Disclaimer

Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service 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. 

Available for sale to the public from:

U.S. Department of Commerce

National Technical Information Service

5285 Port Royal Road

Springfield, VA 22161-0002

Telephone: (800) 553-6847

Fax: (703) 605-6900

E-mail: orders@ntis.gov

Online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/help/ordermethods.aspx

Available electronically at http://www.osti.gov/bridge 

Available for a processing fee to the 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

Telephone: (865) 576-8401

Fax: (865) 576-5728

E-mail: reports@adonis.osti.gov

All cover photos taken by W. Kent Ostler, Senior Scientist, NSTec

Front cover page (left to right):

Mirabillis pudica, Frenchman Flat, April 20, 2004

Agave utahensis, Mercury Ridge, May 24, 2004

Camissionia boothii, Pahute Mesa, May 19, 2004

Oenothera caespitosa, Frenchman Flat, March 23, 2005

Opuntia pulchella, Kawich Canyon, June 7, 2005

Yucca schidigera, Mercury Valley, June 24, 2003

Back cover page (left to right):

Mimulus bigelovii, Rock Valley, June 24, 2003

Cleome lutea, Buckboard Mesa, July 1, 2004

Camissionia boothii, Pahute Mesa, May 19, 2004

Camissionia brevipes, Fortymile Canyon, April 28, 2004

Calochortus flexuosus, Mid Valley, April 4, 2004

Camissonia megalantha, Cane Springs, June 12, 2003
DOE/NV/25946--790 

Nevada Test Site 

Environmental Report 2008 

Editor: Cathy Wills 

Technical Editor: Sierra Cory 

Graphic Design/Desktop Publisher Specialist: Elaine Forbes 

Geographic Information System Specialist: Ashley Burns 

September 2009 

Work Performed Under 

Contract No. DE-AC52-06NA25946 

Prepared for: 

U.S. Department of Energy 

National Nuclear Security Administration 

Nevada Site Office 

Prepared by: 

National Security Technologies, LLC 

P. O. Box 98521 

Las Vegas, NV 89193-8521 
ii Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Executive Summary 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 iii 

Executive Summary 

The Nevada Test Site Environmental Report (NTSER) 2008 was prepared to meet the information needs of the 

public and the requirements and guidelines of the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for annual site environmental reports. It was prepared by National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec), for the U.S. Department of 

Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO). This and previous years’ 

NTSERs are posted on the NNSA/NSO website at http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/publications/aser.aspx. 

Purpose and Scope of the NTS Environmental Report 

This NTSER was prepared to satisfy DOE Order DOE O 231.1A, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting.”

Its purpose is to (1) report compliance status with environmental standards and requirements, (2) present results of 

environmental monitoring of radiological and nonradiological effluents, (3) report estimated radiological doses to 

the public from releases of radioactive material, (4) summarize environmental incidents of noncompliance and 

actions taken in response to them, (5) describe the NNSA/NSO Environmental Management System and 

characterize its performance, and (6) highlight significant environmental programs and efforts. 

This NTSER summarizes data and compliance status for calendar year 2008 at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) and its 

two support facilities, the North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF) and the Remote Sensing Laboratory (RSL)–Nellis. It 

also addresses environmental restoration (ER) projects conducted at the Tonopah Test Range (TTR). Through a 

Memorandum of Agreement, NNSA/NSO is responsible for the oversight of TTR ER projects, and the Sandia 

Site Office of NNSA (NNSA/SSO) has oversight of all other TTR activities. NNSA/SSO produces the TTR 

annual environmental report available at http://www.sandia.gov/news/publications/environmental/index.html. 

Major Site Programs and Facilities 

NNSA/NSO directs the management and operation of the NTS and six sites across the nation. The NTS is located 

about 105 kilometers (km) (65 miles [mi]) northwest of Las Vegas. The six sites include two in Nevada (NLVF 

and RSL-Nellis) and four sites in other states (RSL-Andrews in Maryland, Livermore Operations in California, 

Los Alamos Operations in New Mexico, and Special Technologies Laboratory in California). Los Alamos, 

Lawrence Livermore, and Sandia National Laboratories are the principal organizations that sponsor and 

implement the nuclear weapons programs at the NTS. NSTec is the current Management and Operating (M&O) 

contractor accountable for the successful execution of work and ensuring that work is performed in compliance 

with environmental regulations. The six sites all provide support to enhance the NTS as a location for weapons 

experimentation and nuclear test readiness. The three major NTS missions include National Security, 

Environmental Management, and Stewardship of the NTS. 

Facilities that support the National Security mission of keeping the U.S. stockpile of nuclear weapons safe and 

reliable include the U1a Facility, Big Explosives Experimental Facility (BEEF), Device Assembly Facility 

(DAF), and Joint Actinide Shock Physics Experimental Research (JASPER) Facility. Facilities that support the 

Homeland Security program include the new Radiological/Nuclear Countermeasures Test and Evaluation 

Complex that became operational in 2009. 

Other Key Initiatives 

Apart from the major site programs, other NTS activities include demilitarization activities; controlled spills of 

hazardous material at the Nonproliferation Test and Evaluation Complex (NPTEC) for research purposes; 

processing of waste destined for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad, New Mexico, or the Idaho National 

Laboratory in Idaho Falls, Idaho; disposal of radioactive and mixed waste; and environmental research. 
Executive Summary 

iv Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Environmental Performance Measures Programs 

During the conduct of the major programs and other key initiatives mentioned above, NNSA/NSO complies with 

applicable environmental and public health protection regulations and strives to manage the land and facilities at 

the NTS as a unique and valuable national resource. For the identification of NTS environmental initiatives, 

NSTec relies upon their Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS), contractual requirements, and the 

Environmental Management System (EMS). The ISMS is designed to ensure the systematic integration of 

environment, safety, and health concerns into management and work practices so that NTS missions are 

accomplished safely and in a manner that protects the environment. NNSA/NSO oversees ISMS implementation 

through the Integrated Safety Management Council. 

The NSTec EMS is designed to incorporate concern for environmental performance throughout the organization, 

with the ultimate goal being continual reduction of the organization’s impact on the environment. Specific 

objectives and targets to reduce environmental impacts are identified through the EMS process and are tracked 

annually. On June 21, 2008, NSTec’s EMS was awarded ISO 14001 Certification (Section 17.2). ISO stands for 

the International Organization for Standardization. The certification represents an external third-party 

organization review and approval of the EMS as an effective and efficient system to ensure environmental 

compliance and to conform with NNSA/NSO environmental policy. 

Performance Measures 

Performance measures are used to evaluate the achievement of organization or process goals and to identify the 

need to institute changes in an organization or process. The NTS performance measures defined in the NSTec 

Prime Contract relate to protection of the environment and the public from effects of NTS operations. These 

performance measures apply to several programs and processes. They include (1) the potential radiological dose 

received by the public; (2) the identification, notification, and mitigation of spills and releases to the environment; 

(3) the reduction in the generation of wastes; and (4) compliance with applicable environmental protection 

regulations. The performance measures tracked by each process or program (e.g., air quality protection) are 

consolidated and presented in this report in Section 2.0, Compliance Summary. As part of implementing the 

EMS, objectives and targets to reduce environmental impacts are also identified and tracked on a fiscal year (FY) 

schedule (October 1 through September 30). The objectives and targets for FY 2008 were reviewed and approved 

by the Executive Leadership Council. They included increasing the use of alternative fuels, reducing the use of 

electrical energy, plugging unneeded boreholes, increasing material recycling, and using only environmentally 

friendly electronics. All FY 2008 targets were met or exceeded by the end of 2008 (Section 17.2.4). 

Offsite Monitoring for Radiological Releases into Air 

An offsite radiological air monitoring program is run by the Community Environmental Monitoring Program 

(CEMP) and is coordinated by the Desert Research Institute (DRI) of the Nevada System of Higher Education 

under contract with NNSA/NSO (Section 6.0). It is a non-regulatory public informational and outreach program, 

and its purpose is to provide monitoring for radionuclides that might be released from the NTS. A network of 

29 CEMP stations, located in selected towns and communities within a 160,000 square kilometer (61,776 square 

mile) area of southern Nevada, southeastern California, and southwestern Utah, was operated during 2008. The 

CEMP stations monitored gross alpha and beta radioactivity in airborne particulates using low-volume particulate 

air samplers, penetrating gamma radiation using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs), gamma radiation 

exposure rates using pressurized ion chamber (PIC) detectors, and meteorological parameters using automated 

weather instrumentation. 

No airborne radioactivity related to historic or current NTS operations was detected in any of the samples from 

the CEMP particulate air samplers during 2008. TLD and PIC detectors measure gamma radiation from all 

sources: natural background radiation from cosmic and terrestrial sources and man-made sources. The offsite 

TLD and PIC results remained consistent with previous years’ background levels and are well within background 

levels observed in other parts of the United States. 
Executive Summary 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 v 

Onsite Monitoring and Estimating of Radiological Releases into Air 

Estimates of radionuclide emissions on the NTS in 2008 were made for the following sources: (1) tritium (3H) 

gas released during operations at the Dense Plasma Focus Facility in Area 11; (2) the evaporation of tritiated 

water discharged from E Tunnel in Area 12; (3) the evaporation of 3

H from lined containment sumps at three 

post-shot wells in Areas 2, 4, and 19; (4) the evaporation of tritiated water removed from the basement of 

Building A-1 at the NLVF and transported to the NTS for disposal in the Area 5 Sewage Lagoon; (5) the 

evaporation and transpiration of tritiated water from soil and vegetation, respectively, from the Area 3 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS), the Area 5 RWMS, the Schooner crater in Area 20, and the Sedan crater 

in Area 10; (6) the release of tritium and aerosolized depleted uranium (DU) during high explosives experiments 

at the BEEF; and (7) the resuspension of americium-241 (241Am), plutonium-238 (238Pu), and plutonium-239+240 

(

239+240Pu) from past nuclear testing from soil deposits on the NTS across all NTS areas. A network of 19 air 

sampling stations and a network of 109 TLDs were used to monitor diffuse onsite radioactive emissions in 2008. 

Total radiological atmospheric releases for 2008 (Section 3.1.9) are shown in the table below. The methods used 

to estimate these quantities include the use of annual field air and water monitoring data, historical soil inventory 

data, and accepted soil resuspension and air transport models. 

Total NTS Radiological Atmospheric Releases for 2008 (Curies per year) 

3

H 85Kr 

Noble 

Gases 

(T1/2<40 

days) 

Short-Lived 

Fission and 

Activation 

Products 

(T1/2<3 hr) 

Fission 

 and 

Activation 

Products 

(T1/2>3 hr) 

Total 

Radioiodine 

Total 

Radiostrontium 

Total 

Depleted 

Uranium Plutonium 

Other 

Actinides Other 

440 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.060 0.050 (238Pu) 

0.29 (239+240Pu) 

0.047 

(

241Am)

0 

Offsite Radiological Monitoring of Water 

Offsite water monitoring conducted by the M&O contractor and by DRI (through the CEMP) verifies that there 

has been no offsite migration of man-made radionuclides from NTS underground contamination areas. 

In 2008, NSTec conducted radiological monitoring of 10 offsite non-potable NNSA/NSO wells drilled for 

hydrogeologic investigations including groundwater flow modeling. Most were wells in Oasis Valley. The DRI, 

through the CEMP, sampled 28 offsite water locations in 2008 for tritium. They included 4 springs, 21 wells, and 

3 surface water bodies located in selected towns and communities within 373 km (232 mi) of the NTS (Section 

6.2.1). The NSTec offsite water samples were analyzed for tritium as well as man-made gamma-emitting 

radionuclides and gross alpha and gross beta radioactivity. 

CEMP results in 2008, as in past years, continue to verify that no contaminated groundwater has migrated beyond 

the NTS boundaries into surrounding water supplies used by the public. Tritium concentrations for all the spring 

and surface water samples were either below or barely above laboratory background levels except those from the 

municipal water systems of Boulder City and Henderson where tritium was found at the low levels of 24.1 ± 1.6 

picocuries per liter (pCi/L) and 23.2 ± 1.5 pCi/L, respectively (Section 6.2.3). Boulder City and Henderson 

municipal water systems both obtain water from Lake Mead, which has documented levels of residual tritium 

persisting in the environment that originated from global atmospheric nuclear testing. 

Similarly, the 2008 NSTec data indicate that groundwater at the 10 offsite NNSA/NSO wells has not been 

impacted by past NTS nuclear testing operations. Tritium was not detected above its MDC in these wells. Gross 

alpha and gross beta radioactivity were detected, however, in most of the well samples, but none of the measured 

levels met or exceeded the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) maximum contaminant level (MCL) of 

15 pCi/L for gross alpha, or the EPA Level of Concern of 50 pCi/L for gross beta. They likely represent natural 

radiation sources. 
Executive Summary 

vi Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Onsite Radiological Monitoring of Water 

In 2008, 5 potable and 4 non-potable water supply wells, 14 monitoring wells, 1 tritiated water containment pond 

system, and 2 sewage lagoons were sampled for man-made radiological contaminants. The 2008 data continue to 

indicate that underground nuclear testing has not impacted the NTS potable water supply network. None of the 

onsite water supply wells had detectable concentrations of tritium or detectable concentrations of man-made 

gamma-emitting radionuclides (Section 4.1.8). Tritium values ranged from -19.5 ± 12.6 to 10.6 ± 12.9 pCi/L. 

The gross alpha and gross beta radioactivity detected in potable water supply wells represent the presence of 

naturally occurring radionuclides and did not exceed EPA limits. 

All the monitoring wells measured for gross alpha and gross beta had detectable levels, most likely from natural 

sources. None of the monitoring wells had gamma-emitting radionuclides above their respective MDCs. Ten of 

the 14 onsite monitoring wells had levels of tritium below their MDCs. Four of the 14 monitoring wells had 

detectable levels of tritium above their MDCs that ranged from 31 ± 13 to 356 ± 59 pCi/L (Section 4.1.9). These 

wells (PM-1, UE-7NS, WW A, and U-19BH) are each within 1 km (0.6 mi) of an historical underground nuclear 

test; all have consistently had detectable levels of tritium in past years. Their tritium levels are still less than 3 

percent of the EPA MCL for drinking water of 20,000 pCi/L, and no trend of rising tritium concentrations in these 

wells has been observed since 2000. 

Five constructed basins collect and hold water discharged from E Tunnel in Area 12 where nuclear testing was 

conducted in the past. Tunnel effluent water was analyzed for tritium, gross alpha, and gross beta in accordance 

with a wastewater discharge permit. Tritium in tunnel effluent water was 577,000 ± 88,100 pCi/L, lower than the 

limit allowed under the discharge permit (1,000,000 pCi/L). Gross alpha and gross beta values in 2008 were also 

less than their permitted limits (Section 4.1.10). 

Neither of the two onsite permitted sewage lagoons had detectable levels of tritium. Gross alpha and gross beta 

activity in the lagoon waters were both below their permitted limits (Section 4.1.11). 

The Underground Test Area (UGTA) Sub-Project pumps tritiated water into lined sumps during studies 

conducted at contaminated post-shot or near-cavity wells on the NTS. Four of these types of contaminated wells 

were sampled in 2008. An additional well that is associated with the N-Tunnel complex on Rainier Mesa was 

also sampled. The tritium levels in these wells ranged from 260,000 ± 10,000 to 21,000,000 ± 1,000,000 pCi/L 

(Section 4.1.12). 

Radiation Dose to the Public from the NTS 

Background Gamma Radiation – Mean background gamma radiation exposure rates on the NTS are measured 

at ten TLD stations located away from radiologically contaminated sites. These ranged from 63 to 159 mR/yr 

during 2008 (Section 5.3). This equates to an annual estimated background external dose of 63 to 159 millirem 

per year (mrem/yr) to a hypothetical person residing at those locations all year. In comparison, DRI measured 

background radiation in 2008 at offsite locations using TLDs that ranged from 71 mR/yr at Pahrump, Nevada, to 

148 mR/yr at Twin Springs, Nevada (Section 6.1.2). 

Public Dose from Drinking Water – Man-made radionuclides from past nuclear testing have not been detected 

in offsite groundwater in the past or during 2008 (Section 4.1). The offsite public does not receive a radiation 

dose from NTS operations from drinking water.

Public Dose from Inhalation – The radiation dose limit to the general public via just the air transport pathway is 

established by the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) under the Clean Air Act 

to be 10 mrem/yr. The EPA, Region IX, has approved the use of six air sampling stations on the NTS (called 

“critical receptor” stations) to verify compliance with the NESHAP dose limit. The following radionuclides were 

detected at four or more of the critical receptor samplers: 241Am, 238Pu, 239+240Pu, 233+234U, 235+236U, 238U, and 3

H 

(Section 3.1.5). Concentrations of these radionuclides at each of the stations indicated that the NESHAP dose 

limit to the public was not exceeded. The Schooner station in the far northwest corner of the NTS experienced the 

highest concentrations of radioactive air emissions (Section 3.1.5), yet an individual residing at this station would 

experience a dose from air emissions of only 1.9 mrem/yr, 19 percent of the admissible dose limit. No one resides 
Executive Summary 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 vii 

at this location, and the dose at offsite populated locations 20–80 km (12–50 mi) from the Schooner station would 

be much lower due to wind dispersion. 

Public Dose from Direct Radiation – The radiation dose limit to the general public via all possible transport 

pathways (over and above background dose) established by DOE is 100 mrem/yr. This includes internal and 

external dose. Areas accessible to the public had direct external gamma radiation exposure rates in 2008 

comparable to natural background rates. The TLD location on the west side of the parking area at Gate 100, the 

NTS entrance gate, had an estimated annual mean exposure that ranged from 65.1 mR/yr to 114 mR/yr during the 

first and second quarters of 2008, respectively. It is likely that low-level radioactive waste shipments 

intermittently parked there prior to entering the NTS are responsible for such quarter-to-quarter variation. 

Military or other personnel on the Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR) could be exposed to direct radiation 

from legacy sites in Frenchman Lake playa. A TLD location near the NTS boundary with NTTR in the playa had 

an estimated annual exposure of 349 mR (Section 5.3.1). This represents an above-background dose of 190 to 

286 mrem/yr (depending on which background radiation value is used), which would exceed the 100 mrem/yr 

dose limit to a member of the public. However, there are no living quarters or full-time personnel in that area. 

Public Dose from Ingestion of Radionuclides in Game Animals – Game animals from different contaminated 

NTS sites are trapped each year and analyzed for their radionuclide content to estimate the dose to hunters who 

might consume these animals if the animals moved off the NTS. In 2008, one mourning dove and two cottontail 

rabbits were sampled from near the Schooner Crater in Area 20. Based on tissue analyses from these samples, the 

highest annual dose to a member of the public consuming NTS game animals was estimated to be 0.47 mrem 

(Section 8.1.3, Table 8-1). 

Public Dose from Release of Property Containing Radioactive Material – No items were released from the 

NTS in 2008 that had residual radioactivity in excess of the default authorized limits specified in DOE O 5400.5, 

“Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment.” The NNSA/NSO contribution to the total public dose 

from this source was therefore negligible in 2008. 

Public Dose from All Pathways – Existing 2008 radiological monitoring data indicate that the dose to the public 

living in communities surrounding the NTS is not expected to be significantly higher than the previous 10 years. 

The public dose from all pathways in 2008 was estimated to be 2.37 mrem/yr. This is less than 3 percent of the 

100 mrem/yr dose limit and about 0.6 percent of the total dose the maximally exposed individual receives from 

natural background radiation (340 mrem/yr) (Section 8.1.7). 

Nonradiological Releases into Air 

The release of air pollutants is regulated on the NTS under a Class II air quality operating permit. Class II permits 

are issued for minor sources where annual emissions must not exceed 100 tons of any one criteria pollutant, or 

10 tons of any one of the 189 hazardous air pollutants (HAPs), or 25 tons of any combination of HAPs. Criteria 

pollutants include sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO), particulate matter (PM), 

and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). The NTS facilities regulated by the permit include (1) over 15 

facilities/185 pieces of equipment in Areas 1, 3, 5, 6, 12, 23, and 27; (2) the NPTEC; (3) Site-Wide Chemical 

Release Areas; (4) the BEEF; and (5) the Explosives Ordnance Disposal Unit. 

An estimated 6.05 tons of criteria air pollutants were released on the NTS in 2008 (Section 3.2.1). The majority 

were NOx from diesel generators. Total HAPs emissions from permitted operations was only 190 pounds 

(Section 3.2.1). Lead emissions from non-permitted activities, such as soldering and weapons use, are reported to 

the EPA, and this quantity in 2008 was 4.56 pounds (Section 10.3). No emission limits for any criteria air 

pollutants or HAPS were exceeded. 

One test, consisting of 28 releases of hazardous chemicals at the Area 5 NPTEC facility and 6 releases at the Test 

Cell C NPTEC facility in Area 25, was conducted in 2008 (Section 3.2.5). An annual report of the types and 

amounts of chemicals released and the test plans and final analysis reports for each chemical release were 

submitted to the State of Nevada. No ecological monitoring was performed since each test posed a very low level 

of risk to the environment and biota. 
Executive Summary 

viii Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Nonradiological Releases into Water 

There are no liquid discharges to navigable waters, offsite surface water drainage systems, or publicly owned 

treatment works resulting from operations on the NTS. Therefore, no Clean Water Act National Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits are required for operations on the NTS. 

Industrial discharges on the NTS are limited to two operating sewage lagoon systems, the Area 6 Yucca Lake and 

Area 23 Mercury systems. Liquid discharges to these sewage lagoons are tested quarterly for biological oxygen 

demand, pH, and total suspended solids. Annually, sewage lagoon pond waters are sampled for a suite of toxic 

chemicals. In 2008, analyses of sewage influent and pond waters showed that all water measurements were within permit limits (Section 4.2.3). Also, E Tunnel effluent and holding pond waters were sampled for nonradiological parameters (mainly metals), and all samples had levels of contaminants below permit limits (Section 4.2.4). 

Nonradiological Releases into Air and Water at the NLVF 

The NLVF is regulated for the emission of criteria air pollutants and HAPs. The regulated sources of emissions 

include an aluminum sander, an abrasive blaster, emergency generators, and a spray paint booth. The combined 

quantity of criteria air pollutants and HAPs emitted at the NLVF in 2008 was 0.511 tons, ranging from 0.0002 

tons for HAPS to 0.365 tons for NOx (Appendix A, Section A.1.3). 

Water discharges at the NLVF were regulated in 2008 by a permit with the City of North Las Vegas (CNLV) for 

sewer discharges and by an EPA-issued NPDES discharge permit for dewatering operations to control rising 

groundwater levels that surround the facility. The NPDES permit authorizes the discharge of pumped 

groundwater to the groundwater of the state via percolation and to the Las Vegas Wash via the CNLV storm drain 

system. Self-monitoring and reporting of the levels of nonradiological contaminants in sewage and industrial 

outfalls is conducted. In 2008, contaminant measurements were below established permit limits in all water 

samples from the NLVF sewage outfalls sampled (Appendix A, Section A.1.1). 

Nonradiological Releases into Air and Water at RSL-Nellis

The sources of air pollutants at RSL-Nellis that are regulated for the emission of criteria pollutants and HAPs 

include boilers, water heaters, emergency generators, a spray paint booth, and a vapor degreaser. The total 

estimated quantities of criteria air pollutants and HAPs emitted in 2008 was 0.704 tons. Discharges of wastewater 

from RSL-Nellis are required to meet permit limits set by the Clark County Water Reclamation District. All 

wastewater outfall samples in 2008 were below permit limits (Appendix A, Section A.2.1). 

Environmental Restoration 

The cleanup of sites contaminated by past DOE operations and the hydrogeological investigations supporting 

characterization of underground nuclear contamination areas are the most significant environmental work 

performed by NNSA/NSO each year. The DOE, U.S. Department of Defense, and the State of Nevada Division 

of Environmental Protection identify a work scope and milestone schedule for the cleanup and safe closure of the 

contaminated aboveground sites and for the field investigations and model development necessary to characterize 

the underground sites. In 2008, 70 contaminated aboveground sites were closed safely (Section 9.4). These 

aboveground sites consist of facilities and land, and are referred to as Industrial Sites. In addition to the Industrial 

Sites closures, extensive progress was made toward the development of hydrologic models describing 

groundwater flow and possible radionuclide transport from the primary underground sites into the groundwater 

underlying public lands outside the boundaries of the NTS. In 2008, this involved completing the final draft of 

the Phase I Flow and Transport Model and the Phase II Corrective Action Investigation Plan for the Central and 

Western Pahute Mesa Corrective Action Units (CAUs) (CAU 101 and CAU 102) and completing the compilation, 

analysis, and documentation of all hydrologic and transport parameters that will be used to build the flow model 

for CAU 99 (Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain) (Section 14.2). 
Executive Summary 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 ix 

Pollution Prevention/Waste Minimization (P2/WM) Activities 

P2/WM activities result in reductions to the volume and/or toxicity of waste actually generated on site 

(Section 11.3). A reduction of 268.5 metric tons (mtons) (295 tons) of hazardous wastes was realized in 2008. 

The largest proportion of this reduction came from shipments of lead acid batteries (105.0 mtons [115.5 tons]), 

bulk used oil (76.4 mtons [84 tons]), and lead scrap metal (73.5 mtons [80.8 tons]) to offsite vendors for recycling. 

A reduction of 311.2 mtons (342.3 tons) of solid wastes was realized in 2008. The largest proportion of this 

reduction came from shipping 161.0 mtons (177.1 tons) of mixed paper and cardboard and 84.2 mtons (92.6 tons) 

of ferrous scrap metal to a vendor for recycling and shipping 44.6 mtons (49.1 tons) of food wastes from the NTS 

cafeterias to a local pig farm. 

Compliance with Environmental Laws, Regulations, and Policies 

A summary of NNSA/NSO’s compliance with over 100 applicable environmental laws, regulations, and policies 

is presented in Chapter 2. The following table shows those categories for which compliance was not 100 percent. 

Noncompliance Incidents in 2008 

Air Quality 

Two cooling towers at RSL-Nellis were being operated and were not on the air permit (Appendix A, Section A.2.2). 

Water Quality 

Quarterly sampling of drinking water from the Area 23 and 6 Public Water System was not initiated immediately after 

xylene was measured above the EPA-specified detection level (Section 4.2.1.2). 

Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization 

The Executive Order 13423 goal to have 100 percent of purchases of items from the EPA-designated list contain recycled 

materials at the specified minimum content was not met; only 56 percent of purchases met the criteria (Section 11.1). 

Conservation and Protection of Biota and Wildlife Habitat 

Six out of ten accidental bird deaths were attributable to NTS activities (e.g., killed by vehicular traffic); those killed 

represented five species protected from harm as migratory birds (Section 13.3.2.3). 

Accidental/Unplanned Environmental Releases 

(1) Radiologically contaminated debris at Test Cell C, Area 25 was dispersed outside the boundaries of a controlled 

Contamination Area by high winds, (2) radiologically contaminated debris was found in Area 3 outside an adjacent 

Contamination Area, and (3) a fuel/lube truck leaked 329 gallons of oil in Area 6, contaminating a 60 square foot area 

adjacent to Road 6-05 (Section 2.11.1). 
Executive Summary 

x Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Acknowledgements 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 xi

Acknowledgements 

Environmental Technical Services (ETS) of National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec), is responsible for 

producing this document for the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada 

Site Office (NNSA/NSO). Environmental monitoring and compliance data were gathered through the combined 

efforts of several NSTec organizations in addition to ETS: Environmental Services, Radioactive Waste 

Operations, Solid Waste Operations, Environmental Restoration, Ecological Services, Radiological Control, 

Occupational Safety & Health, and Contractor Assurance & Compliance. The Water Resources and Cultural 

Resources divisions of the Desert Research Institute (DRI) contributed data for offsite water and air monitoring 

and cultural resource protection. Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) provided radioanalysis data for 

certain onsite wells sampled under the Underground Test Area Sub-Project. The Air Resources Laboratory, 

Special Operations and Research Division (ARL/SORD) provided summary descriptions of the Nevada Test Site 

(NTS) climate, and the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) provided water level and usage data for selected wells. 

Chapter Authors and Contributors 

Executive Summary

Cathy A. Wills, NSTec 

1.0 Introduction

Charles B. Davis, EnviroStat

Cathy A. Wills, NSTec 

2.0 Compliance Summary

Colleen M. Beck, DRI 

Elizabeth C. Calman, NSTec 

Andrea L. Gile, NSTec 

Cirilo C. Gonzales, NSTec 

Sydney J. Gordon, NSTec 

Diana J. Mendel, NSTec 

W. Kent Ostler, NSTec 

Phyllis M. Radack, NSTec 

Glenn Richardson, NSTec 

David D. Rudolph, NSTec 

Gregory T. Schmett, NSTec 

Carlton Soong, NSTec 

Tammy H. Wallace, NSTec 

Ronald W. Warren, NSTec 

3.0 Radiological and Nonradiological

 Air Monitoring

Elizabeth C. Calman, NSTec 

Charles B. Davis, EnviroStat 

Robert F. Grossman, NSTec 

Diana J. Mendel, NSTec 

Tammy H. Wallace, NSTec 

Ronald W. Warren, NSTec 

4.0 Radiological and Nonradiological

 Water Monitoring 

Charles B. Davis, EnviroStat 

Sigmund L. Drellack, NSTec 

David L. Finnegan, LANL 

Phyllis M. Radack, NSTec 

Theodore J. Redding, NSTec 

David D. Rudolph, NSTec 

Ronald W. Warren, NSTec 

5.0 Direct Radiation Monitoring

Charles B. Davis, EnviroStat 

Ronald W. Warren, NSTec 

6.0 Oversight Radiological Monitoring

 of Air and Water

William T. Hartwell, DRI 

Charles E. Russell, DRI 

Craig Shadel, DRI 

7.0 Radiological Biota Monitoring

Ronald W. Warren, NSTec 

8.0 Radiological Dose Assessment

Robert F. Grossman, NSTec 

Mark McMahon, NSTec 

Ronald W. Warren, NSTec 

9.0 Waste Management and Environmental 

Restoration

 Pat Arnold, NSTec 

 Carol F. Dinsman, NNSA/NSO 

 Cirilo C. Gonzales, NSTec 

 Sydney J. Gordon, NSTec 
Acknowledgements 

xii Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

9.0 Waste Management and Environmental 

Restoration (continued)

 David B. Hudson, NSTec 

 Glenn Richardson, NSTec 

 Gregory T. Schmett, NSTec 

 Carlton Soong, NSTec 

10.0 Hazardous Materials Control and

 Management

Orin L. Haworth, NSTec 

Carlton Soong, NSTec 

Tammy H. Wallace, NSTec 

11.0 Pollution Prevention

Orin L. Haworth, NSTec 

12.0 Historic Preservation and Cultural

 Resources Management

Colleen M. Beck, DRI 

Barbara A. Holz, DRI 

13.0 Ecological Monitoring

David C. Anderson, NSTec 

Paul D. Greger, NSTec 

Derek B. Hall, NSTec 

Dennis J. Hansen, NSTec 

W. Kent Ostler, NSTec 

14.0 Underground Test Area Sub-Project

Sigmund L. Drellack, NSTec 

15.0 Groundwater Protection Programs, Projects, 

and Activities 

Robert P. Graves, USGS 

Bruce W. Hurley, NNSA/NSO 

Curtis Obi, NSTec 

16.0 Meteorological Monitoring

Walter Schalk, ARL/SORD 

17.0 Environmental Management System

Orin L. Haworth, NSTec 

18.0 Compliance Quality Assurance Program

Elizabeth Burns, NSTec 

Charles B. Davis, EnviroStat 

Theodore J. Redding, NSTec 

19.0 Oversight Quality Assurance Program

Craig Shadel, DRI 

Appendix A: Offsite Facilities

Sigmund L. Drellack, NSTec 

David D. Rudolph, NSTec 

Carlton Soong, NSTec 

Tammy H. Wallace, NSTec 

Ronald W. Warren, NSTec 

NSTec ETS Support Staff 

The following individuals within ETS are responsible for the numerous tasks that are integral to the collection, 

quality assurance, and quality control of much of the environmental data reported in this report. 

Coordination of Field Sampling Operations for Routine Radiological Environmental Monitoring Plan

(RREMP), Clean Water Act (CWA) and Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) Projects:

Terrence P. Sonnenburg 

Field Sampling for RREMP, CWA, and SDWA Projects:

Melissa A. Cabble 

Martin D. Cavanaugh 

Rebecca T. Fish 

Paul D. Greger 

George H. Juniel 

Matthew O. Weaver 

Laboratory Operations Supporting RREMP Screening and Sample Processing:

Lynn N. Jaussi 
Acknowledgements 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 xiii

Sample Management Supporting the NSTec Subcontracting of Environmental Analytical Services:

Catherine D. Castaneda 

Theodore J. Redding 

RREMP Data Verification, Validation, and Review:

Elizabeth Burns 

Theodore J. Redding 

Ronald W. Warren 

Quality Assurance Oversight of the RREMP:

Elizabeth Burns 

Theodore J. Redding 

Administration of the Bechtel Environmental Integrated Data Management System for RREMP, CWA,

and SDWA Projects:

Elizabeth Burns 

Robert G. Peppard 

Report Production and Distribution Support Personnel 

The following individuals were responsible for improving the quality, appearance, and timely production and 

distribution of this report: 

Ashley Burns of NSTec Spatial Sciences worked with all the authors to produce the high-quality Geographic 

Information System (GIS)-generated maps and figures. 

Sierra Cory of Directives Management & Publications (DM&P) provided a thorough review of this document to 

ensure spelling, format, grammar, references, tables, figures, acronyms, table of contents, etc., were all in 

order. 

Charles Davis of EnviroStat provided support for the statistical analyses and interpretation of NTS radiological 

monitoring data collected by ETS. 

Tom Fitzmaurice of NSTec Environmental Restoration provided his artistic talents to produce the drawing of 

possible pathways of radiological exposure to the public presented in the NTSER Summary. 

Elaine Forbes of DM&P is the document’s graphics specialist and desktop publisher responsible for the final 

layout and format of the NTSER and NTSER Summary. 

Kurt Jahn, Jeff Li, and Mark Shaw of Printing, Mail & Administrative Support produced high-quality hard copies 

and compact discs of the NTSER and the NTSER Summary under a tight production schedule. 

David Wieand of Public Affairs and Community Relations designed the report cover. 
Acknowledgements 

xiv Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Table of Contents

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 xv

Table of Contents 

Executive Summary..................................................................................................................................................iii 

Acknowledgements................................................................................................................................................... xi 

List of Figures........................................................................................................................................................ xxii 

List of Tables ........................................................................................................................................................ xxiv 

1.0 Introduction and Helpful Information........................................................................................................ 1-1 

1.1 Site Location................................................................................................................................. 1-1 

1.2 Environmental Setting .................................................................................................................. 1-1 

1.3 Site History................................................................................................................................... 1-1 

1.4 Site Mission .................................................................................................................................. 1-4 

1.5 Primary Facilities and Activities................................................................................................... 1-5 

1.6 Scope of Environmental Report.................................................................................................... 1-5 

1.7 Populations near the NTS ............................................................................................................. 1-8 

1.8 Understanding Data in this Report................................................................................................ 1-8 

1.8.1 Scientific Notation........................................................................................................... 1-8 

1.8.2 Unit Prefixes.................................................................................................................... 1-8 

1.8.3 Units of Radioactivity...................................................................................................... 1-9 

1.8.4 Radiological Dose Units.................................................................................................. 1-9 

1.8.5 International System of Units for Radioactivity and Dose .............................................. 1-9 

1.8.6 Radionuclide Nomenclature .......................................................................................... 1-10 

1.8.7 Units of Measurement.................................................................................................... 1-10 

1.8.8 Measurement Variability ............................................................................................... 1-10 

1.8.9 Mean and Standard Deviation ....................................................................................... 1-11 

1.8.10 Standard Error of the Mean ........................................................................................... 1-11 

1.8.11 Median, Maximum, and Minimum Values.................................................................... 1-12 

1.8.12 Less Than (<) Symbol ................................................................................................... 1-12 

1.8.13 Negative Radionuclide Concentrations ......................................................................... 1-12 

1.8.14 Understanding Graphic Information.............................................................................. 1-12 

2.0 Compliance Summary................................................................................................................................ 2-1

2.1 Air Quality.................................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1.1 Applicable Regulations.................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1.2 Compliance Issues ........................................................................................................... 2-2

2.1.3 Compliance Reports......................................................................................................... 2-2

2.2 Water Quality and Protection ....................................................................................................... 2-5

2.2.1 Applicable Regulations.................................................................................................... 2-5

2.2.2 Compliance Issues ........................................................................................................... 2-5

2.2.3 Compliance Reports......................................................................................................... 2-6

2.3 Radiation Dose Protection ............................................................................................................ 2-9

2.3.1 Applicable Regulations.................................................................................................... 2-9

2.3.2 Compliance Reports....................................................................................................... 2-10

2.4 Radioactive and Nonradioactive Waste Management and Environmental Restoration ............. 2-11

2.4.1 Applicable Regulations.................................................................................................. 2-11

2.4.2 Compliance Reports....................................................................................................... 2-12

2.5 Hazardous Materials Control and Management ......................................................................... 2-16
Table of Contents

xvi Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

2.5.1 Applicable Regulations.................................................................................................. 2-16

2.5.2 Compliance Reports....................................................................................................... 2-17

2.6 Pollution Prevention/Waste Minimization (P2/WM) and Renewable Energy and 

Transportation Management....................................................................................................... 2-19

2.6.1 Applicable Regulations.................................................................................................. 2-19

2.6.2 Compliance Reports....................................................................................................... 2-19

2.7 National Environmental Policy Act............................................................................................ 2-21

2.8 Historic Preservation and Cultural Resource Protection ............................................................ 2-22

2.8.1 Applicable Regulations.................................................................................................. 2-22

2.8.2 Reporting Requirements ................................................................................................ 2-23

2.9 Conservation and Protection of Biota and Wildlife Habitat ....................................................... 2-24

2.9.1 Applicable Regulations.................................................................................................. 2-24

2.9.2 Compliance Issues ......................................................................................................... 2-25

2.9.3 Compliance Reports....................................................................................................... 2-25

2.10 Environmental Management System.......................................................................................... 2-27

2.10.1 Applicable Regulations.................................................................................................. 2-27

2.10.2 Compliance Status ......................................................................................................... 2-27

2.11 Occurrences, Unplanned Releases, and Continuous Releases.................................................... 2-28

2.11.1 Applicable Regulations.................................................................................................. 2-28

2.11.2 Compliance Status ......................................................................................................... 2-28

2.12 Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting............................................................................... 2-30

2.12.1 Applicable Regulations.................................................................................................. 2-30

2.12.2 Compliance Status ......................................................................................................... 2-30

2.13 Summary of Permits ................................................................................................................... 2-31

3.0 Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring.................................................................................... 3-1 

3.1 Radiological Air Monitoring ........................................................................................................ 3-1 

3.1.1 Monitoring System Design.............................................................................................. 3-2

3.1.2 Air Particulate and Tritium Sampling Methods............................................................... 3-4 

3.1.3 Presentation of Air Sampling Data .................................................................................. 3-5 

3.1.4 Air Sampling Results from Environmental Samplers...................................................... 3-5 

3.1.4.1 Americium-241 ............................................................................................... 3-5 

3.1.4.2 Cesium-137 ..................................................................................................... 3-7 

3.1.4.3 Plutonium Isotopes.......................................................................................... 3-7 

3.1.4.4 Uranium Isotopes .......................................................................................... 3-11 

3.1.4.5 Tritium........................................................................................................... 3-13 

3.1.4.6 Gross Alpha and Gross Beta ......................................................................... 3-16 

3.1.5 Air Sampling Results from Critical Receptor Samplers................................................ 3-18 

3.1.6 Air Sampling Results from Point-Source (Stack) Sampler............................................ 3-19 

3.1.7 Emission Evaluations for Planned Projects ................................................................... 3-19 

3.1.8 Unplanned Releases....................................................................................................... 3-19 

3.1.9 Total NTS Radiological Atmospheric Releases ............................................................ 3-19 

3.1.10 Environmental Impact ................................................................................................... 3-20 

3.2 Nonradiological Air Quality Assessment ................................................................................... 3-21 

3.2.1 Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants and Hazardous Air Pollutants.............................. 3-22 

3.2.2 Performance Emission Testing and State Inspection..................................................... 3-23 

3.2.3 Production Rates/Hours of Operation............................................................................ 3-23 

3.2.4 Opacity Readings........................................................................................................... 3-23 
Table of Contents

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 xvii

3.2.5 NPTEC and BEEF Reporting ........................................................................................ 3-24 

3.2.6 Tactical Demilitarization Development (TaDD) Project Reporting.............................. 3-25 

3.2.7 ODS Recordkeeping ...................................................................................................... 3-25 

3.2.8 Asbestos Abatement ...................................................................................................... 3-25 

3.2.9 Fugitive Dust Control .................................................................................................... 3-26 

3.2.10 Environmental Impact ................................................................................................... 3-26 

4.0 Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring ............................................................................... 4-1

4.1 Radiological Surface Water and Groundwater Monitoring.......................................................... 4-1

4.1.1 Areas of Radiological Groundwater Contamination ....................................................... 4-2

4.1.2 Water Monitoring Locations............................................................................................ 4-2

4.1.3 Analytes Monitored ......................................................................................................... 4-2

4.1.4 Water Sampling and Analysis Methods........................................................................... 4-6

4.1.5 Presentation and Statistical Analysis of Water Sampling Data ....................................... 4-7

4.1.6 Results from Offsite Wells .............................................................................................. 4-7

4.1.7 Results from Offsite Springs ......................................................................................... 4-12

4.1.8 Results from NTS Water Supply Wells......................................................................... 4-14

4.1.9 Results from NTS Monitoring Wells............................................................................. 4-17

4.1.10 Results from E Tunnel Ponds and Well ER-12-1 .......................................................... 4-20

4.1.11 Results from NTS Sewage Lagoons .............................................................................. 4-22

4.1.12 UGTA Wells.................................................................................................................. 4-23

4.1.13 Environmental Impact ................................................................................................... 4-23

4.2 Nonradiological Drinking Water and Wastewater Monitoring .................................................. 4-24 

4.2.1 Drinking Water Monitoring........................................................................................... 4-24 

4.2.1.1 PWS and Water-Hauling Truck Monitoring ................................................. 4-24 

4.2.1.2 Xylene Monitoring at Mercury North Tank .................................................. 4-27 

4.2.2 Domestic Wastewater Monitoring................................................................................. 4-28 

4.2.3 Industrial Wastewater Monitoring................................................................................. 4-28 

4.2.3.1 Quarterly Analysis of Sewage Lagoon Influent Water Quality .................... 4-28 

4.2.3.2 Annual Analysis of Toxicity of Sewage Lagoon Pond Waters..................... 4-30 

4.2.3.3 Sewage System Inspections........................................................................... 4-31 

4.2.4 E Tunnel Waste Water Disposal System (ETDS) Monitoring ...................................... 4-31 

4.2.5 Environmental Impact ................................................................................................... 4-32 

5.0 Direct Radiation Monitoring...................................................................................................................... 5-1

5.1 Measurement of Direct Radiation................................................................................................. 5-2

5.2 Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Surveillance Network Design .................................................... 5-2

5.2.1 Data Quality..................................................................................................................... 5-4

5.2.2 Data Reporting................................................................................................................. 5-4

5.3 Results .......................................................................................................................................... 5-4

5.3.1 Potential Exposure to the Public along the NTS Boundary............................................. 5-8

5.3.2 Exposures from NTS Operational Activities................................................................... 5-8

5.3.3 Exposure Rates at RWMSs.............................................................................................. 5-9

5.3.4 Exposure to NTS Plants and Animals............................................................................ 5-11

5.3.5 Exposure Rate Patterns in the Environment over Time................................................. 5-11

5.4 Environmental Impact ................................................................................................................ 5-12 

6.0 Oversight Radiological Monitoring of Air and Water............................................................................... 6-1 

6.1 Offsite Air Monitoring.................................................................................................................. 6-1 

6.1.1 Air Particulate Sampling Results..................................................................................... 6-3 
Table of Contents

xviii Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

6.1.1.1 Gross Alpha and Gross Beta ........................................................................... 6-4 

6.1.1.2 Gamma Spectroscopy...................................................................................... 6-7 

6.1.2 TLD Results..................................................................................................................... 6-7 

6.1.3 PIC Results ...................................................................................................................... 6-8 

6.1.4 Environmental Impact ................................................................................................... 6-10 

6.2 Offsite Surface and Groundwater Monitoring............................................................................ 6-10 

6.2.1 Sample Locations and Methods..................................................................................... 6-10 

6.2.2 Procedures and Quality Assurance ................................................................................ 6-11 

6.2.3 Results of Surface Water and Spring Discharge Monitoring ........................................ 6-11 

6.2.4 Results of Groundwater Monitoring.............................................................................. 6-15 

6.2.5 Environmental Impact ................................................................................................... 6-15 

7.0 Radiological Biota Monitoring .................................................................................................................. 7-1

7.1 Species Selection .......................................................................................................................... 7-1

7.2 Site Selection ................................................................................................................................ 7-2

7.3 Biota Sampling and Analysis at Schooner Crater......................................................................... 7-4

7.3.1 Plants ............................................................................................................................... 7-4

7.3.2 Animals............................................................................................................................ 7-7

7.4 Data Assessment........................................................................................................................... 7-8 

8.0 Radiological Dose Assessment.................................................................................................................. 8-1 

8.1 Radiological Dose to the Public.................................................................................................... 8-1 

8.1.1 Possible Exposure Pathways to the Public ...................................................................... 8-1 

8.1.2 Dose to the Public from NTS Air Emissions................................................................... 8-2 

8.1.3 Dose to the Public from Ingestion of Wild Game from the NTS .................................... 8-3 

8.1.4 Dose to the Public from Drinking Contaminated Groundwater ...................................... 8-4 

8.1.5 Dose to the Public from Direct Radiation Exposure along NTS Borders........................ 8-4 

8.1.6 Dose to the Public from Release of Property Containing Residual Radioactive 

Material............................................................................................................................ 8-5 

8.1.7 Total Offsite Dose to the Public from all Pathways ........................................................ 8-5 

8.1.8 Collective Population Dose ............................................................................................. 8-7 

8.2 Dose to Aquatic and Terrestrial Biota .......................................................................................... 8-7 

8.2.1 2008 Site-Specific Biota Dose Assessment..................................................................... 8-8 

8.2.2 Environmental Impact ..................................................................................................... 8-8 

9.0 Waste Management and Environmental Restoration................................................................................. 9-1

9.1 Radioactive Waste Management .................................................................................................. 9-1

9.1.1 Maintenance of Key Documents ..................................................................................... 9-2

9.1.2 Characterization of LLW and LLMW............................................................................. 9-2

9.1.3 Disposal of LLW and LLMW ......................................................................................... 9-3

9.1.4 TRU Waste Operations.................................................................................................... 9-4

9.1.5 Assessments..................................................................................................................... 9-4

9.1.6 Groundwater Monitoring for Mixed Waste Disposal Unit (Pit P03U)............................ 9-4

9.1.7 Vadose Zone Monitoring................................................................................................. 9-5

9.2 Hazardous Waste Management .................................................................................................... 9-5

9.2.1 Pit P03U........................................................................................................................... 9-5

9.2.2 HWSU and Waste Accumulation Areas.......................................................................... 9-6

9.2.3 EODU .............................................................................................................................. 9-6

9.3 Underground Storage Tank (UST) Management.......................................................................... 9-6
Table of Contents

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 xix

9.4 Environmental Restoration - Remediation of Historic Contaminated Sites ................................. 9-6

9.4.1 Corrective Actions........................................................................................................... 9-7

9.4.2 Post-Closure Monitoring and Inspections........................................................................ 9-9

9.5 Solid and Sanitary Waste Management...................................................................................... 9-10

9.5.1 Landfills......................................................................................................................... 9-10

9.5.2 Sewage Lagoons ............................................................................................................ 9-11

10.0 Hazardous Materials Control and Management ...................................................................................... 10-1 

10.1 TSCA Program ........................................................................................................................... 10-1 

10.2 FIFRA Program .......................................................................................................................... 10-2 

10.3 EPCRA Program......................................................................................................................... 10-2 

10.4 Nevada Chemical Catastrophe Prevention Act........................................................................... 10-3 

11.0 Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization........................................................................................ 11-1 

11.1 P2/WM Goals and Components .................................................................................................11-1 

11.2 Major P2/WM Accomplishments ...............................................................................................11-2 

11.3 Waste Reductions .......................................................................................................................11-3 

12.0 Historic Preservation and Cultural Resources Management.................................................................... 12-1 

12.1 Cultural Resources Inventories, Historical Evaluations, and Associated Activities................... 12-1 

12.1.1 Cultural Resources Inventories...................................................................................... 12-2

12.1.2 Evaluations of Historic Structures................................................................................. 12-2 

12.1.3 Associated Cultural Resources Activities...................................................................... 12-2 

12.1.3.1 General Reconnaissance/Archival Research ................................................. 12-2 

12.1.3.2 Reports .......................................................................................................... 12-3 

12.2 Curation ...................................................................................................................................... 12-3 

12.3 American Indian Program........................................................................................................... 12-4 

13.0 Ecological Monitoring............................................................................................................................. 13-1 

13.1 Desert Tortoise Compliance Program......................................................................................... 13-1 

13.2 Biological Surveys at Proposed Project Sites............................................................................. 13-3 

13.3 Important Species and Habitat Monitoring................................................................................. 13-7 

13.3.1 Sensitive Plants.............................................................................................................. 13-7 

13.3.2 Important Animals......................................................................................................... 13-7 

13.3.2.1 Western Red-tailed Skink.............................................................................. 13-7 

13.3.2.2 Western Burrowing Owl ............................................................................... 13-7 

13.3.2.3 Raptor Monitoring and Bird Mortality.......................................................... 13-8 

13.3.2.4 State-Protected Small Mammals ................................................................... 13-9 

13.3.2.5 Sensitive Bats ................................................................................................ 13-9 

13.3.2.6 Wild Horses................................................................................................... 13-9 

13.3.2.7 Mule Deer...................................................................................................... 13-9 

13.3.2.8 Mountain Lions ............................................................................................. 13-9 

13.3.2.9 Natural and Man-Made Water Sources ....................................................... 13-10 

13.3.3 West Nile Virus Surveillance ...................................................................................... 13-10 

13.4 Habitat Restoration Monitoring Program ................................................................................. 13-10 

13.5 Wildland Fire Hazard Assessment............................................................................................ 13-11 
Table of Contents

xx Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

13.6 Biological Monitoring of the NPTEC Complex....................................................................... 13-11 

14.0 Underground Test Area Sub-Project........................................................................................................ 14-1

14.1 2008 Subsurface Investigations .................................................................................................. 14-4

14.2 2008 Hydrogeologic Modeling and Supporting Studies............................................................. 14-4

14.2.1 Pahute Mesa-Oasis Valley Model Area......................................................................... 14-4

14.2.2 Rainier Mesa-Shoshone Mountain Model Area ............................................................ 14-5

14.2.3 Frenchman Flat Model Area.......................................................................................... 14-5

14.2.4 Yucca Flat-Climax Mine Model Area ........................................................................... 14-5

14.2.5 Other UGTA Sub-Project Modeling and Studies .......................................................... 14-7

15.0 Groundwater Protection Programs, Projects, and Activities ................................................................... 15-1 

15.1 Hydrologic Resources Management Program ............................................................................ 15-1 

15.2 Water Level, Temperature, and Usage Monitoring by the USGS .............................................. 15-1 

15.3 Wellhead Protection.................................................................................................................... 15-2 

15.3.1 Borehole Management Program.................................................................................... 15-2 

15.4 Spill Prevention and Management.............................................................................................. 15-4 

15.5 Groundwater Conservation......................................................................................................... 15-4 

16.0 Meteorological Monitoring...................................................................................................................... 16-1 

16.1 Meteorological Monitoring Goals .............................................................................................. 16-1 

16.2 MEDA Station Locations ........................................................................................................... 16-1 

16.3 MEDA Station Instrumentation.................................................................................................. 16-1 

16.4 Rain Gauge Network .................................................................................................................. 16-3 

16.5 Data Access ................................................................................................................................ 16-3 

17.0 Integrated Safety Management System and Environmental Management System ................................. 17-1

17.1 Scope of Chapter......................................................................................................................... 17-2

17.2 Elements and Status of the NTS EMS........................................................................................ 17-2

17.2.1 NTS Environmental Policy............................................................................................ 17-2

17.2.2 Environmental Aspects.................................................................................................. 17-2

17.2.3 Legal and Other Requirements ...................................................................................... 17-3

17.2.4 Objectives, Targets, and Programs ................................................................................ 17-3

17.2.5 Resources, Roles, Responsibilities, and Authorities...................................................... 17-6

17.2.6 Competence, Training, and Awareness ......................................................................... 17-6

17.2.7 Communication ............................................................................................................. 17-6

17.2.8 Documentation............................................................................................................... 17-6

17.2.9 Control of Documents.................................................................................................... 17-6

17.2.10 Operational Control ....................................................................................................... 17-7

17.2.11 Emergency Preparedness and Response........................................................................ 17-7

17.2.12 Monitoring and Measurement........................................................................................ 17-7

17.2.13 Evaluation of Compliance ............................................................................................. 17-7

17.2.14 Nonconformity and Corrective and Preventive Actions................................................ 17-7

17.2.15 Control of Records......................................................................................................... 17-7

17.2.16 Internal Audit................................................................................................................. 17-8

17.2.17 Management Review ..................................................................................................... 17-8

17.3 DOE O 430.2B Implementation ................................................................................................. 17-8
Table of Contents

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 xxi

18.0 Compliance Quality Assurance ............................................................................................................... 18-1 

18.1 Sampling and Analysis Plan ....................................................................................................... 18-2 

18.1.1 Precision ........................................................................................................................ 18-2 

18.1.2 Accuracy........................................................................................................................ 18-2 

18.1.3 Representativeness......................................................................................................... 18-2 

18.1.4 Comparability ................................................................................................................ 18-2 

18.2 Environmental Sampling ............................................................................................................ 18-3 

18.2.1 Training and Qualification............................................................................................. 18-3 

18.2.2 Procedures and Methods................................................................................................ 18-3 

18.2.3 Field Documentation ..................................................................................................... 18-3 

18.2.4 Inspection and Acceptance Testing ............................................................................... 18-3 

18.3 Laboratory Analyses................................................................................................................... 18-4 

18.3.1 Procurement................................................................................................................... 18-4 

18.3.2 Initial and Continuing Assessment ................................................................................ 18-5 

18.3.3 Data Evaluation ............................................................................................................. 18-5 

18.4 Data Review................................................................................................................................ 18-5 

18.4.1 Data Verification ........................................................................................................... 18-6 

18.4.2 Data Validation.............................................................................................................. 18-6 

18.4.3 Data Quality Assessment (DQA)................................................................................... 18-6 

18.5 Assessments................................................................................................................................ 18-6 

18.5.1 Programmatic................................................................................................................. 18-6 

18.5.2 Measurement Data......................................................................................................... 18-6 

18.5.2.1 Field Duplicates............................................................................................. 18-7 

18.5.2.2 Laboratory Control Samples (LCSs)............................................................. 18-7 

18.5.2.3 Blank Analysis .............................................................................................. 18-7 

18.5.2.4 Proficiency Testing Program Participation ................................................... 18-7 

19.0 Quality Assurance Program for the Community Environmental Monitoring Program........................... 19-1 

19.1 Data Quality Objectives.............................................................................................................. 19-1 

19.2 Measurement Quality Objectives (MQOs)................................................................................. 19-1

19.3 Sampling Quality Assurance Program........................................................................................ 19-1 

19.4 Laboratory QA Oversight........................................................................................................... 19-2

19.4.1 Procurement................................................................................................................... 19-2

19.4.2 Initial and Continuing Assessment ................................................................................ 19-2

19.4.3 Laboratory QA Program................................................................................................ 19-3

19.5 Data Review................................................................................................................................ 19-3

19.6 QA Program Assessments .......................................................................................................... 19-4

19.7 2008 Sample QA Results............................................................................................................ 19-4

19.7.1 Field Duplicates (Precision) .......................................................................................... 19-4

19.7.2 Laboratory Control Samples (Accuracy)....................................................................... 19-5

19.7.3 Blank Analysis............................................................................................................... 19-5

19.7.4 Inter-laboratory Comparison Studies............................................................................. 19-5

Appendix A Offsite Facilities............................................................................................................................A-i 

Appendix B Glossary of Terms........................................................................................................................ B-1 

Appendix C Acronyms and Abbreviations ...................................................................................................... C-1 

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

Library Distribution List......................................................................................................................................DL-1 
Table of Contents

xxii Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

List of Figures 

Figure 1-1 NTS vicinity map..........................................................................................................................1-2 

Figure 1-2 Major topographic features and calderas of the NTS ...................................................................1-3 

Figure 1-3 NTS operational areas, principal facilities, and past nuclear testing areas...................................1-6 

Figure 1-4 NTS land-use map ........................................................................................................................1-7 

Figure 1-5 Data plotted using a linear scale .................................................................................................1-13 

Figure 1-6 Data plotted using a log scale .....................................................................................................1-13 

Figure 3-1 Radiological air sampling network on the NTS in 2008...............................................................3-3 

Figure 3-2 Concentrations of 241Am in air samples collected in 2008 ...........................................................3-6 

Figure 3-3 Concentrations of 238Pu in air samples collected in 2008 .............................................................3-8 

Figure 3-4 Concentrations of 239+240Pu in air samples collected in 2008......................................................3-10 

Figure 3-5 Highest annual mean concentrations of 239+240Pu in air samples for each NTS area 

group, 1971–2008.......................................................................................................................3-10 

Figure 3-6 Fitted average trends in 239+240Pu geometric-means of air samples by NTS area 

group, 1971–2008.......................................................................................................................3-11 

Figure 3-7 Concentrations of 3

H in air samples collected in 2008 and Pahute Mesa air temperature..........3-14 

Figure 3-8 Concentrations of 3

H in air samples collected in 2008 and Pahute Mesa precipitation..............3-14 

Figure 3-9 Annual mean concentrations of 3

H in air samples, 1990–2008 ..................................................3-15 

Figure 3-10 Concentrations of 3

H at Schooner and June–September mean temperatures at Pahute 

Mesa, 1998–2008........................................................................................................................3-15 

Figure 3-11 Gross alpha radioactivity in air samples collected in 2008.........................................................3-17 

Figure 3-12 Gross beta radioactivity in each air sample collected in 2008....................................................3-18 

Figure 4-1 Areas of potential groundwater contamination on the NTS .........................................................4-3 

Figure 4-2 RREMP well monitoring locations sampled on and off the NTS in 2008....................................4-4 

Figure 4-3 Surface water monitoring locations sampled on the NTS in 2008 and in recent years ................4-5 

Figure 4-4 Gross alpha levels in wells that are in and north of Oasis Valley from 2000 to 2008..................4-9 

Figure 4-5 Gross alpha levels in wells in areas west, southwest, and south of the NTS from 2000–2007 ....4-9 

Figure 4-6 Gross beta levels in wells that are in and north of Oasis Valley from 2000 to 2008..................4-10 

Figure 4-7 Gross beta levels in wells in areas west, southwest, and south of the NTS from 2000–2007 ....4-10 

Figure 4-8 Tritium levels in wells that are in and north of Oasis Valley from 2000 to 2008.......................4-11 

Figure 4-9 Tritium levels in wells in areas west, southwest, and south of the NTS from 2000 to 2007......4-11 

Figure 4-10 Gross alpha levels in offsite springs from 2000 to 2007 ............................................................4-12 

Figure 4-11 Gross beta levels in offsite springs from 2000 to 2007 ..............................................................4-13 

Figure 4-12 Tritium concentrations in offsite springs from 2000 to 2007 .....................................................4-13 

Figure 4-13 Gross alpha levels in NTS water supply wells from 2000 to 2008.............................................4-16 

Figure 4-14 Gross beta levels in NTS water supply wells from 2000 to 2008...............................................4-16 

Figure 4-15 Tritium concentrations in NTS water supply wells from 2000 to 2008......................................4-16 

Figure 4-16 Concentrations of tritium in wells with a history of detectable levels........................................4-19 

Figure 4-17 Concentrations of tritium in monitoring wells without histories of elevated levels ...................4-20 

Figure 4-18 Tritium concentration in E Tunnel effluent and ponds from 1999 to 2008 ................................4-21 

Figure 4-19 Concentrations of man-made radionuclides in E Tunnel pond sediments from 2002 to 2007...4-22 

Figure 4-20 Water supply wells and drinking water systems on the NTS .....................................................4-25 

Figure 4-21 Active permitted sewage disposal systems on the NTS..............................................................4-29 

Figure 5-1 Location of TLDs on the NTS......................................................................................................5-3 

Figure 5-2 2008 annual exposure rates on the NTS, by location type, and off the NTS (CEMP stations) ....5-9 

Figure 5-3 2008 annual exposure rates in and around Area 3 RWMS and at background locations ...........5-10 

Figure 5-4 2008 annual exposure rates around Area 5 RWMS and at background locations......................5-10 

Figure 5-5 Trends in direct radiation exposure measured at TLD locations ................................................5-11 
Table of Contents

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 xxiii

Figure 6-1 2008 CEMP Air Surveillance Network ........................................................................................6-2 

Figure 6-2 CEMP station at Mesquite, Nevada..............................................................................................6-3 

Figure 6-3 Historical trend for gross alpha analysis for all CEMP stations ...................................................6-5 

Figure 6-4 Historical trend for gross beta analysis for all CEMP stations .....................................................6-6 

Figure 6-5 Historical trend for TLD analysis for all CEMP stations .............................................................6-8 

Figure 6-6 2008 CEMP water monitoring locations ....................................................................................6-14 

Figure 7-1 Radiological biota monitoring sites on the NTS and sites sampled in 2008................................. 7-3 

Figure 7-2 Plant and animal sampling locations near Schooner Crater in 2008............................................. 7-4 

Figure 7-3 Concentrations of man-made radionuclides in plant samples at varying distances from 

Schooner Crater in 2008 ............................................................................................................... 7-5 

Figure 7-4 Average concentrations of detected man-made radionuclides in plants from 

representative plowshare sites in bedrock or rocky fill at higher elevations ................................ 7-7 

Figure 7-5 Average concentrations of detected man-made radionuclides in animals from representative 

plowshare sites in bedrock or rocky fill at higher elevations........................................................ 7-8 

Figure 8-1 Locations of mourning doves banded on the NTS from 1961–1977 and of bands recovered 

by dove hunters.............................................................................................................................8-3 

Figure 8-2 Comparison of radiation dose to the MEI from the NTS and natural background.......................8-6 

Figure 8-3 Collective population dose within 80 km of NTS emission sources from 1992 to 2004 .............8-7 

Figure 13-1 Desert tortoise distribution and abundance on the NTS .............................................................13-2 

Figure 13-2 Location of biological surveys conducted on the NTS in 2008..................................................13-6 

Figure 13-3 Hatchling western red-tailed skink captured near Schooner, Area 20 .......................................13-7 

Figure 13-4 Western burrowing owl with identification bands .....................................................................13-8 

Figure 13-5 Number of bird deaths recorded on the NTS by year and cause.................................................13-8 

Figure 13-6 Possible adult female (far right) with two yearlings, Dick Adams Cutoff Road, Area 12 .......13-10 

Figure 14-1 Location of UGTA Sub-Project CAUs and model areas............................................................ 14-2 

Figure 14-2 Existing and proposed UGTA Sub-Project drill holes................................................................ 14-3 

Figure 14-3 Results of Phase I Central and Western Pahute Mesa transport model ...................................... 14-6 

Figure 15-1 Annual withdrawals from the NTS, 1951 to present .................................................................. 15-2 

Figure 16-1 Example of a typical MEDA station with a 10-meter tower.......................................................16-1 

Figure 16-2 MEDA station locations on and near the NTS ...........................................................................16-2 

Figure 16-3 Climatological rain gauge network on the NTS .........................................................................16-4 
Table of Contents

xxiv Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

List of Tables 

Table 1-1 Unit prefixes .................................................................................................................................1-8 

Table 1-2 Units of radioactivity ....................................................................................................................1-9 

Table 1-3 Units of radiological dose.............................................................................................................1-9 

Table 1-4 Conversion table for SI units ........................................................................................................1-9 

Table 1-5 Radionuclides and their half-lives ..............................................................................................1-10 

Table 1-6 Metric and U.S. customary unit equivalents...............................................................................1-11 

Table 2-1 NTS compliance status with applicable air quality regulations.................................................... 2-3 

Table 2-2 NTS compliance status with applicable water quality and protection regulations ....................... 2-7 

Table 2-3 NTS compliance status with regulations for radiation protection of the public 

and the environment ................................................................................................................... 2-10 

Table 2-4 NTS compliance status with applicable waste management and environmental 

restoration regulations ................................................................................................................ 2-14 

Table 2-5 NTS compliance status with applicable regulations for hazardous substance control 

and management ......................................................................................................................... 2-18 

Table 2-6 NTS compliance status with P2/WM and renewable energy 

and transportation management regulations ............................................................................... 2-20 

Table 2-7 NTS NEPA compliance activities conducted in 2008 ................................................................ 2-21 

Table 2-8 NTS compliance status with historic preservation regulations................................................... 2-23 

Table 2-9 NTS compliance status with applicable biota and wildlife habitat regulations .......................... 2-26 

Table 2-10 Environmental occurrences in 2008 ........................................................................................... 2-29 

Table 2-11 Environmental permits required for NTS and NTS site facility operations ............................... 2-31 

Table 3-1 Regulatory concentration limits for radionuclides in air ..............................................................3-4 

Table 3-2 Concentrations of 241Am in air samples collected in 2008 ...........................................................3-6 

Table 3-3 Concentrations of 137Csin air samples collected in 2008..............................................................3-7 

Table 3-4 Concentrations of 238Pu in air samples collected in 2008 .............................................................3-8 

Table 3-5 Concentrations of 239+240Pu in air samples collected in 2008........................................................3-9 

Table 3-6 Concentrations of uranium isotopes in air samples collected in 2008........................................3-11 

Table 3-7 Observed values of uranium isotope ratios in 2008....................................................................3-12 

Table 3-8 Expected ratios of uranium isotopes by type of source ..............................................................3-12 

Table 3-9 Concentrations of 3

H in air samples collected in 2008...............................................................3-13 

Table 3-10 Gross alpha radioactivity in air samples collected in 2008.........................................................3-16 

Table 3-11 Gross beta radioactivity in air samples collected in 2008...........................................................3-17 

Table 3-12 Sum of fractions of compliance levels for man-made radionuclides at critical 

receptor samplers........................................................................................................................3-18 

Table 3-13 Radiological atmospheric releases from NTS for 2008..............................................................3-20 

Table 3-14 Tons of criteria air pollutant emissions released on the NTS from permitted facilities 

operational in 2008 .....................................................................................................................3-22 

Table 3-15 Criteria air pollutants and HAPS released on the NTS since 1998.............................................3-23 

Table 3-16 Chemicals released during tests conducted at the Area 5 NPTEC in 2008 ................................3-24 

Table 3-17 Chemicals released during tests conducted at the Test Cell C Facility in 2008 .........................3-25 

Table 3-18 Types and weights of explosives detonated at BEEF in 2008....................................................3-25 

Table 4-1 Gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium analysis results for offsite non-potable NNSA/NSO 

wells in 2008.................................................................................................................................4-8 

Table 4-2 Gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium analysis results for NTS water supply wells in 2008 ........4-14 

Table 4-3 Gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium analysis results for NTS monitoring wells in 2008...........4-18 

Table 4-4 Radiological results for Well ER-12-1 groundwater and ETDS discharge samples ..................4-20 

Table 4-5 Radiological results for sewage lagoon effluent pertaining to permit GNEV 93001 .................4-22 
Table of Contents

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 xxv

Table 4-6 LANL radiochemistry results from UGTA well samples in 2008..............................................4-23 

Table 4-7 Monitoring parameters and sampling design for NTS PWSs and permitted 

water-hauling trucks ...................................................................................................................4-26 

Table 4-8 Water quality analysis results for NTS PWSs and permitted water-hauling trucks ...................4-26 

Table 4-9 Water quality analysis results for NTS sewage lagoon influent waters in 2008.........................4-30 

Table 4-10 Water toxicity analysis results for NTS sewage lagoon pond water in 2008 .............................4-30 

Table 4-11 Nonradiological results for Well ER-12-1 groundwater and ETDS discharge samples.............4-32 

Table 5-1 Annual direct radiation exposure rates measured at TLD locations on the NTS in 2008.............5-5 

Table 5-2 Summary statistics for 2008 annual direct radiation exposure by TLD location type..................5-7 

Table 6-1 Gross alpha results for the CEMP offsite ASN in 2008 ...............................................................6-4 

Table 6-2 Gross beta results for the CEMP offsite ASN in 2008 .................................................................6-5 

Table 6-3 TLD monitoring results for the CEMP offsite ASN in 2008........................................................6-7 

Table 6-4 PIC monitoring results for the CEMP offsite ASN in 2008 .........................................................6-9 

Table 6-5 Average natural background radiation for selected U.S. cities (excluding radon) .......................6-9 

Table 6-6 CEMP water monitoring locations sampled in 2008..................................................................6-12

Table 6-7 Tritium results for CEMP offsite surface water and spring discharges in 2008.........................6-15 

Table 6-8 Tritium results for CEMP offsite wells in 2008..........................................................................6-15 

Table 7-1 NTS animals monitored for radionuclides.................................................................................... 7-2 

Table 7-2 Plant species sampled at Schooner Crater and its control site in 2008......................................... 7-5 

Table 7-3 Concentrations of man-made radionuclides in plants sampled near Schooner Crater in 2008..... 7-6 

Table 7-4 Concentrations of man-made radionuclides in animals sampled near Schooner Crater in 2008.. 7-8 

Table 8-1 Hypothetical dose to a human consuming NTS cottontail rabbits and doves based on 2008 

samples from Schooner Crater......................................................................................................8-4 

Table 8-2 Allowable total residual surface contamination for property released off NTS ...........................8-5 

Table 8-3 Estimated radiological dose to a hypothetical maximally exposed member 

of the general public from 2008 NTS operations..........................................................................8-6 

Table 8-4 Site-specific dose assessment for terrestrial plants and animals sampled in 2008 .......................8-8 

Table 9-1 Key documents required for Area 3 RWMS and Area 5 RWMS operations ...............................9-2 

Table 9-2 Radioactive waste received and disposed at the Area 5 RWMS ..................................................9-4 

Table 9-3 Results of groundwater monitoring of UE5 PW-1, UE5 PW-2, and UE5 PW-3 in 2008 ............9-5 

Table 9-4 Hazardous waste managed at the NTS in 2008 ............................................................................9-6 

Table 9-5 Environmental restoration activities conducted in 2008...............................................................9-8 

Table 9-6 Historic RCRA closure sites.........................................................................................................9-9 

Table 9-7 Remediation sites inspected in 2008...........................................................................................9-10 

Table 9-8 Quantity of solid wastes disposed in NTS landfills in calendar year 2008.................................9-11 

Table 10-1 EPCRA compliance reporting at the NTS in 2008 .....................................................................10-3 

Table 10-2 EPCRA reportable releases of toxic chemicals in 2008 .............................................................10-3 

Table 11-1 Waste reduction activities in 2008..............................................................................................11-3 

Table 11-2 Quantities of waste reduced through P2/WM activities by waste type and year........................11-4 

Table 12-1 Summary data for cultural resources inventories completed in 2008.........................................12-2 

Table 12-2 Reports prepared in 2008............................................................................................................12-3 

Table 13-1 Compliance limits and status for NTS operations in tortoise habitat .........................................13-3 

Table 13-2 Important plants known to occur on or adjacent to the NTS ......................................................13-3 
Table of Contents

xxvi Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

Table 13-3 Important animals known to occur on or adjacent to the NTS ...................................................13-4 

Table 13-4 Records of bird mortality on the NTS in 2008 ...........................................................................13-8 

Table 13-5 Number of individual horses observed on the NTS by age class, gender, and year...................13-9 

Table 14-1 UGTA Sub-Project publications completed in 2008 ..................................................................14-7 

Table 15-1 NTS boreholes plugged in 2008 ................................................................................................. 15-3 

Table 17-1 FY 2008 EMS objectives and targets .........................................................................................17-4 

Table 17-2 FY 2009 proposed objectives and targets...................................................................................17-5 

Table 17-3 FY 2009 NNSA/NSO Executable Plan goals summary .............................................................17-8 

Table 18-1 Summary of field duplicate samples for compliance monitoring in 2008..................................18-8 

Table 18-2 Summary of LCSs for 2008........................................................................................................18-9 

Table 18-3 Summary of laboratory blank samples for 2008.......................................................................18-10 

Table 18-4 Summary of 2008 radiological MAPEP reports.......................................................................18-11 

Table 18-5 Summary of inter-laboratory comparison TLD samples for the subcontract 

dosimetry group in 2008...........................................................................................................18-11 

Table 19-1 Summary of field duplicate samples for oversight monitoring in 2008 .....................................19-4 

Table 19-2 Summary of laboratory control samples (LCS) for oversight monitoring in 2008.....................19-5 

Table 19-3 Summary of laboratory blank samples for oversight monitoring in 2008 ..................................19-5 

Table 19-4 Summary of inter-laboratory comparison samples of the subcontract radiochemistry 

laboratory for oversight monitoring in 2008...............................................................................19-6 

Table 19-5 Summary of inter-laboratory comparison TLD samples of the subcontract 

dosimetry group for oversight monitoring in 2008.....................................................................19-6 
Introduction

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 1-1

1.0 Introduction and Helpful Information 

1.1 Site Location 

The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) 

directs the management and operation of the Nevada Test Site (NTS), which is located in Nye County in southcentral Nevada (Figure 1-1). The southeast corner of the NTS is about 88 kilometers (km) (55 miles [mi]) 

northwest of the center of Las Vegas in Clark County. By highway, it is about 105 km (65 mi) from the center of 

Las Vegas to Mercury. Mercury, located at the southern end of the NTS, is the main base camp for worker 

housing and administrative operations for the NTS. 

The NTS encompasses about 3,561 square kilometers (km2

) (1,375 square miles [mi2]). It varies from 46 to 

56 km (28 to 35 mi) in width from west to east and from 64 to 88 km (40 to 55 mi) from north to south. The NTS 

is surrounded on all sides by federal lands (Figure 1-1). It is bordered on the southwest corner by the Yucca 

Mountain Project Area, on the west and north by the Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR), on the east by an 

area used by both the NTTR and the Desert National Wildlife Range, and on the south by Bureau of Land 

Management lands. The combination of the NTTR and the NTS represents one of the larger unpopulated land 

areas in the United States, comprising some 14,200 km2

 (5,470 mi2). 

1.2 Environmental Setting 

The NTS is located in the southern part of the Great Basin, the northern-most sub-province of the Basin and 

Range Physiographic Province. The NTS terrain is typical of much of the Basin and Range Physiographic 

Province, characterized by generally north-south trending mountain ranges and intervening valleys. These 

mountain ranges and valleys, however, are modified on the NTS by very large volcanic calderas (Figure 1-2). 

The principal valleys within the NTS are Frenchman Flat, Yucca Flat, and Jackass Flats (Figure 1-2). Both Yucca 

and Frenchman Flat are topographically closed and contain dry lake beds, or playas, at their lowest elevations. 

Jackass Flats is topographically open, and surface water from this basin flows off the NTS via the Fortymile 

Wash. The dominant highlands of the NTS are Pahute Mesa and Rainier Mesa (high volcanic plateaus), Timber 

Mountain (a resurgent dome of the Timber Mountain caldera complex), and Shoshone Mountain. In general, the 

slopes of the highland areas are steep and dissected, and the slopes in the lowland areas are gentle and less eroded. 

The lowest elevation on the NTS is 823 meters (m) (2,700 feet [ft]) in Jackass Flats in the southeast, and the 

highest elevation is 2,341 m (7,680 ft) on Rainier Mesa in the north-central region. 

The topography of the NTS has been altered by historic U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) actions, particularly 

underground nuclear testing. The principal effect of testing has been the creation of numerous collapse sinks 

(craters) in Yucca Flat basin and a lesser number of craters on Pahute and Rainier Mesas. Shallow detonations 

that created surface disruptions were also performed during Project Plowshare to determine the potential uses of 

nuclear devices for large-scale excavation. 

The reader is directed to Attachment A: Nevada Test Site Description, a separate file on the compact disc of this 

report, where the geology, hydrology, climatology, ecology, and cultural resources of the NTS are described. 

1.3 Site History 

The history of the NTS, as well as its current missions, directs the focus and design of the environmental monitoring and surveillance activities on and near the site. Between 1940 and 1950, the area now known as the NTS 

was under the jurisdiction of Nellis Air Force Base and was part of the Nellis Bombing and Gunnery Range. The 

NTS was established in 1950 to be the primary location for testing the nation’s nuclear explosive devices and supported nuclear testing from 1951 to 1992. Fact sheets on many of the historical tests and projects mentioned 

below can be found at <http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/factsheets.aspx>. The NTS currently conducts only 

subcritical nuclear experiments. 
Introduction

1-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

Figure 1-1. NTS vicinity map
Introduction

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 1-3

Figure 1-2. Major topographic features and calderas of the NTS 
Introduction

1-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

Atmospheric Tests – 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, dropped from an aircraft, or placed on a rocket. Several tests were categorized as “safety 

experiments” and “storage-transportation tests,” involving the destruction of a nuclear device with non-nuclear 

explosives. Some of these tests resulted in the dispersion of plutonium in the test vicinity. One of these test areas 

lies just north of the NTS boundary at the south end of the NTTR, and four others involving storage-transportation 

tests are at the north end of the NTTR. These test areas have been monitored for radionuclides in the past 

(1996–2000) in support of remediation projects, two of which were completed. The three remaining sites will be 

monitored again once restoration of these sites begins. All nuclear device tests are listed in United States Nuclear 

Tests, July 1945 through September 1992 (U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office, 2000). 

Underground Tests – The first underground test, a cratering test, was conducted in 1951. The first totally contained underground test was in 1957. Testing was discontinued during a bilateral moratorium that began 

October 31, 1958, but was resumed in September 1961 after the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics resumed 

nuclear testing. After 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. From 1951 to 1992, a total of 828 

underground nuclear tests were conducted at the NTS. Approximately one-third of these tests was detonated near 

or below the water table; this has resulted in the contamination of groundwater in some areas. In 1996, DOE, the 

U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), and the State of Nevada entered into a Federal Facility Agreement and 

Consent Order, which established Corrective Action Units on the NTS that delineated and defined areas of 

concern for groundwater contamination. 

Cratering Tests – Five earth-cratering (shallow-burial) tests were conducted from 1962 through 1968 as part of 

the Plowshare Program that explored peaceful uses of nuclear explosives. The first and highest yield Plowshare 

crater test, Sedan (U.S. Public Health Service, 1963), was detonated at the northern end of Yucca Flat on the NTS. 

The second-highest yield crater test was Schooner, located in the northwest corner of the NTS. From these tests, 

mixed fission products, tritium, and plutonium were entrained in the soil ejected from the craters and deposited on 

the ground surrounding the craters. 

Other Tests – Other nuclear-related experiments at the NTS have included the BREN [Bare Reactor Experiment - 

Nevada] series in the early 1960s conducted in Area 4. These tests were performed with a 14-million electron 

volt neutron generator mounted on a 465-m (1,527-ft) steel tower to produce neutron and gamma radiation for the 

purpose of estimating the radiation doses received by survivors of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The tower was 

moved in 1966 to Area 25 and used for conducting Operation HENRE [High-Energy Neutron Reactions 

Experiment], jointly funded by the DoD and the Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) to provide information for 

the AEC’s Division of Biology and Medicine. From 1959 through 1973, a series of open-air nuclear reactor, 

nuclear engine, and nuclear furnace tests were conducted in Area 25, and a series of tests with a nuclear ramjet 

engine were conducted in Area 26. Erosion of metal cladding on the reactor fuel released some fuel particles that 

caused negligible deposition of radionuclides on the ground. Most of the radiation released from these tests was 

gaseous in the form of radio-iodines, radio-xenons, and radio-kryptons. 

1.4 Site Mission 

NNSA/NSO directs the management and operation of the NTS and six sites across the nation. Los Alamos 

National Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and Sandia National Laboratories are the 

principal organizations that sponsor and implement the nuclear weapons programs at the NTS. National Security 

Technologies, LLC, is the current Management and Operating (M&O) contractor accountable for the successful 

execution of work and ensuring that work is performed in compliance with environmental regulations. The six 

sites include the North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF), Remote Sensing Laboratory (RSL)–Nellis, RSL–Andrews, 

Livermore Operations, Los Alamos Operations, and Special Technologies Laboratory. These sites all provide 

support to enhance the NTS as a site for weapons experimentation and nuclear test readiness. The three major 

NTS missions include National Security, Environmental Management, and Stewardship of the NTS. The 

programs that support these missions include Stockpile Stewardship, Homeland Security, Test Readiness, 

Environmental Restoration, Waste Management, and Facilities and Infrastructure. 
Introduction

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 1-5

1.5 Primary Facilities and Activities 

NTS activities in 2008 continued to be diverse, with the primary one being to help ensure that the U.S. stockpile 

of nuclear weapons remains safe and reliable. Facilities that support this national security mission include the 

U1a Facility, Big Explosives Experimental Facility, Device Assembly Facility, and Joint Actinide Shock Physics 

Experimental Research (JASPER) Facility (Figure 1-3). The Radiological/Nuclear Countermeasures Test and 

Evaluation Complex (RNCTEC) (Figure 1-3) is a new facility to support the Homeland Security Program, which 

became operational in 2009. Facilities that support the Waste Management Program include the Area 5 

Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC) and the Area 3 Radioactive Waste Management Site 

(RWMS) (Figure 1-3). Other NTS activities include demilitarization activities; controlled spills of hazardous 

material at the Nonproliferation Test and Evaluation Complex (NPTEC) (Figure 1-3); remediation of industrial 

sites; processing of waste destined for the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad, New Mexico, or the Idaho 

National Laboratory in Idaho Falls, Idaho; disposal of radioactive and mixed waste; and environmental research. 

Land use by each of the NTS missions occurs within zones designated by the land-use map shown in Figure 1-4. 

It is the resultant Record of Decision land-use map for the 1996 programmatic NTS Environmental Impact 

Statement (DOE, 1996), as depicted in the NTS Resource Management Plan (U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada 

Operations Office [DOE/NV], 1998). 

1.6 Scope of Environmental Report 

This report summarizes data and the compliance status of the environmental protection and monitoring programs 

for calendar year (CY) 2008 at the NTS and its two support facilities, the NLVF and RSL-Nellis. This report also 

addresses environmental restoration (ER) projects conducted at the Tonopah Test Range (TTR) (see Figure 1-1). 

Through a Memorandum of Agreement, NNSA/NSO is responsible for the oversight of TTR ER projects, and the 

Sandia Site Office of NNSA (NNSA/SSO) has oversight of all other TTR activities. NNSA/SSO produces the 

TTR annual site environmental reports (e.g., Sandia National Laboratories, 2008), which are posted at

http://www.sandia.gov/news/publications/environmental/index.html. 

NTS Missions and Programs 

National Security 

Stockpile Stewardship Program – Conducts high-hazard operations in support of defense-related nuclear and 

national security experiments. 

Homeland Security Program – Provides support facilities, training facilities, and capabilities for government 

agencies involved in counterterrorism activities, emergency response, first responders, national security 

technology development, and nonproliferation technology development. 

Test Readiness Program – Maintains the capability to resume underground nuclear weapons testing, if directed. 

Environmental Management 

Environmental Restoration Program – Characterizes and remediates the environmental legacy of nuclear 

weapons and other testing at the NTS and at offsite locations, and develops and deploys technologies that 

enhance environmental restoration. 

Waste Management – Manages and safely disposes of low-level waste received from DOE- and DoD-approved 

facilities throughout the U.S. and mixed low-level waste generated in Nevada by NNSA/NSO, and safely 

manages and characterizes hazardous and transuranic wastes for offsite disposal. 

Stewardship of the NTS 

Facilities and Infrastructure – Maintains the buildings, roads, utilities, and facilities required to support all NTS 

programs and to provide a safe environment for NTS workers. 
Introduction

1-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

 

Figure 1-3. NTS operational areas, principal facilities, and past nuclear testing areas 
Introduction

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 1-7

Figure 1-4. NTS land-use map (Source: DOE/NV, 1998) 
Introduction

1-8 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

1.7 Populations near the NTS 

The population of the area surrounding the NTS (see Figure 1-1) is predominantly rural. Population estimates for 

Nevada communities are provided by the Nevada State Demographer’s Office (Hardcastle, 2009). The 2008 

population estimate for Nye County is 47,370, and the largest Nye County community is Pahrump (38,882), 

located approximately 80 km (50 mi) south of the NTS Control Point facility near the center of the NTS. Other 

Nye County communities include Tonopah (2,628), Amargosa (1,521), Beatty (1,024), Round Mountain (850), 

Gabbs (332), and Manhattan (138). Lincoln County to the east of the NTS includes a few small communities 

including Caliente (1,089), Pioche (791), Panaca (595), and Alamo (427). Clark County, southeast of the NTS, is 

the major population center of Nevada and has an estimated population of 1,867,716. The total annual population 

estimate for all Nevada counties, cities, and unincorporated towns is 2,783,733. 

The Mojave Desert of California, which includes Death Valley National Park, lies along the southwestern border 

of Nevada. This area is still predominantly rural; however, tourism at Death Valley National Park swells the 

population to more than 5,000 on any particular day during holiday periods when the weather is mild. 

The extreme southwestern region of Utah is more developed than the adjacent portion of Nevada. The population 

estimates for Utah communities are based on projections for the year 2006 by the Utah Population Estimates 

Committee (2009) of the Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget. The largest community is St. George, 

located 220 km (137 mi) east of the NTS, with an estimated population of 67,614. The next largest town, Cedar 

City, is located 280 km (174 mi) east-northeast of the NTS and has an estimated population of 25,665. 

The 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 (103 mi) south-southeast of the NTS, with an estimated population of 41,187, and Kingman, 280 km 

(174 mi) southeast of the NTS, with an estimated population of 28,823 (Arizona Workforce Informer, 2009). 

1.8 Understanding Data in this Report

1.8.1 Scientific Notation 

Scientific notation is used in this report to express very large or very small numbers. A very small number is 

expressed with a negative exponent, for example 2.0 x 10-5. To convert this number from scientific notation to a 

more traditional number, the decimal point must be moved left by the number of places equal to the exponent 

(5 in this case). The number thus becomes 0.00002. 

Very large numbers are expressed in scientific notation with a positive exponent. The decimal point should be 

moved to the right by the number of places equal to the exponent. The number 1,000,000,000 could be presented 

in scientific notation as 1.0 x 109

. 

1.8.2 Unit Prefixes 

Units for very small and very large numbers are commonly 

expressed with a prefix. The prefix signifies the amount of 

the given unit. For example, the prefix k, or kilo-, means 

1,000 of a given unit. Thus 1 kg (kilogram) is 1,000 g 

(grams). Other prefixes used in this report are listed in 

Table 1-1. 

Table 1-1. Unit prefixes 

Prefix Abbreviation Meaning 

mega- M 1,000,000 (1 x 106) 

kilo- k 1,000 (1 x 103) 

centi- c 0.01 (1 x 10-2) 

milli- m 0.001 (1 x 10-3) 

micro- μ 0.000001 (1 x 10 -6) 

nano- n 0.000,000,1 (1 x 10-9) 

pico- p 0.000,000,000,0001 (1 x 10-12) 
Introduction

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 1-9

1.8.3 Units of Radioactivity 

Much of this report deals with levels of radioactivity in various 

environmental media. The basic unit of radioactivity used in this 

report is the curie (Ci) (Table 1-2). The curie describes the amount of 

radioactivity present, and amounts are usually expressed in terms of 

fractions of curies in a given mass or volume (e.g., picocuries per liter). 

The curie is historically defined as the rate of nuclear disintegrations 

that occur in 1 g of the radionuclide radium-226, which is 37 billion 

nuclear disintegrations per second. For any other radionuclide, 1 Ci is 

the quantity of the radionuclide that decays at this same rate. Nuclear 

disintegrations produce spontaneous emissions of alpha or beta 

particles, gamma radiation, or combinations of these. 

1.8.4 Radiological Dose Units 

The amount of ionizing radiation energy absorbed by a living 

organism is expressed in terms of radiological dose. Radiological 

dose in this report is usually written in terms of effective dose 

equivalent and reported numerically in units of millirem (mrem) 

(Table 1-3). Millirem is a term that relates ionizing radiation to 

biological effect or risk to humans. A dose of 1 mrem has a 

biological effect similar to the dose received from an approximate 

one-day exposure to natural background radiation. An acute (shortterm) dose of 100,000 to 400,000 mrem can cause radiation sickness 

in humans. An acute dose of 400,000 to 500,000 mrem, if left 

untreated, results in death approximately 50 percent of the time. Exposure to lower amounts of radiation 

(1,000 mrem or less) produces no immediate observable effects, but long-term (delayed) effects are possible. The 

average person in the United States receives an annual dose of approximately 300 mrem from exposure to 

naturally produced radiation. Medical and dental X-rays, air travel, and tobacco smoking add to this total. 

The unit “rad,” for radiation absorbed dose, is also used in this report. The rad is a measure of the energy 

absorbed by any material, whereas a “rem,” for roentgen equivalent man, relates to both the amount of radiation 

energy absorbed by humans and its consequence. A roentgen (R) is a measure of radiation exposure. Generally 

speaking, 1 R of exposure will result in an effective dose equivalent of 1 rem. Additional information on 

radiation and dose terminology can be found in the Glossary (Appendix B). 

1.8.5 International System of Units for Radioactivity and Dose 

In some instances in this report, radioactivity and radiological 

dose values are expressed in other units in addition to Ci and 

rem. These units are the becquerel (Bq) and the sievert (Sv), 

respectively. The Bq and Sv belong to the International 

System of Units (SI), and their inclusion in this report is 

mandated by DOE. SI units are the internationally accepted 

units and may eventually be the standard for reporting both 

radioactivity and radiation dose in the United States. One Bq 

is equivalent to one nuclear disintegration per second. 

The unit of radiation absorbed dose (rad) has a corresponding 

SI unit called the gray (Gy). The roentgen measure of 

radiation exposure has no SI equivalent. Table 1-4 provides 

the multiplication factors for converting to and from SI units. 

Table 1-2. Units of radioactivity 

Symbol Name 

Ci curie 

cpm counts per minute 

mCi millicurie (1 x 10-3 Ci) 

μCi microcurie (1 x 10-6 Ci) 

nCi nanocurie (1 x 10-9 Ci) 

pCi picocurie (1 x 10-12 Ci) 

aCi attocurie (1 x 10-18 Ci) 

Table 1-3. Units of radiological dose 

Symbol Name 

mrad millirad (1 x 10-3 rad) 

mrem millirem (1 x 10-3 rem) 

R roentgen 

mR milliroentgen (1 x 10-3 R) 

μR microroentgen (1 x 10-6 R) 

Table 1-4. Conversion table for SI units 

To Convert 

From To Multiply By

becquerel (Bq) picocurie (pCi) 27 

curie (Ci) becquerel (Bq) 3.7 x 1010 

gray (Gy) rad 100 

mrem msievert (mSv) 0.01 

msievert (mSv) mrem 100 

picocurie (pCi) becquerel (Bq) 0.03704 

rad gray (Gy) 0.01 

sievert (Sv) rem 100 
Introduction

1-10 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

1.8.6 Radionuclide Nomenclature 

Radionuclides are frequently expressed with the one- or two-letter 

chemical symbol for the element. Radionuclides may have many 

different isotopes, which are shown by a superscript to the left of 

the symbol. This number is the atomic weight of the isotope (the 

number of protons and neutrons in the nucleus of the atom). 

Radionuclide symbols, many of which are used in this report, are 

shown in Table 1-5 along with the half-life of each radionuclide. 

The half-life is the time required for one-half of the radioactive 

atoms in a given amount of material to decay. For example, after 

one half-life, half of the original atoms will have decayed; after 

two half-lives, three-fourths of the original atoms will have 

decayed; and after three half- lives, seven-eighths of the original 

atoms will have decayed, and so on. The notation 236+238Ra and 

similar notations in this report (e.g., 239+240Pu) are used when the 

analytical method does not distinguish between the isotopes, but 

reports the total amount of both. 

1.8.7 Units of Measurement 

Both metric and non-metric units of measurement are used in this 

report. Metric system and U.S. customary units and their respective equivalents are shown in Table 1-6 on the following page. 

1.8.8 Measurement Variability 

There is always uncertainty associated with the measurement of 

environmental contaminants. For radioactivity, a major source of 

uncertainty is the inherent randomness of radioactive decay events. 

Uncertainty in analytical measurements is also the consequence of 

variability related to collecting and analyzing the samples. This 

variability is associated with reading or recording the result, 

handling or processing the sample, calibrating the counting 

instrument, and numerical rounding. 

The uncertainty of a measurement is denoted by following the 

result with an uncertainty value which is preceded by the plus-orminus symbol, ±. This uncertainty value gives information on 

what the measurement might be if the same sample were analyzed 

again under identical conditions. The uncertainty value implies 

that approximately 95 percent of the time, the average of many 

measurements would give a value somewhere between the reported 

value minus the uncertainty value and the reported value plus the 

uncertainty value. 

If the reported concentration of a given constituent is smaller than 

its associated uncertainty (e.g., 40 ± 200), then the sample may not 

contain that constituent. Such low concentration values are 

considered to be below detection, meaning the concentration of the 

constituent in the sample is so low that it is undetected by the 

method and/or instrument. 

Table 1-5. Radionuclides and their half-lives 

Symbol Radionuclide Half-Life (a)

241Am americium-241 432.2 yr 7

Be beryllium-7 53.44 d 

14C carbon-14 5,730 yr 

134Cs cesium-134 2.1 yr 137Cs cesium-137 30 yr 51Cr chromium-51 27.7 d 

60Co cobalt-60 5.3 yr 

152Eu europium-152 13.3 yr 154Eu europium-154 8.8 yr 155Eu europium-155 5 yr 3

H tritium 12.35 yr 

129I iodine-129 1.6 x 107

 yr 131I iodine-131 8 d 40K potassium-40 1.3 x 108

yr 85Kr krypton-85 107

 yr 212Pb lead-212 10.6 hr 238Pu plutonium-238 87.7 hr 239Pu plutonium-239 2.4 x 104

 yr 240Pu plutonium-240 6.5 x 103

 yr 241Pu plutonium-241 14.4 yr 226Ra radium-226 1.62 x 103

 yr 228Ra radium-228 5.75 yr 220Rn radon-220 56 s 222Rn radon-222 3.8 d 103Ru ruthenum-103 39.3 d 106Ru ruthenum-106 368.2 d 125Sb antimony-125 2.8 yr 113Sn tin-113 115 d 90Sr strontium-90 29.1 yr 

99Tc technetium-99 2.1 x 105

 yr 232Th thorium-232 1.4 x 1010 yr 

U (b) uranium total - - - (c)

234U uranium-234 2.4 x 105

 yr 235U uranium-235 7 x 108

 hr 238U uranium-238 4.5 x 109

 yr 65Zn zinc-65 243.9 d 

95Zr zirconium-95 63.98 d 

(a) From Shleien, 1992 

(b) Total uranium may also be indicated by 

 U-natural (U-nat) or U-mass 

(c) Natural uranium is a mixture dominated by 

 238U; thus, the half-life is approximately 

 4.5 x 109

 years

 
Introduction

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 1-11

 Table 1-6. Metric and U.S. customary unit equivalents 

1.8.9 Mean and Standard Deviation 

The mean of a set of data is the usual average of those data. The standard deviation (SD) of sample data relates to 

the variation around the mean of a set of individual sample results; it is defined as the square root of the average 

squared difference of individual data values from the mean. This variation includes both measurement variability 

and actual variation between monitoring periods (weeks, months, or quarters, depending on the particular 

analysis). The sample mean and standard deviation are estimates of the average and the variability that would be 

seen in a large number of repeated measurements. If the distribution shape were “normal” (i.e., shaped as ), 

about 67 percent of the measurements would be within the mean ± SD, and 95 percent would be within the 

mean ± 2 SD. 

1.8.10 Standard Error of the Mean 

Just as individual values are accompanied by counting uncertainties, mean values (averages) are accompanied by 

uncertainty. The standard deviation of the distribution of sample mean values is known as the standard error of 

the mean (SE). The SE conveys how accurate an estimate the mean value is based on the samples that were 

collected and analyzed. The ± value presented to the right of a mean value is equal to 2 x SE (2 multiplied by the 

SE). The ± value implies that approximately 95 percent of the time the average of many calculated means will 

fall somewhere between the reported value minus the 2 x SE value and the reported value plus the 2 x SE value. 

Metric Unit 

U.S. Customary 

Equivalent Unit U.S. Customary Unit Metric Equivalent Unit 

Length 

 1 centimeter (cm) 0.39 inches (in.) 1 inch (in.) 2.54 centimeters (cm) 

 1 millimeter (mm) 0.039 inches (in.) 25.4 millimeters (mm) 

 1 meter (m) 3.28 feet (ft) 1 foot (ft) 0.3048 meters (m) 

 1.09 yards (yd) 1 yard (yd) 0.9144 meters (m) 

1 kilometer (km) 0.62 miles (mi) 1 mile (mi) 1.6093 kilometers (km) 

Volume 

 1 liter (L) 0.26 gallons (gal) 1 gallon (gal) 3.7853 liters (L) 

 1 cubic meter (m3) 35.32 cubic feet (ft3) 1 cubic foot (ft3) 0.028 cubic meters (m3) 

 1.35 cubic yards (yd3) 1 cubic yard (yd3) 0.765 cubic meters (m3) 

Weight 

 1 gram (g) 0.035 ounces (oz) 1 ounce (oz) 28.6 gram (g) 

 1 kilogram (kg) 2.21 pounds (lb) 1 pound (lb) 0.373 kilograms (kg) 

 1 metric ton (mton) 1.10 short ton (2,000 lb) 1 short ton (2,000 lb) 0.90718 metric ton (mton)

Geographic area 

 1 hectare 2.47 acres 1 acre 0.40 hectares 

Radioactivity 

 1 becquerel (Bq) 2.7 x 10–11 curie (Ci) 1 curie (Ci) 3.7 x 10–10 becquerel (Bq) 

Radiation dose 

 1 rem 0.01 sievert (Sv) 1 sievert (Sv) 100 rem 

Temperature 

 °C = (°F – 32)/1.8 °F = (°C x 1.8) + 32 
Introduction

1-12 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

1.8.11 Median, Maximum, and Minimum Values 

Median, maximum, and minimum values are reported in some sections of this report. A median value is the 

middle value when all the values are arranged in order of increasing or decreasing magnitude. For example, the 

median value in the series of numbers, 1 2 3 3 4 5 5 5 6, is 4. The maximum value would be 6 and the minimum 

value would be 1. 

1.8.12 Less Than (<) Symbol 

The “less than” (<) symbol is used to indicate that the measured value is smaller than the number given. For 

example, <0.09 would indicate that the measured value is less than 0.09. In this report, < is often used in 

reporting the amounts of nonradiological contaminants in a sample when the measured amounts are less than the 

analytical laboratory’s reporting limit for that contaminant in that sample. For example, if a measurement of 

benzene in sewage lagoon pond water is reported as <0.005 milligrams per liter, this implies that the measured 

amount of benzene present, if any, was not found to be above this level, given the sample and analysis methods 

used. For some constituents the notation “ND” is also used to indicate that the constituent in question was not 

detected. For organic constituents, in particular, this could mean that the compound could not be clearly 

identified, the level (if any) was lower than the reporting limit, or (as often happens) both. The measurements of 

radionuclide concentrations are reported whether or not they are below the usual reporting limit (the minimum 

detectable concentration [see Glossary, Appendix B]). 

1.8.13 Negative Radionuclide Concentrations 

There is always a small amount of natural radiation in the environment. The instruments used in the laboratory to 

measure radioactivity in environmental media are sensitive enough to measure the natural, or background, 

radiation along with any contaminant radiation in a sample. To obtain an unbiased measure of the contaminant 

level in a sample, the natural, or background, radiation level must be subtracted from the total amount of 

radioactivity measured by an instrument. Because of the randomness of radioactive emissions and the very low 

concentrations of some contaminants, it is possible to obtain a background measurement that is larger than the 

actual contaminant measurement. When the larger background measurement is subtracted from the smaller 

contaminant measurement, a negative result is generated. The negative results are reported because they are 

useful when conducting statistical evaluations of the data. 

1.8.14 Understanding Graphic Information 

Some of the data graphed in this report are plotted using logarithmic (log) scales. Log scales are used in plots 

where the values are of widely different magnitudes at different locations and/or different times. Log scales use 

equal distances to represent equal ratios of values, whereas in linear scales equal distances represent equal 

differences in values. For example, a log scale would use the same distance to represent a change from 2 to 4 as a 

change from 10 to 20 or a change from 700 to 1,400. 

For example, Figure 1-5 is the same as Figure 3-9 in Chapter 3, which shows long-term trends in annual tritium 

(

3

H) concentrations in air samples at locations with extended histories, using the original scale. In order to allow 

the Schooner data to be represented on the same plot as the data from the other stations with lower concentrations, 

the Schooner data are divided by 10 and the reference line is one percent of the compliance level (CL) (see 

Glossary, Appendix B). The alternate presentation in Figure 1-6 uses a log scale, which allows all stations to be 

represented at their actual measured values and the actual CL to be included. 

 
Introduction

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 1-13

3

H Annual Means

Data before 1999 adjusted to compensate

 for change in sampling methods

0

10

20

30

40

50

1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

Year

x 10-6 pCi/mL

Area 1

Area 5

Area 6, 9, 1 0, and 1 2

Area 1 5, 1 6, and 1 8

Schooner x 0.1

Area 23 and 25

1 % of CL

Figure 1-5. Data plotted using a linear scale 

3

H Annual Means

Data before 1999 adjusted to compensate

 for change in sampling methods

0.1

1

10

100

1000

10000

1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

Year

10-6 pCi/mL

Area 1

Area 5

Areas 6, 9, 1 0, 12

Areas 1 5, 1 6, 18

Schooner

Areas 23 and 25

CL

Figure 1-6. Data plotted using a log scale 
Introduction

1-14 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Compliance Summary

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 2-1 

2.0 Compliance Summary 

Environmental regulations pertinent to operations on the Nevada Test Site (NTS), the North Las Vegas Facility 

(NLVF), and the Remote Sensing Laboratory (RSL)–Nellis are listed in this chapter. They include federal and 

state laws, state permit requirements, Executive Orders (EOs), U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) orders, and 

state agreements. They dictate how the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration 

Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) conducts operations on and off the NTS to ensure the protection of the 

environment and the public. The regulations are grouped by topic, and each topical subsection contains a 

summary description of noncompliance incidents, if any, a listing of compliance reports generated during or for 

the reporting year, and a compliance status table. Each table lists those measures or actions that are tracked or 

performed to ensure compliance with a regulation. A description of the field monitoring efforts, actions, and 

results that support the data in each table is found in subsequent chapters of this document, as noted in the 

“Reference Section” column of each table. At the end of this chapter, Table 2-11 presents the list of all 

environmental permits issued for the NTS and the two Las Vegas area facilities. 

2.1 Air Quality 

2.1.1 Applicable Regulations 

Clean Air Act (CAA), National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) – Title III of 

the CAA establishes NESHAP to control those pollutants that might reasonably be anticipated to result in either 

an increase in mortality or an increase in serious irreversible or incapacitating but reversible illness. Industrywide national emissions standards were developed for 22 of 189 designated hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). 

Radionuclides and asbestos are among the 22 HAPs for which standards were established. NNSA/NSO NESHAP 

compliance activities are limited to radionuclide air monitoring and reporting/notification of asbestos abatement. 

CAA, National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) – Title I of the CAA establishes the NAAQS to 

limit levels of pollutants in the air for six “criteria” pollutants: sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, 

ozone, lead, and particulate matter. Title V of the CAA authorizes states to implement permit programs to 

regulate emissions of these pollutants. At the NTS, there is one main air quality permit. The permit’s emission 

limits (except ozone and lead) are based on published emission values for other similar industries and on 

operational data specific to the NTS. Emissions from operations at the NTS are calculated and submitted each 

year to the State. Lead emissions are reported to the State as part of the total HAPs emissions. The NTS air 

permit also specifies visible emissions (opacity) limits for equipment/facilities as well as requirements for 

recordkeeping, performance testing, opacity field monitoring, particulate monitoring, and monitoring personnel 

certification. NLVF and RSL-Nellis operate under air quality permits that require annual reporting of hours of 

operation, emission quantities of criteria pollutants and HAPs, and summaries of significant malfunctions and 

repairs. 

CAA, New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) –Title I of the CAA establishes the NSPS to set minimum 

nationwide emission limitations for air pollutants from various industrial categories of facilities. NSPS pollutants 

are acid mist, carbon monoxide, particulate matter, fluorides, hydrogen sulfide in acid gas, lead, nitrogen oxides, 

sulfur oxides, total reduced sulfur, and volatile organic compounds. The NSPS impose more stringent standards, 

including a reduced allowance of visible emissions (opacity), than under NAAQS. On the NTS, some screens, 

conveyor belts, and bulk fuel storage tanks are subject to the NSPS, which Nevada regulates under Nevada 

Administrative Code (NAC) 445B. No offsite facilities are subject to the NSPS. 

CAA, Stratospheric Ozone Protection – Title VI of the CAA establishes production limits and a schedule for 

the phase-out of ozone-depleting substances (ODS). The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has 

established regulations for ODS recycling during servicing and disposal of air conditioning and refrigeration 
Compliance Summary

2-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

equipment, for repairing leaks in such equipment, and for safe ODS disposal. While there are no reporting 

requirements, recordkeeping to document the usage of ODS and technician certification is required, and the EPA 

may conduct random inspections to determine compliance. At the NTS, ODS are mainly used in air conditioning 

units in vehicles, buildings, refrigerators, drinking water fountains, vending machines, and laboratory equipment. 

Other Air Quality Requirements –Title V, Part 70 of the CAA requires owners or operators of air emission 

sources to pay annual state fees. Fees are based on a source’s “potential to emit” and range from $500 for a 

Class II source that may emit less than 25 tons per year of any regulated air pollutant except carbon monoxide, to 

a maximum of $5,000 per year for a Class II source that may emit 80–100 tons or more of any regulated air 

pollutant except carbon monoxide. NTS operations are subject to these fees. In addition, NNSA/NSO must allow 

Nevada’s Bureau of Air Pollution Control (BAPC) to conduct inspections of permitted NTS facilities and allow 

the Clark County Department of Air Quality and Environmental Management (DAQEM) to conduct inspections 

of NLVF and RSL-Nellis permitted equipment. 

Section VII of the NTS Class II Air Quality Operating Permit requires implementation of an ongoing program to 

control fugitive dust using the best practicable methods. 

Nevada regulations prohibit the open burning of combustible refuse and other materials unless specifically 

exempted by an authorized variance (NAC 445B.22067). At the NTS, Open Burn Variances are routinely 

obtained for various fire training and emergency management exercises. 

2.1.2 Compliance Issues 

In November 2008, NNSA/NSO received a Letter of Noncompliance from the Clark County DAQEM. DAQEM 

personnel inspected the RSL-Nellis facility and determined that two cooling towers were being operated without 

an air permit. An application to modify the permit to add the cooling towers was submitted to Clark County 

DAQEM on December 16, 2008 (see Appendix A, Section A.2.2). 

2.1.3 Compliance Reports 

The following reports were generated for 2008 NTS operations in compliance with air quality regulations: 

• National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Calendar Year 2008, submitted to EPA 

Region IX (Warren and Grossman, 2009) 

• Annual Asbestos Abatement Notification Form, submitted to EPA Region IX 

• Calendar Year 2008 Actual Production/Emissions Reporting Form, submitted to the Nevada Division of 

Environmental Protection (NDEP) 

• Quarterly Class II Air Quality Reports, submitted to NDEP 

• Nonproliferation Test and Evaluation Complex (NPTEC) Pre-test and Post-test Reports, submitted to NDEP 

The following reports were generated for 2008 operations at offsite facilities in compliance with air quality 

regulations: 

• Clark County Air Emission Inventory for North Las Vegas Facility, submitted to Clark County DAQEM 

• Clark County Air Emissions Inventory for Remote Sensing Laboratory, submitted to Clark County DAQEM 
 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 2-3 

Table 2-1. NTS compliance status with applicable air quality regulations 

Compliance Measure/Actions Compliance Limit 2008 Complian

Clean Air Act – NESHAP 

Annual dose equivalent from all radioactive air emissions 10 mrem/yr (b) 

(0.1 mSv/yr) 

Complia

Notify EPA Region IX if the number of linear feet (ft) or square feet (ft2) of 

asbestos to be removed from a facility exceeds limit 

260 linear ft or 160 ft2 (c) Complia

Maintain asbestos abatement plans, data records, activity/ maintenance records For up to 75 years Complia

Clean Air Act – NAAQS 

Submit quarterly reports of calculated emissions at the NTS to the State Due 30 days after end of 

quarter 

Complia

Submit annual report of calculated emissions at the NTS to the State Due March 1 Complia

Tons of emissions of each criteria pollutant produced by permitted equipment/facility at the NTS based on calculations 

PTE (d) varies Complia

Conduct and pass performance emission tests on permitted equipment Test after 100 hours of operation, emission limits vary CompliaNumber of gallons of fuel used, hours of operation, and rate of aggregate/concrete production by permitted equipment/facility at the NTS 

Limit varies (e) Complia

Conduct opacity readings from permitted equipment/facility Quarterly CompliaPercent opacity of emissions from permitted equipment/facility at the NTS 20% CompliaConduct particulate monitoring for NPTEC and BEEF releases/detonations Per test CompliaSubmit test plans/final analysis reports for each chemical release test at NPTEC or elsewhere on NTS 

Test plans due ≥ 30 days prior 

to test. Final reports due 

≤ 30 days from end of each 

quarter

Complia

Submit annual report of calculated emissions at the NLVF and the RSL-Nellis to Clark County 

Due March 31 Complia

Tons of emissions of each criteria pollutant produced by permitted equipment/facility at NLVF and RSL-Nellis based on calculations 

PTE (d) varies Complia
2-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

Table 2-1. NTS compliance status with applicable air quality regulations (continued) Compliance Measure/Actions Compliance Limit 2008 Complianc

Clean Air Act - NSPS Conduct opacity readings from permitted equipment/facility Quarterly Complian

Percent opacity of emissions from permitted equipment/facility 10% Complian

(No permitted equip

Clean Air Act - Stratospheric Ozone Protection  Maintain ODS technician certification records, approvals for ODS-containing 

equipment recycling/recovery, and applicable equipment servicing records 

NA(f) Complian

Other Nevada Air Quality Permit Regulations

Control fugitive dust for land disturbing activities NA ComplianAllow Nevada BAPC personnel access to the NTS and Clark County DAQEM personnel access to the NLVF and RSL-Nellis to conduct inspections of facilities and operations regulated by state air permits 

NA Clark County D

inspection resulted 

of Noncompliance f

two cooling tow

included in RSL-

permit 

(a) The section(s) within this document that describe how compliance summary data were collected (b) mrem/yr = millirem per year; mSv/yr = millisievert per year (c) 260 linear ft or 160 ft2 = 79.3 linear meters (m) or 14.9 m2

(d) Potential to emit (PTE) = quantities of criteria pollutants that each facility/piece of equipment would emit annually if it were operat

of hours specified in the state air permit 

(e) Compliance limit is specific for each piece of permitted equipment/facility (f) Not applicable 
Compliance Summary

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 2-5 

2.2 Water Quality and Protection 

2.2.1 Applicable Regulations 

Clean Water Act (CWA) – The CWA sets national water quality standards for contaminants in surface waters. 

It prohibits the discharge of contaminants from point sources to waters of the U.S. without a National Pollutant 

Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. At the NTS, CWA regulations are followed through compliance 

with permits issued by NDEP for wastewater discharges. NTS operations do not require any NPDES permits. At 

the NLVF, an NPDES permit regulates the discharge of pumped groundwater (see Appendix A, Section A.1.1.2). 

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) – The SDWA protects the quality of drinking water in the United States and 

authorizes the EPA to establish safe standards of purity. It requires all owners or operators of public water 

systems (PWSs) to comply with National Primary Drinking Water Standards (health standards). State 

governments are authorized to set Secondary Standards related to taste, odor, and visual aspects. NAC 445A 

ensures that PWSs meet both primary and secondary water quality standards. The SDWA standards for 

radionuclides currently apply only to PWSs designated as community water systems. The PWSs on the NTS are 

permitted by the state as non-community water systems. However, all potable water supply wells are monitored 

on the NTS for radionuclides in compliance with DOE Order DOE O 5400.5, “Radiation Protection of the Public 

and the Environment” (see Section 2.3).

NAC 445A - Water Controls (Public Water Systems) – Enforces the SDWA requirements and sets standards 

for permitting, design, construction, operation, maintenance, certification of operators, and water quality of 

PWSs. The NTS has three PWSs and two potable water hauler trucks, which NDEP regulates through the 

issuance of permits. 

NAC 444 and 445A - Water Controls (Water Pollution Control) – Regulates the collection, treatment, and 

disposal of wastewater and sewage at the NTS. The requirements of this state regulation are issued in permits to 

NNSA/NSO for the E-Tunnel Waste Water Disposal System, 2 active and 9 inactive sewage lagoons, 23 septic 

tanks, 5 septic tank pumpers, and 1 septic tank pumping contractor’s license. NNSA/NSO also obtains 

underground injection control (UIC) permits from NDEP for tracer tests in Underground Test Area (UGTA) SubProject characterization wells. 

NAC 534 - Nevada Division of Water Resources Regulations for Water Well and Related Drilling – This 

NAC regulates the drilling, construction, and licensing of new wells and the reworking of existing wells to 

prevent the waste of underground waters and their contamination. NNSA/NSO complies with this NAC as a 

matter of comity, holding to the position that state licensing requirements do not apply to the federal government 

and its contractors as a matter of law under the principle of federal supremacy and associated case law. Two 

current operations that voluntarily comply with this NAC are the UGTA Sub-Project, which drills new wells and 

reworks old wells, and the Borehole Management Project, which plugs abandoned NTS boreholes. 

UGTA Fluid Management Plan - UGTA Sub-Project wells are regulated by the State through an agreement 

between NNSA/NSO and the NDEP called the UGTA Fluid Management Plan. The plan is followed in lieu of 

following separate state-issued water pollution control permits for each UGTA characterization well. Such 

permits ensure compliance with the CWA. The plan prescribes the methods of disposing groundwater pumped 

from UGTA wells during drilling, development, and testing based on the levels of radiological contamination. 

This plan is Attachment I of the UGTA Sub-Project Waste Management Plan (U.S. Department of Energy, 

National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Operations Office, 2002) 

2.2.2 Compliance Issues 

In June 2007, xylene was detected in a water sample from the Mercury North Tank, a point of entry for the 

Area 23 and 6 PWS. The detection, above 0.0005 milligrams per liter (mg/L), should have triggered quarterly 

sampling to determine if the xylene concentration reflected a real presence of the contaminant or an anomalous 
Compliance Summary

2-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

analytical result. Quarterly monitoring was not initiated until June 2008. Quarterly sampling continued 

throughout the remainder of 2008 and into January 2009. Xylene was undetectable or below 0.0005 mg/L in all 

of the additional samples. NDEP determined that the failure to initiate quarterly sampling in 2007 did not 

warrant issuing a Notice of Alleged Violation and/or imposing fines (see Section 4.2.1.2). 

2.2.3 Compliance Reports 

The following reports were generated for NTS operations in 2008 in compliance with water quality regulations: 

• Quarterly Monitoring Report for Nevada Test Site Sewage Lagoons, submitted to NDEP 

• Results of water quality analyses for PWS were sent to the State throughout the year as they were obtained 

from the laboratory 

• Water Pollution Control Permit NEV 96021, Quarterly Monitoring Report (for first, second, and third 

quarters of 2008 for E Tunnel effluent monitoring), submitted to NDEP 

• Water Pollution Control Permit NEV 96021, Quarterly Monitoring Report and Annual Summary Report for 

E-Tunnel Waste Water Disposal System (National Security Technologies, LLC [NSTec], 2009a) 

The following reports were generated for operations at the two offsite facilities in 2008 in compliance with water 

quality regulations: 

• Self-Monitoring Report for the National Nuclear Security Administration’s North Las Vegas Facility: Permit 

VEH-112, submitted to the City of North Las Vegas 

• Quarterly reports titled Remote Sensing Laboratory Self Monitoring Report - Permit No. CCWRD-080,

submitted to the Clark County Water Reclamation District 

• Two monitoring reports titled Remote Sensing Laboratory Additional Monitoring Reports - Permit No. 

CCWRD-080, submitted to the Clark County Water Reclamation District 
Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 2-7 

Table 2-2. NTS compliance status with applicable water quality and protection regulations 

Compliance Measure/Action 

Compliance 

Limit 2008 Compliance Status 

Safe Drinking Water Act and Nevada Water Controls (NAC 445A - Water Controls - Public Water Systems) 

Number of water samples containing coliform bacteria 1 per month per 

PWS 

Compliant 

Concentration of inorganic, organic, and microbial contaminants and disinfection byproducts in permitted NTS PWSs 

Limit varies Compliant 

Adhere to design, construction, maintenance, and operation regulations specified by permits 

NA(d) Compliant 

Allow NDEP access to conduct inspections of PWS and water hauling trucks NA Compliant 

Clean Water Act - NPDES/State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permits 

Measure and report volume of pumped groundwater discharged at the NLVF NA Compliant 

Clean Water Act and Nevada Water Pollution Controls - Sewage Disposal (NAC 444 – Sewage Disposal) 

Adhere to all design/construction/operation requirements for new systems and those specified in septic system permits, septic tank pump truck permits, and septic tank pumping contractor permit 

NA Compliant 

Clean Water Act and Nevada Water Pollution Controls (NAC 445A - Water Pollution Controls) 

Value of 5-day biological oxygen demand (BOD5), total suspended 

solids (TSS), and pH in one sewage lagoon water sample sampled quarterly

BOD5: varies 

TSS: no limit 

pH: 6.0–9.0 S.U.

Compliant 

Concentration of 29 contaminants in the filtrate from one sewage lagoon sample collected annually from each of two permitted facilities 

Limit varies Compliant 

Inspection by operator of active sewage lagoon systems Weekly Compliant Inspection by operator of inactive sewage lagoon systems Quarterly Compliant Submit quarterly monitoring reports for 2 active sewage lagoons (for Areas 6 and 23) 

Due end of 

January, April, 

July, and October 

Compliant 

Allow NDEP access to conduct inspections of active sewage lagoon systems NA Compliant 
2-8 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

Table 2-2. NTS compliance status with applicable water quality and protection regulations (continued) Compliance Measure/Action Compliance Limit 2008 Compliance St

Clean Water Act and Nevada Water Pollution Controls (NAC 445A - Water Pollution Controls) (continued) Concentrations of tritium (3H), gross alpha (α), gross beta (β), (in picocuries per 

liter [pCi/L]), and 14 nonradiological contaminants/water quality parameters in E Tunnel effluent water samples collected quarterly 

3H: 1,000,000 pCi/L 

α: 35 pCi/L 

β: 100 pCi/L 

Non-rad: Limit varies

Compliant 

Concentrations of 3H, α, β, and 17 water chemistry parameters in well ER-12-1 

water samples collected every 24 months 

3H: 20,000 pCi/L 

α: 15 pCi/L β: 50 pCi/L 

Non-rad: Limit varies

Compliant 

Concentrations of 18 contaminants in water samples from three NLVF sewage outfalls and all sludge and liquid samples from the NLVF sand/oil interceptor 

Limit varies Compliant 

Concentrations of 12 contaminants in water samples from sewage outfall at the RSL-Nellis 

Limit varies Compliant 

NAC 534 - Nevada Division of Water Resources Regulations for Water Well and Related Drilling and UGTA Fluid Management Plan 

Maintain state well-drilling license for personnel supervising well construction/reconditioning 

NA Compliant 

For UGTA well drilling fluids, monitor tritium (in pCi/L) and lead levels (in mg/L), manage the fluids, and notify NDEP as required based on the decision criteria limits in the UGTA Fluid Management Plan 

Decision Criteria 

Limits: 

3H > 200,000 pCi/L, 

Lead > 5 mg/L 

Compliant 

File notices of intent and affidavits of responsibility for plugging NA Compliant Adhere to well construction requirements/waivers NA Compliant Maintain required records and submit required reports NA Compliant 

(a) The section(s) within this document that describe how compliance summary data were collected (b) Not detectable (c) Compliance limit is specific for each contaminant; see referenced tables for specific limits (d) Not applicable 
Compliance Summary

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 2-9 

2.3 Radiation Dose Protection 

2.3.1 Applicable Regulations 

Clean Air Act (CAA), National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) – NESHAP 

(Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 61 Subpart H) establishes a radiation dose limit of 10 millirem 

per year (mrem/yr) (0.1 millisievert per year [mSv/yr]) to individuals in the general public from the air pathway. 

NESHAP also specifies “Concentration Levels for Environmental Compliance” (abbreviated as compliance levels 

[CLs]) for radionuclides in air. A CL is the annual average concentration of a radionuclide that could deliver a 

dose of 10 mrem/yr. The CLs are provided for facilities, such as the NTS, which use air sampling at offsite 

receptor locations to demonstrate compliance with the NESHAP public radiation dose limit. Sources of 

radioactive air emissions on the NTS include containment ponds, Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management 

Complex, Sedan crater, Schooner crater, calibration of analytical equipment, and contaminated soil at nuclear 

device safety test and atmospheric test locations. 

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) – The National Primary Drinking Water Regulations (40 CFR 141), 

promulgated by the SDWA, require that the maximum contaminate level goal for any radionuclide be zero. But, 

when this is not possible (e.g., in groundwater containing naturally occurring radionuclides), the SDWA specifies 

that the concentration of one or more radionuclides should not result in a whole body or organ dose greater than 

4 mrem/yr (0.04 mSv/yr). Sources of radionuclide contamination in groundwater at the NTS are the underground 

nuclear tests detonated near or below the water table. 

DOE O 450.1A, “Environmental Protection Program” – Requires federal facilities to (1) conduct 

environmental monitoring to detect, characterize, and respond to releases from DOE activities, (2) assess impacts, 

(3) estimate dispersal patterns in the environment, (4) characterize the pathways of exposure to members of the 

public, (5) characterize the exposures and doses to individuals and to the population, and (6) evaluate the potential 

impacts to the biota in the vicinity of a DOE activity. Such releases, exposures, and doses apply to radiological 

contaminants. 

DOE O 5400.5, “Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment” – This order and its flow-down 

procedural standards establish requirements for (1) measuring radioactivity in the environment, (2) applying the 

ALARA [as low as reasonably achievable] process to all operations, (3) using mathematical models for estimating 

radiation doses, (4) releasing property having residual radioactive material, and (5) maintaining records to 

demonstrate compliance with the requirements. This order sets a radiation dose limit of 100 mrem/yr (1 mSv/yr) 

above background levels to individuals in the general public from all pathways of exposure combined. It also 

provides the Derived Concentration Guides (DCGs) for all radionuclides. The DCGs are the annual average 

concentrations of a radionuclide that could deliver a dose of 100 mrem/yr. 

DOE Standard DOE-STD-1153-2002, “A Graded Approach for Evaluating Radiation Doses to Aquatic and 

Terrestrial Biota” – Provides methods, computer models, and guidance in implementing a graded approach to 

evaluating the radiation doses to populations of aquatic animals, terrestrial plants, and terrestrial animals residing 

on DOE facilities. Dose limits of 1 rad per day (rad/d) (10 milligray [mGy]/d) for terrestrial plants and aquatic 

animals, and of 0.1 rad/d (1 mGy/d) for terrestrial animals are specified by this DOE standard. Dose rates below 

these levels are believed to cause no measurable adverse effects to populations of plants and animals. 

DOE O 435.1, “Radioactive Waste Management” – Ensures that all DOE radioactive waste is managed in a 

manner that is protective of the worker, public health and safety, and the environment. It directs how radioactive 

waste management operations are conducted on the NTS. These requirements are summarized in Section 2.4. 

The manual for this order (DOE M 435.1-1) specifies that operations at the Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste 

Management Sites (RWMSs) must not contribute a dose to the general public in excess of 25 mrem/yr. 
Compliance Summary

2-10 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

2.3.2 Compliance Reports 

In compliance with NESHAP under the CAA, the report National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants, Calendar Year 2008, was submitted to EPA Region IX in June 2009 (Warren and Grossman, 2009). 

This Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 was generated to report 2008 compliance with DOE O 5400.5 

and DOE-STD-1153-2002. 

Table 2-3. NTS compliance status with regulations for radiation protection of the public and the environment 

Compliance Measure Compliance Limit 

2008 Compliance 

Status 

Section 

Reference(a)

 Clean Air Act - NESHAP 

 Annual dose to the general public from all 

radioactive air emissions 

10 mrem/yr Compliant 3.1.5 

 Safe Drinking Water Act 

 Annual dose to the general public from drinking 

water 

4 mrem/yr Compliant(b) 4.1.4; 

Table 4-1 

 DOE O 5400.5, “Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment” 

 Annual dose above background levels to the general 

public from all pathways 

100 mrem/yr Compliant 8.1.7; 

Table 8-3; 

Appendix A, 

A.1.5; 

Table A-5 

 Total residual surface contamination of property 

released offsite (in disintegrations per minute per 

100 square centimeters [dpm/100 cm2

]) 

300–15,000 dpm/100 cm2 

depending on the 

radionuclide 

Compliant 8.1.6 

DOE STD 1153-2002, “A Graded Approach for Evaluating Radiation Doses 

to Aquatic and Terrestrial Biota” 

 

 Absorbed radiation dose to terrestrial plants 1 rad/d Compliant 8.2 

 Absorbed radiation dose to aquatic animals 1 rad/d Compliant 8.2 

 Absorbed radiation dose to terrestrial animals 0.1 rad/d Compliant 8.2 

DOE O 435.1, “Radioactive Waste Management” 

 Annual dose to the general public due to RWMS 

operations 

25 mrem/yr Compliant(c ) 5.3.2 

DOE O 450.1A, “Environmental Protection Program” 

 Conduct radiological environmental monitoring NA(d) Compliant 3.1; 4.1; 5.0; 

6.0; 7.0 

 Detect and characterize radiological releases NA Compliant 3.1; Table 3-13; 

4.1; 5.0; 6.0 

 Characterize pathways of exposure to the public NA Compliant 8.1.1 

 Characterize exposures and doses to individuals, 

the population, and biota 

NA Compliant 8.1; 8.2 

(a) The section(s) within this document that describe how compliance summary data were collected 

(b) Migration of radioactivity in groundwater to offsite wells has never been detected 

(c) Nearest populations to the Area 3 and 5 RWMSs are Amargosa Valley at 55 kilometers [km] (34 miles [mi]) away 

and Cactus Springs at 36 km (22 mi) away, respectively. They are too distant to receive any radiation exposure 

from operations at the sites. 

(d) Not applicable 
Compliance Summary

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 2-11 

2.4 Radioactive and Nonradioactive Waste Management and 

Environmental Restoration 

2.4.1 Applicable Regulations 

10 CFR 830: Nuclear Safety Management – Establishes requirements for the safe management of work at 

DOE’s nuclear facilities. It governs the possession and use of special nuclear and byproduct materials. It also 

covers activities at facilities where no nuclear material is present, such as facilities that prepare the non-nuclear 

components of nuclear weapons, but which could cause radiological damage at a later time. It governs the 

conduct of the management and operating contractor and other persons at DOE nuclear facilities, including 

facility visitors. When coupled with the Price-Anderson Amendments Act (PAAA) of 1988, it provides DOE 

with authority to assess civil penalties for violation of rules, regulations, or orders relating to nuclear safety by 

contractors, subcontractors, and suppliers who are indemnified under PAAA. 

DOE O 435.1, “Radioactive Waste Management” – Ensures that all DOE radioactive waste is managed in a 

manner that is protective of the worker, public health and safety, and the environment. Activities conducted on 

the NTS subject to this order include (1) characterization of low-level radioactive waste (LLW) and low-level 

mixed radioactive waste (LLMW) generated by DOE within the state of Nevada; (2) disposal of LLW and 

LLMW at the Area 3 and Area 5 RWMSs; (3) characterization, visual examination, and repackaging of 

transuranic (TRU) waste at the Waste Examination Facility south of the Area 5 RWMS; and (4) loading of TRU 

waste at the Area 5 RWMS for shipment to Idaho National Environmental Engineering Laboratory. 

Atomic Energy Act (AEA) of 1954 (42 United States Code Sect. 2011 et seq.) – Ensures the proper 

management of source, special nuclear, and byproduct material. At the NTS, AEA regulations are followed 

through compliance with DOE O 435.1 and 10 CFR 830. 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) - 40 CFR Parts 239–282 – RCRA is the nation’s primary 

law governing the management of solid and hazardous waste (HW). RCRA regulates the storage, transportation, 

treatment, and disposal of such wastes to prevent contaminants from leaching into the environment from landfills, 

underground storage tanks (USTs), surface impoundments, and hazardous waste disposal facilities. The EPA 

authorizes the State of Nevada to administer and enforce RCRA regulations. RCRA also requires generators of 

HWs to have a program in place to reduce the volume or quantity and toxicity of HWs generated. Such NTS 

programs are addressed in Sections 2.7 and 11.0 on Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization. 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA)/Superfund 

Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) – Provides a framework for the cleanup of waste sites containing hazardous substances and an emergency response program in the event of a release of a hazardous substance 

to the environment. No HW cleanup operations on the NTS are regulated under CERCLA; they are regulated 

under RCRA instead. The applicable requirements of CERCLA pertain to an emergency response program for 

hazardous substance releases (see Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act in Section 2.5) and to 

how state laws concerning the removal and remediation of hazardous substances apply to federal facilities 

(specifically, implementation of the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order discussed below). 

Federal Facility Compliance Act (FFCA) – Extends the full range of enforcement authorities in federal, state, 

and local laws for management of HWs to federal facilities. The FFCA of 1992, signed by NNSA/NSO and the 

State of Nevada, requires the identification of existing quantities for mixed waste, the proposal of methods and 

technologies of mixed waste treatment and management, the creation of enforceable timetables, and the tracking 

and completion of deadlines. 

Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO), as amended (February 2008) – Pursuant to 

Section 120(a)(4) of CERCLA and to Sections 6001 and 3004(u) of RCRA, this consent order, agreed to by the 

state of Nevada, DOE Environmental Management, the U.S. Department of Defense, and DOE Legacy 
Compliance Summary

2-12 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

Management became effective in May 1996. It addresses the environmental restoration of historically 

contaminated sites at the NTS, parts of Tonopah Test Range, parts of the Nevada Test and Training Range 

(NTTR), the Central Nevada Test Area, and the Project SHOAL Area. Under the FFACO, hundreds of sites have 

been identified for cleanup and closure. An individual site is called a Corrective Action Site (CAS). Multiple 

CASs are often grouped into Corrective Action Units (CAUs). NNSA/NSO is responsible for the CASs included 

in the UGTA Sub-Project, the Soils Sub-Project and the Industrial Sites Sub-Project, while DOE Legacy 

Management is responsible for the CASs at the Central Nevada Test Area and the Project SHOAL Area. 

Settlement Agreement for Mixed Transuranic Waste – This agreement between NNSA/NSO and the State of 

Nevada requires NNSA/NSO to operate the Area 5 TRU Storage Pad in accordance with 40 CFR 264 Subpart I. 

Mixed TRU is stored in compliance with RCRA requirements and weekly inspections are conducted. 

Mutual Consent Agreement – This agreement between NNSA/NSO and the State of Nevada covers the storage 

and management of mixed waste on the NTS that was generated or identified after March 1996. It requires 

NNSA/NSO to develop and submit specific treatment and disposal plans for mixed waste within nine months of 

identification. 

NAC 444.850–444.8746 - Disposal of Hazardous Waste – Regulates the operation of HW disposal facilities on 

the NTS to comply with federal RCRA regulations. Through this NAC, a RCRA Part B Permit (NEV HW0021) 

regulates the operation of the Hazardous Waste Storage Unit (HWSU) in Area 5, the Explosive Ordnance 

Disposal Unit (EODU) in Area 11, and the disposal of LLMW received from DOE offsite facilities into the Pit 3 

Mixed Waste Disposal Unit (P03U). The state permit requires groundwater monitoring of three wells downgradient of P03U, prescribes post-closure monitoring for HW sites that were closed under RCRA prior to 

enactment of the FFACO, and requires preparation of an EPA Biennial Hazardous Waste Report of all HW 

volumes generated annually at NTS and the NLVF. 

NAC 444.570–444.7499 - Solid Waste Disposal Controls – This Nevada regulation sets standards for solid 

waste management systems, including the storage, collection, transportation, processing, recycling, and disposal 

of solid waste. The NTS has one inactive and four active permitted landfills. Active units include the Area 5 

Asbestiform Low-Level Solid Waste Disposal Unit (P06U), Area 6 Hydrocarbon Disposal Site, Area 9 U10c 

Solid Waste Disposal Site, and Area 23 Solid Waste Disposal Site. These landfills are designed, constructed, 

operated, maintained, and monitored in adherence to the requirements of their state-issued permits. The Area 5 

Asbestiform Low-Level Solid Waste Disposal Unit P07U is inactive. 

NAC 459.9921–459.999 - Storage Tanks – Enforces the federal regulations under RCRA pertaining to the 

maintenance and operation of fuel tanks (including underground fuel storage tanks) so as to prevent 

environmental contamination. The NTS has five USTs and RSL-Nellis has four USTs. The tanks are either 

(1) fully regulated under RCRA and registered with the State, (2) regulated under RCRA and registered with the 

State but deferred from leak detection requirements, or (3) excluded from federal and state regulation. At RSLNellis, NDEP allows Clark County to enforce this NAC with the issuance of county permits to NNSA/NSO. 

2.4.2 Compliance Reports 

The following reports were prepared in 2008 or 2009 to comply with environmental regulations for waste 

management and environmental restoration operations conducted on the NTS in 2008. All CAU/CAS reports 

prepared in 2008 as per the FFACO schedule are presented in Table 9-4 of Section 9.4.1. 

• Area 5 Asbestiform Low-Level Solid Waste Disposal Annual Report for CY 2007, submitted to NDEP 

• Quarterly LLW/LLMW Disposal Reports (for all active LLW and LLMW disposal cells), submitted to NDEP 

each quarter 

• 2007 EPA Biennial Hazardous Waste Report for the Nevada Test Site and North Las Vegas Facility, 

submitted to NDEP 
Compliance Summary

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 2-13 

• Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generator 2008 Hazardous Waste Report (for the NTS and NLVF), 

submitted to NDEP 

• Annual Transportation Report for Radioactive Waste Shipments to and from the Nevada Test Site – Fiscal 

Year 2008 (NNSA/NSO, 2009) 

• Biannual Neutron Monitoring Report for the Nevada Test Site Area 9 10c and Area 6 Hydrocarbon Landfills 

• Nevada Test Site 2008 Data Report: Groundwater Monitoring Program Area 5 Radioactive Waste 

Management Site (NSTec, 2009b)

• Nevada Test Site 2008 Waste Management Monitoring Report, Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste 

Management Sites (NSTec, 2009c) 

• Post-closure monitoring reports for RCRA Part B Permit-identified CAUs 

• January-June 2008 Biannual Solid Waste Disposal Site Report for the Nevada Test Site Area 23 Sanitary 

Landfill 

• July-December 2008 Biannual Solid Waste Disposal Site Report for the Nevada Test Site Area 23 Sanitary 

Landfill 

• 2008 Annual Solid Waste Disposal Site Report for the NTS Area 6 Hydrocarbon Landfill and Area 9 U10c 

Landfills 
2-14 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

Table 2-4. NTS compliance status with applicable waste management and environmental restoration regulations 

Compliance Measure/Action Compliance Limit 

2008 C

S

10 CFR 830: Nuclear Safety Management 

Completion and maintenance of proper conduct of operations documents required for Class II Nuclear Facility for disposal/characterization/storage of radioactive waste 

Six types of guiding documents 

required 

Co

DOE O 435.1, “Radioactive Waste Management” 

Establishment of Waste Acceptance Criteria for radioactive wastes received for disposal/storage at Area 3 and 5 RWMSs 

NA(b) Co

Track annual volume of disposed LLW at Area 3 & Area 5 RWMSs (in cubic meters [m3]) NA CoVadose zone monitoring at Area 3 and Area 5 RWMSs Not required by order - Performed to validate 

performance assessment criteria 

of RWMSs 

Con

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (as enforced through permits issued by the 

State of Nevada) 

pH, specific conductance (SC), total organic carbon (TOC), total organic halides (TOX), and tritium (3H) and 11 general water chemistry parameters in groundwater sampled semiannually from wells UE5 PW-1, UE5 PW-2, and UE5 PW-3 to verify performance of 

P03U 

pH: 7.6 to 9.2 

SC: 0.440 mmhos/cm(c)

TOC: 1 mg/L(d)

TOX: 50 μg/L(e)

H3: 2,000 pCi/L 

Co

Volume of disposed LLMW at Pit 3 Mixed Waste Disposal Unit (P03U) (in cubic meters [m3] or cubic feet [ft3]) 

20,000 m3 (706,293 ft3) Co

Volume of nonradioactive HW stored at the HWSU 61,600 liters 

(16,280 gallons) 

Co

Weight of approved explosive ordnance wastes detonated at the EODU (in kilograms [kg] or pounds [lb]) 

45.4 kg (100 lb) at a time, not 

to exceed 1 detonation 

event/hour 

Co

Submit quarterly reports of volume of wastes received at P03U, HWSU, and EODU to the State of Nevada 

Due April, July, October, 

January 

Co

Submit EPA Biennial Hazardous Waste Report for NTS and NLVF to the State of Nevada Due the following February for 

odd-numbered years 
Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 2-15 Table 2-4. NTS compliance status with applicable waste management and environmental restoration regulations (continued) Compliance Measure/Action Compliance Limit 2008 C

S

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (as enforced through permits issued by the State of Nevada) (continued) Conduct vadose zone monitoring for RCRA closure site U3ax/bl Subsidence Crater Continuous monitoring using TDR(f) sensors Co

Periodic post-closure site inspection of five historic RCRA closure sites (CAU 90, 91, 92, 110, 112) NA CoUpgrade, remove, and report on USTs at NTS and RSL-Nellis NA Co

Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order Adherence to calendar year work scope for site characterization, remediation, and closures 23 CAUs identified for some phase of action Co

Post-closure monitoring and inspections of closed sites 44 CAUs required monitoring/ inspecting Co

NAC 444.750-8396 - Solid Waste Disposal Controls Track weight and volume of waste disposed each calendar year Area 5 P06U - No limit Area 6 - No limit Area 9 - No limit Area 23 - 20 tons/day Co

Monitor vadose zone for the Area 6 Hydrocarbon and Area 9 U10c Solid Waste disposal sites Annually using neutron logging through access tubes Co

(a) The section(s) within this document that describe how compliance summary data were collected (b) Not applicable (c) mmhos/cm = micromhos (a measure of conductance) per centimeter (d) mg/L = milligram per liter (e) μg/L = micrograms per liter (f) Time domain reflectometry 
Compliance Summary

2-16 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

2.5 Hazardous Materials Control and Management 

2.5.1 Applicable Regulations 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) – Requires testing and regulation of chemical substances that enter the 

consumer market. Since the NTS does not produce chemicals, compliance is primarily directed toward the 

management of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). At the NTS, remediation activities and maintenance of 

fluorescent lights can result in the disposal of PCB-contaminated waste and light ballasts. Disposal of these items 

and recordkeeping requirements for PCB activities are regulated on the NTS by the State of Nevada. 

Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) – Sets forth procedures and requirements for 

pesticide registration, labeling, classification, devices for use, and certification of applicators. The use of certain 

pesticides (called “restricted-use pesticides”) is regulated. The use of non-restricted-use pesticides (as available in 

consumer products) is not regulated. On the NTS, only non-restricted-use pesticides are applied under the 

direction of a State of Nevada certified applicator. Pesticide applications in food service facilities are 

subcontracted to state-certified vendors who provide these services.

Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) – This act is a provision of the 1986 

SARA Title III amendments to CERCLA. It requires that federal, state, and local emergency planning authorities 

be provided information regarding the presence and storage of hazardous substances and their planned and 

unplanned environmental releases, including provisions and plans for responding to emergency situations 

involving hazardous materials. EO 12856, “Federal Compliance with Right-to-Know Laws and Pollution 

Prevention Requirements,” requires all federal facilities to comply with the provisions of EPCRA. NNSA/NSO is 

required to submit reports pursuant to Sections 302, 304, 311, 312, and 313 of SARA Title III described below. 

Section 302–303, Planning Notification – Requires that the state emergency response commission and the 

local emergency planning committee be notified when an extremely hazardous substance (EHS) is present at 

a facility in excess of the threshold planning quantity. An inventory of the location and amounts of all 

hazardous substances stored on the NTS and at the two offsite facilities is maintained. Inventory data are 

included in an annual report called the Nevada Combined Agency (NCA) Report. Also, NNSA/NSO 

monitors hazardous materials while they are in transit on the NTS through a hazardous materials notification 

system called HAZTRAK. 

Section 304, Extremely Hazardous Substances Release Notification – Requires that the local emergency 

planning committee and state emergency response agencies be notified immediately of accidental or 

unplanned releases of an EHS to the environment. Also, the national response center is notified if the release 

exceeds the CERCLA reportable quantity for the particular hazardous substance. 

Section 311–312, Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS)/Chemical Inventory – Requires facilities to provide 

applicable emergency response agencies with MSDSs, or a list of MSDSs for each hazardous chemical stored 

on site. This is essentially a one-time reporting unless chemicals or products change. Any new MSDSs are 

provided annually in the NCA Report. Section 312 requires facilities to report maximum amounts of 

chemicals on site at any one time. This report is submitted to the State Emergency Response Commission, 

the Local Emergency Planning Committee, and the local fire departments. 

Section 313, Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) Reporting – Requires facilities to submit an annual report 

entitled “Toxic Chemical Release Inventory, Form R” to the EPA and to the State of Nevada if annual usage 

quantities of listed toxic chemicals exceed specified thresholds. Lead releases on the NTS above threshold 

limits are reported to the EPA and the State Emergency Response Commission in the TRI, Form R report.
Compliance Summary

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 2-17 

NAC 555 - Control of Insects, Pests, and Noxious Weeds – Provides the regulatory framework for certification 

of several classifications of registered pesticide and herbicide applicators in the state of Nevada. The Nevada 

Department of Agriculture (NDOA) administers this program and has the primary role to enforce FIFRA in 

Nevada. Inspections of pesticide/herbicide applicator programs are carried out by NDOA. 

NAC 444 - Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) – This code enforces the federal requirements for the handling, 

storage, and disposal of PCBs and contains record-keeping requirements for PCB activities. 

State of Nevada Chemical Catastrophe Prevention Act – This act directed NDEP to develop and implement a 

program called the Chemical Accident Prevention Program (CAPP). The act requires registration of facilities 

storing EHSs above listed thresholds. NNSA/NSO submits a CAPP report to NDEP if any storage quantity 

thresholds are exceeded.

2.5.2 Compliance Reports 

The following reports were generated for 2008 NNSA/NSO operations on the NTS and at the two offsite facilities 

in compliance with hazardous materials control and management regulations: 

• Nevada Combined Agency Report - Calendar Year 2008, submitted to state and local agencies 

• Toxic Release Inventory Report, Form R for CY2008 Operations, submitted to the EPA and the State

• Calendar Year (CY) 2008 Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs) Report for the Nevada Test Site (NTS), 

submitted to NNSA/NSO (no longer required to be submitted to the EPA)

• 2008 Chemical Accident Prevention Program Report, submitted to NDEP 
y

2-18 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

Table 2-5. NTS compliance status with applicable regulations for hazardous substance control and management 

Compliance Measure/Action Compliance Limit 2008 Compliance 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and NAC 444 - Polychlorinated Biphenyls

Storage and offsite disposal of PCB materials Required if >50 ppm(b) PCBs Compliant Storage and onsite disposal of PCB materials Allowed if <50 ppm PCBs No onsite storage or Disposal of bulk product waste containing PCBs generated by remediation and site operations 

Case-by-case approval by NDEP No such bulk produc

were generate

Generate report of quantities of PCB liquids and materials disposed offsite during previous calendar year 

Due July 1 of following year Compliant 

Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) and NAC 555 - Control of Insects, Pests, and Noxious Weeds

Application of restricted-use pesticides is conducted under the direct supervision of a state-certified applicator 

 NA(c) Compliant 

Maintain state certification of onsite pesticide and herbicide applicator 

NA Compliant 

Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) 

Section 302–303 - Planning Notification NCA Report due in March for previous 

calendar year 

Compliant 

Section 304 - EHS Release Notification Notification Report due immediately 

after a release 

Compliant 

(No releases occu

Section 311–312 - MSDS/Chemical Inventory NCA Report due in March for previous 

calendar year 

Compliant 

Section 313 - TRI Reporting TRI Report, Form R due July 1 for 

previous calendar year 

Compliant 

State of Nevada Chemical Catastrophe Prevention Act 

Registration of NTS with the state if EHSs are stored above listed threshold quantities 

NDEP-CAPP(d ) Report due 

June 21, 2009 

Compliant 

(a) The section(s) within this document that describe how compliance summary data were collected 

(b) ppm = parts per million (c) Not applicable 

(d) Chemical Accident Prevention Program 
Compliance Summary

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 2-19 

2.6 Pollution Prevention/Waste Minimization (P2/WM) and Renewable 

Energy and Transportation Management 

2.6.1 Applicable Regulations 

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) – Under RCRA, generators of hazardous waste are required 

to have a program in place to reduce the volume or quantity and toxicity of such waste to the degree determined 

by the generator to be economically practicable. The EPA was required to develop a list of types of commercially 

available products (e.g., copy machine paper, plastic desktop items) and then specify that a certain minimum 

percentage of the product type’s content be composed of recycled materials if they are to be purchased by a 

federal agency. It then requires federal facilities to have a procurement process in place to ensure that they 

purchase product types which satisfy the EPA-designated minimum percentages of recycled material. 

EO 13423, “Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management” – Requires 

federal facilities to begin establishing goals to improve efficiency in energy and water use, procure goods and 

services that use sustainable environmental practices, reduce amounts of toxic materials acquired and maintain a 

cost-effective waste prevention and recycling program, ensure construction and major renovation of buildings that 

incorporate sustainable practices, reduce use of petroleum products in motor vehicles and increase use of 

alternative fuels, and acquire and dispose of electronic products using environmentally sound practices. These 

goals are to be incorporated into the Environmental Management System (EMS) of each federal facility (see 

Section 2.10). NNSA/NSO complies with this EO through adherence to DOE O 430.2B. 

DOE O 430.2B, “Departmental Energy, Renewable Energy and Transportation Management” – Provides 

requirements and responsibilities for DOE or NNSA sites to assist DOE in meeting its energy efficiency goals and 

objectives in electricity, water, and thermal consumption, conservation, and savings, including goals and 

objectives contained in EO 13423. This order requires sites to develop an energy management program and to 

have an Executable Plan for the program in place by December 31, 2008. The Executable Plan must be integrated 

with a site’s Ten Year Site Plan. 

DOE O 450.1A, “Environmental Protection Program” – Requires federal facilities to implement an EMS (see 

Section 2.10) that includes P2/WM goals and objectives. 

NDEP Hazardous Waste Permit Number NEV HW0021 – This state permit requires NNSA/NSO to maintain 

an Annual Waste Minimization Summary Report in the Facility Operating Records. This report should include a 

description of the efforts taken during the year to reduce the volume and toxicity of waste generated as per 

RCRA, as well as a description of the changes in volume and toxicity of waste actually achieved during the year 

in comparison to previous years to the extent such information is available for the years prior to 1984. 

2.6.2 Compliance Reports

The following reports were generated for 2008 NNSA/NSO operations on the NTS and at the two offsite facilities 

in compliance with P2/WM. 

• FY 2009 NNSA/NSO Energy Executable Plan 

• FY 2008 Waste Generation and Pollution Prevention Progress Report, submitted to DOE Headquarters (HQ)

• CY 2008 Waste Minimization Summary Report, submitted to NDEP 
Compliance Summary

2-20 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Table 2-6. NTS compliance status with P2/WM and renewable energy and transportation management regulations 

Compliance Measure/Action 

Compliance 

Limit/Goal 

2008 Compliance 

Status 

Section 

Reference(a)

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) 

Have a program in place to reduce the volume or quantity 

and toxicity of generated hazardous waste to the degree it 

is economically practicable 

NA(b) Compliant 11.1 

Have a process in place to ensure that EPA-designated 

list products are purchased containing the minimum 

content of recycled materials 

NA Compliant 11.1 

EO 13423, “Strengthening Federal Environmental, 

Energy and Transportation Management” 

 

Percent of all purchased items that contain the minimum 

content of recycled material as specified on the EPAdesignated product list 

100% Noncompliant 

56% 

11.2 

DOE O 430.2B, “Departmental Energy, Renewable 

Energy and Transportation Management”

 

Prepare an Energy Executable Plan integrated with the 

Ten Year Site Plan 

Due December 31, 

2008 

Compliant 17.3 

Incorporate renewable energy and transportation 

management goals and objectives into EMS that help 

meet goals of the order 

NA Compliant 17.2.4 

DOE O 450.1A, “Environmental Protection Program” 

Submit a fiscal year Waste Generation and Pollution 

Prevention Progress Report to DOE/HQ 

Due 

December 31, 2008 

Compliant 11.2 

NDEP Hazardous Waste Permit Number NEV HW0021 

Submit a 2008 calendar year Waste Minimization 

Summary Report to NDEP 

Due by 

March 1, 2009 

Compliant 11.2 

(a) The section(s) within this document that describe how compliance summary data were collected

(b) Not applicable
Compliance Summary

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 2-21 

2.7 National Environmental Policy Act 

Before any project or activity is initiated at the NTS, it must be evaluated for possible impacts to the environment. 

Under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), federal agencies are required to consider environmental 

effects and values and reasonable alternatives before making a decision to implement any major federal action 

that may have a significant impact on the human environment. NNSA/NSO uses four levels of documentation to 

demonstrate compliance with NEPA: 

• Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) – a full disclosure of the potential environmental effects of proposed 

actions and the reasonable alternatives to those actions 

• Environmental Assessment (EA) – a concise discussion of proposed actions and alternatives and the potential 

environmental effects to determine if an EIS is necessary 

• Supplement Analysis (SA) – a collection and analysis of information for an action already addressed in an 

existing EIS or EA used to determine whether a supplemental EIS or EA should be prepared, a new EIS or 

EA should be prepared, or no further NEPA documentation is required 

• Categorical Exclusion (CX) – a category of actions that do not have a significant adverse environment impact 

based on similar previous activities and for which, therefore, neither an EA nor an EIS is required 

A NEPA Environmental Evaluation Checklist (Checklist) is required for all proposed projects or activities on the 

NTS. The Checklist is reviewed by the NNSA/NSO NEPA Compliance Officer to determine whether the 

activity’s environmental impacts have been addressed in existing NEPA documents. If a proposed project has not 

been covered under any previous NEPA analysis and it does not qualify as a CX, then a new NEPA analysis is 

performed. The NEPA analysis may result in preparation of a new EA or a new SA to the existing programmatic 

NTS EIS (DOE, 1996). The NEPA Compliance Officer must approve each Checklist before a project proceeds. 

During 2008, a draft programmatic SA to the 1996 NTS EIS was prepared and sent to DOE/HQ for review and 

approval. A decision was made, however, to proceed with a new EIS instead of approving the draft SA. Work on 

the EIS will start in 2009. Table 2-7 presents a summary of how NNSA/NSO complied with NEPA in 2008 for 

54 projects. 

Table 2-7. NTS NEPA compliance activities conducted in 2008 

Results of NEPA Checklist Reviews / NEPA Compliance Activities 

6 projects were exempted from further NEPA analysis because they were of CX status. 

44 projects were exempted from further NEPA analysis due to their inclusion under previous analysis in the NTS EIS 

(DOE, 1996) and its Record of Decision. 

1 project was exempted from further NEPA analysis due to its inclusion under previous analysis in the Final 

Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Relocation of Technical Area 18 Capabilities and Materials at the Los 

Alamos National Laboratory (DOE, 2002) and under previous analysis in the NTS EIS (DOE, 1996). 

1 project was exempted from further NEPA analysis due to its inclusion under previous analysis in the Environmental 

Assessment for Radiological/Nuclear Countermeasures Test and Evaluation Complex, Nevada Test Site (NNSA/NSO, 

2004a). 

2 projects were exempted from further NEPA analysis due to its inclusion under previous analysis in the Final

Environmental Assessment for Activities Using Biological Simulants and Releases of Chemicals at the Nevada Test Site

(NNSA/NSO, 2004b). 
Compliance Summary

2-22 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

2.8 Historic Preservation and Cultural Resource Protection 

2.8.1 Applicable Regulations 

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended – This act presents the goals of federal participation in 

historic preservation and delineates the framework for federal activities. Section 106 requires federal agencies to 

take into account the effects of their undertakings on properties included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the 

National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and to consult with interested parties. The Section 106 process 

involves the agency reviewing background information, identifying eligible properties for the NRHP within the 

area of potential effect through consultation with the Nevada State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO), making a 

determination of effect (when applicable), and developing a mitigation plan when an adverse effect is 

unavoidable. Determinations of eligibility, effect, and mitigation are conducted in consultation with the SHPO 

and, in some cases, the federal Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. Section 110 sets out the broad historic 

preservation responsibilities of federal agencies and is intended to ensure that historic preservation is fully 

integrated into the ongoing programs of all federal agencies. It requires federal agencies to develop and 

implement a Cultural Resources Management Plan, to identify and evaluate the eligibility of historic properties 

for long-term management as well as for future project-specific planning, and to maintain archaeological 

collections and their associated records at professional standards. At the NTS, a long-term management strategy 

includes (1) monitoring NRHP-listed and eligible properties to determine if environmental or other actions are 

negatively affecting the integrity or other aspects of eligibility and (2) taking corrective actions if necessary. 

EO 11593, “Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment” – Reinforces the obligation of 

federal agencies to conduct adequate surveys to locate any and all sites of historic value under their jurisdiction. 

Archaeological Resources and Protection Act of 1979 – The purpose of this act is to secure, for the present and 

future benefit of the American people, the protection of archaeological resources and sites that are on public and 

Indian lands, and to address the irreplaceable heritage of archaeological sites and materials. It requires the 

issuance of a federal archaeology permit to qualified archaeologists for any work that involves excavation or 

removal of archaeological resources on federal and Indian lands and notification to Indian tribes of these 

activities. Unauthorized excavation, removal, damage, alteration, or defacement of archaeological resources is 

prohibited, as is the sale, purchase, exchange, transport, receipt of, or offer for sale of such resources. Criminal 

and civil penalties apply to such actions. Information concerning the nature and location of any archaeological 

resource may not be made available to the public unless the federal land manager determines that the disclosure 

would not create a risk of harm to the resources or site. The Secretary of the Interior is required to submit an 

annual report at the end of each fiscal year to Congress that reports the scope and effectiveness of all federal 

agencies’ efforts on the protection of archaeological resources, specific projects surveyed, resources excavated or 

removed, damage or alterations to sites, criminal and civil violations, the results of permitted archaeological 

activities, and the costs incurred by the federal government to conduct this work. All archaeologists working at 

the NTS must have qualifications that meet federal standards and must work under a permit issued by 

NNSA/NSO. In the event of vandalism, NNSA/NSO would need to investigate the actions.

American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 – This law established the government policy to protect and 

preserve for American Indians their inherent right of freedom to believe, express, and exercise the traditional 

religions, including but not limited to access to sites, use and possession of sacred objects, and the freedom to 

worship through ceremonials and traditional rites. Locations exist on the NTS that have religious significance to 

Western Shoshone and Southern Paiute; visits to these places involve prayer and other activities. Access is 

provided by NNSA/NSO as long as there are no safety or health hazards. 

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) of 1990 – This act requires federal 

agencies to identify Native American human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, and objects of cultural 

patrimony in their possession. Agencies are required to prepare an inventory of human remains and associated 

funerary objects, as well as a summary with a general description of sacred objects, objects of cultural patrimony, 

and unassociated funerary objects. Through consultation with Native American tribes, the affiliation of the 

remains and objects are determined and the tribes can request repatriation of their cultural items. The agency is 
Compliance Summary

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 2-23 

required to publish a notice of inventory completion in the Federal Register. The law also protects the physical 

location where human remains are placed during a death rite or ceremony. The NTS artifact collection is subject 

to NAGPRA, and the locations of American Indian human remains at the NTS must be protected from NTS 

activities. 

2.8.2 Reporting Requirements 

NNSA/NSO submits Section 106 cultural resources inventory reports and historical evaluations to the Nevada 

SHPO for review and concurrence. Mitigation plans and mitigation documents are also submitted to the Nevada 

SHPO, and some types of documents go to the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the National Park 

Service. Reports containing restricted data on site locations are not available to the public. Some technical 

reports, however, are available to the public upon request and can be obtained from the National Technical 

Information Service. The 2008 reports submitted to agencies are discussed in Chapter 12. 

Table 2-8. NTS compliance status with historic preservation regulations 

Compliance Action 

2008 Compliance 

Status 

Section 

Reference(a)

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and 

EO 11593, “Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment” 

Maintain and implement NTS Cultural Resources Management Plan Compliant - - 

Conduct cultural resources inventories and evaluations of historic structures Compliant 12.1; 

Table 12-1 

Make determinations of eligibility to the National Register Compliant 12.1.2; 

Table 12-1 

Make assessments of impact to eligible properties Compliant 12.1.2 

Manage artifact collection as per required professional standards Compliant 12.2 

Archaeological Resources and Protection Act of 1979 

Conduct archaeological work by qualified personnel Compliant - - 

Determine if archaeological sites have been damaged Compliant 12.1.3.2 

Complete and submit Secretary of the Interior Archaeology Questionnaire Compliant 12.1.3.3 

American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978 

Allow American Indians access to NTS locations for ceremonies and 

traditional use 

Compliant 12.3 

Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act 

Consult with affiliated Native American Indian tribes regarding repatriation 

of cultural items 

Completed 12.2 

Protect Native American Indian burial locations on NTS Compliant 12.2 

Overall Requirement 

Consult with tribes regarding various cultural resources issues Compliant 12.3 

(a) The section(s) within this document that describe how compliance summary data were collected
Compliance Summary

2-24 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

2.9 Conservation and Protection of Biota and Wildlife Habitat 

2.9.1 Applicable Regulations 

Endangered Species Act (ESA) – Section 7 of this act requires federal agencies to ensure that their actions do 

not jeopardize the continued existence of federally listed endangered or threatened species or their critical habitat. 

The threatened desert tortoise is the only animal protected under the ESA that may be impacted by NTS 

operations. NTS activities within tortoise habitat are conducted so as to comply with the terms and conditions of 

Biological Opinions issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) to NNSA/NSO. 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) – Prohibits the harming of any migratory bird, their nest, or eggs without 

authorization by the Secretary of the Interior. All but five of the 239 bird species observed on the NTS (Wills and 

Ostler, 2001) are protected under this act. Biological surveys are conducted for projects to prevent direct harm to 

protected birds, nests, and eggs. 

Bald Eagle Protection Act – Prohibits the capture or harming of bald and golden eagles without special 

authorization. Both bald and golden eagles occur on the NTS. Biological surveys are conducted for projects to 

prevent direct harm to eagles and their nests and eggs. 

Clean Water Act (CWA), Section 404, Wetlands Regulations – Regulates land development affecting wetlands 

by requiring a permit obtained from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) to discharge dredged or fill 

material into waters of the United States, which includes most wetlands on public and private land. NTS projects 

are evaluated for their potential to disturb wetlands and their need for a Section 404 permit application. Based on 

recent rulings, no natural NTS wetland may meet the criteria of a “jurisdictional” wetland subject to Section 404 

regulations. However, final determination from the USACE regarding the status of NTS wetlands has yet to be 

received. 

National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act – Forbids a person to knowingly disturb or injure 

vegetation or kill vertebrate or invertebrate animals or their nests or eggs on any National Wildlife Refuge lands 

unless permitted by the Secretary of the Interior. The boundary of the Desert National Wildlife Refuge (DNWR), 

land administered within this system, is approximately 5 km (3.1 mi) downwind of the NPTEC in Area 5. 

Biological monitoring is conducted to verify that tests conducted at the NPTEC do not disperse toxic chemicals 

that could harm biota on the DNWR. 

EO 11990, “Protection of Wetlands” – Requires governmental agencies to minimize the destruction, loss, or 

degradation of wetlands and to preserve and enhance the natural and beneficial values of wetlands in carrying out 

the agency’s responsibilities, including managing federal lands and facilities. Projects are evaluated for their 

potential to disturb the more than 20 natural water sources on the NTS. NTS wetlands are monitored to document 

their status and use by wildlife, even though they may not meet the criteria for “jurisdictional” status under the 

CWA. 

EO 11988, “Floodplain Management” – Ensures protection of property and human well-being within a 

floodplain and protection of floodplains themselves. The Federal Emergency Management Agency publishes 

guidelines and specifications for assessing alluvial fan flooding. NNSA/NSO generally satisfies EO 11988 

through DOE O 420.1, “Facility Safety”, and invoked standards. DOE O 420.1 and the associated 

implementation guide for mitigation of natural phenomena hazards call for a graded approach to assessing risk to 

all facilities (structures, systems, and components [SSC]) from potential natural hazards. Chapter 4 of DOE 

Standard 1020 (DOE-STD-1020-2002) provides flood design and evaluation criteria for SSC. Evaluations of 

flood hazards at the NTS are generally conducted to ensure protection of property and human well-being. 

EO 13186, “Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds” – Directs federal agencies to 

take certain actions to further implement the MBTA if agencies have, or are likely to have, a measurable negative 

effect on migratory bird populations. It also directs federal agencies to support the conservation intent of the 

MBTA and conduct actions, as practicable, to benefit the health of migratory bird populations. NTS projects are 

evaluated for their potential to impact such bird populations. 
Compliance Summary

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 2-25 

EO 13112, “Invasive Species” – Directs federal agencies to act to prevent the introduction of, or to monitor and 

control, invasive (non-native) species; to provide for restoration of native species; and to exercise care in taking 

actions that could promote the introduction or spread of invasive species. Land-disturbing activities on the NTS 

have resulted in the spread of numerous invasive plant species. Habitat reclamation and other controls are 

evaluated and conducted, when feasible, to control such species and meet the purposes of this EO. 

Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act – Requires the protection, management, and control of wild horses 

and burros on public lands and calls for the management and protection of these animals in a manner that is 

designed to achieve and maintain a thriving natural ecological balance. Wild horses on the NTS may wander off 

the NTS onto public lands and therefore are protected under this act. This act makes it unlawful to harm wild 

horses and burros. 

DOE O 450.1A, “Environmental Protection Program” – Requires federal facilities to address the protection of 

site resources from wildland and operational fires and the protection of the environment and biota from site 

activities through the integration of an EMS into each site’s Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) 

(see Section 2.10). Annual surveys of vegetation fuel hazards, ecosystem mapping, surveys for protected and 

important species, and habitat revegetation are conducted to meet the intent of this order. 

Five-Party Cooperative Agreement – Agreement between NNSA/NSO, NTTR, FWS, Bureau of Land 

Management (BLM), and the State of Nevada Clearinghouse that calls for cooperation in conducting resource 

inventories and developing resource management plans for wild horses and burros and to maintain favorable 

habitat on federally withdrawn lands for these animals. BLM considers NTS a zero herd-size management area. 

NNSA/NSO consults with BLM regarding any issue of NTS horse management. Biologists conduct periodic 

horse census surveys on the NTS. 

NAC 503.010–503.104 - Protection of Wildlife – Identifies Nevada animal species, both protected and unprotected, and prohibits the harm of protected species without special permit. Over 200 bird species and 1 bat 

species on the NTS are state-protected. Biological surveys are conducted for projects to prevent direct harm to 

protected birds, nests, eggs, and protected bats. 

NAC 527.270 - Protection of Flora – Requires that the State Forester Firewarden determine the protective status 

of Nevada plants and prohibits removal or destruction of protected plants without special permit. Currently, no 

state-protected plants are known to occur on the NTS. Annual reviews of the status of NTS plants are conducted. 

2.9.2 Compliance Issues 

Six deaths recorded among migratory birds in 2008 were related to NTS activities (see Table 13-4). One 

mitigation action was taken to reduce future accidental bird mortality; a barbed wire fence in which a greathorned owl became entangled and died was removed. 

2.9.3 Compliance Reports 

The following reports were prepared in 2008 or 2009 to meet regulation requirements or to document compliance 

for all activities conducted in 2008: 

• Annual Report of Actions Taken Under Authorization of the Biological Opinion on NTS Activities (File No. 1-

5-96-F-33) – January 1, 2008 Through December 31, 2008 

• Annual Report for Handling Permit S29157, submitted to Nevada Division of Wildlife 

• Annual Report for Federal Migratory Bird Scientific Collecting Permit MB008695-0, submitted to FWS 

Portland Office 

• Annual Report for Federal Migratory Bird Special Purpose Possession Permit (Dead Permit) MB037277-1,

submitted to FWS Portland Office
2-26 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Table 2-9. NTS compliance status with applicable biota and wildlife habitat regulations Compliance Measure/Action Compliance Limit 2008 Compliance Sta

Endangered Species Act – 1996 Opinion for NTS Programmatic Activities Number of tortoises accidentally injured or killed due to NTS activities, per year 3 Compliant 

Number of tortoises captured and displaced from project sites, per year 10 Compliant 

Number of tortoises taken since 1992 by way of injury or mortality on NTS paved roads by 

vehicles other than those in use during a project 

Unlimited Compliant 

Number of total acres (ac) of desert tortoise habitat disturbed during NTS project construction since 1992 

3,015 ac Compliant 

Follow the 23 terms and conditions of the Biological Opinion during construction and operation of NTS projects 

NA(b) Compliant 

Conduct biological surveys at proposed project sites to assess presence of protected species NA Compliant 

Migratory Bird Treaty Act; Bald Eagle Protection Act; and EO 13186, “Responsibilities of Federal Agencies to Protect Migratory Birds” 

Number of birds/nests/eggs harmed by NTS project activities 0 Noncompliant 

6 bird deaths 

National Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act 

Number of animals, their nests, or eggs killed and amount of vegetation disturbed or injured on System lands (the DNWR) as a result of NTS activities 

0 Compliant 

Wild Free-Roaming Horse and Burro Act and Five-Party Cooperative Agreement 

Number of horses harassed or killed due to NTS activities 0 Compliant Cooperate in conducting resource inventories and developing resource management plans for horses on the NTS, NTTR, and DNWR 

NA Compliant 

EO 11988, Floodplain Management” 

Conduct flood hazard assessments NA NA – No floodplain pro

Clean Water Act, Section 404 -Wetlands Regulations and EO 11990, “Protection of Wetlands”  Number of wetlands disturbed by NTS activity NA 0 EO 13112, “Invasive Species” 

Evaluate feasibility of conducting habitat reclamation and other controls to control spread of invasive species 

NA Compliant 

 NAC 503.010–503.104 and NAC 527.270 - Nevada Protective Measures for Wildlife and Flora

Number of state-protected animals harmed or killed and number of state-protected plants collected or harmed due to NTS activities 

0 Noncompliant 

6 bird deaths 

(a) The sections within this document that describe how compliance summary data were collected (b) Not applicable 
Compliance Summary

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 2-27 

2.10 Environmental Management System 

2.10.1 Applicable Regulations 

DOE O 450.1A, “Environmental Protection Program” – Requires each DOE facility to implement an EMS, 

which is a continuing cycle of planning, implementing, evaluating, and improving processes and actions 

undertaken to achieve environmental goals. The objectives are to implement sound stewardship practices that are 

protective of the air, water, land, and other natural and cultural resources impacted by DOE operations, by which 

DOE cost-effectively meets or exceeds compliance with applicable environmental, public health, and resource 

protection laws, regulations, and DOE requirements. The EMS must be fully integrated into the site ISMS. The 

EMS must include pollution prevention goals and objectives. Subsequent DOE orders (e.g., DOE O 430.2B) 

require integration of other types or goals and objectives into a site’s EMS. 

2.10.2 Compliance Status 

In 2008, NSTec tracked environmental measures for those environmental aspects, objectives, targets, and goals 

that had been identified through the EMS (see Chapter 17 for a full description). The 2008 Facility EMS Annual 

Report Data were entered into the DOE computer database as required by NNSA/NSO. 
Compliance Summary

2-28 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

2.11 Occurrences, Unplanned Releases, and Continuous Releases 

2.11.1 Applicable Regulations 

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) – Continuous 

release reporting under Section 103 requires that a non-permitted hazardous substance release that is equal to or 

greater than its reportable quantity be reported to the National Response Center. The EPA requires all facilities 

that release a hazardous substance meeting the Section 103(f) requirements to report annually to EPA and perform 

an annual evaluation of releases. CERCLA requirements applicable to NTS operations also pertain to an 

emergency response program for hazardous substance releases to the environment (see discussion of EPCRA in 

Section 2.5). 

Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA) – This act is described in Section 2.5. 

See Table 2-5 for summary of compliance to EPCRA pertaining to unplanned environmental releases of 

hazardous substances. 

40 CFR 302.1–302.8: Designation, Reportable Quantities, and Notification – Requires facilities to notify 

federal authorities of spills or releases of certain hazardous substances designated under CERCLA and the CWA. 

It specifies what quantities of hazardous substance spills/releases must be reported to authorities and delineates 

the notification procedures for a release that equals or exceeds the reportable quantities. 

DOE O 231.1A, “Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting” – This order includes the requirement for 

reporting environmental occurrences. Along with DOE M 231.1-2, “Occurrence Reporting and Processing of 

Operations Information,” it requires the establishment and maintenance of a system for reporting operations 

information related to DOE-owned and leased facilities, for processing that information to identify the root causes 

of environmental occurrences, and for providing appropriate corrective action for such occurrences. 

NAC 445A.345–445.348 - Notification of Release of Pollutant – Requires state notification for the unplanned or 

accidental releases of specified quantities of pollutants, hazardous wastes, and contaminants. 

Water Pollution Control General Permit GNEV93001 – This general wastewater discharge permit issued by 

the State to the NTS specifies that no petroleum products will be discharged into treatment works without first 

being processed through an oil/water separator or other approved methods. It also specifies how NNSA/NSO 

shall report each bypass, spill, upset, overflow, or release of treated or untreated sewage. 

Other NTS Permits/Agreements – As with General Permit GNEV93001, other state permits and agreements are 

cited in previous subsections of this chapter (e.g., FFACO) that specify that accidents or events of noncompliance must be reported. These include events that may create an environmental hazard. 

2.11.2 Compliance Status 

There are no continuous releases on the NTS or at the two offsite facilities. 

In 2008, four reportable environmental occurrences happened. They included radioactive material blown outside 

a radiological Contamination Area (CA) in Area 25 by high winds, legacy contaminated debris found outside a 

CA in Area 3, cooling towers at RSL-Nellis operating without a Clark County air permit, and a spill of spent oil in 

Area 6. All four are described in Table 2-10. 
Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 2-29 Table 2-10. Environmental occurrences in 2008 Description of Occurrence Reporting Criteria(a) Correc

ORPS Number/Date of Occurrence: EM--NVSO-NST-NTS-2008-0002, February 19, 2008 On February 18, high winds shut down work during packaging of contaminated debris at CAU 127 at Test Cell C in Area 25. Two transportainers were loaded with debris when the wind increased to over 40 miles per hour. Workers left the CA without covering the transportainers because of unsafe working conditions. On February 19, Radiological Control Technicians (RCTs) found pieces of contaminated tarp and tape downwind outside the CA. Radio- logical instrument (direct) readings on the debris ranged from 5,000 to 140,000 dpm of beta/gamma (where maximum removable limit is 350 dpm beta/gamma). 6B(3) - Identification of onsite radioactive contamination greater than 10 times the total contamination values in 10 CFR 835 Appendix D and that is found outside of the following locations: Contamination Areas, High Contamination Areas, Airborne Radioactivity Areas, Radiological Buffer Areas, and areas controlled in accordance with 10 CFR 835.1102(c). For tritium, the reporting threshold is 10 times the removable contamination values in 10 CFR Part 835, Appendix D. The nearby road wa

Manager was notifisearched for additiowas bagged for properformed and a degenerate highly conpackaged for dispothat Environmental trained/briefed to mradiological hazard

ORPS Number/Date of Occurrence: NA--NVSO-NST-NTS-2008-0007, April 10, 2008 On April 10, during a Soils Sub-Project preliminary assessment in Area 3, RCTs identified four locations of contaminated debris outside a radiological CA. Debris had readings from 3,000 to 3 million dpm/100 cm2 total alpha. On April 30, RCTs performed a verification survey of the area. Two survey points showed removable alpha contamination that ranged from 38 to 288 dpm/100 cm2 and total contamination levels that ranged from 126,000 to 200,000 dpm/100 cm2. The alpha spectroscopy confirmed the presence of transuranics (239Pu). 6B(4) - Identification of onsite legacy radioactive contamination greater than 10 times the total contamination values in 10 CFR 835 Appendix D and that is found outside of the following locations: Contamination Areas, High Contamination Areas, Airborne Radioactivity Areas, Radiological Buffer Areas, and areas controlled in accordance with 10 CFR 835.1102(c). For tritium, the reporting threshold is 10 times the removable contamination values in 10 CFR Part 835, Appendix D. The locations of co

temporarily marked After verification scurrent CA boundacontamination. ORPS Number/Date of Occurrence: NA--NVSO-NST-RSL-2008-0004, November 13, 2008 NNSA/NSO received a Letter of Noncompliance from the Clark County DAQEM, dated November 18, 2008. On November 13, 2008, DAQEM personnel inspected the RSL-Nellis facility and determined that two cooling towers were being operated without an air permit. 9(2) - Any written notification from an outside regulatory agency that a site/facility is considered to be in noncompliance with a schedule or requirement (e.g., Notice of Violation, Notice of Intent to Sue, Notice of Noncompliance, Warning Letter, Finding of Violation, Finding of Alleged Violation, Administrative Order, or a similar type of notification or enforcement action). The NNSA/NSO P

written response to when compliance wnoncompliance issuapplication to modithe cooling towers December 16, 2008

ORPS Number/Date: NA--NVSO-NST-NTS-2009-0001, December 31, 2008 On December 31, a fuel/lube truck leaked 329 gallons of oil from a 600-gallon holding tank that was used to store spent (used) oil. Water accumulation between a ball valve and capped section of pipe froze causing the valve to break and leak the oil. The used oil leaked across the 6-05 Road and spread out over an approximately 60 square foot area. 5A(2) - Any discharge that exceeds 100 gallons of oil of any kind or in any form, including, but not limited to, petroleum, fuel oil, sludge, oil refuse, and oil mixed with wastes other than dredged spoil. For operations involving oil field crude or condensate, any discharge of 100 barrels or more is reportable under this criterion. Workers disbursed 

shoulders. Road 6-0Affected soil was p

(a) Reporting requirements provided in DOE M 231.1-2, “Occurrence Reporting and Processing of Operations Information” 
Compliance Summary

2-30 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

2.12 Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting 

2.12.1 Applicable Regulations 

DOE O 231.1A, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting” – This order calls for the “timely collection, 

reporting, analysis, and dissemination of information on environment, safety, and health issues as required by law 

or regulations or as needed to ensure that the DOE and the NNSA are kept fully informed on a timely basis about 

events that could adversely affect the health and safety of the public or the workers, the environment, the intended 

purpose of DOE facilities, or the credibility of the Department.” The order specifically requires DOE and NNSA 

sites to prepare an annual calendar year report, referred to as the Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER). 

DOE M 231.1-1A Chg 2, “Environment, Safety and Health Reporting Manual” – This manual provides 

detailed requirements for implementing DOE O 231.1A. 

The data to be included in an ASER are air emissions, effluent releases, environmental monitoring, and estimated 

radiological doses to the public from releases of radioactive material at DOE or NNSA sites. The annual report 

must also summarize environmental occurrences and responses reported during the calendar year, confirm 

compliance with environmental standards and requirements, and highlight significant programs and efforts. 

Environmental performance indicators and/or performance measures programs are to be included. The breadth 

and detail of this reporting should reflect the size and extent of programs at a particular site. The ASER for the 

calendar year is to be completed and made available to the public by October 1 of the following year. DOE’s 

Office of Analysis is to issue annual guidance to all field elements regarding the preparation of the report. 

For NNSA/NSO, reporting is accomplished through the publication of the NTS ASER, which is titled the Nevada 

Test Site Environmental Report (NTSER). 

2.12.2 Compliance Status 

The 2007 NTSER was published and posted on the NNSA/NSO, NSTec, and DOE Office of Scientific and 

Technical Information Web sites by September 12, 2008. The 2007 NTSER was mailed to all recipients (on a 

compact disc accompanied by a 25-page summary) on September 22, 2008. 
Compliance Summary

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 2-31 

2.13 Summary of Permits 

Table 2-11 presents the complete list of all federal and state permits active during calendar year 2008 that were 

issued to NNSA/NSO and to NSTec for NTS, NLVF, and RSL-Nellis operations, and which have been referenced 

in previous subsections of this chapter. The table includes those pertaining to air quality monitoring, operation of 

drinking water and sewage systems, hazardous materials and hazardous waste management and disposal, and 

endangered species protection. Reports associated with these permits are submitted to the appropriate designated 

state or federal office. Copies of reports may be obtained upon request. 

Table 2-11. Environmental permits required for NTS and NTS site facility operations 

Permit 

Number Description Expiration Date Reporting 

Air Quality NTS 

AP9711-0549.01 NTS Class II Air Quality Operating Permit June 25, 2009 Annually 

08-29 NTS Burn Variance (Various Locations) March 14, 2009 None 

08-30 NTS Open Burn Variance, NTS, A-23, Facility #23-T00200 

(NTS Fire & Rescue Training Center) 

March 14, 2009 None 

NLVF

Facility 657, Mod. 3 Clark County Authority to Construct/Operating Permit for a 

Testing Laboratory None March 

RSL-Nellis 

Facility 348, Mod. 2 Clark County Authority to Construct/Operating Permit for a 

Testing Laboratory None March 

NTS Drinking Water 

NY-0360-12NTNC Areas 6 and 23 September 30, 2009 None 

NY-4098-12NC Area 25 September 30, 2009 None 

NY-4099-12NC Area 12 September 30, 2009 None 

NY-0835-12NP NTS Water Hauler #84846 September 30, 2009 None 

NY-0836-12NP NTS Water Hauler #84847 September 30, 2009 None 

NTS Septic Systems and Pumpers 

NY-1054 Septic System, Area 3 (Waste Management Offices) None None 

NY-1069 Septic System, Area 18 (820th Red Horse Squadron) None None 

NY-1076 Septic System, Area 6 (Airborne Response Team Hangar) None None 

NY-1077 Septic System, Area 27 (Baker Compound) None None 

NY-1079 Septic System, Area 12 (U12g Tunnel) None None 

NY-1080 Septic System, Area 23 (Building 1103) None None 

NY-1081 Septic System, Area 6 (Control Point-170) None None 

NY-1082 Septic System, Area 22 (Building 22-01) None None 

NY-1083 Septic System, Area 5 (Radioactive Material Management 

Site) 

None None 

NY-1084 Septic System, Area 6 (Device Assembly Facility) None None 

NY-1085 Septic System, Area 25 (Central Support Area) None None 

NY-1086 Septic System, Area 25 (Reactor Control Point) None None 

NY-1087 Septic System, Area 27 (Able Compound) None None 

NY-1089 Septic System, Area 12 (Camp) None None 

NY-1090 Septic System, Area 6 (Los Alamos National Laboratory 

Construction Camp Site) 

None None 

NY-1091 Septic System, Area 23 (Gate 100) None None 
Compliance Summary

2-32 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

Table 2-12. Environmental permits required for NTS and NTS site facility operations (continued) 

Permit 

Number Description Expiration Date Reporting 

NTS Septic Systems and Pumpers (cont.) 

NY-1103 Septic System, Area 22 (Desert Rock Airport) None None 

NY-1106 Septic System, Area 5 (Hazmat Spill Center) None None 

NY-1110-HAA-A Individual Sewage Disposal System, A-12, Building 12-910 None None 

NY-1112 Commercial Sewage Disposal System, U1a, Area 1 None None 

NY-1113 Commercial Sewage Disposal System, Area 1, Building 121 None None 

NY-1124 Commercial Individual Sewage Disposal System, NTS, 

Area 6 

None None 

NY-1128 Commercial Individual Sewage Disposal System, NTS, 

Area 6, Yucca Lake Project 

None None 

NY-17-03313 Septic Tank Pumper E 106785 July 31, 2009 None 

NY-17-03315 Septic Tank Pumper E 107105 July 31, 2009 None 

NY-17-03317 Septic Tank Pumper E-105918 July 31, 2009 None 

NY-17-03318 Septic Tank Pumping Contractor (one unit) July 31, 2009 None 

NY-17-06838 Septic Tank Pumper E-105919 July 31, 2009 None 

NY-17-06839 Septic Tank Pumper E-107103 July 31, 2009 None 

Wastewater 

Discharge NTS 

GNEV93001 Water Pollution Control General Permit August 5, 2010 Quarterly 

NEV96021 Water Pollution Control for E-Tunnel Waste Water Disposal 

System and Monitoring Well ER-12-1 

October 1, 2013 Quarterly 

NLVF 

VEH-112 NLVF Wastewater Contribution Permit 

December 31, 

2013 Annually 

NV0023507 North Las Vegas National Pollutant Discharge Elimination 

System Permit 

November 2, 2011 Quarterly 

RSL-Nellis 

CCWRD-080 Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit June 30, 2009 Quarterly 

Hazardous 

Materials NTS 

2287-5146 NTS Hazardous Materials February 28, 2009 Annually 

2287-5147 Nonproliferation Test and Evaluation Complex February 28, 2009 Annually 

NLVF 

2287-5144 NLVF Hazardous Materials Permit February 28, 2009 Annually 

RSL-Nellis 

2287-5145 RSL Hazardous Materials Permit February 28, 2009 Annually 

NTS Hazardous Waste 

NEV-HW0021 NTS Hazardous Waste Management Permit (RCRA) December 1, 2010 Biennially 

0510003453 Utah Generator Site Access Permit November 1, 2008 None 

NTS Waste Management 

U1576-33N-01 RSL-Nellis Waste Management Permit-Underground 

Storage Tank 

December 31, 

2008 

None 
Compliance Summary

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 2-33 

Table 2-12. Environmental permits required for NTS and NTS site facility operations (continued) 

Permit 

Number Description Expiration Date Reporting 

NTS Disposal Sites

SW 13 000 01 Area 5 Asbestiform Low-Level Solid Waste Disposal Site Post-closure(a) Annually 

SW 13 097 02 Area 6 Hydrocarbon Disposal Site Post-closure Annually 

SW 13 097 03 Area 9 U10c Solid Waste Disposal Site Post-closure Annually 

SW 13 097 04 Area 23 Solid Waste Disposal Site Post-closure Biannually 

Endangered Species/Wildlife/Special Use 

File No. 1-5-96-F-33 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service – Desert Tortoise Incidental 

Take Authorization (Biological Opinion for Programmatic 

NTS Activities) 

December 31, 2008 Annually 

MB008695-0 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service – Migratory Bird Scientific 

Collecting Permit 

March 31, 2009 Annually 

MB037277-1 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service – Migratory Bird Special 

Purpose Possession – Dead Permit 

March 31, 2009 Annually 

S29157 Nevada Division of Wildlife – Scientific Collection of 

Wildlife Samples 

December 31, 2008 Annually 

(a) Permit expires 30 years after closure of the landfill 
Compliance Summary

2-34 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 3-1 

3.0 Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring 

Section 3.1 presents the results of radiological air monitoring conducted on the Nevada Test Site (NTS) to verify 

compliance with radioactive air emission standards (see Section 2.1). Sources of radioactive air emissions from 

the NTS include evaporation of tritiated water from containment ponds; diffusion of tritiated water vapor from the 

soil at Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites (RWMSs), Sedan crater, and Schooner crater; 

release of tritium gas during equipment calibrations; and resuspension of plutonium and americium from 

contaminated soil at historical nuclear device safety test locations and atmospheric test locations. Radiological air 

monitoring is conducted by National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec), Environmental Technical Services. 

Measurements of radioactivity in air samples are used to assess radiological dose to the general public in the 

vicinity of the NTS. The assessed dose to the public from all exposure pathways (air, water, direct radiation 

exposure, and consumption of game animals) is presented in Chapter 8. 

The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) has 

also established an air monitoring program to monitor radionuclides in air within communities adjacent to the 

NTS. This independent program, the Community Environmental Monitoring Program, is managed by the 

University of Nevada’s Desert Research Institute (DRI) of the Nevada System of Higher Education. DRI’s 2008 

offsite air monitoring results are presented in Chapter 6. 

Section 3.2 presents the results of nonradiological air quality assessments conducted on the NTS to ensure 

compliance with current air quality permits (see Section 2.1). NTS operations that are potential sources of 

nonradiological air pollution include aggregate production, surface disturbance (e.g., construction), release of 

fugitive dust from driving on unpaved roads, use of fuel-burning equipment, open burning, venting from bulk fuel 

storage facilities, explosives detonations, and releases of various chemicals during testing at the Nonproliferation 

Test and Evaluation Complex (NPTEC) or at other release areas. Air quality assessments are conducted by 

NSTec Environmental Services (ES). 

3.1 Radiological Air Monitoring 

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order DOE O 5400.5, “Radiation Protection of the Public and the 

Environment,” and the Clean Air Act (CAA) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

(NESHAP) require air monitoring for radiological emissions at the NTS. Radiological air monitoring is 

conducted to ensure that no significant emission source that contributes to calculable offsite exposures is ignored 

and that the NTS remains in compliance with the requirements of DOE O 5400.5 and the CAA. To accomplish 

this, an air surveillance network consisting of air particulate and atmospheric moisture samplers has been 

established. The objectives and design of the network are described in detail in the Routine Radiological 

Environmental Monitoring Plan (Bechtel Nevada, 2003a). The network monitors airborne radioactivity near NTS 

sites at which radioactivity from past nuclear testing was deposited on and in the soil, at NTS operating facilities 

that may produce radioactive air emissions, and along the NTS boundaries. 

Diffuse radionuclide sources from historic nuclear testing activities on the Tonopah Test Range (TTR) (Clean 

Slate 1, 2, and 3) are reported by Sandia National Laboratories (SNL) in the TTR annual environmental report 

(SNL, 2008). In July 2008, NNSA/NSO began conducting environmental and radiological monitoring at Clean 

Slate 3. The purpose is to assess current site conditions in preparation for monitoring when active site 

remediation begins. These monitoring efforts will be reported by SNL in the TTR annual environmental report, 

beginning calendar year 2009. Historic sites on the Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR) (Double Tracks and 

Project 57) are currently not being monitored; however, air sampling was conducted at Double Tracks during 

1996–1999 in support for its remediation and at Project 57 in 1997–2000 for surveillance purposes. NTTR air 

sampling results were reported in past NTS Annual Site Environmental Reports available at 

<http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/publications/environmental.aspx>. 

Data from all current sampling stations are analyzed to meet the specific goals listed below. Also listed below are 

the analytes monitored in order to perform dose assessments. These are the radionuclides most likely to be 

present in the air as a result of past or current NTS operations, selected based on NTS inventories of radionuclides 

in surface soil (McArthur, 1991) and upon their volatility and availability for resuspension; half-lives for these 

radionuclides are found in Table 1-5. Uranium is included on this list because depleted uranium (see Glossary, 

Appendix B) ordnance is used during exercises in Areas 20 and 25. Air samples from selected sampling locations 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

3-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

in the vicinity of these areas only are analyzed for uranium. Also, gross alpha and gross beta readings are used in 

air monitoring as a rapid screening measure. 

Radiological Air Monitoring Goals Analytes Monitored 

Americium-241 (241Am) 

Cesium-137 (137Cs) 

Tritium (3H) 

Plutonium-238 (238Pu) 

Plutonium-239+240 (239+240Pu) 

Uranium-233+234 (233+234U) 

Uranium-235+236 (235+236U) 

Uranium-238 (238U) 

Gross alpha radioactivity 

Gross beta radioactivity 

Measure radionuclide concentrations in air at or near historic or current 

operation sites that have the potential to release airborne radioactivity to 

(1) detect and identify local and site-wide trends, (2) identify radionuclides emitted to air, and (3) detect accidental and unplanned releases. 

Determine if radioactive air emissions from past or present NTS 

activities result in a radiation dose, called the committed effective dose 

equivalent (CEDE) (see Glossary, Appendix B), to any member of the 

public that exceeds the NESHAP standard of 10 millirem per year 

(mrem/yr) (0.1 millisievert per year [mSv/yr]). 

Provide point source operational monitoring as required under NESHAP 

for any facility that has the potential to emit radionuclides into the air 

and cause a dose greater than 0.1 mrem/yr (0.001 mSv/yr) to any 

member of the public. 

 

Provide data to determine if radioactive air emissions from past or 

present NTS activities result in a radiation dose to any member of the 

public from all pathways (air, water, food) that exceeds the DOE 

O 5400.5 standard of 100 mrem/yr (1 mSv/yr).

239+240Pu, 233+234U, and 235+236U are 

reported as the sum of isotope 

concentrations since the analytical 

method cannot readily distinguish 

the individual isotopes. 

3.1.1 Monitoring System Design

Environmental Samplers – There are 19 sampling stations referred to as environmental samplers. They include 

3 stations that have only low-volume air particulate samplers, 1 that has only a tritium sampler, and 15 that have 

both air particulate and tritium samplers (Figure 3-1). They are located throughout the NTS in or near the highest 

diffuse radiation sources. Predominant winds were a factor in station placement (for NTS wind rose data, see 

Section A.3 of Attachment A: Site Description, included as a separate file on the compact disc of this report). 

The sources include areas with (1) radioactivity in surface soil that can be resuspended by the wind, (2) tritium 

that transpires or evaporates from plants and soil at the sites of past nuclear tests, and (3) tritium that evaporates 

from ponds receiving tritiated water either pumped from contaminated wells or directed from tunnels that cannot 

be sealed shut. Sampling and analysis of air particulates and tritium were performed at these stations as described 

in Section 3.1.2. Radionuclide concentrations measured at these stations are used for trending, determining 

ambient background concentrations in the environment, and monitoring for unplanned releases of radioactivity. 

Air concentrations approaching 10 percent of the NESHAP Concentration Levels for Environmental Compliance 

(compliance levels [CLs]) (second column of Table 3-1) are investigated for causes that may be mitigated to 

avoid exceeding regulatory dose limits. 

Critical Receptor Samplers – Six of the 15 sampling stations with both air particulate and tritium samplers, near 

the boundaries and the center of the NTS, are approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) 

Region IX as critical receptor samplers (Figure 3-1). Radionuclide concentrations measured at these stations are 

used to assess compliance with the NESHAP dose limit to the public of 10 mrem/yr (0.1 mSv/yr). The annual 

average concentrations from each station were compared with the concentration limits listed in Table 3-1. 

Compliance with NESHAP is demonstrated when the sum of the fractions, determined by dividing each radionuclide’s concentration by its concentration limit and then adding the fractions together, is less than 1.0 at all 

stations. 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 3-3 

Figure 3-1. Radiological air sampling network on the NTS in 2008
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

3-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

 Table 3-1. Regulatory concentration limits for radionuclides in air 

 Concentration (x 10-15 microcuries/milliliter [μCi/mL]) 

Radionuclide 

NESHAP Concentration Level for 

Environmental Compliance (CL)(a)

10% of Derived Concentration Guide 

(DCG)(b)

241Am 1.9 2 

137Cs 19 40,000 

3

H 1,500,000 10,000,000 

238Pu 2.1 3 239Pu 2 2 

233U 7.1 9 234U 7.7 9 235U 7.1 10 236U 7.7 10 

238U 8.3 10 

Note: Both the CL values and 10% of the DCG values represent the annual average concentration that 

would result in a CEDE of 10 mrem/yr, which is the federal dose limit to the public from all 

radioactive air emissions. When they differ, the CLs are more conservative than the DCGs. They 

are computed using different dose models. 

(a) From Table 2, Appendix E of Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 61, 1999 

(b) From Chapter 3 of DOE O 5400.5, see Glossary, Appendix B for definition. 

Point-Source (Stack) Sampler – One facility on the NTS, the Joint Actinide Shock Physics Experimental 

Research (JASPER) Facility in Area 27 (Figure 3-1), requires stack monitoring because it has the potential to emit 

airborne radionuclides that could result in an offsite radiation dose ≥ 0.1 mrem/yr. Air emissions from the facility 

are filtered through high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filters before entering the stack where air is sampled 

before it is released. Environmental sampling of air particulates adjacent to the facility is also performed as stated 

in Section 3.1.2. If air concentrations of any man-made radionuclide were found in stack monitoring samples 

above the minimum detectable concentration (MDC) (see Glossary, Appendix B), an assessment of offsite dose to 

the public would be performed to determine NESHAP compliance, and the cause of the emission would be 

investigated and corrective actions implemented. 

3.1.2 Air Particulate and Tritium Sampling Methods 

A weekly sample was collected from each air particulate sampler by drawing air through a 10-centimeter (cm) 

(4-inch) diameter glass-fiber filter at a flow rate of about 85 liters per minute (L/min) (3 cubic feet [ft3

] per 

minute). The particulate filter is mounted in a filter holder that faces downward at a height of 1.5 meters (m) 

(5 feet [ft]) above ground. A run-time clock measures the operating time. The run time multiplied by 85 L/min 

yields the volume of air sampled, which is about 860 cubic meters (m3

) (30,000 ft3) during a typical seven-day 

sampling period. The air sampling rates were measured at the start and end of each sampling period with massflow meters that are calibrated annually. 

The 10-cm diameter filters were analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta radioactivity after a five-day holding 

time to allow for the decay of naturally occurring radon progeny. The filters collected within each month were 

composited for each station, analyzed by gamma spectroscopy for several analytes, and then analyzed for 238Pu, 

239+240Pu, and 241Am by alpha spectroscopy after chemical separation. To monitor for any potential emissions 

from past exercises using depleted uranium, the filter composites from Yucca (Area 6), Substation 3545 

(Area 16), Gate 20-2p (Area 20), Gate 510 (Area 25), and Able Site (Area 27) were also analyzed for uranium 

isotopes by alpha spectroscopy. 

Tritiated water vapor in the form of 3

H3HO or 3HHO (collectively referred to as HTO) was sampled continuously 

over two-week periods at each tritium (atmospheric moisture) sampling station. Tritium samplers were operated 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 3-5 

with elapsed time meters at a flow rate of about 566 cubic centimeters per minute (1.2 ft3 per hour). The total 

volume sampled is determined from the product of the sampling period and the flow rate (about 11 m3

 [14.4 cubic 

yards] over a two-week sampling period). The HTO was removed from the airstream by two molecular sieve 

columns connected in series (one for routine collection and a second to indicate if breakthrough occurred through 

the first column during collection). These columns were exchanged biweekly. An aliquot of the total moisture 

collected was extracted from the first column and analyzed for tritium by liquid scintillation counting. In all 

cases, measured activity in units per sample is converted to units per volume of air prior to reporting in the 

following sections. 

Routine quality control air samples (e.g., duplicates, blanks, and spikes) are also incorporated into the analytical 

suites on a frequent basis. Chapter 18 contains a discussion of quality assurance/quality control protocols and 

procedures utilized for radiological air monitoring. 

3.1.3 Presentation of Air Sampling Data 

The annual average concentration for each radionuclide at each station is presented in the following sections. The 

annual average concentration for each radionuclide was calculated from uncensored analytical results for 

individual samples; i.e., values less than the sample-specific MDC were included in the calculation. A column is 

included in each table indicating the percentage of the analytical results that were greater than their analysisspecific MDCs. 

Annual average concentrations are also expressed in the tables as percentages of the CL (the second column of 

Table 3-1). In graphs of concentration data, the CL or some percentage of the CL is included as a green 

horizontal line. The CL for each radionuclide is used instead of the DCG, as it is the lesser of the two for those 

radionuclides for which these limits differ. The CL or fraction thereof is shown in graphs for reference only and 

not to demonstrate compliance with NESHAP dose limits, since assessment of compliance is based upon annual 

average concentrations, not upon the single measurement results shown in the graphs. 

For convenience in reporting, values shown in the tables in the following result sections are frequently formatted 

to a greater number of significant digits than can be justified by the accuracy of the measurements, which is 

typically two significant figures (e.g., 2500, 25, 2.5, or 0.025). 

3.1.4 Air Sampling Results from Environmental Samplers 

All elevated radionuclide concentrations in the 2008 air samples shown in the tables and graphs are attributed to 

the resuspension of legacy contamination in surface soils and to the upward flux of tritium from the soil at sites of 

past nuclear tests and of low-level radioactive waste burial. 

Monitoring results for the point-source station at JASPER are included in the tables in this section. These results 

are not included in NTS-wide averages of air concentrations, as they are generally based on rather small air 

volumes and are consequently of rather lower precision than the data from the environmental air samplers. 

3.1.4.1 Americium-241 

During 2008, 28.5 percent of 241Am measurements exceeded their MDCs (Table 3-2). This is about the same as 

2007 (26.5 percent) and somewhat lower than 2006 and 2005 (40 and 35 percent, respectively). The mean 

concentration over all environmental sampler stations was 4.5 x 10-18 μCi/mL, similarly lower than preceding 

years including 2007. The highest concentrations are found sporadically at U-3ah/at S in Area 3 and at 

Bunker 9-300 in Area 9 (Figure 3-2), located within areas of known soil contamination from past nuclear tests. 

The annual mean concentrations at U-3ah/at S and Bunker 9-300 were 17.5 and 11.6 x 10-18 μCi/mL, 0.9 and 

0.6 percent of the CL, respectively. 

 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

3-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Table 3-2. Concentrations of 241Am in air samples collected in 2008 

241Am (x 10-18 μCi/mL) 

NTS 

Area

Sampling 

Station

Number 

of 

Samples Mean

 % of 

CL (a) Median SD (b) Min (c) Max (d)

 Mean 

 MDC

% >

MDC 

1 BJY 12 3.36 0.2 2.19 4.67 -2.27 11.65 9.46 29.2 

3 U-3ah/at N 12 4.42 0.2 3.79 4.91 -2.89 13.19 7.66 25.0 

3 U-3ah/at S 12 17.54 0.9 10.44 23.64 -1.50 82.81 8.43 58.3 

3 U-3bh N 12 5.57 0.3 4.81 7.37 -4.93 18.76 8.32 33.3 

3 U-3bh S 12 10.37 0.5 3.93 12.29 -1.11 34.56 8.75 50.0 

5 DoD 12 1.86 0.1 2.14 2.72 -2.47 6.74 8.33 20.8 

5 Sugar Bunker N 12 0.57 0.0 0.75 3.17 -4.50 5.83 9.15 8.3 

6 Yucca 12 4.49 0.2 2.58 9.09 -6.44 30.95 8.89 16.7 

9 Bunker 9-300 12 11.64 0.6 11.16 12.18 0.40 46.09 8.08 66.7 

10 Gate 700 S 12 2.37 0.1 1.73 4.81 -7.24 12.37 7.56 41.7 

10 Sedan N 12 5.56 0.3 5.14 6.32 -4.05 17.57 7.82 33.3 

16 3545 Substation 12 0.59 0.0 0.64 4.36 -4.43 11.57 9.15 8.3 

18 Little Feller 2 N 12 4.16 0.2 4.61 3.82 -1.06 9.58 7.28 25.0 

20 Gate 20-2P 12 -0.07 0.0 1.59 3.59 -8.28 3.56 9.10 8.3 

20 Schooner 12 4.52 0.2 2.94 8.15 -2.62 27.73 6.65 41.7 

23 Mercury Track 12 1.37 0.1 2.13 2.68 -3.55 6.03 7.98 16.7 

25 Gate 510 12 0.74 0.0 1.71 4.01 -7.35 7.99 8.66 16.7 

27 ABLE Site 12 2.60 0.1 2.36 2.60 -1.26 6.21 8.99 12.5 

All Environmental 

Samplers 216 4.54 0.2 2.58 9.18 -8.28 82.81 8.35 28.5 

27 JASPER Stack 12 43.25 2.3 27.27 47.24 -16.07 124.44 198.71 0.0 

Blue-shaded locations are EPA-approved critical receptor sampler stations. 

The orange-shaded location is a point-source sampler station. 

Non-shaded locations are environmental sampler stations. 

Green shading indicates that some percentage of samples had concentrations above the sample-specific MDC. 

 (a) CL is the NESHAP Concentration Level for Environmental Compliance (see Table 3-1). 

 (b) Standard deviation (c) Minimum (d) Maximum 

Note: The CL for 241Am is 1,900 x 10-18 μCi/mL. 

241Am

0

20

40

60

80

100

01-Jan-08

01-Apr-08

01-Jul-08

30-Sep-08

31-Dec-08

Collection Date

x 10-18 μCi/mL

U-3ah/at S

Bunker 9-300

U-3bh S

Yucca

Schooner

Other

5 % of CL

Figure 3-2. Concentrations of 241Am in air samples collected in 2008 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 3-7 

3.1.4.2 Cesium-137 

No 137Cs measurement exceeded its MDC during 2008 (Table 3-3). Mean values for all environmental samplers 

were near or below zero. No plot is provided because of the low measurement levels. 

Table 3-3. Concentrations of 137Csin air samples collected in 2008 

137Cs (x 10-17 μCi/mL) 

NTS 

Area

Number 

of 

Samples Mean

% of 

CL (a) Median SD (b) Min (c) Max (d)

 Mean 

 MDC

% >

MDC 

1 BJY 11 -4.18 -0.2 -1.44 14.73 -42.49 14.35 58.60 0.0 

3 U-3ah/at N 11 0.30 0.0 -0.86 22.36 -34.31 39.60 69.18 0.0 

3 U-3ah/at S 12 -7.04 -0.4 -11.27 27.88 -48.05 54.00 64.63 0.0 

3 U-3bh N 12 14.54 0.8 -1.15 48.26 -47.32 140.63 72.47 0.0 

3 U-3bh S 12 3.84 0.2 0.18 21.55 -19.97 43.80 69.32 0.0 

5 DoD 11 4.99 0.3 8.93 27.48 -36.84 56.55 67.99 0.0 

5 Sugar Bunker N 12 14.06 0.7 11.33 20.70 -13.12 61.37 59.85 0.0 

6 Yucca 12 -4.07 -0.2 -2.43 14.99 -32.46 15.60 58.27 0.0 

9 Bunker 9-300 11 -1.96 -0.1 -1.40 18.93 -40.73 28.51 61.85 0.0 

10 Gate 700 S 11 -4.13 -0.2 -6.83 16.85 -33.59 26.63 61.09 0.0 

10 Sedan N 10 2.74 0.1 0.97 14.88 -14.89 32.27 60.04 0.0 

16 3545 Substation 12 -6.31 -0.3 -8.08 18.70 -41.16 23.45 66.48 0.0 

18 Little Feller 2 N 12 -2.86 -0.2 -8.56 19.40 -30.11 39.40 64.07 0.0 

20 Gate 20-2P 11 6.14 0.3 1.82 24.46 -27.95 45.44 66.07 0.0 

20 Schooner 12 0.25 0.0 5.54 19.60 -35.50 22.97 55.43 0.0 

23 Mercury Track 12 1.32 0.1 2.32 13.81 -24.54 21.70 59.87 0.0 

25 Gate 510 11 -10.12 -0.5 -15.16 18.77 -33.78 17.35 60.13 0.0 

27 ABLE Site 12 -4.42 -0.2 -4.03 22.49 -50.90 26.37 60.86 0.0 

All Environmental 

Samplers 207 0.20 0.0 -0.87 22.90 -50.90 140.63 63.14 0.0 

27 JASPER Stack 12 318.31 16.8 -119.88 1319.68 -391.59 4396.07 1464.44 0.0 

Blue-shaded locations are EPA-approved critical receptor sampler stations. 

The orange-shaded location is a point-source sampler station. 

Non-shaded locations are environmental sampler stations. 

 (a) CL is the NESHAP Concentration Level for Environmental Compliance (see Table 3-1). 

 (b) Standard deviation 

 (c) Minimum 

 (d) Maximum 

Note: The CL for 137Cs is 1,900 x 10-17μCi/mL. 

3.1.4.3 Plutonium Isotopes 

During 2008 7.8 percent of 238Pu measurements exceeded their MDCs (Table 3-4), somewhat fewer than during 

2007, 2006, and 2005. The overall mean concentration (2.27 x 10-18 μCi/mL) was similar to that of the three prior 

years. No one station appears to be consistently higher than the rest; see Figure 3-3. The highest mean 

concentrations at the stations were only 0.2 percent of the CL. 

Plutonium isotopes 239+240Pu (analytical methods cannot readily distinguish between 239Pu and 240Pu) are of greater 

abundance and hence greater interest. Overall, 48 percent of measurements exceeded their MDCs (Table 3-5). 

The overall mean of 22 x 10-18 μCi/mL is considerably lower than in 2006 and 2005 (138 and 148 x 10-18 μCi/mL, 

respectively) but similar to levels seen in other recent years (39, 48, 38, and 55 x 10-18 μCi/mL in 2007, 2004, 

2003, and 2002, respectively). The locations with the highest means are U-3ah/at S and Bunker 9-300, with 

annual means of 91 and 73 x 10-18 μCi/mL, respectively; these are 4.6 and 3.7 percent of the CL (see Table 3-5
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

3-8 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Table 3-4. Concentrations of 238Pu in air samples collected in 2008

238Pu (x 10-18 μCi/mL) 

NTS 

Area

Sampling 

Station

Number 

of 

Samples Mean

% of 

CL (a) Median SD (b) Min (c) Max (d)

 Mean 

 MDC

% >

MDC 

1 BJY 12 1.35 0.1 0.85 2.42 -2.34 6.53 8.85 0.0 

3 U-3ah/at N 11 0.88 0.0 0.66 2.83 -4.56 5.90 16.58 0.0 

3 U-3ah/at S 12 4.98 0.2 3.36 5.48 -0.77 14.30 10.54 16.7 

3 U-3bh N 11 1.71 0.1 0.53 3.23 -1.13 9.34 8.74 0.0 

3 U-3bh S 11 3.50 0.2 2.26 3.74 -0.67 12.28 8.85 9.1 

5 DoD 11 1.82 0.1 1.63 3.06 -3.07 6.45 9.72 9.1 

5 Sugar Bunker N 12 3.47 0.2 0.28 7.23 -2.03 23.01 11.14 8.3 

6 Yucca 12 3.02 0.1 0.89 7.17 -3.51 22.75 12.24 12.5 

9 Bunker 9-300 12 2.37 0.1 2.12 4.10 -5.65 10.25 7.44 16.7 

10 Gate 700 S 12 1.65 0.1 1.27 1.93 -1.39 5.00 11.62 8.3 

10 Sedan N 12 2.08 0.1 2.29 4.47 -10.81 7.25 10.95 16.7 

16 3545 Substation 12 0.48 0.0 0.00 3.16 -5.88 7.17 8.81 0.0 

18 Little Feller 2 N 12 0.97 0.0 0.75 1.60 -1.16 4.08 10.10 8.3 

20 Gate 20-2P 12 3.74 0.2 1.47 5.99 -0.89 18.40 10.20 0.0 

20 Schooner 12 5.11 0.2 1.88 7.15 -1.22 22.88 9.02 16.7 

23 Mercury Track 12 -0.75 0.0 0.00 3.25 -10.32 2.48 7.48 0.0 

25 Gate 510 12 2.70 0.1 1.92 3.34 -0.67 9.68 8.67 16.7 

27 ABLE Site 11 1.68 0.1 0.00 3.65 -2.27 8.41 11.85 0.0 

All Environmental 

Samplers 211 2.27 0.1 1.13 4.54 -10.81 23.01 10.13 7.8 

27 JASPER Stack 12 57.20 2.7 10.18 146.11 -23.64 514.30 167.54 0.0 

Blue-shaded locations are EPA-approved critical receptor sampler stations. 

The orange-shaded location is a point-source sampler station. 

Non-shaded locations are environmental sampler stations. 

Green shading indicates that some percentage of samples had concentrations above the sample-specific MDC. 

 (a) CL is the NESHAP Concentration Level for Environmental Compliance (see Table 3-1). 

 (b) Standard deviation (c) Minimum (d) Maximum 

Note: The CL for 238Pu is 2,100 x 10-18μCi/mL. 

238Pu

-10

0

10

20

30

01-Jan-08

01-Apr-08

01-Jul-08

30-Sep-08

31-Dec-08

Collection Date

x 10-18 μCi/mL

Sugar Bunker N

Schooner

Yucca

Gate 20-2P

U-3ah/at S

Other

1 % of CL

Figure 3-3. Concentrations of 238Pu in air samples collected in 2008 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 3-9 

and Figure 3-4). The relatively high plutonium values observed at these stations are due to diffuse sources of 

radionuclides from historical nuclear testing in Areas 3 and 9 and in surrounding Areas 4 and 7. 

The temporal patterns for 241Am and 239+240Pu at U-3ah/at S and Bunker 9-300 shown in Figures 3-2 and 3-4 are 

correlated. This is because 241Am is the long-lived daughter product obtained when 241Pu (a short-lived isotope 

created along with the more common Pu isotopes) decays by beta emission. Hence, 239+240Pu and 241Am (and also 

238Pu to some extent) tend to be found together in particles of Pu remaining from past nuclear tests. The half-life 

of 241Pu is 14.4 years, whereas that of 241Am is 432 years; consequently, concentrations of 241Am in NTS soils 

should gradually increase for about 80 years and then decrease. These isotopes become airborne by soil 

disturbances. 

Table 3-5. Concentrations of 239+240Pu in air samples collected in 2008 

 239+240Pu (x 10-18 μCi/mL) 

NTS 

Area 

Sampling 

Station 

Number 

of 

Samples Mean 

% of 

CL (a) Median SD (b) Min (c) Max (d)

 Mean 

 MDC 

% >

MDC 

1 BJY 12 28.60 1.4 16.44 43.89 1.28 161.07 8.30 70.8 

3 U-3ah/at N 12 27.42 1.4 26.23 20.41 1.79 58.26 9.38 66.7 

3 U-3ah/at S 12 91.24 4.6 43.18 141.09 -0.99 511.39 14.35 83.3 

3 U-3bh N 12 32.36 1.6 23.41 30.67 -0.02 100.33 8.45 83.3 

3 U-3bh S 12 55.44 2.8 21.03 88.82 3.30 259.19 6.24 66.7 

5 DoD 12 3.05 0.2 2.57 3.84 -2.40 12.40 6.26 37.5 

5 Sugar Bunker N 12 4.97 0.2 5.30 3.99 -2.00 10.91 9.31 33.3 

6 Yucca 12 24.82 1.2 8.18 57.66 0.00 206.91 8.09 58.3 

9 Bunker 9-300 12 73.18 3.7 48.27 84.04 13.93 327.49 6.21 100.0 

10 Gate 700 S 12 6.78 0.3 4.92 7.12 1.49 28.75 8.77 37.5 

10 Sedan N 12 26.66 1.3 17.41 26.80 -2.08 85.50 9.72 66.7 

16 3545 Substation 12 1.67 0.1 1.99 6.50 -15.62 12.58 8.71 25.0 

18 Little Feller 2 N 12 7.65 0.4 6.10 6.08 1.36 24.56 8.09 50.0 

20 Gate 20-2P 12 2.14 0.1 1.62 4.33 -9.19 7.38 9.57 12.5 

20 Schooner 12 3.54 0.2 1.95 6.39 -3.69 20.73 8.04 16.7 

23 Mercury Track 12 3.56 0.2 2.08 4.33 -1.29 12.75 7.61 20.8 

25 Gate 510 12 1.60 0.1 1.28 2.98 -3.23 8.77 9.25 8.3 

27 ABLE Site 12 3.97 0.2 3.03 4.50 -0.04 16.32 8.70 29.2 

All Environmental 

Samplers 216 22.15 1.1 6.00 53.34 -15.62 511.39 8.61 48.1 

27 JASPER Stack 11 32.48 1.6 15.94 34.33 0.00 106.25 130.55 0.0 

Blue-shaded locations are EPA-approved critical receptor sampler stations. 

The orange-shaded location is a point-source sampler station. 

Non-shaded locations are environmental sampler stations. 

Green shading indicates that some percentage of samples had concentrations above the sample-specific MDC. 

 (a) CL is the NESHAP Concentration Level for Environmental Compliance (see Table 3-1). 

 (b) Standard deviation 

 (c) Minimum 

 (d) Maximum 

Note: The CL for 239+240Pu is 2,000 x 10-18 μCi/mL. 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

3-10 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

239+240Pu

0

100

200

300

400

500

01-Jan-08

01-Apr-08

01-Jul-08

30-Sep-08

31-Dec-08

Collection Date

x 10-18 μCi/mL

U-3ah /at S

Bunker 9-300

U-3bh S

Yucca

Other

20 % of CL

Figure 3-4. Concentrations of 239+240Pu in air samples collected in 2008 

Figure 3-5 shows long-term trends in 239+240Pu annual mean concentrations at locations with at least 15-year data 

histories since 1970. Rather than showing the time histories for all 42 locations, Figure 3-5 shows the annual 

highest mean for any station in its “area group” (geographically contiguous group of NTS Areas). The estimated 

average annual rates of decline for the area groups range from 2.9 percent (Areas 1 and 3) and 4.0 percent 

(Areas 7, 9, 10, and 15) to 17.7 percent (Areas 19 and 20). These rates are all considerably faster than can be 

attributed to radioactive decay, as the half-lives of 239Pu and 240Pu are 24,110 and 6,537 years, respectively. The 

decreases are therefore attributed to immobilization of Pu particles in soil and/or decrease in activities resulting in 

soil resuspension. The half-life of the less abundant 238Pu is 88 years. Figure 3-6 shows the average (geometric 

mean) trend lines by area group for all stations with at least 15-year histories in that area group. 

Highest Annual Mean for 239+240Pu by Area Group

1

10

100

1000

10000

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Year

 x 10-18

μCi/mL

Area 1 and 3

Area 2, 1 2, and 1 6

Area 5 non-RWMS

Area 5 RWMS

Area 6 and 11

Area 7, 9, 1 0, and 1 5

Area 1 9 and 20

Area 23

Area 25 and 27

CL

Figure 3-5. Highest annual mean concentrations of 239+240Pu in air samples for each NTS area group, 1971–2008
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 3-11 

239+240Pu Annual Mean Trends by Area Group

Average Trend Lines for Locations With ≥ 15-Year Histories

0

50

100

150

200

250

1970 1980 1990 2000 2010

Year

x 10-18

μCi/mL

Area 1 and 3

Area 2, 1 2, and 1 6

Area 5 non - RW MS

Area 5 RW MS

Area 6 and 11

Area 7, 9, 1 0, and 1 5

Area 1 9 and 20

Area 23

Area 25 and 27

1 0 % of CL

Figure 3-6. Fitted average trends in 239+240Pu geometric-means of air samples by NTS area group, 1971–2008

3.1.4.4 Uranium Isotopes 

Uranium analyses by radiochemistry were performed for samples from five stations. Exercises using depleted 

uranium ordnance have been conducted in the past in Areas 20 and 25. The annual mean concentrations are 

shown in Table 3-6; note that the scale factor in Table 3-6 is the same for 233+234U and 238U, but an order of 

magnitude lower for 235+236U. All but one of the 233+234U and 238U measurements exceeded their MDCs, whereas 

32 percent of measurements exceeded the MDC for 235+236U. Mean concentrations of all isotopes are similar to 

those for 2007. These mean concentrations remain around 2–4 percent of the CLs for 233+234U and 238U and at 

most 0.2 percent of the CL for 235+236U. No substantial or statistically significant differences were observed 

between stations. 

Table 3-6. Concentrations of uranium isotopes in air samples collected in 2008 

 233+234U (x 10-17 μCi/mL) 

NTS 

Area Sampling Station 

Number of 

Samples Mean 

% of 

CL (a) Median SD (b) Min (c) Max (d)

Mean 

MDC 

% > 

MDC 

6 Yucca 12 18.45 2.6 19.09 3.49 11.21 24.00 2.02 100.0 

16 3545 Substation 12 28.91 4.1 19.15 34.12 2.25 135.35 2.76 100.0 

20 Gate 20-2P 12 17.47 2.5 16.54 3.60 11.79 25.30 1.90 100.0 

25 Gate 510 12 21.83 3.1 18.22 13.13 14.14 62.04 2.24 100.0 

27 ABLE Site 12 18.16 2.6 18.01 2.98 13.10 22.97 2.43 100.0 

 All Stations 60 20.96 3.0 18.89 16.55 2.25 135.35 2.27 100.0 

 235+236U (x 10-18 μCi/mL) 

6 Yucca 12 7.21 0.1 6.54 7.14 -0.29 26.05 16.39 20.8 

16 3545 Substation 12 15.16 0.2 10.59 21.93 1.31 81.09 14.11 50.0 

20 Gate 20-2P 12 7.98 0.1 7.07 6.35 0.98 19.34 13.57 41.7 

25 Gate 510 12 9.75 0.1 9.91 6.56 0.25 20.68 13.28 29.2 

27 ABLE Site 12 7.66 0.1 5.89 7.19 -1.53 19.04 17.80 16.7 

All Stations 60 9.55 0.1 7.36 11.54 -1.53 81.09 15.03 31.7 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

3-12 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Table 3-6. Concentrations of uranium isotopes in air samples collected in 2008 (continued) 

 238U (x 10-17 μCi/mL) 

NTS 

Area Sampling Station 

Number of 

Samples Mean 

% of 

CL (a) Median SD (b) Min (c) Max (d)

Mean 

MDC 

% > 

MDC 

6 Yucca 12 17.44 2.1 17.84 3.07 11.33 22.73 1.90 100.0 

16 3545 Substation 12 17.97 2.2 19.24 5.73 1.63 22.35 2.19 91.7 

20 Gate 20-2P 12 19.11 2.3 19.62 1.81 15.90 21.96 1.59 100.0 

25 Gate 510 12 18.11 2.2 17.01 3.30 13.45 24.72 1.86 100.0 

27 ABLE Site 12 19.73 2.4 20.54 3.64 13.29 24.47 1.94 100.0 

 All Stations 60 18.47 2.2 18.66 3.70 1.63 24.72 1.90 98.3 

Blue-shaded locations are EPA-approved critical receptor sampler stations. 

Non-shaded locations are environmental sampler stations. 

Green shading indicates that some percentage of samples had concentrations above the sample-specific MDC. 

 (a) CL is the NESHAP Concentration Level for Environmental Compliance (see Table 3-1). 

 (b) Standard deviation 

 (c) Minimum 

 (d) Maximum 

 Note: The CL for 233+234U is about 710 x 10-17 μCi/mL. 

 The CL for 235+236U is about 7,100 x 10-18 μCi/mL. 

 The CL for 238U is 830 x 10-17 μCi/mL. 

The ratios of the uranium isotope concentrations are given in Table 3-7, and Table 3-8 presents the values 

expected of those ratios for uranium from different sources. Because of the high proportion of 235+236U 

measurements below their MDCs, including negative values, these ratios are computed in terms of 233+234U/238U 

and 235+236U/238U, a departure from reports over the past five years that used ratios with 238U in the numerator. The 

median 235+236U/238U ratio is consistent with a source of natural U, whereas the median 233+234U/238U ratio is below 

the target values for both natural and depleted U. There was one anomalous sample in April from 

3545 Substation, which had uranium ratios more suggestive of enriched U. No other sample during 2008 

supported evidence of an enriched uranium source at that location. 

Table 3-7. Observed values of uranium isotope ratios in 2008 

Isotope Ratio Values 

233+234U / 238U 235+236U / 238U 

Median (95% CI) 1.00 (0.92, 1.05) 0.043 (0.033, .058) 

 Table 3-8. Expected ratios of uranium isotopes by type of source 

Expected Isotope Ratios Source 233+234U / 238U 235+236U / 238U 

Natural ~1.29 ~0.047 

Enriched ~6.8 ~0.19 

Depleted ~1.13 ~0.016 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 3-13 

3.1.4.5 Tritium 

Measurements of tritium (3H) in air vary widely across monitoring stations on the NTS. Overall 35 percent of 

atmospheric moisture samples have 3

H concentrations above their MDCs (Table 3-9); this proportion of 

detections ranges from 100 percent at Schooner and E Tunnel Pond to less than 10 percent at several stations. 

As in past years, the highest mean concentration was at the Schooner station (280 x 10-6 picocuries per milliliter 

[pCi/mL]). The next highest were 5.6 x 10-6 pCi/mL at Sedan N and 5.0 x 10-6 pCi/mL at E Tunnel Pond 2; all of 

these values were similar to those from 2007. Figure 3-7 shows these data; note that the Schooner values are 

plotted at one-tenth of their actual values in order to allow the variation at other locations to be visible. The 

Schooner annual mean was 19 percent of the CL. The mean concentrations at other locations were at most 

0.4 percent of the CL. 

Table 3-9. Concentrations of 3H in air samples collected in 2008 

 3

H Concentration (x 10-6 pCi/mL) 

NTS 

Area 

Sampling 

Station 

Number of 

Samples Mean 

% of 

 CL (a) Median SD (b) Min (c) Max (d)

Mean

MDC 

% >

MDC 

1 BJY 26 0.85 0.1 0.78 0.74 -0.14 3.20 1.02 34.6 

3 U-3ah/at S 26 1.06 0.1 0.86 0.85 -0.20 2.98 1.02 46.2 

3 U-3bh N 24 1.02 0.1 0.57 1.17 -0.03 4.97 1.05 29.2 

5 DoD 25 0.40 0.0 0.30 0.48 -0.34 1.53 1.02 18.0 

5 Sugar Bunker N 25 0.59 0.0 0.54 0.46 -0.29 1.72 1.07 16.0 

6 Yucca 25 0.32 0.0 0.34 0.32 -0.51 1.01 1.08 0.0 

9 Bunker 9-300 26 1.79 0.1 1.52 1.41 0.01 5.01 1.02 69.2 

10 Gate 700 S 25 0.41 0.0 0.26 0.58 -0.33 2.36 1.02 12.0 

10 Sedan N 26 5.62 0.4 4.32 5.35 -0.01 17.60 1.02 92.3 

12 E Tunnel Pond 2 25 5.01 0.3 4.04 3.13 0.96 10.70 1.02 100.0 

16 3545 Substation 26 0.24 0.0 0.16 0.39 -0.41 1.03 1.00 7.7 

18 Little Feller 2 N 26 0.18 0.0 0.14 0.29 -0.33 0.74 1.00 3.8 

20 Gate 20-2P 26 0.23 0.0 0.30 0.32 -0.55 0.98 0.95 11.5 

20 Schooner 26 279.87 18.7 179.50 282.83 9.30 817.00 1.32 100.0 

23 Mercury Track 26 0.20 0.0 0.23 0.35 -0.61 0.93 1.08 5.8 

25 Gate 510 25 0.09 0.0 0.10 0.34 -0.74 0.74 1.13 8.0 

 All Environmental 

Samplers 408 18.96 1.3 0.53 97.79 -0.74 817.00 1.05 34.8 

 Blue-shaded locations are EPA-approved critical receptor sampler stations.

 Non-shaded locations are environmental sampler stations.

 Green shading indicates that some percentage of samples had concentrations above the sample-specific MDC

 (a) CL is the NESHAP Concentration Level for Environmental Compliance (see Table 3-1). 

 (b) Standard deviation 

 (c) Minimum 

 (d) Maximum 

 Note: The CL for 3

H is 1,500 x 10-6 pCi/mL. 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

3-14 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Figure 3-7. Concentrations of 3H in air samples collected in 2008 and Pahute Mesa air temperature 

The tritium found at Schooner, Sedan N, and E Tunnel Pond 2 comes from past nuclear tests. Tritium associated 

with these tests quickly oxidized into tritiated water, which remains in the surrounding soil and rubble until it 

moves to the surface and evaporates. Higher tritium concentrations in air are generally observed during the 

summer months. For the E Tunnel Pond station, this increase is due to the rate of evaporation increasing as the 

temperature increases during the summer months. For the Schooner and Sedan stations, increased tritium 

emissions are likely due to the movement of relatively deep soil moisture (> 2 m) containing relatively high 

concentrations of tritium to the surface when temperatures are the highest and when shallow (< 2 m) soil moisture 

is the lowest. Rainfall can temporarily suppress these emissions by diluting the shallow soil moisture. Figure 3-7 

shows the relationship between 3

H measurements and the average daily temperature at Pahute Mesa, where 

Schooner is located; Figure 3-8 shows the time and amount of precipitation events in that area. 

3

H and Schooner Precipitation

0

20

40

60

80

01-Jan-08

01-Apr-08

01-Jul-08

30-Sep-08

31-Dec-08

Collection Date

x 10-6 pCi/mL

0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Inches

Schooner x 0.1

Sedan N

E Tunnel Pond

Other

5 % of CL

Precipitation

Figure 3-8. Concentrations of 3

H in air samples collected in 2008 and Pahute Mesa precipitation

3

H and Pahute Mesa Temperature

0

20

40

60

80

01-Jan-08

01-Apr-08

01-Jul-08

30-Sep-08

31-Dec-08

Collection Date

x 10-6 pCi/mL

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

oF

Schooner x 0.1

Sedan N

E Tunnel Pond

Other

5 % of CL

Temperature
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 3-15 

Figure 3-9 shows long-term trends for the annual mean tritium levels at locations with at least seven-year histories 

since 1990, color-coded by NTS Area. At most locations, the 3

H measurements have been decreasing fairly 

rapidly from year to year; the average decline rate is around 14 percent per year across all locations excluding 

Schooner. These figures and patterns differ slightly from those in the 2007 NTS environmental report 

(NSTec, 2008a), as E Tunnel Pond now has enough history to be included in the “≥ 7 years” category. 

3

H Annual Means

Data before 1999 adjusted to compensate

 for change in sampling methods

0

10

20

30

40

50

1988 1993 1998 2003 2008

Year

x 10-6 pCi/mL

Area 1

Area 5

Area 6, 9, 1 0, and 1 2

Area 1 5, 1 6, and 1 8

Schooner x 0.1

Area 23 and 25

1 % of CL

Figure 3-9. Annual mean concentrations of 3

H in air samples, 1990–2008 

The exception to the generally decreasing trend occurs at Schooner. As Figure 3-10 shows, Schooner 3H data do 

not show a consistent trend; rather, 3

H emissions appear to be related to the temperatures on Pahute Mesa during 

the summer months. The data suggest that there may be influences due to seasonal precipitation and recharge as 

well. 

Schooner Tritium vs Pahute Mesa Temperature

100

200

300

400

500

1997 2001 2005 2009

Year

x 10-6 pCi/mL

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

oF

Tritium in air

Jun-Sep mean temp

Figure 3-10. Concentrations of 3H at Schooner and June–September mean temperatures at Pahute Mesa, 1998–2008 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

3-16 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

3.1.4.6 Gross Alpha and Gross Beta 

The gross alpha and gross beta radioactivity in air samples collected in 2008 are shown in Tables 3-10 and 3-11 

and Figures 3-11 and 3-12. Since these radioactivity measurements include naturally occurring radionuclides 

(e.g., 40K, 7

Be, uranium, thorium, and the daughter isotopes of uranium and thorium) in uncertain proportions, a 

meaningful CL cannot be constructed. These analyses are useful in that they can be performed just five days after 

sample collection to identify any increases requiring investigation. 

Overall, 26 percent of gross alpha measurements exceeded their MDCs, comparable to 2007 and somewhat lower 

than 2006 and 2005. The distribution of measurement means across the network is also similar to that of 2007, 

and the overall mean is comparable with those of the past few years. Figure 3-11 shows these measurements; the 

predominant features are the few isolated high values at U-3ah/at S, U3-bh S, and Sugar Bunker N, along with the 

general parallelism of the week-to-week variation in the measurements. 

The gross beta measurements in 2008 resembled those of prior years: all data exceeded their MDCs, the mean 

values are similar, and there are no stations with data standing out from the others. The most prominent feature in 

Figure 3-12, as in past years, is the week-to-week parallel variation between sampling locations. This is much 

more pronounced with gross beta than with gross alpha or other analytes.

 Table 3-10. Gross alpha radioactivity in air samples collected in 2008 

 Gross Alpha (x 10-16 μCi/mL) 

NTS 

Area 

Sampling 

Station 

Number of 

Samples Mean Median SD (a) Min (b) Max (c)

Mean 

MDC 

% >

MDC 

1 BJY 53 18.90 18.93 11.70 -1.08 42.94 29.38 19.8 

3 U-3ah/at N 53 19.42 19.12 12.31 -5.54 51.79 28.92 28.3 

3 U-3ah/at S 52 20.16 18.04 16.70 -5.69 105.55 28.49 23.1 

3 U-3bh N 49 18.09 18.55 11.93 -6.77 44.65 29.78 18.4 

3 U-3bh S 50 24.39 24.36 16.53 -3.55 94.05 28.54 40.0 

5 DoD 52 16.37 15.65 11.14 -7.63 46.36 28.84 19.2 

5 Sugar Bunker N 53 31.62 29.44 19.80 -6.61 86.24 29.63 58.5 

6 Yucca 53 23.34 24.07 12.91 -13.41 49.27 28.68 37.7 

9 Bunker 9-300 52 23.14 21.34 13.82 -12.32 67.61 28.69 34.6 

10 Gate 700 S 52 16.29 14.90 9.73 0.00 41.93 28.93 16.3 

10 Sedan N 53 17.49 14.83 13.15 -5.64 43.40 28.73 28.3 

16 3545 Substation 51 19.15 18.74 12.22 -5.39 53.61 29.22 23.5 

18 Little Feller 2 N 53 17.47 16.58 11.27 -7.87 46.16 28.68 17.0 

20 Gate 20-2P 52 17.74 17.26 12.64 -7.98 45.52 29.27 21.2 

20 Schooner 53 17.64 18.88 10.47 -11.05 39.38 28.70 20.8 

23 Mercury Track 53 17.95 19.21 10.81 -6.63 39.31 29.01 13.2 

25 Gate 510 53 18.55 16.80 12.60 -10.94 48.99 28.91 24.5 

27 ABLE Site 53 16.08 16.69 11.24 -6.68 40.53 28.93 14.2 

All Environmental 

Samplers 940 19.65 18.72 13.47 -13.41 105.55 28.96 25.5 

27 JASPER Stack 48 -72.41 -33.09 312.49 -769.93 776.65 737.24 2.1 

Blue-shaded locations are EPA-approved critical receptor sampler stations. 

The orange-shaded location is a point-source sampler station. 

Non-shaded locations are environmental sampler stations. 

Green shading indicates that some percentage of samples had concentrations above the sample-specific MDC. 

(a) Standard deviation 

(b) Minimum 

(c) Maximum 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 3-17 

Table 3-11. Gross beta radioactivity in air samples collected in 2008 

 Gross Beta (x 10-15 μCi/mL) 

NTS 

Area 

Sampling 

Station 

Number of 

Samples Mean Median SD (a) Min (b) Max (c)

Mean 

MDC 

% >

MDC 

1 BJY 53 20.27 20.10 6.59 7.95 51.66 4.25 100.0 

3 U-3ah/at N 53 20.33 19.85 6.45 9.54 50.01 4.18 100.0 

3 U-3ah/at S 52 21.16 20.20 6.16 11.49 49.53 4.13 100.0 

3 U-3bh N 49 21.02 20.48 6.92 7.80 51.58 4.35 100.0 

3 U-3bh S 50 20.84 20.27 6.62 8.37 50.10 4.15 100.0 

5 DoD 52 21.49 21.28 6.79 9.67 55.78 4.17 100.0 

5 Sugar Bunker N 53 22.94 22.56 7.05 10.35 55.26 4.28 100.0 

6 Yucca 53 21.43 20.74 7.16 10.79 57.06 4.15 100.0 

9 Bunker 9-300 52 20.18 19.63 6.10 9.35 49.10 4.16 100.0 

10 Gate 700 S 52 20.03 19.01 6.44 8.11 50.13 4.18 100.0 

10 Sedan N 53 19.80 18.85 6.41 7.73 49.47 4.15 100.0 

16 3545 Substation 51 19.91 19.17 7.04 8.48 50.32 4.25 100.0 

18 Little Feller 2 N 53 19.17 19.20 6.16 6.18 43.97 4.15 100.0 

20 Gate 20-2P 52 19.38 19.40 5.97 9.14 44.13 4.23 100.0 

20 Schooner 53 19.53 18.62 6.41 7.49 46.93 4.15 100.0 

23 Mercury Track 53 20.94 21.09 6.40 8.62 50.10 4.20 100.0 

25 Gate 510 53 21.68 21.30 7.02 10.18 56.40 4.17 100.0 

27 ABLE Site 53 20.24 19.34 6.88 8.79 54.80 4.18 100.0 

All Environmental 

Samplers 940 20.57 20.09 6.60 6.18 57.06 4.19 100.0 

27 JASPER Stack 48 4.38 3.13 27.33 -75.09 93.08 96.60 0.0 

Blue-shaded locations are EPA-approved critical receptor sampler stations. 

The orange-shaded location is a point-source sampler station. 

Non-shaded locations are environmental sampler stations. 

Green shading indicates that some percentage of samples had concentrations above the sample-specific MDC. 

(a) Standard deviation 

(b) Minimum 

(c) Maximum 

Gross Alpha

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

01-Jan-08

01-Apr-08

01-Jul-08

30-Sep-08

31-Dec-08

Collection Date

x 10-16 μCi/mL

U - 3 a h /a t S

U - 3 b h S

Sugar Bunker N

Other

Figure 3-11. Gross alpha radioactivity in air samples collected in 2008 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

3-18 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Gross Beta

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

01-Jan-08

01-Apr-08

01-Jul-08

30-Sep-08

31-Dec-08

Collection Date

x 10-15 μCi/mL

Figure 3-12. Gross beta radioactivity in each air sample collected in 2008 

3.1.5 Air Sampling Results from Critical Receptor Samplers 

The following radionuclides were detectable at three or more of the critical receptor samplers: 241Am, 238Pu, 

239+240Pu, 233+234U, 235+236U, 238U, and 3

H (see Tables 3-2, 3-4, 3-5, 3-6, and 3-9, respectively). All measured 

concentrations of these radionuclides were well below their CLs during 2008. The uranium isotopes have been 

attributed to naturally occurring uranium, and hence have been monitored only at selected locations (see Section 

3.1.4.4). The concentration of each measured radionuclide (excluding uranium) at each of the six critical receptor 

stations was divided by its respective CL (see Table 3-1) to obtain a “percent of CL.” These were then summed 

for each station. The sum of these fractions at each critical receptor sampler is far less than 1.0, demonstrating 

that the NESHAP dose limit (10 mrem/yr) at these critical receptor locations was not exceeded. The highest 

radiation dose (CEDE) at a critical receptor location would be approximately 1.93 mrem/yr for a hypothetical 

individual residing at Schooner. 

Table 3-12. Sum of fractions of compliance levels for man-made radionuclides at critical receptor samplers 

Radionuclides Included in 

Sum of Fractions(a)

NTS 

Area Sampling Station

Sum of Fractions of Compliance 

Levels (CLs)(b)

6 Yucca 0.016 

10 Gate 700 S 0.006 

16 3545 Substation 0.002 

20 Schooner 0.193(b)

23 Mercury 0.003 

241Am, 238Pu, 239+240Pu, 3

H

25 Gate 510 0.003 

(a) 233+234U, 235+236U, and 238U are not included in sum of fractions. Uranium detected in air particulate samples has 

previously been determined to be naturally occurring, based on the isotopic ratios. If uranium is included as well, the 

sum of fractions increases to 0.064, 0.066, and 0.056 for Yucca, 3545 Substation, and Gate 510, respectively. Isotopic 

uranium analyses have not been performed at the other critical receptor locations; presumably the increases in the sum 

of fractions would be comparable, around 0.05. 

(b) This equates to a hypothetical receptor at this location receiving a CEDE of 1.9 mrem/yr. 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 3-19 

3.1.6 Air Sampling Results from Point-Source (Stack) Sampler 

Analyses of the 2008 air samples from the stack sampler at the JASPER facility contained no measurements of 

man-made radionuclides above their MDCs (see Tables 3-2 through 3-5). The HEPA filters at the facility 

appeared to function as intended; no radionuclide emission rate or offsite dose was calculated for this potential 

NTS radiation source (see Chapter 8). 

3.1.7 Emission Evaluations for Planned Projects 

No new construction or modifications were conducted on the NTS that increased the rate of radionuclide 

emissions to air. Two projects, however, were evaluated during 2008 to determine if they have the potential to 

release airborne radionuclides that would expose the public to a dose equal to or greater than 0.1 mrem/yr. For 

any project or facility with this potential, the EPA requires point-source operational monitoring. The projects 

evaluated in 2008 included: 

• High explosives experiments conducted at the Big Explosives Experimental Facility (BEEF) using depleted 

uranium (DU) 

• Evacuation of unfiltered air from the confinement chamber at the JASPER 

The evaluations were considered periodic confirmatory measurements, as required by 40 CFR Section 61.93 (b) 

(4)(i), to ensure an emission source is still a minor source; these were performed using the EPA-approved 

atmospheric diffusion model called the Clean Air Package 1988, Version 3.0 (CAP88-PC). CAP88-PC computes 

the CEDE for an offsite maximally exposed individual (MEI) from air emissions in mrem/yr. The CEDE to the 

MEI for each evaluated project were well below the limit of 0.1 mrem/yr. The detailed air emission dose 

evaluations for each project are reported separately in Warren and Grossman (2009). 

3.1.8 Unplanned Releases 

No unplanned radionuclide releases occurred on the NTS during 2008. 

3.1.9 Total NTS Radiological Atmospheric Releases 

Each year existing operations, new construction projects, and modifications to existing facilities that have the 

potential for airborne emissions of radioactive materials are reviewed. The following quantities are measured or 

calculated to obtain the total annual quantity of radiological atmospheric releases from the NTS: 

• The quantity of 3

H gas released during laboratory or facility operations 

• The quantity of 3

H released through evaporation from ponds or open tanks, estimated from the measured 3H 

concentrations in water discharged into them and assuming that all water is completely evaporated during the 

year 

• The quantity of 3

H released from the Area 3 and Area 5 RWMSs and from Schooner and Sedan crater sites, 

estimated using (1) the EPA-approved atmospheric diffusion model called CAP88-PC and (2) the annual 

mean concentration of 3

H in air measured by environmental air samplers at locations near these sources 

• The quantity of other radionuclides released during environmental restoration, waste management, or research 

operations/activities estimated using predicted volumes of material to be moved or released, radionuclide 

concentrations in those materials, and emission factors supplied by the EPA (Eastern Research Group, 2004) 

• The quantity of other radionuclides resuspended in air from areas of known soil contamination, calculated 

from an inventory of radionuclides in surface soil determined by the Radionuclide Inventory and Distribution 

Program (McArthur, 1991), a resuspension model (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission [NRC], 1983), and 

equation parameters derived at the NTS (U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office 

[DOE/NV], 1992) 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

3-20 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Emission sources on the NTS identified in 2008 are presented in Table 3-13. Detailed descriptions of the methods 

used for estimating these quantities are reported in Warren and Grossman (2009). The Area 2, 4, and 19 post-shot 

well water data included in Table 3-13 were from UE-2ce in Area 2, U-4u PS #2A in Area 4, and U-19ad PS #1A 

in Area 19. In the last three rows of the table before the All Sources Totals are listed, the amounts of 241Am, 

238Pu, and 239+240Pu emissions from soil re-suspension are presented. They are the sum of emission rates computed 

for each area of the NTS with surface contamination (Areas 1–13, 15–20, and 30). Other radionuclides (60Cs, 

90Sr, 137Cs, 152Eu, 154Eu, and 155Eu), although found in surface soils during past radiation surveys, were not 

included since combined, they contributed less than ten percent to the total MEI dose. 

Table 3-13. Radiological atmospheric releases from NTS for 2008 

Source Radionuclide 

Quantity 

(Curies per 

year) 

Area 11 Dense Plasma Focus Facility – release of gas during operations 3H 300(a)

Area 12 E Tunnel Ponds – evaporation of water discharged from E Tunnel 3H 9.1(b)

Area 2, 4, and 19 – evaporation of water discharged from Post-Shot Wells 3H 1.475(b)

Area 5 Sewage Lagoon – evaporation of tritiated water removed from the basement of 

Building A-1 at North Las Vegas Facility and transported to NTS for disposal in lagoon 

3

H 0.00069(b)

Area 3 RWMS – evaporation (from soil) and transpiration (from plants) of water 3H 27(c)

Area 5 RWMS – evaporation (from soil) and transpiration (from plants) of water 3H 2.1(c)

Area 20 Schooner – evaporation (from soil) and transpiration (from plants) of water 3H 33(c)

Area 10 Sedan – evaporation (from soil) and transpiration (from plants) of water 3H 68(c)

Area 4 BEEF – release during operations DU 0.060(d)

Re-suspension of surface soil contaminated from past nuclear testing across NTS areas: 241Am 0.047(e)

238Pu 0.050(e)

239+240Pu 0.29(e)

All Sources Totals: 3H 440 

DU 0.060 241Am 0.047 238Pu 0.050 239+240Pu 0.29 

Source: Warren and Grossman (2009) 

(a) Estimated from 3H cylinder pressure gauge readings 

(b) Estimated from measured 3

H concentration in samples of water discharged, assuming all water completely 

evaporated 

(c) Estimated from calculations with CAP88-PC and annual mean concentration of 3

H in air measured by air sampling 

at a location near the emission source 

(d) Inventory conservatively assumed to all be released to air when in reality only a small portion is aerosolized 

(e) Calculated release from the inventory of radionuclides in surface soil determined by Radionuclide Inventory and 

Distribution Program (McArthur, 1991), a re-suspension model (NRC, 1983), and equation parameters derived at 

the NTS (DOE/NV, 1992) 

3.1.10 Environmental Impact 

The concentrations of man-made radionuclides in air on the NTS were all less than the regulatory concentration 

limits specified by federal regulations. Long-term trends of 239+240Pu and tritium in air continue to show a decline 

with time. All radionuclides detected by environmental air samplers in 2008 appear to be from legacy deposits of 

radioactivity on and in the soil from past nuclear tests. Radionuclide concentrations in plants and animals on the 

NTS and their potential impact are discussed in Chapter 7. 
 Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 3-21

3.2 Nonradiological Air Quality Assessment 

Nonradiological air quality assessments are conducted to document compliance with the current State of Nevada 

air quality permit that regulates specific operations or facilities on the NTS. The State of Nevada has adopted the 

CAA standards, which include NESHAP, National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), and New Source 

Performance Standards (NSPS) (see Section 2.1). Specifically omitted from this section is NESHAP compliance 

for radionuclide emissions, which is presented in Section 3.1. Data collection, opacity readings, recordkeeping, 

and reporting activities related to air quality on the NTS are conducted by NSTec ES personnel to meet the 

program goals and to track the compliance measures summarized in the table below. 

NNSA/NSO maintains a Class II Air Quality Operating Permit (AP9711-0549.01) for NTS activities. State of 

Nevada Class II permits are issued for sources of air pollutants considered “minor”, i.e., where annual emissions 

must not exceed 100 tons of any one criteria pollutant (see Glossary, Appendix B), or 10 tons of any one 

hazardous air pollutant (HAP), or 25 tons of any combination of HAPs. The NTS facilities regulated by this 

permit include: 

• Over 15 facilities/185 pieces of equipment in Areas 1, 3, 5, 6, 12, 23, and 27 

• NPTEC in Area 5 

• Site-Wide Chemical Release Areas 

• BEEF in Area 4 

• Explosives Ordnance Disposal Unit in Area 11 

The NTS air permit was modified in May 2008, to increase the emission limits of particulate matter (PM) and PM 

equal to or less than 10 microns in diameter (PM10) for the Area 27 Baker and JASPER generators. In December 

2008, an extensive modification package was submitted to the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection 

(NDEP) in advance of the 2009 permit renewal application. The modification application included updates to 

equipment listings and operating parameters, revised NTS maps, facility diagrams, and air dispersion modeling. 

NDEP requires that all updates be incorporated into the existing permit prior to its renewal. The modified NTS 

air permit is expected to be issued in 2009. 

Air Quality Assessment Program Goals Compliance Measures 

Ensure that NTS operations comply with all the 

requirements of the current air quality permit issued 

by the State of Nevada. 

Ensure that air emissions of criteria pollutants (sulfur 

dioxide [SO2]), nitrogen oxides [NOX], carbon 

monoxide [CO], volatile organic compounds [VOCs], 

and particulate matter) do not exceed limits 

established under NAAQS. 

Ensure that emissions of permitted NTS equipment 

meet the opacity criteria to comply with NSPS. 

Ensure that NTS operations comply with the asbestos 

abatement reporting requirements under NESHAP. 

Document usage of ozone-depleting substances (ODS) 

to comply with Title VI of the CAA.

Tons of emissions of criteria pollutants produced 

annually 

Gallons of fuel burned annually 

Hours of operation of equipment per year 

Rate at which aggregate and concrete is produced 

Quarterly opacity readings on specified equipment 

Pounds of chemicals released from NPTEC facilities 

Amount of asbestos in existing structures removed or 

scheduled for removal 

Maintenance of ODS usage, disposition, and 

certification records 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring 

3-22 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

3.2.1 Emissions of Criteria Air Pollutants and Hazardous Air Pollutants 

A source’s regulatory status is determined by the maximum number of tons of criteria pollutants and nonradiological HAPs it may emit in a 12-month period if it were operated for the maximum number of hours and at the 

maximum production amounts specified in the source’s air permit. This maximum emission quantity, known as 

the potential to emit (PTE), is specified in an Air Emissions Inventory of all permitted NTS facilities and equipment. Each year, the State issues to NNSA/NSO Actual Production/Emissions Reporting Forms for the NTS air 

permit. They are used to report the actual hours of operation, gallons of fuel burned, etc., for each permitted 

facility/piece of equipment. Using these data, emissions of the criteria pollutants and HAPs are calculated and 

reported. The forms are completed by ES personnel and returned to NNSA/NSO for submittal to the State. The 

State uses the submitted information to determine annual maintenance and emissions fees and to document that 

calculated emission quantities do not exceed the PTEs. Because lead is considered a HAP as well as a criteria 

pollutant, NTS lead emissions for permitted operations are reported to the State as part of the total HAPs 

emissions. Lead emissions from non-permitted activities, such as soldering and weapons use, are covered under 

the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act and are reported to the EPA (see Section 10.3). 

In 2008, examination of records for permitted facilities and equipment indicated that all operational parameters 

were being properly tracked. A total of 6.05 tons (5.48 metric tons [mtons]) of criteria pollutants were emitted 

from NTS permitted facilities and equipment in 2008 (Table 3-14). No PTEs were exceeded. The majority of the 

emissions were NOx from diesel generators. Only 190 pounds (0.095 tons [0.086 mtons]) of HAPs were released 

in 2008 (Table 3-15). The Calendar Year 2008 Actual Production/Emissions Reporting Form was submitted to 

NDEP on February 12, 2009. Table 3-15 shows the calculated tons of air pollutants released on the NTS since 

1998. 

Field measurements (versus calculated emissions) of particulate matter equal to or less than 10 microns in 

diameter (PM10) are required for two permitted facilities: BEEF and NPTEC. A minimum of one portable PM10 

sampler is required to be located at each facility. The sampling systems must operate and record ambient PM10 

concentrations at least each day a detonation or chemical release occurs. The PM10 emissions are reported to the 

State in reports specific to each series of detonations or chemical releases (see Section 3.2.5). 

Table 3-14. Tons of criteria air pollutant emissions released on the NTS from permitted facilities operational in 2008 

 Calculated Tons(a) of Emissions 

 

Particulate 

Matter 

(PM10)(b)

Carbon 

Monoxide 

 (CO) 

Nitrogen 

Oxides 

 (NOX) 

Sulfur 

Dioxide 

(SO2) 

Volatile Organic

Compounds 

(VOC) 

Facility Actual PTE(c) Actual PTE Actual PTE Actual PTE Actual PTE 

Wet Aggregate Plant 0.07 8.54 NA(d) NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 

Concrete Batch Plant 0.02 4.21 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 

Cementing Services Equipment 0.001 0.41 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 

Portable Bins (Area 6) 0.001 0.51 NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

BEEF 0.01 8.0 0.17 0.54 0 0.07 0 0.003 0.001 0.007 

Diesel Fired Generators 0.12 0.92 0.76 5.77 3.36 25.44 0.06 0.49 0.13 0.96 

Bulk Gasoline Storage Tank NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.34 3.92 

Bulk Diesel Fuel Storage Tank NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA 0.01 0.02 

NPTEC 0 3.00 0.01 3.26 0.001 3.02 0 3.00 0.12 10.0 

Total by Pollutant 0.22 25.59 0.94 9.57 3.36 28.53 0.06 3.49 0.60 14.91 

Total Emissions 6.05 Actual, 82.09 PTE 

(a) For metric tons (mtons), multiply tons by 0.9072 

(b) Particulate matter equal to or less than 10 microns in diameter 

(c) Potential to emit: the quantity of criteria pollutant that each facility/piece of equipment would emit annually if it were operated for 

the maximum number of hours at the maximum production rate specified in the air permit 

(d) Not applicable: the facility does not emit the specified pollutant(s), therefore there is no emission limit set forth in the air permit 
 Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 3-23 

Table 3-15. Criteria air pollutants and HAPS released on the NTS since 1998 

 Total Emissions (tons/yr)(a)

Pollutant 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 

Particulate Matter (PM10)(b) 1.11 1.7 1.46 2.05 3.61 2.39 0.94 0.84 0.69 0.54 0.22 

Carbon Monoxide (CO) 1.85 1.87 2.76 4.84 4.6 1.79 0.24 0.15 0.43 0.51 0.94 

Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) 7.57 8.07 12.75 22.23 21.09 8.11 1.01 0.69 2.02 1.21 3.36 

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) 0.37 0.42 0.98 1.68 1.62 0.76 0.12 0.04 0.03 0.01 0.06 

Volatile Organic Compounds 

(VOC) 11.76 1.99 1.89 2.01 2.1 1.21 4.60 1.94 1.40 1.14 0.60 

Hazardous Air Pollutants (HAPs) NR NR 0.01 0.03 0.01 0 0.41 0.05 1.87 0.02 0.09(d)

(a) For mtons, multiply tons by 0.9072 

(b) Particulate matter equal to or less than 10 microns in diameter 

(c) Not reported 

(d) 95 percent of HAPs were emitted during chemical spill tests at NPTEC 

Unless specifically exempted, the open burning of any combustible refuse, waste, garbage, or oil, or for salvage 

operations, is prohibited. Open burning for other purposes, including personnel training, is allowed if approved in 

advance by the State (Nevada Administrative Code 445B.22067). Approval is denoted by the issuance of an 

Open Burn Variance prior to each burn. Exceptions to this include the Open Burn Variances issued to 

NNSA/NSO for fire extinguisher training at the NTS and for support-vehicle live-fire training evolutions. These 

Open Burn Variances are renewed annually and require 24-hour advance notification to the State prior to each 

burn. There were 12 fire extinguisher training sessions and 36 vehicle burns conducted in 2008. Quantities of 

criteria pollutants produced by open burns are not required to be calculated. 

3.2.2 Performance Emission Testing and State Inspection 

The NTS air permit requires performance emission testing of equipment that vents emissions through stacks 

(called “point sources”). The tests must be conducted once during the five-year life of the NTS air permit for 

each specified source. Once a source accumulates 100 hours of operation (since issuance of the permit in June 

2002) it must be tested within 90 days. Testing is conducted by inserting a probe into the stack while the 

equipment is operating. Visible emissions readings must also be conducted by a certified evaluator during the 

tests (see Section 3.2.4). One performance emission test was conducted in 2008. Emissions from the diesel 

generator located at the Area 27 Baker Facility were within the specified NTS air permit limits. There were no 

State inspections of facilities regulated by the NTS air permit in 2008. 

3.2.3 Production Rates/Hours of Operation 

Compliance with operational parameters such as production rates and hours of operation is verified through an 

examination of the data generated for the annual report to the State. The number of hours that equipment operates 

throughout a year is determined either by meter readings or by recording the operating hours in a logbook each 

time the equipment is operated. Permit requirements specific to each piece of equipment dictate the frequency in 

which readings are obtained. Production rates for construction facilities such as the aggregate-producing plant are 

calculated using the hours of operation and amount of material produced. Logbooks are maintained to record this 

information. Gallons of fuel used are calculated preferably by recording tank levels each time that the tank is 

filled. If this is not possible, then calculations are performed by using industry standards and the hours of 

operation. In 2008, production rates, hours of operation, and gallons of fuel used all were within the specified 

permit limits and were used to calculate the tons of air pollutants emitted (see Table 3-14). 

3.2.4 Opacity Readings 

Under 40 CFR 60, personnel that conduct visible emissions evaluations must be certified semiannually by a 

qualified organization. A form similar to one appearing in 40 CFR 60 for conducting visible emissions 

evaluations is used to record and document the readings. Visual readings are taken every 15 seconds. A 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring 

3-24 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

minimum of 24 consecutive readings is required for a valid reading. The average of the 24 readings must not 

exceed the permit-specified limit (20 percent for NAAQS, 10 percent for NSPS). The NTS air permit requires 

that readings be obtained once each quarter that the equipment is used and be kept on file. This applies to 

construction equipment only. Readings are taken for all other permitted facilities and equipment periodically but 

are not always recorded. 

During 2008, four NSTec employees were certified by Carl Koontz Associates to conduct visible emissions 

evaluations. Readings were taken for the following NTS facilities regulated under the NAAQS opacity limit of 

20 percent: Area 1 Concrete Batch Plant, Area 1 Wet Aggregate Plant, Area 6 Storage Silos, Area 23 Building 

650 Diesel Generator, and the Area 27 Baker Generator. Readings for these facilities ranged from 0 to 10 percent. 

NTS equipment that is regulated by the 10 percent opacity limit under the NSPS includes miscellaneous conveyor 

belts, screens and hoppers, and the Area 1 pugmill. None of this equipment was used in 2008. 

3.2.5 NPTEC and BEEF Reporting 

In addition to annual reporting, the NTS air quality operating permit for the NPTEC and the site-wide chemical 

releases requires the submittal of test plans and final analysis reports to the State for each chemical release or 

release series. For the BEEF, quarterly test plans and final reports must be submitted for the types and weights of 

explosives used and estimated emissions that may be released. 

In 2008, the Tarantula II chemical test was conducted at the Area 5 NPTEC and consisted of 28 releases. Six 

releases were also conducted at the Test Cell C Facility as part of the Tarantula II test series. A completion report 

was submitted to NNSA/NSO for transmittal to NDEP’s Bureau of Air Pollution Control at the conclusion of each 

test. Tables 3-16 and 3-17 summarize the total quantities of all chemicals released during tests. 

The majority of BEEF activities involve sensitive or classified information. To protect confidentiality of data, 

summary reports are submitted on a quarterly basis rather than for each test or test series. Table 3-18 is a 

summary of the general types and weights of explosives detonated during tests conducted in 2008. Emissions 

generated from these releases are summarized in Table 3-14. 

Table 3-16. Chemicals released during tests conducted at the Area 5 NPTEC in 2008 

Chemical Total Released (kg) Total Released (lb)(a)

Acetone 36.04 79.04 

Ammonia 26.99 59.19 

Chlorine 1.60 3.51 

Dimethylamine 15.03 32.96 

Dinitrogen Tetroxide 4.08 8.95 

Dimethyl Methylphosphonate 2.32 5.09 

Ethylene 11.56 25.35 

Freon 134a 19.34 42.41 

Hydrazine 4.56 10.00 

Hydrogen Fluoride 24.40 53.51 

Kerosene 8.25 18.09 

Methane 9.26 20.31 

Monomethyl Hydrazine 3.71 8.14 

Nitrogen Dioxide 2.00 4.39 

Nitrous Oxide 21.51 47.17 

Propylene 34.85 76.43 

Sulfur Hexafluoride 36.77 80.64 

TM185 2.97 6.51 

UDMH 3.35 7.35 

(a) 1 pound (lb) = 0.456 kilograms (kg) 
 Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 3-25 

Table 3-17. Chemicals released during tests conducted at the Test Cell C Facility in 2008 

Chemical Total Released (kg) Total Released (lb)(a)

Hydrogen Fluoride 4.67 10.24 

Sulfur Hexafluoride 5.56 12.19 

 (a) 1 lb = 0.456 kg 

 Table 3-18. Types and weights of explosives detonated at BEEF in 2008 

Type of Explosive Total Released (kg) Total Released (lb)(a)

TNT Based 1579.94 3464.77 

Detonator materials 0.19 0.42 

Nitramine/binder 473.81 1039.06 

Nitramine/binder with fluorine 

or chlorine 0.005 0.01 

Pure Compound 68.02 149.17 

(a) 1 lb = 0.456 kg

3.2.6 Tactical Demilitarization Development (TaDD) Project Reporting 

The TaDD project facility is located in Area 11. It was developed as a prototype of a portable burn facility to 

dispose of unneeded Shillelagh tactical military rocket motors. TaDD was added to the NTS air permit because of 

the emissions generated during each burn. Permit requirements include reporting hours of operation and 

emissions and an opacity limit of 20 percent. This facility has not been used due to lack of funding. It is listed in 

the NTS air permit with zero allowable operating hours. Its removal from the NTS air permit was requested in a 

permit modification submitted in late 2008. 

3.2.7 ODS Recordkeeping 

At the NTS, refrigerants containing ODS are mainly used in air conditioning units in vehicles, buildings, refrigerators, drinking water fountains, vending machines, and laboratory equipment. Halon 1211 and 1301, now 

classified as ODS, have been used in the past in fire extinguishers. There are no reporting requirements for ODS, 

but recordkeeping to document the usage of ODS and technician certification is required. ODS recordkeeping 

requirements applicable to NTS operations include maintaining, for a minimum of three years, evidence of 

technician certification, recycling/recovery equipment approval, and servicing records for appliances containing 

22.7 kg (50 lb) or more of refrigerant. Compliance with recordkeeping and certification requirements for the use 

and disposition of ODS is verified through periodic self assessments. The assessments include a records review 

and interviews with managers and technicians associated with the use, disposition, and purchase of refrigerants. 

The EPA may conduct random inspections to determine compliance with ODS regulations under the CAA. In 

December 2008, an internal assessment of the NTS ODS program was conducted and resulted in no findings and 

one recommendation to consolidate recordkeeping for equipment containing 50 pounds or more of ODS. 

3.2.8 Asbestos Abatement 

A NESHAP notification is submitted annually to the EPA for the next calendar year. It provides an estimate of 

the quantities of asbestos-containing materials that are expected to be removed from small projects: removal of 

less than 80 linear m (260 linear ft), 15 square meters (m2

) (106 square feet [ft2]), or 1 m3 (35 ft3). These 

projections are submitted to the EPA in an Annual Asbestos Abatement Notification Form. A Notification of 

Demolition and Renovation Form is also submitted to the EPA at least 10 working days prior to the start of each 

project if (1) a facility is scheduled for demolition and has no asbestos present, or (2) quantities of asbestoscontaining materials to be removed are estimated to equal or exceed 80 linear m, 15 m2

, or 1 m3. 
Radiological and Nonradiological Air Monitoring 

3-26 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

The recordkeeping requirements for asbestos abatement activities include maintaining air and bulk sampling data 

records, abatement plans, and operations and maintenance activity records for up to 75 years and maintaining 

location-specific records of asbestos-containing materials for a minimum of 75 years. Compliance is verified 

through periodic internal assessments. The assessments include a records review and interviews with managers 

and technicians associated with asbestos abatement. NNSA/NSO informal reviews are performed periodically. 

An Annual Asbestos Abatement Notification Form was submitted to the EPA on November 7, 2007, which 

projected that 45.7 linear m (250 linear ft), 23.2 m2

 (150 ft2) and 1 m3 (30 ft3) of asbestos-containing material 

would be removed from small projects from NTS facilities in 2008. However, asbestos abatement projects that 

were larger than projected arose in 2008. A Notification of Demolition and Renovation Form was submitted to 

the EPA within 10 working days prior to the start of each project. One project was the demolition of multiple rail 

cars for which 1,015 m2

 (10,920 ft2) of asbestos-containing materials were designated as “Non-friable Asbestos 

Material not to be removed” during demolition. The railcars were cut in half, which kept the top halves, 

containing the asbestos, intact for burial. Wet methods were used and air quality monitoring was conducted 

during this project. Another project was the removal of 111.9 linear m (367 linear ft) and 473.8 m2

 (5,100 ft2) of 

asbestos-containing materials from two buildings scheduled for demolition. Four smaller projects were also 

conducted in 2008 for which a combined total of 102 linear m (335 linear ft) of insulation and 84 m2

 (900 ft2) of 

vinyl asbestos tile were removed from buildings to be demolished. The remainder of the asbestos abatement 

activities throughout the NTS complex were minor in scope, involving the removal of amounts below the 

reporting threshold. Asbestos-containing materials were buried in both the Area 9 U10c and Area 23 solid waste 

disposal sites. Asbestos abatement records continue to be maintained as required. 

3.2.9 Fugitive Dust Control

The NTS Class II Air Quality Operating Permit states that the best practical methods should be used to prevent 

particulate matter from becoming airborne prior to the construction, repair, demolition, or use of unpaved or 

untreated areas. Methods and materials that are typically used to control fugitive dust include presoaking, water 

spraying, using dust palliatives, gravelling or paving haul routes, revegetating, reducing vehicle speeds, and either 

covering stockpiles or watering them. At the NTS, the main method of dust control is the use of water sprays. 

During 2008, NSTec personnel conducted several fugitive dust readings of operations throughout the NTS that 

included the Area 1 Aggregate Plant, the Radiological/Nuclear Countermeasures Test and Evaluation Complex, 

and the Area 1 Concrete Batch Plant. No excessive fugitive dust was noted. 

3.2.10 Environmental Impact 

During 2008, NTS activities produced a total of only 6.05 tons of criteria pollutants and 0.095 tons of HAPs. 

These small quantities had little, if any, impact to air quality on the NTS and at offsite locations. Emissions of 

pollutants for 2008 were significantly less than those generated during the heightened activity that occurred in the 

years prior to the nuclear weapons testing moratorium. 

Impacts of the chemical release tests at the NPTEC are minimized by controlling the amount and duration of each 

release. Biological monitoring at the NPTEC is performed whenever there is a risk of significant exposure to 

downwind plants and animals from the planned tests (see Section 13.6). NSTec biologists review all chemical 

release test plans to determine the level of field monitoring needed for each test. To date, chemical releases at the 

NPTEC have used such small quantities (when dispersed into the air) that downwind test-specific monitoring has 

not been necessary. No measurable impacts to downwind plants or animals have been observed. 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 4-1 

4.0 Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring 

This chapter presents radiological and nonradiological monitoring results for surface water and groundwater from 

on and off the Nevada Test Site (NTS). This monitoring program is directed by the U.S. Department of Energy, 

National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO). Surface water and groundwater 

includes natural springs, drinking water, non-potable groundwater, and water discharged into domestic and wastewater systems on the NTS. Water monitoring is conducted to comply with applicable state and federal regulations (see Section 2.2) as well as to address the concerns of stakeholders who reside in the vicinity of the NTS. 

In 2008, several programs or projects were involved in water monitoring. These included (1) routine radiological 

monitoring conducted by National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec), Environmental Technical Services 

(ETS) under the Routine Radiological Environmental Monitoring Plan (RREMP) (Bechtel Nevada [BN], 2003a); 

(2) water quality assessments of permitted water systems conducted by NSTec Environmental Services; and (3) 

water sampling and analysis conducted by NSTec under the Underground Test Area (UGTA) Sub-Project (see 

Chapter 14 for a description of all UGTA Sub-Project activities conducted in 2008). In addition, the Community 

Environmental Monitoring Program, established by NNSA/NSO, annually performs independent monitoring of 

offsite springs and water supply systems in communities surrounding the NTS. This independent community 

outreach program is managed by the Desert Research Institute (DRI). 

Section 4.1 presents the concentrations of radioactivity in all water samples collected in 2008. These data are 

used to calculate radiological doses to the general public residing near the NTS and to biota residing on the NTS; 

these results are provided in Chapter 8 (Radiological Dose Assessment). Section 4.2 presents the results of 

nonradiological monitoring of drinking water and domestic and industrial wastewaters on the NTS. DRI’s 2008 

monitoring results for offsite surface and groundwater are presented in Chapter 6 (Section 6.2). 

4.1 Radiological Surface Water and Groundwater Monitoring 

 The purpose of radiological water monitoring under the RREMP (BN, 2003a) is to determine whether 

concentrations of radionuclides in groundwater and surface water bodies at the NTS and its vicinity pose a threat 

to public health or the environment. Toward this end, the monitoring program collects and analyzes water 

samples to meet the goals shown below. UGTA Sub-Project goals are provided in detail in Chapter 14. 

Radiological Surface Water and Groundwater Monitoring 

Program Goals Analytes Monitored 

Determine if radionuclide concentrations of offsite and onsite water 

supply wells exceed the safe drinking water standards established under 

the Safe Drinking Water Act or the dose limits to the general public set 

by U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order DOE O 5400.5, 

“Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment.” 

Determine if radionuclide concentrations in NTS surface waters expose 

animals to doses that exceed those set by DOE Standard DOE-STD1153-2002, “A Graded Approach for Evaluating Radiation Doses to 

Aquatic and Terrestrial Biota” to protect wildlife populations. 

Determine if permitted facilities on the NTS are in compliance with 

permit discharge limits for radionuclides. 

Determine if radionuclide concentrations in onsite and offsite natural 

springs and non-potable water wells (monitoring wells) indicate that 

NNSA/NSO activities have had an impact on the environment. Strict 

drinking water standards are often used as a monitoring action level for 

this determination. 

Tritium (3H) 

Gross alpha radioactivity 

Gross beta radioactivity 

Gamma-emitting 

radionuclides 

Plutonium-238 (238Pu) 

Plutonium-239+240 

(

239+240Pu) 

Carbon-14 (14C) 

Strontium-90 (90Sr) 

Technetium-99 (99Tc) 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

4-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

4.1.1 Areas of Radiological Groundwater Contamination 

The NTS is located in a complex hydrogeologic setting (see Attachment A: Nevada Test Site Description included 

on the compact disc version of this report). Within this setting, a total of 828 underground nuclear tests were 

conducted between 1951 and 1992. Approximately one-third of these tests were detonated near or below the 

water table (DOE, 1996; U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office, 2000), resulting in 

contamination of groundwater in some areas. The Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order established 

Corrective Action Units (CAUs) that delineate areas of concern for groundwater contamination on the NTS 

(DOE, 1996). Figure 4-1 shows the locations of historic underground nuclear tests and the areas of potential 

groundwater contamination designated as CAUs. 

4.1.2 Water Monitoring Locations 

The RREMP (BN, 2003a) identifies a groundwater monitoring network of 78 wells located on and off the NTS to 

be sampled at frequencies ranging from once every three months to once every three years. Ten additional wells 

(seven offsite and three onsite), not identified in the 2003 RREMP, have been added to the network and are 

sampled opportunistically or at the suggestion of NNSA/NSO. Of these 88 wells, 72 have been sampled at least 

once since 1999. These 72 include 33 offsite wells, 10 onsite water supply wells, and 29 onsite monitoring wells 

(Figure 4-2). Some of the wells monitored under the RREMP are managed by the UGTA Sub-Project (see 

Chapter 14, Figure 14-2). Those wells not sampled since 1999, but identified in the RREMP, include 15 onsite 

monitoring wells and 1 offsite well. They are not sampled for one or more of the following reasons: they are not 

accessible, are used for other purposes, are blocked, provide water samples that are of poor quality or are 

contaminated (disqualifying them from monitoring), or contain waters with known high levels of radiological 

contamination that are not expected to change. 

Natural springs are sampled at intervals from once a year to once every three years, and the RREMP identifies one 

containment pond system and three sewage lagoons that may be sampled quarterly or annually. Only two of the 

three sewage lagoons are currently active. 

In 2008, priority was given to sampling 10 offsite NNSA/NSO wells, particularly those managed by the UGTA 

Sub-Project in Oasis Valley to the west of the NTS (see Figure 4-2). Offsite community water supply wells were 

therefore not sampled in 2008, but are scheduled for 2009 sampling. Also, none of the offsite or onsite springs in 

the monitoring network were sampled in 2008 because many were sampled within recent years (Figure 4-3). A 

total of 33 groundwater locations (Figure 4-2) and 3 surface water locations (Figure 4-3) were sampled in 2008: 

• 10 offsite non-potable NNSA/NSO wells 

• 9 onsite water supply wells (5 potable, 4 non-potable) 

• 14 onsite monitoring wells 

• 1 NTS permitted containment pond system (E Tunnel ponds) 

• 2 onsite sewage lagoons 

Six UGTA Sub-Project wells were sampled for tritium by sub-project participants in 2008. The results are 

discussed briefly in Section 4.1.12 below. 

4.1.3 Analytes Monitored 

The selection of analytes for groundwater monitoring under the RREMP is based on the radiological source term 

from historical nuclear testing, regulatory/permit requirements, and characterization needs. The isotopic 

inventory remaining from nuclear testing is presented in the 1996 environmental impact statement for NTS 

activities (DOE, 1996) and in a Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) document (Bowen et al., 2001). Many 

of the radioactive species generated from subsurface testing have very short half-lives, sorb strongly onto the solid 

phase, or are bound into what is termed “melt glass” and are not available for groundwater transport in the near 

term (Smith, 1993; Smith et al., 1995). Tritium (3

H) is the radioactive species created in the greatest quantities 

and is widely believed to be the most mobile. Tritium is therefore the primary target analyte; every water sample 

is analyzed for this radionuclide. It will represent the greatest concern to users of groundwater on and around the 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 4-3 

Figure 4-1. Areas of potential groundwater contamination on the NTS 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

4-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Figure 4-2. RREMP well monitoring locations sampled on and off the NTS in 2008 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 4-5 

Figure 4-3. Surface water monitoring locations sampled on the NTS in 2008 and in recent years 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

4-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

NTS for at least the next 100 years due to its high mobility and concentration (DOE, 1996; International 

Technology Corporation, 1997). 

Gross alpha and gross beta radioactivity analyses are also conducted on water samples from all locations in the 

monitoring network, but less frequently than tritium analyses at some locations. Gross alpha and gross beta 

radioactivity can include activity from both natural and man-made radionuclides, if any are present. Naturally 

occurring minerals in the water can contribute to both alpha radiation (e.g., isotopes of uranium and radium-226 

[

226Ra]) and beta radiation (e.g., radium-228 [228Ra] and potassium-40 [40K]). Gamma spectroscopy analysis is 

also performed on water samples; this can identify the presence of specific man-made radionuclides 

(e.g., americium-241 [241Am], cesium-137 [137Cs], cobalt-60 [60Co], and europium-152 and -154 [152Eu and 154Eu]) 

as well as natural radionuclides (e.g., actinium-228 [228Ac], lead-212 [212Pb], 40K, uranium-235 [235U], and 

thorium-234 [234Th]). Specific analyses for 238Pu, 239+240Pu, 14C, 90Sr, 99Tc, 241Am, and uranium isotopes are 

performed on selected water samples to help characterize sampled locations. Specific radium analyses were 

discontinued in 2005, since previous analyses indicated that 226Ra and 228Ra are not major contributors to gross 

alpha or gross beta activity, respectively. Water analyses also include chemical parameters to assist in 

characterizing groundwater chemistry and hydrology; these data are not presented in this report. 

4.1.4 Water Sampling and Analysis Methods 

Water sampling methods are based, in part, on the characteristics and configurations of the sample locations. For 

example, wells with dedicated pumps may be sampled from the associated plumbing (e.g., spigots) at the 

wellhead, while wells without pumps may be sampled via a wireline bailer or a portable pumping system. Six of 

the monitoring wells are constructed to allow for sampling different horizons of the penetrated hydrostratigraphic 

units. The sample depths for these six wells are: 

HTH #1

• 590 meters (m) (1,935 feet[ft]) below ground surface (bgs) 

• 622 m (2,040 ft) bgs 

• 649 m (2,130 ft) bgs 

• 701 m (2,300 ft) bgs 

UE-18R

• 518 m (1,700 ft) bgs 

• 649 m (2,130 ft) bgs 

PM-3

• 475 m (1,560 ft) bgs 

• 608 m (1,994 ft) bgs 

ER-19-1

• 826 m (2,710 ft) bgs 

• 1,000 m (3,280 ft) bgs 

Ash-B

• Piezometer #2 - 114 m (375 ft) bgs 

• Piezometer #1 - 312 m (1,025 ft) bgs 

ER-6-1

• 615 m (2,017 ft) bgs 

• 679 m (2,228 ft) bgs 

Of these, wells HTH #1, PM-3, and ER-19-1 were sampled in 2008; the other 30 wells were sampled at single 

depths. 

Sampling frequencies and analyses for routine radiological water monitoring are based on location and type of 

sampling point as defined in the RREMP. As usual, tritium analyses were performed on all samples obtained. 

Other analyses were performed on specific samples based primarily on the RREMP schedule. 

Most tritium analyses were conducted after the samples were enriched. The enrichment process concentrates 

tritium in a sample to provide low minimum detectable concentrations (MDCs) (see Glossary, Appendix B) for 

the laboratory analyses. Sample-specific MDCs for laboratory analysis, reported in each results table, range from 

18 to 34 picocuries per liter (pCi/L) with an average of 23.2 pCi/L. The MDCs for standard (non-enriched) 

tritium analyses typically range from 200 to 400 pCi/L. For comparison, the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) maximum contaminant level (MCL) for tritium in drinking water is 20,000 pCi/L. 

Routine quality control samples (e.g., duplicates, blanks, and spikes) are also incorporated into the analytical 

streams frequently. Section 18.0 discusses the quality assurance/quality control protocols and procedures used for 

radiological water monitoring. 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 4-7 

4.1.5 Presentation and Statistical Analysis of Water Sampling Data 

The following sections present only concentrations that were above their MDCs for man-made gamma-emitting 

radionuclides (i.e., 137Cs), plutonium, 14C, 90Sr, and 99Tc. Concentration values of gross alpha, gross beta, and 

tritium are presented for all water samples in the data tables, whether above or below their MDCs. Most of the 

values in the tables in the following sections are formatted with two significant digits. 

The uncertainty values presented in the data tables represent the uncertainty (“error”) of the analytical method. 

This does not include the uncertainty associated with sample collection or the tritium enrichment process. A 

statistical analysis of water supply well samples analyzed between July 1999 and December 2008 was conducted 

to obtain an estimate of the tritium decision level (LC). The analysis suggests an LC (see Glossary, Appendix B) 

for tritium of approximately 19.6 pCi/L, where LC is a 99 percent prediction limit for any individual measurement 

based on the background water supply well data. Alternately, a 95 percent prediction limit for all enriched tritium 

measurements (PLall), based on the background water supply well data, is 27.2 pCi/L. This takes into account the 

total number of tritium measurements made annually under the current implementation of the RREMP (82 during 

2008, 103 on average). If all monitoring locations produced data from the same distribution as the water supply 

wells, there would be a 5 percent chance of obtaining one or more values exceeding this PLall anywhere during 

any one year. 

Formal statistical trend analyses have been performed on the gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium data for the 

offsite wells, offsite springs, and NTS water supply wells. In each of these, a p-value and observed rate of change 

are determined. The p-value is the “observed significance level”; this is the chance that a trend at least as large as 

that observed (either increasing or decreasing) would result simply from random variation in the data. It is 

common to consider trends with p < 0.05 to be “statistically significant”; however, one must recognize that these 

do occur just by chance in around five percent of such analyses. In the following sections the results of 125 such 

analyses are reported; one would expect therefore around 6.25 “statistically significant” trends to be found due to 

chance variation in the data, and in fact seven were found. Another way to approach the issue of multiple tests is 

to adjust the criterion used for the total number of analyses performed. Using this approach, one would not 

consider a result to be “statistically significant” unless its p-value were less than 0.05 divided by the number of 

analyses, which would be 0.05/125 = 0.0004 here. The smallest p-value reported in the following sections is 

0.005, rather larger than that critical value. 

4.1.6 Results from Offsite Wells 

The 2008 data indicate that groundwater at the offsite NNSA/NSO well locations has not been impacted by past 

NTS nuclear testing operations. Tritium was not detected above its MDC in any of the offsite wells sampled 

(Table 4-1). Gross alpha and gross beta radioactivity were detected, however, in most of the well samples 

(Table 4-1). None of the 2008 gross alpha or beta results met or exceeded the EPA MCL of 15 pCi/L (gross 

alpha) or the EPA Level of Concern of 50 pCi/L (gross beta). These levels likely represent natural radiation 

sources. 

Samples from wells ER-OV-01, ER-OV-02, ER-OV-03C, ER-OV-03C2, and ER-OV-06A were also analyzed for 

gamma-emitting radionuclides, 238Pu, and 239+240Pu. PM-3 was analyzed for 14C, 89+90Sr, and 99Tc. No man-made 

radionuclides were detected. 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

4-8 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Table 4-1. Gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium analysis results for offsite non-potable NNSA/NSO wells in 2008 

 Offsite Well Date Sampled 

Gross α ± 

Uncertainty(a) (MDC) 

(pCi/L)(b)

Gross β ± 

Uncertainty (MDC) 

(pCi/L)(c) 

3

H ± 

Uncertainty (MDC) 

(pCi/L)(d)

ER-OV-01 5/19/2008 NS(e) NS -1.6 ± 13.5 (24) 

 5/19/2008 FD (f) NA(g) NA 5.1 ± 13.7 (24) 

 10/27/2008 10.3 ± 2.2 (1.1) 10.0 ± 2.1 (2.1) -9.2 ± 13.7 (25) 

 

ER-OV-02 5/20/2008 NS NS 2.5 ± 13.8 (24) 

 10/28/2008 11.6 ± 2.5 (1.7) 9.5 ± 2.2 (2.5) 1.5 ± 13.8 (24) 

 

ER-OV-03A 10/27/2008 NS NS 9.1 ± 14.6 (25) 

 

ER-OV-03A3 10/28/2008 NS NS 3.3 ± 14.2 (25) 

 

ER-OV-03C 10/28/2008 7.1 ± 2.2 (1.8) 1.2 ± 1.4 (2.9) -10.5 ± 14.1 (26) 

 

ER-OV-03C2 10/28/2008 6.2 ± 2.0 (1.6) 2.6 ± 1.6 (3.2) -10.8 ± 13.4 (24) 

 10/28/2008 FD NA NA 4.8 ± 14.2 (24) 

 

ER-OV-04A 10/29/2008 NS NS -8.4 ± 14.4 (26) 

 

ER-OV-05 10/29/2008 NS NS 4.2 ± 14.0 (24) 

 

ER-OV-06A 5/19/2008 NS NS -4.7 ± 13.3 (24) 

 5/19/2008 FD NA NA -8.2 ± 13.0 (24) 

 10/27/2008 5.4 ± 1.4 (1.1) 7.9 ± 1.8 (2.2) -15.0 ± 14.0 (26) 

 

PM-3 (1560 ft bgs) 4/22/2008 NS NS 21.9 ± 14.5 (23) 

 (1993 ft bgs) 4/22/2008 NS NS 8.5 ± 12.4 (20) 

Green shaded results are considered detected (result is greater than the sample specific MDC) 

(a) ±2 standard deviations 

(b) The EPA established MCL in drinking water for gross alpha (α) is 15 pCi/L 

(c) The EPA “Level of Concern” in drinking water for gross beta (β) is 50 pCi/L 

(d) The EPA established MCL in drinking water for tritium (3

H) is 20,000 pCi/L 

(e) NS = Not scheduled for gross alpha/beta analysis in 2008, analysis run once every 2–3 years, last analyzed in 2007 

(f) FD = Field duplicate sample 

(g) NA = Not applicable - analysis was not run on the sample 

Trends over time in gross alpha and beta radioactivity and tritium levels among the offsite wells being sampled 

routinely are shown in Figures 4-4 through 4-9. Offsite wells are grouped into five areas in these figures: 

Northwest (wells northwest of the NTS and north of Oasis Valley), Oasis Valley (wells in Oasis Valley and which 

have the prefix “ER-OV”), Beatty to Amargosa Valley (wells in and between the towns of Beatty and Amargosa 

Valley), Southwest (wells south of Amargosa Valley and west of Highway 373), and South (wells south of the 

NTS and east of Highway 373). Wells in areas Beatty to Amargosa Valley, Southwest, and South were not 

sampled in 2008. Figures 4-5, 4-7, and 4-9 show their gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium values for 2000–2007. 

Gross alpha appears to decrease in three Oasis Valley wells (ER-OV-01, ER-OV-02, and ER-OV-03A) over time, 

as seen in Figure 4-4. Nearly all recent gross alpha levels are below the EPA drinking water MCL. Figures 4-6 

and 4-7 show gross beta measurements; no systematic increases or decreases are apparent. Figures 4-8 and 4-9 

show tritium measurements for the offsite wells. Again, most values are below their analysis-specific MDCs as 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 4-9 

well as the PLall discussed in Section 4.1.5. In formal statistical trend tests, there are statistically significant 

increases in tritium in wells ER-OV-02 (p = 0.013, estimated increase = 1.38 pCi/L/year) and PM-3 (p = 0.019, 

estimated increase = 3.24 pCi/L/year) out of the 26 wells with enough data to perform this analysis. One well 

(Tolicha Peak) has a statistically significant decreasing trend in gross alpha (p = 0.005, estimated decrease = 

0.36 pCi/L/year), of 25 wells with enough data to perform this analysis. No statistically significant trends were 

found with gross beta. (Using the conventional five percent significance level, one would expect to see 3.8 

statistically significant trends in these 76 analyte/well combinations just due to random variation.) 

Offsite Wells Gross Alpha

Northwest and Oasis Valley, 2000-2008

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

01-Jan-00 31-Dec-01 01-Jan-04 31-Dec-05 01-Jan-08

Collection Date

pCi/L

Northwest

Oasis Valley

Mean MDC

MCL

Figure 4-4. Gross alpha levels in wells that are in and north of Oasis Valley from 2000 to 2008 

Offsite Wells Gross Alpha

Beatty to Amargosa Valley, Southwest, and South, 2000-2007

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

01-Jan-00 31-Dec-01 01-Jan-04 31-Dec-05 01-Jan-08

Collection Date

pCi/L

Beatty to Amargosa Valley

Southwest

South

Mean MDC

MCL

 Figure 4-5. Gross alpha levels in wells in areas west, southwest, and south of the NTS from 2000 to 2007 

(these wells were not sampled in 2008) 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

4-10 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Offsite Wells Gross Beta

Northwest and Oasis Valley, 2000-2008

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

01-Jan-00 31-Dec-01 01-Jan-04 31-Dec-05 01-Jan-08

Collection Date

pCi/L

Northwest

Oasis Valley

Mean MDC

MCL

Figure 4-6. Gross beta levels in wells that are in and north of Oasis Valley from 2000 to 2008 

Offsite Wells Gross Beta

Beatty to Amargosa Valley, Southwest, and South, 2000-2007

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

01-Jan-00 31-Dec-01 01-Jan-04 31-Dec-05 01-Jan-08

Collection Date

pCi/L

Beatty to Amargosa Valley

Southwest

South

Mean MDC

MCL

 Figure 4-7. Gross beta levels in wells in areas west, southwest, and south of the NTS from 2000 to 2007 

(these wells were not sampled in 2008) 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 4-11 

Offsite Wells Tritium

Northwest and Oasis Valley, 2000-2008

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

01-Jan-99 31-Dec-00 01-Jan-03 31-Dec-04 01-Jan-07 31-Dec-08

Collection Date

pCi/L

Northwest

Oasis Valley

Mean MDC

PLall

Figure 4-8. Tritium levels in wells that are in and north of Oasis Valley from 2000 to 2008 

Offsite Wells Tritium

Beatty to Amargosa Valley, Southwest, and South, 2000-2007

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

01-Jan-99 31-Dec-00 01-Jan-03 31-Dec-04 01-Jan-07 31-Dec-08

Collection Date

pCi/L

Beatty to Amargosa Valley

Southwest

South

Mean MDC

PLall

 Figure 4-9. Tritium levels in wells in areas west, southwest, and south of the NTS from 2000 to 2007 

(these wells were not sampled in 2008) 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

4-12 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

4.1.7 Results from Offsite Springs 

The offsite springs (see Figure 4-3) were not sampled in 2008 due to their planned frequency in the RREMP and 

to the priority given to the offsite NNSA/NSO wells in Oasis Valley. Figures 4-10 through 4-12 repeat the data as 

shown in the Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2007 (NSTec, 2008a). During 2007, no detectable 

concentrations of tritium were found. No analyses for man-made or natural gamma-emitting radionuclides were 

conducted in 2007 on samples from offsite springs. The Barn Spring is not a RREMP location, but was sampled 

opportunistically. Gross alpha was quantified above its MDC and the EPA-established MCL for drinking water. 

This measurable gross alpha radioactivity is likely from natural sources. The other offsite springs were not 

scheduled to be sampled for gross alpha or gross beta analyses. 

Figures 4-10 through 4-12 show trends over time in gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium in the seven offsite 

springs being sampled on a routine schedule and Barn Spring. In these figures, offsite springs are grouped by area 

into those west of the NTS and those south of the NTS (see Figure 4-3). Gross alpha and gross beta levels have 

mostly been below the EPA MCL (gross alpha) or Level of Concern (gross beta). Tritium concentrations have 

mostly been below their MDCs, and all below PLall. There are no noticeable trends during this period. A formal 

statistical analysis finds a statistically significant increase in tritium in Big Springs (p = 0.005, estimated increase 

= 3.78 pCi/L/year); however, it was last sampled during October 2006, when several springs had anomalously 

high values. There were no statistically significant trends with gross alpha or gross beta. Using a conventional 

five percent significance level, one expects about one statistically significant increase to be found due just to 

chance variation in the data among these 19 analyte/well combinations. 

 

Offsite Springs Gross Alpha

2000-2007

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

01-Jan-00 31-Dec-01 01-Jan-04 31-Dec-05 01-Jan-08

Collection Date

pCi/L

West

South

Mean MDC

MCL

Figure 4-10. Gross alpha levels in offsite springs from 2000 to 2007 (springs not sampled in 2008) 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 4-13 

Offsite Springs Gross Beta

2000-2007

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

01-Jan-00 31-Dec-01 01-Jan-04 31-Dec-05 01-Jan-08

Collection Date

pCi/L

West

South

Mean MDC

MCL

Figure 4-11. Gross beta levels in offsite springs from 2000 to 2007 (springs not sampled in 2008) 

Offsite Springs Tritium

2000-2007

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

01-Jan-99 31-Dec-00 01-Jan-03 31-Dec-04 01-Jan-07 31-Dec-08

Collection Date

pCi/L

West

South

Mean MDC

PLall

Figure 4-12. Tritium concentrations in offsite springs from 2000 to 2007 (springs not sampled in 2008) 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

4-14 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

4.1.8 Results from NTS Water Supply Wells 

Five of six permitted wells that supply the potable water needs of NTS operations were sampled in 2008. The 

sixth, J-13 WW, is currently inoperable. Four onsite water wells supply non-potable water to support NTS 

activities (e.g., dust suppression). Results from these nine wells continue to indicate that nuclear testing has not 

impacted the NTS water supply network. Tritium was not detected above its MDC in any of the water wells 

sampled (Table 4-2). 

Nearly all detections of radiological analytes in the NTS water supply wells involved gross alpha and gross beta 

radioactivity (Table 4-2). These likely represent the presence of naturally occurring radionuclides, since 

corresponding man-made radionuclides were not found in the samples. None of the gross alpha or gross beta 

activity concentrations exceeded the EPA-established MCL (gross alpha) or Level of Concern (gross beta) for 

drinking water (Table 4-2).

All nine wells were also monitored for gamma radionuclides and 239+240Pu, and all but Army #1 Water Well were 

monitored for 14C, 89+90Sr, and 99Tc. Analysis of the WW C-1 sample for 89+90Sr resulted in a reported value 

slightly above MDC. Due to the lack of confirmatory data (no detection of tritium, plutonium, 99Tc, fission or 

activation products), this value is considered to be erroneous. No man-made radionuclides were otherwise 

detected in the water supply well samples. 

These wells have been sampled routinely since 1999. Trend graphs for gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium are 

shown in Figures 4-13 through 4-15. Army #1 WW and WW #4A show mildly statistically significant 

decreasing trends in gross alpha; the estimated magnitudes of the decreases are 0.22 and 0.30 pCi/L/year 

(p = 0.028 and 0.034, respectively). One mildly statistically significant increasing trend (p = 0.045) is found with 

tritium in Army #1 WW; the estimated increase is 0.84 pCi/L/year. Otherwise, no statistically significant trends 

are found in these data. (Using the common 5 percent significance level, one would expect to see 11⁄2 statistically 

significant trends just from random variation in the data among these 30 analyte/well combinations.) WW C-1 

had a history of tritium detections prior to 1994 because this well was injected with approximately 0.1 to 0.2 

curies of tritium in 1962 by a researcher conducting a tracer test (Lyles, 1990). Since 1995, annually averaged 

tritium concentrations in WW C-1 have remained below the effective analytical MDC despite wide variations 

seen in individual sample values (e.g., in 2002) (Figure 4-15). 

The Nevada State Health Division’s Bureau of Health Care Quality and Compliance (HCQC) (formerly the 

Bureau of Health Protection Services [BHPS]) is allowed access to the NTS to independently sample the NTS 

water supply wells. In 2008, however, HCQC did not perform any sampling or analysis of onsite water wells. 

HCQC personnel last accompanied ETS personnel in January 2007 to sample all the water wells except WW 5B. 

The HCQC sample results from 2007 indicated that man-made radionuclides are at or below their MDCs and that 

naturally occurring radioactive materials such as thorium and uranium decay chain radionuclides were within 

normal ranges (BHPS, 2007). HCQC personnel did, however, accompany ETS personnel to observe one 

sampling event at a monitoring well in Oasis Valley in 2008. 

Table 4-2. Gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium analysis results for NTS water supply wells in 2008

Water Supply 

Well (NTS Area) Date Sampled 

Gross α ± 

Uncertainty(a) (MDC) 

(pCi/L)(b)

Gross β ± 

Uncertainty(a) (MDC) 

(pCi/L)(c) 

3

H ± 

Uncertainty(a)

(MDC) (pCi/L)(d)

Permitted Potable Wells 

 J-12 WW (Area 25) 1/16/2008 -0.9 ± 1.1 (1.8) 4.3 ± 0.6 (0.7) -7.6 ± 12.9 (24) 

 4/29/2008 2.4 ± 1.5 (2.1) 5.9 ± 2.0 (2.2) -6.8 ± 12.5 (21) 

 7/15/2008 2.7 ± 1.7 (1.6) 5.7 ± 2.0 (2.0) 0.7 ± 13.3 (22) 

 10/21/2008 1.0 ± 0.7 (1.2) 5.4 ± 1.6 (2.5) -9.2 ± 13.7 (25) 

WW #4 (Area 6) 1/16/2008 9.5 ± 2.3 (1.9) 4.9 ± 0.9 (0.8) 3.3 ± 11.3 (20) 

 4/29/2008 7.4 ± 2.7 (1.9) 6.7 ± 2.5 (3.2) -4.8 ± 13.5 (23) 

 4/29/2008 FD 6.9 ± 2.7 (2.0) 6.4 ± 2.2 (2.4) -3.8 ± 13.8 (23) 

 7/15/2008 6.7 ± 2.3 (1.9) 7.7 ± 1.8 (1.2) -5.2 ± 13.6 (23) 

 10/21/2008 5.2 ± 1.6 (1.4) 5.4 ± 1.7 (2.6) -6.0 ± 13.0 (23) 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 4-15 

Table 4-2 Gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium analysis results for NTS water supply wells in 2008 (continued) 

Water Supply 

Well (NTS Area) 

Date 

Sampled 

Gross α ± 

Uncertainty (MDC)(a) 

(pCi/L)(b)

Gross β ± 

Uncertainty (MDC) 

(pCi/L)(c) 

3

H ± 

Uncertainty (MDC) 

(pCi/L)( d)

Permitted Potable Wells (continued) 

WW #4A (Area 6) 1/16/2008 9.2 ± 2.3 (1.8) 5.5 ± 0.9 (0.97) -0.9 ± 13.2 (23) 

 6.7 ± 2.4 (2.0) 5.6 ± 2.2 (2.9) -2.1 ± 13.4 (23) 

 6.2 ± 2.5 (1.8) 8.2 ± 2.1 (1.5) 7.3 ± 13.5 (22) 

 7.5 ± 3.0 (1.9) 7.4 ± 2.0 (1.5) 0.6 ± 13.6 (23) 

 6.1 ± 1.4 (1.0) 7.0 ± 1.6 (1.7) -5.0 ± 12.9 (23) 

 

WW 5B (Area 5) 1/16/2008 4.9 ± 1.7 (1.9) 11.0 ± 1.0 (0.8) -0.9 ± 13.4 (24) 

 4/29/2008 2.2 ± 1.5 (2.0) 10.9 ± 2.9 (2.4) -5.1 ± 13.6 (23) 

 7/15/2008 3.7 ± 1.7 (2.0) 11.4 ± 2.4 (1.5) -0.2 ± 12.4 (21) 

 10/21/2008 2.9 ± 0.9 (0.9) 9.9 ± 2.0 (1.9) -2.7 ± 13.2 (23) 

 10/21/2008 FD 2.6 ± 0.9 (1.0) 13.1 ± 2.5 (2.1) -2.2 ± 13.4 (23) 

 

WW 8 (Area 18) 1/16/2008 1.4 ± 1.2 (1.8) 4.9 ± 1.2 (1.1) -4.5 ± 12.6 (23) 

 1/16/2008 FD 1.2 ± 1.2 (1.9) 3.7 ± 1.0 (1.0) 0.4 ± 13.2 (23) 

 4/29/2008 -1.0 ± 0.9 (2.1) 3.1 ± 1.7 (2.4) 4.8 ± 14.0 (23) 

 7/15/2008 0.0 ± 0.6 (1.6) 2.9 ± 1.4 (1.6) -0.8 ± 12.7 (21) 

 10/21/2008 1.6 ± 1.0 (1.6) 4.5 ± 1.7 (3.0) 2.2 ± 18.3 (32) 

Non-Potable Wells 

Army #1 WW 1/16/2008 0.6 ± 1.1 (2.0) 3.2 ± 0.7 (0.9) 3.8 ± 13.3 (23) 

(Area 22) 4/29/2008 3.8 ± 1.7 (2.0) 7.6 ± 2.3 (2.4) -9.0 ± 13.8 (23) 

 7/15/2008 4.6 ± 2.4 (1.8) 5.1 ± 1.7 (1.4) 3.1 ± 13.5 (23) 

 10/21/2008 3.3 ± 1.2 (1.2) 5.9 ± 1.7 (2.6) -0.9 ± 13.7 (24) 

 

UE-16D WW 1/16/2008 2.7 ± 1.3 (2.0) 4.8 ± 0.6 (0.8) -19.5 ± 12.6 (24) 

(Area 16) 4/29/2008 7.3 ± 2.7 (2.0) 11.4 ± 3.0 (2.4) 2.6 ± 13.1 (22) 

 7/15/2008 6.8 ± 2.9 (1.9) 6.7 ± 2.0 (1.7) -1.0 ± 12.8 (22) 

 10/21/2008 6.1 ± 1.4 (1.0) 7.4 ± 1.6 (1.7) 7.0 ± 13.8 (24) 

 

WW 5C (Area 5) 1/16/2008 12.0 ± 2.4 (1.9) 5.4 ± 1.0 (1.0) -5.2 ± 12.2 (22) 

 4/29/2008 6.4 ± 2.4 (2.0) 5.5 ± 2.0 (2.5) -3.2 ± 13.7 (23) 

 7/15/2008 5.2 ± 2.5 (1.6) 6.3 ± 1.9 (1.5) 3.8 ± 12.6 (21) 

 10/21/2008 5.6 ± 1.4 (1.2) 7.9 ± 2.0 (2.5) 5.1 ± 14.2 (24) 

 

WW C-1 (Area 6) 1/16/2008 11.4 ± 2.0 (2.0) 10.5 ± 1.0 (1.1) -2.6 ± 13.0 (23) 

 4/29/2008 8.2 ± 3.1 (2.0) 14.5 ± 3.3 (2.5) 10.6 ± 12.9 (21) 

 7/15/2008 5.5 ± 2.8 (2.0) 13.2 ± 3.1 (1.6) 3.1 ± 12.4 (21) 

 10/21/2008 12.9 ± 2.6 (1.3) 14.4 ± 3.0 (2.9) -5.6 ± 13.4 (24) 

Green shaded results are considered detected (result is greater than the sample specific MDC)

(a) ±2 standard deviations 

(b) The EPA established MCL in drinking water for gross alpha (α) is 15 pCi/L 

(c) The EPA “Level of Concern” in drinking water for gross beta (β) is 50 pCi/L 

(d) The EPA established MCL in drinking water for tritium (3

H) is 20,000 pCi/L 

(e) FD = field duplicate sample 

 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

4-16 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

NTS Water Supply Wells Gross Alpha

2000-2008

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

01-Jan-00 31-Dec-01 01-Jan-04 31-Dec-05 01-Jan-08

Collection Date

pCi/L

Areas 5 & 6

Areas 16, 18, 22, & 25

Mean MDC

MCL

 

Figure 4-13. Gross alpha levels in NTS water supply wells from 2000 to 2008 

NTS Water Supply Wells Gross Beta

2000-2008

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

01-Jan-00 31-Dec-01 01-Jan-04 31-Dec-05 01-Jan-08

Collection Date

pCi/L

Areas 5 & 6

Areas 16, 18, 22, & 25

Mean MDC

MCL

Figure 4-14. Gross beta levels in NTS water supply wells from 2000 to 2008 

NTS Water Supply Wells Tritium 2000-2008

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

01-Jan-99 31-Dec-00 01-Jan-03 31-Dec-04 01-Jan-07 31-Dec-08

Collection Date

pCi/L

Areas 5 & 6

Areas 16, 18, 22, & 25

Mean MDC

PLall

Figure 4-15. Tritium concentrations in NTS water supply wells from 2000 to 2008 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 4-17 

4.1.9 Results from NTS Monitoring Wells 

Analytical results from the network of onsite RREMP monitoring wells (see Figure 4-2) indicate that migration of 

radionuclides from the underground test areas is not significant. Four NTS monitoring wells (PM-1, U-19BH, 

UE-7NS, and WW A) are known to have detectable concentrations of tritium, although they are all well below the 

EPA drinking water MCL of 20,000 pCi/L. Each is located within 1 kilometer (km) (0.6 miles [mi]) of an 

historical underground nuclear test. They are discussed below, and their historic tritium concentrations are shown 

in Figure 4-16. Other than for these four wells, tritium was not detectable in other samples from onsite RREMP 

monitoring wells during 2008 (Table 4-3), and there were no statistically significant trends in the measured 

tritium levels (Figure 4-15). 

PM-1 – This well is located in the Central Pahute Mesa CAU. It is constructed with unslotted casing from the 

surface to 2,300 m (7,546 ft) bgs and is an open hole from 2,300 to 2,356 m (7,546 to 7,730 ft) bgs. Results 

from depth profile sampling below the static water level in 2001 show a decreasing tritium concentration with 

depth, indicating that tritium is entering the borehole near the static water level at approximately 643 m 

(2,109 ft) bgs. Potential sources include the underground nuclear tests FARM (U-20ab), GREELEY (U-20g), 

and KASSERI (U-20z). The FARM test is closest to PM-1 but is believed to be down-gradient. GREELY 

and KASSERI tests are both upgradient from PM-1 at distances of 2,429 m (7,969 ft) and 1,196 m (3,924 ft), 

respectively. 

U-19BH – This well is located in the Central Pahute Mesa CAU. It is an unexpended emplacement borehole. 

Several nuclear detonations were conducted near U-19BH, but the source of the tritium in the borehole is 

unclear. Previous investigations suggest that the water in the well originates from a perched aquifer, but 

identifying the likely source of tritium is difficult due to a lack of data regarding the perched system 

(Brikowski et al., 1993). The results from a tracer test conducted in the well indicate that there is minimal 

flow across the borehole (Brikowski et al., 1993). The lack of measurable flow in the well suggests that the 

chemistry of the water sampled from the borehole may not be representative of the aquifer. The tritium 

concentrations measured since 1999 at U-19BH show a downward trend (Figure 4-16). 

UE-7NS – This well is located in the Yucca Flat CAU and was drilled 137 m (449 ft) from the BOURBON 

underground nuclear test (U-7n), which was conducted in 1967. This well was routinely sampled between 

1978 and 1987, with the resumption of sampling in 1991. Tritium levels in this well have been decreasing in 

recent years (Figure 4-16). UE-7NS is the second known location on the NTS where the regionally important 

lower carbonate aquifer (LCA) has been impacted by radionuclides from nuclear testing (Smith et al., 1999). 

The first location where the LCA was known to be impacted by radionuclides from nuclear testing is Well UE2CE located less than 200 m (656 ft) from the NASH test conducted in Yucca Flat in 1967. Well UE-2CE is 

not configured for routine sampling. 

WW A – This well is completed in alluvium in the Yucca Flat CAU. It is located within 1 km (0.6 mi) of 

14 underground nuclear tests, most of which appear to be up-gradient of the well. The well has had 

measurable tritium since the late 1980s. The marked increase between 1985 and 1999 suggests inflow of 

tritium to this well from the HAYMAKER underground nuclear test (U-3aus) conducted in 1962, 524 m 

(1,720 ft) north of WW A. This well, which supplied non-potable water for construction, was shut down in the 

early 1990s. The tritium concentrations measured since 2000 at WW A indicate a slight downward trend 

(Figure 4-16). 

Detectable concentrations of gross alpha and gross beta were present in water collected from NTS onsite 

monitoring wells in 2008 (Table 4-3). These low measurable levels are likely from natural sources. The high 

levels of gross alpha and gross beta activity in U-19BH are likely due to contamination. Analysis of the U-19BH 

sample for 14C resulted in a reported value slightly above MDC (232 pCi/L ± 147 pCi/L, MDC = 231 pCi/L), but 

the laboratory duplicate (an aliquot taken from the same sample container) was below the MDC. In addition, due 

to the lack of other indicators (no detection of tritium, plutonium, 99Tc, other fission or activation products) that 

would confirm its presence, this value is considered to be an anomaly. No man-made radionuclides were 

otherwise confirmed as detected at concentrations above their respective MDCs in any of the NTS monitoring 

wells in 2008.
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

4-18 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Table 4-3. Gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium analysis results for NTS monitoring wells in 2008 

Monitoring Well 

Date 

Sampled 

Gross α ± 

Uncertainty(a) (MDC) 

(pCi/L)(b) 

Gross β ± 

Uncertainty (MDC) 

(pCi/L)(c) 

3

H ± 

Uncertainty (MDC) 

(pCi/L)(d)

ER-19-1 (2710 ft bgs) 3/18/2008 NS(e) NS 7.5 ± 10.4 (18) 

 (2710 ft bgs) 3/18/2008 FD(f) NA(g) NA 5.5 ± 10.6 (18) 

 (3280 ft bgs) 3/18/2008 NS NS 3.2 ± 10.9 (19) 

 

ER-20-1 5/13/2008 NS NS -1.7 ± 13.6 (24) 

 5/13/2008 FD NA NA -6.2 ± 13.3 (24) 

ER-20-2 #1 5/14/2008 NS NS 1.4 ± 13.5 (24) 

 5/14/2008 FD NA NA -5.6 ± 13.2 (24) 

 

HTH #1 (1935 ft bgs) 2/26/2008 3.2 ± 1.9 (1.9) 2.0 ± 1.2 (1.6) -0.3 ± 14.0 (23) 

 (2040 ft bgs) 2/26/2008 2.2 ± 1.6 (1.9) 1.2 ± 1.1 (1.7) -0.6 ± 14.0 (23) 

 (2130 ft bgs) 2/26/2008 2.0 ± 1.6 (2.0) 1.1 ± 1.1 (1.7) 4.2 ± 15.1 (25) 

 (2130 ft bgs) 2/26/2008 FD NA NA -2.6 ± 13.8 (23) 

 (2300 ft bgs) 2/26/2008 3.6 ± 2.0 (2.0) 3.7 ± 1.4 (1.5) 0.2 ± 14.2 (24) 

 

SM-23-1 10/8/2008 2.2 ± 1.0 (1.5) 9.6 ± 2.1 (2.4) 1.9 ± 14.0 (24) 

 10/8/2008 FD NA NA 7.2 ± 14.7 (25) 

 

U-19BH 3/17/2008 80 ± 13 (1.7) 92 ± 15 (2.6) 31 ± 13 (19) 

 3/17/2008 FD NA NA 37 ± 13 (19) 

 

UE-1Q 3/5/2008 5.2 ± 1.0 (0.6) 9.9 ± 1.8 (1.1) -0.7 ± 10.7 (19) 

 3/5/2008 FD 5.6 ± 1.2 (0.6) 9.0 ± 1.8 (1.6) NA 

 

UE5PW-1(h) 3/11/2008 NS NS 6.8 ± 11.1 (19) 

 3/11/2008 FD NA NA 3.8 ± 11.0 (19) 

 9/10/2008 NA NA -2.6 ± 13.3 (22) 

 9/10/2008 FD NA NA 11.7 ± 13.0 (21) 

 

UE5PW-2(h) 3/11/2008 NS NS 3.2 ± 10.8 (19) 

 3/11/2008 FD NA NA 12.1 ± 11.2 (18) 

 9/10/2008 NA NA -2.2 ± 12.8 (22) 

 9/10/2008 FD NA NA -1.9 ± 13.1 (22) 

 

UE5PW-3(h) 3/11/2008 NS NS -2.5 ± 10.6 (19) 

 3/11/2008 FD NA NA -0.3 ± 10.8 (19) 

 9/10/2008 NA NA 0.7 ± 13.1 (22) 

 9/10/2008 FD NA NA -10.7 ± 12.8 (22) 

 

UE-7NS 2/27/2008 1.8 ± 1.4 (1.9) 1.9 ± 1.1 (1.5) 90 ± 24 (30) 

 2/27/2008 FD NA NA 84 ± 22 (28) 

 

TW D 3/5/2008 2.7 ± 0.7 (0.6) 9.4 ± 1.7 (0.97) 3.1 ± 10.8 (19) 

 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 4-19 

Table 4-3. Gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium analysis results for NTS monitoring wells in 2008 (continued)

Monitoring Location Date Sampled 

Gross α ± 

Uncertainty(a) (MDC) 

(pCi/L)(b) 

Gross β ± 

Uncertainty (MDC) 

(pCi/L)(c) 

3

H ± 

Uncertainty (MDC) 

(pCi/L)(d)

WW A 2/12/2008 2.0 ± 0.5 (0.4) 6.3 ± 1.2 (1.1) 356 ± 59 (28) 

 2/12/2008 FD NA NA 344 ± 59 (34) 

 

WELL PM-1 4/23/2008 NS NS 127 ± 25 (23) 

4/23/2008 FD NA NA 130 ± 25 (22) 

Green shaded results are considered detected (result is greater than the sample specific MDC) 

Yellow shaded results are any that are equal to or greater than the EPA-designated levels shown below for each analyte:

(a) ±2 standard deviations

(b) The EPA established MCL in drinking water for gross alpha (α) is 15 pCi/L

(c) The EPA Level of Concern in drinking water for gross beta (β) is 50 pCi/L

(d) The EPA established MCL in drinking water for tritium (3

H) is 20,000 pCi/L

(e) NS = Not scheduled for gross alpha/beta analysis in 2008, analysis run once every 2–3 years, last analyzed in 2007 

(f) FD = Field duplicate sample 

(g) NA = Specific analysis was not run on the sample 

(h) Compliance well for validation of waste pit P03U at Area 5 RWMS (see Section 9.1.6) 

Monitoring Wells with Historically Elevated Tritium

1

10

100

1000

10000

100000

01-Jan-84 01-Jan-92 01-Jan-00 01-Jan-08

Collection Date

pCi/L

PM-1

UE-7NS

U-19BH

Water Well A

MCL

PLall

 Figure 4-16. Concentrations of tritium in wells with a history of detectable levels 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

4-20 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Tritium in Onsite Monitoring Wells Without Histories of 

Elevated Concentrations 

-30

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

01-Jan-99 31-Dec-00 01-Jan-03 31-Dec-04 01-Jan-07 31-Dec-08

Collection Date

pCi/L

Mean MDC

PLall

Figure 4-17. Concentrations of tritium in monitoring wells without histories of elevated levels 

4.1.10 Results from E Tunnel Ponds and Well ER-12-1 

The NNSA/NSO manages and operates the E-Tunnel Waste Water Disposal System (ETDS) in Area 12 under a 

water pollution control permit (NEV 96021) issued by the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) 

Bureau of Federal Facilities (BFF). The permit governs the management of radionuclide-contaminated 

wastewater that drains from the E Tunnel portal into a series of holding ponds (called E Tunnel Ponds, see Figure 

4-3). The permit requires Well ER-12-1 groundwater to be monitored once every 24 months and ETDS discharge 

waters to be monitored once every 12 months for tritium, gross alpha, and gross beta (Table 4-4) as well as for 

numerous nonradiological parameters (see Section 4.2.4, Table 4-13). 

Until September 30, 2008, the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) held the NEV 96021 permit and 

conducted the permit monitoring. NSTec assumed management and operating responsibility for the ETDS on 

October 1, 2008. On October 23, 2008, NSTec ETS personnel sampled ETDS discharge water for radiological 

analyses. While tritium concentrations in the tunnel effluent were elevated, they were about 60 percent of the 

limit allowed under permit (Table 4-5). The discharge water was also within gross alpha/beta permit limits. 

Table 4-4. Radiological results for Well ER-12-1 groundwater and ETDS discharge samples

Well ER-12-1 Groundwater 

(sampled every 24 months)(a)

ETDS Discharge Water 

(sampled every 12 months)(b)

 Radiological Parameter Permissible 

Limit (pCi/L) 

Measured Value 

(pCi/L) 

Permissible 

Limit (pCi/L) 

Measured Value 

(pCi/L) 

Tritium 20,000 -220 ± 210 1,000,000 577,000 ± 88,100 

Gross Alpha 15 11.6 ± 2.7 35.1 8.6 ± 2.2 

Gross Beta 50 8.8 ± 2.4 101 42.3 ± 7.2 

(a) sampled April 2007, next sampling to be in April, 2009. 

(b) sampled October 2008. 

 Source: Water Pollution Control Permit NEV 96021 Quarterly Monitoring Report and Annual Summary Report for E-Tunnel Waste 

Water Disposal System (NSTec, 2009a) 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 4-21 

Through 2007, NSTec ETS sampled E Tunnel effluent, water from the ponds, and sediments from the ponds for 

the primary purpose of assessing the dose to NTS aquatic and terrestrial biota living in or using the ponds. 

Results from radiological analyses of these samples were reported in previous years’ NTS environmental reports 

(e.g., NSTec, 2007a; 2008a). Concentrations of tritium in these effluent and pond water samples were generally 

similar to those measured in effluent samples for permit compliance (Figure 4-18). Both samples show tritium 

concentrations decreasing over time. Tritium levels in pond water samples were generally lower than in the 

tunnel effluent samples, which is likely due to precipitation diluting tritium concentrations in the ponds. 

Concentrations of man-made radionuclides in pond sediments, which were sampled from 2002 to 2007, are 

displayed in Figure 4-19. They were consistently above their MDCs, but did not appear to have increasing trends. 

Because inputs of man-made radionuclides to the tunnel system ended with the halt of nuclear weapons testing, 

radionuclides in tunnel effluents are expected to continue their decrease through time. 

The potential dose to NTS biota from the E Tunnel ponds was assessed using the graded approach in DOE 

Standard DOE-STD-1153-2002, the RESRAD-BIOTA computer model (DOE, 2004b), and the radionuclide 

concentrations measured in E Tunnel pond water and sediments. Results demonstrated that the doses to biota 

were much less than the limits set to protect plant and animal populations (BN, 2004a; NSTec, 2008a). Sampling 

of tunnel effluent, pond waters, and sediments were discontinued in 2008 as these samples are in excess of ETDS 

permit compliance and are no longer needed for biota dose monitoring objectives. Plants and animals near the 

ponds will continue to be sampled under RREMP monitoring to directly verify low potential radiological doses to 

them and to humans potentially consuming them. 

E Tunnel Pond Water

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

900,000

1,000,000

1,100,000

1,200,000

Oct-98 Oct-99 Oct-00 Oct-01 Oct-02 Oct-03 Oct-04 Oct-05 Oct-06 Oct-07 Oct-08

Sample Date

Tritium (pCi/L)

Water Sampled in

Support of Permit

(Tunnel Effluent)

ETS Sampled Water

(both Tunnel Effluent

and Pond Water)

Permit Limit

Figure 4-18. Tritium concentration in E Tunnel effluent and ponds from 1999 to 2008 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

4-22 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Radionuclides in E Tunnel Pond Sediment

0.01

0.10

1.00

10.00

100.00

1000.00

Jan-02 Jan-03 Jan-04 Jan-05 Jan-06 Jan-07 Jan-08

Sample Date

pCi/g

Sr-90

Cs-137

Pu-238

Pu-239+240

Am-241

Figure 4-19. Concentrations of man-made radionuclides in E Tunnel pond sediments from 2002 to 2007 

4.1.11 Results from NTS Sewage Lagoons 

Each sewage lagoon at the NTS is part of a closed system used for the evaporative treatment of sanitary sewage. 

Sewage storage and treatment at the NTS has transitioned from lagoons to septic systems at several locations in 

recent years. Two permitted sewage lagoons, operated under the Water Pollution Control General Permit 

GNEV93001, remain: Area 6 Yucca and Area 23 Mercury (see Figure 4-3). 

In July 2008, NSTec Solid Waste Operations collected annual samples to demonstrate permit compliance for 

gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium (Table 4-5). To more completely demonstrate the proper management of 

effluents on the NTS, gamma spectroscopy analyses were also conducted for these lagoons under the RREMP 

(BN, 2003a); no man-made gamma-emitting radionuclides were detected. 

Until 2008, permit GNEV93001 required annual monitoring of gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium radioactivity. 

The permit was revised on November 20, 2008, and the requirement for annual monitoring changed. The lagoons 

will be sampled for gross alpha, gross beta, tritium, and 29 organic and inorganic contaminants only in the event 

of specific or accidental discharges of potential contaminants. Quarterly monitoring of 5-day biochemical oxygen 

demand, total suspended solids, and pH continue to be permit requirements (see Section 4.2.3.1). 

Table 4-5. Radiological results for sewage lagoon effluent pertaining to permit GNEV 93001 

Monitoring 

Location Date Sampled 

Gross α ± 

Uncertainty(a) (MDC) 

(pCi/L) 

Gross β ± 

Uncertainty (MDC) 

(pCi/L) 

3

H ± 

Uncertainty (MDC) 

(pCi/L) 

Area 6 Yucca 7/08/2008 4.7 ± 1.3 (1.3) 23.8 ± 4.1 (2.0) 136 ± 225 (370)

Area 23 Mercury 7/08/2008 3.8 ± 1.3 (1.5) 27.7 ± 5.0 (3.3) 35 ± 222 (370)

Permit Limit 15 50 20,000 

Green shaded results are considered detected (results greater than the sample-specific MDC)

(a) ± 2 standard deviations 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 4-23 

4.1.12 UGTA Wells 

The UGTA Sub-Project (see Chapter 14) pumped and collected groundwater samples from six wells in 2008. 

Three of these wells are associated with underground nuclear tests and are classified as contaminated (UE-2ce, U4u PS#2A, and U-19ad PS#1A), two are characterization wells located on Rainier Mesa (ER-12-3 and ER-12-4), 

and one is associated with the N-Tunnel complex on Rainier Mesa (U-12n.10 Vent Hole) (see Chapter 14, 

Figure 14-2). All of these wells except for the U-12n.10 Vent Hole were purged using downhole electric 

submersible pumps prior to the collection of samples. The U-12n.10 Vent Hole was sampled using a bailer on a 

wireline. A multi-agency team consisting of personnel from LANL and Lawrence Livermore National 

Laboratory collected the groundwater samples and analyzed them for tritium and other radionuclides. The 

resultant tritium concentrations are shown in Table 4-6. 

Table 4-6. LANL radiochemistry results from UGTA well samples in 2008 

UGTA Well Date Sampled 

3

H ± Uncertainty(a) (MDC) 

pCi/L 

UE-2ce 7/2/08 260,000 ± 10,000 (400)

U-4u PS #2a 2/6/08 21,000,000 ± 1,000,000 (400)

U-19ad PS #1a 5/1/08 11,000,000 ± 400,000 (400)

U-12n.10 Vent Hole 8/20/08 6,200,000 ± 300,000 (400)

ER-12-3 9/17/08 <400

ER-12-4 9/24/08 <400

(a) ±2 standard deviations 

4.1.13 Environmental Impact 

The 2008 tritium data provide no evidence that man-made radionuclides have traveled significant distances from 

underground testing areas to offsite NNSA/NSO monitoring wells in Oasis Valley. None of the offsite 

NNSA/NSO monitoring wells sampled had levels of tritium consistently above MDCs. Previous years’ tritium 

data from offsite water supply wells and springs indicate the same findings. Even on the NTS, groundwater 

monitoring results indicate that migration of radionuclides from the underground test areas is not significant. 

Groundwater from four monitoring wells on the NTS is known to consistently have tritium at levels above 

detection, and they are each within 1 km (0.6 mi) of an historical underground nuclear test. Their concentrations 

of tritium are still less than 3 percent of the EPA MCL for drinking water of 20,000 pCi/L, and no trend of rising 

tritium concentrations in these wells has been observed since 2000. 

The radiological impact to water resources from current and past activities on the NTS is groundwater 

contamination from man-made radionuclides within the UGTA Sub-Project CAUs shown in Figure 4-1. The 

NDEP-approved method of containing tritium-contaminated waters in lined sumps (as for the UGTA Sub-Project 

post-shot wells) and in the E Tunnel ponds exposes NTS wildlife to tritium in their drinking water or aquatic 

habitat. The potential dose to NTS biota from the E Tunnel ponds has been assessed, and the results demonstrated 

that the doses to biota were much less than the limits set to protect plant and animal populations (BN, 2004a; 

NSTec, 2008a). The effect on wildlife to NTS radiological sources is addressed in Section 8.2 of this report. 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

4-24 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

4.2 Nonradiological Drinking Water and Wastewater Monitoring 

The quality of drinking water and wastewater on the NTS is regulated by federal and state laws. The design, 

construction, operation, and maintenance of many of the drinking water and wastewater systems are regulated 

under state permits. NSTec is tasked with ensuring that such systems meet the applicable water quality standards 

and permit requirements (see Section 2.2). The NTS nonradiological water monitoring goals are shown below. 

NSTec Environmental Services (ES) personnel met these goals by conducting field water sampling and analyses, 

performing assessments, and maintaining documentation. This section describes the results of 2008 activities. 

Information about radiological monitoring of drinking water on and off the NTS is presented in Sections 4.1.4 

and 4.1.6. 

Nonradiological Water Monitoring Goals Compliance Measures/Actions 

Ensure that the operation of NTS public water systems 

(PWSs) and private water systems provide high-quality 

drinking water to workers and visitors of the NTS. 

Determine if NTS PWS are operated in accordance with 

the requirements in Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) 

445A under permits issued by the State. 

Determine if the operation of commercial septic systems 

to process domestic wastewater on the NTS meets 

operational standards in accordance with the requirements 

NAC 445A under permits issued by the State. 

Determine if the operation of industrial wastewater 

systems on the NTS meets operational standards of 

federal and state regulations as prescribed under the 

GNEV93001 state permit. 

Number of PWS samples containing coliform 

bacteria 

Inorganic Phase II and V chemicals, volatile organic 

Phase I, II, and V chemicals, disinfection byproducts, and Secondary Standards contaminants in 

PWS samples 

5-day biological oxygen demand (BOD5), total 

suspended solids (TSS), pH, and 29 organic and 

inorganic contaminants in sewage lagoon water 

Inspection of sewage lagoon systems 

Flow rate, pH, temperature, specific conductance, 

and 14 contaminants (mostly metals) in E Tunnel 

effluent water

4.2.1 Drinking Water Monitoring 

Six permitted wells supply the potable water needs of NTS operations. These are grouped into three PWSs that 

were operated by NSTec in 2008 (Figure 4-20). The largest PWS (Area 23 and 6) serves the main work areas of 

the NTS. The PWSs are designed, operated, and maintained in accordance with the requirements in NAC 445A 

under permits issued by the NDEP Bureau of Safe Drinking Water (BSDW). PWS permits are renewed annually. 

The three PWSs must meet water quality standards for National Primary and Secondary Drinking Water 

Standards. They are sampled according to a nine-year monitoring cycle, which identifies the specific classes of 

contaminants to monitor for each drinking water source and the frequency of their monitoring. 

For work locations at the NTS that are not part of a PWS, NNSA/NSO hauls potable water in two water tanker 

trucks. The trucks are permitted by the BSDW to haul water to a PWS, and the water they carry is subject to 

water quality standards for coliform bacteria. Normal use of these trucks, however, involves hauling to private 

water systems and to hand-washing stations at construction sites, activities not subject to permitting. NNSA/NSO 

renews the permits for these trucks annually, however, in case of emergency. 

4.2.1.1 PWS and Water-Hauling Truck Monitoring 

Table 4-7 lists the water quality parameters monitored in 2008, the sample frequencies, and sample locations. At 

all building locations, the sampling point for coliform bacteria is one of the sinks within one of the building’s 

bathrooms. Samples for the chemical contaminants were collected at the four points of entry to the PWSs. 

Although not required by regulation or permit, the private water systems were monitored quarterly for coliform 

bacteria to ensure safe drinking water. 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 4-25 

Figure 4-20. Water supply wells and drinking water systems on the NTS 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

4-26 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Table 4-7. Monitoring parameters and sampling design for NTS PWSs and permitted water-hauling trucks 

2008 Monitoring Requirement 

PWS Contaminant Samples/Frequency Monitoring Locations 

Coliform Bacteria 36 samples 

(3 buildings per month, 4 

samples per building) 

Buildings 5-7, U1H restroom, 6-609, 6-900, 

22-1, 23-180, 23-701, 23-777, 23-1103 

Area 23 and 6 

Inorganic Phase II Chemicals: 

Nitrate 

1 sample 

(1 per entry point per year) 

Inorganic Phase V Chemicals: 

Arsenic 

1 sample 

(1 per entry point every 3 years) 

Two entry points: 4/4A S. Tank, Mercury N. 

Tank 

Lead and copper 1 sample 

(1 per building every 3 years) 

Buildings 5-7, 23-117, 23-143, CP-41, 

CP-214, 23-531, 23- 532, 23- 535, 23-614, 

23-652 

Disinfection By-products: 

Trihalomethanes, haloacetic acids 

1 sample 

(1 per building every 3 years) 

Buildings 23-180, 22-1, 6-900 

Coliform Bacteria 4 samples 

(1 per quarter) 

Building 12-30 

Inorganic Phase II Chemicals: 

Fluoride, nitrate, nitrite 

1 sample 

(1 per entry point every 3 years) 

Area 12 

Secondary Standards: 

11 contaminants (Table 4-8) 

1 sample 

(1 per entry point every 3 years) 

One entry point: Area 12 S. Tank 

Area 25 Coliform Bacteria 4 samples (1 per quarter) Building 25-4320 or 25-4221 

Inorganic Phase II Chemicals: 

Fluoride and nitrate 

1 sample 

(1 per entry point every 3 years) One entry point: J-11 Tank 

Water-Hauling Truck 

Truck 84846 and

Truck 84847 

Coliform Bacteria 12 samples 

(1 per month for each truck) 

From water tank on each truck after filling at 

Area 6 potable water fill stand 

All water samples were collected in accordance with accepted practices and the analyses were performed by 

state-approved laboratories. Approved analytical methods listed in NAC 445A and Title 40 Code of Federal 

Regulations (CFR) Part 141 were used by the laboratories. 

In 2008, monitoring results indicated that the PWSs and the permitted water-hauling trucks complied with 

National Primary Drinking Water Quality Standards and Secondary Standards (Table 4-8). In June 2008, ten 

buildings in the Area 23 and 6 PWS (see Table 4-7) that have copper (Cu) pipes with lead (Pb) solder were 

sampled for these two metals. Pb and Cu were not detected above their reporting limits of 0.015 milligrams per 

liter (mg/L) (Pb) and 1.3 mg/L (Cu). In July 2008, three buildings within the Area 23 and 6 PWS (see Table 4-7) 

were sampled for total trihalomethanes (TTHM) and haloacetic acids (HAA), which are disinfection by-products. 

None of the samples exceeded the reporting limits of 0.08 mg/L for TTHM and 0.06 mg/L for HAA. 

Table 4-8. Water quality analysis results for NTS PWSs and permitted water-hauling trucks

 2008 Results (mg/L) 

Contaminant

Maximum 

Contaminant Level 

(mg/L) Area 23 and 6 PWS Area 12 PWS Area 25 PWS 

Coliform Bacteria Coliforms present in 1 

sample/month

Present in 1 sample 

in January

Absent in all 

samples

Absent in all 

samples 

Inorganic Chemicals – Phase II 

 Fluoride 2.0 NA(a) 0.756 1.89-1.90 

 Nitrate 10 (as nitrogen) 3.25-3.77 1.20 1.9 

 Nitrite 1 (as nitrogen) NA(a) ND (b) NA 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 4-27 

 Table 4-8. Water quality analysis results for NTS PWSs and permitted water-hauling trucks (continued) 

 2008 Results (mg/L) 

Contaminant

Maximum 

Contaminant Level 

(mg/L) Area 23 and 6 PWS Area 12 PWS Area 25 PWS 

Inorganic Chemicals – Phase V 

 Arsenic 10 7.8–9.1 NA 10 

Secondary Standards 

 Aluminum 0.2 NA ND NA 

 Chloride 400.0 NA 9.61 NA 

 Copper 1.0 NA ND NA 

 Foaming Agents 0.5 NA ND NA 

 Iron 0.6 NA 0.17 NA 

 Magnesium 150.0 NA 0.84 NA 

 Manganese 0.1 NA 0.0086 NA 

 Silver 0.1 NA ND NA 

 Sulfate 500.0 NA 18.1 NA 

 Total Dissolved Solids 

 (TDS) 1000.00 NA 94 NA 

 Zinc 5.0 NA ND NA 

(a) NA = Not applicable, not required to be sampled in 2008 

(b) ND = Not detectable 

Periodically, NDEP conducts a sanitary survey of the permitted NTS PWSs. It consists of an inspection of the 

wells, tanks, and other visible portions of each PWS to ensure that they are maintained in a sanitary configuration. 

As non-community water systems, the minimum survey frequency is once every five years. NDEP performed a 

sanitary survey of the PWSs in November 2008, and there were no significant findings. 

NDEP inspects the two water-hauling trucks annually at the time of permit renewal to make sure they still meet 

the requirements of NAC 445A. Inspections were performed in June 2008 and permits were renewed. 

4.2.1.2 Xylene Monitoring at Mercury North Tank 

In June 2007, the organic contaminant xylene was detected in a water sample from the Mercury N. Tank point of 

entry into the Area 23 and 6 PWS (see Figure 4-20). The sample concentration was above 0.0005 mg/L but well 

below the MCL of 10 mg/L (Table 4-10 of NSTec, 2008a). To comply with the Safe Drinking Water Act, any 

regulated organic contaminant that is detected at a level exceeding 0.0005 mg/L in any sample, must trigger the 

initiation of quarterly monitoring at each sampling point that resulted in a detection [40 CFR 141.24 (f)(11)(i)]. 

NSTec did not initiate quarterly monitoring for xylene at the Mercury N. Tank immediately. NSTec discovered 

this oversight during routine data review and initiated quarterly sampling at the Mercury N. Tank in June 2008. 

Samples were collected on June 25, July 14, and November 5, 2008. The last quarterly sample was collected on 

January 29, 2009. Xylene was not detected (i.e., concentrations were <0.005 mg/L) in the subsequent quarterly 

samples. 

In September 2008, NDEP determined that the failure to initiate quarterly sampling in 2007 did not warrant 

issuing a Notice of Alleged Violation (NOAV) and/or imposing fines. In lieu of issuing an NOAV, NDEP 

directed NNSA/NSO to implement specific changes in their sampling, administrative, and quality assurance 

programs (NDEP, 2008). NSTec complied with all requested changes by the end of 2008. In March 2009, NDEP 

notified NNSA/NSO that quarterly monitoring for xylene could be discontinued and that the routine annual 

sampling for xylene could be resumed (NDEP, 2009). 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

4-28 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

4.2.2 Domestic Wastewater Monitoring 

A total of 23 permitted septic systems for domestic wastewater are being used on the NTS (Figure 4-21). These 

septic systems are permitted to handle 5,000 gallons of wastewater per day. Of the 23 permitted systems, 7 

systems are under the direct control of the Solid Waste Department; the remaining 16 systems fall under the 

supervision and management of the building’s Facility Manager. The permitted septic systems are inspected 

periodically for sediment loading and are pumped as required. A state-permitted septic pumping contractor is 

used. The State conducts onsite inspections of pumper trucks and pumping contractor operations. ES personnel 

perform management assessments of the permitted systems and services to determine and document adherence to 

permit conditions. The assessments are performed according to existing directives and procedures. 

In 2008, the following compliance actions relating to domestic wastewater on the NTS occurred: 

• During the second quarter of 2008, the inactive Area 12 lagoon received an unplanned discharge of 

approximately 4,000 gallons of potable water. Water used for a fire suppression test was inadvertently sent to 

the lagoon instead of the septic system because a by-pass plug was dislodged. 

• A septic tank pumping contractor permit (NY-17-03318), septic tank pump truck permits (NY-17-03313, 

NY-17-03315, NY-17-03317, NY-17-06838), and a septic tanker permit (NY-17-06839) were approved by 

the State and renewed in July 2008. 

The design and construction application for the Area 6 Criticality Experiments Facility septic system was 

terminated due to budget constraints. This new proposed system would have connected into the existing 

permitted Device Assembly Facility septic system. It would have assisted in managing the additional sewage 

flow generated from an increase number of workers when a new training and laboratory complex are constructed. 

4.2.3 Industrial Wastewater Monitoring 

Industrial discharges on the NTS are limited to two operating sewage lagoon systems: Area 6 Yucca Lake and 

Area 23 Mercury (these lagoon systems also receive domestic wastewater) (Figure 4-21). The Area 6 Yucca Lake 

system consists of two primary lagoons and two secondary lagoons. All lagoons in this system are lined with 

compacted native soils that meet the State of Nevada requirements for transmissivity (10-7centimeters per second). 

The Area 23 Mercury system consists of one primary lagoon, a secondary lagoon, and an infiltration basin. The 

primary and secondary lagoons in this system have a geosynthetic clay liner and a high-density polyethylene liner. 

The lining of the ponds allows Area 23 lagoons to operate as a fully contained, evaporative, non-discharging 

system. 

Both sewage systems are monitored quarterly for influent quality and annually for influent toxicity. The locations 

where water samples are collected for analysis within each sewage system include the following: 

• Each influent headwork for systems where there is direct access to influent flows 

• Each pond near the lagoon’s inlet for systems where there is no direct access to influent flows 

• Each infiltration basin at a place where a sample most closely representing the infiltrating wastewater can be 

collected 

In 2008, composite samples were collected over a period of 8 hours at the Area 6 Yucca Lake and Area 23 

Mercury systems. All water samples were collected in accordance with accepted practices, and the analyses were 

performed by state-approved laboratories. Approved analytical methods listed in NAC 445A and Title 40 CFR 

141 were used by the laboratories. 

4.2.3.1 Quarterly Analysis of Sewage Lagoon Influent Water Quality

A composite sample from each influent headwork was collected quarterly. The composite sample was analyzed 

for three parameters: 5-day biological oxygen demand (BOD5, see Glossary, Appendix B), total suspended solids 

(TSS), and pH (Table 4-9). The compliance limits for these parameters, established under Water Pollution 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 4-29 

 Figure 4-21. Active permitted sewage disposal systems on the NTS 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

4-30 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Control General Permit GNEV93001, are shown in Table 4-9. All quarterly monitoring results for BOD5, TSS, 

and pH for sewage system influent waters were within permit limits in 2008. 

Table 4-9. Water quality analysis results for NTS sewage lagoon influent waters in 2008 

4.2.3.2 Annual Analysis of Toxicity of Sewage Lagoon Pond Waters 

A grab sample from the Area 23 Mercury primary lagoon and an equal-volume composite sample from the two 

Area 6 Yucca Lake primary lagoons were collected in July. Each grab and composite sample was filtered, the 

solids discarded, and the filtrate analyzed directly, using methods of analysis cited in EPA (1986). Each sample 

was analyzed for the contaminants listed in Table 4-10. The limits for these contaminants are specified under the 

GNEV93001 permit; they are the same limits specified in 40 CFR 261.24, Table 1, Maximum Concentration of 

Contaminants for the Toxicity Characteristic. Annual monitoring showed that no contaminants exceeded permit 

limits (Table 4-10). As mentioned in Section 4.1.11, the permit’s requirement for annual monitoring of the 

lagoons changed in November 2008. The lagoons will only be sampled for the contaminants in Table 4-10 in the 

event of specific or accidental discharges of potential contaminants. 

Table 4-10. Water toxicity analysis results for NTS sewage lagoon pond water in 2008 

Contaminant Limit(a) (mg/L) 

Area 6 Yucca 

(mg/L) 

Area 23 Mercury 

(mg/L) 

Benzene 0.5 ND(b) ND 

Carbon Tetrachloride 0.5 ND ND 

Chlorobenzene 100 ND ND 

Chloroform 6.0 ND ND 

Cresol (Total) 200 ND ND 

2,4-D 10 ND ND 

1,4-Dichlorobenzene 7.5 ND ND 

1,2-Dichloroethane 0.5 ND ND 

1,1-Dichlorethylene 0.7 ND ND 

2,4-Dinitrotoluene 0.13 ND ND 

Hexachlorobenzene 0.13 ND ND 

Hexachlorobutadiene 0.5 ND ND 

Hexachloroethane 3.0 ND ND 

Methylethyl Ketone 200 ND ND 

Nitrobenzene 2.0 ND ND 

Pentachlorophenol 100 ND ND 

 Minimum and Maximum Values from Quarterly Samples 

Parameter Units Area 6 Yucca Lake Area 23 Mercury 

BOD5 42-270 66-250 

BOD5 Permit Limit 

mg/L 

No Limit No Limit 

BOD5 Mean Daily Load (a) 0.18-1.06 8.31-45.21 

BOD5 Mean Daily Load Limit 

kg/d 

8.66 115.4 

TSS 118-248 98.6-160 

TSS Permit Limit 

mg/L 

No Limit No Limit 

pH 8.15-8.77 7.69-8.46` 

pH Permit Limit 

S.U. (b)

6.0–9.0 6.0–9.0 

(a) BOD5 Mean Daily Load in kilograms per day (kg/d) = (mg/L BOD x liters per day (L/d) average flow x 3.785)/106

(b) Standard units of pH
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 4-31 

Table 4-10. Water toxicity analysis results for NTS sewage lagoon pond water in 2008 (continued) 

Contaminant Limit(a) (mg/L) 

Area 6 Yucca 

(mg/L) 

Area 23 Mercury 

(mg/L) 

Pyridine 5.0 ND ND 

Trichloroethylene 0.5 ND ND 

2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 400 ND ND 

2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 2.0 ND ND 

Vinyl Chloride 0.2 ND ND 

Arsenic 5.0 ND ND 

Barium 100 0.0411 0.0631 

Cadmium 1.0 ND ND 

Chromium 5.0 ND ND 

Lead 5.0 ND ND 

Mercury 0.2 ND ND 

Selenium 1.0 ND ND 

Silver 5.0 0.0060 0.0085 

(a) Source: 40 CFR 261.24, Table 1 

(b) Not detected - results of laboratory analysis were below the lab’s minimum detection limits 

4.2.3.3 Sewage System Inspections 

The sewage system operators inspect active systems weekly and inactive lagoon systems quarterly. NDEP 

inspects both active and inactive NTS lagoon systems annually. Onsite operators inspect for abnormal conditions, 

weeds, algae blooms, pond color, abnormal odors, dike erosion, burrowing animals, discharge from ponds or 

lagoons, depth of staff gauge, crest level, excess insect population, maintenance/repairs needed, and general 

conditions. Weekly and quarterly inspections were conducted by NSTec throughout the year, and NDEP 

conducted its annual inspection in May 2008. The inspection covered field maintenance programs, lagoons, sites, 

and access roads functional to operations. There were no notable findings from the onsite and NDEP inspections. 

4.2.4 E-Tunnel Waste Water Disposal System (ETDS) Monitoring 

The NNSA/NSO manages and operates the ETDS in Area 12 under a separate water pollution control permit 

(NEV 96021) issued by the NDEP BFF. The permit governs the management of radionuclide-contaminated 

wastewater that drains from the E Tunnel portal into a series of holding ponds. The permit requires Well ER-12-1 

groundwater and ETDS discharge waters to be monitored for radiological parameters (see Section 4.1.10, Table 4-

4) and for the nonradiological parameters listed below in Table 4-11. Monthly monitoring of the ETDS is also 

conducted during which personnel measure the flow rate, pH, temperature, and specific conductance of the 

discharge water and the total volume and structural integrity of the holding ponds. Well and ETDS monitoring 

data are reported to the NDEP BFF in annual and quarterly reports, respectively. 

Until September 30, 2008, DTRA held the NEV 96021 permit and conducted the permit monitoring. NSTec 

assumed management and operating responsibility for the ETDS on October 1, 2008. In 2008, all nonradiological 

parameters in the annual ETDS sample were within the threshold limits specified by the permit (Table 4-11). The 

Well ER-12-1 groundwater sample, collected in July 2007, was also within permit limits for these parameters 

(Table 4-11). All 2008 monthly measurements and observations demonstrated compliance with permit limits and 

specifications. 

Prior to September 2008, DTRA determined that the E Tunnel containment pond system needed modification and 

received approval for the modification from NDEP. Two earthen berms were constructed across Pond 6 to restore 

the pond’s original holding capacity and reduce the risk of an uncontrolled release from the ETDS. The 

construction subdivided Pond 6 into three sections. The new numbering system for the impoundments is Ponds 4, 

5, 6a, 6b, and 6c. Construction of the berms was completed on January 15, 2009. 
Radiological and Nonradiological Water Monitoring

4-32 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Table 4-11. Nonradiological results for Well ER-12-1 groundwater and ETDS discharge samples 

Well ER-12-1 Groundwater 

(Sampled July 2007) 

ETDS Discharge Water 

(Sampled October 2008) 

Nonradiological Parameter Threshold 

(mg/L) 

Measured Value 

(mg/L) 

Threshold 

(mg/L) 

Measured Value 

(mg/L) 

Cadmium 0.005 0.002 0.045 0.00025(a)

Chloride 250 15.4 360 9.4 

Chromium 0.09 0.006 0.09 0.0021 

Copper 1.2 0.006 1.2 0.001(a)

Fluoride 3.6 0.243 3.6 0.25(a)

Iron 5.0 2.59 5.0 1.42 

Lead 0.014 0.003 0.014 0.0015(a)

Magnesium 135 60.5 135 1.35 

Manganese 0.25 0.145 0.25 0.0163 

Mercury 0.0018 0.0002 0.0018 0.00006(a)

Nitrate nitrogen 9 0.104 9 1.13 

Selenium 0.045 0.003 0.045 0.003(a)

Sulfate 450 328 450 15.8 

Zinc 4.5 0.091 4.5 0.022 

(a) Estimated quantity based on the minimum detection limit Source: (NSTec, 2008a) 

4.2.5 Environmental Impact 

The results of all drinking water and wastewater monitoring in 2008 were within permit limits. In the past, some 

drinking water standards in NTS water supply wells or PWSs have been exceeded (e.g., arsenic in Army #1 WW 

and WW 5C, lead in the Area 12 PWS, elevated total dissolved solids and hardness in WW C-1). However, all 

were determined to have been due to natural causes or the condition of the water distribution systems themselves; 

they have not been the result of the release of contaminants into the groundwater from site operations. Nonradiological contamination of groundwater from NTS operations is expected to be co-located with the radiological 

contamination that has occurred from historic underground nuclear testing within the UGTA Sub-Project CAUs. 

It is expected to be minor, however, in comparison to the radiological contamination. For nuclear tests above the 

water table, potential nonradiological contaminants are not likely to reach groundwater because of their negligible 

advective and dispersive transport rates through the thick vadose zone. Water samples from UGTA Sub-Project 

wells, which include hot wells, have not had elevated levels of nonradiological man-made contaminants. 

Well drilling, waste burial, chemical storage, and wastewater management are the only current NTS activities that 

have the potential to contaminate groundwater with nonradiological contaminants. This potential is very low, 

however, due to engineered and operational deterrents and natural environmental factors. Current drilling 

operations include the containment of drilling muds and well effluents in sumps (see Chapter 14). Well effluents 

are monitored for nonradiological contaminants (predominantly lead) to ensure that lined sumps are used when 

necessary. The Area 3 and 5 RWMSs and the solid waste landfills are designed and monitored to ensure that 

contaminants do not reach groundwater (see Chapter 9). In addition, the potential for mobilization of 

contaminants from all these sources to groundwater is negligible due to the arid climate, the extensive depth to 

groundwater (thickness of the vadose zone), and the proven behavior of liquid and vapor fluxes in the vadose 

zone (primarily upward liquid movement towards the ground surface). 

The Environmental Restoration program, through the Soils Project and Industrial Sites Project, conducts cleanup 

and closures of historic surface and shallow subsurface contamination sites, some of which have nonradiological 

contaminants like metals, petroleum hydrocarbons, hazardous organic and inorganic chemicals, and unexploded 

ordnance (see Chapter 9). The potential for mobilization of these contaminants to groundwater is negligible due 

to the same regional climatic, soil, and hydrogeologic factors mentioned above. 

No past or present NNSA/NSO operations are known to have contaminated natural springs or ephemeral surface 

waters on the NTS.
Direct Radiation Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 – Draft 5-1 

5.0 Direct Radiation Monitoring 

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order DOE O 5400.5, “Radiation Protection of the Public and the 

Environment,” and DOE O 435.1, “Radioactive Waste Management,” have requirements to protect the public and 

environment from exposure to radiation (see Section 2.3). Energy from radionuclides present in the Nevada Test 

Site (NTS) environment could potentially be deposited inside humans and animals through inhalation and 

ingestion. Section 3.1 and Section 4.1 present the results of monitoring radionuclides in air and water on the 

NTS; those results are used to estimate potential internal radiation dose to the public via inhalation and ingestion. 

Energy absorbed from radioactive materials outside of the body results in an external dose. During 2008, external 

dose was measured under the Direct Radiation Monitoring Program of National Security Technologies, LLC 

(NSTec), Environmental Technical Services. External dose comes from direct ionizing radiation on the NTS 

from all sources, including natural radioactivity from cosmic or terrestrial sources as well as man-made 

radioactive sources. This chapter presents the data obtained through this program. 

Direct radiation monitoring is conducted to assess the state of the external radiation environment, detect changes 

in that environment, and measure gamma radiation levels near potential exposure sites. DOE O 450.1A, 

“Environmental Protection Program,” states that environmental monitoring should be conducted to detect, 

characterize, and respond to releases from DOE activities, assess impacts, and estimate dispersal patterns in the 

environment. In addition, DOE O 5400.5 states that “it is also an objective that potential exposures to members 

of the public be as low as is reasonably achievable (ALARA).” 

Direct Radiation Monitoring Program Goals

Assess the proportion of dose to the public that comes from background radiation versus NTS operations. 

Measure the potential external dose to a member of the public in order to determine if the total dose (internal 

and external) exceeds 100 millirem per year (mrem/yr) (1 millisievert [mSv]/yr), the dose limit of 

DOE O 5400.5. 

Determine if radiation levels from the Radioactive Waste Management Sites (RWMSs) are likely to result 

in a dose exceeding the 25 mrem/yr (0.25 mSv/yr) dose limit to members of the public as specified in 

DOE Manual DOE M 435.1-1, “Radioactive Waste Management Manual.” 

Monitor operational activities involving radioactive material, radiation-generating devices, or accidental 

releases of radioactive material to ensure exposure to members of the public are kept ALARA as stated in 

DOE O 5400.5. 

Determine if the absorbed radiation dose (in a unit of measure called a rad [see Glossary, Appendix B]) 

from external radiation exposure to NTS terrestrial plants and aquatic animals is less than 1 rad per day 

(1 rad/d) (0.01 gray [Gy]/d), and if the absorbed radiation dose to NTS terrestrial animals is less than 0.1 rad/d 

(1 milligray [mGy]/d) (limits prescribed by DOE O 5400.5 and DOE Standard DOE-STD-1153-2002, “A 

Graded Approach for Evaluating Radiation Doses to Aquatic and Terrestrial Biota”). 

Determine the patterns of exposure rates through time at various soil contamination areas to fulfill the 

requirements of DOE O 450.1A to characterize releases in the environment. 

An offsite monitoring program has been established by the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security 

Administration Nevada Site Office to monitor direct radiation within communities adjacent to the NTS. The 

Desert Research Institute (DRI) conducts this monitoring as part of its Community Environmental Monitoring 

Program (CEMP). DRI’s 2008 direct radiation monitoring results are presented in Sections 6.1.2 and 6.1.3; see 

also Figure 5-2 of this chapter. 
Direct Radiation Monitoring

5-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 – Draft 

5.1 Measurement of Direct Radiation 

Direct radiation is exposure to electromagnetic (gamma and X-ray) radiation. Electromagnetic radiation can 

travel long distances through air and penetrate living tissue causing ionization within the body tissues. By 

contrast, alpha and beta particles do not travel far in air (a few centimeters for alpha and about 10 meters (m) 

(33 feet [ft]) for beta particles). Alpha particles deposit only negligible energy externally; they rarely penetrate 

the outer dead layer of skin. Beta particles are generally absorbed in the layers of skin immediately below the 

outer layer. 

Direct radiation exposure is usually reported in the unit milliroentgen (mR), which is a measure of exposure in 

terms of numbers of ionizations in air. The dose in human tissue resulting from an exposure from the most 

common external radionuclides can generally be approximated by equating a 1 mR exposure with a 1 millirem 

(mrem) (0.01 millisievert [mSv]) dose. 

5.2 Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Surveillance Network Design 

Monitoring is performed on the NTS because some NTS areas have elevated radiation levels resulting from 

historical weapons testing, current and past radioactive waste management activities, and/or current operations 

involving radioactive material or radiation-generating devices. A surveillance network of thermoluminescent 

dosimeter (TLD) sampling locations has been established on the NTS. The objectives and design of the network 

are described in detail in the Routine Radiological Environmental Monitoring Plan (RREMP) (BN, 2003a). 

TLDs measure ionizing radiation exposure from all sources, including both natural and man-made radioactivity. 

The TLD used is the Panasonic UD-814AS, which consists of four elements housed in an air-tight, water-tight, 

ultraviolet-light-protected case. A slightly shielded lithium borate element can be used to check low-energy 

radiation levels. The average of three calcium sulfate elements is used to measure penetrating gamma radiation. 

A pair of TLDs is placed at 1.0 ± 0.3 m (28 to 51 inches [in.]) above the ground at each monitoring location; these 

are exchanged for analysis quarterly. The quarterly analysis of TLDs is performed using automated TLD readers 

that are calibrated and maintained by the NSTec Radiological Control Department (RCD). Reference TLDs are 

exposed to 100 mR from a cesium-137 radiation source under tightly controlled conditions. These are then read 

along with TLDs collected from the environment to calibrate their response. 

In 2008, there were 109 active environmental TLD locations on the NTS (Figure 5-1). They include the 

following numbers and types of locations: 

• Background (B) – 10 locations where radiation effects from NTS operations are negligible. 

• Environmental 1 (E1) – 41 locations where there is no measurable radioactivity from past operations but 

which are of interest due to the presence of personnel or the public in the area and/or the potential for 

receiving radiation exposure from a current operation. 

• Environmental 2 (E2) – 35 locations where there is measurable added radioactivity from past operations and 

the locations are of interest due to the potential for personnel to be in the area and/or the need to monitor 

exposure trends in the area. Some locations fitting this description are grouped with the waste operations 

category below. 

• Waste Operations (WO) – 17 locations in and around the Area 3 and Area 5 RWMS. 

• Control (C) – 5 locations in Building 652 and 1 location in Building 650 in Mercury. Control TLDs are kept 

in stable environments and are used as a quality check on the TLDs and the analysis process. 
Direct Radiation Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 – Draft 5-3 

 Figure 5-1. Location of TLDs on the NTS 
Direct Radiation Monitoring

5-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 – Draft 

5.2.1 Data Quality 

Quality assurance procedures for TLD monitoring of ambient radiation involve comparing the data from paired 

TLDs to estimate measurement precision, and reviewing data from the TLDs in the control locations. Five of the 

six control locations are shielded; the sixth is unshielded, but located in Mercury in Building 650. These locations 

allow one to detect and estimate any systematic quarter-to-quarter variation that might be introduced by the 

measurement process itself. 

Some amount of systematic quarter-to-quarter variation is typical in the measurement process. When the TLD 

data for 2008 were examined, however, it was found that the third quarter data for virtually all stations exhibited 

atypical patterns. It has been determined that these patterns were due to improper “annealing” (essentially, 

resetting the TLDs to zero exposure) between subsequent deployments. The third quarter data were therefore 

discarded and steps have been taken to avoid this sort of anomaly in the future (e.g., screening steps programmed 

in software that controls anneal results). Unless stated otherwise, the results reported in this chapter are based on 

the TLD measurements made during the first, second, and fourth quarters. 

Of the 327 possible pairs of TLD measurements, four were not available either because the TLDs were found on 

the ground or were missing. Agreement between results provided by the paired TLDs was very good, with an 

average relative percent difference between measurements of 2.2 percent for 2008. The quarter-to-quarter 

coefficient of variation (CV, identical to the relative standard deviation) ranged from 0.4 to 7.7 percent 

(median = 2.8 percent) except at the Gate 100 Truck Parking #1 and Stake TH-48 locations (see Sections 5.3.1 

and 5.3.2). The quarter-to-quarter CVs were also a bit higher for control locations, ranging from 3.4 to 9.4 

percent. For comparison, CV values for control locations have ranged from 1.2 to 10.0 percent in recent years. 

(CVs at control locations tend to be higher than those at environmental locations since the exposure rates are 

much lower due to shielding.) 

At a programmatic level, quality assurance and quality control (QA/QC) protocols, including Data Quality 

Objectives, have been developed and are maintained as essential elements of direct radiation monitoring, as 

directed by the RREMP. The QA/QC requirements established for the monitoring program include the use of 

sample packages to thoroughly document each sampling event, rigorous management of databases, and 

completion of essential training. The RCD maintains certification through the U.S. Department of Energy 

Laboratory Accreditation Program for dosimetry. 

5.2.2 Data Reporting

Direct radiation is reported as exposure per unit time. TLD analysis results are maintained in a database as 

milliroentgen per day (mR/d), calculated by dividing the measured mR exposure per quarter for each TLD by the 

number of days the TLD was exposed at its measurement location in the quarter. For annual reporting purposes, 

these are multiplied by 366 (since 2008 was a leap year). The estimated annual exposure is the average of the 

quarterly annualized values; this is used to determine compliance with federal annual direct radiation exposure 

limits. 

5.3 Results 

Estimated annual exposures for all TLD locations are summarized in Table 5-1; summary statistics for the five 

location types are given in Table 5-2. During 2008, the average of the estimated annual exposures at background 

locations was 116 mR; these ranged from 63 to 159 mR over the ten background locations (Table 5-2). These 

values are slightly lower than those from 2007. A 95 percent prediction interval (PI) for annual exposures based 

on background location annual mean values for 2008 is 39.5 to 192.3 mR (the “95% PI from B” shown in Figures 

5-2, 5-3, and 5-4). This is a spatial prediction for mean values to be expected at new B locations; prediction limits 

for values to be expected at existing locations based on their own histories would be considerably narrower. 
Direct Radiation Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 – Draft 5-5 

For comparison, the CEMP-estimated annual exposure in Las Vegas, Nevada (at 622 m [2,040 ft] elevation) was 

94 mR during 2008 (see Table 6-3). Estimated exposures at CEMP locations ranged from 71 mR at Pahrump 

(777 m [2,550 ft] elevation) to 148 mR at Twin Springs (1,541 m [5,055 ft] elevation). There is generally an 

increasing relationship between exposure and elevation, with a correlation coefficient around 0.45. For 

comparison, the NTS background locations with lowest and highest exposures are at elevations 1,087 m (3,568 ft) 

(for the station named “Area 5, 3.3 Mi SE of Aggregate Pit”) and 1,737 m (5,700 ft) (for the station named “Area 

20, Stake A-112”), respectively. Exposure estimates at all locations include the contribution from natural sources. 

Dose limits prescribed by DOE orders only apply to exposures above background levels. 

 Table 5-1. Annual direct radiation exposure rates measured at TLD locations on the NTS in 2008 

 Estimated Annual Exposure (mR)(a)

NTS 

Area Station 

Location

Type(b)

Number of

Quarters Mean(c) SD(c) Min(c) Median(b) Max(c)

5 3.3 Mi SE of Aggregate Pit B 3 63 2 61 64 64 

14 Mid-Valley B 3 142 5 138 141 148 

16 Stake P-3 B 3 116 4 112 117 120 

20 Stake A-112 B 3 159 4 154 159 163 

20 Stake A-118 B 3 152 5 149 149 158 

22 Army #1 Water Well B 3 82 3 78 84 85 

25 Gate 25-4-P B 2 129 5 126 129 133 

25 Gate 510 B 3 126 5 123 124 132 

25 Jackass Flats & A-27 Roads B 3 81 3 79 82 84 

25 Skull Mtn Pass B 3 108 4 104 108 111 

23 Building 650 Dosimetry C 3 59 2 57 59 61 

23 Lead Cabinet, 1 C 3 26 2 24 25 28 

23 Lead Cabinet, 2 C 3 27 2 24 26 29 

23 Lead Cabinet, 3 C 3 27 2 25 26 29 

23 Lead Cabinet, 4 C 3 27 2 25 27 29 

23 Lead Cabinet, 5 C 3 26 2 25 26 28 

1 BJY E1 3 117 4 114 115 121 

1 Sandbag Storage Hut E1 3 112 2 110 113 114 

1 Stake C-2 E1 3 117 1 117 117 118 

2 Stake M-140 E1 3 131 2 129 133 133 

2 Stake TH-58 E1 3 94 3 90 95 96 

3 LANL Trailers E1 2 120 4 117 120 123 

3 Stake OB-20 E1 3 89 3 86 88 92 

3 Well ER 3-1 E1 3 124 3 121 126 126 

4 Stake TH-41 E1 3 111 2 109 110 112 

4 Stake TH-48 E1 3 140 43 115 116 189 

5 Water Well 5B E1 3 113 6 106 114 118 

6 CP-6 E1 3 70 2 68 71 72 

6 DAF East E1 3 96 1 95 96 97 

6 DAF North E1 3 103 3 100 105 106 

6 DAF South E1 3 135 3 131 136 138 

6 DAF West E1 3 84 3 80 84 86 

6 Decon Facility NW E1 3 129 4 126 128 133 

6 Decon Facility SE E1 3 134 5 129 134 138 

6 Stake OB-11.5 E1 3 126 3 122 128 128 

6 Yucca Compliance E1 3 93 3 90 94 96 
Direct Radiation Monitoring

5-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 – Draft 

 Table 5-1. Annual direct radiation exposure rates measured at TLD locations on the NTS in 2008 (continued) 

 Estimated Annual Exposure (mR)(a)

NTS 

Area Station 

Location

Type(b)

Number of

Quarters Mean(c) SD(c) Min(c) Median(c) Max(c)

6 Yucca Oil Storage E1 3 99 3 97 98 102 

7 Reitmann Seep E1 3 125 2 124 125 128 

7 Stake H-8 E1 3 126 3 122 125 129 

9 Papoose Lake Road E1 3 88 2 86 89 89 

9 U-9CW South E1 3 102 1 101 102 103 

9 V & G Road Junction E1 3 113 3 111 114 116 

10 Gate 700 South E1 3 131 4 127 130 135 

11 Stake A-21 E1 3 129 4 124 131 131 

12 Upper N Pond E1 3 129 4 126 127 133 

16 3545 Substation E1 3 137 4 135 135 141 

18 Stake A-83 E1 3 145 6 141 142 152 

18 Stake F-11 E1 3 143 6 140 140 150 

19 Stake P-41 E1 3 161 3 158 160 164 

20 Stake J-41 E1 3 138 4 135 137 143 

23 Gate 100 Truck Parking 1 E1 3 83 27 65 71 114 

23 Gate 100 Truck Parking 2 E1 3 63 3 61 63 66 

23 Mercury Fitness Track E1 3 59 4 54 59 63 

25 HENRE E1 3 123 5 119 123 128 

25 NRDS Warehouse E1 3 124 3 120 123 127 

27 Cafeteria E1 3 113 2 111 114 115 

27 JASPER-1 E1 3 114 4 110 116 117 

1 Bunker 1-300 E2 3 122 2 121 121 124 

1 T1 E2 3 271 4 267 272 275 

2 Stake L-9 E2 3 166 4 162 168 168 

2 Stake N-8 E2 3 515 9 508 512 526 

3 Stake A-6.5 E2 3 139 1 138 138 141 

3 T3 E2 3 366 10 355 367 376 

3 T3 West E2 3 351 7 343 354 356 

3 T3A E2 3 395 12 382 400 404 

3 T3B E2 2 496 7 491 496 501 

3 U-3co North E2 3 186 5 183 184 191 

3 U-3co South E2 3 144 1 142 144 145 

4 Stake A-9 E2 3 643 10 631 647 650 

5 Frenchman Lake E2 3 349 12 335 351 360 

7 Bunker 7-300 E2 3 234 4 230 234 238 

7 T7 E2 3 115 1 114 115 115 

8 BANEBERRY 1 E2 3 367 5 362 370 370 

8 Road 8-02 E2 3 123 5 120 122 129 

8 Stake K-25 E2 3 104 3 102 102 107 

8 Stake M-152 E2 3 162 2 161 161 165 

9 B9A E2 3 131 5 127 130 137 

9 Bunker 9-300 E2 3 121 1 121 121 122 

9 T9B E2 3 516 14 501 516 529 

10 Circle & L Roads E2 3 121 1 121 121 122 

10 Sedan East Visitor Box E2 3 132 3 128 133 134 
Direct Radiation Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 – Draft 5-7 

 Table 5-1. Annual direct radiation exposure rates measured at TLD locations on the NTS in 2008 (continued) 

Estimated Annual Exposure (mR)(a) NTS 

Area

 

Station

Location

Type(b)

Number of

Quarters Mean(c) SD(c) Min(c) Median(c) Max(c)

10 Sedan West E2 3 234 7 227 234 240 

10 T10 E2 3 253 1 252 253 254 

12 T-Tunnel #2 Pond E2 3 241 4 239 239 246 

12 Upper Haines Lake E2 3 107 1 106 107 108 

15 EPA Farm E2 3 111 4 107 112 114 

18 JOHNNIE BOY North E2 3 143 5 138 142 149 

20 PALANQUIN E2 3 225 8 219 222 234 

20 SCHOONER-1 E2 3 705 21 687 701 729 

20 SCHOONER-2 E2 3 260 3 258 260 263 

20 SCHOONER-3 E2 3 142 6 135 143 147 

20 Stake J-31 E2 3 163 8 156 162 172 

3 A3 RWMS Center WO 3 141 6 137 138 148 

3 A3 RWMS East WO 3 134 2 132 134 136 

3 A3 RWMS North WO 3 124 4 121 122 129 

3 A3 RWMS South WO 3 347 6 343 345 354 

3 A3 RWMS West WO 3 125 4 121 127 128 

5 A5 RWMS East Gate WO 3 109 3 106 109 112 

5 A5 RWMS Expansion NE WO 3 139 5 136 136 145 

5 A5 RWMS Expansion NW WO 3 147 6 140 150 150 

5 A5 RWMS NE Corner WO 3 127 5 120 129 130 

5 A5 RWMS NW Corner WO 3 123 4 119 123 128 

5 A5 RWMS South Gate WO 3 110 3 108 110 113 

5 A5 RWMS SW Corner WO 3 122 2 120 123 124 

5 Building 5-31 WO 3 106 3 103 107 109 

5 WEF East WO 3 123 2 121 123 124 

5 WEF North WO 3 114 3 110 115 116 

5 WEF South WO 3 124 4 119 125 127 

5 WEF West WO 3 122 3 120 121 126 

(a) To obtain daily exposure rates, divide exposure measures by 366 

(b) Location types: 

 B: Background locations 

 C: Control locations 

E1: Environmental locations with exposure rates near background but monitored for potential for increased 

 exposure rates due to NTS operations 

 E2: Environmental locations with measurable radioactivity from past operations, excluding those designated WO 

 WO: Locations in or near waste operations 

(c) Mean, standard deviation, minimum, median, and maximum values from quarterly estimates. In general, each quarterly estimate 

is the average of two TLD readings per location 

 Table 5-2. Summary statistics for 2008 annual direct radiation exposure by TLD location type 

 Estimated Annual Exposure (mR) 

Location Type 

Number of 

Locations Mean(a) SD(a) Min(a) Median(a) Max(a)

Background (B) 10 116 32 63 121 159 

Control (C) 6 32 13 26 27 59 

Environmental 1 (E1) 41 114 23 59 117 161 

Environmental 2 (E2) 35 253 161 104 186 705 

Waste Operations (WO) 17 138 55 106 124 347 

 (a) Mean, standard deviation (SD), minimum, median, and maximum values from annual estimated exposures 
Direct Radiation Monitoring

5-8 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 – Draft 

5.3.1 Potential Exposure to the Public along the NTS Boundary 

Most of the NTS is not accessible to the public, as only the southern portion of the NTS boundary borders public 

land. Therefore, the only place the public has potential for exposure to direct radiation from the NTS is along the 

southern boundary. 

Gate 100 is the primary entrance point to the NTS. The outer parking areas are accessible to the public. Trucks 

hauling radioactive materials, primarily low-level radioactive waste destined for disposal in the RWMSs, often 

park outside Gate 100 while waiting for entry to the NTS. Two TLD locations were established in October 2003 

to monitor this truck parking area. The TLD on the north end of the parking area (Gate 100 Truck Parking 2) had 

an estimated annual exposure of 63 mR, with quarterly estimates varying between 61 and 66 mR, at the lower end 

of the range of background exposures observed at the NTS. 

The TLD location on the west side of the parking area (Gate 100 Truck Parking 1) has had somewhat elevated 

exposure levels at various times throughout its history, as documented in previous annual NTS environmental 

reports. The most recent high value was 268 mR, during the third quarter of 2007. The first quarter 2008 value 

(114.4 mR) is still descending from that peak. The second and fourth quarter values (65.1 and 71.2 mR, 

respectively) have returned to levels similar to those of Gate 100 Truck Parking 2 and the lower end of the range 

of NTS background values. The first quarter 2008 value is itself well within the range of NTS background values, 

although not at the low end of that range. 

After the source of the problems with the third quarter data was identified, an informal adjustment of the third 

quarter data was made for the purpose of identifying any anomalies that might have occurred during that quarter. 

Gate 100 Truck Parking 1 again appeared mildly elevated during that quarter; its adjusted annualized value 

estimated at 115.4 mR, about the same as the first quarter. Again, this is high compared with expected values at 

this location, but well within the range of NTS background values. 

While the public has access only to the southern portions of the NTS borders, other people may have access to 

other boundaries of the NTS. The great majority of the NTS is bounded by the Nevada Test and Training Range 

(NTTR). Military or other personnel on the NTTR who are not classified as radiation workers would also be 

subject to the 100 mrem/yr public dose limit. Nuclear tests on the NTTR (Double Tracks and Project 57) 

consisted of experiments where weapons were conventionally exploded without going critical (safety 

experiments). These areas, therefore, have primarily alpha-emitting radionuclides that do not contribute 

significantly to external dose. 

The only place a radiological boundary extends beyond the NTS is in the Frenchman Lake region of Area 5 along 

the southeast boundary of the NTS. This region was a location of atmospheric weapons testing in the 1950s. A 

TLD location was established in July 2003 near the NTS boundary in the Frenchman Lake playa. The estimated 

annual exposure at Frenchman Lake during 2008 was 349 mR (down from 369 mR in 2007, 379 mR in 2006, 

391 mR in 2005, and 411 mR in 2004). The resulting above-background dose of approximately 190 to 286 mrem, 

depending on which background value is used, would exceed the 100 mrem dose limit to a person residing yearround at this location; however, there are no living quarters or full-time workers in this vicinity. 

5.3.2 Exposures from NTS Operational Activities 

During 2008, there were 41 TLDs in locations where there is negligible radioactivity from past operations but 

where monitoring is of interest due either to the presence of personnel or the public in the area and/or due to the 

potential for receiving radiation exposure from current operations (E1 locations). The estimated mean annual 

exposure at these locations was 114 mR, approximately the same as the mean estimated annual exposure at 

background locations (see Table 5-2). Overall, annual exposures were not different between B (background) and 

E1 locations (Figure 5-2); the estimated annual exposures at all E1 locations were within the background-based 

PIs. These were also comparable with the off-NTS exposures reported by the CEMP stations. 
Direct Radiation Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 – Draft 5-9 

Figure 5-2. 2008 annual exposure rates on the NTS, by location type, and off the NTS (CEMP stations) 

As noted in Section 5.2.1, there was a large between-quarter variation at Station TH-48 in Area 4. The first 

quarter measurements were around 63 percent higher than those of other quarters, including the adjusted third 

quarter values. The high first quarter values (averaging 189.2 mR) are barely within the background-stationbased prediction limits shown in Figure 5-2. Values nearly as high have been measured a couple of times at that 

station from 1989 through 1993, but since then, values have been in the 100–140 mR range. The source of this 

inconsistent measurement is not known. Other than the anomalies noted here and at Gate 100 Truck Parking 1, all 

other exposure rate measurements were similar to, or decreasing from, values measured in past years. 

5.3.3 Exposure Rates at RWMSs 

DOE M 435.1-1, “Radioactive Waste Management Manual,” states that low-level waste disposal facilities shall be 

operated, maintained, and closed so that a reasonable expectation exists that annual dose to members of the public 

shall not exceed 25 mrem. Given that the RWMSs are located well within the NTS boundaries, no members of 

the public could access these areas for significant periods of time. Exposures are still measured by TLDs located 

at the RWMSs to show the potential dose to a hypothetical person residing year-round at each RWMS. 

The Area 3 RWMS is located in Yucca Flat. Between 1952 and 1972, 60 nuclear weapons tests were conducted 

within 400 m of the Area 3 RWMS boundary. Fourteen of these tests were atmospheric tests that left 

radionuclide-contaminated surface soil and, therefore, elevated radiation exposures across the area. Waste pits in 

the Area 3 RWMS are subsidence craters from seven subsurface tests, which are being filled with low-level 

radioactive waste. These are then covered with clean soil, resulting in lower exposures inside the Area 3 RWMS 

compared with the average exposures at the fence line or in Area 3 outside the fence line. 

Annual exposures during 2008 in and around the Area 3 RWMS are shown in Figure 5-3. The exposures 

measured inside the Area 3 RWMS and three of four measurements at the boundary were within the range of 

background exposures. The estimated exposure above the range of NTS background levels at one location on the 

RWMS boundary is associated with historic aboveground nuclear weapon test locations. Under these conditions, 

current Area 3 RWMS operations would have contributed negligible external exposure to a hypothetical person 

residing at the Area 3 RWMS boundary during 2008. 

0

200

400

600

800

CEMP B C E1 E2 WO_

__

Location Type

Estimated Annual Exposures

by Location Type, with 2008 CEMP Data

95% PI from B

mR
Direct Radiation Monitoring

5-10 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 – Draft 

The Area 5 RWMS is located in the northern portion of Frenchman Flat. Between 1951 and 1971, 25 nuclear 

weapons tests were conducted within 6.3 kilometers (km) (3.9 miles [mi]) of the Area 5 RWMS. Fifteen of these 

were atmospheric tests, and of the remaining ten, nine released radioactivity to the surface, which contributes to 

exposures in the area. No nuclear weapons testing occurred within the boundaries of the Area 5 RWMS. During 

2008, estimated annual exposures at Area 5 RWMS TLD locations were within the range of exposures measured 

at NTS background locations (Figure 5-4). The one exposure rate measured outside the RWMS in Area 5 that 

was higher than background levels was within 0.5 km (0.3 mi) of six atmospheric tests in Frenchman Lake Playa. 

 

Figure 5-3. 2008 annual exposure rates in and around Area 3 RWMS and at background locations 

Figure 5-4. 2008 annual exposure rates around Area 5 RWMS and at background locations 

0

200

400

600

800

m

R

 All B RWMS Outside_ Locations Boundary RWMS__

Area 5 RWMS Estimated Annual Exposures

B locations

E1 locations

E2 locations

WO locations

95% PI from B

0

200

400

600

800

m

R

 All B Inside RWMS Outside__

 Locations RWMS Boundary RWMS__

Area 3 RWMS Estimated Annual Exposures

B locations

E1 locations

E2 locations

WO locations

95% PI from B 
Direct Radiation Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 – Draft 5-11 

5.3.4 Exposure to NTS Plants and Animals 

The highest exposure rate measured at any TLD location during 2008 was 729 mR/yr at the Schooner-1 location 

(see Table 5-1). This was measured during the first quarter and equates to an exposure rate of 1.99 mR/d. Given 

such a large area source, there is very little difference between the exposure measured at 1-m (3.3-ft) height and 

that measured at an elevation near the ground (e.g., 3 centimeters [1.2 in.]) where small plants and animals reside. 

Therefore, the daily exposure rate near the ground surface at the Schooner-1 location would be approximately two 

percent of the most stringent total dose rate to biota, which is the 0.1 rad/d (approximately 100 mR/d) limit to 

terrestrial animals mandated by DOE-STD-1153-2002. Hence, doses to plants and animals from external 

radiation exposure at NTS monitoring locations are low compared with the mandated dose limit. Dose to biota 

from both internal and external radionuclides is discussed in Chapter 8. 

5.3.5 Exposure Rate Patterns in the Environment over Time 

DOE O 450.1A states that environmental monitoring should be conducted to characterize releases from DOE 

activities. Continued monitoring of exposures at locations of past releases on the NTS helps to do this. Small 

quarter-to-quarter changes are normally seen in exposure rates from all locations. In 2008, inter-quarter CVs 

averaged 2.8 percent (excluding Gate 100 Truck Parking 1 and Stake TH-48). The control locations tended to 

have larger quarter-to-quarter relative differences, which suggests that systematic analytical variability is a major, 

but not the only, contributing factor to the observed quarter-to-quarter variation. 

Long-term trends are displayed in Figure 5-5 by location type for locations that have been monitored for at least 

ten years. As expected, the C and B locations show virtually no net change through time due to the protected 

locations and lack of added man-made radionuclides. Over all locations with at least 10-year data histories, the 

exposure rate at E1 locations decreased 0.4 percent per year; the E2 locations decreased 2.0 percent per year on 

average, and the WO locations decreased 0.7 percent per year on average. Those E2 and WO locations whose 

2008 estimated exposures were above the background-based prediction limits decreased 3.8 percent per year on 

average. 

 Figure 5-5. Trends in direct radiation exposure measured at TLD locations 

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008

mR

Year

Estimated Annual Exposures

Locations With at Least 10-Year Histories by 2008

Control

Background

Environmental 1

Environmental 2

Waste Operations

A4 Stake A-9

A2 Stake N-8

A3 RWMS S
Direct Radiation Monitoring

5-12 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 – Draft 

Note that the Schooner-1 TLD location, which has the highest exposure of any current NTS location, is not 

included in Figure 5-5 because it was established in 2003. The two highest exposures shown in Figure 5-5, 

Stake A-9 in Area 4 and Stake N-8 in Area 2, are decreasing by 4.0 and 4.9 percent per year, respectively; these 

correspond to half-lives of about 17 and 14 years. The next highest exposures shown in Figure 5-5 are at the WO 

location RWMS South in Area 3; these are decreasing an average 3.7 percent per year. The observed decreases 

are due to a combination of natural radioactive decay and the dispersal of radionuclides in the environment. 

5.4 Environmental Impact 

Direct radiation exposure to the public from NTS operations in 2008 was negligible. Radionuclides historically 

released to the environment on the NTS have resulted in localized elevated exposures. These areas of elevated 

exposure are not open to the public, nor do personnel work in these areas full-time. Overall exposures at the 

RWMSs appear to be generally lower inside or at the boundary compared with those outside the RWMSs. This is 

likely due to the presence of radionuclides released from historical testing distributed throughout the area around 

the RWMSs compared with the clean soil used inside the RWMSs to cap waste pits. The external dose to plants 

and animals at the location with the highest measured exposure was a small fraction of the dose limit to biota; 

hence no detrimental effects to biota from external radiation exposure are expected at the NTS. 
Oversight Radiological Monitoring of Air and Water

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 6-1 

6.0 Oversight Radiological Monitoring of Air and Water 

Community oversight for the Nevada Test Site (NTS) is provided through the Community Environmental 

Monitoring Program (CEMP) whose mission is to monitor and communicate environmental data that are relevant 

to the safety and well-being of participating communities and their surrounding areas. Previously, the CEMP 

network functioned as a first line of offsite detection of potential radiation releases from underground nuclear tests 

at the NTS, and it can be outfitted to fulfill this role again should underground testing resume. It currently exists 

as a non-regulatory public informational and outreach program, although quarterly reporting of monitoring data is 

furnished to the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Region IX as a supplemental requirement to NTS onsite monitoring. The CEMP is sponsored by the U.S. 

Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO), and is 

administered and operated by the Desert Research Institute (DRI) of the Nevada System of Higher Education. 

Monitored and collected data include, but are not necessarily limited to, background and airborne radiation data, 

meteorological data, and tritium concentrations in community and ranch drinking water. Network stations, 

located in Nevada, Utah, and California, are managed by local citizens, many of them high school science 

teachers, whose routine tasks are to ensure equipment is operating normally and to collect air filters and route 

them to the DRI for analysis. These Community Environmental Monitors (CEMs) are also available to discuss 

the monitoring results with the public and to speak to community and school groups. DRI’s responsibilities 

include maintaining the physical monitoring network through monthly visitations by environmental radiation 

monitoring specialists, who also participate in training and interfacing with CEMs and interacting with other local 

community members and organizations to provide information related to the monitoring data. DRI also provides 

public access to the monitoring data through maintenance of a project Web site at <http://www.cemp.dri.edu/>. A 

detailed informational background narrative about of the CEMP can be found at 

<http://www.cemp.dri.edu/cemp/moreinfo.html> along with more detailed descriptions of the various types of 

sensors found at the stations and on outreach activities conducted by the CEMP. 

6.1 Offsite Air Monitoring 

During 2008, 29 CEMP stations managed by DRI comprised the Air Surveillance Network (ASN) (Figure 6-1). 

The ASN stations include various equipment as described below. The Mesquite, Nevada CEMP station is shown 

in Figure 6-2.

CEMP Low-Volume Air Sampling Network – During 2008, the CEMP ASN included continuously operating 

low-volume particulate air samplers located at 27 of the 29 CEMP station locations. No low-volume air samplers 

were located at Medlin’s Ranch or Warm Springs Summit, Nevada, during 2008. Duplicate air samples were 

collected from up to three ASN stations each week. The duplicate samplers are operated at randomly selected 

stations for three months (one calendar quarter) before being moved to a new location. 

Glass-fiber filters from the low-volume particulate samplers are collected by the CEMs and mailed to DRI, where 

they are prepared and forwarded to an independent laboratory to be analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta 

activity. Samples are held for a minimum of seven days after collection to allow for the decay of naturally 

occurring radon progeny. Upon completion of the gross alpha/beta analyses, the filters are returned to DRI to be 

composited on a quarterly basis for gamma spectroscopy analysis. 

CEMP Thermoluminescent Dosimetry Network – Thermoluminescent dosimetry is another of the essential 

components of environmental radiological assessments. This is used to determine both individual and population 

external exposure to ambient radiation from natural and artificial sources. In 2008, this network consisted of 

fixed environmental thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) at 28 of the 29 CEMP stations (see Figure 6-1). A 

TLD is not currently deployed at Warm Springs Summit due to limited access during the winter months. The 

TLD used is a Panasonic UD-814AS. Within the TLD, a slightly shielded lithium borate element is used to check 

low-energy radiation levels while three calcium sulfate elements are used to measure penetrating gamma 

radiation. For quality assurance (QA) purposes, duplicate TLDs are deployed at three randomly selected 
Oversight Radiological Monitoring of Air and Water

6-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 Figure 6-1. 2008 CEMP Air Surveillance Network 
Oversight Radiological Monitoring of Air and Water

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 6-3 

Figure 6-2. CEMP station at Mesquite, Nevada 

environmental stations. An average daily exposure rate was calculated for each quarterly exposure period. The 

average of the quarterly values was multiplied by 365.25 days to obtain the total annual exposure for each station. 

CEMP Pressurized Ion Chamber (PIC) Network – The PIC detector measures gamma radiation exposure 

rates, and because of its sensitivity may detect low-level exposures that go undetected by other monitoring 

methods. PICs are in place at all 29 stations in the CEMP network (see Figure 6-1). 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 vary naturally among locations, reflecting differences in altitude 

(cosmic radiation), radioactivity in the soil (terrestrial radiation), and slight variations at a single location due to 

weather patterns. Because a full suite of meteorological data is recorded at each CEMP station, variations in PIC 

readings caused by weather events such as precipitation or changes in barometric pressure are more readily 

identified. These variations can be easily viewed by selecting the Time Series Graph link from the CEMP home 

page, <http://www.cemp.dri.edu/>, after selecting a desired station and then selecting the desired variables. 

CEMP Meteorological (MET) Network – Because changing weather conditions can have a significant effect on 

measurable levels of background radiation, meteorological instrumentation is in place at each of the 29 CEMP 

stations. The MET network includes sensors that measure air temperature, humidity, wind speed and direction, 

solar radiation, barometric pressure, precipitation, and soil temperature and moisture data. All of these data can 

be observed real-time at the onsite station display, and archived data are accessible by accessing the CEMP home 

page at <http://www.cemp.dri.edu/>. 

6.1.1 Air Particulate Sampling Results 

For the first three quarters of 2008, samples of airborne particulates from CEMP ASN stations were collected by 

drawing air through a 5-centimeter (2-inch) diameter glass-fiber filter at a constant flow rate of 56.6 liters per 

minute (2 cubic feet [ft3

] per minute) at standard temperature and pressure. The actual flow rate and volume were 

measured and recorded with an in-line air-flow calibrator. The particulate filter is mounted in a filter holder that 

faces downward at a height of 1.5 meters (m) (5 feet [ft]) above the ground. The total actual volume collected 

ranges from approximately 538 to 793 cubic meters (m3

) (19,000 to 28,000 ft3), depending on the elevation of the 

station and changes in air temperature and/or pressure. Beginning in October 2008, DRI began using a bi-weekly 

air sample collection routine. This routine required a reduction in the flow rate of the air sampler to compensate 
Oversight Radiological Monitoring of Air and Water

6-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

for increased particle loading on the filter. The current rate used is 49.5 liters per minute (1.75 ft3 per minute). 

The total actual volume collected currently ranges from approximately 1,030 to 1,290 m3 (36,000 to 45,000 ft3). 

6.1.1.1 Gross Alpha and Gross Beta 

Analyses of gross alpha and beta in airborne particulate samples are used to screen for long-lived radionuclides in 

the air. The mean annual gross alpha activity across all sample locations was 1.61 ± 0.43 x 10-15 microcuries per 

milliliter (μCi/mL) (5.95 ± 1.59 x 10-5 Becquerels [Bq]/m3

) (Table 6-1). Most of the results for 2008 exceeded 

the analytical minimum detectable concentration (MDC) (see Glossary, Appendix B) and, overall, are similar to 

results from previous years. Figure 6-3 shows the long-term maximum, mean, and minimum alpha trend for the 

CEMP stations as a whole. The data for the Duckwater, Nevada station represents the first full year of sample 

collection since its installation. In addition, a three month gap in data for the Tecopa, California station occurred 

due to difficulties in finalizing permitting for the electrical infrastructure at the site. 

Table 6-1. Gross alpha results for the CEMP offsite ASN in 2008 

Concentration (x 10-15 μCi/mL [3.7 x 10-5 Bq/m3]) 

Sampling Location 

Number 

of 

Samples Mean 

Standard 

Deviation Minimum Maximum 

Alamo 44 1.93 0.92 0.47 4.15 

Amargosa Valley 46 1.58 0.58 0.69 3.64 

Beatty 46 1.88 0.75 0.62 3.76 

Boulder City 46 2.07 0.82 0.66 3.86 

Caliente 46 2.27 0.99 0.77 4.30 

Cedar City 46 1.31 0.56 0.36 3.04 

Delta 46 1.35 0.50 0.43 3.56 

Duckwater 42 1.30 0.49 0.46 2.67 

Ely 45 1.24 0.52 0.34 2.74 

Garden Valley 46 1.24 0.32 0.39 1.93 

Goldfield 45 1.41 0.50 0.69 2.66 

Henderson 43 1.48 0.49 0.37 2.73 

Indian Springs 44 1.28 0.42 0.64 2.34 

Las Vegas 46 2.94 0.89 0.69 4.71 

Mesquite 44 1.66 0.69 0.86 4.19 

Milford 46 1.59 0.84 0.65 6.08 

Nyala Ranch 46 1.04 0.31 0.46 1.91 

Overton 46 2.04 0.88 0.76 4.35 

Pahrump 46 1.62 0.71 0.52 3.92 

Pioche 44 1.27 0.49 0.59 3.29 

Rachel 45 1.65 0.62 0.57 3.64 

Sarcobatus Flats 46 2.35 1.09 0.83 4.78 

Stone Cabin Ranch 46 1.38 0.44 0.64 2.82 

St. George 46 1.41 0.42 0.43 2.23 

Tecopa 34 1.52 0.64 0.55 3.36 

Tonopah 45 1.39 0.45 0.51 2.41 

Twin Springs 45 1.29 0.41 0.55 2.05 

Network Mean = 1.61 ± 0.43 x 10-15 μCi/mL

Mean MDC = 0.47 x 10-15 μCi/mL Standard Error of Mean MDC = 0.07 x 10-15 μCi/mL 
Oversight Radiological Monitoring of Air and Water

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 6-5 

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

x 10-15 μCi/mL

Max

Mean

Min

Year

Figure 6-3. Historical trend for gross alpha analysis for all CEMP stations 

The mean annual gross beta activity across all sample locations (Table 6-2) was 2.09 ± 0.16 x 10-14 μCi/mL 

(7.73 ± 0.59 x 10-4 Bq/m3

). Most of these results also exceeded the MDC, and are similar to previous years’ data. 

Figure 6-4 shows the long-term maximum, mean, and minimum beta trend for the CEMP stations as a whole. 

Table 6-2. Gross beta results for the CEMP offsite ASN in 2008 

Concentration (x 10-14 μCi/mL [3.7 x 10-4 Bq/m3

]) 

Sampling Location 

Number of 

Samples Mean 

Standard 

Deviation Minimum Maximum 

Alamo 44 2.12 0.59 0.96 4.46 

Amargosa Valley 46 2.07 0.43 1.11 2.87 

Beatty 46 2.14 0.49 1.07 3.06 

Boulder City 46 2.22 0.43 1.06 3.55 

Caliente 46 2.23 0.50 1.04 3.09 

Cedar City 46 1.92 0.51 0.99 2.92 

Delta 46 2.09 0.53 0.86 3.43 

Duckwater 42 1.99 0.50 1.03 3.04 

Ely 45 1.91 0.49 1.11 3.44 

Garden Valley 46 2.01 0.43 1.36 2.94 

Goldfield 45 1.89 0.40 1.16 2.85 

Henderson 43 2.15 0.51 0.90 3.27 

Indian Springs 44 1.94 0.41 1.04 2.76 

Las Vegas 46 2.35 0.48 1.26 3.82 

Mesquite 44 2.28 0.54 1.15 3.65 

Milford 46 2.18 0.55 0.93 3.65 

Nyala Ranch 46 1.72 0.41 1.01 3.16 

Overton 46 2.21 0.46 1.33 3083 

Pahrump 46 2.06 0.49 0.99 3.08 

Pioche 44 1.90 0.53 0.79 3.69 
Oversight Radiological Monitoring of Air and Water

6-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

Table 6-2. Gross beta results for the CEMP offsite ASN in 2008 (continued) 

Concentration (x 10-14 μCi/mL [3.7 x 10-4 Bq/m3

]) 

Sampling Location 

Number of 

Samples Mean 

Standard 

Deviation Minimum Maximum 

Rachel 45 2.23 0.58 1.17 4.57 

Sarcobatus Flats 46 2.30 0.56 1.33 3.42 

Stone Cabin 46 2.03 0.52 1.08 3.22 

St. George 46 2.30 0.52 1.29 4.16 

Tecopa 34 2.23 0.57 1.13 4.00 

Tonopah 45 1.90 0.44 0.91 2.72 

Twin Springs 45 2.12 0.63 0.95 4.21 

Network Mean = 2.09 ± 0.16 x 10-14 μCi/mL 

Mean MDC = 0.09 x 10-14 μCi/mL Standard Error of Mean MDC = 0.02 x 10-14 μCi/mL 

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

x 10-14 μCi/mL

Max

Mean

Min

Year

Figure 6-4. Historical trend for gross beta analysis for all CEMP stations 

The mean gross alpha results show a generally increasing trend from 1998 to 2001 before slightly trending 

downward the last seven years. Likewise, the gross beta results show a similar trend beginning in 1998, although 

the downward trend is not as pronounced. These trends are also reflected by most of the stations on an individual 

basis. This trend is most likely explained as being a result of persistent drought conditions throughout the 

southwest and Great Basin states. Drought in these regions has existed to varying degrees since 1996. These dry 

conditions could be directly responsible for an increase in suspended air particles collected by the air-sampling 

network. The slight decrease in mean values since 2001 may indicate a minor change in the severity of drought 

conditions, but overall remain greater than pre-drought values (not shown). 
Oversight Radiological Monitoring of Air and Water

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 6-7 

6.1.1.2 Gamma Spectroscopy 

Gamma spectroscopy analysis was performed on all samples from the low-volume air sampling network. The 

filters were composited by station on a quarterly basis after gross alpha/beta analysis. As in previous years, all 

samples were gamma-spectrum negligible with respect to man-made radionuclides (i.e., gamma-emitting 

radionuclides were not detected). In most of the samples, naturally occurring beryllium-7 (7

Be) was detected 

above the analytical MDC. This radionuclide is produced by cosmic ray interaction with nitrogen in the 

atmosphere. The mean annual activity for 7Be for the sampling network was 1.04 ± 0.21 x 10-13 μCi/mL. 

6.1.2 TLD Results 

TLDs measure ionizing radiation from all sources, including natural radioactivity from cosmic or terrestrial 

sources and from man-made radioactive sources. The TLDs are mounted in a plexiglass holder approximately 

1 m above the ground and are exchanged quarterly. TLD results are not presented for the Warm Springs Summit, 

Nevada station at this time since its access is limited in the winter months. This does not allow for a proper 

quarterly change of the TLD as required. The total annual exposure for 2008 ranged from 71 milliroentgens (mR) 

(0.71 millisieverts [mSv]) at Pahrump, Nevada, to 148 mR (1.48 mSv) at Twin Springs, Nevada, with a mean 

annual exposure of 112 mR (1.12 mSv) for all operating locations. Results are summarized in Table 6-3 and are 

consistent with previous years’ data. Figure 6-5 shows the long-term trend for the CEMP stations as a whole. 

Table 6-3. TLD monitoring results for the CEMP offsite ASN in 2008 

Daily Exposure (mR) Sampling 

Location 

Number of 

Days Mean Minimum Maximum 

Total Annual 

Exposure (mR) 

Alamo 370 0.29 0.26 0.31 107 

Amargosa Valley 366 0.27 0.25 0.29 99 

Beatty 364 0.39 0.35 0.42 142 

Boulder City 363 0.27 0.27 0.28 100 

Caliente 364 0.31 0.30 0.34 113 

Cedar City 364 0.24 0.22 0.26 89 

Delta 364 0.27 0.24 0.29 97 

Duckwater 378 0.30 0.29 0.31 108 

Ely 372 0.26 0.24 0.29 96 

Garden Valley 364 0.39 0.36 0.42 141 

Goldfield 364 0.34 0.31 0.38 122 

Henderson 363 0.31 0.30 0.35 115 

Indian Springs 366 0.25 0.22 0.27 92 

Las Vegas 363 0.26 0.24 0.27 94 

Medlin’s Ranch 365 0.36 0.31 0.40 132 

Mesquite 366 0.27 0.27 0.27 98 

Milford 364 0.40 0.37 0.42 146 

Nyala Ranch 366 0.30 0.26 0.35 110 

Overton 364 0.24 0.22 0.25 86 

Pahrump 366 0.19 0.16 0.22 71 

Pioche 364 0.30 0.27 0.32 108 

Rachel 364 0.36 0.34 0.37 132 

Sarcobatus Flats 364 0.36 0.33 0.40 132 

Stone Cabin Ranch 364 0.36 0.34 0.39 133 

St. George 363 0.23 0.22 0.24 84 

Tecopa 366 0.28 0.27 0.30 103 

Tonopah 364 0.36 0.35 0.38 131 

Twin Springs 364 0.41 0.37 0.44 148 

Overall Annual Mean = 112 mR
Oversight Radiological Monitoring of Air and Water

6-8 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

mR/yr

Max

Mean

Min

Year

Figure 6-5. Historical trend for TLD analysis for all CEMP stations 

With the exception of the dip in 2000, the TLD data also show a generally increasing trend from 1998 to 2002 

before showing a slight decrease the last six years. The TLD trends generally mirror those for gross alpha and 

beta analyses. This again may be consistent with minor changes in drought conditions observed in the regions 

around the monitoring network as described in Section 6.1.1.1. 

6.1.3 PIC Results 

The PIC data presented in this section are based on daily averages of gamma exposure rates from each station. 

Table 6-4 contains the maximum, minimum, and standard deviation of daily averages (in microroentgens per 

hour [μR/hr]) for the periods during 2008 when telemetry data were available. It also shows the average gamma 

exposure rate for each station during the year (in μR/hr) as well as the total annual exposure (in milliroentgens per 

year [mR/yr]). The exposure rate ranged from 72.71 mR/yr (0.72 mSv/yr) in Pahrump, Nevada to 175.64 mR/yr 

(1.76 mSv/yr) in Warm Springs Summit, Nevada. Background levels of environmental gamma exposure rates in 

the United States (from combined effects of terrestrial and cosmic sources) vary between 49 and 247 mR/yr 

(BEIR III, 1980). Averages for selected regions of the United States were compiled by the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency and are shown in Table 6-5. The annual exposure levels observed at the CEMP stations in 

2008 are well within these United States background levels.

 
Oversight Radiological Monitoring of Air and Water

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 6-9 

 Table 6-4. PIC monitoring results for the CEMP offsite ASN in 2008 

Table 6-5. Average natural background radiation for selected U.S. cities (excluding radon) 

Source: <http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cemp/Radiation.html.> “Radiation in Perspective,” 

August 1990 (Access Date: 4/2/2009) 

Daily Average Gamma Exposure Rate (μR/hr) 

Sampling Location Mean 

Standard 

Deviation Minimum Maximum 

Annual 

Exposure 

(mR/yr) 

Alamo 13.65 0.25 12.8 14.5 119.57 

Amargosa Valley 12.50 0.14 12.0 13.0 109.50 

Beatty 16.95 0.21 16.3 17.6 148.48 

Boulder City 15.45 0.14 14.8 16.1 135.34 

Caliente 16.20 0.61 14.8 17.6 141.91 

Cedar City 11.10 0.28 10.2 12.0 97.24 

Delta 12.35 0.56 11.2 13.5 108.19 

Duckwater 14.10 0.40 11.3 16.9 123.52 

Ely 12.20 0.32 11.2 13.2 106.87 

Garden Valley 17.85 0.54 16.0 19.7 156.37 

Goldfield 15.10 0.39 13.8 16.4 132.28 

Henderson 14.85 0.55 12.6 17.1 130.09 

Indian Springs 11.30 0.22 10.7 11.9 98.99 

Las Vegas 10.65 0.15 10.1 11.2 93.29 

Medlin’s Ranch 16.90 0.30 15.4 18.4 148.04 

Mesquite 11.90 0.16 11.3 12.5 104.24 

Milford 17.45 1.52 15.8 19.1 152.86 

Nyala Ranch 13.95 0.36 12.8 15.1 122.20 

Overton 10.20 0.21 9.5 10.9 89.35 

Pahrump 8.30 0.15 7.8 8.8 72.71 

Pioche 13.80 0. 46 12.1 15.5 120.89 

Rachel 15.50 0.27 14.4 16.6 135.78 

Sarcobatus Flats 17.75 0.24 16.9 18.6 155.49 

Stone Cabin Ranch 16.90 0.77 15.1 18.7 148.04 

St. George 9.45 0. 21 8.6 10.3 82.78 

Tecopa 15.35 0.29 14.2 16.5 134.47 

Tonopah 16.15 0.31 15.2 17.1 141.47 

Twin Springs 19.35 0.50 17.6 21.1 169.51 

Warm Springs Summit 20.05 0.45 18.9 21.2 175.64 

 City Radiation (mR/yr) 

Denver, CO 164.6 

Fort Worth, TX 68.7 

Las Vegas, NV 69.5 

Los Angeles, CA 73.6 

New Orleans, LA 63.7 

Portland, OR 86.7 

Richmond, VA 64.1 

Rochester, NY 88.1 

St. Louis, MO 87.9 

Tampa, FL 63.7 

Wheeling, WV 111.9 
Oversight Radiological Monitoring of Air and Water

6-10 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

6.1.4 Environmental Impact 

Results of analyses conducted on data obtained from the CEMP network of low-volume particulate air samplers, 

TLDs, and PICs showed no measurable evidence at CEMP station locations of offsite impact from radionuclides 

originating on the NTS. Activity observed in gross alpha and beta analyses of low-volume air sampler filters was 

consistent with previous years’ results and are within the range of activity found in other communities of the 

United States that are not adjacent to man-made radiation sources. Also, no man-made gamma-emitting radionuclides were detected. Likewise, TLD and PIC results remained consistent with previous years’ background 

levels and are well within average background levels observed in other parts of the United States (see Table 6-5). 

Occasional elevated gamma readings (10–50 percent above normal average background) in 2008 were always 

associated with precipitation events and/or low barometric pressure. Low barometric pressure can result in the 

release of naturally occurring radon and its daughter products from the surrounding soil and rock substrates. 

Precipitation events can result in the “rainout” of globally distributed radionuclides occurring as airborne 

particulates in the upper atmosphere. Figure 6-6, generated from the CEMP Web site, illustrates an example of 

this phenomenon. 

Figure 6-6. The effect of meteorological phenomena on background gamma readings 

6.2 Offsite Surface and Groundwater Monitoring 

During 2008, DRI was tasked by NNSA/NSO to provide independent verification of the tritium activity within 

some of the offsite groundwater wells, surface waters, and springs used for water supplies in areas surrounding 

the NTS. Samples collected by DRI personnel provide, in some years, a direct comparison to the results obtained 

by National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec), under the Routine Radiological Environmental Monitoring 

Plan. In 2008, however, DRI and NSTec did not sample from the same offsite water sources (see Section 4.1). 

The sole analyte for this project was tritium. Tritium is one of the most abundant radionuclides generated by an 

underground nuclear test and, since it is a constituent of the water molecule itself, it is also one of the most mobile. 

6.2.1 Sample Locations and Methods 

During the period of June 17 to September 11, 2008, DRI sampled 4 springs, 21 wells, and 3 surface water bodies 

either directly or through municipal water supply systems. Sample locations were selected based upon input from 

the CEMs and local ranch owners participating in the CEMP project. All wells were sampled utilizing downhole 
Oversight Radiological Monitoring of Air and Water

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 6-11 

submersible pumps. Samples from surface water bodies were obtained via discharge from a faucet or valve 

connected to the water supply system that pumps that body of water. Springs were sampled by hand along 

surface drainage that emanates from the spring orifice, or from the water supply system connected to the spring 

discharge. Each well was pumped a minimum of 5 to 15 minutes prior to sampling to purge water from the pump 

tubing and well annulus. This process ensured that the resultant sample was representative of local groundwater. 

Table 6-6 lists all of the sample points, their locations, the date they were sampled, and the sampling method. The 

locations of the sample points are shown in Figure 6-7.

6.2.2 Procedures and Quality Assurance 

DRI utilized several methods to ensure that radiological results reported herein conform to current QA protocols 

(see Section 19.0 for a detailed description of the CEMP QA program). This was achieved through the use of 

standard operating procedures, field QA samples, and laboratory QA procedures. DRI’s standard operating 

procedures are detailed procedures that describe the method and materials, using step-by-step instructions, which 

are required to collect field water quality samples and protect the samples from tampering and environmental 

conditions that may alter their chemistry. 

The second tier of QA utilized on this project consisted of field QA samples, specifically field blanks, duplicates, 

and spiked samples. The intent of field blanks was to provide direct measures of the contribution of radioactive 

material that was derived from the bottles, sampling equipment, and the environment to the activity of tritium 

measured within the samples. Duplicate samples were collected to establish a measure of the repeatability of the 

analysis. Spiked samples consisted of samples that had the appearance of being routine CEMP samples, yet 

actually consisted of water containing a known quantity of tritium in it. Sixteen samples (36 percent of the 

sample load) were collected for the purposes of meeting field QA requirements. The third tier of QA utilized on 

this project were laboratory QA controls, which consisted of the utilization of published laboratory techniques for 

the analysis of tritium, method blanks, laboratory control samples, and laboratory duplicates. The laboratory QA 

samples provide a measure of the accuracy and the confidence of the reported results. 

Samples collected in 2008 were analyzed using enriched gas proportional counting at the University of Miami. 

CEMP tritium samples taken prior to 2008 were analyzed using gas proportional counting. The enrichment 

process significantly lowers the detection limit, improving confidence in the reported results, especially for those 

samples containing little or no tritium. The decision level (LC) (see Glossary, Appendix B) for enriched gas proportional counting was 0.5 picocuries per liter (pCi/L). The LC is the result that must be exceeded before there is 

a 95 percent confidence that the sample contains radioactive material above laboratory background. The MDC 

(see Glossary, Appendix B) for tritium was approximately 1.0 pCi/L. 

6.2.3 Results of Surface Water and Spring Discharge Monitoring 

Measured tritium (3H) concentrations from the springs and surface waters sampled in 2008 ranged from below 

MDC to 24.1 pCi/L (Table 6-7). All samples yielded results that were distinguishable from background 

(i.e., ≥ LC). The Stone Cabin Ranch sample was above background, yet the activity was too low to quantitatively 

distinguish from background at 95 percent confidence (i.e., < MDC). The remaining surface water and spring 

discharge samples contained sufficient tritium to quantify above background with 95 percent confidence 

(i.e., ≥ MDC). This is a change from results of previous years where many samples were less than the MDC. The 

difference is due to an improved analytical method that significantly lowered MDC rather than to a real increase 

in the tritium of surface waters and springs sampled as part of the CEMP project. The greatest activities were 

detected in samples from Boulder City and Henderson, which originated from Lake Mead. Slightly elevated 

tritium activities in Lake Mead are documented in previous annual NTS environmental reports (e.g., Bechtel 

Nevada [BN], 2004a; 2005a; BN and NSTec, 2006; NSTec, 2007a; 2008a) and are due to residual tritium 

persisting in the environment that originated from global atmospheric nuclear testing. All tritium results were 

well below the safe drinking water limit of 20,000 pCi/L. 
 

6-12 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 200

8

Table 6-6. CEMP water monitoring locations sampled in 2008 

Monitoring Location Description Latitude Longitude 

Date 

Sampled Sample Collect

Adaven Springs 38 08.25 -115 36.20 7/15/2008 By hand from stream discharging Alamo city water supply system - source of water is 

municipal well field 

37 21.84 -115 10.13 6/17/2008 By hand from municipal water w

Amargosa Valley school well 36 34.16 -116 27.66 9/09/2008 By hand at wellhead at the schooBeatty Water and Sewer municipal water distribution system 

36 50.00 -116 49.44 7/29/2008 By hand at holding tank containi

corner of Rhyolite and Bullfrog. location of well supplying water 

Boulder City municipal water distribution system 35 59.74 -114 49.90 7/09/2008 By hand from a drinking fountai

water originates from Lake Mead

Caliente municipal water supply well 37 36.93 -114 30.98 6/17/2008 By hand at well in municipal weCedar City municipal water supply well about 11 

kilometers (km) (7 miles [mi]) west of town 

37 39.84 -113 13.03 6/19/2008 By hand at wellhead. 

Delta municipal well 39 21.59 -112 34.65 6/18/2008 By hand at wellhead. Duckwater water supply well 38 55.41 -115 41.99 7/16/2008 By hand at faucet inside pump hEly municipal water source 39 13.80 -114 54.01 7/16/2008 By hand from sump located in sp

Springs are used as municipal wa

Goldfield municipal water supply well about 18 km 

(11 mi) north of town 

37 52.41 -117 14.96 7/29/2008 By hand at wellhead; sampled ne

Henderson municipal water distribution system 36 00.43 -114 57.95 7/09/2008 By hand from faucet inside build

Nevada; water originates from L

Indian Springs municipal well 36 34.41 -115 40.1 9/09/2008 By hand at wellhead. Las Vegas Valley Water District #103 36 13.94 -115 15.13 9/11/2008 By hand at wellhead. Medlin’s Ranch - spring 10 mi west of ranch house 37 24.10 -115 32.25 7/30/2008 By hand at kitchen faucet; water 

16 km (10 mi) west of ranch. 

Mesquite municipal water supply well 3 km (2 mi) S.E. of town 

36 46.40 -114 03.26 9/11/2008 By hand at wellhead. 

Milford municipal well 38 22.88 -112 59.78 6/18/2008 By hand at wellhead. Nyala Ranch water well 38 14.93 -115 43.72 7/15/2008 By hand from front yard hose fauOverton water well located at Arrow Canyon 

approximately 32 km (20 mi) west of town 

36 44.06 -114 44.87 9/11/2008 By hand at wellhead. 
Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 200

8 6-13

Table 6-6. CEMP water monitoring locations sampled in 2008 (continued) 

Monitoring Location Description Latitude Longitude 

Date 

Sampled Sample Collectio

Pahrump municipal water system 36 11.29 -115 57.95 9/09/2008 By hand at wellhead, location is dPioche municipal well 37 56.98 -114 25.78 6/17/2008 By hand at wellhead. Rachel - Little Ale Inn well 37 38.79 -115 44.75 7/30/2008 By hand from faucet inside Lil AlSarcobatus Flats well 37 16.78 -117 01.92 7/29/2008 By hand at wellhead. St. George municipal water distribution system 37 10.47 -113 23.92 6/19/2008 By hand at water treatment plant; 

Quail Creek Reservoir. 

Stone Cabin Ranch 38 12.45 -116 37.99 7/16/2008 By hand from outside house fauce

spring 

Tecopa Residential Well 35 57.59 -116 15.71 9/09/2008 By hand at wellhead. Tonopah public utilities well field located approximately 

19 km (12 mi) from town 

38 11.68 -117 04.70 7/30/2008 By hand at wellhead. 

Twin Springs Ranch Well 38 12.21 -116 10.53 7/15/2008 By hand from wellhead. Note: Coordinates reported last year for Alamo City well head were slightly in error. Coordinates reported this year are accurate. 
Oversight Radiological Monitoring of Air and Water

6-14 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008Figure 6-6. 2008 CEMP water monitoring locations 
Oversight Radiological Monitoring of Air and Water

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 6-15 

Table 6-8. Tritium results for CEMP offsite wells in 2008

All samples were analyzed for the presence of trends with respect to samples collected in previous years. All 

samples indicated a presence of tritium in the water as opposed to previous years where tritium was generally not 

detected. This is due to the use of an improved analytical method rather than any real change in the activity of the 

water being monitored. 

 Table 6-7. Tritium results for CEMP offsite surface water and spring discharges in 2008 

Monitoring Location 

3

H ± Uncertainty (a)

(pCi/L) 

Adaven Springs 10.7 ± 0.7 

Ely municipal water source 2.8 ± 0.6 

Medlin’s Ranch 5.1 ± 0.6 

Stone Cabin Ranch 0.8 ± 0.6 

Boulder City municipal water distribution system 24.1 ± 1.6 

Henderson municipal water distribution system 23.2 ± 1.5 

St. George municipal water distribution system 9.4 ± 0.6 

(a) ± 2 standard deviations 

LC = 0.5 pCi/L; MDC = 1.0 pCiL for all samples 

6.2.4 Results of Groundwater Monitoring 

The results for the 21 groundwater tritium analyses from the University of Miami Tritium Laboratory are 

presented in Table 6-8. The measured activities ranged from -0.3 to 5.4 pCi/L. Most of the samples yielded 

results that were statistically indistinguishable from laboratory background (≤LC). The exceptions were samples 

obtained from Alamo City, Caliente, Las Vegas, and Nyala Ranch. Of these samples, only one exceeded the 

MDC (1.0 pCi/L). This sample was from Caliente (5.4 ± 0.6 pCi/L). The tritium activities for Caliente exhibited 

detectable tritium for the first time. This is most likely 

due to the use of an improved methodology for the 

detection of tritium rather than any real increase in tritium 

in water from Caliente over time. All groundwater 

samples were well below the safe drinking water limit of 

20,000 pCi/L. 

6.2.5 Environmental Impact 

Results of the CEMP tritium analyses conducted on 

selected offsite groundwater wells and water supply 

systems surrounding the NTS showed no evidence of 

tritium migration off site via groundwater. Detectable 

activities (≥MDC) were most often found in surface 

waters and in spring discharge emananting from small 

local groundwater systems located in recharge areas. 

Most of the groundwater samples analyzed were below 

the LC for tritium (see Table 6-8). The greatest observed 

activity, 5.4 pCi/L for Caliente, is upgradient of the NTS 

and may be due to localized recharge. 

Monitoring Location 

3

H ± Uncertainty (a) 

(pCi/L) 

Alamo City 0.8 ± 0.6 

Amargosa Valley 0.0 ± 0.6 

Beatty -0.2 ± 0.6 

Caliente 5.4 ± 0.6 

Cedar City 0.2 ± 0.6 

Delta -0.1 ± 0.6 

Duckwater 0.3 ± 0.6 

Goldfield 0.4 ± 0.6 

Indian Springs 0.1 ± 0.6 

Las Vegas 0.8 ± 0.6 

Mesquite -0.0 ± 0.6 

Milford -0.3 ± 0.6 

Nyala Ranch 0.5 ± 0.6 

Overton -0.1 ± 0.6 

Pahrump 0.1 ± 0.6 

Pioche 0.1 ± 0.6 

Rachel -0.2 ± 0.6 

Sarcobatus Flats 0.1 ± 0.6 

Tecopa -0.2 ± 0.6 

Tonopah -0.1 ± 0.6 

Twin Springs Ranch -0.1 ± 0.6 

 ± 2 standard deviations 

LC = 0.5 pCi/L; MDC = 1.0 pCiL for all samples 
Oversight Radiological Monitoring of Air and Water

6-16 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Radiological Biota Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 7-1 

7.0 Radiological Biota Monitoring 

Historical atmospheric nuclear weapons testing, outfalls from underground nuclear tests, and radioactive waste 

disposal sites provide sources of potential radiation contamination and exposure to Nevada Test Site (NTS) plants 

and animals (biota). U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order DOE O 5400.5, “Radiation Protection of the 

Public and the Environment,” requires that all DOE sites monitor radioactivity in the environment to ensure that 

the public does not receive a radiological dose greater than 100 millirems per year (mrem/yr) from all pathways of 

exposure, including the ingestion of contaminated plants and animals. The DOE also requires monitoring to 

determine if the radiological dose to aquatic and terrestrial biota on site exceeds DOE-established limits expressed 

in rad (for radiation absorbed dose, see Glossary, Appendix B) per day (rad/d). 

Current NTS land use precludes the harvest of plants or plant parts (e.g., pine nuts and wolf berries) for direct 

consumption by humans. Therefore, the ingestion of game animals is the primary potential biotic pathway for 

radionuclide contamination from the NTS to the public. Game animals that occur on the NTS may travel off the 

site and become available, through hunting, for consumption by the public. Game animals are therefore 

monitored under the Routine Radiological Environmental Monitoring Plan (RREMP) (Bechtel Nevada, 2003a). 

In 2008, National Security Technologies, LLC, Environmental Technical Services conducted the monitoring. 

Plants and game animals are sampled annually from contaminated sites on the NTS to estimate hypothetical doses 

to hunters (i.e., the public), measure the potential for radionuclide transfer through the food chain, and determine 

if NTS biota are exposed to radiation levels harmful to their own populations. Biota are also sampled from 

Radioactive Waste Management Sites (RWMSs) as a measure of potential contact with the waste (integrity of 

waste containment). This chapter describes the biota monitoring program designed to meet public and 

environmental radiation protection regulations (see Section 2.3) and presents the field sampling and analyses 

results from 2008. Analyses results were used to estimate the dose to humans consuming game animals from the 

NTS and to biota found in contaminated areas of the NTS. These dose estimates are presented in Section 8.0. 

Radiological Biota Monitoring Goals

Analytes Measured in Plant 

and Animal Tissues 

Determine if the potential dose to humans consuming game animals from the 

NTS is less than 100 mrem/yr, the limit set by DOE O 5400.5. 

Demonstrate that projected releases of radionuclides to the environment from 

the Area 3 and Area 5 RWMSs shall be maintained as per Performance 

Assessments required by DOE O 435.1, “Radioactive Waste Management.” 

Determine if the absorbed radiation dose to NTS biota is less than the limits set 

by DOE O 5400.5 and DOE Standard DOE-STD-1153-2002, “A Graded 

Approach for Evaluating Radiation Doses to Aquatic and Terrestrial Biota:” 

 < 1 rad/d for terrestrial plants and aquatic animals 

 < 0.1 rad/d for terrestrial animals 

Americium-241 (241Am) 

Cesium-137 (137Cs) 

Cobalt-60 (60Co) 

Europium-152 (152Eu) 

Europium-154 (154Eu) 

Tritium (3H) 

Plutonium-239+240 

(

239+240Pu) 

Strontium-90 (90Sr) 

7.1 Species Selection 

The goal for vegetation monitoring is to sample the most contaminated plants within the NTS environment. They 

are generally found inside demarcated radiological areas near the “ground zero” locations of historical aboveground nuclear tests. The species selected for sampling represent the most dominant life forms (e.g., trees, 

shrubs, herbs, or grasses) at these sites. Woody vegetation (i.e., shrubs versus forbs or grasses) is sampled 

because it is reported to have deeper penetrating roots and higher concentrations of 3

H (Hunter and Kinnison, 

1998). Woody vegetation also is a major source of browse for game animals that might potentially migrate off 

site. Grasses and forbs are also sampled when present, however, because they are also a source of food for 

wildlife. Plant parts collected for analysis represent new growth over the past year. 
Radiological Biota Monitoring

7-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

The game animals monitored to assess the potential dose to the public had to meet three criteria: (1) have a 

relatively high probability of entering the human food chain; (2) have a home range that overlaps a contaminated 

site and, as a result, have the potential for relatively high radionuclide body burdens from exposure to 

contaminated soil, air, water, or plants at the contaminated site; and (3) be sufficiently abundant at a site to 

acquire an adequate tissue sample for laboratory analysis. These criteria limited the candidate game animals to 

those listed in Table 7-1. Mule deer and pronghorn antelope are only collected as the opportunity arises if they 

are found dead on the NTS (e.g., from accidentally being hit by a vehicle). Tissues from other game species, such 

as predators, or species analogous to big game, such as feral horses, may be collected opportunistically as well. 

The goal of sampling animals for the purpose of determining potential dose to biota is to select species that are 

most exposed and most sensitive to effects from radiation. In general, mammals and birds are more sensitive to 

radiation than fish, amphibians, or invertebrates (DOE-STD-1153-2002). Because of this, and because no native 

fish or amphibians are found on the NTS, the species in Table 7-1 are also used to assess potential dose to animals. 

The animal species monitored to assess the integrity of radioactive waste containment had to meet three criteria: 

(1) is fossorial (i.e., burrows and lives predominantly underground), (2) has a home range small enough to ensure 

it resides for most of its time on the waste disposal site, and (3) is sufficiently abundant at a site to acquire an 

adequate tissue sample for laboratory analysis. These criteria limited the animals to those listed in Table 7-1. 

Table 7-1. NTS animals monitored for radionuclides 

Small Mammals Large Mammals Birds 

Game Animals Monitored for Dose Assessments 

Cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus audubonii) Mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) Mourning dove (Zenaida macroura)

Jackrabbit (Lepus californicus) Pronghorn antelope (Antilocapra americana) Chukar (Alectoris chukar)

 Gambel’s quail (Callipepla gambelii)

Animals Monitored for Integrity of Radioactive Waste Containment

Kangaroo rats (Dipodomys sp.) 

Mice (Peromyscus sp.) 

Desert woodrat (Neotoma lepida) 

7.2 Site Selection 

The monitoring design focuses on sampling sites that have the highest concentrations of radionuclides in other 

media (e.g., soil and surface water) and have relatively high densities of candidate animals. The RREMP 

identifies five contaminated sites and their associated control sites at which biota are sampled once every five 

years. They are E Tunnel Ponds, Palanquin Crater, Sedan Crater, T2, and Plutonium Valley (Figure 7-1), and 

each is associated with one type of a legacy contamination area (see bulleted list below). The control site selected 

for each contaminated site has similar biological and physical features. Control sites are sampled to document the 

radionuclide levels representative of background. 

• Runoff areas or containment ponds associated with underground or tunnel test areas. Contaminated 

water draining from test areas can form surface water sources that are important given the limited availability 

of surface water on the NTS. Therefore, they have a high potential for transferring radionuclides to plants and 

wildlife seeking surface water. The associated monitoring site is E Tunnel Ponds below Rainier Mesa. It was 

last sampled in 2007.

• Plowshare sites in alluvial fill at lower elevations with high surface contamination. Subsurface nuclear 

detonations at these sites have distributed contaminants over a wide area, usually in the lowest precipitation 

areas of the NTS. The associated monitoring site is Sedan Crater in Yucca Flat. It was last sampled in 2005. 

• Plowshare sites in bedrock or rocky fill at higher elevations with high surface contamination.

Subsurface nuclear detonations at these sites distributed contaminants over a wide area, usually in the highest 

precipitation areas of the NTS. Through 2007, the associated monitoring site was Palanquin Crater. It was 

last sampled in 2003. Schooner Crater was added as a biota sampling site and sampled in 2008. 
Radiological Biota Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 7-3 

Figure 7-1. Radiological biota monitoring sites on the NTS and sites sampled in 2008 
Radiological Biota Monitoring

7-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

• Atmospheric test areas. These sites have highly disturbed soils due to the removal of topsoil during 

historical cleanup efforts and to the sterilization of soils from heat and radiation during testing. The same 

areas were often used for multiple nuclear tests. The associated monitoring site is T2 in Yucca Flat. It was 

last sampled in 2006.

• Aboveground safety experiment sites. These areas are typified by current radioactive soil contamination, 

primarily in the form of plutonium and uranium. The associated monitoring site is Plutonium Valley in 

Area 11. It was last sampled in 2004. 

Biota sampling is also conducted periodically at the Area 5 RWMS and the Area 3 RWMS (Figure 7-1) to assess 

whether fossorial small mammals are being exposed to buried wastes and, therefore, whether the integrity of 

waste containment is compromised. These sites contain subsurface radioactively contaminated materials at 

depths equal to or greater than 2 meters (m) (6.6 feet [ft]). At least one of these sites is sampled about every two 

years. Both were last sampled in 2007. Other sites may be monitored if new sites become radiologically 

contaminated or if contamination conditions change (e.g., through the addition of water pumped from 

contaminated groundwater or from soil disturbance). 

7.3 Biota Sampling and Analysis at Schooner Crater 

In 2008, Schooner Crater was sampled. It represents a Plowshare site in bedrock or rocky fill at high elevation. 

The Schooner test was conducted on December 8, 1968, on Pahute Mesa in Area 20 at about 1,700 m (5,577 ft) 

elevation to demonstrate the ability of a nuclear device to excavate large amounts of earth in an igneous rockdominated location. Contaminants resulting from this test were primarily tritium (3

H), strontium-90 (90Sr), 

cesium-137 (137Cs), plutonium-239+240 (239+240Pu), and americium-241 (241Am). The control area for the 

Schooner Crater is located about 12 kilometers (km) 

(7.5 miles [mi]) southeast of the crater in similar 

habitat (partially disturbed) in Area 20 (Figure 7-1). 

Aerial surveys of the area indicate radionuclide 

dispersion from the Schooner test was generally in a 

northerly direction (Hendricks and Riedhauser, 

1999). Vegetation was therefore sampled along a 

transect to the northeast and, for comparison, along 

a generally southern transect. Because of the 

mobility of animals, samples were taken relatively 

close to the crater in a relatively accessible location. 

7.3.1 Plants 

Plant sampling at Schooner Crater and the control 

site occurred on July 16, 2008. Sixteen samples 

were collected at distances ranging from about 100 

to 950 m (330 to 3,100 ft) north and south of the 

crater (Figure 7-2). Four samples were collected at 

the control site. The species sampled represent the 

dominant shrubs at each site (Table 7-2). Each 

sample consisted of about 150 to 500 grams (5.3 to 

17.6 ounces) of fresh-weight plant material and was 

a composite of material from many plants of the 

same species found generally within 5 m (16 ft) of 

each other. Leaves and stems were hand-plucked 

and stored in airtight plastic bags. Rubber gloves 

were used by samplers and changed between each 

composite sample. 

Figure 7-2. Plant and animal sampling locations near 

Schooner Crater in 2008
Radiological Biota Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 7-5 

 Table 7-2. Plant species sampled at Schooner Crater and its control site in 2008 

Common Name Scientific Name

Name 

Abbreviation

Schooner 

Crater

Control 

Site

Black sagebrush Artemisia nova ARNO X X 

Basin big sagebrush Artemisia tridentata ARTR X 

Yellow rabbitbrush Chrysothamnus viscidiflorus CHVI X 

Rubber rabbitbrush Ericameria nauseosus ERNA X X 

Samples were labeled and stored in an ice chest. Within 4 hours of collection, the samples were delivered to the 

laboratory. Water was separated from plant samples by distillation. Water and dried plant tissues were submitted 

to a commercial laboratory for analysis of radionuclides. Water from plants was analyzed for 3

H and dried plant 

tissue was analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides, 90Sr, uranium, plutonium, and 241Am. 

All plant samples from the 

Schooner Crater location had 

detectable concentrations of manmade radionuclides (Table 7-3). 

Activity in samples was 

dominated by 3

H but also included 

90Sr, 137Cs, and 239+240Pu with 

relatively smaller concentrations 

of 152Eu, 238Pu, and 241Am. The 

samples with the highest 

concentrations of tritium were in 

rubber rabbitbrush (ERNA) 

located closest to the crater 

(Figure 7-3). No man-made 

radionuclides were detected in 

plant samples from the control 

location. 

These results differ from the 

Palanquin Crater plant sampling 

results from 2003. The average 

concentrations of 3

H, 137Cs, and 

152Eu across all plant samples from 

the Schooner Crater were higher 

than those observed at the 

Palanquin Crater (Figure 7-4). 

3

H and 152Eu were not detected in 

any plant samples near the 

Palanquin Crater, while 238Pu, 

239+240Pu, 241Am, and 90Sr in the 

Palanquin samples tended to be 

slightly higher. 

Figure 7-3. Concentrations of man-made radionuclides in plant samples at 

varying distances from Schooner Crater in 2008 
7-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Table 7-3. Concentrations of man-made radionuclides in plants sampled near Schooner Crater in 2008 Radionuclide Concentrations ± Uncertainty(a) 3H(b) 90Sr(c) 137Cs(c) 152Eu(c) 238Pu(c) 239

Schooner Crater ARNO #1 3,090 ± 419 0.04 ± 0.03 0.05 ± 0.06 0.02 ± 0.18 0.008 ± 0.009 0.00

ARNO #2 6,990 ± 795 0.02 ± 0.04 0.07 ± 0.08 0.07 ± 0.19 0.004 ± 0.009 0.0ARNO #3 667 ± 206 0.03 ± 0.03 0.03 ± 0.09 0.37 ± 0.35 0.002 ± 0.005 0.0ARNO #4 853 ± 262 0.05 ± 0.04 0.08 ± 0.07 0.01 ± 0.21 -0.001 ± 0.005 0.00ARTR #1 8,820 ± 979 0.09 ± 0.04 -0.01 ± 0.07 0.01 ± 0.17 0.012 ± 0.011 1.08ARTR #2 6,920 ± 794 -0.06 ± 0.05 0.02 ± 0.05 0.27 ± 0.24 0.007 ± 0.010 -0.00CHVI #1 2,390 ± 351 0.08 ± 0.06 0.05 ± 0.07 -0.15 ± 0.17 0.008 ± 0.009 0.00CHVI #2 8,760 ± 971 0.20 ± 0.07 0.15 ± 0.09 0.32 ± 0.27 0.049 ± 0.023 0.03CHVI #3 3,040 ± 415 0.12 ± 0.05 0.00 ± 0.11 0.20 ± 0.28 0.001 ± 0.006 0.00CHVI #4 4,510 ± 556 0.01 ± 0.03 0.01 ± 0.08 0.19 ± 0.20 0.002 ± 0.007 0.00ERNA #1 9,980,000 ± 997,000 0.35 ± 0.09 1.34 ± 0.23 0.04 ± 0.36 -0.001 ± 0.006 0.00ERNA #2 3,800,000 ± 380,000 0.39 ± 0.10 0.46 ± 0.14 0.26 ± 0.25 0.000 ± 0.007 0.00ERNA #3 148,000 ± 14,800 0.14 ± 0.05 0.03 ± 0.11 -0.05 ± 0.24 0.006 ± 0.009 0.00ERNA #4 618,000 ± 61,800 0.04 ± 0.04 0.00 ± 0.09 0.12 ± 0.25 -0.001 ± 0.005 0.00ERNA #5 287,000 ± 28,700 0.05 ± 0.04 0.22 ± 0.10 0.15 ± 0.17 -0.001 ± 0.005 0.00ERNA #6 1,060,000 ± 106,000 0.04 ± 0.04 0.24 ± 0.10 -0.06 ± 0.19 -0.001 ± 0.005 -0.00

% Above MDC (d) (Average MDC) 100% (292) 38% (0.06) 31% (0.12) 13% (0.30) 13% (0.013) 19% 

Schooner Control ARNO #1 59 ± 198 0.03 ± 0.03 -0.01 ± 0.11 0.03 ± 0.22 -0.001 ± 0.005 0.00

ARNO #2 182 ± 205 0.06 ± 0.07 0.04 ± 0.07 0.06 ± 0.16 0.001 ± 0.005 0.00ERNA #1 137 ± 205 0.10 ± 0.07 0.06 ± 0.11 -0.01 ± 0.19 0.001 ± 0.006 0.00ERNA #2 25 ± 196 0.07 ± 0.06 0.05 ± 0.09 -0.20 ± 0.28 -0.001 ± 0.005 0.00

% Above MDC (Average MDC) 0% (345) 0% (0.10) 0% (0.12) 0% (0.31) 0% (0.014) 0% Green-shaded results are considered detected (results greater than the sample-specific MDC). (a) ± 2 standard deviations (b) picocuries per liter (pCi/L) water from sample (c) picocuries per gram (pCi/g) dry weight of sample (d) MDC=minimum detectable concentration 
Radiological Biota Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 7-7 

Figure 7-4. Average concentrations of detected man-made radionuclides in plants from representative 

Plowshare sites in bedrock or rocky fill at higher elevations 

7.3.2 Animals 

State and federal permits were secured to trap specific small mammals and birds in 2008 and to sample roadkilled, large mammals. Animal trapping took place July through August. One mourning dove and two cottontail 

rabbits were trapped near the Schooner Crater (see Figure 7-2). No animals were successfully trapped at the 

control site. No large mammals were sampled due to a lack of road-kills or other mortalities. 

In the laboratory, samples were individually homogenized. Past results have shown that radionuclide 

concentrations are generally higher in the skin, bone, and viscera compared with muscle. Though muscle is 

usually the only portion consumed by humans, whole animals were homogenized to give a more conservative 

(higher) estimate of potential dose to someone consuming the animals (see Section 8.1.3). Water was distilled 

from the samples and submitted to a laboratory for 3

H analysis, and the dried tissue samples were submitted for 

analysis of gamma-emitting radionuclides, 90Sr, uranium, plutonium, and 241Am. 

Man-made radionuclides were detected in all three animals trapped near Schooner Crater (Table 7-4). Activity 

levels were dominated by 3

H. Radionuclide levels were generally higher in the Cottontail #2 sample, but only 

concentrations of 60Co, 152Eu, and 154Eu were significantly higher than those of Cottontail #1. These results differ 

from the Palanquin Crater sampling results from 2003 (Figure 7-5). Concentrations of 239+240Pu and 241Am were 

higher in animals collected near Palanquin Crater, but 3

H concentrations were much higher in animals trapped 

near Schooner Crater. 

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

1,000,000

10,000,000

100,000,000

H-3

Average Concentration (pCi/L)

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

1.40

1.60

Sr-90 Cs-137 Eu-152 Pu-238 Pu-239+240 Am-241

Radionuclide

Average Concentration (pCi/g)

Palanquin 2003 Schooner 2008

Bars extend from the minimum to maximum value observed in that year. If lower cap is not visible, bar extends below axis. 
Radiological Biota Monitoring

7-8 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Table 7-4. Concentrations of man-made radionuclides in animals sampled near Schooner Crater in 2008 

Radionuclide Concentrations ± Uncertainty(a)

Cottontail #1 Cottontail #2 Mourning Dove % Above MDC 

(Average MDC) 3

H (b) 562,000 ± 56,400 532,000 ± 53,300 6,250 ± 828 100 (395) 60Co (c) 0.04 ± 0.03 0.13 ± 0.03 0.00 ± 0.04 33 (0.05) 90Sr (c) 1.91 ± 0.41 1.11 ± 0.26 0.05 ± 0.04 67 (0.07) 137Cs (c) 0.53 ± 0.07 0.53 ± 0.08 0.00 ± 0.03 67 (0.04) 152Eu (c) 0.03 ± 0.08 0.99 ± 0.12 0.07 ± 0.09 33 (0.11) 154Eu (c) 0.05 ± 0.12 0.73 ± 0.15 0.03 ± 0.10 33 (0.14) 238Pu (c) 0.006 ± 0.008 0.018 ± 0.018 -0.001 ± 0.005 33 (0.012) 239+240Pu (c) -0.001 ± 0.006 0.018 ± 0.018 -0.001 ± 0.005 33 (0.013) 241Am (c) 0.006 ± 0.010 0.019 ± 0.016 -0.003 ± 0.007 33 (0.014) 

Green-shaded results are considered detected (results greater than the sample-specific MDC). 

(a) ± 2 standard deviations 

(b) picocuries per liter (pCi/L) water from sample 

(c) picocuries per gram (pCi/g) dry weight of sample 

Figure 7-5. Average concentrations of detected man-made radionuclides in animals from representative 

Plowshare sites in bedrock or rocky fill at higher elevations 

7.4 Data Assessment 

As expected, higher concentrations of radionuclides were detected in plants from Schooner Crater than in those 

from the control site. Schooner Crater biota samples tended to have much higher activities of tritium and of 

certain fission and activation products, while the Palanquin Crater samples tended to have higher concentrations 

of plutonium isotopes and 241Am. The levels of radionuclides detected pose negligible risk to humans and biota. 

The potential dose to a person hunting and consuming these animals is well below dose limits to members of the 

public (see Section 8.1.4). Also, radionuclide concentrations were below levels considered harmful to the health 

of the plants or animals; the dose resulting from observed concentrations were less than 1 percent of dose limits 

set to protect populations of plants and animals (see Section 8.2). 

1

10

100

1,000

10,000

100,000

1,000,000

10,000,000

100,000,000

H-3

Average Concentration (pCi/L)

0.00

5.00

10.00

15.00

20.00

25.00

Co-60

Sr-90

Cs-137

Eu-152

Eu-154

Pu-238

Pu-239+240

Am-241

Radionuclide

Average Concentration (pCi/g)

Palanquin 2003 Schooner 2008

Bars extend from the minimum to maximum value observed in that year. If lower cap is not visible, bar extends below axis.
Radiological Dose Assessment

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 8-1

8.0 Radiological Dose Assessment 

The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) requires DOE facilities to estimate the radiological dose to the general 

public and to plants and animals in the environment caused by past or present facility operations. These requirements are specified in DOE Order DOE O 450.1A, “Environmental Protection Program,” and DOE O 5400.5, 

“Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment” (see Section 2.3). To estimate these radiological doses, 

mathematical models are used along with data gathered annually on the Nevada Test Site (NTS) by National 

Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec), and existing data from past inventories of the radionuclide content of NTS 

surface soils. The 2008 data used are presented in Sections 3.0 through 7.0 of this report and include the results 

for onsite compliance monitoring of air, water, direct radiation, and biota, and the offsite monitoring results of air, 

direct radiation, and water reported by the Community Environmental Monitoring Program (CEMP). The 

specific goals for the dose assessment component of radiological monitoring are shown below along with the 

compliance measures that are calculated in order to accomplish these assessment goals. 

Radiological Dose Assessment Goals Compliance Measures 

Determine if the maximum radiation dose to a member of the general 

public from airborne radionuclide emissions at the NTS is less than 

the Clean Air Act, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants (NESHAP) limit of 10 millirems per year (mrem/yr) 

(0.1 millisieverts [mSv]/yr). 

Determine if the total radiation dose to a member of the general 

public from all possible pathways (direct exposure, inhalation, 

ingestion of water and food) as a result of NTS operations is less than 

the limit of 100 mrem/yr established by DOE O 5400.5. 

Determine if the radiation dose (in a unit of measure called a rad [see 

Glossary, Appendix B]) to NTS biota is less than the following limits 

set by DOE O 5400.5 and DOE Standard DOE-STD-1153-2002, “A 

Graded Approach for Evaluating Radiation Doses to Aquatic and 

Terrestrial Biota”: 

 < 1 rad per day (rad/d) for terrestrial plants and aquatic animals 

 < 0.1 rad/d for terrestrial animals 

Annual average concentrations of 

radionuclides at six NTS criticalreceptor air sampling locations 

compared to the Concentration Levels 

for Environmental Compliance, Table 

2, Appendix E, Title 40 Code of 

Federal Regulations Part 61 

(NESHAP) 

Committed effective dose equivalent 

(CEDE) for an offsite resident from all 

pathways, in mrem/yr (or mSv/yr) 

Absorbed dose to onsite plants and 

animals, in rad/d 

8.1 Radiological Dose to the Public 

Several steps are taken to compute radiological dose to the public from all pathways. This section briefly 

describes these steps, identifies how field monitoring data interface with other NTS data sources 

(e.g., radionuclide inventory data) to provide input to the dose estimates, and presents the results of each step. 

8.1.1 Possible Exposure Pathways to the Public 

As prescribed in the Routine Radiological Environmental Monitoring Plan (Bechtel Nevada [BN], 2003s), NSTec 

routinely samples air, groundwater, and biota to document the amount of radioactivity in these media and to 

provide data that can be used to assess the radiation dose received by the general public from several pathways. 

The potential pathways by which a member of the general public residing off site might receive a radiation dose 

resulting from past or present NTS operations include the following: 
Radiological Dose Assessment

8-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

• Inhalation of, ingestion of, or direct external exposure to airborne radionuclide emissions transported off site 

by wind 

• Ingestion of meat from wild game animals that drink from surface waters and eat vegetation containing NTSrelated radioactivity 

• Drinking contaminated water from underground aquifers containing radionuclides that have migrated from 

the sites of past underground nuclear tests 

• Exposure to direct radiation along the borders of the NTS 

• Exposure to direct radiation from the release of property (e.g., equipment, building materials) containing 

residual radioactive material 

In 2008, only the wind transport pathway and the ingestion of wild game were credible pathways of exposure to 

the public residing off site. The subsections below address all of the potential pathways and their contribution to 

public dose estimated for 2008. 

8.1.2 Dose to the Public from NTS Air Emissions 

Six air particulate and tritium (3H) sampling stations located near the boundaries and the center of the NTS are 

approved by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Region IX as critical receptor samplers to demonstrate 

compliance with the NESHAP public dose limit of 10 mrem/yr from air emissions. Analysis of air particulate and 

3

H data obtained at these six stations was performed in 2008 (Section 3.1.5). To be in compliance with NESHAP, 

the annual average concentration of an airborne radionuclide must be less than its NESHAP Concentration Level 

for Environmental Compliance (abbreviated as compliance level [CL]) (see Table 3-1 of Section 3.1.1). The CL 

for each radionuclide represents the annual average concentration of that radionuclide in air that would result in a 

CEDE of 10 mrem/yr. If multiple radionuclides are detected at a station, then compliance with NESHAP is 

demonstrated when the sum of the fractions (determined by dividing each radionuclide’s concentration by its CL 

and then adding the fractions together) is less than 1.0. 

The following radionuclides were detected at four or more of the critical receptor samplers: americium-241 

(

241Am), plutonium-238 (238Pu), plutonium-239+240 (239+240Pu), uranium-233+234 (233+234U), uranium-235+236 

(

235+236U), uranium-238 (238U), and 3

H (Section 3.1.5). All concentrations of these radionuclides were well below 

their CLs. The uranium isotopes are attributed to naturally occurring uranium. The concentration of each 

measured radionuclide (excluding uranium, since it has been determined to be of natural origin) at each of the six 

critical receptor samplers was divided by its respective CL to obtain a “fraction of CL.” These fractions were then 

summed for each location and all were less than 1.0 (see Table 3-12, Section 3.1.5). As in previous years, the 

2008 data from the six critical receptor samplers show that the NESHAP dose limit to the public of 10 mrem/yr 

was not exceeded. The Schooner critical receptor station in the far northwest corner of the NTS had the highest 

concentrations of radioactive air emissions, yet an individual residing at this station would experience a dose from 

air emissions of only 1.9 mrem/yr, 19 percent of the admissible dose limit. No one resides at this location, and the 

dose at offsite populated locations 20–80 kilometers (km) (12–50 miles [mi]) from the Schooner station would be 

much lower due to wind dispersion. 

In previous years (1992–2004), the air transport model called Clean Air Package 1988 (CAP88-PC) was used to 

calculate the dose to the public from NTS air emissions, including diffuse emissions from legacy soil 

contamination. Beginning in 2005, CAP88-PC was no longer used. The air sampling data from the critical 

receptor stations, now used to calculate public dose, provides a more conservative estimate of potential dose to the 

public. See Sections 3.1 and 8.0 of the Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2005 (BN and NSTec, 2006) for 

discussions on this change in dose assessment methods. The CAP88-PC model is used, however, to evaluate new 

projects and activities for NESHAP compliance (see Sections 3.1.7–3.1.9). In 2008, no unplanned releases 

occurred and airborne emissions from planned projects and new activities resulted in an emission less than ten 

percent of that estimated from legacy soil contamination (Warren and Grossman, 2009). 
Radiological Dose Assessment

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 8-3

Figure 8-1. Locations of mourning doves banded on the NTS 

from 1961–1977 and of bands recovered by dove hunters

8.1.3 Dose to the Public from Ingestion of Wild Game from the NTS 

Two game species, mule deer and mourning doves, 

have been shown to travel off of the NTS, making 

them available to hunters. The movements of NTS 

mule deer herds were studied with a combined use 

of visual marking and radio-telemetry in the 1980s 

(Giles and Cooper, 1985). Although the majority of 

NTS deer studied did not migrate off federal lands 

onto public lands, two deer (1.7 percent of marked 

deer) did. One radio-collared buck captured on Echo 

Peak was harvested by a hunter near Kawich Peak 

about 120 km (75 mi) northwest of the NTS, and 

one visually marked doe was observed twice in the 

Barley Creek area of central Nevada, approximately 

200 km (125 mi) northwest of her capture location 

during the following summer. 

Data on banded mourning doves indicate that they 

may be more commonly available to offsite hunters 

than mule deer. Between 1961 and 1977, 586 

mourning doves were reported banded on the NTS, 

based on data retrieved from the USGS Patuxent 

Wildlife Research Center, Bird Banding Laboratory, 

North American Bird Banding Program. Of these, 

ten bands were recovered by hunters outside of 

Nevada (Figure 8-1). Assuming there are no 

differences between behaviors of banded doves and 

all other doves on the NTS, and that the number of 

bands reported by hunters range from 30 to 60 

percent of those actually collected (Tomlinson, 

1968; Reeves, 1979; Otis et al., 2008;), the percent 

of doves potentially collected by hunters for this 

time period was 3 to 6 percent of mourning doves using the NTS.

Game animals on the NTS are sampled annually near known radiologically contaminated areas as a conservative 

(worst case) estimate of the levels of radionuclides that hunters may consume if these animals leave the NTS and 

are harvested. In 2008, one mourning dove and two cottontail rabbits were sampled from near the Schooner 

Crater in Area 20 and analyzed for radionuclide content (see Section 7.3.2, Table 7-4 for analysis results). The 

potential dose to an individual from consuming these game animals was calculated using the following 

assumptions: 

• An individual consumes 20 doves and 20 rabbits over the year (these numbers are the possession limits set for 

these species by the Nevada Division of Wildlife).

• An individual consumes a total of 600 grams (g) of dove breast meat (30 g per dove) and 4,000 g of cottontail 

rabbit meat (200 g per rabbit). 

• Each consumed dove and rabbit contains the average concentration of radionuclides that was detected in the 

muscle tissue of the dove and rabbits sampled. 

• The moisture content of meat consumed is 75 percent. 

The CEDE was calculated using dose conversion factors (DOE, 1988) multiplied by the total activity estimated to 

be consumed for each of the detected radionuclides. The resultant potential doses are shown in Table 8-1. The 

highest estimated CEDE was 0.47 mrem (0.0047 mSv) from consuming cottontail rabbits from Schooner, which 
Radiological Dose Assessment

8-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

is only 0.47 percent of the annual dose limit for members of the public. If someone were to consume just one 

cottontail rabbit from the near the Schooner Crater, the potential dose would be only about 0.023 mrem 

(0.00023 mSv). The dose from consuming 20 doves from near the Schooner Crater, based on the 2008 sample, 

would be much lower at about 0.0002 mrem (0.000002 mSv). 

The radionuclide contributing most to dose was 90Sr (42 percent) followed by 3

H (22 percent), plutonium (18 

percent), and 241Am (12 percent) in the cottontail rabbits. 3H was present at much higher concentrations than 

other nuclides but contributes relatively little to the dose because it only emits low energy beta particles and has a 

short biological half-life. 

To put these potential doses in perspective, the dose from naturally occurring cosmic radiation received during a 

1-hour airplane flight at 39,000 feet is about 0.5 mrem (0.005 mSv). This is about the same as the CEDE from 

consuming 20 cottontail rabbits and about 2,500 times higher than consuming 20 doves like those sampled from 

Schooner Crater in 2008. 

 Table 8-1. Hypothetical dose to a human consuming NTS cottontail rabbits and doves based on 

 2008 samples from Schooner Crater 

 Radionuclide 

Average 

Concentration (a)

Dose Conversion Factor

(mrem/pCi ingested)(b)

CEDE 

(mrem) 

Sum of CEDE 

(mrem) 

 Cottontail Rabbit (Assumed weight of muscle consumed = 4,000 g) 0.47 3

H 547,000 pCi/L 0.000000063 0.103 

60Co 0.08 pCi/g 0.000026000 0.002 

90Sr 1.51 pCi/g 0.000130000 0.196 

137Cs 0.53 pCi/g 0.000050000 0.027 152Eu 0.51 pCi/g 0.000006000 0.003 

154Eu 0.39 pCi/g 0.000009100 0.004 

238Pu 0.012 pCi/g 0.003800000 0.045 239+240Pu 0.009 pCi/g 0.004300000 0.037 241Am 0.012 pCi/g 0.004500000 0.056 

 Mourning Dove (Assumed weight of muscle consumed = 600 g) 0.0002 3

H 6,250 pCi/L 0.000000063 0.0002 

(a) Negative values were set to zero prior to averaging. Radionuclides not detected in a species were not 

included in dose estimate. 

(b) Dose conversion factors for human ingestion are from DOE (1988).

8.1.4 Dose to the Public from Drinking Contaminated Groundwater 

The migration of radioactivity in groundwater has not been detected off site in the past, nor was it detected in 

2008 (see Section 4.1). Therefore, drinking contaminated groundwater is not a possible pathway of exposure to 

the public residing off site. 

8.1.5 Dose to the Public from Direct Radiation Exposure along NTS Borders 

The direct exposure pathway from gamma radiation to the public is monitored annually (see Section 5.0). In 

2008, the only place where the public had the potential to be exposed to direct radiation along the NTS borders was 

at Gate 100, the primary entrance to the site on the southern NTS border. Trucks hauling radioactive materials, 

primarily low-level radioactive waste being shipped for disposal at the Area 3 and 5 Radioactive Waste 

Management Sites, park outside Gate 100 while waiting for entry approval. Only during these times is there a 

potential for exposure to the public on the NTS. However, no member of the public resides or remains full-time 

at the Gate 100 truck parking area. 
Radiological Dose Assessment

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 8-5

8.1.6 Dose to the Public from Release of Property Containing Residual Radioactive 

Material 

The release of property off the NTS that contains residual radioactive material is another type of release to the 

environment and potential contributor to the dose received by the public. No vehicles, equipment, structures, or 

other materials can be released from the NTS unless the amount of radiological contamination on such items is 

less than the authorized limits specified in the NV/YMP Radiological Control Manual (Table 8-2) (U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Operations Office [NNSA/NV], 2004) as 

specified in DOE O 5400.5. Items proposed for unrestricted release must be surveyed to document compliance 

with the release criteria. 

In 2000, DOE placed a moratorium on the release of scrap material from radiological areas for recycling. This 

moratorium is still in effect. Government vehicles and equipment are routinely released or excessed when they 

are no longer needed by NTS projects or if they are required to be replaced. They are permitted to be released 

based on a combination of process knowledge and direct and indirect surveys such that the release criteria of 

Table 8-2 are met. 

Some building structures and items on the NTS house uncontained radioactive materials. NSTec has no plans to 

release such structures and items off the NTS. If, in the future, there are plans to do so, approval of alternate 

authorized limits specific for this release would be requested from DOE in accordance with DOE O 5400.5. No 

items with residual radioactivity in excess of the default authorized limits specified in Table 8-2 were released 

from the NTS in 2008. The contribution to public dose from released items from the NTS was therefore 

negligible in 2008. 

Table 8-2. Allowable total residual surface contamination for property released off NTS 

 Residual Surface Contamination (dpm/100 cm2

)

(a)

Radionuclide Removable

Average(b)

(Fixed & 

Removable) 

Maximum 

Allowable(c) (Fixed 

& Removable) 

Transuranics, 125I, 129I, 226Ra, 227Ac, 228Ra, 228Th, 230Th, 231Pa 20 100 300 

Th-natural, 90Sr, 126I, 131I, 133I, 223Ra, 224Ra, 232U, 232Th 200 1,000 3,000 

U-natural, 235U, 238U and associated decay products, alpha emitters 1,000 5,000 15,000 

Beta-gamma emitters (radionuclides with decay modes other than alpha 

emission or spontaneous fission) except 90Sr and others noted above 

1,000 5,000 15,000 

(a) Disintegrations per minute per 100 square centimeters Source: NNSA/NV (2004) 

 (b) Averaged over an area of not more than 1 square meter 

 (c) Applicable to an area of not more than 100 cm2

8.1.7 Total Offsite Dose to the Public from all Pathways 

DOE O 5400.5 establishes a radiation dose limit to a member of the general public from all possible pathways as 

a result of DOE facility operations. This limit is 100 mrem/yr (1 mSv/yr) over and above background radiation 

and includes the air transport pathway, ingestion pathway, and direct exposure pathway. For 2008, the only 

possible pathways of public exposure to man-made radionuclides from current or past NTS activities included the 

air transport pathway and the ingestion of game animals. The doses from these pathways are combined below to 

present an estimate of the total 2008 dose to the maximally exposed individual (MEI) (see Glossary, Appendix B) 

residing off site. 

The dose estimate for an offsite MEI from radionuclides in air is expected to be no greater than 1.9 mrem/yr 

(0.019 mSv) (see Section 3.1.5). If the offsite MEI is assumed to eat 20 cottontail rabbits from near the Schooner 

Crater, this individual may receive an estimated additional 0.47 mrem/yr (0.0047 mSv/yr) dose (see Table 8 -1). 

The total CEDE to this hypothetical MEI would be 2.37 mrem/yr (0.024 mSv/yr) (Table 8-3). The total dose of 

2.37 mrem/yr is 2.37 percent of the DOE limit of 100 mrem/yr and about 0.6 percent of the total dose the MEI 

receives from natural background radiation (340 mrem/yr) (Figure 8-2). 
Radiological Dose Assessment

8-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Table 8-3. Estimated radiological dose to a hypothetical maximally exposed member of the general 

public from 2008 NTS operations 

 Dose to MEI 

Pathway (mrem/yr) (mSv/yr) 

Percent of DOE 

100-mrem/yr Limit 

Air (a) 1.9 0.019 1.9 

Water (b) 0 0 0 

Wildlife (c) 0.47 0.0047 0.47 

Property Containing Radioactive Material (d) 0 0 0 

Direct (e) 0 0 0 

All Pathways 2.37 0.024 2.37 

(a) Based on maximum observed annual average concentrations at compliance stations on the NTS, 2008 (Section 3.1.5) 

(b) Based on all offsite groundwater sampling in 2008 (Sections 4.1 and 5.2) 

(c) Assumes that the MEI consumes 20 cottontail rabbits from near the Schooner Crater (Table 8-1) 

(d) Based on 2008 property release tracking (Section 8.1.6) 

(e) Based on 2008 gamma radiation monitoring data (Section 5.0) 

 

Natural background radiation consists of cosmic radiation, terrestrial radiation, radiation from radionuclides 

within the composition of the human body (primarily potassium-40), and radiation from the inhalation of 

naturally occurring radon and its progeny. The cosmic and terrestrial components of background radiation shown 

in Figure 8-2 were estimated from the annual mean radiation exposure rate measured with a pressurized ion 

chamber (PIC) at Indian Springs by the CEMP (98 milliroentgens per year [mR/yr], see Table 6-4 in Section 6.0). 

The radiation exposure in air measured by the PIC in units of mR/yr is approximately equivalent to the unit of 

mrem/yr for tissue. The portion of the background dose from the internally deposited, naturally occurring 

radionuclides, and from the inhalation of radon and its daughters shown in Figure 8-2 were estimated at 

40 mrem/yr and 200 mrem/yr, respectively, using the approximations by the National Council on Radiation 

Protection (NCRP) (NCRP, 1996). 

Figure 8-2. Comparison of radiation dose to the MEI from the NTS and natural background (percent of total) 

28.8%

11.8%

58.8%

0.7%

Dose from cosmic and

terrestrial radiation at 

Indian Springs, 

98 mrem/yr

Dose from natural

radionuclides in the body,

40 mrem/yr

Dose from inhalation of

decay products from

natural radon,

200 mrem/yr

Dose from NTS emissions 

to air and consumption 

of wildlife, 

2.37 mrem/yr
Radiological Dose Assessment

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 8-7

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Year

person-rem/yr

8.1.8 Collective Population Dose 

The collective population dose to residents within 80 km (50 mi) of the NTS emission sources was not estimated 

in 2008 because this assessment depends upon CAP88-PC estimations, which were not calculated. The collective 

population dose has been below 0.6 person-rem/yr for the period 1992 to 2004 (Figure 8-3). The DOE approved 

the discontinuance of reporting collective population dose because it is so low for the NTS. The DOE 

recommended, however, that the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration 

Nevada Site Office should consider reporting it once again if ever it exceeds 1.0 person-rem/yr (DOE, 2004a). 

Figure 8-3. Collective population dose within 80 km of NTS emission sources from 1992 to 2004 

8.2 Dose to Aquatic and Terrestrial Biota 

DOE O 450.1A requires DOE facilities to evaluate the potential impacts of radiation exposure to biota in the 

vicinity of DOE activities. To assist in such an evaluation, DOE’s Biota Dose Assessment Committee developed 

DOE-STD-1153-2002. This standard established the following radiological dose limits for plants and animals. 

Dose rates equal to or less than these are expected to have no direct, observable effect on plant or animal 

reproduction: 

• 1 rad/d (0.01 grays per day [Gy/d]) for aquatic animals 

• 1 rad/d (0.01 Gy/d) for terrestrial plants 

• 0.1 rad/d (1 milligrays per day) for terrestrial animals 

DOE-STD-1153-2002 also provides concentration values for radionuclides in soil, water, and sediment that are to 

be used as a guide for determining if biota are potentially receiving radiation doses that exceed the limits. These 

concentrations are called the Biota Concentration Guide (BCG) values. They are defined as the minimum 

concentration of a radionuclide that would cause dose limits to be exceeded using very conservative uptake and 

exposure assumptions. 

NSTec biologists utilize the graded approach described in DOE-STD-1153-2002. The approach is a three-step 

process consisting of a data assembly step, a general screening step, and an analysis step. The analysis step 

consists of site-specific screening, site-specific analysis, and site-specific biota dose assessment. The following 

information is required by the graded approach: 
Radiological Dose Assessment

8-8 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

• Identification of terrestrial and aquatic habitats on the NTS that have radionuclides in soil, water, or sediment 

• Identification of terrestrial and aquatic biota on the NTS that occur in contaminated habitats and are at risk of 

exposure 

• Measured or calculated radionuclide concentrations in soil, water, and sediment in contaminated habitats on 

the NTS that can be compared to BCG values to determine the potential for exceeding biota dose limits 

• Measured radionuclide concentrations in NTS biota, soil, water, and sediment in contaminated habitats on the 

NTS to estimate site-specific dose to biota 

A comprehensive biota dose assessment for the NTS using the graded approach was reported in the Nevada Test 

Site Environmental Report 2003 (Bechtel Nevada, 2004a). This dose assessment demonstrated that the potential 

radiological dose to biota on the NTS was not likely to exceed dose limits. No data exist to suggest that NTS 

surface contamination conditions have changed; therefore, the terrestrial biota dose evaluation conclusion remains 

the same for 2008. 

8.2.1 2008 Site-Specific Biota Dose Assessment 

The site-specific biota dose assessment phase of the graded approach centers on the actual collection and analysis 

of biota. To obtain a predicted dose to biota at the sites sampled near Schooner Crater in 2008, the RESRADBIOTA, Version 1.21 computer model (DOE, 2004b) was used. Input to the model included the average concentrations of radionuclides in soil, as estimated from decay corrected radionuclide inventories (McArthur, 1991), 

and the maximum measured concentrations in animals and plants sampled from the monitoring site (see Tables 

7-3 and 7-4). Internal dose is calculated using measured concentrations in biota tissue, and external dose is 

predicted from the average soil concentrations. 

Dose to biota near the Schooner Crater in 2008 was estimated to be 0.01 rad/d for plants and 0.002 rad/d for 

cottontail rabbits (Table 8-4). External dose accounted for about 95 percent of the total dose to rabbits, with 

europium (Eu) isotopes and 60Co dominating. Both Eu and 60Co are activation products in the soil from nuclear 

weapons testing. External dose only accounted for about 27 percent of the total dose to plants due to relatively 

high concentrations of plutonium, 241Am, and 3

H in the plant tissue. The total estimated dose rates are 2 percent 

or less than dose limits for terrestrial plants and animals. 

 Table 8-4. Site-specific dose assessment for terrestrial plants and animals sampled in 2008 

 Estimated Radiological Dose (rad/d) 

 To Plants(a) To Animals(a)

Location Internal External Total Internal External Total 

Schooner Crater 0.008 0.003 0.01 0.0001 0.002 0.002 

DOE Dose Limit: 1 0.1 

 (a) For information on plants and animals sampled, see Section 7.0 

8.2.2 Environmental Impact 

Radionuclides in the environment from past or present NTS activities do not contribute significant dose to the 

public or biota. The estimated worst case dose to the MEI for 2008 was only 2.37 percent of the limits set to 

protect human health. Dose to biota at the NTS sites monitored during 2008 were 2 percent, or less, than the dose 

limits set to protect plant and animal populations. Based on the low potential doses from NTS radionuclides, 

impacts from those radionuclides are expected to be negligible. 
Waste Management and Environmental Restoration

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 9-1 

9.0 Waste Management and Environmental Restoration 

Several federal and state regulations govern the safe management, storage, and disposal of radioactive, hazardous, 

and solid wastes generated or received on the Nevada Test Site (NTS) for the purpose of protecting the environment and the public (see Section 2.4). This section describes both the waste management and environmental 

restoration operations conducted under the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration 

Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) Environmental Management Program and summarizes the activities performed 

in 2008 to meet all environmental/public safety regulations. The goals of the program are shown below. The 

compliance measures and actions tracked and taken to meet the program goals are also listed. 

9.1 Radioactive Waste Management 

DOE Order DOE O 435.1, “Radioactive Waste Management,” requires that DOE radioactive waste management 

activities be systematically planned, documented, executed, and evaluated. Radioactive waste is managed to 

protect the public, the environment, and workers from exposure to radiation from radioactive materials and to 

comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations; Executive Orders; and DOE directives. 

The major tasks within Radioactive Waste Management include: 

• Verifying that NTS waste acceptance criteria are met for waste received 

• Characterization of LLW and LLMW that has been generated by DOE projects within the State of Nevada 

• Disposal of LLW and LLMW at the Radioactive Waste Management Complex (RWMC), which consists of 

the Area 3 Radioactive Waste Management Site (RWMS) and the Area 5 RWMS (the Area 3 RWMS is 

currently not being utilized but is being maintained for future use, as needed) 

• Characterization, visual examination, and repackaging of legacy TRU waste at the Waste Examination 

Facility (WEF) at the RWMC 

• Loading of legacy TRU waste at the Area 5 RWMS for shipment to either the WIPP or INL 

Waste Management and 

Environmental Restoration Goals Compliance Measures/Actions 

Manage and safely dispose of the following wastes 

generated by NNSA/NSO, other U.S. Department of 

Energy (DOE), and U.S. Department of Defense 

(DoD) operations: 

 Low-level radioactive waste (LLW) 

 Low-level radioactive mixed waste (LLMW) 

 Hazardous waste (HW) 

Continue to characterize, inspect, repackage, load, and 

ship transuranic (TRU) wastes stored on an interim 

basis at the NTS to either the Waste Isolation Pilot 

Plant (WIPP) in Carlsbad, New Mexico, or to the 

Idaho National Laboratory (INL). 

Characterize and remediate historic sites contaminated 

by NNSA/NSO testing activities. 

Manage and safely dispose of solid/sanitary wastes 

generated by NNSA/NSO. 

Completion/maintenance of documents required for a 

Class II Non-reactor Nuclear Facility established for 

waste disposal 

Acceptance criteria for radioactive wastes received for 

disposal 

Volume of disposed LLW 

Volume of stored nonradioactive HW 

Volume of disposed LLMW 

Weight of approved explosive ordnance wastes 

detonated 

Vadose zone monitoring 

Groundwater monitoring 

Site characterization, remediation, closure, and postclosure site monitoring 

Weight and volume of solid waste disposed 
Waste Management and Environmental Restoration

9-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

9.1.1 Maintenance of Key Documents 

Table 9-1 lists the key documents that must be current and in place for RWMS disposal operations to occur. In 

2008, all of these key documents were maintained, one was revised, and one new document was prepared. 

Table 9-1. Key documents required for Area 3 RWMS and Area 5 RWMS operations 

Disposal Authorization Statement 

 Disposal Authorization Statement for Area 5 RWMS, December 2000 

 Disposal Authorization Statement for Area 3 RWMS, October 1999 

Performance Assessment 

 Addendum 2 to Performance Assessment for Area 5 RWMS, Revision 2.1, September 2005 

 Performance Assessment/Composite Analysis for Area 3 RWMS, Revision 2.1, October 2000 

Composite Analysis 

 Composite Analysis for Area 5 RWMS, September 2001 

 Performance Assessment/Composite Analysis for Area 3 RWMS, Revision 2.1, October 2000 

NTS Waste Acceptance Criteria 

 NTS Waste Acceptance Criteria, Revision 7, June 2008 

Integrated Closure and Monitoring Plan 

 

Closure Plan for the Area 3 RWMS at the NTS, September 2007 

Closure Plan for the Area 5 RWMS at the NTS, September 2008 

Auditable Safety Analysis 

 Documented Safety Analysis for the NTS Area 5 RWMC, Revision 3, November 2007 

 Documented Safety Analysis for the NTS Area 3 RWMS, Revision 2, March 2006 

 Technical Safety Requirements for the Area 5 RWMC LLW Activities, Revision 5, October 2007 

 Technical Safety Requirements for the Area 5 RWMC TRU Waste Activities, Revision 5, October 2007 

 

Technical Safety Requirements for the Area 3 RWMS, Revision 2, March 2006 

Authorization Agreement for Area 5 RWMC, January 2007 

9.1.2 Characterization of LLW and LLMW 

Waste Generator Services (WGS) characterizes LLW and LLMW generated by the DOE primarily at the NTS but 

also at selected offsite DOE locations. Characterization is performed utilizing either knowledge of the generating 

process or sampling and analysis. Following the characterization of a waste stream, a Waste Profile is completed 

for approval by an appropriate disposal facility. The Waste Profile delineates the pedigree of the waste, including 

but not limited to a description of the waste generating process, physical and chemical characteristics, radioactive 

isotopes and their quantities, and detailed packaging information. WGS then packs and ships approved waste 

streams in accordance with U.S. Department of Transportation requirements to the Area 5 RWMS or to an offsite 

treatment, storage, or disposal facility. 

In 2008, LLW and LLMW were characterized by WGS for the following general waste stream categories: 

• Lead Solids • Compactable Trash 

• Sealed Sources • Contaminated Soils 

• Miscellaneous Debris • Contaminated Liquids 

• Depleted Uranium • Hazardous Soils 

• Carbon flecks • Contaminated Sludges 

• Contaminated Asbestos Waste • Contaminated Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) Waste 
Waste Management and Environmental Restoration

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 9-3 

9.1.3 Disposal of LLW and LLMW 

The RWMC, which includes the Area 3 and Area 5 RWMSs, operates as a Category II Non-reactor Nuclear 

Facility. The RWMC is designed and operated to perform three functions: 

• Dispose of LLW and LLMW from NNSA/NSO activities performed on and off the NTS and from offsite 

generators located in the State of Nevada. 

• Dispose of DOE LLW and LLMW from around the DOE Complex, primarily from the cleanup of sites 

associated with the manufacture of weapons components. 

• Dispose of LLMW from around the DOE Complex. 

All generators of waste streams must demonstrate eligibility to ship waste to the NTS for disposal, submit profiles 

characterizing specific waste streams, meet the NTS Radioactive Waste Acceptance Criteria, and receive 

programmatic approval from NNSA/NSO. The NNSA/NSO assesses and predicts the long-term performance of 

LLW disposal sites by conducting a Performance Assessment (PA) and a Composite Analysis (CA). A PA is a 

systematic analysis of the potential risks posed by a waste disposal site to the public and to the environment. A 

CA is an assessment of the risks posed by all wastes disposed in a LLW disposal site and by all other sources of 

residual contamination that may interact with the disposal site. The RWMC receives LLW generated within the 

DOE complex from numerous DOE sites across the United States, LLW from DoD sites that carry a national 

security classification, and LLMW generated within the DOE complex for disposal. 

The Area 5 RWMS includes 81 hectares (ha) (200 acres [ac]) of existing and proposed disposal cells for burial of 

both LLW and LLMW, and approximately 202 ha (500 ac) of land available for future radioactive disposal cells. 

Waste disposal at the Area 5 RWMS has occurred in a 37 ha (92 ac) portion of the site since the early 1960s. This 

part of the Area 5 RWMS (commonly referred to as the “92-Acre Area”) consists of 31 disposal cells (pits and 

trenches) and 13 Greater Confinement Disposal (GCD) boreholes (listed below). This site is used for disposal of 

waste in drums, soft sided containers, large cargo containers, and boxes. The 92-Acre Area is expected to be 

filled and closed by 2011, and new cells extending to the north and west are expected to close after 2027. LLW 

and LLMW disposal services are expected to continue at the Area 5 RWMS as long as the DOE complex requires 

the disposal of wastes from the weapons program. Onsite disposal services for LLMW generated on and off site 

will continue through November 2010 or until a total volume of 20,000 cubic meters is received, whichever 

occurs first. 

31 Disposal Cells at Area 5 RWMS: 13 GCD Boreholes at Area 5 RWMS:

6 active that receive standard LLW 4 inactive (open but have not received waste) 

1 active and permitted to receive asbestiform LLW (P06UA) 4 closed containing TRU waste 

1 active and permitted to receive LLMW (P03U) 5 closed containing LLW 

11 operationally closed containing LLW 

11 cells operationally closed containing LLW 

and LLMW (Corrective Action Unit [CAU] 111) 

1 operationally closed containing asbestiform LLW (P07U) 

Disposal operations at the Area 3 RWMS began in the late 1960s. The Area 3 RWMS consists of seven subsidence craters configured into five disposal cells. Each subsidence crater was created by an underground 

weapons test. Until July 1, 2006, when the site was placed into inactive status, the site was used for disposal of 

bulk LLW waste, such as soils or debris, and waste in large cargo containers. The site consists of the following 

seven craters: 

 3 Disposal Cells (Inactive Status): 2 Closed Cells: 2 Undeveloped Cells: 

 U-3ah/at U-3ax/bl (CAU 110) U-3az 

 U-3bh U-3bg 
Waste Management and Environmental Restoration

9-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

In calendar year 2008, the Area 5 RWMS received shipments containing a total of 37,722 cubic meters (m3) 

(1,332,130 cubic feet [ft3

]) of radioactive wastes for disposal (Table 9-2). The majority of disposed LLW and LLMW 

were received from offsite generators. Only 1,160 m3

 (40,952 ft3) of the LLW disposed in 2008 were generated on 

site. Fiscal year 2008 (October 1–September 30) volumes of waste shipments are reported in NNSA/NSO (2009). 

Table 9-2. Radioactive waste received and disposed at the Area 5 RWMS 

2008 Quantities Received and Disposed 

Waste Type Disposal Cell(s) 

Permitted Limit 

(m3

) m3

 (ft3) (a) tons (b)

LLW P10C, P12C, P13U, 

P14U, P15U, P16C 

NA(c) 36,368 (1,284,319) NA 

LLMW (d) P03U 20,000 1,312 (46,330) 1,880.5 

Asbestiform LLW P06UA NA 41.9 (1,481) 5.79 

2008 Totals 37,722 (1,332,130) 1,886.5 

(a) LLW disposal is regulated by DOE and totals reported are based on volume (m3). 

(b) Fees paid to Nevada for HW generated at NTS and LLMW wastes received for disposal are based on weight (tons). 

(c) Not applicable. 

(d) LLMW contains a hazardous component that is regulated by Nevada (see Section 9.2.1). 

9.1.4 TRU Waste Operations 

The TRU-Pad/Transuranic Pad Cover Building (TPCB) at the Area 5 RWMC is a Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act (RCRA) Part B interim status facility designed for the safe storage of TRU waste generated by 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and other small-quantity sites. The TPCB accepts TRU waste from 

NTS generators including the Joint Actinide Shock Physics Experimental Research facility. The TPCB stores 

TRU waste until it is characterized at the WEF at the Area 5 RWMC. Once characterized, the TRU waste is 

loaded at the mobile loading unit for shipment either to the WIPP at Carlsbad, New Mexico, for disposal or to an 

interim site for further characterization. Current agreements between NNSA/NSO and WIPP plan for TRU waste 

shipments to be completed by July 31, 2009. In 2008, TRU waste stored at the TPCB continued to be 

characterized, visually inspected, repackaged, and prepared for shipment. 

9.1.5 Assessments 

In 2008, assessments were conducted at the RWMC in accordance with National Security Technologies, LLC 

(NSTec), procedures. Schedules for management self-assessments (MSAs) are developed for the RWMC. In 

addition to the MSAs performed internally at the RWMC, assessments were performed periodically by other 

NSTec organizations, NNSA/NSO, and the Defense Nuclear Facilities Safety Board. The results of each 

assessment and any required corrective action(s) were logged for NNSA/NSO in the companywide issues tracking 

system known as CaWeb. 

9.1.6 Groundwater Monitoring for Mixed Waste Disposal Unit (Pit P03U) 

P03U is operated according to RCRA Interim Status standards for the disposal of mixed LLW. Title 40 Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 265 (Groundwater Monitoring) Subpart F (40 CFR 265.92) requires groundwater 

monitoring to verify the performance of P03U to protect groundwater from buried radioactive wastes. Wells 

UE5 PW-1, UE5 PW-2, and UE5 PW-3 are monitored for this purpose; these wells comprise 3 of the 14 onsite 

monitoring wells sampled periodically for radionuclide analyses of groundwater (see Section 4.1.7). Investigation 

levels (ILs) for five indicators of groundwater contamination (Table 9-3) were established by NNSA/NSO and the 

Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) for these three wells in 1998. Further groundwater 

analyses will be required if the results from all replicate samples exceed a parameter’s IL. None of the samples 

collected semi-annually from the wells had contaminant levels above their ILs (Table 9-3). General water 

chemistry parameters are also monitored. All sample analysis results are presented in NSTec (2009b). Table 4-4 

of Section 4.1.7 presents the tritium results for UE5 PW-1, UE5 PW-2, and UE5 PW-3. 
Waste Management and Environmental Restoration

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 9-5 

Table 9-3. Results of groundwater monitoring of UE5 PW-1, UE5 PW-2, and UE5 PW-3 in 2008 

Parameter Investigation Level (IL) Sample Levels 

pH < 7.6 or > 9.2 S.U.(a) 8.00 to 8.17 S.U.

Specific conductance (SC) 0.440 mmhos/cm(b) 0.360 to 0.386 mmhos/cm

Total organic carbon (TOC) 1 mg/L(c) <0.5 to 0.65 mg/L

Total organic halides (TOX) 50 μg/L(d) < 5.2 to 6.4 μg/L

Tritium (3H) 2,000 pCi/L(e) -10.7 to 12.1 pCi/L

(a) S.U. = standard unit(s) (for measuring pH) (b) mmhos/cm = millimhos per centimeter Source: NSTec (2009b)

(c) mg/L = milligrams per liter (d) μg/L = microgram(s) per liter (e) pCi/L = picocuries per liter 

9.1.7 Vadose Zone Monitoring 

Monitoring of the vadose zone (unsaturated zone above the water table) is conducted at the RWMC to 

demonstrate (1) that the PA assumptions at the RWMSs are valid regarding the hydrologic conceptual models 

used, including soil water contents, and upward and downward flux rates and (2) that there is negligible 

infiltration of precipitation into zones of buried waste at the RWMSs. Vadose zone monitoring (VZM) offers 

many advantages over groundwater monitoring, including detecting potential problems long before groundwater 

resources would be impacted, allowing corrective actions to be made early, and being less expensive than 

groundwater monitoring. 

The components of the VZM program include (1) the Drainage Lysimeter Facility northwest of the U-3ax/bl, (2) 

the Area 5 Weighing Lysimeter Facility southwest of the Area 5 RWMS, (3) automated monitoring systems in the 

operational covers on Pits P03U, P04U, and P05U; the floor of P05U underneath the waste; and the vegetated 

closure cover on U-3ax/bl, (4) tritium monitoring via soil gas sampling at Well GCD-05U (one of the 13 GCD 

boreholes at the Area 5 RWMS), and (5) radon flux monitoring on the U-3ax/bl cover at the Area 3 RWMS and 

on the P01U cover at the Area 5 RWMS. Descriptions of these components and the results of monitoring in 2008 

can be found in the Nevada Test Site 2008 Waste Management Monitoring Report Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive 

Waste Management Sites (NSTec, 2009c). All VZM conducted in 2008 continued to demonstrate that there is 

negligible infiltration of precipitation into zones of buried waste at the RWMC and that the perform-ance criteria 

of the waste disposal cells are being met to prevent contamination of groundwater and the environment. 

9.2 Hazardous Waste Management 

Hazardous wastes regulated under RCRA are generated at the NTS from a broad range of activities including 

onsite laboratories, paint shops, vehicle maintenance, communications and photo operations, and environmental 

restoration of historic contaminated sites (see Section 9.3). The RCRA Part B Permit (NEV HW0021) regulates 

the operation of three HW facilities on the NTS: P03U at the Area 5 RWMS, the Hazardous Waste Storage Unit 

(HWSU) in Area 5, and the Explosive Ordnance Disposal Unit (EODU) in Area 11. Quarterly reports are 

submitted to the State of Nevada that document the weight of HW received each quarter at each of these HW units 

for management (i.e., for disposal, temporary storage, or detonation). Quarterly fees are paid to the State based on 

the weights of HW received. Also, Part II.K.2 of the permit requires preparation of a U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency Biennial Hazardous Waste Report of all hazardous waste volumes generated at the NTS and at 

the North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF) during a year. This report is prepared for odd-numbered years only. No 

report, therefore, was prepared for 2008. 

9.2.1 Pit P03U 

Pit P03U began receiving LLMW from offsite DOE facilities in April 2006. The RCRA Part B Permit, 

NEV HW002, authorizes the disposal of LLMW received from DOE offsite facilities into P03U through 

November 2010 or until a total of 20,000 m3

 is received, whichever occurs first. P03U received a total of 1,880.5 

tons (1,312 m3

) in 2008 (Table 9-4). 
Waste Management and Environmental Restoration

9-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

9.2.2 HWSU and Waste Accumulation Areas 

The HWSU is a pre-fabricated, rigid-steel-framed, roofed shelter that is permitted to store a maximum of 

61,600 liters (16,280 gallons) of approved waste at a time. HW generated at NSTec environmental restoration 

sites off the NTS (e.g., at the Tonopah Test Range [TTR]) or generated at the NLVF are direct-shipped to 

approved disposal facilities. HW generated on the NTS is also direct-shipped if the sites generate bulk, nonpackaged HW that is not accepted at the HWSU for storage. HW would also be direct-shipped in the unlikely 

case when the waste volume capacity of the HWSU is approaching its permitted limits. Satellite Accumulation 

Areas (SAAs) and 90-day Hazardous Waste Accumulation Areas (HWAAs) are used at the NTS for the 

temporary storage of HW prior to direct shipment off site or to the HWSU. 

In 2008, 8.96 tons of HW was received for storage at the HWSU (Table 9-4). In addition, the HWSU received 

and stored drums of lamp ballasts and debris contaminated with PCBs totaling 0.98 tons, and eight drums totaling 

0.82 tons of PCB material were shipped off site (see Section 10.1). In 2008, no HW was direct-shipped from 

NTS SAAs nor from HWAAs (Table 9-4). No storage limits were exceeded. Quarterly reports of applicable 

waste quantities were submitted on time to NDEP. 

9.2.3 EODU 

Conventional explosive wastes are generated at the NTS from tunnel operations, the NTS firing range, the 

resident national laboratories, and other activities. The permit allows NNSA/NSO to treat explosive ordnance 

wastes at the EODU by open detonation of no more than 45.4 kilograms (100 pounds) of approved waste at a 

time, not to exceed one detonation event per hour. In 2008, no explosive ordnance were detonated (Table 9-4). 

Table 9-4. Hazardous waste managed at the NTS in 2008 

Permitted Unit Total Waste Managed (tons) (a)

P03U 1,880.5 

HWSU 8.96 

HWSU – PCB Waste 0.98 

SAAs and HWAAs 0 (b) 

EODU 0 

(a) Fees paid to Nevada for hazardous wastes generated at NTS and LLMW wastes received for 

disposal are based on weight (tons). 

(b) Tons shipped directly off site from SAAs and/or HWAAs. 

9.3 Underground Storage Tank (UST) Management 

NNSA/NSO operates one deferred UST and three excluded USTs at the Device Assembly Facility. NNSA/NSO 

also maintains a fully regulated UST at the Area 6 helicopter pad, which is not in service. No new USTs were 

installed or closed in 2008. In 2008, NDEP did not conduct any inspections of these USTs. 

9.4 Environmental Restoration - Remediation of Historic Contaminated 

Sites 

In April 1996, the DOE, DoD, and the State of Nevada entered into a Federal Facility Agreement and Consent 

Order (FFACO) to address the environmental restoration of historic contaminated sites at the NTS, parts of TTR, 

parts of the Nellis Air Force Range (now known as the Nevada Test and Training Range), the Central Nevada 

Test Area, and the Project Shoal Area. These sites, known as Corrective Action Sites (CASs), may be contaminated with both radioactive and nonradioactive wastes. Appendix VI of the FFACO, as amended (February 

2008), describes the strategy that will be employed to plan, implement, and complete environmental corrective 

actions at facilities where nuclear-related operations were conducted. Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture conducted 

most site characterization activities, while the NTS Management and Operating contractor (NSTec) conducted site 

restoration, soil remediation, and some facility decontamination and decommissioning activities in 2008. 
Waste Management and Environmental Restoration

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 9-7 

9.4.1 Corrective Actions 

The corrective action strategy is based on four steps: (1) identifying the CASs, (2) grouping the CASs into CAUs, 

(3) prioritizing the CAUs for funding and work, and (4) implementing the corrective action investigations (CAIs) 

and/or corrective actions, as applicable. CASs are broadly organized into the following four categories based on 

the source of contamination: 

• Industrial Sites – CASs located on the NTS and TTR where activities were conducted that supported nuclear 

testing activities 

• Underground Test Area (UGTA) Sites – CASs located where underground nuclear tests have resulted or 

might result in local or regional impacts to groundwater resources 

• Soils Sites – CASs where tests have resulted in extensive surface and/or shallow subsurface contamination 

• Nevada Off-Sites – Additional CASs associated with underground nuclear testing at the Project Shoal Area 

and the Central Nevada Test Area, located in northern and central Nevada, respectively 

Identifying CASs – The first step in the strategy is to identify CASs potentially requiring CAIs and/or corrective 

actions. As CASs are identified, a literature search may be completed and each CAS is verified on aerial 

photographs or in the field to confirm its location and site condition. A data repository has been created 

containing or referencing all information currently available for each CAS. 

Grouping CASs into CAUs – A CAU may have several CASs or only one. In addition to the four categories 

noted above, criteria for grouping CASs into CAUs include the following: 

• Potential source of contamination 

• Agency responsible for cleanup of the CAS 

• Function of the CAS and the nature of the contamination 

• Geographic proximity of CASs to one another 

• Potential for investigation or cleanup of grouped CASs to be accomplished within a similar time frame 

Implementing CAIs and/or Corrective Actions – When a CAU is assigned priority and funding, environmental 

restoration activities follow a formal work process beginning with a Data Quality Objectives (DQO) meeting with 

NNSA/NSO, NDEP, and contractors. If existing information about the nature and extent of contamination at the 

CASs is insufficient to evaluate and select preferred corrective actions, a CAI will be conducted. A Corrective 

Action Investigation Plan (CAIP) is prepared that provides a conceptual model of the site and defines how the site 

is to be characterized in conformance with the DQO process. 

Site characterization is performed and then documented in a Corrective Action Decision Document (CADD). The 

CADD provides the information that either confirms or modifies the preliminary conceptual model. If suitable 

information is available to make a decision, a remedial action alternative is selected that best provides site closure. 

In some instances, additional site characterization may be required before the CADD can be prepared. 

If a site requires a closure action, a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) is prepared that will implement the recommended remedial action/closure alternative. A CAP is composed of the following elements for site closure: a detailed 

scope of work, target field schedule, quality control measures, waste management strategy, design specifications/ 

drawings (when applicable), verification sampling strategies (for clean closures), and other information necessary 

for satisfying the specific closure requirements. Some sites also require a Post-Closure Plan as the site or parts of 

the site are closed in place. Information on field inspections, types of monitoring, monitoring frequency, and 

maintenance/repairs are provided in an Annual Post-Closure Monitoring Report. 

Once the closure is completed, a Closure Report (CR) is prepared. The CR provides information on the scope of 

work performed, results of verification sampling, as-built drawings, waste management, and post-closure requirements for closed-in-place sites, etc. Some sites are closed under the Streamlined Approach for Environmental 

Restoration (SAFER) process identified in the FFACO. These sites typically have enough information available 
Waste Management and Environmental Restoration

9-8 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

to remediate the site within a shorter duration. For such sites, a SAFER plan is prepared that will implement the 

plan for site closure. After closure, a SAFER CR is prepared that documents the scope of work performed. 

NDEP is a participant throughout the remediation process, and the Community Advisory Board (CAB) is kept 

informed of the progress made. The CAB’s comments are strongly considered before final prioritization of 

corrective actions. A public participation working group of representatives from NNSA/NSO, the State of 

Nevada, and the CAB meets twice a year to discuss quarterly progress, upcoming environmental restoration 

activities, priority-setting activities established under the FFACO, and the level of public involvement required. 

Table 9-5 lists the CAUs for which some step of the site remediation process was completed in calendar year 

2008. All 2008 milestones were met. A total of 70 CASs were closed, either under the SAFER process or the 

complex closure process. 

Table 9-5. Environmental restoration activities conducted in 2008 

CAU CAU Description 

Number 

of CASs Milestone Due Date 

Date 

Submitted 

Date NDEP 

Approved 

Defense Threat Reduction Agency/DOE Industrial Sites(a)

481 Area 12 T-Tunnel Conditional 

Release Storage Yard 

1 Closure Report to State 12/31/08 11/28/08 12/29/08 

DOE Industrial Sites – Defense Project 

556 Dry Wells and Surface Release 

Points 

4 CADD/CR to State 9/30/08 9/10/08 9/17/08 

557 Spills and Tank Sites 4 CAIP to State 7/31/08 7/3/08 7/14/08 

560 Septic Systems 7 CAIP to State 5/31/08 5/6/08 5/12/08 

563 Septic Systems 4 CADD to State 3/31/08 2/29/08 3/7/08 

DOE Industrial Sites – Environmental Restoration Project (ERP)

121 Storage Tanks and Miscellaneous 

Sites 

3 Closure Report to State 9/30/08 9/22/08 9/29/08 

124 Storage Tanks 5 Closure Report to State 2/29/08 1/22/08 1/30/08 

127 Areas 25 and 26 Storage Tanks 12 Closure Report to State 2/29/08 2/21/08 3/6/08 

130 Storage Tanks 7 SAFER Plan to State 8/31/08 6/18/08 7/3/08 

134 Aboveground Storage Tanks 4 SAFER Plan to State 5/31/08 5/29/08 6/17/08 

145 Wells and Storage Holes 6 Closure Report to State 6/30/08 2/21/08 3/6/08 

151 Septic Systems and Discharge Area 8 Closure Report to State 4/30/08 4/15/08 5/1/08 

190 Contaminated Waste Sites 4 CADD/CR to State 3/17/08 3/10/08 3/27/08 

234 Mud Pits, Cellars, and Mud Spills 12 CADD/CR to State 9/30/08 5/19/08 6/2/08 

543 Liquid Disposal Units 7 Closure Report to State 1/31/08 1/22/08 1/28/08 

545 Dumps, Waste Disposal Sites, and 

Buried Radioactive Materials 

8 CADD/CR to State 9/30/08 4/10/08 4/29/08 

546 Injection Well and Surface Releases 2 CAIP to State 4/30/08 3/6/08 3/14/08 

DOE Soil Sites

107 Low Impact Soil Sites 15 SAFER Plan to State 9/30/08 9/29/08 10/28/08 

370 T-4 Atmospheric Test Site 1 CAIP to State 4/30/08 4/25/08 5/7/08 

DOE UGTA Sites

99 Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain 66 Phase I Transport 

Parameters 

3/5/08 3/5/08 4/8/08 

99 Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain 66 Phase I Hydrology 

Documentation Package 

3/5/08 3/5/08 4/8/08 

99 Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain 66 Phase I Model Approach 

Strategy 

4/4/08 4/3/08 7/30/08 
Waste Management and Environmental Restoration

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 9-9 

Table 9-5. Environmental restoration activities conducted in 2008 (continued) 

CAU CAU Description 

Number 

of CASs Milestone 

Due 

Date 

Date 

Submitted 

Date 

NDEP 

Approved 

DOE UGTA Sites (continued) 

99 Rainier Mesa/Shoshone 

Mountain 

66 Complete Well 

Development, Testing, & 

Sampling for ER-16-1 

4/16/08 4/10/08 4/23/08 

101 Central Pahute Mesa 64 Phase I Transport Model 10/1/08 9/29/08 3/11/09 

102 Western Pahute Mesa 18 Phase I Transport Model 10/1/08 9/29/08 3/11/09 

101 Central Pahute Mesa 64 CAIP Phase II to State 12/3/08 12/1/08 AP(b)

102 Western Pahute Mesa 18 CAIP Phase II to State 12/3/08 12/1/08 AP 

Nevada Off-Sites

443 Central Nevada Test Area - 

Subsurface 

3 Final CADD/CAP 

Addendum 

1/11/08 1/9/08 1/17/08 

(a) In 2008, the responsible authority for this site was transferred from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) to 

NSTec. This site is currently managed under the Environmental Restoration (ER) Project, Industrial Sites Sub-Project. 

(b) Approval pending with NDEP, as of July 29, 2009. 

9.4.2 Post-Closure Monitoring and Inspections 

The RCRA Part B Permit for the NTS prescribes quarterly or semi-annual post-closure monitoring for five of 

eight hazardous waste sites that were closed under RCRA prior to enactment of the FFACO (Table 9-6). One of 

the sites, the Area 3 U-3ax/bl Subsidence Crater (CAU 110), also requires VZM. The U-3ax/bl Subsidence Crater 

engineered cover cap is designed to limit infiltration into the disposal unit and is monitored using time-domain 

reflectometry soil water content sensors buried at various depths within the waste cover to provide water content 

profile data. The soil water content profile data are used to demonstrate whether the cover is performing as 

expected. The cover cap was also revegetated with native vegetation and is periodically monitored for 

revegetation success (see Section 13.4). 

 Table 9-6. Historic RCRA closure sites 

CAU Remediation Site Post Closure Requirements 

90 Area 2 Bitcutter Containment Semi-annual site inspection 

91 Area 3 U-3fi Injection Well Semi-annual site inspection 

92 Area 6 Decon Pond Quarterly site inspection 

93 Area 6 Steam Cleaning Effluent Ponds None 

94 Area 23 Building 650 Leachfield None 

109 Area 2 U-2bu Subsidence Crater None 

110 Area 3 U-3ax/bl Subsidence Crater Quarterly site inspection, VZM of cover 

112 Area 23 Hazardous Waste Trenches Quarterly site inspection 

Under the FFACO, the CRs for many of the closed remediation sites specify that post-closure monitoring or 

inspections be performed. In 2008, all required post-closure monitoring and inspections were conducted as 

specified by RCRA permit or by site CRs. VZM results for CAU 110 indicated that surface water is not 

migrating into buried wastes and that the cover is functioning as designed. The 44 CAUs for which physical 

inspections were conducted during the 2008 post-closure inspection period are listed in Table 9-7. Some CAUs 

originally listed have been updated and no longer require monitoring, maintenance, or inspections. This is the 

result of a risk-based evaluation between current use-restriction data and final threshold contamination limits. An 

annual monitoring report combining all RCRA closure sites was prepared and submitted to NDEP. Similarly, a 

combined annual monitoring report for non-RCRA closure sites was also prepared and submitted to NDEP. 
Waste Management and Environmental Restoration

9-10 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Table 9-7. Remediation sites inspected in 2008 

CAU Remediation Site CAU Remediation Site 

005 Landfills 357 Mud Pits and Waste Dump 

90 Area 2 Bitcutter Containment 383 Area 12 E-Tunnel Sites (formerly DTRA)(a)

91 Area 3 U-3fi Injection Well 400 Bomblet Pit and Five Points Landfill (TTR) 

92 Area 6 Decon Pond Facility 404 Roller Coaster Lagoons and Trench (TTR) 

110 Area 3 U-3ax/bl Subsidence Crater 407 Roller Coaster RadSafe Area (TTR) 

112 Area 23 Hazardous Waste Trenches 423 Area 3 Underground Discharge Point, Building 

113 Area 25 R-MAD Facility 0360 (TTR) 

115 Area 25 Test Cell A Facility 424 Area 3 Landfill Complexes (TTR) 

118 Area 27 Super Kukla Facility 426 Cactus Spring Waste Trenches (TTR) 

137 Waste Disposal Sites 427 Area 3 Septic Waste Systems 2, 6 (TTR) 

140 Waste Dumps, Burn Pits, and Storage Area 453 Area 9 UXO Landfill (TTR) 

143 Area 25 Contaminated Waste Dumps 476 Area 12 T-Tunnel Muckpile (formerly DTRA)(a)

165 Area 25 and 26 Dry Well and Washdown Areas 477 Area 12 N-Tunnel Muckpile (formerly DTRA)(a)

168 Area 25 and Area 26 Contaminated Materials and 478 Area 12 T-Tunnel Ponds (formerly DTRA) 

 Waste Dumps 482 Area 15 U15a/e Muckpiles and Ponds (formerly 

204 Storage Bunkers DTRA)(a)

254 Area 25 Reactor Maintenance, Assembly, and 487 Thunderwell Site (TTR) 

 Disassembly Decontamination Facility 528 Polychlorinated Biphenyls Contamination 

261 Area 25 Test Cell A Leachfield 529 Area 25 Contaminated Materials 

262 Area 25 Septic Systems and UDP 542 Disposal Holes 

309 Area 12 Muckpiles 551 Area 12 Muckpiles 

322 Areas 1 and 3 Release Sites and Injection Wells 552 Area 12 Muckpiles and Ponds 

333 U-3auS Disposal Site (not required until 2011) 554 Area 23 Release Sites 

339 Area 12 Fleet Operations Steam Cleaning 559 T-Tunnel Compressor/Blower Pad (formerly 

 Effluent DTRA)(a)

(a) In 2008, the responsible authority for this site was transferred from the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) to 

NSTec. This site is currently managed under the Industrial Sites ER Post Closure Monitoring program. 

9.5 Solid and Sanitary Waste Management 

9.5.1 Landfills

The NTS has three landfills for solid waste disposal that were operated by NSTec Waste Management in 2008. 

The landfills are regulated and permitted by the State of Nevada (see Table 2-11 for list of permits). No liquids, 

hazardous waste, or radioactive waste are accepted in these landfills. They include: 

• Area 6 Hydrocarbon Disposal Site – accepts hydrocarbon-contaminated wastes, such as soil and absorbents. 

• Area 9 U10c Solid Waste Disposal Site – designated for industrial waste such as construction and demolition 

debris. 

• Area 23 Solid Waste Disposal Site – accepts municipal-type wastes such as food waste and office waste. 

Regulated asbestos-containing material is also permitted in a special section. The permit allows disposal of 

no more than an average of 20 tons/day at this site. 

These landfills are designed, constructed, operated, maintained, and monitored in adherence to the requirements 

of their state-issued permits. NDEP visually inspects the landfills and checks the records on an annual basis to 

ensure compliance with the permits. 

The vadose zone is monitored at two of the permitted sanitary landfills: the Area 6 Hydrocarbon Disposal Site and 

the Area 9 U10c Solid Waste Disposal Site. VZM is performed once annually in lieu of groundwater monitoring 

to demonstrate that contaminants from the landfills are not leaching into the groundwater. VZM in 2008 

indicated that there was no soil moisture migration and, therefore, no waste leachate migration to the water table. 
Waste Management and Environmental Restoration

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 9-11 

The amount of waste disposed of in each solid waste landfill in 2008 is shown in Table 9-8. An average of 

2.75 tons/day was disposed at the Area 23 landfill, well within permit limits. State inspections of the three 

permitted landfills were conducted in April 2008. No out-of-compliance issues were noted. 

Table 9-8. Quantity of solid wastes disposed in NTS landfills in calendar year 2008 

Metric Tons (Tons) of Waste 

Area 6 Hydrocarbon 

Disposal Site 

Area 9 U10c Solid Waste 

Disposal Site 

Area 23 Solid Waste 

Disposal Site 

17.2 (19) 4,144.1 (4,569) 519.7 (573) 

9.5.2 Sewage Lagoons 

The NTS also has two state-permitted sewage lagoons that were operated by NSTec Waste Management in 2008. 

They are the Area 6 Yucca Lake and Area 23 Mercury lagoons. The operations and monitoring requirements for 

these sewage lagoons are specified by Nevada water pollution control regulations. Because of this, the discussion 

of their operations and compliance monitoring are presented in Section 4.2.3. 
Waste Management and Environmental Restoration

9-12 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
 Hazardous Materials Control and Management

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 10-1 

10.0 Hazardous Materials Control and Management 

Hazardous materials used or stored on the Nevada Test Site (NTS) are controlled and managed through the use of 

a Hazardous Substance Inventory database. All contractors and subcontractors of the U.S. Department of Energy, 

National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) utilize this database if they use or 

store hazardous materials. They are required to comply with the operational and reporting requirements of the 

Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA); the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA); the 

Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA); and the Nevada Chemical Catastrophe Act 

(see Section 2.5). Chemicals to be purchased are subject to a requisition compliance review process. 

Environmental Services (ES) personnel with National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec), reviewed each 

chemical purchase in 2008 to ensure that toxic chemicals and products were not purchased when less hazardous 

substitutes were commercially available. Requirements and responsibilities for the use and management of 

hazardous/toxic chemicals were provided in company documents and were aimed at meeting the goals shown 

below. The reports and activities prepared or performed in 2008 to document compliance with hazardous 

materials regulations are presented below. 

10.1 TSCA Program 

There are no known pieces of polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB)-containing electrical equipment (transformers, 

capacitors, or regulators) at the NTS; however, sometimes during demolition activities, old hydraulic systems are 

found to contain PCB liquids. The TSCA program consists mainly of properly characterizing, storing, and 

disposing of various PCB wastes generated through remediation activities and maintenance of fluorescent lights. 

The remediation waste is generated by NSTec and Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture at Corrective Action Sites during 

environmental restoration activities (see Section 9.4) and during maintenance activities and building decontamination and decommissioning activities performed by NSTec. These activities can generate PCB-contaminated 

fluids and bulk product waste containing PCBs. 

Waste classified as bulk product waste generated on the NTS by remediation and site operations can be disposed 

of on site in the U10c landfill with prior State of Nevada approval. PCB-containing light ballasts removed during 

normal maintenance can also go to an onsite landfill, but when remediation or upgrade activities generate several 

ballasts, these must be disposed of off site at an approved PCB disposal facility. Soil and other materials 

contaminated with PCBs must also be sent off site for disposal. 

Hazardous Materials Control 

and Management Goals Compliance Activities/Reports 

Minimize the adverse effects of improper 

use, storage, or management of 

hazardous/toxic chemicals. 

Ensure compliance with applicable 

federal and state environmental 

regulations related to hazardous 

materials. 

Use of Hazardous Substance Inventory database

Annual TSCA report 

FIFRA management assessments

Annual Nevada Combined Agency (NCA) Report 

Annual EPCRA Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) Report, Form R 

Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) Chemical 

Accident Prevention Program Annual Registration Form

Use of electronic Hazardous Materials Notification System 

(known as HAZTRAK) for tracking the movements of such 

materials 
Hazardous Materials Control and Management

10-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

During 2008, eight drums of PCB light ballasts were generated from remediation, demolition, and renovation 

activities and sent off site for disposal in one shipment. On May 19, 2009, an Annual Report was generated for 

PCB management activities during 2008. There were no TSCA inspections by outside regulators performed at the 

NTS in 2008. 

10.2 FIFRA Program 

ES personnel performed the following oversight functions to ensure FIFRA compliance: (1) screened all 

purchase requisitions for restricted-use pesticides; (2) reviewed operating procedures for handling, storing, and 

applying pesticide products; and (3) conducted facility inspections for unauthorized pesticide storage/use. On the 

NTS, pesticides are applied under the direction of a State of Nevada certified applicator. This service was 

provided by Solid Waste Operations (SWO). SWO maintained appropriate Commercial Category (Industrial) 

certifications for applying restricted-use pesticides, but only non-restricted pesticides were used. Pesticide 

applications in food service facilities are subcontracted to state-certified vendors. 

SWO did not purchase any restricted-use pesticides during 2008. Training was provided to affected personnel. 

Certifications were kept current in 2008 for Industrial Category application(s) of restricted-use pesticides. 

Facility inspections were conducted and indicated that there were no restricted-use pesticides being used or stored 

in violation of federal/state requirements. 

10.3 EPCRA Program 

EPCRA requires that federal, state, and local emergency planning authorities be provided information regarding 

the presence and storage of hazardous substances and their planned and unplanned environmental releases, 

including provisions and plans for responding to emergency situations involving hazardous materials. 

NNSA/NSO prepares and submits reports in compliance with EPCRA pursuant to Sections 302, 303, 304, 311, 

312, and 313 of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, Title III (see Section 2.5.1). 

In response to the EPCRA requirements, all chemicals that are purchased are entered into a hazardous substance 

inventory database and assigned specific hazard classifications (e.g., corrosive liquid, flammable, diesel fuel). 

Annually, this database is updated to show the maximum amounts of chemicals that were present in each building 

at the NTS, the Nonproliferation Test and Evaluation Complex (NPTEC), the North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF) 

(see Section A.1.4), and the Remote Sensing Laboratory (RSL)–Nellis (see Section A.2.3). This information is 

then used to complete the NCA Report (Table 10-1). The NCA Report provides information to the State of 

Nevada, community, and local emergency planning commissions on the maximum amount of any chemical, based 

on its hazard classification, present at any given time during the preceding year. The State Fire Marshall then 

issues permits to store hazardous chemicals on the NTS, as well as at RSL-Nellis and NLVF. The 2008 chemical 

inventory for NTS facilities was updated and submitted to the State of Nevada in the NCA Report on February 26, 

2009. No accidental or unplanned release of an extremely hazardous substance occurred on the NTS in 2008. 

The hazardous substance inventory database is also used to complete the TRI Report, Form R (Table 10-1). This 

report provides the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the State Emergency Response 

Commission information on any toxic chemical that enters the environment above a given threshold. It also 

provides these agencies with the amounts of toxic chemicals that are recycled. NNSA/NSO submitted this report 

for calendar year 2008 to EPA on June 11, 2009. Lead was the only listed toxic chemical released into the NTS 

environment in 2008 that was reportable (Table 10-2). The total amount of lead released into the air was 

4.56 pounds (lb). Lead that is recovered during site remediation activities or is excess to NTS operational needs 

(e.g., lead bricks, lead shielding) is either sent off site for recycling or is sent off site for proper disposal. Lead 

acid batteries that are recycled (see Chapter 11, Table 11-1) are exempt from inclusion in the TRI Report, Form 

R. In 2008, 1,318 lbs of lead were sent off site for disposal. 

No EPCRA inspections were performed by outside regulators at the NTS in 2008. 
 Hazardous Materials Control and Management

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 10-3 

 Table 10-1. EPCRA compliance reporting at the NTS in 2008 

Section of the Act Activity Regulated

Notification/Report Submitted per 

Applicable Requirement

Section 302–303 Planning Notification NCA Report 

Section 304 Extremely Hazardous Substance 

Release Notification

Not applicable (no releases occurred)

Section 311–312 Material Safety Data Sheet/Chemical 

Inventory 

NCA Report

Section 313 TRI Reporting TRI Report 

 Table 10-2. EPCRA reportable releases of toxic chemicals in 2008 

Toxic Chemical Source Quantity (lb)

Lead – solid Ammunition - Mercury 

Firing Range

7,606

Lead – air release Ammunition - Mercury 

Firing Range

4.56

Lead – air release Solder 0.01 

 

HAZTRAK is a tracking system that monitors hazardous materials while they are in transit. When a truck 

transporting hazardous material enters the NTS, all information concerning the load is entered into the tracking 

system. Once the delivery is complete, the information provided at the time of entry is removed from the tracking 

system. 

10.4 Nevada Chemical Catastrophe Prevention Act 

If extremely hazardous substances (EHSs) are stored in quantities that exceed threshold quantities established by 

NDEP, then NNSA/NSO submits a report notifying the State of Nevada. From June 1, 2008, through May 31, 

2009, NPTEC in Area 5 stored two EHS (nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide) in quantities that required state 

notification. A Nevada Chemical Accident Prevention Program Report was prepared regarding June 1, 2008, 

through May 31, 2009, NTS operations and was submitted to NDEP on June 11, 2009. 
Hazardous Materials Control and Management

10-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 11-1 

11.0 Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization 

The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) has 

pollution prevention and waste minimization (P2/WM) initiatives that establish a process to reduce the volume 

and toxicity of waste generated by NNSA/NSO on the Nevada Test Site (NTS) and its satellite facilities. They 

also ensure that proposed methods of treatment, storage, and disposal of waste minimize potential threats to 

human health and the environment. These initiatives address the requirements of several federal and state regulations applicable to operations on the NTS (see Section 2.7). The following information provides an overview of 

the P2/WM goals, major accomplishments during the reporting year, and a description of efforts undertaken by 

National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec), in 2008 to reduce the volume and toxicity of waste generated. 

11.1 P2/WM Goals and Components 

It is the priority of NNSA/NSO to minimize the generation, release, and disposal of pollutants to the environment by 

implementing cost-effective P2 technologies, practices, and policies. A commitment to P2 minimizes the impact on 

the environment, improves the safety of operations, improves energy efficiency, and promotes the sustainable use of 

natural resources. This commitment includes providing adequate administrative and financial materials on a 

continuing basis to ensure goals are achieved. When economically feasible, source reduction is the preferred method 

of handling waste, followed by reuse and recycling, treatment, and as a last resort, landfill disposal. 

Source Reduction – Source reduction is the minimization or elimination of waste before it is generated by a 

project or operation. Examples of source reduction include chemical substitution, process modification, and 

segregation. NNSA/NSO’s Integrated Safety Management System requires that every project/operation address 

waste minimization issues during the planning phase and ensure that adequate funds are allocated to perform any 

identified waste minimization activities. 

To minimize the generation of waste, project managers are required to incorporate waste minimization into the 

planning phase of their projects. Waste-generating processes must be assessed to determine if the waste can be 

economically reduced or eliminated. Waste minimization activities that are determined to be cost-effective 

should be incorporated into the project plan and adequate funding allocated to ensure their implementation. 

Recycling – For wastes that are generated, an aggressive recycling program is maintained. Items recycled 

through the NNSA/NSO recycling program in 2008 included paper, cardboard, aluminum cans, toner cartridges, 

inkjet cartridges, used oil, food waste from the cafeteria, plastic, scrap metal, computer equipment, rechargeable 

batteries, lead-acid batteries, fluorescent light bulbs, mercury lamps, metal hydride lamps, and sodium lamps. 

An effective method for reuse is the coordination of the Material Exchange Program. Created in 1998, the 

Material Exchange Program diverts supplies, chemicals, and equipment from landfills. Unwanted chemicals, 

supplies, and equipment are made available through electronic mail or postings on the intranet Material Exchange 

Database so that individuals in need can obtain the items at no cost. These materials are destined for disposal, 

either as solid or hazardous waste, as a result of process modification, discontinued use, or shelf-life expiration. 

Rather than disposing of these items, the majority of them are provided to other employees for their intended 

purpose, thus avoiding disposal costs and costs for new purchases. If items are not placed with another user, they 

can be returned to the vendor for recycle/reuse, or given to other U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) sites, other 

government agencies, or local schools. 

Affirmative Procurement – As required by Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Section 42 

United States Code (USC) 6962, NNSA/NSO maintains an Affirmative Procurement process that stimulates a 

market for recycled content products and closes the loop on recycling. RCRA Section 42 USC 6962 requires the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop a list of items containing recycled materials that should 

be purchased. The EPA is also required to determine what the minimum content of recycled material should be 

for each item. Federal facilities are required to ensure that a process is in place for purchasing the EPAdesignated items containing the minimum content of recycled materials. Executive Order (EO) 13423, 

“Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy and Transportation Management,” goes one step further and 
Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization

11-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

requires federal facilities to ensure, where possible, that 100 percent of purchases of items from the EPAdesignated list contain recycled materials at the specified minimum content. Of these items NNSA/NSO 

purchased from the EPA-designated list in 2008, about 56 percent contained recycled materials at the specified 

minimum content. 

Employee and Public Awareness – The NNSA/NSO P2 and WM initiatives also include an employee and 

public awareness program. Awareness of P2/WM issues is accomplished by dissemination of articles through 

electronic mail, contractor and NNSA/NSO newsletters, the maintenance of a P2/WM intranet Web site, 

employee training courses, and participation at employee and community events. These activities are intended to 

increase awareness of P2/WM and environmental issues and highlight the importance of P2/WM for improving 

environmental conditions in the workplace and community. 

Establishing P2/WM Related Goals – EO 13423,”Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and 

Transportation Management,” requires federal facilities to begin establishing goals to improve efficiency in 

energy and water use, procure goods and services that use sustainable environmental practices, reduce amounts of 

toxic materials acquired, maintain a cost-effective waste prevention and recycling program, ensure construction 

and major renovation of buildings that incorporate sustainable practices, reduce use of petroleum products in 

motor vehicles and increase use of alternative fuels, and acquire and dispose of electronic products using 

environmentally sound practices. 

11.2 Major P2/WM Accomplishments 

The following six accomplishments were reported to DOE Headquarters for 2008: 

The North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF) is regulated under RCRA as a conditionally exempt small quantity 

generator (CESQG) of hazardous waste (HW). By definition, a CESQG generates less than 100 kilograms (kg) 

(220 pounds [lb]) of HW, or less than 1 kg (2.2 lb) of acute HW per month, or less than 100 kg of spill residue per 

month. When an activity arose at the NLVF that would generate two 55-gallon drums of lead-contaminated rags, 

it was noted that this would necessitate a change in generator status as well as an unscheduled HW pickup for the 

facility. It was determined that paper towels could be used instead of the rags; thus keeping the total weight of 

waste at the NLVF to less than 100 kg and eliminating the need to change the generator status of the facility, 

dispose of the two 55-gallon drums of lead-contaminated rags, and pay for a special HW collection. The total 

cost savings was estimated to be $8,000. 

NSTec had a fiscal year (FY) 2008 (October 1, 2007–September 31, 2008) environmental target, in accordance 

with EO 13423, to increase the use of non-petroleum-based fuel by 10 percent over its use in FY 2007. Through 

good employee awareness and management support, an increase of 35 percent was achieved. 

NSTec successfully completed a commitment to obtain International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 

14001 Certification within a two-year time frame. Part of the ISO Certification process was to establish the 

environmental objectives and targets program. Several of the targets successfully met in FY 2008 were in the 

area of pollution prevention. 

A cleanup project at the T-Tunnel Laydown Yard in Area 12 could have resulted in large amounts of potentially 

radiologically contaminated metal being buried in an onsite landfill. However, by careful segregation and a 

minimal amount of costly radiological characterization, over 227 metric tons (mtons) (250 tons) of material (34 

percent) was able to be designated for recycling. 

The Information Services Department of NSTec developed a database for listing software that ordinarily would 

have been excessed and either recycled or disposed. The database allows employees to search for needed 

software, which is provided to them at no cost. This process allows software to be redeployed and reused by 

employees, therefore avoiding the cost of recycle/disposal and the purchase of new software. 

Thirty-four oversize locomotive and forklift batteries, weighing about 7,893 kg (174,000 lb), were no longer 

required and needed to be removed from the NTS. A search was made for a local recycling vendor who could 

accept the batteries and a suitable one was found. This avoided the onsite storage of a large quantity of HW at the 

Hazardous Waste Storage Unit in Area 5 and the associated costs of onsite storage and offsite disposal. 
Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 11-3 

Per NSTec’s Environmental Management System (EMS), the Material Exchange Program is continually striving 

for improvement. Articles were published in newsletters and disseminated to employees in all organizations 

within the NNSA/NSO complex to raise the level of awareness of the program and its Web site. The Material 

Exchange Program diverted 3.4 mtons (3.7 tons) of chemicals, office supplies, and equipment from solid and HW 

landfills in 2008, bringing the total of usable materials diverted from such landfills since the program’s inception 

in 1998 to 194 mtons (213 tons).

A number of P2/WM goals were identified and tracked in 2008. These goals are integrated into the NSTec EMS 

and are presented in Chapter 17 (see Table 17-1). 

On November 26, 2008, NSTec completed the FY 2008 Waste Generation and Pollution Prevention Progress 

Report for the NTS. This was done by entering the site’s data, including annual recycling totals and waste 

minimization accomplishments, into the DOE Headquarters electronic database. NSTec also submitted the 

calendar year 2008 Waste Minimization Summary Report to NNSA/NSO in February 2009 for its subsequent 

transmittal to the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection. 

11.3 Waste Reductions 

P2/WM techniques and practices are implemented for all activities that may generate waste. These P2/WM 

activities result in reductions to the volume and/or toxicity of waste generated on site. Table 11-1 shows a 

summary of the waste reduction activities accomplished during 2008. Estimated reductions of 268.5 mtons 

(295 tons) of HW (including RCRA, Toxic Substance Control Act, and state-regulated HW) and 311.2 mtons 

(342 tons) of solid waste (sanitary waste) occurred in 2008, all from recycling and reuse. Table 11-2 compares 

the amounts of radioactive, hazardous, and solid wastes reduced in 2008 to the amounts in prior years. 

 Table 11-1. Waste reduction activities in 2008 

 Activity 

Reduction 

(mtons)(a)

Hazardous Waste

Bulk used oil was sent to an offsite vendor for recycling 76.4 

Lead acid batteries were shipped to an offsite vendor for recycling 178.5 

Computer equipment was returned to the vendor where it is refurbished and sold for reuse 12.1 

Spent fluorescent light bulbs, mercury lamps, metal hydride lamps, and sodium lamps were sent to an 

offsite vendor for recycling 

1.3 

Rechargeable batteries were sent to an offsite vendor for recycling 0.2 

Total 268.5 

Solid Waste

Scrap ferrous metal was sold to a vendor for recycling 84.2 

Mixed paper and cardboard was sent off site for recycling 161.0 

Food waste from the cafeterias was sent off site to be reused as pig feed for a local pig farmer 44.6 

Shipping materials including pallets, styrofoam, bubble wrap, and shipping containers were reused 8.6 

Scrap non-ferrous metal was sold to a vendor for recycling 6.0 

Spent toner cartridges were sent off site for recycling 2.7 

Non-hazardous chemicals, equipment, and supplies were relocated to new users through the Material 

Exchange Program, diverting them from landfill disposal 

3.4 

Aluminum cans were sent off site for recycling 0.7 

Total 311.2 

 1 mton = 1.1 ton 

 

 
Pollution Prevention and Waste Minimization

11-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

 Table 11-2. Quantities of waste reduced through P2/WM activities by waste type and year 

Calendar Year Radioactive (m3

)

(a) Hazardous (mtons)(b) Solid (mtons)

2008 28.9 268 311 

2007 0 167 1,698

2006 0 149 803

2005 0 13,992 1,194

2004 0 115 1,438

2003 40.0 207 1,547

2002 63.2 177 904 

(a) 1 cubic meter (m3) = 1.3 cubic yards 

(b) 1 mton = 1.1 ton 
Historic Preservation and Cultural Resources Management

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 12-1 

12.0 Historic Preservation and Cultural Resources 

Management 

The historic landscape of the Nevada Test Site (NTS) contains archaeological sites, buildings, structures, and 

places of importance to American Indians and others. These are referred to as “cultural resources.” 

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order DOE O 450.1A, “Environmental Protection Program,” requires that 

NTS activities and programs comply with all applicable cultural resources regulations (see Section 2.8) and that 

such resources on the NTS be monitored. The Cultural Resources Management (CRM) program has been 

established and is implemented by the Desert Research Institute (DRI) on the NTS to meet this requirement. The 

CRM program is designed to meet the specific goals shown below. 

In order to achieve the program goals and meet federal and state requirements, the CRM program is multifaceted 

and contains the following major components: (1) inventories and historical evaluations, (2) curation of 

archaeological collections, and (3) the American Indian Program. The guidance for the CRM program work is 

provided in the Cultural Resources Management Plan for the Nevada Test Site (Drollinger et al., 2002). Historic 

preservation personnel and archaeologists of DRI who meet the qualification standards set by the Secretary of the 

Interior conduct the work, and the archaeological efforts are permitted under the Archaeological Resources 

Protection Act (ARPA). 

A brief description of the CRM program components and their 2008 accomplishments is provided in this chapter. 

The methods used to conduct inventories and historical evaluations in support of NTS operations were 

summarized in the 2003 NTS Environmental Report (Bechtel Nevada, 2004a). The reader is directed to a 

separate file called Nevada Test Site Description on the compact disc of this 2008 report. The Nevada Test Site 

Description contains a summary of the known human occupation and use of the NTS from the Paleo-Indian 

Period, about 12,000 years ago, until the mining and ranching period of the twentieth century, just before NTS 

lands were withdrawn for federal use. 

12.1 Cultural Resources Inventories, Historical Evaluations, and 

Associated Activities 

Cultural resources inventories are conducted at the NTS to meet the requirements of the National Historic 

Preservation Act (NHPA) and the ARPA. The inventories are completed prior to proposed projects that may 

disturb or otherwise alter the environment. The following information is maintained in databases: 

• Number of cultural resources inventories conducted 

• Location of each inventory 

• Number of acres surveyed at each project location 

Cultural Resources Management Program Goals 

Ensure compliance with all regulations pertaining to cultural resources on the NTS (see Section 2.8). 

Inventory and manage cultural resources on the NTS. 

Provide information that can be used to evaluate the potential impacts of proposed projects and programs to 

cultural resources on the NTS and mitigate adverse effects. 

Curate archaeological collections in accordance with Title 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 79. 

Conduct American Indian consultations related to places and items of importance to the Consolidated Group 

of Tribal Organizations. 
Historic Preservation and Cultural Resources Management

12-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

• Types of cultural resources identified at each project location 

• Number of cultural resources determined eligible to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) 

• Eligible properties avoided by project activities 

• Cultural resources requiring mitigation to address an adverse effect 

• Final report on results 

12.1.1 Cultural Resources Inventories 

In 2008, six cultural resources inventories were conducted for proposed projects: (1) the Firing Range in Area 23, 

(2) the Underground Test Area (UGTA) ER-20-7 Well Pad and Access Road in Area 20, (3) the UGTA ER-20-8 

Well Pad and Access Road in Area 20, (4) the UGTA Borrow Pit Expansion in Area 20, (5) the UGTA ER-EC-11 

Well Pad and Access Road on Range EC South Nevada Test and Training Range (NTTR), and (6) the UGTA 

ER-EC-11 Well Pad Relocation on Range EC South NTTR. One site was identified during these surveys. As 

summarized in Table 12-1, a total of 25.02 hectares (62.09 acres) was examined during cultural resources 

inventories. Three self-assessments were performed for the inventories associated with the UGTA Sub-Project. 

Table 12-1. Summary data for cultural resources inventories completed in 2008

Area Surveyed 

Inventory 

Prehistoric/ 

Historic Sites 

Found 

Cultural 

Resources 

Evaluated 

Cultural 

Resources 

Determined 

NRHP Eligible Hectares Acres 

Firing Range 0 0 0 3.8 9.4 

UGTA ER-20-7 Well Pad and Access Road 0 0 0 8.7 12.0 

UGTA ER-20-8 Well Pad and Access Road 0 0 0 4.39 10.9 

UGTA Borrow Pit Expansion, Area 20 0 0 0 3.6 8.9 

UGTA ER-EC-11 Well Pad and Access Road 1 1 1 5.04 12.52 

UGTA ER-EC-11 Relocation Sites 0 0 0 3.39 8.37 

Totals 1 1 0 25.02 62.09 

12.1.2 Evaluations of Historic Structures 

Three historical evaluations of nuclear testing related locations were in progress at the end of 2008. The historical 

evaluation report for the U12t Tunnel was submitted for technical review. Archival research and fieldwork were 

completed for the U12n Tunnel with the report in development. For the Structural Response Safety Program 

Structures, fieldwork was completed with a report pending. 

12.1.3 Associated Cultural Resources Activities

12.1.3.1 General Reconnaissance/Archival Research 

Five field projects and ten archival research projects were conducted in 2008. The first field project was the 

annual site monitoring program for which 15 sites were monitored. The NHPA requires federal agencies to 

identify and maintain the integrity of historic properties under their jurisdiction. Historic properties are cultural 

resources that have been determined eligible to the NRHP through consultation between the NNSA/NSO and the 

Nevada State Historic Preservation Office. The purpose of the monitoring program is to periodically document 

that the historic properties, traditional cultural properties, and American Indian sacred sites on the NTS retain 

their integrity and NRHP eligibility. Monitoring the condition of cultural resources is an integral part of the 

NNSA/NSO historic preservation program. In terms of field efforts, the monitoring of archaeological sites of 

diverse site types is yielding interesting data that can ultimately be used to develop models for predicting retention 

of site integrity. The 2008 monitoring project focused on 15 properties eligible to the NRHP. The sites 

monitored were five temporary camps, three dual component camps (prehistoric and historic), three historic 
Historic Preservation and Cultural Resources Management

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 12-3 

structures, one historic cabin, one prehistoric processing locality, one cave site, and one historic residential base. 

The monitoring provided the opportunity to update site information, evaluate the condition of site locations and 

make further recommendations for the protection of the sites. Of the 15 sites monitored, only two sites, both dual 

component sites, were moderately affected by visitor traffic. The remaining 13 sites were all in a good state of 

preservation, though sustaining normal weathering. 

Two field projects focused on the photo-documentation of structures in Areas 3 and 23. Two other field projects 

were site visits to three tower locations in Areas 2 and 3 and four nuclear test locations in Areas 18 and 20. Four 

archival research projects involved conducting research on the history of the test locations Russet, Raritan, Little 

Feller II, and T-4. 

Archival research was conducted for six proposed projects. Four of these projects are a Wackenhut training area 

to be built in one of multiple proposed locations, a concentrating solar power plant in Area 22, the proposed 

removal of old electrical panels in multiple NTS areas, and a buried fiber-optic line from the NTS to Indian 

Springs. There also was archival research for a pending Environmental Impact Statement for one of the locations 

in the United States that is in consideration for a new low-level waste facility. At the NTS, the location proposed 

is in Area 5 near the RWMS. The last archival research project involved gathering photographs of Native 

American structures on the NTS. 

12.1.3.2 Reports 

Six inventory reports (SR), seven letter reports (LR) and one monitoring report (MR) were completed in 2008 and 

are listed in Table 12-2. Site location information is protected from public distribution; reports containing such 

data are not available to the public. The data on NTS archaeological activities also were provided to DOE 

Headquarters in the formal Archeology Questionnaire for transmittal to the Secretary of the Interior and, 

ultimately, to the U.S. Congress as part of the Secretary of the Interior’s Annual Archeology Report to Congress. 

Table 12-2. Reports prepared in 2008 

Project Report Author(s) Report No. Citation 

Proposed Nevada Test Site Firing Range Robert C. Jones SR031008-1 Jones, 2008a 

Proposed UGTA ER-20-7 Well Pad and Access Road Robert C. Jones SR090308-1 Jones, 2008b 

Proposed UGTA ER-20-8 Well Pad and Access Road Robert C. Jones SR090408-1 Jones, 2008c 

Proposed UGTA ER-EC-11 Well Pad and Access Road Robert C. Jones SR091708-1 Jones, 2008d 

Proposed UGTA Borrow Pit Expansion Robert C. Jones SR092908-1 Jones, 2008e 

Proposed UGTA ER-EC-11 Well Pad Relocation Robert C. Jones SR102108-1 Jones, 2008f 

Fiscal Year (FY) 2008 Cultural Resources Monitoring of 

Cane Spring 

Barbara A. Holz LR030508-2 Holz, 2008a 

FY 2008 Cultural Resources Monitoring of Japanese Village Barbara A. Holz LR030608-1 Holz, 2008b 

FY 2008 Cultural Resources Monitoring of Wahmonie Barbara A. Holz LR031808-1 Holz, 2008c 

FY 2008 Cultural Resources Monitoring of Rice Grass 

Village 

Barbara A. Holz LR032508-1 Holz, 2008d 

FY 2008 Cultural Resources Monitoring of Bower Cabin Barbara A. Holz LR043008-1 Holz, 2008e 

Curation Compliance Annual Progress Report Harold Drollinger LR090508-1 Drollinger, 2008 

Soils Project Pre-Task Cultural Resources Visit Robert C. Jones and 

Colleen M. Beck 

LR102808-1 Jones and Beck, 

2008 

FY 2008 Cultural Resources Monitoring Program Barbara A. Holz MR030508-1 Holz, 2008f 

12.2 Curation 

The NHPA requires that archaeological collections and associated records be maintained at professional 

standards; the specific requirements are delineated in 36 CFR Part 79, Curation of Federally-Owned and 
Historic Preservation and Cultural Resources Management

12-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

Administered Archeological Collections. The NTS Archaeological Collection currently contains over 400,000 

artifacts and is curated in accordance with 36 CFR 79. The requirements for curation of the NTS Archaeological 

Collection include the following: 

• Maintain a catalog of the items in the NTS collection 

• Package the NTS collection in materials that meet archival standards (e.g., acid-free boxes) 

• Store the NTS collection and records in a facility that is secure and has environmental controls 

• Establish and follow curation procedures for the NTS collection and facility 

• Comply with the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act 

In the 1990s, NNSA/NSO completed the required inventory and summary of NTS cultural materials accessioned 

into the NTS Archaeological Collection and distributed the inventory list and summary to the tribes affiliated with 

the NTS and adjacent lands. Consultations followed, and all artifacts the tribes requested were repatriated to 

them. This process was completed in 2002; it will be repeated for new additions to the collection in the future. 

Known NTS locations of American Indian human remains continued to be protected from NTS activities in 2008. 

NNSA/NSO is in the process of obtaining NTS archaeological materials that currently are curated at other artifact 

repositories in Nevada in order to assemble the entire NTS collection in the NNSA/NSO facility. In the early 

years of the NTS, various archaeologists worked there and these collections have been stored for decades at 

facilities that existed at that time. In 2008, 3,876 artifacts that are part of an NTS archaeological collection from 

the 1960s were transferred to the NNSA/NSO. These artifacts were inventoried with analysis pending. 

The ongoing effort to upgrade the storage materials used to house the entire archaeological collection was 

completed in 2008, and now all the artifacts are stored in current archival-quality materials. Although the work 

schedule in the curation facility is variable, the state of this collection is monitored weekly to ensure that the 

materials remain in good condition. The curation facility was audited by the U.S. General Services 

Administration in 2008, and no corrective actions were recommended. For records curation, 30 years of 

archaeological survey reports, technical reports, and site records were scanned and linked to a searchable 

Geographical Information System that has been developed for these data. 

12.3 American Indian Program 

NNSA/NSO has had an active American Indian Program since the late 1980s. The function of the program is to 

conduct consultations between NNSA/NSO and NTS-affiliated American Indian tribes. Such consultation occurs 

through the Consolidated Group of Tribes and Organizations (CGTO). The CGTO is composed of 16 groups of 

Southern Paiute, Western Shoshone, and Owens Valley Paiute-Shoshone, along with the Las Vegas Indian 

Center, a Pan-Indian organization. The 16 groups of the CGTO are listed in previous NTS environmental reports 

(e.g., National Security Technologies, LLC, 2008a). A history of this program is contained in American Indians 

and the Nevada Test Site, A Model of Research and Consultation (Stoffle et al., 2001). The goals of the program 

are to: 

• Provide a forum of the CGTO to express and discuss issues of importance. 

• Provide the CGTO with opportunities to actively participate in decisions that involve places and locations that 

hold significance for them. 

• Involve the CGTO in the curation and display of American Indian artifacts. 

• Enable the CGTO and its constituency to practice their religious and traditional activities. 

In 2008, the American Indian Program Coordinator worked to update the information from the various tribes and 

to develop future activities for the program. This effort is the groundwork for a CGTO meeting in the near future. 

There was one activity that resulted in consultation with the tribes, identifying a site of special importance. There 

were no new proposals for artifact displays and no requests by tribes or tribal members to conduct religious 

ceremonies. 
Ecological Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 13-1

13.0 Ecological Monitoring 

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order DOE O 450.1A, “Environmental Protection Program,” requires 

ecological monitoring and biological compliance support for activities and programs conducted at DOE facilities. 

The National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec), Ecological Monitoring and Compliance (EMAC) Program 

provides this support for the Nevada Test Site (NTS). The major sub-programs and tasks within EMAC include 

(1) the Desert Tortoise Compliance Program, (2) biological surveys at proposed construction sites, (3) monitoring 

important species and habitats, (4) the Habitat Restoration Program, (5) wildland fire hazard assessment, and 

(6) biological impact monitoring at the Nonproliferation Test and Evaluation Complex (NPTEC). Brief 

descriptions of these sub-programs and their 2008 accomplishments are provided in this chapter. More detailed 

information may be found in the most recent annual EMAC report (Hansen et al., 2009). EMAC annual reports 

are available at <http://www.osti.gov/bridge>. 

13.1 Desert Tortoise Compliance Program 

The desert tortoise inhabits the southern one-third of the NTS (Figure 13-1). It is listed as threatened under the 

Endangered Species Act. Activities conducted in desert tortoise habitat on the NTS must comply with the terms 

and conditions of a Biological Opinion (Opinion) issued to the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear 

Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). The 

Opinion is effectively a permit to conduct activities in desert tortoise habitat in a specific manner. It authorizes 

the incidental “take” (accidental killing, injury, harassment, etc.) of tortoises that may occur during the activities 

which, without the Opinion, would be illegal and subject to civil or criminal penalties. The first Opinion was 

issued to NNSA/NSO in August 1996 (FWS, 1996) and was valid through December 31, 2007. In July 2007, 

NNSA/NSO received a one-year extension of the Opinion. On July 2, 2008, NNSA/NSO provided FWS with a 

Biological Assessment of anticipated activities on the NTS for the next ten years and entered into formal 

consultation with the FWS to obtain a new Opinion. FWS issued a draft Opinion to NNSA/NSO on December 6, 

2008, and asked NNSA/NSO to provide comments. NSTec biologists and NNSA/NSO met with FWS personnel 

and negotiated changes to the draft Opinion. FWS issued the new final Opinion to NNSA/NSO in February 2009. 

Both the 1996 and 2009 Opinions state that proposed NTS activities are not likely to jeopardize the continued 

existence of the Mojave population of the species and that no critical habitat would be destroyed or adversely 

modified. They establish compliance limits for the numbers of accidentally injured and killed tortoises, captured 

and displaced tortoises, and the acres of tortoise habitat that can be disturbed. They also establish mitigation 

requirements for habitat loss. The Desert Tortoise Compliance Program was developed to implement the 

Opinion’s terms and conditions, document compliance actions taken, and assist NNSA/NSO in FWS 

consultations. 

In 2008, biologists conducted surveys for 18 projects that were within the distribution range of the desert tortoise. 

All of the proposed projects were covered under the 1996 Opinion. No desert tortoises were accidentally injured 

or killed, nor were any found, captured, or displaced from project sites. No desert tortoises were killed along 

roads in 2008. 

Ecological Monitoring and Compliance Program Goals 

Ensure compliance with all state and federal regulations and stakeholder commitments pertaining to 

NTS flora, fauna, wetlands, and sensitive vegetation and wildlife habitats (see Section 2.9). 

Delineate NTS ecosystems. 

Provide ecological information that can be used to evaluate the potential impacts of proposed projects 

and programs on NTS ecosystems and important plant and animal species. 
Ecological Monitoring

13-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 Figure 13-1. Desert tortoise distribution and abundance on the NTS
Ecological Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 13-3

A cumulative total of 126.04 hectares (ha) (311.46 acres [ac]) of desert tortoise habitat on the NTS has been 

disturbed since the desert tortoise was listed as threatened in 1992. During 2008, none of the threshold levels for 

compliance measures established by the FWS in the 1996 Opinion were exceeded (Table 13-1). In January 2009, 

NNSA/NSO submitted a report to the FWS Southern Nevada Field Office that summarized tortoise compliance 

activities for the 1996 Opinion conducted on the NTS from January 1 through December 31, 2008. 

Table 13-1. Compliance limits and status for NTS operations in tortoise habitat 

Compliance Measure from 1996 Opinion for NTS Programmatic Activities

Threshold 

Value

2008 

Value 

Number of tortoises accidentally injured or killed as a result of NTS activities per year 3 0

Number of tortoises captured and displaced from NTS project sites per year 10 0

Number of tortoises taken in form of injury or mortality on paved roads on the NTS by 

vehicles other than those in use during a project

Unlimited 0

Number of total ha (ac) of desert tortoise habitat disturbed during NTS project construction 

since 1992 

1,220 (3,015) 126.04 (311.46)

13.2 Biological Surveys at Proposed Project Sites 

Biological surveys are performed at proposed project sites where land disturbance will occur. The goal is to 

minimize the adverse effects of land disturbance on important plant and animal species and their associated 

habitat, important biological resources (i.e., nest sites, active tortoise burrows), and wetlands. The important 

species known to occur on the NTS include 19 plants, 1 mollusk, 2 reptiles, over 250 birds, and 26 mammals 

(Tables 13-2 and 13-3). All of these species are evaluated for their inclusion in long-term monitoring activities on 

the NTS. Important biological resources include such things as cover sites, nest or burrow sites, roost sites, 

wetlands, or water sources that are vital to important species. 

In 2008, surveys for 28 projects were conducted. The important species and biological resources found included 

22 potential tortoise burrows, Darin buckwheat (Eriogonum concinnum), yuccas, and cacti. For each project, 

NSTec provided a written summary report of survey findings and mitigation recommendations. The findings and 

recommendations are summarized by project in Hansen et al. (2009). Figure 13-2 shows the general location for 

each project (labeled 08-01 through 08-28). 

 Table 13-2. Important plants known to occur on or adjacent to the NTS 

SENSITIVE PLANT SPECIES

Flowering Plant Species Common Name Status(a)

Astragalus beatleyae Beatley milkvetch S, 5 years 

Astragalus funereus Black woolypod S, 5 years 

Astragalus oopherus var. clokeyanus Clokey eggvetch S, 5 years 

Eriogonum concinnum Darin buckwheat S, 5 years 

Eriogonum heermannii var. clokeyi Clokey buckwheat S, 5 years 

Ivesia arizonica var. saxosa Rock purpusia S, 5 years 

Phacelia beatleyae Beatley scorpionflower S, 10 years 

Arctomecon merriamii White bearpoppy S, 10 years 

Camissonia megalantha Cane Spring suncup S, 10 years 

Cymopterus ripleyi var. saniculoides Sanicle biscuitroot S, 10 years 

Frasera pahutensis Pahute green gentian S, 10 years 

Galium hilendiae ssp. kingstonense Kingston Mountains bedstraw S, 10 years 

Hulsea vestita ssp. inyoensis Pumice alpinegold S, 10 years 

Penstemon fruticiformis var. armagosae Death Valley beardtongue S, 5 years 

Penstemon pahutensis Pahute Mesa beardtongue S, 10 years 

Phacelia filiae Clarke phacelia S, 10 years 

Phacelia mustelina Weasel phacelia S, 10 years 

Phacelia parishii Parish phacelia S, 10 years 
Ecological Monitoring

13-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

 Table 13-2. Important plants known to occur on or adjacent to the NTS (continued) 

SENSITIVE PLANT SPECIES

Moss Species Common Name Status(a)

Entosthodon planoconvexus Planoconvex entosthodon S, 5 years 

PROTECTED/REGULATED PLANT SPECIES

Cactaceae Cacti (18 species) CY 

Agavaceae Yucca (3 species), Agave (1 species) CY 

Pinus monophylla/Juniperus osteosperma Pinyon/Juniper CY 

(a) Status Codes: 

 State of Nevada

S - Listed on the Nevada Natural Heritage Program (NNHP) Nevada Animal and Plant At-Risk Tracking List, March 2007

CY - Protected as a cactus, yucca, or Christmas tree from unauthorized collection on public lands. Such plants are not protected 

from harm on private lands or on withdrawn public lands such as the NTS 

 Long-term Sensitive Plant Monitoring Status under EMAC

 5 years - Monitor a minimum of once every 5 years 

10 years - Monitor a minimum of once every 10 years 

Table 13-3. Important animals known to occur on or adjacent to the NTS 

Mollusk Species Common Names Status (a)

Pyrgulopsis turbatrix Southeast Nevada pyrg S, A 

Reptile Species 

Eumeces gilberti rubricaudatus Western red-tailed skink S, E 

Gopherus agassizii Desert tortoise LT, NPT, S, IA 

Bird Species(b) 

Accipiter gentilis Northern goshawk NPS, S, IA 

Alectoris chukar Chukar G, IA 

Aquila chrysaetos Golden eagle EA, NP, IA 

Buteo regalis Ferruginous hawk NP, S, IA 

Callipepla gambelii Gambel’s quail G, IA 

Coccyzus americanus Western yellow-billed cuckoo C, NPS, S, IA 

Falco peregrinus anatum Peregrine falcon NPE, S, IA 

Haliaeetus leucocephalus leucocephalus Bald eagle EA, NPE, S, IA 

Ixobrychus exillis hesperis Western least bittern NP, S, IA 

Lanius ludovicianus Loggerhead shrike NPS, IA 

Oreoscoptes montanus Sage thrasher NPS, IA 

Phainopepla nitens Phainopepla NP, S, IA 

Spizella breweri Brewer’s sparrow NPS 

Toxostoma bendirei Bendire’s thrasher NP, S, IA 

Toxostoma lecontei LeConte’s thrasher NP, S, IA 

Mammal Species 

Antilocapra americana Pronghorn antelope G, IA 

Antrozous pallidus Pallid bat NP, M, A 

Corynorhinus townsendii pallescens Townsend’s big-eared bat NPS, S, H, A 

Equus asinus Burro HB, IA 

Equus caballus Horse HB, A 

Euderma maculatum Spotted bat NPT, S, M, A 
Ecological Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 13-5

 Table 13-3. Important animals known to occur on or adjacent to the NTS (continued) 

Mammal Species (continued) Common Names Status (a)

Lasionycteris noctivagans Silver-haired bat M, A 

Lasiurus blossevillii Western red bat NPS, S, H, A 

Lasiurus cinereus Hoary bat M, A 

Lynx rufus Bobcat F, IA 

Microdipodops megacephalus Dark kangaroo mouse NP, A 

Microdipodops pallidus Pale kangaroo mouse NP, S, A 

Myotis californicus California myotis M, A 

Myotis ciliolabrum Small-footed myotis M, A 

Myotis evotis Long-eared myotis M, A 

Myotis thysanodes Fringed myotis NP, S, H, A 

Myotis yumanensis Yuma myotis M, A 

Ovis canadensis nelsoni Desert bighorn sheep G, IA 

Odocoileus hemionus Mule deer G, A 

Pipistrellus hesperus Western pipistrelle M, A 

Puma concolor Mountain lion G, A 

Sylvilagus audubonii Audubon’s cottontail G, IA 

Sylvilagus nuttallii Nuttall’s cottontail G, IA 

Tadarida brasiliensis Brazilian free-tailed bat NP, A 

Urocyon cinereoargenteus Gray fox F, IA 

Vulpes velox macrotis Kit fox F, IA 

(a) Status Codes: 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Act

 LT - Listed Threatened 

 PD - Proposed for delisting 

 PT - Proposed for listing as Threatened 

 C - Candidate for listing 

U.S. Department of Interior

 EA - Protected under Bald and Golden Eagle Act 

 HB - Protected under Wild Free Roaming Horses and Burros Act 

State of Nevada

 F - Regulated as fur-bearer species 

 G - Regulated as game species 

 NPE - Species protected as endangered under Nevada Administrative Code (NAC) 503 

 NPT - Species protected as threatened under NAC 503 

 NPS - Species protected as sensitive under NAC 503 

 NP - Species listed as protected under NAC 503 

 S - Listed on NNHP’s Nevada Animal and Plant At-Risk Tracking List, March 2007 

Revised Nevada Bat Conservation Plan (Bradley et al., 2005) – Bat Species Risk Assessment Designations

 H - High: species imperiled or at high risk of imperilment and having the highest priority for funding, planning, 

 and conservation actions 

 M - Moderate: species that warrant closer evaluation, more research, and conservation actions and lacking 

 meaningful information to adequately assess species’ status 

Long-term Sensitive Animal Monitoring Status under EMAC

 A - Active: currently included in long-term population monitoring activities 

 E - Evaluate: species for which more information on distribution, abundance, and susceptibilities to threats 

 on the NTS must be gathered before deciding to include in long-term monitoring activities 

 IA - Inactive: not currently included in long-term population monitoring activities 

 (b) All wild bird species on the NTS are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act except for the following five species: 

 Gambel’s quail, chukar, English house sparrow, rock dove, and European starling. 

 Also, the State of Nevada protects all wild birds that are protected by federal laws in addition to the species listed in this table. 
Ecological Monitoring

13-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Figure 13-2. Location of biological surveys conducted on the NTS in 2008 
Ecological Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 13-7

13.3 Important Species and Habitat Monitoring 

Over the last three decades, NNSA/NSO has taken an active role in collecting or supporting the collection of 

information on the status of important plants and animals and their habitat on the NTS and has produced 

numerous documents reporting their occurrence, distribution, and susceptibility to threats on the NTS (see 

Ecology of the Nevada Test Site: An Annotated Bibliography [Wills and Ostler, 2001]). In 1998, NNSA/NSO 

prepared a Resource Management Plan (U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office, 1998). One of 

the natural resources goals stated in the plan is to protect and conserve sensitive plant and animal species found on 

the NTS and to minimize cumulative impacts to those species as a result of NNSA/NSO activities. In 2008, the 

major accomplishments under this EMAC task are presented below. Detailed descriptions of these actions and 

results can be found in Hansen et al. (2009). 

13.3.1 Sensitive Plants 

The current list of sensitive plants on the NTS (Table 13-2) represents a significant effort by botanists over the 

last three decades. The list is reviewed annually and modifications are made as necessary. The only modification 

made in 2008 was the removal of Lathyrus hitchockianus, Bullfrog Hills peavine. Although it is found about 

3.2 kilometers (km) (2 miles [mi]) west of the NTS boundary, it has not yet been found on the NTS. 

Field surveys were conducted in 2008 for Eriogonum heermannii var. clokeyi to better define the range of this 

species on the NTS. They were conducted along the north slope of Red Mountain and the slopes of Mercury 

Ridge. Both of these hills are located just north of the town site of Mercury in Area 23. Over 5,000 plants were 

observed, and the known species distribution was increased to 178 ha (439 ac), more than seven times the 26 ha 

(64 ac) reported previously. Field surveys were conducted for the Gold Meadows population of Frasera 

pahutensis with the same objective. Approximately 1,000 individual F. pahutensis plants were observed over 9 

ha (21 ac). This is ten times the size of the population originally identified in 1997. A map of all the known 

sensitive plant populations on the NTS was updated in 2008. It is the culmination of several years of work and 

replaces a similar map prepared in 1994. It is available on the NNSA/NSO Internet Web site at 

http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/publications/Environmental/Figures/Fig11-3.pdf. 

13.3.2 Important Animals 

13.3.2.1 Western Red-tailed Skink 

Surveys for the western red-tailed skink (Eumeces 

gilberti rubricaudatus) continued in 2008. Eight 

western red-tailed skinks, including one hatchling 

(Figure 13-3), were captured from 4 sites during 6,099 

trap days at 31 sites. A total of 267 reptiles 

representing 10 of the 16 known lizards and 7 of the 

17 known snake species on the NTS were captured or 

observed in 2008. Current NTS distributions of 

western red-tailed skinks are presented in Hansen et al. 

(2009). NTS biologists collaborated with Dr. Jonathan 

Richmond of Cornell University to provide specimens 

for genetic testing. 

13.3.2.2 Western Burrowing Owl 

Western burrowing owls (Athene cunicularia 

hypugaea) were trapped on the NTS in 2008 as part of a collaborative effort with Dr. Courtney Conway to 

evaluate the genetic relatedness and migratory status of this species in western North America. Dr. Conway is 

funded by the Department of Defense Legacy Project. Nine owls (seven adults and two juveniles) were captured 

and banded (Figure 13-4). No recaptures from previous years were documented. The current total of documented 

western burrowing owl locations on the NTS is 164 (47 owl sightings [no burrow located] and 117 burrow sites). 

Figure 13-3. Hatchling western red-tailed skink captured 

near Schooner, Area 20 (Photo by D. B. Hall, July 31, 2008) 
Ecological Monitoring

13-8 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Figure 13-4. Western burrowing owl with identification 

bands (Photo by W. K. Ostler, June 20, 2007)

13.3.2.3 Raptor Monitoring and Bird Mortality 

Raptors are sensitive species and all are protected or 

regulated under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or 

Nevada state law (see Table 13-3). Nine raptor species 

are known to breed on the NTS. Field surveys for 

active raptor nests are conducted at least once every 

five years. They were not conducted in 2008. Opportunistic sightings of raptors were uncommon in 2008 

and were recorded in a raptor sighting database. 

Bird mortality is a measure of the impacts of 

NNSA/NSO activities on protected birds. Ten bird 

mortalities were recorded in 2008, and six can be 

attributed to NNSA/NSO activities (Table 13-4). One 

mitigation action was taken to reduce bird mortality; 

NSTec biologists removed the barbed wire fence in 

which a great-horned owl had become entangled and 

died. The fence surrounded a solar panel array used to 

power the air sampling station at Schooner crater in Area 20. NNSA/NSO activities have a low impact on 

protected birds. Since 1990, an average of 13 bird mortalities has been reported each year, which includes deaths 

caused naturally and those caused by NNSA/NSO activities (Figure 13-5). 

Table 13-4. Records of bird mortality on the NTS in 2008 

 Cause of Death 

Species Electrocution Vehicle Tangled in Barbed Wire Unknown

Barn owl (Tyto alba) 2 

Common raven (Corvus corax) 1 

Great-horned owl (Bubo virginianus) 1 

Horned lark (Eremophila alpestris) 1 

Prairie falcon (Falco mexicanus) 1 1 

Red-tailed hawk (Buteo jamaicensis) 1 1 

Sabine’s gull (Xema sabini) 1 

 Total 1 4 1 4 

Figure 13-5. Number of bird deaths recorded on the NTS by year and cause 

Figure 13-4. Western burrowing owl with identification 

bands (Photo by W. K. Ostler, June 20, 2007) 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

1990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008

Number of Dead Birds

Year

Roadkill

Electrocution

Entrapment

Drowning

Predation

Disease

Chick Mortality

Unknown
Ecological Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 13-9

13.3.2.4 State-Protected Small Mammals 

In 2005, the dark kangaroo mouse (Microdipodops megacephalus) and the pale kangaroo mouse (M. pallidus) 

were added to the list of Nevada Protected species under NAC 503 (see Table 13-2). Small mammal trapping was 

initiated in 2005 to help assess these species’ distribution and abundance on the NTS. Trapping continued in 

2008; however, these two species were not captured. 

13.3.2.5 Sensitive Bats 

In 2008, acoustic (bat vocalization) data and concurrent climate data were collected from Camp 17 Pond, 16A 

Tunnel was monitored for bat use, and bat roosts in buildings were documented. The acoustic data collected have 

not yet been analyzed. Monitoring results from 16A Tunnel indicated it was being used by five sensitive bat 

species (see Table 13-3) as a day roost or night roost/foraging site; therefore, installation of a bat-compatible 

closure was recommended and installed. Future surveys will assess whether bats continue to use this tunnel. Bats 

were found in nine NTS buildings. Four were found dead and five were removed and relocated. 

13.3.2.6 Wild Horses 

An annual horse census is conducted by driving selected NTS roads and using cameras to record individual 

markings of animals. Total numbers have dropped from 42 in 2007 to 35 in 2008 (Table 13-5). Their estimated 

range of 213 square kilometers (km2

) in 2008 was very similar in size to the horse range in 2007 (NSTec, 2008). 

Camp 17 Pond and Gold Meadows Spring continue to be important summer water sources for horses. 

Table 13-5. Number of individual horses observed on the NTS by age class, gender, and year 

Age Class Years 

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 

Foals 11 5 6 5 5 8 8 9 

Yearlings 2 0 9 (a) 9 6 8 1 0 

 Gender (b)

 M F M F M F M F M F M F M F M F 

2-Year Olds 2 2 0 2 0 0 4 4 5 4 3 3 2 3 0 0 

3-Year Olds 0 0 2 2 0 2 0 0 4 4 4 4 1 3 1 1 

(>3-Year Olds) 11 20 8 19 8 20 6 21 5 21 7 24 5 27 6 27 

Total (c) 37 33 38 44 49 53 42 35 

(a) 1 of the 9 was found dead (b) M=Male, F=Female (c) Excludes foals and dead horses 

13.3.2.7 Mule Deer 

Mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) abundance has been measured on the NTS during most years since 1989 by 

counting the number of deer sighted at night while driving along a prescribed census route. Deer counts have 

fluctuated from a low of 9.0 deer/night in 1999 to a high of 62.1 deer/night in 2006. The average number of deer 

counted in 2008 was 45.5 deer/night. In 2008, deer density was calculated along different sections of the route 

and along the total route using Program Capture, Version 5.0 (Thomas et al., 2006). Deer density on the Rainier 

Mesa route segment was 4.0 deer/km2

, significantly higher than that of the Pahute Mesa route segment, which was 

2.0 deer/km2

. This is attributed to the presence of more permanent water sources on Rainier Mesa. One 9-km 

section of the Pahute Mesa route, which is in the highest elevation region of the mesa, had a significantly higher 

deer density (6.4 deer/km2

) than the total Pahute Mesa transect. This may indicate an area of higher quality 

habitat for deer. 

13.3.2.8 Mountain Lions 

Mountain lions (Puma concolor) prey on wild horses, deer, antelope (Antilocapra americana), and even desert 

tortoises and pose a potential threat to humans on the NTS. A collaborative effort continued in 2008 with Erin 

Boydston of the U.S. Geological Survey to investigate mountain lion distribution and abundance on the NTS. 

Remote, motion-activated cameras were set up at 17 sites in 2008, and 1,639 photographs or video clips were 

taken. Of these, 15 images were of mountain lions and the remaining were of 14 other species (mainly birds and 
Ecological Monitoring

13-10 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

mammals). Noteworthy images included a 

video clip of a mature male mountain lion at 

Topopah Spring in Area 29 and a photograph 

of three mountain lions on Rainier Mesa, 

possibly an adult female with two yearlings 

(Figure 13-6). The adult female may be the 

same lactating female captured on film in 

October 2007 (NSTec, 2008a). A photograph 

was also taken of a mountain lion within 1.5 

km of buildings at CP6, evidence that they 

occur near active facilities. Further information about distribution, abundance, and 

temporal activity can be found in Hansen et al. 

(2009). 

13.3.2.9 Natural and Man-Made 

Water Sources 

Natural wetlands on the NTS are monitored 

and protected when feasible as unique and 

important habitats for plants and wildlife per the intent of Executive Order (EO) 11990, “Protection of Wetlands.” 

Characterization of these mesic habitats and periodic monitoring of their hydrologic and biotic parameters was 

started in 1997 to help identify natural fluctuations and ranges in measured parameters. Twelve wetlands were 

monitored in 2008 to document water surface area, surface flow, observed disturbances, and wildlife use and 

mortality. The surface areas (in square meters [m2

]) and flow rates (in liters per minute [L/min]) were 

moderately low at the natural springs in 2008 (0.1–600 m2

 and 0.020–1.5 L/min where flow was measurable, 

respectively) (Hansen et al., 2009). No wetlands were damaged by NTS activities. A sensitive species of 

springsnail (Pyrgulopsis turbatrix) was present in 2008 at Cane Spring, its only natural habitat on the NTS. Since 

the Pleistocene, this population has been isolated from others that occur in the Spring Mountains 80 km (50 mi) to 

the south. 

Man-made water sources were monitored in 2008 for wildlife use and mortality. They included 34 plastic-lined 

sumps and 2 radioactive containment ponds. No dead animals were observed in the sumps or ponds. Sediment 

ramps, previously constructed in the plastic-lined sumps, are either working to prevent entrapment of deer and 

other animals, or else animals did not enter any of these sumps in 2008. 

13.3.3 West Nile Virus Surveillance 

West Nile virus (WNV) surveillance on the NTS continued in 2008 for the fifth consecutive year in cooperation 

with Southern Nevada Health District (SNHD) personnel. Ten sites were sampled during 12 surveys. NSTec 

personnel took captured mosquitoes to SNHD personnel for species identification and WNV testing. A total of 89 

individuals representing three species were captured and analyzed. All specimens tested for WNV were negative. 

No new species of mosquitoes were detected in 2008. 

13.4 Habitat Restoration Monitoring Program 

Native habitat disturbed by NNSA/NSO activities or by wildfires is sometimes revegetated by seeding and/or 

planting native plant species. NNSA/NSO evaluates revegetation as a potential method to stabilize soils based on 

site size, future use, nature of soils, annual precipitation, slope, aspect, and site location. Revegetation supports 

the intent of EO 13112, “Invasive Species” to prevent the introduction and spread of non-native species and 

restore native species to disturbed sites. The majority of NNSA/NSO projects for which revegetation has been 

pursued are wildland fire sites and abandoned industrial or nuclear test support sites characterized and remediated 

under the Environmental Restoration (ER) Project. The ER Program has also revegetated soil closure covers (or 

cover caps) to protect against soil erosion and water percolation into buried waste. 

Figure 13-6. Possible adult female (far right) with two yearlings, 

Dick Adams Cutoff Road, Area 12 (Photo by motion-activated 

camera, August 28, 2008) 
Ecological Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 13-11

In 2008, the Habitat Restoration Monitoring Program surveyed eight sites revegetated in 1999 or 2000. Four of 

the sites are staging areas for cleanup activities at Corrective Action Units (CAUs) on the Tonopah Test Range 

(TTR): CAU 400 (Five Points Landfill and the Bomblet Pit), CAU 404 (Rollercoaster Sewage Lagoon), and 

CAU 426 (Cactus Spring Waste Trenches). The other four sites are cover caps, three at TTR (CAU 404, CAU 

426, and CAU 407 [Rollercoaster Radsafe]) and one on the NTS (CAU 110 [U-3ax/bl Subsidence Crater]). 

Plant cover, averaged over the four TTR staging areas, was 10 percent higher in 2008 than in 2007, due mainly to 

the increased abundance of annual plants that were not seeded. The density of forbs fluctuates over the years, and 

in 2008, some of the highest forb densities recorded to date were observed. The majority of the forbs were seeded 

species. The density of the seeded perennial plants has not changed significantly year to year since 2004. At the 

three TTR sites cover caps, total plant cover and perennial plant density were similar to those of the previous few 

years. The density of forbs was the highest observed to date. At the cover cap for U-3ax/bl, total plant cover was 

the highest it has ever been observed. Perennial plant cover, all from shrubs, was higher than in 2007, and annual 

plant cover was more than four times higher than in previous years. 

Overall, both plant cover and density were higher in 2008 than in previous years, primarily due to the increase in 

annual forbs. There were no significant declines in the cover or density of those perennial shrubs and forbs that 

were seeded at any of the eight sites monitored in 2008. 

13.5 Wildland Fire Hazard Assessment 

DOE O 450.1A requires protection of site resources from wildland and operational fires. An annual vegetation 

survey to determine wildland fire hazards is conducted on the NTS each spring. Survey findings are submitted to 

the NTS Fire Marshal and summarized in the annual EMAC report (Hansen et al., 2009). In April and May, 

NSTec biologists visited 211 NTS roadside sampling stations to assess a fuel index that can range from 0 to 10 

(lowest to highest risk of wildfires) based on the presence of fine fuels and woody fuels. Fine fuels refer to finetextured fuels, typically invasive non-native and native grasses and forbs. Woody fuels refer mainly to shrubs. 

Mean precipitation in 2008 was about 50 percent of average at the NTS rain gauges operated by the Air Resources 

Laboratory, Special Operations and Research Division. The mean combined fuels index for all 211 sampling 

stations was 4.81, compared to 4.77, 5.26, 5.64, and 4.88 in 2007, 2006, 2005, and 2004, respectively. Most of 

the biomass in 2008 was biomass persisting from 2007 and 2006. The roadside areas that had the highest risk of 

wildland fires were in Areas 29 and 30. In 2008, there were 20 wildland fires, but less than 1 ha (2.5 ac) was 

burned. Most fires were confined to a single tree or shrub. 

13.6 Biological Monitoring of the NPTEC Complex 

Biological monitoring at the NPTEC in Area 5 is performed whenever there is a risk of significant exposure to 

downwind plants and animals from planned test releases of hazardous materials. The Desert National Wildlife 

Refuge (DNWR) lies just east of the NTS border, approximately 5 km (3 mi) from the NPTEC. The National 

Wildlife Refuge System Administration Act forbids the disturbance or injury of native vegetation and wildlife on 

any National Wildlife Refuge System lands unless permitted by the Secretary of the Interior. The DNWR is 

administered within this System. Biological monitoring is conducted to verify that approved tests do not disperse 

toxic chemicals that harm biota on DNWR. This is also a requirement of NPTEC’s Programmatic Environmental 

Assessment (U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office, 2002). Monitoring involves sampling 

established transects both downwind and upwind of the NPTEC and recording (1) the number and type of dead 

animals observed, (2) the number and type of wildlife observed, and (3) the presence of observed vegetation 

damage. 

In 2008, chemical release test plans for two activities on Frenchman Lake playa, Tarantula III and Black Widow 

151, were reviewed. Chemicals were released at such low volumes or low toxicity that there was no need to 

monitor downwind transects for biological impacts. Baseline monitoring was not conducted at established 

control-treatment transects near the NPTEC in 2008 due to budget and personnel constraints. 
Ecological Monitoring

13-12 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Underground Test Area Project 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 14-1 

14.0 Underground Test Area Sub-Project 

From 1951 to 1992, more than 800 underground nuclear tests were conducted at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) 

(U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office, 2000). Most were conducted hundreds of feet above 

groundwater; however, over 200 were within or near the water table. The Underground Test Area (UGTA) SubProject, the largest component of the Environmental Restoration Project, investigates areas where local or regional groundwater contamination has occurred. These areas have been organized into five UGTA Corrective Action 

Units (CAUs) which are directly related to the geographical and hydrologic areas of past NTS underground 

testing (Figure 14-1). UGTA CAUs are included in the Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO) 

(as amended February 2008) between the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration 

Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) and the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP). Completing 

the schedule of FFACO corrective actions for UGTA CAUs is among the highest mission priorities of NNSA/NSO. 

The UGTA Sub-Project gathers information regarding the hydrology and geology of each CAU and gathers data 

to define groundwater flow rates and direction to determine the nature and location of aquifers. Hydrogeologic 

studies use existing data from past testing and data obtained from drilling and testing newly constructed deep 

wells and from recompleting or rehabilitating existing wells. Figure 14-2 shows the new and historic wells that 

are managed under the UGTA Sub-Project. UGTA wells that are not designated as source term characterization 

wells are made available for routine radiological monitoring (see Section 4.1.2). 

Data from studies are used to produce hydrogeologic models that will be used to predict groundwater flow and 

contaminant transport. Numerous surface and subsurface investigations and computer modeling are performed by 

various participating organizations including National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec); Los Alamos 

National Laboratory (LANL); Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL); the U.S. Geological Survey 

(USGS); the Desert Research Institute (DRI); and Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture (SNJV).

Surface investigations include: 

• Evaluating discharges from springs located downgradient of the NTS 

• Assessing surface geology 

Subsurface investigations include: 

• Drilling deep wells to access groundwater hundreds to thousands of feet below the surface 

• Sampling groundwater to test for radioactive contaminants 

• Assessing NTS hydrology and subsurface geology to determine possible groundwater flow paths and direction 

Hydrogeologic modeling includes: 

• Developing a regional three-dimensional computer groundwater model (International Technology 

Corporation [IT], 1996) to identify any immediate risk and to provide a basis for developing more detailed 

CAU-specific models 

• Developing CAU-specific models of groundwater flow and contaminant transport that geographically cover 

the six former NTS underground nuclear testing areas 

• Developing smaller scale (“sub-CAU scale”) models to investigate specific geographic areas and for 

sensitivity analysis to identify key uncertainties and data needs 

• Identifying, through the CAU-specific models, contaminant boundaries based on the extent of contaminant 

migration at specified regulatory limits 

The final product for each UGTA CAU will be an analytical model that includes a predicted contaminant 

boundary and a negotiated compliance boundary. A monitoring well network will be designed and installed for 

each CAU and used for monitoring to ensure public health and safety (NNSA/NSO, 2006). Closure-in-place with 

monitoring is considered to be the only feasible corrective action because cost-effective groundwater technologies 

have not been developed to effectively remove or stabilize deep subsurface radiological contaminants. 
Underground Test Area Project 

14-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Figure 14-1. Location of UGTA Sub-Project CAUs and model areas 
Underground Test Area Project 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 14-3 Figure 14-2. Existing and proposed UGTA Sub-Project drill holes 
Underground Test Area Project 

14-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

14.1 2008 Subsurface Investigations 

The UGTA Sub-Project pumped and collected groundwater samples from six wells in 2008 (Figure 14-2). Three 

of the wells are associated with underground nuclear tests and are classified as contaminated, two are characterization wells located on Rainier Mesa, and one is associated with the N-Tunnel complex at Rainier Mesa: 

Contaminated Wells Characterization Wells N-Tunnel

UE-2ce ER-12-3 U-12n.10 Vent Hole 

U-4u PS#2A ER-12-4 

U-19ad PS#1A 

All of these wells, except for the U-12n.10 Vent Hole, were purged using downhole electric submersible pumps 

prior to the collection of samples. The U-12n.10 Vent Hole was sampled using a bailer on a wireline. A multiagency team consisting of personnel from LANL and LLNL collected the groundwater samples and analyzed 

them for tritium and other radionuclides. The groundwater from these wells, except the U-12n.10 Vent Hole, was 

discharged into nearby lined sumps in accordance with the Decision Criteria Limits specified in the UGTA Fluid 

Management Plan (Attachment I of U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration 

Nevada Operations Office, 2002). The limited amount of water recovered from bailing operations at the 

U-12n.10 Vent Hole was containerized on location. The tritium concentrations were below detection limits in the 

characterization wells and ranged from 260,000 to 21,000,000 picocuries per liter among the other five wells. 

Tritium concentrations are presented in Section 4.1.10 (see Table 4-8). Groundwater data are maintained by 

SNJV in the UGTA Sub-Project geochemical database (SNJV, 2008a). 

In anticipation of drilling new characterization wells in 2009 (see Section 14.2.1 below), land and ecological 

surveys of proposed access roads and drill sites for the first three wells (ER-20-7, ER-EC-11, and ER-20-8) were 

completed. Work on the access road and drill-pad for the first well, ER-20-7, was started. 

NSTec personnel who support UGTA well drilling operations renewed their State of Nevada well drilling 

operations licenses in 2008. 

14.2 2008 Hydrogeologic Modeling and Supporting Studies 

Construction of CAU-specific groundwater-flow and contaminant-transport models requires a hydrostratigraphic 

framework that depicts the character and extent of hydrostratigraphic units in three dimensions. Four 

hydrostratigraphic framework models, also referred to as geologic models, have been built (see the color-coded 

model areas in Figure 14-1). The four model areas encompass the five UGTA CAUs: 

• Pahute Mesa-Oasis Valley, CAUs 101 and 102 (Bechtel Nevada [BN], 2002) 

• Rainier Mesa-Shoshone Mountain, CAU 99 (NSTec, 2007b) 

• Frenchman Flat, CAU 98 (BN, 2005b) 

• Yucca Flat-Climax Mine, CAU 97 (BN, 2006) 

In 2008, work was conducted for all four model areas. 

14.2.1 Pahute Mesa-Oasis Valley Model Area 

The final draft of the Phase I flow and transport model for the Central and Western Pahute Mesa CAUs 

(CAUs 101 and 102) was completed near the end of 2008 and is documented in SNJV (2009a). A formal review 

and assessment of the Phase I model was conducted in 2008 by the Technical Working Group Pahute Mesa 

Phase II Corrective Action Investigation Plan (CAIP) ad hoc Subcommittee, which included the NNSA/NSO 

UGTA Sub-Project director, subject matter experts consisting of UGTA Sub-Project participants (NSTec, DRI, 

LLNL, LANL, SNJV, USGS), a representative from NDEP, and two representatives of the Community Advisory 
Underground Test Area Project 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 14-5 

Board. Based on the review, additional work activities (Phase II) were proposed in the Central and Western 

Pahute Mesa CAIP. 

Both the Phase I Central and Western Pahute Mesa Transport Model and the CAIP support the statements

released in the 1997 regional groundwater flow and tritium transport report (U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada 

Operations Office, 1997) stating that radioactively contaminated groundwater is predicted to travel off the 

northwestern boundary of the NTS. The flow and transport model predicts the migration of tritium and carbon-14 

off the NTS within 50 years of the first nuclear detonation (1966) in the Pahute Mesa-Oasis Valley Model Area. 

The model predicts that contamination above the Safe Drinking Water Act standard for tritium of 20,000 pCi/L 

should be present off the NTS (Figure 14-3). However, well sampling results have not detected the presence of 

man-made radionuclides downgradient of Pahute Mesa in any of the seven UGTA wells on the Nevada Test and 

Training Range (ER-EC-1, -2A, -4, -5, -6, -7, -8; see Figure 14-3). 

The Subcommittee reviewed the state of knowledge supporting the Phase I flow and transport model, identified 

data needs, identified further analysis work to support Phase II modeling, and prioritized proposed drilling 

locations for new wells (SNJV, 2009b). The CAIP will outline a new well drilling campaign which will involve 

drilling nine wells during the next three years to gather further data regarding the establishment of a long-term 

monitoring system. The UGTA Sub-Project has selected 12 proposed locations for these new Phase II wells 

(Figure 14-2). This well drilling campaign began in May 2009. Continued well drilling and data collection will 

improve and refine the transport model for this area. Scientific objectives, predicted geology and hydrology, 

expected drilling conditions, and well construction and completion designs for the proposed Phase II wells are 

summarized in a well drilling and completion document to be published in 2009 by SNJV. 

Upon completion of the final draft Phase I Central and Western Pahute Mesa Transport Model at the end of 2008, 

NNSA/NSO began preparing a public presentation of the model predictions and the current state of knowledge of 

contaminant migration off the NTS based on offsite well monitoring. This presentation was completed in 

February 2009 when the transport model was published (SNJV, 2009a) and was given at an open house on 

February 18, 2009, at the Beatty Community Center in Beatty, Nevada. Links to the regional transport model, to 

the Phase I Central and Western Pahute Mesa Transport Model, and to the posters presented at the open house can 

be found at the NNSA/NSO web page http://www.nv.doe.gov/emprograms/environment/restoration/ugta.htm. 

Figure 14-3 is adapted from one of the posters presented at the open house. 

14.2.2 Rainier Mesa-Shoshone Mountain Model Area 

The compilation, analysis, and documentation of all hydrologic and transport parameters that will be used to build 

the flow model for the Rainier Mesa-Shoshone Mountain CAU were completed (SNJV, 2008b; 2008c) and a 

modeling strategy for this CAU was developed (SNJV, 2008d). Sub-CAU-scale models were constructed for the 

N-Tunnel area by LANL, and for the T-Tunnel area by DRI. 

14.2.3 Frenchman Flat Model Area 

The Phase II flow model (SNJV, 2006) and transport model (publication in preparation) for the Frenchman Flat 

CAU have been completed and are being used by the SNJV and LANL modeling team for transport analysis. The 

transport analysis work is scheduled to be completed and published in late 2009 by SNJV. The total assemblage 

of models and documentation packages will be submitted for formal external peer review in 2010. Work on the 

development of objectives and criteria for the long-term monitoring well network for the Frenchman Flat CAU 

began in late 2008. 

14.2.4 Yucca Flat-Climax Mine Model Area 

UGTA Sub-Project participants continued in 2008 toward developing flow and transport models for the Yucca 

Flat-Climax Mine CAU. LLNL participants continued to work on a source-term model. Studies are being 

conducted regarding radionuclide transport through NTS volcanic rocks, including the distribution of reactive 

minerals and their radionuclide sorption properties (Carle et al., 2008). 
Underground Test Area Project 

14-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 Figure 14-3. Results of Phase I Central and Western Pahute Mesa transport model
Underground Test Area Project 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 14-7 

14.2.5 Other UGTA Sub-Project Modeling and Studies 

UGTA studies not related to a particular CAU were also conducted. In 2008, three focused hydrogeologic 

investigations were completed: 

• Documentation of the hydrostratigraphic system for modeling groundwater at the NTS 

• Identification and characterization of NTS hydrogeologic units using geophysical logs 

• Hydrogeologic characterization of NTS faults 

The resultant draft reports will be finalized and published by NSTec in 2009. All UGTA Sub-Project reports and 

publications that were completed in 2008 and were subsequently released by June 2009 are listed in Table 14-1. 

The list includes collaborative work with other programs and organizations. Some of the published technical 

reports can be obtained from DOE’s Office of Scientific and Technical Information (OSTI) at 

<http://www.osti.gov/bridge>, and the OSTI identification number (ID) for those reports is provided. The 

hydrogeologic modeling deliverables that were submitted in 2008 to NDEP as FFACO deliverables are presented 

in Chapter 9, Table 9-4). 

Compiling, evaluating, and updating the various databases is an ongoing effort. The water chemistry and fracture 

databases were expanded and updated in 2008. Efforts to compile petrographic, mineralogical, and chemical data 

from outcrops, tunnels, and drill cuttings samples continued and will be included in updates of A Petrographical, 

Geochemical, and Geophysical Database and Framework for the Southwestern Nevada Volcanic Field

(Warren et al., 2003). 

Table 14-1. UGTA Sub-Project publications completed in 2008 and released prior to June 2009 

Report Reference 

Spatial Variability of Reactive Mineral and Radionuclide Kd Distributions in the Tuff Confining 

Unit: Yucca Flat, Nevada Test Site (OSTI ID 926431) 

Carle et al., 2008 

Hydrologic Resources Management Program and Underground Test Area Project FY 2006 

Progress Report (OSTI ID 945573) 

Culham et al., 2008 

Letter Report: Yucca Fracture Mapping Dickerson and Hand, 

2008 

Predevelopment Water-Level Contours for Aquifers in the Rainier Mesa and Shoshone Mountain 

Area of the Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada (OSTI ID 932993)

Fenelon et al., 2008 

Geochemical and Isotopic Evaluation of Groundwater Movement in Corrective Action Unit 99: 

Rainier Mesa and Shoshone Mountain, Nevada Test Site. 

Hershey et al., 2008 

Actinide Sorption in Rainier Mesa Tunnel Waters from the Nevada Test Site (OSTI ID 926020) Pihong et al., 2008 

Analysis of Fractures in Cores from the Tuff Confining Unit Beneath Yucca Flat, Nevada Test 

Site (OSTI ID 92885) 

Prothro, 2008 

Geochem08.mdb and User Guide to the Comprehensive Water Quality Database for 

Groundwater in the Vicinity of the Nevada Test Site 

SNJV, 2008a 

Phase I Hydrologic Data for the Groundwater Flow and Contaminant Transport Model of 

Corrective Action Unit 99: Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain, Nevada Test Site, Nye 

County, Nevada (OSTI ID 932406) 

SNJV, 2008b 

Phase I Contaminant Transport Parameters for the Groundwater Flow and Contaminant Transport 

Model of Corrective Action Unit 99: Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain, Nevada Test Site, 

Nye County, Nevada (OSTI ID 932410)

SNJV, 2008c 

Modeling Approach/Strategy for Corrective Action Unit 99: Rainier Mesa and Shoshone 

Mountain, Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada (OSTI ID 943562) 

SNJV, 2008d 

Phase I Transport Model of CAUs 101 and 102: Central and Western Pahute Mesa, Nevada Test 

Site, Nye County, Nevada (OSTI ID 948559) 

SNJV, 2009a 
Underground Test Area Project 

14-8 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Table 14-1. UGTA Sub-Project publications completed in 2008 and released prior to June 2009 (continued) 

Report Reference 

Phase II Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Units 101 and 102: Central 

and Western Pahute Mesa, Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada 

SNJV, 2009b 

Documentation Report for Rainier Mesa Test Information Compiled for the UGTA Project Townsend, 2008 

Completion Report for the Well ER-6-2 Site, Corrective Action Unit 97: Yucca Flat-Climax 

Mine (OSTI ID 928812) 

NNSA/NSO, 2008a 

Analysis of the Variability of Classified and Unclassified Radiological Source Term Inventories 

in the Frenchman Flat Area, Nevada Test Site (OSTI ID 945617)

Zhao and Zavarin, 

2008a 

Analysis of the Variability of Classified and Unclassified Radiological Source Term Inventories 

in the Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain Area, Nevada Test Site (OSTI ID 945619) 

Zhao and Zavarin, 

2008b 

On the Appropriate “Equivalent Aperture” for the Description of Solute Transport in Single 

Fractures: Laboratory-scale Experiments 

Zheng et al., 2008 
Other Groundwater Programs, Projects, and Activities

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 15-1 

15.0 Groundwater Protection Programs, Projects, and 

Activities 

This chapter presents other U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site 

Office (NNSA/NSO) programs and 2008 activities related to the protection of groundwater which have not been 

discussed in previous chapters of this report (Chapter 4, Chapter 6 [Section 6.2], Chapter 9 [Sections 9.1.6 and 

9.1.7], and Chapter 14). 

It is the policy of NNSA/NSO to prevent pollutants, both from past and current Nevada Test Site (NTS) activities, 

from impacting the local groundwater. The groundwater protection goals of NNSA/NSO are to (1) prevent future 

groundwater contamination, (2) control existing contamination, and (3) protect groundwater quality and 

availability for current and future NTS missions. NNSA/NSO acknowledges that the greatest potential for 

environmental impact at the NTS is the resumption of underground testing of nuclear devices and their 

components. If such testing were resumed in the future, the groundwater protection policy of the NNSA/NSO 

would be to minimize, rather than eliminate, the impacts of testing. 

In 2008, the NNSA/NSO Hydrology Program Manager directed the revision of the Groundwater Protection 

Program Plan for the National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO, 2008b). With 

the aid of this internal plan, the Hydrology Program Manager communicates and helps facilitate furtherance of the 

NNSA/NSO groundwater protection policy and goals and helps integrate site-wide groundwater-related activities 

across the multiple NNSA/NSO programs. 

15.1 Hydrologic Resources Management Program 

The Hydrologic Resources Management Program (HRMP) is a groundwater program that is currently unfunded. 

Up until 2007, its function has been to provide NNSA/NSO with hydrologic data and information on groundwater 

supplies to support ongoing and future activities at the NTS. It has provided a sound technical basis for NTS 

groundwater use decisions and assessments of the potential impacts of large-scale water withdrawals from or near 

NTS groundwater basins. The HRMP has provided long-term support to NNSA/NSO through studies of the 

occurrence, distribution, and movement of radionuclides in groundwater at the NTS and in characterizing groundwater recharge of the region. When funded, participants in the HRMP include Los Alamos National Laboratory, 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), and the Desert Research Institute. 

The HRMP may be reinstated at a future time, should adequate funding again become available. 

15.2 Water Level, Temperature, and Usage Monitoring by the USGS 

The USGS Nevada Water Science Center collects, compiles, stores, and reports hydrologic data used in 

determining the local and regional hydrogeologic conditions in and around the NTS. Hydrologic data are 

collected quarterly or semi-annually from wells within two monitoring networks: an onsite and an offsite network 

(wells located on and off of the NTS). 

By the end of 2008, the USGS monitored water levels in 187 wells. This included 92 wells on the NTS and 95 

wells off the NTS. Also during 2008, annual temperature data were collected from wells at 1.5 and 16.8 meters 

(5 and 55 feet) below the water surface. All water-level and temperature data are posted on the USGS/ 

Department of Energy (DOE) Cooperative Studies in Nevada Web page at <http://nevada.usgs.gov/doe%5Fnv/>. 

The water-level data are also published in the USGS Nevada Water Science Center Annual Water-Resources Data 

Report available at <http://nevada.usgs.gov/>. 

Groundwater use from water-supply wells on the NTS is collected using flow meters that are read monthly by the 

NTS Management and Operating subcontractor and then reported to the USGS Nevada Water Science Center. 

The principal water supply wells monitored during 2008 included J-12 WW, UE-16d WW, WW #4, WW #4A, 

WW 5B, WW 5C, WW 8, and WW C-1. The USGS compiles the annual water-use data and reports annual 
Other Groundwater Programs, Projects, and Activities

15-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

withdrawals in millions of gallons. Discharge data from these wells for 2008 have been compiled, processed, and 

entered onto the USGS/DOE Cooperative Studies in Nevada Web site at 

<http://nevada.usgs.gov/doe_nv/wateruse/wu_map.htm>. Discharge from these wells during 2008 was 

approximately 170.5 million gallons (Figure 15-1). 

Water-use data are also published in the USGS Nevada Water Science Center Annual Water-Resources Data 

Report on a water-year calendar (October–September). The Water-Year 2008 report is available at 

<http://nevada.usgs.gov/> and will include monthly water-use data for each well listed from October 2007 

through September 2008. 

The USGS also continued to maintain and develop the Death Valley Regional Groundwater Flow System Model 

and manage the NTS well hydrologic and geologic information database. 

Annual Withdrawals from Nevada Test Site, 1951 to Present

0

200

400

600

800

1,000

1,200

19511953195519571959196119631965196719691971197319751977197919811983198519871989199119931995199719992001200320052007

Year

Withdrawals, in millions of gallons

Metered or reported

Estimated

Figure 15-1. Annual withdrawals from the NTS, 1951 to present 

15.3 Wellhead Protection 

NNSA/NSO seeks to protect groundwater from the infiltration or introduction of contaminants at the wellhead 

through a variety of procedures and programs. Wellhead protection areas on the NTS have been identified by the 

State for NTS water supply wells, and inventories and assessments of potential contaminant sources within these 

areas have been performed. Wellheads are routinely surveyed to identify potential new contaminant sources. 

Wellheads are protected from public access by locked well caps and by the prohibition of public access onto NTS 

land enforced by site security. NNSA/NSO wells that are sampled are protected through adherence to proper 

groundwater sampling procedures developed by each NTS contractor or tenant organization. These procedures 

must be identified and implemented as a condition of well access authorization under an NNSA/NSO permit 

called a Real Estate/Operations Permit. Also, the Borehole Management Program protects groundwater “at the 

wellhead” for boreholes that have been abandoned. These boreholes are plugged to prevent possible aquifer 

contamination. This program and their 2008 activities are described below. 

15.3.1 Borehole Management Program 

More than 4,000 boreholes were drilled on and off the NTS in support of nuclear testing. They include 

emplacement holes for nuclear devices, post-shot investigation boreholes, exploratory holes, instrument holes, 

potable water wells, construction water supply wells, monitoring wells, and other special purpose boreholes. The 

Borehole Management Program has identified 871 unneeded boreholes and has plugged 617 of them (as of 
Other Groundwater Programs, Projects, and Activities

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 15-3 

January 2009). Of the unneeded boreholes, 151 are believed to penetrate groundwater and underground nuclear 

test cavities. Of these 151, 93 have been plugged (as of January 2009). Plugging may reduce the potential for 

boreholes to act as conduits for contaminants transported down the borehole from the surface or from contaminated aquifers to non-contaminated aquifers. They are plugged by National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec), 

according to Nevada Administrative Code 534.420–534.427 requirements, to the extent possible. The database of 

boreholes is maintained by NSTec. A fiscal year progress report is sent annually to the Nevada Division of Water 

Resources. In April and May of 2008, a total of 40 boreholes were plugged (Table 15-1). 

 Table 15-1. NTS boreholes plugged in 2008 

Surface Casing 

NTS 

Area Borehole 

Year 

Constructed 

Hole Size 

(in.) 

Original 

Depth (ft) Size (in.) Depth (ft) 

Depth 

Plugged 

From to 

Surface (ft) 

2 U-2gg PS #1A 1989 9.875 2035 10.75 110 1521 

2 U-2cj PS #1A 1969 9.875 1340 10.75 90 45 

3 UE-3ct 1975 12.25 1230 20 120 120 

3 U-3gh PPS #1A 1968 12.25 72 7.625 69 69 

3 U-3kb PS #1D 1975 9.875 1813 13.375 117 33 

3 U-3ek PS #1V 1966 12.25 886 13.375 47 287 

3 U-3bi 1967 42 890 29 870 23 

3 U-3bm PS #4 1962 6.125 875 7.625 32 40 

3 U-3bm PS #1 1962 9.625 872 10.75 40 504 

3 U-3bm PS #2 1962 9.625 870 10.75 40 277 

3 U-3ap PS #2 1962 6.125 1200 7 950 964 

3 U-3bd PS #1 1962 9.625 1511 4.5 1490 970 

3 U-3bs PS #1D 1966 9.875 1991 13.375 805 805 

4 U-4c PPS #1D 1966 9.875 1194 13.375 1147 100 

4 U-4q PS #1A 1984 9.875 2449 10.75 123 17 

4 U-4ah PS #1A 1978 9.875 1351 10.75 112 1028 

4 U-4t PS #1A 1986 9.875 2404 13.375 120 1736 

4 U-4t PS #2A 1986 9.875 1863 10.750 109 1751 

7 U-7m PPS #1D 1966 9.875 875 13.375 835 95 

7 U-7s PPS #1D 1966 9.875 980 13.375 938 74 

7 U-7s PS #2D 1972 9 2181 13.375 60 31 

8 UE-8d 1970 9.625 1246 10.75 80 1167 

8 UE-8i 1973 12.25 1200 13.375 119 813 

9 U-9cr PS #1A 1981 9.625 1432 10.75 108 1051 

9 U-9cr PS #2A 1981 9.875 1109 10.75 110 1077 

9 U-9cn PS #1A 1982 9.875 1158 10.75 119 930 

9 U-9u PS #1A 1962 9.875 643 10.75 40 382 

9 U-9cg PS #1A 1977 9.875 1213 10.75 125 1124 

9 U-9ce PS #1A 1966 9.875 1635 10.75 108 670 

9 U-9cl PS #1A 1975 9.875 1267 10.75 131 911 

9 U-9cq PS #1A 1981 9.875 1304 10.75 112 199 

10 U-10am #2 PS #1A 1969 9.875 850 10.75 114 423 

12 Whiterock Springs 3a 1959 5.75 10 none none 6 

12 Whiterock Springs 3 1959 5.75 41 none none 26 

26 Pluto 1 1962 NA 778 4.5 24 21 

26 Pluto 3 1962 NA 263 4.5 24 23 

26 Pluto 6 1962 NA 1000 3.5 NA(a) 124 

26 Pluto 7 1962 NA NA 4.0 NA 113 

26 Pluto 10 1962 NA 802 3.5 NA 36 

26 Pluto 11 1962 NA 800 3.5 NA 88 

(a) Not available 
Other Groundwater Programs, Projects, and Activities

15-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

15.4 Spill Prevention and Management 

NSTec has established procedures for the prevention, control, cleanup, and reporting of spills of hazardous and 

toxic materials, or any other regulated material, into the environment. Spills include releases from underground 

tanks, aboveground tanks, containers, equipment, or vehicles. All users of the NTS are instructed to prevent, 

control, and report spills. NSTec ensures that spills are reported to proper state and county regulatory agencies, if 

required, and are properly mitigated by removing and disposing the contaminated media. All federal and state 

regulations concerning spills under the Clean Water Act, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, 

Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act, and the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know 

Act are followed. These activities help ensure that surface spills or subsurface releases of contaminants do not 

infiltrate to groundwater or flow into surface waters at the North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF) and the Remote 

Sensing Laboratory–Nellis facility. Reportable spills that occurred during 2008 are described in Section 2.10 of 

this document. 

15.5 Groundwater Conservation 

DOE Order DOE 430.2B, “Renewable Energy and Transportation Management,” includes a water conservation 

goal to reduce potable water use by at least 16 percent by 2015 relative to the baseline of the facility/site’s potable 

water use in fiscal year (FY) 2007. Other goals within the order that relate to water conservation include the 

installation of metering systems for water, auditing water use, using water efficient products, and increasing the 

use of recycled, reclaimed, and grey water where possible. In 2008, NSTec developed an FY 2009 NNSA/NSO 

Energy Executable Plan (NSTec, 2008b) that identified plans to address these water conservation goals. The 

FY 2009 plans include a water study to baseline potential water reduction and identify water reduction projects, a 

project to install water meters at NLVF through an Energy Savings Performance Contract awarded by 

NNSA/NSO, and the purchase and installation of WaterSense labeled products. 

The NSTec Environmental Management System (EMS) will include water conservation Performance Objectives 

to ensure compliance with DOE O 430.2B, as approved by NNSA/NSO. An EMS performance target established 

for FY 2009 is to reduce water usage by 2 percent below FY 2008 usage (see Section 17.2.4, Table 17-2). 
Meteorological Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 16-1 

16.0 Meteorological Monitoring 

16.1 Meteorological Monitoring Goals 

Meteorological and climatological data are collected on the Nevada Test Site (NTS) by the Air Resources 

Laboratory, Special Operations and Research Division (ARL/SORD). Data are collected through the 

Meteorological Data Acquisition (MEDA) system, a network of over 30 mobile meteorological towers located 

primarily on the NTS. The MEDA system became operational in 1981, replacing an older system. MEDA is 

used to measure, transmit, and display vital meteorological data to SORD meteorologists and U.S. Department of 

Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) customers. These data are 

used daily for operational support to a wide variety of projects on the NTS and form the climatological database 

for the NTS. The data are also used in safety analysis reports, emergency response activities, radioactive waste 

remediation projects, environmental reports, and consequence assessments. The NTS Site Description, 

Section 3.0, presents descriptive NTS climatological data collected by the MEDA system. The NTS Site 

Description is included as a separate file on the compact disc of this 2008 report for easy reference. 

16.2 MEDA Station Locations 

A standard MEDA unit consists of an enclosed 

trailer, a portable 10-meter (m) (32.8-feet [ft]) 

tower, meteorological instrumentation, a 

microprocessor, and a microwave radio transmitter 

powered by a battery and solar recharge system 

(Figure 16-1). Locations of the MEDA stations are 

shown in Figure 16-2. All towers were sited 

according to standards set by the Federal 

Meteorological Handbook No. 1 (National Oceanic 

and Atmospheric Administration, 1995]) and the 

World Meteorological Organization, 2002) so as 

not to be influenced by natural or man-made 

obstructions or by heat dissipation and generation 

systems. MEDA station locations are based on the 

following criteria: (1) access by road, (2) 

line-of-sight to a microwave repeater, and (3) 

project support. A primary goal of the network is 

to provide details in the surface wind field for 

emergency response activities related to the 

transport and dispersion of hazardous materials. 

Another primary goal is to provide data used in 

computing offsite radiological dose estimates. 

16.3 MEDA Station 

Instrumentation 

MEDA station instrumentation is located on top of 

the tower and on booms oriented into the prevailing 

wind direction and at a minimum distance of two tower widths from the tower. Wind direction and speed are 

measured at the 10-m (32.8-ft) level, in accordance with the American National Standard for Determining 

Meteorological Information at Nuclear Facilities (American Nuclear Society, 2005) specifications. 

Figure 16-1. Example of a typical MEDA station with a 

 10-meter tower 
Meteorological Monitoring

16-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 Figure 16-2. MEDA station locations on and near the NTS
Meteorological Monitoring

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 16-3 

Ambient temperature, relative humidity, and atmospheric pressure measurements are taken at approximately the 

2-m (6.6-ft) level so as to be within the surface boundary layer. Observations are collected and transmitted every 

15 minutes on the quarter hours. Wind data are 5-minute averages of speed and direction. The peak wind speed 

is the fastest instantaneous gust measured within the 15-minute time interval. Temperature, relative humidity, and 

pressure are instantaneous measurements. 

16.4 Rain Gauge Network 

ARL/SORD also operates and maintains a climatological rain gauge network on the NTS (Figure 16-3). This 

network consists of 16 Belford Series 5-780 Universal Precipitation Gauges and one Vaisala 44A Tipping Bucket 

Precipitation Gauge. The 16 Belford gauges are strip chart recorders that are read at least once every 30 days. 

The Vaisala gauge is part of the MEDA network and reports data every fifteen minutes to the weather database. 

Once read and checked, the data are entered into the SORD precipitation climatological database. Data are 

recorded as daily totals. Under special circumstances, 1- to 3-hour totals can be obtained. 

16.5 Data Access 

The meteorological parameters measured at each station, along with other information, are listed on the SORD 

Web site <http://www.sord.nv.doe.gov>. MEDA data are also processed and archived in the ARL/SORD 

climatological database. Climatological data summaries are posted on the ARL/SORD Web site under the 

Climate section. SORD meteorologists provide specially tailored climatological summaries by request through 

NNSA/NSO. For new NTS projects and facility modifications that may produce radiological emissions, wind 

data from the MEDA stations are used to calculate potential radiological doses to members of the public residing 

near the NTS (see Section 3.1.7). 
Meteorological Monitoring

16-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Figure 16-3. Climatological rain gauge network on the NTS 
Integrated Safety Management System and Environmental Management System 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 17-1 

17.0 Integrated Safety Management System and 

Environmental Management System 

A plan to integrate environment, safety, and health (ES&H) management programs at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) 

was developed and initiated at the NTS in 1996. The NTS Integrated Safety Management System (ISMS) is 

designed to ensure the systematic integration of ES&H concerns into management and work practices so that 

missions are accomplished safely. The term safety is used synonymously with environment, safety, and health

throughout the NTS ISMS implementation policies to encompass protection of the public, the workers, and the 

environment. The seven guiding principles of ISMS and the five core functions are shown below. 

Seven Guiding Principles Five Core Functions 

Line management is directly responsible for the protection of the 

public, the workers, and the environment. 

Clear roles and responsibilities for ES&H are established and 

maintained. 

Personnel competence is commensurate with their responsibilities. 

Resources are effectively allocated to address ES&H, programmatic, 

and operational considerations with balanced priorities. 

ES&H standards and requirements are established that ensure adequate 

protection of the employees, the public, and the environment. 

Administrative and engineering controls to prevent and mitigate 

ES&H hazards are tailored to the work being performed. 

Operations are authorized.

Define the scope of work. 

Identify and analyze the 

hazards and environmental 

aspects associated with the 

work. 

Develop and implement 

hazard and aspect controls. 

Perform work within the 

controls. 

Provide feedback on the 

adequacy of the controls for 

continuous improvement. 

The use of an ISMS helps ensure that (1) all levels of program organizations are accountable for environmental 

protection, (2) all projects are planned with ES&H concerns in mind, and (3) continuous improvements in 

program implementation occur. 

In 2000, Executive Order (EO) 13148, “Greening the Government Through Leadership in Environmental 

Management,” was issued. It required all federal agencies to adopt an Environmental Management System 

(EMS). It applied to most of the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) 

and to U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and NNSA contractors. An EMS is a business management practice 

that allows an organization to strategically address its ES&H matters. EMSs are designed to incorporate concern 

for environmental performance throughout an organization, with the ultimate goal being continual reduction of 

the organization’s impact on the environment. EMS implementation reflects accepted quality management 

principles based on the “Plan, Do, Check, Act” model, using a standard process to identify goals, implement 

them, determine progress, and make improvements to ensure continual improvement. 

In January 2003, DOE O 450.1, “Environmental Protection Program” was issued. This order implemented the 

requirements of EO 13148, requiring DOE and NNSA facilities to have an EMS that is fully integrated into each 

site’s ISMS by December 31, 2005. 

In January 2007, EO 13423, “Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management,” 

was issued and EO 13148 was revoked. EO 13423 requires federal facilities to begin establishing goals to 

improve efficiency in energy and water use, procure goods and services that use sustainable environmental 

practices, reduce the amount of toxic materials acquired, maintain a cost-effective waste prevention and recycling 

program, ensure construction and major renovation of buildings, incorporate sustainable practices, reduce the use 

of petroleum products and increase the use of alternative fuels in motor vehicles, and acquire and dispose of 

electronic products using environmentally sound practices. 
Integrated Safety Management System and Environmental Management System 

17-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

In February 2008, DOE Order DOE O 430.2B, “Departmental Energy, Renewable Energy and Transportation 

Management,” was issued. The requirements and goals in this order are similar to those in EO 13423 and are 

discussed in Section 17.3. 

In June 2008, DOE O 450.1 was superceded by DOE O 450.1A of the same title. The updated order establishes 

requirements for implementing EO 13423 and achieving DOE sustainable environmental stewardship goals. This 

chapter presents integrated EMS status and activities for 2008 that flow from compliance with DOE O 450.1A. 

17.1 Scope of Chapter 

This chapter reflects the status of EMS and ISMS in 2008 under National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec), 

the current Management and Operating (M&O) contractor. Work in previous years on the M&O’s EMS and 

ISMS integration can be found in previous Nevada Test Site Environmental Reports.

17.2 Elements and Status of the NTS EMS 

In 2006, a commitment was made by NSTec to pursue ISO 14001 Certification (ISO stands for the International 

Organization for Standardization) as the method of satisfying the requirement of DOE O 450.1 to have an EMS, 

and to have it audited by a qualified outside party. NSTec committed in their contract proposal to obtain the 

certification by June 30, 2009. An internal management assessment had been performed in December 2006 to 

evaluate the existing environmental program against the requirements of the ISO 14001:2004 Standard. The 

assessment showed that the 2006 program was mature and effective, but that improvements had to be made in 

some of the elements to satisfy all the rigorous ISO 14001 requirements. In 2007, an Implementation Strategy 

was developed to address the identified deficiencies, and an Environmental Working Group (EWG) representing 

all operating parts of the company was formed to direct the implementation strategy. Monthly meetings were 

held, at which the environmental staff reviewed implementation progress with the Executive Leadership Council 

NSTec President and his direct reports. Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance (LRQA) was contracted to be 

NSTec’s ISO 14001 certifying company, and the NSTec stretch goal was to obtain the certification by June 30, 

2008. In June of 2008, LRQA performed the certification assessment and awarded NSTec with ISO 14001 

certification. The 2008 status of each ISO element is discussed in the subsections below. 

17.2.1 NTS Environmental Policy 

The Environmental Protection Policy is a statement of NSTec’s intentions and principles regarding overall ES&H 

performance. It provides a framework for planning and action. The policy was streamlined in an April 28, 2008, 

revision and is posted on the NSTec Programs Internet Website (http://www.nstec.com/programs/index.htm) 

available to the public. The policy contains the following key goals and commitments: 

• Protect environmental quality and human welfare by implementing EMS practices. 

• Identify and comply with all applicable DOE orders and federal, state, and local environmental laws and 

regulations. 

• Identify and mitigate environmental aspects early in project planning. 

• Establish environmental objectives, targets, and performance measures. 

• Collaborate with employees, customers, subcontractors, and key suppliers on sustainable development and 

pollution prevention efforts. 

• Communicate and instill an organizational commitment to environmental excellence in company activities 

through processes of continual improvement. 

17.2.2 Environmental Aspects 

When operations have an environmental aspect, NSTec implements the EMS to minimize or eliminate any 

potential impact. NSTec evaluates its operations by performing a Hazard Assessment (HA), identifies the aspects 

of operations that can impact the environment, and determines the appropriate mitigation actions. The HA 

requires the activity manager to go through a series of questions that identify potential environmental impacts. 
Integrated Safety Management System and Environmental Management System 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 17-3 

The assessment also lists available mitigations, such as training and applicable procedures and guidance. The 

completed HA is then reviewed and, when approved by the NSTec Environment, Safety, Health, and Quality 

(ESH&Q) Division, becomes part of the authorization basis for performing the work. National Environmental 

Policy Act documents, Health and Safety Plans, and Execution Plans also identify aspects that can have potential 

impacts. Each of these documents then requires that mitigation actions be identified to minimize the risk of 

adverse impacts. In 2008, the EWG updated the list of aspects for fiscal year (FY) 2009 (October 1, 2008, 

through September 30, 2009) and applied a risk matrix to determine which aspects were significant. NSTec has 

determined that the following aspects of its operations have the potential to affect the environment: 

Significant aspects:

• Air quality 

• Drinking water quality 

• Energy and fuel use 

• Environmental restoration 

• Groundwater protection 

• Hazardous, radioactive, and mixed waste 

generation and management 

• Wastewater management (generation and 

disposal) 

Other aspects:

• Building construction and renovation 

• Building demolition 

• Electronics stewardship 

• Industrial chemical storage and use 

• Non-hazardous waste generation and 

management 

• Purchase of materials and equipment 

• Recycling and management of surplus 

property and materials 

• Resource protection (cultural, biological, and 

raw materials) 

• Surface water and storm water runoff 

• Water usage 

17.2.3 Legal and Other Requirements 

To implement the compliance commitments of the Environmental Protection Policy and to meet its legal requirements, NSTec monitors changes in federal, state, or local environmental regulations and DOE orders. Changes 

are communicated to affected parts of the company, along with recommended actions to satisfy the new 

requirements. The changes frequently require amendments to operating permits, modifications to record-keeping 

or hours of operation, revisions to procedures, and upgrades to training. Execution Plans identify requirements 

applicable to each NSTec-managed facility, project, and work activity by referencing the requirements in the 

NSTec Prime Contract that apply to that plan. Execution Plans are reviewed annually and updated as necessary. 

17.2.4 Objectives, Targets, and Programs 

Objectives and targets are developed by NSTec on an FY (versus calendar year) basis. NSTec first evaluates 

which aspects are considered significant, and then, with senior management input, sets objectives to improve 

performance with respect to those aspects. Finally, targets to meet the objectives are established by the operating 

organizations and their member of the EWG. Targets can also come from goals identified in DOE orders. The 

potential objectives and targets are then presented to the Executive Leadership Council for final selection and 

approval. Organizations within NSTec are assigned responsibility for each target, develop action plans detailing 

how they will achieve their objectives and targets, and commit the necessary resources to successfully implement 

them. A company directive outlines the responsibilities of all organizations involved in establishing, tracking, 

and reporting progress on environmental targets. Objectives and targets established and implemented for FY 2008 

are described in Table 17-1. The objectives and targets established in 2008 for FY 2009 are described in Table 17-2. 

NSTec also works with U.S Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office 

(NNSA/NSO) to clearly define expectations and performance measures that directly address NNSA/NSO 

priorities and concerns. These activities, which are associated with award and incentive fees, are tracked by the 

NSTec Prime Contract Office. 

Several environmental management programs exist throughout NSTec. These programs are discussed in 

sequential chapters of this report. 
17-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 200

8

Table 17-1. FY 2008 EMS objectives and targets 

Environmental Aspect Objective Target R

Air Quality Increase the percentage of alternate 

fuel use relative to overall fuel consumption. 

Increase alternative fuel use at the NTS by at least 10% over FY 2007 usage. 

Exceeded Target – A of alternative fuel use 

Reduce electrical energy use per gross square foot by 3% in comparison to the FY 2007 2% reduction goal baseline. 

Exceeded Target – Re

Energy Use Reduce energy use. 

Retrofit/install 200 individual building-smart electrical meters at the NTS to identify those buildings where improvements can be made.

Partially Met Target 

off at some buildings tschedule, but all were 

Groundwater Protection Protect groundwater quality. Prepare 45 unneeded boreholes for 

plugging and plug 40. 

Met Target. 

Non-hazardous Waste Generation and Management 

Increase recycling. At the T-Tunnel cleanup site, recycle 

or salvage 30% by weight of material that is nonradioactive. 

Exceeded Target – 34removed was sent off s

Purchase of Material and Equipment 

Lease environmentally friendly electronics. 

Lease only computers that are Electronic Product Environmental Assessment Tool (EPEAT)-registered as existing ones are replaced. By end of FY 2008, have 100% of leased desktops and 90% of leased laptops be EPEAT-registered. 

Exceeded Target – 10and 100% of leased lapregistered. 
Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 17-5 

 Table 17-2. FY 2009 proposed objectives and targets 

Environmental Aspect Objective Target 

Air Quality Reduce hazardous emissions. Replace three fuel burning boilers with high effiDrinking Water Quality Upgrade water system to stabilize 

pressures and reduce maintenance. 

Replace approximately 823 meters (2,700 feet) o

Reduce energy use. Reduce electrical energy use per gross square fo

to the FY 2008 baseline. 

Energy and Fuel Use 

Increase the percentage of alternate fuel use relative to overall fuel consumption.

Increase alternative fuel use at the NTS by at leausage.

Environmental Restoration Close/remediate sites identified in the 

Federal Facility Agreement and Consent Order. 

Complete closures of four Corrective Action Un

Groundwater Protection Protect groundwater quality. Prepare 80 unneeded boreholes for plugging and Hazardous, Radioactive, and Mixed Waste Generation and Management 

Reduce environmental contamination risk at vulnerable sites. 

Take identified corrective actions to mitigate top Vulnerable Sites List. This is a prioritized list otype of identified corrective action to remove or environmental problem (usually a chemical relea

Reuse excavated soil from excavation of a new disposal cell in Area 5. 

Reuse 100% of the soil excavated from Pit 17 as Area 5 disposal cells. 

Non-hazardous Waste Generation and Management 

Reuse pavement removed from roads. Use a process that removes existing pavement an

grinds up the material, and then applies the matesubsurface. 

Water Usage Reduce water usage. Reduce water usage by 2% below FY 2008 usag
Integrated Safety Management System and Environmental Management System 

17-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

17.2.5 Resources, Roles, Responsibilities, and Authorities 

All employees at NSTec have specific roles and responsibilities in key areas, including environmental protection. 

These are identified in company procedures and work packages. Employee-stop-work authority applies to 

potential environmental issues as well as health and safety problems. Job-specific environmental training is 

identified for workers and included on their company-required training matrix. NSTec Environmental Services 

(ES) technical support personnel assist the line organizations with developing and meeting their environmental 

responsibilities.

17.2.6 Competence, Training, and Awareness 

Extensive training on NSTec’s EMS requirements has been provided to staff whose responsibilities include 

environmental protection. The training program includes general environmental awareness for all employees, 

regulatory compliance training for selected staff, and specific courses for managers, internal assessors, and 

operations personnel whose work can impact the environment. In May 2007, all members of the EWG and other 

key environmental people attended a one-week training course on ISO 14001 Implementation and Auditing. In 

2008, all upper and mid-level managers received a 4-hour ISO awareness briefing from an outside subcontractor, 

and all employees received an awareness briefing specific to the NSTec ISO 14001 program. EMS awareness is 

also part of the training that all new employees receive.

17.2.7 Communication 

NSTec communicates environmental issues to employees through e-mails, articles in newsletters, safety meetings, 

new-hire orientations, job hazard analyses, pre-task briefings, and company procedures. Energy issues are 

communicated through the intranet employee publication, The Joule. NSTec assists NNSA/NSO in soliciting 

input from interested external parties such as community members, activists, civic organizations, Indian tribes, 

elected officials, and regulators. This is accomplished primarily through Community Advisory Board (CAB) 

meetings. The CAB consists of 10–15 volunteer Nevada citizens who represent rural and urban areas. CAB 

meetings occur monthly and focus on the Environmental Management program and projects on site. 

Environmental Management also sponsors a Speakers Bureau, which provides representatives a chance to give 

presentations to schools, groups, or organizations and sponsors community exhibits and displays for 

communicating NTS environmental issues and interacting one-on-one with the public. All external 

communications are coordinated through NNSA/NSO. 

17.2.8 Documentation 

NSTec has comprehensive environmental documents as part of the EMS that detail information on regulatory 

requirements, site-wide operating procedures, and work control procedures on how to control processes and 

perform work in a way that protects the environment. The current “Environmental Management System 

Description” was updated in July 2008 to incorporate the program improvements made in pursuit of ISO 

Certification. 

17.2.9 Control of Documents 

The NSTec document control system ensures effective management of procedures and other requirements 

documents. When facilities require additional procedures to control their work, document control protocols are 

implemented to ensure that workers have access to the most current versions of procedures. Documents of longterm NNSA/NSO or NSTec interest are archived and are destroyed according to schedules mandated by federal 

laws. 
Integrated Safety Management System and Environmental Management System 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 17-7 

17.2.10 Operational Control 

Operations are evaluated through HAs and work packages for the adequacy of current controls to prevent or 

minimize impacts to the environment. Task-specific procedures or work plans are developed when needed. 

Additional administrative or engineered controls are identified, and plans for upgrades and improvements are 

developed and implemented. Assessments are currently being performed to make sure that all environmental 

issues identified in upper-tier documents like HAs are rolled down to the work level plans. Lessons learned and 

critiques are incorporated into work processes to continually improve environmental performance. 

17.2.11 Emergency Preparedness and Response 

NSTec has an emergency preparedness and response program and specialized onsite staff to provide timely 

response to hazardous materials releases or other environmental emergencies. There is a comprehensive NSTec 

Emergency Management Plan, and many facilities have a facility Emergency Management Plan where all credible 

scenarios are evaluated. These emergency plans are tested and evaluated at least annually, and improvements are 

made to the plans. This program includes procedures for preventing, as well as responding to, emergencies. 

Agreements are in place with outside emergency response agencies to support non-NTS facilities. 

17.2.12 Monitoring and Measurement 

NSTec has an extensive network of environmental compliance programs with defined monitoring, surveillance, 

and compliance and performance measures tracking (see Section 2.0, Compliance Summary). These programs 

help ensure the effectiveness of controls, adherence to regulatory requirements, and timely identification and 

implementation of corrective measures for all work performed by NSTec for NNSA/NSO. In addition to the 

monitoring programs, an independent program called the Community Environmental Monitoring Program, 

established by NNSA/NSO, monitors air and groundwater within communities adjacent to the NTS. Onsite and 

offsite monitoring and surveillance results are reported to regulatory agencies and are summarized annually in this 

report. Many of these monitoring activities are required by state or federal environmental operating permits. In 

addition, NSTec tracks and trends its progress and performance in achieving environmental objectives/targets and 

performance measures which are not strictly compliance-driven (see Table 17-1). 

17.2.13 Evaluation of Compliance 

NSTec has procedures for periodically evaluating its compliance with relevant environmental regulations. Line 

managers and facility managers periodically inspect their operations and facilities. NSTec ES and NNSA/NSO 

personnel also perform regulatory inspections and assessments in a particular topical area to verify the compliance 

status of multiple organizations, or a comprehensive assessment of a particular organization. Lastly, external 

regulatory agencies and/or technical experts frequently conduct independent audits of compliance. 

17.2.14 Nonconformity and Corrective and Preventive Actions 

NSTec continues to improve processes that identify and correct problems. Critiques, root cause analyses, and 

lessons learned are used in an attempt to prevent recurrences of environmental problems and promote continual 

improvement. Any deficiencies resulting from incidents or assessments are entered into an electronic Web-based 

system, where corrective actions are identified and tracked until completed. 

17.2.15 Control of Records 

EMS-related records, including audit and training records, permits, waste manifests, waste characterization, and 

inspections are maintained according to federal standards and a formal NSTec records control procedure is 

followed to ensure integrity, facilitate retrieval, and protect them from loss. 
Integrated Safety Management System and Environmental Management System 

17-8 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

17.2.16 Internal Audit 

NSTec has used internal staff and subcontractors to identify the EMS elements that are fully implemented and 

those that still require strengthening. This is an ongoing activity intended to continually improve the environmental program. A comprehensive audit of the environmental program against the ISO 14001 requirements was 

started in December 2007 and completed in February 2008. This audit was conducted by the EWG under the 

direction of a lead auditor, and served as the last internal audit or assessment prior to the arrival of the ISO 

registrar in February 2008. Annual audits of various parts of the EMS program will continue to be performed by 

internal audit groups. In addition, compliance with regulatory requirements is verified through routine 

inspections, operational evaluations, and periodic audits. 

17.2.17 Management Review 

The NSTec Senior Manager for ESH&Q will ensure periodic review of the EMS to ensure its continuing 

suitability, adequacy, and effectiveness. The review process is scheduled in the NSTec ESH&Q Execution Plan 

and documented. A management review of the EMS program is conducted monthly by the environmental staff 

and the Executive Leadership Council. Environmental issues are discussed and action items are assigned. This is 

a proceduralized process, and meeting minutes are kept to document continual improvement in the EMS. 

17.3 DOE O 430.2B Implementation 

The purpose of DOE O 430.2B is to meet, lead, or exceed the goals of all applicable laws, EOs, and federal 

regulations with respect to energy, buildings and fleets. In particular, the goals in EO 13423 are applied through 

this Order. NSTec identified key employees in various organizations affected by the Order and formed an Energy 

Management Council to evaluate the level of effort and cost to fully implement the requirements (goals) in the 

Order. In December 2008, the FY 2009 NNSA/NSO Energy Executable Plan was developed. The Executable 

Plan serves as a contract between NNSA/NSO and NNSA Headquarters in terms of how to meet DOE O 430.2B. 

It is organized into five goals (Table 17-3) and discusses each goal in terms of current NNSA/NSO status; sitespecific goals as negotiated between NSTec, DOE, and NNSA/NSO; description of projects and activities; 

funding plan; and milestones. Table 17-3 summarizes the initial implementation status of each goal as reported in 

the Executable Plan. The EMS mirrors annual energy goals in the Executable Plan to ensure consistency. 

Table 17-3. FY 2009 NNSA/NSO Executable Plan goals summary 

Goal Executable Plan’s Status with Meeting Goal 

Energy Efficiency On track to meet goal of reducing energy intensity by 30% by 2015, with certain facilities excluded 

by waiver. 

Renewable Energy Pursuing construction of an onsite Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) plant to achieve goal of having 

7.5% of NTS’s annual electricity and thermal consumption from an onsite renewable energy source 

by 2010. Meeting this goal is dependent on acquiring funding for construction of CSP. 

Water Pursuing installation of needed water meters, use of Best Management Practices for Water Efficiency, and conducting water study in 2009 to baseline potential water reduction and identify water 

reduction projects. On track to reduce potable water use by 16% by 2015 relative to 2007 usage. 

Transportation/ Fleet 

Management 

On track to exceed goals of reducing fleet’s total consumption of petroleum products by 2% 

annually by 2015 and increase non-petroleum-based fuel consumption by 10% annually. Goal to 

use plug-in hybrid (PIH) vehicles currently unfeasible due to excessive summer heat and PIH air 

conditioning limitations. 

High Performance 

Sustainable 

Buildings (HPSB) 

Plan meets goal for new buildings. An HPSB Plan is being developed to meet the August 1, 2009, 

deadline. Approximately 30 retro-commissioning audits are scheduled each FY from FY 2009–FY 

2015 to ensure 15% of buildings can be classified as HPSB by the end of FY 2015, if sufficient 

funding is provided to correct energy issues identified by the audits. 
Compliance Quality Assurance

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 18-1 

18.0 Compliance Quality Assurance 

The National Security Technologies, LLC (NSTec), Quality Assurance Program (QAP) documents the process 

used by NSTec to ensure that quality is integrated into work performed under Prime Contract DE-AC52-

06NA25946. It establishes and communicates the program requirements for compliance with (1) Title 10 Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 830, Subpart A, Quality Assurance Requirements; (2) U.S. Department of Energy 

(DOE) Order DOE O 414.1C, “Quality Assurance;” and (3) other relevant requirements documents for the 

operation, process, or program to which they apply. The ten criteria established in 10 CFR 830 Subpart A and 

DOE O 414.1C that are required as part of a quality program are shown in the box below. The NSTec QAP 

requires a graded approach to quality for determining the level of rigor that effectively provides assurance of 

performance and conformance to requirements. 

The Data Quality Objectives (DQO) process developed by the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is generally used 

to provide the quality assurance (QA) structure for designing, 

implementing, and improving upon environmental monitoring 

efforts when environmental sampling and analysis are 

involved. Sampling and Analysis Plans are developed prior to 

performing an activity to ensure complete understanding of the 

data use objectives. Personnel are trained and qualified in 

accordance with company and task-specific requirements. 

Access to sampling locations is coordinated with organizations 

conducting work at or having authority over those locations in 

order to avoid conflicts in activities and to communicate 

hazards to better ensure successful execution of the work and 

protection of the safety and health of sampling personnel. 

Sample collection activities adhere to organization instructions 

and/or procedures that are designed to ensure that samples are 

representative and data are reliable and defensible. Sample 

shipments on site and to offsite laboratories are conducted in 

accordance with the U.S. Department of Transportation and International Air Transport Association regulations, 

as applicable. Quality control (QC) in the analytical laboratories is maintained through adherence to standard 

operating procedures that are based on methodologies developed by nationally recognized organizations such as 

the EPA, DOE, and ASTM International. Key quality-affecting procedural areas cover sample collection, 

preparation, instrument calibration, instrument performance checking, testing for precision and accuracy, and 

laboratory data review. NSTec data users perform reviews as required by the project-specific objectives before 

the data are used to support decision making. 

The key elements of environmental monitoring process work flow are listed below. Each of these elements is 

designed to ensure the applicable QA requirements are implemented. A discussion of these elements follows. 

• A Sampling and Analysis Plan (SAP) is developed using the EPA DQO process to ensure that clear goals 

and objectives are established for the environmental monitoring activity. The SAP is implemented in 

accordance with EPA, DOE, and other requirements addressing environmental, safety, and health concerns. 

• Environmental Sampling is performed in accordance with the SAP and site work controls to ensure 

defensibility of the resulting data products and protection of the workers and the environment. 

• Laboratory Analyses are performed to ensure that the resultant data meet DOE-, NSTec-, and regulationdefined requirements. 

• Data Review is done to ensure that the SAP DQOs have been met, and thereby determine whether the data 

are suitable for their intended purpose. 

Required Criteria of a Quality Program 

• Quality assurance program 

• Personnel training and qualification 

• Quality improvement process 

• Documents and records 

• Established work processes 

• Established standards for design and 

verification 

• Established procurement requirements 

• Inspection and acceptance testing 

• Management assessment 

• Independent assessment 
Compliance Quality Assurance

18-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

• Assessments are employed to ensure that monitoring operations are conducted accordingly and that analytical 

data quality requirements are met in order to identify nonconforming items, investigate causal factors, 

implement corrective actions, and monitor for corrective action effectiveness. 

18.1 Sampling and Analysis Plan 

Most environmental monitoring is specifically mandated to demonstrate compliance with a variety of 

requirements including federal and state regulations and DOE orders and standards. Developing the SAP using 

the DQO approach ensures those requirements are considered in the planning stage. The following statistical 

concepts and controls are vital in designing and evaluating the system design and implementation. 

18.1.1 Precision 

Precision is the degree to which a set of observations or measurements of the same property, obtained under 

similar conditions, conform to themselves. Precision is a data quality indicator. Precision is usually expressed as 

standard deviation, variance or range, in either absolute or relative terms (DOE, 2008). 

Practically, precision is determined by comparing the results obtained from performing analyses on split or 

duplicate samples taken at the same time from the same location or locations very close to one another, 

maintaining sampling and analytical conditions as nearly identical as possible. 

18.1.2 Accuracy 

Accuracy refers to the degree of agreement between an observed value and an accepted reference value. 

Accuracy includes a combination of random error (precision) and systematic error (bias) components that are due 

to sampling and analytical operations. Accuracy is a data quality indicator (DOE, 2008). Accuracy related to 

laboratory operations is monitored by performing measurements and evaluating results of control samples 

containing known quantities of the analytes of interest. 

18.1.3 Representativeness 

Representativeness is the degree to which a measurement is truly representative of the sampled medium or 

population (i.e., the degree to which measured analytical concentrations represent the concentrations in the 

medium being sampled) (Stanley and Verner, 1985). 

At each sampling point in the sampling and analysis process, subsamples of the medium of interest are obtained. 

The challenge is to ensure that each subsample maintains the character of the larger sampled population. From a 

field sample collection standpoint, representativeness is managed through sampling plan design and execution. 

Representativeness related to laboratory operations concerns the ability to appropriately subsample and 

characterize for analytes of interest. For example, in order to ensure representative characterization of a 

heterogeneous matrix (soil, sludge, solids, etc.), the sampling and/or analysis process should evaluate whether 

homogenization or segregation should be employed prior to sampling or analysis. Water samples are generally 

considered homogeneous unless observation suggests otherwise. Each air monitoring station’s continuous 

operation at a fixed location results in representatively sampling the ambient atmosphere. Field sample duplicate 

analyses are additional controls allowing evaluation of representativeness and heterogeneity. 

18.1.4 Comparability 

Comparability refers to “the confidence with which one data set can be compared to another” (Stanley and 

Verner, 1985). Comparability from an overall monitoring perspective is ensured by consistent execution of the 

sampling design concerning sample collection and handling, laboratory analyses, and data review. This is 

ensured through adherence to established procedures and standardized methodologies. Ongoing data evaluation 
Compliance Quality Assurance

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 18-3 

compares data collected at the same locations from sampling events conducted over multiple years and produced 

by numerous laboratories to detect any anomalies that might occur. 

18.2 Environmental Sampling 

Environmental samples are collected in support of various environmental programs. Each program executes the 

field sampling activities in accordance with the SAP to ensure usability and defensibility of the resulting data. 

The key elements supporting the quality and defensibility of the sampling process and products include: 

• Training and qualification 

• Procedures and methods 

• Field documentation 

• Inspection and Acceptance testing 

18.2.1 Training and Qualification 

The environmental programs ensure that personnel are properly trained and qualified prior to doing the work. In 

addition to procedure-specific and task-specific qualifications for performing work, training addresses 

environment, safety, and health aspects to ensure protection of the workers, the public, and the environment. 

Recurrent training is also conducted as appropriate to maintain proficiency. 

18.2.2 Procedures and Methods 

Sampling is conducted in accordance with established procedures to ensure consistent execution and continuous 

comparability of the environmental data. The methods to be used for sample analyses are also consulted in order 

to ensure that viable samples are obtained. 

18.2.3 Field Documentation 

Field documentation is generated for each sample collection activity, and may include chain of custody, sampling 

procedures, analytical methods, equipment and data logs, maps, Material Safety Data Sheets, and other materials 

needed to support the safe and successful execution and defense of the sampling effort. Chain of custody 

practices are employed from point of generation through disposal (cradle-to-grave); these are critical to the 

defensibility of the decisions made as a result of the sampling and analysis. Sampling data and documentation are 

stored and archived so that they are readily retrievable for use at a later date. In many cases the data are managed 

in electronic data management systems. Routine assessments or surveillances are performed to ensure that 

sampling activities are performed in accordance with applicable requirements. Deficiencies are noted, causal 

factors are determined, corrective actions are implemented, and follow-up assessments are performed to ensure 

effective resolution. This data management approach ensures the quality and defensibility of the decisions made 

using analytical environmental data. 

18.2.4 Inspection and Acceptance Testing 

Sample collection data are reviewed for appropriateness, accuracy, and fit with historical measurements. In the 

case of groundwater sampling, real-time field measurements are monitored during purging to determine when 

parameters have stabilized, thereby indicating that the purge water is generally representative of the aquifer, at 

which time sampling may begin. After a sampling activity is complete, data are reviewed to ensure the samples 

were collected in accordance with the SAP. Samples are further inspected to ensure that their integrity has not 

been compromised, either physically (leaks, tears, breakage, custody seals) or administratively (labeled 

incorrectly) and that they are valid for supporting the intended analyses. If concerns are raised at any point during 
Compliance Quality Assurance

18-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

collection, the data user, in consideration of data usability, is consulted for direction on proceeding with or 

canceling the subsequent analyses. 

18.3 Laboratory Analyses 

Samples are transported to a laboratory for characterization. Several NSTec organizations maintain measurement 

capabilities that are generally considered “screening” operations, and may be used to support planning or 

preliminary decision-making activities. However, unless specifically authorized by the U.S. Department of 

Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office or the regulator, all data used for reporting 

purposes are generated by a DOE and NSTec-qualified laboratory whose services have been obtained through 

subcontracts. Ensuring the quality of procured laboratory services is accomplished through focus on three 

specific areas: (1) procurement, (2) initial and continuing assessment, and (3) data evaluation. 

18.3.1 Procurement 

Laboratory services are procured through the use of the DOE Integrated Contractor Purchasing Team (ICPT) 

Analytical Services Basic Ordering Agreement (BOA). The ICPT was put in place to pursue strategic sourcing 

opportunities that represent procurement-leveraged spending, which results in a lower total cost of ownership for 

DOE Complex-wide Site and Facility Contractors. Agreements placed by the ICPT have met all applicable 

requirements of the Competition in Contracting Act, the Federal Acquisition Regulation, the DOE Acquisition 

Regulations, prime contractor terms and conditions for subcontracting, and other relevant policies and procedures. 

As such, no further requirements apply pertaining to competition, further price analysis/justification, additional 

review of the terms and conditions, etc., which also saves time and effort. 

The Analytical Services BOA was initially developed in 1998 by a team of contractor subject matter experts (both 

technical and procurement) from across the DOE complex, and BOAs were established with numerous 

laboratories beginning in 1999. The analytical services technical basis was initially contained in the BOA. It has 

been revised over the years and is currently codified in the DOE Quality Systems for Analytical Services (QSAS), 

revision 2.4, October 2008 (DOE, 2008). The QSAS is based on the National Environmental Laboratory 

Accreditation Conference Chapter 5, Quality Systems, 2003, as implemented in 2005, based on International 

Organization for Standardization (ISO) 17025, General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and 

Calibration Laboratories. Prior to a laboratory being issued a BOA, it must be assessed to be in compliance with 

the QSAS. Once a BOA is issued, the laboratory is routinely audited under the DOE Consolidated Audit Program 

(DOECAP). 

Because of the rigor involved with the ICPT BOA process, rather than issuing a Request for Proposal to several 

laboratories and investing the time to evaluate the proposals received, NSTec awards subcontracts to laboratories 

that already hold a BOA. The NSTec subcontracts cite the BOA as the base requirement and address site-specific 

conditions. 

The process for obtaining an ICPT BOA requires significant effort both on the laboratory and DOE’s part. 

Consequently, BOA-holding laboratories are primarily those providing a wide range of analytical services to the 

DOE. NSTec obtains services not available from a BOA laboratory either through an NSTec subcontract 

laboratory’s subcontracting of the work (i.e., lower-tier subcontractor) or by subcontracting directly with the 

laboratory. In either case, DOE and NSTec requirements for laboratory services are established with those 

laboratories as well for the specific services provided. 

The subcontract places numerous requirements on the laboratory, including: 

• Maintaining the following documents: 

– A Quality Assurance Plan and/or Manual describing the laboratory’s policies and approach to the 

implementation of quality assurance requirements 

– An Environment, Safety, and Health Plan 

– A Waste Management Plan 

– Procedures pertinent to subcontract scope 
Compliance Quality Assurance

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 18-5 

• The ability to generate data deliverables, both hard copy reports and electronic files 

• Responding to all data quality questions in a timely manner 

• Mandatory participation in proficiency testing programs 

• Maintaining specific licenses, accreditations, and certifications 

• Conducting internal audits of laboratory operations, as well as audits of vendors 

• Allowing external audits by the DOECAP and NSTec, and providing copies of other audits considered by 

NSTec to be comparable and applicable 

18.3.2 Initial and Continuing Assessment 

An initial assessment is made during the request for proposal process above, including a pre-award audit. If an 

acceptable audit has not been performed within the past year, NSTec will consider performing an audit (or 

participating in a DOECAP audit) of those laboratories awarded the contract. NSTec will not initiate work with a 

laboratory without authorized approval of those NSTec personnel responsible for ensuring vendor acceptability. 

A continuing assessment consists of the ongoing monitoring of a laboratory’s performance against contract terms 

and conditions, of which the technical specifications are a part. Tasks supporting continuing assessment are: 

• Conducting regular audits or participating in evaluation of DOECAP audit products 

• Monitoring for continued successful participation in proficiency testing programs such as: 

– National Institute of Standards and Technology Radiochemistry Intercomparison Program 

– Studies that support certification by the State of Nevada or appropriate regulatory authority for analyses 

performed in support of compliance monitoring 

• Monitoring of the laboratory’s adherence to the QA requirements 

18.3.3 Data Evaluation 

Data products are continuously evaluated for compliance with contract terms and specifications. This primarily 

involves review of the data against the specified analytical method to determine the laboratory’s ability to adhere 

to the QA/QC requirements, as well as an evaluation of the data against the DQOs. This activity is discussed in 

further detail in Section 18.4. Any discrepancies are documented and resolved with the laboratory, and 

continuous assessment tracks the recurrence and efficacy of corrective actions. 

18.4 Data Review 

A systematic approach to thoroughly evaluating the data products generated from an environmental monitoring 

effort is essential for understanding and sustaining the quality of data collected under the program. This allows 

the programs to determine whether the DQOs established in the planning phase were achieved and whether the 

monitoring design performed as intended or requires review. 

Because decisions are based on environmental data, and the effectiveness of operations is measured at least in part 

by environmental data, reliable, accurate, and defensible records are essential. Detailed records that must be kept 

include temporal, spatial, numerical, geotechnical, chemical, and radiological data, and all sampling, analytical, 

and data review procedures used. Failure to maintain these records in a secure but accessible form may result in 

exposure to legal challenges and the inability to respond to demands or requests from regulators and other 

interested organizations. 

An electronic data management system is a key tool used by many programs for achieving standardization and 

integrity in managing environmental data. The primary objective is to store and manage in an easily and 

efficiently retrievable form unclassified environmental data that are directly or indirectly tied to monitoring 

events. This may include information on monitoring system construction (groundwater wells, ambient air 

monitoring), analytical, geotechnical, and field parameters at the Nevada Test Site. Database integrity and 
Compliance Quality Assurance

18-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

security are enforced through the assignment of varying database access privileges commensurate with an 

employee’s database responsibilities. 

18.4.1 Data Verification 

Data verification is defined as a subcontract compliance and completeness review to ensure that all laboratory 

data and sample documentation are present and complete. Additional critical sampling and analysis process 

information is also reviewed at this stage, which may include, but is not limited to, sample preservation and 

temperature, defensible chain-of-custody documentation and integrity, and analytical hold-time compliance. Data 

verification also ensures that electronic data products correctly represent the sampling and/or analyses performed 

and includes evaluation of QC sample results. 

18.4.2 Data Validation 

Data validation supplements verification and is a more thorough process of analytical data review to better 

determine if the data meet the analytical and project requirements. Data validation ensures that the reported 

results correctly represent the sampling and analyses performed, determines the validity of the reported results, 

and assigns data qualifiers (or “flags”), if required. 

18.4.3 Data Quality Assessment (DQA) 

DQA is a scientific and statistical evaluation to determine if the data obtained from environmental operations are 

of the right type, quality, and quantity to support their intended use. The DQA includes reviewing data for 

accuracy, representativeness, and fit with historical measurements to ensure that the data will support their 

intended uses. 

18.5 Assessments 

The overall effectiveness of the environmental program is determined through routine surveillance and 

assessments of work execution as well as review of the program requirements. Deficiencies are identified, causal 

factors are investigated, corrective actions are developed and implemented, and follow-on monitoring is 

performed to ensure effective resolution. The assessments discussed below are broken down into general 

programmatic and focused measurement data areas. 

18.5.1 Programmatic 

Assessments and audits under this category include evaluations of the work planning, execution, and performance 

activities. Personnel independent of the work activity perform the assessments to evaluate compliance with 

established requirements and report on the identified deficiencies. Organizations responsible for the activity are 

required to develop and implement corrective actions, with the concurrence of the deficiency originator or 

recognized subject matter expert. NSTec maintains the companywide issues tracking system (called CaWeb) to 

manage assessments, findings, and corrective actions. 

18.5.2 Measurement Data 

This type of assessment includes routine evaluation of data generated from analyses of QC samples. QC sample 

data are used to monitor the analytical control on a given batch of samples and are indicators over time of 

potential biases in laboratory performance. Discussion of the 2008 results for field duplicates, laboratory control 

samples, blank analysis, and inter-laboratory comparison studies are provided and summary tables are included 

below. 
Compliance Quality Assurance

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 18-7 

18.5.2.1 Field Duplicates 

Samples obtained at approximately the same locations and times as initial samples are termed field duplicates and 

are used to evaluate the overall precision of the measurement process, including small-scale heterogeneity in the 

medium (air, soil, water, etc.) being sampled as well as analytical and sample preparation variation. The relative 

error ratio (RER) compares the absolute difference of initial and field duplicate measurements to a measure of the 

analytical uncertainty. The absolute relative percent difference (RPD) compares the absolute difference of initial 

and field duplicate measurements with the average of the two measurements; it is computed only from pairs for 

which both values are above their respective minimum detectable concentrations (MDCs). These are provided in 

Table 18-1. 

The values in Table 18-1 fall in typical ranges. The highest RPD (63.5 percent) is found with 239+240Pu; this is due 

mostly to one air sampler intercepting a particle with high Pu while the other sampler in the pair had a typical 

background value. The RER is also affected by this pair. The second highest RPD (45.7 percent) occurred with 

235+236U; values of this analyte tend to be rather low on the whole, which tends to inflate variability measured in 

relative terms. 

18.5.2.2 Laboratory Control Samples (LCSs) 

An LCS is a sample matrix, free from the analytes of interest, spiked with verified known amounts of analytes or 

a material containing known and verified amounts of analytes. It is generally used to establish intra-laboratory or 

analyst-specific precision and bias or to assess the performance of all or a portion of the measurement system 

(DOE, 2008). 

The results are calculated as a percentage of the true value, and must fall within established control limits (or 

percentage range) to be considered acceptable. If the LCS recovery falls outside control limits, evaluation for 

potential sample data bias is necessary. The numbers of 2008 LCSs analyzed and within control limits are 

summarized in Table 18-2. 

18.5.2.3 Blank Analysis 

In general terms, a blank is a sample that has not been exposed to the analyzed sample stream, and is analyzed in 

order to monitor contamination during sampling, transport, storage, or analysis. The blank is subjected to the 

usual analytical and measurement process to establish a zero baseline or background value and is sometimes used 

to adjust or correct routine analytical results (DOE, 2008). 

Laboratory method blank data are summarized in Table 18-3. A method blank is a sample of a matrix similar to 

the batch of associated samples (when available) that is free from the analytes of interest and is processed 

simultaneously with and under the same conditions as samples through all steps of the analytical procedures, and 

in which no target analytes or interferences are present at concentrations that impact the analytical results for 

sample analyses (DOE, 2008). 

18.5.2.4 Proficiency Testing Program Participation 

Laboratories are required to participate in Proficiency Testing Programs. Laboratory performance supports 

decisions on work distribution and may also be a basis for state certifications. Table 18-4 presents the 2008 

results for the Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP) administered by the Radiological and 

Environmental Sciences Laboratory of the Idaho National Laboratory. 

Table 18-5 shows the summary of inter-laboratory comparison sample results for the NSTec Radiological Health 

Dosimetry Group. This internal evaluation was based on National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program 

(NVLAP) criteria. The Dosimetry Group participated in the Battelle Pacific Northwest National Laboratory 

performance evaluation study program during the course of the year. 
Compliance Quality Assurance

18-8 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Table 18-1. Summary of field duplicate samples for compliance monitoring in 2008

(a) Represents the number of field duplicates reported for the purpose of monitoring precision. If an associated field sample was not 

processed, the field duplicate was not included in this table. 

(b) Represents the number of field duplicate-field sample result sets with both values above their minimum detectable concentrations 

(MDC). The MDC does not apply to thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) measurements. If either the field sample or its duplicate 

was reported below the MDC, the RPD was not determined. 

(c) Reflects the average absolute RPD calculated as follows: 

 

Where: S = Sample result 

 D = Duplicate result 

(d) Relative error ratio (RER) determined by the following equation is used to determine whether a sample result and the associated field 

duplicate result differ significantly when compared to their respective one sigma uncertainties. The RER is calculated for all sample 

and field duplicate pairs reported without regard to the MDC. 

 

Where: S = Sample result 

 D = Duplicate result 

 TPUS = one-sigma total propagated uncertainty of the field sample 

 TPUD = one-sigma total propagated uncertainty of the field duplicate 

(e) 7

Be and 40K are naturally occurring analytes included for quality assessment of the gamma spectroscopy analyses. 

(f) Third quarter TLD data are omitted; see Chapter 5 discussion. 

Analyte Medium 

Number of 

Duplicate Pairs(a)

Number of 

Pairs > 

MDC(b)

Average 

Absolute RPD(c) 

of Pairs > MDC 

Average 

Absolute RER(d) 

of All Pairs 

Gross Alpha Air 105 13 10.4 0.70 

Gross Beta Air 105 105 7.9 0.73 

Tritium Air 50 19 23.5 1.04 

241Am Air 24 2 27.7 1.19 7

Be(e) Air 24 24 7.5 0.96 40K(e) Air 21 10 32.7 0.82 238Pu Air 23 0 - 0.74 239+240Pu Air 24 7 63.5 1.69 233+234U Air 13 13 18.5 0.79 235+236U Air 13 4 45.7 0.75 238U Air 13 13 20.8 0.96 137Cs Air 24 0 - 0.99 235U (gamma) Air 24 0 - 0.72 

Gross Alpha Water 5 4 11.4 0.44 

Gross Beta Water 5 5 16.1 1.01 

Tritium Water 22 4 7.4 0.58 

TLD Ambient 

Radiation 

323(f) NA 2.2 0.26 

100

( ) / 2

| | X

D S

D S Absolute RPD

+

− =

( )( ) 2 2

| |

TPU S TPU D

S D Absolute RER

+

− =
Compliance Quality Assurance

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 18-9 

Table 18-2. Summary of LCSs for 2008 

Analysis Matrix 

Number of LCS 

Results Reported 

Number Within 

Control Limits 

Control Limits 

(%) 

Radiological Analyses 

Tritium Air 34 34 70-130 

60Co Air 30 30 70-130 

137Cs Air 30 30 70-130 239+240Pu Air 39 39 70-130 241Am Air 64 64 70-130 

Gross Alpha Water 12 12 70-130 

Gross Beta Water 12 12 70-130 

Tritium Water 62 62 70-130 

60Co Water 11 11 70-130 

90Sr Water 10 10 70-130 

137Cs Water 11 11 70-130 239+240Pu Water 14 14 70-130 241Am Water 10 10 70-130 60Co Soil 3 3 70-130 

90Sr Soil 4 4 70-130 

137Cs Soil 3 3 70-130 239+240Pu Soil 2 2 70-130 241Am Soil 5 5 70-130 

Nonradiological Analyses 

Metals Water 178 178 80-120 

Volatiles Water 375 369 70-130 

Semi Volatiles Water 115 110 Laboratory specific 

Miscellaneous Water 321 320 80-120 

Metals Soil 9 9 75-125 

Volatiles Soil 26 25 70-130 

Semi Volatiles Soil 71 68 Laboratory specific 
Compliance Quality Assurance

18-10 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

 Table 18-3. Summary of laboratory blank samples for 2008 

Analysis Matrix 

Number of 

Blank 

Results Reported 

Number of 

Results < MDC 

Radiological Analyses

Tritium Air 31 29 

7

 Be Air 30 30 

60Co Air 30 29 

137Cs Air 30 30 238Pu Air 28 27 239+240Pu Air 28 23 241Am Air 54 50 

Gross Alpha Water 24 24 

Gross Beta Water 24 23 

Tritium Water 55 54 

60Co Water 11 11 

90Sr Water 8 8 

137Cs Water 11 11 238Pu Water 8 8 239+240Pu Water 8 8 241Am Water 11 11 60Co Soil 3 3 

90Sr Water 8 8 

137Cs Water 11 11 238Pu Water 8 8 239+240Pu Water 8 8 241Am Water 11 11 60Co Soil 3 3 

90Sr Soil 3 3 

137Cs Soil 3 3 238Pu Soil 4 4 239+240Pu Soil 4 4 241Am Soil 5 5 

Nonradiological Analyses 

Number of 

Results < 

Reporting Limit 

Metals Water 183 168 

Volatiles Water 171 168 

Semi Volatiles Water 80 79 

Miscellaneous Water 243 242 

Metals Soil 19 16 

Volatiles Soil 30 29 

Semi Volatiles Soil 49 49 
Compliance Quality Assurance

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 18-11 

 Table 18-4. Summary of 2008 radiological MAPEP reports 

Analysis Matrix 

Number of Blank 

Results Reported 

Number of Results 

< MDC 

Radiological Analyses

Tritium Air 31 29 

7

 Be Air 30 30 

60Co Air 30 29 

137Cs Air 30 30 238Pu Air 28 27 

239+240Pu Air 28 23 241Am Air 54 50 

Gross Alpha Water 24 24 

Gross Beta Water 24 23 

Tritium Water 55 54 

60Co Water 11 11 

90Sr Water 8 8 

137Cs Water 11 11 238Pu Water 8 8 239+240Pu Water 8 8 241Am Water 11 11 60Co Soil 3 3 

90Sr Soil 3 3 

137Cs Soil 3 3 238Pu Soil 4 4 239+240Pu Soil 4 4 241Am Soil 5 5 

Nonradiological Analyses 

Number of Results 

< Reporting Limit 

Metals Water 183 168 

Volatiles Water 171 168 

Semi Volatiles Water 80 79 

Miscellaneous Water 243 242 

Metals Soil 19 16 

Volatiles Soil 30 29 

Semi Volatiles Soil 49 49 

Table 18-5. Summary of inter-laboratory comparison TLD samples for the subcontract 

dosimetry group in 2008 

Analysis Matrix 

Number of 

Results Reported 

Number Within 

Control Limits(a)

TLD Ambient Radiation 29 29 

(a) Based upon NVLAP criteria; absolute value of the bias plus one standard deviation < 0.3 
Compliance Quality Assurance

18-12 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
 Quality Assurance Program for the CEMP

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 19-1 

19.0 Quality Assurance Program for the 

Community Environmental Monitoring Program 

The Community Environmental Monitoring Program (CEMP) Quality Assurance Program Plan (QAPP) was 

followed for the collection and analysis of radiological air and water data presented in Section 6.0 of this report. 

The CEMP QAPP ensures compliance with U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order DOE O 414.1C, “Quality 

Assurance,” which implements a quality management system ensuring the generation and use of quality data. 

This QAPP addresses the following items previously defined in Section 18.0: 

• Data Quality Objectives (DQOs) 

• Sampling plan development appropriate to satisfy the DQOs 

• Environmental health and safety 

• Sampling plan execution 

• Sample analyses 

• Data review

• Continuous improvement

19.1 Data Quality Objectives 

The DQO process is a strategic planning approach that is used to plan data collection activities. It provides a 

systematic process for defining the criteria that a data collection design should satisfy. These criteria include 

when and where samples should be collected, how many samples to collect, and the tolerable level of decision 

errors for the study. DQOs are unique to the specific data collection or monitoring activity, and are further 

explained in Appendices A through E of the Routine Radiological Environmental Monitoring Plan (BN, 2003a). 

19.2 Measurement Quality Objectives (MQOs) 

The MQOs are basically equivalent to DQOs for analytical processes. The MQOs provide direction to the 

laboratory concerning performance objectives or requirements for specific method performance characteristics. 

Default MQOs are established in the subcontract with the laboratory, but may be altered in order to satisfy 

changes in the DQOs. The MQOs for the CEMP project are described in terms of precision, accuracy, 

representativeness, completeness, and comparability requirements. These terms are defined and discussed in 

Section 18.1 for onsite activities. 

19.3 Sampling Quality Assurance Program 

Quality Assurance (QA) in field operations for the CEMP includes sampling assessments, surveillances, and 

oversight of the following supporting elements: 

• The sampling plan, DQOs, and field data sheets accompanying the sample package 

• Database support for field and laboratory results, including systems for long-term storage and retrieval 

• A training program to ensure that qualified personnel are available to perform required tasks 

Sample packages include the following items: 

• Station manager checklist confirming all observable information pertinent to sample collection 

• An Air Surveillance Network Sample Data Form documenting air sampler parameters, collection dates and 

times, and total sample volumes collected 

• Chain-of-custody forms 
Quality Assurance Program for the CEMP

19-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

This managed approach to sampling ensures that the sampling is traceable and enhances the value of the final data 

available to the project manager. The sample package also ensures that the station manager Community 

Environmental Monitor (CEM) (see Section 6.0 for description of CEMs) has followed proper procedures for 

sample collection. The CEMP Project Manager or QA Officer routinely performs assessments of the station 

managers and field monitors to ensure that standard operating procedures and sampling protocol are being 

followed properly. 

Data obtained in the course of executing field operations are entered in the documentation accompanying the 

sample package during sample collection and in the CEMP database along with analytical results upon their 

receipt and evaluation. 

Completed sample packages are kept as hard copy in file archives. Analytical reports are kept as hard copy in file 

archives as well as on read-only compact disks by calendar year. Analytical reports and databases are protected 

and maintained in accordance with the Desert Research Institute’s (DRI’s) Computer Protection Program. 

19.4 Laboratory QA Oversight 

CEMP ensures that DOE O 414.1C requirements are met with respect to laboratory services through review of the 

vendor laboratory policies formalized in a Laboratory Quality Assurance Plan (LQAP). CEMP is assured of 

obtaining quality data from laboratory services through a multifaceted approach involving specific procurement 

protocols, the conduct of quality assessments, and requirements for selected laboratories to have an acceptable 

QA program. These elements are discussed below. 

19.4.1 Procurement 

Laboratory services are procured through subcontracts. The subcontract establishes the technical specifications 

required of the laboratory and provides the basis for determining compliance with those requirements and 

evaluating overall performance. The subcontract is awarded on a “best value” basis as determined by pre-award 

audits. The prospective vendor is required to provide a review package to CEMP that includes the following 

items: 

• All procedures pertinent to subcontract scope 

• Environment, Safety, and Health Plan 

• LQAP 

• Example deliverables (hard copy and/or electronic) 

• Proficiency testing (PT) results from the previous year from recognized PT programs 

• Resumes 

• Facility design/description 

• Accreditations and certifications 

• Licenses 

• Audits performed by an acceptable DOE program covering comparable scope 

• Past performance surveys 

• Pricing 

CEMP evaluates the review package in terms of technical capability. Vendor selection is based solely on these 

capabilities and not biased by pricing. 

19.4.2 Initial and Continuing Assessment 

An initial assessment of a laboratory is managed through the procurement process above, including a pre-award 

audit. Pre-award audits are conducted by CEMP (usually by the CEMP QA Officer). In no instance shall CEMP 

initiate work with a laboratory without approval of the CEMP Program Manager. 
 Quality Assurance Program for the CEMP

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 19-3 

A continuing assessment of a selected laboratory involves ongoing monitoring of a laboratory’s performance 

against the contract terms and conditions, of which technical specifications are a part. Tasks supporting 

continuing assessment are: 

• Tracking schedule compliance 

• Review of analytical data deliverables 

• Monitoring of the laboratory’s adherence to the LQAP 

• Conducting regular audits 

• Monitoring for continued successful participation in approved PT programs 

19.4.3 Laboratory QA Program 

The laboratory policies and approach to the implementation of DOE O 414.1C must be verified in a LQAP 

prepared by the laboratory. The elements of a LQAP required for the CEMP are similar to those required by 

National Security Technologies, LLC, for onsite monitoring, and are described in Section 18.3.3. 

19.5 Data Review 

Essential components of process-based QA are data checks, verification, validation, and data quality assessment 

to evaluate data quality and usability. 

Data Checks – Data checks are conducted to ensure accuracy and consistency of field data collection operations 

prior to and upon data entry into CEMP databases and data management systems. 

Data Verification – Data verification is defined as a subcontract compliance and completeness review to ensure 

that all laboratory data and sample documentation are present and complete. Sample preservation, chain-ofcustody, and other field sampling documentation shall be reviewed during the verification process. Data 

verification ensures that the reported results entered in CEMP databases correctly represent the sampling and/or 

analyses performed and includes evaluation of quality control (QC) sample results. 

Data Validation – Data validation is the process of reviewing a body of analytical data to determine if it meets 

the data quality criteria defined in operating instructions (OIs). Data validation ensures that the reported results 

correctly represent the sampling and/or analyses performed, determines the validity of the reported results, and 

assigns data qualifiers (or “flags”), if required. The process of data validation consists of: 

• Evaluating the quality of the data to ensure that all project requirements are met 

• Determining the impact on data quality of those requirements if they are not met 

• Verifying compliance with QA requirements 

• Checking QC values against defined limits 

• Applying qualifiers to analytical results in the CEMP databases for the purposes of defining the limitations in 

the use of the reviewed data 

OIs, procedures, applicable project specific work plans, field sampling plans, QAPPs, analytical method 

references, and laboratory statements of work may all be used in the process of data validation. Documentation of 

data validation includes checklists, qualifier assignments, and summary forms. 

Data Quality Assessment – Data Quality Assessment (DQA) is the scientific evaluation of data to determine if 

the data obtained from environmental data operations are of the right type, quality, and quantity to support their 

intended use. DQA review is a systematic review against pre-established criteria to verify that the data are valid 

for their intended use. 
Quality Assurance Program for the CEMP

19-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

19.6 QA Program Assessments 

The overall effectiveness of the QA program is determined through management and independent assessment as 

defined in the CEMP QAPP. These assessments evaluate the plan execution work-flow (sampling plan 

development and execution, chain-of-custody, sample receiving, shipping, subcontract laboratory analytical 

activities, and data review) as well as program requirements as it pertains to the organization. 

19.7 2008 Sample QA Results 

QA procedures were performed by the CEMP, including the laboratories responsible for sample analyses. These 

assessments ensure that sample collection procedures, analytical techniques, and data provided by the 

subcontracted laboratories comply with CEMP requirements. Data were provided by Testamerica Laboratories 

and the University of Nevada, Las Vegas Radiation Services Laboratory (gross alpha/beta and gamma 

spectroscopy data), Global Dosimetry Solutions (thermoluminescent dosimeter [TLD] data), and the University of 

Miami Tritium Laboratory (tritium data). A brief discussion of the 2008 results for field duplicates, laboratory 

control samples, blank analyses, and inter-laboratory comparison studies is provided along with summary tables 

within this section. The 2008 CEMP radiological air and water monitoring data are presented in Section 6.0. 

19.7.1 Field Duplicates (Precision) 

A field duplicate is a sample collected, handled, and analyzed following the same procedures as the primary 

sample. The relative percent difference (RPD) between the field duplicate result and the corresponding field 

sample result is a measure of the variability in the process caused by the sampling uncertainty (matrix 

heterogeneity, collection variables, etc.) and measurement uncertainty (field and laboratory) used to arrive at a 

final result. The average absolute RPD, expressed as a percentage, was determined for the calendar year 2008 

samples and is listed in Table 19-1. An RPD of zero indicates a perfect duplication of results of the duplicate 

pair, whereas an RPD greater than 100 percent generally indicates that a duplicate pair falls beyond QA 

requirements and are not considered valid for use in data interpretation. These samples are further evaluated to 

determine the reason for QA failure and if any corrective actions are required. Overall, the RPD values for all 

analyses indicate very good results, with only nine alpha duplicates exceeding an RPD of 100 percent. 

Table 19-1. Summary of field duplicate samples for oversight monitoring in 2008 

Analysis Matrix 

Number of Samples 

Reported(a) 

Number of 

Samples Reported 

above MDC(b)

Average Absolute 

RPD of those 

above MDC (%)(c)

Gross Alpha Air 117 117 66.1 

Gross Beta Air 117 117 32.2 

Gamma - Beryllium-7 Air 12 12 12.2 

Tritium Water 7 4 1.9 

TLDs Ambient Radiation 11 11 5.0 

(a) Represents the number of field duplicates reported for the purpose of monitoring precision. If an associated field sample was 

 not processed, the field duplicate was not included in this table. 

(b) Represents the number of field duplicate-field sample result sets reported above the minimum detectable concentration (MDC) 

(MDC is not applicable for TLDs). If either the field sample or its duplicate was reported below the detection limit, the 

precision was not determined. 

(c) Reflects the average absolute RPD calculated for those field duplicates reported above the MDC. 

 The absolute RPD calculation is as follows: 

 Where: FD = Field duplicate result 

 FS = Field sample result 100 %

( ) / 2

| | X

FD FS

FD FS Absolute RPD

+

− =
 Quality Assurance Program for the CEMP

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 19-5 

19.7.2 Laboratory Control Samples (Accuracy) 

Laboratory control samples (LCSs) (also known as matrix spikes) are performed by the subcontract laboratory to 

evaluate analytical accuracy, which is the degree of agreement of a measured value with the true or expected 

value. Samples of known concentration are analyzed using the same methods as employed for the project 

samples. The results are determined as the measured value divided by the true value, expressed as a percent. To 

be considered valid, the results must fall within established control limits (or percentage range) for further 

analyses to be performed. The LCS results obtained for 2008 are summarized in Table 19-2. The LCS results 

were satisfactory with only 3 percent of the alpha and beta control samples falling outside of control parameters 

for the air sample matrix. 

Table 19-2. Summary of laboratory control samples (LCS) for oversight monitoring in 2008 

Analysis Matrix 

Number of LCS 

Results Reported 

Number Within 

Control Limits(a)

Gross Alpha Air 95 92 

Gross Beta Air 95 93 

Gamma Air 8 8 

Tritium Water 5 5 

(a) Control limits are as follows: 80 to 120 percent for gross alpha, 80 to 120 percent for gross beta, 80 to 114 

percent for gamma (137Cs, 60Co, 241Am), 80 to 120 percent for tritium. 

19.7.3 Blank Analysis 

Laboratory blank sample analyses are essentially the opposite of control samples discussed in Section 19.7.2. 

These samples do not contain any of the analyte of interest. Results of these analyses are expected to be “zero,” 

or more accurately, below the MDC of a specific procedure. Blank analysis and control samples are used to 

evaluate overall laboratory procedures, including sample preparation and instrument performance. The laboratory 

blank sample results obtained for 2008 are summarized in Table 19-3. The laboratory blank results were 

satisfactory with less than 5 percent of the alpha and beta blank samples outside of control parameters for the air 

sample matrix. 

Table 19-3. Summary of laboratory blank samples for oversight monitoring in 2008 

Analysis Matrix 

Number of Blank 

Results Reported 

Number Within 

Control Limits(a)

Gross Alpha Air 95 90 

Gross Beta Air 95 92 

Gamma Air 8 8 

Tritium Water 5 4 

(a) Control limit is less than the MDC. 

19.7.4 Inter-laboratory Comparison Studies 

Inter-laboratory comparison studies are conducted by the subcontracted laboratories to evaluate their performance 

relative to other laboratories providing the same service. These types of samples are commonly known as “blind’ 

samples, in which the expected values are known only to the program conducting the study. The analyses are 

evaluated and, if found satisfactory, the laboratory is certified that its procedures produce reliable results. The 

inter-laboratory comparison sample results obtained for 2008 are summarized in Tables 19-4 and 19-5. 

Table 19-4 shows the summary of inter-laboratory comparison sample results for the Subcontract Radiochemistry 

Laboratories. The Laboratories participated in either the Quality Assurance Program administered by 
Quality Assurance Program for the CEMP

19-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

Environmental Research Associates (ERA), the Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP) for 

gross alpha, gross beta, and gamma analyses, and/or the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) tritium 

inter-laboratory comparison study. The subcontractors performed very well during the year by passing all of the 

parameters analyzed. 

Table 19-5 shows the summary of the in-house performance evaluation results conducted by the Subcontract 

Dosimetry Group. This internal evaluation was based on National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program 

(NVLAP) criteria and was performed biannually. The Dosimetry Group performed very well during the year 

passing 20 out of 20 TLDs analyzed. 

Table 19-4. Summary of inter-laboratory comparison samples of the subcontract radiochemistry 

laboratory for oversight monitoring in 2008 

Analysis Matrix

Number of 

Results Reported

Number Within 

Control Limits(a)

MAPEP, ERA and IAEA Results 

Gross Alpha Air 2 2 

Gross Beta Air 2 2 

Gamma Air 2 2 

Tritium Water 6 6 

(a) Control limits are determined by the individual inter-laboratory comparison study. 

Table 19-5. Summary of inter-laboratory comparison TLD samples of the subcontract dosimetry 

group for oversight monitoring in 2008 

Analysis Matrix

Number of 

Results Reported

Number Within 

Control Limits(a)

TLDs Ambient Radiation 20 20 

(a) Based upon NVLAP criteria; absolute value of the bias plus one standard deviation < 0.3. 
Appendix A - Offsite Facilities

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 A-i 

 Appendix A 

A.0 Offsite Facilities 
Appendix A - Offsite Facilities

A-ii Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Appendix A - Offsite Facilities

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 A-iii 

Table of Contents

A.1 North Las Vegas Facility ............................................................................................................................. A-1

 A.1.1 Compliance with Water Permits ..................................................................................................... A-1

 A.1.1.1 Wastewater Contribution Permit VEH-112.................................................................... A-1

 A.1.1.2 National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit NV0023507......................... A-3

 A.1.2 Groundwater Control and Dewatering Operation........................................................................... A-6

 A.1.2.1 Discharge of Groundwater from Building A-1 Sump Well............................................ A-6

 A.1.3 Compliance with Air Quality Permits............................................................................................. A-7

 A.1.4 Compliance with Hazardous Materials Regulations....................................................................... A-7

 A.1.5 Compliance with Radiation Protection Regulations ....................................................................... A-7

 A.1.5.1 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP)........................ A-7

 A.1.5.2 DOE O 5400.5.... ........................................................................................................... A-8

A.2 Remote Sensing Laboratory-Nellis.............................................................................................................. A-8

 A.2.1 Compliance with Wastewater Contribution Permit CCWRD-080 ................................................. A-9

 A.2.2 Compliance with Air Quality Permits........................................................................................... A-10

 A.2.3 Compliance with Hazardous Materials Regulations..................................................................... A-10

 A.2.4 Compliance with Waste Management Regulations ...................................................................... A-10

List of Figures 

Figure A-1 Location of NTS offsite facilities in Las Vegas and North Las Vegas........................................... A-2 

Figure A-2 Location of dewatering and monitoring wells around Building A-1 .............................................. A-4 

List of Tables 

Table A-1. Environmental permits for NLVF in 2008 .........................................................................................A-1

Table A-2. Results of 2008 monitoring at NLVF for Wastewater Contribution Permit VEH-112 ......................A-3

Table A-3. NPDES Permit NV0023507 monitoring requirements and 2008 sampling results............................A-5

Table A-4. Tons of criteria air pollutant and HAPs emissions estimated for NLVF in 2008...............................A-7

Table A-5. Results of 2008 direct radiation exposure monitoring at NLVF ........................................................A-8

Table A-6. Environmental permits for RSL-Nellis in 2008..................................................................................A-9

Table A-7. Mean concentration of outfall measurements at RSL-Nellis in 2008.................................................A-9

Table A-8. Summary of air emissions for RSL-Nellis in 2008 ..........................................................................A-10
Appendix A - Offsite Facilities

A-iv Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Appendix A - Offsite Facilities

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 A-1 

Appendix A: Offsite Facilities 

The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office (NNSA/NSO) 

manages two facilities in Clark County, Nevada, that support NNSA/NSO missions on and off the Nevada 

Test Site (NTS). They include the North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF) and the Remote Sensing Laboratory 

(RSL)–Nellis (Figure A-1). This appendix describes all environmental monitoring and compliance activities 

conducted in 2008 at these offsite facilities. 

A.1 North Las Vegas Facility 

The NLVF is a fenced complex composed of 31 buildings that house much of the NTS project management, 

diagnostic development and testing, design, engineering, and procurement. The 32-hectare (80-acre) facility is 

located along Losee Road, a short distance west of Interstate 15 (Figure A-1). The facility is buffered on the 

north, south, and east by general industrial zoning. The western border separates the property from fully 

developed, single-family residential-zoned property. The NLVF is a controlled-access facility. 

Environmental compliance and monitoring activities associated with this facility in 2008 included the maintenance of one wastewater permit, one National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit, one air 

quality operating permit, one hazardous materials permit (Table A-1), and the monitoring of tritium in air and 

ambient gamma-emissions to comply with radiation protection regulations. 

Table A-1. Environmental permits for NLVF in 2008 

Permit Number Description Expiration Date Reporting 

Wastewater Discharge 

 VEH-112 NLVF Wastewater Contribution Permit December 31, 2013 Annually 

 NV0023507 NLVF NPDES Permit November 2, 2011 Quarterly 

Air Quality 

 Source 657, 

 Modification (Mod.) 2/ 

 Mod.3

Clark County Authority to Construct/Operating 

Permit for a Testing Laboratory (Mod 2.)/for a 

Nonmajor Commercial Building (Mod 3.)

None March 

Hazardous Materials 

 2287-5144 NLVF Hazardous Materials Permit February 28, 2009 Annually 

A.1.1 Compliance with Water Permits 

Wastewater permits in 2008 for NLVF included a Class II Wastewater Contribution Permit with the City of North 

Las Vegas (CNLV) for sewer discharges and an NPDES permit issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) used in dewatering operations to control rising groundwater levels that surround the facility. 

Discharges of sewage and industrial wastewater from NLVF are required to meet permit limits set by the CNLV. 

These limits support the permit limits for the Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW) operated by the City of 

Las Vegas. Regulations for wastewater discharges are codified in the municipal codes for both cities. 

A.1.1.1 Wastewater Contribution Permit VEH-112 

This permit specifies concentration limits for contaminants in domestic and industrial wastewater discharges. 

Self-monitoring and reporting of the levels of nonradiological contaminants in sewage and industrial outfalls is 

conducted. In 2008, contaminant concentrations (in milligrams per liter [mg/L]) were below the established 

permit limits in all water samples from the NLVF outfalls sampled (Table A-2). In compliance with this permit, a 
Appendix A - Offsite Facilities

A-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Figure A-1. Location of NTS offsite facilities in Las Vegas and North Las Vegas 
Appendix A - Offsite Facilities

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 A-3 

report summarizing wastewater monitoring was generated for NLVF operations and was submitted on 

October 27, 2008 to CNLV. The report is titled Self-Monitoring Report for the National Nuclear Security 

Administration’s North Las Vegas Facility: Permit VEH-112.

Table A-2. Results of 2008 monitoring at NLVF for Wastewater Contribution Permit VEH-112 

Contaminant 

Permit Limit 

 (mg/L) 

Outfall A 

(mg/L)

Outfall B 

(mg/L)

Ammonia 61.0 12.2 20.0 

Arsenic 2.3 0.0038 <0.0025 

Barium 13.1 0.144 0.151 

Beryllium 0.02 <0.00025 <0.00025 

Cadmium 0.15 <0.00025 <0.00025 

Chromium (hexavalent) 0.10 0.0003 0.0003 

Chromium (total) 5.60 0.0012 0.0016 

Copper 0.60 0.171 0.251 

Cyanide (total) 19.9 <0.010 <0.0114 

Lead 0.20 < 0.0015 <0.0015 

Mercury 0.001 <0.00006 <0.00006 

Nickel 1.10 0.0044 0.0041 

Oil & Grease (animal or vegetable) 250 1.5 <1.0 

Oil & Grease (mineral or petroleum) 100 <1.0 <1.0 

Organophosphorus or carbamate compounds 1.0 <0.1 <0.1 

pH (Standard Units) 5.0–11.0 8.22 8.17 

Phenols 33.6 0.0083 0.0323 

Phosphorus (total) 0.50 0.0045 0.0057 

Selenium 2.70 < 0.0005 < 0.0005 

Silver 8.20 0.255 0.224 

Zinc 13.1 0.144 0.151 

A.1.1.2 National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit NV0023507 

An NPDES permit (NV0023507) covers the dewatering operation conducted at the NLVF (see Section A.1.2). 

Dewatering wells (NLVF-13s, -15, -16, -17) pump groundwater into a 39,747 liter (L) (10,500 gallon [gal]) 

storage tank (Figure A-2). The permit allows for the discharge of water from the storage tank to the groundwater 

of the state via percolation, when used for landscape irrigation and dust suppression, and into the Las Vegas Wash 

via direct discharge into the CNLV storm water drainage system. The permit defines the discharge source via 

percolation as “Outfall 001” and via the storm water drainage system as “Outfall 002.” Water produced from the 

dewatering wells may also be used for purposes that do not require a groundwater discharge or an NPDES permit 

(e.g., evaporative cooling). In accordance with the permit, chemistry analyses are performed quarterly, annually, 

and biennially for water samples collected from the storage tank (Table A-3). The total quantities of groundwater 

produced and discharged and the results of groundwater chemistry analyses are reported quarterly to Nevada 

Division of Environmental Protection Bureau of Water Pollution Control. 

In 2008, the four dewatering wells produced a total of about 9,664 L (2,553 gal) per day that were directed into 

the storage tank (Figure A-2). The pumping rates varied from 2.7 liters per minute (Lpm) (0.72 gallons per 

minute [gpm]) at Well NLVF-13s to 0.9 Lpm (0.24 gpm) at Wells NLVF-15 and NLVF-16. The average 

combined discharge from all four wells was about 295,000 L (78,000 gal) per month. Discharge rates did not 

exceed the NPDES permit limits (Table A-3). Quarterly and annual water samples from the holding tank had 

total petroleum hydrocarbons, total suspended solids, total dissolved solids, total inorganic nitrogen (as nitrogen 

[N]), pH, and tritium levels that were all below permit limits (Table A-3). Biennial water sampling for the 

presence of over 100 analytes (listed in Attachment A of the permit) began in January 2007. Therefore, no 

sampling for these analytes was conducted in 2008. 
Appendix A - Offsite Facilities

A-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 Figure A-2. Location of dewatering and monitoring wells around Building A-1 
Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 A-5

Table A-3. NPDES Permit NV0023507 monitoring requirements and 2008 sampling results 

Monitoring Requirements 

Parameter 

Sample 

Frequency Sample Type 

Permit 

Discharge Limits 

Daily Maximum 

Sample 

Results 1st

Quarter 

Sample 

Results 2nd

Quarter 

S

Re

Q

Daily Maximum Flow (MGD) (a) Continuous Flow Meter 0.005184 0.002523 0.002647 0Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (mg/L) Annually (4th Qtr) Discrete 1.0 NS (b) NS Total Suspended Solids (mg/L) Quarterly Discrete 135 ND (c) 6 Total Dissolved Solids (mg/L) Quarterly Discrete 1900 760 966 Total Inorganic Nitrogen as N (mg/L) Quarterly Discrete 20.0 0.81 0.76 pH (S.U.) (d) Quarterly Discrete 6.5–9.0 7.58 7.63 Tritium (picocuries per liter [pCi/L]) Annually (4th Qtr) Discrete MR (d) NS NS Permit Attachment A Analytes (mg/L): 46 Base Neutral Extractables Biennial Discrete MR  12 Acid Extractables Biennial Discrete MR  28 Volatile Organics Biennial Discrete MR  25 Pesticides/PCBs (e) Biennial Discrete MR  Dioxins Biennial Discrete MR  13 Metals Biennial Discrete MR  Cyanide Biennial Discrete MR  Asbestos Biennial Discrete MR 

These analytes were not sampled in in January 2007 (National Security [NSTec], 2008a) and in January 20results will be reported in the 2009 Report. 

(a) MGD = million gallons per day (b) NS = not required to be sampled that quarter (c) ND = not detected (d) S.U. = Standard Unit (d) MR = monitor and report (e) PCBs = Polychlorinated biphenyls *Values were less than the laboratory detection limits. 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 200

8 A-5
Appendix A - Offsite Facilities

A-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

A.1.2 Groundwater Control and Dewatering Operation 

During 2008, the groundwater control and dewatering project at the NLVF continued efforts to reduce the 

intrusion of groundwater below Building A-1. Since its inception in 2002, the project has transitioned from initial 

groundwater investigations and characterization phases to a long-term/permanent dewatering operational project. 

A review of the rising groundwater situation and past efforts to understand and remediate the problem is presented 

in previous reports (Bechtel Nevada [BN], 2003b; 2004b; 2005c; National Security Technologies, LLC [NSTec], 

2006; 2008a). 

Groundwater monitoring for this operation includes taking periodic water-level measurements at 29 NLVF 

monitoring wells, taking continuous water-level measurements at the A-1 Basement Sump well, measuring the 

total volume of discharged groundwater, and conducting groundwater chemistry analyses in accordance with the 

NPDES permit (see Section A.1.1.2). Groundwater data are assessed quarterly or as new data become available. 

This information is used to help characterize the groundwater situation, validate the conceptual hydrologic model, 

and evaluate the dewatering operation. The presence or absence of particular constituents or overall chemical 

signature could suggest or confirm source(s) of the rising near-surface groundwater. Water monitoring data are 

maintained in the NSTec Environmental Integrated Data Management System database. 

In 2008, about 295,000 L (78,000 gal) per month were pumped from the dewatering wells. Groundwater also 

continued to be pumped from the A-1 Basement Sump well (Figure A-2), totaling about 935,235 L (247,070 gal) 

in 2008. When the A-1 Basement Sump well pump is active, the water level directly beneath Building A-1 is 

about 50 centimeters (cm) (20 inches [in.]) (below the basement floor, as measured in a monitoring tube installed 

outside a nearby elevator shaft. When the pump is active, water within the A-1 Basement Sump well itself is 

about 244 cm (96 in.) below the basement floor. When the A-1 Basement Sump well pump is turned off for short 

periods of three to six days, the water in the elevator shaft-monitoring tube rises 33 cm (13 in.), to 18 cm (7 in.) 

below the basement floor, and water in the A-1 Basement Sump well itself rises to within 76 cm (30 in.) of the 

basement floor. These water level measurements reflect a drop of roughly 61 cm (24 in.) in the local water table 

beneath Building A-1 since full-scale dewatering operations began in 2006. 

However, the general trend in the 29 NLVF monitoring wells shows rising water levels, about 0.9 meters 

(3 feet) higher than levels obtained over the past three to five years. The dewatering efforts must counter this 

rising groundwater trend. Water levels in the closest monitoring well, NLVF-12s (Figure A-2), seem to be 

decreasing, however, presumably reflecting drawdown of the local water table due to the dewatering operations at 

Building A-1. 

A.1.2.1 Discharge of Groundwater from Building A-1 Sump Well 

During 2001, the sump well was installed in the basement of Building A-1 and used in operations to remediate 

tritium contamination in the basement that occurred in 1999 (BN, 2000). The discharge water, containing tritium, 

was disposed of at the NTS. The sump well was turned off after the remedial operations were completed. 

However, beginning in early 2003, the sump well has been used intermittently to help control the encroaching 

water below Building A-1. The water contains some residual tritium (1,900 pCi/L or about one-tenth of the Safe 

Drinking Water Act limit of 20,000 pCi/L) and it is kept separate with its own disposal process. The discharge is 

transported to the NTS during the winter, but during the warm months, the discharge is evaporated with an 

exterior array of evaporative units on the north side of Building A-1. In 2008, about 363,000 L (95,900 gal) were 

transported to the NTS for disposal during the winter and about 572,230 L (151,170 gal) were evaporated at the 

NLVF during the summer months. These measured quantities of water released through evaporation and the 

measured tritium concentrations in these waters allowed estimates of total curies released to the atmosphere in 

2008 at the NTS (see Section 3.1.9, Table 3-13) and at the NLVF (see Section A.1.5.1). 
Appendix A - Offsite Facilities

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 A-7 

A.1.3 Compliance with Air Quality Permits 

Sources of air pollutants at the NLVF were regulated in 2008 by the Source 657 Authority to Construct/ 

Operating Permit for the emission of criteria pollutants (see Glossary, Appendix B) and hazardous air pollutants 

(HAPs). These pollutants include sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxide (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO), particulate 

matter (PM), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and any of 189 defined HAPs. The regulated sources of 

emissions at the NLVF include an aluminum sander, an abrasive blaster, emergency generators, and a spray paint 

booth. 

An application to modify the permit by removing a diesel generator from it that had been previously stationed 

outside of Building B-3 was submitted to Clark County in March 2008. The modified permit was issued in April 

2008. Another application to modify the permit by adding five cooling towers and two boilers was submitted to 

Clark County at the end of 2008. The Clark County Department of Air Quality and Environmental Management 

(DAQEM) requires submittal of an annual emissions inventory. The emissions inventory for 2008 was submitted 

to DAQEM on March 24, 2009. The estimated quantities of criteria air pollutants and HAPs emitted in 2008 are 

shown in Table A-4. 

Table A-4. Tons of criteria air pollutant and HAPs emissions estimated for NLVF in 2008 

Criteria Pollutant (Tons/yr)(a)

CO NOx PM10(b) SO2 VOC HAPs (Tons/yr) 

0.082 0.365 0.027 0.016 0.021 0.0002 

Total Emissions = 0.511 

(a) 1 ton equals 0.91 metric tons 

(b) Particulate matter equal to or less than 10 microns in diameter 

A.1.4 Compliance with Hazardous Materials Regulations 

In 2008, the chemical inventory at NLVF was updated and submitted to the State in the Nevada Combined 

Agency (NCA) Report on February 26, 2009, as per the requirements of the Hazardous Materials Permit 2287-

5144 (see Section 2.5, Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act for description of content, 

purpose, and federal regulatory driver behind the NCA Report). No accidental or unplanned release of an 

extremely hazardous substance (EHS) occurred at NLVF in 2008. Also, no annual usage quantities of toxic 

chemicals kept at NLVF exceeded specified thresholds (see Section 2.5 concerning Toxic Chemical Release 

Inventory, Form R). 

A.1.5 Compliance with Radiation Protection Regulations 

A.1.5.1 National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) 

In compliance with NESHAP of the Clean Air Act, NSTec assessed the radionuclide air emissions from the 

NLVF in 2008 and the resultant radiological dose to the public surrounding the facility. NESHAP establishes a 

dose limit for the general public to be no greater than 10 millirems per year (mrem/yr) from all radioactive air 

emissions. Building A-1’s basement was contaminated with tritium in 1995 when a container of tritium foils was 

opened, emitting about 1 curie of tritium (U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office, 1996). 

Complete cleanup of the tritium was unsuccessful due to the tritium being absorbed into the building materials. 

This has resulted in a continuous but decreasing release of tritium into the basement air space, which is ventilated 

to the outdoors. Since 1995, a dose assessment has been performed every year for this building. 

In 2008, groundwater containing detectable levels of tritium were pumped from the sump well in the basement 

and allowed to evaporate from the array of evaporative units on the north side of the building during the summer 
Appendix A - Offsite Facilities

A-8 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

months (see Figure A-2). The tritium concentration levels in the groundwater and the volume of groundwater 

diverted to the evaporative units were known and were used to compute total annual tritium emissions from the 

evaporative units. Also, two air samples were collected from the basement (from April 14 to 21 and from 

September 8 to 16) in order to compute average tritium emissions from the basement. A calculated annual total of 

11.1 millicuries (mCi) were released from both the evaporative units (1.1 mCi) and the basement air being vented 

to the outside (10 mCi). Based on this emission rate, the calculated radiation dose to the nearest member of the 

general public from the NLVF, located about 100 m northwest of Building A-1, was very low at 0.00006 mrem/yr 

(Warren and Grossman, 2009). This is the same low public dose that was estimated in 2007 (NSTec, 2008a). 

A.1.5.2 DOE O 5400.5 

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order DOE O 5400.5, “Radiation Protection of the Public and the 

Environment,” specifies that the radiological dose to a member of the public from radiation from all pathways 

must not exceed 100 mrem/yr as a result of DOE activities. This dose limit does not include the dose contribution 

from natural background radiation. The Atlas A-1 Source Range Laboratory and the Building C-3 High Intensity 

Source Building are two NLVF facilities that use radioactive sources or where radiation-producing operations are 

conducted that have the potential to expose the general population or non-project personnel to direct radiation. 

NSTec’s Environmental Technical Services (ETS) conducts direct radiation monitoring at these locations. ETS 

utilizes thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) to monitor external gamma radiation exposure near the boundaries 

of these facilities. The methods of TLD use and data analyses are described in Section 5.0 of this report. 

In 2008, radiation exposure was measured at two locations along the perimeter fence and at one control location. 

Annual exposure rates estimated from measurements at those NLVF locations are summarized in Table A-5. The 

radiation exposure in air measured by the TLDs in units of milliroentgens per year (mR/yr) is approximately 

equivalent to the unit of mrem/yr for tissue. These exposures include contributions from background radiation 

and are similar to the TLD measurement of 94 mR/yr for total annual exposure reported by the Desert Research 

Institute from their Las Vegas air monitoring station (see Section 6.1.2, Table 6-3). The NLVF TLD results 

indicate that facility activities do not contribute a radiological dose to the surrounding public that can be 

distinguished from that of background radiation. 

Table A-5. Results of 2008 direct radiation exposure monitoring at NLVF 

 Gamma Exposure (milliroentgens per year [mR/yr]) 

Location

Number of 

Samples Mean Median Minimum Maximum 

Control (along west fence of 

Building C-1) 4 91 93 83 97 

North Fence of Building A-1 4 92 93 83 97 

North Fence of Building C-3 4 92 93 83 97 

A.2 Remote Sensing Laboratory-Nellis 

RSL-Nellis is approximately 13.7 kilometers (km) (8.5 miles [mi]) northeast of the Las Vegas city center, and 

approximately 11.3 km (7 mi) northeast of NLVF. It occupies six facilities on approximately 14 secured hectares 

(35 acres) at the Nellis Air Force Base. The six NNSA/NSO facilities were constructed on property owned by the 

U.S. Air Force (USAF). There is a Memorandum of Agreement between the USAF and the NNSA/NSO whereby 

the land belongs to the USAF, but is under lease to the NNSA/NSO for 25 years (as of 1989) with an option for a 

25-year extension. The facilities are owned by NNSA/NSO. RSL-Nellis provides emergency response resources 

for weapons-of-mass-destruction incidents. The laboratory also designs and field tests 

counterterrorism/intelligence technologies and has the capability to assess environmental and facility conditions 

using complex radiation measurements and multi-spectral imaging technologies. 
Appendix A - Offsite Facilities

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 A-9 

Environmental compliance and monitoring activities at RSL-Nellis in 2008 included maintenance of a wastewater 

contribution permit, an air quality permit, a hazardous materials permit, and a waste management permit 

(Table A-6). Sealed radiation sources are used for calibration at RSL-Nellis, but the public has no access to any 

area that may have elevated gamma radiation emitted by the sources. Therefore, no environmental TLD 

monitoring is conducted. However, dosimetry monitoring to ensure protection of personnel who work within the 

facility is performed. 

 

Table A-6. Environmental permits for RSL-Nellis in 2008 

A.2.1 Compliance with Wastewater Contribution Permit CCWRD-080 

Discharges of wastewater from RSL-Nellis are required to meet permit limits set by the Clark County Water 

Reclamation District (CCWRD). These limits support the permit limits for the POTW operated by Clark County. 

The wastewater permit for this facility requires quarterly monitoring and reporting. Table A-7 presents the mean 

concentration of outfall measurements collected once per quarter in 2008. All contaminants in the outfall samples 

were below permit limits. Quarterly reports were submitted on March 12, May 14, September 15, and 

December 11, 2008, to the CCWRD. The CCWRD also conducted two inspections of RSL-Nellis in 2008. The 

inspections resulted in no findings or corrective actions for the facility. 

Table A-7. Mean concentration of outfall measurements at RSL-Nellis in 2008 

Contaminant/Measure

Permit Limit 

(mg/L)

Outfall 

(mg/L) 

Ammonia NL(a) 19.25 

Cadmium 0.35 0.00053 

Chromium (Total) 1.7 0.0017 

Copper 3.36 0.276 

Cyanide (Total) 1 0.015 

Lead 0.99 0.002 

Nickel 10.08 0.0048 

Phosphorus NL(a) 3.90 

Silver 6.3 0.0008 

TDS NL(a) 1,585 

TSS NL(a) 162.3 

Zinc 23.06 0.467 

pH (Standard Units) 5.0–11.0 8.38 

Temperature (Degrees Fahrenheit) 140 74.0 

(a) No limit listed on permit 

Permit Number Description Expiration Date Reporting 

Wastewater Discharge 

CCWRD-080 Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit June 30, 2008 March, May, 

September, December 

Air Quality 

Facility 348, Mod. 2

Clark County Authority to 

Construct/Operating Permit for a 

Testing Laboratory

None March 

Hazardous Materials 

2287-5145 RSL-Nellis Hazardous Materials Permit February 28, 2009 Annually 

Waste Management 

U1576-33N-01 RSL-Nellis Waste Management PermitUnderground Storage Tank December 31, 2008 None 
Appendix A - Offsite Facilities

A-10 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

A.2.2 Compliance with Air Quality Permits 

Sources of air pollutants at RSL-Nellis are regulated by the Facility 348 Authority to Construct/Operating Permit 

for the emission of criteria pollutants and HAPs (see Glossary, Appendix B). The regulated sources include 

boilers, water heaters, emergency generators, a spray paint booth, and a vapor degreaser. On November 13, 2008, 

the DAQEM conducted an inspection of the equipment regulated by the permit. The inspector was pleased with 

the records and logbooks maintained by RSL-Nellis; however, it was noted that two cooling towers were not 

included in the permit. A letter of noncompliance was issued by DAQEM on November 18, 2008, which required 

NNSA/NSO to modify the permit to add the cooling towers. No monetary fines or violations were issued. An 

application to modify the permit was submitted to DAQEM on December 16, 2008. The new permit was issued 

July 21, 2009. The DAQEM requires submittal of the annual emissions inventory. The estimated quantities of 

criteria air pollutants and HAPs emitted at RSL-Nellis in 2008 are presented in Table A-8. Natural gas 

consumption is also reported as per the requirements of the consolidated air permit issued for RSL-Nellis. The 

emissions inventory for 2008 was submitted to DAQEM on March 24, 2009. 

Table A-8. Summary of air emissions for RSL-Nellis in 2008 

Criteria Pollutant (Tons/yr)(a)

CO NOx PM10(b) SO2 VOC

HAPs 

(Tons/yr)

Natural Gas 

Consumption (ft3

) (c)

0.217 0.426 0.025 0.009 0.023 0.004 3,777,100 

Total Emissions of Pollutants = 0.704

(a) 1 ton equals 0.91 metric tons 

(b) Particulate matter equal to or less than 10 microns in diameter 

(c) Cubic feet 

A.2.3 Compliance with Hazardous Materials Regulations 

In 2008, the chemical inventory at RSL-Nellis was updated and submitted to the state in the NCA Report on 

February 26, 2009, as per the requirements of the Hazardous Materials Permit 2287-5145 (see Section 2.5 of this 

report for description of content, purpose, and federal regulatory driver behind the NCA Report). No accidental 

or unplanned release of an EHS occurred at RSL-Nellis in 2008. Also, no annual usage quantities of toxic 

chemicals kept at RSL-Nellis exceeded specified thresholds (see Section 2.5 concerning Toxic Chemical Release 

Inventory, Form R). 

A.2.4 Compliance with Waste Management Regulations 

The underground storage tank program at RSL-Nellis consists of two active permitted tanks (gasoline/diesel 

fuel), one inactive tank (empty used oil tank), one deferred tank (as per Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Part 

280.10(d)) for emergency power generation, and three unregulated tanks. The permitted and deferred tanks are 

located at Building 2211. The fuel tanks were retrofitted with spill/overflow protection in 1998. They are 

inspected annually by the Southern Nevada Health District. No deficiencies were noted during the 2008 health 

district’s inspection at RSL-Nellis. As-built engineering drawings of the permitted tanks were provided to the 

health district at their request. 
Appendix B – Glossary of Terms 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 B-1 

Appendix B: Glossary of Terms 

A Absorbed dose: the amount of energy imparted to matter by ionizing radiation per unit mass of irradiated 

material, in which the absorbed dose is expressed in units of rad or gray (l rad equals 0.01 gray). 

Accuracy: the closeness of the result of a measurement to the true value of the quantity measured. 

Action level: defined by regulatory agencies, the level of pollutants which, if exceeded, requires regulatory 

action. 

Alluvium: a sediment deposited by flowing water. 

Alpha particle: a positively charged particle emitted from the nucleus of an atom, having mass and charge 

equal to those of a helium nucleus (two protons and two neutrons), usually emitted by transuranic elements. 

Analyte: the specific component measured in a chemical analysis. 

Aquifer: a saturated layer of rock or soil below the ground surface that can supply usable quantities of 

groundwater to wells and springs, and be a source of water for domestic, agricultural, and industrial uses. 

Atom: the smallest particle of an element capable of entering into a chemical reaction. 

B Background: as used in this report, background is the term for the amounts of chemical constituents or 

radioactivity in the environment that are not caused by Nevada Test Site operations. 

Becquerel (Bq): the International System of Units unit of activity of a radionuclide, equal to the activity of a 

radionuclide having one spontaneous nuclear transition per second. 

Beta particle: a negatively charged particle emitted from the nucleus of an atom, having charge, mass, and 

other properties of an electron, emitted from fission products such as cesium-137. 

Biological oxygen demand (BOD): a measure of the amount of dissolved oxygen that microorganisms need 

to break down organic matter in water; used as an indicator of water quality. 

C CAP88-PC: a computer code required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for modeling air 

emissions of radionuclides. 

Code of Federal Regulations (CFR): a codification of all regulations promulgated by federal government 

agencies. 

Collective population dose: the sum of the total effective dose equivalents of all individuals within a 

defined population. The unit of collective population dose is person-rem or person-sievert. Collective 

population dose may also be referred to as “collective effective dose equivalent” or simply “population dose.” 

Committed dose equivalent: the dose equivalent to a tissue or organ over a 50-year period after an intake of 

a radionuclide into the body. Committed dose equivalent is expressed in units of rem or sievert. 

Committed effective dose equivalent (CEDE): the sum of the committed dose equivalents to various 

tissues in the body, each multiplied by an appropriate weighting factor representing the relative vulnerability 

of different parts of the body to radiation. Committed effective dose equivalent is expressed in units of rem or 

sievert. 

Compliance Level (CL): the Clean Air Act National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants 

Concentration Level for Environmental Compliance. The CL value represents the annual average 

concentration that would result in a dose of 10 millirem per year, which is the federal dose limit to the public 

from all radioactive air emissions. 
Appendix B – Glossary of Terms

B-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Cosmic radiation: radiation with very high energies originating outside the earth’s atmosphere; it is one 

source contributing to natural background radiation. 

Criteria pollutants: those air pollutants designated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as 

potentially harmful and for which National Ambient Air Quality Standards under the Clean Air Act have been 

established to protect the public health and welfare. These pollutants include sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen 

oxides (NOX), carbon monoxide (CO), ozone, lead, and particulate matter equal to or less than 10 microns in 

diameter (PM10). The State of Nevada, through an air quality permit, establishes emission limits on the 

Nevada Test Site for SO2, NOX, CO, PM10, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs). Ozone is not regulated 

by the permit as an emission as it is formed in part from NOX and VOCs. Lead is considered a hazardous air 

pollutant (HAP) as well as a criteria pollutant, and lead emissions on the Nevada Test Site are reported as part 

of the total HAP emissions. Lead emissions above a specified threshold are also reported under Section 313 

of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act. 

Curie (Ci): a unit of measurement of radioactivity, defined as the amount of radioactive material in which 

the decay rate is 3.7 × 1010 disintegrations per second or 2.22 × 1012 disintegrations per minute; one Ci is 

approximately equal to the decay rate of one gram of pure radium. 

D Daughter nuclide: a nuclide formed by the radioactive decay of another nuclide, which is called the parent. 

Decision level: the counts of radioactivity (or concentration level of a radionuclide) in a sample that must be 

exceeded before there is a specified level of confidence (typically 95 or 99 percent) that the sample contains 

radioactive material above the background; also known as the Critical Level (LC).

Depleted uranium: uranium having a lower proportion of the isotope 235U than is found in naturally 

occurring uranium. The masses of the three uranium isotopes with atomic weights 238, 235, and 234 occur in 

depleted uranium in the weight-percentages 99.8, 0.2, and 5 × 10–4, respectively; see Table 3-7 and related 

discussion. 

Derived Concentration Guide (DCG): concentrations of radionuclides in water and air that could be 

continuously consumed or inhaled for one year and not exceed the U.S. Department of Energy primary 

radiation dose limit to the public of 100 millirem per year effective dose equivalent. 

Dose: the energy imparted to matter by ionizing radiation; the unit of absorbed dose is the rad, equal to 

0.01 joules per kilogram for irradiated material in any medium. 

Dose equivalent: the product of absorbed dose in rad (or gray) in tissue and a quality factor representing the 

relative damage caused to living tissue by different kinds of radiation, and perhaps other modifying factors 

representing the distribution of radiation, etc., expressed in units of rem or sievert. 

Dosimeter: a portable detection device for measuring the total accumulated exposure to ionizing radiation. 

Dosimetry: the theory and application of the principles and techniques of measuring and recording radiation 

doses. 

E Effective dose equivalent (EDE): an estimate of the total risk of potential effects from radiation exposure; it 

is the summation of the products of the dose equivalent and weighting factor for each tissue. The weighting 

factor is the decimal fraction of the risk arising from irradiation of a selected tissue to the total risk when the 

whole body is irradiated uniformly to the same dose equivalent. These factors permit dose equivalents from 

non-uniform exposure of the body to be expressed in terms of an EDE that is numerically equal to the dose 

from a uniform exposure of the whole body that entails the same risk as the internal exposure. The EDE 

includes the committed effective dose equivalent from internal deposition of radionuclides and the EDE 

caused by penetrating radiation from sources external to the body, and is expressed in units of rem or sievert. 

Effluent: used in this report to refer to a liquid discharged to the environment. 
Appendix B – Glossary of Terms 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 B-3 

Emission: used in this report to refer to a vapor, gas, airborne particulate, or radiation discharged to the 

environment via the air. 

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS): a detailed report, required by the National Environmental Policy 

Act, on the environmental impacts from a federally approved or funded project. An EIS must be prepared by 

a federal agency when a “major” federal action that will have “significant” environmental impacts is planned. 

F Federal facility: a facility that is owned or operated by the federal government, subject to the same 

requirements as other responsible parties when placed on the Superfund National Priorities List. 

Federal Register: a document published daily by the federal government containing notification of 

government agency actions, including notification of U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and 

U.S. Department of Energy decisions concerning permit applications and rule-making. 

Fiscal year: the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Agency Nevada Site Office’s fiscal 

year is from October 1 through September 30. 

G Gamma ray: high-energy, short-wavelength, electromagnetic radiation emitted from the nucleus of an atom, 

frequently accompanying the emission of alpha or beta particles. 

Gray (Gy): the International System of Units unit of measure for absorbed dose; the quantity of energy 

imparted by ionizing radiation to a unit mass of matter, such as tissue. One gray equals 100 rads, or 1 joule 

per kilogram. 

Gross alpha: the measure of radioactivity caused by all radionuclides present in a sample that emit alpha 

particles. Gross alpha measurements reflect alpha activity from all sources, including those that occur 

naturally. Gross measurements are used as a method to screen samples for relative levels of radioactivity. 

Gross beta: the measure of radioactivity caused by all radionuclides present in a sample that emit beta 

particles. Gross beta measurements reflect beta activity from all sources, including those that occur naturally. 

Gross measurements are used as a method to screen samples for relative levels of radioactivity. 

H Half-life: the time required for one-half the radioactive atoms in a given amount of material to decay; for 

example, after one half-life, half of the atoms will have decayed; after two half-lives, three-fourths; after three 

half-lives, seven-eighths; and so on, exponentially. 

Hazardous waste: hazardous wastes exhibit any of the following characteristics: ignitability, corrosivity, 

reactivity, or Extraction Procedure toxicity (yielding excessive levels of toxic constituents in a leaching test), 

but other wastes that do not necessarily exhibit these characteristics have been determined to be hazardous by 

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Although the legal definition of hazardous waste is 

complex, according to EPA, the term generally refers to any waste that, if managed improperly, could pose a 

threat to human health and the environment. 

High-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter: a throwaway, extended-media, dry-type filter used to 

capture particulates in an air stream; HEPA collection efficiencies are at least 99.97 percent for 

0.3-micrometer diameter particles. 

Hydrology: the science dealing with the properties, distribution, and circulation of natural water systems. 

I Inorganic compounds: compounds that either do not contain carbon or do not contain hydrogen along with 

carbon, including metals, salts, various carbon oxides (e.g., carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide), and 

cyanide. 

Instrument detection limit (IDL): the lowest concentration that can be detected by an instrument without 

correction for the effects of sample matrix or method-specific parameters such as sample preparation. IDLs 
Appendix B – Glossary of Terms

B-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

are explicitly determined and generally defined as three times the standard deviation of the mean noise level. 

This represents 99 percent confidence that the signal is not random noise.

Interim status: a legal classification allowing hazardous waste incinerators or other hazardous waste 

management facilities to operate while the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency considers their permit 

applications, provided that they were under construction or in operation by November 19, 1980, and can meet 

other interim status requirements. 

International System of Units (SI): an international system of physical units that includes meter (length), 

kilogram (mass), kelvin (temperature), becquerel (radioactivity), gray (radioactive dose), and sievert (dose 

equivalent). The abbreviation, SI, comes from the French term Système International d’Unités. 

Isotopes: forms of an element having the same number of protons in their nuclei, but differing numbers of 

neutrons. 

L LC: the counts of radioactivity (or concentration level of a radionuclide) in a sample that must be exceeded 

before there is a specified level of confidence (typically 95 or 99 percent) that the sample contains radioactive 

material above the background; called the Critical Level (LC) or the decision level. 

Less than detection limits: a phrase indicating that a chemical constituent or radionuclide was either not 

present in a sample, or is present in such a small concentration that it cannot be measured as significantly 

different from zero by a laboratory’s analytical procedure and, therefore, is not identified at the lowest level 

of sensitivity. 

Low-level radioactive waste (LLW): waste, defined by U.S. Department of Energy Order DOE O 435.1 

that contains transuranic nuclide concentrations less than 100 nanocuries per gram. 

Lower limit of detection: the smallest concentration or amount of analyte that can be detected in a sample at 

a 95-percent confidence level. 

Lysimeter: an instrument for measuring the water percolating through soils and determining the dissolved 

materials. 

M Maximally exposed individual (MEI): a hypothetical member of the public at a fixed location who, over an 

entire year, receives the maximum effective dose equivalent (summed over all pathways) from a given source 

of radionuclide releases to air. Generally, the MEI is different for each source at a site. 

Maximum contaminant level (MCL): the highest level of a contaminant in drinking water that is allowed 

by U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulation. 

Minimum detectable concentration (MDC): also known as the lower limit of detection, the smallest 

amount of radioactive material in a sample that can be quantitatively distinguished from background radiation 

in the sample with 95 percent confidence. 

Metric units: metric units, U.S. customary units, and their respective equivalents are shown in Table 1-6. 

Except for temperature for which specific equations apply, U.S. customary units can be determined from 

metric units by multiplying the metric units by the U.S. customary equivalent. Similarly, metric units can be 

determined from U.S. customary equivalent units by multiplying the U.S. customary units by the metric 

equivalent. 

Mixed waste (MW): waste that has the properties of both hazardous and radioactive waste. 

N National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP): standards found in the Clean Air 

Act that set limits for hazardous air pollutants. 

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES): a federal regulation under the Clean Water 

Act that requires permits for discharges into surface waterways. 
Appendix B – Glossary of Terms 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 B-5 

Nuclide: any species of atom that exists for a measurable length of time. A nuclide can be distinguished by 

its atomic mass, atomic number, and energy state. 

O Offsite: for effluent releases or in the nuclear testing area, any place outside the Nevada Test Site and 

adjacent Nevada Test and Training Range. 

Onsite: for effluent releases or in the nuclear testing area, any place inside the Nevada Test Site and adjacent 

Nevada Test and Training Range. 

P Part B Permit: the second, narrative section submitted by generators in the Resource Conservation and 

Recovery Act permitting process that covers in detail the procedures followed at a facility to protect human 

health and the environment. 

Parts per million (ppm): a unit of measure for the concentration of a substance in its surrounding medium; 

for example, one million grams of water containing one gram of salt has a salt concentration of 1 ppm. 

Perched aquifer: an aquifer that is separated from another water-bearing stratum by an impermeable layer. 

Performance standards (incinerators): specific regulatory requirements established by the 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency limiting the concentrations of designated organic compounds, 

particulate matter, and hydrogen chloride in incinerator emissions. 

pH: a measure of hydrogen ion concentration in an aqueous solution. Acidic solutions have a pH from 

0 to 7, basic solutions have a pH greater than 7, and neutral solutions have a pH of 7. 

PM10: a fine particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter equal to or less than 10 microns. 

Point source: any confined and discrete conveyance (e.g., pipe, ditch, well, or stack). 

Q Quality assurance (QA): a system of activities whose purpose is to provide the assurance that standards of 

quality are attained with a stated level of confidence. 

Quality control (QC): procedures used to verify that prescribed standards of performance are attained. 

Quality factor: the factor by which the absorbed dose (rad) is multiplied to obtain a quantity that expresses 

(on a common scale for all ionizing radiation) the biological damage to exposed persons, usually used 

because some types of radiation, such as alpha particles, are biologically more damaging than others. Quality 

factors for alpha, beta, and gamma radiation are in the ratio 20:1:1. 

R Rad: the unit of absorbed dose and the quantity of energy imparted by ionizing radiation to a unit mass of 

matter such as tissue; equal to 0.01 joule per kilogram, or 0.01 gray. 

Radioactive decay: the spontaneous transformation of one radionuclide into a different nuclide (which may 

or may not be radioactive), or de-excitation to a lower energy state of the nucleus by emission of nuclear 

radiation, primarily alpha or beta particles, or gamma rays (photons). 

Radioactivity: the spontaneous emission of nuclear radiation, generally alpha or beta particles, or gamma 

rays, from the nucleus of an unstable isotope. 

Radionuclide: an unstable nuclide. See nuclide and radioactivity. 

Rem: a unit of radiation dose equivalent and effective dose equivalent describing the effectiveness of a type 

of radiation to produce biological effects; coined from the phrase “roentgen equivalent man,” and the product 

of the absorbed dose (rad), a quality factor (Q), a distribution factor, and other necessary modifying factors. 

One rem equals 0.01 sievert. 
Appendix B – Glossary of Terms

B-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Risk assessment: the use of established methods to measure the risks posed by an activity or exposure by 

evaluating the relationship between exposure to radioactive substances and the subsequent occurrence of 

health effects and the likelihood for that exposure to occur. 

Roentgen (R): a unit of measurement used to express radiation exposure in terms of the amount of ionization 

produced in a volume of air. 

S Sanitary waste: most simply, waste generated by routine operations that is not regulated as hazardous or 

radioactive by state or federal agencies. 

Saturated zone: a subsurface zone below which all rock pore-space is filled with water; also called the 

phreatic zone. 

Sensitivity: the capability of methodology or instrumentation to discriminate between samples having 

differing concentrations or containing varying amounts of analyte. 

Sievert (Sv): the International System of Units unit of radiation dose equivalent and effective dose 

equivalent, that is the product of the absorbed dose (gray), quality factor, distribution factor, and other 

necessary modifying factors; 1 Sv equals 100 rem. 

Source term: the amount of a specific pollutant emitted or discharged to a particular medium, such as the air 

or water, from a particular source.

Specific conductance: the measure of the ability of a material to conduct electricity; also called 

conductivity. 

Subcritical experiment: an experiment using high explosives and nuclear weapon materials (including 

special nuclear materials like plutonium) to gain data used to maintain the nuclear stockpile without 

conducting nuclear explosions banned by the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. 

T Thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD): a device used to measure external beta or gamma radiation levels, 

and which contains a material that, after exposure to beta or gamma radiation, emits light when processed and 

heated. 

Total dissolved solids (TDS): the total mass of particulate matter per unit volume that is dissolved in water 

and that can pass through a very fine filter. 

Total organic carbon (TOC): the sum of the organic material present in a sample. 

Total organic halides (TOX): the sum of the organic halides present in a sample. 

Total suspended solids (TSS): the total mass of particulate matter per unit volume suspended in water and 

wastewater discharges that is large enough to be collected by a very fine filter. 

Transpiration: a process by which water is transferred from the soil to the air by plants that take the water 

up through their roots and release it through their leaves and other aboveground tissue. 

Tritium: a radioactive isotope of hydrogen, containing one proton and two neutrons in its nucleus, which 

decays at a half-life of 12.3 years by emitting a low-energy beta particle. 

Transuranic (TRU) waste: material contaminated with alpha-emitting transuranium nuclides that have an 

atomic number greater than 92 (e.g., 239Pu), half-lives longer than 20 years, and are present in concentrations 

greater than 100 nanocuries per gram of waste. 
Appendix B – Glossary of Terms 

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 B-7 

U Uncertainty: the parameter associated with a sample measurement that characterizes the range of the 

measurement that could reasonably be attributed to the sample. Used in this report, the uncertainty value is 

established at ± 2 standard deviations.

Unsaturated zone: that portion of the subsurface in which the pores are only partially filled with water and 

the direction of water flow is vertical; is also referred to as the vadose zone. 

V Vadose zone: the partially saturated or unsaturated region above the water table that does not yield water to 

wells. 

Volatile organic compound (VOC): liquid or solid organic compounds that have a high vapor pressure at 

normal pressures and temperatures and thus tend to spontaneously pass into the vapor state. 

W Waste accumulation area (WAA): an officially designated area that meets current environmental standards 

and guidelines for temporary (less than 90 days) storage of hazardous waste before offsite disposal. 

Wastewater treatment system: a collection of treatment processes and facilities designed and built to 

reduce the amount of suspended solids, bacteria, oxygen-demanding materials, and chemical constituents in 

wastewater. 

Water table: the water-level surface below the ground at which the unsaturated zone ends and the saturated 

zone begins, and the level to which a well that is screened in the unconfined aquifer would fill with water. 

Weighting factor: a tissue-specific value used to calculate dose equivalents that represents the fraction of the 

total health risk resulting from uniform, whole-body irradiation that could be contributed to that particular 

tissue. The weighting factors used in this report are recommended by the International Commission on 

Radiological Protection. 

Wind rose: a diagram that shows the frequency and intensity of wind from different directions at a specific 

location. 
Appendix B – Glossary of Terms

B-8 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Appendix C - Acronyms and Abbreviations

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 C-1 

C.0 Appendix C: Acronyms and Abbreviations 

ac acre(s) 

AEA Atomic Energy Act 

AEC Atomic Energy Commission 

ALARA as low as reasonably achievable 

241Am americium-241 

AP air particulate 

ARL/SORD Air Resources Laboratory, Special 

Operations and Research Division 

ARPA Archaeological Resources Protection 

Act 

ASER Annual Site Environmental Report 

ASN Air Surveillance Network 

ATM Atomic Testing Museum 

B background 

BAPC Bureau of Air Pollution Control 

BCG Biota Concentration Guide 

Be beryllium 

BEEF Big Explosives Experimental Facility 

BFF Bureau of Federal Facilities 

bgs below ground surface 

BHPS Bureau of Health Protection Services 

BLM Bureau of Land Management 

BN Bechtel Nevada 

BOA Basic Ordering Agreement 

BOD biological oxygen demand 

Bq Becquerel 

Bq/m3 Becquerels per cubic meter 

BREN Bare Reactor Experiment - Nevada 

BSDW Bureau of Safe Drinking Water 

C control 

°

C degree(s) Celsius 

14C carbon-14 

CA Composite Analysis 

CAA Clean Air Act 

CAB Community Advisory Board 

CADD Corrective Action Decision 

Document 

CAI corrective action investigation 

CAIP Corrective Action Investigation Plan 

CAP Corrective Action Plan 

CAPP Chemical Accident Prevention 

Program 

CAP88-PC Clean Air Package 1988 

CAS Corrective Action Site 

CAU Corrective Action Unit 

CCWRD Clark County Water Reclamation 

District 

CEDE committed effective dose equivalent 

CEM Community Environmental Monitor 

CEMP Community Environmental 

Monitoring Program 

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental 

Response, Compensation, and 

Liability Act 

CESGQ conditionally exempt small quantity 

generator 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

CGTO Consolidated Group of Tribes and 

Organizations 

Ci curie(s) 

Ci/yr curie(s) per year 

CL compliance level (used in text for the 

Clean Air Act National Emission 

Standards for Hazardous Pollutants 

Concentration Level for 

Environmental Compliance) 

cm centimeter(s) 

CNLV City of North Las Vegas 

Co cobalt 

CO carbon monoxide 

CP Control Point 

cpm counts per minute 

CR Closure Report 

CRM Cultural Resources Management 

Cs cesium 

CSP concentrating solar power 

Cu copper 

CV coefficient of variation 

CWA Clean Water Act 

CX Categorical Exclusion 

CY calendar year 

d day(s) 

DAF Device Assembly Facility 

DAQEM Department of Air Quality and 

Environmental Management (Clark 

County) 

DCG Derived Concentration Guide 
Appendix C - Acronyms and Abbreviations

C-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

DNWR Desert National Wildlife Refuge 

DoD U.S. Department of Defense 

DOE U.S. Department of Energy 

DOECAP U.S. Department of Energy 

Consolidated Audit Program 

DOE/HQ U.S. Department of Energy 

Headquarters 

dpm/100 cm2

 disintegrations per minute per 100 

square centimeters 

DQA Data Quality Assessment 

DQO Data Quality Objectives 

DRI Desert Research Institute 

DTRA Defense Threat Reduction Agency 

DU depleted uranium 

EA Environmental Assessment 

EDE effective dose equivalent 

EHS extremely hazardous substance 

EIS Environmental Impact Statement 

EMAC Ecological Monitoring and 

Compliance 

EMS Environmental Management System 

EO Executive Order 

EODU Explosive Ordnance Disposal Unit 

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection 

Agency 

EPCRA Emergency Planning and Community 

Right-to-Know Act 

EPEAT Electronic Product Environmental 

Assessment Tool 

ER Environmental Restoration 

ERA Environmental Research Associates 

ERP Environmental Restoration Project 

ES Environmental Services 

ES&H Environment, Safety, and Health 

ESA Endangered Species Act 

ESH&Q Environment, Safety, Health, and 

Quality 

ETDS E-Tunnel Waste Water Disposal 

System 

ETS Environmental Technical Services 

Eu europium 

EWG Environmental Working Group 

°

F degree(s) Fahrenheit 

FD field duplicate 

FFACO Federal Facility Agreement and 

Consent Order 

FFCA Federal Facility Compliance Act 

FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and 

Rodenticide Act 

ft foot or feet 

ft2

 square feet 

ft3 cubic feet 

FWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

FY fiscal year 

g gram(s) 

gal gallon(s) 

GCD Greater Confinement Disposal 

GIS Geographic Information System 

gpm gallon(s) per minute 

Gy gray(s) 

Gy/d gray(s) per day 

3

H tritium 

ha hectare(s) 

HA Hazard Assessment 

HAA haloacetic acid 

HAP hazardous air pollutant 

HCQC Bureau of Health Care Quality and 

Compliance 

HENRE High-Energy Neutron Reactions 

Experiment 

HEPA high-efficiency particulate air 

HPSB High Performance Sustainable 

Building 

hr hour(s) 

HRMP Hydrologic Resources Management 

Program 

HTO tritiated water 

HW hazardous waste 

HWAA Hazardous Waste Accumulation 

Area 

HWSU Hazardous Waste Storage Unit 

ICPT Integrated Contractor Purchasing 

Team 

ID identification number 

IDL instrument detection limit 

IL investigation level 

in. inch(es) 

INL Idaho National Laboratory 

ISMS Integrated Safety Management 

System 

ISO International Organization for 

Standardization 
Appendix C - Acronyms and Abbreviations

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 C-3 

IT International Technology 

Corporation 

JASPER Joint Actinide Shock Physics 

Experimental Research 

K potassium 

kg kilogram(s) 

kg/d kilogram(s) per day 

km kilometer(s) 

km2

 square kilometer(s) 

L liter(s) 

LANL Los Alamos National Laboratory 

lb pound(s) 

LC Critical Level (synonymous with 

Decision Level) 

LCA lower carbonate aquifer 

LCS laboratory control sample 

L/d liter(s) per day 

LLMW low-level radioactive mixed waste 

LLNL Lawrence Livermore National 

Laboratory 

LLW low-level radioactive waste 

L/min liter(s) per minute 

log logarithmic 

Lpm liter(s) per minute 

LQAP Laboratory Quality Assurance Plan 

LRQA Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance 

μCi microcurie(s) 

μCi/mL microcurie(s) per milliliter 

μg/L microgram(s) per liter 

μR microroentgen(s) 

μR/hr microroentgen(s) per hour 

m meter(s) 

m2 square meter(s) 

m3 cubic meter(s) 

M&O Management and Operating 

MAPEP Mixed Analyte Performance 

Evaluation Program 

MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act 

mCi millicurie(s) 

MCL maximum contaminant level 

MDC minimum detectable concentration 

MEDA Meteorological Data Acquisition 

MEI maximally exposed individual 

MET meteorological 

MGD million gallons per day 

mGy/d milligray(s) per day 

mg/L milligram(s) per liter 

mi mile(s) 

mi2

 square mile(s) 

mm millimeter(s) 

mmhos/cm millimhos per centimeter 

MQO Measurement Quality Objectives 

mR milliroentgen(s) 

mR/d milliroentgen(s) per day 

mR/yr milliroentgen(s) per year 

mrad millirad(s) 

mrem millirem(s) 

mrem/yr millirem(s) per year 

MSA management self-assessments 

MSDS Material Safety Data Sheet 

mSv millisievert(s) 

mSv/yr millisievert(s) per year 

mton metric ton(s) 

MW mixed waste 

N nitrogen 

NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality 

Standards 

NAC Nevada Administrative Code 

NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection 

and Repatriation Act 

NCA Nevada Combined Agency 

NCRP National Council on Radiation 

Protection 

NDEP Nevada Division of Environmental 

Protection 

NDOA Nevada Department of Agriculture 

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act 

NESHAP National Emission Standards for 

Hazardous Air Pollutants 

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act 

NLVF North Las Vegas Facility 

NNHP Nevada Natural Heritage Program 

NNSA U.S. Department of Energy, National 

Nuclear Security Administration 

NNSA/NSO U.S. Department of Energy, National 

Nuclear Security Administration 

Nevada Site Office 

NNSA/SSO U.S. Department of Energy, National 

Nuclear Security Administration 

Sandia Site Office 

NOx nitrogen oxides 
Appendix C - Acronyms and Abbreviations

C-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

NPDES National Pollutant Discharge 

Elimination System 

NPTEC Nonproliferation Test and Evaluation 

Complex 

NRC U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 

Commission 

NRHP National Register of Historic Places 

NRS Nevada Revised Statutes 

NSPS New Source Performance Standards 

NSHD Nevada State Health Division 

NSTec National Security Technologies, LLC 

NTS Nevada Test Site 

NTSER Nevada Test Site Environmental 

Report 

NTTR Nevada Test and Training Range 

NVLAP National Voluntary Laboratory 

Accreditation Program 

ODS ozone-depleting substance 

OSTI Office of Scientific and Technical 

Information 

oz ounce(s) 

P03U Pit 3 Mixed Waste Disposal Unit 

P06U Area 5 Asbestiform Low-Level Solid 

Waste Disposal Unit 

P2 pollution prevention 

P2/WM pollution prevention/waste 

minimization 

PA Performance Assessment 

PAAA Price-Anderson Amendments Act 

Pb lead 

PCB polychlorinated biphenyl 

pCi picocurie(s) 

pCi/g picocurie(s) per gram 

pCi/L picocurie(s) per liter 

pCi/mL picocurie(s) per milliliter 

PI prediction interval 

PIC pressurized ion chamber 

PIH plug-in hybrid 

PLall prediction limit for all enriched 

tritium measurements 

PM particulate matter 

PM10 particulate matter equal to or less 

than 10 microns in diameter 

POTW Publicly Owned Treatment Works 

ppm part(s) per million 

PT proficiency testing 

PTE potential to emit 

Pu plutonium 

PWS public water system 

QA quality assurance 

QAP Quality Assurance Program 

QAPP Quality Assurance Program Plan 

QA/QC quality assurance and quality control 

QC quality control 

QSAS Quality Systems for Analytical 

Services 

R roentgen(s) 

rad radiation absorbed dose (a unit of 

measure) 

rad/d rad(s) per day 

RCD Radiological Control Department 

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery 

Act 

RCT radiological control technician 

rem roentgen equivalent man (a unit of 

measure) 

RER relative error ratio 

RNCTEC Radiological/Nuclear 

Countermeasures Test and 

Evaluation Complex 

RPD relative percent difference 

RREMP Routine Radiological Environmental 

Monitoring Plan 

RSL Remote Sensing Laboratory 

RWMC Radioactive Waste Management 

Complex 

RWMS Radioactive Waste Management Site 

s second(s) 

SA Supplement Analysis 

SAA Satellite Accumulation Area 

SAFER Streamlined Approach for 

Environmental Restoration 

SAP Sampling and Analysis Plan 

SARA Superfund Amendments and 

Reauthorization Act 

SC specific conductance 

SD standard deviation 

SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act 

SE standard error of the mean 

SHPO State Historic Preservation Office 

SI International System of Units 

SNHD Southern Nevada Health District 
Appendix C - Acronyms and Abbreviations

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 C-5 

SNJV Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture 

SNL Sandia National Laboratories 

SORD Special Operations and Research 

Division 

SO2 sulfur dioxide 

Sr strontium 

SSC structures, systems, and components 

S.U. standard unit(s) (for measuring pH) 

Sv sievert(s) 

SWO Solid Waste Operations 

TaDD Tactical Demilitarization 

Development Project 

Tc technetium 

TDR time domain reflectometry 

TDS total dissolved solids 

Th thorium 

TLD thermoluminescent dosimeter 

TOC total organic carbon 

TOX total organic halides 

TPCB Transuranic Pad Cover Building 

TRI Toxic Release Inventory 

TRU transuranic 

TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act 

TSS total suspended solids 

TTHM total trihalomethane 

TTR Tonopah Test Range 

U uranium 

UGTA Underground Test Area 

U.S. United States 

USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 

USAF U.S. Air Force 

USC United States Code 

USGS U.S. Geological Survey 

UST underground storage tank 

VOC volatile organic compounds 

VZM vadose zone monitoring 

WAA Waste Accumulation Area 

WEF Waste Examination Facility 

WGS Waste Generator Services 

WIPP Waste Isolation Pilot Plant 

WM waste minimization 

WNV West Nile virus 

WO Waste Operations 

WW water well 

yd yard(s) 

yd3

 cubic yard(s) 

yr year(s) 
Appendix C - Acronyms and Abbreviations

C-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
References

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 R-1

References 

American Nuclear Society, 2005. American National Standard for Determining Meteorological Information at 

Nuclear Facilities, ANSI/ANS-3.11-2005, American Nuclear Society, 555 North Kensington Avenue, 

La Grange Park, IL. 

Arizona Workforce Informer, 2009. July 1, 2008 Population Estimates for Arizona’s Counties, Incorporated 

Places and Balance of County. Available at 

http://www.azcommerce.com/doclib/econinfo/FILES/2008AZestimates.pdf, as accessed on April 20, 2009. 

Bechtel Nevada, 2000. Characterization Report - Building A- I at the U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada 

Operations Office, North Las Vegas Facility, DOE/NV/11718--413, Las Vegas, NV. 

Bechtel Nevada, 2002. A Hydrostratigraphic Framework Model of the Pahute Mesa - Oasis Valley Area, Nye 

County, Nevada, DOE/NV/11718--646, Las Vegas, NV. OSTI ID: 790074 

Bechtel Nevada, 2003a. Routine Radiological Environmental Monitoring Plan, DOE/NV/11718--804, Las Vegas, 

NV, prepared for U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site 

Office. 

Bechtel Nevada, 2003b. Summary Report for the U.S. Department of Energy National Nuclear Security 

Administration Nevada Site Office FY02/FY03 Groundwater Control Study at the North Las Vegas 

Facility, September 2003, prepared by the Bechtel Nevada Geotechnical Sciences Group.

Bechtel Nevada, 2004a. Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2003, DOE/NV/11718--971, Las Vegas, NV, 

prepared for U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office. 

Bechtel Nevada, 2004b. Summary Report for the U.S. Department of Energy National Nuclear Security 

Administration Nevada Site Office Groundwater Control at Building A-1 North Las Vegas Facility,

Las Vegas, NV. 

Bechtel Nevada, 2005a. Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2004, DOE/NV/11718--1080, Las Vegas, NV, 

prepared for U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office. 

Bechtel Nevada, 2005b. A Hydrostratigraphic Framework Model and Alternatives for the Groundwater Flow 

and Contaminant Transport Model of Corrective Action Unit 98: Frenchman Flat, Clark, Lincoln and 

Nye Counties, Nevada, DOE/NV/11718--1064, Las Vegas, NV, prepared for U.S. Department of Energy, 

National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office. 

Bechtel Nevada, 2005c. FY 2005 Mid-Year Status Report for the U.S. Department of Energy National Nuclear 

Security Administration Nevada Site Office Groundwater Control at Building A-1 North Las Vegas 

Facility, Las Vegas, NV. 

Bechtel Nevada, 2006. A Hydrostratigraphic Framework Model and Alternatives for the Groundwater Flow and 

Contaminant Transport Model of Corrective Action Unit 97: Yucca Flat-Climax Mine, Lincoln and Nye 

Counties, Nevada, DOE/NV/11718--1119, Las Vegas, NV. 

Bechtel Nevada and National Security Technologies, LLC, 2006. U.S. Department of Energy, 2006a. Nevada 

Test Site Environmental Report 2005, DOE/NV/11718--1214 and DOE/NV/25946--007, National 

Security Technologies, LLC, Las Vegas, NV, prepared for U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear 

Security Administration Nevada Site Office. OSTI ID: 892135 

BEIR III, 1980. The Effects on Populations of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: 1980, Committee 

on the Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation III, National Academy Press, Washington, D.C. 
References

R-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

BHPS, see Nevada State Health Division, Bureau of Health Protection Services. 

BN, see Bechtel Nevada. 

BN and NSTec, see Bechtel Nevada and National Security Technologies, LLC. 

Bowen, S. M., D. L. Finnegan, J. L. Thompson, C. M. Miller, P. L. Baca, L. F. Olivas, C. G. Geoffrion, D. K. 

Smith, W. Goishi, B. K. Esser, J. W. Meadows, N. Namboodiri, and J. F. Wild, 2001. Nevada Test Site 

Radionuclide Inventory, 1951–1992. LA-13859-MS, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM. 

Bradley, P. V., J. J. O’Farrell, J. A. Williams, and J. E. Newmark (Editors), 2005. The Revised Nevada Bat 

Conservation Plan, Nevada Bat Working Group, Reno, NV. 

Brikowski, T. H., J. B. Chapman, B. F. Lyles, and S. Hokett, 1993. Origin of Elevated Water Levels Encountered 

in Pahute Mesa Emplacement Boreholes: Preliminary Investigations, Desert Research Institute 

Publication No. 45123, Las Vegas, NV. OSTI ID: 10164133 

Carle, S. F., M. Zavarin, and G. A. Pawloski, 2008. Spatial Variability of Reactive Mineral and Radionuclide Kd

Distributions in the Tuff Confining Unit: Yucca Flat, Nevada Test Site, LLNL-TR-402227-DRAFT, 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA. OSTI ID: 926431 

Culham, H. W., G. F. Eaton, V. Genetti, Q. Hu, A. B. Kersting, R. E. Lindvall, J. E. Moran, G. A. Blasiyh Nuño, 

B. A. Powell, T. P. Rose, M. J. Singleton, R. W. Williams, M. Zavarin, and P. Zhao, 2008. Hydrologic

Resources Management Program and Underground Test Area Project FY 2006 Progress Report. 

M. Zavarin, A. B. Kersting, R. E. Lindvall, and T. P. Rose (eds.), LLNL-TR-404620, Lawrence 

Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA. OSTI ID: 945573 

Dickerson, R., and J. S. Hand, 2008. Letter Report: Yucca Fracture Mapping, Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture, 

Las Vegas, NV. 

DOE, see U.S. Department of Energy. 

DOE/NV, see U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office. 

Drollinger, H., 2008. Fiscal Year 2008 Curation Compliance Annual Progress Report, Desert Research Institute, 

Division of Earth and Ecosystems Sciences Letter Report No. LR090508-1, Las Vegas, NV. 

Drollinger, H., C. M. Beck, and R. Furlow, 2002. Cultural Resources Management Plan for the Nevada Test Site, 

DOE/NV/11508--47, Desert Research Institute, Division of Earth and Ecosystems Sciences, Las Vegas, 

NV. 

Eastern Research Group, 2004. Methods for Estimating Fugitive Air Emissions of Radionuclides from Diffuse 

Sources at DOE Facilities, prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency by Eastern Research 

Group, Inc., Morrisville, NC. 

EPA, see U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

Fenelon, J. M., R. J. Laczniak, and K. J. Halford, 2008. Predevelopment Water-Level Contours for Aquifers in 

the Rainier Mesa and Shoshone Mountain Area of the Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada, Scientific 

Investigations Report 2008-5044, U.S. Geological Survey, Las Vegas, NV. OSTI ID: 932993 

FWS, see U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Giles, K. R. and J. Cooper, 1985. Characteristics and Migration Patterns of Mule Deer on the Nevada Test Site, 

EPA 600/4-85-030 (DOE/DP/00539-054), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas, NV. 
References

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 R-3

Hansen, D. J., D. C. Anderson, D. B. Hall, P. D. Greger, and W. K. Ostler, 2009. Ecological Monitoring and 

Compliance Program 2008 Report, DOE/NV/25946--704, National Security Technologies, LLC, 

April 2009, Las Vegas, NV. OSTI ID: 960405 

Hardcastle, J., 2009. 2008 Estimates by County. Prepared by Nevada State Demographer’s Office for Nevada 

Department of Taxation, Nevada Small Business Development Center, from Internet URL: 

http://www.nsbdc.org/what/data_statistics/demographer/pubs/pop_increase/, as accessed on April 20, 2009. 

Hendricks, T. J., and S. R. Riedhauser, 1999. An Aerial Radiological Survey of the Nevada Test Site, 

DOE/NV/11718--324, U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV. 

Hershey, R. L., J. B. Paces, M. J. Singleton, E. M. Kwicklis, D. L. Decker, W. M. Fryer, and S. Earman, 2008. 

Geochemical and Isotopic Evaluation of Groundwater Movement in Corrective Action Unit 99: Rainier 

Mesa and Shoshone Mountain, Nevada Test Site, DOE/NV/26383-10, Desert Research Institute 

Publication No. 45229, Las Vegas, NV. 

Holz, B. A., 2008a. Fiscal Year 2008 Site Monitoring, Cane Spring, Site 26NY4, Areas 5 and 27, Nevada Test 

Site, Nye County, Nevada, Desert Research Institute, Division of Earth and Ecosystems Sciences Short 

Report No. SR030508-2, Las Vegas, NV. 

Holz, B. A., 2008b. Fiscal Year 2008 Site Monitoring Japanese Village Component of Site 26NY8765, Area 4, 

Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada, Desert Research Institute, Division of Earth and Ecosystems 

Sciences Short Report No. SR030608-1, Las Vegas, NV. 

Holz, B. A., 2008c. Fiscal Year 2008 Site Monitoring Wahmonie Component of Site 26NY9843, Area 26, 

Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada, Desert Research Institute, Division of Earth and Ecosystems 

Sciences Short Report No. SR031808-1, Las Vegas, NV. 

Holz, B. A., 2008d. Fiscal Year 2008 Site Monitoring, Rice Grass Village, Site 26NY2, Area 18, Nevada Test 

Site, Nye County, Nevada, Desert Research Institute, Division of Earth and Ecosystems Sciences Short 

Report No. SR032508-1, Las Vegas, NV. 

Holz, B. A., 2008e. Fiscal Year 2008 Site Monitoring, Bower Cabin at Site 26NY8806, Area 15, Nevada Test 

Site, Nye County, Nevada, Desert Research Institute, Division of Earth and Ecosystems Sciences Short 

Report No. SR043008-1, Las Vegas, NV. 

Holz, B. A., 2008f. Fiscal Year 2008 Cultural Resources Site Monitoring, Nevada Test Site, Nye County, 

Nevada, Desert Research Institute, Division of Earth and Ecosystems Sciences Monitoring Report No. 

MR030508-1, Las Vegas, NV. 

Hunter, R. B., and R. R. Kinnison, 1998. Tritium in Vegetation on the Nevada Test Site, United States 

Department of Energy, December 1998, In: Nevada Test Site Routine Radiological Environmental 

Monitoring Plan, Appendices, DOE/NV/11718--244. Bechtel Nevada, Las Vegas, NV. 

International Technology Corporation, 1996. Regional Geologic Model Data Documentation Package (Phase I, 

Data Analysis Documentation, Volume I, Parts 1 and 2), ITLV/10972-181, Las Vegas, NV. 

International Technology Corporation, 1997. Groundwater Flow Model Documentation Package (Phase I, Data 

Analysis Documentation, Volume VI), Las Vegas, NV. 

IT, see International Technology Corporation. 

Jones, R. C., 2008a. A Class III Cultural Resources Inventory of the Proposed Firing Range, Area 23, Nevada 

Test Site, Nye County, Nevada, Desert Research Institute, Division of Earth and Ecosystems Sciences 

Short Report No. SR031008-1, Las Vegas, NV. 
References

R-4 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Jones, R. C., 2008b. A Class III Cultural Resources Inventory of the Proposed Underground Test Area ER-20-7 

Well Pad and Access Road, Area 20, Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada, Desert Research Institute, 

Division of Earth and Ecosystems Sciences Short Report No. SR090308-1, Las Vegas, NV. 

Jones, R. C., 2008c. A Class III Cultural Resources Inventory of the Proposed Underground Test Area ER-20-8 

Well Pad and Access Road, Area 20, Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada, Desert Research Institute, 

Division of Earth and Ecosystems Sciences Short Report No. SR090408-1, Las Vegas, NV. 

Jones, R. C., 2008d. A Class III Cultural Resources Inventory of the Proposed Underground Test Area ER-EC-11 

Well Pad and Access Road, Range EC South, Nevada Test and Training Range, Nye County, Nevada, 

Desert Research Institute, Division of Earth and Ecosystems Sciences Short Report No. SR091708-1, 

Las Vegas, NV. 

Jones, R. C., 2008e. A Class III Cultural Resources Inventory of the Proposed Underground Test Area Borrow 

Pit Expansion, Area 20, Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada, Desert Research Institute, Division of 

Earth and Ecosystems Sciences Short Report No. SR092908-1, Las Vegas, NV. 

Jones, R. C., 2008f. A Class III Cultural Resources Inventory of the Relocation of the Proposed Underground 

Test Area ER-EC-11 Well Pad, Range EC South, Nevada Test and Training Range, Nye County, Nevada, 

Desert Research Institute, Division of Earth and Ecosystems Sciences Short Report No. SR092908-1, 

Las Vegas, NV. 

Jones, R, C., and C. M. Beck, 2008. Soils Project Pre-Task Cultural Resources Visit to Schooner, Palanquin, 

Cabriolet, and Johnnie Boy Event Locations, Areas 18 and 20, Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada, 

Desert Research Institute, Division of Earth and Ecosystems Sciences Short Report No. SR102808-1, 

Las Vegas, NV. 

Lyles, B. F., 1990. Tritium Variations in Groundwater on the Nevada Test Site, Desert Research Report 45086, 

DOE/NV/10384--380. 

McArthur, R. D., 1991. Radionuclides in Surface Soil at the Nevada Test Site, DOE/NV/10845-02, Water 

Resources Center Publication #45077, Desert Research Institute, Las Vegas, NV. 

National Council on Radiation Protection, 1996. A Guide for Uncertainty Analysis in Dose and Risk Assessments 

Related to Environmental Contamination, NCRP Commentary No. 14, Bethesda, MD. 

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 1995. Surface Weather Observations and Reports, 

FCM-H1-1995, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. 

National Security Technologies, LLC, 2006. U.S. Department of Energy National Nuclear Security 

Administration Nevada Site Office Groundwater Control at Building A-1, North Las Vegas Facility 

Enhanced Dewatering Initiative. Las Vegas, NV. 

National Security Technologies, LLC, 2007a. Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2006, DOE/NV/25946--

259, Las Vegas, NV, prepared for U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration 

Nevada Site Office. OSTI ID: 915233 

National Security Technologies, LLC, 2007b. A Hydrostratigraphic Model and Alternatives for the Groundwater 

Flow and Contaminant Transport Model of Corrective Action Unit 99: Rainier Mesa-Shoshone 

Mountain, Nye County, Nevada. DOE/NV/25946--146. Las Vegas, NV. OSTI ID: 934454 

National Security Technologies, LLC, 2008a. Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2007, DOE/NV/25946--

543, Las Vegas, NV, prepared for U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration 

Nevada Site Office. OSTI ID: 936844
References

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 R-5

National Security Technologies, LLC, 2008b. FY 2009 NNSA/NSO Energy Executable Plan, Las Vegas, NV, 

December 2008. 

National Security Technologies, LLC, 2009a. Water Pollution Control Permit NEV 96021, Quarterly Monitoring 

Report and Annual Summary Report for E Tunnel Waste Water Disposal System, Las Vegas, NV. 

National Security Technologies, LLC, 2009b. Nevada Test Site 2008 Data Report: Groundwater Monitoring 

Program Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, DOE/NV/25946--619, Las Vegas, NV. 

OSTI ID: 946167 

National Security Technologies, LLC, 2009c. Nevada Test Site 2008, Waste Management Monitoring Report, 

Area 3 and Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Sites, DOE/NV/25946--736, Las Vegas, NV. 

OSTI ID: 960411 

NCRP, see National Council on Radiation Protection. 

NDEP, see Nevada Division of Environmental Protection. 

Nevada State Health Division, Bureau of Health Protection Services, 2007. State of Nevada Report HDAIP 30, 

Sanford Cohen & Associates ID 6614, Las Vegas, NV. 

Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, 2008. Letter from T. H. Murphy (Chief, Bureau of Federal 

Facilities) to J. L. Appenzeller-Wing (Acting Assistant Manager for Environmental Management, 

NNSA/NSO), September 19, 2008. 

Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, 2009. Letter from C. D. Andres (Supervisor, Bureau of Federal 

Facilities) to L. A. Plummer (Acting Team Leader Environmental Protection Team, NNSA/NSO), 

March 17, 2009. 

NNSA/NSO, see U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office. 

NNSA/NV, see U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Operations Office. 

NRC, see U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. 

NSTec, see National Security Technologies, LLC. 

Otis, D. L., J. H. Schulz, and D. P. Scott. 2008. Mourning Dove (Zenaida macroura) Harvest and Population 

Parameters Derived from a National Banding Study, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Biological Technical 

Publication-BTP-R3010-2008, Washington, D.C. 

Pihong, Z., M. Zavarin, R. Leif, B. Powell, M. Singleton, R. Lindvall, and A. Kersting, 2008. Actinide Sorption 

in Rainier Mesa Tunnel Waters from the Nevada Test Site, LLNL-TR-400273, Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratory, Livermore, CA. OSTI ID: 926020 

Prothro, L. B., 2008. Analysis of Fractures in Cores from the Tuff Confining Unit Beneath Yucca Flat, Nevada 

Test Site, DOE/NV/25946--351, National Security Technologies, LLC, Las Vegas, NV. OSTI ID: 92885 

Reeves, H. M., 1979. Estimating of Reporting Rate for Mourning Dove Bands, Journal of Wildlife Management

43:36–42. 

Sandia National Laboratories, 2008. Annual Site Environmental Report Tonopah Test Range, Nevada & Kauai 

Test Facility, Hawaii, SAND2008-5070P, Albuquerque, NM, prepared for U.S. Department of Energy, 

National Nuclear Security Administration Sandia Site Office. 
References

R-6 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

Shleien, B. (ed.), 1992. The Health Physics and Radiological Health Handbook, Revised Edition, Scinta, Inc., 

Silver Spring, MD. 

Smith, D. K., 1993. A Review of Literature Pertaining to the Leaching and Sorption of Radionuclides Associated 

with Nuclear Explosive Melt Glasses, UCRL-ID-113370, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 

Livermore, CA. 

Smith, D. K., B. K. Esser, and J. L. Thompson, 1995. Uncertainties Associated with the Definition of a 

Hydrologic Source Term for the Nevada Test Site, UCRL-ID-120322, Lawrence Livermore National 

Laboratory, Livermore, CA. 

Smith, D. K., S. B. Kersting, J. M. Keneally, T. P. Rose, G. B. Hudson, and G. F. Eaton, 1999. Radionuclide 

Migration Studies: FY 1998 Progress Report, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA. 

SNJV, see Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture. 

SNL, see Sandia National Laboratories. 

Stanley, T. W., and S. S. Verner, 1985. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Quality Assurance 

Program, in: J. K. Taylor and T. W. Stanley (eds.), Quality Assurance for Environmental Measurements, 

ASTM STP-867, Philadelphia, PA. 

Stoffle, R. W., M. N. Zedeno, and D. B. Halmo, 2001. American Indians and the Nevada Test Site, A Model of 

Research and Consultation, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 

Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture. 2006. Phase II Groundwater Flow Model of Corrective Action Unit 98: 

Frenchman Flat, Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada, S-N/99205--074, Las Vegas, NV. OSTI ID: 

891955 

Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture, 2008a. Geochem08.mdb and User Guide to the Comprehensive Water Quality 

Database for Groundwater in the Vicinity of the Nevada Test Site, Rev. 3, S-N/99205--059-Rev. 3, 

Las Vegas, NV. 

Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture, 2008b. Phase I Hydrologic Data for the Groundwater Flow and Contaminant 

Transport Model of Corrective Action Unit 99: Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain, Nevada Test Site, 

Nye County, Nevada, S-N/99205--103, Las Vegas, NV. OSTI ID: 932406 

Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture, 2008c. Phase I Contaminant Transport Parameters for the Groundwater Flow 

and Contaminant Transport Model of Corrective Action Unit 99: Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain, 

Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada, Rev. 1, S-N/99205--102, Las Vegas, NV. OSTI ID: 932410 

Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture, 2008d. Modeling Approach/Strategy for Corrective Action Unit 99: Rainier Mesa 

and Shoshone Mountain, Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada, Rev. 1, S-N/99205--106, Las Vegas, NV. 

OSTI ID: 943562 

Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture, 2009a. Phase I Transport Model of Corrective Action Units 101 and 102: Central 

and Western Pahute Mesa, Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada, Revision No. 1, S-N/99205--111, 

February 2009, Las Vegas, NV. OSTI ID: 948559 

Stoller-Navarro Joint Venture, 2009b. Phase II Corrective Action Investigation Plan for Corrective Action Units 

101 and 102: Central and Western Pahute Mesa, Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada, Rev. 1, 

DOE/NV--1312, Las Vegas, NV. 

Thomas, L., J. L. Laake, S. Strindberg, F. F. C. Marques, S. T. Buckland, D. L. Borchers, D. R. Anderson, 

K. P. Burnham, S. L. Hedley, J. H. Pollard, J. R. B. Bishop, and T. A. Marques, 2006. Distance 5.0. 

Release 1. Research Unit for Wildlife Population Assessment, University of St. Andrews, UK. 
References

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 R-7

Tomlinson, R. E., 1968. Reward banding to determine reporting rate of recovered Mourning Dove bands, Journal 

of Wildlife Management 32:6–11. 

Townsend, D. R., 2008. Documentation Report for Rainier Mesa Test Information Compiled for the UGTA 

Project, Wastren Advantage, Incorporated, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1988. Internal Dose Conversion Factors for Calculation of Dose to the Public, 

DOE/EH-0071, Washington, D.C. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1996. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Nevada Test Site and Off-Site 

Locations in the State of Nevada, Volume 1, Chapters 1–9, DOE/EIS--0243, Las Vegas, NV, 

August 1996. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 2002. Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Relocation of 

Technical Area 18 Capabilities and Materials at the Los Alamos National Laboratory, DOE/EIS-0319, 

Washington, D.C. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 2004a. E-mail from Gustavo Vazquez, DOE/EH-41, to Bruce W. Hurley, 

U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Operations Office, dated 

April 1, 2004. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 2004b. Users Guide, Version 1; RESRAD-BIOTA: A Tool for Implementing A 

Graded Approach To Biota Dose Evaluation, DOE/EH-0676 (also Interagency Steering Committee on 

Radiation Standards [ISCORS] Technical Report 2004-02), Washington D.C. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 2008. Quality Systems for Analytical Services, Revision 2.4, October 2008. 

U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Operations Office, 2002. 

Underground Test Area Project Waste Management Plan, DOE/NV--343, Rev. 2, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Operations Office, 2004. NV/YMP 

Radiological Control Manual, DOE/NV/11718--079, Rev. 5, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, 2004a. Environmental 

Assessment for Radiological/Nuclear Countermeasures Test and Evaluation Complex, Nevada Test Site, 

DOE/EA-1499, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, 2004b. Final

Environmental Assessment for Activities Using Biological Simulants and Releases of Chemicals at the 

Nevada Test Site, DOE/EA-1494, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, 2006. Nevada Test 

Site Environmental Management End State Vision, DOE/NV--958, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, 2008a. Completion 

Report for the Well ER-6-2 Site, Corrective Action Unit 97: Yucca Flat-Climax Mine, DOE/NV--1270, 

Las Vegas, NV. OSTI ID: 928812 

U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, 2008b. Groundwater 

Protection Program Plan for the National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, 

DOE/NV/25946--557, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, 2009. Annual 

Transportation Report for Radioactive Waste Shipments to and from the Nevada Test Site – Fiscal Year 

2008, DOE/NV--1309, Las Vegas, NV, February 2009. OSTI ID: 946803 
References

R-8 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office, 1992. Summary of the Nevada Applied Ecology Group 

and Correlative Programs, DOE/NV--357, Las Vegas, NV. OSTI ID: 10191695 

U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office, 1996. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air 

Pollutants Submittal – 1995, DOE/NV/11718--032, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office, 1997. Regional Groundwater Flow and Tritium 

Transport Modeling and Risk Assessment of the Underground Test Area, Nevada Test Site, Nevada, 

DOE/V--477, October 1997, Las Vegas, NV. OSTI ID: 788792 

U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office, 1998. Nevada Test Site Resource Management Plan, 

DOE/NV--518, Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office, 2000. United States Nuclear Tests, July 1945 through 

September 1992, DOE/NV--209, Rev. 15, Las Vegas, NV. Available at: 

http://www.nv.doe.gov/library/publications/historical/DOENV_209_REV15.pdf, as accessed on August 

31, 2009. 

U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada Operations Office, 2002. Environmental Assessment for Hazardous 

Materials Testing at the Hazardous Materials Spill Center, Nevada Test Site, DOE/EA-0864, Las Vegas, 

NV. 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986 and Subsequent Updates. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, 

Physical/Chemical Methods, EPA PublicationSW-846. Available at http://www.epa.gov/SW846/main.htm, as accessed on July 8, 2009. 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1996. Final Programmatic Biological Opinion for Nevada Test Site Activities,

File No. 1-5-96-F-33, August 22, 1996, Reno, NV. 

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1983. Radiological Assessment. Report NUREG/CR-3332, J. E. Till and 

H. R. Meyer, Editors, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Washington, D.C. 

U.S. Public Health Service, 1963. Project SEDAN, Final Off-Site Report, AEC Report PNE-200F, Offsite 

Radiological Safety Organization, Las Vegas, NV. 

Utah Population Estimates Committee, 2009. Subcounty Population Projections (Total Population), Governor’s 

Office of Planning and Budget. Available at http://governor.utah.gov/dea/popprojections.html, as 

accessed on April 20, 2009. 

Warren, R. G., D. A. Sawyer, F. M. Byers, Jr., and J. C. Cole, 2003. A Petrographic/Geochemical and 

Geophysical Database, and Stratigraphic Framework for the Southwestern Nevada Volcanic Field. 

LANL Report LA-UR-03-1503, Los Alamos, NM. 

Warren, R. W., and R. F. Grossman, 2009. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Calendar 

Year 2008. DOE/NV/25946--742, U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration 

Nevada Site Office, Las Vegas, NV. 

Wills, C. A., and W. K. Ostler, 2001. Ecology of the Nevada Test Site: An Annotated Bibliography, with 

Narrative Summary, Keyword Index, and Species List. DOE/NV/11718--594, Bechtel Nevada, 

Ecological Services, Las Vegas, NV. OSTI ID: 901998 

Woodward, R., K. R. Rautenstrauch, D. B. Hall, and W. K. Ostler, 1998. The Relative Abundance of Desert 

Tortoises on the Nevada Test Site Within Ecological Landform Units, DOE/NV/11718--245, Bechtel 

Nevada, Las Vegas, NV. OSTI ID: 901934 
References

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 R-9

World Meteorological Organization, 2002. Manual on the Global Observing System, Vol. 1, WMO No. 55, 

Secretariat of the World Meteorological Organization, Geneva, Switzerland. 

Zhao, P., and M. Zavarin, 2008a. Analysis of the Variability of Classified and Unclassified Radiological Source 

Term Inventories in the Frenchman Flat Area, Nevada Test Site, LLNL-TR-404694, Lawrence Livermore 

National Laboratory, Livermore, CA. OSTI ID: 945617 

Zhao, P., and M. Zavarin, 2008b. Analysis of the Variability of Classified and Unclassified Radiological Source 

Term Inventories in the Rainier Mesa/Shoshone Mountain Area, Nevada Test Site, LLNL-TR-404695, 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA. OSTI ID: 945619 

Zheng, Q., S. E. Dickson, and Y. Guo, 2008. On the Appropriate “Equivalent Aperture” for the Description of 

Solute Transport in Single Fractures: Laboratory-scale Experiments, Water Resources Research 44:9. 
References

R-10 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Distribution List

Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 DL-1 

Library Distribution List 

Libraries in this list will be mailed a hard copy of this full report (NTSER), a hard copy of the abbreviated Nevada 

Test Site Environmental Report Summary 2008 (SUM), a compact disc (CD) containing the NTSER, SUM, and 

Attachment A: Site Description, and/or electronic copies as indicated below. All versions are uncontrolled. 

Alamo Branch Library, P.O. Box 239, Alamo, NV 89001 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

Amargosa Valley Library District, HCR 69-2, P.O. Box 401-T, Amargosa Valley, NV 89020 

(1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

Beatty Library District, P.O. Box 129, Beatty, NV 89003 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

Boulder City Library, 701 Adams Blvd., Boulder City, NV 89005 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

Caliente Branch Library, P.O. Box 306, Caliente, NV 89009 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

Cedar City Public Library, 303 N. 100 E., Cedar City, UT 84720-2610 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

Delta City Library, 76 N. 200 W., Delta, UT 84624-9440 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

Goldfield Public Library, P.O. Box 430, Goldfield, NV 89013 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

Henderson District Public Library, 280 Water Street, Henderson, NV 89015 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

Indian Springs Library, P.O. Box 629, Indian Springs, NV 89018 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

Lincoln County Library, P.O. Box 330, Pioche, NV 89043 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

Milford Public Library, P.O. Box 579, Milford, UT 84751-0579 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

Moapa Valley Library, P.O. Box 397, Overton, NV 89040 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

Pahrump Library District, 2101 E. Calvada Boulevard, Pahrump, NV 89048 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

Tonopah Library District, P.O. Box 449, Tonopah, NV 89049 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

UNLV Library Government Documents, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, P.O. Box 457013, Las Vegas, 

NV 89154-7013 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

Alisa Huckle, Business & Government Information Center/322, University of Nevada Libraries, 1664 North 

Virginia Street, Reno, NV 89557-0044 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, Technical Library, P.O. 

Box 98518, M/S 505, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518 (1 CD) 

 

U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration Nevada Site Office, Public Reading 

Facility c/o Nuclear Testing Archive, P.O. Box 98521, M/S 400, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8521 (2 CD) 

 

U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Scientific and Technical Information, P.O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831-

0062 (1 electronic copy NTSER/SUM/Attachment A) 

Washington County Library, 50 S. Main Street, St. George, UT 84770-3490 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 

White Pine County Library, 950 Campton Street, Ely, NV 89301 (1 NTSER/SUM/CD) 
Distribution List

DL-2 Nevada Test Site Environmental Report 2008 

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK 
Disclaimer

Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service 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. 

Available for sale to the public from:

U.S. Department of Commerce

National Technical Information Service

5285 Port Royal Road

Springfield, VA 22161-0002

Telephone: (800) 553-6847

Fax: (703) 605-6900

E-mail: orders@ntis.gov

Online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/help/ordermethods.aspx

Available electronically at http://www.osti.gov/bridge 

Available for a processing fee to the 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

Telephone: (865) 576-8401

Fax: (865) 576-5728

E-mail: reports@adonis.osti.gov

All cover photos taken by William K. Ostler, Senior Scientist, NSTec

Front cover page (left to right):

Mirabillis pudica, Frenchman Flat, April 20, 2004

Agave utahensis, Mercury Ridge, May 24, 2004

Camissionia boothii, Pahute Mesa, May 19, 2004

Oenothera caespitosa, Frenchman Flat, March 23, 2005

Opuntia pulchella, Kawich Canyon, June 7, 2005

Yucca schidigera, Mercury Valley, June 24, 2003

Back cover page (left to right):

Mimulus bigelovii, Rock Valley, June 24, 2003

Cleome lutea, Buckboard Mesa, July 1, 2004

Camissionia boothii, Pahute Mesa, May 19, 2004

Camissionia brevipes, Fortymile Canyon, April 28, 2004

Calochortus flexuosus, Mid Valley, April 4, 2004

Camissonia megalantha, Cane Springs, June 12, 2003