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 U.S. Government or

any agency thereof or its contractors or subcontractors.

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

Available to the public from:

U.S. Department of Commerce

National Technical Information Service

5285 Port Royal Road

Springfield, VA 22161-0002

(703) 487-4650

Available electronically at http://www.doe.gov/bridge. Available to U.S.

Department of Energy and its contractors in paper from:

U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Scientific and Technical Information

P.O. Box 62

Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062

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

NEVADA TEST SITE

ANNUAL SITE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

FOR CALENDAR YEAR 1997

Editors: Stuart C. Black and Yvonne E. Townsend

October 1998

Work Performed Under

Contract No. DE-AC08-96NV11718

Prepared for: 

U.S. Department of Energy

Nevada Operations Office

Prepared by:

Bechtel Nevada

Post Office Box 98521

Las Vegas, Nevada 89193-8521
ii

This page intentionally left blank
iii

AUTHORS AND CONTRIBUTORS

1.0 Summary 5.0 Water Surveillance Activities

Stuart C. Black, BN

2.0 Introduction

Colleen M. Beck, DRI

Stuart C. Black, BN

James W. Kesler, BN

3.0 Compliance Summary

Colleen M. Beck, DRI

Gina M. Cook, BN

Orin L. Haworth, BN

James W. Kesler, BN

Cathy A. Wills, BN

4.0 Air Surveillance Activities

Stuart C. Black, BN

Christopher A. Fontana, EPA

Robert F. Grossman, BN

Orin L. Haworth, BN

Anita A. Mullen, EPA

Elizabeth C. Calman, BN

James W. Kesler, BN

Max G. Davis, EPA

Sigmund L. Drellack, BN

Robert F. Grossman, BN

Anita A. Mullen, EPA

6.0 Other Reportable Activities

Colleen M. Beck, DRI

Stuart C. Black, BN

Brian L. Dozier, BN

Deron Linkenheil, BN

Anita A. Mullen, EPA

Cathy A. Wills, BN

7.0 Dose Assessment

Stuart C. Black, BN

Anita A. Mullen, EPA

8.0 Laboratory Quality Assurance

Stuart C. Black, BN

Mark D. Sells, EPA
iv

This page intentionally left blank
v

FOREWORD

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

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

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

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

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

Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Laboratory (various names) in Las Vegas, Nevada,

were reported separately by that Agency.

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

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

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

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

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

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

in dose-estimation calculations. 
vi

This page intentionally left blank
vii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

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

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

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

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

Environment, Safety and Health Division (ESHD) and the EPA’s Radiation & Indoor

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

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

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

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

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

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

combined onsite and offsite environmental report is greatly appreciated.
viii

This page intentionally left blank
ix

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

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

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

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

Table of Contents .......................................................... ix

List of Figures ............................................................ xv

List of Tables ............................................................. xvii

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

NTS Description ......................................... 2-1

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Flora and Fauna ........................................ 2-15

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

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

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

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

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

Special Technologies Laboratory (STL) ....................... 2-18
Table of Contents, cont. Page

x

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

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

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

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

3.0 Compliance Summary ................................................. 3-1

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Underground Storage Tanks ........................ 3-6

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, 

 and Liability Act/Superfund Amendments and

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

Emergency Reporting and Community 

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

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

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

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

Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act .............. 3-8

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

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

Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management ................ 3-10

Executive Order 11990, Protection of Wetlands ................. 3-10

Executive Order 12856, Federal Compliance With Right-To-Know 

 Laws and Pollution Prevention Requirements ................. 3-10

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

Clean Air Act ........................................... 3-11

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

Safe Drinking Water Act .................................. 3-12

Comprehensive Environmental Response,

 Compensation, and Liability Act ............................ 3-13

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

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

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

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

Pollution Prevention Opportunity Assessments

 (PPOAs) ..................................... 3-15

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

Federal Facilities Agreement and Consent Order ................ 3-18
Table of Contents, cont. Page

xi

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

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

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

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

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

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

Legal Actions .......................................... 3-22

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Air Surveillance Network (ASN) .............................. 4-6

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

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

Community Technical Liaison Program

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Offsite Locations ........................................ 5-17
Table of Contents, cont. Page

xii

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

7.0 Dose Assessment .................................................... 7-1

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Table of Contents, cont. Page

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Radiological Performance Evaluation Results ............. 8-7

 Corrective Actions Implemented in Response 

 to Performance Evaluation Programs .................. 8-8

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

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

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

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

This page intentionally left blank
xv

LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 2.1 NTS Location in Nevada ......................................... 2-2

Figure 2.2 NTS Area Numbers, Principal Facilities, and Testing Areas .............. 2-3

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

 Range Complex .............................................. 2-5

Figure 2.4 Topography of the NTS ......................................... 2-7

Figure 2.5 Basic Lithologic Structure of the NTS ............................... 2-9

Figure 2.6 Drill Hole Locations on the NTS .................................. 2-10

Figure 2.7 Groundwater Hydrologic Units of the NTS and Vicinity ................. 2-12

Figure 2.8 1992 Wind Rose Patterns for the NTS (Courtesy of Air Resource 

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

Figure 2.9 Land Use Around the NTS ...................................... 2-17

Figure 4.1 Air Sampling Stations on the NTS - 1997 ............................ 4-2

Figure 4.2 TLD Stations on the NTS - 1997 ................................... 4-3

Figure 4.3 CTLP, PIC, and Air Sampling Locations Around the NTS ................ 4-7

Figure 4.4 Locations of Offsite Station and Personnel TLDs ...................... 4-9

Figure 4.5 Annual Average Gross Beta from Air Sampling - 1997 ................. 4-13

Figure 4.6 Air Monitoring Results for RWMS-5 - 1997 .......................... 4-14

Figure 4.7 Trend in Annual Average Gross Beta Concentration in Air on the NTS ..... 4-14

Figure 4.8 Annual Average Pu in Air on the NTS - 1997 .................... 4-16 239+240

Figure 4.9 Trend in Annual Averages for Plutonium Concentration on the NTS ....... 4-17

Figure 4.10 Trend in Annual Averages for HTO Concentration on the NTS ........... 4-17

Figure 5.1 Supply Well and Potable Water Sampling Stations on the NTS - 1997 ...... 5-3

Figure 5.2 Surface Water Sampling Locations on the NTS - 1997 .................. 5-4

Figure 5.3 Wells on the NTS Sampled by R&IE-LV - 1997 ........................ 5-6

Figure 5.4 Wells and Springs Outside the NTS Included in the LTHMP - 1997 ........ 5-8

Figure 5.5 Areas of Potential Groundwater Contamination on the NTS ............. 5-11

Figure 5.6 Trends in Tritium Concentration, Test Well B on the NTS ............... 5-23

Figure 5.7 Sampling Locations at the FAULTLESS Site - 1997 ................... 5-25

Figure 5.8 Sampling Locations at the SHOAL Site - 1997 ....................... 5-26

Figure 5.9 Sampling Locations at the RULISON Site - 1997 ..................... 5-27

Figure 5.10 Sampling Locations at the RIO BLANCO Site - 1997 .................. 5-29

Figure 5.11 Sampling Locations at the GNOME Site - 1997 ...................... 5-30

Figure 5.12 Sampling Locations at the GASBUGGY Site - 1997 ................... 5-32

Figure 5.13 Sampling Locations Near GZ at the SALMON Site - 1997 ............... 5-34

Figure 5.14 Sampling Locations Offsite at the SALMON Site - 1997 ................ 5-35

Figure 5.15 Tritium Results Trends in Baxterville, Public Drinking Water Supply - 1997 . . 5-36

Figure 5.16 Tritium Results in Well HM-S, SALMON Site, Project DRIBBLE - 1997 ..... 5-36

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

This page intentionally left blank
xvii

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1.1 Radionuclide Emissions on the NTS - 1997 ......................... 1-11 (a)

Table 1.2 Summary of Effective Dose Equivalents from NTS Operations 

 During 1997 ................................................. 1-11

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

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

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

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

Table 4.1 Summary of the NTS Air and Direct Radiation Surveillance Program - 1997 . . 4-20

Table 4.2 Analytical Procedure, Air and TLD - 1997 ............................ 4-21

Table 4.3 NTS Active Air Quality Permits - 1997 ............................... 4-22

Table 4.4 Active Air Quality Permits for Non-NTS Facilities - 1997 ................. 4-23

Table 4.5 NTS Radionuclide Emissions - 1997 ................................ 4-24

Table 4.6 Summary Data (μCi/mL) for Gross Alpha, Gross Beta,

 Be and Plutonium in Air - 1997 ................................... 4-25 7

Table 4.7 Summary of NTS Kr Concentrations - 1997 .......................... 4-26 85

Table 4.8 Airborne Tritium Concentrations on the NTS - 1997 ..................... 4-26

Table 4.9 Mean Air Monitoring Results for Various Radionuclides 

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

Table 4.10 Mean Air Monitoring Results for Various Radionuclides

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

Table 4.11 NTS Boundary Gamma Monitoring Results Summary - 1997 .............. 4-27

Table 4.12 NTS TLD Historical Station Comparisons, 1991-1997 ................... 4-27

Table 4.13 Gross Alpha Results for the Offsite Air Surveillance Network - 1997 ........ 4-28

Table 4.14 Gross Beta Results for the Offsite Air Surveillance Network - 1997 ......... 4-28

Table 4.15 Plutonium Results for the Offsite Hi-Volume Air Surveillance Network - 1997 . 4-29

Table 4.16 Gamma Monitoring Results for Offsite Stations - 1997 .................. 4-29

Table 4.17 Gamma Monitoring Results for Offsite Personnel - 1997 ................. 4-31

Table 4.18 Summary of Gamma Exposure Rates as Measured by PIC - 1997 ......... 4-31

Table 4.19 BN Offsite Boundary Monitoring Data - 1997 .......................... 4-32

Table 5.1 Summary of Analytical Procedures for Water Samples - 1997 ............. 5-42

Table 5.2 Summary of the Water Surveillance Program - 1997 .................... 5-43

Table 5.3 Groundwater Monitoring Parameters at the RWMS-5 ................... 5-43

Table 5.4 NTS Facilities with RCRA Closure Plans ............................. 5-44

Table 5.5 Locations with Detectable Man-Made Radioactivity - 1997 .............. 5-44 (a)

Table 5.6 Radioactivity in NTS Surface Waters - 1997 .......................... 5-45

Table 5.7 NTS Open Reservoir Gross Beta Analysis Results - 1997 ................ 5-46

Table 5.8 NTS Drinking Water Sources - 1997 ................................ 5-46

Table 5.9 NTS Supply Well Radioactivity Averages - 1997 ....................... 5-46

Table 5.10 Radioactivity Averages for NTS Tap Water Samples - 1997 .............. 5-47

Table 5.11 Radium Analysis Results for NTS Potable Water Supply Wells - 1997 ....... 5-48

Table 5.12 Summary of Tritium Results for NTS Wells Sampled by R&IE-LV - 1997 ..... 5-48

Table 5.13 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Wells Near the NTS - 1997 ........ 5-49

Table 5.14 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project FAULTLESS - 1997 ........ 5-50

Table 5.15 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project SHOAL - 1997 ............ 5-51
List of Tables, cont. Page

xviii

Table 5.16 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project RULISON - 1997 .......... 5-51

Table 5.17 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project RIO BLANCO - 1997 ....... 5-52

Table 5.18 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project GNOME - 1997 ........... 5-52

Table 5.19 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project GASBUGGY - 1997 ........ 5-53

Table 5.20 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project SALMON - April 1997 ...... 5-54

Table 5.21 Influent Quality - 1997 ........................................... 5-58

Table 5.22 Organic Loading Rates - 1997 ..................................... 5-58

Table 5.23 Pond Water Depths in Infiltration Basins - 1997 ........................ 5-59

Table 5.24 Influent Toxics for Facilities that Received Industrial Wastewater - 1997 ..... 5-60

Table 5.25 Sampling Data for Infiltration Ponds Containing 30 cm or More - 1997 ....... 5-62

Table 5.26 Nitrate Analyses of Well Water Samples (mg/L), First Quarter - 1997 ....... 5-62

Table 5.27 NTS Drinking Water System Permits - 1997 .......................... 5-62

Table 5.28 Sewage Discharge Permits - 1997 ................................. 5-63

Table 5.29 Permits for NTS Septic Waste Hauling Trucks - 1997 ................... 5-63

Table 6.1 Summary of Radionuclides Detected in Milk Samples - 1997 .............. 6-12

Table 6.2 Low-Level Waste Disposed of at the RWMS-5, 1993 - 1997 .............. 6-12

Table 6.3 Inventory of Radionuclides (>0.1 Ci) Disposed of at the RWMS-5 in 1997 .... 6-12

Table 6.4 Low-Level Waste Disposed of at the RWMS-3, 1993 - 1997 .............. 6-13

Table 6.5 Inventory of Radionuclides (>1 mCi) Disposed of at the RWMS-3 in 1997 .... 6-13

Table 6.6 Quantity of Wastes Disposed of in Landfills - 1997 ..................... 6-13

Table 6.7 Permits Required for NTS Operations - 1997 .......................... 6-14

Table 7.1 Summary of Effective Dose Equivalents from NTS Operations - 1997 ........ 7-5

Table 7.2 Monitoring Networks Data Used in Dose Calculations - 1997 ............... 7-5

Table 8.1 Precision Objectives Expressed as Percents ........................... 8-9

Table 8.2 Accuracy Objectives Expressed as Percent Bias ........................ 8-9

Table 8.3 Analysis Completeness Data for Calendar Year 1997 ................... 8-10

Table 8.4 Precision Estimates from Replicate Sampling - 1997 .................... 8-10

Table 8.5 Accuracy of R&IE-LV Radioanalyses (EML QAP and PESP) - 1997 ........ 8-11

Table 8.6 Accuracy of ASL Radioanalyses (EPA PESP and EML QAP) - 1997 ....... 8-11
xix

MEASUREMENT UNITS AND NOMENCLATURE

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

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

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

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

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

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

laboratory measurements of radioactivity in samples, background is the activity

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

(also called a blank).

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

1 Bq = 1 disintegration per second.

concentration Usually expressed as μCi/mL, or pCi/m . 

3

curie Abbreviation Ci. The historic unit for disintegration rate. 1 Ci = 3.7 x 1010

disintegrations per second = 3.7 x 10 Bq. The usual submultiples of Ci are mCi 10

(10 Ci or one thousandth Ci), μCi (10 Ci or one millionth Ci), and pCi -3 -6

(10 or one trillionth Ci). -12

EDE Effective dose equivalent - radiation dose corrected by various weighting factors 

that relate dose to the risk of serious effects.

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

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

subunit is the millirem (10 rem or one thousandth rem), abbreviated mrem. -3

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

The usual unit is mR for 10 R (one thousandth R). -3

volume The SI unit for volume is m (cubic meter). Other units used are liter (L) and mL 3

(10 L or one thousandth liter). One cubic meter = 1,000 L, 1 L = 1.06 quarts. -3

The elements and corresponding symbols used in this report are:

Element Symbol Element Symbol

Aluminum Al Iron Fe

Americium Am Krypton Kr

Argon Ar Lithium Li 

Arsenic As Mercury Hg

Barium Ba Nitrogen N

Beryllium Be Oxygen O

Boron B Plutonium Pu

Cadmium Cd Radium Ra

Calcium Ca Radon Rn

Carbon C Selenium Se

Cesium Cs Sulfur S

Chlorine Cl Strontium Sr

Chromium Cr Technetium Tc

Copper C Thorium Th

Fluorine F Thulium Tm

Germanium Ge Tritium H

3

Hydrogen H Uranium U

Iodine I Xenon Xe
xx

This page intentionally left blank
xxi

LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS

AEC U.S. Atomic Energy Commission

AIRFA American Indian Religious Freedom Act

ARL/SORD Air Resource Laboratory, Special Operations and Research Division

ASER Annual Site Environmental Report

ASL Analytical Services Laboratory

ASN Air Surveillance Network 

AVO Amador Valley Operations

BN Bechtel Nevada 

BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand

BoFF Bureau of Federal Facilities, State of Nevada

CA Composite Analysis

CAA Clean Air Act

CADD Corrective Action Decision Document

CAP Corrective Action Plan

CAP88-PC Clean Air Package 1988 (EPA software program for estimating doses)

CEDE Committed Effective Dose Equivalent

CEI Compliance Evaluation Inspection

CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

CP Control Point

CRMP Community Radiation Monitoring Program

CTLP Community Technical Liaison Program 

CWA Clean Water Act

CX Categorical Exclusion

CY Calendar Year

DAF Device Assembly Facility

DCG Derived Concentration Guide

DDR Data Discrepancy Report

DOD U.S. Department of Defense

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

DOE/HQ DOE Headquarters 

DOELAP DOE Laboratory Accreditation Program

DOE/NV DOE Nevada Operations Office

DQO Data Quality Objectives

DRI Desert Research Institute, University and Community College System, Nevada

DTRA Defense Threat Reduction Agency

EA Environmental Assessment

EDE Effective Dose Equivalent

EGIS Ecological Geographic Informational System

EHS Extremely Hazardous Substances

EIS Environmental Impact Statement

ELU Ecological Landform Unit

EMAC Ecological Monitoring and Compliance

E-MAD Engine Maintenance, Assembly and Disassembly (on the NTS)

EML Environmental Measurements Laboratory (DOE) 

EMP Environmental Monitoring Plan

EOD Explosive Ordnance Disposal (NTS)

EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

EPCRA Emergency Reporting and Community Right-to-Know Act 

EPD DOE Environmental Protection Division

ERP Environmental Restoration Project

ESA Endangered Species Act 
List of Acronyms and Expressions, cont.

xxii

ESHD Environment, Safety and Health Division (DOE/NV)

ESS&H Environment, Safety, Security, and Health

FFACO Federal Facilities Agreement and Consent Order

FFCA Federal Facilities Compliance Act

FY Fiscal Year

gal Gallon

GBq Gigabequerel (10 bequerels) 9

GIS Geographical Information System

GZ Ground Zero

HRMP Hydrologic Resources Management Program

HSC Hazardous Materials Spill Center

HTO Tritiated Water

HWSU Hazardous Waste Storage Unit

ICRP International Commission on Radiological Protection

ID Identification 

IT International Technology Corporation

IUC International Uranium Corporation

JIT Just-in-Time

keV Kilo-electronvolt

LANL Los Alamos National Laboratory

LAO Los Alamos Operations (BN)

LDR Land Disposal Restrictions

LLNL Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

LLW Low-Level (Radioactive) Waste

LTHMP Long-Term Hydrological Monitoring Program 

LVAO Las Vegas Area Operation (BN)

M&O Management and Operation

MAPEP Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program

MCL Maximum Contaminant Level

MDC Minimum Detectable Concentration

MEI Maximally Exposed Individual

MQO Measurement Quality Objectives

MSDS Material Safety Data Sheet

MSL Mean Sea Level

MSN Milk Surveillance Network (R&IE-LV)

NAC Nevada Administrative Code 

NAFB Nellis Air Force Base

NAFRC Nellis Air Force Range Complex

NAGPRA Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act

NEPA National Environmental Policy Act

NEPD Nevada Environmental Protection Division 

NESHAP National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

NHPA National Historic Preservation Act

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology

NLVF North Las Vegas Facility (BN)

NPDES National Pollution Discharge Elimination System

NR National Register of Historic Places

NRS Nevada Revised Statutes

NSHPO Nevada State Historical Preservation Office

NTS Nevada Test Site

ORNL Oak Ridge National Laboratory 

ORSP Offsite Radiological Safety Program

PA Performance Assessment
List of Acronyms and Expressions, cont.

xxiii

PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl

PE Performance Evaluation

PEIS Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement

PESP Performance Evaluation Studies Program

pH Hydrogen ion concentration

PHS U.S. Public Health Service

PIC Pressurized Ion Chamber

PPOA Pollution Prevention Opportunity Assessments

ppm Parts per Million

QA Quality Assurance

QAP Quality Assessment Program

RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

R&IE-LV Radiation & Indoor Environment National Laboratory - Las Vegas (EPA)

REECo Reynolds Electrical & Engineering Company, Inc.

RMP Resource Management Plan

ROD Record of Decision

ROI Return on Investment

RSD Relative Standard Deviation

RSL Remote Sensing Laboratory (BN)

RWMS Radioactive Waste Management Site

RWMS-3 Radioactive Waste Management Site, Area 3

RWMS-5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, Area 5

s Sample Standard Deviation

SAFER Streamlined Approach for Environmental Restoration

SARA Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act

SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act

SGZ Surface Ground Zero

SMSY Strategic Materials Storage Yard

SOP Standard Operating Procedure

STL Special Technologies Laboratory (BN)

TCE Trichloroethane

TDS Total Dissolved Solids

TLD Thermoluminescent Dosimeter

TRU Transuranic

TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act

TTR Tonopah Test Range

UGTA Underground Test Area

UNLV University of Nevada, Las Vegas

U.S. United States of America

USFWS United States Fish and Wildlife Service

USGS U.S. Geological Survey

UST Underground Storage Tank

VOC Volatile Organic Compound

WAC Waste Acceptance Criteria

WAMO Washington Aerial Measurements Operations (BN)

WEF Waste Examination Facility

WIPP Waste Isolation Pilot Plant

WI Work Instructions
xxiv

This page intentionally left blank
SUMMARY

1-1

1.0 SUMMARY

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

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

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

compliance with applicable DOE, state, and federal regulations and

guidelines. All discharges of radioactive liquids remained onsite in

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

radioactivity to the offsite area through groundwater. Surveillance around

the NTS indicated that airborne radioactivity from diffusion, evaporation of

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

exposure above existing background to members of the offsite population

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

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

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

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

maximally exposed individual offsite would have been 0.089 mrem. This

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

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

received 144 mrem from natural background radiation. There were no

nonradiological releases to the offsite area. Hazardous wastes were shipped

offsite to approved disposal facilities. Compliance with the various

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

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

waste management have been obtained from the appropriate agencies. 

Cooperation with other agencies has resulted in seven different consent

orders and agreements.

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

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

waste permits as mandated for each location.

1.1 ENVIRONMENTAL

MANAGEMENT

The DOE Nevada Operations Office

(DOE/NV) is committed to increasing

the quality of its management of NTS

environmental resources. This has been

promoted by the establishment of an

Environmental Protection Division under the

purview of Assistant Manager of Technical

Services and upgrading the Environmental

Management activities to the Assistant

Manager level to address those

environmental issues that have arisen in the

course of performing the original primary

mission of the DOE/NV, underground testing

of nuclear explosive devices. DOE/NV

management has vigorously promoted the

practice of pollution prevention, including

waste minimization and material recycling.

Operational releases and seepage of

radioactivity are reported soon after their

occurrence. In compliance with the National

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air

Pollutants (NESHAP), as set forth in Title 40

Code of Federal Regulations Part 61, the

accumulated annual emissions are used as

part of the input to the EPA’s CAP88-PC

software program to calculate potential

EDEs to people living beyond the

boundaries of the NTS and the surrounding

exclusion areas.
1-2

1.2 RADIOLOGICAL

ENVIRONMENT

Radiological effluents in the form of air

emissions and liquid discharges are normally

released into the environment as a routine

part of operations on the NTS. Radioactivity

in liquid discharges released to onsite waste

treatment or disposal systems (containment

ponds) is monitored to assess the efficacy of

treatment and control and to provide a

quantitative and qualitative annual summary

of released radioactivity. Air emissions are

monitored for source characterization and

operational safety as well as for

environmental surveillance purposes. SURVEILLANCE

Air emissions in 1997 consisted primarily of

small amounts of tritium, radioactive noble

gases, and plutonium released to the

atmosphere that were attributed to:

 Diffusion of tritiated water (HTO) vapor in

atmospheric moisture from evaporation

of HTO from tunnel and characterization

well containment ponds.

 Diffuse emissions calculated from the

results of environmental surveillance

activities.

 Resuspension of plutonium as measured

with air sampling equipment or

calculated by use of resuspension

equations.

 Release of Kr from tests under Pahute 85

Mesa when atmospheric pressure

changes occur. Such releases were

statistically undetectable in 1997.

Diffuse emissions included HTO, only

slightly above detection limits, from the

Radioactive Waste Management Site in 

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

Area 10 and resuspended Pu from 239+240

areas on the NTS where it was deposited by

atmospheric nuclear tests or device safety

tests in earlier years. Table 1.1 shows the

quantities of radionuclides released from all

sources, including postulated loss of 

laboratory standards. None of the

radioactive materials listed in this table were

detected in the offsite area above ambient

levels.

Onsite liquid discharges to containment

ponds included approximately 20 Ci (740

GBq) of tritium. This was much less than

last year's tritium releases. Evaporation of

this material could have contributed HTO to

the atmosphere, but the amounts were too

small to be detected by the tritium monitors

onsite. No liquid effluents were discharged

to offsite areas.

ONSITE ENVIRONMENTAL

Environmental surveillance on the 3,500-km2

(1,350-mi ) NTS is designed to cover the 2

entire area with some emphasis on areas of

past nuclear testing and present operational

activities. In 1997, samplers were operated

at 48 locations to collect air particulate

samples, at 13 locations to collect HTO in

atmospheric moisture, and at 3 locations to

collect air for analysis of noble gas content. 

Grab samples were collected frequently from

water supply wells, water taps, springs, open

reservoirs, containment ponds, and sewage

lagoons. Thermoluminescent dosimeters

(TLDs) were placed at 166 locations on the

NTS to measure ambient gamma exposures.

Data from these networks are summarized

as annual averages for each monitored

location. Those locations with

concentrations above the NTS average are

assumed to reflect onsite emissions. These

emissions arise from diffuse (areal) sources

and from particular operational 

activities (e.g., radioactivity buried in the

low-level radioactive waste [LLW] site). 

Approximately 2,400 air samples were

analyzed by gamma spectroscopy. All

isotopes detected by gamma spectroscopy

were naturally occurring in the environment

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

thorium series), except for a few instances

where very low levels of Cs were 137
SUMMARY

1-3

detected. Gross beta analysis of the air effluent, and nine sewage lagoons. A grab

samples yielded an annual average for the sample was taken from each of these 

network of 2.0 x 10 μCi/mL (0.74 mBq/m ). surface water sites for analysis of gross -14 3

Plutonium analyses of monthly or quarterly beta, tritium, gamma-emitters, and plutonium

composited air filters indicated an annual isotopes. Strontium-90 was analyzed once

arithmetic average below 10 μCi/mL per year for each location. Water samples -16

(4 μBq/m ) of Pu and below 10 from the springs, reservoirs, and lagoons 3 239+240 -18

μCi/mL (0.04 μBq/m ) of Pu for all contained background levels of gross beta, 3 238

locations during 1997, with the majority of tritium, plutonium, and strontium. Samples

results for both isotopes being on the order collected from the tunnel containment pond

of 10 μCi/mL (0.04 μBq/m ). A slightly and characterization well effluent ponds -18 3

higher average was found in samples in contained detectable levels of radioactivity,

certain areas, but that level was calculated as would be expected. 

to be only 0.01 percent of the Derived

Concentration Guide (DCG) for exposure to Water samples from onsite supply wells and

the public. Higher than background levels of drinking water distribution systems were

plutonium are to be expected in some air analyzed for radionuclides. The supply well

samples because atmospheric testing in the average gross beta activity of 7.0 x 10

1950s, and nuclear safety tests dispersed μCi/mL (0.26 Bq/L) was 3 percent of the

plutonium over a small portion of the surface DCG for K (used for comparison

of the NTS. purposes); gross alpha was 6.2 x 10

The annual average concentration of Kr percent of the drinking water standard; the 85

from the three noble gas monitoring stations maximum Sr measured was 1.7 x 10

was 27 x 10 μCi/mL (1 Bq/m ). This μCi/mL (6.3 mBq/L), about 2 percent of the -12 3

concentration is similar to that reported in DCG; H averaged about 3.4 x 10 μCi/mL

previous years and is attributed to worldwide (0.12 Bq/L), less than 0.002 percent of the

distribution of Kr from the use of nuclear DCG; Pu and Pu were both below 85

technology. their minimum detectable levels of about 

Throughout the year atmospheric moisture

was collected for two-week periods at 13

locations on the NTS and analyzed for HTO

content. The annual arithmetic average of

(4.7 ± 9.7) x 10 pCi/mL (0.17 ± 0.36 Bq/m ) -6 3

was similar to last year's average. The

highest annual average concentrations were

at the E Tunnel pond, the SEDAN crater,

and RWMS-5 locations, in that order. The

primary radioactive liquid discharge to the

onsite environment in 1997 was 16 Ci

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

from E Tunnel. Also, effluent produced

during pumping from wells in Area 3

contained about 4.2 Ci (0.16 GBq) of HTO. 

For dose calculations, all of the HTO was

assumed to have evaporated.

Surface water sampling was conducted

quarterly at eight open reservoirs, seven

springs, two containment ponds and an

-9

40

-9

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

90 -10

3 -9

239+240 238

2 x 10 μCi/mL (0.074 mBq/L). -11

Analysis of the TLD network showed that the

16 boundary station locations had an annual

average exposure of 127 mR, and the 9

historic stations annual average was 95 mR,

both within the range of values previously

reported.

OFFSITE ENVIRONMENTAL

SURVEILLANCE

The offsite radiological monitoring program

is conducted around the NTS by the EPA's

Radiation & Indoor Environments National

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

Interagency Agreement with DOE. This

program consists of several environmental

sampling, radiation detection, and dosimetry

networks as described below. These

networks operated continuously during

1997.
1-4

The Air Surveillance Network (ASN) was detected in air, water, or milk samples posed

made up of 20 continuously operating any significant health risk to nearby

sampling locations surrounding the NTS, 6 residents.

of which also had high-volume air samplers. 

The ASN stations included 16 sampling A network of 17 CTLP stations was operated

locations, at Community Technical Liaison by local residents, one without an air

Program (CTLP) stations, described below. sampler. Each station was an integral part

During 1997, no airborne radioactivity of the ASN and TLD networks. In addition,

related to current activities at the NTS was they were equipped with a PIC connected to

detected on any sample from the ASN. a gamma-rate recorder. Samples and data

Other than naturally occurring Be, the only from these CTLP stations were analyzed 7

specific radionuclide detected by this and reported by R&IE-LV and also

network was Pu or Pu on high- interpreted and reported by the Desert 238 239+240

volume air-filter samples. Research Institute, University of Nevada

The Milk Surveillance Network consisted of consistent with previous years and were

11 sampling locations within 300 km (186 within the normal background range for the

mi) of the NTS. Samples were analyzed for United States.

Sr, which averaged 0.7 pCi/L. The data 90

from this network are consistent with Although no radioactivity attributable to

previous data and indicate little or no current NTS operations was detected by any

change. of the offsite monitoring networks, based on

In 1997, external exposure was monitored atmospheric dispersion model calculation

by a network of 38 TLDs and 27 pressurized (CAP88-PC) indicated that the maximum

ion chambers (PICs) located in towns and potential EDE to any offsite individual would

communities around the NTS. There was have been 0.089 mrem (8.9 x 10 mSv), and

also a PIC located at the SALMON site near the dose to the population within 80 km of

Baxterville, Mississippi. The PIC network in the several emission sites on the NTS would

the communities surrounding the NTS have been 0.26 person-rem (2.6 x 10

indicated background exposures, ranging person-Sv), both of which were less than

from 71 to 156 mR/yr, that were consistent last year. The hypothetical person receiving

with previous data and well within the range this dose would also have been exposed to

of background data in other areas of the 144 mrem from natural background

United States. The exposures measured by radiation. A summary of the potential EDEs

the TLDs were slightly less, as has been due to operations at the NTS is presented in

true in the past. Table 1.2.

Sampling of Long-Term Hydrological

Monitoring Program (LTHMP) wells and

surface waters around the NTS showed only

background radionuclide concentrations. 

The LTHMP also included groundwater and

surface water monitoring at locations in

Alaska, Colorado, Mississippi, New Mexico,

and Nevada where underground nuclear

tests were conducted. The results obtained

from analysis of samples collected at those

locations were consistent with previous data,

except for a sample from a deep well at

Project GASBUGGY, where the H and Cs 3 137

has been detected the last few years. No

concentrations of radioactivity that were

System. All measurements for 1997 were

the NTS releases reported in Table 1.1, an

-4

-3

ECOLOGICAL STUDIES

The Ecological Monitoring and Compliance

Program monitoring tasks, which were

selected for 1997, included habitat mapping

on the northern portion of the NTS,

characterizing the natural springs on the

NTS, conducting a census of the horse

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

on wildlife. Ecological monitoring of certain

spill tests at the Hazardous Materials Spill

Center (HSC) (formerly Liquefied Gaseous

Fuels Spill Test Facility) was also

conducted.
SUMMARY

1-5

Field surveys were conducted from June Nevada; Santa Barbara, California; and at

1996 through February 1997 to identify

those natural NTS springs, seeps, tanks,

and playas, which could be designated by

the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers as

jurisdictional wetlands. A summary report of

the survey findings entitled “NTS Wetlands

Assessment” has been published.

LOW-LEVEL WASTE DISPOSAL

Environmental monitoring at the RWMS,

Area 3 (RWMS-3) has detected plutonium 

in air samples. However, the

upwind/downwind sampler results were

equivalent, and plutonium was detected in

other air samples from Area 3 indicating that

the source is resuspended plutonium. 

Elevated levels of plutonium have been

detected in air samples from several areas

on the NTS where operational activities and

vehicular traffic resuspend plutonium for

detection by air sampling. The presence of

plutonium on the NTS is primarily due to

atmospheric and safety tests conducted in

the 1950s and 1960s. These tests spread

plutonium in the eastern and northeastern

areas of the NTS (Figure 2.3, Chapter 2

displays these locations). 

Environmental monitoring at and around

RWMS-5 indicated that HTO in air was

detectable at, but not beyond, the waste site

boundaries. This monitoring included air

sampling, water sampling, and external

gamma exposure measurement. Vadose

zone monitoring for hazardous constituents 1997, which were issued by the state of

has been installed in the mixed waste

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

of detecting any downward migration of

mixed waste. Also, three monitoring wells,

installed to satisfy Resource Conservation

and Recovery Act (RCRA) requirements for

a mixed-waste disposal operation, have not

yet detected migration of hazardous

materials.

RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING AT

OFFSITE SUPPORT FACILITIES

Fence line monitoring, using Panasonic UD814 TLDs, was conducted at offsite DOE/NV

support facilities in North Las Vegas, 

the Washington Aerial Measurements

Operation. The 1997 results indicated that

only background radiation was detected at

the fence line of these facilities. In 1995, a

small amount of tritium was accidently

released from a calibration range building in

North Las Vegas that was still detectable

this year in the room where the release

occurred. Monitoring of the release provided

data for input into the CAP88-PC program

for calculating offsite exposures. The

maximum offsite exposure was calculated to

be only 0.00025 mrem, which is far below

the EPA permissible limit of 10 mrem.

1.3 NONRADIOLOGICAL

MONITORING

Nonradiological environmental monitoring of

NTS operations involved only onsite

monitoring because there were no

discharges offsite that involved

nonradiological hazardous materials. The

primary environmental permit areas for the

NTS were monitored to verify compliance

with ambient air quality and the RCRA

requirements. Air emissions sources

common to the NTS included particulates

from construction, aggregate production,

surface disturbances, fugitive dust from

unpaved roads, fuel burning equipment,

open burning, and fuel storage facilities. 

NTS environmental permits active during

Nevada or by federal agencies, included one

comprehensive air quality permit covering

emissions from construction of facilities,

boilers, storage tanks, and open burning;

four permits for surface disturbance

(environmental restoration activities); seven

permits for onsite drinking water distribution

systems; one permit for sewage discharges

to lagoon collection systems; six permits for

septage hauling; one incidental take permit

for the threatened desert tortoise; and one

permit for the scientific collection and study

of various species on the NTS. Further, a

RCRA permit has been obtained for general

NTS operations and for two specific facilities

on the NTS.
1-6

Permits at non-NTS operations included 12 In January and June of 1997, the state

air pollution control permits, 2 sewage 

discharge permits, and 2 hazardous material

storage permits. Three EPA Generator

Identification numbers were issued to NTS

operations, and three local RCRA-related

permits were required at two of those

operations.

The only nonradiological air emission of

regulatory concern under the Clean Air Act

(CAA) has been due to asbestos removal

during building renovation projects and from

insulated piping at various locations on the

NTS. During 1997, there were no projects

that required state of Nevada notifications. 

The annual estimate for non-scheduled

asbestos demolition/renovation for fiscal

year 1997 was sent to EPA Region 9 in

December 1997.

RCRA requirements were met through an

operating permit for hazardous waste

storage, mixed waste storage, and explosive

ordnance disposal operations. A Federal

Facilities Agreement and Consent Order

(FFACO) has been signed with the state that

exempts the NTS from potential enforcement

action related to mixed waste storage

prohibition under RCRA.

The state’s annual Compliance Evaluation

Inspection during September 1997 found

only minor deficiencies.

As there are no liquid discharges to

navigable waters, offsite surface water

drainage systems, or publicly owned

treatment works, no Clean Water Act (CWA)

National Pollution Discharge Elimination

System (NPDES) permits were required for

NTS operations. Under the conditions of the

state of Nevada operating permits, liquid

discharges to onsite sewage lagoons are sitewide EIS for the NTS and other test

regularly tested for biochemical oxygen

demand, pH, and total suspended solids. In

addition to the state-required monitoring,

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

to further protect the NTS environment. such discharges are to onsite sewage 

inspected all NTS equipment regulated by

the state air quality permit. There were no

findings as a result of these inspections.

In compliance with the Safe Drinking Water

Act (SDWA) and seven state of Nevada

drinking water supply system permits, the

onsite distribution systems supplied by

onsite wells are sampled monthly for

residual chlorine, pH, bacteria, and, less

frequently, for other water quality indicators.

No exceedances have been found.

Monitoring for polychlorinated biphenyls as

required by the Toxic Substances Control

Act (TSCA) was done and was reported to

the EPA and the state in June 1997.

At the HSC, 2 series of spill tests using 38

different chemicals were conducted during

1997. None of the tests generated enough

airborne contaminants to be detected at the

NTS boundary during or after the tests. 

Boundary monitoring was performed by

R&IE-LV personnel.

1.4 COMPLIANCE ACTIVITIES

DOE/NV is required to comply with various

environmental laws and regulations in the

conduct of its operations. Monitoring

activities required for compliance with the

CAA, CWA, SDWA, TSCA, and RCRA are

summarized above. Endangered Species

Act activities include compliance with the

USFWS Biological Opinion on NTS Activities

and the Biological Opinion on Fortymile

Canyon Activities. NEPA activities included

action on 3 Environmental Impact

Statements (EISs), 5 Environmental

Assessments (EAs), and 44 Categorical

Exclusions. The Record of Decision on the

locations within the state of Nevada was

published in December 1996.

Wastewater discharges at the NTS are not

regulated under NPDES permits, because all
SUMMARY

1-7

lagoons. Discharges to these lagoons are occurred previously. None exceeded 33

permitted under the Nevada Water Pollution percent of the National Primary Drinking

Control Act. Wastewater discharges from Water Regulation level.

the non-NTS support facilities were within

the regulated levels established by city or HTO was detected in samples from wells at

county publicly owned treatment works. formerly utilized sites, such as the SALMON

Underground storage tank activities were GASBUGGY (New Mexico), at levels

limited to continued remediation of sites from consistent with previous experience. The

previous tank removals. HTO in water from Well EPNG 10-36 at

In 1997, 13 surveys were conducted for 1984, was detected for the sixth year in a

historical and archaeological sites that row. 

identified 25 prehistoric and historic

archeological sites. Four of these are Because wells that were drilled for water

considered candidates for listing on the supply or exploratory purposes are used in

National Register of Historic Places. the NTS monitoring program, rather than

wells drilled specifically for groundwater

The American Indian Religious Freedom Act

(AIRFA) directs federal agencies to consult

with Native Americans to protect their right

to exercise their traditional religions. In

1997, work continued on a summary report,

site records, and an artefact inventory of

materials in the DOE/NV Curatorial Facility

in preparation for an AIRFA consultation. 

Waste minimization and pollution prevention

activities conducted at the NTS and its

offsite facilities involve an intensive recycling

program and active product substitution

projects.

1.5 GROUNDWATER

PROTECTION

A LTHMP was instituted in 1972 to be

operated by the EPA under an Interagency

Agreement. In 1997 surface waters and

groundwaters were monitored on and around

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

two off-NTS locations in Nevada to detect

the presence of any radioactivity that may

be related to nuclear testing activities. No

radioactivity was detected above

background levels in the groundwater

sampling network surrounding the NTS. 

Low levels of tritium, in the form of HTO,

were detected in onsite wells, as has 

(Mississippi), GNOME (New Mexico), and

GASBUGGY that began to be detected in

monitoring, a program of well drilling for

groundwater characterization is underway. 

The design of the program is for installation

or recompletion of groundwater

characterization wells at strategic locations

on and near the NTS. Through 1997, 15 of

these wells have been drilled on the NTS

and 10 existing wells recompleted, while 16

wells have been drilled or completed in the

near offsite area, downgradient of the NTS.

Other activities in this program included

studies of groundwater transport of

contaminants (radionuclide migration

studies) and nonradiological monitoring for

water quality assessment and RCRA

requirements.

1.6 RADIOACTIVE AND

MIXED WASTE STORAGE

AND DISPOSAL

Two RWMSs are operated on the NTS, one

each in Areas 3 and 5. During 1997, the

RWMSs received LLW generated at the NTS

and other DOE facilities. Waste is disposed

of in shallow pits and trenches in RWMS-5

and in selected craters in RWMS-3. 

Transuranic (TRU) and TRU mixed wastes

are stored on a curbed asphalt pad on

pallets in overpacked 55-gal drums and

assorted steel boxes pending 
1-8

characterization and shipment to the Waste chemical analyses are done by offsite

Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico. The contract laboratories. These contract

RWMS-3 is used for disposal of bulk LLW laboratories are monitored for their

waste and LLW that is contained in participation and performance in various

packages that are larger than the specified performance evaluation programs.

standard size used at RWMS-5.

Environmental monitoring at both sites

included air sampling for radioactive

particulates and HTO in air and external

exposure measurements using TLDs. Water

sampling and vadose zone monitoring for

moisture and hazardous constituents are

conducted at the RWMS-5. Environmental

monitoring results for 1997 indicated that

measurable radioactivity from waste

disposal operations was detectable only in

the immediate vicinity of the facilities.

Because the NTS is not a RCRA-permitted

disposal facility, RCRA regulations require

the shipment of nonradioactive hazardous

waste to licensed disposal facilities offsite so

there is no disposal of hazardous waste on

the NTS.

Pit 3 in RWMS-5 has interim status for

mixed waste generated on the NTS.

LLW will only be accepted for disposal from

generators (onsite and offsite) that have

submitted a waste application that meets the 

requirements of the Waste Acceptance

Criteria document (NTS 1996) and that have

received DOE/NV approval of the waste

stream(s) for disposal at the NTS.

1.7 QUALITY ASSURANCE

The quality assurance (QA) program

covering NTS activities has three

components. There are QA programs for

nonradiological analyses, for onsite

radiological analyses, and for offsite

radiological analyses conducted by EPA’s

R&IE-LV.

ONSITE NONRADIOLOGICAL

QUALITY ASSURANCE

The onsite nonradiological QA program was

not operative during 1997, because stable

ONSITE RADIOLOGICAL QUALITY

ASSURANCE

The onsite radiological QA program includes

conformance to best laboratory practice and

implementation of the provisions of DOE

Order 5700.6C. The external QA

intercomparison program for radiological

data QA consists of participation in the DOE

Quality Assessment Program administered

by the DOE Environmental Measurements

Laboratory and the Performance Evaluation

Studies Program conducted by the EPA’s

National Exposure Research Laboratory.

OFFSITE RADIOLOGICAL

QUALITY ASSURANCE

The policy of the EPA requires participation

in a centrally managed QA program by all

EPA organizational units involved in

environmental data collection. The QA

program developed by the R&IE-LV for the

Offsite Radiological Safety Program meets

all requirements of EPA policy and also

includes applicable elements of the DOE QA

requirements and regulations. The program

defines data quality objectives (DQOs),

which are statements of the quality of data a

decision maker needs to ensure that a

decision based on those data is defensible. 

Achieved data quality may then be

evaluated against these DQOs.

1.8 ISSUES AND

ACCOMPLISHMENTS

PRINCIPAL COMPLIANCE PROBLEMS

FOR 1997

 On June 28, 1994, the state of Nevada

filed a Complaint for Declaratory

Judgement and Injunction in the U.S.
SUMMARY

1-9

District Court against DOE. Nevada  Continued use of a Just-in-Time supply

claimed that the DOE failed to comply

with NEPA requirements at the NTS and

must initiate a single, sitewide EIS for all

major federal actions at the NTS. The

state was seeking to halt shipments of

LLW from Fernald and all other

transportation, receipt, storage, and

disposal of all kinds of waste and was

also seeking to enjoin DOE from

pursuing any "Weapons Complex"

activities until publication of the EIS. In

January 1995, the U.S. District Court

dismissed the claims regarding Fernald

waste and the sitewide EIS. As of the

end of 1997, the remaining claim,

regarding disposal of LLW from offsite

facilities is still unsettled.

 A notification letter was received

regarding alleged potentially responsible

party status connected with a

commercial disposal site in California. 

The state notified DOE/NV that Omega

Chemical Co., a hazardous waste

treatment and storage facility,

possessed documents indicating that

DOE/NV had shipped hazardous waste

to the site between 1988 and 1992. The

company has declared bankruptcy and is

unable to clean up the site. Jurisdiction

of this site has been transferred to the

EPA, which so far, has made no contact.

ACCOMPLISHMENTS FOR 1997

 One EIS and three EAs were initiated

during 1997.

 Throughout 1997, DOE/NV continued to

maintain and update the “DOE/NV

Compliance Guide” (Volume III), a

handbook containing procedures,

formats, and guidelines for personnel

responsible for NEPA compliance

activities.

 The Nevada Operations 1997 Site

Pollution Prevention Program Plan, was

completed and submitted to DOE

Headquarters.

system allowed NTS contractors to

reduce product stock and control

potentially hazardous products.

 Progress continued on the NTS

groundwater characterization program. 

Fifteen special wells have been

completed and ten existing wells have

been recompleted to meet program

requirements.

 Environmental Restoration Program

activities were conducted at some 29

sites during 1997.

 DOE/NV has entered into several

consent orders and agreements. These

are (1) a Memorandum of Understanding

with the state covering radiological

releases, (2) an Agreement in Principle

with Nevada and Mississippi covering

oversight of environment safety and

health activities, (3) a Cooperative

Agreement with Alaska’s Fish and

Wildlife Service, (4) a Settlement

Agreement with the state to manage

mixed TRU waste, (5) a FFACO for

providing storage of low-level mixed

waste generated at the NTS and for

environmental restoration of

contaminated areas, and (6) a

Programmatic Agreement with the state

covering archaeological and historic

preservation activities.

 The Cotter concentrate, consisting of

1,148 barrels of material stored in Area 5

for many years, was shipped to an

offsite contractor for recycling of the

contained material.

 The last deficiency from a 1993

Environmental Compliance Audit was

closed this year. This audit, by the

Reynolds Electrical & Engineering Co.

(the previous M&O contractor), was

conducted at all facilities and work sites

on the NTS.

 The following offsite remedial actions

were completed in 1997:
1-10

1) Plutonium-contaminated soil was pumps were refurbished and

removed from the site of the 1963 installed in four existing wells, and

CLEAN SLATE I nuclear device one seismic check hole was plugged.

storage-transportation test on the

NAFRC, and the site was

revegetated. The soil was disposed

of in the LLW site in Area 3, NTS.

2) At the SHOAL site in Nevada, four

monitoring wells were installed to a

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

Research Institute DRI conducted

aquifer tests, and SAFER closure of

one mud pit was completed.

3) At the RULISON site in Colorado,

quarterly sampling for hazardous

waste at four wells, a two year 

program required by the state, was

completed. No migration of

hazardous wastes has been

detected.

4) At the FAULTLESS site in Nevada,

surface characterization of mudpits

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

performed.

5) At the SALMON site in Mississippi,

14 new shallow groundwater

monitoring wells were installed, 

1.9 CONCLUSION

The environmental monitoring results

presented in this report document that

operational activities on the NTS in 1997

were conducted so that no measurable

radiological exposure occurred to the offsite

public. Calculation of the highest individual

dose that could have been received by an

offsite resident (based on estimation of

onsite worst-case radioactive releases

obtained by measurement or engineering

calculation and assuming the person

remained outside all year) equated to 0.09

mrem to a person living in Springdale,

Nevada. This may be compared to that

individual's exposure to 144 mrem from

natural background radiation as measured

by the PIC instrument at Beatty, Nevada.

There were no major incidents of

nonradiological contaminant releases to the

environment in 1997. Many contaminated

sites are on schedule for remediation, and

intensive efforts to characterize and protect

the NTS environment, implemented in 1990,

were continued in 1997.
SUMMARY

1-11

Table 1.1 Radionuclide Emissions on the NTS - 1997(a)

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

Airborne Releases:

H 12.35 140 3 (c)

Pu 24065. 0.28 239+240 (c)

Containment Ponds:

H 12.35 20 3 (d)

Pu 87.743 1.5 x 10 238 -6

Pu 24065. 3.4 x 10 239+240 -5

Sr 29. 1.5 x 10 90 -5

Cs 30.17 1.7 x 10 137 -3

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

(b) Multiply by 37 to obtain GBq.

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

and calculated resuspension of surface deposits.

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

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

Collective EDE to

Maximum EDE at Maximum EDE to Population within 80 km

NTS Boundary an Individual of the NTS Sources (a) (b)

Dose 0.12 mrem 0.089 mrem 0.26 person-rem

(1.2 x 10 mSv) (8.9 x 10 mSv) (2.6 x 10 person Sv) -3 -4 -3

Location Site boundary 40 km Springdale, NV 58 km 31,000 people within

WNW of NTS CP-1 WNW of NTS CP-1 80 km of NTS Sources

NESHAP 10 mrem per yr 10 mrem per yr

 Standard (0.1 mSv per yr) (0.1 mSv per yr) -----

Percentage

 of NESHAP 1.2 0.89 -----

Background 144 mrem 144 mrem 3064 person-rem

(1.44 mSv) (1.44 mSv) (30.6 person Sv)

Percentage of

 Background 8.0 x 10 6.0 x 10 8 x 10 -2 -2 -3

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

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

from the NTS Control Point 1.

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

where the highest dose-rate occurs as calculated by CAP88-PC (Version 1.0) using NTS

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

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

each NTS source.

INTRODUCTION

2-1

2.0 INTRODUCTION

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

were conducted in 1997. Nonnuclear testing included controlled spills of

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

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

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

The NTS environment is characterized by desert valley and Great Basin

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

the southern Great Basin deserts. Restricted access and extended wind

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

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

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

features afford protection to the inhabitants of the adjacent areas from

potential exposure to radioactivity or other contaminants resulting from

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

0.5 persons/km versus approximately 29 persons/km in the 48 contiguous 2 2

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

livestock grazing with scattered mining and recreational areas.

In addition to the NTS operations, the U.S. Department of Energy, Nevada

Operations Office (DOE/NV) is accountable for six non-NTS Bechtel Nevada

(BN) facilities in five different cities. These BN operations support DOE/NV

programs with activities ranging from aerial measurements and aircraft

maintenance to electronics and heavy industrial fabrication. All of these

latter operations are in metropolitan areas.

2.1 NTS OPERATIONS

NTS DESCRIPTION

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

nuclear weapons testing. It is located

in Nye County, Nevada, with the southeast

corner lying about 105 km (65 mi) northwest

of the city of Las Vegas, Nevada, as shown

in Figure 2.1. The NTS encompasses about

3,500 km (1,350 mi ), an area larger than 2 2

the state of Rhode Island. The dimensions 14,200 km (5,470 mi ). Figure 2.2 shows

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

mi) in width (eastern to western border) and

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

(northern to southern border). The NTS is

surrounded on the east, north, and west

sides by public exclusion areas, called the

Nellis Air Force Range Complex (NAFRC)

and the Tonopah Test Range(TTR) (see

Figure 2.1). These two areas provide a

buffer zone varying from 24 to 104 km (15 to

65 mi) between the NTS and public lands. 

The combination of the NAFRC and the NTS

is one of the larger unpopulated land areas

in the United States, comprising some

2 2

the general layout of the NTS, including the 
#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

##

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

Ely

Elko

Jean

Gabbs

RENO

Wells

Sloan Arden

Beatty

McGill

Schurz

Fallon

Minden

Dayton

Carlin

Owyhee

SPARKS

Fernley

Pahrump

Tonopah

Johnnie

Laughlin

Mesquite

Caliente

Lovelock

Hawthorne

Yerington

Stateline

Wadsworth

LAS VEGAS

Winnemucca

Zephyr

Cove

Moapa

Valley

Gardnerville

Smith

Valley

CARSON

CITY

West Wendover

Fallon Station

Silver

Springs

Indian

Springs

Incline

Village

Battle Mountain

Amargosa

Valley

Scotty's

Junction

Mercury

,.-15

,.-80

,.-80 N E V A D A

CALIFORNIA ARIZONA

UTAH

OREGON IDAHO

Nellis

Air Force

Range

Nevada

Test

Site

CALIFORNIA

State Line

Community

Nevada Test Site (NTS)

NTS Operational Area

#

Nellis Air Force Range

1

25 0 25 50 75 100 125 150

Miles

50 0 50 100 150 200

Kilometers

Figure 2.1 NTS Location in Nevada

2-2
#

#

#

Beatty

Amargosa Valley

20 19

18

30

29

25

22

23

27

26

14

16

2

12

15

10

9

7

3

6 11

5

4

1

17

Mercury

Area 12

Camp

Area 5

RWMS

Control

Point - 1

HAZMAT

Spill Center

Area 3

RWMS

8

Nevada

California

Jackass Flats

Pahute Mesa

Rainier Mesa

Yucca Flat

Buckboard Mesa

State Line

Community

Nevada Test Site (NTS)

NTS Operational Area

Nuclear Test Area 

(2000 meter buffer around nuclear tests)

#

Principal Facility

Active Camp 1 5 0 5 10 15 20

Miles

10 0 10 20 30

Kilometers

2-3

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

INTRODUCTION
2-4

location of major facilities and area numbers northern end of Yucca Flat. There have

referred to in this report. The areas outlined been no U.S. nuclear explosive tests since

in green in Figure 2.2 indicate the principal September 1992.

geographical areas used recently for

underground nuclear testing. Mercury,

Nevada, at the southern end of he NTS, is

the main base camp for worker housing and

administrative operations for the NTS. 

MISSION AND NATURE OF

OPERATIONS

The NTS has been the primary location for

testing the nation's nuclear explosive

devices since January 1951. Tests

conducted through the 1950s were

predominantly atmospheric tests. These

tests involved a nuclear explosive device

detonated, while on the ground surface, on a

steel tower suspended from tethered

balloons or dropped from an aircraft. 

Several tests were categorized as "safety"

experiments, involving the destruction of a

nuclear device with nonnuclear explosives. 

Some surface safety tests resulted in

dispersion of plutonium in the test vicinity. 

One of these test areas lies just north of the

NTS boundary, and four others, involving

transport/storage safety, lie at the north end

of the NAFRC (see Figure 2.3). All nuclear

tests are listed in DOE/NV Report NVO-209

(DOE 1994a).

Underground nuclear tests were first

conducted in 1957. Testing was

discontinued during a moratorium that began

in November 1958, but was resumed in

September 1961 after tests by the Union of

Soviet Socialist Republics began. Since late

1962, nearly all tests were conducted in

sealed vertical shafts drilled into Yucca Flat

and Pahute Mesa or in horizontal tunnels

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

conducted over the period of 1962 through

1968 as part of the Plowshare Program, that disposal of wastes that had high specific

explored peaceful uses of nuclear

explosives. The first and largest test,

SEDAN (PHS 1963) was detonated at the

Other nuclear testing over the history of the

NTS has included the Bare Reactor

Experiment - Nevada series in the 1960s. 

These tests were performed with a 14-MeV

neutron generator mounted on a 465-m

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

neutron and gamma-ray interaction studies

on various materials. From 1959 through

1973, a series of open-air nuclear reactor,

nuclear engine, and nuclear furnace tests

was conducted in Area 25, and a series of

tests with a nuclear ramjet engine was

conducted in Area 26.

Limited nonnuclear testing has also occurred

at the NTS, including spills of hazardous

materials at the HSC in Area 5. The tests

conducted at the HSC, from the latter half of

the 1980s to date, involved controlled

spilling of liquid materials to study both spill

control and mitigation measures and the

resultant dispersion and transport of

airborne clouds. These tests are

cooperative studies involving private

industry, the U.S. Department of

Transportation, and the DOE. At the

Explosive Ordnance Disposal in Area 11,

explosive materials are destroyed, generally

by detonation, with the amounts destroyed

being limited in order to maintain downwind

air concentrations within state limits.

Waste storage and disposal facilities for

defense low-level radioactive waste (LLW)

and mixed waste are located in Areas 3 and

5. At the Area 5 Radioactive Waste

Management Site (RWMS-5), LLW from

DOE-affiliated onsite and offsite generators

is disposed of using standard shallow land

disposal techniques. A greater confinement

disposal technique was once used for

activity, high mobility, or were not

acceptable for normal disposal. This

method of disposal is no longer used.
#

#

#

#

#

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S#S

#S

#S

#S

#S#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S#S

#S

#S

#S

#S#S#S#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S

#S#S

#S

#S

#S #S

#S #S

Beatty

Indian Springs

Amargosa Valley

Scotty's

Junction

20 19

18

30

29

25

22

23

27

26

14

16

2

12

15

10

9

7

3

6 11

5

4

1

17

Mercury

8

State Line

Community

Nevada Test Site (NTS)

NTS Operational Area

#

Safety Test Site

#S Storage-Transportation Test Site

#S

1

Nevad

Ca

a

lifornia

Jackass Flats

Pahute Mesa

Rainier

Mesa

Yucca Flat

Buckboard

Mesa

10 0 10 20 30

Miles

10 0 10 20 30 40 50

Kilometers

2-5

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

INTRODUCTION
2-6

TRU wastes are retrievably stored in surface projects, radionuclide emissions, and state

containers at the RWMS-5 pending shipment air quality permits; (3) Clean Water Act

to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP) compliance involving state wastewater

facility in New Mexico. Nonradioactive permits; (4) Safe Drinking Water Act

hazardous wastes are accumulated at a compliance involving monitoring of drinking

special accumulation site before shipment to water distribution systems; (5) Resource

a licensed offsite disposal facility. Conservation and Recovery Act

At the Area 3 RWMS (RWMS-3), bulk LLW Comprehensive Environmental Response,

(such as debris from atmospheric nuclear Compensation, and Liability Act reporting;

test locations) and LLW in large non- and (7) Toxic Substances Control Act

standard packages are emplaced and buried management of polychlorinated biphenyls. 

in selected surface subsidence craters Also included were preactivity surveys to

(formed as a result of prior underground detect and document archaeological and

nuclear tests). historic sites on the NTS. Compliance with

1997 ACTIVITIES

NUCLEAR TESTS

No nuclear explosives tests were conducted

during 1997, due to the moratorium

announced in late 1992. However,

continuous environmental surveillance for

radioactivity and radiation was conducted

both onsite and offsite, because of the large

number of potential effluent sources that

exist on the NTS as a result of the prior

nuclear tests. The surveillance program and

results are described in Chapters 4, 5, 

and 6.

NTS-RELATED ACTIVITIES

LLW and mixed waste handling and

disposal, TRU waste storage and monitoring

prior to shipment to the WIPP in New

Mexico, and remedial actions related to sites

contaminated by tests of nuclear devices are

some of the activities that occurred in 1997.

Compliance with state and federal

environmental laws and regulations was

another principal activity during 1997. 

Specifically included were actions related to 

(1) National Environmental Policy Act

documentation preparation, such as

Environmental Impact Statements,

Environmental Assessments, etc.; (2) Clean

Air Act compliance for asbestos renovation

management of hazardous wastes; (6)

the Endangered Species Act involved

conducting pre-operation surveys to

document the status of state of Nevada and

federally listed endangered or threatened

plant and animal species. 

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SPILL CENTER

(HSC)

DOE/NV’s HSC is a research and

demonstration facility available on a user-fee

basis to private and public sector test and

training sponsors concerned with the safety

aspects of hazardous chemicals. The site is

located in Area 5 of the NTS and is

maintained by BN. The HSC is the basic

research tool for studying the dynamics of

accidental releases of various hazardous

materials. This is described more

completely in Chapter 6.

TOPOGRAPHY AND TERRAIN

The topography of the NTS is typical of the

Great Basin Section of the Basin and Range

physiographic province of Nevada, Arizona,

and Utah. North-south-trending mountain

ranges are separated by broad, flat-floored,

and gently-sloped valleys. The topography

is depicted in Figure 2.4. Elevations range

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

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

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

the northern and western boundaries. The

slopes on the upland surfaces are steep and 
Frenchman

Flat

Yucca

Flat

Mercury

Jackass Flats

Rainier

Mesa

Pahute Mesa

Buckboard

Mesa

Timber

Mountain

Yucca

Silen

C

t

anyon

Yucca

Lake

Gold Flat

Frenchman

Lake

H a l f p i

n t

Rock Valley

#

CP-1

Area 12

Camp

#

Mou

nta

ni

Specter

Range

Emigrant

Valley

R

a

n

g

e

A m a r g o s a V a l l e y

Spring Mountains

Spring Mountains

A m a r g o s a V a l l e y

R

a

n

g

e

Emigrant

Valley

Range

Specter

Mou

nta

ni

Rock Valley

H a l f p i

n t

Gold Flat

Silen

C

t

anyon

Yucca

Timber

Mountain

Buckboard

Mesa

Pahute Mesa

Rainier

Mesa

Jackass Flats

Mercury

Yucca

Flat

Frenchman

Flat

Fortymile

Canyon

Fortymile

Canyon

2-7

Figure 2.4 Topgraphy of the NTS

INTRODUCTION
2-8

dissected, whereas the slopes on the lower lavas of Tertiary age, which (in the valleys)

surfaces are gentle and alluviated with rock are covered by; (3) alluvium of late Tertiary

debris from the adjacent highlands. and Quaternary age. The sedimentary rocks

The principal effect upon the terrain from thick and are comprised mainly of carbonate

nuclear testing has been the creation of rocks (dolomite and limestone) with clastic

numerous dish-shaped surface subsidence rocks (shale and quartzite) near the top and

craters, particularly in Yucca Flat. Most at the bottom of the section. The volcanic

underground nuclear tests conducted in rocks in the valleys are down-dropped and

vertical shafts produced surface subsidence tilted along steeply dipping normal faults of

craters that occurred when the overburden late Tertiary age. The alluvium is rarely

above a nuclear cavity collapsed and formed faulted and is derived from erosion of

a rubble "chimney" to the surface. A few Tertiary and Paleozoic rocks. Compared to

craters have been formed as a result of tests the Paleozoic rocks, the Tertiary rocks are

conducted on or near the surface by shallow relatively undeformed, and dips are

depth-of-burial cratering experiments, or generally gentle. The volcanic rocks of the

following some tunnel events. Tertiary age are predominantly rhyolitic tuffs

There are no continuously flowing streams volcanic centers. The aggregate thickness

on the NTS. Surface drainages for Yucca of the volcanic rocks is many thousands of

and Frenchman Flats closed-basin systems feet, but in most places the actual thickness

are onto the dry lake beds (playas) in each of the section is far less because of erosion

valley. The remaining areas of the NTS or nondeposition. These materials erupted

drain via arroyos and dry stream beds that before the collapse of large volcanic centers

carry water only during unusually intense or known as calderas. Alluvial materials fill the

persistent storms. Rainfall or snow melt intermountain valleys and cover the adjacent

typically infiltrates quickly into the moisture- slopes. These sediments attain thicknesses

deficient soil or runs off in normally dry of 600 to 900 m (2,000 to 3,000 ft) in the

channels, where it evaporates and seeps central portions of the valleys. The alluvium

into permeable sands and gravels. During in Yucca Flat is vertically offset along the

extreme conditions, flash floods may occur. prominent north-south-trending Yucca fault.

GEOLOGY

The basic lithologic structure of the NTS is

depicted in Figure 2.5. Investigations of the

geology of the NTS, including detailed

studies of numerous drill holes and tunnels,

have been in progress by the U.S.

Geological Survey (USGS) and other

organizations since 1951. Because of the

large number of drilled holes, see Figure 2.6,

the NTS is probably one of the better

geologically characterized large areas within

the United States. 

In general, the geology consists of three

major rock units. These rock units are 

(1) complexly folded and faulted

sedimentary rocks of Paleozoic age overlain

at many places by; (2) volcanic tuffs and

of Paleozoic age are many thousands of feet

and lavas, which erupted from various

HYDROGEOLOGY

The deep aquifers, slow groundwater

movement, and exceedingly slow downward

movement of water in the overlying

unsaturated zone serve as significant

barriers to transport of radioactivity from

unsaturated zone sources via groundwater,

greatly limiting the potential for transport of 

radioactivity to offsite areas. Some historic

nuclear tests were conducted below the

groundwater table; others were at varying

depths above the groundwater table. 

Nuclear tests below the groundwater table

have a greater potential for offsite migration. 

However, the great distance to offsite water

supply wells or springs makes it unlikely that

contaminants will be transported in

significant quantities.

#

#

#

'

'

'

' ' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

''

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

'

' ' ' '

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

'

''

'

'

''

''

''

'

'

'

''

''

'

'' ''

'

' '

'

'

'

''

'

'

''

''

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

'

'

'

''

'

'

'

'''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'''

''

''

'

''

'

'

'

'

''

'

'

' '

''

'

'

''

' '

'

'

'

'

'

''

''

'

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

''

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' ''

'''

'

'

'

'

' '

''

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

''''

''

''

'''

''

'''

'

'' ''

'

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' ' '

' '

'

'

''

'

'

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '

'

''

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

'

'

'

''

'

'' '

' ' '

''

''

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

''

'

'

'

'

''

'

'

'

'''

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

'

''

'

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

''

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

' '

'

''

''

'

''

''

''

''

'

'

''

''

'

'

'

''

''

''

'

''

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

''

''

'

'

'

'

'

''

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' ' '

'

' '

'

''

'

'

''

'

''

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

' ''

''

'

''

''

' ''

''

''

''

''

'' '

'

'

'

'

''

'

''

''

''

''

''

''

''

''

''

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

'

'

'

''

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '

' ''

'

''

'

''

''

''

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

' '

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' ' '

'

''

'

'

'

''

'

''

'

'

'

' '

''

' '

'

'

'

'

' ''

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'''

'

'''

''''

'

'

' '

'

'

''

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '

' '

'

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

'

'

''

'

'

'

''

''

'

''

'

''

'

''''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' ' '' '

'

' '

'''

'

'

'

''

'

''

''

'

'

'

'

''

'

''

'

'

'

'

' '''

'

'

'

' '

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

''

'

''

''

'

'

''

'

'

'

'

''

'

'

''

'

' '

''

''

'

''

''

'

'

'

''

''

'

''

''

''

'

''

'

''

''

'

''

'

''

''

''

'

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

''

''

''

'

' '

''

''

''

''

'

'

'

''

'

'

'

'

''

''

''

''

'

'

''

'

'

'

''

'

''

'' '

'

''

'

' ''

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

'

' ''

' ''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

'

''

'

''

'

'

'

'

'

'

''

' ''

'

'

''''''''''''''

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' ''

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

' '

'

'

'

'

'

'

'

Beatty

Mercury

Amargosa Valley

20 19

18

30

29

25

22

23

27

26

14

16

2

12

15

10

9

7

3

6 11

5

4

1

17

State Line

# Community

Nevada Test Site (NTS)

NTS Operational Area

' Drill Hole Location

1

Nevad

Ca

a

lifornia

5 0 5 10 15 20

Miles

10 0 10 20 30

Kilometers

2-10

Figure 2.6 Drill Hole Locations on the NTS
INTRODUCTION

2-11

Depths to groundwater under the NTS vary directions can be radically different from the

from about 210 m (690 ft) beneath the regional trend. 

Frenchman Flat playa (Winograd and

Thordarson 1975) in the southern part of the Groundwater is the only local source of

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

part of Pahute Mesa. In the eastern

portions, the water table occurs generally in

the alluvium and volcanic rocks above the

regional carbonate aquifer, and, in the 

western portions, it occurs predominantly in

volcanic rocks. The flow in the shallower

parts of the groundwater is generally toward

the major valleys (Yucca and Frenchman),

where it may deflect downward to join the

regional drainage to the southwest in the

carbonate aquifer. 

The hydrogeology of the underground

nuclear testing areas on the NTS (Figure

2.7) has been summarized by the Desert

Research Institute, University of Nevada

System and the USGS (Russell 1990, and

Laczniak et al., 1996). Yucca Flat is

situated within the Ash Meadows

groundwater subbasin. Groundwater occurs

within the valley-fill, volcanic and carbonate

aquifers, and in the volcanic and clastic

aquitards. The depth to water generally

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

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

aquitard forms the principal Cenozoic

hydrostratigraphic unit beneath the water

table in the eastern two-thirds of the valley

and is unconfined over most of its extent. 

The valley-fill aquifer is saturated in the

central part of the valley and is unconfined

(Winograd and Thordarson 1975). 

Some underflow, past all of the subbasin

discharge areas, probably reaches springs

in Death Valley. Recharge for all of the

subbasins most likely occurs by precipitation

at higher elevations and infiltration along

ephemeral stream courses and in playas. 

Regional groundwater flow is from the

upland recharge areas in the north and east,

towards discharge areas at Ash Meadows

and Death Valley, southwest of the NTS. 

Due to the large topographic changes

across the area and the importance of

fractures to groundwater flow, local flow

drinking water in the NTS area. Drinking

and industrial water supply wells, for the

NTS, produce from the lower and upper

carbonate aquifers and the volcanic and the

valley-fill aquifers. Although a few springs

emerge from perched groundwater lenses at

the NTS, discharge rates are low, and spring

water is not currently used for DOE

activities. South of the NTS, private and

public supply wells are completed in a

valley-fill aquifer. 

Frenchman Flat is also within the Ash

Meadows subbasin. Regional groundwater

flow in this valley occurs within the major

Cenozoic and Paleozoic hydrostratigraphic

units at depths ranging from 210 to 350 m

(690 to 1,150 ft) below the ground surface. 

Perched water is found as shallow as 20 m

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

in the western part and older Tertiary

sedimentary rocks in the southwestern part

of the valley. In general, the depth to water

is at least 210 m (690 ft) beneath

Frenchman playa and increases to nearly

360 m (1,180 ft) near the margins of the

valley (Winograd and Thordarson 1975). 

The water table beneath Frenchman Flat is

considerably shallower than beneath Yucca

Flat. Consequently, the areal extent of

saturation in the valley-fill and volcanic

aquifers is correspondingly greater.

Winograd and Thordarson (1975)

hypothesized that groundwater within the

Cenozoic units of Yucca and Frenchman

Flats probably cannot leave these basins

without passing through the underlying and

surrounding tuff confining unit. In addition,

lateral gradients within the saturated

volcanic units exist and may indicate

groundwater flow toward the central areas of

Yucca and Frenchman Flats prior to vertical

drainage.

The only hydrostratigraphic units

encountered at Pahute Mesa are the

volcanic aquifers and aquitards. Pahute 
#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

Beatty

Pahrump

Tonopah

Johnnie

Mercury

Indian Springs

Amargosa Valley

Scotty's

Junction

Furnace

Creek

Ranch

Death

Valley

Junction

20 19

18

30

29

25

22

23

27

26

14

16

17

12

15

10

9

7

3

6 11

5

Alkali

Flat

Discharge

Area

Oasis

Valley

Discharge

Area

Amargosa

Flat Ash

Meadows

Discharge

Area

Furnace

Creek

Ranch

Discharge

Area

A s h M e a d o w s S u b b a s i n

Alkali Flat Furnace Creek Ranch

Oasis Subbasin

Valley Subbasin

NEVADA TEST SITE

Hydrologic Basin

State Line

# Community

Nevada Test Site (NTS)

NTS Operational Area

Hydrologic Subbasin

Discharge Area

1

Nevada

California

10 0 10 20 30 40

Miles

10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Kilometers

Figure 2.7 Groundwater Hydrologic Units of the NTS and Vicinity

2-12
INTRODUCTION

2-13

Mesa is thought to be a part of both the precipitation. For example, on the NTS the

Oasis Valley and Alkali Flat/Furnace Creek

Ranch subbasins (Fig. 2.7). The location of

the inter-basin boundary is uncertain. 

Groundwater is thought to move towards the

south and southwest, through Oasis Valley,

Crater Flat, and western Jackass Flats. 

Points of discharge are thought to include

the springs in Oasis Valley, Alkali Flat, and

Furnace Creek. The amount of recharge 

to Pahute Mesa and the amount of

underflow, which moves to the various

points of discharge, are not accurately

known. Vertical gradients within Pahute

Mesa suggest that flow may be downward in

the eastern portion of the mesa but upward

in the western part (Blankennagel and Weir

1973).

The hydrostratigraphic units beneath Rainier

Mesa consist of the welded and bedded tuff

aquifer, tuff confining unit, the lower

carbonate aquifer, and the lower clastic 

aquitard. The volcanic aquifer and aquitards

support a semiperched groundwater lens. 

Nuclear testing at Rainier Mesa was

conducted within the tuff aquitard. Work by

Thordarson (1965) indicates that the

perched groundwater is moving downward

into the underlying regional aquifer.

Depending on the location of the subbasin

boundary, Rainier Mesa groundwater may

be part of either the Ash Meadows or the

Alkali Flat/Furnace Creek Ranch subbasin. 

The regional flow from the mesa may be

directed either towards Yucca Flat or,

because of the intervening upper clastic

aquitard, towards the Alkali Flat discharge

area in the south. The nature of the regional

flow system beneath Rainier Mesa requires

further investigation.

CLIMATE AND METEOROLOGY

Precipitation levels on the NTS are low,

runoff is intermittent, and the majority of the

active testing areas onsite drain into closed

basins on the NTS. Topography contributes

to temporal and spatial variability of for the NTS are shown in Figure 2.8.

mesas receive an average annual

precipitation of 23 cm (9 in), which includes

wintertime snow accumulations. The lower

elevations receive approximately 15 cm 

(6 in) of precipitation annually, with

occasional snow accumulations lasting only

a matter of days (Quiring 1968).

Elevation also influences temperatures on

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

ft) above MSL in Area 20 on Pahute Mesa,

the average daily maximum temperatures

range from 40 to 80 F, and minimum O

temperatures from 21 to 57 F (4 to 27 C O O

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

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

average daily maximum temperatures range

from 51 to 96 F and the minimum O

temperatures from 28 to 62 F (11 to 36 C O O

and -2 to 17 C, respectively). O

Wind direction and speed are important

aspects of the environment at the NTS. The

movements of large-scale pressure systems

control the seasonal changes in the wind

direction frequencies. Predominating winds

are southerly from the south during summer

and northerly during winter. The general

downward slope in the terrain from north to

south results in an intermediate scenario

that is reflected in the characteristic diurnal

wind reversal from southerly winds during

the day to northerly winds at night. This

north to south reversal is strongest in the

summer and, on occasion, becomes intense

enough to override the wind regime

associated with large-scale pressure

systems. This scenario is very sensitive to

the orientation of the mountain slopes and

valleys. At higher elevations such as Area

20, the average annual wind speed is 17

km/h (10 mi/h) but is only 11 km/h (7 mi/h) in

the valleys, such as Yucca Flat. The

prevailing wind direction during winter

months is from the north-northeast and

north-northwest, but it reverses in the

summer months. The 1992 10-m wind roses

INTRODUCTION

2-15

FLORA AND FAUNA

The vegetation on most of the NTS includes

various associations of desert shrubs typical

of the Mojave or Great Basin Deserts or the

zone of transition between these two. 

Extensive floral collection has yielded 711

taxa of vascular plants within or near the

boundaries of the NTS (O'Farrell and Emery

1976). Associations of creosote bush,

Larrea tridentata, which are characteristic of

the Mojave Desert, dominate the vegetation

mosaic on the bajadas of the southern NTS. 

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

5,000 ft) in elevation in Yucca Flat,

transitional associations are dominated by

Grayia spinosa-Lycium andersonii

(hopsage/desert thorn) associations, while

the upper alluvial fans support Coleogyne

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

vegetation mosaic is dominated by

sagebrush associations of Artemisia

tridentata and Artemisia arbuscula

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

piñon pine and juniper mix with the

sagebrush associations, where there is

suitable moisture for these trees. No plant

species located on the NTS is currently on

the federal endangered species list;

however, the state of Nevada has placed

Astragalus beatleyae on its critically

endangered species list.

Most mammals on the NTS are small and natural springs were able to sustain

secretive (often nocturnal in habitat), hence livestock, ranchers, and miners. Stone

not often seen by casual observers. cabins, corrals, and fencing stand today as

Rodents are the most important group of testaments to these early settlers. The

mammals on the NTS, based on distribution mining activities included two large mines:

and relative abundance. Larger mammals one at Wahmonie, the other at Climax Mine. 

include feral horses, mule deer, mountain Prospector claim markers are found in these

lions, bobcats, coyote, kit foxes, and rabbits, and other parts of the NTS. Native

among others. Among other taxa, the Americans coexisted with the settlers and

reptiles include the desert tortoise, over miners, utilizing the natural resources of the 

12 lizards, and 17 snakes; 4 of which are region and, in some cases, working for the

venomous. Bird species are mostly new arrivals. They also maintained a

migrants or seasonal residents. Most connection with the land, especially areas

nonrodent mammals have been placed in important to them for religious and historical

the "protected" classification by the state of reasons. These locations, referred to as

Nevada. The Mojave population of the traditional cultural properties, continue to be

desert tortoise, Gopherus agassizii, is listed significant to the Paiute and Shoshone

as threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Indians.

Service. The habitat of the desert tortoises

on the NTS is found in the southern third of

the NTS outside the recent areas of nuclear

explosive test activities.

CULTURAL RESOURCES

Human habitation of the NTS area began at

least as early as 10,000 years ago. Various

indigenous cultures occupied the region in

prehistoric times. The survey of less than 

5 percent of the NTS area has located more

than 2,000 archaeological sites, which

contain the only information available

concerning the prehistoric inhabitants. The

site types identified include rock quarries,

tool-manufacturing areas, plant-processing

locations, hunting locales, rock art,

temporary camps, and permanent villages. 

The prehistoric people's lifestyle was

sustained by a hunting and gathering

economy, which utilized all parts of the NTS. 

While major springs provided perennial

water, the prehistoric people developed

strategies to take advantage of intermittent

fresh water sources in this arid region. In

the nineteenth century, at the time of initial

contact, the area was occupied by Paiute

and Shoshone Indians. Prior to 1940, the

historic occupation consisted of ranchers,

miners, and Native Americans. Several
2-16

Between 1940 and 1950, the area now many as 5,000 tourists and campers on any

known as the NTS was under the jurisdiction

of NAFB and was part of the Nellis Bombing

and Gunnery Range. Very few locations

associated with this time period have been

identified. In 1950, the NTS was selected as

the continental nuclear testing ground. 

Surveys have located and recorded many

structures associated with nuclear testing. 

These structures are significant because of

the importance of the nuclear testing

program in the history of the United States,

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

DEMOGRAPHY

The population of the area surrounding the

NTS has been estimated based on the 1990

Bureau of Census estimates (Department of

Commerce 1990). Excluding Clark County,

the major population center (over 1,000,000

in 1996), the population density within a 150-

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

persons/km . In comparison, the 48 2

adjoining states (1990 census) had a

population density near 29 persons/km . 2

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

NTS Control Point (CP) is predominantly

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

historically has been the point from which

distances from the NTS were determined. 

Several small communities are located in the

area, the largest being in the Pahrump

Valley. This growing rural community, with

an estimated population of nearly 20,000, is

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

Amargosa Farm area, which has a

population of about 1,200, is approximately

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

largest town in the near offsite area is

Beatty, which has a population of about

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

the west of CP-1. 

The Mojave Desert of California, which

includes Death Valley National Monument,

lies along the southwestern border of

Nevada. The National Park Service

estimated that the population within the

boundaries ranges from 200 permanent

residents during the summer months to as 

particular day during holiday periods in the

winter months. As many as 30,000 are in

the area during "Death Valley Days" in

November. The largest nearby population in

this desert is in the Ridgecrest-China Lake

area about 190 km (118 mi) southwest of the

NTS, containing about 28,000 people. The

next largest is in the Barstow area located

265 km (165 mi) south-southwest of the NTS

with a population of 24,000. The Owens

Valley, where many small towns are located,

lies west of Death Valley. The largest town

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

west-northwest of the NTS, with a population

of 3,500.

The extreme southwestern region of Utah is

more developed than the adjacent portion of

Nevada. The largest community is St.

George, located 220 km (137 mi) east of the

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

largest town, Cedar City, with a population of

14,000, is located 280 km (174 mi) eastnortheast of the NTS.

The extreme northwestern region of Arizona

is mostly rangeland, except for that portion

in the Lake Mead recreation area. In

addition, several small communities lie along

the Colorado River. The largest towns in the

area are Bullhead City, 165 km (103 mi)

south-southeast of the NTS, with a

population estimate of 22,000, and Kingman,

located 280 km (174 mi) southeast of the

NTS, with a population of about 13,000.

SURROUNDING LAND USE

Figure 2.9 is a map of the offsite area

showing a wide variety of land uses such as

farming, mining, grazing, camping, fishing, 

and hunting within a 300-km (180-mi) radius

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

range from 85 m (280 ft) below MSL in

Death Valley to 4,400 m (14,500 ft) above

MSL in the Sierras, including parts of the

Owens and San Joaquin agricultural valleys. 

The areas south of the NTS are more

uniform, since the Mojave Desert ecosystem

(mid-latitude desert) comprises most of this

portion of Nevada, California, and Arizona. 

2-18

The areas east of the NTS are primarily mid- of LLNL programs. Although most of the

latitude steppe with some of the older river work has been in support of NTS

valleys, such as the Virgin River and Moapa underground weapons testing, AVO also

Valleys, supporting irrigation for small-scale supports LLNL with optical alignment

but intensive farming of a variety of crops. systems and a variety of mechanical and

Grazing is also common in this area, electrical engineering activities associated

particularly towards the northeast. The area with energy research and development

north of the NTS is also mid-latitude steppe programs. Areas of environmental interest

where the major agricultural activity is include two small chemical cleaning

grazing of cattle and sheep, and a minor operations.

agricultural activity is the growing of alfalfa

hay. Many of the residents cultivate home

gardens.

Recreational areas lie in all directions

around the NTS and are used for such

activities as hunting, fishing, and camping. 

In general, the camping and fishing sites to

the north of the NTS are not utilized in the

winter months. Camping and fishing

locations to the south are utilized throughout

the year. The peak hunting season is from

September through January.

2.2 NON-NTS FACILITIES

Under a contract with DOE/NV, BN has

several offsite operations that support

activities at the NTS. Each of these facilities

is located in a metropolitan area. 

City, county, and state regulations govern

emissions, waste disposal, and sewage. No

independent BN systems exist for sewage

disposal or for supplying drinking water, and

hazardous waste is moved off the facility

sites for disposal. Radiation sources are

sealed, and no radiological emissions above

a small fraction of federal guidelines are

expected during normal facility operations.

AMADOR VALLEY OPERATIONS

(AVO)

The AVO facility in Pleasanton, California,

occupies a 5,520-m (59,445-ft ) two-story 2 2

combination office/laboratory building. AVO

is located near the Lawrence Livermore

National Laboratory (LLNL) in Livermore, 

California, to simplify logistics and

communications associated with BN support

SPECIAL TECHNOLOGIES

LABORATORY (STL)

STL is located in Santa Barbara, California. 

The current facilities occupy approximately

4,608 m (49,600 ft ) and consist of 2 2

combination office/lab areas used primarily

for engineering and electronic research. 

The research is conducted to develop a

suite of sensor systems for testing and field

deployment in support of DOE Headquarters

and DOE/NV. Areas of environmental

interest include a small printed circuit board

operation, minor solvent cleaning

operations, neutron activation, and pulsed Xray system experiments.

LAS VEGAS AREA OPERATIONS

(LVAO)

The LVAO includes the North Las Vegas

Facility (NLVF) and the Remote Sensing

Laboratory (RSL) on the NAFB in North Las

Vegas, Nevada. These facilities provide

technical support for the DOE/NV activities.

The NLVF includes multiple structures

totaling about 53,820 m (585,000 ft ). At 2 2

the facility there are numerous areas of 

environmental interest, including metal

finishing operations, a radiation source

range, an X-ray laboratory, solvent and

chemical cleaning operations, small amounts

of pesticide and herbicide application, photo

laboratories, and hazardous waste

generation and accumulation.

The RSL is an 11,000-m (118,000-ft ) 2 2

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

within the confines of the NAFB. The facility
INTRODUCTION

2-19

includes space for aircraft maintenance and space; a 1,110-m (12,000-ft ) hangar,

operations, mechanical and electronics

assembly, computer operations, photo

processing, a light laboratory, warehousing,

and emergency operations. Areas of

environmental interest are photo processing,

aircraft maintenance, and operations.

LOS ALAMOS OPERATIONS (LAO)

The LAO resides in an engineering and

laboratory office complex of approximately

4,645 m (50,000 ft ). It is located near the 2 2

Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL)

facility to provide local support for LANL’s

programs. The work performed includes

direct support to the LANL Science-Based

Stockpile Stewardship program, the DOE

Research and Development Program, and

miscellaneous DOE cash-order work. LAO's

primary activities are twofold: the design,

fabrication, and fielding of data acquisition

systems used in underground and above

ground testing diagnostics; and the analysis

of data from prior experiments. Areas of

environmental interest include small solvent

cleaning, metal machining operations, and a

small photo laboratory.

WASHINGTON AERIAL

MEASUREMENTS OPERATIONS

(WAMO)

The WAMO, located at Andrews Air Force

Base, consists of five buildings: a 186-m2

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

2 2

combination electronics laboratory, aircraft

maintenance, and office complex; a 37-m2

(400-ft ) equipment service and storage 2

building; and 186 m (2,000 ft ) in each of 2 2

two other joint tenant buildings. WAMO

provide an effective east coast emergency

response capability and an eastern aerial

survey capacity to the DOE/NV. Areas of

environmental interest include minor solvent

cleaning operations, used fuels, and oils.

2.3 NON-NTS

UNDERGROUND TEST SITES

Nuclear explosive tests have been

conducted underground for a variety of

purposes at eight different non-NTS sites in

the U.S. The tests and their locations

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

1970, 1972, 1973a, 1973b; DOE 1978,

1984, 1986; PHS 1966). Activities at these

locations generally are limited to annual

sampling of surface and groundwater at over

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

sites where tests were conducted. However,

a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study

has begun at the Mississippi test location,

which will include significant new

characterization activities. Sampling near

three test sites on Amchitka Island, Alaska,

occurs only periodically. Sampling results

for these sites appear in Chapter 5 of this

report.
2-20

Table 2.1 Non-NTS Underground Nuclear Test Sites

Test Date of

Name Location Purpose Test

GNOME Carlsbad, New Mexico Multi-purpose in salt 12/10/61

SHOAL Fallon, Nevada Test detection research 10/26/63

SALMON (DRIBBLE) Hattiesburg, Mississippi Test detection research 10/22/64

LONG SHOT Amchitka Island, Alaska Test detection research 10/29/65

STERLING (DRIBBLE) Hattiesburg, Mississippi Test detection research 12/03/66

GASBUGGY Farmington, New Mexico Gas stimulation experiment 12/10/67

FAULTLESS Central Nevada, Nevada Seismic calibration 01/19/68

RULISON Grand Valley, Colorado Gas stimulation experiment 09/10/69

MILROW Amchitka Island, Alaska Seismic calibration 10/02/69

CANNIKIN Amchitka Island, Alaska Spartan missile warhead test 11/06/71

RIO BLANCO Rifle, Colorado Gas stimulation experiment 05/17/73
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY

3-1

3.0 COMPLIANCE SUMMARY

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

calendar year (CY) 1997 involved the permitting and monitoring

requirements of numerous state of Nevada and federal regulations. Primary

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

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

asbestos renovation projects, radionuclide emissions, and state air quality

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

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

monitoring of drinking water distribution systems; (5) Resource

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

(6) Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability

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

management of polychlorinated biphenyls; (8) Endangered Species Act

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

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

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

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

American Resources. There were no activities requiring compliance with

Executive Orders on Flood Plain Management or Protection of Wetlands.

Throughout 1997, the NTS was subject to several formal compliance

agreements with regulatory agencies, including a Memorandum of

Understanding with Nevada covering releases of radioactivity; a Federal

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

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

health activities; and a Settlement Agreement to manage mixed transuranic

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

continued in 1997.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(5) hazardous substance reporting. Pollution prevention and waste

minimization efforts continued at all locations.
3-2

3.1 COMPLIANCE STATUS

NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL

POLICY ACT

ection 102 of the 1969 NEPA requires Sall federal agencies to consider

environmental effects, values, and

reasonable alternatives before making a

decision to implement any major federal

action that may have a significant impact on

the human environment.

Since November 1994, DOE/NV has had full

delegation of authority from DOE Station in Fallon, Nevada. Still pending are

Headquarters (DOE/HQ) for Environmental

Assessments (EAs), issuing Findings of No

Significant Impact and associated floodplain

and wetland action documentation related to

DOE/NV proposed actions. 

DOE uses three levels of documentation to

demonstrate compliance with NEPA: (1) an

Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is a

full disclosure of the potential environmental

effects of proposed actions and the

reasonable alternatives to those actions; 

(2) an EA is a concise discussion of a

proposed action and alternatives and the

potential environmental effects to determine

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

Exclusion (CX) is used for classes of

activities, which have been found to have no

adverse environmental impacts, based on

similar, previous activities. During 1997,

DOE/NV activities involved all three of these

categories. 

During fiscal year (FY) 1996 and FY97, a

draft NEPA Environmental Evaluation

Checklist was circulated by DOE/NV

Environmental Protection Division (EPD). In

October 1997, the Checklist was formally

issued by EPD. Completion of the Checklist

is required under the DOE/NV Work

Acceptance Process Procedural Instructions

(DOE 1997d) for all proposed projects or

activities. The Checklist is reviewed by the

DOE/NV NEPA Compliance Officer to

determine whether the project or activity is 

included in the NTS/EIS and record of

decision (ROD) or other previously

completed NEPA analysis. During FY97

Checklists were completed for 44 proposed

projects or activities. Nineteen of these 44

were exempted from further NEPA analysis

by being a CX; twenty were exempted due

to previous analysis in the NTS/EIS and

ROD; one is still pending; three resulted in

further analysis required in EAs (one of

which was later withdrawn); and one

required further analysis in an EIS. 

One EIS was initiated during 1997 for the

withdrawal of public lands for range safety

and training purposes at the Naval Air

the following documents:

 Nellis Air Force Range Complex EIS.

 Los Alamos National Laboratory

Sitewide EIS.

 Land Surface Research and

Development EA.

 Kistler Aerospace Corp. in Areas 18 and

19 EA.

Work was conducted on two EAs, including: 

 Defense Special Weapons Agency,

Johnston Atoll Pilot-Scale Technology

Demonstrations and the Transport and

Disposal of Contaminated Rubble and

Soil.

 Southern California/Southern Nevada

Intermodal Transportation of Low Level

Radioactive Waste to the NTS.

Throughout CY97, the staff of the EPD

continued to maintain and update the NEPA

Compliance Guide (Volume III), a quick

reference handbook containing procedures,

formats, and guidelines for those personnel

responsible for NEPA compliance activities. 

The staff of the EPD prepared Volume III to

supplement the NEPA Compliance Guides,

Volumes I and II, prepared and distributed

by the Office of NEPA Policy and

Assistance, DOE/HQ.
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY

3-3

CLEAN AIR ACT

The CAA and the state of Nevada air quality

control compliance activities were limited to

asbestos abatement, radionuclide

monitoring, and reporting under the National

Emission Standards for Hazardous Air

Pollutants (NESHAP), and air quality permit

compliance requirements. There were no

criteria pollutant or prevention of significant

deterioration monitoring requirements for

NTS operations.

NTS NESHAP ASBESTOS COMPLIANCE

The state of Nevada Division of

Occupational Safety and Health regulations

(Nevada Administrative Code [NAC]

618.760-805) require that all asbestos

abatement projects in Nevada, involving

friable asbestos in quantities greater than or

equal to three linear feet or three square

feet, submit a Notification Form. 

Notifications are also required to be made to

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

(EPA) Region 9 for projects, which disturb

greater than 260 linear ft or 160 ft of 2

asbestos-containing material, in accordance

with Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations

(CFR) 61.145-146 (CFR 1989).

During 1997, there were no projects that

required state of Nevada notifications be

made. The annual estimate for nonscheduled asbestos demolition/renovation

for FY98 was sent to EPA Region 9 in

December 1997. 

RADIOACTIVE EMISSIONS ON THE NTS

NTS operations were conducted in

compliance with the NESHAP radioactive air

emission standards of Subpart H, of Title 40

CFR 61. In compliance with those

requirements, a report on airborne

radioactive effluents is provided to DOE/HQ

for submission to EPA. 

There are two locations on the NTS where

airborne radioactive effluents may be 

emitted from permanent stacks: (1) the

tunnels in Rainier Mesa, and (2) the 

analytical laboratory hoods in the community

of Mercury. Based on the amount of

radioactivity handled, the exhaust from the

analytical laboratories is considered

negligible compared to other sources on the

NTS and the tunnels have been sealed

(although water still seeps from one). 

Present sources are gases from the ground

caused by barometric pressure variations,

evaporation of tritiated water (HTO) from

containment ponds, diffusion of HTO vapor

from the Area 5 Radioactive Waste

Management Site (RWMS-5), and

resuspension of plutonium contaminated soil

from nuclear safety test and atmospheric

test locations. 

In the 1997 NTS NESHAP report for

airborne radioactive effluents (Black 1998),

airborne emission of HTO vapor from the

containment ponds was conservatively

reported as if all the liquid discharge into the

ponds had evaporated and become

airborne. For HTO vapor diffusing from the

RWMS-5, plutonium particulate

resuspension from Areas 3 and 9, and

various other areas on and near the NTS,

the airborne effluents were conservatively

estimated as follows. The monitoring station

with the maximum annual average

concentration for the radionuclide in

question was selected from among the

surrounding sampling stations. An effective

dose equivalent (EDE) was then calculated

for that concentration. EPA's Clean Air

Package 1988 (CAP88-PC) software

program was used to determine what total

activity would have to have been emitted

from the geometric center of the region in

question in order to produce that EDE. 

Resuspended radioactivity was estimated by

employing a published formula and

confirming with offsite data.

Using these conservative estimates of air

emissions in 1997 as input to the CAP88-PC

computer model, the EDE would have been

only 0.09 mrem, much less than the 10-

mrem limit that is specified in Title 40 

CFR 61.
3-4

NTS AIR QUALITY PERMIT COMPLIANCE NON-NTS OPERATIONS

Compliance with air quality permits is

accomplished through permit reporting and

renewals and ongoing verification of

operational compliance with permit specified

limitations. A summary of NTS permits is in

Table 3.1. (See Chapter 4 for a listing of

active permits.) Common air pollution

sources at the NTS include aggregate

production, stemming activities, surface

disturbances, fugitive dust from unpaved

roads, fuel burning equipment, open burning,

and fuel storage facilities. The 1996 Air

Quality Permit Data Report was sent to the

state of Nevada on February 21, 1997. This

report includes aggregate production,

operating hours of permitted equipment, and

a report of all surface disturbances of five

acres or greater. In order to provide

consistency in responses, the state provided

forms, which required calculation of actual

emissions. During 1996, approximately six

tons of pollutants were emitted from

operations at the NTS.

NTS air quality permits limit particulate

emissions to 20 percent opacity. 

Certification of personnel to perform valid

visible emission opacity evaluations is

required by the state, with recertification

required every six months. During 1997,

one Bechtel Nevada (BN) Environmental

Compliance Department employee was

recertified. In 1997, several visible emission

evaluations of permitted air quality point

sources were conducted. When visual

evaluations determine that an emission

exceeds the opacity requirement, corrective

action is initiated. No exceedances of the

opacity limit were noted in 1997.

During 1997, state of Nevada personnel

conducted two inspections of NTS

equipment regulated by air quality operating

permits. In January 1997, the state

conducted an inspection to verify process

flow diagrams for all permitted facilities prior

to issuance of the NTS Class II Air Quality

Operating Permit. In June 1997, a state

inspector returned to conduct an annual

inspection of permitted facilities. There were

no findings as a result of that inspection.

Under normal conditions, the six non-NTS

facilities operated by the DOE/NV do not

produce radioactive effluents. The six are

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

the Remote Sensing Laboratory (RSL) in

North Las Vegas; (3) the Special

Technologies Laboratory (STL) in Santa

Barbara, California; (4) the Amador Valley

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

the Los Alamos Operation (LAO) in Los

Alamos, New Mexico; and (6) the

Washington Aerial Measurements Operation

(WAMO) in Washington, DC.

CLEAN WATER ACT

The Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as

amended by the CWA, establishes ambient

water quality standards and effluent

discharge limitations, which are generally

applicable to facilities, which discharge any

materials into the waters of the United

States. Discharges from DOE/NV facilities

are primarily regulated under the laws and

regulations of the facility host states. 

Monitoring and reporting requirements are

typically included under state or local permit

requirements. A summary of NTS permits is

displayed in Table 3.1, and a complete

listing of applicable permits appears in

Chapter 5. There are no National Pollutant

Discharge Elimination System permits for

the NTS, as there are no wastewater

discharges to onsite or offsite surface

waters. 

NTS OPERATIONS

Discharges of wastewater are regulated by

the state of Nevada under the Nevada Water

Pollution Control Act (NRS 445A .131-354). 

The state of Nevada also regulates the

design, construction, and operation of

wastewater collection systems and

treatment works. Wastewater monitoring at

the NTS was limited to sampling wastewater

influents to sewage lagoons and

containment ponds. 
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY

3-5

State general permit GNEV93001, which

regulates the ten usable sewage treatment

facilities on the NTS, was issued by the

Nevada Environmental Protection Division

(NEPD) and became effective on February

1, 1994. Hydrogeological modeling utilizing

site-specific soil characteristics, vadose

zone monitoring, groundwater monitoring, or

lining an adequate portion of the

impoundments at a specific facility were all

accepted by NEPD as methods to comply

with the permit requirements for protection of

the groundwater.

The following actions were taken in 1997 to

remain in compliance with sewage lagoon

discharge permit requirements:

 A pump, cable, control box, level

monitoring piping, and discharge piping

were installed in the Area 23 Infiltration

Basin Groundwater Monitoring Well in

August.

 NEPD concurred with studies conducted

at the Area 6 LANL Camp system and

the Area 6 Yucca Lake system, which

demonstrated that liners installed in

these systems met the groundwater

protection standards required by the

operating permit.

By January 31,1999, one method of

groundwater protection must be installed or

demonstrated at three remaining systems to

maintain permit compliance and renewal. 

The three systems are the Area 6 Device

Assembly Facility (DAF), Area 25 Central

Support, and the Area 25 Reactor Control

Point.

NON-NTS OPERATIONS

Four permits for wastewater discharges

were held by non-NTS facilities. One permit

is required for the NLVF, one for the RSL,

and the STL holds wastewater permits for

the Botello Road and Ekwill Street locations. 

No wastewater permits were required for the

AVO, LAO, or WAMO facilities in 1997.

SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT

NTS OPERATIONS 

The SDWA primarily addresses quality of

potable water supplies through sampling and

monitoring requirements for drinking water

systems. The state of Nevada has enacted

and enforces SDWA regulations including

system operations such as operation and

maintenance, water haulage, operator

certification, permitting, and sampling

requirements. A list of state potable water

permits is shown in Chapter 5.

As required under state health regulations

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

distribution systems at the NTS are

monitored for residual chlorine content and

coliform bacteria. NTS potable water

distribution systems are also monitored for

volatile organic compounds, inorganic

compounds, synthetic organic compounds,

and other water quality parameters. All

monitoring results for 1997 were within

regulatory limits, and are discussed in

Chapter 5.

NTS WATER HAULAGE 

To accommodate the diverse and often

transient field work locations at the NTS, a

water haulage program is used. To ensure

potability of hauled water, water is obtained

from potable water fill stands and chlorinated

to obtain a residual of at least one part per

million (ppm) in the hauling tank. Water in

the hauling tank is sampled periodically for

coliform bacteria. The state of Nevada

decided in 1994 that water hauling trucks

should be permitted as water distribution

systems. Permits were obtained again in

1997 for the three trucks used in the

program. There were no positive coliform

bacteria sample results in 1997.

NON-NTS OPERATIONS

All non-NTS operations are on municipal

water systems and have no compliance

activities under the SDWA.
3-6

RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND

RECOVERY ACT

The RCRA of 1976 and Hazardous and Solid

Waste Amendments of 1984 (Title 40 CFR

260-281) constitute the statutory basis for

the regulation of hazardous waste and

underground storage tanks (USTs).

Under Section 3006 of RCRA, the EPA may

authorize states to administer and enforce

hazardous waste regulations. Nevada has

received such authorization and acts as the

primary regulator for many DOE/NV

facilities. The Federal Facilities Compliance

Act (FFCA) of 1992 extends the full range of

enforcement authorities in federal, state, and

local laws for management of hazardous

wastes to federal facilities, including the

NTS. 

NTS RCRA COMPLIANCE

In 1995, DOE/NV received a RCRA

Hazardous Waste Operating Permit for the

Area 5 Hazardous Waste Storage Unit

(HWSU) and the Area 11 Explosive

Ordnance Disposal (EOD) Unit. In addition,

the Part B Permit application was revised to

include the Mixed Waste Storage Pad (now

under interim status) and updated

information concerning general facility

conditions. During 1996, the permit was

modified to include the change in contractor

and operational changes concerning the

EOD and HWSU. The permit application

modification for the Pit 3 Mixed Waste

Disposal Unit was completed and submitted

to the state in 1997. Several other minor

modifications were made to the permit

during 1997, mostly relating to updated

personnel and training records. 

No biennial report for hazardous waste

generation was required to be submitted in

1997.

On January 5, 1994, the state of Nevada

and DOE/NV entered into a Mutual Consent

Agreement, which allowed low-level

radioactive mixed wastes generated on the 

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

1994 to include environmental restoration

mixed waste generated in Nevada. Waste

was already in storage at this facility and will

continue to be held in storage until a final

determination of the proper treatment and

disposal technology is established by the

EPA. Under the FFCA, these mixed wastes

were exempt from storage prohibitions in the

Land Disposal Restrictions (LDR) until

October 6, 1995. The NEPD specified that

this exemption would be extended through

February 1996, pending negotiations

towards a signed FFCA Consent Order. A

Consent Order was signed, effective March

27, 1996, requiring compliance with a Site

Treatment Plan (DOE 1996a), which was

also finalized in March 1996. Compliance

with the Consent Order exempts the NTS

from potential enforcement action resulting

from the mixed waste storage prohibition

under RCRA. 

The NEPD conducted its annual Compliance

Evaluation Inspection (CEI) in September

1997. A few minor areas of concern were

identified. At the end of 1997 NEPD, DOE,

and BN were still resolving the issues and

coming to common agreement on the

corrective actions. It is unlikely that NEPD

will pursue any formal enforcement actions

as a result of the CEI.

HAZARDOUS WASTE REPORTING FOR

NON-NTS OPERATIONS

In 1996, at contract transition, the existing

EPA ID numbers for the AVO, STL, and LAO

locations were terminated. BN obtained new

numbers for AVO and STL and will operate

the LAO facility as a conditionally exempt

small quantity generator. In 1997, it was not

required to submit the state of Nevada

Hazardous Waste Generator biennial report

for hazardous wastes generated at the

NLVF under EPA Identification Number

NVD097868731.

UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS

NTS OPERATIONS

The NTS UST program continues to meet

regulatory compliance schedules for the

reporting, upgrading, or removal of 
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY

3-7

documented USTs. Efforts are continuing to SARA Title III Reports

identify undocumented USTs at the NTS. 

Once identified, undocumented USTs are

reported to the NEPD to satisfy state

regulatory reporting requirements.

During 1997, there were no USTs that were

required to be removed in accordance with

state and federal regulations. Remedial

activities continued at previous tank removal

sites during 1997 as funding became

available.

NON-NTS OPERATIONS

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

COMPREHENSIVE

ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE,

COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY

ACT/SUPERFUND AMENDMENTS

AND REAUTHORIZATION ACT

(SARA)

In April 1996, the DOE/NV, Department of

Defense, and the NEPD entered into an

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

CERCLA and Sections 6001 and 3004(u) of

RCRA to address the environmental

restoration of historic contaminated sites at

the NTS, parts of Tonopah Test Range

(TTR), parts of the Nellis Air Force Range

Complex (NAFRC), the Central Nevada Test

Area, and the Project SHOAL Area. 

Appendix VI of the FFACO describes the

strategy that will be employed to plan,

implement, and complete environmental

corrective action at facilities where nuclearrelated operations were conducted.

EMERGENCY REPORTING AND

COMMUNITY RIGHT-TO-KNOW ACT

(EPCRA)

Compliance with this Act is discussed in the

paragraphs below and summarized in the

following checklist:

 NTS Compliance

EPCRA Not

Section Yes No Required

302-302:

Planning Notification x

304:

EHS Release Notification x 

311-312:

MSDS/Chemical Inventory x

313:

TRI Reporting x

Additional compliance activities under

CERCLA/SARA for 1997 included the

Nevada Combined Agency Report, which

combines reporting under SARA Section

312, Tier II and Nevada Chemical

Catastrophe Prevention Program

requirements. The latter program covers

extremely hazardous substances (EHSs).

The 1997 Nevada Combined Agency

Hazardous Substances Reports for the NTS

and other Nevada operations (NLVF and

RSL) were submitted to the state as

required. Due to the low reporting

thresholds established by the Fire Marshall

(many at one pound) the reports included

many chemicals, both mixtures and single

constituents. There were no reportable

EHSs for 1996 so a report was not required

in 1997.

The Nevada Combined Agency Reports for

the Area 5 Hazardous Materials Spill Center

and Areas 5 and 6 were also submitted as

required.

In compliance with Executive Order 12856, a

Toxic Release Inventory Report required by

Section 313 of the SARA Title III must be

provided if the facility, any time in the prior

calendar year, exceeds any section 313

threshold for manufacture, process, or other

use. In CY96 no thresholds were exceeded,

so no report was required in 1997.
3-8

NON-NTS TIER II REPORTING UNDER 1996, but was later found to still contain

SARA TITLE III

The reports for the off-NTS Nevada facilities,

RSL and NLVF, are described under EPCRA

above.

Other non-Nevada operations either had no

chemicals above reporting thresholds or

submitted their chemical inventories to the

cities/counties as part of their business

plans.

STATE OF NEVADA CHEMICAL

CATASTROPHE PREVENTION

ACT

The state of Nevada Chemical Catastrophe

Prevention Act of 1992 contains regulations

for facilities defined as Highly Hazardous

Substance Regulated Facilities. This law

requires registration of facilities storing

highly hazardous substances above listed

thresholds. Reporting for this program is

also covered by the Nevada Combined

Agency Report discussed under EPCRA

above. There were no reportable chemicals

for 1996, and therefore no reports were

submitted to the state in 1997.

TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL

ACT

State of Nevada regulations implementing

the TSCA require submittal of an annual

report describing polychlorinated biphenyl

(PCB) control activities. The 1996 NTS PCB

annual report was transmitted to EPA and

the state of Nevada in June 1997. The

report included the quantity and status of

PCB and PCB-contaminated transformers

and electrical equipment at the NTS. Also

reported were the number of shipments of

PCBs and PCB-contaminated items from the

NTS to an EPA-approved disposal facility. 

Fifty-two large and four small low volume

PCB capacitors remain under the

management of the LANL in Area 27 of the

NTS. One PCB-containing transformer was

repaired and put in service at the NTS in 

PCBs so it was removed from service again. 

In 1997, this transformer was successfully

retrofitted so now there are no known PCB

or PCB-containing transformers in-service at

the NTS. 

FEDERAL INSECTICIDE,

FUNGICIDE, AND RODENTICIDE

ACT

Pesticide usage included insecticides,

herbicides, and rodenticides. Insecticides

were applied twice a month at the food

service and storage areas. Herbicides were

applied once or twice a year at NTS sewage

lagoon berms. All other pesticide

applications were on an as-requested basis. 

General-use pesticides were preferred,

although restricted-use herbicides and

rodenticides were used. Contract

companies applied pesticides at all non-NTS

facilities in 1997.

Records were maintained on all pesticides

used, both general and restricted. These

records will be held for at least three years. 

State-sponsored training materials are

available for all applicators. No unusual

environmental activities occurred in 1997 at

the NTS relating to the Federal Insecticide,

Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act.

HISTORIC PRESERVATION

The NHPA (36 CFR 79, 1966) requires

federal agencies to consider any impact of

their actions on cultural resources

(archaeological sites, historic sites, historic

structures, and traditional cultural properties)

eligible for listing in the National Register

(NR) of Historic Places. Accordingly,

cultural resource surveys and other studies

are conducted to assess any impacts NTS

operations may have on such resources. 

When cultural resources eligible for the NR

are found in a project area and they cannot

be avoided, plans are written for programs to

recover data to mitigate the effects of the 
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY

3-9

projects on these sites. Technical reports 

contain the results of these data recovery

programs. A data recovery plan was

developed for one archaeological site and a

field data recovery program was completed

last October. Great Basin Indian tribal

representatives visited this site before and

after the fieldwork. The data recovery plan

included three monitors from the major

tribes. For those historic properties, which American peregrine falcon is the only

can be avoided by NTS activities, a

monitoring program has been developed to

field verify the condition of these sites

through time.

The NHPA also requires that federal

agencies inventory the cultural resources

under their jurisdiction. In 1994, a survey of

archaeological sites near four springs on the planned activities at the NTS for a ten-year

NTS was conducted. The results of this

inventory were presented in a 1997 technical

report. Also, a survey report on the second

phase of the Fortymile Canyon rock art

inventory was completed. Last spring,

DOE/NV conducted interviews with Great

Basin Indian tribal cultural experts at the 

Fortymile rock art locale.

The American Indian Religious Freedom Act

directs federal agencies to consult with

Native Americans to protect their right to

exercise their traditional religions. The

Native American Graves Protection and

Repatriation Act (NAGPRA) requires federal

agencies to consult with Native Americans

regarding items in their artifact collections,

which may be associated funerary items,

human remains, sacred objects, or objects

of cultural patrimony. A collection of

DOE/NV archaeological materials, which

had been housed at the Harry Reid Center

at University of Nevada, Las Vegas (UNLV),

was transferred to the DOE/NV Curatorial

Facility along with the data for the

archaeological sites. A summary report, site

records, and an artifact inventory were

completed for this collection. NAGPRA

consultation on these artifacts will be

conducted in the near future.

THREATENED AND ENDANGERED

SPECIES PROTECTION

The ESA (Title 50 CFR 17.11) requires

federal agencies to insure that their actions

do not jeopardize the continued existence of

federally listed endangered or threatened

species or their critical habitat. The

endangered species and the desert tortoise

and bald eagle are the only threatened

species, which occur on the NTS. No

threatened or endangered plants are known

to occur on the site. A non-jeopardy

Programmatic Biological Opinion was issued

by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services

(USFWS) to DOE/NV in August 1996 for

period.

The Desert Tortoise Compliance Program

implemented the terms and conditions of the

Programmatic Biological Opinion and

documented compliance actions taken by

DOE/NV. The terms and conditions, which

were implemented in 1997, included the

following: (1) tortoise clearance surveys for

two projects (conducted within 24 hours from

the start of project construction); (2) onsite

monitoring of construction for two projects

when heavy equipment was being used; 

(3) quarterly monitoring of tortoise-proof

fencing around the ER-5-2 Well and at

sewage treatment ponds in Areas 6, 22, 23,

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

surveys around two proposed underground

testing area well sites near Beatty, Nevada

believed to be outside suitable tortoise

habitat; and (5) preparation of an annual

compliance report to the USFWS for NTS

activities that were conducted in CY97.

A total of 339 transects totaling 902 km (559

mi) were surveyed on the NTS over the last

half of CY97 and the first quarter of CY98 for

the presence of desert tortoises or their sign

in areas of unknown tortoise abundance. 
3-10

Areas of “none to very low” tortoise management. NTS design criteria do not 

abundance were identified by the sample specifically address floodplain management;

transect data. According to the 1996

Biological Opinion, tortoise clearance

surveys are optional for new projects located

in these areas. A GIS-generated map of the

“none to very low” tortoise abundance areas

was submitted to the USFWS for their

concurrence, and a draft document of the

survey results was prepared and will be

finalized in CY98. 

There is one bird (mountain plover

[Charadrius montanus]) and two plant

species (Clokey’s eggvetch [Astragalus

oophorus var. clokeyanus] and Blue

Diamond cholla [Opuntia whipplei var.

multigeniculata]), which are known, or are

expected to exist on the NTS, that are

candidates for listing by the USFWS under

the ESA. There are ten plant, one reptile,

one bird, and six bat species that occur on

the NTS, which the USFWS has removed

from the list of candidate species for listing. 

These species are now considered by the

USFWS to be “species of concern”

belonging to a group of species from which

new candidates will be selected, if

warranted. In 1997, preconstruction

biological surveys were conducted at four

proposed construction sites to determine the

presence of these species. Survey results

and mitigation recommendations were

documented in survey reports. Field

surveys to determine the presence and

distribution of the reptile, bird, and bat

species, which are “species of concern” on

the NTS, were started in 1996 and were

completed in 1997. Field survey results

were summarized in a report titled

“Distribution of the Chuckwalla, Western

Burrowing Owl, and Six Bat Species on the

Nevada Test Site” (Steen et al., 1997),

which was prepared and published as a

DOE topical report in May. Field surveys for

Clokey’s eggvetch were conducted in 1997

and will be completed in 1998. 

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11988,

FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT

There were no projects in 1997, which

required consultation for floodplain 

however, all projects are reviewed for areas

which would be affected by a 100-year flood

pursuant to DOE Order 6430.1A.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 11990,

PROTECTION OF WETLANDS

There were no projects in 1997, which

required consultation for protection of

wetlands. NTS design criteria do not

specifically address protection of wetlands;

however, all projects are reviewed pursuant

to the requirements of DOE Order 5400.1.

Field surveys were conducted under the

Ecological Monitoring and Compliance

program from June 1996 through February

1997 to identify those natural NTS springs,

seeps, tanks, and playas, which could be

designated by the U.S. Army Corps of

Engineers as jurisdictional wetlands. A

summary report of survey findings titled

“Nevada Test Site Wetlands Assessment”

(Hansen et al., 1997) was completed and

distributed as a DOE topical report in May.

EXECUTIVE ORDER 12856,

FEDERAL COMPLIANCE WITH

RIGHT-TO-KNOW LAWS AND

POLLUTION PREVENTION

REQUIREMENTS

Actions taken to comply with the

requirements of this Order are discussed in

Section 3.2.

3.2 CURRENT

ENVIRONMENTAL

COMPLIANCE ISSUES AND

ACTIONS

There were numerous activities and actions

relating to environmental compliance issues

in 1997. These activities and actions are

discussed below, grouped by general area

of applicability.
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY

3-11

CLEAN AIR ACT

Under Title V, Part 70 of the CAA

Amendments, all owners or operators of Part

70 sources must pay annual fees that are

sufficient to cover costs of state operating

permit programs. The Nevada

Administrative Code (NAC) determines

annual fees based on tons of actual

emissions. Annual fees for facilities

generating less than 25 tons of emissions

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

that produce more than 25 tons of emissions

in a calendar year. From the 1996 annual

report, which was submitted in February

1997, it was determined that approximately

six tons of emissions were produced, so that

no annual fee was required. 

An application to obtain a Class II air quality

operating permit for the NTS was submitted

in April 1996 and then revised and

resubmitted in November 1996. In February

1997, the state issued a Class II Air Quality

Operating Permit AP9711-0549 for the NTS. 

The permit replaced all existing air quality

permits on the NTS except for the In April 1997, a permit was issued for the

Hazardous Material Spill Center (HSC) and CLEAN SLATES environmental restoration

the open burn permits. The new permit project, located on the TTR. The permit

omitted the Area 5 and Area 23 portable consisted of a General Air Quality Operating

slant screens, which are no longer required Permit (AP9711-0549), which included

to be permitted. In April 1997, the permit surface disturbance restrictions and an

was modified to include a Cambilt conveyor, Approval of Location, which granted

which was relocated to the TTR to be used approval to operate 16 pieces of permitted

in conjunction with the CLEAN SLATES equipment that had been relocated from the

environmental restoration projects (See Non- DOUBLE TRACKS project at the NAFRC to

NTS Air Quality Permits). the TTR. A report documenting production

The five-year operating permit for the HSC to the state upon completion of the CLEAN

was renewed in October 1997. The new SLATE I project in June 1997.

permit, AP9711-0556, contains several new

requirements, including weekly monitoring The state issued a permit for the CLEAN

and recording of throughput amounts and SLATE II environmental restoration project,

hours of operation of emission units, and a also located on the TTR, in June 1997. The

20 percent opacity restriction. DOE/NV EPD permit included a Surface Area Disturbance

is currently working with the state to modify Permit 9711-0549 and a Site Specific Permit

these restrictions. Attachment 1574 to reflect the change of

Two open burn permits were renewed by the from the CLEAN SLATE I project location. 

state in 1997. These include Permit 97-34, The CLEAN SLATE II project has not yet

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

for fire and radiological emergency response

training exercises. Notification and reporting

requirements previously listed in the Area 27

burn permit were deleted from the 1997

renewal. These requirements were also

deleted from the other burn permit during the

preceding year. In January 1997, the state

determined that it was not necessary to

permit activities that didn’t meet the

definition of open burning as it appears in

the NAC. Therefore, because activities such

as high explosives tests are not included in

the NAC definition, the Big Explosives

Experiment Facility open burn permit was

not renewed. 

The NTS also has a Nevada Hazardous

Materials Storage Permit Number 13-97-

0034-X, issued by the state Fire Marshall,

and is renewed annually when a facility

makes a report required by the state’s

Chemical Catastrophe Prevention Act. 

Table 3.1 contains a permit summary.

NON-NTS AIR QUALITY PERMITS

amounts and operating hours was submitted

location of 15 pieces of permitted equipment
3-12

Twelve air pollution control permits were requirements at this time. Improvements will

active for emission units at the Las Vegas

Area Operations. These permits were

issued through the Clark County Health

District. Annual renewal is contingent upon

payment of permit fees. Permits are

amended and revised only if the situation

under which the permit has been issued

changes. STL had one air pollution control

permit for a degreasing operation, but the

permit was terminated in December 1997

when a nontoxic degreaser was substituted. 

For the other non-NTS operations, no

permits have been required, or the facilities

have been exempted. 

CLEAN WATER ACT

Dewatering of septage and wintertime

portable toilet waste was conducted in the

Area 25 Engine Test Stand No. 1 sewage

lagoon and two Area 12 sewage lagoon

secondary infiltration basins during 1997 and

will be used again in 1998 for this

application. 

A total of 12 active septic tank systems are

in service on the NTS. Two active holding

tanks, which require replacement with an

approved system, are still in service on the

NTS. Nine additional septic tank systems mix developed from soils readily available at

serve unoccupied buildings, but will remain

on active status until permanently closed. 

Facility Managers have been informed of

deficiencies noted during inspections.

Construction of the Area 23 Infiltration Basin

Groundwater Monitoring Well was completed

on February 27, 1996. Installation of a

pump with cable and discharge piping and

development of a completion report were

completed during 1997 to finish the project. 

The monitoring well is now functional and in

compliance with groundwater protection

requirements contained in state general

permit GNEV93001. 

The Area 25 Test Cell C was taken out of

service during the first quarter of 1997 to

comply with SDWA regulations. No system

action will be required at the sewage

lagoons to comply with the permit 

be implemented if use of the facility is

needed in the future.

A bypass sewer line for the Area 25 Central

Support primary sewage lagoon was

constructed from November 12 through

November 18 as a result of joint efforts

between the BN Waste Management

Project/Technical Support and DOE/Yucca

Mountain Site Characterization Office staffs. 

This line will provide for operational flexibility

and in situ primary lagoon infiltration rate

measurements. The effectiveness of

biological clogging on the existing soils was

determined in 1997 to be inadequate for

compliance with the groundwater protection

program, so conceptual designs on options

have been initiated. 

Funding for design of engineered liner

installation within the Area 25 Reactor

Control Point sewage lagoons was received

from DOE/Asset Management Division in

October of 1996. Engineering drawings for

this installation have been drafted, and a

cost estimate for the installation of a

geosynthetic liner was completed during the

first quarter 1997. A second project cost

estimate depicting the installation of a liner

the Area 1 Batch Plant has also been

prepared. Both of these options are being

considered, as well as suspending the

intermittent use of the facility.

Funding for design of an engineered liner in

the Area 6 DAF primary sewage lagoon was

obtained in FY97. The most feasible and

cost effective method to comply with

groundwater protection requirements at this

site is to line the primary lagoon to attain full

containment with existing flow rates. 

Funding has been requested for FY98 to

install the liners by the permit deadline date.

SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT

Engineering design has been completed on

approximately 50 buildings or facilities at the

NTS requiring retrofit through installation of 
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY

3-13

backflow prevention devices on water the preparation of Historic American

service lines. These facilities required over

110 separate installations; the last one was

completed this year.

During 1997, a ten-inch water line was

installed leading to the Area 5 HSC. Plans

were also finalized to replace the Army Well

tank and to recoat four other existing tanks. 

This tank work will begin in 1998.

The Operations and Maintenance Manual for

the NTS water distribution systems was

updated to incorporate some recently

passed state of Nevada regulations.

There was no sanitary survey of the water

distribution systems by the Nevada Bureau

of Health Protection Services during 1997. 

COMPREHENSIVE

ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE,

COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY

ACT

Other than the reporting covered in Section

3.1, there is no formal CERCLA program at

the NTS. The FFACO, with the state, may

preclude the NTS from being placed on the

National Priority List. More of a RCRA

approach in remediating environmental

problems will be taken by the FFACO.

HISTORIC PRESERVATION

Historic preservation studies and surveys

are conducted by the Desert Research

Institute (DRI), University and Community

College System of Nevada. In 1997, 13

surveys were conducted for historic

properties on the NTS, and unpublished

reports on the findings were prepared. 

These surveys identified 25 prehistoric and

historic archaeological sites. Through

consultation with the Nevada State Historical

Preservation Office, four of these sites were

considered eligible for the NR. Work

continued on historic structures associated

with early NTS activities. Impacts planned

to the Engineering Maintenance Assembly

and Disassembly Facility in Area 25 required 

Engineering Records documentation for the

facility. This documentation will reside in the

Library of Congress. Historic American

Building Survey documentation is in

preparation for the EPA Farm.

Other efforts in 1997, included

administration of the cultural resources

program on the NTS, preparing management

objectives and plans and promoting public

relations and communications concerning

the NTS archaeology and cultural resources

program.

To comply with federal regulations in Title 36

CFR 79, a multi-phase program is in

progress to upgrade the NTS archaeological

collection and archives. In 1997, DRI

continued and completed the piece-by-piece

inventory of the lithic artifacts in the

collection. Approximately 500,000 artifacts

in the collection have been inventoried and

repackaged according to federal

requirements.

POLLUTION PREVENTION AND

WASTE MINIMIZATION

IMPLEMENTATION

BN published the Nevada Operations Site

Pollution Prevention Program Plan in 1997 

for the Nevada Operations Office in

accordance with DOE/NV and DOE/HQ

requirements. This plan is a guidance

document, utilized to reduce waste

generation and any potential pollutant

releases to the environment. BN reviews

the plan annually and revises it every three

years, or as needed, to incorporate the most

current pollution prevention and waste

minimization requirements and Executive

Orders. This provides a means of

establishing ongoing goals for further

improvements and increased protection to

public health and the environment by:

 Reducing employee exposure.

 Reducing resource usage.
3-14

 Reducing inventories of chemicals that process relies on the health, safety, and

require reporting under the SARA and environmental issues related to the product. 

the EPA 33/50 Pollution Program. If the waste generated by these materials

 Reducing exposure to civil and criminal 1980 CERCLA/RCRA, or has a potential of

liabilities under environmental laws. causing harm to individuals or the

 Reducing waste management and purchase only if there is no approved

compliance costs. substitute for the product, and the use of the

 Reducing overhead costs and increasing modification. 

productivity through improved work

processes and greater awareness. AFFIRMATIVE PROCUREMENT 

GOALS AND DESCRIPTIONS

The site-specific quantitative goals and with the requirements of Executive Order

deliverables for 1997 were satisfied. These 12873 to procure products containing

goals include reducing of hazardous and recovered materials. This program focuses

sanitary waste generation, increasing on seven major categories, including

sanitary waste recycling and increasing construction materials, landscape, nonAffirmative Procurement of EPA-Designated paper office, paper office, park and

Recycled Products. The goals are based on recreation, transportation and vehicular

the 1993 baseline quantities for routine products. Under each category are a

waste. number of specific products. In FY97, 100

The BN Just-in-Time (JIT) supply system of paper office products, 80 percent of noncontinues to account for nearly 90 percent of paper office products, and 64 percent of

all procurement actions, providing the most vehicle re-refined lubricating oil, procured by

commonly used items (e.g., cleansers and BN, contained recovered materials.

lubricants) to all NTS agencies. This Additionally, BN increased procurement of

program has significantly reduced on-hand retread tires by 12 percent. There were no

stores, thereby reducing administrative and new purchases in FY97 for the remaining

handling costs, and significantly reducing major categories.

waste generation due to expiration of shelf

life or overstock conditions. All parties COTTER CONCENTRATE

benefit in reduced waste disposal and

increased productivity. 

PROCUREMENT CONTROLS

The purchase of any item that requires a Facility. It was to eventually undergo

Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS), additional uranium extraction for use in the

including JIT purchase requisitions, is DOE nuclear weapons program. In January

screened by Environmental, Safety, and 1995, due to the decline in demand for raw

Health personnel and Waste Management materials for the production of nuclear

Projects/Nonradioactive Waste Operations weapons, DOE/HQ determined that there

personnel. They determine the need for the was no longer a use for the Cotter

hazardous material requested and review Concentrate as strategic material and

MSDSs for products purchased outside the declared the material mixed waste. 

BN JIT system. These products may be Responsibility for performing treatment of

approved or disapproved. The approval the waste to meet the LDR requirements and

has the potential to be regulated under the

environment, the reviewers will approve that

product cannot be prevented by process

The DOE/NV and BN established an

Affirmative Procurement Program to comply

percent of construction materials, 96 percent

In 1987, the material known as “Cotter

Concentrate,” which had been designated by

DOE/HQ as strategic material, was shipped

to the DOE NTS from the DOE Mound
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY

3-15

disposal of the material was assigned to the destined for disposal as waste as a result of

DOE/NV. In 1997, this waste was process modification, discontinued use, or

redesignated as a feedstock material and shelf life expiration are returned to the

shipped to a uranium processing facility vendor or transferred to another government

known as International Uranium Corporation contractor or agency to be utilized. This is a

(IUC), formerly Energy Fuels Nuclear, substantial cost savings for both BN and

located in southeastern Utah. IUC DOE/NV. Examples of chemical and

performed additional uranium extraction, material exchanges made during 1997 are

followed by disposal of the residue listed below:

generated by their reprocessing. 

The benefits to DOE/NV were cost savings unused chemicals, destined for disposal,

of approximately three million dollars, due to to the vendor.

reprocessing as feedstock material rather

than having to perform treatment and  Coordinated redistribution of 32 different

disposal. In addition, the material, chemicals that were destined to be

approximately 197 m , was recycled and disposed of. The estimated cost saving 3

used as a resource, instead of being was $30,000.

discarded as a waste. The extracted

uranium will be used in the production of  Assisted in transferring 73 pounds of

energy by commercial nuclear power plants. virgin mercury, destined for disposal,

TRAINING to U.S. Geological Survey in Area 25.

BN is committed to implementing effective

pollution prevention, waste minimization, and

recycling awareness. Every practical effort

is implemented to educate all employees in

pollution prevention. Employee education is

accomplished through formal training,

articles published in BN newsletters, and

other awareness program strategies. A

Pollution Prevention home page will be

developed and placed on the BN Intranet

during FY98.

Management and employees working in the

environmental arena are instructed in BN

pollution prevention and waste minimization

policies and procedures. The level of

instruction qualifies personnel to perform

pollution prevention tasks. Environmental ASSESSMENTS (PPOAs)

awareness training is presented to

managers and employees on an as needed

basis.

CHEMICAL AND MATERIAL EXCHANGE 

BN continues to coordinate chemical and radioactive, mixed, and nonhazardous solid

material exchanges whenever possible. waste streams generated and disposed of. 

Virgin chemicals and materials that are Waste streams are carefully reviewed to

 Returned an estimated 91 gallons of

from the BN Material Testing Laboratory

 Coordinated with BN Redistribution and

Sales Group on the Energy-Related

Laboratory Equipment Program to

donate miscellaneous laboratory

equipment, estimated at $9,000, to the

UNLV Physics Laboratory.

 A BN Procurement representative took a

pro-active pollution prevention approach

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

vendor for reuse. These cartridges were

previously disposed of as hazardous

waste, so the estimated cost savings

was $8,751.

POLLUTION PREVENTION OPPORTUNITY

BN implements pollution prevention and

waste minimization options involving source

reduction and elimination via product

substitution, reuse, and recycle. These

efforts reduce the total volume of hazardous,
3-16

identify opportunities for reducing or equipment or procedure), and onsite

eliminating the volume and toxicity of wastes

generated through the use of PPOAs.

BN implements pollution prevention options

in accordance with the Pollution Prevention

Act hierarchy that states the following

criteria should be implemented to prevent or

reduce pollution at the source wherever

feasible:

 Recycle wastes in an environmentally

acceptable manner.

 Reuse if applicable.

 Treat wastes that cannot feasibly be

prevented or recycled.

 Dispose of wastes only as a last resort.

Pollution prevention is the DOE’s preferred

approach to environmental management. 

BN’s activities have reduced or eliminated

hazardous chemicals and generated cost

savings/avoidance in disposal, product,

energy, and labor costs. Progress toward

meeting mission objectives poses continuing

challenges and opportunities for pollution

prevention to reduce future risks and costs

associated with managing wastes and

pollutants.

The sitewide (NTS and NLVFs) waste

reduction results have come from formal

processes such as PPOAs, a Return on

Investment (ROI) Project, solid and liquid

waste recycling, affirmative procurement,

and from employees knowledgeable with

processes which generate waste or use

hazardous chemicals. 

A PPOA is a systematic, planned, and

documented procedure with the objective of

identifying methods that reduce energy

consumption or eliminate waste streams. 

The technical and economical feasibility of

options are evaluated, and the most

promising options are selected for 

implementation. Options include product

substitution, cross contamination control,

process change (i.e., the use of alternate nonhazardous photoluminescent EXIT signs. 

recycling. During 1997, one PPOA was

conducted at the RSL Photography

Laboratory located on the NAFB. This

pollution prevention opportunity was

selected as having the greatest potential for

waste stream reduction. 

This PPOA analyzed the feasibility of

combining two processors; the Hope roller

transport E-6 processor and Kodak RT-1811

roller transport film processor, in order to

eliminate the E-6 film process. The PPOA

investigated the opportunity to eliminate the

prehardener and neutralizer stages of the

RT-1811 process. The goal of the PPOA

was to reduce the chemical usage, thereby

minimizing associated waste and worker

exposure to the hazardous components of

the chemicals. The most viable

recommendation was to upgrade the

equipment to Kodak Aerial Color Processor,

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

designed for the latest Kodak color aerial

films. This option eliminated the need for

the prehardener and neutralizer chemicals

and associated safety and health hazards

and waste products. Additionally, the

RT-1611 will most likely accommodate E-6

film products, eliminating the need for that

process. The feasibility is good, with an

estimated annual cost saving of $38,405 and

an anticipated annual reduction in the

quantity of chemicals of 2,150 gallons.

RETURN ON INVESTMENT (ROI)

The ROI program was initiated to

demonstrate the economic benefit of

implementing pollution prevention projects

and focus on those with the potential for

reducing operational costs. The ROI

program is based upon total cost savings

achieved across all DOE organizations

compared to the dollars spent to implement

the project. The ROI project listed below was

identified and implemented in FY97 with an

estimated payback period of 1.01 years. 

The ROI project consists of replacing of

expired tritium powered EXIT signs with
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY

3-17

Implementation of this ROI successfully  Onsite recycling of antifreeze from heavy

eliminates future use of EXIT signs

containing tritium and also diverts expired

signs from a low level waste landfill. 

Seventy-six tritium powered EXIT signs have

been shipped offsite to one of the original

manufacturers for disposal. The

manufacturer will recover the remaining

tritium in the EXIT signs for reuse in other

products. Replacement, nonhazardous

photoluminescent EXIT signs have been

procured and installed to replace the signs

containing tritium. The photoluminescent

EXIT signs can be disposed of in a sanitary

landfill, effectively eliminating the costs of

disposal offsite. Through product

substitution, future use of a hazardous

radioactive material and generation of a

hazardous radioactive waste will be avoided. 

This ROI for replacing tritium powered EXIT

signs is high, with a short payback period of

just over one year.

PUBLIC AND COMMUNITY OUTREACH

PROGRAM

The BN Pollution Prevention Project Office,

along with DOE/NV and Wackenhut

Services Incorporated, continue to

participate in public and community outreach

programs. These activities include the Earth

Fair, JASON Foundation for Education,

Nevada Regional Science Bowl, open house

for employees at the NLVF and NTS, and

presentations related to pollution prevention

and waste minimization at local schools. 

SOLID WASTE RECYCLING

The solid waste recycling project (high-grade

paper, mixed paper, cardboard, and

aluminum cans) continues at all BN

locations. During 1997, the solid waste

recycling project at the NTS improved with

the installation of recycling stations

(collection containers) in all occupied

buildings.

BN improved the following recycling projects

during 1997:

equipment and light duty vehicles. This

project was initiated by an employee of

Fleet Operations.

 The lead weights were removed from

vehicle tires during scheduled routine

maintenance and collected for recycling

offsite.

 The retread tire project began in late

1996. The project consists of sending

old tires from heavy equipment and light

duty vehicles offsite to be recapped; if

the tires are beyond use, they are sent

offsite to be salvaged or recycled. 

Recapped tires are purchased for limited

types of vehicles. 

 The NTS Reproduction Shop was closed

during 1997. An estimated 25,000

sheets of various forms were made into

scratch pads, an alternative use

suggested by an employee from the

Reproduction Shop.

Table 3.2 contains the amount of various

items recycled during 1997.

REPORTS

The BN CY96 pollution prevention

accomplishments, to be published in the

Annual Report of Waste Generation and

Pollution Prevention Progress Report, were

completed and transmitted to DOE/HQ on

February 25, 1997.

The SARA Section 313 chemical usage

report and the 33-50 TRI Program Priority

chemical usage report for CY96 were

submitted to DOE/NV on March 27, 1997.

The Nevada Operations Site Pollution

Prevention Program Plan, 1997, was

submitted and approved by DOE/NV and

transmitted to DOE/HQ on July 8, 1997. 

The Affirmative Procurement Report was

submitted and approved by DOE/NV on

December 18, 1997, and forwarded to 

DOE/HQ, in accordance with RCRA, Section

6002(d) and Executive Order 12873.
3-18

Quarterly pollution prevention reports were Chapter 6 also gives the amount of

submitted to DOE/HQ during 1997.

SOLID/SANITARY WASTE

During 1997, landfills were operated in

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

disposed of in each is provided in Chapter

6.0.

EPA regulations promulgated in 1991

required that Class II municipal solid waste

landfills (i.e., those receiving less than 20

tons per day of waste) be closed by October

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

result of an agreement with the NEPD

Bureau of Federal Facilities (NEPD/BoFF),

the Class II landfill at U-10c Crater in Area 9

was closed on October 5, 1995, for retrofit

as a Class III Site. The retrofit consisted of

the installment of a barrier layer of at least

four feet of native soil to segregate the

different waste types and to inhibit leachate

transport to the lower waste zone. In

addition, five neutron monitoring tubes were

installed in the barrier layer to monitor

possible leachate production and water

activity. Upon the NEPD approval of the

installed barrier and operating plan, U-10c

Crater was reopened in January 1996 as a

Class III Site for the disposal of industrial

solid waste and other inert waste. An

application for a permit to operate the U-10c

Crater as a Class III industrial solid waste

disposal site was submitted to the 

NEPD/BoFF in May 1996. The Class III

permit application was revised and

resubmitted in August 1996 in response to

informal comments provided by the

NEPD/BoFF. Operating Permit SW 13 097

03 was issued by NEPD with an effective

date of July 17, 1997. 

An application for a permit to operate the

Area 23 landfill as a Class II Municipal and

Industrial Solid Waste Disposal Site was

submitted to the NEPD/BoFF in October

1996. This was approved by NEPD issuing

Operating Permit SW 13 097 04, with an

effective date of December 12, 1997. 

hydrocarbon contaminated soil disposed of

in the Area 6 landfill in 1997. An application

for a permit to operate the Area 6

hydrocarbon landfill as a Class III solid

waste disposal site was submitted to the

NEPD/BoFF in March 1996. Upon receipt of

verbal comments from the NEPD/BoFF, a

revised application was submitted in April

1996, followed by the receipt of a

Notification of Completeness from the

NEPD/BoFF in May 1996. An evaluation of

the merits of the application was conducted

and, as a result, minor changes were

incorporated in the application document. A

copy of the revised permit application was

submitted to the NEPD/BoFF in August

1996. Operating Permit SW 13 097 02 was

then issued by NEPD with an effective date

of May 23, 1997.

The NTS Cleanup Project, initiated in 1994,

is an activity devised to remove and dispose

of or recycle, where applicable,

nonhazardous debris and material and

readily identify hazardous debris and

material. In 1997, cleanup activities were

completed in Area 2, as confirmed in a

September 15, 1997, letter to DOE/NV from

NEPD. During this cleanup approximately

131,260 pounds of solid waste were

removed from Area 2 and properly disposed

of in U10c Landfill. Also, 9,048 pounds of

lead materials and 17,000 pounds of

electrical cable were delivered to the NTS

Salvage Yard for recycling and reclamation. 

FEDERAL FACILITIES

AGREEMENT AND CONSENT

ORDER

REMEDIAL ACTIVITIES - SURFACE

AREAS

Environmental restoration activities

continued at the NTS and TTR in 1997. 

Activities followed the agreements specified

in the FFACO signed between the DOE/NV

and the NEPD. 

These activities follow a formal work process

beginning with a Data Quality Objectives

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

3-19

contractors. The purpose of the DQO The NEPD is a participant throughout the

meeting is to define the scope of work, how remediation process. The Community

the site characterization is to be done Advisory Board is also kept informed by

(sampling strategy), and to develop the DOE/NV of the progress made.

conceptual model for the site. The

conceptual model defines the nature and Some small sites are closed under the

extent of waste in the subsurface and guides Streamlined Approach for Environmental

the investigation. A Corrective Action Restoration (SAFER) process. These sites

Investigation Plan is prepared providing the typically have small amounts of

information on how the site is to be contamination and can be remediated by

characterized. simple excavation and sampling to verify

Site characterization is carried out and reached. A SAFER plan is prepared

documented in the Corrective Action providing the methods to be used to close

Decision Document (CADD). This report the site. After closure a SAFER closure

provides the information that either confirms report is prepared documenting the work

the conceptual model or modifies it. If performed.

suitable information is available to make a

decision, a remedial alternative is selected Work performed in 1997 is summarized

from several identified for analysis that best below:

provides site closure. (In some instances,

additional site characterization may be  The Area 6 Decontamination Pond

required before the CADD can be prepared). RCRA Closure Unit characterization was

The CADD may also include a risk completed. Additional geotechnical

assessment to better define the risk to sampling and testing was completed for

humans and the environment. the Corrective Measures Study. Design

If a site requires remediation, a Corrective was started and will be completed in

Action Plan (CAP) is prepared that provides 1998. Closure activities are anticipated

the necessary design and other information to be completed in 1998.

on how the remediation is to be performed. 

A CAP includes the proposed methods to be  An annual report was submitted to

used to close a site, quality control comply with the conditions of the RCRA

measures, waste management strategy, Part B Permit for the Area 2 Bitcutter

design drawings (when appropriate), Shop and LLNL Post Shot Containment

verification sampling strategies (for clean Building Injection Wells RCRA Closure

closures) and other information necessary to Unit that was closed in 1996.

perform the closure. Some sites also

require a Post Closure Plan as the site or  The closure of the Area 25 Jr. Hot Cell

parts of the site are closed in place. was completed by the disposal of the

Information on inspections and monitoring radiological waste in the Area 3

are provided in an Annual Post Closure Radiological Waste Management

Monitoring Report. Facility.

Once the closure has been completed, a  The expedited closure of the Area 15

Closure Report is prepared. This document EPA Farm was completed in October

provides information on the work performed, 1997. The facility was decontaminated

results of verification sampling, as-built and dismantled. Waste disposal and

drawings (if appropriate), waste closure documentation will be completed

management, etc. in 1998. 

that the Remediation Level has been

and field testing for the engineered cover
3-20

 Characterization of portions of the Area  The SAFER Closure Plan for the Area 5

25 Engine Maintenance Assembly and

Disassembly (E-MAD) Building was

completed in 1997. Two characterization

reports were issued. No 

decontamination activities were

conducted because the facility end-use

requirements would be determined in the

future.

 Closure of the Area 12 Fleet Operations

Steam Cleaning Discharge Area was

completed by excavation and removal of

approximately 61 m (80 yd ) of 3 3

petroleum hydrocarbon soil. Biennial

monitoring (every two years) for the next

six years of undisturbed impacted areas

will be required to evaluate whether or

not sufficient degradation of the

petroleum hydrocarbons has been

demonstrated.

 Clean closure of the Area 6 Steam

Cleaning Effluent Ponds RCRA Closure

Unit was completed by excavation and

disposal of approximately 412 m3

(540 yd ) of soil as a RCRA hazardous 3

waste and 534 m (700 yd ) of 3 3

nonhazardous petroleum hydrocarbon

impacted soil. The Closure Report will

be prepared and transmitted to the

NEPD for concurrence during 1998.

 The Area 23 Building 650 Leachfield

RCRA Closure Unit characterization was

completed. The Closure Plan and field

work will be completed in 1998.

 The contents of the aboveground tanks

located at the Area 23 Fire Training Pit

were characterized and disposed of as a

RCRA hazardous waste (approximately

3,000 gal [11.4 m ]). Site debris and 3

materials were sampled for

disposal/reuse. Some materials were

removed from the site and disposed of

as nonhazardous construction debris. 

The site characterization activities and

additional site debris/material

disposal/reuse are anticipated to be

completed in 1998. North Disposal Trench was completed by 

and 6 Aboveground Tanks was

prepared, completed, and approved by

the NEPD. Closure activities are

anticipated to be completed in 1998.

 The Area 2 Photo Skid site

characterization was completed and the

results indicated that no remediation

activities were required. The site was

restored by backfilling and grading. No

Closure Report was required for site

closure.

 Characterization activities were

completed for the TTR Area 3 Landfill

Complex and Area 9 UXO Landfill. The

Corrective Action Decision Document

and Corrective Action Plan will be

prepared and transmitted to the NEPD

for concurrence during 1998. Remedial

activities are planned for 1998.

 Fencing of the TTR Five Points Landfill

and Bomblet Pit was completed to

support the revegetation activities. Both

sites were seeded with native plant

species, and site inspections will be

completed in the following years to

evaluate the progress of the revegetation

activities.

 Characterization of the TTR Second Gas

Station was completed. Based upon the

results, the NEPD has concurred with

the recommended closure in-place of the

petroleum impacted soils. The Closure

Report will be prepared and transmitted

to the NEPD for concurrence during

1998.

 Characterization activities were started

at the TTR Building 360 Underground

Discharge Point and Areas 2 and 6

Septic Systems. The Corrective Action

Decision Document and Corrective

Action Plan will be prepared and

transmitted to the NEPD for concurrence

during 1998.

 An expedited closure in-place of the TTR

Roller Coaster Sewage Lagoons and
COMPLIANCE SUMMARY

3-21

constructing an engineered vegetative The Building A-1 (Atlas) tritium

cover over the sites. The construction

activities were designed and

successfully implemented to eliminate

the generation of any waste during the

closure activities since the site was

impacted with pesticides above the EPA

Preliminary Remediation Goals. The site

is located approximately 56 km (35 mi)

northwest of the NTS. The Closure

Report will be prepared and transmitted

to the NEPD for concurrence during

1998.

 An expedited closure in-place of the TTR

Cactus Spring Waste Trenches was

completed by constructing an

engineered vegetative cover over the

site. The site is also located

approximately 56 km (35 mi) northwest

of the NTS. The Closure Report will be

prepared and transmitted to the NEPD

for concurrence during 1998.

 An expedited closure of the Project

SHOAL area mud pit was completed by

the SAFER, which resulted in the

excavation and disposal of

approximately 184 m (240 yd ) of 3 3

petroleum hydrocarbon impacted drilling

muds. The mud pit area was regraded

to the approximate original topography. 

The Project SHOAL Area is located

about 274 km (170 mi) northwest of the

NTS.

Remediation of the CLEAN SLATE I site was

completed. Approximately 12,382 m3

(16,220 yd ) of plutonium contaminated soil 3

was shipped to the NTS for disposal. A

Closure Report was prepared and

transmitted to DOE.

An aerial radioactivity survey of the Project

57 site was completed. Completion of site

characterization activities is planned for

1999.

Reclamation success at the DOUBLE

TRACKS site was monitored, and the data

were included as part of the annual

Reclamation Progress report.

decontamination was completed. All

decontaminated areas have been freereleased with the condition that a weekly

long-term monitoring program be conducted

for a least one year.

There were also two Housekeeping Sites

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

that were cleaned up during 1997.

RADIATION PROTECTION

NTS OPERATIONS

Redesign of the environmental surveillance

networks on the NTS during 1997 will result

in a reduction of monitoring costs while

maintaining necessary and sufficient

coverage. Results of monitoring, during

1997, indicated full compliance with the

radiation exposure guidelines of DOE Order

5400.5, "Radiation Protection of the Public

and the Environment", and the Title 40 CFR

141 National Primary Drinking Water

Regulations. Onsite air monitoring results

showed average annual concentrations

ranging from 0.008 percent of the DOE

Order 5400.5 guidelines for Kr in air to 2.6 85

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

Drinking water supplies on the NTS

contained less than 0.001 percent of the

DOE Order 5400.5 guideline and less than

0.004 percent of the National Primary

Drinking Water Regulation for tritium. 

Supply wells contained 0.0 percent of the

DOE Order 5400.5 guideline for Pu. 239+240

NON-NTS BN OPERATIONS

Results of environmental monitoring at the

off-NTS operations performing radiological

work during 1997 indicate full compliance

with the radiation exposure guidelines of

DOE Order 5400.5 and Title 10 CFR 835. 

No radioactive or nonradioactive surface

water/liquid discharges, subsurface

discharges through leaching, leaking, or

seepage into the soil column, well disposal,

or burial occurred at any of the BN

operations. Use of radioactive materials is 

primarily limited to sealed sources; however,

unsealed tritium is used in some operations. 
3-22

A small seepage of tritium into the air at the

NLVF Atlas Building (reported in 1995)

continued during 1997. Facilities, which use

radioactive sources or radiation producing

equipment, with the potential to expose the

general population outside the property line

to direct radiation, are the WAMO in

Washington, DC, the Atlas, NLVF A-1

Source Range, and the STL during the

operation of the sealed tube neutron

generator or during operation of the

Febetron. Sealed sources are tested every

six months to assure there is no leakage of

radioactive material. Operation of any

radiation generating devices is controlled by

BN procedures. At least two

thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) are at

the fence line on each side of these facilities

that are exchanged quarterly with additional

control TLDs kept in a shielded safe. The

TLD results were consistent with previous

data indicating no exposures to the public

from any of the monitored facilities.

ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE

AUDITS

In March 1993, an environmental

compliance assessment was conducted by

Reynolds Electrical & Engineering Co., Inc.

(REECo) of all active REECo facilities and

work sites at the NTS. Numerous

deficiencies were corrected at the time of

the assessment. Those deficiencies, which

were not correctable, were assigned a

system deficiency number and are being

formally tracked by BN, the successor to

REECo. The assessment identified

approximately 55 of these system

deficiencies. During 1997, the last of the

identified deficiencies was closed.

OCCURRENCE REPORTING

Occurrences are environmental, health,

and/or safety-related tests, which are

reported in several categories in accordance

with the requirements of DOE Order

5000.3B, "Occurrence Reporting and

Processing of Operations Information." The

two reportable environmental occurrences

for 1997 on NTS facilities appear in Table

3.2. An analysis of occurrences for 1997 as

required by the Order showed that there

were four main reasons for them: (1)

management problems - 25 percent, (2)

personnel error - 21 percent, (3) procedural

problems - 12 percent, and (4) external

phenomena - 38 percent. 

LEGAL ACTIONS

DOE/NV was not involved with any legal

actions during 1997.

3.3 PERMIT SUMMARY

For facilities used in the operation and

maintenance of the NTS and non-NTS

facilities, the contractors providing such

operation and support activities for the

DOE/NV have been granted numerous

permits by the appropriate regulatory

authorities. In addition to the existing

number of permits in 1997 (Table 3.1), the

EOD Facility and the Area 5 Storage Facility

of the RCRA Part B permit application were

permitted, while the other units in the

application are in various stages of the

NEPD review for permission to construct or

operate.
3-23

Table 3.1 Environmental Permit Summary - 1997

Air Drinking Waste Generator Materials 

Pollution Wastewater Water Disposal User IDs Storage Permit 

Number of

EPA Hazardous

NTS 5 7 7 4 1 3 

(a)

Las Vegas AreaOperations Office 12 1 1 2 (b) (a)Amador ValleyOperations 1 1Los AlamosOperationsSpecial TechnologiesLaboratory (SantaBarbara) 1 2 2 1 TOTAL 18 10 7 4 5 7 

(a) Biennial Report Required.(b) Routine Monitoring of Emissions is Not Required.
3-24

Table 3.2 NTS Recycling Activities - 1997

Material Quantity

Office Paper 278.63 mt(a)

Aluminum (bulk) 35.9 mt

Aluminum cans 7.39 mt

Used Motor Oil 29.9 mt

Cable and copper 22.68 mt

Iron and steel 183.19 mt

Batteries 38.66 mt

Lead 2.56 mt

Toner Cartridges 2.80 mt

Silver Recovery .01 mt

Tritium 874 curies

Tires 48.1 mt

Chemical and material exchanges 212.12 mt

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

Table 3.3 Off-Normal Occurrences at NTS Facilities

Date Report Number Description Status

01/22/97 NVOO-BNLV-NTS- A small fuel leak under a piece of Complete

1997-0002 heavy equipment was discovered in

August 1996. After the equipment was

removed and remediation started in

January 1997, the extent of the cleanup

was sufficient for required notification.

04/28/97 NVOO-BNLV-NTS- A drum of compressor oil leaked Complete

1997-0006 about 35 gallons on the ground 
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

4-1

4.0 AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

The air surveillance activities consist of monitoring and compliance

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

facilities. These activities include radiological and nonradiological

monitoring and environmental permit and operations compliance. There are

two radiological monitoring programs associated with the NTS, one onsite

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

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

responsible for NTS air surveillance, effluent monitoring, and ambient

gamma radiation monitoring. The offsite program is conducted by the 

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

Restoration, Monitoring and Emergency Response of the Radiation & Indoor

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

4.1 ONSITE RADIOLOGICAL

MONITORING

t the NTS, radiological effluents may Aoriginate from tunnels, underground

test sites (at or near surface ground

zeros), resuspension of surface

deposits, and facilities where radioactive

materials are either used, processed, stored,

or discharged. All of these sources have the

potential to, or are known to, discharge

radioactive effluents into the environment. 

Two types of monitoring operations are used

for these sources: (1) effluent monitoring,

which measures radioactive material

collected at the point of discharge; and (2)

environmental surveillance, which measures

radioactivity in the general environment.

Table 4.1 is a summary of the routine air

surveillance program, as of the end of 1997. 

Air sampling was conducted for radioactive

particulates, noble gases, and tritiated water

(HTO) vapor. The air sampling locations are

shown in Figure 4.1, and Figure 4.2 shows

the locations where ambient gamma

radiation monitoring is conducted on the

NTS using thermoluminescent dosimeters

(TLDs).

CRITERIA

Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)

50, “National Primary and Secondary

Ambient Air Quality Standards” (CFR 1971) (DOE 1991d).

and Title 40 CFR 61,“National Emission

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants,”

Subpart H, “Emission of Radionuclides Other

Than Radon from Department of Energy

Facilities” (CFR 1989) issued by the EPA are

the primary drivers for air monitoring

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

Energy (DOE) published DOE Order 5400.1,

"General Environmental Protection

Program," (DOE 1990b) which establishes

environmental protection program

requirements, authorities, and

responsibilities for DOE operations. These

mandates require compliance with

applicable federal, state, and local

environmental protection regulations. Other

DOE directives applicable to environmental

monitoring include DOE Order 5480.11,

"Radiation Protection for Occupational

Workers" (DOE 1990e), DOE Order

5480.1B, "Environment, Safety, and Health

Program for DOE Operations" (DOE 1990d);

DOE Order 5484.1, "Environmental

Protection, Safety, and Health Protection

Information Reporting Requirements" (DOE

1990f); DOE Order 5400.5, "Radiation

Protection of the Public and the

Environment" (DOE 1990c); and 

DOE/EH-0173T, "Environmental Regulatory

Guide for Radiological Effluent Monitoring

and Environmental Surveillance" 


4-4

AIRBORNE EFFLUENT

MONITORING

Airborne radioactive effluents are the

emissions on the NTS with the greatest

potential for reaching members of the public. 

For all activities on the NTS, the estimated

effective dose equivalent to any member of

the public offsite from all airborne

radionuclide emissions continues to be

much less than one mrem/yr (<10% of the

guideline). Compliance with the regulations

listed above requires periodic measurements

of effluents to confirm the low emission

levels. The estimated effluents for 1997 are

shown in Table 4.5 and include measured

and calculated effluents, evaporated liquids,

and resuspension of contaminated soils.

An increase in efforts to monitor radioactive

air emissions at the NTS began in November

1988 as a result of requirements in DOE

Order 5400.1. Known and potential effluent

sources throughout the NTS were assessed

for their potential to contribute to public dose

and were considered in designing the “Site

Effluent Monitoring Plan”, which forms part

of the “Environmental Monitoring Plan,

Nevada Test Site and Support Facilities”

published in November 1991 (DOE 1991c). 

This plan was updated in 1992 and 1993,

but will be superseded by a “Routine

Radiological Environmental Monitoring Plan”

that is in review and will be completed in

1998.

ENVIRONMENTAL

SURVEILLANCE

Air surveillance was conducted onsite

throughout the NTS. Equipment at fixed

locations continuously sampled the ambient

air to monitor for radioactive material

content. Ambient gamma exposures were

measured with TLDs placed at fixed

locations.

AIR MONITORING

The air surveillance program operated

samplers that were designed to detect

airborne radioactive particles, radioactive

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

form of H HO or HHO (HTO). 3 3 3

The air sampling units used to measure

radioactive particulates were operated at 48

stations on the NTS (Figure 4.1) and Nellis

Air Force Range Complex (NAFRC) during

1997. These stations included 13 at

radioactive waste management facilities. 

Access, worker population, geographical

coverage, presence of radioactivity, and

availability of electrical power were

considerations in site selection for air

samplers. During 1996, air samplers

powered by solar photovoltaic/battery

systems were acquired for operation in

contaminated areas where commercial

power was not available and were in use

during 1997.

An air sampling unit consisted of a constant

volume pump drawing approximately 85

L/min (3 cfm) of air through a 9-cm (3.5-in)

diameter Whatman GF/A glass-fiber filter

that trapped air particulates. Due to the

moratorium on nuclear explosives testing,

charcoal cartridges are no longer used in the

air sampler. The particulate filter was

mounted in a plastic, cone-shaped sample

holder that faced downward at a height of

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

measured the operating time. The clock

time multiplied by 85 L/min yields the volume

of air sampled, which was about 860 m3

(30,000 ft ) during the typical 7-day sampling 3

period.

The filters were analyzed for gross alpha,

gross beta, and for gamma-emitting

radionuclides. The filters from the Area 5

Radioactive Waste Management Site

(RWMS-5) samplers were not analyzed for

gross alpha. The filters from 13 weeks of

sampling were composited and analyzed for

plutonium isotopes. Noble gases were

continuously sampled at three locations and

analyzed for Kr. These sampling units 85

were housed in a metal tool box and

consisted of three metal air bottles attached

to the sampling unit with short hoses. A

vacuum was maintained on the first bottle by

pumping the sample into the other two

bottles. The two collection bottles were

exchanged weekly and contained a sample

volume of about 400 L (14 ft ) each at 3

standard conditions.
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

4-5

Airborne HTO vapor was monitored at 13 15 new stations were added reducing the

locations throughout the NTS. For this total to 100 stations.

monitoring, a small pump continuously drew

air into the sampler at approximately 0.4 WASTE MANAGEMENT SITE 

L/min, the total volume being measured with MONITORING

a dry-gas meter. The HTO vapor was

removed from the air stream by a silica-gel

drying column followed by a drierite column,

for detection of breakthrough. These

columns were exchanged biweekly.

The analytical procedures used on all these

air samples are summarized in Table 4.2.

AMBIENT GAMMA MONITORING

Ambient gamma monitoring was conducted

at 166 stations within the NTS (Figure 4.2)

by use of TLDs. The dosimeter used was

the Panasonic UD-814AS environmental

dosimeter, consisting of four elements

housed in an air-tight, water-tight,

ultraviolet-light-protected case. One

element, made of lithium borate, was only

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

made of calcium sulfate, were shielded by

1,000 mg/cm of plastic and lead to monitor 2

penetrating gamma radiation only. TLDs

were deployed in a holder placed about one

meter above the ground and were

exchanged quarterly. Locations were

chosen at the site boundary, at locations

where historical monitoring has occurred, or

where operations or ground contamination

have occurred.

The TLD network at the NTS in 1997 began

with 160 TLDs at fixed locations. During the

year, two new stations were established

near the U-3co crater in Area 3, four new

stations were established outside the fenced

area of the RWMS-3 and 18 stations around

the Mounds Strategic Materials storage

compounds in Area 5 were terminated after

the radioactive materials were shipped out to

a uranium reprocessing facility to recover

uranium. Throughout the year, TLDs were 

used at a total of 166 locations. At the end

of the year, 63 stations were terminated and

Environmental surveillance on the NTS

included monitoring of RWMSs. These sites

are used for the disposal of low-level

radioactive waste from the NTS and other

DOE facilities. Shallow-land disposal in

trenches and pits was done at the RWMS-5

and in subsidence craters at the 

RWMS-3.

There were 17 air particulate sampling

stations, 9 HTO vapor sampling stations,

and 48 TLD stations placed inside and

around RWMS-5 at the beginning of 1997. 

The site was assessed using site specific

monitoring data, and it was determined that

the facility could be adequately monitored

with 7 air particulate and 4 HTO samplers,

with no change in TLDs. The RWMS-3 was

monitored by four air particulate stations,

one HTO sampling station, and by nine TLD

stations. 

4.2 OFFSITE RADIOLOGICAL

MONITORING

Under the terms of an Interagency

Agreement between DOE and EPA’s Office

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

conducts an Offsite Radiation Safety

Program (ORSP) around the NTS. The

primary activity of the ORSP is routine

monitoring of potential human exposure

pathways. Secondary activities include

maintaining readiness to monitor during

nuclear testing, emergency response, public

information, and community assistance.

Maintaining readiness was exercised during

two subcritical experiments conducted in

1997, REBOUND and HOLOG. For each of

the two experiments, R&IE-LV senior

personnel served on the Test Controller's

Scientific Advisory Panel and on the EPA

offsite radiological safety staff. 
4-6

Routine offsite environmental monitoring for air samplers were operational at six of the

compliance with National Emission

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants

(NESHAPs) and with DOE orders 5400.1

and 5400.5 continued throughout 1997.

Environmental monitoring networks,

described in following Chapters, measure

radioactivity in air (this chapter),

groundwater (Chapter 5), and milk (Chapter

6). These networks monitor the major

potential pathways for transfer of

radionuclides to man. Ambient gamma

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

Panasonic TLDs. Data from these networks

are used to calculate an annual exposure to

the offsite residents. 

The Community Technical Liaison Program

(CTLP), formerly Community Radiation

Monitoring Program (CRMP), stations that

were established at prominent locations in a

number of communities around the NTS,

continued to operate. The CTLP stations

are managed by local residents and contain

air samplers, PICs, and TLDs. The Desert

Research Institute (DRI), University and

Community College System of Nevada, is a

cooperator with R&IE-LV in the CTLP.

AIR SURVEILLANCE NETWORK

(ASN)

The inhalation of radioactive airborne

particles can be a major pathway for human

exposure to radiation. The atmospheric

monitoring networks are designed to detect

environmental radioactivity from both NTS

and non-NTS activities. Data from

atmospheric monitoring can be used to

determine the concentration and source of

airborne radioactivity and to project the

fallout patterns and durations of exposure to

man.

The ASN is currently designed to monitor

the areas within approximately 130 km (80

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

1997, the ASN consisted of 20 continuously

operating sampling stations. High-volume

stations. The current network is shown in

Figure 4.3. Station location depends in part

on the availability of electrical power and a

resident willing to operate the equipment.

The low-volume air samplers at each station

are equipped to collect particulate

radionuclides on 5-cm (2.0-in) diameter

glass-fiber filters at a flow rate of about 80

m (2,800 ft ) per day. Filters are changed 3 3

weekly (approximately 560 m or 20,000 ft 3 3

of air sampled). Activated charcoal

cartridges placed directly behind the filters to

collect gaseous radioiodine are changed at 

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

20- x 25-cm (8- x 10-in) glass-fiber filters at

a flow rate of approximately 1,600 m3

(58,000 ft ) per day. High-volume samples 3

are collected monthly (approximately 

48,000 m , or 1.7 million ft of air sampled). 3 3

Duplicate air samples are collected from two

routine ASN stations each week. The

duplicate samplers are operated at randomly

selected stations for three months and then

moved to new locations. One duplicate 

high-volume sampler is operated in the same

manner as the duplicate low-volume samplers. 

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

and the charcoal cartridges from low-volume

samplers are analyzed by high-resolution

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

and gross beta activity 7 to 14 days after

sample collection to allow time for the decay

of naturally occurring radon progeny. Filters

from high-volume air samplers are analyzed

using high-resolution gamma spectrometry

and are then analyzed for plutonium

isotopes using wet chemistry methods. 

THERMOLUMINESCENT

DOSIMETRY (TLD) NETWORK

An essential component of environmental

radiological assessments is external 

dosimetry, which is used to determine both

individual and population exposure to

ambient radiation, natural or otherwise.

4-8

The primary purpose of EPA’s offsite fixed environmental TLD monitoring stations

environmental dosimetry program is to

establish dose estimates to populations

living in the areas surrounding the NTS. 

Panasonic Model UD-814 TLDs are used for

environmental monitoring. The UD-814

consists of one element of Li B O :Cu and 24 7

three elements of CaSO :Tm phosphors. 4

The CaSO :Tm elements are behind a filter 4

of approximately 1,000 mg/cm . An average 2

of the corrected values for the latter three

elements gives the total exposure for each

TLD. For quality assurance purposes, two

UD-814 TLDs are deployed at each fixed

environmental station location. The TLDs

are exchanged quarterly.

In addition to a fixed environmental TLD,

EPA deploys personnel TLDs to individual

volunteers, predominantly CTLP station

managers and their alternates, living in

areas surrounding the NTS. 

Panasonic Model UD-802 TLDs are used for

personnel monitoring. The UD-802 consists

of two elements, each of Li B O :Cu and 24 7

CaSO :Tm phosphors. The phosphors are 4

behind filters of approximately 17,300,300

and 1,000 mg/cm respectively. With the 2

use of different phosphors and filtrations, a

dose algorithm can be applied to ratios of

the different element responses. This

process defines the radiation type and

energy and provides data for assessing an

absorbed dose equivalent to the

participating individuals. These TLDs are

also exchanged quarterly.

An average daily exposure rate was

calculated for each quarterly exposure

period and the average of the four values

was multiplied by 365.25 to obtain the total

annual exposure for a station. New

computers and software were installed to

increase report options, and further

hardware upgrades were completed in 1997.

In 1997, the TLD program consisted of 39

fixed environmental monitoring stations and

18 offsite personnel. Figure 4.4 shows the 

and the location of personnel monitoring

participants.

PRESSURIZED ION CHAMBER

(PIC) NETWORK

The PIC network uses Reuter-Stokes

models 1011, 1012, and 1013 PICs. The

PIC is a spherical shell filled with argon gas

at 25 times atmospheric pressure. In the

center of the shell is a spherical electrode

with an electrical charge opposite to the

shell. When gamma radiation penetrates the

sphere, ionization of the gas occurs and the

negative ions are collected by the center

electrode. The current generated is

proportional to the radiation exposure.

The PIC measures gamma radiation

exposure rates and because of its

sensitivity, may detect low-level exposures

not detected by other monitoring methods. 

The primary function of the PIC network is to

detect changes in ambient gamma radiation

due to human activities. In the absence of

such activities, ambient gamma radiation

rates naturally differ among locations as

they may change with altitudes (cosmic

radiation), with radioactivity in the soil

(terrestrial radiation), and may vary slightly

within a location due to weather patterns.

Data are currently recorded on magnetized

recorder tapes, memory data cartridges, and

strip chart recorders. Previously, data

collection was performed by satellite

telemetry for immediate access to the PIC

data. In October 1997, the funding for

support and maintenance of the Los Alamos

National Laboratory (LANL) satellite

telemetry system, which allowed EPA

access to near real-time data, was

discontinued. Currently, the PICs are visited

weekly at the stations immediately adjacent

to the NTS and monthly at the other stations

to retrieve data. EPA stations in Boulder

City, Henderson, Las Vegas, and

Mississippi, display gamma and 

4-10

meteorological data near real-time on the readout of external gamma exposure and a

LANL NEWNET web page which is updated recording barograph are located at all

every 24 hours. stations. All of the equipment is mounted on

There are 26 PICs located in communities community so the residents can become

around the NTS and 1 in Mississippi. The aware of the surveillance and, if interested,

Boulder City station was relocated and can check the data. Also, computerreturned to operation on August 19, 1997, at generated reports of the PIC data are issued

St. Judes Ranch, approximately a quarter monthly for each station.

mile northeast of the previous site. The

locations of the PIC stations around the NTS

are shown in Figure 4.3.

COMMUNITY TECHNICAL LIAISON

PROGRAM (CTLP)

Because of the successful experience with

the Citizen's Monitoring Program during the

purging of the Three Mile Island containment

in 1980, the CRMP was begun. Because of

reductions in the scope of monitoring, the

CRMP was changed to the CTLP. It now

consists of stations located in the states of

Nevada and Utah. In 1997, there were 17

stations located in these two states. The

CTLP is a cooperative project of the DOE,

EPA, and DRI.

DOE/NV sponsors the program. The EPA

provides technical and scientific direction,

maintains the instrumentation and sampling

equipment, analyzes the collected samples,

and interprets and reports the data. The

DRI administers the program by hiring the

local station managers and alternates,

securing rights-of-way, providing utilities,

and performing additional quality assurance

checks of the data. Shown in Figure 4.3 are

the locations of the CTLP stations.

Each station is operated by a local resident. 

In most cases, this resident is a high-school

science teacher. Samples are analyzed at

the R&IE-LV. Data interpretation is provided

by DRI to the communities involved. All of

the 17 CTLP stations had one of the

samplers for the ASN and Noble Gas and

Tritium Surveillance Network, on either

routine or standby status, and a TLD. In

addition, a PIC and recorder for immediate

a stand at a prominent location in each

4.3 NONRADIOLOGICAL

MONITORING

The 1997 nonradiological monitoring

program for the NTS included onsite

sampling of various environmental media

and substances for compliance with federal

and state regulations or permits and for

ecological studies as discussed in Chapters

5 and 6. Air quality monitoring is not

required for the NTS. The air permits issued

by the state of Nevada do require opacity

and material throughput measurements. In

1997, nonradiological monitoring was

conducted for two series of tests conducted

at the Hazardous Material Spill Center

(HSC) on the NTS.

MONITORING OF NTS

OPERATIONS

ROUTINE MONITORING

As there were no industrial-type production

facility operations on the NTS, there was no

significant production of nonradiological air

emissions or liquid discharges to the

environment. Sources of potential

contaminants were limited to construction

support and NTS operational activities. This

included motor pool facilities; large

equipment and drill rig maintenance areas;

cleaning, warehousing, and supply facilities;

and general worker support facilities

(including lodging and administrative offices)

in the Mercury Base Camp, Area 12 Camp,

and to a lesser extent in Area 20 and the

NTS Control Point (CP) Complex in Area 6.
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

4-11

The HSC in Area 5 is a source of potential that an emission exceeds the opacity

release of nonradiological contaminants to

the environment, depending on the individual 

tests conducted. In 1997, there were two

series of tests, involving 38 different

chemicals, conducted at this facility. 

Routine nonradiological environmental

monitoring on the NTS in 1997 was limited to

Nevada operating permit requirements, and

asbestos sampling in conjunction with

asbestos removal and renovation projects

and in accordance with occupational safety

and NESHAPs compliance. 

NTS AIR QUALITY PERMIT COMPLIANCE

Compliance with air quality permits is

accomplished through permit reporting and

renewals, and ongoing verification of

operational compliance with permit specified

limitations. Common air pollution sources at

the NTS include aggregate production,

stemming activities, surface disturbances,

fugitive dust from unpaved roads, fuel

burning equipment, open burning, and fuel

storage facilities. The 1996 Air Quality

Permit Data Report was sent to the state of

Nevada on February 21, 1997. During 1996,

approximately six tons of pollutants were

emitted from operations at the NTS. This

report includes aggregate production,

operating hours of permitted equipment, and

a report of all surface disturbances of five

acres or greater. In order to provide

consistency in responses, the state provided

forms to be completed, which also required

calculation of actual emissions.

NTS air quality permits limit particulate

emissions to 20 percent opacity. 

Certification of personnel to perform valid

visible emission opacity evaluations is

required by the state, with recertification

required every six months. During 1997,

one BN Environmental Compliance

Department employee was recertified. In

1997, several visible emission evaluations

were conducted of permitted air quality point

sources. When visual evaluations determine 

requirement, corrective action is initiated. 

No exceedances of the opacity limit were

noted in 1997.

During 1997, state of Nevada personnel

conducted two inspections of NTS

equipment regulated by air quality operating

permits. In January 1997, the state

conducted an inspection to verify process

flow diagrams for all permitted facilities prior

to issuance of the NTS Class II Air Quality

Operating Permit. In June 1997, a state

inspector returned to conduct an annual

inspection of permitted facilities. There were

no findings reported as a result of these

inspections.

OFFSITE MONITORING

The HSC was established in the Frenchman

Basin in Area 5 as a basic research tool for

studying the dynamics of accidental

releases of various hazardous materials and

the effectiveness of mitigation procedures. 

At the beginning of each HSC test series

and at other tests in the series depending on

projected need, a field monitoring technician

from the EPA with appropriate air sampling

equipment is deployed downwind of the test

at the NTS boundary to measure chemical

concentrations that may have reached the

offsite area. No such monitoring occurred in

1997.

NON-NTS FACILITY MONITORING

Under normal conditions, the operations at

the six non-NTS facilities operated by BN for

DOE/NV do not produce radioactive

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

Vegas Facility (NLVF), (2) the Remote

Sensing Laboratory (RSL), (3) the Special

Technologies Laboratory (STL), (4) the

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

Alamos Operation (LAO), and (6) the

Washington Aerial Measurements Operation

(WAMO).

Air quality operating permits were required

for three of the six non-NTS operations. 
4-12

There were no effluent monitoring AIR SAMPLING RESULTS

requirements associated with these permits. 

Nineteen emission units at the Las Vegas

Area Operation (LVAO), which includes the

NLVF and the RSL, were regulated during

1997 under conditions of 13 permits issued

by the Clark County Health District in Las

Vegas, Nevada. 

The STL of Santa Barbara, California, holds

a permit, issued by the county of Santa

Barbara, to operate a vapor degreaser. The

Air Pollution Control District Permit

conditions include throughput limitations and

record keeping requirements.

No air permits were held or required for the

AVO, LAO, or WAMO facilities in 1997.

AIR QUALITY PERMITS

Air quality permits were required for

numerous locations at the NTS and at two

non-NTS facilities in Las Vegas. The

permits required for 1997 are listed in Table

4.3. The permits required in 1997 for other

non-NTS facilities that support the work of

DOE/NV are listed in Table 4.4.

4.4 AIR SURVEILLANCE

PROGRAM RESULTS

ONSITE RADIOLOGICAL

MONITORING

AIRBORNE EFFLUENTS

During 1997, effluent monitoring at the NTS

involved several operational facilities and

some inactive locations. Due to the

continuation of the moratorium on nuclear

testing throughout 1997, effluent monitoring

for nuclear tests was not required. The

results of effluent monitoring, calculated or

measured, are set forth in Table 4.5. The

total curies of radioactivity included in Table

4.5 are less than were reported in the “1996

Annual Site Environmental Report” because

of smaller tritium emissions.

GROSS ALPHA

The annual average gross alpha results for

each air sampling station are shown in Table

4.6. The NTS average gross alpha result

was 1.7 x 10 μCi/mL (63 μBq/m ), only -15 3

7 percent higher than the median minimum

detectable concentration (MDC). This

average was slightly lower than the 1996

value. The samples from the NAFRC were

all higher than the NTS average at 

2.2 x 10 μCi/mL (81 μBq/m ). -15 3

The samples collected from the air samplers

at the low-level radioactive waste disposal

facility in RWMS-3 had gross alpha levels

slightly above the NTS average. Previous

investigations have not discovered the

source for gross alpha radioactivity in air. 

The air samples from RWMS-5 were not

analyzed for gross alpha radioactivity.

GROSS BETA

The annual average gross beta results for

each air sampling station are shown in

Figure 4.5 and Figure 4.6 indicates the

distribution of this radioactivity. The NTS

average this year is the same as for 1996 at

2.0 x 10 μCi/mL (0.74 mBq/m ). The air -14 3

samples from the NAFRC had the same

average value. This is consistent with the

results for the past few years. Figure 4.7

depicts the trend in concentration for the

past few years, but expressed as percent

Derived Concentration Guide (DCG) (set by

the EPA as 10 mrem per year for inhaled

radioactivity). Note that the levels are only

about 2 percent of the DCG. This guide is

for public exposure and is based on Sr, 90

once a common beta emitting isotope in the

environment. The basic data are in

Table 4.6.

Air samples from RWMS-3 had gross beta

levels that were consistent with the NTS

average value, while those from RWMS-5

were slightly higher than the average.

PLUTONIUM

The annual average Pu result of 6.7 x 238

10 μCi/mL (2.5 μBq/m ) is less than the -19 3

median MDC for this isotope and less than


AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

4-15

the 1996 average. The results from the for 1996. The concentrations in samples

NAFRC were similar. Only 5 of the 45 from the NAFRC were all much lower at

stations had results slightly greater than the 1.2 x 10 μCi/mL (4.4 mBq/m ).

MDC. The annual averages for Pu and for 238

Pu are included in Table 4.6. Concentrations of Be in air samples from 239+240

The Pu network average of 1.9 x 10 percent higher than the NTS average value. 239+240 -17

μCi/mL (0.7 μBq/m ) was about eight times 3

the MDC but was less than the 1996

average value. To indicate the distribution

of this nuclide over the NTS, the annual

average concentration for each station is

plotted in Figure 4.8 (see Figure 4.6 for

RWMS-5). The elevated values in Area 3

are evident therein. The maximum offsite

concentration, at Rachel, Nevada, (see

Table 4.15) was 1.8 x 10 μCi/mL (0.7 -17

μBq/m ), about equal to the onsite average 3

and much less than the onsite maximum

concentrations. Of the NAFRC samples, the

set from CLEAN SLATE I had the highest

concentration of any station on- or offsite,

perhaps because of cleanup activities at that

location in the summer of 1997. The trend

of the NTS site-wide Pu concentration 239+240

with time for the past few years is shown on

Figure 4.9. There the data are plotted as a

percent of the DCG for the general

population as was done for the gross beta

data above. The peak in the curve in 1992

was due to increased concentrations during

the summer of 1992 in Area 3, which was

probably due to increased vehicular traffic

and construction activities.

Air samples from RWMS-3 have

concentrations of plutonium generally above

the NTS average, while those from RWMS-5

are generally lower than the NTS average,

as they are this year.

GAMMA

Gamma spectral analyses of the glass-fiber

filters indicated only naturally occurring

radioactive materials. The predominant one

was Be formed by cosmic ray interaction 7

with nitrogen in the atmosphere. The annual

average values for this isotope are shown in

Table 4.6 and the NTS average of 2.1 x 10-13

μCi/mL (7.8 mBq/m ) is similar to the value RWMS-3 and RWMS-5 are set forth in 3

-13 3

7

both RWMS-3 and RWMS-5 were about 10

NOBLE GASSES

There were only three locations on the NTS

where samples were collected for analysis of

radioactive noble gasses. There is a

sampler at the BJY location, one in Area 19,

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

these samples at present. The annual

average of these three stations was 

27 x 10 μCi/mL (1 Bq/m ), consistent with -12 3

previous results for this isotope. The

analytical data are summarized in Table 4.7.

TRITIATED WATER VAPOR (HTO)

The annual average value for the 13 stations

in this network was 4.2 x 10 pCi/mL (0.2 -6

Bq/m ). This concentration is slightly higher 3

than it was in 1996 as each station had a

slightly higher concentration. All of the data

are displayed in Table 4.8 and are plotted as

a trend over the last several years in Figure

4.10. The data plotted in Figure 4.10 are the

network average concentration of HTO in

each year expressed as a percent of the

DCG for the general offsite population. 

Although there has been a slight downward

trend over the period plotted, all values are

less than 0.2 percent of the DCG.

The HTO concentrations for the two stations

near RWMS-3 were less than the network

average. However, two of the four stations

around the RWMS-5 had concentrations

exceeding the network average, as has

generally occurred. This is related to the

tritium disposed of at this site.

TREND AT THE WASTE MANAGEMENT

SITES

The trends in air concentrations of HTO in

atmospheric moisture and plutonium at 


4-18

Tables 4.9 and 4.10, respectively. There μCi/mL (73 μBq/m ), slightly higher than the

appears to be a trend of decreasing Pu 239+240

and HTO concentration at RWMS-5 but not

at RWMS-3.

ONSITE TLD RESULTS

The 1997 average exposure for the 16

boundary monitoring stations was 127

mR/year, essentially the same as the

average value of 124 mR/yr for these

stations in 1996 (see Table 4.11). Also, the

1997 average exposure for the nine

historically monitored stations was 0.26

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

The results for these stations for the last

four years have been almost identical. 

Both sets of results indicate that external

radiation measured by TLDs has not

changed to any measurable extent, at least

for the last few years.

OFFSITE RADIOLOGICAL

RESULTS

AIR SAMPLING RESULTS

This section describes results for the offsite

ASN. This atmospheric monitoring network

measures the major radionuclides which

could potentially be emitted from activities

on the NTS, as well as naturally occurring

radionuclides. The ASN represents the

possible inhalation exposure pathway for the

general public. 

Gamma spectrometry was performed on all

samples from the ASN high and low volume

air samplers. The majority of the samples

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

gamma-emitting radionuclides detected). 

Naturally occurring Be was detected 7

occasionally by the low-volume network of

samplers. It was detected consistently by

the high-volume sample method with an

average annual activity of 1.5 x 10 μCi/mL, -13

slightly less then the onsite average.

GROSS ALPHA

Gross alpha analysis was performed on all

low-volume network samples. The average 

annual gross alpha activity was 2.0 x 10-15

3

onsite results. Summary results for the ASN

are shown in Table 4.13.

GROSS BETA

As in previous years, the gross beta results

from the low-volume sampling network

consistently exceeded the analytical MDC. 

The annual average gross beta activity was

1.5 ± 0.60 x 10 μCi/mL (5.5 ± 2.2 x 10 -14 -4

Bq/m ), somewhat lower than the results for 3

the onsite network. Summary gross beta

results for the ASN are in Table 4.14.

PLUTONIUM

High-volume samples were collected

monthly and analyzed for plutonium

isotopes. Due to a low limit of detection for

high-volume sampling and analysis

methods, environmental levels of Pu 239+240

were consistently detected at all six of the

sampling sites. A total of 66 samples were

analyzed during the CY, of which 52 were

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

above the MDC for Pu. The average 238

annual activity was 0.18 x 10 μCi/mL (7 -18

nBq/m ) for Pu and 4.2 x 10 μCi/mL 3 238 -18

(0.16 μBq/m ) for Pu, about one-fourth 3 239+240

the activity detected in the onsite air

network. Summary results of the highvolume data are shown in Table 4.15.

TLD RESULTS FOR STATIONS

There were 39 offsite environmental stations

monitored with TLDs in 1997. Figure 4.4

shows current fixed environmental

monitoring locations. Total annual exposure

for 1997 ranged from 61 mR (0.61mSv) per

year at Pahrump, Nevada, to 161 mR (1.6

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

mean annual exposure of 99 mR (0.99 mSv)

per year for all operating locations. The next

highest annual exposure was 130 mR (1.3

mSv) per year at Queen City Summit,

Nevada. All results are shown in Table 4.16. 

These results are consistent with those for

1996.
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

4-19

TLD RESULTS FOR PERSONNEL and Tonopah stations show the greatest

Eighteen offsite residents were issued TLDs

to monitor their annual dose equivalent. 

Locations of personnel monitoring

participants are also shown in Figure 4.4. 

Annual whole body dose equivalents ranged

from a low of 74 mrem (0.74 mSv) to a high BN facilities that use radioactive sources or

of 147 mrem (1.5 mSv) with a mean of 98 radiation producing equipment with the

mrem (0.98 mSv) for all monitored personnel potential to expose the general population

during 1997. A summary of the results is outside the property line to direct radiation

shown in Table 4.17. These results are also are the Special Technologies Laboratory

similar to those for 1996. (STL), during operation of the Sealed Tube

PRESSURIZED ION CHAMBER NETWORK Febetron; the Washington Aerial

The PIC data presented in this section are

based on daily averages of gamma

exposure rates from each station. Table

4.18 contains the number of daily averages 

available from each station and the

maximum, minimum, mean, standard

deviation, and median of the averages. The

mean ranged from 8.1 μR/hr at Pahrump,

Nevada, to 17.7 μR/hr at Milford, Utah, or

annual exposures from 71 to 155 mR (18 to

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

and the average gamma exposure rate for

each station. Background levels of

environmental gamma exposure rates in the

United States (from the combined effects of

terrestrial and cosmic sources) vary between

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

III 1980). The annual exposure levels

observed at each PIC station are well within

these United States background levels. The

data from the Milford, Stone Cabin Ranch,

range and the most variability. All of these

data are within a few tenths μR/hr from

those of last year.

NON-NTS BN FACILITY MONITORING

Neutron Generator and operation of the

Measurements Operation (WAMO) during

storage of sealed sources; and the Atlas

North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF) A-1 Source

Range. Sealed sources are tested every six

months to assure there is no leakage of

radioactive material. The data from sealed

source testing are kept in the BN Radiation

Protection Records. Operation of radiation

generating devices is controlled by BN

procedures.

Fence line radiation monitoring at STL,

WAMO, and NLV was conducted during

1997 using Panasonic Type UD-814 TLDs. 

At least two TLDs were at the fence line on

each side of any facility. TLDs were

exchanged on a quarterly basis with

additional control TLDs kept in a shielded

safe. These TLD results are given in

Table 4.19. The range of results, 52 to 115

mR/yr, is within the background range in the

continental U.S.
4-20

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

 Onsite Monitoring 

Sample Collection Number of Type of

Type Description Frequency Locations Analysis (a)

Air Sampling through Weekly 45 Gamma spectroscopy,

 Whatman GF/A glass gross  & ß,( Pu, 238,239+240

fiber filter, 85 L/min. Monthly 1 quarterly composite). (a)

Low-volume sampling Biweekly 13 HTO (tritiated water)

through silica gel

Low-volume Weekly 3 Kr 85

sampling

External UD-814AS Quarterly 166 Total quarterly

Gamma thermoluminescent exposure

Radiation dosimeters

Levels

 Offsite Monitoring 

Air Sampling through 5-cm Weekly 20 Gamma spectroscopy,

 glass-fiber filter and gross  & ß

a charcoal cartridge,

56 L/min

Sampling through 500- Monthly 6 Gamma spectroscopy

cm glass-fiber filter at Pu 2 238,239+240

1100 L/min

External UD-814AS Quarterly 39 Quarterly exposure at

Gamma thermoluminescent deployed location

Radiation dosimeters

Levels

UD-802 Quarterly 18 Quarterly exposure 

thermoluminescent of offsite personnel

dosimeters

External Reuter-Stokes Continuous 26 Continuous rate 

Gamma Pressurized recording summarized 

Radiation Ion Chambers hourly

Rate

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

weekly.
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

4-21

 Table 4.2 Analytical Procedures, Air and TLD - 1997

 BN Analytical Procedures 

Count 

Sample Type Analytical Time Estimated

Analysis Nominal Size Procedure Equipment (min) MDC

Gross  Air, 860 m After 5 - 7 days, Gas-flow 20 74 μBq/m 3 3

place in planchet proportional (2 x 10 pCi/m ) -3 3

counter

Gross  Air, 860 m Continue count. Gas-flow 20 150 μBq/m 3 3

proportional (4 x 10 pCi/m ) -3 3

counter

Gamma

spectrometry Air, 860 m Move planchet to HpGe, calibrated 1 20 370 μBq/m 3 3

Gamma Spec keV per channel, (1 x 10 pCi/m ) -2 3

20 to 2000 keV for Cs 137

Pu Air, Acid dissolution, Alpha spectrometer 333 0.1 μBq/m 238,239+240 3

Quarterly 11,000 m ion-exchange, ppt with solid-state PIP (3 x 10 pCi/m ) 3 -6 3

composite with Pu tracer, detector 242

collect on filter

Tritium Air, 8 m Moisture trapped on 5 mL in cocktail 70 0.07 Bq/m 3 3

silica gel, removed counted in liquid (2 pCi/m )3

with heat scintillation counter

Kr Air, 0.4 m Cryogenic Liquid scintillation 20 0.37 Bq/m 85 3

separation, collect counter (10 pCi/m )3

in cocktail

Ambient TLD, UD- Expose in field, 3 Automatic TL 10 mR per 

gamma 814AS months reader quarter

 EPA Analytical Procedures 

Gross  Air, 560 m After 7-14 days Gas-flow 30 30 μBq/m 3 3

place in proportional (8 x 10 pCi/m ) -4 3

planchet counter

Gross  Air, 560 m After 7-14 days Gas-flow 30 90 μBq/m 3 3

place in proportional (2.5 x 10 pCi/m ) -3 3

planchet counter

Gamma Air, 560 m Place on detector, HpGe detector, 30 2 mBq 3

spectrometry Low-vol has online calibrated 0.5 (0.05pCi)/m3

10,000 m3 analytical program keV/channel from 20 μBq (5 x 10-4

High-vol 40 to 2000 keV pCi) per m3

(Hi-vol), Cs 137
4-22

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

 EPA Analytical Procedures 

Analysis Nominal Size Procedure Equipment (min) MDC

Sample Type Analytical Time Estimated

Count

Pu Air, Acid dissolution, Alpha 1000 2 μBq/m 238,239+240

10,000 m separate by ion spectrometer, (5 x 10 3

exchange, silicon surface pCi/m )

electroplate barrier detector

3

-5

3

Ambient TLD, UD-814 Expose in field, Automatic TL 5 mR per

gamma 3 months reader quarter

Ambient TLD, UD-802 Personnel wear 3 Automatic TL 5 mR per

gamma months reader quarter

Gamma Pressurized Expose in field Online display 5 μR/hr

rate ion chamber and data

storage

systems

Table 4.3 NTS Active Air Quality Permits - 1997

Expiration

Permit No. Facility or Operation Date

AP9711-0549 02/07/02

Area 1 Facilities Shaker Plant Circuit

Rotary Dryer Circuit

 Wet Aggregate Plant

 Concrete Batch Plant

 Sandbag Facility

Cedar Rapids Screen

Cambilt Conveyer

Area 3 Facilities Mud Plant

Area 5 Facilities Naval Thermal Treatment Unit

Area 6 Facilities Cementing Equip. (silos)

Decontamination Facility Boiler

Diesel Fuel Tank

 Gasoline Fuel Tank

 Portable Field Bins

Portable Stemming System 1 & 2

Diesel Engines (13)

Two-Part Epoxy Batch Plant

Area 12 Facilities Cafeteria Boiler

Concrete Batch Plant
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

4-23

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

Expiration

Permit No. Facility or Operation Date

AP9711-0549, cont.

Area 23 Facilities Building 753 Boiler

 Cafeteria Boilers (2)

 Diesel Fuel Tank

 Gasoline Fuel Tank

 NTS Surfaces Disturbances

WSI Incinerator

AP9711-0556 Area 5 HSC 10/20/02

AP9611-0683 DOUBLE TRACKS Surface Disturbance (TTR) 06/12/01

AP9711-0549 CLEAN SLATE I Environmental Restoration Project 04/04/02

AP9711-0549 CLEAN SLATE II Environmental Restoration Project 06/30/02

OP 97-20 NTS Open Burn - Training 02/06/98

OP97-34 Area 27 Burn Box 02/06/98

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

Expiration

Permit No. Facility or Operation Date

Las Vegas Area Operation(a)

A38702 Hamada Offset Press, NLVF Indef.

A06505 Time Saver Aluminum Sander, NLVF Indef.

A06507 Trinco Dry Blast with Dry Bag Dust Filters, NLVF Indef.

A38701 Spray Paint Booth, NLVF Indef.

A06503 Three Emergency Generators, and

 Emergency Fire Control Equipment, NLVF Indef.

A38703 Emergency Generator, NLVF Indef.

A34801 Columbia Boiler Model WL-180, Penthouse #1, RSL Indef.

A34802 Columbia Boiler Model WL-90, Penthouse #1, RSL Indef.

A34803 4.0 MM BTU Water Heater #2, RSL Indef.

A34804 Cummins Emergency Generator and Emergency

 Fire Control Pump, RSL Indef.

A34805 Spray Paint Booth, RSL Indef.

A0034811 Excimer Laser, RSL Indef.

Special Technologies Laboratory(a)

8477 Permit to Operate a 12 Gallon Capacity Vapor Degreaser Indef.

(a) An annual fee is paid on these permits.
4-24

Table 4.5 NTS Radionuclide Emissions - 1997

Onsite Liquid Discharges

Curies(a)

ContainmentPonds H Sr Cs Pu 

3 90 137 238 

Area 12, E Tunnel 1.6 × 10 1.5 × 10 1.7 × 10 1.5 × 10 

1 -5 -3 -6 

Area 3, Well U-3cn PS#2 3.7 × 100Area 3, Well U-3cn#5 5.5 × 10-1TOTAL 2.0 x 10 1.5 x 10 1.7 x 10 1.5 x 10 

1 -5 -3 -6 

Airborne Effluent Releases

Curies(a)

Facility Name

H Pu 3 (b) 239+240

Areas 3 and 9 0.036 (c)Area 5, RWMS 2.4 x 10 (d) -1Atlas Facility 1.1 x 10 (d) -1SEDAN Crater 1.4 x 10 (d) 2Other Areas 0.24 (c)TOTAL 1.4 x 10 0.28 2(a) Multiply by 3.7 × 10 to obtain Bq. Calculated releases from laboratory spills and losses are included in Tab

10

(b) In the form of tritiated water vapor, primarily HTO.(c) Resuspension from known surface deposits.(d) Calculated from air sampler data.
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

4-25

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

Location Gross  Gross  Beryllium-7 Pu Pu 238 239+240

Area 1, BJY 1.5 x 10 1.9 x 10 2.0 x 10 7.9 x 10 2.1 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -17

Area 2, Complex 1.7 x 10 2.0 x 10 2.4 x 10 2.8 x 10 4.9 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -18

Area 2, 2-1 Substation 1.5 x 10 1.9 x 10 2.2 x 10 5.2 x 10 2.1 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -17

Area 3, Mud Plant 1.7 x 10 1.9 x 10 2.1 x 10 5.8 x 10 4.1 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -17

Area 3, U-3ah/at E 1.8 x 10 2.3 x 10 1.0 x 10 1.9 x 10 -14 -13 -18 -17

Area 3, U-3ah/at N 1.9 x 10 2.0 x 10 2.3 x 10 6.5 x 10 4.9 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -17

Area 3, U-3ah/at S 2.0 x 10 1.9 x 10 2.3 x 10 7.3 x 10 7.3 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -17

Area 3, U-3ah/at W 1.7 x 10 2.3 x 10 -4.6 x 10 1.2 x 10 -14 -13 -20 -17

Area 3, U-3bh S 1.9 x 10 1.8 x 10 2.0 x 10 -2.0 x 10 2.0 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -17

Area 3, U-3bg N 2.2 x 10 2.1 x 10 1.5 x 10 -1.9 x 10 6.4 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -17

Area 3, Well ER-3-1 1.5 x 10 1.9 x 10 1.8 x 10 4.4 x 10 1.1 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -17

Area 4, Bunker T-4 1.6 x 10 1.9 x 10 2.6 x 10 6.9 x 10 3.7 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -18 -17

Area 5, RWMS No. 1 2.1 x 10 2.3 x 10 4.1 x 10 3.2 x 10 -14 -13 -19 -18

Area 5, RWMS No. 4 2.2 x 10 2.3 x 10 2.6 x 10 3.0 x 10 -14 -13 -20 -18

Area 5, RWMS No. 6 2.2 x 10 2.5 x 10 6.1 x 10 2.2 x 10 -14 -13 -20 -18

Area 5, RWMS No. 8 2.2 x 10 2.5 x 10 4.3 x 10 2.5 x 10 -14 -13 -20 -18

Area 5, RWMS Pit 5 2.1 x 10 2.2 x 10 9.9 x 10 1.8 x 10 -14 -13 -20 -18

Area 5, TP Building N 2.4 x 10 2.3 x 10 1.9 x 10 1.4 x 10 -14 -13 -19 -18

Area 5, TP Building S 2.3 x 10 1.8 x 10 -7.4 x 10 1.6 x 10 -14 -13 -20 -18

Area 5, WEF S 2.0 x 10 2.0 x 10 2.0 x 10 -1.1 x 10 2.7 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -18

Area 5, WEF N 1.9 x 10 2.0 x 10 1.4 x 10 3.9 x 10 2.0 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -18

Area 5, DOD 1.6 x 10 1.9 x 10 1.9 x 10 5.0 x 10 4.4 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -20 -18

Area 5, Well 5B 1.8 x 10 2.2 x 10 2.3 x 10 5.3 x 10 2.7 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -20 -18

Area 6, YUCCA 1.8 x 10 2.1 x 10 1.5 x 10 2.3 x 10 1.4 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -17

Area 6, CP-6 1.7 x 10 2.0 x 10 2.5 x 10 8.0 x 10 6.6 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -18

Area 6, Well 3 1.6 x 10 1.9 x 10 1.5 x 10 3.1 x 10 7.1 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -18

Area 7, UE-7ns 1.5 x 10 1.8 x 10 1.7 x 10 7.6 x 10 1.0 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -20 -17

Area 9, 9-300 2.2 x 10 1.9 x 10 1.6 x 10 4.2 x 10 2.6 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -18 -16

Area 10, Gate 700 S 1.6 x 10 1.9 x 10 2.1 x 10 1.9 x 10 6.6 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -18

Area 10, SEDAN Crater 1.6 x 10 2.0 x 10 2.1 x 10 2.1 x 10 4.6 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -18 -17

Area 11, Gate 293 1.4 x 10 1.8 x 10 1.3 x 10 3.9 x 10 1.1 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -20 -17

Area 12, Complex 1.1 x 10 1.6 x 10 2.3 x 10 6.0 x 10 1.5 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -18

Area 15, EPA Farm 1.5 x 10 1.8 x 10 1.8 x 10 3.0 x 10 2.9 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -17

Area 16, 3545 Substation 1.4 x 10 1.8 x 10 2.0 x 10 1.5 x 10 1.9 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -20 -19

Area 18, Well UE-18t 1.5 x 10 1.8 x 10 1.6 x 10 1.5 x 10 2.0 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -17

Area 20, SCHOONER 1.5 x 10 1.9 x 10 2.6 x 10 2.0 x 10 2.0 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -18 -18

Area 20, CABRIOLET 1.7 x 10 1.8 x 10 2.0 x 10 2.8 x 10 4.3 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -18 -19

Area 20, Complex 1.4 x 10 1.6 x 10 1.9 x 10 1.0 x 10 5.4 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -19

Area 23, Bldg 790 No. 2 1.6 x 10 2.1 x 10 2.7 x 10 -7.2 x 10 3.4 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -20 -19

Area 23, H&S Building 1.5 x 10 1.9 x 10 2.2 x 10 1.1 x 10 8.6 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -19

Area 25, E-MAD N 1.5 x 10 1.8 x 10 2.2 x 10 6.6 x 10 1.3 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -20 -18

Area 25, NRDS 1.8 x 10 1.9 x 10 2.3 x 10 7.0 x 10 7.1 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -20 -19

Area 27, Complex 1.3 x 10 1.7 x 10 1.2 x 10 1.1 x 10 1.6 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -18

Average 1.6 x 10 2.0 x 10 2.1 x 10 6.5 x 10 1.9 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -17

Area 13, Project 57 2.0 x 10 1.9 x 10 1.2 x 10 7.7 x 10 5.1 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -17

Area 52, CLEAN SLATE I 2.5 x 10 2.1 x 10 1.2 x 10 2.2 x 10 4.0 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -18 -16

Area 52, CLEAN SLATE III 2.3 x 10 2.0 x 10 1.2 x 10 -6.8 x 10 3.3 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -20 -18

Area 52, DOUBLE TRACKS 2.0 x 10 2.0 x 10 1.2 x 10 -8.0 x 10 4.5 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -20 -18

Average 2.2 x 10 2.0 x 10 1.2 x 10 7.0 x 10 1.6 x 10 -15 -14 -13 -19 -16

Median MDC 1.5 x 10 4.1 x 10 1.1 x 10 8.3 x 10 2.5 x 10 -15 -15 -13 -19 -18
4-26

Table 4.7 Summary of NTS Kr Concentrations - 1997 85

 Kr Concentration (10 μCi/mL) 85 -12

Arithmetic Standard Mean as

Location Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation % DCG

Area 1, BJY 48 38 6.2 28 7.5 <0.01

Area 19, Pahute Substation 43 40 -9.2 24 9.1 <0.01

Area 20, Dispensary 46 49 4.4 29 9.2 <0.01

All Stations 137 49 -9.2 27 8.8 <0.01 

Median MDC was 8.7 x 10 μCi/mL -12

Table 4.8 Airborne Tritium Concentrations on the NTS - 1997

 H Concentration (10 pCi/mL) 3 -6

Arithmetic Standard Mean as

Location Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation %DCG

Area 1, BJY 26 2.2 -0.4 0.84 0.74 <0.01

Area 3, Mud Plant 25 4.2 -0.64 1.2 1.3 0.013

Area 3, U-3ah/at N 25 3.4 -1.4 1.2 1.2 0.012

Area 5, RWMS No. 1 26 3.6 -0.2 1.3 0.86 0.013

Area 5, RWMS No. 4 26 15 0.30 3.7 3.5 0.037

Area 5, RWMS No. 6 25 3.9 -0.33 1.5 1.1 0.015

Area 5, RWMS No. 8 21 7.4 -0.18 1.5 1.1 0.085

Area 6, Decon Pad 14 56 4.1 21 12 0.21

Area 10, SEDAN Crater 25 29 0.001 9.6 8.6 0.095

Area 12, Complex 25 7.6 -2.3 0.40 1.7 <0.01

Area 12, E Tunnel Pond No. 2 26 39 -0.14 13 11 0.13

Area 15, EPA Farm 25 20. 1.9 6.4 3.9 0.064

Area 23, H&S Building 26 1.3 -1.1 -0.03 0.60 <0.01

All Stations 315 56 -2.3 4.2 7.2 0.047

Median MDC was 2.7 x 10 pCi/mL -6

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

Pu Pu Tritium 239+240 238

Year ( x 10 μCi/mL) ( x 10 μCi/mL) ( x 10 μCi/mL) -17 -17 -12

Arithmetic Mean 1997 3.8 0.06 1.2

Arithmetic Mean 1996 16 0.25 0.5

Arithmetic Mean 1995 8.8 0.16 NA

Arithmetic Mean 1994 13 0.25 NA

Mean MDC 0.25 0.083 2.8

Derived Concentration Guide 2,000 3,000 100,000
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

4-27

Table 4.12 NTS TLD Historical Station Comparisons, 1991-1997

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

Pu Pu Tritium 239+240 238

Year ( x 10 μCi/mL) ( x 10 μCi/mL) ( x 10 μCi/mL) -17 -17 -12

Arithmetic Mean 1997 0.23 0.03 3.7

Arithmetic Mean 1996 0.51 0.02 3.2

Arithmetic Mean 1995 0.6 0.01 5.7

Arithmetic Mean 1994 1.1 0.04 4.9

Mean MDC 0.25 0.083 2.8

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

Table 4.11 NTS Boundary Gamma Monitoring Results Summary - 1997

First Second Third Fourth Annual

Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter Average

Location (mR/day) (mR/day) (mR/day) (mR/day) (mR/d) (mR/yr)

310 U-15E Substation 0.27 0.27 0.27 0.25 0.27 97

342 Stake C-31 0.40 0.45 0.44 0.38 0.42 150

355 Gold Meadows 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.29 107 (a)

365 Stake R-29 0.38 0.44 0.43 0.37 0.40 150

382 Stake J-41 0.35 0.40 0.40 0.34 0.37 140

383 Stake LC-4 0.44 0.49 0.48 0.43 0.46 170

384 Stake A-118 0.39 0.43 0.43 0.40 0.41 150

386 Papoose Lake Road 0.22 0.23 0.22 0.21 0.22 81

387 Gate 19-3P 0.39 0.43 0.45 0.41 150 (a)

388 Hill Top 0.35 0.36 0.37 0.41 0.38 140

389 East of U11B 0.32 0.33 0.35 0.32 0.33 120

400 Army Well No. 1 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.23 83 (a)

402 3.3 Miles SE of Aggregate Pit 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.17 0.17 63

403 Guard Station 510 0.34 0.39 0.34 0.33 0.35 130

404 Yucca Mountain 0.42 0.41 0.38 0.35 0.39 140

405 Cat Canyon/Buggy Rd 0.44 0.50 0.50 0.45 0.47 170

(a) Missing TLD.

 Exposure Rate (mR/day) 

Area Station 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997

5 Well 5B 0.36 0.31 0.39 0.34 0.30 0.30 0.30

6 CP-6 0.24 0.23 0.30 0.19 0.19 0.21 0.20

6 Yucca Oil Storage 0.33 0.31 0.37 0.27 0.26 0.28 0.28

23 Building 650 Dosimetry 0.19 0.18 0.26 0.15 0.15 0.14 0.16

23 Building 650 Roof 0.19 0.18 0.25 0.14 0.15 0.14 0.16

23 Post Office 0.24 0.23 0.30 0.21 0.20 0.18 0.20

25 HENRE Site 0.40 0.36 0.45 0.32 0.33 0.34 0.32

25 NRDS Warehouse 0.39 0.37 0.46 0.33 0.36 0.32 0.33

27 Cafeteria 0.42 0.39 0.46 0.33 0.33 0.34 0.37

Network Average 0.31 0.28 0.36 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.26
4-28

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

 Concentration (10 μCi/mL [37 μBq/m ]) -15 3

Sampling Standard

Location Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation

Alamo, NV 52 5.3 0.0 2.2 1.2

Amargosa Center, NV 50 5.9 -0.1 1.8 1.3

Beatty, NV 52 5.4 0.3 2.4 1.3

Boulder City, NV 23 6.6 0.3 2.7 1.5

Goldfield, NV 52 6.8 0.3 2.2 1.4

Henderson, NV 51 6.3 -0.6 2.0 1.4

Indian Springs, NV 51 3.4 0.2 1.3 0.73

Las Vegas, NV 51 4.4 0.1 2.0 0.95

Overton, NV 51 6.0 0.2 1.8 1.3

Pahrump, NV 50 3.6 -0.4 1.6 0.93

Pioche, NV 50 3.3 0.2 1.4 0.72

Rachel, NV 51 7.3 0.2 2.9 1.6

Sunnyside, NV 35 4.3 -0.2 1.3 0.91

Stone Cabin, NV 52 4.3 0.9 2.4 0.88

Tonopah, NV 51 4.1 0.0 1.8 1.0

Twin Springs, NV 52 12 -0.4 2.5 1.8

Cedar City, UT 52 4.8 0.7 2.4 0.98

Delta, UT 52 5.5 0.3 1.2 0.93

Milford, UT 47 3.8 0.3 1.5 0.78

St. George, UT 21 6.6 0.7 2.5 1.5

Mean MDC = 7.5 x 10 μCi/mL Standard Deviation of Mean MDC = 2.3 x 10 μCi/mL -16 -16

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

 Concentration (10 μCi/mL [0.37 mBq/m ]) -14 3

Sampling Standard

Location Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation

Alamo, NV 52 6.9 0.46 1.5 0.85

Amargosa Center, NV 50 2.7 0.20 1.5 0.52

Beatty, NV 52 3.1 0.51 1.5 0.50

Boulder City, NV 23 3.0 0.13 1.8 0.71

Goldfield, NV 52 2.4 0.20 1.4 0.51

Henderson, NV 51 3.0 0.39 1.5 0.52

Indian Springs, NV 51 3.1 0.27 1.4 0.54

Las Vegas, NV 51 3.0 0.00 1.4 0.60

Overton, NV 51 3.5 0.65 1.7 0.57

Pahrump, NV 50 2.4 0.47 1.4 0.40

Pioche, NV 50 2.4 0.08 1.4 0.51

Rachel, NV 51 4.2 0.36 1.5 0.60

Stone Cabin, NV 52 2.6 0.10 1.3 0.47

Sunnyside, NV 35 2.6 0.63 1.3 0.42

Tonopah, NV 51 3.1 0.28 1.3 0.48

Twin Springs, NV 52 5.3 0.41 1.6 0.78

Cedar City, UT 52 2.3 0.48 1.4 0.45

Delta, UT 52 3.8 0.69 1.6 0.72

Milford, UT 47 3.0 0.21 1.6 0.56

St. George, UT 21 3.7 0.91 2.2 0.71

Mean MDC = 2.43 x 10 μCi/mL Standard Deviation of Mean MDC = 3.89 x 10 μCi/mL -15 -16
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

4-29

Table 4.15 Plutonium Results for the Offsite Hi-Volume Air Surveillance Network - 1997

Pu Concentration (10 μCi/mL) 238 -18

Sampling Standard

Location Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation %DCG(a)

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

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

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

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

Rachel, NV 12 1.8 -0.16 0.64 0.67 0.03

Tonopah, NV 10 0.49 0.00 0.13 0.14 (b)

Mean MDC = 0.51 x 10 μCi/mL Standard Deviation of Mean MDC = 0.39 x 10 μCi/mL -18 -18

(a) Derived Concentration Guide; Established by DOE Order as 2 x 10 μCi/mL -15

(b) Not applicable, result less than MDC

Note: To convert μCi/mL to Bq/m multiply by 3.7 x 10 (e.g., [0.64 x 10 ] x [37 x 10 ] = 24 3 10 -18 9

nBq/m ). 3

Pu Concentration (10 μCi/mL) 239+240 -18

Sampling Standard

Location Number Maximum Minimum Mean Deviation %DCG(a)

Alamo, NV 12 4.3 0.00 1.1 1.1 0.06

Amargosa Center, NV 11 8.0 0.21 1.5 2.2 0.08

Goldfield, NV 9 5.0 0.17 1.3 1.4 0.06

Las Vegas, NV 12 1.5 -0.19 0.56 0.36 0.03

Rachel, NV 12 77 0.49 18 25 0.90 

Tonopah, NV 10 2.3 0.25 0.91 0.60 0.05

Mean MDC = 0.35 x 10 μCi/mL Standard Deviation of Mean MDC = 0.24 x 10 μCi/mL -18 -18

(a) Derived Concentration Guide; Established by DOE Order as 3 x 10 μCi/mL -15

(b) Not applicable, result less than MDC

Note: To convert μCi/mL to Bq/m multiply by 3.7 x 10 (e.g., [1.1 x 10 ] x [37 x 10 ] = 41 3 10 -18 9

nBq/m ). 3

Table 4.16 Gamma Monitoring Results for Offsite Stations - 1997

Station Daily Exposure (mR) Total (mR) Percent

Name Min Max Mean Exposure Complete

Alamo, NV 0.23 0.25 0.24 113 100

Amargosa Center, NV 0.20 0.23 0.21 76 75

Beatty, NV 0.30 0.32 0.31 112 100

Blue Jay, NV 0.32 0.46 0.36 131 100
4-30

Table 4.16 (Gamma Monitoring Results for Offsite Stations - 1997, cont.)

Station Daily Exposure (mR) Total (mR) Percent

Name Min Max Mean Exposure Complete

Boulder City, NV 0.23 0.26 0.24 86 100

Caliente, NV 0.26 0.28 0.27 97 100

Cedar City, UT 0.19 0.21 0.20 72 100

Complex I, NV 0.29 0.30 0.29 107 100

Coyote Summit, NV 0.33 0.35 0.34 122 100

Delta, UT 0.22 0.33 0.25 87 100

Ely, NV 0.20 0.20 0.20 72 100

Furnace Creek, CA 0.20 0.21 0.21 75 100

Goldfield, NV 0.26 0.28 0.27 99 100

Groom Lake, NV 0.24 0.26 0.25 91 100

Henderson (CCSN), NV 0.23 0.28 0.25 90 100

Hiko, NV 0.19 0.22 0.20 72 100

Indian Springs, NV 0.20 0.21 0.21 74 50

Las Vegas UNLV, NV 0.13 0.20 0.17 61 100

Lund, NV 0.27 0.29 0.28 100 100

Lund, UT 0.29 0.32 0.30 111 100

Medlins Ranch, NV 0.29 0.31 0.30 111 100

Mesquite, NV 0.19 0.21 0.20 72 100

Milford, UT 0.23 0.33 0.30 112 100

Moapa, NV 0.22 0.24 0.24 86 100

Nyala, NV 0.23 0.25 0.24 89 100

Overton, NV 0.19 0.20 0.20 71 100

Pahrump, NV 0.16 0.18 0.17 61 100

Pioche, NV 0.23 0.25 0.24 85 100

Queen City Summit, NV 0.33 0.38 0.36 130 100

Rachel, NV 0.30 0.32 0.31 113 100

Sacorbatus Flats, NV 0.20 0.35 0.30 111 100

St. George, UT 0.17 0.19 0.18 64 100

Stone Cabin, NV 0.29 0.33 0.31 114 100

Sunnyside, NV 0.17 0.24 0.19 69 100

Tonopah Test Range, NV 0.33 0.37 0.34 125 100

Tonopah, NV 0.32 0.35 0.33 120 100

Twin Springs, NV 0.31 0.33 0.32 116 100

Uhaldes Ranch, NV 0.30 0.31 0.31 111 100

Warm Springs #1, NV 0.27 0.29 0.28 103 100
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

4-31

Table 4.17 Gamma Monitoring Results for Offsite Personnel - 1997

Daily Deep Dose Total

Personnel Associated Number of Exposure (mrem) Annual Percent

ID# Station Name Days Min Max Mean Exposure Complete

022 Alamo, NV 358 0.21 0.25 0.22 83 100

038 Beatty, NV 300 0.37 0.46 0.41 147 100

042 Tonopah, NV 357 0.25 0.36 0.32 116 100

293 Pioche, NV 357 0.22 0.27 0.24 86 100

344 Delta, UT 301 0.21 0.23 0.22 80 100

345 Delta, UT 301 0.27 0.31 0.28 103 100

346 Milford, UT 317 0.24 0.31 0.27 100 100

347 Milford, UT 317 0.28 0.30 0.30 108 100

348 Overton, NV 300 0.20 0.27 0.22 82 100

427 Alamo, NV 336 0.20 0.30 0.25 95 100

592 Rachel, NV 298 0.21 0.35 0.28 103 100

593 Cedar City, UT 358 0.26 0.35 0.31 113 100

595 Las Vegas, NV 328 0.20 0.27 0.23 84 100

596 Las Vegas, NV 328 0.17 0.25 0.23 84 100

607 Tonopah, NV 335 0.26 0.41 0.33 120 100

608 Logandale, NV 300 0.17 0.26 0.21 79 100

610 Caliente, NV 357 0.27 0.40 0.31 112 100

621 Indian Springs, NV 358 0.20 0.21 0.20 74 100

Table 4.18 Summary of Gamma Exposure Rates as Measured by PIC - 1997

 Gamma Exposure Rate (μR/hr) 

Number of 1997

Daily Standard Mean

Station Averages Maximum Minimum Deviation Median mR/yr (μR/hr)

Alamo, NV 364 15.0 11.9 0.25 12.8 111 12.7

Amargosa Center, NV 365 14.0 10.0 0.76 11.0 97 11.1

Beatty, NV 334 19.0 15.3 0.24 12.8 143 16.3

Boulder City, NV 70 12.3 10.6 0.27 11.4 99 11.3

Caliente, NV 304 16.0 13.0 0.28 14.2 125 14.3

Cedar City, UT 335 12.6 9.0 0.47 10.5 91 10.4

Complex I, NV 365 18.9 14.0 0.43 15.3 134 15.3 

Delta, UT 303 12.9 10.5 0.35 11.9 103 11.8

Furnace Creek, CA 297 11.0 8.6 0.28 9.7 86 9.8

Goldfield, NV 359 17.1 14.0 0.34 15.3 135 15.4

Henderson, NV 286 19.0 12.0 0.42 13.7 119 13.6

Indian Springs, NV 356 14.0 10.7 0.32 11.5 101 11.5

Las Vegas, NV 294 12.7 8.3 0.27 10.2 89 10.2

Medlin's Ranch, NV 365 18.7 15.0 0.38 16.4 143 16.4

Milford, UT 304 19.0 16.3 0.50 17.6 155 17.7

Note: Multiply μR/hr by 2.6 x 10 to obtain μC # kg # hr . -4 -1 -1
4-32

Table 4.18 (Summary of Gamma Exposure Rates as Measured by PIC - 1997, cont.)

 Gamma Exposure Rate (μR/hr) 

Number of 1997

Daily Standard Mean

Station Averages Maximum Minimum Deviation Median mR/yr (μR/hr)

Nyala, NV 304 17.0 11.0 0.38 12.3 108 12.3

Overton, NV 334 12.0 9.0 0.27 10.1 88 10.0

Pahrump, NV 358 10.6 7.0 0.18 8.0 71 8.1

Pioche, NV 364 13.9 10.9 0.27 11.9 105 12.0

Rachel, NV 350 19.0 15.2 0.33 16.4 145 16.5

St. George, UT 360 10.0 7.8 0.16 8.3 73 8.3

Stone Cabin Ranch, NV 328 20.0 15.4 0.43 17.0 150 17.1

Terrell’s Ranch, NV 365 19.0 15.0 0.29 16.0 141 16.1

Tonopah, NV 358 19.3 16.5 0.45 17.6 154 17.6

Twin Springs, NV 364 20.0 15.0 0.47 16.4 146 16.6

Uhalde's Ranch, NV 304 19.0 12.8 0.84 17.4 149 17.0

Note: Multiply μR/hr by 2.6 x 10 to obtain μC # kg # hr . -4 -1 -1

Table 4.19 BN Offsite Boundary Monitoring Data - 1997

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

I.D.# Description (mR) (mR) (mR) (mR) (mR)

Washington Aerial Measurements Operation

WA-006 Calibra Lab Door, Bldg 1794 34.8 14.5 22.6 17.4 89.3

WA-007 Work Area Wall, Bldg 1794 35.1 16.4 23.4 16.2 91.1

WA-020 Background Station 33.7 13.9 22.9 14.1 84.6

WA-021 Background Station 34.5 16.8 23.8 18 93.1

WA-022 Background Station 39 17.4 26.7 17.7 100.8

WA-023 Background Station 39.8 20.4 26.7 18.9 105.8

WA-012 Control - 1 32.5 29.2 19 12.3 93

WA-012 Control - 2 32.2 29.2 13.2 99.5 (a)

North Las Vegas Facility

LV-055 NW Corner Fence/Gate C6 21.8 19.4 19.8 19.8 80.8

LV-056 NW Corner Fence/Gate C6 21.2 19.5 19.35 19.35 79.4

LV-057 N Fence--West End A-12 16.7 15.1 14.95 14.95 61.7

LV-058 N Fence--West End A-12 16.4 14.8 15.1 15.1 61.4

LV-059 N Fence--West End A-4 16.4 15.4 14.35 14.35 60.5

LV-060 N Fence--West End A-4 16.1 14.8 15.2 15.2 61.3

LV-061 NE Corner Fence/A-12 15.8 13.6 13.9 13.9 57.2

LV-062 NE Corner Fence/A-12 15.5 13.4 14.2 14.2 57.3

LV-063 E Fence/Center A-Complex 15.2 12.8 14.05 14.05 56.1

(a) Missing data.
AIR SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

4-33

Table 4.19 (BN Offsite Boundary Monitoring Data - 1997, cont.)

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

I.D.# Description (mR) (mR) (mR) (mR) (mR)

North Las Vegas Facility, cont.

LV-064 E Fence/Center A-Complex 14.3 14.2 13.45 13.45 55.4

LV-065 NLV Badge Off (A-7)/A-2 14 13.1 13 13 53.1

LV-066 NLV Badge Off (A-7)/A-2 14 13.1 13.05 13.05 53.2

LV-067 E Fence/North End B-Complex 16 13.9 14.35 14.35 58.6

LV-068 E Fence/North End B-Complex 16.7 14.2 14.5 14.5 59.9

LV-069 E Fence/South End B-Complex 17 14.5 14.9 14.9 61.3

LV-070 E Fence/South End B-Complex 16.1 15.1 14.9 14.9 61

LV-071 S Fence/Center 17.3 15.1 19.05 19.05 70.5

LV-072 S Fence/Center 17.3 14.8 15.25 15.25 62.6

LV-075 C-1 W End Guard Gate 20 17.1 18.45 18.45 74

LV-076 C-1 W End Guard Gate 20.9 17.7 17.85 17.85 74.3

LV-077 W Fence/Gate C-3 17 (a) (a) (a)

LV-078 W Fence/Gate C-3 17.3 (a) (a) (a)

LV-079 NW End A-13/Double G 17 16 16.1 16.1 65.2

LV-080 NW End A-13/Double G 17.3 14.8 15.2 15.2 62.5

LV-098 Control - 1 9.9 9.5 9.5 38 (a)

LV-099 Control - 2 10.1 9.4 9.4 38 (a)

Special Technologies Laboratory

ST197 Bldg. 226, West Fence 20 16.2 21 76.3 (a)

ST198 Bldg. 226, West Fence 21.2 16.5 19.9 76.8 (a)

ST199 Bldg. 229-C, Left Side 20.9 18.8 21.9 18 79.6

ST200 Bldg. 229-C, Left Side 21.2 18.2 21.3 18.3 79

ST201 Bldg. 227, E Fence 21.2 17.6 21 79.7 (a)

ST202 Bldg. 227, E Fence 20.3 16.8 21 77.5 (a)

ST205 Bldg. 227, NE Corner Step 20.4 16.2 21 76.8 (a)

ST206 Bldg. 227, NE Corner Step 20.6 17.1 20.7 77.9 (a)

ST207 Bldg. 227, NE Fence 23.6 17.4 21.5 83.3 (a)

ST208 Bldg. 227, NE Fence 20.9 17.9 21.6 80.5 (a)

ST209 Bldg. 227, Behind CF Shed 21.8 17.6 22.2 18.9 80.5

ST210 Bldg. 227, Behind CF Shed 20.9 16.7 22.8 18.3 78.7

ST211 Bldg. 227, E Fence Center 18.7 (a) (a) (a)

ST212 Bldg. 227, E Fence Center 18.4 (a) (a) (a)

ST213 Bldg. 227, SE Fence Corner 23 17.9 22.5 17.8 81.2

ST214 Bldg. 227, SE Fence Corner 21.6 17.9 23.6 17.5 80.6

ST141 Bldg. 227, Rear on Fence 25.1 19.9 23.4 19.4 87.8

ST-C1 Control 1 13 14.2 54.4 (a) (a)

ST-C2 Control 2 13.6 14.2 54 (a) (a)

(a) Missing data.

WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-1

5.0 WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

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

Office (DOE/NV) at the Nevada Test Site (NTS) has been the testing of

nuclear devices and their components. The DOE/NV's Environmental

Protection Policy Statement outlines a general policy of preventing

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

recognizes that some options for groundwater protection are precluded by

an increased risk of atmospheric releases and potential violation of

international agreements. Therefore, the DOE/NV groundwater protection

policy represents a balance between strict compliance with atmospheric

release agreements and minimization of groundwater impacts. Groundwater

protection is implemented by various programs that address compliance

with regulatory requirements, minimization of waste streams, closure and

monitoring of waste facilities, remedial investigations, groundwater

monitoring, and environmental research.

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

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

the assessment and cleanup of contaminated sites and facilities to meet

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

formalized an agreement with the state for implementing corrective actions

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

and cooperative manner. Investigation and cleanup activities continued on

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

state of Nevada and other states. 

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

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

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

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

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

previous nuclear testing activities. Although tritium initially seeped from

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

decreasing and were well below the National Primary Drinking Water

Regulation levels. NTS supply wells were monitored for specific radioactive

constituents and for permit compliance.

5.1 WATER MONITORING

PROGRAM INFORMATION

Water monitoring activities conducted

on the NTS and related facilities

involve surveillance of surface and

groundwaters, drinking water systems,

sewage treatment ponds, and actions

protective of groundwater resources.

ONSITE ENVIRONMENTAL

MONITORING

CRITERIA

DOE Order 5400.1, "General Environmental

Protection Program," establishes

environmental protection program

requirements, authorities, and

responsibilities for DOE operations. These

mandates require compliance with 
5-2

applicable federal, state, and local Analytical procedures are summarized in

environmental protection regulations. Other

DOE directives applicable to environmental

monitoring include DOE Order 5480.11,

"Radiation Protection for Occupational

Workers"; DOE Order 5480.1B,

"Environment, Safety, and Health Program

for DOE Operations"; DOE Order 5484.1,

"Environmental Protection, Safety, and

Health Protection Information Reporting

Requirements"; DOE Order 5400.5,

"Radiation Protection of the Public and the

Environment"; and DOE/EH-0173T,

"Environmental Regulatory Guide for

Radiological Effluent Monitoring and

Environmental Surveillance."

WATER EFFLUENT MONITORING

Radiologically contaminated water continued

to be discharged from E Tunnel in Rainier

Mesa (Area 12) despite efforts to seal that

tunnel. A grab sample was collected

quarterly from the tunnel's effluent discharge

point and from the tunnel's containment

pond. These samples were analyzed for

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

gamma emitters. In addition, an annual

sample was analyzed for Sr. Tritium was 90

the radionuclide most consistently detected

at the tunnel sites. Other radionuclides were

detected infrequently. Flow data obtained

from the Defense Special Weapons Agency

(formerly the Defense Nuclear Agency) were

used to calculate the total volume

discharged. Annual average radioactivity

concentrations were calculated from the

quarterly measurements. From these, the

total amount of radioactivity in the effluent

was obtained.

Water pumped from wells drilled, or

recompleted, to obtain data for

characterization of the NTS groundwater

was discharged into containment ponds. In

1997, two wells were recompleted at

emplacement hole U-3cn. These wells were

purged and the purge water placed in lined

containment ponds. The total volume and

the tritium concentration of water in each

pond were available.

Table 5.1 for both Bechtel Nevada (BN) and

Radiation and Indoor Environment National

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

WATER ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING

Environmental monitoring was conducted

onsite throughout the NTS and the near

offsite area. Surface water and groundwater

samples were routinely collected at

preestablished locations and analyzed for

radioactivity. 

Water samples were collected from selected

potable tap water points, water supply wells,

natural springs, open reservoirs, sewage

lagoons, and containment ponds. The

frequency of collection and types of

analyses done for these types of samples is

shown in Table 5.2. Sampling locations are

shown on Figures 5.1 and 5.2.

A 500-mL aliquot was taken from the water

sample, placed in a plastic bottle, and

counted for gamma activity with a

germanium detector. A 2.5-mL aliquot was

used for H analysis by liquid scintillation 3

counting. The remainder of the original

sample was evaporated to 15 mL,

transferred to a stainless steel counting

planchet, and evaporated to dryness after

the addition of a wetting agent. Alpha and/or

beta analyses were accomplished by

counting the planchet samples for 100

minutes in a gas-flow proportional counter.

Tritium enrichment analyses were done on

samples from the water supply wells by

concentrating the volume and tritium content

of a 250-mL sample aliquot to 10 mL by

electrolysis of a basic solution and analyzing

a 5-mL portion of the concentrate by liquid

scintillation counting. 

The Ra concentrations were 226,228

determined from low-background gamma

spectrometric analyses of radium sulfate. 

The samples were prepared by adding a

barium carrier and Ra tracer to 800 mL of 225

a sample, precipitating the barium and

radium as a sulfate, separating the

precipitate, and analyzing it by counting for

500 minutes in a low-level gamma

spectroscopy facility. 


WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-5

The radiochemical procedure for plutonium

was similar to that described in Section 4.1. 

Alpha spectroscopy was used to measure

any Pu, Pu, and the Pu tracer 238 239+240 242

present in the samples.

The present R&IE-LV sampling locations on

the NTS, or immediately outside its borders

on federally owned land are shown in Figure

5.3. All sampling locations are selected by

DOE and primarily represent potable water

supplies. R&IE-LV samples onsite wells

without pumps and, for quality assurance

purposes, collects samples from some

potable wells sampled by BN. A total of 22

wells was sampled. All samples were

analyzed by gamma spectrometry and for

tritium.

5.2 LONG-TERM

HYDROLOGICAL

MONITORING PROGRAM

(LTHMP)

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

operation of the LTHMP, including sample

collection, analysis, and data reporting. 

Until implementation of the LTHMP in 1972,

monitoring of ground and surface waters

was done by the U.S. Public Health Service

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

and the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission

(AEC) contractor organizations. The LTHMP

consists of routine radiological monitoring,

analysis, and reporting of samples collected

from specific wells on the NTS and of wells,

springs, and surface waters in the offsite

area around the NTS. Samples are also

collected from sites in Nevada, Colorado,

New Mexico, Mississippi, and Alaska where

nuclear tests have been conducted. In

1965, tritium escaped from the LONG SHOT

test on Amchitka Island and contaminated

the shallow groundwater, and during cleanup

and disposal operations, shallow

groundwater at the Tatum Dome Test Site in

Mississippi was contaminated with tritium. 

Summaries of the 1997 sampling results for

each of the offsite LTHMP locations are

provided in Section 5.5. 

SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS

PROCEDURES

The procedures for the analysis of samples

collected for this report are described by

Johns et al., 1979 and are summarized in

Table 5.1. These include gamma spectral

analysis and radiochemical analysis for

tritium. The procedures are based on a

standard methodology for the stated

analytical procedures. Two methods for

tritium analysis were performed: 

conventional and electrolytic enrichment. 

The samples were initially analyzed for

tritium by the conventional method followed

by enrichment analysis if the results were

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

it was decided that only 25 percent of the

samples would be analyzed by the

electrolytic enrichment method. The

samples selected have a tritium result of

less than 800 pCi/L by the conventional

method and are from locations that are in

position to show possible migration. Two

250-mL glass bottles and a 1-gal plastic

container are filled at each sampling

location. At the sample collection sites, the

pH, conductivity, water temperature, and

sampling depth are measured and recorded

when the sample is collected. For wells with

operating pumps, the samples were

collected at the nearest convenient 

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

unit, it is possible to collect 3-L samples

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

The first time samples are collected from a

well, Sr, Pu, Pu, and uranium 89,90 238 239+240

isotopes are determined by radiochemical

analysis, in addition to analysis mentioned

above. The 250-mL samples are analyzed

for tritium and the 1-gal sample from each

site is analyzed by gamma spectrometry. 

GROUNDWATER NEAR THE NEVADA

TEST SITE

Water sampling around the NTS is

conducted by R&IE-LV under an interagency

agreement with DOE to ensure the
#

#

#

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U %U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

Beatty

Mercury

Amargosa Valley

20 19

18

30

29

25

22

23

27

26

14

16

2

12

15

10

9

7

3

6 11

5

4

1

17

WW A

WW #4

WW 8

PM-1

WW 5B

UE-5n

UE -6e

Well C & C-1

HTH#1

UE-1C

UE -6d

UE-16d

UE-18r

Well 2

Well B

UE-15d

UE-16f

UE-18t

Well D

Well 20

HTH 'F'

U-3cn #5

UE-5c

J-12 WW

J-13 WW

Army #6A

UE-19c WW

Army #1

WW 5C

1

Nevad

Ca

a

lifornia

%U Not Sampled This Year

%U Water Sampling Location

NTS Operational Area

Nevada Test Site (NTS)

# Community

State Line

5 0 5 10 15 20

Miles

10 0 10 20 30

Kilometers

5-6

Figure 5.3 Wells on the NTS Sampled by R&IE-LV - 1997
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-7

radiological safety of public drinking water aquifer occurs under confined conditions. 

supplies, and representative water sources The depth to the saturated zone is highly

of rural residents and, where suitable, to variable, but is generally at least 210 m

monitor any migration of radionuclides from (approximately 690 ft) below the land

the NTS. This water monitoring is surface and is often more than 300 m

conducted within the LTHMP. R&IE-LV (approximately 1,000 ft). The hydrogeologic

personnel routinely collect and analyze units, at the NTS, occur in three

water samples from locations in the offsite groundwater subbasins in the Death Valley

areas surrounding the NTS. Due to the Groundwater Basin (see Chapter 2, Figure

scarcity of surface waters in the region, most 2.7, for a diagram of these systems). The

of the samples are groundwater, collected actual subbasin boundaries are poorly

from existing wells. Samples from specific defined, but what is known about the basin

locations are collected monthly, biannually, hydrology is summarized below. 

annually, or biennially in accordance with a

preset schedule. Many drinking water Groundwater beneath the eastern part of the

supplies used by the offsite population are

represented in the LTHMP samples. Figure

5.4 is a map of the locations sampled.

GROUNDWATER AT OTHER TEST AREAS

Sampling for the LTHMP is also conducted

at sites of past nuclear device testing in

other parts of the United States to ensure

the radiological safety of public drinking

water supplies and, where suitable sampling

points are available, to monitor any

migration of radionuclides from the test

cavity. Annual sampling of surface and

groundwaters is conducted at the Projects

SHOAL and FAULTLESS sites in Nevada,

the Projects GASBUGGY and GNOME sites

in New Mexico, the Projects RULISON and

RIO BLANCO sites in Colorado, and the

Project DRIBBLE (SALMON) site in

Mississippi. Sampling is normally conducted

in odd numbered years on Amchitka Island,

Alaska, at the site of Projects CANNIKIN,

LONG SHOT, and MILROW. 

5.3 GROUNDWATER

PROTECTION PROGRAM

HYDROGEOLOGY OF THE NTS

The NTS has three general water-bearing

units: the lower carbonate aquifer, volcanic

aquifers, and valley-fill aquifers. The water

table occurs variably in the latter two units,

while groundwater in the lower carbonate

NTS is in the Ash Meadows Subbasin and

discharges along a spring line in Ash

Meadows, south of the NTS. Most of the

western NTS is in the Alkali Flat-Furnace

Creek Subbasin, with discharges occurring

by evapotranspiration at Alkali Flat and by

spring flow near Furnace Creek Ranch. 

Groundwater beneath the far northwestern

corner of the NTS may be in the Oasis

Valley Subbasin, which discharges by

evapotranspiration in Oasis Valley. Some

underflow from the subbasin discharge

areas probably travels to springs in Death

Valley. Regional groundwater flow is from

the upland recharge areas in the north and

east toward discharge areas in Ash

Meadows and Death Valley, southwest of

the NTS. Because of large topographic

changes across the area and the importance

of fractures to groundwater flow, local flow

directions may be radically different from the

regional trend (Laczniak et al., 1996).

HYDROGEOLOGY OF NON-NTS 

UNDERGROUND TEST SITES

The following descriptions of the

hydrogeology of non-NTS underground test

sites are summarized from Chapman and

Hokett, 1991.

FALLON, NEVADA

The Project SHOAL site is located in the

granitic uplift of the Sand Spring Range. 
#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

%U

%U

%U %U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U

%U %U

%U

%U

Beatty

Pahrump

Tonopah

Johnnie

Mercury

LAS VEGAS

Amargosa Indian Springs

Valley

Scotty's

Junction

Furnace

Creek

Ranch

Death

Valley

Junction

US Ecology

TTR Well 6

USAF Well 2

Crystal Pool

Sharps Ranch

Tolicha Peak

Adaven

Springs

Crystal

Springs

Well 18S-51É-7dg

Fairbanks Spring Indian Springs

Sewer Co.

Well 1

Younghan's

Ranch

Alamo

City Well 4

Coffer's

11S/48E-1dd

Tonopah

City Well #1

Spring 17S/50E-14cac

Penoyer

Culinary Well

Beatty

Well 12S-47E-7dbd

Twin Springs

Ranch Well

Amargosa Valley

Well 15S-50E-18cdc

Klondike Well 2

N e l l i s

A i r

F o r c e

R a n g e

N e v a d a

T e s t

S i t e

1

Nevad

Ca

a

lifornia

%U Water Sampling Location

NTS Operational Area

Nevada Test Site (NTS)

# Community

State Line

Nellis Air Force Range

10 0 10 20 30 40 50

Miles

20 0 20 40 60 80

Kilometers

5-8

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

5-9

The highland area around the site is a Piceance Creek Basin. Three aquifers

regional groundwater recharge area, with comprise most of the groundwater

regional discharge occurring to the west in resources: a shallow alluvial aquifer, the

Fourmile Flat and Eightmile Flat and to the upper "A" potable aquifer, and the lower "B"

northeast in Dixie Valley. Evidence saline aquifer. The "A" and "B" aquifers are

suggests that a groundwater divide exist separated by the Mahogany Oil Shale

northwest of the site and that the main aquitard. These aquifers lie well above the

component of lateral movement of test depth. The alluvial aquifer is the

groundwater near the site is southeast primary source of groundwater in the area

toward Fairview Valley. Groundwater in with flow to the northeast toward the

Fairview Valley moves north to the Piceance Creek. Recharge to the alluvial

discharge areas in Dixie Valley. aquifer occurs by downward infiltration of

Groundwater in Fairview Valley occurs in precipitation and surface water and by

three separate alluvial aquifers separated by upward leakage from underlying aquifers. 

clay aquitards. Ground-water flow velocities

through the granite to the alluvial aquifers of The "A" aquifer is larger in areal extent than

Fairview Valley are calculated to be very low the overlying alluvial aquifer with the

(Chapman and Hokett 1991). permeability in the "A" aquifer controlled by

CENTRAL, NEVADA exhibits minimal communication with the "A"

The Project FAULTLESS site is located in a

thick sequence of alluvial material underlain

by volcanic rocks in the northern portion of

Hot Creek Valley. Recharge to the alluvial Project RULISON is located in the Mesa

aquifer and volcanic aquifer occurs in the Verde Sandstone, which is overlain by

higher mountain ranges to the west, with alluvium, the Green River Formation (shale

groundwater flowing toward the east-central and marlstone), the Wasatch Formation

portion of the valley, and discharging by (clay and shale), and the Ohio Creek

evapotranspiration and underflow to Railroad Formation (conglomerate). The direction of

Valley. groundwater flow is thought to be northward. 

AMCHITKA ISLAND, ALASKA area are in the alluvial aquifer, which is

The groundwater system of Amchitka Island

is typical of an island-arc chain with a

freshwater lens floating on seawater in

fractured volcanic rocks. Active freshwater

circulation occurs by precipitation,

recharging the water table with a curving

flow path downward in the interior of the

island and upward flow near the coast. 

Generally, the hydraulic gradient is from the

axis of the island toward the coast. 

Groundwater travel times have been

estimated to be between 23 and 103 years

from the test cavities to the Bering Sea.

RIFLE, COLORADO

Project RIO BLANCO is located in the Fort

Union and Mesa Verde sandstones in the

a vertical fracture system. The "B" aquifer

aquifer.

GRAND VALLEY, COLORADO

The principal groundwater resources of the

separated from the test horizon by great

thicknesses of low-permeability formations. 

Pressure tests of deep water-bearing zones

indicated very little mobile water.

HATTIESBURG, MISSISSIPPI

Project DRIBBLE and the Miracle Play

Program were conducted in the Tatum Salt

Dome (also known as the SALMON Site). 

The Tatum Salt Dome interrupts and

deforms the lower units of coastal marine

deposits in the area, has low permeability,

and allows little water movement. Seven

hydrologic units are recognized in the area,

exclusive of the salt dome and its anhydrite

caprock. These are, from the surface

downward, the Surficial Aquifer, the Local

Aquifer, and Aquifers 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5. 
5-10

These aquifers consist of sands and gravels, of possible groundwater contamination as

sandstones, shales, and limestones with

low-permeability clay beds acting as

aquitards. The natural flow has been

disrupted by pumping from the upper

aquifers and by injection of oil-field brines

into Aquifer 5. The transient conditions and

lack of data results in uncertainties in

groundwater flow directions.

FARMINGTON, NEW MEXICO

Project GASBUGGY is located on the

eastern side of the San Juan Basin. The

direction of groundwater movement is not

well known, but is thought to be to the

northwest in the Ojo Alamo sandstone

toward the San Juan River. The test was

conducted in the underlying Pictured Cliffs

sandstone and Lewis Shale, which are not

known to yield substantial amounts of water. 

The rate of groundwater movement in the

Ojo Alamo sandstone is estimated to be

approximately 0.01 m/yr.

CARLSBAD, NEW MEXICO

The Project GNOME site is located in the

northern part of the Delaware Basin, which

contains sedimentary rocks and a thick

sequence of evaporites. The test was

conducted in the halites of the Salado

Formation, which is overlain by the Rustler

Formation, the Dewey Lake Redbeds, and

alluvial deposits. The Rustler Formation

contains three water-bearing zones: a

dissolution residue at its base, the Culebra

Dolomite, and the Magenta Dolomite. The

Culebra Dolomite is the most regionally

extensive aquifer in the area. The

groundwater in the Culebra is saline, but is

suitable for domestic and stock uses. 

Groundwater in the Culebra flows to the

west and southwest toward the Pecos River.

NTS AREAS OF POSSIBLE

GROUNDWATER

CONTAMINATION 

In 1996, DOE/NV analyzed and confirmed

the location of 908 underground tests in 878

holes at the NTS that are included in areas

indicated on Figure 5.5. Approximately one

third (259) of these tests were at or below

the water table (DOE 1996a). The principal

by-products from these tests were heavy

metals and a wide variety of radionuclides

with differing half-lives and decay products. 

Detonations within, or near, the regional

water table have contaminated the local

groundwater with over 60 radionuclides

being present in significant quantities. 

Tritium is the most abundant radionuclide,

with an estimated 300 million curies present

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

Surface activities associated with

underground testing and other NTS activities

such as disposal of low-level radioactive

waste (LLW) and mixed wastes, spill testing

of hazardous liquefied gaseous fuels, and

transport of radioactive materials, also pose

potential soil and groundwater contamination

risks. The types of possible contaminants

found on the surface of the NTS include

radionuclides, organic compounds, metals,

and residues from plastics, epoxy, and

drilling muds. A wide variety of surface

facilities, such as former injection wells,

leach fields, sumps, waste storage facilities,

tunnel containment ponds and muck piles,

and storage tanks, may have contaminated

the soil and shallow unsaturated zone of the

NTS. The known sites are categorized by

type and listed in Appendices II, III, and IV

of the Federal Facility Agreement and

Consent Order (FFACO), jointly agreed to by

the DOE, U. S. Department of Defense

(DOD), and Nevada Environmental

Protection Division (NEPD). The great

depths to groundwater and the arid climate

mitigate the potential for mobilization of

surface and shallow subsurface

contamination. However, contaminants

entering the carbonate bedrock from Rainier

Mesa tunnel ponds, contaminated wastes

injected into deep wells, underground tests

near the water table, and wastes disposed of

into subsidence craters have the potential to

reach groundwater.
#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

# #

##

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

# # #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

# ##

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

# #

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

# #

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

##

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# #

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

## ##

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

## ###

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

#

# # #

#

#

#

#

#

#

Beatty

Amargosa Valley

20 19

18

30

29

25

22

23

27

26

14

16

2

12

15

10

9

7

3

6 11

5

4

1

17

8

Mercury

State Line

Community

Nevada Test Site (NTS)

NTS Operational Area

Underground Test Area

#

# Underground Nuclear Test 1 5 0 5 10 15 20

Miles

10 0 10 20 30

Kilometers

Nevada

California

Central Pahute Mesa

Rainier Mesa

Yucca Flat

Climax Mine

Shoshone Mountain

Frenchman Flat

West Pahute Mesa

5-11

Figure 5.5 Areas of Potential Groundwater Contamination on the NTS

WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES
5-12

ACTIVITIES PROTECTIVE OF

GROUNDWATER

DOE/NV has instituted a policy regarding

protection of the environment. This policy

states: "A principal objective of the DOE/NV

policy is to assure the minimization of

potential impacts on the environment,

including groundwater, from underground

testing.” An ongoing program to monitor and

assess the effectiveness of groundwater

protection efforts will be enhanced so that 

resources are allocated based on current

understanding of the effectiveness of

groundwater protection programs. 

Groundwater protection activities contained

within DOE/NV programs are described

below.

STORM WATER RUN-OFF

At this time, the state of Nevada does not

require storm water Runoff Permits for the

NTS. Storm water, at the NTS, primarily

follows the natural terrain and after a large

storm will temporarily collect on low spots,

including dry lake beds. With the depth to

groundwater that exists at the NTS, this

occasional pooling of storm water runoff

presents no hazard to groundwater.

WASTE MINIMIZATION AND POLLUTION

PREVENTION AWARENESS PROGRAM

The Waste Minimization and Pollution

Prevention Awareness Program is designed

to reduce waste generation and possible

pollutant releases to the environment,

increasing the protection of employees and

the public. All DOE/NV contractors and NTS

users who exceed the EPA criteria for smallquantity generators have established

implementation plans in accordance with

DOE/NV requirements. Contractor

programs ensure that waste minimization

activities are in accordance with federal,

state, and local environmental laws and

regulations and DOE Orders. A discussion

of 1997 activities is given in Chapter 3.

There are three closed-loop recirculating

steam cleaning units that are used to clean

equipment prior to servicing. These units

not only minimize the water that is needed to

operate, but also prevent the wastewater

from running onto the ground and potentially

contaminating the soil. These hydrocarbon

materials are instead captured in a filter and

properly disposed of or recycled.

SITING FOR UNDERGROUND NUCLEAR

TESTS

The DOE/NV Procedural Instruction “Siting

Criteria for Protection of Groundwater at the

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

five criteria for siting underground nuclear

tests, based upon the current understanding

of the effects of testing on the groundwater

environment. Before an emplacement hole

or emplacement drift can be used for a test,

documentation must be submitted by the

sponsoring user to the DOE/NV Assistant

Manager for National Security to show

compliance with these criteria, which are as

follows:

 Future testing should utilize previously

used test areas.

 Tests with working points at or below the

water table should be minimized. Testing

within perched water conditions is

excluded from this criterion.

 Working points should be placed no

closer than two cavity radii from any

regional carbonate aquifer.

 Emplacement holes should not be sited

within 1,500 m of the NTS boundary

where groundwater leaves the NTS.

 Emplacement holes, which extend more

than two cavity radii or 30 m, whichever is

greater, beneath the working point, should

be plugged to prevent the open borehole

from becoming a preferential pathway for

groundwater contamination.
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-13

WASTE TREATMENT, STORAGE, AND VADOSE ZONE MONITORING

DISPOSAL

DOE/NV currently operates disposal

facilities in Areas 3 and 5 at the NTS for

LLW generated by DOE and the DOD

facilities. All hazardous wastes generated at

the NTS are stored at a Hazardous Waste

Accumulation Site in Area 5 until shipped

offsite to EPA-approved commercial

disposal facilities.

In accordance with Title 40 Code of Federal

Regulations (CFR) 265 - Subpart F,

operators of interim status treatment,

storage, and disposal facilities are required

to collect quarterly samples for one year

from one upgradient and three downgradient

wells for characterization of back

groundwater quality. Sampling protocols for

characterization and detection data

collection were based on the Resource

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)

Groundwater Monitoring Technical

Enforcement Guidance Document (EPA

1986). Groundwater elevation was

measured prior to each sampling event. The

first collections of these characterization

data were performed in 1993. Subsequent

semi-annual sampling was continued

through 1997 and results were statistically

compared with the initial characterization

data. No chemical or radiological

constituents attributable to DOE weapon

testing or waste disposal activities have

been detected. The uppermost aquifer

meets current water quality standards for

drinking water sources. The analyses

performed are shown in Table 5.3. 

Groundwater monitoring results for 1997

can be found in the "1997 Groundwater

Monitoring Report” (Bechtel 1997).

At the NTS there are three nonhazardous

waste landfills that have state of Nevada

Operating Permits. The permitting process

considers groundwater protection at these

location. At the Area 23 Class II Municipal

and Industrial Solid Waste Disposal Site,

there in no groundwater monitoring well.

However, Well SM-23-1 described below is

considered (informally) by the state as a

supplement to vadose monitoring at the

landfill. 

The moisture content of the vadose zone is

monitored at Pits 1 through 4 at the Area 5

Radioactive Waste Management Site

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

(RWMS-3). Moisture content is monitored

quarterly to detect the downward movement

of wetting fronts from precipitation. Moisture

content monitoring may provide an early

warning of contaminant migration and allows

testing of conceptual models of site

performance. At the RWMS-5, monitoring is

conducted using neutron moisture meters in

access tubes penetrating the operational

cover (approximately 8 ft), the waste zone

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

pit floor. No wetting fronts were observed to

pass through the operational covers at the

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

monitoring is conducted in cased boreholes

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

disposal units. Soil moisture content below

the RWMS-3 remained unchanged in 1997.

WELLHEAD RECONSTRUCTION AND

WELL REHABILITATION

The Hydrologic Resources Management

Program (HRMP) began an active borehole

surface rehabilitation program. The

rehabilitation of 16 boreholes was

completed. Rehabilitation activities include

either the extension or shortening of the

well’s casing to approximately one-half

meter aboveground level. Locking caps are

installed on each well along with the hole

designation inscribed on the outside of the

casing extension using a weld bead and the

painting of casings for easy identification. 

The holes identified for rehabilitation are

suitably located for potential utilization in the

monitoring network. Video logging will be

used to determine the integrity of the hole

and accessability to the water table.

All of the wells associated with the state

permitted drinking water distribution systems

at the NTS have been inspected by the state

and meet current wellhead protection

regulations.
5-14

SEWAGE LAGOON COMPLIANCE tests will be investigated, along with areas

State Water Pollution Control Permit

GNEV93001 requires that one of four

methods of groundwater protection be

established at active sewage lagoons on the

NTS by January 31, 1999. The four

acceptable groundwater protection methods

identified in the permit include groundwater

monitoring, vadose zone monitoring,

engineered liner installation, and

hydrogeological site characterization.

Over the past four years, groundwater

protection permit compliance has been

attained at nine of the NTS facilities. 

Groundwater protection permit compliance

has not been attained at two remaining

facilities: (1) the Area 6 Device Assembly

Facility, and (2) the Area 25 Reactor Control

Point. Full compliance will be attained at all

sites by the expiration date of the permit.

Initial groundwater sampling at the Area 23

Infiltration Basin Groundwater Monitoring

Well SM-23-1 was performed in August

1997, and compliance monitoring will begin

in 1998. Results indicate that the

groundwater adjacent to and beneath the

infiltration basin meets drinking water

standards. Information on improvements 

to the monitoring well is contained in 

Chapter 3.

5.4 ENVIRONMENTAL

RESTORATION

The Nevada ERP was begun in the late

1980s to address contamination resulting

primarily from nuclear weapons testing and

related support operations. The goals of the

project are to safeguard the public’s health

and safety and to protect the environment. 

This involves the assessment and cleanup

of contaminated sites and facilities to meet

standards required by federal and state

environmental laws. Approximately 878

sites used for historic underground nuclear at the scale of Corrective Action Units. 

where more than 100 aboveground tests

were conducted. Additionally, 1,500 other

sites that were used for support operations

will potentially require environmental

remediation. 

The DOE/NV is working closely with

representatives of the state of Nevada to

ensure compliance with applicable

environmental regulations. A FFACO was

signed by the DOE, DOD, and NEPD in May

1996. The FFACO provides a mechanism

for implementing corrective actions based on

public health and environmental

considerations in a cost-effective and

cooperative manner. It also establishes a

framework for identifying, prioritizing,

investigating, remediating, and monitoring

contaminated DOE sites in Nevada. The

FFACO’s corrective action requirements

supersede some portions of the NTS RCRA

Permit issued in May 1995. 

Investigations and remediations follow a

strategy for investigation and remediation

outlined in Appendix VI, Corrective Action

Strategy, of the FFACO. The strategy is

based on four steps: (1) identifying

corrective action sites, (2) grouping the sites

into corrective action units, (3) prioritizing

the units for funding and work, and 

(4) implementing investigations or actions as

applicable. The sites are broadly organized

into underground test area sites, industrial

sites, soil sites, and off sites. Information

related to investigation and cleanup

activities as it relates to groundwater

protection follows.

UNDERGROUND TEST AREA

(UGTA) SITES

The UGTA subproject focused on well

development, testing, and sampling wells

near underground nuclear tests. Some of

this work was also supported by the HRMP. 

These activities were conducted in order to

determine radiochemical and hydrogeologic

conditions near tests in support of modeling
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-15

Contaminated fluid produced during drilling The experiment was designed to

and sampling was managed in accordance

with the UGTA Waste Management Plan

(DOE 1996d) to prevent degradation of

groundwater. Evaporation of tritiated water

from the drilling operations is included in the

calculations for compliance with the National

Emissions Standard for Hazardous Air

Pollutants.

Accomplishments of the UGTA project in

1997 include the sampling of two wells at the

TYBO underground nuclear test and a

“Forced Gradient Experiment” at the

BULLION test on Pahute Mesa. Other

activities included the development and

sampling of three zones in Well UE-10j

located in northern Yucca Flat and two wells

near the BILBY site in south central Yucca

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

also sampled, including U-3cn PS#2

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

PSPS1 ddh (CHESHIRE). In general,

results show no evidence of man-made

radionuclides in the regional carbonate

aquifer beneath Yucca Flat, and expected

levels of contamination in the post shot and

near-event wells at Yucca Flat and on

Pahute Mesa. These activities are

summarized below. Results are scheduled

for publication in 1998.

BULLION FORCED-GRADIENT

EXPERIMENT

The BULLION Forced-Gradient Experiment

was conducted from June 2 to August 28,

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

Mesa in the northwestern corner of the NTS. 

This well cluster consists of three wells: a

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

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

production well. The wells are

approximately aligned with the local

groundwater gradient and the major fracture

system, a short distance downgradient from

the BULLION test. Well #3 was pumped at

116 gal/ min to induce a groundwater

gradient towards this well. A selection of

tracers was injected into the other two wells,

and breakthrough curves for the tracers

were determined by analyzing samples from

Wells #2 and #3.

characterize transport parameters in

fractured volcanic rocks, specifically

effective porosity, matrix diffusion, and

dispersivity. The tracers used are

conservative, but have significantly different

diffusion coefficients. The wells were also

sampled for water chemistry and

radiochemistry parameters. During the

experiment, onsite monitoring of tritium

concentration at all three wells found that

concentration declined to the low thousands

of picocuries per liter, rather than the

substantial increases expected from

transport of radionuclides from the BULLION

test cavity. Radionuclides were variously

analyzed by IT, Lawrence Livermore

National Laboratory (LLNL), Desert

Research Institute (DRI), and Los Alamos

National Laboratory (LANL 1998). Additional

information and analytical results will be

reported by the respective organizations

during 1998.

POST-SHOT WELLS (“HOT WELLS”)

Two post-shot cavity holes were sampled in

1997 by a joint LANL-LLNL-USGS team. 

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

DALHART test) was sampled this year,

because it is one of the “hot holes”

monitored periodically, and because it is a

candidate for a test of a new pumping

methodology. The DALHART test was fired

on October 13, 1988, in central Yucca Flat. 

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

region in 1990. Analyses of water samples

collected in July 1997, indicated a tritium

activity of 26 μCi/L (9.7 x 10 Bq/L) (LANL 5

1998).

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

to support studies of radionuclide migration

from the cavity/chimney region of the

CHESHIRE underground test that was

conducted on Pahute Mesa in February of

1976. Radionuclide migration studies at this

site have been intermittent since 1976. 

Water samples collected from this well in

July 1997 had a tritium activity of about 

150 μCi/L (5.7 x 10 Bq/L) (LANL 1998). 6
5-16

WELL UE-10J tritium (1.33 x 10 pCi/L), cesium-137 

Well UE-10j is located in northern Yucca Flat

and is completed in the lower carbonate

aquifer (regional aquifer) (DOE 1995). Well

development, groundwater sampling, and

data compilation for Well UE-10j were

performed in 1997 (IT 1997).

Well development of the three completion

zones, which are equipped with sliding

sleeves, was conducted in March 1997. 

Groundwater characterization samples were

collected from each completion zone and

analyzed by Lockheed Analytical Services

for general chemistry, principal cations and

anions, metals, and radionuclides. Gamma

scan analytical results include actinium-228,

bismuth-214, cobalt-57/60, cesium-134/137,

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

thallium-208, uranium-235, and tritium. 

Bismuth-214 was the only radionuclide

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

compared to a laboratory minimum

detectable concentration (MDC) of 19 pCi/L. 

LLNL analyzed groundwater samples from

each of the completion zones for

radiochemistry and isotopic analyses. The

analytical results revealed the groundwater

samples contain natural levels of all the

isotopes measured. The DRI collected

groundwater samples from each completion

zone for stable isotopic analyses. Static

water-level measurements for Well UE-10j

were taken quarterly by the USGS. The

above data was reported in IT 1997.

BILBY

Two wells, located at the NTS BILBY site in

south-central Yucca Flat, were refurbished

and sampled by the UGTA Subproject in

1997. The purpose of this work was to

restore and/or replace the existing

submersible pumps that were installed

approximately 20 years ago in Hydrologic

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

the BILBY cavity in the lower carbonate

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

BILBY cavity and rubble chimney. Analysis

of groundwater samples collected on

January 22, 1997, at U-3cn PS#2 showed

7

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

Cesium-137 is an expected component of

groundwater close to a nuclear test, while

barium-133 is unexpected. Tritium activity

for groundwater samples from U-3cn#5,

collected on January 29, 1997, remained

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

No gamma emitters, other than those

naturally present in groundwater, were

detected (LANL 1998). The low tritium

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

be the result of poor hydraulic conductivity of

the zeolitized-bedded tuffs (tuff confining

unit) between the test cavity and the

underlying lower carbonate aquifer 

(LLNL 1997).

TYBO/BENHAM

From 1995 to early 1996, the UGTA

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

#3, adjacent to the site of the underground

nuclear test, code named TYBO (DOE

1997c). Water samples from these wells

were analyzed at LANL and LLNL and were

found to contain radionuclides not often

measured in similar sites (LANL 1998).

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

extent of radionuclide migration adjacent to

a relatively large yield test conducted below

the water table. The TYBO test was

conducted on Pahute Mesa on May 14,

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

below the static water level of 630 m 

(2,066 ft). Well ER-20-5 #1 was completed

and screened in a transmissive aquifer at a

depth comparable to the working point of the

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

and screened in a deeper transmissive

aquifer at a depth comparable to the working

point of the 1968 BENHAM test, located

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

The BENHAM test was fired on December

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

well below the static water table of 641 m

(2,102 ft). Both ER-20-5 #1 and #3 were

believed to be sited hydrologically

downgradient of the TYBO test.
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-17

Radionuclides detected include Cs, Co, During 1997, there were no USTs that were 137 60

Eu, and Pu. Except for tritium, 152,154,155 239+240

the activity levels measured in the ER-20-5

groundwater are well below the drinking

water limits calculated by EPA standards. 

Groundwater samples collected in April 1997

at ER-20-5 #1 had a tritium activity of 6.89 x

10 pCi/L (2.55 MBq/L) and 1.42 x 10 pCi/L 7 5

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

water samples indicates that, except for

tritium, the radionuclides are associated with

particulates and colloids. Furthermore,

isotopic ratios for Pu are relative to the 239+240

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

north, and not to the closer TYBO test, as

expected (Thompson et al., 1997).

INDUSTRIAL SITES AND

DECONTAMINATION AND

DECOMMISSIONING

The Area 6 Decontamination Pond RCRA

Closure Unit characterization was

completed. Additional geotechnical

sampling and testing was completed for the

Corrective Measures Study. Design and

field testing for the engineered cover was

started and will be completed in 1998. 

Closure activities are anticipated to be

completed in 1998.

An annual report was submitted to comply

with the conditions of the RCRA Part B

Permit for the Area 2 Bitcutter Shop and

LLNL Post Shot Containment Building

Injection Wells RCRA Closure Unit that was

closed in 1996. These facilities and other

NTS facilities with RCRA closure plans are

listed in Table 5.4.

ABANDONED UNDERGROUND STORAGE

TANKS 

The NTS underground storage tank (UST)

program continues to meet regulatory

compliance schedules for the reporting,

upgrading, or removal of documented USTs. 

Efforts are continuing to identify

undocumented USTs at the NTS. Once

identified, undocumented USTs are reported

to the NEPD to satisfy state regulatory

reporting requirements.

required to be removed in accordance with

state and federal regulations. Remedial

activities continued at previous tank removal

sites during 1997 as funding became

available.

SOIL SITES

In 1997, radiologically contaminated soils

from the CLEAN SLATE I site, on the

NAFRC, northwest of the NTS were

removed and disposed of in Area 3 on the

NTS. However, these contaminated soils

were at the ground surface and did not

contaminate the subsurface or groundwater. 

Therefore, they are not discussed further

here.

OFFSITE LOCATIONS

The offsite areas are described in Section

5.2 of this chapter. Activities related to

groundwater protection at these sites are

conducted as part of the ERP. Investigation

and cleanup at these sites are being

conducted in accordance with the FFACO,

with the state of Nevada, for the two sites in

Nevada, SHOAL and FAULTLESS. In the

remainder of the states, agreements will be

developed as the restoration activities

proceed. Following is a summary of

activities at sites where activities were

conducted during 1997.

At the Project SHOAL site, an investigation

plan was completed and approved; four

monitoring wells were installed to a total

depth of 396 m (1,300 ft); DRI conducted

aquifer testing, and SAFER closure of one

mudpit was completed.

At the Project RULISON site, following

mudpit cleanup in 1995, quarterly sampling

was done at four groundwater wells for

hazardous waste during the second and final

year, as required by the state of Colorado. 

No migration of hazardous wastes has been

detected so far. IT Corporation is writing a

closure report on this project.
5-18

Surface characterization of mudpits at wells Concentration Guide (DCGs) for ingested

UC-1, UC-3, and UC-4 was conducted at the

FAULTLESS site.

At the SALMON site, 14 new shallow

groundwater monitoring wells were installed,

pumps were rehabilitated and installed in 4

existing wells, and 1 seismic check hole was

plugged.

5.5 WATER SURVEILLANCE

PROGRAM RESULTS

The analytical results obtained for water

samples collected onsite and offsite are

described in this Section. Only a few

samples contained detectable

concentrations of radionuclides. Table 5.5

lists the routine sampling locations, onsite

and offsite, where well water samples

contained concentrations greater than 0.2

percent of the National Primary Drinking

Water Standards.

ONSITE WATER MONITORING

RESULTS

RADIOACTIVITY IN SURFACE WATER

Surface water sampling at the NTS was

conducted at eight open reservoirs, seven

natural springs, a containment pond and an

effluent, and nine sewage lagoons. The

locations of these sources are shown in sampled. These springs are a source of

Figure 5.2. When water was available and

the weather permitted, a grab sample was

taken using the schedule in Table 5.2. The

sample was analyzed for H, gross beta, 3

gamma activity, Pu, Pu, and Sr 238 239+240 90

according to the schedule shown in 

Table 5.2. Sources of surface water were,

for the most part, man-made; i.e., created

for or by NTS operations.

The annual average for each radionuclide

analyzed in surface waters is presented in

Table 5.6, along with the results from

analysis of tunnel effluents. The annual

averages for open reservoirs and natural

springs are compared to the Derived grab sample was taken from the E Tunnel

water. The results from gamma

spectrometry were non-detectable for all

sample locations. Most radionuclide levels

were below the detection limit, except for

samples from the E Tunnel effluent and

ponds, which had tritium concentrations

ranging up to 1.1 x 10 μCi/mL. -3

With the exception of containment ponds, no

annual average concentration in surface

waters was found to be statistically different

from any other at the 5 percent significance

level. The analytical results from the Area

12 containment ponds showed measurable

quantities of radioactivity as has been noted

previously.

OPEN RESERVOIRS

Open reservoirs have been established at

various locations on the NTS for industrial

uses. The annual average concentrations of

gross beta were compared to the DCGs for

ingested water listed in DOE Order 5400.5,

even though there was no known

consumption of these waters. The

appropriate data are shown in Table 5.7.

 

NATURAL SPRINGS

Of the nine natural springs found onsite,

(i.e., spring-supplied pools located within the

NTS), only seven had enough water to be

drinking water for wild animals on the NTS. 

The annual average gross beta results for all

spring are shown in Table 5.6 and compared

to the Sr DCG for drinking water, although 90

the water is not used for drinking. The

highest result was for Area 7 Reitman Seep,

but it was still below the DCG. 

CONTAINMENT PONDS

Due to the sealing of the tunnels at the close

of 1993, liquid effluents ceased at all except

E Tunnel. The E Tunnel containment ponds

were fenced and posted with radiological

warning signs. During each sampling, a
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-19

containment pond and at the effluent constant check of the radioactivity and to

discharge point. The samples were

analyzed for H, Sr, Pu, Pu, gross 3 90 238 239+240

beta, and gamma activity in accordance with

the schedule in Table 5.2. The annual

average of gross beta analyses from the two

sampling locations is listed in Table 5.6.

The effluent from characterization wells in

Area 3 was discharged into containment

ponds. The total liquid discharged was

measured. By multiplying that volume by

the average concentration of H in collected 3

samples, shown in Table 5.6, the total

amount of tritium discharged (4.2 Ci or 0.16

TBq) was calculated.

SEWAGE LAGOONS 

Samples were collected quarterly during this

year from nine sewage lagoons on the

network at the end of 1997. Each of the

lagoons is part of a closed system used for

evaporative treatment of sanitary waste. 

The lagoons are located in Areas 5, 6, 12,

22, 23, and 25. The annual gross beta

concentration averages for all lagoons

ranged between 7.7 and 33 x 10 μCi/mL -9

(0.28 to 1.2 Bq/L). No radioactivity was

detected above the MDCs for H or Sr. No 3 90

test-related radioactivity was detected by

gamma spectrometric analyses.

RADIOACTIVITY IN SUPPLY WELLS AND

DRINKING WATER

The principal water distribution system on

the NTS is potentially the critical pathway for

ingestion of waterborne radionuclides. 

Consequently, the water distribution system

is sampled and evaluated frequently. The

NTS water system consisted of 11 supply

wells, 10 of which supplied potable water to

onsite distribution systems. The drinking

water is pumped from the wells to the points

of consumption. The supply wells were

sampled on a quarterly basis. Drinking

water is sampled at taps on the end-points

of the distribution systems to provide a

allow end-use activity comparisons to the

radioactivity of the water in the supply wells. 

In this section, analytical results are

presented from samples taken at the 11

supply wells. Each well was sampled and

analyzed as noted in the schedule in 

Table 5.2.

The locations of the supply wells are shown

in Figure 5.1. Water from these wells (ten

potable and one nonpotable) was used for a

variety of purposes during 1997. Samples

were collected from those wells which could

potentially provide water for human

consumption. These data were used to help

document the radiological characteristics of

the NTS groundwater system. The sample

results are maintained in a database so that

long-term trends and changes can be

studied. Table 5.8 lists the drinking water

sources, and Table 5.9 lists the potable and

nonpotable supply wells and their respective

radioactivity averages. No test-related

radionuclides were detected by gamma

spectrometry. Included in the table are the

median MDCs for each of the measurements

for comparison to the concentration

averages for each location. For various

operational reasons, samples could not be

collected from all locations every sampling

period.

As a check on any effect the water

distribution system might have on water

quality, samples were taken from seven

water distribution system end-points (tap

water samples). To ensure that all of the

water available for consumption was being

considered, each drinking water system was

identified. The drinking water network at the

NTS consists of five drinking water systems. 

The components of the five are shown in

Table 5.8. These systems, fed by ten

potable supply wells, are the source of the

water for the seven end-points. Table 5.10

lists the annual concentration averages for

all the analyses performed on tap water

samples. No test-related radionuclides were

detected by gamma spectrometry.
5-20

GROSS BETA PLUTONIUM

As shown in Table 5.9, the gross beta

concentration averages for all the supply

wells were above the median MDC of the

measurement. The highest average gross

beta activity occurred at Well 5B and was

1.1 x 10 μCi/mL (0.41 Bq/L), which was 3.7 -8

percent of the DCG for K and 28 percent of 40

the DCG for Sr based upon 4 mrem 90

effective dose equivalent (EDE) per year. In

earlier reports (Scoggins 1983 and Scoggins

1984), it was noted that the majority of gross

beta activity was attributable to naturally

occurring K. All concentration averages 40

were comparable to those reported last year.

As in previous years, the gross beta

concentration averages for all tap water

samples were above the median MDC of the

measurements. The highest annual average

occurred in the Area 23 Cafeteria, 10 x 10-9

μCi/mL (0.37 Bq/L), similar to the supply well

water. The annual EDE is also equivalent to

that from the supply well water.

TRITIUM

As shown in Table 5.9, the average tritium samples from Well C-1 in Area 6 and was 

concentrations at all locations was below the

average MDC of the measurement (note that

the MDC was 13 x 10 μCi/mL, based on -9

tritium enrichment analysis). 

The annual average tritium concentrations in

tap water samples, as shown in Table 5.10,

were all less than the median MDC of 7.2 x

10 μCi/mL. The tritium concentrations for -7

all end-point water samples, which were

determined by a conventional liquid

scintillation counting method, are expected

to be lower than the MDC, because the

levels of tritium in the potable supply wells

were near the median tritium enrichment

MDC of 1.4 x 10 μCi/mL (0.52 Bq/L). -8

These MDC values are 0.9 percent and

0.018 percent, respectively, of the drinking

water DCG adjusted to a 4 mrem (0.04 mSv)

EDE.

All supply water samples analyzed for Pu 238

and Pu had concentrations below their 239+240

MDC’s of about 2.0 x 10 μCi/mL, which are -11

about 2.0 percent of their respective DCGs

adjusted to a 4 mrem EDE per year. Table

5.9 lists the concentration averages for

these nuclides for each location.

The annual averages of Pu and Pu 239+240 238

for each tap water sample were below the

median MDC of the measurements, which

were both less than 2 percent of the 4 mrem

DCG. These isotopes are not normally

detected in drinking water.

GROSS ALPHA

In accordance with the National Primary

Drinking Water Regulations (Title 40 CFR

141), gross alpha measurements were made

on quarterly samples from the drinking water

systems, namely the potable supply wells. 

As shown in Table 5.9, the average gross

alpha concentration for all of the supply

wells, except Well J-12 and Well 8, was

above the median MDC of 1.4 x 10 μCi/mL. -9

The highest concentration occurred in

17 x 10 μCi/mL (0.63 Bq/L). This is -9

acceptable according to the EPA drinking

water standard (Title 40 CFR 141) as long

as the combined concentration of Ra and 226

Ra is less than 5 x 10 μCi/mL (0.18 228 -9

Bq/L). The combined Ra concentration, for

these two wells, was less than the combined

MDC of 4.5 x 10 μCi/mL (0.17 Bq/L), as -9

shown in Table 5.11.

As added assurance that no radioactivity

gets into the systems between the supply

wells and end-point users, measurements of

gross alpha are also made on quarterly

samples from the tap water samples. As

shown in Table 5.10, the annual

concentration averages for gross alpha

radioactivity in tap water samples collected

at five locations, exceeded the screening

level at which Ra analysis is required, 226

5 pCi/L (0.19 Bq/L). Samples from the
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-21

supply wells were collected and analyzed for (2.2 kBq/L) in a sample from Well UE-5n. 

both Ra and Ra. As shown by the This activity is less than 70 percent of the 226 228

radium results in Table 5.11, the sum of the DCG for tritium established in DOE Order

average concentrations for Ra and Ra 5400.5 for comparison with the dose limit (4 226 228

were all less than 5 pCi/L, so the onsite mrem) in the National Primary Drinking

systems were in compliance with drinking Water Regulations. Six of the wells sampled

water regulations. yielded tritium results greater than the MDC. 

STRONTIUM from Test Well B is shown in Figure 5.6 and

Beginning in 1994, Sr analyses were 90

changed from annually to quarterly on

samples collected from the potable supply

wells, but analyses on non-potable supply

wells remained on an annual basis. The

concentration averages of Sr for each 90

location, as shown in Table 5.9, were below

the median MDC. OF THE NEVADA TEST SITE

As indicated by Table 5.10, the Sr results 90

for samples collected from all the selected

tap water samples had concentrations that interagency agreement with DOE, to ensure

were less than the median MDC of the

measurements.

LTHMP MONITORING ON AND

AROUND THE NEVADA TEST SITE

NEVADA TEST SITE MONITORING 

The present R&IE-LV sampling locations on

the NTS, or immediately outside its borders

on federally owned land are shown in Figure

5.3. All sampling locations are selected by

DOE and primarily represent potable water

supplies. Since 1995, R&IE-LV has only

sampled wells without pumps and, for quality

assurance purposes, collected samples from

some of the potable wells sampled by BN. A

total of 22 wells was sampled.

All samples were analyzed by gamma

spectrometry and for tritium. No gammaemitting radionuclides were detected in any

of the NTS samples collected in 1997. 

Summary results of tritium analyses are

given in Table 5.12. The highest average

tritium activity was 6.0 x 10 pCi/L 4

The trend in tritium concentration in samples

is typical of a well with decreasing tritium

concentrations. Well UE-7ns was routinely

sampled between 1978 and 1987 and

sampling began again in 1992. An

increasing trend in tritium activity was

evident at the time sampling ceased in 1987.

OFFSITE MONITORING IN THE VICINITY

Water sampling around the NTS is

conducted by the EPA’s R&IE-LV, under an

the radiological safety of public drinking

water supplies and representative water

sources or rural residents and, where

suitable, to monitor any migration of

radionuclides from the NTS. The sampling

locations are shown on Figure 5.4 and the

analytical results are in Table 5.13. No manmade gamma-emitting radionuclides were

detected in any sample. Adaven Spring 

showed detectable tritium activity, while the

sample from the low-level waste site south

of Beatty had barely detectable activity.

LTHMP MONITORING AT OTHER

TEST SITES

Annual sampling of surface and

groundwaters is conducted at the Projects

SHOAL and FAULTLESS sites in Nevada,

the Projects GASBUGGY and GNOME sites

in New Mexico, the Projects RULISON and

RIO BLANCO sites in Colorado, and the

Project DRIBBLE (SALMON) site in

Mississippi. Sampling is normally conducted

in odd numbered years on Amchitka Island, 

Alaska, at the site of Projects CANNIKIN,

LONG SHOT, and MILROW. 


5-24

PROJECT SHOAL Sampling was conducted May 6, 1997, with

Project SHOAL, a 12-kt test emplaced at

365 m (1,198 ft), was conducted on October

26, 1963, in Fallon Nevada, in a sparsely

populated area near Frenchman Station,

Nevada. The test, part of the Vela Uniform

Program, was designed to investigate

detection of a nuclear detonation in an

active earthquake zone. The working point

was in granite and no surface crater was

created. 

Samples were collected on February 24 and

25, 1997. The sampling locations are shown

in Figure 5.8. Only nine of the ten routine

wells were sampled. Spring Windmill, and

Smith and James Spring have been deleted. 

In 1997, four new wells were added to the

LTHMP at this site, which are positioned

near ground zero (GZ). Well HC-3 was dry

and will have to be reworked. It will be

sampled in 1998. At least one location, Well

HS-1, should intercept radioactivity migrating

from the test cavity, should it occur

(Chapman and Hokett 1991). 

Gamma-ray spectral analysis results

indicated that no man-made gamma-emitting

radionuclides were present in any samples

above the MDC. One of the new wells, 

HC-4 drilled in 1996, had a tritium

concentration of 860 ± 160 pCi/L 

(320 ± 6 Bq/L). Tritium concentrations at all

the other locations were below the MDC

(see Table 5.15).

PROJECT RULISON

Cosponsored by the AEC and Austral Oil

Company under the Plowshare Program,

Project RULISON was designed to stimulate

natural gas recovery in the Mesa Verde

formation. The test, conducted near Grand

Valley, Colorado, on September 10, 1969,

consisted of a 40-kt nuclear explosive

emplaced at a depth of 2,568 m (8,425 ft). 

Production testing began in 1970 and was

completed in April 1971. Cleanup was

initiated in 1972 and the wells were plugged

in 1976. Some surface contamination

resulted from decontamination of drilling

equipment and fallout from gas flaring.

Contaminated soil was removed during the

cleanup operations.

collection of samples from all sampling

locations in the area of Grand Valley and

Rulison, Colorado. Routine sampling

locations are shown in Figure 5.9 and

include five local ranches, five sites in the

vicinity of surface GZ (SGZ), including one

test well, a surface-discharge spring, and a

surface sampling location on Battlement

Creek. Seven new monitoring wells were

completed at the RULISON site in 1995. 

Wells RU-1 and RU-2 were added to the

LTHMP in 1997, as part of the Remedial

Investigation and Feasibility Study.

Tritium has never been observed in

measurable concentrations in the Grand

Valley City Springs. All of the remaining

sampling sites show detectable levels of

tritium, which have generally exhibited a

stable or decreasing trend over the last 

two decades. The range of tritium activity in

1997 was from 42 ± 5 pCi/L (2 ± 0.2 Bq/L) at

Well RU-1, to 100 ± 5.9 pCi/L (4 ± 0.2 Bq/L)

at Lee Hayward Ranch. All values were less

than 1 percent of the DCG (see Table 5.16). 

The detectable tritium activities were

probably a result of the high natural

background in the area. This was supported

by the DRI analysis, which indicated that

most of the sampling locations were shallow,

drawing water from the surficial aquifer,

which was unlikely to become contaminated

by any radionuclides arising from the Project

RULISON cavity (Chapman and Hokett

1991). Gamma-ray spectral analysis results

indicated that man-made gamma-emitting

radionuclides were not detectable.

PROJECT RIO BLANCO

Project RIO BLANCO, a joint governmentindustry test designed to stimulate natural

gas flow, was conducted under the

Plowshare Program. The test was

conducted on May 17, 1973, at a location

between Rifle and Meeker Colorado. Three

nuclear explosives, with a total yield of 99 kt,

were emplaced at 1780-, 1920-, and 2040-m

(5840-, 6299-, and 6693-ft) depths in the

Fort Union and Mesa Verde formations. 

Production testing continued to 1976 when


WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-27

cleanup and restoration activities were Sampling at Project GNOME was conducted

completed. Tritiated water produced during June 25 through 27, 1997. The routine

testing was injected to 1,710 m (5,610 ft) in sampling sites, depicted in Figure 5.11,

a nearby gas well. include nine monitoring wells in the vicinity

Samples were collected May 7 and 8, 1997, Loving and Carlsbad, New Mexico. 

from the sampling sites shown in Figure

5.10. Only 13 of the 14 routine wells were

sampled. No sample was collected from

CER #4, which was not accessible due to

heavy rainfall. The routine sampling

locations included three springs and six

wells. Three of the wells are located near

the cavity and at least two of the wells

(Wells RB-D-01 and RB-D-03) were suitable

for monitoring possible migration of

radioactivity from the cavity.

No radioactive materials attributable to the

RIO BLANCO test were detected in samples

collected in May 1997. The range of tritium

activity, using the enrichment method, was

from 36 ± 5.2 (1.3 ± 0.2 Bq/L) at the B-1

Equity Camp to 25 ± 3.7 (1 ±0.1 Bq/L) at

Fawn Creek, 8,400 ft downstream (see

Table 5.17). The tritium concentrations are

well below 20,000 pCi/L level defined in the

EPA National Primary Drinking Water

Regulations (Title 40 CFR 141). All samples

were analyzed for presence of gamma-ray

emitting radionuclides, and none were

detected. 

PROJECT GNOME

Project GNOME, conducted on December

10, 1961, near Carlsbad, New Mexico, was a

multipurpose test performed in a salt

formation. A 3-kt nuclear explosive was

emplaced at 371 m (1,217 ft) depth in the

Salado salt formation. Radioactive gases

were unexpectedly vented during the test. 

The USGS conducted a tracer study in

1963, involving injection of 20 Ci H, 10 Ci 3

Cs, 10 Ci Sr, and 4 Ci I (740, 370, 137 90 131

370, and 150 GBq, respectively) into Well

USGS-8 and pumping water from Well

USGS-4. During cleanup activities in 1968-

69, contaminated material was placed in the

test cavity access well. More material was

slurried into the cavity and drifts in 1979.

of GZ and the municipal water supplies at

Tritium results greater than the MDC were

detected in water samples from 6 of the 12

sampling locations in the immediate vicinity

of GZ. Tritium activities in Wells DD-1, LRL7, USGS-4, and USGS-8 ranged from 6.16 x

10 to 2.46 x 10 pCi/L (2.29 x 10 to 91 7 3 6

Bq/L), as shown in Table 5.18. Well DD-1

collects water from the test cavity; Well LRL7 collects water from a side drift; and Wells

USGS-4 and -8 were used in the

radionuclide tracer study conducted by the

USGS. None of these wells are sources of

potable water. 

In addition to tritium, Cs and Sr 137 90

concentrations were observed in samples

from Wells DD-1, LRL-7, and USGS-8 and

Sr activity was detected in Well USGS-4 as 90

in previous years (see Table 5.18). No

tritium was detected in the remaining

sampling locations, including Well USGS-1,

which the DRI analysis (Chapman and

Hokett 1991) indicated is positioned to

detect any migration of radioactivity from the

cavity. All other tritium results were below

the MDC.

PROJECT GASBUGGY

Project GASBUGGY was a Plowshare

Program test co-sponsored by the U.S.

Government and El Paso Natural Gas. 

Conducted near Farmington, New Mexico,

on December 10, 1967, the test was

designed to stimulate a low productivity

natural gas reservoir. A nuclear explosive

with a 29-kt yield was emplaced at a depth

of 1,290 m (4,240 ft). Production testing

was completed in 1976, and restoration

activities were completed in July 1978.

Sampling at GASBUGGY was conducted

during May 10 through 12, 1997. Only 12

samples were collected at the designated

sampling locations shown in Figure 5.12. 



WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-31

The Bixler Ranch Well has been sealed up of about 5.3 kt, detonated on October 22,

and the Well 28.3.33.233 south had the

pumps removed and no samples could be

obtained.

The Cedar Springs sampling site yielded a

tritium activity of 46 ± 5.8 pCi/L

(1.7 ± 0.2 Bq/L). For Lower Burro Canyon,

the tritium activity was 93 ± 5.5 pCi/L (3.4 ±

0.2 Bq/L), which was less than 0.2 percent

of the DCG and similar to the range seen in

previous years (see Table 5.19). Tritium

samples from the other locations were all

below the average MDC. Well EPNG 10-36,

a gas well located 132 m (435 ft) northwest

of the test cavity, with a sampling depth of

approximately 1,100 m (3,600 ft), has

yielded detectable tritium activities since

1984. The sample collected in May 1997

contained tritium at a concentration of 122 ±

5.9 pCi/L (4.5 ± 0.2 Bq/L), as shown in Table

5.19. The migration mechanism and route is

not currently known, although an analysis by

DRI indicated two feasible routes: one

through the Printed Cliffs sandstones and

the other one through the Ojo Alamo

sandstone, one of the principal aquifers in

the region (Chapman et al., 1996b). In

either case, fractures extending from the

cavity may be the primary or a contributing

mechanism.

All gamma-ray spectral analysis results

indicated that no man-made gamma-emitting

radionuclides were present in any offsite

samples. Tritium concentrations of water

samples collected onsite and offsite are

consistent with those of past studies at the

GASBUGGY site.

PROJECT DRIBBLE 

Project DRIBBLE was comprised of two

nuclear and two gas explosive tests,

conducted in the SALMON test site area

near Hattiesburg, Mississippi, under the Vela

Uniform Program. The purpose of Project

DRIBBLE was to study the effects of

decoupling on seismic signals produced by

nuclear explosives tests. The first test,

SALMON, was a nuclear device with a yield

1964, at a depth of 826 m (2,710 ft). This

test created the cavity used for the

subsequent tests, including STERLING, a

nuclear test conducted on December 3,

1966, with a yield of 380 tons, and the two

gas explosions, DIODE TUBE (on February

2, 1969) and HUMID WATER (on April 19,

1970). The ground surface and shallow

groundwater aquifers were contaminated by

disposal of drilling muds and fluids in surface

pits. The radioactive contamination was

primarily limited to the unsaturated zone and

upper, nonpotable aquifers near SGZ. 

Shallow wells, labeled HMH wells on Figure

5.13, have been added to the area near

SGZ to monitor this contamination. Fifteen

new wells were completed in 1996 and first

sampled by the EPA LTHMP Program in

1997. These wells are shallow, between 9

m to 12 m (30 ft to 40 ft) in depth. In

addition to the monitoring of wells near GZ,

extensive sampling of water wells is

conducted in the nearby offsite area as

shown in Figure 5.14.

Because of the variability noted in past

years in samples from the shallow

monitoring wells near the SALMON GZ, the

sampling procedure was modified several

years ago. A second sample is taken after

pumping for a specified period of time or

after the well has been pumped dry and

permitted to recharge. These second

samples may be representative of formation

water, whereas the first samples may be

more indicative of recent rainfall. 

Sampling on and in the vicinity of the

SALMON site was conducted between April

20 through 24, 1997. 

Long-term decreasing trends in tritium

concentrations are evident for those

locations that had detectable tritium activity

at the beginning of the LTHMP, such as in

the samples from the Baxterville City Well

depicted in Figure 5.15 and Well HM-S

shown in Figure 5.16. Due to the high

rainfall in the area, the normal sampling 



WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-35

procedure is modified for the shallow onsite radionuclides were present in any samples

wells as described above. Of the 45 collected onsite. Tritium concentrations of

locations sampled onsite, 20 sites were water samples collected onsite are

sampled twice (pre-and post-pumping), and consistent with those of past studies at the

8 yielded tritium activities greater than the three sites, MILROW, CANNIKIN, and

MDC in either the first or second sample. Of LONG SHOT. Results are discussed in

these, eight yielded results higher than greater detail in the “Amchitka Alaska

normal background (approximately 60 pCi/L Special Sampling Report” (Faller 1997

[2.2 Bq/L]), as shown in Table 5.20. The available from R&IE-LV).

locations where the highest tritium activities

were measured generally correspond to

areas of known contamination. No tritium

concentrations above normal background

values were detected in any offsite samples. 

Man-made gamma-ray emitting

radionuclides were not detected in any

sample collected in this study.

Six of the previously sampled locations

regularly have tritium values above those

expected in surface water samples. Of the

15 new wells, tritium values ranged from 3.4

x 10 to 14 ± 3.2 pCi/L (1.3 x 10 to 0.5 ± 4 3

0.2 Bq/L) as shown in Table 5.20. Only one

well was above the MDC in the 36 samples

collected from the offsite sampling locations. 

Tritium activity ranged from less than the

MDC to 26 pCi/L (1 Bq/L), 0.01 percent of

the DCG. These results do not exceed the

natural tritium activity expected in rain water

in this area.

Results of sampling related to Project

DRIBBLE are discussed in greater detail in

the Onsite and Offsite Environmental

Monitoring Report, "Radiation Monitoring

around SALMON Test Site," Lamar County,

Mississippi, April 1997 (Davis 1997,

available from R&IE-LV). 

AMCHITKA ISLAND, ALASKA

Sampling was conducted June 3 through 17,

1997. The sampling locations on Amchitka

Island are shallow wells and surface

sampling sites. Therefore, the monitoring

network for Amchitka Island is restricted to

monitoring of surface contamination and

drinking water supplies.

All gamma-ray spectral analysis results

indicated that no man-made gamma-emitting

GROUNDWATER MONITORING

GROUNDWATER QUANTITY

Water levels are monitored annually by the

USGS on and around the NTS at

approximately 156 measurement locations. 

Data for the 1995 water year are reported in

Bauer et al., 1996, the most recent

publication. Results are used in regional

and local groundwater models, but are not

routinely analyzed for water level trends. 

However, no significant water level impacts

associated with groundwater usage were

detected in 1996.

The USGS has begun to compile historic

water-level and water-withdrawal data to

evaluate trends of water withdrawal and

water levels in the southern NTS area. The

purpose of the study is to determine whether

correlations exist that may indicate short- or

long-term effects of water use in Frenchman

Flat and Mercury Valley. Ten wells have

been used as production wells and 11 wells

have been used for observation. 

Water-level data were evaluated for all the

observation wells and production wells

having sufficient water-level data. 

Water usage on the NTS is monitored by the

both the USGS and BN. The data are

reported in Bauer et al., 1996. Water use at

the NTS continues to decline, due to the

cessation of underground nuclear testing in

1992 and was about 1.33 x 10 m 6 3

(351 x 10 gal) in 1997. 6

GROUNDWATER QUALITY

LLNL collaborated with LANL and USGS to

collect fluid samples from post-shot wells at

the NTS. In addition to radionuclides more
5-36

commonly found in cavity fluids, the the source. LANL and LLNL monitored

presence of low-levels of plutonium

(0.22 pCi/L at collection time) were

confirmed in one of the wells. Results from

this sampling event will be included in the

LLNL Hot Well Database, which compiles

new and historical radiochemical data from

cavity and near cavity wells on the NTS. 

Isotopic and chemical data from 107

samples of southern Nevada waters were

compiled and published (Rose et al., 1997).

LLNL continues to investigate the

occurrence, distribution, and potential

mobility of radionuclides in the sub-surface

through investigation of archival post-shot

debris. Static leaching experiments of glass

and crystalline samples commenced to

elucidate controls on the solubility of

radionuclides.

Regional-scale groundwater investigations

concentrated on determining recharge

locations and flow paths for the groundwater

flow systems in southern Nevada. This

included two separate sampling trips, during

which approximately 50 samples were

collected. Geochemical and

isotopic measurements included cation and

anion chemistry, oxygen, hydrogen and

carbon stable isotopes, and radiocarbon.

Groundwater quality was determined by

monitoring wells and springs, both onsite

and offsite, for radioactive constituents as

discussed above. The remainder of this

chapter summarizes analyses of water for

chemical constituents, radioisotopes, and

stable isotopes in order to comply with

environmental permits, better characterize

NTS groundwater quality, and support

regional groundwater flow and transport

models. 

DOE continued efforts to create a long-term

monitoring program for wells in or near

underground nuclear test cavities. The

program objectives are to characterize the

hydrologic source term and evaluate the

decay and potential migration of

radionuclides through monitoring at or near

water at the TYBO, BULLION, and

CHESHIRE tests on Pahute Mesa and the

DALHART and DILBY tests in Yucca Flat

(LANL 1998). A LLNL summary report will

be released in 1998.

5.6 NONRADIOLOGICAL

MONITORING

The 1997 nonradiological monitoring

program for the NTS included onsite

sampling of various environmental media

and substances for compliance with federal

and state regulations or permits and for

ecological studies. The Ecological

Monitoring and Compliance Program

performed habitat mapping in the southern

third of the NTS, characterized NTS springs,

monitored man-made water sources,

conducted wild horse and chukar surveys,

prepared a biological monitoring plan for the

Hazardous Materials Spill Center (HSC), and

surveyed for several former candidate

species for federal listing under the

Endangered Species Act. In 1997,

nonradiological monitoring was conducted

for two series of tests conducted at the HSC

on the NTS.

Nonradiological monitoring of non-NTS

DOE/NV facilities was conducted at three

offsite facilities. This monitoring was limited

to wastewater discharges to publicly owned

treatment works.

Routine nonradiological environmental

monitoring on the NTS in 1997 was limited

to:

 Sampling of drinking water distribution

systems and water haulage trucks for

Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) and

state of Nevada compliance.

 Sewage lagoon influent and E Tunnel

discharge sampling for compliance with

state of Nevada operating permit

requirements.
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-37

CLEAN WATER ACT RESULTS

NTS OPERATIONS

The NTS General Permit requires quarterly

reporting for biochemical oxygen demand

(BOD) and specific conductance, organic

loading rates, and water depths in infiltration

basins. It also requires reporting of second

quarter influent toxics sampling. The results

of this sampling are shown in Tables 5.21,

5.22, 5.23, and 5.24, respectively. All

values in these tables are in compliance with

the permit requirements.

The permit also requires monitoring of the

infiltration basins, which attain a depth of 30

cm or more in January and June for

parameters listed in Appendix II of the

permit. Sampling is required as soon as any

other system exceeds the 30 cm. Three

secondary ponds at the Area 23 facility

usually contain the required depth, but are

excluded as needing the sampling in Part

III.C.4 of the permit. During 1997, the Yucca

Lake system exceeded the 30 cm in the first 

quarter, and these sampling results are

given in Table 5.25. All values in this table

are in compliance with the permit

requirements.

NON-NTS OPERATIONS

Only the North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF)

and the Remote Sensing Laboratory (RSL)

are required by permit to sample and

analyze wastewater effluent and submit selfmonitoring reports. The NLVF selfmonitoring report consists of two outfalls and

the burn pit batch discharge being

monitored. The Clark County Sanitation

District wastewater permit for the RSL

requires biannual monitoring of two outfalls,

quarterly pH, and monthly septage reports. 

All sampling results for 1997 were within

permit limits.

SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT

RESULTS

Water sampling was conducted for analysis

of bacteria, volatile organic compounds

(VOCs), inorganic constituents, and water

quality as required by the SDWA and state

of Nevada regulations. Samples were taken

at various locations throughout all drinking

water distribution systems on the NTS. 

Common sampling points were restroom and

cafeteria sinks. All samples were collected

according to accepted practices, and the

analyses were performed by state approved

laboratories. Analyses were performed in

accordance with Nevada Administrative

Code 445A and Title 40 CFR 141. 

BACTERIOLOGICAL SAMPLING

Samples were submitted to the stateapproved Associated Pathologists

Laboratories in Las Vegas, Nevada, for

coliform analyses. All water distribution

systems were tested once a month, with the

number of people being served determining

the number of samples collected. If coliform

bacteria are present, the system must be

shut down and chlorinated. In order to

reopen the system, three or four consecutive

samples must meet state requirements,

depending again on the number of people

served. There were no incidents of positive

coliform results during 1997.

Residual chlorine and pH levels were

determined at the collection point by using

colorimetric methods approved by the state. 

The results were recorded in BN’s drinking

water sample logbook, and the chlorine

residual level was recorded on an analysis

form. 

Samples from trucks, which hauled potable

water from NTS wells to work areas, were

also analyzed for coliform bacteria. During

1996, the state relaxed the requirement to

test every truck load of water, to testing

each of the three trucks weekly. There were

no positive coliform sample results in 1997

that required superchlorination and

resampling.

CHEMICAL ANALYSIS

Chemical analysis in 1997 consisted of

VOCs, metals, and inorganics.
5-38

ORGANIC COMPOUND ANALYSIS qualify for jurisdictional wetlands protection. 

Samples for VOCs were collected during the

first quarter of 1997 from potable water wells

4A and 5B and during the third quarter from

well 5B. The samples were analyzed by a

state-approved laboratory. None of the

results were above quantitation limits.

METAL ANALYSIS

In compliance with a state agreement,

samples were collected in the first and third

quarters and analyzed for lead and copper. 

These samples were taken from faucets and

a fill stand at 37 separate locations at the

NTS, covering all the potable water

distribution systems. All results were below

the method detection limits of 0.5 mg/L for

copper and 0.01 mg/L for lead.

INORGANIC COMPOUND ANALYSIS AND

WATER QUALITY and August. They included Cane, Captain

To comply with a 1991 variance to the Area

25 water system permit, fluoride samples

need to be taken annually before July 31 to

confirm that the fluoride concentration is less

than four parts per million. Samples taken

from Area 25 wells J-12 and J-13 in the first

quarter of 1997 confirmed that the fluoride

concentration was acceptable.

During the first quarter of 1997, all systems

(ten water wells) were sampled and

analyzed for nitrates. The results of these

analyses are shown in Table 5.26. Since

the samples from wells J-12 and J-13 had

nitrate concentrations at one half the

maximum contaminant level of 10 mg/L,

repeat analyses were required for the next

four consecutive quarters. Samples from

these two wells in the second, third, and

fourth quarters of 1997 have all been

satisfactory, at less than half of the

maximum contaminant level.

CHARACTERIZATION AND MONITORING

OF NTS SPRINGS

From June 1996 through February 1997,

biologists visited 25 natural water sources at

the NTS to determine if these mesic habitats

A summary report of all findings titled

“Nevada Test Site Wetlands Assessment”

(Hansen et al., 1997) was completed and

distributed as a DOE/NV topical report in

May. The report identifies 16 NTS natural

water sources that may be classified as

jurisdictional wetlands and 8 water sources

that may be classified as waters of the

United States. The report also identifies and

summarizes previous studies on NTS natural

water sources; describes their known

physical, chemical, and biological features;

identifies the current DOE management

practices related to the protection of NTS

wetlands; and identifies the information

needed to develop and implement resource

management objectives for NTS wetlands. 

Periodic monitoring of selected NTS natural

water sources was continued in 1997. Nine

water sources were visited between June

Jack, Gold Meadows, Tippipah, Topopah,

Tub, and Whiterock Springs; Reitmann

Seep; and Yucca Playa Pond. Selected

hydrology, water quality, and wildlife usage

data were collected. These data were

summarized and presented in an annual

report titled “Ecological Monitoring and

Compliance Program Fiscal Year 1997

Report,” submitted to DOE/NV in

September.

5.7 WATER QUALITY

PERMITS

Water quality permits were required by the

state for onsite drinking water systems. 

Other types of water permits were required

for onsite and offsite sewage-related

activities.

ONSITE WATER PERMITS

DRINKING WATER SYSTEM PERMITS

Four NTS drinking water system permits

issued by the state of Nevada, as shown in

Table 5.27 were renewed with new

expiration dates. During 1994, the state of

Nevada determined that the trucks used for
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-39

hauling potable water should also have included two permits at the LVAO facilities

permits, so three additional permits were and two at the Special Technologies

obtained. These permits were also Laboratory (STL) as shown in Table 5.28. 

renewed. No drinking water systems were Each was issued by the county or local

maintained by non-NTS facilities. municipality in which the facility was located

SEWAGE DISCHARGE PERMITS

Sewage discharge permits from the state of

Nevada, Division of Environmental

Protection are listed in Table 5.28 and

require submission of quarterly discharge

monitoring reports. 

NTS SEWAGE HAULING PERMITS

Permits issued by the state of Nevada

Division of Health for six sewage hauling

trucks for the NTS were renewed in

November 1995 and are listed in Table 5.29.

NON-NTS SEWAGE PERMITS

Sewage permits were required for four

locations at non-NTS operations. These

as follows:

 NLVF - The NLVF self-monitoring report

was submitted in October 1997. Two

outfalls and the burn pit batch discharge

are monitored.

 RSL - The Clark County Sanitation

District wastewater permit for the RSL

required biannual monitoring of two

outfalls, quarterly pH, and monthly

septage reports. RSL monitoring reports

were submitted in May and December

1997.

 STL - The STL holds wastewater permits

for the Botello Road and Ekwill Street

locations. There is no required selfmonitoring.
5-40

Table 5.1 Summary of Analytical Procedures for Water Samples - 1997

Type of Analytical Count Analytical Sample Approximate

Analysis Equipment Time-min Procedure Size-mL MDC

 BN Procedures

Gross  Gas-flow 100 Boil down. Place 900 2 pCi/L

Proportional on planchet and

Counter heat to dryness

Gross  Gas-flow 100 Boil down. Place 900 2 pCi/L

Proportional on planchet and

Counter heat to dryness

Gamma HpGe detector 100 Online computer 500 10 pCi/L for Cs

calibrated at 1 analysis

keV/channel 

137

Tritium Liquid scintil- 70 Distillation of 2.5 300-700 pCi/L

Convent. lation counter 100 mL

Tritium Liquid scintil- 300 Electrolysis of 250 5 20 pCi/L

Enrichment lation counter mL basic solution

Plutonium Alpha 1000 Tracer, ion 900 0.02 pCi/L

Spectrometer exchange, collect

ppt on filter

Radium Gamma 500 Tracer, ppt as 90 1 pCi/L for Ra

Spectrometer sulfate, collect 3 pCi/L for Ra

on filter

228

226

Strontium Gas-flow 100 ppt as carbonate, 900 0.3 pCi/L

Proportional count yttrium in

Counter growth

R&IE-LV Procedures

Gamma HpGe detector 100 Online computer 3500 Varies with

calibrate at 0.5 analysis nuclide/detector 

keV/channel Cs: 7 pCi/L 137

Tritium Liquid scintil- 300 Distillation of 5-10 300-700 pCi/L

Convent. lation counter sample

Tritium Liquid scintil- 300 250 mL 5 5 pCi/L

Enrichment lation counter concentrate by

electrolysis, 

distill
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-41

Table 5.2 Summary of the Water Surveillance Program - 1997

Number

Sample Collection of Sampling Type of

Type Description Frequency Locations Analysis (a)

Onsite Monitoring

Tap Grab sample Monthly 7 Gamma spectroscopy,

Water gross ß, H, 3

( Pu, gross  238,239+240

quarterly),

( Sr annually). 90

Potable Grab sample Quarterly 10 Gamma spectroscopy,

Supply Wells gross  & ß, Ra, 226 & 228

Pu, H enrich, 238,239+240 3

Sr. 90

Nonpotable Grab sample Quarterly 2 Gamma spectroscopy,

Supply Wells gross  & ß, H, ( Sr 3 90

annually) Pu. 238,239+240

Open Grab sample Annually 15 Gamma spectroscopy,

Reservoirs gross ß, H, Sr 3 90

Pu. 238,239+240

Natural Grab sample Annually 8 Gamma spectroscopy, 

Springs gross ß, H, Sr 3 90

Pu. 238,239+240

Containment Grab sample Quarterly 1 Gamma spectroscopy,

Ponds gross ß, H, Pu 3 238,239+240

( Sr annually). 90

Sewage Grab sample Quarterly 9 Gamma spectroscopy,

Lagoons gross ß, H, Pu 3 238,239+240

( Sr annually). 90

(a) All locations were not sampled for various reasons.

Table 5.3 Groundwater Monitoring Parameters at the RWMS-5

Parameters Determining Suitability of Groundwater

Total and Dissolved Metals - As, Ba, Cd, Cr, Hg, Ag, Pb, Se

Total and Dissolved Gross Alpha/Beta

Parameters Establishing Water Quality

Chloride

Total and Dissolved Fe, Mn, Na
5-42

Table 5.3 (Groundwater Monitoring Parameters at the RWMS-5, cont.)

Parameters Establishing Water Quality, cont.

Phenols

Sulfate

Indicators of Contamination

pH

Conductivity

Total Organic Carbon

Total Organic Halogen

Additional Selected Parameters

Volatile Organics 

Tritium

Table 5.4 NTS Facilities with RCRA Closure Plans

Location Designation

Area 2 Bitcutter Shop & LLNL Post Shot Shop

Area 2 U-2bu Subsidence Crater

Area 3 U-3fi Injection Well (closed)

Area 6 Decontamination Facility Evaporation Pond

Area 6 Steam Cleaning Effluent Pond

Area 23 Building 650 Leachfield

Area 23 Hazardous Waste Trenches (closed)

Area 27 Explosive Ordnance Disposal Facility (closed)

Table 5.5 Locations with Detectable Man-Made Radioactivity - 1997(a)

Concentration

Location Radionuclide x 10 μCi/mL -9 

NTS Onsite Network

Well UE-5n H 60,000 3

Well UE-6d H 540 3

Well UE-7ns H 530 3

Project DRIBBLE, Mississippi 

Well HMH-2 H 290 3

Well HMH-5 H 880 3

Well HMH-10 H 160 3

Well HM-L H 960 3

(a) Only H concentrations greater than 0.2 percent of the 4 mrem DCG are shown (i.e., 3

greater than 1.6 x 10 μCi/mL [160 pCi/L {6 Bq/L}]). Detectable levels of other man- -7

made radioisotopes are also shown.
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-43

Table 5.5 (Locations with Detectable Man-Made Radioactivity - 1997 , cont.) (a)

Concentration

Location Radionuclide x 10 μCi/mL -9 

(Project DRIBBLE, Mississippi, cont.)

Well HM-S H 3300 3

Half Moon Creek Overflow H 200 3

REECo Pit B H 590 3

REECo Pit C H 320 3

SAI-1-H H 34,000 3

SAI-2-H H 3200 3

SAI-4-H H 340 3

SAI-5-H H 1300 3

SAI-6-H H 160 3

 GNOME, New Mexico

Well DD-1 H 6.2 x 10 3 7

Sr 13,000 90

Cs 6.9 x 10 137 5

Well LRL-7 H 2500 3

Sr 2.5 90

 Cs 160 137

Well USGS-4 H 74,000 3

Sr 4800 90

Cs <5.0 137

Well USGS-8 H 68,000 3

Sr 4000 90

Cs 100 137

(a) Only H concentrations greater than 0.2 percent of the 4 mrem DCG are shown (i.e., 3

greater than 1.6 x 10 μCi/mL [160 pCi/L {6 Bq/L}]). Detectable levels of other man- -7

made radioisotopes are also shown.

Table 5.6 Radioactivity in NTS Surface Waters - 1997

 Annual Average Concentrations (10 μCi/mL) -9

Source of Number of % DCG

Water Locations Gross ß Tritium Pu Pu Sr Range 238 239+240 90 (a)

Open Reservoirs 8 10 -159 -0.0016 -0.008 -0.060 <0.01-0.1

Natural Springs 7 9.8 -32 -0.0010 0.012 -0.084 <0.01-0.1

Containment Ponds

E Tunnel 2 76 10 x 10 0.38 3.1 1.1 (b) 5 (c)

U-3cn Wells 2 -- 13 x 10 -- -- -- 6 (c)

Sewage Lagoons 8 20 31 -0.001 0.016 -0.080 (c)

Mean MDC 1.2 740 0.015 0.018 0.34

(a) DCG based on value for drinking water (4 mrem EDE).

(b) A pond and an effluent.

(c) Not a potable water source.
5-44

Table 5.7 NTS Open Reservoir Gross Beta Analysis Results - 1997

 Gross Beta Concentration (10 μCi/mL) -9

Concentration

Location Concentration as %DCG(a)

Area 2, Mud Plant Reservoir 9.7 24

Area 2, Well 2 Reservoir - - (b)

Area 3, Mud Plant Reservoir - - (b)

Area 3, Well A Reservoir 14 35

Area 5, UE-5c Reservoir 18 45

Area 5, Well 5B Reservoir 12 30

Area 6, Well 3 Reservoir 13 32

Area 6, Well C1 Reservoir 8.0 20

Area 18, Camp 17 Reservoir 3.2 8.0

Area 18, Well 8 Reservoir - - (b)

Area 19, UE-19c Reservoir - - (b)

Area 20, Well 20A Reservoir - - (b)

Area 23, Swimming Pool - - (b)

Area 25, Well J-11 Reservoir 4.4 11

Area 25, Well J-12 Reservoir - - (b)

(a) DCG based on Sr value for drinking water (4 mrem EDE - 40 pCi/L) 90

(b) Reservoir was dry.

Table 5.8 NTS Drinking Water Sources - 1997

System Supply Wells End-Point

No. 1 Wells C1, 4, 4A Area 6, Cafeteria

Area 6, Building 6-900 

No. 2 Well 8 Area 2, Restroom

Area 12, Building 12-23 

No. 3 Well UE-16d Area 1, Building 101

No. 4 Wells 5B, 5C, 

 and Army No. 1 Area 23, Cafeteria

No. 5 Wells J-12, J-13 Area 25, Building 4221

Table 5.9 NTS Supply Well Radioactivity Averages - 1997

Annual Average Concentrations - 10 μCi/mL -9

Description Gross Beta H Pu Pu Gross Alpha Sr 3 239+240 238 90 (a)

Potable Water Supply Wells

Area 5, Well 5C 6.7 3.5 0.00005 -0.0006 9.5 -0.036 

Area 6, Well 4 6.6 0.6 -0.0008 -0.0016 9.8 -0.0001

Area 6, Well 4A 7.2 4.2 -0.0003 -0.0021 11 -0.097
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-45

Table 5.9 (NTS Supply Well Radioactivity Averages - 1997, cont.)

Annual Average Concentrations - 10 μCi/mL -9

Description Gross Beta H Pu Pu Gross Alpha Sr 3 239+240 238 90 (a)

Potable Water Supply Wells

Area 5, Well 5B 11. 4.7 0.0008 -0.0019 5.3 -0.004

Area 6, Well C1 9.8 2.6 -0.0018 -0.0033 11 0.049

Area 16, Well UE-16d 7.6 4.1 -0.0017 -0.0014 7.4 0.17

Area 18, Well 8 3.2 0.4 -0.0012 0.012 0.8 0.015

Area 22, Army Well No.1 5.8 0.2 -0.0005 0.0033 4.3 0.082

Area 25, Well J-12 4.7 5.3 -0.0004 0.017 1.4 0.051

Area 25, Well J-13 4.7 3.9 -0.0009 -0.0021 2.0 0.17

Non-Potable Water Supply Wells

Area 5, Well UE-5c 8.6 1.4 -0.0007 -0.0001 9.0 0.08

Median MDC 1.2 13 0.017 0.021 1.4 0.34

Table 5.10 Radioactivity Averages for NTS Tap Water Samples - 1997

 Annual Average Concentrations -10 μCi/mL -9

Description Gross Beta H Pu Pu Gross Alpha Sr 3 239+240 238 90 (a)

Area 1, Bldg. 101 6.8 -39 -0.0027 -0.0004 7.7 -0.12 (b)

Area 2, Restroom 3.4 250 -0.0020 -0.0007 0.7 -0.16 

Area 6, Cafeteria 6.2 -59 -0.0018 0.0002 9.2 -0.083 

Area 6, Bldg. 6-900 6.8 -50 -0.0014 -0.0005 9.7 -0.055 

Area 12, Bldg. 12-23 3.8 80 -0.0054 -0.0012 0.7 -0.036 

Area 23, Cafeteria 7.3 17 -0.0033 -0.0011 5.8 -0.051 

Area 25, Bldg. 4221 5.6 128 -0.0033 -0.0014 2.4 0.009

Median MDC 1.2 740 0.020 0.016 1.4 0.31

(a) Sr values are for one sample. 90

(b) One sample collected from Area 1 Ice House when Building 101 inaccessible.
5-46

Table 5.11 Radium Analysis Results for NTS Potable Water Supply Wells - 1997

 Concentrations (10 μCi/mL) -9

Ra Ra 226 228

Number Arithmetic Standard Arithmetic Standard

Location of Samples Mean Deviation Mean Deviation

Area 5, Well 5B 4 0.27 1.1 0.45 0.31

Area 5, Well 5C 4 1.6 1.4 0.38 0.46

Area 6, Well 4 4 0.086 2.0 0.40 0.31

Area 6, Well 4A 3 0.83 0.62 0.29 0.17

Area 6, Well C-1 4 1.9 2.2 0.76 0.34

Area 16, Well UE-16d 4 1.1 1.7 0.09 0.43

Area 18, Well 8 4 1.4 1.6 0.10 0.70

Area 23, Army Well No. 1 4 0.85 0.88 0.18 0.82

Area 25, Well J-12 4 0.28 0.67 0.42 0.40

Area 25, Well J-13 4 0.49 1.5 -0.01 0.54

Median MDC 3.5 0.97

Table 5.12 Summary of Tritium Results for NTS Wells Sampled by R&IE-LV - 1997

Tritium Concentration (pCi/L)

Number Arithmetic Mean Mean

Location of Samples Maximum Minimum Mean 1 Sigma as %DCG MDC (a)

Test Well B 1 --- --- 46 2.2 0.05 5.6

Test Well D 1 --- --- 3.0 1.6 5.3 (b)

Test Well F 2 31 26 29 2.4 0.03 4.9

Well C-1 1 --- --- 0.46 1.7 5.6 (b)

Well HTH-1 1 --- --- 180 70 230 (b)

Well PM-1 1 --- --- 180 70 230 (b)

Well UE-1c 2 140 -77 32 70 220 (b)

Well UE-5n 2 66000 54000 60000 400 67 230

Well UE-6d 2 540 510 520 6.6 0.58 5.5

Well UE-6e 2 77 -51 13 68 230 (b)

Well UE-7ns 2 530 310 420 100 0.47 230

Well UE-16d 1 --- --- 66 70 230 (b)

Well UE-16f 1 --- --- 58 69 230 (b)

Well UE-18r 2 3.7 -2.9 0.4 2.2 5.2 (b)

Well UE-18t 1 --- --- 210 70 230 (b)

Well 1 Army 2 19 -26 -4 95 220 (b)

Well 2 1 --- --- 19 69 230 (b)

Well 4 1 --- --- -3.1 1.8 6.0 (b)

Well 5B 1 --- --- -3.0 1.6 5.8 (b)

Well 5C 1 --- --- -100 65 220 (b)

Well 6A Army 1 --- --- 6.8 1.8 <0.01 4.2

Well 8 1 --- --- -12 69 230 (b)

(a) DCG - Derived Concentration Guide; established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L for water. 

(b) Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable.

Note: Italic indicates enrichment analysis, regular font indicates conventional analysis.
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-47

Table 5.13 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Wells Near the NTS - 1997

 Tritium Concentration (pCi/L) 

Number 1 Standard % of Mean

Location of Samples Max Min Mean Deviation DCG MDC (a)

Adaven

Adaven Spring 3 24 17 21 2.9 0.02 6.6

4 2 7 -29 9 140 220 (b)

Alamo

Well 4 City 2 27 -140 -55 95 220 (b)

Amargosa Valley

Bar-B-Q Ranch 1 -- -- 1.1 1.4 4.8 (b)

1 -- -- -26 66 220 (b)

Ponderosa Dairy Well 2 1 -- -- 11 65 220 (b)

Ash Meadows

Big Spring 1 4.9 -2.3 1.3 2.6 5.8 (b)

Crystal Pool 3 4.5 -3.7 0.3 3.5 6.9 (b)

4 88 -170 -120 140 230 (b)

Fairbanks Spring 1 -- -- 0.7 2.0 6.5 (b)

Longstreet Spring 1 -- -- 1.7 1.6 5.3 (b)

2 66 -26 20 95 220 (b)

17S-50E-14cac 2 -51 -64 -57 94 220 (b)

Well 18S-51E-7db 2 -12 -26 -19 65 220 (b)

Beatty

Low Level Waste Site 3 7.5 2.5 4.6 2.9 4.8 (b)

4 180 -29 28 140 230 (b)

Tolicha Peak 4 27 -150 -59 140 230 (b)

11S-48E-1dd Coffer’s 4 66 -68 9 140 230 (b)

12S-47E-7dbd City 2 66 -100 -17 95 220 (b)

Clark Station

TTR Well 6 2 -26 -51 -38 95 220 (b)

Goldfield

Klondike #2 Well 2 49 -12 18 95 220 (b)

Hiko

Crystal Springs 2 -12 -26 -19 95 220 (b)

Indian Springs

Sewer Co. Well 1 2 49 -12 18 95 220 (b)

Air Force Well 2 2 66 -26 20 95 220 (b)

Lathrop Wells

 15S-50E-18cdc City 2 11 -12 -0.5 95 220 (b)

(a) DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L. 

(b) Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable.

Note: Italic indicates enrichment analysis, regular font indicates conventional analysis.
5-48

Table 5.13 (LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Wells Near the NTS - 1997, cont.)

 Tritium Concentration (pCi/L) 

Number 1 Standard % of Mean

Location of Samples Max Min Mean Deviation DCG MDC (a)

Nyala

Sharp’s Ranch 2 27 11 19 95 220 (b)

Oasis Valley

Goss Springs 1 -- -- -13- 68 230 (b)

Pahrump

Calvada City Well 4 66 -68 9 140 230 (b)

Rachel

 Penoyer Culinary 4 -49 -64 0 140 230 (b)

Tonopah

 City Well 2 100 -26 37 95 220 (b)

Warm Springs

 Twin Springs Ranch 3 2.5 -2.5 0.4 3.1 5.9 (b)

4 -26 -130 -69 140 230 (b)

(b) DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L. 

(c) Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable.

Note: Italics indicate enrichment analysis, normal font conventional analysis.

Table 5.14 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project FAULTLESS - 1997

 Tritium Concentration (pCi/L) 

Number 1 Standard % of Mean

Location of Samples Result Deviation DCG MDC (a)

Hot Creek Ranch 1 -51 70 230 (b)

Blue Jay Maintenance 1 22 70 230 (b)

Base Camp Well 1 -51 70 230 (b)

Well HTH-1 1 4.0 3.6 5.9 (b)

Well HTH-2 1 2.1 4.0 6.5 (b)

Well Six Mile 1 -12 70 230 (b)

(a) DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L.

(b) Not applicable because result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable.

Note: Italic indicates enrichment analysis, regular font indicates conventional analysis.
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-49

Table 5.15 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project SHOAL - 1997

 Tritium Concentration (pCi/L) 

Number 1 Standard % of Mean

Location of Samples Result Deviation DCG MDC (a)

Hunts' Station 1 -51 70 230 (b)

Well Flowing 1 -51 70 230 (b)

Well H-2 1 -118 70 240 (b)

Well H-3 1 3.6 4.0 6.5 (b)

Well HS-1 1 1.4 3.4 6.4 (b)

Well HC-1 1 -78 70 240 (b)

Well HC-2 1 0.44 2.9 4.7 (b)

Well HC-3 Well Dry

Well HC-4 1 860 80 0.96 240

(a) DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L.

(b) Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable. 

Note: Italic indicates enrichment analysis, regular font indicates conventional analysis.

Table 5.16 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project RULISON - 1997

 Tritium Concentration (pCi/L) 

Number % of Mean

Location of Samples Result 1 Sigma DCG MDC (a)

Battlement Creek 1 36 3.7 0.04 5.0

City Springs 1 80 70 230 (b)

Gardner Ranch 1 40 70 230 (b)

Well CER Test 1 55 4.5 0.06 5.7

Hayward Ranch 1 100 5.9 0.11 6.8

Potter Ranch 1 200 70 230 (b)

Jacobs Ranch 1 280 70 0.31 230

Rothgery Ranch 1 200 70 230 (b)

Spring 300 Yards N 1 30 3.8 0.03 5.3

Well RU-1 1 42 5.0 0.05 6.9

Well RU-2 1 33 3.8 0.03 5.3

(a) DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L.

(b) Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable.

Note: Italic indicates enrichment analysis, regular font indicates conventional analysis.
5-50

Table 5.17 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project RIO BLANCO - 1997

 Tritium Concentration (pCi/L) 

Number % of Mean

Location of Samples Result 1 Sigma DCG MDC (a)

B-1 Equity Camp 1 36 5.2 0.04 7.4

Brennan Windmill 1 3.2 3.2 5.7 (b)

CER 1 Black Sulpher 1 80 70 230 (b)

CER 4 Black Sulpher No Access

Fawn Creek 1 1 120 70 230 (b)

Fawn Creek 500' Up 1 80 70 230 (b)

Fawn Creek 500' Down 1 40 70 230 (b)

Fawn Creek 6800' Up 1 -40 70 230 (b)

Fawn Creek 8400' Down 1 25 3.7 0.03 5.3

Fawn Creek 3 1 40 70 230 (b)

Johnson Artesian 1 80 70 230 (b)

Well RB-D-01 1 1.4 4.0 6.6 (b)

Well RB-D-03 1 80 70 230 (b)

Well RB-S-03 1 40 70 230 (b)

(a) DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L.

(b) Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable.

Note: Italic indicates enrichment analysis, regular font indicates conventional analysis.

Table 5.18 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project GNOME - 1997

 Tritium Concentration (pCi/L) 

Number % of Mean

Location of Samples Result 1 Sigma DCG MDC (a)

Carlsbad City Well 1 10 70 230 (b)

Loving City Well 2 1 5.7 3.1 <0.01 6.4

Well DD-1 1 6.2 x 10 5.8 x 10 6.9 x 10 220 (c) 7 5 5

Well LRL-7 1 2.5 x 10 220 2.8 220 (d) 3

Well PHS 6 1 -29 70 230 (b)

Well PHS 8 1 -29 70 230 (b)

Well PHS 9 1 -29 70 230 (b)

Well PHS 10 1 10 70 230 (b)

Well USGS 1 1 -12 3.8 6.3 (b)

Well USGS 4 1 7.4 x 10 320 82 230 (e) 4

Well USGS 8 1 6.8 x 10 300 76 230 (f) 4

J. Mobley Ranch 1 7.9 3.6 5.7 (b)

(a) DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L.

(b) Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable.

Note: Italic indicates enrichment analysis, regular font indicates conventional analysis.
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-51

Table 5.18 (LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project GNOME - 1997, cont.)

Additional Results Greater than the MDC

1 Standard

Nuclide Result Deviation MDC Units

(c) Sr 1.3 x 10 1.3 x 10 pCi/L 90 4 3

Cs 6.9 x 10 4.8 x 10 6.5 pCi/L 137 5 4

(d) Sr 2.5 1.2 pCi/L 90

 Cs 160 10 6.5 pCi/L 137

(e) Sr 4800 1.2 pCi/L 90

(f) Sr 4000 1.2 pCi/L 90

 C 99 10 4.6 pCi/L 137

Table 5.19 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project GASBUGGY - 1997 

 Tritium Concentration (pCi/L) 

Number % of Mean

Location of Samples Result 1 Sigma DCG MDC (a)

La Jara Creek 1 120 70 230 (b)

Lower Burro Canyon 1 93 5.5 0.10 6.4

Pond N of 30.3.32.3 1 80 70 230 (b)

Arnold Ranch Spring 1 40 70 230 (b)

Arnold Ranch Well 1 -0.45 3.6 (b)

Bixler Ranch Ranch Abandoned

Bubbling Springs 1 120 70 230 (b)

Cave Springs 1 190 70 230 (b)

Cedar Springs 1 43 4.5 0.05 6.1

Well Jicarilla 1 40 70 230 (b)

Well 28.3.33.233 Pump Out

Well 30.3.32.343 1 -2.1 3.3 5.5 (b)

Windmill 2 1 80 70 230 (b)

Well EPNG 10-36 1 120 5.9 0.13 6.3

(a) DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L.

(b) Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable.

Note: Italic indicates enrichment analysis, regular font indicates conventional analysis.
5-52

Table 5.20 LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project SALMON - April 1997

 Tritium Concentration (pCi/L) 

Date % of Mean

Location Collected Result 1 Sigma DCG MDC (a)

Baxterville, MS

Anderson, Billy Ray 4/22/97 55 71 230 (b)

Anderson Pond 4/22/97 11 3.4 0.01 5.2 (c)

Anderson, Robert Harvey 4/23/97 Sample lost in lab

Anderson, Robert Lowell, Jr. 4/21/97 1.1 3.4 0.01 5.2 (c)

Anderson, Robert Lee 4/21/97 1.1 3.8 0.01 5.9 (c)

Anderson, Tony 4/22/97 -63 70 230 (b)

Burge, Joe 4/21/97 -23 70 230 (b)

Cockerham, Steve 4/24/97 -23 70 230 (b)

Daniels, Webster, Jr. 4/23/97 -9.6 4.4 7.5 (c) (b)

Daniels - Well No. 2 Fish Pond 4/23/97 16 70 230 (b)

Hilbey, Billy 4/22/97 -23 70 230 (b)

Salt Dome Hunting Club 4/23/97 17 3.4 0.02 5.1 (c)

Salt Dome Timber Co. 4/22/97 16 70 230 (b)

Saucier, Dennis 4/22/97 16 70 230 (b)

Well Ascot 2 4/23/97 26 4.1 0.03 6.0 (c)

Baxterville Well City 4/22/97 17 4.0 0.02 6.1 (c)

Well E-7 4/21/97 3.5 3.7 6.0 (c) (b)

Well HM-1 Pre pump 4/22/97 16 3.8 0.02 5.7 (c)

1⁄2 hr pump 4/21/97 -23 70 230 (b)

1 hr pump 4/21/97 -23 70 230 (b)

Post 4/21/97 -1.1 3.1 5.1 (c) (b)

Well HM-2A Pre pump 4/21/97 -1.1 2.8 4.7 (c) (b)

1⁄2 hr pump 4/21/97 -23 70 230 (b)

1 hr pump 4/21/97 16 70 230 (b)

Post pump 4/21/97 -1.4 3.0 4.9 (c) (b)

Well HM-2B Pre pump 4/21/97 -0.96 3.0 5.0 (c) (b)

1⁄2 hr pump 4/21/97 -63 70 230 (b)

1 hr pump 4/21/97 -23 70 230 (b)

Post pump 4/21/97 2.2 3.2 5.2 (c) (b)

Well HM-3 Pre pump 4/21/97 2.0 3.3 5.3 (c) (b)

1⁄2 hr pump 4/21/97 -23 70 230 (b)

1 hr pump 4/21/97 -23 70 230 (b)

11⁄2 hr pump 4/21/97 -100 70 230 (b)

Post pump 4/21/97 2.4 3.0 4.9 (c) (b)

(a) DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L.

(b) Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable.

(c) Enrichment analysis.

(d) Pre indicates sampling prior to pumping the well, Dup indicates a duplicate sample, Post

indicates sampling after pumping the well, and Post Dup is a duplicate sample after pumping

the well.
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-53

Table 5.20 (LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project SALMON - April 1997, cont.)

 Tritium Concentration (pCi/L) 

Date % of Mean

Location Collected Result 1 Sigma DCG MDC (a)

(Baxterville, MS, cont.)

Half Moon Creek Pre 4/20/97 0.17 2.7 4.4 (c) (b)

Post 4/22/97 21 4.4 0.02 6.5 (c)

Half Moon Creek Pre 4/20/97 -1.4 2.7 4.5 (d) (c) (b)

Overflow Post 4/20/97 200 6.4 0.22 5.7 (c)

Post Dup 4/20/97 190 6.9 0.21 6.5 (c)

Lee, P. T. 4/21/97 130 72 230 (b)

Little Creek No. 1 4/21/97 -23 70 230 (b)

Lower Little Creek No. 2 4/21/97 94 72 230 (b)

Mills, Roy 4/21/97 94 72 230 (b)

Napier, Denice 4/22/97 12 3.8 0.01 5.8 (c)

Noble's Pond 4/21/97 -13 70 230 (b)

Noble, W. H., Jr. 4/25/97 -23 70 230 (b)

Pond West of GZ Pre 4/20/97 0.12 3.7 6.0 (c) (b)

Post 4/21/97 13 3.3 0.01 5.0 (c)

REECo Pit Drainage-A 4/21/97 No Sample

REECo Pit Drainage-B 4/21/97 590 9.6 6.4 (c) (b)

REECo Pit Drainage-C 4/21/97 320 6.6 5.1 (c) (b)

Dup 4/21/97 340 7.7 6.2 (c) (b)

Well HM-L Pre pump 4/21/97 920 76 1.0 230 (d)

1⁄2 hr pump 4/21/97 960 79 1.1 230

1 hr pump 4/21/97 720 76 0.8 230

11⁄2 hr pump 4/21/97 960 79 1.1 230

Post pump 4/21/97 880 78 1.0 230

Well HM-L2 Pre 4/22/97 -100 70 230 (d) (b)

Post 4/22/97 -23 70 230 (b)

Well HM-S Pre 4/20/97 3400 97 3.8 230

Post 4/21/97 3300 96 3.7 230

Well HMH-1 Pre 4/20/97 1600 84 1.8 230

Post 4/21/97 2100 88 2.3 230

Well HMH-2 Pre 4/20/97 220 5.7 0.24 4.5 (c)

Post 4/22/97 290 6.3 0.32 5.1 (c)

Well HMH-3 Pre 4/20/97 14 3.3 0.02 5.0 (c)

Post 4/21/97 12 3.3 0.01 5.1 (c)

Dup 4/21/97 14 3.3 0.02 5.1 (c)

Well HMH-4 Pre 4/20/97 130 72 230 (b)

Post 4/21/97 -63 70 230 (b)

(a) DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L.

(b) Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable.

(c) Enrichment analysis.

(d) Pre indicates sampling prior to pumping the well, Dup indicates a duplicate sample, Post

indicates sampling after pumping the well, and Post Dup is a duplicate sample after pumping

the well.
5-54

Table 5.20 (LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project SALMON - April 1997, cont.)

 Tritium Concentration (pCi/L) 

Date % of Mean

Location Collected Result 1 Sigma DCG MDC (a)

(Baxterville, MS, cont.)

Well HMH-5 Pre 4/20/97 410 74 0.46 230

Post 4/21/97 880 76 0.98 230

Dup 4/21/97 250 73 0.28 230

Well HMH-6 Pre 4/20/97 55 71 230 (b)

Post 4/20/97 -63 70 230 (b)

Well HMH-7 4/20/97 No Sample, well under water

Well HMH-8 4/20/97 No Sample, well under water

Well HMH-9 Pre 4/20/97 130 72 230 (b)

Post 4/21/97 -63 70 230 (b)

Well HMH-10 Pre 4/20/97 110 4.6 0.12 4.6 (c)

Post 4/21/97 160 5.0 0.18 5.0 (c)

Well HMH-11 Pre 4/20/97 55 3.7 0.06 4.5 (c)

Post 4/21/97 110 4.5 0.12 5.0 (c)

Well HMH-12 Pre 4/20/97 55 71 230 (b)

Post 4/21/97 -63 70 230 (b)

Well HMH-13 Pre 4/20/97 -23 70 230 (b)

Post 4/21/97 -23 70 230 (b)

Well HMH-14 Pre 4/20/97 -23 70 230 (b)

Post 4/21/97 -63 70 230 (b)

Well HMH-15 Pre 4/20/97 16 70 230 (b)

Post 4/21/97 -63 70 230 (b)

Well HMH-16 Pre 4/20/97 55 71 230 (b)

Post 4/21/97 55 71 230 (b)

Well HT-2C 4/23/97 0.3 2.9 4.7 (c) (b)

Well HT-4 4/24/97 1.6 3.2 5.2 (c) (b)

Well HT-5 4/24/97 0.59 3.4 5.6 (c) (b)

New Monitoring Wells

SA1-1-H 4/23/97 34.500 450 38 230

SA1-2-H 4/23/97 No Sample, lost in lab

SA1-4-H 4/23/97 340 7.0 0.38 5.5 (c)

SA1-5-H 4/23/97 1300 160 1.4 230

SA1-6-H 4/23/97 160 5.0 0.18 4.4 (c)

SA1-7-H 4/23/97 33 3.7 0.04 5.2 (c)

(a) DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L.

(b) Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable.

(c) Enrichment analysis.

(d) Pre indicates sampling prior to pumping the well, Dup indicates a duplicate sample, Post

indicates sampling after pumping the well, and Post Dup is a duplicate sample after pumping

the well.
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-55

Table 5.20 (LTHMP Summary of Tritium Results for Project SALMON - April 1997, cont.)

 Tritium Concentration (pCi/L) 

Date % of Mean

Location Collected Result 1 Sigma DCG MDC (a)

(Baxterville, MS, New Monitoring Wells, cont.)

SA3-4-H 4/23/97 25 5.8 0.03 8.8 (c)

SA3-5-H 4/23/97 22 4.9 0.02 7.5 (c)

SA3-1-M 4/23/97 9 3.3 0.01 5.2 (c)

SA3-3-M 4/23/97 15 3.5 0.02 5.4 (c)

SA4-1-M 4/23/97 4.8 3.4 5.4 (c) (b)

SA5-1-M 4/23/97 15 4.0 0.02 6.2 (c)

SA5-2-M 4/23/97 20 3.8 0.02 5.7 (c)

SA5-3-M 4/23/97 14 3.2 0.02 4.8 (c)

Columbia, MS

Dennis, Buddy 4/22/97 -23 70 230 (b)

Dennis, Marvin 4/22/97 -63 70 230 (b)

Well 64B City 4/22/97 12 4.0 0.01 6.3 (c)

Lumberton, MS

Anderson, Arleene 4/22/97 16 70 230 (b)

Anderson, Lee L 4/22/97 94 72 230 (b)

Boren Crawfish Pond 4/21/97 55 71 230 (b)

Hartfield, Ray 4/21/97 -23 70 230 (b)

Ladner, Rushing, Debra 4/21/97 55 71 230 (b)

Powell, Sliannon 4/23/97 16 70 230 (b)

Rogers, Robert 4/24/97 170 72 230 (b)

Saul, Ola 4/21/97 16 70 230 (b)

Smith, Howard - Pond 4/22/97 16 70 230 (b)

Thompson, Roswell 4/21/97 -23 70 230 (b)

Well 2 City 4/22/97 1.7 3.4 5.5 (c) (b)

Purvis, MS

Burge, Willie Ray & Grace 4/21/97 -63 70 230 (b)

Boren, Ron 4/22/97 -63 70 230 (b)

City Supply 4/22/97 0.8 3.7 6.1 (c) (b)

Rain Sample

IT Compound (Baxterville) 4/22/97 -23 70 230 (b)

(a) DCG - Derived Concentration Guide. Established by DOE Order as 90,000 pCi/L.

(b) Not applicable because the result is less than the MDC or water is known to be nonpotable.

(c) Enrichment analysis.

(d) Pre indicates sampling prior to pumping the well, Dup indicates a duplicate sample, Post

indicates sampling after pumping the well, and Post Dup is a duplicate sample after pumping

the well.
5-56

Table 5.21 Influent Quality - 1997

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

BOD5 S.C. BOD5 S.C. BOD5 S.C. BOD5 S.C. (a) (b)

Facility (mg/L) (μmhos/cm) (mg/L) (μmhos/cm) (mg/L) (μmhos) (mg/L) (μmhos/cm)

Gate 100 257 2.7 472 1.38 <60 0.64 454 1.65

Mercury 360 3.8 514 0.97 99 1.15 242 0.88

Yucca Lake 148 1.81 50 0.63 109 0.76 296 0.88

Tweezer 375 4.1 135 1.15 188 0.84 266 1.16

CP-6 0 0 - - - - - -

CP-72 0 0 - - - - - -

DAF 135 1.58 106 1.31 20 0.95 30 1.03

Reactor Control 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Test Stand 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Base Camp 25 192 1.65 124 0.85 41 0.98 161 1.61

Base Camp 12 <6 0.28 8 0.36 <6 0.23 <6 0.21

Test Cell C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

RWMS Site 5 66 1.35 40 0.65 86 0.75 309 1.63

(a) Biochemical Oxygen Demand - 5-day Incubation.

(b) Specific Conductance.

Note: CP-6 and CP-72 not in use after first quarter.

Table 5.22 Organic Loading Rates - 1997

Metered Rates

Limit (Jan-Mar) (Apr-June) (Jul-Sept) (Oct-Dec)

Facility (Kg/day) Mean Daily Load Mean Daily Load Mean Daily Load Mean Daily Load

Mercury 172 77.05 120.91 27.387 41.36

LANL

 on Tweezer 5.0 3.52 1.01 0.770 0.84

Yucca Lake 8.6 3.32 2.30 3.367 12.45(a)

Base Camp 12 54 0.04 0.08 0.125 0.04

RWMS Site 5 0.995 0.32 0.36 0.117 0.45

Calculated Rates

CP-6 8.7 0 - - -

CP-72 1.1 0 - - -

DAF 7.6 0.67 3.21 0.345 0.21

Reactor Control 4.2 0 0 0 0

Eng Test Stand 2.3 0 0 0 0

Test Cell C 1.3 0 0 0 0

Base Camp 25 7.4 1.29 1.43 0.594 1.08

Gate 100 2.4 0.54 1.72 0.386 0.84

(a) Erroneous result due to problem with automatic sampler, will resample in January.

Note: CP-6 and CP-72 not in service after the first quarter.
5-57

Table 5.23 Pond Water Depths in Infiltration Basins - 1997

Maximum Average Average Average 

Operating Depth, cm Depth, cm Depth, cm 

Impound Depth, cm (1st Quarter) (2nd Quarter) (3rd Quarter) 

Gate 100, Basin 90 40 0.7 53 Mercury, Basin 180 0 0 0 Yucca Lake  North Basin 140 126 127 110  South Basin 140 0 0 0 Tweezer  East Basin 244 0 0 0  West Basin 244 0 0 0 CP-6  East Basin 90 0 - -  West Basin 90 0 - - CP-72 90 0 - - DAF  Basin 1 150 0 0 0  Basin 2 150 0 0 0 Reactor Control, Basin 130 0 0 0 Test Stand 1, Basin 90 0 0 0 Test Cell C, Basin 90 0 0 0 Base Camp 25, Basin 100 0 0 0 Base Camp 12, Basin 1 120 0 0 0 Base Camp 12, Basin 2 120 0 0 0 Base Camp 12, Basin 3 120 0 0 0 Base Camp 12, Basin 4 120 0 0 0 Base Camp 12, Basin 5 120 0 0 0 Note: CP-6 and CP-72 were not in service after the first quarter.
5-58

Table 5.24 Influent Toxics for Facilities that Received Industrial Wastewater - 1997

Area 25 

Mercury Base Camp Area 6 DAF Area 5 RWMS Area 6 L

Compliance Measurement Measurement Measurement Measurement Measure

Parameter Limit (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/Arsenic 5.0 0.015 0.0167 0.01

(a) (a) 

Barium 100 0.59 0.665 0.499 0.735 0.61Cadmium 1.0 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Chromium 5.0 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Lead 5.0 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Mercury 0.2 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Selenium 1.0 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Silver 5.0 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Benzene 0.5 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Carbon Tertachloride 0.5 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Chlorobenzene 100 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Chloroform 6.0 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) 1,4-dichlorobenzene 7.5 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) 1,2-dichlorobenzene 0.5 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) 1,1-dichloroethylene 0.7 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Methylethyl Ketone 200 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Not Detected.Note: VOC samples were taken from each primary lagoon as they can not be composited. No VOCs were detec

 reporting period. Future measurements for volatile samples from facilities with multiple primary lagoons w
5-59

Table 5.24 (Influent Toxics for Facilities that Received Industrial Wastewater - 1997, cont.)

Area 25 

Mercury Base Camp Area 6 DAF Area 5 RWMS Area 6 L

Compliance Measurement Measurement Measurement Measurement Measure

Parameter Limit (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/L) (mg/Pyridine 5.0 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Tetrachloroethylene 0.7 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Trichloroethylene 0.5 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Vinyl Chloride 0.2 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Cresol, total 200 <0.30 <0.30 <0.30 <0.30 <0.32,4-dinitrotoluene 0.13 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Hexachlorobenzene 0.13 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Hexachlorobutadiene 0.5 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Nitrobenzene 2.0 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Pentachlorophenol 100 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) 2,4,5-trichlorophenol 400 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) 2,4,6-trichlorophenol 2.0 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Chlorodane 0.03 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Endrin 0.02 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Heptachlor 0.008 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Lindane 0.4 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Methoxychlor 10.0 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Toxaphene 0.5 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) 2,4-D 10.0 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) 2,4,5-TP (Silvex) 1.0 (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) (a) Not Detected.Note: VOC samples were taken from each primary lagoon as they can not be composited. No VOCs were detec

 reporting period. Future measurements for volatile samples from facilities with multiple primary lagoons w
5-60

Table 5.25 Sampling Data for Infiltration Ponds Containing 30 cm or More - 1997

Action Level A-6 Yucca Lake

Parameter mg/L Q1 Result mg/L

 

 Arsenic 0.5 (b)

 Cadmium 0.1 (b)

 Chromium 0.5 (b)

 Lead 0.5 (b)

 Selenium 0.1 (b)

 Silver 0.5 (b)

 Nitrate Nitrogen 100 (b)

 Sulfate 5000 87.2

 Chloride 1000 74.1

 Fluoride 40 1.6

 Tritium Monitor Only (a) (b)

(a) Unit for tritium is 10 μCi/cc. -7

(b) Not Detected.

Table 5.26 Nitrate Analyses of Well Water Samples (mg/L), First Quarter - 1997

Well Name Limit Result Well Name Limit Result

Well 5C 10 <1 Well J-12 10 5

Well 5B 10 3 Well J-13 10 5

Well 4 10 2 Well 8 10 <1

Well C-1 10 4 Well UE-16d 10 <1

Well 4-A 10 4 Well Army 1 10 <1

Table 5.27 NTS Drinking Water System Permits - 1997

Permit No. Area(s) Expiration Date

NY-5024-12NC Area 1 09/30/98

NY-4099-12C Area 2 & 12 09/30/98

NY-360-12C Area 23 09/30/98

NY-4098-12NCNT Area 25 09/30/98

NY-835-12NCNT Sitewide Truck 09/30/98

NY-836-12NCNT Sitewide Truck 09/30/98

NY-841-12NCNT Sitewide Truck 09/30/98
WATER SURVEILLANCE ACTIVITIES

5-61

Table 5.28 Sewage Discharge Permits - 1997

NTS Permits

Permit No./Location Areas Expiration Date

GNEV93001 NTS General Permit 01/31/99 (a)

Off-NTS Permits

Las Vegas Area Operations

VEH-112 NLVF (Sewage Contribution) 12/31/99 (a)

Special Technologies Laboratory

AII-204/ Santa Barbara, California 12/31/98

III-331/ Santa Barbara, California 12/31/98

(a) Owner/Operator effluent monitoring required by permit.

Table 5.29 Permits for NTS Septic Waste Hauling Trucks - 1997

Expiration

Permit Number Vehicle Identification Number Date

NY-17-03311 Septic Tank Pumper E-104573 11/30/98

NY-17-03313 Septic Tank Pumper E-105293 11/30/98

NY-17-03314 Septic Tank Pumper E-105299 11/30/98

NY-17-03315 Septic Tank Pumper E-105919 11/30/98

NY-17-03317 Septic Tank Pumper E-105918 11/30/98

NY-17-03318 Septic Tank Pumping Subcontractor 11/30/98

 Vehicle

ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM INFORMATION

6-1

6.0 OTHER REPORTABLE ACTIVITIES

Reported in this section are environmental surveillance activities other than

those in air and water. Activities reported are those related to the Nevada

Test Site (NTS) missions and special studies under the purview of the

Environmental Protection Division of the U.S Department of Energy Nevada

Operations Office (DOE/NV).

6.1 TEST-RELATED

ACTIVITIES

nder the terms of an Interagency UAgreement between the DOE and the

U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency (EPA), the EPA’s Office of Radiation

and Indoor Environment National

Laboratory-Las Vegas (R&IE-LV) conducts

the Offsite Radiation Safety Program

(ORSP). The primary activity of the ORSP

is routine monitoring of potential human

exposure pathways. Maintaining readiness

to conduct nuclear testing, public

information, and community assistance

constitutes secondary activities.

Two subcritical experiments were conducted

in 1997, REBOUND and HOLOG. For each

of the two tests, R&IE-LV senior personnel

served on the Test Controller's Scientific

Advisory Panel and on the EPA’s offsite

radiological safety staff.

No radioactive materials were released to

the ambient environment as a result of these

two experiments.

6.2 RADIOLOGICAL

SURVEILLANCE

OFFSITE MILK SURVEILLANCE

NETWORK (MSN)

Milk is an important source for evaluating

potential human exposures to radioactive

material. It is one of the most universally

consumed nutrients, and certain

radionuclides are readily traceable through 

the food chain from feed or forage to the 

consumer. This is particularly true of

radioiodine isotopes, which, when consumed

in sufficient quantities, can cause

impairment of thyroid function. Because

dairy animals consume vegetation

representing a large area and because many

radionuclides are transferred to milk,

analysis of milk samples yields information

on the deposition of small amounts of

radionuclides over a relatively large area. 

The MSN includes commercial dairies and

family-owned milk cows and goats

representing the major milksheds within 300

km (186 miles) of the NTS. This network

was designed to monitor areas adjacent to

the NTS, which could be affected by a

release of activity, as well as from areas

unlikely to be affected. There were 11

locations comprising the MSN at the

beginning of 1997. Samples were collected

from only ten of these locations, as shown in

Figure 6.1, because the Hafen Ranch in

Ivins, Utah, was not milking during the

collection period.

Raw milk was collected in 3.8-L (1-gal)

Cubitainers from each MSN location in July

and preserved with formaldehyde. The

samples were analyzed by high-resolution

gamma spectrometry for gamma emitters

and for Sr by radiochemical separation and 90

beta counting. 

The average total potassium concentration

derived from naturally occurring K activity 40

was 1.5 g/L for samples analyzed by gamma

spectrometry. No other gamma-ray emitters

were detected. Selected MSN milk samples

were analyzed for Sr, and the results are 90

similar to those obtained in previous years.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM INFORMATION

6-3

Only Rockview Dairies, Inc., located in have undergone RCRA Closure and require

Moapa, Nevada, had a Sr result above the 90

MDC (1.9 ± 0.44 pCi/L). The MSN network

average Sr values are shown in Table 6.1. 90

6.3 NONRADIOLOGICAL

MONITORING

The 1997 nonradiological monitoring

program for the NTS included onsite

sampling of various environmental media

and substances for compliance with federal

and state regulations or permits and for

ecological studies. The Ecological

Monitoring and Compliance (EMAC) program

performed habitat mapping in northern NTS

areas, characterized springs, monitored

man-made water sources, conducted wild

horse surveys, and prepared a biological

monitoring plan for the Hazardous Material

Spill Center (HSC). In 1997, nonradiological

monitoring was performed for two series of

tests involving 38 chemicals that were

conducted at the HSC.

ENVIRONMENTAL

SURVEILLANCE

Routine nonradiological environmental

monitoring on the NTS in 1997 was limited

to:

 Nevada operating permit requirements.

 Sampling of electrical equipment oil, soil,

water, surfaces, and waste oil for the

presence of polychlorinated biphenyls as

part of Toxic Substance Control Act ECOLOGICAL MONITORING

compliance.

 Sampling of soil, water, sediment, waste

oil, and other media for Resource

Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA)

constituents.

Two facilities at the NTS that are listed in the

NTS Hazardous Waste Management Permit

post-closure monitoring.

 Post-closure monitoring of the Mercury

Landfill Hazardous Waste Trenches

RCRA Closure Unit was conducted on a

monthly and quarterly basis for soil

moisture. Monthly monitoring during the

last quarter of calendar year (CY) 1997

was required because the 30-day

cumulative rainfall exceeded the permit

requirements of one inch. The covers

are performing as designed, with no

releases occurring. Sealing the neutron

tubes outside of the covers to prevent

infiltration of water was completed.

 Post Closure monitoring of the U-3fi

Injection Well RCRA Closure Unit was

conducted on a quarterly basis.

Downward movement of moisture was

not detected during the CY; therefore,

the conditions of the permit have not

been exceeded.

In support of facility operations at the NTS,

samples are collected and analyzed from

various waste streams in order to show

compliance with operational requirements, or

to properly dispose of the wastes generated. 

Most of the nonradiological analyses are

performed at approved offsite laboratories. 

During 1997, 138 bulk or air samples were

collected for asbestos determination, 85 oil

samples collected for polychlorinated

biphenyl (PCBs) determination, and 1,412

samples of various kinds collected for

chemical characterization.

The ecological monitoring tasks conducted

under the EMAC program in 1997 included

habitat mapping within the northern part of

the NTS, characterizing and monitoring

hydrologic and biotic parameters of the

natural springs on the NTS, conducting a

census of the NTS horse population, 

monitoring man-made water sources to 
6-4

assess their affects on wildlife, necessary CHARACTERIZING AND MONITORING

monitoring of spill tests at the HSC in Area

5, and surveying control plots at the HSC

annually. 

HABITAT MAPPING

From April through September 1997, the

northeastern third of the NTS was

partitioned into 500 Ecological Landform

Units (ELUs) using regular and multispectral

aerial photographs of the NTS and Satellite

Pour l’Observation de la Terre (SPOT)

satellite imagery. ELUs were then visited to

confirm unit boundaries, describe vegetation

and other physical and biological

characteristics of the unit, and photograph

the site vegetation. The majority of the

ELUs sampled were within the Yucca Flat

drainage basin. Much of the area sampled

had been previously disturbed by ground

clearing and historic nuclear testing

activities, creating great diversity in habitats. 

No Geographical Information System (GIS)

spatial coverages were developed for ELUs

sampled in 1997, because emphasis was

placed on conducting field work. Habitats in

the remaining one-third of the NTS

(mountains and mesas in the northwest

portion of the NTS) will be sampled, and GIS

spatial coverages and Resource

Management Plan (RMP) map products will

be completed in 1998. Habitat and species

range maps will also be prepared for

inclusion in Bechtel Nevada’s (BN’s)

Ecological GIS (EGIS).

The GIS-based map products and database

produced by this activity will facilitate

ecosystem management of the NTS, the

analysis of NTS species distribution and

abundance, the preparation of future

environmental assessments and impact

statements, and siting of new NTS projects

and facilities. The map products to be

completed in 1998 will be the base

vegetation and species habitat maps used in

the NTS RMP.

NTS SPRINGS

From June 1996 through February 1997,

biologists visited 25 natural water sources at

the NTS to determine if these mesic habitats

qualify for jurisdictional wetlands protection. 

A summary report of all findings titled

“Nevada Test Site Wetlands Assessment”

(Hansen et al., 1997) was completed and

distributed as a DOE/NV topical report in

May. The report identifies 16 NTS natural

water sources that may be classified as

jurisdictional wetlands and 8 water sources

that may be classified as waters of the

United States. The report also identifies and

summarizes previous studies on NTS natural

water sources; describes their known

physical, chemical, and biological features;

identifies the current DOE management

practices related to the protection of NTS

wetlands; and identifies the information

needed to develop and implement resource

management objectives for NTS wetlands. 

Periodic monitoring of selected NTS natural

water sources was continued in 1997. Nine

water sources were visited between June

and August. They included Cane, Captain

Jack, Gold Meadows, Tippipah, Topopah,

Tub, and Whiterock Springs; Reitmann

Seep; and Yucca Playa Pond. Selected

hydrology, water quality, and wildlife usage

data were collected. These data were

summarized and presented in an annual

report titled “Ecological Monitoring and

Compliance Program Fiscal Year 1997"

submitted to DOE/NV in September. Cane,

Gold Meadows, and Reitmann Seep had no

visible surface flow, while the other springs

exhibited some surface flow. Three

locations had some limited physical

disturbance (Cane, Captain Jack, and Gold

Meadows Springs), notably from horse

activity (grazing and trampling of vegetation)

at the latter two. Most water quality

parameters varied moderately between

sites, particularly water temperature (range

of 1.7( to 26(C [35( to 79(F]) and dissolved 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM INFORMATION

6-5

oxygen, which was low (< 3.0 parts per years, the feral horse population at the NTS

million [ppm]) at six springs and higher has declined about 29 percent, from 56 to 40

(> 6 ppm) at eight other natural water horses. Natural processes (e.g., predation,

sources. Total dissolved solids (TDS) were emigration) may be the cause of this

moderately low at most springs (within a population decline, but data to verify this

range of 33 to 435 ppm), compared to TDS, have not been collected. 

at the Yucca Playa Pond (> 1,000 ppm),

probably due to evaporation and The annual population census of horses has

concentration of salts at Yucca Playa Pond. routinely been conducted in the summer

The surface area of water at this ephemeral when horses are nearer to water sources

pond was greatly reduced during early June and thus easier to find. These census

(3,000 m [32,292 ft ]) from the surface area surveys provide an adequate estimate of the 2 2

measured in January (23,000 m [247,000 ft ]) summer range, but are not useful for 2 2

when TDS was much lower (162 ppm). estimating their annual range. Efforts were

Three species of mammals and 18 species horse sign sightings to better estimate their

of birds were detected at 10 water sources. annual range. Horse sign sightings were

The most abundant and widely distributed recorded in each ELU sampled as part of the

species was the mourning dove, observed at habitat mapping task and during surveys for

eight sites. The highest number of individual sensitive plant species. Selected roads

birds was observed at Topopah Spring and were also driven within the suspected

included chukar and mourning doves, annual horse range and all fresh signs

predominantly. The most abundant (estimated to be < 1 year old) observed

passerine species were ravens, observed at adjacent to the roads were recorded. Data

Gold Meadows Spring and house finches, collected indicated that the 1997 NTS horse

which were found at four water sources. range includes Kawich Canyon, Gold

Hydrobiid springsnails were present at Cane Meadows, Rainier Mesa, Big Burn Valley,

Spring inside the cave pool. Buckboard Mesa, Redrock Valley, the

HORSE SURVEYS

Horse abundance surveys were conducted

from July through September. A standard

road course on the NTS was driven to locate

and identify horses. Horses were not

marked, but were identified by their unique

physical features. Individual horses

observed more than one time during the

sampling period were considered

recaptures. The population estimate based

on sampling was 40 animals. The 95

percent confidence interval for this

population estimate, based on the Capture

Program (White et al., 1982), was 40 to 47

animals. Three foals were observed during

the summer. Six horses observed in 1996

were missing in 1997, representing a 13

percent decline in the population. One

horse, which was not observed in 1996,

drowned in Camp 17 pond in October 1996. 

This is the first known occurrence of horse

drowning on the NTS. Over the past three

made in 1997 to collect data on horse and

Eleana Range, the southwestern foothills of

the Eleana Range, and northwest Yucca

Flat. Most roads on Pahute Mesa were not

driven, so horse use in most of Areas 19

and 20 could not be determined. In 1998,

horse sign data will be entered into BN’s 

EGIS and analyzed to characterize those

vegetation communities used by horses and

to map their annual range. 

Selected water sources on the NTS were

surveyed to evaluate their effect on the

distribution of horses. Only two natural

water sources (Captain Jack Spring in Area

12 and Gold Meadows Spring in Area 19)

and one man-made pond (Camp 17 Pond in

Area 18) were used by horses in the

summer of 1997. Two man-made ponds,

Well 2 Pond and the Mud Plant Pond, both

in Area 2, were used by horses in the past. 

Well 2 Pond was heavily used by horses in

1995, but has been dry since then. The Mud

Plant Pond was used in 1996, but its water

surface area dropped by half to 400 m2
6-6

(4,305 ft ) in August 1997, making it scat, burrows, nests, tracks), and any 2

unusable by horses. As a result, 11 to 13 damage to vegetation. No evidence of

horses relied completely on Captain Jack damage to wildlife or vegetation was

Spring for summer water. An estimated 25 observed. The sampling periods for this

to 29 horses appeared to be dependent on baseline monitoring of the transects will

Camp 17 pond during the summer and fall correspond with periods of maximum plant

and Gold Meadows Spring during the growth such as spring, periods of declining

summer until it dried up in late August 1997. growth and increasing plant stress such as

Field surveys indicate that the 1997 summer summer, and periods of dormancy such as

distribution of horses has not changed winter. Sampling of these transects

significantly from that observed in previous throughout each year will document any

years because of their dependence on water long-term or cumulative impacts of testing

sources in Areas 12 and 18. that would not be detected otherwise. 

MONITORING MAN-MADE WATER

SOURCES 

In 1997, only one animal mortality (ground

squirrel) was observed and attributed to

entrapment in a plastic lined sump. No

animal mortalities at unlined or cement-lined

ponds were observed. Soil placed in

mounds over plastic lining in the corners of

sumps was determined to be the most

practical and effective way to limit animal

mortalities. 

HSC MONITORING

Biologists reviewed chemical spill test plans

for two experiments at the HSC. It was

determined that all experiments would

represent minimal risk and no field biological

monitoring of treatment transects for these

experiments would be required. Letters

documenting these reviews were submitted

to DOE/NV’s Environment Safety and Health

Division in April and September 1997. 

Control and treatment transects surrounding

the HSC were established in 1997. 

Treatment transects are each 1,000 m

(3,280 ft) long and at three distances (1, 3,

and 5 km [0.6, 1.9, and 3.1 mi]) downwind

from the spill site. Control transects are

similar lengths and are at similar distances

upwind. The control transects were selected

to contain similar plant species as the

treatment transects. Seasonal baseline

sampling of the transects was conducted in

March and September. Data collected

included the presence of any dead animals, 

observations of wildlife or their sign (i.e.,

HISTORIC PRESERVATION

Historic preservation studies and surveys

are conducted by the Desert Research

Institute (DRI), University and Community

College System of Nevada. In 1997, 13

surveys were conducted for historic

properties on the NTS, and reports on the

findings were prepared (Beck; Dubarton and

Drollinger; Holz and Beck; Jones and

Drolllinger; McCarty and Drollinger [1997]). 

These surveys identified 25 prehistoric and

historic archaeological sites. Through

consultation with the Nevada State Historical

Preservation Office, four of these sites were

considered eligible for the National Register

of Historic Places. Work continued on

historic structures associated with early NTS

activities. Impacts planned to the Engine

Maintenance Assembly and Disassembly

Facility in Area 25 required the preparation

of Historic American Engineering Records

documentation for the facility. This

documentation will reside in the Library of

Congress. Historic American Building

Survey documentation is in preparation for

the EPA Farm.

Other efforts in 1997, included

administration of the cultural resources

program on the NTS, preparing management

objectives and plans and promoting public

relations and communications concerning

the NTS archaeology and cultural resources

program.

To comply with 36 CFR 79, “Protection of

Historic and Cultural Properties” (CFR

1966), a multi-phase program is in progress

6-8

disposed of at the Area 5 Radioactive Waste TRU mixed waste for disposal at the Waste

Management Site (RWMS-5), in shallow pits Isolation Pilot Plant in New Mexico. In 1997,

and trenches. LLW in large containers and the WEF began pilot testing and is expected

unpackaged bulk waste from NTS to begin operations in 1998. Low-level

environmental restoration projects are buried radioactive mixed waste is also currently

in selected subsidence craters at the Area 3 stored on the TRU waste storage pad. 

RWMS (RWMS-3). Hazardous, transuranic

(TRU), and mixed TRU wastes are stored In 1997, uranium ore residues from the

aboveground pending shipment to offsite Mound Plant in Miamisburg, Ohio, which

permitted disposal facilities. were stored north of the RWMS-5 in the

RWMS-5 WASTE MANAGEMENT

OPERATIONS

The RWMS-5 is used for the disposal of

radioactive waste generated at the NTS and

at offsite DOE and U.S. Department of

Defense facilities. LLW is accepted for

disposal from generators that have received

approval from DOE Headquarters and

DOE/NV. Disposal of mixed waste is still

restricted to waste generated on the NTS. 

LLW, mixed waste, and small quantities of

TRU waste have been disposed of in 22

shallow pits and trenches since disposal

operations began in 1961. The shallow pits

and trenches range in depth from 4.6 to 14.6

m (15 to 48 ft). Filled pits and trenches are

covered by a 2.4 m (8 ft) alluvium cap

pending final closure of the site. 

LLW disposed of prior to DOE’s

implementation of RCRA (Title 40 CFR

260-281) in 1986 may contain low levels of

hazardous constituents. A single disposal

unit, Pit 3, has interim status as a mixed

waste disposal unit for NTS generated

wastes that meet the RCRA Land Disposal

Restrictions (LDR) requirements. Low-level

mixed waste generated on the NTS is stored

on the TRU waste storage pad until

characterization is complete. If the waste

meets or has been treated to meet LDR

requirements, it may be disposed of in Pit 3.

Transuranic mixed waste is stored in a

covered building on a specially constructed

RCRA-designed pad. The Waste

Examination Facility (WEF) was designed

and constructed to characterize and certify

Strategic Material Storage Yard (SMSY),

were transferred to an out-of-state facility. 

Waste is no longer stored in the SMSY. 

In 1997, the RWMS-5 received 9.76 x 10 m3 3

(3.45 x 10 ft ) of waste containing a total of 5 3

2.6 x 10 Ci (9.6 x 10 TBq) of reportable 5 3

radionuclides. This is a small increase in

volume but a large increase in activity from

the previous year (see Table 6.2). Tritium

accounted for approximately 99.9 percent of

total radioactivity disposed of in 1997 and

accounted for the increase in activity over

1996 (see Table 6.3). Natural uranium and

thorium contributed the majority of the

remaining activity.

Radioactivity in air, groundwater, 

vegetation, gamma and neutron radiation

fields, and soil moisture content were

monitored at the RWMS-5 in 1997. 

Radioactivity in air, gamma radiation fields,

and soil moisture content were monitored at

the RWMS-3. Air samples were analyzed

for gross alpha radiation, gross beta

radiation, photon-emitting radionuclides,

plutonium, and tritium. All airborne

radionuclide concentrations were a small

fraction of DOE allowable limits. Tritium was

the only man-made airborne radionuclide

detected at the RWMS-5 and probably

originates from LLW disposed of there. 

Plutonium was the only man-made airborne

radionuclide detected at the RWMS-3. The

airborne plutonium likely originates from the

resuspension of soils contaminated by

atmospheric nuclear weapons tests. 

Groundwater samples were analyzed for 

RCRA parameters, gross alpha, gross beta,

tritium, and photon emitting radionuclides. 

No man-made radionuclides or hazardous

chemicals were detected. Gamma radiation 
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM INFORMATION

6-9

fields were monitored by thermoluminescent inventory and is routinely detected in air

dosimeters. Neutron radiation fields at the

perimeter of the TRU waste storage pad

were monitored by proton recoil dosimeters. 

Dose equivalents greater than background

were measured at the RWMS-3 and 

RWMS-5, at locations where radioactive

waste is stored or remained exposed in

active disposal units. Contamination from

atmospheric nuclear weapons tests

contributed to the dose equivalent measured

at the RWMS-3. Soil moisture monitoring

did not detect the infiltration of wetting fronts

below the depth of waste disposal units at

either site. The results of air monitoring are

described in Chapter 4 and of water

monitoring in Chapter 5.

RWMS-5 PERFORMANCE

ASSESSMENT (PA)

The DOE assesses the long-term

performance of LLW disposal sites by

conducting a PA. This is a systematic

analysis of the potential risks posed by a

waste disposal site to the public and to the

environment and a comparison of those

risks to established performance objectives. 

A PA identifies the processes that could

cause detectable releases of radioactive

materials to the accessible environment

during operation of the site. The only

release pathway expected in the near term

is diffusion of volatile radionuclides through

the operational cap to the atmosphere. 

Tritium is the most abundant volatile

radionuclide disposed of at the RWMS-5. 

PA models indicate that nonvolatile

radionuclides may eventually be detected in

soil excavated by burrowing animals and in

deep-rooted vegetation growing on disposal

unit covers. Site characterization data and

modeling studies indicate that transport of

nonvolatile radionuclides from the waste to

the uppermost aquifer is extremely unlikely

because of the thick dry vadose zone, low

precipitation, and high potential

evapotranspiration at the site.

RWMS-5 monitoring results are generally

consistent with PA results. Tritium is the

volatile radionuclide with the largest 

samples at the RWMS-5 at levels that are a

small fraction of DOE allowable limits. Since

maintenance operations keep operational

covers vegetation free, deep-rooted

vegetation samples are not routinely

available for analysis. Tritium is the only

radionuclide that has been detected in

previous analyses of cap vegetation. 

Groundwater monitoring results confirm that

after 37 years of operations, groundwater

beneath the RWMS-5 remains

uncontaminated. Monitoring of soil moisture

content confirms that infiltrating precipitation

does not percolate through the disposal unit

operational caps before it evaporates and

returns to the atmosphere.

RWMS-3 WASTE MANAGEMENT

OPERATIONS

The RWMS-3 is used for the disposal of bulk

waste. Packaged bulk LLW is accepted

from approved onsite and offsite generators. 

Unpackaged bulk LLW from NTS

environmental restoration projects also has

been accepted and disposed of. Disposal is

in subsidence craters formed by

underground nuclear tests. The subsidence

craters range in depth from 15 to 24 m 

(49 to 78 ft) and are filled by alternating

layers of stacked waste packages and 1 m

(3 ft) of clean alluvium. Waste disposed of

at the RWMS-3 tends to have a lower

activity concentration than waste disposed

of at the RWMS-5 because bulk waste tends

to be generated by environmental

restoration projects.

Waste disposal operations at the RWMS-3

began in the U-3ax crater in 1968. The

U-3ax crater was eventually joined with

U-3bl to form the U-3ax/bl disposal unit. 

This unit received mostly unpackaged LLW

from NTS nuclear testing operations. The

U-3ax/bl disposal unit was filled in 1987 and

covered with a 2.4-m (8-ft) thick temporary

closure cap. This disposal unit is a mixed

waste management unit as mixed waste is

known to have been disposed of. Waste

disposal operations moved to the U-3at
6-10

crater in 1988 and was joined with the U-3ah

crater to form the U-3ah/at disposal unit. 

This disposal unit remained open in 1997

and contains LLW only. During 1997,

disposal of unpackaged plutonium

contaminated soil from the CLEAN SLATE I

site on the Nellis Air Force Range Complex

about 14 mi (22 km) east of Goldfield,

Nevada began in the U-3bh crater. 

During 1997, the RWMS-3 received 

1.49 x 10 m (5.26 x 10 ft ) of waste 4 3 5 3

containing 6.5 Ci (0.24 GBq) of activity (see

Table 6.4). This was an increase in volume

and a slight increase in the activity disposed

of, compared to the previous year. Isotopes

of plutonium and Am from the cleanup of 241

the CLEAN SLATE I site accounted for

approximately 95 percent of the total

radioactivity disposed of during 1997 (see

Table 6.5). 

RWMS-3 PERFORMANCE

ASSESSMENT 

A PA has been conducted for the RWMS-3

(Shott et al., 1997b). Release pathways at

the RWMS-3 are expected to be the same

as at the RWMS-5 because of the similar

site conditions and disposal operations. 

However, the inventory of radioactive

materials disposed of at the RMWS-3 is

much less than that disposed of at the

RWMS-5. The RWMS-3 inventory of H, the 3

most likely radionuclide to be released, is

significantly less than at the RWMS-5, so

the potential for detecting releases of

radioactivity is also significantly less. 

Moreover, the interpretation of

environmental monitoring results at the

RWMS-3 is confounded by the presence of

significant soil contamination from

aboveground testing. The small RWMS-3

inventory combined with the existing soil

contamination from aboveground testing

makes interpretation of environmental

monitoring data from the RWMS-3 difficult. collected for chemical characterization.

HAZARDOUS WASTES

NTS OPERATIONS

Hazardous wastes generated on the NTS

are accumulated at a location east of the

RWMS in Area 5, the Hazardous Waste

Accumulation Site, before shipment to an

offsite Treatment, Storage, and Disposal

facility. Hazardous waste generation

activities at the NTS are performed under

EPA Identification (ID) Number

NV3890090001. The NTS continues to be

regulated by the 1995 NTS RCRA

Hazardous Waste Operating Permit (No.

NEV HW009) for the general operation of

the facility and the specific operation of the

Hazardous Waste Storage Unit (HWSU) and

the Explosive Ordnance Disposal Unit.

Three permit modifications have occurred

since October 1, 1996. These modification

include changes in the NTS training program

and personnel changes in the Area 5 and

Area 11 Emergency Management Plans. 

The Pit 3 Mixed Waste Disposal Unit located

in the Area 5 RWMS continues to operate

under RCRA Interim Status.

The NTS also has a Nevada Hazardous

Materials Storage Permit Number 13-94-

0034-X, issued by the state Fire Marshall. 

This permit is renewed annually when a

report required by the state’s Chemical

Catastrophe Prevention Act is submitted.

CHEMICAL ANALYSES

In support of facility operations at the NTS,

samples are collected and analyzed from

various waste streams in order to show

compliance with operational requirements or

to properly dispose of the wastes generated. 

Most of the nonradiological analyses are

performed at offsite approved laboratories. 

During 1997, there were 138 bulk or air

samples collected for asbestos

determination, 85 oil samples collected for

PCBs determination, and 1,412 samples
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM INFORMATION

6-11

NON-NTS OPERATIONS there was a release to the soil during

Four EPA Generator ID numbers have been

issued to five non-NTS operations. In

addition, three local ID numbers were

required at one operation. Hazardous waste

is managed at all locations, by using satellite

accumulation areas. Three operations have

centralized accumulation areas. All

hazardous and industrial wastes are

transported offsite to RCRA-permitted

facilities for approved treatment and/or

disposal. 

SANITARY WASTE

At the NTS there are three nonhazardous

waste landfills that have state of Nevada

Operating Permits, i.e., the Area 6

Hydrocarbon Disposal Site, the Area 9

U-10c Solid Waste Disposal Site, and the

Area 23 Solid Waste Disposal Site. There

are no monitoring requirements for nonhazardous solid waste disposed of at the

NTS in the three landfills; however, before

the waste is disposed of, it is weighed. 

During 1997, there were approximately

12,500 tons of waste disposed of at the

NTS, as shown in Table 6.6.

The permitting process considers

groundwater protection at these locations. 

At the Area 23 Class II Municipal and

Industrial Solid Waste Disposal Site, a

groundwater monitoring well has been

installed. This well also serves to satisfy

monitoring requirements for the Mercury

sewage lagoon system. An initial baseline

water sample was collected in August 1997,

and compliance monitoring will begin in 1998.

The RCRA-permitted Area 5 HWSU also had

groundwater protection considered in the

permitting process. The facility has

impervious cement floor compartments with

adequate spill containment capacity to store

containers of hazardous waste. In the event 

container handling, there is spill containment

present to control the release.

6.6 PERMITS FOR NTS

OPERATIONS

Federal and state permits have been issued

to DOE/NV and to BN (Table 6.7). These

permits are required for the conduct of such

DOE/NV activities as hazardous and

sanitary waste storage and disposal for

certain ecological studies and for operations

involving endangered species. All BN nonNTS facilities are located in existing

metropolitan areas and are not subject to the

Endangered Species Act. Annual reports

associated with these permits are filed as

stipulated in each permit.

The only RCRA permit in use at the NTS is

the Hazardous Waste Management Permit

NEV HW009. With this permit, hazardous

waste generated at the NTS can be stored

at the Area 5 HWSU for up to one year. It is

then shipped offsite for treatment and/or

disposal. During 1997, the total amount of

hazardous waste shipped offsite was

1,022,360 pounds, 2,900 gallons, and 60

cubic yards (464 T, 766 L, and 46 m ). 3

The North Las Vegas Facility (NLVF) has a

Waste Generator number of NVD09786831

that covers generation and a 90-day

accumulation of hazardous waste. The

waste is shipped offsite for final treatment

and/or disposal. During 1997, there were

2,910 kg (6,415 lb) of hazardous waste

shipped offsite from the NLVF.

DOE/NV activities on the NTS comply with

all terms and conditions of a desert tortoise

incidental take authorization issued in a

Biological Opinion (File Number 1-5-96-F-33)

from the United States Fish and Wildlife

Service (USFWS).

The Nevada Division of Wildlife issued a

scientific collection permit, S15842, to BN

that allows collection of wildlife samples.
6-12

Table 6.1 Summary of Radionuclides Detected in Milk Samples - 1997

Number of samples with results > MDC

 (Network average concentration in pCi/L)

1997 1996 1995

H Not Analyzed Not Analyzed 0(37) 3

Sr Not Analyzed 0(0.01) 0(0.03) 89

Sr 1(0.70) 0(0.63) 0(0.61) 90

Table 6.2 Low-Level Waste Disposed of at the RWMS-5, 1993 - 1997

Calendar Year Volume of LLW Disposed of (m ) Activity of LLW Disposed of (Ci) 3

1993 8,327 3.0 x 104

1994 12,300 5.2 x 104

1995 9,171 5.6 x 102

1996 7,293 7.7 x 103

1997 9,762 2.6 x 105

Table 6.3 Inventory of Radionuclides (>0.1 Ci) Disposed of at the RWMS-5 in 1997

Radionuclide Activity (Ci) Percent of Total Activity

H 2.8 x 10 1.0 x 10 3 5 2

U 7.0 x 10 2.5 x 10 238 1 -2

Th 2.5 x 10 9.1 x 10 232 1 -3

Th 2.4 x 10 8.6 x 10 228 1 -3

Ra 2.2 x 10 8.0 x 10 228 1 -3

U 2.1 x 10 7.5 x 10 234 1 -3

Pu 6.9 x 10 2.5 x 10 241 0 -3

Th 5.7 x 10 2.1 x 10 230 0 -3

Pu 3.9 x 10 1.4 x 10 239 0 -3

Tc 3.1 x 10 1.1 x 10 99 0 -3

U 1.4 x 10 5.0 x 10 235 0 -4

Pu 8.3 x 10 3.0 x 10 240 -1 -4

Am 6.2 x 10 2.2 x 10 241 -1 -4

U 4.2 x 10 1.5 x 10 236 -1 -4

Pb 2.7 x 10 9.9 x 10 210 -1 -5

Cs 2.3 x 10 8.1 x 10 137 -1 -5

Sr 1.8 x 10 6.5 x 10 90 -1 -5

Ra 1.7 x 10 6.1 x 10 226 -1 -5

Ba 1.7 x 10 6.0 x 10 133 -1 -5

Pu 1.0 x 10 3.6 x 10 238 -1 -5

Total 2.8 x 10 1.0 x 10 5 2
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAM INFORMATION

6-13

Table 6.4 Low-Level Waste Disposed of at the RWMS-3, 1993 - 1997

Calendar Year Volume of LLW Disposed (m ) Activity of LLW Disposed (Ci) 3

1993 9,848 0.24

1994 10,550 0.21

1995 11,073 3.1

1996 7,033 5.7

1997 14,910 6.5

Table 6.5 Inventory of Radionuclides (>1 mCi) Disposed of at the RWMS-3 in 1997

Radionuclide Activity (Ci) Percent of Total Activity

Pu 3.7 x 10 5.7 x 10 239 0 1

Pu 1.8 x 10 2.8 x 10 241 0 1

Pu 3.5 x 10 5.4 x 10 240 -1 0

Am 2.5 x 10 3.8 x 10 241 -1 0

U 9.4 x 10 1.5 x 10 238 -2 0

U 7.6 x 10 1.2 x 10 234 -2 0

Ra 5.9 x 10 9.1 x 10 228 -2 -1

Th 4.4 x 10 6.8 x 10 228 -2 -1

Cs 1.6 x 10 2.5 x 10 137 -2 -1

Th 1.4 x 10 2.2 x 10 232 -2 -1

Th 8.4 x 10 1.3 x 10 230 -3 -1

Ra 6.7 x 10 1.0 x 10 226 -3 -1

Tc 5.5 x 10 8.4 x 10 99 -3 -2

U 5.4 x 10 8.3 x 10 235 -3 -2

U 5.3 x 10 8.2 x 10 236 -3 -2

Total 6.5 x 10 1.0 x 10 0 2

Table 6.6 Quantity of Wastes Disposed of in Landfills - 1997

Quantity (in pounds)

Month Area 9 Area 23 Area 6

January 1,870,110 427,600 260,990

February 367,340 130,300 94,480

March 217,520 190,000 12,400

April 1,157,870 124,400 340

May 1,029,180 300,350 4,170

June 1,451,190 155,980 300
6-14

Table 6.6 (Quantity of Wastes Disposed of in Landfills - 1997, cont.)

Quantity (in pounds)

Month Area 9 Area 23 Area 6

July 183,070 216,460 1,001,220

August 878,160 513,640 10,360,360

September 1,432,890 381,240 33,640

October 1,157,890 239,520 8,140

November 117,420 240,820 17,440

December 162,560 240,820 50

 

Total 10,025,200 3,161,130 11,793,530

Table 6.7 Permits Required for NTS Operations - 1997

EPA Generator ID 

NV3890090001 NTS Activities

NVD097868731 NLV Activities

NTS Permits

Permit No. Areas Expiration Date

NEV HW009 NTS Hazardous Waste Management (RCRA) 05/01/00

SW 13 097 02 Area 6 Hydrocarbon Disposal Site On Closure

SW 13 097 03 Area 9 U-10c Solid Waste Disposal Site On Closure

SW 13 097 04 Area 23 Solid Waste Disposal Site On Closure

13-97-0034-X NTS Hazardous Materials 12/31/97

13-97-0037-X HSC Hazardous Materials 12/31/97

S15482 Scientific Collection of Wildlife Samples 12/31/98

File 1-5-96-F-33 USFWS -- Desert Tortoise Incidental Take Authorization 08/00/06

Interim Status RCRA Part B -- Pit 3 Mixed Waste Disposal Operation On Permit 

Approval

13-94-0034-X State Chemical Catastrophe Prevention Act Compliance Renewal on

report submission

Off-NTS Permits

Las Vegas Area Operations

03-97-0265-X NLV Hazardous Materials 12/31/97

03-97-0266-X RSL Hazardous Materials 12/31/97
DOSE ASSESSMENT

7-1

7.0 DOSE ASSESSMENT

The offsite environmental surveillance system, operated around the Nevada

Test Site (NTS) by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s)

Radiation and Indoor Environments National Laboratory in Las Vegas

(R&IE-LV), measured no radiation exposures attributable to recent NTS

operations. However, using onsite emission measurements and calculated

resuspension data as input to the EPA's Clean Air Package 1988 (CAP88-PC)

model, a potential effective dose equivalent (EDE) to the maximally exposed

individual (MEI) was calculated to be 0.089 mrem (8.9 x 10 mSv) to a -4

hypothetical resident of Springdale, Nevada, located 58 km (36 mi) westnorthwest of Control Point 1 (CP-1) on the NTS. The calculated population

dose (collective EDE) to the approximately 31,000 residents living within 80

km (50 mi) from each of the NTS airborne emission sources was 0.26

person-rem (2.6 x 10 person-Sv). Monitoring network data indicated an -3

exposure to the MEI of 144 mrem (1.44 mSv) from normal background

radiation. The calculated dose to this individual from worldwide

distributions of radioactivity as measured from surveillance networks was

0.015 mrem (1.5 x 10 mSv). These maximum dose estimates, excluding -4

background, are less than 1 percent of the most restrictive standard.

7.1 ESTIMATED DOSE FROM

NTS ACTIVITIES

he potential EDE to the offsite Tpopulation due to NTS activities is

estimated annually. Two methods are

used to estimate the EDE to residents in the

offsite area in order to determine the

community potentially most impacted by

airborne releases of radioactivity from the

NTS. In the first method, effluent release

estimates, based on monitoring data or

calculated resuspension of deposited

radioactivity, and meteorological data are

used as inputs to EPA's CAP88-PC model

which then produces estimated EDEs. The

second method entails using data from the

Offsite Radiological Safety Program (ORSP)

monitoring networks with documented

assumptions and conversion factors to

calculate the committed EDE (CEDE). The

latter method provides an estimate of the

EDE to a hypothetical individual

continuously present outdoors at the

location of interest that includes both NTS

emissions and worldwide fallout. In addition,

a collective EDE is calculated by the first

method for the total offsite population

residing within 80 km (50 mi) of each of the

NTS emission sources. Background

radiation measurements are used to provide

a comparison with the calculated EDEs. In

the absence of detectable releases of

radiation from the NTS, the Pressurized Ion

Chamber (PIC) network provides a

measurement of background gamma

radiation in the offsite area.

There are four sources of possible radiation

exposure to the population of Nevada, some

of which were monitored by EPA's offsite

monitoring networks during 1997. These

were:

 Background radiation due to natural

sources such as cosmic radiation,

radioactivity in soil, and Be in air. 7

 Worldwide distributions of man-made

radioactivity, such as Sr in milk and 90

plutonium in soil.

 Operational releases of radioactivity from

the NTS, including those from drill-back

and purging activities when they occur.
7-2

 Radioactivity that was accumulated in offsite monitoring network. For example,

migratory game animals during their

residence on the NTS.

Operational releases and calculated sources

of radioactive emissions from the NTS are

used as input data for CAP88-PC to provide

estimates of exposures to offsite

populations. The other three sources of

exposure listed above are discussed below.

ESTIMATED DOSE USING

REPORTED NTS EMISSIONS

Onsite source emission measurements, as

provided by Department of Energy (DOE),

are listed in Chapter 4, Table 4.5, and

include tritium and plutonium. These are

estimates of releases made at the point of

origin. Meteorological data collected by the

Air Resources Laboratory, Special

Operations and Research Division

(ARL/SORD) were used to construct wind

roses and stability arrays for the following

areas: Mercury, Area 12, Area 20, Yucca

Flat, and the Radioactive Waste

Management Site in Area 5. A calculation of

estimated dose from NTS effluents was

performed using EPA's CAP88-PC model

(EPA 1992a). The results of the model

indicated that the hypothetical individual with

the maximum calculated dose from airborne

NTS radioactivity would reside at Springdale,

Nevada, 58 km (36 mi) west-northwest of

CP-1. The maximum dose to that individual

could have been 0.089 mrem (8.9 x 10-4

mSv). For comparison, data from the PIC

monitoring network indicated an exposure of

144 mrem (1.44 mSv) from background

gamma radiation occurring in that area. The

population living within a radius of 80 km

(50 mi) from the airborne sources on the

NTS was estimated to be 31,000 individuals,

based on estimated population data. The

collective population dose within 80 km

(50 mi) from each of these sources was

calculated to be 0.26 person-rem (2.6 x 10-3

person-Sv). Activity concentrations in air

that would cause these calculated doses are

much higher than actually detected by the 

0.088 mrem of the calculated EDE to the

MEI is due to plutonium. The annual

average plutonium concentration in air that

would cause this EDE is 3.4 x 10 μCi/mL. -17

This is about 20 times the annual average

plutonium in air measured in Goldfield,

Nevada, (nearest community) of 0.14 x 10-17

μCi/mL (Chapter 4, Table 4.15). Table 7.1

summarizes the annual contributions to the

EDEs due to 1997 NTS operations as

calculated by use of CAP88-PC and the

radionuclides listed in Chapter 4, Table 4.5. 

Input data for the CAP88-PC model included

meteorological data from ARL/SORD and

effluent release data calculated from

monitoring results and from resuspension

estimates. These release data are known to

be estimates and the meteorological data

are mesoscale, e.g., representative of an

area approximately 40 km (25 mi) or less

around the point of collection. However,

these data are considered sufficient for

model input, primarily because the model

itself is not designed for complex terrain

such as that on and around the NTS. Errors

introduced by the use of the effluent and

meteorological data are small compared to

the errors inherent in the model. The model

results are considered over-estimates of the

dose to offsite residents. This has been

confirmed by comparison with the offsite

monitoring results.

ESTIMATED DOSE USING

MONITORING NETWORK DATA 

Potential CEDEs to individuals may be

estimated from the concentrations of

radioactivity, as measured by the EPA

monitoring networks during 1997. Actual

results obtained in analysis are used; the

majority of which are less than the reported

minimum detectable concentration (MDC). 

No krypton or tritium in air data were

collected offsite, so the onsite krypton for

this year, and an average value for previous

year’s offsite tritium were used. No

vegetable or animal samples were collected

in 1997 so calculations for these intakes are

not done. 
DOSE ASSESSMENT

7-3

Data quality objectives (DQOs) for precision As an example calculation, the following is

and accuracy are, by necessity, less

stringent for values near the MDC, so

confidence intervals around the input data 

are broad. The concentrations of

radioactivity detected by the monitoring

networks and used in the calculation of

potential CEDEs are shown in Table 7.2.

The concentrations given in Table 7.2 are

expressed in terms of activity per unit

volume. These concentrations are

converted to a dose by using the

assumptions and dose conversion factors

described below. The dose conversion

factors assume continuous presence at a

fixed location and no loss of radioactivity in

storage or handling of ingested materials.

 Adult respiration rate = 8,400 m /yr from 3

International Commission on

Radiological Protection Publication 21

(ICRP 1975)

 Milk intake (average for 20 and 40 yr old)

= 110 L/yr (ICRP 1975)

 Water consumption = 2 L/day (ICRP

1975)

The EDE conversion factors are derived

from Federal Guidance Report No. 11 (EPA

1988). Those used here are:

 H: 6.4 x 10 mrem/pCi (ingestion or 3 -8

inhalation)

 Be: 2.6 x 10 mrem/pCi (inhalation) 7 -7

 Sr: 1.4 x 10 mrem/pCi (ingestion) 90 -4

 Kr: 1.5 x 10 mrem/yr per pCi/m 85 -5 3

(submersion)

 Pu: 3.7 x 10 mrem/pCi 238,239+240 -4

(ingestion, f =10 ) 3.1 x 10 mrem/pCi 1

-4 -1

(inhalation, Class Y)

The algorithm for the internal dose

calculation is:

 (concentration) x (intake in volume

[mass]/unit time) x (CEDE conversion

factors) = CEDE

the result of breathing a concentration of

tritium in air of 0.2 pCi/m :3

 (2 x 10 pCi/m ) x (8400 m /yr) x (6.4 x -1 3 3

10 mrem/pCi) = 1.1 x 10 mrem/yr -8 -4

However, in calculating the inhalation CEDE

from H, the value must be increased by 50 3

percent to account for skin absorption (ICRP

1979). The total dose in one year, therefore,

is 1.1 x 10 x 1.5 = 1.6 x 10 mrem/yr. -4 -4

Dose calculations from ORSP data are

summarized in Table 7.2.

The individual CEDEs, from the various

pathways, added together give a total of

0.015 mrem/yr. Total EDEs can be

calculated based on different combinations

of data. If the interest was in just one area,

for example, the concentrations from those

stations closest to that area could be

substituted into the equations used herein. 

In 1997, because of budget cuts and the

standby status of nuclear device testing,

samples of game animals and garden

vegetables were not collected. Also, the

noble gas and tritium sampling network was

discontinued in the offsite locations, and the

air sampling network was reduced. In order

to calculate an EDE for a resident of

Springdale, Nevada, using the MEI from the

CAP88-PC operation, it is necessary to

make some assumptions as shown in the

next section.

7.2 DOSE (EDE) FROM

OFFSITE EXPOSURES

The NTS average Kr concentration is 85

representative of statewide levels, so it can

be used in this calculation. Also, tritium in

air does not change much from year to year,

so previous data for that can be used. 

Finally, Goldfield, Nevada, has the nearest

air sampler to Springdale, Nevada, so its

plutonium concentration is used to calculate

the EDE. In addition, there is a contribution

from Be that is formed in the atmosphere by 7

cosmic ray interactions with oxygen and

nitrogen. The annual average Be 7
7-4

concentration measured by the NTS mrem can be obtained, if certain

surveillance network was 0.12 pCi/m . With 3

a dose conversion factor for inhalation of

2.6 x 10 mrem/pCi, and a breathing volume -7

of 8,400 m /yr, this equates to a dose of 3

2.6 x 10 mrem. Also, assume the network -4

average of Sr in milk and the average of 90

tritium in water for sources near Springdale

apply. All of the calculations that use these

assumptions are shown in Table 7.2 and

lead to an EDE at that location of 0.015

mrem, which is about 16 percent of the EDE

calculated by use of CAP88-PC. Both of

these calculated EDEs are negligible,

compared to the PIC measurement of 144

mR at Beatty in 1997.

The maximum offsite EDE would have been

at Rachel, Nevada, because the network’s

highest annual average Pu 239+240

concentration of 1.8 x 10 μCi/mL -17

(0.7 μBq/m ) occurred there. A resident of 3

Rachel would thus receive an inhalation

exposure leading to 0.047 mrem 

(4.7 x 10 mSv) EDE for 1997. When -4

exposure to the other radionuclides listed in

Table 7.2 is added, the total becomes 0.059

mrem.

Therefore, based on offsite monitoring data,

the MEI would live in Rachel, Nevada, and

the EDE would be 0.059 mrem as contrasted

with the CAP88-PC result that the MEI would

live in Springdale, Nevada, and the EDE

would be 0.089 mrem.

7.3 SUMMARY

The offsite environmental surveillance

system operated around the NTS by EPA’s

R&IE-LV detected no radiological exposures

that could be attributed to recent NTS

operations, but a calculated EDE of 0.015 

assumptions are made, as shown in Table

7.2. Calculation with the CAP88-PC model,

using estimated or calculated effluents from

the NTS during 1997, resulted in a maximum

dose of 0.089 mrem (8.9 x 10 mSv) to a -3

hypothetical resident of Springdale, Nevada,

14 km (9 mi) west of the NTS boundary. 

Based on monitoring network data, this dose

is calculated to be 0.015 mrem. This latter

EDE is about 17 percent of the dose

obtained from CAP88-PC calculation. This

maximum dose estimate is less than 1

percent of the International Commission of

Radiological Protection (ICRP)

recommendation that an annual EDE for the

general public not exceed 100 mrem/yr

(ICRP 1985). The calculated population

dose (collective EDE) to the approximately

31,000 residents living within 80 km (50 mi)

of each of the NTS airborne emission

sources was 0.26 person-rem (2.6 x 10-3

person-SV). Background radiation yielded

an EDE of 3,064 person-rem (30.6 person-Sv).

Data from the PIC gamma monitoring

indicated a dose of 144 mrem from

background gamma radiation measured in

the Springdale area. The CEDE calculated

from the monitoring networks or the model,

as discussed above, is a negligible amount

by comparison. The uncertainty (2)) for the

PIC measurement at the 144 mrem

exposure level is approximately 5 percent. 

Extrapolating to the calculated annual

exposure at Springdale, Nevada, yields a

total uncertainty of approximately 7 mrem

which is greater than either of the calculated

EDEs. Because the estimated dose from

NTS activities is less than 1 mrem (the

lowest level for which DQOs are defined, as

given in Chapter 8), no conclusions can be

made regarding the achieved data quality as

compared to the DQOs for this insignificant

dose.
DOSE ASSESSMENT

7-5

Table 7.1 Summary of Effective Dose Equivalents from NTS Operations - 1997

Table 7.2 Monitoring Networks Data Used in Dose Calculations - 1997

Collective EDE to

Maximum EDE at Maximum EDE to Population within 80 km

NTS Boundary an Individual of the NTS Sources (a) (b)

Dose 0.12 mrem 0.089 mrem 0.26 person-rem

(1.2 x 10 mSv) (8.9 x 10 mSv) (2.6 x 10 person-Sv) -3 -4 -3

 

Location Site boundary 40 km Springdale, NV 58 km 31,000 people within

WNW of NTS CP-1 WNW of NTS CP-1 80 km of NTS Sources

 

NESHAP 10 mrem per yr 10 mrem per yr (c)

 Standard (0.1 mSv per yr) (0.1 mSv per yr) -----

 

Percentage 

 of NESHAP 1.2 0.89 -----

 

Background 144 mrem 144 mrem 3064 person-rem

(1.44 mSv) (1.44 mSv) (30.6 person-Sv)

Percentage of

 Background 0.08 0.06 0.008

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

the year at the NTS boundary located 40 km (25 mi) west-northwest from CP-1.

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

dose-rate occurs as calculated by CAP88-PC (Version 1.0) using NTS effluents listed in Table 4.5 and

assuming all tritiated water input to the Area 12 containment ponds was evaporated. 

(c) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants.

Medium Radionuclide Concentration Mrem\Year Comment

Meat Not collected this year

Milk Sr 0.7 1.1 x 10 Concentration is the average 90 (a) -2

(0.023) of all network results

H 0 0 Not Analyzed 3

Drinking Water H 1.8 8.4 x 10 Concentration is average 3 (a) -5

(0.07) from 4 wells in the area 

Vegetables Not collected this year

Air H 0.2 1.6 x 10 Concentration is average 3 (b) -4

(0.007) network result (1994 data)

Be 0.12 2.6 x 10 Annual average for 7 (b) -4

(0.0044) NTS area

Kr 27. 4.1 x 10 NTS network average 85 (b) -4

(0.93)

Pu 1.3 x 10 3.4 x 10 Annual average for 239+240 -6 (b) -3

(4.8 x 10 ) Goldfield, Nevada -8

TOTAL (Air = 4.2 x 10 , Liquids = 1.1 x 10 ) = 1.5 x 10 mrem/yr -3 -2 -2

(a) Units are pCi/L and Bq/L.

(b) Units are pCi/m and Bq/m . 3 3

LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE

8-1

8.0 LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE

It is the policy of U.S. Department of Energy Nevada Operations Office

(DOE/NV) that all data produced for its environmental surveillance and

effluent monitoring programs be of known quality. Therefore, a quality

assurance (QA) program is used for collection and analysis of samples for

radiological and nonradiological parameters to ensure that data produced by

the laboratory meets customer- and regulatory-defined requirements. Data

quality is assured through process-based QA, procedure-specific QA, data

quality objectives (DQOs), and performance evaluation (PE) programs. The

external QA program for radiological data consists of participation in the

DOE Quality Assessment Program (QAP) administered by the DOE

Environmental Measurements Laboratory (EML), and the Performance

Evaluation Studies Program (PESP) conducted by the U.S. Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA) National Exposure Research Laboratory in Las

Vegas. The radiological external QA program also consists of participation

in the Oak Ridge National Laboratories (ORNL) radiobioassay study

conducted by ORNL in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. External radiation

measurement QA for the onsite program and EPA’s Radiation & Indoor

Environments National Laboratory-Las Vegas (R&IE-LV) offsite

Thermoluminescent Dosimeter (TLD) programs consists of participation in

EML’s DOE Laboratory Accreditation Program (DOELAP). The

nonradiological data QA program was accomplished by using commercial

laboratories with appropriate certification or accreditation by state or

government agencies.

The environmental surveillance program off the Nevada Test Site (NTS) was

performed by R&IE-LV. The QA program developed by R&IE-LV for the

Offsite Radiological Safety Program (ORSP) meets all requirements of EPA

policy, and also includes applicable elements of the requirements and

regulations of DOE/NV QA. The ORSP QA program defines DQOs, which are

statements of the quality of data a decision maker needs to ensure that a

decision based on that data is defensible.

8.1 POLICY

nvironmental surveillance, conducted Eonsite by Bechtel Nevada (BN) and

offsite by EPA’s R&IE-LV, is governed

by the DOE QA policy as set forth in DOE

Order 5700.6C, “Quality Assurance”. The

Order outlines ten specific elements that

must be considered for compliance with the

QA policy. These elements are:

1. Program

2. Personnel Training & Qualification

3. Quality Improvement

4. Documents and Records measurement efforts supported or mandated 

5. Work Processes

6. Design

7. Procurement

8. Data Acceptance and Review

9. Management Assessment

10. Independent Assessment

In addition, R&IE-LV meets the EPA policy

which states that all decisions which are

dependent on environmental data must be

supported by data of known quality. The

EPA’s policy requires participation in a

centrally managed QA Program by all EPA

elements as well as those monitoring and
8-2

through contracts, regulations, or other Compliance to analytical procedures is

formalized agreements. Further, the EPA’s

policy requires participation in a QA Program

by all EPA organizational units involved in

environmental data collection. The QA

policies and requirements of R&IE-LV are

summarized in the "Quality Management

Plan" (EPA/ORIA 1996). The QA policies

and requirements specific to the ORSP are

documented in the "Quality Assurance

Program Plan for the Nuclear Radiation

Assessment Division Offsite Radiation

Safety Program," (unpublished). The

requirements of these documents establish

a framework for consistency in the

continuing application of QA standards and

implementing procedures in support of the

ORSP. Administrative and technical

implementing procedures based on these

QA requirements are maintained in

appropriate manuals or are described in

standard operating procedures of the

R&IE-LV.

8.2 OVERVIEW OF THE

LABORATORY QA PROGRAM

The BN Analytical Services Laboratory

(ASL) implements the requirements of the

DOE Order 5700.6C through integrated

quality procedures. The quality of data and

results is ensured through both processbased and procedure-specific QA.

Procedure-specific QA begins with the

development and implementation of work

instructions (WIs) which contain the

analytical methodologies and required

quality control samples for a given analysis. 

Personnel performing a given analysis are

trained and qualified for that analysis,

including the successful analysis of a quality

control sample. Analysis-specific

operational checks and calibration standards

traceable to either the National Institute of

Standards and Technology (NIST) or the

EPA are required. Quality control samples,

e.g., spikes, blanks, and replicates, are

included for each analytical procedure. the NTS.

measured through procedure-specific

assessments or surveillances.

An essential component of process-based

QA is data review and verification to assess

data usability. Data review requires a

systematic, independent review against preestablished criteria to verify that the data are

valid for their intended use. Initial data

processing is performed by the analyst or

health physicist generating the data. An

independent review is then performed by

another analyst or health physicist to ensure

that data processing has been correctly

performed and that the reported analytical

results correspond to the data acquired and

processed. Data checks are made for

internal consistency, proper identification,

transmittal errors, calculation errors, and

transcription errors. Supervisory review of

data is required prior to release of the data

to sample management personnel for data

verification. Data verification ensures that

the reported results correctly represent the

sampling and/or analyses performed, and

includes assessment of quality control

sample results. Data processing by sample

management personnel ensures that

analytical results meet project requirements. 

Data discrepancies identified during the data

review and verification process are

documented on data discrepancy reports

(DDRs). DDRs are reviewed and compiled

quarterly to discern systematic problems. 

Process-based QA programs also include

periodic operational checks of analytical

parameters such as reagent water quality

and storage temperatures. Periodic

calibration is required for all measuring

equipment such as analytical balances,

analytical weights, and thermometers. The

overall effectiveness of the QA program is

determined through systematic assessments

of analytical activities. Systematic problems

are documented and corrective actions

tracked through System Deficiency Reports. 

Similar procedures and methodologies are

used by R&IE-LV to ensure the quality of

environmental radiological data collected off
LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE

8-3

8.3 DATA AND

MEASUREMENT QUALITY

OBJECTIVES 

DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES

DQOs delineate the circumstances under

which measurements are made and define

the acceptable variability in the measured

data. DQOs are based on the decision(s) to

be made, the range of sampling possibilities,

what measurements will be made, where the

samples will be taken, how the

measurements will be used, and what

calculations will be performed on the

measurement data to arrive at the final

desired result(s). Associated measurement

quality objectives (MQO), which define

acceptable variability in the measured data,

are established to ensure the quality of the

measurements.

DECISIONS TO BE MADE

The primary decisions to be made, based on

radiological environmental surveillance

measurements, are whether, due to NTS

activities (1) any member of the general

public, outside the site boundaries, receives

an effective dose equivalent (EDE) that

exceeds regulatory limits; (2) there is

detectable contamination of the

environment; or (3) there is a biological

effect. A potential EDE to a member of the

public from NTS activities is much more

likely to be due to inhalation or ingestion of

radionuclides which have reached the

person through one or more pathways, such

as transport through the air (inhalation

exposure), or through water and/or

foodstuffs (ingestion exposure), than to be

due to external exposure. A pathway may

be quite complex; e.g., the food pathway

could include airborne radioactivity falling on

soil and plants, also being absorbed by

plants, which are eaten by an animal, which

is then eaten by a member of the public. At

the NTS, because of the depth of aquifers,

negligible horizontal or vertical transport,

lack of surface water flows and little rain,

very sparse vegetation and animal

populations, lack of food grown for human

consumption, and large distances to the

nearest member of the public, the airborne

pathway is by far the most important for a

possible EDE to a member of the public.

Decisions made based on nonradiological

data are related to waste characterization,

extent and characterization of spills,

compliance with regulatory limits for

environmental contaminants, and possible

worker exposure(s). 

RANGE OF SAMPLING POSSIBILITIES

Determination of the numbers, types, and

locations of radiological sampling stations is

based on factors such as the location of

possible sources, isotopes of concern, wind

and weather patterns, the geographical

distribution of human populations, the levels

of risk involved, the desired sensitivity of the

measurements, physical accessibility to

sampling locations, and financial constraints. 

The numbers, types, and location of

nonradiological samples are typically defined

by regulatory actions on the NTS and are

determined by environmental compliance or

waste operations activities. Workplace and

personnel monitoring to determine possible

worker exposures is conducted by Industrial

Hygienists and Health Physicists from the

Environment, Safety, Security, and Health

Division of BN.

MEASUREMENTS TO BE MADE

Radioanalyses are made of air, water, or

other media samples to determine the types

and amounts of radioactivity in them. These

measurements are then converted to

radioactivity concentrations by dividing by

the sample volume or weight, which is

measured separately. Nonradiological

inorganic or organic constituents in air,

water, soil, and sludge samples are

analyzed and reported by commercial

laboratories under contract to BN. Methods

and procedures used to measure possible

worker exposures to nonradiological hazards 
8-4

are defined by Occupational Safety and calculational model gives the greatest

Health Administration or National Institute of

Occupational Safety and Health protocols. 

Typical contaminants for which ES&H

personnel collect samples and request

analyses are asbestos, solvents, and

welding metals. Sample media, which are

analyzed, include urine, blood, air filters,

charcoal tubes, and bulk asbestos. 

SAMPLING LOCATIONS

The locations of routine radiological

environmental surveillance sampling both on

and off the NTS are described in Chapters 4

and 5 of this report. Onsite sampling

methodologies are described in BN's

Environmental Management Procedures,

and offsite methodologies by similar R&IELV procedures. The locations of

nonradiological environmental sampling and

monitoring are determined through site

remediation and characterization activities

and by permit requirements.

USE OF THE MEASUREMENTS

There are several techniques to estimate the

EDE to a member of the public. One

technique is to measure the radionuclide

concentrations at the location(s) of interest

and use established methodologies to

estimate the EDE a person at that location

could receive. Another technique is to

measure radionuclide concentrations at

specific points within the site and to use

established models to calculate

concentrations at other, offsite locations of

interest. The potential EDE to a person at

such a location could then be estimated. 

This second technique is the one used for

most of the environmental surveillance data

measured at the NTS.

CALCULATIONS TO BE PERFORMED

The EDE of greatest interest is the EDE to

the maximally exposed individual (MEI). The

MEI is located where, based on measured

radioactivity concentrations and distances

from all contributing NTS sources, the data, and locations of human populations.

potential EDE for any member of the public. 

The assumptions used in the calculational

model are conservative; i.e., the calculated

EDE to the MEI most certainly exceeds the

EDE any member of the public would

actually receive. The model used at the

NTS is EPA’s CAP88-PC, a wind dispersion

model approved for this purpose.

MEASUREMENT QUALITY

OBJECTIVES

MQOs are commonly described in terms of

representativeness, comparability,

completeness, precision, and accuracy. 

Although the assessment of the first two

characteristics must be essentially

qualitative, definite numerical goals may be

set and quantitative assessments performed

for the latter three.

REPRESENTATIVENESS

Representativeness is the degree to which a

sample is truly representative of the sampled

medium, i.e., the degree to which measured

analytical concentrations represent the

concentrations in the medium being sampled

(Stanley and Verner 1985). 

Representativeness also refers to whether

the locations and frequency of sampling are

such that calculational models will lead to a

correct estimate of potential EDE to a

member of the public when measured

radioactivity concentrations are put into the

model. An environmental monitoring plan for

the NTS, "Environmental Monitoring Plan,

Nevada Test Site and Support Facilities"

(DOE, 1991c) has been established to

achieve representativeness for

environmental data. Factors which were

considered in designing this monitoring plan

include locations of known and potential

sources, historical and operational

knowledge of isotopes and pathways of

concern, hydrological, and topographical
LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE

8-5

COMPARABILITY PRECISION

Comparability refers to the degree of

confidence and consistency we have in our

analytical results, or defined as "the

confidence with which one data set can be

compared to another" (Stanley and Verner

1985). To achieve comparability in

measurement data, sample collection and

handling, laboratory analyses, and data

analysis and validation are performed in

accordance with established WIs. Standard

reporting units and a consistent number of

significant digits are used. Instruments are

calibrated using NIST-traceable sources. 

Each batch of field samples is accompanied

by a spiked sample with a known quantity of

the compound(s) of interest. Extensive QA

measures are used for all analytical

processes. In addition, comparability is

attained through comparison of external

performance audit results to those achieved

by other laboratories participating in the EPA

PESP.

COMPLETENESS

Completeness is defined as the percentage

of samples collected versus those which had

been scheduled to be collected, or the

percentage of valid analysis results versus

the results which would have been obtained

if all samples had been obtained and

correctly analyzed. Realistically, samples

can be lost during shipping, handling,

preparation, and analysis, or not collected

as scheduled. Also data entry or

transcription errors can be made. The BN

completeness objectives for all radiological

samples and analyses have been set at 90

percent for sample collection and 85 percent

for analyses, or 75 percent overall. R&IELV's completeness objective for the LongTerm Hydrological Monitoring Program is 80

percent and for the other networks is 90

percent.

Completeness for inorganic and organic

analyses is based on the number of valid

results received versus the number

requested.

Precision refers to "the degree of mutual

agreement characteristic of independent

measurements as the result of repeated

application of the process under specified

conditions" (Taylor 1987). Practically,

precision is determined by comparing the

results obtained from performing the same

analysis on split samples, or on duplicate

samples taken at the same time from the

same location, maintaining sampling and

analytical conditions as nearly identical as

possible. Precision for samples is

determined by comparing results for

duplicate samples of particulates in air,

tritiated water vapor, noble gases, and some

types of water samples. For TLDs, precision

is assessed from variations in the three

CaSO elements of each environmental 4

TLD. Precision is expressed 

quantitatively as the percent relative

standard deviation (%RSD), i.e., the ratio of

the standard deviation of the measurements

being compared to their mean converted to

percent. The smaller the value of the

%RSD, the greater is the precision of the

measurement. The precision objectives are

shown in Table 8.1. They are a function of

the concentration of radioactivity in the

samples; i.e., the analysis of samples with

concentrations near zero will have low

precision, while samples with higher

concentrations will have proportionately

higher precision.

ACCURACY

Accuracy refers to how well we can measure

the true value of a given quantity and can be

defined as "the degree of agreement of a

measured value with the true or expected

value of the quantity of concern" (Taylor

1987). For practical purposes, assessments

of accuracy for ASL are done by performing

measurements on special QA samples

prepared, using stringent quality control, by

laboratories which specialize in preparing

such samples. The values of the activities

of these samples are not known by the staff

of the ASL until several months after the

measurements are made and the results
8-6

sent back to the QA laboratory. These Current and historical data are maintained in

sample values are unknown to the analysts

and serve to measure the accuracy of the

analytical procedures. The accuracy of

these measurements, which is assumed to

extend to other similar measurements

performed by the laboratory, may be defined

as the ratio of the measured value divided

by the true value, expressed as a percent. 

Percent bias is the complement of percent

accuracy, i.e., %Bias = 100 - % accuracy. 

The smaller the percent bias, the more

accurate are the measurements. Table 8.2

shows the accuracy objectives of the ASL

and of the R&IE-LV.

Measurements of sample volumes should be

accurate to ± 5 percent for aqueous samples

(water and milk) and to ± 10 percent for air

and soil samples. The sensitivity of

radiochemical and gamma spectrometric

analyses must allow no more than a 5

percent risk of either a false negative or

false positive value. Control limits for

accuracy, monitored with matrix spike

samples, are required to be no greater than

± 20 percent for all gross alpha and gross

beta analyses and for gamma spectrometric

analyses. 

Both the R&IE-LV and ASL participate in

several interlaboratory PE programs such as

EPA's PESP and EML's QAP and the

DOELAP for TLDs. The ASL also

participates in two bioassay programs,

DOELAP and ORNL. 

The accuracy of the TLDs is tested every

two or three years by DOELAP. This

involves a three-part, single blind,

performance testing program followed by an

independent onsite assessment of the

overall program. Both BN and R&IE-LV

participate in this program.

Once the data have been finalized, they are

compared to the MQOs. Completeness,

accuracy, and precision statistics are

calculated. If data fail to meet one or more

of the established MQOs, they may still be

used in data analysis; however, the data and

any interpretive results must be qualified. 

an access-controlled database. 

All sample results exceeding the traditional

natural background activity range are

investigated. If data are found to be

associated with a non-environmental

condition, e.g., a check of the instrument

using a calibration source, the data are

flagged and are not included in calculations

of averages, etc. Only data verified to be

associated with a non-environmental

condition are flagged; all other data are used

in calculation of averages and other

statistics, even if the condition is traced to a

source other than the NTS.

8.4 RESULTS FOR

COMPLETENESS,

PRECISION, AND ACCURACY

Summary data for completeness, precision,

and accuracy are provided in Tables 8.3 to

8.6, respectively. Complete data used in

these MQO’s for 1997 may be found in the

associated document, "Environmental Data

Report for the Nevada Test Site - 1997"

(DOE/NV/11718-232).

COMPLETENESS

The analysis completeness data for calendar

year 1997 are shown in Table 8.3. These

percentages represent all analyses which

were carried to completion, and include

some analyses for which the results were

found to be invalid for other reasons. Had

objectives not been met for some analyses,

other factors would be used to assess

acceptability, e.g., fit of the data to a trend or

consistency with results from samples

collected before and after.

The completeness of MQOs for the onsite

networks were met or exceeded in all cases. 

For the offsite networks, the MQOs were

met or exceeded except for the high volume

and pressurized ion chamber networks,

where field equipment malfunction prevented

complete collections.
%BIAS 
 (

Cm 	 Ca

Ca

) 100

where:

%BIAS 
 percent bias

Cm 
 measured sample activity

Ca 
 known sample activity

LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE

8-7

PRECISION

From replicate samples collected and

analyzed throughout the year, the %RSD

was calculated for various types of analyses

and sampling media. The results of these

calculations are shown in Table 8.4 for both

the onsite and offsite networks. In addition

to examination of %RSDs for individual

duplicate pairs, an overall precision estimate

was determined by calculating the pooled

standard deviation, based on the algorithm

given in Taylor (1987). To convert to a

unitless value, the pooled standard deviation

was divided by the grand mean and

multiplied by 100 to yield a %RSD. The

table presents the pooled data and

estimates of overall precision. The pooled

standard deviations and %RSD indicate the

estimated achieved precision for samples. 

For the R&IE-LV, the analysis for gross (DOE/NV/11718-232). 

alpha in air and a few low-activity air

samples, in which Be was detected, did not 7

meet the precision MQO. Activity barely

exceeds the minimum detectable

concentration (MDC) for most of these

samples resulting in a decrease in precision

for the analysis group. The precision data

for all other analyses were well within their

respective MQOs. The R&IE-LV data

presented in Table 8.4 include only duplicate

pairs that exceeded the MDC.

For the ASL, the reason for the low precision

in some of the analyses was the low activity

in these environmental samples as noted by

R&IE-LV above, e.g., for tritium in air, the

few that were useful for calculation of

precision barely exceeded the MDC.

ACCURACY

The ASL and R&IE-LV accuracy objectives

were measured through participation in the

interlaboratory comparison and QAPs

discussed below.

RADIOLOGICAL PERFORMANCE

EVALUATION RESULTS

The external radiological PESP consisted of

participation in the QAP conducted by

DOE/EML and the PESP conducted by EPA. 

These programs serve to evaluate the

performance of the radiological laboratory

and to identify problems requiring corrective

actions. 

Summaries of the 1997 results of the

interlaboratory PE and QAPs conducted by

the EPA and DOE/EML are provided in

Tables 8.5 and 8.6. The column or section

in each table labeled percent Bias is the

accuracy of analysis and may be compared

to the objectives listed in Table 8.2. The

individual radionuclide recoveries are listed

in tables which may be found in the

associated document, "Environmental Data

Report for the Nevada Test Site - 1997"

Accuracy, as percent difference or percent

bias is calculated by:

The R&IE-LV failed the accuracy MQO in

only 1 of the 20 analyses attempted in the

EPA PE Study. In the EML QAP, 8 of the 29

analyses performed exceeded the DQO of ±

20 percent. In 1997, R&IE-LV maintained

accreditation by DOELAP for the personnel

TLD program. QA checks are routinely

performed to ensure compliance with

applicable performance standards. 

BN’s ASL results exceeded the 3 normalized

deviation limits in 2 of the 56 analyses

attempted. The MQOs for accuracy in

analysis of DOE/EML samples were not met

in only 3 of the 85 analyses attempted.
8-8

CORRECTIVE ACTIONS IMPLEMENTED gamma spectroscopy in both air and water

IN RESPONSE TO PERFORMANCE

EVALUATION PROGRAMS

BN results were generally within the control

limits determined by the program sponsors. 

Results which were not within acceptable objectives of the study.

performance limits were investigated and

corrective actions taken to prevent

reoccurrence. Corrective actions included a

new process for preparing and including

quality control samples, training of analysts,

and an improved tracking system for PE

samples.

In the R&IE-LV, the 1997 results that did not

meet analysis criteria were investigated to

determine the cause of the reported error. 

Corrective actions were implemented.

COMPARABILITY

The EPA PESP and the EML/QAP provide

results to each laboratory participating in

each study that include a grand average for

all values, excluding outliers. A normalized

deviation statistic compares each

laboratory's result (mean of three replicates)

to the known value and to the grand The outcome for this calculation did not

average. If the value of this statistic (in

multiples of standard normal deviate,

unitless) lies between control limits of -3 and

+3, the accuracy (deviation from known

value) or comparability (deviation from grand

average) is within normal statistical variation.

Data from the 1997 intercomparison studies

for all variables measured were compared

with the grand average to calculate a

normalized deviation for the R&IE-LV

results. With the exception of one gamma

spectroscopy sample, all analyses were

within three standard normal deviate units of

the grand mean, and most were within two

normalized deviate units. This indicates

acceptable comparability of the R&IE-LV

results with the 188 laboratories participating

in the EPA PESP.

One of the two EML studies for 1997 was

reported outside of acceptable limits for

matrices. The problem with the air filters

was traced to incorrect spiking (i.e.,

preparation) of the air filters. The samples

were successfully re-analyzed to

demonstrate that the analyst could meet the

R&IE-LV continued to participate in the DOE

Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation

Program (MAPEP) during 1997. Analysis of

water and soil matrix samples was

performed with all analytical results within

the acceptable bias limit of ±20 percent.

The onsite ASL’s results in the EML QAP

were acceptable. There were only three

instances in which the ASL results were

greater than the MQO. Corrective actions

were made and the results from the next

semi-annual PE sample were acceptable. 

The EPA PESP includes a grand average

(average result from all participating

laboratories, less outliers) in its report to

participants. Using the formula for percent

bias described above, the percent bias of

the ASL results as compared to the grand

average was calculated for each analysis. 

differ from the accuracy results reported

above. Thus comparability of the ASL

results is the same as its accuracy on PE

samples as reported above.

SPIKE AND REAGENT BLANK

DATA

Reagent blanks prepared by ASL were

analyzed for the same radionuclides as the

samples. Only 4 of 212 reagent blank

results exceeded the MDC of the analysis

for which the blanks were prepared.

A similar number of spike samples were

prepared by ASL. The accuracy (as percent

recovery) varied from 70 to 122 percent for

the eight different analyses. The standard

deviations of these percent recoveries is a

measure of precision. These ranged from

3.5 to 15.1 percent for eight of the analyses.
LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE

8-9

Table 8.1 Precision Objectives Expressed as Percents

< <

Table 8.2 Accuracy Objectives Expressed as Percent Bias

< <

>

 

 ASL 

Analysis Conc. > 10 MDC 4 MDC Conc. 10 MDC

Gross Alpha ±30 ±60

Gross Beta ±30 ±60

Gamma Spectrometry ±30 ±60

Scintillation Counting ±30 ±60

Alpha Spectrometry ±20 ±50

Noble Gas Analysis ±30 ±40

Note: The precision objective for TLDs at environmental levels is 10 percent.

 R&IE-LV 

Conventional Tritium ±10 ±30

Strontium (in milk) ±10 ±30

Thorium ±10 ±30

Uranium ±10 ±30

Enriched Tritium ±20 ±30

Strontium (in other media) ±20 ±30

Plutonium ±20 ±30

 ASL 

Analysis Conc. > 10 MDC 4 MDC Conc. 10 MDC

Gross Alpha ±20 ±50

Gross Beta ±20 ±50

Gamma Spectrometry ±20 ±50

Scintillation Counting ±20 ±50

Alpha-Spectrometry ±20 ±50

Noble Gas Analysis ±30 ±60

Note: The objective for TLDs is 20 percent for exposures <10 mR and 10 percent for 10 mR.

 R&IE-LV 

Tritium, Conventional ±10 ±30% 

Strontium (Milk) ±10 ±30% 

Thorium ±10 ±30% 

Uranium ±10 ±30% 

Tritium, Enriched ±20 ±30% 

Strontium (other media) ±20 ±30% 

Plutonium ±20 ±30% 

TLDs Meet DOELAP Criteria
8-10

Table 8.3 Analysis Completeness Data for Calendar Year - 1997

Completeness

Percent

 Analysis Medium BN R&IE-LV

Gross Alpha/Beta Low Volume Particulate Air Filter 93.6 95.5

Plutonium High Volume Particulate Air Filter 85.3 (a)

Plutonium Low Volume Particulate Air Filter 97.0 --

Gamma Spectrometry Low Volume Particulate Air Filter 98.0 95.5

Gamma Spectrometry Low Volume Charcoal Air Filter 95.5 (a)

Gamma Spectrometry High Volume Particulate Air Filter 85.3 (a)

Tritiated Water Air 90.6 (a)

Krypton-85 Air 87.6 (a)

Gross Alpha Potable Water Taps 96.6

Gross Beta Potable Water Taps 96.6 (a)

Gamma Spectrometry Potable Water Taps 96.6 (a)

Tritiated Water Potable Water Taps 96.6 (a)

Plutonium Potable Water Taps 96.6 (a)

Gross Beta Wells, Reservoirs, Springs, Ponds 100 (a)

Plutonium Wells, Reservoirs, Springs, Ponds 100 (a)

Gamma Spectrometry Wells, Reservoirs, Springs, Ponds 100 98.0

Tritiated Water Wells, Reservoirs, Springs, Ponds 100 97.8

Strontium-90 Wells, Reservoirs, Springs, Ponds 98.5 (a)

Gross Alpha Potable Wells and Taps 97.5 (a)

Tritium Milk 93.5 (a)

Strontium Milk 93.5 (a)

Pressurized Ion Chamber Ambient Radiation 91.7 (a)

TLDs, Environmental Ambient Radiation 90.2 98.7

TLDs, Personnel Ambient Radiation 100 (a)

(a) Analyses not performed.

Table 8.4 Precision Estimates from Replicate Sampling - 1997

 ASL 

Analysis Number of Replicate Analyses Precision Estimate %RSD

Gross Beta in Air 47 15.9

Gamma in Air 35 23.1

Gross Alpha in Air 41 46.5

Tritium in Air 21 27.2

Gross Alpha in Potable Water 28 5.1

Gross Beta in Potable Water 35 15.1

HTO in Tunnel Effluent 8 3.6

Pu in Tunnel Effluent 16 8.5

 R&IE-LV 

Gross Alpha in Air 84 28.5

Gross Beta in Air 145 18.0

Gamma Spectrometry (Low-Vol Be) 14 36.2 7

Gamma Spectrometry (Hi-Vol Be) 11 46.8 7

Tritium in Water (enriched) 12 7.9

Tritium in Water (unenriched) 2 26.2
LABORATORY QUALITY ASSURANCE

8-11

Table 8.5 Accuracy of R&IE-LV Radioanalyses (EML QAP and PESP) - 1997

Water Samples Range of Results - pCi/L

Analysis No. PESP R&IE-LV % Bias

Gross Alpha 5 10 - 75 12 - 71 -4.2 - 20

Gross Beta 5 7 - 167 13 - 162 -3.2 - 13

Gamma Spec. 5 10 - 745 12 - 6300 -9 - 790 (a)

Strontium 2 10 - 25 12 - 24 -4 - 23

Alpha Spec. 5 5 - 58 5 - 55 -6 - 3

Tritium 2 10880 - 22000 10800 - 21300 3.1 - -0.4

(a) One group of samples submitted for gamma spectrometric evaluation included an incorrect

dilution factor, thus a reporting error. Positive % Bias for the remaining samples was a

maximum of 12 for the 1997 reporting period.

% Bias Range for Analysis of EML QAP Samples

Analysis No. Air Soil Vegetation Water

Plutonium 13 -3.1 - 6.5 -30 - 1.9 -11 - 13 0.5 - 1.3

Uranium 4 0.8 - 20 (a) (a) (a)

Strontium 5 -100 -100 - -91 -11 - 15 (a)

Tritium 2 -16 - -11 (a) (a) (a)

Gamma Spec. 19 -5.2 - 18 25 - 28 (a) (a)

(a) No sample.

% Bias Range for Analysis of MAPEP QAP Samples

Plutonium 4 1.4 - 3.9 -4.0 - -4.8 (a) (a)

Strontium 1 -15 (a) (a) (a)

Gamma Spec. 3 -5.6 - 4.6 (a) (a) (a)

(a) No sample.

Table 8.6 Accuracy of ASL Radioanalyses (EPA PESP and EML QAP) - 1997

Analysis Normalized

 Water BN/ASL EPA QA Deviation(a)

Samples No. Average pCi/L Known Grand Avg.

Co 5 15.7 - 109 0.23 - 3.46 0.15 - 3.77 60 (b) (b)

Zn 2 48.7 - 342 2.41 - 4.73 1.86 - 4.36 65 (b) (b)

Cs 5 414 - 80.3 -1.50 - 1.02 -0.50 - 2.57 134

Co 4 10.0 - 28.3 0.00 - 0.92 -0.16 - 0.62 60

(a) No sample.

(b) Results exceed three Normalized Deviations.
8-12

Table 8.6 (Accuracy of ASL Radioanalyses [EPA PESP and EML QAP] - 1997, cont.)

Analysis Normalized

 Water BN/ASL EPA QA Deviation(a)

Samples No. Average pCi/L Known Grand Avg.

Zn 2 85.3 - 107 1.21 - 2.24 0.64 - 1.56 65

Cs 4 9.0 - 136 -1.73 - 0.00 -0.63 - 0.63 134

Cs 4 23.0 - 78.0 0.85 - 1.39 0.09 - 0.64 137

Ba 2 25 - 97.7 -0.23 - 0.00 0.44 - 0.54 133

Sr 4 8.7 - 40.3 -1.73 - -0.12 -1.78 - 0.13 89

Sr 4 13.0 - 22.3 -0.92 - 0.00 -0.41 - 0.17 90

I 2 13.7 - 110 1.06 - 4.55 0.79 - 4.22 131 (b) (b)

Tritium 2 7950 - 10900 -0.17 - 0.12 0.05 - 0.49

Ra 6 3.9 - 25.5 0.37 - 4.33 0.35 - 4.21 226 (b) b)

Ra 6 4.1 - 10.9 0.49 - 2.71 0.47 - 2.64 228

U (nat.) 6 4.8 - 39.0 -0.79 - 0.04 -0.48 - 0.68

Gross Alpha 5 2.7 - 45.1 -1.20 - 0.38 -0.77 - 0.10

Gross Beta 5 14.6 - 122 -1.70 - 1.11 -1.48 - 0.78

(a) ± 3 Normalized Deviation is acceptable.

(b) Results exceed three Normalized Deviations, only two results exceeded.

% Bias Range for Analysis of EML QAP Samples

Analysis No. Air Soil Vegetation Water

Americium 2 3.9 - 7.0 -5.0 - 18.3 -2.0 - 15 -5.0 - 7.9

Plutonium 4 -11.6 - -1.0 -22.9 - -1.0 -28.4 - 10 -25.8 - 8

Uranium 4 -0.5 - 18 -12 - -1 -2 - 10 (a)

Strontium 2 -8 - -5.5 -14 - 9.9 -15 - -11 -11 - -1.3

Tritium 2 6.0 - 9.9 (a) (a) (a)

Gamma Spec. 6 -18 - 7.5 -24 - 11.3 -41 - 9.6 -2 - 15.6 (b) (c) (c)

Gross Alpha 2 0.0 - 4.0 -5.0 - 4.0 (a) (a)

Gross Beta 2 4 - 202 -17 - 13 (a) (a)

(a) No sample.

(b) Number of Isotopes was 12 (air), 6 (soil & vegetation), and 7 (water).

(c) Two high bias analyses in soil and one in vegetation.
R-1

REFERENCES

Bauer, D. J., B. J. Foster, J. D. Joyner, and R. A. Swanson, 1996, “Water Resources Data - 

Nevada - Water Year 1995,” Water Data Report NV-95-1, U.S. Geological Survey, 

Carson City, NV.

Bechtel Nevada, 1996, “Biological Monitoring Plan for Hazardous Materials Testing at the

Liquefied Gaseous Fuels Spill Test Facility on the Nevada Test Site,” Unnumbered Report,

Ecological Sciences, Environmental Restoration and Waste Management Division, BN, Las

Vegas, NV.

Bechtel Nevada, 1997, “Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site, Groundwater 

Monitoring Program,” Unnumbered Report, Waste Management Operations, Environmental

Management Division, BN, Las Vegas, NV.

Beck, C.M., 1997, “Monitoring Plan for the Cultural Resources Monitoring Program,” Desert 

Research Institute, Quaternary Sciences Center, Las Vegas, NV.

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,

2101 Constitution Ave, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20418.

Black, S. C., 1998, “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants Submittal

1997,” Report DOE/NV/11718-213, Bechtel Nevada, Las Vegas, NV.

Blankennagel, R. K. and J. E. Weir, 1973, “Geohydrology of the Eastern Part of Pahute Mesa, 

Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada,” U.S. Geological Survey Prof. Paper 712-B.

Blomquist, K. W., T. A. Lindeman, G. E. Lyon, D. C. Steen, C. A. Wills, S. A. Flick and W. K. 

Ostler, 1995, Current Distribution, Habitat, and Status of Category 2 Candidate Plant Species

On and Near the U.S. Department of Energy’s Nevada Test Site,” Report EGG 11265-1149,

EG&G/Energy Measurements, Las Vegas, NV.

Chapman, J. B. and S. L. Hokett, 1991, “Evaluation of Groundwater Monitoring at Offsite

Nuclear Test Areas,” DOE Nevada Field Office Report DOE/NV/10845-07, Las Vegas, NV. 

Chapman, J., S. Earman, and R. Andricevic, 1996a, “Assessment of Hydrologic Transport of

Radionuclides from the Rio Blanco Underground Nuclear Test Site, Colorado,” Report 

DOE/NV/11508-19, Desert Research Institute, Las Vegas, NV.

Chapman, J., T. Mihevc, and B. Lyles, 1996b, “Tritium Migration at the Gasbuggy Site:

Evaluation of Possible Hydrologic Pathways,” Report DOE/NV/11508-12, Desert Research

Institute, Las Vegas, NV.

Code of Federal Regulations, 1966, “Protection of Historic and Cultural Properties,” Title 36, 

Part 79.

Code of Federal Regulations, 1969, “National Environmental Policy Act,” Title 40, Parts 

1500 - 1508, Council on Environmental Quality.

Code of Federal Regulations, 1971, “National Primary and Secondary Air Quality Standards,” 

Title 40, Part 50, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
References, cont.

R-2

Code of Federal Regulations, 1973, “Threatened and Endangered Species Regulations,” Title 50,

Parts 17.11 and 17.12, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 

Code of Federal Regulations, 1976, “National Primary Drinking Water Regulations,” Title 40, 

Part 141, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Code of Federal Regulations, 1977, “Clean Water Act Regulations,” Title 40, Parts 110 to 136.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Code of Federal Regulations, 1984, “Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Regulations,” 

Title 40, Parts 260 to 281, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Code of Federal Regulations, 1986, “Superfund, Emergency Planning and Community Right-toKnow Act Regulations,” Title 40, Parts 300 - 373, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Code of Federal Regulations, 1989, “National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air

Pollutants,” Title 40, Part 61, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Code of Federal Regulations, 1993, “Occupational Radiation Protection,” Title 10, Part 835, U.S. 

Department of Energy.

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), 1980, 42 

U.S. Code 9601 et seq.

Davis, M. G., 1997, “Annual Water Sampling and Analysis at the Salmon Test Site Area, Lamar 

County MS, April 1997" Report EPA-420-98-006, Radiation Sciences Laboratory, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Las Vegas, NV.

Dubarton, A. and H. Drollinger, 1997, “Results of a Class III Survey of Tub Spring, Reitmann

Seep, and Captain Jack Spring, Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada,’ Desert Research

Institute, Quaternary Sciences Center, Technical Report No. 90, Las Vegas, NV.

Earman, S., J. Chapman, and R. Andricevic, 1996a, “Assessment of Hydrologic Transport of 

Radionuclides from the Rulison Underground Nuclear Test Site, Colorado,” Report 

DOE/NV/11508-17, Desert Research Institute, Las Vegas, NV.

Earman, S., J. Chapman, K. Pohlmann, and R. Andricevic, 1996b, “Assessment of Hydrologic 

Transport of Radionuclides from the Gnome Underground Nuclear Test Site, New Mexico,” 

Report DOE/NV/11508-11, Desert Research Institute, Las Vegas, NV.

EG&G/EM (EG&G Energy Measurements), 1994, “The Northern Boundary of the Desert

Tortoise Range on the Nevada Test Site,” U.S. Department of Energy Topical Report EGG

111265-1103, 20pp.

Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), 1986, Title III of SARA.

Executive Order (EO) 11988, 1977, “Floodplain Management,” amended by EO 12148, 1979.

Executive Order 11990, 1977,. “Protection of Wetlands,” May 24, 1977.

Executive Order 12856, 1993, “Federal Compliance with Right-to-Know Laws and Pollution 

Prevention Requirements,” August 3, 1993.
References, cont.

R-3

Faller, S.D., 1997, “Amchitka, Alaska, Special Sampling Project 1997: Final Report,” 3 vol.,

Radiation & Indoor Environments National Laboratory, U.S, Environmental Protection Agency,

Report No. EPA-402-R-98-002, Las Vegas, NV.

Federal Facilities Compliance Act, 1992, Public Law No. 102-386, 106 Statutes 1505.

Federal Facilities Agreement and Consent Order (FFACO), 1996, An FFACO among the state of

Nevada, the U.S. Department of Energy, and the U.S. Department of Defense, May 1996.

Hansen, D. J., P. D. Greger, C. A. Wills, and W. Kent Ostler, 1997, “Nevada Test Site Wetlands 

Assessment,” DOE/NV/11718-124, Bechtel Nevada, Inc., Las Vegas, Nevada.

Holz, B.A. and C.M. Beck, “A Class III Cultural Resources Reconnaissance of the Proposed

Launch Site for the Kistler Project in Areas 18 and 19, Nevada Test Site, Nye County,

Nevada,” Desert Research Institute, Quaternary Sciences Center, Short Report No.

SR042297-1, Las Vegas, NV.

International Commission on Radiological Protection, 1975, “Report of the Task Group on

Standard Man,” ICRP Publication 23, Pergamon Press, New York.

International Commission on Radiological Protection, 1979, “Limits for Intake by Workers,” 

ICRP Publication 30, Supplement to Part 1, Pergamon Press, New York.

International Commission on Radiological Protection, 1985, Insert to “Quantitative Bases for 

Developing an Index of Harm,” ICRP Publication 45, Pergamon Press, New York.

IT Corporation, 1997, “BULLION Forced Gradient Experiment: Implementation Plan,” 

International Technology Corp. Report ITLV/10972-195, Las Vegas, NV.

Johns, F. B., P. B. Hahn, D. J. Thome’, and E. W. Brethauer, 1979, “Radiochemical and 

Analytical Procedures for Analysis of Environmental Samples,” Report EMSL-LV-0539-17,

Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, U.S. EPA, Las Vegas, NV.

Jones, R. and H. Drollinger, 1997, “Phase 2 of a Cultural Resources Reconnaissance of the

Fortymile Canyon Archaeological Rock Art and Site Research Area, Area 18 and 30, Nevada

Test Site, Nye County, Nevada,” Desert Research Institute, Quaternary Sciences Center,

Short Report No. SR111296-1, Las Vegas, NV.

Kenneally, J. M., 1996, “Isotopic Characteristics of Groundwater Beneath Yucca Flat, Nevada, 

and Inferences about Groundwater Sources and Flow,” Master of Science Thesis, University 

of California, Berkeley, CA.

Laczniak, R. J., J. C. Cole, D. A. Sawyer, and D. A. Trudeau, 1996, “Summary of Hydrogeologic 

Controls on Ground-Water Flow at the Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada,” Water 

Resources Investigation Report 96-4109, U.S. Geological Survey, Carson City, NV.

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 1997, “Final Isotopic Analysis: Monitoring Well U-3cn,”

Isotopic Sciences Div., LLNL, Livermore, CA. Letter of Accomplishment, June 11, 1997.

Los Alamos National Laboratory, 1998, “Laboratory and Field Studies Related to Radionuclide

Migration at the Nevada Test Site. October 1, 1996 - Septermber 30, 1997,” J.L. Thompson,

Editor, LANL Report LA-13419-PA, Los Alamos, NM.
References, cont.

R-4

McCarty, J. and H. Drollinger, 1997, “A Class III Cultural Resources Reconnaissance of Fourteen

Proposed Shallow Borehole Locations for Tracer Studies, Areas 18, 19, 20 and 30, Nevada

Test Site, Nye County, Nevada,” Desert Research Institute, Quaternary Sciences Center,

Short Report No. SR040397-1, Las Vegas, NV.

National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement, 1975, “Krypton-85 in the 

Atmosphere,” NCRP Report No. 44, Washington D.C.

Nevada Administrative Code 445A-890, “Public Water Systems.”

Nevada Administrative Code 618.760-805, “Abatement of Asbestos.”

Nevada Revised Statutes, “Public Health and Safety/Water Pollution Control,” Title 40,

Chapter 445A, and Nevada Administrative Code 445A.247.

Nevada Revised Statutes, “Public Health and Safety/Disposal of Hazardous Waste,”

Title 40, Chapter 459, and Nevada Administrative Code 444.8632.

Nevada Revised Statutes, “Regulation of Highly Hazardous Substances”, 459.380 et seq. And 

Nevada Administrative Code 459.952 et seq.

Nevada Test Site, 1997, Annual Update for the Nevada Test Site Site Treatment Plan, Waste 

Management Division, Nevada Operations Office, DOE.

Nevada Test Site, 1996, Waste Acceptance Criteria, Report NTSWAC (Rev. 0), Waste 

Management Division, Nevada Operations Office, DOE.

O'Farrell, T. P. and L. A. Emery, 1976, “Ecology of the Nevada Test Site: A Narrative Summary 

and Annotated Bibliography,” Report NVO-167, Desert Research Institute, University of

Nevada, Las Vegas, NV.

Pohll, G. and K. Pohlmann, 1996, “Evaluation of the Radionuclide Tracer Test Conducted at the 

Project Gnome Underground Nuclear Test Site, New Mexico,” Report DOE/NV/11508-08,

Desert Research Institute, Las Vegas, NV.

Quiring, R. E., 1968, “Climatological Data, Nevada Test Site, Nuclear Rocket Development 

Station,” ESSA Research Laboratory Report ERLTM-ARL-7, Las Vegas, NV.

Resource Recovery and Conservation Act (RCRA), 1976, as amended, 42 U.S. Code 6901

et seq.

Rose, T.P., J.M. Kenneally, D.K. Smith, M.L. Davisson, G.B. Hudson, and J.H. Rego, 1997,

“Chemical and Isotopic Data for Groundwater in Southern Nevada,” UCRL-ID-128000,

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA.

Russell, C. E., 1990, “Assessment of the Nevada Test Site Monitoring Well System,” Report 

DOE/NV/10384-31, Water Resources Center, Desert Research Institute, University of

Nevada, Las Vegas, NV.

Scoggins, W. A., 1983, “Environmental Surveillance Report for the Nevada Test Site, January 

1982 through December 1982,” DOE/NVO-410-76, Reynolds Electrical & Engineering Co.,

Inc., Las Vegas, NV.
References, cont.

R-5

Scoggins, W. A., 1984, “Environmental Surveillance Report for the Nevada Test Site, January 

1983 through December 1983,” DOE/NVO-10327-4, Reynolds Electrical & Engineering Co.,

Inc., Las Vegas, NV.

Seaber, P.A., E.D. Stowers and R.H. Pearl, 1997, “Bibliography of Reports on Studies of the

Geology, Hydrogeology, and Hydrology at the Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada, from

1951 to 1996,” Publication 45156, Desert Research Institute, University and Community

College System of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV.

Shott, G.J., L.E. Barker, S.E. Rawlinson, and M.J. Sullt, 1997a, “Performance Assessment for

the Area 5 Radioactive Waste Management Site at the Nevada Test Site, Nye County,

Nevada,” Rev. 2.1, Bechtel Nevada, Las Vegas, NV.

Shott, G.J., V. Yucel, M.J. Sully, L.E. Barker, S.E. Rawlinson, and B.A. Moore, 1997b,

“Performance Assessment/Composite nalysis for the Area 3 Radioactive Waste Management

Site at the Nevada Test Site, Nye County, Nevada,” Rev. 2.0, Report DOE/NV-491, Bechtel

Nevada, Las Vegas, NV.

Smith, D.K., S.B. Kersting, J.M. Keneally, T.P. Rose, G.B. Hudson and G.F., 1998, “Radionuclide

Migration Studies: FY 1997, Progress Report, UCRL-ID-126886, Lawrence Livermore National

Laboratory, Livermore, CA.

Stanley, T. W. and S. S. Verner, 1985, “The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Quality 

Assurance Program,” in J. K. Taylor and T. W. Stanley (eds.), Quality Assurance for

Environmental Measurements, ASTM STP-867, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Steen, D. C., D. B. Hall, P. D. Greger, and C. A. Wills, 1997, “Distribution of the Chuckwalla,

Western Burrowing Owl, and Six Bat Species on the Nevada Test Site,” DOE/NV/11718-149,

Bechtel Nevada, Inc., Las Vegas, Nevada.

Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA), 1986, 42 U.S. Code 11001 - 11050.

Taylor, J. K., 1987, “Quality Assurance of Chemical Measurements,” Chapter 4, Lewis 

Publications.

Thompson, J. L., 1997, “Laboratory and Field Studies Related to the Hydrologic Resources 

Management Program, October 1, 1995 - September 30, 1996,” Report LA-13270-PR, Los

Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM.

Thompson, J.L., A.B. Kersting, and D.L. Finnegan, 1997, “Plutonium in Groundwater at the NTS:

Observations at ER-20-5,:” Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM.

Thordarson, W., 1965, “Perched Ground Water in Zeolitized Bedded Tuff, Rainier Mesa and 

Vicinity, Nevada Test Site,” U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report TEI-862.

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1964, “Project Manager’s Report, Project SHOAL,” Report 

NVO-11, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1965, “Project GNOME - the Environment Created by a 

Nuclear Explosion in Salt,” Report PNE-107F, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1966, "Report of the AEC Deputy Test Manager: Project 

LONG SHOT," Report NVO-26, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV.
References, cont.

R-6

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1970, "Physical and Biological Effects: MILROW Event," 

Report NVO-79, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1972, "Draft Environmental Statement: Rio Blanco Gas 

Stimulation Project," Report WASH-1519, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1973a, "Long Term Surveillance Plan, Central Nevada Test 

Area," Report NVO-90, Appendix 2, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, 1973b, "Physical and Biological Effects: CANNIKIN Event," 

Report NVO-123, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Department of Commerce, 1990, “Population Count Pursuant to Public Law 94-171,”

Bureau of Census, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1978, "Special Study, Tatum Dome Test Site, Lamar County, 

Mississippi, Final Report," Report NVO-200, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1984, "Long-Term Hydrologic Monitoring Program, RULISON Event Site, 

Grand Valley, Colorado," Report NVO-273, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1986, "Long-Term Hydrologic Monitoring Program, Project GASBUGGY, 

Rio Arriba County, New Mexico," Report NVO-277, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1988, “Radioactive Waste Management,” DOE Order 5820.2A.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1990a, “Occurrence Reporting and Processing of Operations 

Information,” DOE Order 5000.3B.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1990b, “General Environmental Protection Program,” DOE Order 

5400.1.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1990c, “Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment,” 

DOE Order 5400.5.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1990d, “Environmental Protection, Safety, and Health Protection 

Program for DOE Operations,” DOE Order 5480.1B.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1990e, “Radiation Protection for Occupational Workers,” DOE 

Order 5480.11.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1990f, “Environmental Protection, Safety, and Health Protection 

Information Reporting Requirements,” DOE Order 5484.1.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1990g, “Site Specific Plan for Environmental Restoration and 

Waste Management,” Report DOE/NV-336, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1991a, “Quality Assurance,” DOE Order 5700.6C.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1991b, “General Design Criteria Manual,” DOE Order 6430.1A.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1991c, “Environmental Monitoring Plan, Nevada Test Site and 

Support Facilities,” Report DOE/NV/10630-28, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV.
References, cont.

R-7

U.S. Department of Energy, 1991d, “Environmental Regulatory Guide for Radiological Effluent 

Monitoring and Environmental Surveillance,” Report DOE/EH-0173T, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1994a, “United States Nuclear Tests: July 1945 through September 

1992,” Report DOE/NV-209 (Revision 14), Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1994b, “Site Characterization and Monitoring Data from Area 5 

Pilot Wells, Nye County, Nevada,” DOE/NV/11432-74, Reynolds Electrical & Engineering Co.,

Inc., Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1996a, “Nevada Test Site Site Treatment Plan,” Report 

DOE/NV-397, Rev. 2, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1996b, “Shaft and Tunnel Nuclear Detonations at the Nevada Test 

Site: Development of a Primary Database for Estimation of Potential Interactions with the

Regional Groundwater System,” Report DOE/NV-464, Nevada Operations Office,

Las Vegas, NV. 

U.S. Department of Energy, 1996c, “Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Nevada Test 

Site and Off-Site Locations in the State of Nevada,” Report DOE/EIS-0243, Nevada

Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1996d, “Underground Test Area Subproject Waste Management 

Plan,” Report DOE/NV-343, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1997a, “Nevada Operations Office Annual Site Environmental

Report - 1996,” DOE/NV/11718-137, Bechtel Nevada, Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1997b, “Environmental Data Report for the Nevada Test Site - 

1996,” DOE/NV/11718-138, Bechtel Nevada, Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1997c, “Completion Report for Well Cluster ER-20-5,” Report 

DOE/NV-466, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1997d, “Siting Criteria for Protection of Groundwater at the Nevada 

Test Site,” Nevada Operations Office, Procedural Instruction NV PI 97-001.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1997e, “Work Acceptance Process,” Nevada Operations Office, 

Procedural Instruction NV PI 97-005.

U.S. Department of Energy, 1998, “Completion Report for Well Cluster ER-20-6, “ Report 

DOE/NV-467, Nevada Operations Office, Las Vegas, NV.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1976, “Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution 

Measurement Systems,” Report EPA/600/9-76/005, Office of Research and Development,

Research Triangle Park, NC.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1983, “Interim Guidelines and Specifications for 

Preparing Quality Assurance Project Plans - QAMS-005/80,” Office of Research and

Development, Report EPA/600/4-83/004, Washington, D.C.
References, cont.

R-8

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986, “RCRA Groundwater Monitoring Technical 

Enforcement Guidance Document,” Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Report

No. OSWER-9950.1, 208pp.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1987, “Quality Assurance Program Plan,” EPA/600/X87/241, Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory, P.O. Box 93478, Las Vegas, NV

89193-3478.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1988, “Limiting Values of Radionuclide Intake and Air 

Concentration and Dose Conversion Factors for Inhalation, Ingestion, and Submersion,”

Federal Guidance Report No. 11, EPA/520/1-88/020, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1992, “User's Guide for CAP88-PC, Version 1.0,” 

Office of Radiation Programs, Las Vegas Facility, Report 402-B-92-001.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1996, “Quality Management Plan ,” Report EPA/600/X96-024, Office of Radiation and Indoor Air, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1991, “NRC TLD Direct Radiation Monitoring Network 

Progress Report, October to December, 1991,” NUREG-0873, 11: No. 4, U.S. Nuclear

Regulatory Commission, Region 1, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.

U.S. Public Health Service, 1963, “Project SEDAN, Final Off-Site Report,” Off-Site Radiological 

Safety Organization, AEC Report PNE-200F, Las Vegas, NV

U.S. Public Health Service, 1966, “Final Report of Off-Site Surveillance for the SALMON Event of

Project DRIBBLE,” Report VUF-1021, Southwestern Radiological Health Laboratory, Las 

Vegas, NV.

White, G.C., D.R. Anderson, K.P. Burnham and D.L. Otis, 1982, “A Capture-Recapture and 

Removal Methods for Sampling Closed Populations,” Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los

Alamos, New Mexico, Report LA-8787-NERP.

Winograd, I. J. and W. Thordarson, 1975, “Hydrogeologic and Hydrochemical Framework, 

South-Central Great Basin, Nevada-California, with Special Reference to the Nevada Test

Site,” U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 712-c, U.S. Government Printing Office,

Washington, D.C. 
D-1

DISTRIBUTION LIST

DOE/HQ

Assistant Secretary for Defense Programs (DP-1 FORS), U.S. Department of Energy, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585

Assistant Secretary for Environment, Safety, and Health (EH-1 FORS), U.S. Department of 

Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585 (10)

Assistant Secretary for Environmental Management (EM-1 FORS), U.S. Department of Energy, 

1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585

Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Military Application (DP-2 FORS), U.S. Department of 

Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Research and Development (DP-10 FORS), U.S. Department 

 of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585

Deputy Assistant Secretary for Planning, Policy, & Budget (EM-20 FORS), U.S. 

Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, MD 20585 (3)

Deputy Assistant Secretary, for Program Support (DP-40 GTN), U.S. Department of Energy, 19901 

Germantown Road, Germantown, MD 20545 (3)

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Waste Management (EM-30 FORS), U.S. Department of 

Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585

Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Environmental Restoration (EM-40 FORS), U.S. 

Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585

Director, Office of RD&T Facilities (DP-13 GTN), U.S. Department of Energy, 19901 Germantown 

Road, Germantown, MD 20545

Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary, Office of Technical and Environmental Support (DP-45 GTN),

U.S. Department of Energy, 19901 Germantown Road, Germantown, MD 20545 (2)

Director, Office of ES&H Residents (EH-24) 270, U.S. Department of Energy, 20300 Centrury Blvd, 

Germantown, MD 20874 (10)

Director, Office of Energy Research (ER-1 FORS), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585

Associate Director, Office of Health and Environmental Research (ER-70 GTN), U.S. 

Department of Energy, 19901 Germantown Road, Germantown, MD 20545

Director, Office of Field Management (FM-1 FORS), U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 

Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585

Director, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (RW-1 FORS), U.S. Department of 

Energy, 1000 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, D.C. 20585
Distribution, cont.

D-2

DOE/NV

Manager, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department of Energy, P. O. Box 98518,

Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, M/S 505

Assistant Manager for Technical Services, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department

of Energy, P. O. Box 98518, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, M/S 505

Assistant Manager for National Security, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department

of Energy, P. O. Box 98518, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, M/S 505

Assistant Manager for Environmental Management, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department

of Energy, P. O. Box 98518, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, M/S 505

Assistant Manager for Business & Financial Services, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department

of Energy, P. O. Box 98518, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, M/S 505

Director, Office of Public Affairs and Information, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department of 

Energy, P. O. Box 98518, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, M/S 505 (2)

Director, Waste Management Division, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department of 

Energy, P. O. Box 98518, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, M/S 505

Deputy Assistant Manager for Technical Services, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department

of Energy, P. O. Box 98518, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, M/S 505

Director, Environment, Safety and Health Division, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department of 

Energy P. O. Box 98518, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, M/S 505

Director, Resources Management Division, Nevada Operations Office, Nevada Operations Office,

U.S. Department of Energy, P. O. Box 98518, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, M/S 505

N. George McNeill, Environment, Safety and Health Division, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. 

Department of Energy, P. O. Box 98518, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, M/S 505

Director, Technology Development Division, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department of Energy, 

P. O. Box 98518, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, M/S 505

Technical Information Resource Center, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department of Energy, 

P. O. Box 98518, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, M/S 505

Public Reading Facility, Nevada Operations Office, U.S. Department of Energy, 

P. O. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8521, NLV040

EPA

Assistant Administrator for Radiation and Indoor Air, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

401 M Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20460

Director, Criteria and Standards (ANR-460 ORP), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 

M Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20460
Distribution, cont.

D-3

Director, Analysis & Support Division (ANR-461 ORP), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

401 M Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20460

Director, Air & Toxic Division, Region IX, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

75 Hawthorne Street, San Francisco, CA 94103

Regional Radiation Representative, Region VIII, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,

999 18th Street Suite 500, Denver, CO 80202

Regional Radiation Representative, Region VI, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, First 

Interstate Bank Tower Suite 1200, 1445 Ross Avenue, Dallas, TX 75202

Regional Radiation Representative, Region X, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

1200 6th Avenue, Seattle, WA 98101

Regional Radiation Representative, Region VII, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 726 

Minnesota Avenue, Kansas City, KS 66101

Director, Radiation & Indoor Environments National Laboratory (R&IE), U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, P. O. Box 98517, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8517, M/S 513

Deputy Director, Radiation & Indoor Environments National Laboratory, U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency, P. O. Box 98517, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8517, M/S 513

Director, Center for Environmental Restoration, Monitoring and Emergency Response, R&IE-LV,

 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, P. O. Box 98517, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8517, M/S 513

Anita A. Mullen, Center for Environmental Restoration, Monitoring, and Emergency Response, 

R&IE-LV, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, P. O. Box 98517, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8517,

M/S 513 

Angela Haag, Center for Environmental Restoration, Monitoring and Emergency Response, 

R&IE-LV, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, P. O. Box 98517, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8517,

M/S 513 

Departments of Environment and Health

Radiological Health Section, Bureau of Health Protection Services, 505 E. King Street

Room 203, Carson City, NV 89710

Al Tinney, Bureau of Health Protection Services, 620 Belrose Street, Las Vegas, NV

89158-5242

Paul Liebendorfer, Nevada Division of Environmental Protection, Capitol Complex, 

333 W. Nye Lane, Carson City, NV 89706-0866

Clem Goewert, NDEP, 555 E. Washington Ave., Suite 4300, Las Vegas, NV 89101-1049

Clinton Case, NDEP, Capitol Complex, 333 W. Nye Lane, Carson City, NV 89706-0866

Charles Bubak, NDEP, 555 E. Washington Ave., Suite 4300, Las Vegas, NV 89101-1049
Distribution, cont.

D-4

Larry Franks, Radiological Health Section, NDEP, 620 Belrose Street, Las Vegas, NV

89158-5242

Director, Environmental Improvement Division, Department of Health and Environment, 1190 

Saint Francis Drive, Santa Fe, NM 87503

Director, Radiation and Hazardous Waste Control Division, Department of Health, 4210 E. 

11th Avenue, Denver, CO 80220

Director, Bureau of Radiation and Occupational Health, 288 N. 1460 West, P. O. Box 

16690, Salt Lake City, UT 84116-0690

Director, Division of Air Quality, State Department of Health, 150 N. 1950 West, Salt Lake 

City, UT 84116

Director, Health Department, 88 E. Fiddlers Canyon, Suite 8, Cedar City, UT 84720

Chief, Department of Health and Social Services, Radiological Health Program, 

P. O. Box H-02, Juneau, AK 99811

Public Health Physicist, Radiological Health Section, Orange County Health Care Agency,

P. O. Box 355, Santa Ana, CA 92705

Director, Department of Health Services, Occupational Health and Radiation Management,

2615 S. Grand Avenue, Room 608, Los Angeles, CA 90007

Director, Santa Barbara Health Care Services, 315 Camino Del Remedio,

 Santa Barbara, CA 93110

Director, Division of Radiological Health, State Board of Health, P. O. Box 1700,

Jackson, MS 39215-1700

Director, Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency, 4814 S. 40th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85040 

ANL

N.W. Golchert, Manager, Environmental Protection, Argonne National Laboratory,

9700 S. Cass Avenue, Argonne, IL 60439

LANL

C. F. Eberhart, M/S F670, Los Alamos National Laboratory, P. O. Box 1663,

 Los Alamos, NM 87545 (2)

C. F. Costa, Los Alamos National Laboratory, P. O. Box 0, Mercury, NV 89023, M/S 900

Julie A. Carpenter, Los Alamos National Laboratory, P. O. Box 0, Mercury, NV 89023,

M/S NTS967

LLNL

Resident Manager, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P. O. Box 45,

Mercury, NV 89023, M/S 777
Distribution, cont.

D-5

J. M. Haeberlin, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P. O. Box 45, 

Mercury, NV 89023, M/S 777

J. Shinn, Environmental Science Division L-453, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 

P. O. Box 808, Livermore, CA 94551

J. Fischer, Chemistry and Materials Division L-311, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory,

P. O. Box 808, Livermore, CA 94551

Jim Kercher, Health and Ecological Assessment Division, L-524, Lawrence Livermore National

Laboratory, P. O. Box 808, Livermore, CA 94551

Lynn Anspaugh, Risk Sciences Center, L-453, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P. O. Box 

808, Livermore, CA 94551

Bob Schock, Energy Program L-641, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P. O. Box 808, 

Livermore, CA 94551

David Smith, L-231, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P. O. Box 808, 

Livermore, CA 94551

SNL

Resident Manager, Sandia National Laboratories, P. O. Box 238, Mercury, NV 89023,

M/S NTS944

James H. Metcalf, Sandia National Laboratories, P. O. Box 238, Mercury, NV 89023,

M/S NTS944

Roger Smith, Sandia National Laboratories, P. O. Box 871, Tonopah, NV 89023

DTRA

David A. Bedsun, Defense Threat Reduction Agency, P. O. Box 98539, 

Las Vegas, NV 89193-8518, M/S 573

Battelle

R. O. Gilbert, Sigma 3, Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratory, P. O. Box 999, 

Richland, WA 99352

Manager, Environmental Restoration and Waste Management, Pacific Northwest Laboratories, 

P. O. Box 999, Richland, WA 99352

DRI

Colleen M. Beck, Desert Research Institute, 755 E. Flamingo Road, Las Vegas, NV 89120, 

M/S 505

Roger L. Jacobson, Desert Research Institute, 755 E. Flamingo Road, Las Vegas, NV 89120,

M/S 505 (3)
Distribution, cont.

D-6

IT

Mary L. Brown, International Technology Corporation, P. O. Box 93838, Las Vegas, NV 

89193-3838, M/S NLV439

Barbara Hampton, International Technology Corporation, P. O. Box 93838, Las Vegas, NV 

89193-3838, M/S NLV439

Cathy Baker, International Technology Corporation, P. O. Box 93838, Las Vegas, NV 

89193-3838, M/S NLV439

BN

Manager, Bechtel Nevada, P. O. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 89193-8521, M/S NLV001

Manager, Environmental Management, Bechtel Nevada, P. O. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV

89193-8521, M/S NLV102 (2) 

Manager, Waste Management Program, Bechtel Nevada, P. O. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 

89193-8521, M/S NLV080

Brian Dozier, Environmental Management, Bechtel Nevada, P. O. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 

89193-8521, M/S NLV022 (2) 

Martha E. DeMarre, Coordination and Information Center, Bechtel Nevada, P. O. Box 98521, 

Las Vegas, NV 89193-8521, M/S NLV040

Robert F. Grossman, Environmental Management, Bechtel Nevada, P. O. Box 98521, 

Las Vegas, NV 89193-8521, M/S NTS279 

O. L. Haworth, Environmental Management, Bechtel Nevada, P. O. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 

89193-8521, M/S NTS110

R. R. Kinnison, Environmental Management, Bechtel Nevada, P. O. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 

89193-8521, M/S NLV082

J. W. Kesler, Environmental Compliance Office, Bechtel Nevada, P. O. Box 98521,

Las Vegas, NV 89193-8521, M/S NLV042

D. Linkenheil, Waste Management Program, Bechtel Nevada, P. O. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 

89193-8521, M/S NLV080

D. A. Nichols, Defense and Civil Projects, Bechtel Nevada, P. O. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 

89193-8521, M/S NLV103

T. Van Sittert, Environmental Management, Bechtel Nevada, P. O. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 

89193-8521, M/S NLV081

C. A. Wills, Environmental Management, Bechtel Nevada, P. O. Box 98521, Las Vegas, NV 

89193-8521, M/S NLV081
Distribution, cont.

D-7

Miscellaneous

E. W. Chew, U.S. Department of Energy, 785 Doe Place, Idaho Falls, ID 83402, M/S 4149

Environmental Protection Department, Mason and Hanger, Silas-Mason Co., Inc., Pantex

Plant, P. O. Box 30020, Amarillo, TX 79177

Jeff Tappan, Westinghouse Corporation, 101 Convention Center Drive, Las Vegas, NV 89109

Office of Scientific and Technical Information, Technical Center, U.S. Department of Energy,

P. O. Box 62, Oak Ridge, TN 37831 (2)

UNLV Library Government Documents, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, P. O. Box 457013, 

Las Vegas, NV 89154-7013

UNR Getchell Library, University of Nevada-Reno, Reno, NV 89557-0044

E. A. Hopper UDAF/EV, 4551 Devlin Drive, Nellis AFB, NV 89191-6828

Ann-Marie Choephel, Nuclear Waste Repository Project Office, P. O. Box 1767, 

Tonopah, NV 89049

Steve Deandi, Western Governmental Association, 223 Old P. O. Road, 

Boulder, CO 80302

Doris Shirky, Community Library, 2101 E Calvada Boulevard Pahrump NV 89048-5806

Michelle Delee, Amargosa Valley Community Library, Star Route 15 401-T, 

 Amargosa Valley NV 89020

Diane Watson, Waste Policy Institute, Savannah River Research Campus, 227 Gateway Drive,

 Aiken SC 29803

Doran O’Donald, University of Cincinnati, Department of Communication, 620 Teachers College,

 Cincinnati OH 45221-0184

J W Fischer (L-311), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, P. O. Box 808, Livermore CA 94551