross Alpha 5 10 - 75 12 - 71 -4.2 - 20 

Gross Beta 5 7 - 167 13 - 162 -3.2 - 13 

Gamma Spec.'") 5 10 - 745 12 - 6300 -9 - 790 

Strontium 2 10 - 25 12 - 24 -4 - 23 

Alpha Spec. 5 5 - 58 5 - 55 -6 - 3 

Tritium 2 10880 - 22000 10800 - 21300 3.1 - -0.4 

(a) One group of samples submitted for gamma spectrometric evaluation included an incorrect 

dilution factor, thus a reporting error. Positive % Bias for the remaining samples was a 

maximum of 12 for the 1997 reporting period. 

Analvsis 

Plutonium 

Uranium 

Strontium 

Tritium 

Gamma Spec. 

(a) No sample. 

Plutonium 

Strontium 

Gamma Spec. 

(a) No sample. 

% Bias Ranae for Analvsis of EML QAP Samples 

.Na & - Soil -n Water 

0.5 - 1.3 

0.8 - 20 

-11 - 15 

-16 --11 

25 - 28 

-4.0 - -4.8 

-1 5 

-5.6 - 4.6 

Table 8.6 Accuracy of ASL Radioanalyses (EPA PESP and EML QAP) - 1997 

Analysis 

Water 

Samdes 

Normalized 

BN/ASL EPA QA Deviation(a) 

- No. Averaae pCi/L Known Grand Avo. 

5 15.7 - 109 0.23 - 3.46'b) 0.15 - 3.77(b1 

2 48.7 - 342 2.41 - 4.73'b' 1.86 - 4.36'b' 

5 414 - 80.3 -1.50 - 1.02 -0.50 - 2.57 

4 10.0 - 28.3 0.00 - 0.92 -0.16 - 0.62 

(a) No sample. 

(b) Results exceed three Normalized Deviations. 

8-1 1 
Table 8.6 (Accuracy of ASL Radioanalyses [EPA PESP and EML QAP] - 1997, cont.) 

Analysis 

Water 

Samples 

’%s 

l3’CS 

’=Ba 

89S r 

131) 

Tritium 

226Ra 

228Ra 

U (nat.) 

Gross Alpha 

Gross Beta 

!!b 

2 

4 

4 

2 

4 

4 

2 

2 

6 

6 

6 

5 

5 

E$N/ASL 

- Averaae DCiL 

85.3 - 107 

9.0 - 136 

23.0 - 78.0 

25 - 97.7 

8.7 - 40.3 

13.0 - 22.3 

13.7 - 110 

7950 - 10900 

3.Cl - 25.5 

4.1 - 10.9 

4.8 - 39.0 

2.7’ - 45.1 

14.6 - 122 

EPA QA 

Known 

1.21 - 2.24 0.64 - 1.56 

-1.73 - 0.00 -0.63 - 0.63 

0.85 - 1.39 0.09 - 0.64 

-0.23 - 0.00 0.44 - 0.54 

-1.73 - -0.12 -1.78 - 0.13 

-0.92 - 0.00 -0.41 - 0.17 

1.06 - 4.55(b) 0.79 - 4.22@’ 

0.37 - 4.33” 0.35 - 4.2Ib’ 

0.49 - 2.71 0.47 - 2.64 

-0.79 - 0.04 -0.48 - 0.68 

-1.20 - 0.38 -0.77 - 0.10 

-1.70 - 1.11 -1.48 - 0.78 

-0.17 - 0.12 0.05 - 0.49 

(a) * 3 Normalized Deviation is acceptable. 

(b) Results exceed three Normalized Deviations, only two results exceeded. 

% Bias Ranae for Arialvsis of EML QAP Samples 

Analvsis - No. 

Americium 2 

Plutonium 4 

Uranium 4 

Strontium 2 

Tritium 2 

Gamma Spec.(b) 6 

Gross Alpha 2 

Gross Beta 2 

- Air 

3.9 - 7.0 

-11.6 - -1.0 

-0.5 - 18 

-8 - -5.5 

(a) 

-18 - 7.5 

0.0 - 4.0 

4 -202 

-5.0 - 18.3 

-22.9 - -1.0 

-12 - -1 

-14 - 9.9 

(a) 

-24(’) - 1 1.3 

(a) 

(a) 

Normalized 

Deviation(a) 

Grand Avq, 

Veaetation 

-2.0 - 15 

-28.4 - 10 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

(a) 

-15 - -11 

-41‘” - 9.6 

Water 

-5.0 - 7.9 

-25.0 - 8 

-2 - 10 

-11 - -1.3 

6.0 - 9.9 

-2 - 15.6 

-5.0 - 4.0 

-17 - 13 

(a) No sample. 

(b) Number of Isotopes was 12 (air), 6 (soil ;It vegetation), and 7 (water). 

(c) Two high bias analyses in soil and one in vegetation. 

8-1 2 
REFERENCES 

Bauer, D. J., B. J. Foster, J. D. Joyner, and R. A. Swanson, 1996, “Water Resources Data - Nevada - Water Year 1995L” Water Data Report NV-95-1, U.S. Geological Survey, 

Carson City, NV. 

Bechtel Nevada, 1996, “Bioloaical Monitorina Plan for Hazardous Materials Testina at the 

Liquefied Gaseous Fuels Spill Test Facilitv on the Nevada Test Site,” Unnumbered Report, 

Ecological Sciences, Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Division, BN, Las 

Vegas, NV. 

Bechtel Nevada, 1997, “Area 5 Radioactive Waste Manaaement Site. Groundwater 

Monitorina Proaram:’ Unnumbered Report, Waste Management Operations, Environmental 

Management Division, BN, Las Vegas, NV. 

Beck, C.M., 1997, “Monitorina Plan for the Cultural Resources Monitorina Proaram,” Desert 

Research Institute, Quaternary Sciences Center, Las Vegas, NV. 

BElR 111, 1980, ‘‘The Effects on Pomlations of Exposure to Low Levels of lonizina Radiation: 

1980:’ Committee on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation 111, National Academy Press, 

21 01 Constitution Ave, N.W., Washington, D.C. 2041 8. 

Black, S. C., 1998, “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Submittal 

1997%’’ Report DOE/NV/I 171 8-21 3, Bechtel Nevada, Las Vegas, NV. 

Blankennagel, R. K. and J. E. Weir, 1973, “Geohvdroloav of the Eastern Part of Pahute Mesa. 

Nevada Test Site. Nve County. Nevada:’ U.S. Geological Survey Prof. Paper 712-B. 

Blomquist, K. W., T. A. Lindeman, G. E. Lyon, D. C. Steen, C. A. Wills, S. A. Flick and W. K. 

Ostler, 1995, Current Distribution, Habitat. and Status of Cateaory 2 Candidate Plant Species 

On and Near the U.S. Department of Enerav’s Nevada Test Site:’ Report EGG 11265-1 149, 

EG&G/Energy Measurements, Las Vegas, NV. 

Chapman, J. B. and S. L. Hokett, 1991, “Evaluation of Groundwater Monitorina at Offsite 

Nuclear Test Areas:’ DOE Nevada Field Office Report DOE/NV/10845-07, Las Vegas, NV. 

Chapman, J., S. Earman, and R. Andricevic, 1996a, “Assessment of Hydrologic Transport of 

Radionuclides from the Rio Blanco Underaround Nuclear Test Site, Colorado:‘ Report 

DOE/NV/I 1508-1 9, Desert Research Institute, Las Vegas, NV. 

Chapman, J., T. Mihevc, and B. Lyles, 1996b, “Tritium Miaration at the Gasbuxav Site: 

Evaluation of Possible Hvdroloaic Pathwavs:’ Report DOE/NV/11508-12, Desert Research 

Institute, Las Vegas, NV. 

Code of Federal Regulations, 1966, “Protection of Historic and Cultural Properties:’ Title 36, 

Part 79. 

Code of Federal Regulations, 1969, “National Environmental Policy Act,” Title 40, Parts 

1500 - 1508, Council on Environmental Quality. 

R-1 
Code of Federal Regulations, 1971, “National Primarv and Secondary Air Qualitv Standards,’’ 

Title 40, Part 50, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

Code of Federal Regulations, 1973, “Threakened and Endanaered Species Reaulationst” Title 50, 

Parts 17.1 1 and 17.12, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Code of Federal Regulations, 1976, “National Primary Drinkinu Water ReaulationsL” Title 40, 

Part 141, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

Code of Federal Regulations, 1977, “Clean Water Act Reaulations:’ Title 40, Parts 1 10 to 136. 

US. Environmental Protection Agency. 

Code of Federal Regulations, 1984, ‘‘Resouirce Conservation and Recoverv Act Reaulationsz” 

Title 40, Parts 260 to 281, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

Code of Federal Regulations, 1986, “Superi‘und. Emeraencv Plannina and Communitv Riaht-toKnow Act Reaulations:‘ Title 40, Parts 3130 - 373, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

Code of Federal Regulations, 1989, “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

PollutantsL” Title 40, Part 61 , U.S. Envircmmental Protection Agency. 

Code of Federal Regulations, 1993, “OccuDational Radiation Protection:’ Title 10, Part 835, US. 

Department of Energy. 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act SCERCLA), 1980, 42 

US. Code 9601 et seq. 

Davis, M. G., 1997, “Annual Water Samplina and Analvsis at the Salmon Test Site Area. Lamar 

County MS. April 1 997“ Report EPA-420-98-006, Radiation Sciences Laboratory, U.S. 

Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas, NV. 

Dubarton, A. and H. Drollinger, 1997, “Results of a Class Ill Survev of Tub Sprina. Reitmann 

Seen and Captain Jack SDrina. Nevada Test Site, Nve County. Nevada,’ Desert Research 

Institute, Quaternary Sciences Center, Technical Report No. 90, Las Vegas, NV. 

Earman, S., J. Chapman, and R. Andricevic, 1996a, “Assessment of Hvdroloaic Transport of 

Radionuclides from the Rulison Underaround Nuclear Test Site. Colorado:’ Report 

DOE/NV/l 1508-1 7, Desert Research Institute, Las Vegas, NV. 

Earman, S., J. Chapman, K. Pohlmann, ancl R. Andricevic, 199613, “Assessment of Hvdroloaic 

TransDort of Radionuclides from the Gnome Underaround Nuclear Test Site, New Mexicot” 

Report DOE/NV/I 1508-1 1, Desert Research Institute, Las Vegas, NV. 

EG&G/EM (EG&G Energy Measurements), 1994, “The Northern Boundary of the Desert 

Tortoise Ranae on the Nevada Test Site L’’ U.S. Department of Energy Topical Report EGG 

1 1 1265-1 103,20pp. 

Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), 1986, Title Ill of SARA. 

Executive Order (EO) 1 1988, 1977, “Floodplain Manaaement,” amended by EO 121 48, 1979. 

R-2 
Executive Order 1 1990, 1977,. “Protection of Wetlands,” May 24, 1977. 

Executive Order 12856, 1993, “Federal ComPliance with Riaht-to-Know Laws and Pollution 

Prevention Reauirements:’ August 3, 1993. 

Faller, S.D., 1997, “Amchitka, Alaska, SDecial Samplina Proiect 1997: Final Report,” 3 vol., 

Radiation & Indoor Environments National Laboratory, U.S, Environmental Protection Agency, 

Report No. EPA-402-R-98-002, Las Vegas, NV. 

Federal Facilities Compliance Act, 1992, Public Law No. 102-386, 106 Statutes 1505. 

Federal Facilities Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO), 1996, An FFACO among the state of 

Nevada, the U.S. Department of Energy, and the U.S. Department of Defense, May 1996. 

Hansen, D. J., P. D. Greger, C. A. Wills, and W. Kent Ostler, 1997, “Nevada Test Site Wetlands 

Assessment,” DOE/NV/I 171 8-1 24, Bechtel Nevada, Inc., Las Vegas, Nevada. 

Holz, B.A. and C.M. Beck, “A Class Ill Cultural Resources Reconnaissance of the ProDosed 

Launch Site for the Kistler Pro-iect in Areas 18 and 19. Nevada Test Site, Nve Countv, 

Nevada,” Desert Research Institute, Quaternary Sciences Center, Short Report No. 

SR042297-1, Las Vegas, NV. 

Standard Man:’ ICRP Publication 23, Pergamon Press, New York. 

International Commission on Radiological Protection, 1975, “Report of the Task Group on 

International Commission on Radiological Protection, 1979, “Limits for Intake bv Workers:’ 

ICRP Publication 30, Supplement to Part 1, Pergamon Press, New York. 

International Commission on Radiological Protection, 1985, Insert to Quantitative Bases for 

Developina an Index of Harm:’ ICRP Publication 45, Pergamon Press, New York. 

IT Corporation, 1997, “BULLION Forced Gradient Experiment: Implementation Plan,” 

International Technology Corp. Report ITLV/10972-195, Las Vegas, NV. 

Johns, F. B., P. B. Hahn, D. J. Thome’, and E. W. Brethauer, 1979, “Radiochemical and 

Analytical Procedures for Analvsis of Environmental Samples:‘ Report EMSL-LV-0539-17, 

Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, U.S. EPA, Las Vegas, NV. 

Jones, R. and H. Drollinger, 1997, “Phase 2 of a Cultural Resources Reconnaissance of the 

Fortvmile Canvon Archaeoloaical Rock Art and Site Research Area. Area 18 and 30. Nevada 

Test Site, Nve Countv, Nevada,” Desert Research Institute, Quaternary Sciences Center, 

Short Report No. SR111296-1, Las Vegas, NV. 

Kenneally, J. M., 1996, “Isotopic Characteristics of Groundwater Beneath Yucca Flat. Nevada, 

and Inferences about Groundwater Sources and Flow:’ Master of Science Thesis, University 

of California, Berkeley, CA. 

Laczniak, R. J., J. C. Cole, D. A. Sawyer, and D. A. Trudeau, 1996, “Summary of Hvdroaeoloaic 

Controls on Ground-Water Flow at the Nevada Test Site. Nve Countv. Nevada:’ Water 

Resources Investigation Report 96-41 09, U.S. Geological Survey, Carson City, NV. 

R-3 
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 1997, “Final Isotopic Analvsis: Monitorina Well U-3cn,” 

Isotopic Sciences Div., LLNL, Livermore, CA. Letter of Accomplishment, June 11, 1997. 

Los Alamos National Laboratory, 1998, “moratory and Field Studies Related to Radionuclide 

Miaration at the Nevada Test Site. October 1, 1996 - Septermber 30. 1997,” J.L. Thompson, 

Editor, LANL Report LA-13419-PA, Los Alamos, NM. 

McCarty, J. and H. Drollinger, 1997, “A Class 111 Cultural Resources Reconnaissance of Fourteen 

Proposed Shallow Borehole Locations for Tracer Studies, Areas 18. 19.20 and 30. Nevada 

Test Site, Nve Countv, Nevada,” Desert Research Institute, Quaternary Sciences Center, 

Short Report No. SR040397-1, Las Vegas, NV. 

National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement, 1975, “Krypton-85 in the 

Atmosphere:’ NCRP Report No. 44, Washington D.C. 

Nevada Administrative Code 445A-890, ‘‘Public Water Svstems.” 

Nevada Administrative Code Chapter 61 8.850 et seq., “Abatement of Asbestos.” 

Nevada Revised Statutes, “Public Health and SafetvMlater Pollution Control,” Title 40, 

Chapter 445A, and Nevada Administrative Code 445A.247. 

Nevada Revised Statutes, “Public Health and Safetv/Disposal of Hazardous Waste:’ 

Title 40, Chapter 459, and Nevada Administrative Code 444.8632. 

Nevada Revised Statutes, “Reaulation of Hicihlv Hazardous Substances”, 459.380 et seq. And 

Nevada Administrative Code 459.952 et seq. 

Nevada Test Site, 1997, Annual Update for the Nevada Test Site Site Treatment Plan, Waste 

Management Division, Nevada 0peration.s Office, DOE. 

Nevada Test Site, 1996, Waste AccePtance Criteria, Report NTSWAC (Rev. 0), Waste 

Management Division, Nevada Operations Office, DOE. 

O’Farrell, T. P. and L. A. Emery, 1976, “Ecol!,av of the Nevada Test Site: A Narrative Summary 

and Annotated BiblioaraphvL” Report NVO-167, Desert Research Institute, University of 

Nevada, Las Vegas, NV. 

Pohll, G. and K. Pohlmann, 1996, “Evaluation of the Radionuclide Tracer Test Conducted at the 

Proiect Gnome Underground Nuclear Test Site, New Mexico:‘ Report DOE/NV/I 1508-08, 

Desert Research Institute, Las Vegas, NV. 

Quiring, R. E., 1968, “Climatoloaical Data, Nevada Test Site, Nuclear Rocket Development 

Station,’ ESSA Research Laboratory Report ERLTM-ARL-7, Las Vegas, NV. 

Resource Recovery and Conservation Act (RCRA), 1976, as amended, 42 U.S. Code 6901 

et seq. 

Rose, T.P., J.M. Kenneally, D.K. Smith, M.L. Davisson, G.B. Hudson, and J.H. Rego, 1997, 

“Chemical and Isotopic Data for Groundwater in Southern Nevada,” UCRL-ID-128000, 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA. 

R-4 
Russell, C. E., 1990, Report 

DOE/NV/I 0384-31, Water Resources Center, Desert Research Institute, University of 

Nevada, Las Vegas, NV. 

Scoggins, W. A., 1983, “& 

1982 throuah December 1982%’’ DOWNVO-410-76, Reynolds Electrical & Engineering Co., 

Inc., Las Vegas, NV. 

Scoggins, W. A., 1984, “Environmental Surveillance Report for the Nevada Test Site. Januaw 

1983 throuah December 1983:’ DOWNVO-10327-4, Reynolds Electrical & Engineering Co., 

Inc., Las Vegas, NV. 

Seaber, P.A., E.D. Stowers and R.H. Pearl, 1997, “Biblioaraphv of Reports on Studies of the 

Geoloav. Hvdroaeoloav. and Hvdroloav at the Nevada Test Site, Nve Countv. Nevada. from 

1951 to 1996,” Publication 451 56, Desert Research Institute, University and Community 

College System of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV. 

Shott, G.J., L.E. Barker, S.E. Rawlinson, and M.J. Sullt, 1997a, “Performance Assessment for 

the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Manaaement Site at the Nevada Test Site. Nve Countv, 

Nevada,” Rev. 2.1, Bechtel Nevada, Las Vegas, NV. 

Shott, G.J., V. Yucel, M.J. Sully, L.E. Barker, S.E. Rawlinson, and B.A. Moore, 1997b, 

“Performance AssessmenVComposite nalvsis for the Area 3 Radioactive Waste Manaaement 

Site at the Nevada Test Site, Nve Countv. Nevada,” Rev. 2.0, Report DOUNV-491, Bechtel 

Nevada, Las Vegas, NV. 

Smith, D.K., S.B. Kersting, J.M. Keneally, T.P. Rose, G.B. Hudson and G.F., 1998, “Radionuclide 

Miaration Studies: FY 1997, Progress Report, UCRL-ID-126886, Lawrence Livermore National 

Laboratory, Livermore, CA. 

Stanley, T. W. and S. S. Verner, 1985, “The U.S. Environmental Protection Aaencv’s Qualitv 

Assurance Proaram:’ in J. K. Taylor and T. W. Stanley (eds.), Qualify Assurance for 

Environmental Measurements, ASTM STP-867, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 

Steen, D. C., D. B. Hall, P. D. Greger, and C. A. Wills, 1997, “Distribution of the Chuckwalla, 

Western Burrowina Owl, and Six Bat SDecies on the Nevada Test Site,” DOE/NV/I 171 8-149, 

Bechtel Nevada, Inc., Las Vegas, Nevada. 

Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), 1986,42 U.S. Code 1 1001 - 1 1050. 

Taylor, J. K., 1987, “Qualitv Assurance of Chemical Measurements,” Chapter 4, Lewis 

Publications. 

iompson, J. L., 1997, “Laboratorv and Field Studies Related to the Hvdroioaic Resources 

Manaaement Proaram. October 1, 1995 - September 30.1996:’ Report LA-1 3270-PR, Los 

Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM. 

iompson, J.L., A.B. Kersting, and D.L. Finnegan, 1997, “Plutonium in Groundwater at the NTS: 

Observations at ER-20-5,:” Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM. 

Thordarson, W., 1965, “Perched Ground Water in Zeolitized Bedded Tuff, Rainier Mesa and 

Vicinitv. Nevada Test Site:’ U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report TEI-862. 

R-5 
U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1964, mject maer‘s Report. Project SHOAl ” Report 

NVO-1 I, Nevada Operations Office, Las ’degas, NV. 

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1965, mject GNOMF - the Fnvironment Created bv a 

lear Fxplosion in S&+” Report PNE-1 O7F, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV. .. 

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1966, “Report of the AFC neputv Test Manaer: Proiect 

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1970, asical and Riolom Effects: MI1 ROW Fvea’l 

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1972, “Draft Environmental Stateme nt: Rio Blanco Gas 

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1973a, -1 Term Surveillance Plan. Central Nevada Test 

Report NVO-90, Appendix 2, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV. 

US. Atomic Energy Commission, 1973b, “PtyW and Rioloaical Effects: CANNlKlN Fvent” 

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1990, “Powlation Count Pursuant to Public Law 94-171 L” 

JSHOTC Report NVO-26, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV. 

Report NVO-79, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV. 

Stimulation Pro-iect,” Report WASH-1519, Washington, D.C. 

Report NVO-123, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV. 

Bureau of Census, Washington, D.C. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1978, “SDecialudv. Tatum Dome Test Site. Lam ar Countv. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1984, “Lona-Term Hvdroloaic Monitorina Proaram. RULISON Event Site. 

Mississippi. Final Report,” Report NVO-200, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV. 

Grand Vallev. Colorado.” Report NVO-273, Nevada Operations Off ice, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1986, “Lona-Term Hvdroloaic Monitorina Proaram. Project GASB UGGY. 

Rio Arriba Countv. New Mexico:’ Report NVO-277, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1988, “Radioactive Waste Manaaement:‘ DOE Order 5820.2A. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1990a, “Occurrence Reoortina and Processina of Operations 

Informationc” DOE Order 5000.3B. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1990b, “General Environmental Protection Proaram:’ DOE Order 

5400.1 . 

US. Department of Energy, 199Oc, “Radiatioii Protection of the Public and the Environment:’ 

DOE Order 5400.5. 

U .S. Department of Energy, 1990d, “Environrnental Protection. Safetv. and Health Protection 

Proaram for DOE OPerationsL” DOE Order 5480.1 B. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1990e, “Radiation Protection for OccuDational Workers:’ DOE 

Order 5480.1 1. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1990f, “Environmental Protection, Safetv. and Health Protection 

Information Reoortina Requirements:’ DOE Order 5484.1. 

R-6 
U.S. Department of Energy, 1990g, “Site Specific Plan for Environmental Restoration and 

Waste Manaaement:’ Report DOE/NV-336, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1991 a, “Qualitv Assurance:’ DOE Order 5700.66. 

US. Department of Energy, 1991 b, “General Desian Criteria ManualL” DOE Order 6430.1A. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1991c, “Environmental Monitorina Plan, Nevada Test Site and 

Support Facilities%” Report DOE/NV/10630-28, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1991 d, “Environmental Reaulatow Guide for Radioloaical Effluent 

Monitorina and Environmental Surveillance:‘ ReportbOE/EH-O173T, Washington, D.C. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1994a, “United States Nuclear Tests: Julv 1945 throuuh SeDtember 

1992%” Report DOE/NV-209 (Revision 14), Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1994b, “Site Characterization and Monitorina Data from Area 5 

Pilot Wells, Nve Countv, Nevada:’ DOE/NV/11432-74, Reynolds Electrical & Engineering Co., 

Inc., Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1996a, “Nevada Test Site Site Treatment Plan,” Report 

DOE/NV-397, Rev. 2, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1996b, “Shaft and Tunnel Nuclear Detonations at the Nevada Test 

Site: Development of a Primary Database for Estimation of Potential Interactions with the 

Reaional Groundwater Svstem,” Report DOE/NV-464, Nevada Operations Off ice, 

Las Vegas, NV. 

US. Department of Energy, 1996c, “Final Environmental ImDact Statement for the Nevada Test 

Site and Off-Site Locations in the State of Nevada,” Report DOE/EIS-0243, Nevada 

Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1996d, “Underaround Test Area Subproiect Waste Manaaement 

- Plan,” Report DOE/NV-343, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1997a, “Nevada ODerations Office Annual Site Environmental 

Report - 1996; DOE/NV/11718-137, Bechtel Nevada, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1997b, “Environmental Data Report for the Nevada Test Site - 1996,” DOE/NV/11718-138, Bechtel Nevada, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1997c, “Completion Report for Well Cluster ER-20-5,” Report 

DOE/NV-466, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV. 

US. Department of Energy, 1997dJ “Sitina Criteria for Protection of Groundwater at the Nevada 

Test Site,” Nevada Operations Office, Procedural Instruction NV PI 97-001. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1997e, “Work Acceptance Process:’ Nevada Operations Office, 

Procedural Instruction NV PI 97-005. 

R-7 
U.S. Department of Energy, 1998, “ComrJletion Report for Well Cluster ER-20-6, “ Report 

DOEYNV-467, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1 9y76, “Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution 

Measurement Systems,” Report EPA/6C10/9-76/005, Office of Research and Development, 

Research Triangle Park, NC. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1983, “Interim Guidelines and Specifications for 

PreDarina Qualitv Assurance Project Plans - QAMS-005/80:’ Office of Research and 

Development, Report EPA/600/4-83/004, Washington, D.C. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986, “RCRA Groundwater Monitorina Technical 

Enforcement Guidance Document:’ Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Report 

NO. OSWER-9950.1,208~~. 

US. Environmental Protection Agency, 1987, “Qualitv Assurance Proaram Plan:’ EPA/6OO/X87/241, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, P.O. Box 93478, Las Vegas, NV 

891 93-3478. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1988, “Limitina Values of Radionuclide Intake and Air 

Concentration and Dose Conversion Factors for Inhalation. lnaestion. and Submersion:’ 

Federal Guidance Report No. 11, EPA/520/1-88/020, Washington, D.C. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992, “User’s Guide for CAP88-PC. Version 1 .O: 

Office of Radiation Programs, Las Vegas Facility, Report 402-6-92-001. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996, “Qualitv Manaaement Plan %” Report EPN6OOM96-024, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air, Washington, D.C. 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1991, “NRC TLD Direct Radiation Monitorina Network 

Proaress Report, October to December, 1991:’ NUREG-0873, 11: No. 4, U.S. Nuclear 

Regulatory Commission, Region 1, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 

U.S. Public Health Service, 1963, ‘‘Project SIEDAN. Final Off-Site ReDort,” Off-Site Radiological 

Safety Organization, AEC Report PNE-200F, Las Vegas, NV 

U.S. Public Health Service, 1966, “Final Report of Off-Site Surveillance for the SA1 MON Fvent ot 

Project DRlRRl F ” Report VUF-1021, Southwestern Radiological Health Laboratory, Las 

Vegas, NV. 

White, G.C., D.R. Anderson, K.P. Burnham and D.L. Otis, 1982, “A Capture-Recapture and 

Removal Methods for Samplina Closed Populations,” Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los 

Alamos, New Mexico, Report LA-8787-N ERP. 

Winograd, I. J. and W. Thordarson, 1975, “f-lvdroaeoloaic and Hvdrochemical Framework. 

South-Central Great Basin, Nevada-California, with SDecial Reference to the Nevada Test 

Site.” U.S. Geological Survey Profession’s1 Paper 71 2-c, US. Government Printing Office, 

Washington, D.C. 

R-8 
DISTRIBUTION LIST 

DOUHQ 

Assistant Secretary for Defense Programs (DP-1 FORS), U.S. Department of Energy, 

Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety, and Health (EH-1 FORS), U.S. Department of 

Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 (1 0) 

Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (EM-I FORS), U.S. Department of Energy, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Defense Programs (DP-2 FORS), U.S. Department of 

Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Research and Development (DP-1 0 FORS), US. Department 

of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Planning & Resource Management (DP-40 FORS), U.S. 

Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, MD 20585 (3) 

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Compliance and Program Coordination (EM-20 FORS), 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave. SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Waste Management (EM-30 FORS), U.S. Department of 

Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Environmental Restoration (EM-40 FORS), U.S. 

Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 

Director, Office of RD&T Facilities (DP-13 GTN), U.S. Department of Energy, 19901 Germantown 

Road, Germantown, MD 20545 

Director, LLNUNTS Facility Management Division (DP-I 3 GTN), U.S. Department of Energy, 

19901 Germantown Road, Germantown, MD 20545 

Director, Office of Reconfiguration (DP-25 FORS), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 

1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 (5) 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 (3) 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 

Director, Office of Environmental Support (DP-34 FORS), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 

Director, Environmental Compliance Division (EH-22 FORS), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 

Director, Office of Environmental Audit (EH-24 FORS), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 

Director, Office of Energy Research (ER-1 FORS), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 

D-1 
Distribution. cont. 

Associate Director, Office of Health and Environmental Research (ER-70 GTN), U.S. 

Director, Office of Field Management (FM-1 FORS), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 

Director, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (RW-1 FORS), U.S. Department of 

DOUNV 

Manager, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Llepartment of Energy, P. 0. Box 9851 8, 

Assistant Manager for Technical Services, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department 

Assistant Manager for National Security, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department 

Department of Energy, 19901 Germantown Road, Germantown, MD 20545 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 

Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 

Las Vegas, NV 891 93-851 8, M/S 505 

of Energy, P. 0. Box 9851 8, Las Vegas, IVV 891 93-851 8, M/S 505 

of Energy, P. 0. Box 9851 8, Las Vegas, IVV 891 93-851 8, M/S 505 

Assistant Manager for Environmental Management, Nevada Operations Off ice, U.S. Department 

Assistant Manager for Business & Financial Services, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department 

Director, Office of Public Affairs and Information, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department of 

Director, Waste Management Division, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department of 

Deputy Assistant Manager for Technical Services, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department 

Director, Environment, Safety and Health Division, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department of 

Director, Resources Management Division, Nevada Operations Office, Nevada Operations Office, 

of Energy, P. 0. Box 9851 8, Las Vegas, IW 891 93-851 8, M/S 505 

of Energy, P. 0. Box 9851 8, Las Vegas, NV 891 93-851 8, M/S 505 

Energy, P. 0. Box 9851 8, Las Vegas, NV 891 93-851 8, M/S 505 (2) 

Energy, P. 0. Box 9851 8, Las Vegas, NV 891 93-851 8, M/S 505 

of Energy, P. 0. Box 98518, Las Vegas, PdV 89193-8518, M/S 505 

Energy P. 0. Box 9851 8, Las Vegas, NV 891 93-851 8, M/S 505 

U.S. Department of Energy, P. 0. Box 98!j18, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, M/S 505 

Department of Energy, P. 0. Box 9851 8, Las Vegas, NV 891 93-851 8, M/S 505 

P. 0. Box 98518, Las Vegas, NV 89193-21518, M/S 505 

P. 0. Box 98518, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, MIS 505 

P. 0. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 891 93-8521, NLV040 

N. George McNeill, Environment, Safety and Health Division, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. 

Director, Technology Development Division, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Technical Information Resource Center, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department of Energy, 

Public Reading Facility, Nevada Operations Off ice, U.S. Department of Energy, 

D-2 
D-3 

Distribution. cont. 

Assistant Administrator for Radiation and Indoor Air, US. Environmental Protection Agency, 

401 M Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20460 

Director, Criteria and Standards (ANR-460 ORP), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 

M Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20460 

Director, Analysis & Support Division (ANR-461 ORP), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

401 M Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20460 

Director, Air & Toxic Division, Region IX, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94103 

Regional Radiation Representative, Region VIII, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

999 18th Street Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202 

Regional Radiation Representative, Region VI, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, First 

Interstate Bank Tower Suite 1200, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202 

Regional Radiation Representative, Region XI U .S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1200 6th Avenue, Seattle, WA 981 01 

Regional Radiation Representative, Region VII, US. Environmental Protection Agency, 726 

Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, KS 661 01 

Director, Radiation & Indoor Environments National Laboratory (R&IE), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, P. 0. Box 98517, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8517, MIS 513 

Deputy Director, Radiation & Indoor Environments National Laboratory, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, P. 0. Box 98517, Las Vegas, NV 891 93-851 7, M/S 51 3 

Director, Center for Environmental Restoration, Monitoring and Emergency Response, R&IE-LV, 

US. Environmental Protection Agency, P. 0. Box 9851 7, Las Vegas, NV 891 93-851 7, M/S 51 3 

Anita A. Mullen, Center for Environmental Restoration, Monitoring, and Emergency Response, 

R&lE-LV, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, P. 0. Box 98517, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8517, 

MIS 513 

Angela Haag, Center for Environmental Restoration, Monitoring and Emergency Response, 

R&lE-LV, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, P. 0. Box 9851 7, Las Vegas, NV 891 93-851 7, 

1 

MIS 513 

Radiological Health Section, Bureau of Health Protection Services, 505 E. King Street 

Room 203, Carson City, NV 8971 0 

AI Jinney, Bureau of Health Protection Services, 620 Belrose Street, Las Vegas, NV 

891 58-5242 
Distribution, cont. 

Paul Liebendorfer, Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, Capitol Complex, 

Clem Goewert, NDEP, 555 E. Washington ,We., Suite 4300, Las Vegas, NV 891 01 -1 049 

333 W. Nye Lane, Carson City, NV 89706-0866 

Clinton Case, NDEP, Capitol Complex, 333 'W. Nye Lane, Carson City, NV 89706-0866 

Charles Bubak, NDEP, 555 E. Washington he., Suite 4300, Las Vegas, NV 89101-1049 

Larry Franks, Radiological Health Section, NIDEP, 620 Belrose Street, Las Vegas, NV 

891 58-5242 

Director, Environmental Improvement Division, Department of Health and Environment, 1 190 

Saint Francis Drive, Santa Fe, NM 87503 

Director, Radiation and Hazardous Waste Control Division, Department of Health, 421 0 E. 

1 1 th Avenue, Denver, CO 80220 

Director, Bureau of Radiation and Occupational Health, 288 N. 1460 West, P. 0. Box 

16690, Salt Lake City, UT 841 16-0690 

Director, Division of Air Quality, State Department of Health, 150 N. 1950 West, Salt Lake 

City, UT 841 16 

Director, Health Department, 88 E. Fiddlers Canyon, Suite 8, Cedar City, UT 84720 

Chief, Department of Health and Social Services, Radiological Health Program, 

P. 0. Box H-02, Juneau, AK 9981 1 

Chief, Radiological Health Branch, Department of Health Services, 1232 Q Street, 

Sacramento, CA 95814 

Public Health Physicist, Radiological Health Section, Orange County Health Care Agency, 

P. 0. Box 355, Santa Ana, CA 92705 

Director, Department of Health Services, Occupational Health and Radiation Management, 

2615 S. Grand Avenue, Room 608, Los Angeles, CA 90007 

Director, Santa Barbara Health Care Services, 31 5 Camino Del Remedio, 

Santa Barbara, CA 931 10 

Director, Division of Radiological Health, Statle Board of Health, P. 0. Box 1700, 

Jackson, MS 3921 5-1 700 

Director, Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency, 4814 S. 40th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85040 

N.W. Golchert, Manager, Environmental Protection, Argonne National Laboratory, 

9700 S. Cass Avenue, Argonne, IL 60439 

D-4 
Distribution, cont. 

LANL 

C. F. Eberhart, MIS F670, Los Alamos National Laboratory, P. 0. Box 1663, 

Los Alamos, NM 87545 (2) 

C. F. Costa, Los Alamos National Laboratory, P. 0. Box 0, Mercury, NV 89023, M/S 900 

Julie A. Carpenter, Los Alamos National Laboratory, P. 0. Box 0, Mercury, NV 89023, 

MIS NTS967 

LLNL 

Resident Manager, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P. 0. Box 45, 

Mercury, NV 89023, MIS 777 

Mercury, NV 89023, MIS 777 

P. 0. Box 808, Livermore, CA 94551 

J. M. Haeberlin, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P. 0. Box 45, 

J. Shinn, Environmental Science Division L-453, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 

J. Fischer, Chemistry and Materials Division L-311, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 

P. 0. Box 808, Livermore, CA 94551 

Jim Kercher, Health and Ecological Assessment Division, L-524, Lawrence Livennore National 

Laboratory, P. 0. Box 808, Livermore, CA 94551 

808, Livermore, CA 94551 

Lynn Anspaugh, Risk Sciences Center, L-453, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P. 0. Box 

Bob Schock, Energy Program L-641, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P. 0. Box 808, 

Livermore, CA 94551 

David Smith, L-231, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P. 0. Box 808, 

Livermore, CA 94551 

SNL 

Resident Manager, Sandia National Laboratories, P. 0. Box 238, Mercury, NV 89023, 

James H. Metcalf, Sandia National Laboratories, P. 0. Box 238, Mercury, NV 89023, 

Roger Smith, Sandia National Laboratories, P. 0. Box 871, Tonopah, NV 89023 

DSWA 

David A. Bedsun, Defense Special Weapons Agency, P. 0. Box 98539, 

MIS NTS944 

MIS NTS944 

Las Vegas, NV 891 93-851 8 , MIS 573 

D-5 
Distribution. cont. 

Battelle 

R. 0. Gilbert, Sigma 3, Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratory, P. 0. Box 999, 

Richland, WA 99352 

Manager, Environmental Restoration and VVaste Management, Pacific Northwest Laboratories, 

P. 0. Box 999, Richland, WA 99352 

Colleen M. Beck, Desert Research Institute, 755 E. Flamingo Road, Las Vegas, NV 89120, 

M/S 505 

Roger L. Jacobson, Desert Research Institute, 755 E. Flamingo Road, Las Vegas, NV 89120, 

M/S 505 (3) 

Mary L. Brown, International Technology Corporation, P. 0. Box 93838, Las Vegas, NV 

891 93-3838, MIS NLV439 

Barbara Hampton, International Technology Corporation, P. 0. Box 93838, Las Vegas, NV 

891 93-3838, MIS NLV439 

Cathy Baker, International Technology Corporation, P. 0. Box 93838, Las Vegas, NV 

891 93-3838, M/S NLV439 

Manager, Bechtel Nevada, P. 0. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8521, M/S NLV001 

Manager, Environmental Management, Becl$tel Nevada, P. 0. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 

89193-8521, M/S NLV102 (2) 

Manager, Waste Management Program, Bechtel Nevada, P. 0. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 

891 93-8521 , M/S NLV080 

Brian Dozier, Environmental Management, E3echtel Nevada, P. 0. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 

891 93-8521, M/S NLV022 (2) 

Martha E. DeMarre, Coordination and Information Center, Bechtel Nevada, P. 0. Box 98521, 

Las Vegas, NV 89193-8521, M/S NLV040 

Robert F. Grossman, Environmental Management, Bechtel Nevada, P. 0. Box 98521, 

0. L. Haworth, Environmental Management, Bechtel Nevada, P. 0. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 

Las Vegas, NV 891 93-8521, MIS NTS27!3 

891 93-8521, M/S NTS110 

R. R. Kinnison, Environmental Management, Bechtel Nevada, P. 0. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 

891 93-8521, M/S NLV082 

J. W. Kesler, Environmental Compliance Office, Bechtel Nevada, P. 0. Box 98521, 

Las Vegas, NV 891 93-8521, M/S NLV042 

D-6 
Distribution. cont. 

D. Linkenheil, Waste Management Program, Bechtel Nevada, P. 0. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 

D. A. Nichols, Defense and Civil Projects, Bechtel Nevada, P. 0. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 

T. Van Sittert, Environmental Management, Bechtel Nevada, P. 0. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 

C. A. Wills, Environmental Management, Bechtel Nevada, P. 0. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 

Miscellaneous 

E. W. Chew, US. Department of Energy, 785 Doe Place, Idaho Falls, ID 83402, M/S 4149 

Environmental Protection Department, Mason and Hanger, Silas-Mason Co., Inc., Pantex 

Jeff Tappan, Westinghouse Corporation, 101 Convention Center Drive, Las Vegas, NV 891 09 

Office of Scientific and Technical Information, Technical Center, US. Department of Energy, 

UNLV Library Government Documents, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, P. 0. Box 45701 3, 

UNR Getchell Library, University of Nevada-Reno, Reno, NV 89557-0044 

E. A. Hopper UDAF/EV, 4551 Devlin Drive, Nellis AFB, NV 89191-6828 

Ann-Marie Choephel, Nuclear Waste Repository Project Office, P. 0. Box 1767, 

Steve Deandi, Western Governmental Association, 223 Old P. 0. Road, 

Doris Shirky, Community Library, 21 01 E Calvada Boulevard Pahrump NV 89048-5806 

Michelle Delee, Amargosa Valley Community Library, Star Route 15 401 -T, 

Diane Watson, Waste Policy Institute, Savannah River Research Campus, 227 Gateway Drive, 

Doran ODonald, University of Cincinnati, Department of Communication, 620 Teachers College, 

J W Fischer (L-31 l), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P. 0. Box 808, Livermore CA 94551 

891 93-8521, M/S NLV080 

891 93-8521, M/S NLVI 03 

891 93-8521, M/S NLV081 

891 93-8521, M/S NLV081 

Plant, P. 0. Box 30020, Amarillo, TX 79177 

P. 0. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831 (2) 

Las Vegas, NV 891 54-701 3 

Tonopah, NV 89049 

Boulder, CO 80302 

Amargosa Valley NV 89020 

Aiken SC 29803 

Cincinnati OH 45221 -01 84 

D-7