Chapter 4—Monitoring Accidental Radianon Releases @ 6]

larly from the ingestion of contaminated milk.? The

whole-body dose is the main concern. However,
deposition of radioactive materia] on pastures can
lead to concentration in milk obtained from cows
that graze on those pastures. The infant thyroid doses
from drinking milk from family cows is also

assessed.*

The Department of Energy's criteria for conduct-

ing a test are:

Fortests at the Nevada Test Site. when considering the event-day weather conditions and the specific
event characteristics, calculations should be made
using the most appropriate hypothetical release
models which estimate the off-site exposures that
could result from the most probable release scenario.
Should such estimatesindicate that off-site populations, in areas where remedial actions to reduce
whole-body exposuresare not feasible, could receive
average whole-body dose in excess of 0.17 R/year
(170 mR/fyear), the event shall be postponed until
more favorable conditions prevail. In addition,

recommendedremedial actions, and where remedial

actions against uptake of radionuclides in the food
chain are practicable.

The controllable area is the zone within approximately 125 miles of the test control point (see figure

4-2) for which EPA judges thatits remedial actions

would be effective. Within this area, EPA has the
capability to track any release and perform remedial
actions to reduce exposure, including sheltering or
evacuation of all personnel (as needed); controlling

access to the area; controlling livestock feeding
practices, i.e., providing feed rather than allowing

grazing; replacing milk; and controlling food and

water.

In the case of the controllable area, a test may be
conducted if the fallout estimate implies that individuals in the area would not receive whole-body

doses in excess of 0.5 R/year and thyroid dosesof 1.5

R/year. If winds measured by the weather service

if the estimate of the fallout from an accidental

indicate that the cloud of radioactive debris produced by the assumed venting would drift over
controllable areas, such as to the north, the test is
permitted when EPA’s mobile monitors are in the
downwind areas at populated places. EPA must be
ready to measure exposure andto assist in moving
people under coveror evacuating them.if necessary,
to keep their exposures below allowable levels.

0.17 R/year in areas that are uncontrollable, i.e.,

AS a consequence of the geometry ofthe controllable area, tests are generally not conducted if winds

events may proceed only where remedial! actions

against uptake of radionuclides in the food chain are
practicable and/or indications are that average thytoid doses to the population will not exceed 0.5

R/year (500 mR/year).5

Thesecriteria mean that a test can only take place

release of radioactivity would not be greater than

where ‘‘remedial actions to reduce whole-body

exposures are not feasible.”’ Thus, tests are not
conducted when the wind is blowing in the general
direction of populated areas considered to be uncontrollable, except under persistent light wind conditions that would limit the significant fallout to the
immediate vicinity of the NTS. Areas considered to
be uncontrollable by EPA are shownin figure 4-2.
The EPA and DOEhavealso defined a controllable area (figure 4-2), within which remedial actions
are considered feasible. Criteria for the controllable
area, as defined by the DOEare:
... those areas where trained rad-safe monitors are
available, where communications are effective (where
the exposure of each individual can be documented),

where people can be expected to comply with

aloft blow toward Las Vegas or towards other nearby

populated locations. In addition, the test will not be
conducted if there is less than 3 hours of daylight
remaining to track the cloud.
Prior to conducting test, detailed fallout projections are made by the weather service for the
condition of ‘‘the unlikely event of a prompt
massive venting.’’ Predictions are made of the
projected fallout pattern and the maximum radiation
exposures that might occur. An example of such a
prediction is shown in figure 4-3. The center line is
the predicted path of maximum fallout deposition
for a prompt venting, marked with estimated arrival
times (in hours) at various distances. Lines to either
side indicate the width of the fallout area. The two
dashed lines indicate the 500 mR/year area and the

3See ‘Offsite Remedial Action Capability for Underground Nuclear Weapons Test Accidents,’’ U.S. Environmental Protecuon Agency.

Environmental Monitonng Systems Laboratory—Las Vegas, NV, October 1988.

4In the case of an accident, however, the actual dose would be munumized because the milk would be replaced as much as possible.
SSee ‘Offsite Remedial Action Capability for Underground Nuclear Weapons Test Accidents,’ U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
Environmental Monitoring Systems Laboratory—Las Vegas, NV, October 1988.

Select target paragraph3