JAFP-84-0338, Radiological Environ Surveillance Rept,1983
| ML20083L867 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1983 |
| From: | Corbin McNeil POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK |
| To: | Murley T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| References | |
| JAFP-84-0338, JAFP-84-338, NUDOCS 8404170386 | |
| Download: ML20083L867 (173) | |
Text
-
1983 ,
RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL
- SURVEILLANCE REPORT i JANUARY 1,1983 through DECEMBER 31,1983 a
~
!@ fl; lW [I I
lii lili , ll i u ,
7 g. , ,3 ,,
_ ; ' , 1 I y ll 'l ll khiE d [ L M #W n g Illi o il jii, iii JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT OPERATING LICENSE NO. DPR- 59 DOCKET NO. 50- 333 NEW YORK POWER AUTHORITY kbYo!
I
(
(
(
NEW YORK POWER AUTHORITY ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT PART B: RADIOLOGICAL REPORT JANUARY 1,1983 - DECEMBER 31, 1983 JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-59 DOCKET NUMBER 50-333 i
_ _ - - . _ - _ _ _ _ . - _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ . __._____-_>-.._.__---._--.x ----__ - - . _ - - - x --__
L TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION 1 Introduction 1 Program Objectives 2 II. PROGRAB1 IMPLEMENTATION AND DESIGN 3 l Sample Methodology 4 Analysis Performed 8 Changes in Program 9 III. SAMPLE SUMMARIES 12 l
IV. ANALYTICAL RESULTS 30 V. DATA SUMMARIES AND CONCLUSIONS 62 Lake Program 64 Terrestrial Program 80 Conclusion 103 Exceptions to the Program 104 References 106 VI. HISTORICAL DATA 107 VII. FIGURES AND MAPS 135 i
___m.-_ _ _ ____.m__ __-_ _ _.__.m _a _
LIST OF TABLES Page Table I Required Sample Collection and Analysis (Lake Program) 10 Table II Required Sample Collection and Analysis j (Land Program) 11 Table 1 Periphyton Results 31 Table 2 Bottom Sediment Results 32 Table 3 Mollusk Results 33 Table 4 GAP 151ARUS Results 34 Table 5 Fish Results 35 Table 6 Water Composite Results, Gross Beta 36 Table 7 Water Composite Results, Tritium, Sr-89, Sr-90 37 Table 8 Water Composite Results, Gamma Isotopic 38 Table 9, 10 Particulate Filter Results,. Gross Beta 40, 41 Table 11 Particulate Composite Results, Gamma Isotopic 42 Table 12, 13 Airborne I-131 Results 44,.45 Table 14 TLD Results ,
46 Table 15 Radiation hionitor Readings 48 Table 16 Milk Results, I-131 52 Table 17 Blilk Results, Gamma Isotopic 53 Table 18 5111k Results, Sr-90 55 Table 19 Milch Animal Census Results 56 Table 20 Food Product Results, Gamma Isotopic 58 Table 21 Soil Results, Gamma Isotopic, Sr-90 61 11 l
LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1 Offsite Environmental Stations and TLD Locations 136 Figure 2 Offsite Radiological Monitoring Stations
( 138 Figure 3 Onsite Environmental Stations and TLD Locations 139 Figure 4 Produce, Meats, Poultry and Eggs Sample Locations 140 Figure 5 Milch Animal Census Locations 141 Figure 6 New York State Regional Map 142 Figure 7 Bottom Sediment Description 143 Figure 8 Graph - Periphyton (Co-60) 144 Figure 9 Graph - Periphyton (Cs-137) 145 Figure 10 Graph - Periphyton (Ce-144) 146 Figure 11 Graph - Mollusk (Co-60) 147 Figure 12 Graph - Mollusk (Mn-54) 148 l
Figure 13 Graph - Pfallusk (Sr-90) 149 Figure 14 Graph - Bottom Sediment (Co-60) 150 Figure 15 Graph - Bottom Sediment (Cs-137) 151 Figure 16 Graph - Fish (Cs-137) 152 Figure 17 Graph - Fish (Sr-90) 153 Figure 18 Graph - Lake Water Gross Beta 154 Figure 19 Graph - Lake Water Gross Beta for 1983 155 Figure 20 Graph - Air Particulate Gross Beta 156 Figure 21 Graph - Air Particulate Gross Beta, Weeks 1-26 (1983) 157 Figure 22 Graph - Air Particulate Gross Beta, Weeks 27-52 (1983) l 158 Figure 23 Graph - Air Particulate Composite (Co-60) for 1983 159 ill
l lage Figure 24 Graph - Air Particulate Composite (Co-60) 160 Figure 25 Graph - Air Particulate Composite (Cs-137) for 1983 161 Figure 26 Graph - Air Particulate Composite (Cs-137) 162 Figure 27 Graph - Milk (Cs-137) 163 Figure 28 Graph - Milk (Cs-137), Stations 40,16, 4, 45 for 1983 164 Figure 29 Graph - Milk (Cs-137), Stations 40, 5, 7, 50, 55 for 1983 165 Figure 30 Graph - Milk (I-131) 166 Figure 31 Graph - Milk (Sr-90) 167 IV 1
I
/
INTRODUCTION S
9 0
l I-A INTRODUCTION The New York Power Authority (NYPA) is the owner and licensee of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAFNPP) which is located on the eastern portion of the Nine P!ile Point promontory approximately one-half mile due east of the Niagara flohawk Power Corporation (NMPC) Nine Mile Point Nuclear Power Station (NMPNPS). The NMPNPS Unit #1 is located on the western portion of the site and is a boiling water reactor with a design capacity of 620 MWe. The NMPNPS has been in commercial operation since the fall of 1969. Located between the JAFNPP and NPIPNPS, Nine Mile Point Unit #2 is under construction. NMPNPS Unit #2 will have generation capac-ity of 1,100 MWe and is expected to be completed in 1986. The JAFNPP is a boiling water reactor with a power output of 810 MWe (net). Initial fuel loading of the reactor core was completed in November of 1974. Initial criticality was achieved in late November, 1974 and commercial operation began in July of 1975.
The site is located on the southern shore of Lake Ontario in Oswego County, New York, approximately seven miles northeast of the city of Oswego, New York. Syracuse, New York is the largest metropolitan center
! in the area and is located 40 miles to the south of the site. The area con-sists of partially wooded land and shoreline. The land adjacent to the site is used mainly for recreational and residential purposes. For many miles to i the west, east and south the country is characterized by rolling terrain rising gently up from the lake, composed mainly of glacial deposits. Ap-proximately 34 percent of the land area in Oswego County is devoted to farming.
The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program for the FitzPatrick Plant is a site program with responsibility for the program shared by the Power Authority and Niagara Mohawk. Similar Technical Specifications for 4
radiological monitoring of the environment allows for majority of the sam-pling and analysis to be a joint undertaking. Data generated by the pro-gram is shared by the two facilities with review and publication of the data undertaken through each organization.
This report is submitted in accordance with Section 5.6.1 of Appendix B, to DPR-59, Docket 50-333. Environmental reports of this nature have t
been compiled and submitted in semiannual and annual reports since 1974.
This report contains data from samples representing the period from Janu-ary 1,1983 to December 31, 1983.
i
, 1
i i l 1
I-B PROGRAh! OBJECTIVES The objectives of the Radiological Environmental h!onitoring Program 1
are as follows:
! 1. To determine and evaluate the effects of plant operation on the envi- .
rons and to verify the effectiveness of the controls on radioactive ma-terial sources.
l 2. To monitor and evaluate natural radiation levels in the environs of the JAFNPP site.
]
- 3. To meet the requirements of applicable state and federal regulatory
- guides and limits.
i
! 4. To provide information by which the general public can evaluate the 4
environmental aspects of nuclear power using data which is factual and
- unbiased.
3 J
I
- k
- )
i l
l
)
l i
- I i
i l
l 2
II 9
PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION AND DESIGli
'b
II PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION AND DESIGN To achieve the objectives listed in Section I-B, sampling and analysis arc performed as outlined in Tables I and II in this section.
The sample collections for the radiological program are accomplished by a dedicated site environmental staff from both the James A. FitzPatrick Plant and the Nine Mile Point Station. The site staff is assisted by a con-tracted environmental engineering company, Ecological Analysts, Inc.(EA).
EA was responsible for performing the 1983 Aquatic Ecology Study at the site which is required by Section 4.1, Appendix B of the plant operating license (DPR-59). The staff required by EA to perform the aquatic studies program is used to perform the radiological aquatic sampling and assists the site staff with the terrestrial sampling program.
3
l l
- 1. SAMPLE COLLECTION METHODOLOGY A. Lake Water (surface water)
The two indicator stations are the respective inlet canals at JAFNPP and NMPNPS. These samples are composited using continuously . running pumps which discharge into large holding tanks. l The control station sample is collected from the city of Oswego water intake. The sample is drawn from the intake prior to treat-ment and is composited in a large sample bottle.
Qucrterly composite samples are made up from proportional ali-quotes of monthly samples.
B. Air Particulate / Iodine The air sampling stations are located in two rings surrounding the site. The onsite locations ring the terrestrial area around the plants inside the site boundary.
The onsite sampling network is composed of nine stations. The offsite air monitoring locations range six to 17 miles from the site and are composed of six stations. Air monitoring locations are shown on Figures 1 and 2 of Section VII.
The air particulate glass fiber filters are approximately two inches in diameter and are placed in sample holders in the intake line of a vacuum sampler. Dtrectly down stream from the particulate filter is a 2 x 1 inch charcoal cartridge used to absorb airborne radiolodine. The samplers run continuously and the charcoal cs.rtridges and particulate filters are changed on a weekly basis.
The particulate filters are composited on a monthly basis by loca-tion (offsite, onsite) after being counted individually for gross beta activity.
C. Milk During the first month of the 1983 grazing season, milk samples were collected from 10 locations. During the remainder of the 1983 grazing season, milk . samples were collected from eight locations.
Seven of these locations are considered indicator samples and the eighth is used as a control sample. Milk samples are collected in
~
polyethylene bottles from the- bulk storage tank at each sampled farm. ' Before the sample is drawn the tank contents are agitated from three to five minutes to assure a homogenous mixture of milk and butterfat. Two gallons are collected during the first week of each month ' from each of the farms. An additional one . gallon is 4
, collected from each farm at mid month to make up the second half
} of the monthly composite. The complete composite is made up from one gallon collected during the first week of the month and one gallon from the mid month collection. The samples are frozen and l shipped to the analytical contractor routinely within 36 hours4.166667e-4 days <br />0.01 hours <br />5.952381e-5 weeks <br />1.3698e-5 months <br /> of collection in insulated shipping containers. The milk sampling lo-cations are found on Figure 4 of Section VII.
D. Meat. Poultry and Eggs Semiannually one kilogram of meat is collected from locations within a 10 mile radius of the site. Periodic phone calls are made to the local slaughter houses to determine availability of slaughtered live-stock from within the sampling area'. Whenever possible meat sam-ples are collected from locations previously used. Attempts are made to collect a control sample located outside the 10 mile radius, with each series of collections.
Semiannually one kilogram of poultry and one kilogram of eggs are collected from each of three locations within a 10 mile radius of the site. Attempts are made to collect poultry and eggs at the same time as the meat samples. The poultry and eggs are frosen and shipped in insulated containers. Whenever possible samples are obtained from previously sampled farms. Attempts are. made to collect a control sample located outside the 10 mile radius, with each series of collections (see Section VII, Figure 5).
E. Human Food Crops l Human food crops are collected during the late summer harvest season at locations previously sampled, if available. One kilogram each, of the two types of fruits and/or vegetables from each of the three locations within a 10 mile radius of the site are collected.
The types of fruits and vegetables samp?ed depend on what is lo-cally available at the time of collection. Attempts are made to col-lect at least one broad leaf type vegetable from each location. The fruits and vegetables are chilled prior to shipping and shipped fresh in insulated containers. Attempts are made to collect a con-trol sample located outside the 10 mile radius for each type of sam-ple (see Section VII, Figure 5).
F. Soil Samples Soil samples are required once every three years. Samples were collected during 1983. Soil samples were taken at each of the 15 air monitoring stations (see Figures VII-1 and VII-3).
G. Fish Samples .
Available fish species are removed from the Nine Illite Point Aquatic Ecology Study monitoring collections during the spring and fall 5
I collection periods. Samples are collected from a combination of the four onsite sample transects and one offsite sample transect (see Section VII, Figure 1). Available species are selected under the following guidelines:
- 1) 0.5 to 1 kilogram of edible portion only of a maximum of three .l species per location.
- 2) Samples composed of more than 1 kilogram of single species from the same location are divided into samples of 1 kilogram each prior to shipping. A maximum of three samples per spe-cies per location are used. Weight of samples are the edible portions only.
Selected fish samples are frozen immediately after collection and )
segregated by species and location. Camples are shipped frozen in insulated containers for analysis.
H. GAMMARUS GAMMARUS (fresh water shrimp) samples are collected by EA per-sonnel during the spring and fall season from two onsite locations and from one offsite location. Natural and artificial substrates are used to collect samples. The GAMMARUS samples are removed from the sampling gear, frozen .and shipped to the analytical con-tractor in insulated shipping containers.
- 1. Mollusks During the spring and fall seasons at two onsite locations and one offsite location benthic samples are collected. The mollusks are collected by divers and sorted. The tissue is removed from the shell, frozen and shipped for analysis in insulated containers.
J. Bottom Sediments One kilogram of bottom sediment sample is collected at two onsite locations and one offsite location. Samples are collected at the same time and location as the mollusk samples, where possible, by a diver. The samples are placed in plastic bags, sealed and shipped for analysis in insulated containers.
K. Periphyton Periphyton (fresh water algae) samples are collected in the spring and fall seasons from two onsite loostions and one offsite location.
Periphyton is collected from natural substrates. The periphyton is scraped from the substrates into vials, labeled, frozen and shipped in insulated containers for offsite analysis.
l; 8
l L. TLD (direct radiation)
Thermoluminescent- dosimeters (TLD's) are used to measure direct
. adiation in the JAF/NMP-1 environment. The TLD stations are placed around the site using a two zone distribution. The first gmup of TLD's is located within the site boundary and are called "cnsite" TLD's. The second set of TLD stations is the "offsite" l stations, located at the offsite air monitoring stations and in areas of special interest such as population centers. Also included in the offsite group are the field control TLD's. A total of 45 TLD stations were used for the 1983 TLD program.
TLD's used during the first three quarters of 1983 were made up of CaSOg dosimeters (two chips per dosimeter), sealed in a poly-ethylene package to insure dosimeter integrity. The TLD's used in the fourth quarter of 1983 were rectangular Teflon wafers im-pregnated with 25 percent CaSOg:Dy phosphor. These were also sealed in a polyethylene package to insure dosimeter integrity.
The TLD packages are further protected by placement in plastic holders, or by tape sealing to supporting surfaces. The dosime-ters are collected, replaced and evaluated on a quarterly basis, i
i I
I 7
I
- 2. ANALYSIS PERFORMED The analysis of the environmental samples is performed by the Radiation Management Corporation (RMC), Teledyne Isotopes (TI), and the James A. FitzPatrick Environmental Counting Laboratory (JAFECL).
The following samples are analyzed at the JAFECL: l Air Particulate Filter - gross beta (weekly)
]
Air Particulate Filter Composites - gamma spectral analysis (monthly)
Airborne Rcdioiodine - gamma spectral analysis (weekly)
Surface Water Composites - gamma spectral analysis (monthly)
Special Samples (soil, etc.) -
gamma spectral analysis (as collected)
The remainder of the sample analysis as outlined in Tables I and II in this section is performed by the RMC (January through June), or TI j (July through December). l l
8
I
(
- 3. CHANGES TO THE 1983 SAMPLE PROGRAM A. In January 1983 RMC was purchased by TI. Environmental sam-ples were analyzed during the first half of 1983 by RMC under contract, and during the second half of 1983 by TI.
i B. Milk sample locations number 14 and number 60 were deleted from I the milk sampling program in June of 1983. These deletions were the result of the spring 1983 milch animal census which indicated that the other milk locations were in more critical locations for radionuclide deposition.
TABLE I SAMPl.li COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS SITE RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM A. l.AKE PROGRMi lI}
MEDIA ANALYSIS FREQUENCYl4} N TION (2)
- 1. Fish GeLi, 89Sr 4 90Sr 2/yr 2 onsite 1 offsite
- 2. Mollusks Gel.i. 89Sr G 90Sr 2/yr 2 onsite 1 offsite
- 3. Gammarus GeLi, 89Sr f. NSr 2/yr 2 onsite 1 offsite
- 4. Bottom Sediments GeLi, 90Sr 2/yr 2 onsite 1 offsite g 5. Periphyton GeLi 2/yr 2 onsite 1 offsite
- 6. Lake Water GB, GSA or GeLi M Comp. 3(3) 311, 89S r, 90S r Qtr. Comp.
5 Notes:
(1) Program centinued for at least three years after the startup of James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant.
(2) Onsite locations samples collected in the vicinity of discharges, offsite samples collected at a distance of at least five miles from site.
(3) The three lake water samples to include Nine Mile Point Unit 1 intake water, James A. FitzPatrick intake water, and Oswego City water.
(4) Sampics of items I through S co!Iected in spring and fall when available.
- - - ,- ~ - - - - - - - - w
TABLE II
. SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Silli RADIOIAGICAL ENVIR0fGE.NTAL MONITORING PROGRAM B. IAND I M (I) .
MEDIA ANALYSIS FREQtNiNCY NO. OF IACATIONS IACATIONS
- 1. Air Particulates GB W At least 10 9 onsite 6 offsite CSA M Comp.(6)
- 2. Soil CSA, 90Sr Every 3 years 15 9 onsite 6 offsite
- 3. TIA c - Dose Qtr. 20 14 onsite 6 offsite
- 4. Radiation Monitors Gamma Dose C 10 9 onsite 1 offsite
- 5. Airborne.- II3I GSA W At least 10 9 onsite 6 offsite
- 6. Milk 1 M 4l73 (8)
CSA, NSr M Comp.
- 7. thaman Food Crops GSA, I3II A - -
3 (8)
Notes: (Cont.) ,
(6) Onsite samples counted together, offsite comented together, any high count samples counted separately.
(7) Freqenency applied only during grazing season.
(8) Samples to be collected from farms within a 10-mile radius having the highest potential concentrations
. of radionuctides.
Abbreviations:
M Comp. - Monthly composite of weekly or bi-wcekly samples A - Annually BW - Bi-weekly (alternate wks.)
GS - Gross beta mar. lysis W - Weekly Qtr. - Quarterly i GeLi - Gamma spectral analysis on a GeLi system-(quantitative) M - Monthly SA - Semiannually '
GSA - Gamma spectral analysis on a Nat system (qsaantitative)' .C - Continuous. ]
L_
A_ss -+_d,; .u e e- _- e- ,__ eL- _b _ u -,. m e_ - X- = xJa-- _ Jh-Ma- - __-
- _ " ._
I
{
Y 6
i 1 i I
i 1
e 1
l i
i
! 111 4
i 1
4 2 r i
k t
t
.i
)
l 1
SAMPLE SUMMARIES ;
i i
i t
I i
I 4
1 6 i
6
-i r I
s I
4
III SAMPLE SUMMARIES All sample data is summarized in table form. The tables are titled "Envi-ronmental Sample Data Summary" and use the following format:
A. Sample medium.
B. Type of analysis performed.
C. Number of analyses performed.
l D. Range of detectable levels. The data column is labeled " Lower l Limits of Detection". This wording indicates that inclusive data is based on 4.66 sigma of background.
E. Mean value of the data, based on positive measured values *.
F. Standard deviation, based on positive measured values. (The standard deviations represent the variability of measured results for different samples rather than single sample uncertainty *.)
G. Maximum and minimum values.
I II . Range of the data, calculated by subtracting the minimum value ,
from the maximum value.
- Only positivo measured values are used in statistical calculations. The use of LLD's in ther.e calculations would result in the means being biased high and the standard deviations being biased low.
12 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
ll
'1 Ij(I) ll ll l 4 2 420 E
C m
24 5 9.-
8 0 - 01 01
- 56..
43 - - 5 010 - - -
a 01 0 00 12 0 000 t
a mI G 7 355 uI i
03 90 - - - - 0 2 f-40 - - - - 87n2 11 i - - 1 3. e. 0 - - -
iE n
m 01 0 00 11 0 800 Y m uE R i 27 4 27 3355 9 375 A aN t
n 49 - - - 41 - - - -
12 4 80 65 23 2.-
310,-
0 008 M
M _
U S
s t
a A t 77 6 8 34 6 8. ...-
3 5 T aE n
l 33 81
- - - A 0. 0
01
- 2.
0 A 89. A - - -
A sE D
E L DDD P s a 58 DDDD LLLL L D DDDD LLLL DD D
.LL L LLL -
M [
m 18.LLLL4L22LLLL LLLL 1. L 4 1.L L L L 72n.
98
L A 5 s 3
1029 72 1214 28 74 1224 T 1 1
el 5t t )eg 0009 01 0000 01 e0 82 0 0. e. 0 E 0Se0 N 1 EE 0088 E S0 E 8900 EEEE E 00 i 1 n NN N N NN.,- M N E t M (r 1 a OO 568 O O 696 OOO NNN,9 e6N53N81e2 O O3 $
t NN0004N42N4942 M s ef 9098 41 90 0400 48S8 09 0S 81 S4 68e0 0 8. e. 0 N t a 800S O
R I B .
sf V F t 8se i t E
t 0
N e. af t a 22222222222222 44444444444444 5 1
E t nt ai P
5 P
9 S
CI I
5l S c I e i p
I st a s o 4
1 uB sE 0 E
1 t.
s a
r 0
ae1 I o 3 t tC a t
e 67~4584 3 t 6746343 eeB B r 445! G34223S89 a c 4 8342234e9 t M m t T4549 1- 1221I55 - 785.5 1 s r e112211s5 E a i n - 4 - 4 - - - - - - - - i F s d BE,C9 1 M a e e1e o r e o e a h s e o e- n e ,e s e a h s u o e- B E
1 C C BEFCZRCCRTCRCF I ZRCCRTCRCF E g
s t
4 5
) 0 7
ft e) ote t es r
EMi t e
cw t
y(
t G
e -
4 I h-5 B (s epgu t t
a G
kMcp t
a A
l il III i
/'
E e 4s40 1 7 C 3 N - t. - - - - - - 2. e. e. 0. - - - - s
- 3
- A R
a 0ee0 4 7
2.
0 7831 2182 - - - -
08e0 3
3 e
7 9
0 E"
Y R "
' 5 1871 4 6
4 A - 3 - - - - - - - 5 1 0 2.- - - -
1 S
a 088e 0 M
M .
U S
7 A 6
- - e. ----
232 10 0. A - - - -
0 0
3 T 4 000 S e.
S A
I D
E L
P DDD DD DDDD D D S DD LL DDDD.LLL LL1LLLLLLL LLLI LL LL8451LLLL LLLL L5 L38 L
L11 M A M LL 3.LLLLLLL LL LL 348081 0 2.L LLL LLLL L L LS A LLeLLLLLLL AA AAAAAAA AA AAAA L 8 A A S
L A 1 5 23 lle2115 334 02226 4 9 T 1 0 1
0 1 )
1
- 9. e. e. e. 2. e. 0 0. e. e. 8 3 0S8 40900 0 2 N 1 8 C eg ee esee0ee E EE 00090 8 E 8 E 1 ti N NM M N u
E t M (r rO 7 OO 676 9 O 9 O 1eNtlet112 418NN40041 4N 9N M M t
N 8. e. e.e.2.e.0 0 0 003 20008 0 9 8
N t 8e eeee0e8 008 84800 0 O
R I S .
5 V F 1 S1 t eI E
I E M
N e. et st ssa 2222222222 4444444444 22 44 8 5
E aM 5
0 P
E C
I I
S t s i e I I
5 n p 8 B 2 a t e 9 I S
aE BN t d -
r l u r S t aMl I e
5SOR 1M AC s a
wt s
a nr 55 n
5 4e2e339 9 4s5s2s115 74 t a 5 5 6 4428339 w 9- 645 - 42511 74 .lo 9 rt 8
- n S0 S9 e 9e 8t W a.
WH I
a CC ebmErCRCCCFNz 4 -e - - - -
hoaosse
- - t.
I n bn4 -
enoaoss5e NIEPCRCCCF S c r e rr SS e
m SS g
r r-t u
Eg g
i l
) ) e p
t t t e er e i s )s rie a
(
m W eti 0 t s *(g g S
5 E (a e I e 1 t
t E
L k 1 Lk **
a P C L a C P
S A
E l!; !! .!l L
ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA
SUMMARY
SAMPLE IVPE Of ANALVSIS N0.0F LOWER llWils
$ " "' " " " "'" RANCE M(Oluu PERIORMED AND ANALYSIS OF DETECil0N MEAN NUCllDE PERIORMED (range) ,
(units) 1 Lake Bottom Gamma Isotopic Sediment Sr-90 pCilg (dry)
Control .
0.69 A 0.69 0.69 0.00 Be-7 2 0.70 0.70 3.17 NONE 8.82 2.24 10.40 7.23 K-40 2 - -
Nh-95 2 0.02 0.09 ALL LLD - -
0.24 0.08 0.29 0.18 0.11 Cs-137 2 NONE -
ALL LLD - -
Cs-134 2 0.02 0.06 0.70 0.88 A 0.88 0.88 0.00 Ra-226 .2 0.70 - -
Pin-54 2 0.02 0.05 ALL LLD - -
0.002 0.14 A 0.14 0.14 0.00 Sr 2 0.002 5'
Indicator 0.70 0.55 A 0.55 0.S5 0.00 He-7 4 0.10 8.43 NONE 12.27 3.50 16.70 8.27 K-40 4 0.03 0.16 0.10 0.06 Co-60 4 NONE 0.14 0.08 0.05 A 0.05 0.05 0.00 Nb-95 4 0.02 4 NONE 0.33 0.11 0.43 0.18 0.25 Cs-137 A 0.02 0.02 0.00 Cs-134 4 0.03 0.05 0.02 i
v ._ -
0.70 1.02 0.47 1.36 0.69 0.G7 l Jj y . Re-226 ,
y'4 0.50 -
4" Pin -54 r,,' ' '4 0.01 0.05 ALL LLD - - -
( 3 Srf90 ! 4 0.002 0.003 0.05 A 0.05 0.05 0.00 g * '
4 '
a-Y 1
1 ,.
l l
, A ONLY ONE PostilVE VALUE, N0 STATISTICS POSSISLE.
i s t
" = -
, s II ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA
SUMMARY
SAMPLE ITPE OF ANALYSIS NO. O F 10WER llMIIS Si NDARD MAllMUM MINIMUM Of DEllC110N MEAN RANCE MIDIUM PIRIORMID AND ANALVSIS IN E (range)
(units) NUCllDE PERIORMED l
Lake Gamma Isotopic i
GAE1P1 A RUS Sr-89 Sr-90 pCilg (wet)
Cont rol Co-60 2 0.03 0.20 ALL LLD - - -
ALL LLD - -
0.10 F1n-54 2 0.03 -
Cs-137 2 0.03 0.10 ALL LLD - -
Cs-134 - 2 0.04 0.10 ALL LLD - - - -
2n-65 2 0.07 0.30 ALL LLD - - -
S r-89 2 0.02 0.20 ALL LLD - -
2 NONE 0.07 0.03 0.10 0.05 0.05 S r-90 Co-58 2 0.04 0.20 ALL LI.D - - - -
Fe-59 2 0.11 0.50 ALL I LD - - - -
5 Indicator Co-60 4 0.04 0.80 0.05 A 0.05 0.05 0.00 Eln-54 . 4 0.03 0.80 ALL LLD - - - -
Cs-137 4 0.03 0.90 0.21 0.21 0.36 0.06 0.30 Cs-134 4 0.03 0.90 ALL LLD - - - - -
l Zn-65 4 0.07 2.00 ALL LLD - - - -
S r-89 4 0.03 1.00 ALL LLD - - - -
Sr-90 4 0.40 0.40 0.18 0.03 0.21 0.16 0.05 Co-58 4 0.04 1.00 ALL LLD - - - -
Fe-59 4 0.09 3.00 ALL LLD - - - -
A - ONLY ONE POSlilVE VAtu[, N0 STALLS 11CS POSSIRLE.
j ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA
SUMMARY
IVPE Of ANAlfSIS NO. 0 f 10W[R llMilS SAMPLE '" IN U RANCE MEDIUM PERIORMID AND ANAtVSIS OF DEIECil0N MEAN (range)
(usils) NUCllDE PIRf0RMfD Lake Fish Gamma Isotopic pCilg (wel) Sr-89. Sr-90 Cont rol NONE 3.13 0.33 3.78 2.83 0.95 K-40 , 6 - -
P1n-54 6 0.007 0.02 ALL LLD - -
NONE 0.05 0.009 0.06 0.04 0.02 Cs-137 6 -
ALL LLD - -
Cs-134 6 0.007 0.02 -
Co-58 6 0.008 .0.03. ALL, LLD - - -
ALL LLD - -
S r-89 . 6 0.004 0.03 -
Sr-90 6 0.002 0.003 ALL LLD - - -
Co-60 6 0.007 0.02 ALL LLD - -
ALL LLD - -
y, 0.04 -
Zn-65 6 0.02 Indicator NONE 3.26 0.37 3.93 2.65 1.28 E-40 12 '
ALL LLD - - -
Illn-54 12 0.005 0.02 -
NONE 0.05 0.009 0.06 0.03 0.03 Cs-137 12 -
Cs-134 12 0.005 0.02 ALL LLD - - -
ALL LLD - - -
Co-58 12 0.006 0.04 Sr-89 12 0.001 0.10 ALL LLD - - -
Sr-90 12 0.001 0.003 ALL LLD - -
Co-60 12 'O.005 0.03 ALL LLD - - - -
Fe-59 12 0.02 0.10 ALL LLD - - -
Zn-65 12 0.01 0.05 ALL LLD - - - -
A - ONLV ONE POSillVE VALUE, NO STATISilCS POSSIBLE.
ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA
SUMMARY
SAMPLE IVPE Of ANALYSIS NO. 0 f 10WER llMilS ND R IM M MINIMUM MEDIUM PIRIORMID AND ANALYSIS Of DIlfCil0N MEAN RANCE MIAll0N VA M VA M (units) NUCilDE PIRf0RMID (range) _
Lake Water Gross Heta Analysis Control NONE 2.98 1.74 7.92 1.47 6.45 pCi/t 12 Indicator 24 2.6 3.0 3.34 1.59 7.90 0.57 7.33 Lake 11ater Tritium Analysis 71.8 50 Cont rol NONE 250 280 230 l pCl/l 4 Indicator 8 NONE 317 116.9 560 190 370 5-Lake 11ater Sr-89 Analysis
. pCill Control 4 0.76 2.00 ALL LLD - - - -
Indicator 8 0.59 2.00 ALL LLD - - - -
Lake Water Sr-90 Analysis pCl/l Control 4 0.90 0.90 0.89 0.08 0.97 0.82 0.15 Indicator B 0.70 0.70 0.83 0.21 1.10 0.60 0.50 A- ONLY ONE POSlilVE VALUE NG STATISilCS POSSIBLE.
l
- ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA
SUMMARY
SAMPLE IVPE Of ANALV$lS N O. 0 F LOWER llMIII I ND RD MAllMUM MINIMUM RANCE MEDIUM PIRIORMfD AND ANALYSIS DI DEllCil0N MEAN VAluf VAIDF.
DEVIATION
' (bails) NUCllDE PERIORMED (range) i Lake Ifater Gamma Isotopic l Analysis pCill Cont rol - l Co-144 12 2.78 6.34 ALL LLD - -
ALL LLD - -
Cs-134 12 0.46 1.53 - -
Cs-137 12 0.50 1.62 ALI. LLD - -
Zr-95 12 1.67 4.53 ALL LLD - -
Nb-95 12 1.21 3.59 ALL LLD -
ALL LLD - -
Co-58 12 0.66 1.88 -
Mn-54 12 0.51 1.72 - ALL LLD - - -
Fe-59 12 0.90 3.11 ALL LLD - -
Co-60 12 0.51 1.95 ALL LLD - -
p Indicator ALL LLD - - -
- Ce-144 24 3.27 6.70 -
ALL LLD - -
Cs-134 24 0.65 1.24 -
Cs-137 24 0.60 1.36 ALL LLD - - -
Zr-95 ~ 24 2.64 4.73 ALL LLD -
Nb-95 24 1.27 3.33 ALL LLD - - - -
Co-58 24 1.02 2.04 ALL LLD . - - - -
Mn-54 24 0.75 1.40 ALL LLD - - - -
Fe-59 24 1.26 3.09 ALL LLD - - - -
Co-60 24 1.02 2.00 ALL LLD - - - _
Airborne Gross Heta Particulate Activity .
Analysis . ,
0.009 0.085 0.007 0.078 pC1/ms Control 312 NONE 0.024 468 NONE 0.023 0.009 0.062 0.003 0.059 Indicator -
A ONLV ONE POSlilVE VAtuf.NO SIAllSTICS POSS10(E.'
I ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA
SUMMARY
SAMPLE IVPE Of ANALYSIS NO. O f LOWIR llMilS STANDARD MAllMUM MINIMUM MIDIUM PERf 0RMED AND ANALVSIS Of Dli!Cil0N MEAN RANCE
{ (usils) NUCllDE PfRIORMED (range) lAll0N VA W VA M Airborne Gamma Isotopic Particulate AnIlysis Cont ml t
pCi/m 8 x 10-a 0.42 Co-60 12 0.18 0.27 0.29 0.19 0.53 0.11 P1n-54 12 0.14 0.25 ALL LLD - - -
Co-58 ,
12 0.17 0.28 ALL LLD - - - -
Nb-95 12 0.18 0.34 ALL LLD - - -
Zr-95 12 0.35 0.60 ALL LLD - - -
Cs-137 12 0.15 0.26 0.19 0.06 0.26 0.11 0.15 Cs-134 12 0.12 0.20 ALL LLD - - - -
Cc-141 12 0.23 0.36 ALL LLD - - - -
Ce-144 12 0.65 0.94 ALL LLD - - - -
Ru-103 12 0.16 0.28 ALL LLD - - - -
l He-7 12 NONE 107.2 21.2 136.0 77.6 58.4 1 94 l lC Indicator Co-60 12 0.15 . 0.24 0.35 0.24 0.71 0.18 0.53 Pin-54 12 0.11 0.18 0.27 A 0.27 0.27 0.0 Co-58 12 0.13 0.20 ALLutD - - - -
Nb-95 12 0.15 0.29 ALL LLD - - - -
Zr-95 12 0.28 0.43 AI.L LLD - - - -
Cs-137 12 0.13 0.18 0.19 0.04 0.25 0.13 0.12 Cs-134 12 0.10 0.17 ALL LLD - - - -
Ce-141 12 0.21 0.32 ALL LLD - - - -
Co-144 12 0.53 0.76 ALL LLD - - - -
Hu-103 12 0.14 0.21 ALL LLD - - - -
Be-7 12 NONE 97.4 20.5 133.0 74.8 58.2 Airborne Iodine Gamma Analysis ,
An lysis 1-131 pCi/m8 Control 312 0.005 0.115 ALL LLD - - - -
Indicator 468 d.006 0.070 0.028 0.007 0.035 0.022 0.013 A ONLV ONE POSlilVE VALUE.N0 STATISTICS POSSIBLE.
9 e u
wn .
ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA
SUMMARY
SAMPLE TVPE Of ANALYSIS NO.0F t0WER llulIS MAllhDM MINIMUM STANDARD RANCE MIDIUM PERIORMED AND ANALYSIS DI DITICil0N MEAN DIVIAll0N VAtBE VAtBE (mails) NUCllDE PERIORMED (range)
Environmental Offsite TI.D's Readings ' 5.9 0.4 7.2 5.2 2.0 l First Quarter 23 NONE 4.6 2.2 )
mrem / Standard 23 NONE 5.7 0.5 6.8
- Second Quarter nth 5.1 0.4 5.8 4.2 1.6 Third Quarter 22 NONE 1.9 NONE 5.5 0.5 6.6 4.7 Fourth Quarter 22 4.2 3.0 90 NONE 5.5 0.4 7.2 Year Onsite Pionitor TI.D's (Excluding D-1 Onsite)
NONE 6.4 1.2 9.0 5.3 3.7 First Ouarter 8 0.7 7.5 5.1 2.4 Second Quarter 8 NONE 6.3 NONE 5.4 0.3 5.9 5.0 0.9 Third Quarter 6 NONE 6.6 0.9 8.5 5.6 2.9 to Fourth Ouarter 8 0.9 9.0 5.0 4.0 P' Year 30 NONE 6.2 .
Continuous ~ Exposure Rate Radiation Location Ptonitors mR/hr (Average Offsite Plonthly Value) NONE 0.017 0.004 0.030 0.013 0.017 C 13 I Onsite
'NONE 0.019 0.004 0.025 0.011 0.014 D-1 13 NONE 0.015 0.002 0.020 0.012 0.008 D-2 13 f 13 NONE 0.016 0.002 0.020 0.013 0.007 E 0.015 0.018 13 NONE 0,022 0.005 0.033 F' 0.015 0.010 13 NONE 0.021 0.003 0.025 G 0.005 13 NONE 0.022 0.002 0.025 0.020 H 0.028 0.013 0.015 13 NONE- 0.021 0.005 1
NONE 0.014 0.002 0.018 0.012 0.006 J 13 NONE 0.017 0.002 0.018 0.012 0.006 K 13 A - ONtf SNE PostilVE VALUE.N0 STAllSilCS POSSistE.
+
-J m^ ' '
ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA
SUMMARY
SAMPLE TYPE Of ANALYSIS NO.0F 10W[R llMlIS I NDARD MAXIMUM MINIMUM ANALYSIS OF DE1[Cil0N MEAN RANCE MEDIUM PIAf0RMID AND VAIDE DIVIAl!0N VALUE (usils) NUCllDE PIRf0RMED (range)
Milk Analysis 1-131 pCi/I Location No. 4 8 0.14 0.40 ALL LLD - -
No. 7 8 0.16 0.42 ALL LLD - -
No. 5 8 0.14 0.50 ALL LLD - -
ALL LLD - -
No. 14 1 0.25 0.25 - -
No. 16 8 0.10 0.30 ALL LLD - - - -
No. 45 8 0.17 0.33 ALL LLD - - - -
No. 40 (Control > 8 0.12 0.30 ALL LLD - - -
No. 50 8 0.16 0.40 ALL LID - -
No. 55 8 0.17 0.40 ALL LI.D - - - -
No. 60 1 0.32 0.32 ALL LI.D - - - -
- i. to t@
Milk Analysis Gamma Isotopic pCill S r-90 Location No. 4 8 NONE 1219 158.3 1500 1060 440 l K-40 Cs-137 8 4.2 6.0 ALL LLD - - - -
Cs-134 8 3.3 6.0 ALL LLD - - - -
La-140 8 5.0 11.0 ALL LLD - - - -
Ba-140 8 5.0 57.0 ALL LLD - - - -
l S r-90 8 NONE 2.71 0.79 3.97 1.30 2.67
. No. 7 8 NONE 1280 224.1 1520 923 597 K-40 Cs-137 8 4.0 8.0 ALL LLD - - - -
Cs-134 8 2.8 8.0 ALL LLD - - - -
La-140 8 5.1 10.0 ALL LLD - - - -
Ba-140 8 5.1 45.0 ALL LLD - - - -
S r-90 8 NONE 2.48 0.95 4.10 1.30 2.80 1
A - ONLV ONE POSITIVE VALUE.N0 SIAllSilCS POSSIBLE.
1
./
6 ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA
SUMMARY
TVPE Of ANALVSl$ N0. 0 F l0WER LIMITS SAMPLE "' " '" I"I""
RANCE MEDIUM PERIORMfD AND ANALYSIS OF DEI [Cil0N (range)
MEAN (mails) NUCt10E PIRIORMED Plilk Analysis Gamma Isotopic pCill . Sr-90 (cont.)
Location No. 5 1219 136.2 1400 990 410 K-40 8 NONE 4.1 8.0 5.1 A 5.1 5.1 0.0 Cs-137 8 - - -
Cs-134 8 3.9 7.0 ALL LLD -
La-140 8 3.8 13.0 ALL LLD -
Ba-140 8 3.8 56.0 ALL LLD - - -
NONE 2.38 0.89 4.10 1.00 3.10 Sr-90 8
$ No. 14 NONE 1300 A 1300 1300 0.00 K-40 . 1 Cs-137 1 4.4 4.4 ALL LLD - - - -
Cs-134 1 3.6 3.6 ALL LLD - - - -
La-140 1 11.0 11.0 ALL LLD - - - -
Ba-140 1 40.0 40.0 ALL LLD - - - -
NONE 4.45 A 4.45 4.45 0.00 Sr-90' 1 No. 16 -
NONE 1254 208.9 1500 938 562 K-40 8 - -
Cs-134 8 2.6 7.0 ALL LLD - - - -
La-140- 8 5.7 11.0 ALL LLD - -
Ba-140 8 5.7. 46.0 ALL LLD - - - -
NONE 3.03 1.11 ; 4.72 1.60 3.12 Sr-90 8
' A ONtf GNE POSillVE VAtut, NO SIATISTICS POS$1BLE.
.. . _ . . _ _ _ _ __m
l l!
rI 1 llIlll( l E 6 0 C - - - - 7 - - - - 6 N
A 0 2 0 1 R 9 3 4 5 M 0 U E 0 MUL I
- - - - 3 - - - - 0 NI AV 0 1
1 0 7
1 M 0 9 1 1
/
Y U E R UL A U
6 0 A M V
0
- - - - 0 4 0
- - - - 6 2
M 0 5
1 0
6 1
M s. ; ,
U _
S D N R D U
A 5 - - - - 9 8
2 - - - - 5 0
T I 9 0 8 0 A S D 6 1
8 1
D E
L P DDDD DDDD N LLLL LLLL LLLL7 LLLL1 M A E
M 0 LLLL 8
0 LLLL 9
A 5 LLLL 2AAAA 2
8 2AAAA LLLL 1 S 1 1 L
A S N 5010 T i 0 l
Mi)C l
0000 N l
[
e g
t s818 14 E E 7790 5 E l n N N N N E R 1
E r D(
a O O O O I N N N N M W 0 f 0200 5955 N 1 O 4355 3255 O
R I
S D .
V F 0 S I E M
E l
N Y R O. AL I O 888888 888888 10 E N N R A E P
S O
P S
C
) TI S
S l D c o l l
SI Y A N i p) t r A I
L A D ED o 1. n S o
N I A Mt l
t o
son C 0 N
Rc I c 7400 ( 7400 f
OOu ( n 334 40 33440 ,
I N a o 5 01 111 9 0 011119 E i
4 - - - - - 4 4 - - - - - U E R P I m0 t a
4
- ssaar - ssaar L V P m9- c o KCCLBS o KCCLBS A V
I ar o.
GS I N N E V
I T
s SI i O s P E 4' ) y L
U s l E P I a N MDit A I n A
n O S M (u l f t
kl / N i C l
O l
P p -
A
, ll1, 1flll
ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA
SUMMARY
SAMPLE TVPE of ANALYSIS N0. 0 f ECW[R tiMiiS IN R M IMU MINIMUM RANCE MEDIUM PERIORMED AND ANAtVSIS OF DEIECil0N M[AN lAll0N VALUE VALUE (units) NUCllDE PIRIORMED (range) flink Analysis Gamma Isotopic pCl/l Sr-90 (cont.)
Location l No. 50 1244 198.6 1500 1020 4R0 K-40 8 NONE * -
Cs-137 8 4.6 7.9 ALL LLD - - -
Cs-134 8 3.4 7.7 ALL LLD - -
r La-140 8 7.0 11.0 ALL LLD - - -
Ha-140 8 7.0 60.0 ALL LLD - - -
NONE 1.86 0.62 3.17 1.10 2.07 Sr-90 8
. un No. 55 NONE 1302 205.0 1500 947 553 K-40 7 -
Cs-137 7 4.0 7.4 ALL LLD - - -
ALL LLD - - -
Cs-134 7 3.4 7.1 -
La-140 7 4.5 11.0 ALL LLD - - - -
ALL LLD - - -
Ba-140 7 4.5 43.0 -
l NONE 2.66 1.27 5.05 1.27 3.78 l Sr-90 7 No. 60 NONE 1500 A 1500 1500 0.00 K-40 1 Cs-137 1 4.5 4.5 ALL LLD - - - -
Cs-134 1 3.2 3.2 ALL LLD - - - -
La-140 1 9.5 9.5 ALL LLD - - - -
Ba-140 1 50.0 50.0 ALL LLD - - - -
NONE 3.79 A 3.79 3.79 0.00 S r-90 1 A - 051Y ONE POSlilVE VALUE. N0 STAllSilCS POSSIBLE.
e
t ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA
SUMMARY
SAMPLE IVPE Of ANALYSIS NO. 0 f 10WIR llMlIS SI NDARD MAllMM MINIMUM MfDIUM PERf 0RMED AND ANALYSIS Of 0[Itcil0N MEAN DEVIAll0N VALUE VALUE RANCE '
(usils) NUCllDE PERIOR'n1[D (range) l l
Meat & Poultry Gamma Isotopic l pCilg (wet)
Control ,
Co-60 4 0.005 0.019 ALL LLD - - -
NONE 2.7 0.7 3.3 1.7 1.6 E-40 4 -
Cs-134 4 0.005 0.014 ALL LLD - - -
Cs-137 4 0.006 0.014 ALL LLD - - -
Co-58 4 0.006 0.021 ALL LLD - - - -
Mn-54 4 0.005 0.015 ALL LLD - - - -
Ce-144 4 0.04 0.08 ALL LLD - - - -
De-7 4 0.05 0.22 ALL LLD - - - -
Indicator Co-60 12 0.004 0.019 ALL LLD - - -
12 NONE 2.9 0.3 3.4 2.3 1.1 K -
Cs-134 12 0.005 0.019 ALL LLD - - -
Cs-137 12 0.007 0.018 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.03 Co-58 12 0.005 0.031 ALL LLD - - - -
Mn-54 12 0.004 0.021 ALL LLD - - - -
Ce-144 12 0.03 0.15 ALL LLD - - - -
Be-7 12 0.04 0.31 ALL LLD - - - -
l A - ONlf DNE P0$lilVE VAluE.N0 SIAllSilCS P0$518tE.
t i
t
5 W
ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA
SUMMARY
SAMPlf IVPE Of ANALYSIS N0. 0f (0WER tlMils STANDARg MAllMUM MINIMUM MEAN MEDIUM PERf0RMit ANS ANALYSIS Of DETECiloll DEVIA110N VALUE VAIDE NUCllDE PERf0RMED (range)
(seits)
Chicken Eggs Gamma Isotopic pct /g (wet)
Control Co-60 2 0.009 0.030 ALL LLD -
0.26 l 0.88 0.18 1.01 0.75 K-40 2 NONE - - l Cs-134 2 0.008 0.018 ALL LLD - -
Cs-137 2 0.008 0.019 ALL LLD - -
- - )
Co-58 2 0.009 0.035 ALL LLD - -
Pin-54 2 0.008 0.021 ALL LLD - -
Ce-144 2 0.06 0.16 ALL LLD - -
B e-7 2 0.11 0.37 ALL LLD -
N Indicator Co-60 6 0.005 0.024 ALL LLD - -
1.10 0.10 1.14 0.90 0.24 K-40 6 NONE -
ALL LLD - - -
Cs-134 6 0.005 0.022 -
Cs-137 6 0.005 0.024 ALL LLD - - -
Co-58 6 0.005 0.038 ALL LLD - -
Hn-54 6 0.005 0.024 ALL LLD - -
Ce-144 6 0.04 0.18 ALL LLD - - -
ALL LLD - -
0.40 Be-7 6 0.05 A - Gulf $NE PoslilVE VAluf, NO SIATISilCS POSS18tE.
1 ENVIROf1 MENTAL SAMPLE DATA
SUMMARY
SAMPLE TVPE Of ANAtVSIS NO.0F [0WIR llMIIS ND RD M l UM MINIMUM MEDIUM PIRIORMED AND ANALYSIS OF Dil[CIl0N MEAN VAIM VAIDE RANCE DEWAll0N (units) NUCtIDE PIRIORMfD (range) j-Produce Gamma Isotopic pCilg (wet)
Cont rol K-40 2 NONE 2.04 1.17 2.86 1.21 1.65 Cs-134 2 0.007 0.012 ALL LLD - - - -
Cs-137 2 0.007 0.013 ALL LLD - - - -
Be-7 2 0.06 0.013 ALL LLD - - - -
Cc-144 2 0.06 0.08 ALL LLD - -
Nb-95 2 0.006 0.011 ALL LLD - - - -
Indicator K-40 6 NONE 2.58 1.27 4.58 1.57 3.01 u 6 0.006 0.016 ALL LLD - - - -
co Cs-134 Cs-137 6 0.006 0.016 ALL LLD - - - -
Be-7 6 0.04 0.13 ALL LLD - - - -
Ce-144 6 0.04 0.11 ALL LLD - - - -
Nb-95 6 0.005 0.014 ALL LLD - - - -
Produce I-131 pCilg (wet)
Control 2 0.009 0.014 ALL LLD - - - -
}
Indicator 6 0.007 0.019 ALL LLD - - - -
J A- ONtf SNE POSIIIVE VALUE.NO SIAllSilCS POSSIBtE.
ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA
SUMMARY
SAMPLE ItPE Of ANAlVSl$ NO.0F LOWER llMilS
" ' '""" I"I ""
RANCE MEDIUM PERIORMED AND ANALYSl$ OF OlI[Cil0N MEAN
'A IA#
(usils) NUCllDE PIRf0RMfD (range)
Soil Gamma Isotopic*
i pCilg (dry)
Control NONE 12.5 3.4 18.1 9.0 9.1 K-40 6 6 NONE 0.67 0.49 1.46 0.20 1.26 Cs-137 1.77 1.30 0.47 Ra-226 6 0.96 1.40 1.47 0.26 6 NONE 0.72 0.15 0.94 0.55 0.39 Th-228 Indicator 9 NONE 12.9 3.5 19.4 7.2 12.2 K-40 0.07 1.12 Cs-137 9 0.043 0.045 0.42 0.41 1.19 9 0.71 0.99 1.44 0.42 2.15 1.13 1.02 w Ra-226 0.42 9 NONE 0.69 0.15 0.94 0.52 u> Th-228 Soil Sr-90 pCilg (dry) 0.18 0.09 0.32 0.10 0.22 Control 6 NONE Indicator 9 0.037 0.038 0.18 0.18 0.47 0.03 0.44 A - ONLY ONE P0$lilVE VAlWE.No SIAllSilCS POS$ltlE.
1- - - - - - - -
A '
4--2 --'-4L---4-- w -- -La:L aA.Am--a L.-,m a2--- --m .
u - -~s a a ---,-a--.m-- -mar , - -- - w --- ,, a, 1
i 1
i t
1 4
l f'
IV 1
[
a f
i I
i i ANALYTICAL RESULTS .
'I i
k I
A L
1 1
1
f l
IV ANALYTICAL RESULTS Sample Summaries j Environmental sample data is summarized by tables. Tables are pro-vided for select sample media and contain data summaries based on quar-terly mean values. Mean values are comprised of both positive and LLD values where applicable. These tables are entitled " Environmental Sample Summary".
e es l
l 30
TABLE 1 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN PERIPHYTON SAMPLES Results in Units of pCi/g (wet) t 2 sigma COLLECTION NUCLIDES JUNE AUGUST SITE FOUND 1983 1983 FitzPatrick Be-7 2.28 +0.23 (03) K-40 2.63[+0.26 1.17 0.12 1.74[0.17 Mn-54 0.01310.006 0.047 0.009 Co-58 <0.01 <0.011 Fe-59 <0.03 <0.03 Co-60 0.23810.024 0.25110.025 Zn-65 <0.02 <0.018 Cs-134 0.04810.007 <0.011 Cs-137 0.68510.069 0.327 0.033 Ra-226 <0.20 (0.15 Th-228 0.04810.007 0.16610.017 Others <LLD <LLD Nine Mile Point Be-7 1.18 +0.16 1.78 +0.18 (02) K-40 3.53[0.35 1.63[0.16 Mn-54 0.02410.011 0.03710.007 Co-58 (0.02 <0.01 Fe-59 <0.04 <0.023 Co 0.12010.014 0.14210.014 Zn-65 <0.03 <0.015 Cs-134 (0.01 <0.009 Cs-137 0.17110.017 0.20710.021 Ra-226 0.32810.167 <0.13 Th-228 0.14110.014 0.11910.012 Others (LLD <LLD Oswego Be-7 1.42 +0.14 0.90110.090 (Control - 00) K .40 2.97[0.30 1.03 10.10 Mn-54 <0.01 (0.005 Co-58 <0.01 <0.006 Fe-59 <0.04 <0.017 Co-60 (0.009 (0.006 Zn-65 <0.02 <0.011 Cs-134 (0.01 (0.006 Cs-137 0.13610.014 0.05610.006 Ra-226 0.42310.137 (0.12 Th-228 0.17310.017 0.05810.006-Others <LLD <LLD 31
l f
I TABLE 2 CONCENTRATIONS OF STRONTIUM-90 AND CAP 9tA IwlTTERS IN BOTTOM SEDIMENT SAMPLES Results in Units of PCi/g (dry) + 2 sigma GLLECTION COLLECTION CAD 9tA EMITTERS SITE DATE St-90 K-40 Co-60 Cs-134 Cs-137 Ra-226 OTHERS 06/16/83 <0.002 8.27+0.83 0.102+0.028 (0.03 0.179+0.028 (0.50 (LLD Fit:Fatrick (03) 10/10/83 <0.002 11.3 +1.I 0.130+0.013 0.025+0.012 0.309+0.031 0.694+0.201 (LLD em '
ma (0.05 0.382+0.058 <0.70 (LLD Nine Nile Point 06/16/83 0.051+0.02 16.7 31.7 0.164+0.047 (02) 10/05/83' (0.003 12.8 11.3 0.146+0.028 (0.03 0.426+0.043 1.36 10.39 <LLD Oswego 06/15/83 0.140 ,+0.04 7.23+0.00 (0.05 (0.06 0.lf210.052 <0.70 (LIA (Control - 00)
- 10/04/83 (0.002 10.4 11.0 (0.02 <0.020 0.287+0.029 -.
, 0.88410.270 (LLD i i
?
k.
M
= a $ s d $
v v
F v v v v O
e
.@ O.=
N O O O
- O O N 4 O N. N.
e N. -
M. +3 4 O O O e O O v v O V V M v O
n n M N == N O
.= O. O.
g O. O. O. O.
8 O O O O O O Q v v v v v v M 4 lea -r O .=*
.J N O N O *d
- e. M.
a O. O.
r e O. O. O. O.
R e O O O O O O M U v v v v v v N
N
- 3 @ M N M M C J @ O. O. O. O.
e O. O.
.J C C O O O O O N v v v v v v X N 4 m -. ao m, O.
8 5 8 O
M 4 O O O O O. O.
H q t + 3 N
+l 4
+l O
+l O O H u O M M v v en og O 4 4 E *.
O. O. O. O.
w a O O O O
+1 u,
.m 4 e. @ N 4 MO 4 Q e Ena e Q C. O. O. O. O.
w ee O O O. O O G e O O v 2 3 H.
m in. v v v v v O to 5 40 N O N O N m M @ e O. O. O. O. - O. O.
e %.e g W E u' O O O O O O O
=J D 4. U v V V V V V 80 m 4 la %
b 2 O N en @ O O N *e .= m as e O. O. O.
la w w O. .-.
m
- e O O O O O. O.
C I el + 0 +6 +1 A D G e O or O O x x > M v v
< or.
. . C.
.c. . .
O O
- O O
. e e u N O
- a ~ c N. A.
M e M.
- a. O. O O. O. O.
3 g C O O O w O O C E 4 +l +3 M. +3 + 6 +
N A O == ==. 4 la hd
. v3 O @ v m -r N la. e. N. M. M. N.
O O O O O O M
N N w
- O.
8 5 8 E. 8 M
e O O O O O O ta e +1 +6 +6 +l +6 +4
- r. = or -r ine va M N w .M 4 M
=*
. O. ==. O. O. O.
O O O O O O O
e @ '
8, 2 8 3 S. C. . I.
- 6. O O O O O O m v v v v v v M
- . M. M. < M. M. ' M.
to tal % %
m e U> n O 4 a g O
. g O
- g O 8
.w
' S- A
% 8 g e
me $
- he m w e-*
. De w O-OM w **
saa - e E .O
.w h.
M S.
O NM 'IN mO I$
su v -ga.wow .mw . Ow _
4
. 33
m Un ut tG sd @ an OD GC US N fad NW NW at O +2 O *Z C C *EO W 4 C b= O 4OH =F G H E
t= v s + so JJ v v l + 10 v
0 +10 v
y wO O wM3e. .J w ao
@ .J e .J =e4.J
- 4 ** 4 ** 4 M C N M N N .e M O. . M C M
== O O C e m= +1 +1 O= ==.
a C N N O O O=
Q v e e v v v O. M.
O O U1 W N 00 N @
.J M c O M C M A ==
r p m. O. N. O. ==. C.
M e o o O C O v
C Wa U v v v v v Vl 3
== N 00
@ @ C @ O @
@ 4 M C*
ar, e O. O. C.
- C C N O O O O O N v v v v v v 2
m Un QG W @ 4 6 a N no @
5.*
- O O O. O M C M
=E e @ C w g cD. +g N. O. N. O. /
N O C m O O O O U v 4 v v v v
+1 O.
e O U +4 Ut G et C 3 W nc w 4
40 a N
e O % Z on a0 C @ C =
m
- We O= Oa
- e. 4 W 6 0 9 O. ==.
4 I G. G M C C O O O m2 3 sa. v v v v v v 4 . en.
i= H O 2 O C e as **
H * @ @ M un C eo M C M C .g 3 A O g O. O. N. O. N. O.
E O O == c O C O O
- C
- O V V V V v v e e GO **
1 *n E 3 N 40 =r D @ 9 C N O N M o + 0 m.=
1 es t eo. O. N. O. O.=.
e Z C C C O O O O O E v v v v v v as H
U1 Cs. m g O == 00 a.e M O ut o O C. C. O. C. C.
E e -r C O O O O O t * +1 +1 +9 +1 -+8 m b o v
@ M i=
4 UB c0 =.e @
s=*
e e ad ==. N. . O. O.
ta O O O O O C
-U Z
O G O
@ <e O M C N eo e O. O. N. O. N. O.
W == c O O' 'O O M V V v v v v z
O m
h N N M M M M N N M M N M U G3 CD G3 00 m G3 e e e e e e W lal % % % % % % % % % % % %
.J H == 0m e0e == 0m mOe == 0m J4 o se em ** u N O se =e *e u N O u == e.e
= 0e uN-OO % % % % % % % % % % % %
v @ @ ao G3 @ @ e ao @ @ .e: e O O O O O O O O O O O O C e
= , m 8
O u $
- =
- 4
>= W be = ce UH ** =* O W == 4 E Ok f4 Ge 49 **
se e 0e eg C as M CN
- 3Q Q *O la. w
- O' Ew eQ Cw e-34:
1
ad W
S aaS *d vvv add vvv asa asa vvv vvv asa vvv vvv
'ddd ddd ddd.ddd ddd
<<< <<< ddd Med @~. e =* C Oec N . 80
~ 555. 888 355 @~$ 8 8. . E. s. s. 8 8 8 m eCO COO CO
- COO OCO C C C'
& A'a'1' a'a'a' com a'a'A
<em
. ., 'a'A,'
m .
4'A';' A'1,',9' e.
u
- 8. **
m e *** . ***
- a.
- o. 8.
C00
=.e 8
- a. 8 OCO OCO COO cm. e ... 4.~ ~~.
4
, E. s. s.OOO 8.5. ~8 555 .$O8. 5 555 888 COO COO COO
. COO vvv- C vv- O O.s vvv vvv M u vvv vvv a
N~C
., . C Med N ., N 4__~ eN .O, ,d,m e -~
=
1c .* 8. *e *** .
- . a. 3 *COO
- a.
. o.
- o. *.COO ***
m OCO OCO COO vvy vvy vvv N vvy vvy vvv g
=
~
O.O e~. ... -.. ~~.
2 S, B. E. S. 888 535 $.$. $. S. E. E. 888 O OCO COO COO COO COO COO vvy vvv vvv vvv vvv g u vvy 5 ." "
~.g .~C gem ...
mm$
".. K. 3 8. . E. s. s. .88 555 8 3. . em.B. B. S.
C 5 ~~. ~~. k eg. . . . . ..O e i -4 #2 5 888 888 g 808 8
~$O5 g 885 F85 gu4 5 ddd ddd ddd 4d4 w dd4 ddd
=
a E p Q g vvv vvv W vvv vvv g vvv vvv
- 8 4 1 n E
- . 2
~.~ m O., ...
O ". g %. 553 .8 $. ~8 .
355 $.8. $. 55.5 ~~$8 COO
- 8. .
a COO COO COO OOO COO g g vvv VVV vvv vvy vvv- vvv
. M h5 O
i 995 399
?*. ?*.?
39E $69-
- ? . . **.i 988 EE~
? ?.T. Ti .?. *
- ~"7 ""* **" 7** **7 5 7-*
enn mmm men men m m. m e. m m
m~m -- m ~ ,., -- _~~ ~~~
O
= 8, 888 8 OCO 8. 8 888 .
88 .888 8OCO 8.8 O b COO OOO OO COO vvv w to vvv vvv vvv vv vvv ta
~m~ .~. ~ ~ - - ~-m 2-E 8, $. m e38 888 S. S. 8 8. 8 S. S. S. - .$8.5. .L O C O. CCO OOO OO OOO OOO g ha en vvv vvv .vvv vv vvv vvv
].
-N d N gg .g gg am N 4" % -N M y umm a eJ % % M M%%
MM MM MM b ou 3uM w,. ,g8 Egg _ mag 88 - 8 8~ - "8"8
, ro, ro. ro- -- ew-- *ww pp pp HH kN HP MP #
a l 32 'l2 I;J -l22 ass ass
.. l .3 2 - l 3 2
- ss ass 233 23s t.
S
=
- e 689 - W 48%
- - - 3
- s. .. u a. u o
- e. . =
- g. -m --
'f y u.J '
fw w h.
f
.w h g .)
h
. . i b, G.'
35
l TALLE 6 {
l CONCEN1 RATIONS OF BETA EHITTERS IN LAKE WATER SAMPLES - 1983 l Results in Units of.pC1/112 si a.a t Station code January February March April May June JAF Inlet 0.640.5 1.840.6 2.6+0.7 2.740.6 2 .94 0.7 3.1+1.3 NHP Inlet 0.6+ 0. 5 2 .5_+ 0. 7 2.5+ 0. 6 0.6+ 0.4 2.9_40.7 7.9+1.7 Raw City 0.8+0.6 2.1+0.6 1.840.6 1.540.5 2.616.7 2.3+1.2 Water (control)
_g Station code July August September October Ncves.Ler Lecember JAF Inlet 2.2+1.2 3.2+0.5' 4.2+1.9 <2.6 3.1+1.8 <2.0 NHP Inlet 3.5+1.3 2.9+1.2 3.0+1.8 <2.6 3.311.6 3.511.7 Raw City '2.4+1.2 2.6+1.2 3.5+1.8 2.7+1.8 3.3+1.9
<2.0
- l. Water (control) l
.h .
I l
l l
L_____ ._
r' TABLE 7 CONCENTRATIONS OF TRITIUM AND STRONTIUM-89 AND STRONTIUM-90 IN LAKE WATER (QUARTER COMPOSITE SAMPLES)
Results Jn Units of pCi/l + 2 sigma DATE TRITIUM Sr-89 Sr-90 STATION CODE PERIOD 249 + 130 <0.593 1.764+ 0.33 JAF INLET First Quarter 12/30/82 to 03/31/83 <2.00 1.00 I 0.50 Second Quarter 03/31/83 to 06/30/83 260 I 140 06/30/83 to 09/30/83 560 I 80 <2.00 0.60 I 0.34 Third Quarter Fourth Quarter. 09/30/83 to 01/04/84 320 { 70 <1.40 0.63{0.33 U
260 + 130 <1.14 1.03 + 0.40 NNP INLET First Quarter 12/30/82.to 03/31/83 0.72 I 0.39 03/31/83 to 06/30/83 410 I 140 <2.00 Second Quarter 290 I 90 <l.00 <0!70 Third Quarter 06/30/83 to 09/30/83 <1.60 1.10 + 0.40
. Fourth Quarter 09/30/83 to 12/28/83 190 { 90 12/30/82 to 03/31/83 239 + 130 <0.757 0.968+ 0.32 RAW CITY WATER First Quarter 230 7 140 <2.000 <0!90 l (Control) Second Quarter 03/31/83 to 06/30/83 0.88 + 0.37 06/30/83 to 09/30/83 280 T. 70 <2.00 Third Quarter Fourth Quarter 09/30/83 to 12/28/83 250 { 80 <1.40 0.82{0.40
TABLE 8 i
CONCENTRATIONS OF CAHMA EHITTERS IN LAKE WATER SAMPLES - 1983 Results in Units of pC1/1 + 2 signs Station Code Nuclide January February March April Hay June OSWECO CITY Ce-144 < 5.4 6 <5.33 <5.40 <4.93 <5.06 < 5.4 0 WATER Cs-134 <0,97 <0.99 <1.15 <0.97 <0.65 <0.99
_(00, CONTROL) Cs-137 <1.18 <1.10 <1.4 5 <1.15 <0.90 <0.94 Zr-95 < 3.03 <3.21 <4.03 <3.30 <3.18 <4.54 Nb-95 <1.97 <2.03 <1.97 <1.90 < 2.0 5 <3.35 Co-58 <1.30 <1.54 <1.72 <1.33 <1.46 <1.68 Mn-54 <1.01 <1.22 <1.30 <1.11 <1.07 < 0.8 8 Fe-59 <2.52 <1.98 < 2.32 <2.39 <1.56 <1.51 Co-60 <1.58 <1.52 <1.75 <1.4 5 <1.02 <1.0 9 K-40 < 13.3 <17.1 <15.5 < 11.7 <11.9 13.2.17.3 NINE MILE Ce-144 <5.15 <5.15 <6.02 <5.88 <4.73 <5.36 POINT Cs-134 <1.10 <0.90 <1.05 <1.07 <0.94 <1.06 5 (02, INLET) Cs-137 <1.23 <1.10 <1.27 <1.22 < 0.9 6 <1.10 Zr-95 <3.18 <3.84 < 4 .15 <3.51 <3.24 <4.34 Nb-95 <1.94 <1.91 <2.23 <1.83 <2.37 <4.2 7 Co-58 <1.29 <1.75'
<1.62 <1.42 <1.43 <1.60 Ma-54 <1.35 L.23 <1.26 <1.16 <1.2 6 Fe-59 < 2.4 ' . 21 <1.93 <1.86 <2.32 Co-60 ' <1.6% .6 7 - <1.39 <1.14 <1.32 K-40 < 16.4 14.0 16.5,18.7 <12.6 6.716.2 FITZPATRICK Ce-144 <5.39 <5.4 7 <5.12 <5.39 < 5.0 3
- , (03, INLET) Cs-134 <1.05 e <1.18 <1.01 <1.03 <0.90 Cs-137 <1.11 s. 48 <1.34 <1.12 <1.0 8 <0.88
-Zr-95 <2.93 <3.36 <3.34 <3.23 <2.66 <2.94 Nb-95 <1.68 <2.36 <2.0 0 <1.27 <2.11 <1.9 8 Co-58 <1.02 <1.36 <1.35- <1.19 <1.33 <1.38 Ma-54 <1.22 <1.09 <1.12 <1.09 <1.01 <1.2 3 Fe-59 <1.74 <2.32 <2.00 <2.49 <1 66 <1.75 Co-60 <1.25 <1.29 <1.4 6 <1.0 8 <1.33 <1.14 K-40 < 18.2 - <14.5 <13.5 <12.3 <11.3 <15.8
TABLE 8,, Cont'd)
( -
CONCENRATIONS OF CAMMA EHITTERS IN AKE WATER SAMPLES - 1983 Results in Units of pC1/112 sign.s Station Code Nuclide July Augus t September October November December OSWECO CITY Ce-144 <5.66 <4.79 <5.22 <4.39 <6.3k <5.65 UATER Cs-134 <1.05 <0.86 <1 09 <0.64 <1.53 <0.94 (00, CONTROL) Cs-137 <1.11 <1.32 <1.08 <0.88 <1.62 < 1.0 8 Zr-95 < 3.08 <2.97 < 3. 60 <3.26 <4.51 <2.96 Mb-95 <1.75 <1.51 <1.79 <1.53 <2.4 7 <2.13 Co-58 <1.40 <1.17 <1.34 <1.49 <1.68 < 1.15 Ma-54 <1.03 <1.03 <1.02 <0.99 <1.7 2 <1.15 Fe-59 <1.74 <1.90 <2 11 <2 16 <3 11 <2.02 ,
Co-60 <1.20 <1.52 <1.16 <1.12 < 1.9 5 <1.27 K-40 < 14.0 < 10.7 <16.0 <10.9 <20.6 <13.6 -
NINE MILE Ce-144 <4.50 < 5.7 9 <5.41 <6.55 <5.99 <5.18 POINT Cs-134 <0.95 <1 11 <0.94 <1.43 <1.06 <0.55
$ (02, INLET) Cs-137 <1.14 <1.0 6 <1.0 3 <1.32 <1.3 0
<3.82-
< 0.9 6
<3.51 Zr-95 < 3.09 <4.02 <3.70 <5.05 Mb-95 <1.65 <2.4 7 <1.67 <3.63 <2.2 3 <1.71 Co-58 <1.18 <1.81 <1.44 <2 35 <1.70 <1.45
~Ma-54 <1.18 <1.10 <1.18 <1.47 <1.31 < 0.9 3 Fe-59 <1.95 <2.27 <1.99 <3.03 <2.51 <2.40 Co-60 <1.56 <1.32 <1.42 <1.26 <1.76 <1.0 2 K-40 < 12.9 < 11.7 13.617.8 <21.2 <16.8 <12.8 FITZPARICK Ce-144 <4.7 9 <5.56 <4.7 7 <6.70 < 6.0 8 <5.37 (03, INLET) Cs-134 <0.86 <1.18 <1.06 < 1.4 0 < 1.16 <1.10 Co-137 <1.01 <1.22 <1.03 <1.36 <1.22 <1.0 0 ,
Ir-95 <2.88 <4.11 <3.% <4.73 <3.36 <2.70 -i Nb-95 <1.8 3 <2.59 <2.7 0 <3.33 <1.99 < 2.0 2 )
Co-58 <1.30 <2.04 <1.52 <1.69 <1.54 <1.16 Mn-54 <1.06 <1.40 ' <1.20 <1.30 <1.38 <1.0 9 Fe-59 < 2.03 <2.51 <1.73 <2.b7 <3.09 <1.71 Co-60 <1.05 <1.52 <1.28 <1.57 <2.00 <1.20 K-40 < 10.7 <17.9 <14.6 <14.4 <20.4 9.616.4 y, .' .
'f
'g\ $ c 3x 4 . - y A.' ,
,- TABLE 9
+ IB
.E PA.IP/JAF SITEilCiR. ATE SAlW'LES - 0FF SITE STATIO11S
'ENYl.cleEllial. AI. 0.EIA ACilVITY pCi/a*312 Signa C.0SS LOCATION E EIS s EE. ATE C--OFF n-OFF D2-OFF E--OFF F-0FF C--OFF INim 1:lifil: 1:l!n!:!!! 1:l!!!!:!!! 1:Su:Hi wms won
.mn..m ..mn.m . . m.un n
.m . .n
.nm..n .I:l!Dl:n!
.um..n
.mn.m
.!:n#.!:m
.ng..
. mn.m
. .nm..n
.an .m ..mn..n
.mn..n ...nm..n .nsn.. n mn . .m .nm..n au.mn w ms . mn . .mn.m .nsn.m . nn.m
.nm . .n .nsn.m wnm .mn. n . .mnun.m. m .nsu.m .nm.m
.mn.m . n.n . m <
1.:.l,$Hl:m L'1 .13 i I.:.l!!,!!:l.l.3 !
lb'l bin t, 1:liSil:l!!a u . u , ,n .. ":l.il!l:l.li
.m
..um. n L:lisil:l.lt u.um. n
..nm..n I.:.l!NI:l.lt nm.
.. n o. ..n n 1. . I wwn . . nsa . .u . . n m . .n
..nm..n
. . n m . .n
..mn..n wwn . . m n . .n . . mn . .n ..nsn.m n Ew.s wa 1.an.m
. ..um nm. . m.
.mn.m.n
.nm. ..m..m
. .n ...n2. m ..n m...n.3
..ii1 ..
. m. u.2 ...n
..mn n
...iu ..3
.nm..n .iun..n .nm.
.nm. n w.m, .nsa.
wwa .nm. . ..mn nsa . . . .n .nm..n ..nm..
..nm. n. .n..mn.m ,r. . .n n
. n o. . .n w s. . . mn n. .n ...nm.n
.. n m .mn..n wwu ..mn.
. .um..
. mn . .u n . . n m . .n n nmn. .n...nm.m ..nsa.n.n
.nm.
3 ..
. i.3
.. .n,n. .1.
..n. ..n w es m
.. .nm.
. n m.n. .n
. . nm . .n
..nm..n ..nm. .nsa . .n
.nm.m
.nm..n
..mn..n
. . n m . ..
..i r 3 a
Elb.
wmn sm.) . u m . ..
n 1.nm..n
...nm.m
.um . .n
..n
. . .m ul..n
. .n ..un..n
. . um . m
..nsu..n
. . um . .n
. . n m . .n
. ..sg
. nm.n3. .n oma ..mn.nm.m ..n . nm . .n . .. m nm.
1:In;11:ll!
. .n . .n ..nm.m ..um..n . . nm. . .n l El#1! 1:Init:lll 1: mil:m n
I:Bil:l!!
..nsn.m .MiHl:m 1:ns.l:lli
. anm .. ,..n ..ng
, u. .m .. m. .un
. m .. m . .. nm.m .. . .n ...nm.m nm . m . um..n ..n li. .mn..l!! 1:g!!!!:l!! l:.nm.m ll!!!:
.EM;m E l: 1:N!!:"!! .
..nm..lli 1:l!Hl:!n
..nm..n 1..:nm:ll!
.an . .
w.m. .nm .n.n ..nm.m . . nso . .u . . nm n. .n ..nm..n . nm . .n
..n
..n m..n.
m.. m
..nm.m ..nsa..nm
... ...mn.m
.. um n . .n
- ll3>. ..nm.m .no..ln .nsa.m usu. .n w.m
=w
..um.m
. .u 1. .. ..nm. . . .n
. .w. . .u.s ...
. .m. . n3 m.. ..n
.. m.. m.
. . nm . m
..um.m . mn . .n wwll 1. im.n...
. .n
.. ..nm
.. m .... .n
..nm.m
..an
.. m ...n
...un..
. .nm.m m.
. nm n..n
. . .un . .n
. .nm
. nm . .n
.,m.
. ..ns.mn. l.
..m nn. n. .mn..m . nm.
n
. .m. . .n
.mn . n
. nm . .n
..m
... .un.
. . nm . .n
. .. . n .n o.. m.
.mn.m E!N wmil omi 1.:.111!!:m um..n 1.:.ll#1:ll . 1:l..!,!!!.:!.!!
ir.
1:n'!!:!n
. 2 1... 3 !.:l!!!U.n.3
. 2ir..
Ulm:Hi3
. 2 1...
n l:..nm..1 n . nm . .n . . mn . .n . um . .n ,
l$mu 11'41 wi .
l.uiI:.llt
. . um..n
- u. m.m t!!:
..nm..lltlIm..n
. . mn n. .n 1:lllli.llt..}m.3
..mn. n
.I:ll!!.!:ll!
g
. . n.i,1. ....n.3 1:lNI:!!!
. . n. i,m.
1 .. . .n.3 1: lim:llt
.. n. 1.m... . .n.3
. nn .n
..mn:en ...un..n
- u. ..
- u. it..u. 1.nsa.ln
.nm.u .12m.m 1.mo:.n
.um m . . .un . m . .um.m
. usu . .n Ein!' u:lE!!:2 1:11111:2 1:ll!!!:lli I:ll!!!:ll! I:lli!Uli I:!all:n!
TABLE 10 tW/JAF SITE ENVIRONttENTAl. AIRBORNE PARTICU1.AIE sal 1PLES - DN SITE STATI0llS CROSS !< ETA ACTIV1TY pCi/n'3 1 2 Signa LOCATION WEEt END
+
DATE 31-DN D2-UN E--DN f-OH C-ON H-DN I-ON J--Dil K--DN 83/11/18 8.822*I.II3 8.827+8.II4 8.82t+0.II4 0.121*I.804 I.824*I.005 0.021el.203 8.823*I.803 0.023+0.II3 0.022*0.II3 83/01/17 8.8'.5TI.II3 3.016TI.II3 0.818TO.ID3 I.121i0.004 0.117TI.II4 0.016TI.103 0.018TI.003 0.02iTO.003 1.013TO.Ib3 83/81/24 1.121TO.883 0.127T8.007 8.023TI.IO4 0.124Tt.IIS 8.123TI.II5 I.121TI.004 0.121TI.803 0.018TI.183 0.12170.003 83/01/31 8.82tTI.II3 0.024TI.II4 0.025T3.IO4 8.824TI.005 0.123TI.II5 0.027TI.IO4 0.123T8.813 I.026TO.IIS 8.017TO.003 83/02/07 0.117T0.083 0.119T0.II4 8.82818.114 0.122T0.015 0.018TI.II4 0.026T4.II4 0.016T8.183 0.016TO.013 0.018T0.003 83/82/14 8.021T8.II3 8.12BTS .It5 8.123T0.004 0.021T0.015 0.82210.005 0.021,0.884 0.019TI.003 0.02310.003 0.021T8.004 83/12/22 0.031T0.013 3.039TI.IIS 3.141TI.105 t.844TI.II6 1.048TI.II4 0.02710.003 0.028TO.103 0.024TO.083 0.058TO.II7 83/12/28 0.124TI.II4 0.023T0.815 0.12918.115 8.028TI.IO6 1.12111.884 0.021T8.804 0.02tTO.II4 0.018i8.884 0.022TO.004
[ 83/03/07 8.124TI.II3 8.826T8.II5 0.023T3.II4 0.024TO.815 0.024TI.II4 I.82218.064 0.117T0.II3 0.02410.004 0.024TO.065 1 83/83/14 s.814TI.813 I.gi4T8.It3 8.814T8.103 0.013T8.084 I.Ii3TI.II3 8.Il3TI.ID3 8.114T0.013 0.013TO.883 0.013TO.003 83/53/21 B.115TI.II3 3.821TI.II4 0.01BTO.834 0.115T0.815 8.liSig.lI3 0.017i0.003 8.814T0.813 0.014TO.103 1.011TO.003 83/I3/28 0.823TI. tit I.027TO.II4 0.129T8.814 8.832TI.085 0.127TI.II4 8.125TO.004 0.024T8.003 8.127TO.003 0.026TO.004 83/I4/84 8.825TI.II4 0.023TI.II4 0.021T8.884 0.126T8.005 0.122TI.It4 8.120TI.II3 0.820TO.183 0.026TO.003 0.021TI.003 83/84/11 8.015T8.303 8.812T8.II3 8.811TI.II3 I.108TI.II3 0.011TI.II3 0.015TI.II3 8.II?TO.II2 I.II7TI.082 I.009TO.002 83/04/18 I.818T4.883 8.81350.II4 8.114T8.103 0.11510.004 I.815T4.814 0.11110.103 0.014TS.It3 0.025T4.II9 0.011TO.II3 s 83/84/25 0.015TI II3 0.118i8.114 I.813TI.II3 0.11511.004 0.812TI.II3 I.li6TI.103 0.014T8.083 1.015T8.003 8.014TO.003 83/05/12 8.121Ts.II3 3.119ft.314 8.821TI.II4 8.119T8.004 0.01918.804 0.023T8.884 8.020TI.003 0.li6TI.004 8.018TO.003 83/85/19 0.819T8.883 I.81610.814 8.11818.813 0.114T3.103 0.017TI.II4 S.125T8.004 3.016TO.103 0.016T8.II3 0.014TO.003
.) 83/IS/16 0.013TI.003 8.816TI gl4 8.IISTI.004 I.812T8.883 0.01210.004 8.Illit.II3 8.Il2TI.II3 8.013T3.103 0.012TO.103 l 83/85/23 0.024TI II4 I.822TO.II4 0.122T8.IO4 8.Il6TI.II4 0.123TI.Its 8.123TO.II4 0.019TI.II3 0.017TI.II3 1.018TO.013 4
83/15/31 8.114TI.II2 0.013TI.II3 0.81218.812 I.114T8.003 0.011TI 813 8.116TI.003 0.013TI.II2 8.112TO.002 1.010T0.102
. 83/86/86 0.014TI.II3 0.016T1.184 8.116T8.103 0.015T0.003 0.113T8.003 8.819TI.003 0.814TO.II3 0.013TO.DI2 0.011TO.II2 83/16/13 0.125TI.II4 0.026TI.II3 0.82818.t04 0.828TI.IO4 4.827TI.003 0.025TI.II3 8.125T8.003 0.021T0.013 3.022TO.003 83/06/28 8.839TI.084 0.I49T8.006 0.145T8.015 0.037TI.It4 8.129TI.II4 8.033T3.gl4 0.014T8.002 0.153TI.005 8.028TO.013 4 83/86/27 8.827TI.II3 8.425T0.004 0.025TI.814 8.125T8.It4 8.421T0.014 0.123T8.103 0.123T8.II3 0.019TI.004 0.020TI.003
! 83/07/85 0.820TI gI3 8.322TI.II3 0.12111.103 8.81930.185 8.822TI.It3 8.022TI.II3 0.016T0.012 0.020TO.004 0.015TO.002
,. 83/07/11 0.018TI.II3 B.82110.114 8.821TI.II3 8.822T8.183 I.824TI.It4 I.Ii8TI gI3 g.118TI.003 I.015ig.803 0.017TO.103 1 83/07/18 0.825it.II4 0.028TI.IIS I.129i8.004 8.831TI.II4 0.032TI.IIS 3.130TO.II4 0.815T1.803 0.023T8.004 I.827TO.004 83/47/26 8.826T3.gI3 3.127TI.II4 0.125TI.II3 8.028TI.II3 8.823TI.II3 8.825TI.103 8.034TI.005 0.022TI.013 1.022TO.003 il 0.030Ts.gl3 l 83/18/81 0.829TI.If4 0.13210.115 0.128TI.II4 8.129T8.II4 0.024TO.II4 8.829T8.004 0.018TO.882 0.022TO.003 1 83/18/8 0.026TI.lI3 I.829TI.II4 I.82618.113 8.126T3.113 s.818TI.003 0.826TI.II3 0.127TI.003 0.025TI.II3 0.028TO.003 1 83/08/15 I.I15TI.813 0.01718.113 8.821TI.!I3 0.021T8.II3 8.118il.II3 0.I15T3.103 0.317T0.113 0.01BTO.II3 0.018T0.903 03/88/22 0.134TI.884 1.340TI.805 0.031TI.II4 0.031TI.It3 3.032TI.II4 0.033TI.II4 8.024TO.003 0.039TO.003 0.031TO.803 1* 83/I8/29 0.831TI.II3 I.03I18.184 0.033TI.II4 0.837TI.013 0.033TI.II4 0.017T8.II3 0.025TI.II3 8.131TI.tI3 0.013TO.002 83/89/6 0.145TO.II4 0.852TI.105 8.851TI.dI4 8.15tTI.II4 I.842TI.II4 I.851TI.II4 8.854T8.II4 8.045TO.IO4 1.042TO.883 83/19/12 0.030T8.II4 8.834T4.II5 0.830T3.II4 0.028TI.II3 0.026TI.II4 0.030T8.II4 g.030TI.IO4 8.027TO.004 8.02270.013 83/19/19 8.821TI.883 0.124TB.II4 0.123T8.II4 0.126TI.Il3 0.01718.113 8.822T8.103 8.120TI.II3 0.021T0.003 B.118T0.333 83/19/26 0.126T8.003 8.126T8.II4 8.823TI.814 0.126TI.013 8.826TI.II4 3.320TI.003 g.127il.II3 0.830TO.003 1.121TI.003 83/18/3 8.136TI.tO4 0.341T8.005 I.835Ts.II4 s.138Ts.II4 0.135TI.II4 8.835Ts.II4 8.835TO.II4 8.g3170.022 0.134TO.It3 j 83/10/11 8.027T8.II3 0.333it.814 1.028TI.II3 0.030TI.II3 0.127TI.II3 0.gi4Ts.103 0.022it.II3 0.829TI.803 I.02270.013
- 83/11/17 0.117T8.013 I.117TI.804 0.015T1.113 0.02111.014 0.11518.013 0.017T0.103 0.115TO.083 0.813TO.003 0.016TO.003 l 83/10/24 8.823TI.II3 I.129T8.114 8.022TI.II4 I.123TI.II3 8.823T4.II3 8.12DT0.803 0.813TO.IO2 0.023TI.003 1.822TI.003
- 83/10/31 8.128TI.III 0.018TI.It4 8.81978.083 8.019il.II3 8.822il.II3 8.618il.II3 5.821i8.804 0.019i0.803 1.015i0.003 i 83/11/87 8.11678.883 0.018i0.814 8.81970.103 0.015i8.003 8.01670.103 s.818i8.883 0.017il.II3 013TI.012 0.014i0.802 4 83/11/14 8.131T0.004 8.34110.005 0.83410.004 0.130TI.II4 8.83518.II4 0.124TI.804 0.027TO.II4 B.034T0.004 8.832T8.004 0.
- 83/11/21 8.027T8.III 3.i27TI.812 8.837TO.II2 0.035T8.II2 8.831TI.II2 1.821T8.101 0.021T3.III I.132TO.IO2 0.021T0.011
, 83/11/28 0.824TI.313 8.823TI.II4 8.I27T3.II4 8.82318.013 0.12910.II4 8.02118.II3 1.015TI.II2 8.024TI.003 0.027TO.003 83/12/5 I.818i0.101 0.121it.II4 8.022i0.003 8.018TI.II3 8.01978.003 3.024TI.II6 8.120il.II3 0.018i8.003 0.017T0.813 83/12/12 8.827T0.003 0.030T0.004 8.831T8.884 0.13210.004 8.12I10.003 8.026TO.004 s.129TI.II4 0.027TI.084 8.02310.003 83/12/19 I.816T8.311 3.122T0.102 I.II2TI.III I.819TI.III I.86210.012 0.32918.002 8.81BTI.III I.019TO.III I.020TO.tI2 83/12/27 0.028TO.III I.146TO.II2 8.033TI.812 8.127TI.Ig1 3.114T3.111 t.430TI.802 0.043TO.II2 0.030TB.002 8.031T0.002
- 84/81/3 8.151i8.883 8.043T8.II2 I.045TS.II2 0.026T3.sti I.146T_I.II2 0.144TI.II2 0.038TO.II2 8.143TO.002 0.033TO.102 mre
TABLE 11 CONCENTRATIONS OF CAMMA EHITTERS IN HONTilLY COMPOSITES OF JAF AIR PARTICULA 1E SAMPLIS 1983 Results in Units of 10-3 pC1/m3 + 2 sigma
.Nuclides January- -February March April May June OFFSITE COMPOSITE l Ce-144 <0.794 <0.939 <0.805 < 0. 012 <0.777 <0.913 Ce-141' <0.296 <0.353 <0.299 <0.338 <0.268 <0.355
, Be-7 77.664.3 126+5 111+4 88.7+4.5 87.St4.0 136+ 6 R u-103 <0.2YS <0.Y77 < 0.Y06 < 0.2T7 <0.138 <0.I45 i
<0.172 <0.192 .<0.193 <0.134 <0.189 Cs-134 <0.167 Cs-137 . <0.222 0.210+0.167 0.172+0.097 <0.229 0.10860.075 0.25610.130 Zr-95 <0.561 <0.548 <0.383 <0.601 <0.35T <0.546 l Nb--95 <0.241 <0.340 <0.24 3 <0.34 0 <0.177 <0.306 Co-58 <0.223 <0.266 <0.172 <0.229 0.180 0.210 0 .Hn-54 <0.165 <0.218 <0.182 <0.199 <0.137 ' <0.175 Co-60 < 0.252 <0.270 <0.215 <0.260 0.113+0.069 <0.255 ONSITE COMPOSITE Ce-144 < 0.654 <0.760 <0.532 < 0.647 <0.585 < 0.746 Ce-141 - <0.245 <0.271 <0.221 <0.246 <0.209 <0.320 Be-7 74.8t3.6 104+4 100t4 77.0t3.6 9 3.0+3.7 133+5
.Ru-103 < 0.170 <0.Y04 <0.T79 ,<0.172 < 0.172 - < 0.110 Cs-134 <0.172 <0.156 <0.103 i <0.123 <0.106 < 0.141
- A 'Cs-137 -~<0 . 176 -0.190+0.086 0.178+ 0.097 0.191+ 0.098 <0.166 0.253t0.13 5 a~i ' Zr-95 <0.411 <0.423 <0.36E <0.427 <0.324 <0.39I ' '
Nb <0.209- .<0.232 <0.197 <0.180 4 <0.154 . <0.26 0
-Co-58' <0.184 <0.178 <0.130 <0.154 <0.125 < 0.1'il
Hn-54 <0.157 <0.142 10.270+ 0.140 <0.135 <0.116 <0.177 Co-60 ' <0.236 <0.217 s . . ' < 0 .16T - <0.160 0.18440.095 "0.29540.121
! i i 3 h %
~,
g7 i: , ..
4
. b_ A' *
- , ,- g s ,
t - - -
i
- - - -,i-----
k__.. ' -
{_
TABLE 11 (con.t.)
CONCENTRATIONS OF CAHMA EHITTERS IN HONTilLY COMPOSITES OF JAF AIR PARTICULA 1E SAMPLLS 1983 i,
Results in Units of 10-3 pC1/m3 + 2 sigma Nuclides July August September OctoLcr November December OFFSITE COMPOSITE Ce-144 <0.847 <0.748 <0.750 <0.785 <0.652 <0.702 Ce-141c <0.338 <0.308 .<0.282 < 0. 300 <0.225 <0.512 Be-7 136+5 135t5 .106+ 4 89.4+4.3 95.813.1 81.2+4.9
' R u-103 <0.T90 <0.T86 <0.T82 < 0.1V5 < 0.172 <0.360 Cs-134 <0.167 ,< 0.156 < 0.117 <0.156 < 0.150 <0.131 Cs-137 <0.195 <0.220 <0.147 <0.190 <0.153 <0.169 Zr-95 <0.488 <0.384 <0.373 <0.498 <0.369 <0.569 N b-95 <0.268 <0.251 <0.189 <0.220 <0.202 <0.461 Co-58 <0.163 <0.195 <0.172 .<0.229 0.171 0.258
$ Hn-54 <0.147 <0.218 <0.182 <0.199 .<0.137 <0.17 5 Co-60 0.16340.107 0.366,10.193 <0.176 <0.184 <0.185 0.526,10.163 ONSITE COMPOSITE ce-144 <0.709 <0.660 <0.546 <0.593 <0.625 <0.591 Ce-141 <0.294- < 0.281 ' <0.236 < 0. 217 .<0.230 <0.435 Be-7 130+5 118+ 4 85.2+3.4 75.2+3.3 82.1+3.4 81.6+4.1 R u-103 ' <0.T75 <0.T68 < 0.1TO < 0.1T7 <0.165 <0.275 l Cs-134 . <0.117 < 0.113 <0.108 <0.112 <0.121 <0.099 j' .<0.137' <0.152 <0.133 Ca-137 0.131+0.102 0.180+0.075 <0.130 Zr < 0.353 .<0.305 <0.350 <0.281 '<0.379 <0.466 Hb-95 <0.219' ~ 0.216
< <0.175 <0.175 <0.203 <0.530 200-58 <0.182 <0.147 < 0.158 <0.139 <0.177 < 0.190 Hn-54 _ <0.136' <0.138 <0.147 <0.110 <0.184 <0.137 Co-60 <0.179 < 0.17 7 :0.217,10.097 <0.150 <0.219 0.70810.154 s
ll .l lll 1ll1li F
F O !36')88855987728433475594726554678018309427H308878
!11l112111121121111111121i111111112222221 1 2 21112
!100000108000800000000100.l.00098808000000.
180lu00lu0I000400010 188l. : 0 le.I0 G 1 ((((((((((((((((((((t0080I1I80100111tI10 (((((((((((((((((((((( l ((((((
I4l fs1I F
F 3269263714856200991591758775768618196450656t845194
!21{u1112212122211210110111010i011211112111i2 D
! 900.I.088000000000000080000.I.0080800800088. 00.l .21212 100lu00lu0I00008000I00I0OI84s8t0t
. : . I.0. I.0 F 1(((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((000I0000I0l0 (((((((((l((((((
tuII S
N D
I T
A T
S F E
T F
D !849718398898802959596894767519668562734a87n927912
!12112221112122211111111111111111111i112i11 l 00.I.088000.I.0000000000081000.I.00000080.l.000,l.00.I S0.I.000 i21122 I - 108I0IO0OII0000008000I0I00088 S E 1 (((((((((((((((((((((((((((((0t0088II000800I (((((((((((((I((((((
0It08 F
F 0a
-p i
Ss E
L2 P
EM1 TA 2 IS3 N 1 S
- O EnI F E FG/ T L ADi A O F t20739866799264556999111279286622271566I487!729271 i 2212i2121012111111011111011l11112121012211 l ii1222 B JIC C A /Rp O 2
- l: 008300080100.I.0080000181800.l.u00000000000000l i0008000I0t1
. . : . .8S0408 T
F1 IRY L D f ((((((((((((0000000I00008000800000I00I09
(((((((((((( (((((( ((((((((((((!(((t ((
80!080800 NAT CI V
L1 A1 0C CA I
A1 H3 C1 lI .-
A T F 079306139783035359268564082735496i74065,12i543093 N
E M
F O
M211123221112211111111111211111112211212121!ii1212
!108800008800088000009000000088000800000000.!S.0000 N i l80I800000O80I80 : . . . . .
O R
D i((((((((((((((((000O0000tB08t0000080I00O
(((((((((((((((((((((((((( 008(((00t0 0
(((
I V
N E
F F
D 1 2551581811906205337i9291512414667382945566 !! 22i2121 2112121222221111110i1111112111111111112121 4708
- 1 00.I.86000,08180000010.t.00000808800000000800 88.!: 0.t.8,000 C 8 ((((l((((00800008408000000I608I0t00000I88 I8I 00
( ((((( ( ((((((( ((( ((((( ((( ( ( (( (( (( (!(0O!000000 (((((
E
- 518 18529529631741741862272 631 307 385 - g 29 l200 g101220112011200122612209123712'%11210i261224 308-T -
A-l000 _1122//////////////////////////////////////////l//////
p6 3333 3444455556666677 778888899990 00 11!ia2221 8000000000800000000880000800000111i11!ii1110
.n888g 333 8888888888888884888888888888888888 3333333333333333333333333333333333 D-l///////////////////////////////////////w3g/'d33334
/
8B*
l/////
88888 t :1 il.l' ll' ll
1ABLE 13 NNP/JAF SITE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARCOAL CARTRIDGE SAMPLES - DN SITE STATIONS I-131 ACTIVITY pCi/n 3 1 2 signa LOCATION WEEE END BA1E D1-DN D2-DN E-DN F--DN C--OH H--ON 1--DN J--DN K--DN l 83/01/18 (0.017 (0.019 (I.017 (8.823 (0.018 (0.023 (0.013 (0.013 (0.011 83/81/17 (0.012 (8.824 (0.025 (0.030 (0.026 (0.014 (0.017 (0.018 (0.011
- 83/01/24 (0.021 (0.047 (0.020 (0.026 (0.029 (0.019 (I.018 (0.023 (0.017 83/01/31 (0.010 (I.016 (0.023 (0.026 (I.036 8.02260.015 (0.018 (I.020 (8.822 83/02/07 (0.014 (8.820 (0.023 (0.038 (0.029 (1.527 (8.024 (I.021 (0.021 83/02/14 (8.017 (0.021 (0.021 (0.026 (0.029 (0.019 (0.010 (0.123 (0.025 83/02/22 '(0.018 (0.033 (0.027 (0.031 (0.816 (0.023 (8.816 (0.028 (1.045 83/02/28 (I.015 (8.028 (I.026 (0.134 (8.027 (0.838 (0.021 (0.021 (0.021 83/03/07 (0.017 (8.033 (8.818 (8.032 (0.023 (0.021 (0.021 (0.825 (1.033 83/03/14 (0.018 (0.018 (I.019 (0.027 (0.816 (0.017 (8.816 (0.020 (0.118 83/03/21 (0.018 (0.026 (I.027 (0.022 (8.020 (0.023 (4.017 (0.822 (0.011 83/03/28 (0.020 (0.029 (0.018 (I.835 (8.015 (8.114 (0.022 (0.016 (0.019 83/04/84 (0.015 (0.024 (0.019 (0.038 (0.134 (0.023 (0.015 (I.116 (8.015 83/84/11 (0.029 (0.024 (0.819 (0.031 (0.016 (0.016 (0.113 (0.016 (I.020 83/04/18 (0.021 (I.025 (0.016 (0.029 (0.015 (0.019 (0.018 (0.868 (0.011 83/04/25 (0.010 (I.830 (8.I!8 (0.020 (0.020 (0.022 (0.02I (I.022 (0.018 83/05/02 (0.009 (0.821 (0.818 (0.022 (0.027 (0.019 (0.017 (0.026 (0.012 93/05/09 (0.014 '(0.021 (I.014 (8.819 (8.023 (0.019 (0.019 (8.817 (0.815 83/05/16 (0.017 (I.025 (0.021 (0.028 (0.023 (0.420 (0.820 (0.018 (4.613 83/05/23 (8.815 (0.021 (0.832 (0.815 (I.019 (0.020 (0.019 (0.015 (I.815 83/05/31 (0.016 (0.024 (8.015 (0.017 (0.834 (0.022 (0.018 (0.819 (0.014 83/06/06 (0.814 (0.023 (0.023 (0.014 (0.030 0.032+I.017 (0.823 (0.028 (0.011 '
83/06/13 (0.017 (0.021 (I.817 (0.016 (0.020 0.035T0.016 (8.019 (0.012 (8.115 83/06/20 (0.017 (0.031 .(0.029 (0.017 (0.027 (0.519 (0.021 (0.031 (0.018 3 83/86/27 (0.017 (0.029 (0.012 (8.028 (0.017 (0.022 (0.013 (I.027 (0.024 03/07/05 (0.012 (8 (0.011 (0.844 (0.019 (0.021 (0.011 (0. 028 (0.011 83/07/11 (4.518 (0.013 016 (0.028 (0.016 (0.827 (0.024 (0.011 (0.818 (0.017 83/07/18 (0.009 (I.019 (8.016 (8.810 (0.028 (0.823 (0.015 (0.018 (0.014 83/07/26 (0.813 (0.019 (0.823 (8.013 (0.014 (0.021 (0.031 (I.012 (0.813
.83/08/01 (0.019 (0.013 (0.024 -(0.014 .(0.024 (4.818 (0.016 (0.017 (0.018 83/08/9 (0.016 (0.026 (0.017 (0.014 (0.008 (0.820 (8.010 (0.017 (0.817 83/08/15 (0.012 -(0.015 (0.019 (0.016 (0.819 (0.015 (0.012 (0.015 (0.014 83/08/22- (8.814 (0.025 (0.017 (0.015 (0.007 (0.016 (0.016 (0.015 (0.I19 83/08/29 (0.015 (0.414 (8.018 (0.015 (0.018 (0.013 (0.014 (0.010 (0.015 83/09/6 (0.014 (0.016 (0.013 (0.014 (0.017 (0.088 (I.014 (0.014 (I.011 83/09/12 (8.017 (0.024 (0.018 (0.019 (0.019 (0.028 (0.022 (8.121 (0.011 83/09/19 '(0.823 (0.831 (0.030 (8.022 (0.025 (0.025 (0.026 (0.021 (0.016 83/89/26 (0.022 - (0.928 (8.019 (8.016 (0.016 (0.025 (0.016 (I.015 (8.011 83/10/3 (0.019 (0.024 (0.025 (0.016 (0.822 (I.022 (0.018 (I.123 (0.018 83/14/11 .(0.021 (0.038 (0.016 (0.013 (0.886 (0.822 (0.023 (0.025 (0.015
-83/10/17 (0.025 (8.037 (B.022 (0.026 (0.025 (0.029 (0.019 (0.020 (0.027 83/10/24 (0.017 (O.836 (0.025 (0.017 (0.016 (I.014 (0.024 (I.018 (1.018 83/is/31 (8.821 (0.025 (0.018 (8.019 (0.024 (0.017 (0.028 (0.012 (I 118 83/11/87 (0.014 '(0.022 (0.817 (0.019 (0.421 (8.018 (0.018 (0.013 (0.019 83/11/14 (0.123 (0.034 -(8.026 (0.023 (0.021 (0.I'I (8.019 0.023 (I.017 83/11/21 (0.024 (0.030 (0.029 (0.029 (0.032 (0.8$4 (0.025 (0.025
( (1.028 83/11/28 (0.017 (8.823 (I.024 (0.017 (0.816 (0.014 (0.020 (0.011 (0.821 83/12/5 ' (0.823 (0.832 (I.823 (0.818 (0.024 (8.078 (I.019 (0.022 (0.017 83/12/12 (0.017 (0.035 -(0.020 (0.017 (0.024 (0.019 (0.020 (0.022 (0.012 83/12/19 (0.019 '(0.838 (I.024 (0.815 (0.018 0.82348.813 (0.019 (0.023 (0.123 03/12/27 (8.019 . (0.026 - (0.826 -(0.019 (0.026 (0.520 (0.031 (0.826 (0.025
~'84/01/3 .(8.040 (0.041 (8.025 (0.818 (8.028 (0.826 (0.025 (I.032 (I.024
- - - ~ . -
TABLE 14 DIRECT RADIATION HEASUREMENTS - QUARTERLY RESULTS (1983)
Results in Units of mrem /Std. Mc. nth + 2 Sign.s
- STATION JANUARY APRIL JULY OCTOBER LOCATION TilROUCll TilROUCil TilR00Cll TitROU611 NUMBER LOCATION (L1REL110N ANL MARCll JUNE SEPTDtBER DECEMBER (DISTANCE)*
3 D1 on Site 12.89+1.88 10.81+0.66 6.75+0.84 16.5+1.0
- 4. D2 on Site 0.25 miles e 69*
5 7.00il .23 5.96TO.43 5.66i0.98 7.270.5 0.40 miles 8140
- E on Site 5.71TO.61 6.13T1.31 5.3970.64 6.4TO.6 0.40 miles e 175*
6 F on Site 5.30i0.51 5.0870.17 (T) 5.6i0.3 7' C on Site 0.50 miles 0 210*
5.60iO.52 5.80TO.53 5.2740.44 6.3TO.2 0.70 miles 6 250*
'8 C off Site 7.17i0.56 6.82il.11 9
5.75i0.37 6.170.4 16.00 miles e 42*
D1 off Site 6.09IO.89 5.31TO.48 4.61T0.82 5.5T0.1 11.40 miles 6 80*
10 D2 of f Site 5.92io.26 5.00i0.72 5.1670.40 5.7i0.4 11 E off Site 9.00 miles 0117* l 5.4 6T0.45 5.59TO.99 5.31TO.75 5.3TO.3 7.20 miles e 160*
> 12 F of f Site 5.64i0.34 4.64TO.72 5.1770.17 5.4i0.2 l
13 C off Site 7.70 miles e 190*
- 5.77T0.41 5.52TO.26 5.05TO.37 5.8TO.3 5.30 miles % 225*
14' DeHass Rd, SW Oswego-Control 5.85T0.49 5.34TO.54 -
15 4.8670.69 5.7TO.2 12.80 miles 6 225*
Pole 66, W. Boundary-Bible Camp 5.36TO.61 4.3q0.32 18 Progress Center-Picnic Area 5.31_T1.00 5.5140.62 5.62+0.56 4 80.2 0.50 miles e 236*
19 East Boundary-JAF, Pole 9 5.50+ 0.9 0 6.8+0.3 0.50 miles 6 268*
5.83T0.33 6.82TO.25 5.11TO.66 5.6TO.7 1.30 miles 6 81*
23 H on Site 8.9770.70 7.46T1.31 5.9070.19 8.5i0.6 0.80 alles 6 71*
24 I on Site 6.59T1.08 6.44TO.98 25 (T) 6.2T0.6 0.00 miles 9 56*
J on Site 6.04+0.21 6.50+1.33 26 5.41+0.16 6.4+0.3 0.90 miles G 110
- K on Site 5.03IO.62 27 6.31T_0.31 6.73_IO.26 6.0T0.4 0.50 miles e 131*
Nor. Fence-NNW Sector, JAF 20.95+2.23 15.76+2.55 28 Light Pole (E) JAF 47.05I5.10 10.78+ 0.76 21.5+2.2 0.40 alles 0 60*
41.17_II.93 26.18T3.56 52.4T4.3 0.50 miles 8 6h*
29' Nor. Fence (E) JAF 74.80+11.44 58.20+10.58 33.21+2.21 72.8+3.9
.30 Nor. Fence (NW) JAF 16.02I0.74 0.50 miles 0 65*
13.85_T2.35 9.16TO.4 7 18.6T1.2 0.40 miles'8 5)*
31 Nor. Fence (NW) NMP-1 21.39+2.05 39-17.96+1.64 17.65+1.28 - 21.6+0.5 0.20 miles G 290
- East Fence, Rad. Waste-NMP-l' 58.04T5.78 12.65T1.76 12.83TO.79
-43 16.3TO.4 0.10 miles 6 292*
.9 mi Rt. 3 from Rt.104B 6.0171.30 6.5570.39 5.3270.60 44 Cor. Rt 3 and Kelly Drive 6.1770.53 5.4TO.3 9.40 miles 0 88*
5.99_T1.15 5.35_TO.26 5.9TO.2 11.60 miles 6 64*
l TAllLE 14 (Con' t.)
l DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENTS - QUARTERLY RESULTS (1983)
Results in Units of mrem /Std. Month + 2 SILLS JANUARY APRIL JULY OCTOBER LOCATION
- STATION TilROUCil TilROUGil Ti!R00Cil ThR00Cil (IARECTION AND NUMBER LOCATION HARCll JUNE SEPTEHBER DECEMBER (DISTANCE)*
45 Cor. Rt 64 and Rt. 35 6.1440.36 6.56+1.12 5.3910.54 6.640.5 7.60 miles e 130*
46 Cor. Rt 176 and Black Creek Rd. 5.75i0.19 5.9070.75 5.08i0.47 6.0i0.7 7.90 miles 0178*
47 NE Shoreline (JAF) 45.33T9.97 17.15T1.57 8.76T1.14 16.970.7 0.60 miles e 65* j 48 .36 mi (N) on Access Rd. (JAF) 7.9570.74 6.77i0.17 (IT 7.3i0.3 0.60 miles 6 92* '
6 49 Phoenix, NY-Control 5.82TO.57 5.70TO.57 4.99+0.44 4.9T0.2 26.00 miles 6 165*
50 Lake Rd. West of -J On-Site (1) 6.4870.65 4.8270.44 5.6i0.3 0.70 miles 0 115*
51 Oswego Steam Sta. N End of W Fence 6.1440.22 5.76TO.18 (17 (T) 7.50 miles e 233*
52 East 111th St. Fitzhugh Park Sch. 5.62+0.57 4.9311.39 5.02+0.30 5.9+0.4 5.80 alles G 227*
53 Broadwell & Chestnut Sts-Fulton II.S. 5.98TO.30 5.74TO.36 5.54TO.05 5.870.1 15.70 miles 8 185*
54 Liberty St. & Co. Rt.16-Mexicoll.S. 5.2370.35 5.6070.23 4.76i0.31 5.Oi0.2 9.30 milch 6 115*
( $; 55 Ilinnmann Rd. & Co. Rt. 5-Pulaski II.S. 5.72TO.26 5.56TO.38 4.64TO.71 5.0TO.2 13.70 miles 8 75*
56 Rt.104 - New Ilaven li.S. (SE Corner) 6.02i0.08 6.17il.43 5.15i0.44 6.3i0.3 5.46 alles 6120" 57 Co. Rt. 296Hiner Rd.(SE)-Lycoming,NY 5.77_T0.51 5.76_TO.21 4.21TO.52 5.3TO.3 1.90 miles 8 145*
58 Co. Rt.1 - ALCAN (S of Entrance Rd.) 5.4140.26 6.1810.77 5.13+ 0.59 6.0t0.2 3.20 miles 6 220*
0.50 miles e 95*
59 Environmental Lab - JAF 20.3773.17
~
15.07T3.57
~
9.32 1.46
~
31.1T3.4
~
60 S. Shore (Fish Point) Little Sodus Bay, NY 6.7440.32 6.1940.14 5.1640.51 4.6+0.1 21.00 miles 8 225*
61 700' N of $48 (On Access Rd.)-JAF 10.4770.75 8.49i0.34 (IT 9.9i0.8 0.80 milcs 8 83*
65 Dutch Ridge Rd. & Kerfien Rd.(SE) 5.74TO.26 5.46+6.58 4.9740.85 4 7T0.1 7.60 miles 0 196*
(1) TLDs lost 0 Direction and distance based on NHP-2 Reactor Centerline
TABLE 15 CONTINUOUS RADIATION MONITORS * (GM[
mR/hr FIRST HALF mR/hr LOCATION PERIOD 1983 MIN. MAX. AVG.
C Offsite 01/05 to 02/01 0.010 0.050 0.015 02/01 to 03/01 0.010 0.020 0.015 03/01 to 03/29 0.010 0.025 0.015 03/29 to 04/26 0.010 0.080 0.030 04/26 to 05/24 0.010 0.025 0.018 05/24 to 06/28 0.010 0.023 0.018 D1 Onsite 01/06 to 02/03 0.010 0.045 0.015 02/03 to 03/03 0.010 0.052 0.020 03/03 to 03/29 0.013 0.075 0.020 03/29 to 04/28 0.010 0.050 0.022 04/28 to 05/27 0.012 0.032 0.023 05/27 to 06/27 0.010 0.027 0.011 D2 Onsite 01/06 to 02/03 0.010 0.050 0.015 02/03 to 03/03 0 .010 0.043 0.016 03/03 to 03/29 0.010 0.095 0.012 03/29 to 04/26 0.010 0.038 0.013 04/28 to 05/27 0.010 0.025 0.012 05/27 to 06/27 0.010 0.028 0 013 E Onsite 01/06 to 02/03 0.010 0.19 0.020 02/03 to 03/03 0.010 0.050 0.018 03/03 to 03/29 0.010 0.052 0.013 03/29 to 04/28 0.010 0.030 0 015 04/28 to 05/27 0.010 0.042 0.015 05/27 to 06/27 0.0 11 0.025 0.015 F Onsite 01/06 to 02/03 0.010 0.030 0.018 02/03 to 03/03 0.010 0.024 0 018 03/03 to 03/29 0.012 0.050 0.015 03/29 to 04/28 0.010 0.076 0 016 04/28 to 05/27 0.020 0.090 0.033 05/27 to 06/27 0.0 12 0.040 0.023
- Detectors are " bugged" to insure on scale readings.
48
TABLE 15 (Cont'd)
CONTINUOUS RADIATION MONITORS * (GM) mR/hr SECOND HALF mR/hr ,
LOCATION PERIOD 1983 MIN. . MAX. AVG.
C Offsite 06/28 to 07/27 0.010 0.032 0.018 07/27 to 08/26 0.010 0.042 0.015 08/26 to 09/27 -
0.010 0.045 0 013 09/27 to 10/21 0.010 0.035 0.015 10/21 to 11/15 0.010 0.040 0.020 11/15 to 12/13 0.012 0.025 0.018 12/13 to 01/10 0.010 0.025 0.015 Di Onsite 06/27 to 07/26 0.010 0.018 0.012 07/26 to 08/25 0.010 0.025 0 018 08/25 to 09/23 0.010 0.030 0.020 09/23 to 10/20 0.010 0.042 0.020 10/20 to 11/14 0.012 0.060 0.023 l 11/14 to 12/12 0.016 0.060 0.025 12/12 to 01/09 0.011 0.065 0.018 D2 Onsite 06/27 to 07/26 0.010 0.020 0.013 07/26 to 08/25 . 0.012 0.022 0.0 15 08/25 to 09/23 0.012 0.028 0.018 09/23 to 10/20 0 .0 13 0.028 0.020 10/20 to 11/14 0.012 0.060 0.015 11/14 to 12/12 0.011 0.060 0.015 12/12 to 01/09 0.010 0.050 0.015 E Onsite 06/27 to 07/26 0.013 0.035 0.018 07/26 to 08/25 0.012 0.025 '0.018.
08/25 to 09/23 0.012 0.025 0 018 09/23 to 10/20 0.012 0.025 0.018 10/20 to 11/14 0.013 0.026 0.015 11/14 to 12/12 0.012 0.070 0.015 12/12 to 01/09 0.010 0.085 0.015 F Onsite 06/27 to 07/26 0.010 0.035 0.022 07/26 to 08/25 0.015 0.048 0.022 08/25 to 09/23 0.018 0.040 0.022 09/23 to 10/20 0.015 0.035 0.025 10/20 to 11/14 0.015 0.032 0.025' 11/14 to 12/12 0.015 0.060 0.023 12/12/ to 01/09 0.012 0.060 0.018 1
)
- Detectcrs are " bugged" to insure on scale readings.
49
E TABLE 15 (Cont'd )
CONTINUOUS RADIATION MONITORS * (GM) mR/hr FIRST HALF mR/hr LOCATION PERIOD 1983 MIN. MAX._ AVG..
G Onsite 01/06 to 02/03 0.012 0.033 0.021 02/03 to 03/03 0.012 0.065 0.020 03/03 to 03/29 0.013 0.060 0.020 03/29 to 04/28 0.015 0.047 0.020 04/28 to 05/27 0.015 0.045 0.025 05/27 to 06/27 0.015 0.040 0.024 H Onsite 01/06 to 02/03 0.011 0. 13 0.020 02/03 to 03/03 0.012 0.045 0.023 03/03 to 03/29 0.012 0.050 0.020 03/29 to 04/28 0.013 0.040 0.020 04/28 to 05/27 0.012 0.045 0.020 05/27 to 06/27 0.015 0.040 0.020 I Onsite 01/06 to 02/03 0.013 0.072 0.016 02/03 to 03/03 0.012 . 0.039 0.022 03/03 to 03/29 0.015 0.060 0.025 03/29 to 04/28 0.020 0.060 0.028 04/28 to 05/27 0.013 0.073 0.025 05/27 to 06/27 0.018 0.039 0.028 J Onsite 01/06 to 02/03 0.010 0.065 0.013 02/03 to 03/03 0.010 0.051 0.018 03/03 to 03/29 0.010 0.052 0.013 03/29 to 04/28 0.010 0.042 0.013 04/28 to 05/27 0 010 0.062 0.018 05/27 to 06/27 0.010 0.042 0.015 K Onsite 01/06 to 02/03 0.010 0.023 0.012 02/03 to 03/03 0.010 0.039 0.018 03/03 to 03/29 0.011 -0.059 0.0 18 03/29 to 04/28 0.013 0.032 0.018 04/28 to 05/27 0.010 0.035 0.018 05/27 to 06/27 0.012 0.030 0.018 Detectors are " bugged" to insure on scala readings.
50
TABLE 15 (Cont'd)
CONTINUOUS RADIATION MONITORS * (GM) mR/hr SECOND HALF mR/hr LOCATION PERIOD 1983 MIN._ MAX._ AVG._
G Onsite 06/27 to 07/26 0.018 0.038 0.025 07/26 to 08/25 0.016 0.049 0.023 08/25 to 09/23 0.013 0.036 0.022 09/23 to 10/20 0.015 0.032 0.020 10/20 to 11/14 0.015 0.035 0.021 11/14 to 12/12 0.015 0.060 0.019 12/12 to 01/09 0.010 0.055 0.015 H Onsite 06/27 to 07/26 0.012 0.062 0.025 07/26 to 08/25 0.018 0.13 0.024 08/25 to 09/23 0.015 0.13 0.022 09/23 to 10/20 0 .0 15 0.080 0.025 10/20 to 11/14 0.015 0.090 0.025 11/14 to 12/12 0 .0 15 0.080 0.025 12/12 to 01/09 0.010 0.050 0.020 I Onsite 06/27 to 07/26 0.010 0.036 0.028 07/26 to 08/25 0.010 0.030 0.020 08/25 to 09/23 0.010 0.026 0.013 09/23 to 10/20 0.010 0.030 0.015 10/20 to 11/14 0.010 0.030 0.015 11/14 to 12/12 0.012 0.040 0.020 12/12 to 01/09 0.010 0.025 0.015 J Onsite 06/27 to 07/26 0.010 0.025 0.013 07/26 to 08/25 0.010 0.025 0.0 13 08/25 to 09/23 0.010 0.080 0.013 09/23 to 10/20 0.010 0.020 0.015 10/20 to 11/14 0.010 0.10 0.015 11/14 to 12/12 0.010 0.040 0 .0 13 12/12 to 01/09 0.010 0.055 0.012 l K Onsite 06/27 to 07/26 0 .012 0.038 0.018 07/26 to 08/25 0.010 0.028 0.018 08/25 to 09/23 0.010 0.026 0.018 09/23 to 10/20 0.012 0.052 0.018 10/70 to 11/14 0.010 0.030 0.015 11/14 to 12/12 0.010 0.030 0.016 12/12 to 01/09 0.010 0.040 0.012 l,
- Detectors are " bugged" to insure on scale readings.
51
I TABLE 16 CONCENTRATIONS OF 10 DINE-131 IN MILK Results in Units of pCi/1 + 2 sigma August September Octo,er b November December Station
- May June July i
<0.167 <0.20 <0.30 (0.30 <0.13 <0.27 16 (0.104 (0.228
<0.205 <0.140 <0.30 <0.40 <0.30 <0.17 <0.21 4 <0.277
<0.329 <0.168 <0.30 <0.30 <0.30 <0.18 <0.24 45 <0.231
<0.254 <0.229 <0.137 <0.30 <0.20 <0.50 <0.15 (0.26 5
<0.271 <0.177 <0.163 <0.30 <0.20 <0.30 <0.16 <0.42 7
<0.122 <0.289 <0.185 <0.30 <0.20 (0.30 <0.18 <0.17 !
! 40 (Control) .
<0.200 (0.245 <0.227 <0.30 <0.20 <0.40 <0.32 <0.16 50 (0.397 , <0.169 <0.142 <0.40 <0.20 <0.30 <0.19 <0.28 55 14 <0.247 - - - -
(0.321 - - -
60 -
t
- Corresponds to sample locations listed on Figure 5,Section VII.
- Sampling station no longer. required by Technical Specifications, therefore discontinued.
TABLE 17 CONCENTRATIONS OF CAMMA EMITTERS IN HILK (MONTHLY COMPOSITE SAMPLES)
Results in Units of pC1/1 + 2 sigma 05/09/83 06/06/83 07/04/83 08/01/83 09/12/83 10/10/83 11/08/83 12/05/83 to to .to to to to to to STATION
- NUCLIDES 05/23!83 06/20/83 07/18/83 08/15/83 09/26/83 10/24/83 11/21/83 12/19/83 No. 16 K-40 1500+150 1400+140 1400+140 1170+120 938+ 94 !!50+120 1030+100 1440+140 Cs-134 (2!6 (3!2 (4!0 (7!O <476 <474 (473 (4!7 Cs-137 <3.6 (4.8 (6.0 <6.0 (5.7 <5.1 (4.7 <5.4 Ba-140 <46.0 <42.0 (6.0 (9.0 (6.0 <5.7 (9.7 (7.1 La-140 <8.5 (11.0 (6.0 (9.0 (6.0 <5.7 (9.7 (7.1 Others (LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD No. 4 K-40 1300+130 1500+150 1120+110 1370+140 1120+110 1070+110 1060+110 1210+120 Cs-134 (3!3 <3!4 <6!O <4!O (4!! <472 <471 <4!5 Cs-137 <4.4 (4.6 <6.0 <5.0 <4.2 <4.7 <4.8 (4.8 Ba-140 (57.0 (51.0 <9.0 (7.0 <5.0 <5.2 <t1.0 <5.9 La-140 <8.5 <9.9 (9.0 (7.0 <5.0 (5.2 <!1.0 <5.9 g, Others (LLD <LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD ca No. 45 K-40 1300+130 1500+150 11'0+120 1210+120 1310+130 1060+110 1010+100 1430+140 Cs-134 <3!4 (3!2 (8!O (7!0 <6!5 (4!2 (472 <476 Cs-137 (4.0 ' (6.2 (8.0 (8.0 <6.5 <4.2 (5.1 <5.3 Ba-140 <35.0 (48.0 <10.0 <10.0 (7.4 <5.0 (9.4 (6.3 La-140 (8.0 (11.0 (10.0 (10.0 <7.4 <5.0 <9.4 (6.3 Others <LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD No. 5 K-40 1400+140 1400+140 1130+110 1180+120 990+ 99 1220+120 1180+100 1250+130 Cs-134 (4!0 <3!9 (7!O (4!O (470 (4!! <4!O (6!8 Cs-137 (4.5 5.1+2.8 <7.0 (8.0 <5.6 <4.1 <4.3 (6.9 Ba-140 <54.0 <56.0 <10.0 (6.0 <3.8 <6.5 (8.5 <8.2 La-140 <!1.0 (13.0 (10.0 (6.0 <3.8 <6.5 (8.5 <8.2 Others (LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD <LLD (LLD No. 7 K-40 1500+150 1500+150 1520+150 1120+110 1160+120 1140+110 923+ 92 1380+140 Cs-134 (2!9 <2!8 <8!O (5!O (5!6 <4!6 <4!6 <5!7 Cs-137 (4.1 (4.0 (8.0 (6.0 <5.8 <5.0 <5.4 (6.1 Ba-140 (41.0 (45.0 <10.0 <8.0 <5.1 (7.1 <10.0 (7.5 La-140 (7.2 (9.2 (10.0 (8.0 (5.1 (7.1 (10.0 (7.5 Others (LLD (LLD (LI.D (LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD (LLD w corresponds to sample locations noted on Figure 5 Section VII.
TABLE 17 (cont.)
CONCENTitATIONS OF CAMMA EMITTERS IN MILK (MONTHLY COMPOSITE SAMPLES)
Results in t! nits of PC1/1 + 2 sigma 05/09/83 06/06/83 07/04/83 08/01/83 09/12/83 10/10/83 11/08/83 12/05/83 to to to to to to to to STATION
- NUCLIDES 05/23/83 06/20/83 07/18/83 08/15/83 09/26/83 10/24/83 11/21/83 12/19/83 1130+110 1120+110 1240+120 1250+120 1070+110 1330+130 No. 40 (Control) K-40 1600+160 1500+150 Cs-134 (2!9
~
<3 7 (470 (4!0 <7!O <3!7 <4!3 (4!3 Cs-137 (3.5 (4.9 (6.0 <5.0 (7.5 <5.5 (5.5 (4.8 l
<50.0 <9.0 (6.0 <9.1 <5.5 (8.8 <6.0 l Ba-140 (42.0 (9.0 <6.0 (9.1 <5.5 <8.8 <6.0 l La-140 (6.3 (7.7
<LLD (LLD <LLD (LLD <LLD (LLD (LLD <LLD 0thers 1500+150 1190+120 1420+140 1020+100 1160+120 1010+110 1090+110 No. 50 K-40 1500+150 Cs-134 (34
~
(4!O <6!O (6!0 <7!6 (573 <5!4 (7!7 Cs-137 (4.6 (4.8 (6.0 (7.0 (7.4 (5.4 <6.5 <7.9 Ba-140 (53.0 (60.0 (8.0 (8.0 <7.4 (7.0 (11.0 <10.0 La-140 (7.6 (11.0 (8.0 (8.0 <7.4 <7.0 <t1.0 (10.0 Others <LLD (LLD <LLD <LLD (LLD <LLD (LLD <LLD ;
j un ** 1370+140 947+ 95 1080+110 1400+140 1420+140 i
& Wo. 55 K-40 1400+140 1500+150 '
Cs-134 <3!7 (3!4 ** <4!0 (4!! (7!! <4!7 <4!3 Cs-137 (4.7 (4.0 ** (4.0 (4.6 <7.4 (5.0 <4.8 Ba-140 (41.0 (43.0 ** <7.0 (4.5 (11.0 (11.0 (6.8 La-140 (9.8 (4.6 ** (7.0 (4.5 <t1.0 <t1.0 (6.8
<LLD <LLD ** <LLD (LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD Others No, I4 K-40 1300+t30 - - - -
<3!6 - - - -
Cs-134 - -
Cs-137 (4.4 - -
Ba-140 (40.0 - -
I La-140 (11.0 - - - - - -
. Others (LLD - - - - -
f - - - -
I No. 60 K-40 1500+150 - - -
l Cs-134 <3!2 - - - -
Cs-137 (4.5 - - -
f
,84-140 <50.0 - - - - - - -
La-140 <9.5 - - - - -
Others (LLD - - - -
- Corresponds to sample locations noted on Figure 5. Section vil.
! - Sampling statiens discontinued (not required by Environmental Technical Specifications).
- Sample lost in shipment.
~;,
I _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
TABLE 18 CONCENTRATIONS OF STRONTIUM-90 IN MILK (HONTHLY COMPOSITE SAMPLES)
Results in Units of pC1/1 1 2 sigma June July August Sration* May 16 2.84 1 0.53 4.72 1 1.8 4.5 10'.7 2.0 2 0.6 3.97 1 0.84 3.0 1 0.7 2.8 1 0.7 4 2.72 1 0.87 45 4.06 2 1.10 1.30 1 0.30 3.2 1 0.7 3.2 ! 0.7 2.84 1 0.53 1.69 1 1.1 4.1 0.7 2.5 i 0.6 5 2.4 0.6 7 _3.66 1 0.73 2.45 t 1.4 4.1 1 0.7 1.99 1 0.51 1.50 1 0.30 2.4 1 0.6 2.1 1 0.5 40 (Control) 1.7 1.8 t 0.4 50 3.17 t 0.78 1.79 1 0.89 2 0.5
- 1.6 ! 0.6 55 1.27 1 0.70 5.05 1 1.3 -
4.45 2 1.60 - -
14 -
3.79 1 0.72 - -
E! 60 September October November December Station *
'2.9 1 0.6 2.4 1 0.7 1.6 2 0.6 3.3 t 0.6 16 1.3 ! 0.6 2.5 ! 0.6 3.3 ! 0.6 2.1 i 0.5 4
3.8 1 0.5 2.7 2 0.5 1.6 1 0.6 3.1 2 0.6 45 2.5 1 0.7 1.0 2 0.7 2.2 0.5 2.2 ! 0.7 5
2.1 2 0.5 1.3 2 0.6 1.7 0.8 2.1 0.5 7
40 (Control) 1.9 .2 0.4 1.0 0.6 1.8 ! 0.5 2.6 2 0.5 1.3 1 0.4 1.9 ! 0.6 1.1 1 0.4 2.1 i 0.4 50 2.0 1 0.5 3.1 1 0.8 2.5 1 0.7 3.1 1 0.6 55
- Corresponds to sample locations listed on Figure 5.Section VII.
- Sampling station no longer required by Environmental Technical Specifications.
- Sample lost in shipment.
(.
TABLE 19 MILCH ANIMAL CENSUS SPRING 1983 NUMBER ON NUMIER TOWN CENSUS MAP N OF MILCH ANIFJLLS S criba 1 None ***
16* 39C 2 MC 3 1C 6 1C New Haven 8 30C 9 40C 4* 75 C 45* 22 C 10 28C 5* 45C 11 40 C 7* MC Mexico 12 70C 13 2C 14* 65C 15 MC 17 43C 18 46C 19 41C 20 7C 60* 40C 50* 150C 55* Sic 21 78C Richland 22 40C 23 65C Oswego 24 31C Hannibal was - 34C Volney 25 10C IQIALs 1215 Cows 0 Coats C = cows G = Goats
- = Milk sample location
- = Milk sample control location
- ** = Previous 1982 location (1) = References Tigure 5 56
TABLE 19 (Continued)
MILCH ANIMAL CUSUS SUMMER 1983 NUMBER ON NUMBEL TOW CUSUS MAP N OF MILCH ANIMALS Scriba 1 2G 16* 39C 2 NA 3 1C 6 1C 26 1C
~
New Haven a 30C 9 40C 4e 65C 45* 23 C 10 27C 5* 45C 11 35 C 7* MC
~
Mexico 12 66C 13 2C 14 60C 15 33C 17 43C 18 47C 19 42C 20 None***
60* 40 C 508 150C 558 52C 21 MC Richland 22 55C-23 70C Osweso 24 None***
Haunibal 40 34C Yolney 25 10C IUTALE 1145 Cows 2 Goata
~
C = Cows l G = Goats
- = Milk sample location
- = Milk sample control location
- ** = Previous 1983 location NA = Did not wish to participate in the survey (1) = References Figure 5 -
1 57
7 TAELE 23 CONCENTRATIONS CF CAMA IMITTERS IN VARIOUS FOOD PRODUCTS Results in Units of pC1/g(het) + 2 sigma M 8FrTION SANPLE SITE BATE DESCRIPTION Re-7 K-40 1-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 Cthers A 5-10-83 Eggs <0.31 0.9 + 0.2 (1) <0.018 <0.016 <LLL R 5-19-83 Eggs <0.40 1.2 + 0.3 <3.6 <0.022 <0.024 <LLL C 6-3-83 Eggs <0.22 1.1 I 0.2 <0.7 <0.014 <0.016 <LLD C(control) 5-10-83 Eggs <0.37 0.8 + 0.4 (1) < 0. 018 <0.019 <LLL A _5-10-83 Foultry <0.25 2.9 + 0.3 (1) <0.015 <0.015 <LLD R 5-19-83 Poultry <0.31 2.8 T 0.3 <2.8 <0.016 <0.016 <LLD C 6-3-83 Poultry <0.15 2.8 T 0.3 <0.5 <0.010 0.018 + 0.008 <LLD C(control) 5-10-83 Poultry <0.18 1.7 I 0.2 (1) <0.010 < 0. 010'- <LLL E 6-2-83 Beef <0.24 2.9 + 0.3 <0.7 <0.015 <0.017 <LLD F 5-25-83 Beef <0.30 2.5 I 0.3 <1.6 < 0.019 0.023 + 0.013 <LLL C 5-25-83 Seef <0.20 2.3 T 0.3 <1.1 <0.015 <0.018- <LLD
' O(control) 5-18-83 Beef < 0.22 2.6 _I 0.3 , <1.7 < 0.014 < 0.014 <tLL E
l
[ (1) 1-131 act la the radionuclide library.
I 1
1
tat!J: 20 (Cu.tinued)
CONCDf7 RATIONS CF CAD 9tA IMITTIES IN VARIOUS FOOD PRODUCTS Results in Units of pC1/g,(wet) + 2 sigma entIprTION SABFLE SITE DATE hF9fRIPTION Be-7 K-40 1-131 Ca.-134 Cs-137 Others A 30-43 Eggs <0.04 1.1 + 0.1 <0.02 <0.005 <0.005 <LLL 3 11-4-83 Eggs <0.07 1.1 I 0.1 < 0.12 <0.005 <0.006 < L11 C 11-7-43 Eggs <0.08 1.1 I 0.1 <0.15 <0.006 <0.007 <LLL D(control) 11-1-83 Eggs <0.11 1.0 _T 0.1 <0.34 <0.006 <0.006 <LLL A 11-30-83 Poultry <0.07 3.1 + 0.3 <0.03 <0.009 <0.009 < LLC -
B- 11-8-83 Poultry <0.08 3.2 I 0.3 <0.12 <0.007 <0.007 <LLD C 11-7-43 Poultry <0.09 3.1 I 0.3 <0.16 <0.008 <0.008 <LLD D kontrol) 11-1-83 Poultry <0.09 3.3 _I 0.3 <0.25 <0.007 <0.007 < LIS 1 11-8-83 Beef <0.06 2.9 + 0.3 <0.10 : <0.005 0.044 + 0.006 <LLL J 12-2-83 Beef <0.04 2.4 I 0.2 <0.01 <0.005 0.014 I 0.004 <LIA K 11-18-43 Beef <0.08 3.4 I 0.3 <0.0 7 , <0.009 0.023 I 0.007 <LLD D(control) 11-11-83 teef <0.05 3.210.3 <0.08 <0.005 <0.006- <LLL E
TABLE 20 (Continued) -
CONCENTRATIONS OF CADMA EMITTERS IN VARIOUS FOOD PROCUCTS Results ju Units of pC1/g(wet) + 2 signa COLLECTION SAMPLE SITE DATE DESCRIPTION Be-7 K-40 1-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 6thers 1 9-26-83 Swiss Chard- <0.08 3.7 + 0.4 <0.01 <0.008 <0.010 <LLD 1 9-26-83 Tomatoes < 0.04 2.3 + 0.2 <0.01 <0.006 <0.006 <LLD 1
1 L 9-26-83 Swiss Chard <0.13 4.6 + 0.5 <0.02 <0.016 <0.016 <LLL L 9-25-83 Cucumbers <0.05 1.6 + 0.2 <0.01 <0.007 <0.010 <LLL O 9-26-83 Cabbage <0.09 1.8 + 0.2 <0.01 <0.011 <0.013 <LLL M 9-26-83 Squash <0.11 1.6 + 0.2 <0.02 <0.014 <0.014 <LLL M(control) 9-26-83 Cabbage <0.09 2.9 + 0.3
<0.01 <0.012 <0.013 <LLD C(:catrol) 9-26-83 Zucchial <0.06 1.2 + 0.1 <0.01 <0.007 <0.007 <LLL f
e
.- .i
1 i
-i TABLE 21 CONCENTRATIONS OF STRONTIUM-90 AND CAMMA EMITTERS IN Soll ,
Results in Units of pC1/g (dry) + 2 sigma SAMPLE CAletA EMITTERS Y SAMPLE Ra-226 Th-228 OTHERS DATE Sr-90 K-40 Cs-137 CODE
<0.038 16.3 +1.6 0.096+0.044 1.19+0.53 D-2 11/10/83 <0799 0.52I0.10 ALL(LLD 11/10/83 0.4t+0.04 7.2 70.9 0.60370.058 E 1.22+0.34 0.70IO.07 ALL(LLD F 11/10/83 0.04970.020 10.1 II.0 <0!O43 0.67IO.07 ALL(LLD a 0.034*0.018 13.9 II.4 0.095+0.016 1.13I0.30
OFFSITE 1.46+0.15 1.77+0.84 0.94+0.09 ALL<tLD C 11/09/83 0.13+0.04 18.1 +1.8 ALL(LLD 9.0 IO.9 0.20I0.04 1.30IO.70 0.83IO.08 D-1 11/09/83 0.17I0.03 0.59I0.06 ALL<LLD 0.27*0.06 10.4 II.0 0.66+0.07 1.3570.71 D-2 !!/09/83 1.03IO.12 <t!40 0.55+0.08 ALL(LLD E 11/09/83 0.32IO.04 10.3 II.3 0.72IO.06 ALL(LLD 0.11I0.03 12.3 +1.2 0.4570.06 (0.96 F !!/09/83 <!.10 0.69{0.07 ALL(LLD C 11/09/83 0.10I,0.03 14.8{I.5 0.20{0.06
- Sample locations were at each air monitoring station, see Figesres I and 3,Section VII.
I l
l V
/
DATA SUMP.lARIES AND CONCLUSIONS 4
/
V DATA SUMMARIES AND CONCLUSIONS The results of the 1983 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Pro-gram are evaluated considering the natural processes of the environment and the aggregate of past data. A number of factors are considered in the course of this radiological data evaluation and interpretation. The interpretation of data can be made at sevaral levels including trend analy-sis, population dose, risk estimates to the general population based on environmental concentrations, effectiveness of plant effluent controls and specific research areas, among others. An attempt has been made in this report not only to report the data collected during the 1983 sample pro-gram but also to assess the significance of the radionuclides detected in the environment. It is important to note that detection of an isotope is not of itself an indication of its onvironmental significance. Evaluation of the impact of the radionuclide in terms of potential increased dose to man, in relation to natural background, is necessary.
Three specific groups of radionuclides exist in the environment.
The first of these groups is naturally occurring. It must be recognized that our environment contains a broad inventory of natural background radiation of primordial and daily origin. The background radiation is in a constant state of flux, influenced by a myriad of daily phenomena in-cluding solar activity, snow cover, barometric pressure and meteorological conditions. The natural background radiation in the general area of the site is assessed on a quarterly basis and is found to be the most signifi-cant contributor to man's radiation exposure.
The radiation resulting from the detonation of thermonuclear devices in the earth's atmosphere has produced a second group of radionuclides generally found in the environment. The inventory of fallout radionu-clides found worldwide is the result of atmospheric testing conducted in the years 1945 through 1963. In 1963 a ban was placed on the testing of thermonuclear devices in the atmosphere greatly reducing the inventory of short half-life radionuclides in the environment. Since 1963 several atmo-spheric nuclear tests have been conducted by the People's Republic of China. The most recent of these tests took place in October of 1980.
The resulting fallout from these tests has influenced the background radi-ation in the vicinity of site and is evident in many of the sample media analyzed during 1983. Calculations of the resulting dose to man from fallout nuclides in the environment show' that the contribution from such nuclides in some cases (Sr-90 and Cs-137) is significant and second in in-tensity only to natural background radiation.
The third group of radionuclides detected in the local environment is those resulting from the operation of the plant. The detection of plant related radionuclides is one of the main objectives of the environmental surveillance program. The dose to man as a result of plant operation is small and much less than the radiation exposure from naturally occurring sources of radiation and in most cases from fallout exposure.
i 62
In Section V each sample medium is discussed. Concentrations of radionuclides detected and exposure to man are presented and scruti-nized.
Section VI, titled HISTORICAL DATA, contains sample statistics from previous environmental sampling. The process of determining the impact (or lack of impact) of plant operation on the environment includes the scrutiny of past analytical data, a tool by which trends are - discerned.
The interpretation of historical data in this report is done to a limited degree. Because of the constant change in analytical sensitivities, as state-of-the-art detection capabilities improve, data comparisons become difficult. For example, minimum detection capabilities for the 1969 and 1974 analyses of environmental samples would be considered anomalous by 1983 standards.
l 63
{
LAKE PROGRAM Tables 1 through 8 list the 1983 analytical results for the aquatic / lake water media sampled during the 1983 sampling program.- Aquatic samples were obtained at a combination of four onsite locations. The transect designations used for the onsite sampling locations are NMPW (01), NMPP (02), JAF (03) and NMPE (04). Due to limited availability of certain required sample media, samples could not be obtained consistently at each of the same onsite transects sampled for other media. Offsite samples were collected in the vicinity of the Oswego Harbor (offsite - 00).
64
l
- 1. PERIPHYTOM SAMPLES - TABLE 1 Periphyton is a common fresh water algae found throughout the Great Lakes and in almost all underwater aquatic systems. Periphy-ton in its simplest form is a single celled organism which colonizes the natural and artificial substrates found in the shore and near shore waters. Colonies of periphyton can be found from the shore zone to water depths which can be sufficiently penetrated by sun-light to support photosynthesis. Periphyton is dependent on sun-light and inorganic materials found in the lake to support life therefore putting it in the classification of a primary producer.
Periphyton in its simplest form is the slimy coating which is found on most underwater surfaces and has a brown to green coloration.
This organism is used as an indicator organism to help evaluate the possible effects of plant operation on the local aquatic environment on the lowest level of the food chain.
The collection and analysis of periphyton samples was performed twice during the 1983 sample program.
The first collection of periphyton was completed on June 20, 1983 and the second collection was completed on August 23-24, 1983. The gamma spectral analysis of periphyton samples showed detectable concentrations of Cs-134, Cs-137 , Mn-54, Co-60, Be-7, Ra-226, Th-228 and K-40. The eight radionuclides detected in periphyton samples can be attributed to several sources. Each of the radio-nuclides detected can be placed in one of three groups. The first group of radionuclides is the result of plant operation. The second group of radionuclides is naturally occurring and is found in many living organisms as noted throughout this report. The third group of radionuclides is the result of past atmospheric nuclear weapons testing. Radionuclides with relatively long half-lives which fall into this third group are the result of atmospheric tests conducted over the past decades. The only fallout related radionuclide detected in 1983 periphyton samples was Cs-137. Cs-137 requires specini consid-eration as this radioisotope of cesium is a common constituent of the background radiation due to fallout but can also be attributed to the operation of the plant. In 1981 six fallout radionuclides were detected in the periphyton samples. Of the six radionuclides de-tected in 1981, two, Co-144 and Cs-137, were detected in 1982, and one, Cs-137, was detected in the 1983 samples. The other fallout radionuclides were not detected in 1982-83 because of their short half-lives (3.5 days to 368 days) which resulted in their decaying away to concentrations below that of the lower limits of detection (LLD) and as a result of ecological cycling.
The first set of periphyton samples collected on June 20, 1983 con-tained detectable concentrations of D e-7, K-40, Mn-54, Cs-134, Cs-137, Co-60, Ra-226 and Th-228. The maximum detectable concen-trations for plant related radionuclides were 0.048 pCl/g (wet) for Cs-134, 0.024 pC1/g (wet) for Mn-54, 0.24 pCl/g (wet) for Co-60, and 0.60 pCl/g (wet) for Cs-137. Cs-137 was detected in both the 65
control (offsite) sample and the two indicator (onsite) samples with the maximum concentration, as noted above, present in the indicator sample.
The second collection of periphyton samples completed on August 24, showed a small increase in the concentrations of two plant related radionuclides, with a slight decrease of concentration in the third.
The maximum detectable concentrations of plant related radionuclides in the second or summer collection were 0.047 pC1/g (wet) for Mn-54, 0.25 pC1/g (wet) for Co-60, and 0.33 pC1/g (wet) for Cs-137. Cs-134 which was found in the Juno samples was not de-tected in the August samp!cs. As in the June samples, Cs-137 was detected at all three sample locations including the control location.
Four naturally occurring radionuclides were detected in each of the six 1983 samples. Be-7, K-40, Ra-226 and Th-228 were found in both the onsite and the offsite samples. The concentration of the naturally occurring radionuclides was consistent with levels detected in previous years' samples. A general increase in the concentrations of radionuclidos in the second or late summer collection compared to the June co!!cction was noted for the 1983 samples at the indicator locations. A similar increase in concentration in samples collected in late summer was also noted in 1980,1981, and 1982. This increase in sample concentration may be due to 'the higher metabolic rate or increased growth of the periphyton community between the first and second collections. Each of the plant related radionuclides detected in the 1983 samples were trace amounts and are attributed to plant effluents. ,
i A dose to man calculation from the level of activity found in lake periphyton samples in the vicinity of the plant is difficult to make as periphyton is not directly in the human food chain. To best deter-mine the resulting dose to man from the activity found in periphyton samples, calculations woro made based on concentrations found in fish samples as fish represent the upper level of the food chain in which periphyton is a primary producer. Dose to man calculations based on concentrations found in fish and consumption rates are contained in Section V.5.
A review of past data shows Cs-137 concentrations in both indicator and control periphyton samples increased s!!ghtly since the 1982 samples, but show a decrease from a secondary peak in 1981 which was the result of ft.llout from a nuclear weapons test conducted in October of 1980. Co-60 concentration in periphyton also showed a slight increase in concentration at the indicator stations. Ce-144 shows a leveling effect from 1982 samples, with a marked decrease in concentration from 1981. This return of Co-144 concentrations to background levels (LLD) at both the indicator and control sample locations is due to the radiological decay of Co-144. Both the 1977 and 1981 peaks represented on the graph of Ce-144 concentration in Section VII are attributed to fallout from atmospheric testing.
Graphs depicting concentrations of Cs-137 and Co-60 are also pre-sent in Section VII.
66
BOTTOM SEDI?!ENT - TABLE 2
- 2. ,
s- -
Bottom sediment samples were collected twide, during the;1983 sam-pling program. Gamma spectral analyses asd Sc-94 anstyses' were performed on each of the six samples.and the results are presetited in Table 2. Samples were collected in June and- Octooer in 1983 with the Oswego 11 arbor area (transect [001) serving As the control loca-tion, Nine Mile Point Plant (transect (02]) and tne FitzPatrid Plant (transect (03]) serving as the indici. tor oc' o'asite Gmple locations... ,d As in past years the most abundant tission radionuclide detected was' .'
Cs-137 which was found in each of the six samples collected in,1093, .
which included both the onsite and offsite samples. Co-60 was de-tected in four of the six samples and;Sr490 was dolected in two of the six 1983 samples. _
The presence of Cs-137 in the lake bottom sediment can be attri- _
buted to the accumulation of fallout in _the aqutto environment as a result of the detonation of nuclear' deirices in the atmosphere, fChe origin of Cs-137 in atmosphere testing can bo denonstrated by saro . ,l ple results which show the presence of Cs-137 in' control location ~
sediment samples. The Cs-137 concentrations for the control station /
ranged from 0.29 pCl/g (dry) to 0.18 pCilg (dry). nnd 0;43'pUilg (dry) to 0.18 pC1/g (dry) for the indicator sampler,. _. < ?
Co-60 was detected in all four of the indicator samplbs collected in ,
1983. Positive detections of Co-60 ranged from a mintratW of 0.10 . -
pC1/g (dry) to a maximum of 0.16 pC1/g (dry). The. decots,1 levelu .',
of Co-60 are relatively the same as the concentratio6.s(detected 'In / ?
1982 when the minimum concentration was 0.09 pC1/g' (dry) and th(
maximum value was 0.10 pC1/g (dry). The detection of Co-60 in sediment can be attributed to the operation of the plant.', C5-60 was not detected in the control samples collected in 1983. The levels of Co-60 detected in the onsite samples are very small, and are near c
the lower limits of detection. - 7 '
o Strontium-00 was detected in two of the six Bottom Sedimcot s.irnplea '
collected in 1983. One positive detection was made at the Uswego -
Ilarbor (00) transect, and the other at the Nine Mile Fehlt (02), -
transect. Sr-90 was not detected at the second onsito sample loca -
tion. The presence of Sr-00 at the control and indicator locat',bns is . {
considered to be the result of weapons fallout. Sr-90 was also d4-. I tected at both control and indicator sample locations dutlog 193',' , y 1979,1980, and 1981, which is evidence that Sr-90 is attributable to -
weapons testing fallout. The mean 1983 control concentratiotivfory "
Sr-90 was 0.14 pC1/g (dry). The mean 1983 indicator concentrationi - *
]
for Sr-00 was 0.05 pCilg (dry). Both these positive distwetions of Sr-90 were found during the first (June) bottom sediment collection, ' '
The Sr-90 concentration for the control and two indicator saiaplo In-cations for the second (October) bottom sediment collaction were all LLD values. Variations in Sr-90 concentrations can be infhwnced by- '
several factors including sediment type and chemical make-up. 'ThW -
presence of Sr-00 in many of the other control samples supports the -
fact that Sr-00 is ubiquitous throughout the environment.. '. e- ,-
% p
. :l .
(a u ,
67 .
L ~.J : -
. m w
The dose to man from bottom sediment is not of concern and cannot be directly calculated. Bottom sediment is not accessible to man and the radioactivity found in the sediment is shielded by the overlaying water column. To illustrate the impact of radioactivity in sediment samples with respect to the dose to man concept, the assumption can be made that at some future time bottom sediment could be intro-duced into the shoreline sediment through re-suspension and depost-tion. Assuming that the don'sity of the sediment is 40 kg/m8 (dry) and using the average residence time on the shore of 47 hours5.439815e-4 days <br />0.0131 hours <br />7.771164e-5 weeks <br />1.78835e-5 months <br /> per year for a teenager, the annual dose rate from a maximum indicator sample Cs-137 concentration of 0.43 pCi/g (dry) is calculated to be 0.0034 mrom per year whole body dose. The whole body dose from a Co-60 concentration of 0.16 pCi/g (dry) woulri be equal to 0.0051 mrom per year. The resulting total whole body dose would be equal to 0.0085 mrom per year whole body. The contribution to the total whole body dose due to Sr-90 would be infinitesimal due to the fact that Sr-90 decays by a beta emission and has no associated strong gamma energy.
A review of past Cs-137 data illustrates that the mean concentration values for the indicator stations have dropped significantly from 1976 to 1979 with the general trend downward continuing from 1979 through 1982. The 1983 mean concentration of Cs-137 was slightly higher than the 1982 value. Since 1979, the mean value for the con-trol station has been greater than the indicator stations with 1982 ,
showing a change in the downward trend for Cs-137 concentrations at the control locations. However, the 1983 concentrations show a reverse in this situation. This change in trending for the Cs-137 concentrations may be the effect of ~ the control -location's close proximity to the Oswego River Outlet and a possible source of Cs-137 from deposition of Cs-137 from atmospheric nuclear testing onto the river watershed. The concentration of Co-60 in sediment samples has shown a similar downward trend to that of Cs-137 since 1977. The maximum Co-60 concentration in the indicator samples (mean) shows a consistent downward trend since 1977 that continued through 1981 with a slight increase in mean concentrations for i
l 1982-83. This increase is not significant and is within the bounds of statistical variation. Historical trends for concentrations of Cs-137 and Co-60 are presented in graphic form in Section V!1.
i k
48
- 3. MOLLUSK SAMPLES - TABLE 3 A total of six mollusk samples were collected in 1983 from a total of three general locations. Each sample was analyzed for gamma- emit-ters using gamma spectral analysis and for Sr-90 using chemical sep-arations and beta particle analysis. The results of the 1983 samples are presented on Table 3. As in past years the effort to collect mollusk samples of sufficient size has been of limited' success in terms of sample volume collected. The collections in 1983 were pro-ductive and resulted in sample volumes in the 500 gram range which in some cases resulted in good sensitivities for the gamma spectral analysis, in particular for the indicator samples. Mollusk samples ,
were successfully collected at the offsite (00) or control location and at the Nine Mile Point Plant (02) transect and the FitzPatrick (03) transect, for the indicator samples.
The results of the isotopic analysis of mollusk tissue detected the presence of five radionuclides. The nuclides detected consisted of two naturally occurring radionuclides (K-40 and Ra-226), two plant related radionuclides (Mn-54 and Co-60), and one radionuclide re-lated to fallout from atmospheric nuclear testing (Sr-90). Detectable concentrations of Sr-90 were measured in each of six samples col-lected at both the onsite and offsite locations. The presence of Sr-90 in all the mollusk samples collected for the sample year was also observed in 1979, 1980, 1981, and 1982. The 1983 Sr-90 con-centrations ranged from a maximum of 0.14 pCi/g (wet) 't'o a minimum of 0.03 pCi/g (wet) with the control station mean equal to 0.035 '
pCilg (wet) and the indicator mean equal to .0.11 pCi/g (wet). ~ As in other sample media the presence of Sr-90 is considered to be the.
~
result of fallout from atmospheric nuclear testing. This determi-nation is based on the fact that Sr-90 is consistently detected in -
control samples in previous years as noted above. Mn-54 and Co-60 were detected in each of the four onsite or indicator samples col-
~
lected in 1983. The presence of Mn-54 and Co-60 in mollusk tissue can be attributed to the operation of the plant. Manganese-54 was detected in only the indicator samples with concentrations ranging -
from a maximum of 0.18 pCi/g - (wet) to a minimum of 0.10 ' pci/g L (wet) . Co-60 concentrations ranged from a maximum of. 0.068 pCi/g (wet) to a minimum of 0.030 pCi/g (wet).
The relatively high frequency for the detection of Co-60 and partic-ularly Mn-54 in mollusk samples can be attributed to the phenomenon -
of bioaccumulation or concentration factors. The level-of an element -
in a particular organism relative to the level or. concentration. of the same_ element in the organism's environment is known as the concen-tration factor. Fresh water mollusk have an extremely high concen-tration factor of 300,000 (mean) for Mn-54 and 32,408 (mean) for Co-60*. Such high concentration factors would result in a rapid ac-'
cumulation of manganese and cobalt activity in mollusk that are in-digenous to the off shore area of the site. -
s
_]
- Eisenbud (1973) ,
j
.V m
m 69-
~
a n., _ a _ _ a_. ~_L v__.a _a x_ -__ - ____ _ - - - - - - - _ _ _ - _ _ _ ~ _ _ . _ = . . . .
Fresh water mollusk found in the vicinity of the site are not con-sumed by humans. and are not a major component or level in the food chain if for no other reason other than the small population due to the unfavorable physical makeup of the lake bottom in the area. Be-cause these fresh water mollusk are not considered edible there is no dose to man from the presence of the Mn-54 or Co-60 concentrations.
As in past. years an estimate can be made using substituted parame-ters for the purpose of putting into perspective the possible sig-nificance of Mn-54 and Co-60 concentrations detected in the mollusk samples. Using the average individual consumption of seafood of 1.0 kg/ year for an adult , the dose resulting from ingestion of mollusks would be 0.0002 mrem / year to the whole body and 0.0025 mrem / year to the gastrointestinal tract for the maximum Mn-54 con-centration of 0.18 pCi/g (wet). The dose resulting from. the Co-60 concentration of 0.068 pCi/g -(wet) would be 0.0003 mrem / year to the whole body and 0.0027 mrem / year to the gastrointestinal tract. The total maximum dose that would be received from the consumption of 1.0 kg of fresh water mollusk would be 0.0005 mrem to the whole body and 0.0052 mrem to the gastrointestinal tract. This calculated dose is extremely small and as noted above in reality would be equal to no dose, because of the zero consumption rate.
The concentrations of Mn-54 and Co-60 have shown a significant de-cline since 1976 when both radionuclides were detected at their maxi-mum level. The concentration of Mn-54 detected in the 1983 samples .
shows a slight decrease from the 1982 values. The Co-60 concentra-tion in the indicator samples also showed a .small decrease from the levels detected in 1982. Co-60 concentrations in mollusk samples have remained relatively constant since 1977 Sr-90 concentrations in mollusk samples have remained stable since 1978 after a peak in 1 1976, with little change in the 1983 samples. Graphs of previous mollusk sample results for Mn-54, Co-60 and Sr-90 are presented in i Section VII. Also found in Section VII is a physical description of the lake bottom in the vicinity of the site for reference to the suit-ability of the area for mollusk habitat.
70 -
mgr- >r..p
__ _ _ _ ____m______________m_ _ . _ _
t
- 4. GAMMARUS - TABLE 4 GAMMARUS samples were collected twice during the 1983 sample peri-od in conjunction with mollusk, periphyton and bottom sediment.
GAMMARUS are benthic or demersal dwelling organisms found in the j general vicinity of the site and throughout Lake Ontario. GAMMARUS are. sampled as an indicator organism whose major predator is the local fish population. GAMMARUS are generally found in periphyton and cladophora growth areas and are limited in their territorial ranges. Samples were successfully collected at the control (00) location and at the NMPP ,(02) and JAF (03) transects for the spring and summer sampling. Sample collections were made over a two week period in order to collect sufficient samples for acceptable analyses.
The first collection of GAMMARUS in the spring of 1983 (June 1, 1983 through June 15, 1983) yielded sample weights of only 22.2 g, 15.6 g, and 6.1 g respectively for the Oswego, NMPP, and JAF transects. It should be noted that GAMMARUS are normally less than 10 mm in size and require a large number to obtain a biomass of one gram of sample. The spring collection of GAMMARUS is also usually impeded by the cold lake water temperatures resulting in few GAMMARUS inhabiting the shoreline shallows. The analytical sensi-tivities were adequate for the spring samples with the exception of the JAF (03) transect sample which is most probably due to its small sample size. The JAF sample resulted in sensitivities of less than 0.80 pCi/g (wet) for Co-60, less than 0.90 pCi/g (wet) for Cs-137, and less than 0.40 pCi/g (wet) for Sr-90. These sensitivities are acceptable, but several times higher than those achieved for. the control and the NMPP samples. The control sample resulted in sen- 1 sitivities of less than 0.20 pCi/g (wet) for Co-60, - less than 0.10 l pCi/g (wet) for Cs-137, and a positive concentration of 0.096 pCi/g (wet) for Sr-90. The NMPP sample resulted in a sensitivity of less than 0.20 pCi/g (wet) for Co-60, and positive concentrations. for both Cs-137 and Sr-90 of 0.36 pCi/g (wet) and 0.21 pCi/g (wet) re-spectively.
The summer (August 15, 1983 through August 29, 1983) collection of GAMMARUS provided sufficient quantities of this organism for good analytical sensitivities. The analyses of the summer GAMMARUS col-lected in August showed measurable concentrations of Co-60,- Cs-137, K-40, and Sr-90. K-40 was detected in all three of the' sample loca-tions. K-40. is a naturally -occurring radionuclide'. Co-60 was detected at only' one of the indicator locations JAF. (03) with' a con-centratit value of 0.049 pCilg (wet). Cs-137 was 'also 'only -detected f at the JAF (03) location with 'a concentration :value of 0.057 pCi/g (wet) . The levels of Co-60 'and Cs-137 detected in the one 'onsite -
sample are very small and .are near the lower limits of detection.
Strontium-90 was detected in each of the samples collected in 1983 in both the indicator and control samples. As noted previously,' similar .
detections of Sr-90 were made' in mollusk samples. Strontium-90 is considered to be a background radionuclide because its origin is not related to. the operation of the _ plant, but is attributed to fallout ,
from atmospheric nuclear testing. '
.71.
l c
The absence of plant related radionuclides in GAMMARUS samples from the previous years of 1980,1981 (second collection only), and 1982 indicate that the presence of these nuclides in GAMMARUS organisms is not routine nor chronic, the dose to man as a direct result of concentrations of cobalt and cesium would be zero as GAMMARUS is not consumed by man. The importance of the activity in these organisms is only significant with respect to the passage of any radionuclides through the food chain to a trophic level which may impact man.
The 1983 GAMMARUS sample results show a mean positive concentra-tion for Cs-137 of 0.21 pCi/g (wet). This positive detection for Cs-137 is lower than the mean LLD value for Cs-137 in 1982 which was less than 0.45 pCi/g (wet), and many times bcs than the posi-tive detection of 4.7 pCi/g (wet) for Cs-137 in 1981. Also the mean positive concentration for Co-60 in 1983 GAMMARUS samples was 0.049 pCi/g (wet) which was much Icer than the mean LLD value for Co-60 in 1982 which was less than 0.65 pC1/g (wet), and many l times less than the positive detection of 1.4 pCi/g (wet) for Co-60 in i 1981. No definite trend can be determined for Co-60 or Cs-137 con- l centrations as positive detections have been random in past years.
Previous GAMMARUS data (Cs-137, S r-89 , Sr-90) is presented in ,
Section VI, lilSTORICAL DATA.
l 72
1
- 5. FISH - TABLE 5 A total of 18 required fish samples were collected in the spring sea-son (May 1983) and in the fall season (October 1983). Collections were made utilizing gill nets at one offsite location greater than five miles from the site (Oswego Harbor area), and at two onsite locations in the vicinity of the Nine Mile Point Unit #1 (02), and the James A.
FitzPatrick (03) generating facilities. The Oswego Harbor samples j served as control samples while the NMP (02) and JAF (03) samples I served as indicator samples. Samples were analyzed for gamma emitters, Sr-89, and Sr-90. Data is presented in the ANALYTICAL RESULTS section of the report on Table 5.
Analysis of the 1983 fish samples contained detectable concentrations of radionuclides related to past weapons testing and natural origins (naturally occurring) . Small detectable concentrations of Cs-137 were found in all fish samples (including control samples). Detect-able concentrations of K-40, a naturally occurring radionuclide, were also found in all fish samples collected for the 1983 program.
Spring fish collections were comprised of two separate species and nine individual samples. The two species represented one feeding type. Lake trout and brown trout are highly predacious and feed on significant quantities of smaller fish such as smelt, alewife, and other smaller predacious species. Because of the limited availability of species present in the catches, no bottom feeder. species were col-lected in the spring samples.
Cs-137 was detected in all onsite and offsite samples for both ' species collected. Onsite samples showed Cs-137 concentrations to be slight-ly greater than control levels for some samples and slightly less than control levels for other samples. . The concentrations detected are not significantly different from the control results and are therefore considered background. Cs-137 in lake trout samples ranged from 0.033 to 0.056 pCilg (wet) and averaged 0.045 pCilg (wet) for the indicator samples. Cs-137 in the control samples ranged from 0.049 to 0.057 pCi/g (wet). .and averaged 0.053 pCi/g (wet) for lake trout. Cs-137 in brown trout samples ranged from 0.042 to 0.046 pCi/g (wet) and averaged 0.044 pCi/g (wet). Cs-137-in the control samples was 0.046 pCi-g (wet) (one sample collected).
K-40 was detected in all of the spring samples collected. K-40 is a naturally occurring radionuclide and is not related to power plant operations. Detectable concentrations of' K-40 in the indicator sam-ples (lake trout and brown trout) ranged from 2.9 to 3.8 pCi/g (wet) and 3.0 to 3.1 pCi/g (wet). for the control samples. No' other -
radionuclides were detected in any of the spring fish samples.
Fall sample collections ' were comprised of. two' separate species and-
~
nine individual' samples. - Six samples of lake trout and-three samples of brown trout were collected at a combination of two. onsite sample .
.73
- _--__ _ _ - _-_---_-_- _ _ - -_=_ -_ _ _ _= _ -
locations (NMP and JAF) and one offsite sample location (Oswego Harbor area). Samples were collected by gill net in October.
Cs-137 was detected in all nine samples including the three control samples. The detected concentrations were not significantly differ-ent from one another because of the extremely small quantities detected. Cs-137 in lake trout samples at the indicator locations ranged from 0.038 to 0.055 pCi/g (wet) and averaged 0.046 pCi/g (wet) . Lake trout samples at the control location ranged from 0.041 !
to 0.044 pCi/g (wet) and averaged 0.042 pCi/g (wet). Brown trout samples from the indicator locations ranged from 0.041 to 0.050 pCi/g (wet) and averaged 0.046 pCi/g (wet). The associated control sam-ple was 0.057 pCi/g (wet).
K-40 was detected in all of the fall samples collected. Detectable conceatrations of K-40 in the indicator samples (lake trout and brown trout) ranged from 2.7 to 3.9 pCi/g (wet) and 2.8 to 3.8 pC1/g (wet) for the control samples. No other radionuclides were detected in any of the fall fish samples.
Sr-89 and Sr-90 concentrations for the spring and fall fish samples were all less than the minimum detectable level. Sr-89 and Sr-90 were not detected in any of the onsite or offsite locations.
Review of past environmental data indicates that the Sr-89 and Sr-90 concentrations have decreased steadily since 1976 for both the indi-cator and control locations to the present 1983 LLD levels. A general decline in detectable Sr-89 and Sr-90 results is most probably due to the result of the incorporation of these radionuclides with organic and inorganic substances through ecological- cycling. In addition,-
Sr-89 has a relatively short half-life of 52 days.
I The mean 1983 Cs-137 concentrations have decreased slightly from ,
1981 for the indicator samples and significantly from 1980 to 1976.
Concentrations for these samples decreased from a level of 1.4 pCi/g (wet) in 1976 to a level of 0.045 pCi/g (wet) in 1983. Control sample results have also decreased from a level of 0.12 pCi/g (wet) in 1976 to a level of 0.049 pCi/g (wet) in 1983. Results from 1979 to 1983 have remained fairly consistent.
As noted for Sr-89 and Sr-90 above, the general _ decreasing trend for Cs-137 is most probably a result of ecological cycling. . A signifi--
cant portion of Cs-137 detected since 1976 in fish is a result for '
weapons testing fallout, and the general downward trend in concen-trations will continue as a function of ecological cycling and nuclear decay.
Lake Ontario fish- are considered an important food source by many, therefore, fish is an integral part of the human food chain. Based on the importance.of fish in the local diet, a reasonable estimate of dose -to man can be calculated. - Assuming that the average; adult consumes 6.9 kg of fish ~ per year and the fish consumed contains an 74
average Cs-137 concentration of 0.045 pCi/g (wet) (annual mean result of indicator samples for 1983), the whole body dose received would be 0.022 mrem per year. The critical organ in this case is the liver which would receive a calculated dose of 0.034 mrem per year.
The whole body and oritical organ doses are conservative calculated doses associated with consuming fish from the Nine Mile Point area (indicator samples).
Conservative whole body and critical organ doses can be calculated for the consumption of fish from the control location as well. In this case the consumption rate is assumed to remain the same (6.9 kg per year) but the average annual Cs-137 mean concentration for the con-trol samples is 0.049 pCi/g (wet). The calculated Cs-137 whole body dose is 0.024 mrem per year and the associated dose to the liver is 0.037 mrem per year.
In summary, the whole body and critical organ doses observed as a '
result of consumption of fish is small. Doses received from the consumption of indicator and control sample fish are approximately the same with the dose from control samples being slightly higher.
Doses from both sample groups are considered in the range of back-ground exposure rates.
Graphs of past Cs-137 and Sr-90 concentration can be found in Sec-tion VII.
k )I s >
l g 6. LAKE WATER - TABLES 6, 7, AND 8 h
1983 lake water samples were analyzed monthly for gross beta and gamma emitters (using gamma spectral analysis). Sr-89, Sr-90, and I tritium analyses were performed quarterly. Quarterly samples (i.e. ,
k Sr-89, Sr-90, and tritium) were composites of monthly samples.
The analytical results for the 1983 lake water sample program showed no evidence of plant related radionuclide buildup in the lake water in the vicinity of the site. Indicator samples were collected from the inlet canals at the Nine Mile Point Unit #1 and James - A. FitzPatrick facilities. The control location samples were collected at the City of Oswego water treatment plant and consisted of raw lake water prior to treatment.
The gross beta annual mean activity for the indicator sample loca-tions , Nine Mile Point Unit #1 and the James A. FitzPatrick inlet canals (3.34 pCi/ liter), was slightly higher than the 1982 mean inlet canal results (2.73 pCi/ liter). The Nine Mile Point Unit #1 canal samples were greater than the control samples for seven of the 12 monthly samples analyzed and ranged from 0.57 pCi/ liter to 7.90 pCi/ liter. The James A. FitzPatrick canal samples were greater than the control samples for six of the 12 monthly samples analyzed and ranged from 1.85 pCi/ liter to 5.61 pCi/ liter. The contr'o1 sample results ranged from 1.47 pCi/ liter to 7.92 pCi/ liter. The fluctuation in the gross beta canal sample results is due to the natural variation in concentration of naturally occurring radionuclides.
A reduction in gross beta activity since 1974 is primarily the result of improved analytical procedures and equipment and not necessarily to changes in plant operations. Although the past elevated gross beta concentration may be due in part to past weapons testing, it is difficult to determine what portion was due to improved instrumenta-tion and what part was due to weapons testing. There were no sig-nificant changes or trends in gross beta activity on a monthly basis for 1983. (See historical data graphsSection VII.)
Gamma spectral analysis was performed on 36 monthly composite sam-ples required by the Environmental Technical Specifications. - Only one radionuclide was detected in the inlet canal samples. This radionuclide is naturally occurring and not plant related.
K-40, a naturally occurring radionuclide, was detected ~ once in 1983 during- the month of December, in the . Ja.nes A. FitzPatrick inlet canal. The concentration detected during this : month was 9.6 pC1/ liter. No other radionuclides were ; detected in the ' James A.
FitzPatrick inlet-canal samples.
No radionuclides were detected' in the Nine Mile . Point inlet sample -
with the exception of naturally occurring K-40. K-40 was - detected in the April and September inlet canal samples for 1983.- The con-
)
1 l
.76 i
centrations detected were 16.5 pCi/ liter and 20.8 pCi/ liter respec-tively.
Water samples of raw water prior to treatment at the City of Oswego water treatment plant showed no detectable concentrations of plant related radionuclides. K-40 was the only detectable radionuclide and was noted in May and August at concentrations of 6.9 pCi/ liter and 10.4 pCi/ liter respectively.
Quarterly samples for Sr-89 analysis were composites of the monthly samples. Sr-89 was not detected in any of the water samples taken from the City of Oswego water treatment plant, the James A. Fitz-Patrick inlet canal, or the Nine Mile Point inlet canal. The lower limit of detection values for the City of Oswego water treatment plant canal samples (control location) ranged from less than 0.76 pCi/ liter to less than 2.00 pCilliter (LLD). The lower limit of detection val-ues for the indicator (James A. FitzPatrick inlet canal and Nine Mile Point inlet canal) locations ranged from less than 0.59 pCi/ liter to less than 2.00 pCi/Hter (LLD).
Quarterly samples for Sr-90 analysis were composites of the monthly samples as noted for the Sr-89 analysis. Sr-90 was detected in all the quarterly samples for the James A. FitzPatrick inlet canal, and in three of the four quarterly samples for both the Nine Mile Point inlet canal and the City of Oswego water treatment plant. At the City of Oswego water treatment plant or control location, Sr-90 ranged from 0.82 pCi/ liter to 0.97 pCi/ liter with a ' mean of 0.89 pCi/ liter. Sr-90 in the Nine Mile Point inlet canal samples ranged from 0.72 pCi/ liter to 1.10 pCi/ liter and showed a mean value of 0.95 l pCi/ liter. The James A. FitzPatrick inlet canal . samples showed Sr-90 ranging from 0.60 pCi/ liter to 1.00 pCi/ liter and a mean value of 0.75 pCi/ liter. Sr-90, as detected in the 1983 water samples, is considered to be background Sr-90 as a result of past weapons testing.
Tritium samples, as noted above for Sr-89 and Sr-90, are cuarterly samples that are a composite of the appropriate monthly samples.
Tritium was detected in all samples taken at all three locations. The City of Oswego water treatment plant showed tritium concentrations ranging from 230 pCi/11ter to 280 pCi/ liter with a mean of ~ 250 pCi/ liter. Tritium concentrations for the James A. FitzPatrick inlet canal ranged from 249 pCi/ liter to 560 'pCi/ liter and showed a mean concentration of 347 pCi/ liter. Inlet canal samples taken at Nine Mile Point showed tritium concentrations ranging from.190 pCi/ liter. to 410 pCi/ liter. The annual mean concentration was 288 pCi/ liter.
Evaluation of past environmental data shows that gross beta concen-trations in water samples have decreased significantly 'since 1977 at
- both the indicator sample' locations (inlet canals) and at -the control location (Oswego city water). As noted . previously,.- however, the decrease is primarily a result of superior analytical instrumentation.
Since 1978, gross beta levels have remained relatively constant at ]'
both indicator and control locations. -Indicator annual means; ranged 77
i i from 15.8 pCi/ liter in 1977 to 41.8 pCi/ liter in 1976. For the period of 1978 through 1981, annual means ranged from 2.73 pCi/ liter (1982) to 4.53 pCi/ liter (1978). The indicator annual mean for 1983 was 3.34 pCi/ liter. Control annual means also were relatively high l during 1975 to 1977 During these years, the concentrations ranged form 45.33 pCi/ liter (1975) to 10.9 pCi/ liter (1977). Data from 1974 for the control location was deleted from this comparison because of questionable results. For the period 1978 through 1981, annual mean gross beta concentration ranged from 2.42 pCi/ liter (1982) to 3.55 pCi/ liter (1978). The control annual mean for 1983 was 2.98 pCi/ liter.
Review of previous data for Sr-89 demonstrates that results have been variable since 1975. Sr-89 for the indicator samples has ranged from not detected (1976, 1977, 1979 and 1983) to 0.78 pCi/ liter (1981) and has been at relatively constant levels when detected. At the control locations, Sr-89 ranged from not detected (1975-1978, 1981 and 1983) to 1.4 pC1/ liter (1980). During 1983, Sr-89 showed an annual mean of less than 1.54 pCi/ liter (LLD) at the control location and less than 1.47 pCi/ liter (LLD) at the indica-tor location. Sr-90 annual means have remained relatively consistent at both indicator and control sample locations since 1975. Mean re-sults for the indicator samples ranged from_ not detected (1975 and 1976) to 1.08 pCi/ liter (1982). Mean results at the control sample location ranged from not detected (1975-1978) to 2.04 pCi/ liter (1982). The 1983 annual mean Sr-90 results for the indicator samples and control samples were 0.83 pCi/ liter and 0.89 pCi/ liter respec-tively.
Previous annual mean results at the indicator sample location has decreased slightly since 1976, with the exception of 1982. Sample results .were available since 1974 through 1982 and showed a peak value of 641.0 pCi/ liter (1982) and a minimum value of 234.0 pCi/ liter (1979). The annual mean tritium result at the indicator -
locations for 1983 was 317.0 pCi/ liter. This is a decrease from the value detected in 1982 (641.0 pCi/ liter) .
Mean tritium results at the control location have also decreased slightly since 1976. Mean annual results were available for 1974 through 1982. These results show that tritium at the control location ranged from not detected (1974) to 651.7 pCi/ liter (1976).
The annual mean tritium result at the control location for 1983 was -
250.0 pCi/ liter. This is a slight increase ' from . the 1982 value of 165.0 pCi/ liter. The fact that tritium is a naturally occurring radioactive isotope of hydrogen which is produced in the. upper atmosphere by cosmic radiation, as well as a product of reactor operation, accounts for the background: level in the lake to vary slightly from year to year.
The impact, as expressed by a dose to man, is not' assessed here since the primary pathway, in this case, is drinking . water. The nearest source for drinking water is the City of. Oswego water treat-
- ment plant which is the control location for the sampling program.
The results of the control location are consistent ' with ~ previous 78
years' results and are representative of normal background radionu-clide concentrations in lake water and regional drinking water that might be affected by the site.
Previous Lake Water data (tritium, Sr-89, Sr-90, and gross beta) is presented in Section VI, HISTORICAL DATA.
79
I TERRESTRIAL PROGRAM Tables 9 through' 21 represent the analytical results for the terrestrial samples collected for the 1983 reporting period.
l 1
'80
- 1. AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA - TABLES 9 and 10 Tables 9 and 10 contain the weekly air particulate gross beta results for the six offsite and nine onsite sample locations. The samples are counted at a minimum of twenty-four hours after collection to allow for the decay of naturally occurring radionuclides with short half-lives. A total of 312 offsite and 468 onsite samples were collected and analyzed during 1983. No significant levels of gross beta activ-ity were observed in any of the samples. The offsite or control mean concentration for 1983 was 0.024 pCi/m8 while the indicator or onsite sample mean was equal to 0.023 pCi/m3 As noted, the onsite mean is about five percent lower than the offsite mean for the same sample period. This difference in mean concentration has been ex-hibited in the past eight years with the exception of 1977 when a higher annual mean gross beta activity was observed for the onsite sampling stations. In these seven years, the control stations' annual mean ranged from a minimum difference of 5.0 percent higher than the indicator observed in 1983 to a maximum difference of 28.6 per-cent higher, observed in 1978. The difference in offsite and onsite weekly and monthly mean values for gross beta could be the result of a combination of the many natural processes which can affect en-vironmental concentrations. The most significant parameter that could possibly contribute to a depressed or lower concentration for the onsite stations would be location. The close proximity of onsite sampling stations to the lakeshore (Lake Ontario) would account for lower concentrations of naturally occurring radionuclides being col-lected on the sampling media. Surface winds from off the lake would contain less particulate matter and airborne gases than surface winds from adjacent ' land areas. The major component of gross beta con-centrations are decay or daughter products of -uranium and thorium and potassium-40. The concentrations of these nuclides in the ground level atmosphere are dependent upon the local geology and its chemical constituents. Thus surface winds of terrestrial origin have a potential for containing higher concentrations of naturally oc-curring radionuclides.
The observed increases and decreases in general gross beta activity can be attributed to changes experienced in the biosphere. ' As dis -
cussed above, the concentrations of the naturally occurring radionu--
- clides in the lower limits of the atmosphere directly above the ter-restrial portion of the earth are affected by time related processes such as wind direction, snow cover, soil temperature and soil mois-ture content. Very little change was noted in gross . beta activity -
which corresponded with seasonal . changes as has been observed in ~
past years.
In general, gross beta activity in air samples has decreased signif-icantly. The mean 1983 concentration for both offsite and onsite is six' times : lower than the mean concentration detected in 1981, and 26 -
percent lower .than the mean concentration detected in 1982. This - '
overall reduction in activity is directly attributable to the increased activity detected in 1981 as' a result of fallout from an atmospheric nuclear test and subsequent - return to background levels in :1983.
~
l '
1 81 <
I I
The trend of gross beta activity in the environment is that of re-duced concentrations. The mean 1983 concentration is the lowest level of gross beta activity observed since sampling for the FitzPatrick program began in 1974. This general decrease could be the result of the reduction of atmospheric nuclear testing in recent years in comparison to the 1960's when such testing was prolific.
Graphs of air particulate gross beta concentrations on a weekly and yearly basis can be found in Section VII.
82
- 2. MONTHLY PARTICULATE COMPOSITES - TABLE 11 The air particulate filters collected weekly from each of the 15 air sampling stations are composited monthly by location (onsite/offsite).
Each composite is analyzed for gamma emitter using gamma spectral analysis.
The results for the 24 monthly samples analyzed for the 1983 pro-gram showed positive detections for six radionuclides. Those radio-nuclides detected were Co-60, La-140, Cs-137, and Mn-54 in addition to Be-7 and K-40 which are both naturally occurring radionuclides.
The six radionuclides measured in the 1983 composite samples can be divided into two categories, the first category is naturally occurring radionuclides. Be-7 was detected in each of the 24 composite sam-ples both onsite and offsite. The mean value for Be-7. concentra-tions was ten percent higher in the offsite composite samples than the onsite samples. Potassium-40. was detected in eight of the offsite and 11 of the onsite monthly composite samples. _ The onsite annual mean was 10 percent higher than the offsite annual mean for K-40.
The second category of radionuclides detected are those which are plant related. Included here are Co-60, Mn-54, La-140 and Cs-137.
Cs-137 was included here due to the fact that the Cs-137 may be a constituent of plant effluents. A review of 1983 Cs-137 sample data indicates that Cs-137 is most likely the result of past weapons testing and subsequent environmental levels of Cs-137 from fallout.
Cs-137 was detected in four of the offsite composite samples and six of the onsite composite samples. The yearly mean concentration of Cs-137 was 0.00019 pCi/m3 for the offsite sample results and 0.00019 pCi/m3 for the onsite sample results. The maximum Cs-137 concen-trations detected were 0.00026 pCi/m3 and 0.00025 pCi/m8 for the offsite and onsite composite samples respectively. The presence of Cs-137 in the offsite samples on a temporal distribution, consistent with detections of Cs-137 at the onsite locations, is an indication that the main source of Cs-137 in the environment is not due to the operation of the plant. The three remaining radionuclides are La-140, Mn-54, and Co-60. La-140 was detected in one of the onsite monthly samples and was not detected in the offsite samples. The one onsite La-140 detection was made in April of 1983 at a concentra-tion of 0.0011 pCi/m3. . Mn-54 was also detected in one .of the onsite monthly composite samples. and was not detected in the offsite sam-ples. The one onsite Mn-54 detection was made in March of 1983 at a - concentration of 0.00027 pCi/m8 Co-60 was detected in four of the twelve onsite monthly composite samples and four of the -twelve offsite monthly composite samples. The onsite Co-60 concentrations ranged from a minimum of 0.00018 pCi/mi in May and a maximum concentration of 0.00071 pCi/m3 in December of 1983. The mean -
Co-60 concentration for the onsite samples was 0.00035 pCi/m8 for 1983.
Dose to man calculations can be made using inhalation rates and air 3 concentrations based on air sample results. . Using the average adult )
j 83.
i inhalation rate of 8,000 m3/yr (667 m8/ standard month) and the mean concentration measured at the onsite sample stations, the following i yearly doses can be calculated based on the amount of time the ra-dionuclide was detected during the year:
Concentration No. Months Dose
- t Nuclide (pCi/m8) Detected Origin (mrem /yr)
! Cs-137 0.00019 6 Fallout / Plant 0.00001 l Co-60 0.00035 4 Plant 0.00070
, M1-54 0.00027 1 Plant 0.00003 i La-140 0.0011 1 Plant 0.00001 j Totals 0.00075 i
Plant 0.00074 Fallout / Plant 0.00001 i
- Dose to the lung.
The above table illustrates that the average calculated dose to man l from plant related radionuclides is very small and of little biological significance.
i For the purpose of illustration, the significance of the above doses can be brought into perspective by a comparison to the average an-nual population lung dose received from the ' combustion of natural-
. gas used in cooking ranges and unvented heaters. This average an-
) nual population lung dose ranges from 2.0 mrem /yr to 5.0 mrem /yr 2
(NCRP, No. 56). This represents a dose approximately 3,000 times that received from plant effluents as noted above.
1 i The presence of elevated concentrations of Co-60 were noted in the i month of December .1983 and also in the month of January and the first week of February 1994. The eleveted concentrations were de-
! .termined to be contamination of the air particulate filters and not a .
result of plant effluents.- A review of plant gaseous effluent data .
for this period showed that the Co-60 release rates were well within l four percent of the design objective of the plant as outlined in Sec-i tion 2.3.B.2 of the Environmental Technical Specifications. These l limits were consistent with past effluent rates when Co-60 was not j detected.
l An investigation of the cause for these elevated. concentrations re-
- vealed cross contamination from the sample preparation area to the
" clean" air particulate filters (. .tose filters used prior to being placed in the field). Two separate analyses of the " clean" particu . ,
late filters revealed Co-60 concentrations consistent with. the levels detected in the monthly air particulate composites. This problem was immediately corrected.
6 l 84-1 . ,-. , . - . . - , _ _ , . _ . - .- - ..
If. the Co-60 concentrations are solely attributed to plant effluents and not to cross contamination, the annual mean Co-60 concentration would be 0.00073 pC1/m3 The resultant dose to the lung from this concentration of Co-60, in addition to the doses calculated in the above table, would be 0.0015 mrem /yr.
This dose is insignificant and, as noted above, represents in ecm-parison only 0.075 percent of the average annual population lung dose received from the combustion of natural gas used in cooking ranges and unvented heaters.
Graphic representations of air particulate composite Co-60 and Cs-137 concentrations are presented in Section VII.
85 I
- 3. AIRBORNE RADIOIODINE (I-131) - TABLES 12 AND 13 4
The results for Iodine-131 (charcoal cartridge) sampling and analyses are presented in Table 12 (Offsite) and Table 13 (Onsite).
4 During the 1983 sampling program airborne radiciodine was not de-tected in sny of the 312 weekly samples collected from the six offsite sampling stations. In the 1,559 weekly offsite I-131 samples col-t lected in 1979 through 1983, I-131 was only detected once (June 16, 1982). Offsite I-131 detections were made in 1977 and 1978.
I-131 was detected in four of the 468 onsite samples analyzed in 1983. These samples which contained radiolodine covered a total of four sample weeks or perieds. The environmental I-131 concentra-tions detected in 1983 are outlined as follows:
i Sample Onsite Concentration Dose (mrem)
End Date Sample Station I-131, pCi/m3 Thyroid /Whole Body 02/01/83 H 0.0219 0.0151 0.0052/0.000009 06/07/83 H 0.0315 0.0169 0.0075/0.000013 06/14/83 H 0.035010.0160 0.0084/0.000014 12/20/83 H 0.0228!0.0126 0.0054/0.000009 j
TOTAL' O.0265/0.000045 The spacial distribution of the I-131 concentrations show that the
! four positive detections were observed at H onsite air monitoring i station.
4 The onsite air monitoring station showing positive I-131 detections in j 1983 is located, in reference to the FitzPatrick reactor conterline, at -
approximately 1,900 ft/60o (H onsite). A meaningful dose estimate is difficult to make for the I-131 concentrations .at the onsite sampling j station as there are no residencies or individuals in the immediate vicinity of the sample location.
As noted on Figure 3 in Section VII,
, the H monitoring station is within the site boundary or controlled l- area. The above table illustrates the doses that can be calculated i
using the assumption that a critical individual was present at the .
monitoring location simultaneously for the total period of time for
' which the I-131 was collected. Such an individual does not exist but the calculated dose can be used for the purpose of illustration. The
- critical organ for this example is the thyroid. gland. The calculated l total dose for the above mentioned critical individual would be 0.0265 mrem to the thyroid and 0.000045 mrem to the whole body assum'ng a
- seven day sample period and an inhalation rate of 160 m8 per sample period. The resulting calculated dose due to onsite I-131 concentra-tion is extremely small and can. be compared to a similar dose from
! 86
i natural or background radiation that an individual could receive as a result of changing elevation. An individual residing 100 meters higher in altitude for a period of 4.8 days would receive an addi-tional radiation dose of 0.0265 mrem which is equal to the total cal-culated dose to the thyroid from environmental I-131 concentrations.
A review of plant gaseous effluent data for the sample periods in which I-131 was detected in the environment was performed. This data shows that the I-131 release rates- are well within the 4% design objective of the plant as outlined in the appropriate sections of the Environmental Technical Specifications. Calculations show that the detectable levels of I-131 in the environment are consistent with the measured source terms at the plant for the same sample period.
The end result of the 1983 I-131 sampling effort showed no signifi-
~l cant impact due to the operation of the plant. During 1983, I-131 was not detecte.1 in any other environmental sample media including milk and green leafy vegetables.
I i
4 l
l 87
~
! 4. TLD (ENVIRONMENTAL DOSIMETRY) - TABLE 14 i TLD's were collected once per quarter during the sample year. The I TLD results are an average of four independent readings at each lo-cation and are reported in mrem per standard month. In 1983, i
TLD's for the most part were collected on March 31, 1983, June 30, l 1983, September 30, 1983, and January 6,1984.
TLD results are organized into three. groups for reporting purposes.
The groups are onsite TLD's (defined as TLD's in the immediate proximity of the individual facilities, at points of interest), environ-mental station TLD's (a ring of TLD's surrounding the generating
- property or controlled area and ranging up to 20 miles from the - l l site) . '
A net dose at the environmental station TLD's can be calculated sim-ply by subtracting the mean standard month offsite doses from the mean standard month onsite environmental station doses *. Environ-mental station TLD's are arranged in a concentric circle and range in
, distance from the individual facilities from 1,500 to 2,000 feet. The i
net dose per mean standard month for each quarter is as follows:
m y ter Net Environmental Station Dose ** -
0.46 4 0.62 3 0.35 4 0.99 The annual site property boundary dose for 1983 cannot be deter-mined from the net environmental station dose since 'the property boundary extends out to approximately . 0.75 miles . from the site (i.e. , beyond the concentric circle of environmental station TLD's).
A general estimate can be made based on two available TLD's located at the site boundary. The net dose per standard month for each quarter can be calculated for these two locations (TLD numbers 19
! and 15) east and west of the site. This calculation is conservative
- since it represents the shortest distance to populated areas.
Quarter Net Site Property Boundary Dose **
l 1 - 0.32 2 + 0.37 3 - 0.30 4 - 0.20 l
- Location numbers 5, 6, 7, 23, 24, 25, and 26.
- Dose in mrem per standard month.
- 88.
As observed, the site boundary dose based on two available TLD lo-cations was less than the average offsite dose for three of the four quarters in 1983. This is probably due to the difference in ground dose rates which are indicative of variable concentrations of natural-ly occurring radionuclides in soil and rock such as radium, uranium, thorium, and potassium. The difference could also result from sta-tistical variation in the TLD readings, as the site boundary dose is l based on a population of only eight individual readings per quarter l (two TLD's).
TLD numbers 31 and 39 are located within the Nine Mile Point #1 re-stricted area near the radwaste facility and are influenced by the close proximity to the building. TLD numbers 27 through 30 and 47 i are located within the restricted area of the James A. FitzPatrick radwaste facility and are influenced by the radwaste buildings. TLD
- number 59 is located near the restricted area of the FitzPatrick Plant
- stack and is influenced by the proximity to this structure. TLD ,
numbers 3 and 4 are located at the construction site of Nine Mile Point #2. TLD's are subject to radiography at the Unit #2 site and
- to a much lesser extent the FitzPatrick facility.
Offsite TLD results remained fairly consistent for most TLD locations each quarter. Any slight variations in natural background radiation levels that were observed are most probably a result of increasing or decreasing emission rates for radon and thoron gases emanating from
- the ground. These emission rates are related to ground moisture 4
content and other natural parameters.
Onsite TLD results remained fairly consistent except for TLD's lo-cated near radwaste facilities which may be affected by the frequen-cy of radwaste processing and shipment. These TLD's include num-
- bers 23, 24, 27, 28, 29, 30, 47, 48, and 61 at the James A. Fitz-Patrick facility and number 39 at the Nine Mile Point #1 facility.
TLD numbers 3, 4, 41, and 62 are located at the Nine Mile Point #2 facility and were affected by the frequency of radiography at the j construction site. Radiography is a common practice at construction ;
sites in order to determine the quality of equipment welds such as -
i pipes. TLD's located in areas near radiography work will show flue-tuating doses as .the amount of radiography performed is not consis -
! tent. TLD number 59 results were variable as a result of the oper-
, ating mode of the James A. FitzPatrick facility. This TLD is located l near the James A. FitzPatrick facility exhaust stack.
The results of 1983 showed no detectable impact from direct radiation measured outside the site boundary.
i l
. l l
l I
l 89
- .. =. . - - . -. ..___ - . -
is t 5. RADIATION h!ONITORS - TABLE 15 Environmental radiation monitors are located in 10 of the 15 air moni-toring environmental stations. Each of the on site environmental l monitoring stations contains a radiation monitor and, in addition, the C off site monitoring station contains a similar monitor. The radia-tion monitors consist of a GAI detector with an associated power sup-ply, chart recorder, and trip unit. The monitor has an operating and recording range from 0.01 to 100 mrem /hr. Each radiation moni--
tor has a small radioactive source mounted inside the detector casing to produce an on scale reading. The design intent of the monitors is to detect possible dose rates resulting from plume releases from the site. The monitors are not considered to be capable of high sensitivity environmental monitoring and do not detect minute fluctu-ation in levels of background radiation. Because of the relatively low sensitivity of the monitors (environmentally speaking) no compar-isons are made between the radiation monitor readings and the read-ings from environmental TLD's. ;
r j
1 i
s
?
I l 90 l . - . _ .
- 6. MILK - TABLES 16,17, AND 18 Milk samples were collected from a combination of ten farms during the first month of the 1983 grazing season, and from eight farms during the remainder of the 1983 grazing season and the following months of November and December. The grazing season is . con-sidered to be May through October. Two of the sample locations, numbers 14 and 60, were deleted from the milk sampling program as a result of the 1983 spring milch animal census. These locations were deleted in June. Sample location descriptions are listed below.
Location No. Direction from Site Distance from Site (miles) 4 ESE 7.7 5 SSE 7.2 7 ESE 5.5 14 ESE 9.8 16 SSW 5.2 40 SW 15.3 45 SE 5.5 50 E 8.25 55 E 9.00 60 E 9.50 Milk samples were collected from each of the locations in the first half of the month and analyzed for I-131. At approximately mid month, a second milk collection was made at the same locations. The second collection was composited with an equal aliquot from each lo-cation sampled during the first collection. The composite samples were analyzed for gamma emitters and Sr-90. I-131, gamma isotopic, and Sr-90 results are found in the analytical results section.
The gamma spectral analysis of the monthly composite samples showed K-40 to be the most abundant radionuclide detected in the milk sam-ples collected in 1983. K-40 was detected in every sample analyzed and ranged in concentration from 1,520 pCilliter to 923 pCi/ liter at the indicator locations and 1,600 pCi/ liter to 1,070 pCi/ liter at the control location. K-40 is a naturally occurring radionuclide and is found in many of the environmental medlas sampled.
Sr-90 was also detected in all of the 66 milk samples collected during 1983. The mean Sr-90 concentration for the control location was 1.91 pCilliter. The mean for all indicator l locations (within 10 miles of the site) was A.81 pCi/ liter. The control and indicator sample means are - similar. "Sr-90 results for the indicator locations ranged from 5.05 pCi/ liter to 1.00 pCilliter. Control sample results ranged from 2.60 pCi/ liter to 1.00 pCi/ liter. The detection of Sr-90 in indicator and control locations at similar concentrations is indicative of back-ground Sr-90 as a result of past weapons testing.
91 h .-
Milk samples were collected and analyzed monthly for I-131. Iodine-131 was not detected during 1983 in any of the indicator or control samples. All 1983 I-131 milk results are reported as LLD.
Cs-137 was the detected in only one of the 66 monthly samples anal-yzed. This single detection of Cs-137 was made at indicator location number 5 during the month of June, 1983. Annual means for the detection of Cs-137 at all locations are presented below.
Location No. Annual Mean (Cs-137) 4 <4.8 pCi/l (LLD) 5 5.1 pC1/1 (positive) l 7 <5.5 pCi/1 (LLD) 14 <4.4 pCi/1 (LLD)
, 16 <5.2 pCi/l (LLD)
I 40 (control) <5.3 pCi/l (LLD) 45 <5.9 pCi/l (LLD) l 50 <6.2 pCi/l (LLD) 55 <4.9 pC1/1 (LLD) 60 <4.5 pCi/l (LLD)
Annual mean Cs-137 values for each sampling location are not signift-cantly different from one another. Location number 40 (control loca-tion) showed no detectable Cs-137 during 1983. This was also true for every indicator location with the exception of indicator number 5 (see above). The concentration of this one positive detection for Cs-137 was 5.1 pCi/ liter. This number is very small and near the LLD as can be seen when compared to the control location's (location number 40) annual mean for Cs-137 of less than 5.3 pCi/ liter (LLD).
Because there was only one positive detection of Cs-137 and because of the minute quantity detected, it is difficult to assess whether the '
concentration detected is a result of operations at the site or wheth-er part or all of the detected cesium is due to weapons testing fall-out. The impact in any case is extremely small (see below).
No other radionuclides were detected in milk samples during 1983 using gamma spectral analysis.
Examination of previous Cs-137 levels in milk samples shows that the annual mean for the indicator samples has decreased steadily since I
1974. 1976 did show a decrease (7.8 pCi/ liter) that was less than 1975 and 1977 (1975 was 20.6 pCi/ liter and 1977 was 17.1 pCi/ liter).
l 1974 through 1981 showed Cs-137 concentrations ranging from 26.1 pCi/ liter in 1974 to 7.57 pCi/ liter in 1981. As noted above, the in-dicator mean for 1983 was 5.1 pCi/ liter. Previous Cs-137 concentra-
, tions at the control location is only available from 1978 to 1982.
I Concentrations range from 3.73 pCi/ liter in 1979 to 7.0 pCi/ liter in 1981. The mean control result for 1983 was less than 5.3 pCi/ liter (LLD result).
( 92 l . .. .. . ..
Presented below is a table taken from NCRP _ Report No. 45 (National' Council On Radiation Protection And Measurements), " NATURAL BACKGROUND RADIATION IN THE UNITED STATES" November 15, 1975.
USPHS Network Data for *Sr and
"'Cs concentrations in milk (pCi/1)*
19ss test 19ee'1968 1962 1963 1964 1968'ttee 1967 toes'1960 1970 left 1982 wSr New York 4 8 9 8 le 28 23 18 14 11 12 le to 7 4 Cleeinesti t 13 30 8 14 23 22 15 12 to 9 8 7 7 8 St. Louis 13 22 18 8 13 21 22 17 le to 9 8 8 4 4 Salt I4ke City 4 7 4 8 9 22 25 19 !! 8 8 8 4 8 3 Seeramente 8 5 3 4 4 to 4 6 6 3 2 ,1 2 I I Atlanta Ith 18 13 to 18 29 31 24 la 14 14 to 11 le 9 Ausde 3' 6 4 3 7 9 9 7 3 4 3 2 3 1 2 Chicago 16 9-9 4 11 20 19 14 10 9 9 7 7 6 8 Spoksee 96 12 11 8 12 25 26 22 14 10 6 7 8 8 4
- C4 New York 40 54 28 13 51 I47 144 ft as to 18 12 17 8 8 Closinenal 84 30 to <3 30 84 se - 42 20 to 8 3 3 2 4 St. Louis 80 80 30 15 32 82 74 34 24 7 7 2 4 3 3 Seit Lake City 30 40 30 8 82 tes les sa 29 11 12 4 8 12 2 Searamento 60 45 to 3 14 58 e2 27 11 4 8 0 0 0 0 Attenta 906 83 34 10 37 13 7 13 0 44 32 24 20 19 14 14 10 Ausde 50* 44 13 <3 20 44 38 23 !! 4 2 4 3 0 0 Chiesse so" 60 30 to 39 tot toe 50 25 14 10 _9 11 9 9 Seeksee 80* 70 33 is 40 ist 132 ft 24 17 to 4 2 4 8
- Ites-ee, Raw Milk Network; IMI on. Festeuneed Milk Network.
bData set collerted for the estate year.
This table illustrates the levels of Sr-90 and Cs-137 detected in milk samples in the United States in the years 1958 through 1972 as mea-sured by the Public Health Service Milk Networks. The presence of Cs-137 and Sr-90 in milk is not unique and is a situation common in the northern hemisphere. The levels detected in 1983 milk samples are similar to those detected in the years 1971 and 1972 as might. be expected, considering the long radiological half-lives for Sr-90 and Cs-137 (29 years and 30 years respectively), and the fact that sev-eral atmospheric nuclear tests have been conducted since 1972, one as recent as 1980.
Previous Sr-90 data from the indicator locations shows that the an-nual mean Sr-90 concentrations have decreased slightly since 1974.
Sr-90 ranged from 2.81 pCi/ liter in 1983 to 7.16 pCi/ liter in 1976.
The 1983 annual mean for Sr-90 was 2.81 pCi/ liter, which shows a slight decrease from the 1982 annual mean for Sr-90 of 4.60 pCi/-
liter. Strontium-90 concentrations at the control location are only available since 1978. The annual mean concentration ranged. from 1.91 pCi/ liter in 1983. to 5.88 pCi/ liter in 1978. The 1983 annual mean for Sr-90 (control location) was 1.91 pCi/ liter, and also shows a slight decrease from the 1982 annual mean for Sr-90 of 2.96 pCi/ .
liter.
The impact as a result of Cs-137 in 1983 milk samples is very mini-mal. With respect to Cs-137, the dose resulting from Sr-90 ingestion to the bone-is much more significant. - Cs-137 was detected in only. ,
one of the indicator samples during 1983. The control samples i showed no detectable Cs-137. As noted above - it is difficult to l
93
, . , . . , , , , , , . . . , - W
assess whether Cs-137 in the indicator milk samples is a result of background cesium levels, totally as a result of site operations, or partially as a result of plant operations. The difficulty arises because of the minute quantities detected that are at or just above the lower limit of detection.
The impact can be assessed by calculating doses to man as a result of consumption of milk with detectable quantities of Cs-137. For the !
purposes of a calculated dose, the mean indicator sample Cs-137 con- l centration is used (5.1 pCi/ liter). Assuming a consumption rate of I 330 liters (87.18 gallons) per year for an infant (Regulatory Guide 1.109 maximum exposed individual), the whole body dose would be 0.049 mrem and a critical organ dose would be 0.686 mrem to the liver. The calculated doses are based on eight months of consump-tion (eight months of milk sample results). Since Cs-137 was not detected at the control location in 1983, a dose calculation cannot be performed. For a limited comparative purpose, the calculated dose to an infant as a result of consuming milk from the control location during 1981 would be 0.067 mrem whole body dose and 0.94 mrem critical organ dose (dose to the liver). The annual mean Cs-137 concentration for the 1981 control location was 7.0 pC1/ liter.
The calculated dose to an adult can be determined assuming a con-sumption rate of 110 liter (29.06 gallons) per year (Regulatory Guide 1.109) and a mean Cs-137 concentration of 5.1 pCi/ liter for the indi-cator locations. The resultant doses are 0.027 mrem to the whole body and 0.041 mrem to the liver (critical organ). The calculated doses are based on eight months of consumption. As noted above, Cs-137 was not detected at the control location, therefore no whole body or critical organ, doses can be calculated. Using the example above, the dose to an adult based on the 1981 control sample results would be 0.037 mrem to the whole body and 0.056 mrem to the liver (critical organ).
For the purpose of illustration, the significance of the above doses can be brought into perspective by comparison to background doses due to cosmic radiation with changes in altitude. Assuming the above calculated whole body dose, as a result of the consumption of milk, is 0.049 mrem to an infant and is totally a result of plant op-erations at the site, a comparison can be made to the incremental increase in dose due to cosmic radiation at sea level. A dose of 0.049 mrem whole body is equal to residing at a location 100 meters (328 feet) higher in altitude for 8.9 days.
An additional comparison can be made to naturally occurring K-40.
K-40 has been noted in almost all environmental samples at signifi-cant levels. A 70 kg adult weighs approximately 154 pounds and contains approximately 0.1 microcuries of K-40 as a result of normal life functions (inhalation, consumption, etc.). The dose to the bone tissue is about 20 mrem per year as a result of.the internal depos-ited K-40. For comparison purposes, an adult bone dose can be calculated that results from the consumption of milk from the 1983 94
,: . ,~ ,
l . . ,
-l
./ ~ -
indicator location. The mean Cs-137 concentration of 5.1 pCi[dter is'. * "[
used. The resulting. bone dose is 0.045 mrem per year (an asarage ,
milk Cs-137 concentration of 5.1 pCi/ liter is applied over the" entire ' ',yy year). This dose is 0.002 of the bone dose as a result of nat'urally'"
occurring K-40 in a 154 pound adult. I_ ! ' - l 7'
The impact, as a result of Sr-90 in milk, due to plant operation, is ,
4 extremely small if any since the mean result of the indicator results ,
and the control results are approximately equal considering- fluctuae '
tions in the background levels. The levels of Sr-90 detected in ine .,s/
4
! dicator as well as control samples is considered to be representative ? 0 '
of background concentrations. In this regard, the resultant,calcu- ' ' '
3 lated doses would be approximately equal. % ',^
.f, '
y., .-2
- Iodine-131 was not detected in the 66 monthly milk samples atlaly:::c'.d ' ,' '
for the 1983 program. No doses to man have been calculated-'due tM the lack of positive detection. The detection of I-131 in milk saap, i '
ples has not been routine in the past. In past sampling programs, I-131 has been detected in milk samples in conjunction with fresh T.
j fallout from atmospheric nuclear testing. f ,' .
c , ,
Graphs of yearly milk sample results for Cs-137, Sr-90 and I-131, .
along with monthly (1983) Cs-137 results by station, are presented ,'
1 in Section VII.
%g.'
s
=
+
i 4
4 i
- -i 9,
f - j
,,, m
, r -
)
1 C,; :
r*, n
~
.F~ ^
.* ) ' . ,'
, ,~ ~
i .,.
95 ; - l' ..
- x= < ~:: <
- 7. MILCH ANIMAL CENSUS - TABLE 19 The milch animal census is an estimation of the number of cows and goats within a 10 mile radius of the Nine Mile Point Site. A census is conducted twice per year, once in the spring and once in the summer. The census is conducted by sending questionnaires to pre-vious milch animal owners and also by road surveys to locate any possible new owners. Questionnaires not responded to are followed up by telephone calls.
The number of milch animals located within the 10 mile radius of the site was estimated to be 1,213 cows and no goats for the spring 1983 census. No new locations were found since the summer 1982 census.
The number of cows increased by 72 and the number of goats de-creased by two with respect to the 1982 summer census.
The 1983 summer census showed a total of 1,145 cows and two goats.
This represents a decrease of 68 cows and an increase of two goats l
l with respect to the spring 1983 census, i
l l
l l
l 96
[
N Ti
- 8. HUMAN FOOD PRODUCTS - TABLE 20 Human food product samples were comprised of meat, eggs, poultry, and vegetables. Collections for meat, poultry, and eggs were made in the spring and fall seasons. Samples of produce included vegeta-bles with an attempt to sample at least one green leafy vegetable from each location. The collection of produce was performed in late summer or early fall. Three indicator locations were sampled for each type of media collected, in addition, a control location was sam-pled during each collection period. Indicator samples were collected within a 10 mile radius of the site in areas which would have a high potential for demonstrating possible effects of site operations. The ultimate factor controlling sample locations was the availability of required samples. Attempts were made to maintain prior sample loca-tions where possible.
Meat Spring meat collections were made at one . offsite location .(gEeater than 10 miles from the site) and at three onsite locations (less than 10 miles from the site). Spring meat collections showed detectable concentrations of K-40 in all samples. K-40 concentrations ranged from 2.3 pCi/g (wet) to 2.9 pCi/g (wet). K-40 is a naturally occur-ring radionuclide. Only one of the four spring meat samples showed detectable concentrations of Cs-137. The detected Cs-137 concentra-tion was in the indicator or onsite sample. The Cs-137 result for this sample was 0.023 pCi/g (wet). Cs-137 was not detected in the control sample.
Cs-137 is detected in many environmental samples and was. most prevalent in meat and fish, with respect to all the sample media collected. Cs-137 in meat samples is essentially a result of past weapons testing. Cesium is incorporated into meat tissue from feed ,
sources. The results detected in the spring meat: samples are very low concentrations and thus can appear in some samples. and not in others. By review of the 1981 spring meat sample data, it is noted .
that Cs-137 appeared in the control samples (0.017 pCi/g' [ wet] . and 0.024 pC1/g [ wet]). Cs-137 was 'also found in the control sample during 1980 (0.01 pCi/g [ wet]). .i The one meat sample that showed a detectable concentrhtion of Cs-137 (0.023 pCi/g [ wet]) was approximately - equal ~ to detected concentrations in control sample results during'the spring of 1981.
' Because this result (0.023 pCi/g [ wet]) is small, the impact or dose as a result of this concentration is _ insignificant and 'is addressed below.
~
No other ' radionuclides were . detected in the ' spring - meat : semples using gamma spectral analysis.
- Fall meat collections 'were made .'at one ~ offsite' and 'at- three' onsite
. sample locations. : The fall samples showed detectable concentrations '
of K-40 in all samples. K-40 concentrations. ranged from ~ 2.4 pCi/g (wet) to 3.4 pCi/g (wet). ~
e + 4L
'97 ]'" 3m 3
Cs-137 was detected in three of the four fall meat camples. The i
three positive results were the three indicator samples (less than 10 miles from the site). The three results showed small concentrations of Cs-137. The results were 0.044 pCi/g. (wet), 0.023 pCi/g (wet) i and 0.014 pCi/g (wet) as compared to the control sample result of less than 0.01 pCi/g (wet). These results are very small concentra-tions and, as noted above for the spring samples, are comparable to i
concentrations detected at control locations during 1981. These 1981 1
samples showed control Cs-137 concentrations of 0.017 and 0.024 i
pCi/g (wet) respectively. The impact of these small concentrations is discussed below.
, No other radionuclides were detected in the fall meat samples using
- gamma spectral analysis.
The detection of Cs-137 in meat samples has been noted for all years since 1978 for indicator samples and since 1980 for control locations (control samples were not collected prior to 1980). The detected concentrations since 1978 at the indicator-locations have been fairly consistent. These samples ranged from 0.021 to 0.036 pCi/g- (wet).
At the control locations, Cs-137 ranged from 0.01 to 0.021 pCi/g (wet) . The indicator sample annual mean results have been slightly higher than the control sample annual mean results.
' The historical detection of Cs-137 in meat at control and indicator sample locations is an indication of cesium production from weapons testing. During 1983, Cs-137 was not detected at the control sample locations although Cs-137 has been detected in the past (1981 for example) at control sample locations. As noted above. -the concen-trations detected are very small and the impact or dose to man is insignificant. An average annual dose to man can be calculated as _a result of meat consumption from within 10 miles of the site (indicator sample results). . .
The average Cs-137 concentration in meat during 1983 was 0.024-pCi/g (wet). Assuming an adult consumption rate of 95 kg per year, the annual dose to the whole body is 0.163 . mrem per year. The critical ' organ dose is.0.249 mrem per year to ' the liver. This calculated dose is small and can be compared to an annual dose of 20 mrem per. year to the critical organ (the gonads' in this case) as a-result of naturally occurring. K-40 in 'the environment. The~ calcu -
lated whole body dose (0.163 mrem per year) and the calculated crit-ical organ dose (0.249 mrem per year to the liver) can 'also be com-pared to the dose received from control sample results during 1981.
During 1981, the annual mean concentration . for the . control _ meat samples was 0.02 pCi/g (wet). ~ Using the~ same consumption factor of :
~
95 kg per year, ' the annual whole. body' dose was 0.136 mrem 'per .
year and 0.207 mrem per year to the liver (critical organ- dose).- As-noted above, the 1983 control samples did _ not 'showD any . Cs-137.
above the lower -limits 'of detection. -However, Cs-137 in meat' has historically been present. Because of the~ small concentrations noted here, cesium.can be noted in 'some samples and not in other samples. . U
, 1 98-
E_gg_s Egg samples were collected in the spring (May 10-19, June 3,- 1983) and in the fall (November 1-30, 1983). Samples were collected at three onsite locations (within 10 miles of the site) and at one offsite -
location (greater than 10 miles from the site). The only radionuclide detected during 1983 in egg samples was K-40. K-40 was detected in the spring samples at concentrations that ranged from 0.8 pCi/g to 1.2 pCi/g (wet). The fall samples showed K-40 concentrations that ranged from 1.0 pCi/g to 1.1 pCi/g (wet). For both the spring and fall samples, the control samples had the highest K-40 concen-trations.
Poultry Poultry samples were taken during the spring (May 10-19, June 3, 1983) and during the fall (November 1-30, 1983) at three onsite loca-tions and one offsite location. K-40 was detected in all spring and fall samples both onsite and offsite. K-40 in the spring samples ranged from 1.7 pCi/g to 2.9 pCi/g (wet). The control sample had the lower concentration (1.7 pCi/g) . K-40 in the fall samples ranged from 3.1 pCi/g to 3.3 pCi/g (wet) . The control sample showed a concentration of 3.3 pCi/g (wet).
Cs-137 was detected in one of the onsite poultry sample locations during 1983. The concentration detected was very small . and was approximately at the lower limit of detection (LLD) level- for all the 1983 poultry samples. The detected Cs-137 concentration was 0.018 pCi/g (wet) . The LLD levels for the other samples ranged from 0.007 pCi/g to 0.018 pCi/g (wet). Historically, the control samples for poultry have not demonstrated detectable concentrations of Cs-137. Although this sample is an onsite sample (i.e. , within 10 miles of the site), it is difficult to assese whether the ' detected cesium is plant related or a minute background cesium concentration.
In regards to background Cs-137, poultry can be compared to beef
~
(meat) samples in the sense that Cs-137 can .become incorporated in tissue through the ingestion pathway. Thus, poultry have the po-tential to ' ingest Cs-137 through the purchased feed they consume (possible weapons testing source) but conversely they also have the potential to incorporate Cs-137 through ingestion of local deposition (plant related source).
The impact, as a result of consumption ' of poultry. can be assessed by projecting a whole body and critical organ dose to 'an- adult. 'A maximum and therefore ~ very conservative dose can be calculated based on the' one positive detection of Cs-137. Assuming a . Cs-137 concentration of 0.018 pC1/g (wet), and a consumption rate 'of 95 kg per year, a conservative dose to man .can be ' calculated.. The adult -
whole body dose is 0.061 mrem per year and -the adult critical organ' dose is 0.093. mrem per year to the liver. These ~ doses were calcu-lated for a six month period since Cs-137 was- detected only during.
the first half of the year. . As noted in the assessment. of the meat sample -data, these . doses are small when _ compared to an annual dose -
- 99
i of 20 mrem per year to the critical organ (the gonads in this case) cs a result of naturally occurring K-40 in the environment.
An additional comparison can be made to natural background cosmic l radiation and the resulting increase in dose with an increase in altitude. Using the incremental increase in dose due to cosmic radiation at sea level, a conservative dose calculation can be made.
The dose due to consumption of. poultry to the whole body is 0.061 mrem per year, as noted above. This dose is equal to an increase i in dose due to cosmic radiation that one would receive by residing at a location 100 meters (328 feet) higher in altitude for 11.1 days. It is assumed that by residing at this location one would remain at this altitude for the full 11.1 days.
Fruits and Vegetables Fruits and vegetables were obtained during the harvest season. Col-lections were made during September at three indicator locations and one control location. A successful attempt was made to collect one broadleaf and one non-broadleaf fruit or vegetable at each location.
Broadleaf vegetables of Swiss chard and cabbage and non-broadleaf fruits and vegetables of tomatoes, cucumbers, squash, and zucchini were collected.
K-40 was detected in all broadleaf and non-broadleaf vegetables and fruits. Broadleaf vegetables (Swiss chard and cabbage) showed con-centrations of K-40 ranging from 1.8 pCi/g to 4.6 pCi/g (wet). The j indicator sample had the highest concentration (4.6 pCi/g [ wet]).
- Non-broadleaf fruits and vegetables showed concentrations of K-40
- ranging from 1.2 pCi/g to 2.3 pCi/g (wet). Again the indicator lo-cation had the highest K-40 concentration (2.3 pCi/g [ wet]).
No other radionuclides were detected in the 1983 collection of fruits and vegetables.
Review of past environmental data indicates that K-40 has been con-sistently detected in food crop samples. K-40 concentrations have fluctuated from one sample to another but the annual ranges have remained relatively consistent from year to year. Be-7 has been de-tected occasionally during the past on leafy vegetables (1978 through 1982).
l Dose estimates are not performed here for fruits and/or vegetables since no other radionuclides with the exception of naturally occur-ring K-40 were detected.
i l
l
l l l l 9. SOIL - TABLE 21 l l
Soil samples are required once every three years. Samples were col-lected during 1983 at each of _ the 15 air monitoring stations - (see Section VII, Figures 1 and 3). The radiological analysis of the soil !
samples showed detectable concentrations of Sr-90, Cs-137, K-40, i Ra-226, and Th-228. Each of the radionuclides detected can be placed into one of two groups. The first group of radionuclides is l the result of past atmospheric nuclear weapons testing. The second group of radionuclides is naturally occurring. Radionuclides with relatively long half-lives which fall into the first group are the result of atmospheric tests conducted over the past decades. The fallout related radionuclides detected in 1983 soil samples were Sr-90 and Cs-137. Sr-90 and Cs-137 require special consideration as these radionuclides are a common constituent of the background radiation l due to fallout, but can also be attributed -to the operation of the plant. The three naturally occurring radionuclides (K-40, Ra-226, and Th-228) were found in both tha onsite and offsite samples. The concentrations of the naturally occurring radionuclides was consistent from station to station during 1983, and consistent with levels detected in previous soil sample collections (1977 ard 1980).
Strontium-90 was detected in seven of the nine onsite soil samples j collected in 1983. The concentration of Sr-90 in the onsite (indica-l tor) samples ranged from 0.03 pCi/g (dry) to 0.47 pCi/g (dry).
Strontium-90 was detected in all six of the offsite (control) soil sam-i ples. The concentration of Sr-90 in the offsite samples ranged'from 0.10 pCi/g (dry) to 0.32 'pCi/g (dry).
Cesium-137 was also detected in seven of the nine onsite soil samples and all six of the offsite soil samples. The Cs-137 concentration in' the onsite samples ranged from 0.07 pCi/g (dry) to 1.19 pCi/g l
(dry). The Cs-137 concentration in the offsite samples ranged from 0.20 pCi/g (dry) to 1.46 pCi/g (dry). The above results show that -
the highest Sr-90 concentration was found at the indicator location,-
and the highest Cs-137 concantration was found at the control loca-tion.
The 1983 mean Sr-90 concentration for both the indicator and control soil samples is identical (0.18 pCi/g [ dry]). The detection - of Sr-90 '
in similar concentrations at both the control and indicator locations is indicative of past weapons testing.
The 1983 mean Cs-137 concentration was slightly higher in the con-trol samples (0.67 pCilg [ dry]) than in .the indicator samples (0.42 pCi/g [ dry]). As noted above for Sr-90, the detection of Cs-137 in similar concentrations at both the control and indicator locations -is also indicative of past weapons testing.
A review of past environmental data shows that the mean Sr-90 con-centration for both the indicator and- control locations shows a slight ,
increase 'over the 1980 mean Sr-90 results. However, ' the 1983 mean l i
l 101
Sr-90 results are slightly lower than the levels detected in 1977.
This variability in the Sr-90 level may be due in part to the ecologi-cal cycling of Sr-90 in soils, and in part to the additional deposition of Sr-90 as a result of the Chinese nuclear test in October 1980.
Review of previous environmental data shows that the mean Cs-137 concentration for both the indicator and control locations shows a slight decrease from 1977 and 1980 Cs-137 results. Again , this slight decrease in Cs-137 concentrations is most likely due to the ecological cycling of cesium in soils. Previous soil sample data (Cs-137, Sr-90) is presented in Section VI, HISTORICAL DATA.
I J
I l
1 I
1 l
1 l
l i
I CONCLUSION The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program is conducted each year to determine the radiological impact of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear 3
l Power Plant on the local environment. As demonstrated by the analytical I results of the 1983 program, the major radiological impact on the environ-ment was the result of fallout from atmospheric nuclear testing. I l
Levels of natural background and the associated fluctuation in intensity l are much more significant in terms of dose to man (normal background in l the vicinity of the site is equal to 60 mrem /yr) than radiation levels in l the environment associated with the operation of the plant. ,
Using the data presented in this report, and earlier reports as a basis, it can be concluded that no appreciable radiological environmental impact has resulted from the operation of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant.
l 1
( i l
103 l
_ . _- - - _ . = -- . . . _ -.
i EXCEPTIONS TO THE PROGRAM
- 1. The air sampling pump at the D-2 onsite environmental sampling sta-4 tion was inoperable from January 17,1983 (1406 hours0.0163 days <br />0.391 hours <br />0.00232 weeks <br />5.34983e-4 months <br />) to January l 20, 1983 (1310 hours0.0152 days <br />0.364 hours <br />0.00217 weeks <br />4.98455e-4 months <br />). Inopersbility was caused by pump mechanical problems.
1
, 2. Environmental radiation monitor C offsite was inoperable from March 29,1983 (0930 hours0.0108 days <br />0.258 hours <br />0.00154 weeks <br />3.53865e-4 months <br />) to April 7,1983 (1010 hours0.0117 days <br />0.281 hours <br />0.00167 weeks <br />3.84305e-4 months <br />). Inoperability j was caused by an electrical malfunction.
. 3. The air sampling pump at the J onsite environmental sampling station
- was inoperable from April 15, 1983 (0400 hours0.00463 days <br />0.111 hours <br />6.613757e-4 weeks <br />1.522e-4 months <br />) to April 18, 1983 (1320 hours0.0153 days <br />0.367 hours <br />0.00218 weeks <br />5.0226e-4 months <br />). Inoperability was caused by an electrical short circuit i
in the cord.
- 4. Environmental radiation monitor F onsite was inoperable from May 25, 1983 (2040 hours0.0236 days <br />0.567 hours <br />0.00337 weeks <br />7.7622e-4 months <br />) to May 27,1983 (1145 -hours). Inoperability was caused by an electrical malfunction.
i
- 5. The air sampling pump at the G offsite environmental sampling sta-tion was inoperable from June 14, 1983.(1130 hours0.0131 days <br />0.314 hours <br />0.00187 weeks <br />4.29965e-4 months <br />) to June 15, 1983 (1530 hours0.0177 days <br />0.425 hours <br />0.00253 weeks <br />5.82165e-4 months <br />). Inoperability was caused by a blown fuse.
- 6. The air sampling pump at the J onsite environmental sampling station was inoperable from June 16, 1983 (1100 hours0.0127 days <br />0.306 hours <br />0.00182 weeks <br />4.1855e-4 months <br />) to June 20, 1983 (1350 hours0.0156 days <br />0.375 hours <br />0.00223 weeks <br />5.13675e-4 months <br />). Inoperability was caused by pump mechanical
, problems.
) 7. Environmental sampling station F onsite was inoperable from June 30, 1983 (1600 hours0.0185 days <br />0.444 hours <br />0.00265 weeks <br />6.088e-4 months <br />) to July 5,1983 (1500 hours0.0174 days <br />0.417 hours <br />0.00248 weeks <br />5.7075e-4 months <br />), as a result of an automobile accident on June 30, 1983. On June 30, a car collided i
with the utility pole that F onsite environmental sampling station was
} mounted on. The crash caused damage to the cabinet, the vacuum
- pump, and the radiation monitor.
I i 8. The air sampling pump at the D-1 offsite environmental sampling
' station was inoperable from July 19, 1983 (0820 hours0.00949 days <br />0.228 hours <br />0.00136 weeks <br />3.1201e-4 months <br />) to July 20, 1983 (1046 hours0.0121 days <br />0.291 hours <br />0.00173 weeks <br />3.98003e-4 months <br />). Inoperability was caused by pump mechanical problems.
1 9. The air sampling pump at the I onsite environmental sampling station was' inoperable from July 22, 1983 (0845 hours0.00978 days <br />0.235 hours <br />0.0014 weeks <br />3.215225e-4 months <br />) to July 25, 1983 (1330 hours0.0154 days <br />0.369 hours <br />0.0022 weeks <br />5.06065e-4 months <br />). Environmental radiation monitor I onsite was also .
inoperable from ' July 22, 1983 (0845 ' hours) to July 26, 1983 (1010-j hours). Inoperability of the pump and monitor was caused by an electrical malfunction to the power supply to the environmental i cabinet.
- 10. Environmental radiation monitor G onsite was inoperable from . July
[ 26, 1983 (1328 hours0.0154 days <br />0.369 hours <br />0.0022 weeks <br />5.05304e-4 months <br />) to August 3, 1983 (1505 hours0.0174 days <br />0.418 hours <br />0.00249 weeks <br />5.726525e-4 months <br />). -Inoperability
! was caused by an electrical malfunction.
I l.
l ~104'
_=- - - .. -
l
- 11. Environmental radiation monitor H onsite was inoperable from August 22, 1983 (1430 hours0.0166 days <br />0.397 hours <br />0.00236 weeks <br />5.44115e-4 months <br />) to August 25, 1983 (0800 hours0.00926 days <br />0.222 hours <br />0.00132 weeks <br />3.044e-4 months <br />). Inoperabili- ,
- ty was caused by an electrical malfunction. !
l
- 12. Environmental radiation monitor I onsite was inoperable from August l 24, 1983 (0940 hours0.0109 days <br />0.261 hours <br />0.00155 weeks <br />3.5767e-4 months <br />) to August 25, 1983 (1445 hours0.0167 days <br />0.401 hours <br />0.00239 weeks <br />5.498225e-4 months <br />). Inoperabili- !
ty _was caused by an electrical malfunction.
! l
- 13. Environmental radiation monitor C offsite was inoperable from Sep- i tember 1, 1983 (0725 hours0.00839 days <br />0.201 hours <br />0.0012 weeks <br />2.758625e-4 months <br />) to September 13, 1983 (0922 hours0.0107 days <br />0.256 hours <br />0.00152 weeks <br />3.50821e-4 months <br />).
Inoperability was caused by an electrical malfunction.
- 14. The air sampling pump at the H onsite environmental sampling station was inoperable from September 21, 1983 (0414 hours0.00479 days <br />0.115 hours <br />6.845238e-4 weeks <br />1.57527e-4 months <br />) to September
- 22,1983 (1041 hours0.012 days <br />0.289 hours <br />0.00172 weeks <br />3.961005e-4 months <br />). Inoperability was caused by pump mechanical i problems.
l
- 15. The air sampling pump at the J onsite ' environmental sampling station was inoperable from September 26,1983 (1335 hours0.0155 days <br />0.371 hours <br />0.00221 weeks <br />5.079675e-4 months <br />) to ' September 30, 1983 (1040 hours0.012 days <br />0.289 hours <br />0.00172 weeks <br />3.9572e-4 months <br />). Inoperability was caused by a blown fuse.
- 16. The air sampling pump at the J onsite environmental sampling station was inoperable from September 30, 1983 (1910 hours0.0221 days <br />0.531 hours <br />0.00316 weeks <br />7.26755e-4 months <br />) to October 3, 1983 (1025 hours0.0119 days <br />0.285 hours <br />0.00169 weeks <br />3.900125e-4 months <br />). Inoperability was caused'by a blown fuse.
, 17. The air sampling pump at the H onsito environmental sampling station I was inoperable from December 1, 1983 (1000 hours0.0116 days <br />0.278 hours <br />0.00165 weeks <br />3.805e-4 months <br />) to December 5,
- 1983 (1000 hours0.0116 days <br />0.278 hours <br />0.00165 weeks <br />3.805e-4 months <br />). Inoperability was caused by the technician's 4 failure to turn the pump on after the weekly onsite environmental l station inspection.
- 18. Environmental radiation monitor I onsite was inoperable from Decem-ber 5, 1983 (1000 hours0.0116 days <br />0.278 hours <br />0.00165 weeks <br />3.805e-4 months <br />) to December 16, 1983 (1320 hours0.0153 days <br />0.367 hours <br />0.00218 weeks <br />5.0226e-4 months <br />). Inop-erability was caused by an electrical malfunction.
- 19. Environmental radiation monitor I onsite was inoperable from Decem---
ber 27,1983 (1005 hours0.0116 days <br />0.279 hours <br />0.00166 weeks <br />3.824025e-4 months <br />) to December 29,1983 (1025 hours0.0119 days <br />0.285 hours <br />0.00169 weeks <br />3.900125e-4 months <br />). Inop-erability was caused by an electrical malfunction.
- 20. One Environmental Technical Specification (ETS) milk sampis collected' i
during October (October 10, 1983)' and analyzed for iodine-131 had
, this analysis performed within 9.40 days instead of 8.041 days (one -
i half-life of iodine-131). The analysis time was well within 10.05 days (one half-life of lodine-131 plus or minus 25 percent), 'and the LLD sensitivity for I-131 (less than 0.5 pCi/1) 'was satisfied as is re-
- quired by the ETS.
l 1
i a
d
, 105 ~.
REFERENCES
- 1. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.109, " Cal-culation of Annual Doses to alan from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluent for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR j Part 50, Appendix I", alarch,1976.
- 2. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.109, " Cal-i culation of Annual Doses to Alan from Routine Releases of Reactor
- Effluent for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I", October,1977.
1 3. Eichholz, G., Environmental Aspects of Nuclear Power, First Edition, j Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Inc. , Ann Arbor, Alichigan,1976.
- 4. National Council on Radiation Protection and hieasurements (NCRP),
Environmental Radiation hieasurements. NCRP Report No. 50, 1976, i 5. National Council on Radiation Protection and 51easurements (NCRP),
Natural Background Radiation in the United States, NCRP Report No. 45, 1975.
- 6. National Council on Radiation Protection and hieasurements (NCRP),
Cesium-137 from the Environment to h!an: BIetabolism and Dose, NCRP Report No. 52, 1977.
- 7. National Council on Radiation Protection and f.feasurements (NCRP),
Radiation Exposure from Consumer Products And Aliscellaneous Sources, NCRP Report No. 56, 1977.
- 8. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 4.8, " Environ-
! mental Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants", December j 1975.
- 9. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Branch . Technical Position to
- Regulatory Guide 4.8, "An Acceptable Radiological Environmental 1 Afonitoring Program", November,1979.
- 10. Eisenbud, Blerril, Environmental Radioactivity, Second Edition, Aca-demic Press, New York, New York,1973.
- 11. Francis , C. W., Radiostrontium Slovement in Soils and - Uptake in l Fiants, Environmental Sciences Division, Oak- Ridge National Labora-
, tory, U.S. Department of Energy,1978.
- 12. National Council on Radiation Protection and f.feasurements (NCRP),
t Radiation Exposure from Consumer Products and h11scellaneous l Sources, NCRP Report No. 56, 1977.
- 13. Pochin, Edward E., Estimated Population Exposure from Nuclear Power Production and Other Radiation Sources, Organization for-Economic Co-operation and Development,1976.
- 14. ICRP Publication Number 29, Radionuclide Releases into the Environ-l ment
- Assessment of Dose to Elan,1979. .
l 106
l' l
i VI l
i HISTORICAL DATA t
3 1
1 1:
l
... . _.i a.
1, VI HISTORICAL DATA Sample Statistics from Previous Environmental Sampling The mean, standard deviation, minimum value, maximum value, and range, 1 i
were calculated for selected sample mediums and isotopes. ,
! Special Considerations:
- 1. Sample data listed as 1969 was taken from the NINE MILE POINT, PREOPERATION SURVEY, 1969 and ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT FOR NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION, NOVEMBER,1970.
- 2. Sample data listed as 1974 was taken from the NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION , ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT. The 1974 data is pre-operational to the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, which started commercial operation in November,1974.
l
- 3. Sample data listed as 1975, 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, and 1982 was taken from the respective environmental operating reports for Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station and James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant.
!, 4. Only measured values were used for statistical calculations.
l I
I 4
I l
8 s
b i
i r
i 107 l
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL l STANDARD Periphyton -
MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE Cs-137 eCi/a (wet) DEVIATION 1983 0.10 0.06- 0.14 0.06 0.08 1982 0.05 0.01 0.06 0.04 0.02 1981 0.19 0.07 0.24 0.14 0.10 1980 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.02 1979 0.07 0.08 0.13 0.02 0.11 1978 0.04 0.03 0.063 0.023 0.04 1977 <st. --- --- - -
l 1976 5.00 ONLY ONE DATA POINT 1975
<st - --- -_-
1974 0.10 0.02 0.12 0.09 0.03 1969 IPRE 0PERATIONAD NO DATA --- -- -- -~
INDICATOR I STANDARD Periphyton MEAN MAXIMUM DEVIATION MINIMUM RANGE
- ce 117 ne'4/c (vet) l 1983 0.35 0.23 0.69 0.17 0.52 1982 0.14 0.16 0.38 0.05 0.33 1981 6.24 6.75 16.00 0.47 15.53 1980 0.09 0.05 0.15 0.04 0.11 1979 0.36 0.55 1.10 0.08 1.02 1978 0.11 0.06 0.19 0.05 0.14 1977 0.42 0.56 1.40 0.09 1.31 1976 2.60 1.38 4.10 1.40 2.70 1975 22.2s 14.34 36.00 4.00 32.00 1974 s.18 3.73 a.44 i.7> 6.72 (PRE 0 TIONAD NO DATA --- --- --- ---
108
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL STANDARD Mollusks -
MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM DEVIATION RANGE Sr-89 oCi/g (wet) 1983 <LLD -- --- -
1982 <tLD -- -- -- -
l 1981 <tta - -- --
i 1980 <tto -- -- --- -
19 79 <tLD -- -- --
1978 0.02 oNLY oNE DATA POINT 1977 < Mot --- -- --- -
- 1976 30 og73 ___ __ ___
! 1975 NO DATA - -- --
1974 No DATA - --- ---
(PRE 0 T10NAO NO DATA -- -- -- --
1 i
i l
l INDICATOR i
STANDARD EAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM l
l N_kS*I*fe f.,, g DEVIATION RANGE 1983 <tto ___ ___
j 1982 <tta -- -- ---
1981 l <tto --- --
, 1980 <tto --- ---
1979 0.04 0.03 0.07 0.01 0.06 1978 o,os o,o3 o,o7 o,o3 o,o4
! 1977 < Mot - ---
1976 0.42 ONLY ONE DATA POINT 1975
<gt _ _ _ _
1974
<wnt -- --- --- ---
1969 (PRE 0PERATIONAO NO DATA -- --- --- ---
109
l HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL Mollusks MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANCE Sr-90 pC1/g (vet) DEV AT10N 1983 0.035 0.007 0.04 0.03 0.01 1982 0.03 0.01 0.04 0.02 0.02 1981 0.046 0.008 0.052 0.040 0.012 1980 0.07 0.06 0.11 0.03 0.08 1979 0.07 0.05 0.10 0.02 0.08 1978 0.14 0.02 0.15 0.12 0.03 1977 0.23 0.21 0.38 0.08 0.30 1976 30 og73 __ __ __ _
1975 3.g g373 __ __ __ __
1974 30 og73 ___ __ __ ___
1969 (PRE 0PERATIONAll NO DATA -- -- -- --
INDICATOR STANDARD Mollusks MEAN DEVIATION MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANCE Sr 00 nCi/c (vaO 1983 o,11 a.o3 o.14 o.07 0.07 1082 0.10 0.02 0.12 0.07 0.05 1981 0.094 0.060 0.117 0.0n* n 1'T 1980 o,11 o,og 0.16 n.n7 n ny 1979 o.10 0.04 0.17 0.os n.39 1978 0.14 0.03 0.18 0.10 0.nA 1977 0.10 0.02 0.11 0.07 0.n4 1976 l n,51 gyy ny nm o n y ,,
1975 g,17 n,, n ,s n n, o n3 1974 o,37 nyy n, ,, i 1 ,,,,,
1969 (PRE 0PER ATION AL) 0.12 0.t7 0.24 n.ot n 91 110
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA !
CONTROL STANDARD Mollusks MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE
, Cs-137 pCi/g (wet) DEVIATION 1983 (LLD -- - -- --
1982 <LLD -- -- --- --
i 1981 <LLD --- -- -- --
1980 <ttD -- -- -- --
19 79 <LLD - --- -- -
1978 <MDL -- -- --- --
1977 <xDL -- -- -- --
- 1976 go 3373 __ __ __ --_
1975 3g gg73 ___ __ __ __
! 1974 30 3373 __ __ __ __
(PRE 0 T10NAO NO DATA --- -- -- --
INDICATOR i
STANDARD no11usks MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM c,_i,7 -ct/, tv e3 DEVIATION RANGE 3
1983 <ttD --- -- --
1982 < t.tD --- --- -- --
1981 0.061 ONI.Y ONE DATA POINT 1980 < t.to --- --- -- ---
! 1979 <ttD - -- -- __
1978 g,99 0.80 2.10 0.24 1.86 i
1977 <33t __ ___ __
1976 0.I8 ONtY ONE DATA POINT 1975
<xDt --- --- --- _--
1974 0.26 ONLY ONE DATA POINT ,
i 1969 l IPRE 0PERATIONAO 0.08 ONLY ONE DATA POINT l 111
HISTOR! CAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL STANDARD Bottom Sediment MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE Sr-90 pCi/st (vet) DEVIATION 1983 0.14 OhU ONE DATA POINT 1982 (LLD -- --- --- ---
1981 0.027 0.007 0.032 0.022 0.01 1980 0.12 ONU ONE DATA POINT 1979 0.02 ONLY ONE DATA POINT 1973 0.05 0.01 0.06 0.04 0.02 1977 <st ___ _-- -__ ___
1976 < g t, __ __ __ ___
1975
<st ___ __ ___ _
1974 < s t. -- -- --- --
(PRE 0 TIONALI NO DATA --- --- -- ---
INDICATOR STANDARD Bottom Sediment MEAN DEVIATION MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE e,_00 ac4/, /.m t )
1983 0.05 ONLY ONE DATA POINT 1982 0.037 0.03 0.06 0.013 0.047 1981 0.011 0.007 0.02 0.005 0.01s 1980 0.01 0.003 0.015 0.011 0.004 1979 0.02 0.20 0.05 0.01 0.04 1978 0.0t5 ONLY ONE DATA POINT 1977 <gt __ ___ ___ ___
1976 n,og g,g3 g,g3 n,og n,og 1975 g,79 g , ,7 n,4s n o3 o,47 1974
<st __ __ __ _ _ ,
! 1969 (PRE 0PERAT10NALI o.oA nNLY oyE DATA POINT 112
l HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL STANDARD l
Bottom Sediment MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE Cs-137 pCi/g (dry) DEVIATION 1983 0.24 0.08- 0.29 0.18 0.11 1982 0.52 0.33 0.75 0.29 0.46 1981 0.26 0.23 0.42 0.10 0.32 l 1980 0.43 0.2 0.57 0.29 0.28 1979 0.47 0.10 0.54 0.40 0.14 1978 0.61 0.15 0.71 0.50 0.21 1977 0.68 0.08 0.73 0.62 0.11 1976 et l __ __ ___ ___
1975 0.40 0.10 0.50 0.30 0.20 1974 0.11 ONLY ONE DATA POINT (PRE 0 fTIONAll NO DATA --- -- -- ---
l j
l l
INDICATOR STANDARD Bottom Sediment MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM e,_ t u -s /, t a,.,a DEVIATION RANGE 1983 0.33 0.11 0.43 0.18 0.25 1982 0.20 0.11 0.30 0.05 0.25 1981 0.23 0.04 0.27 0.19 0.08 1980 0.34 0.40 l 0.94 0.12 0.82 1979 0.44 0.45 1.00 0.13 0.87 1978 0.99 j 0.80 '2.10 0.24 1.86 1977 2.27 1.90 4.10 0.31 3.79 1976 2.45 0.64 2.90 2.00 0.90 1975 g,g3 g,g4 3,30 g,,o 3,3g 1974 o,30 o,23 o,3g o,,, o,,,
IPRE OkRfT10NAl) 0.38 0.09 0.44 0.11 0.13 l
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL 1 STANDARD c M ARUS MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE Sr-89 pCi/g (wet) DEVIATION 1983 <LLD - _-
1982 <LLD -- --- --- --
1981 0.034 ONLY 0PE DATA POINT 1980 <LLD -- -- -- --
f 1979 <LLD - -
1978 <xot __ __ ___
I 1977 <xon ___ __ -- ___
1976 go og7A __ __ __ ___
1975 l NO DATA -- -
1974 <xot ___ ___ ___ _
= (PRE 0Nbil0NAL) NO DATA - -- --
INDICATOR STANDARD l c M ARUS MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE
' DEVIATION cr _so ectie (vee 1983 <tto ___ ___ ___ ___
1982 <tto ___ ___ ___ ___
1981 0.069 ONLY ONE DATA POINT 1980 <tto __ ___ ___
1979 0.105 ONLY ONE DATA POINT 1978 <xot ___ ___ ___ ___
1977 <xot ___ ___ ___ ___
1976 30 3473 ___ __ ___ ___
1975 3g 3373 ___ __ ___ ___
1974 <ynt __ ___ ___ ___
1969 (PRE 0PERATION AI) NO DATA -- --- -- ---
114
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL
$h Y $1/g (wee) MEAN DEV ATION MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE 1983 0.07 0.03. 0.10 0.05 0.05 1982 0.09 ONLY ONE D.tTA POINT l
1981 0.099 0.066 0.146 0.052 0.094 1980 0.102 ONLY ONE DATA POINT 1979 0.10 0.02 0.11 0.08 0.03
) 1978 0.14 0.01 0.14 0.13 0.01 1977 0.32 ONLY ONE DATA POINT 1976 NO DATA --- -- -- --
1975 NO DATA -- - --- --
1974 <st - --- --
(PRE 0 TIONAL) NO DATA - - --
l lN DIC ATO R STANDARD
$h !i/g(wet) MEAN DEVIATION MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE 1983 0.18 0.03 0.21 0.16 0.05
] 1982 0.23 0.10 0.30 0.16 0.14 1981 0.193 0.058 0.274 0.138 0.136
- 1980 0.64 0.86 1.64 0.14 1.5 1979 0.19 0.01 0.20 0.17 0.03
]
.i
- 1978 0.14 0.04 0.21 0.13 0.08 1977 0.40 0.46 0.73 0.08 0.65 1976 NO DATA -- -- --- -
1975 NO DATA -- -- -- --
l 1974 <st ___ ___ ___ ___
(PRE OhfRfil0NAL) NO DATA - - -- ---
(
115
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL STANDARD GAMARUS -
MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE Cs-137 pC1/g (wet) DEVIAT10N 1983 <LLD --- -- --- -
1982 <LLD --- -- -- ---
1981 (LLD - -- ---
t 1980 <tLD - -- --- --
19 79 0.05 0.04 0.08 0.02 0.06 1978 0.028 ONLY oNE DATA POINT l 1977 <xnt -- -- -- ---
1976 30 3473 __ __ --_ l 1975 30 3g73 __ __ _ l 1974 30 og74 __ ___ __ _
l (PREObfil0NAO No DATA -- ---
INDICATOR STANDARD t
cAMARUS MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE DEVIATION Cs-137 oci /r heeti 1
1983 0.21 0.21 0.36 0.06 0.30 1982 <ttn --- -- --- --
1981 4.7 4.67 8.0 1.4 6.6 1980 <ttD --- --- --- ---
1979 0.06 0.02 0.07 0.04 0.03 1978 0.05 0.00 0.05 0.05 0.00 1 1
1977 <xnt. --- --- -- ---
1976 30 og74 __ ___ __ ___
1975 30 333 __ __ __ __
l 1974 o.:1 onty on nAmi pntw (PRE 0 T10NAO No DATA --- -- --- ---
116
1 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL STANDARD Fish Samples MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE Sr-89 oCi/r (vet) DEVIATION
( 1983 <tLD - -- -- -
! 1982 0.004 0.001 0.005 0.003 0.002 1981 0.015 0.001 0.015 0.014 0.001 1980 <tto --- -- -- -
1979 0.07 0.04 0.09 0.04 0.05 i
1978 <xat -- -- -- --
1977 0.04 0.01 0.05 0.03 0.02 l 1976 0.24 0.08 0.33 0.19 0.14 1975
, <xat --- _-- --
1974
<33t __ __ _ __
IPRE0 fil0NAD No DATA -- --- -- ___
i
! INDICATOR STANDARD
- Fish Samples MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE DEVIATION
, tr.90 44!? (*se * )
1983 <tto ___ __ _ ___
1982 l 0.004 0.001 0.004 0.003 0.001 f 1981 0.061 0.021 i
0.10 0.027 n.o7, 1980 <tt3 __ __ _ ___
l 1979 <tto __ ___ __ __
1978 0.01 0.001 0.015 0.014 0.001 l 1977 0.07 0.os o.24 0.03 0.21 1976 g,,, g,13 n,31 n , , ,, g , ,, ,
1975 l <vnt ___ ___ ___ ___
1974 mt __ - __- __
(PRE 0kR T10NAD Mo DATA --- _-- --- --
117
i HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL STANDARD Fish Samples MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANCE Sr-90 pCi/g (vet) DEVIATION 1983 (LLD -- --- --- --
1982 0.006 0.006 0.013 0.002 0.011 1981 <tto --- --- --- --
1980 0.005 0.002 0.007 0.002 0.005 1979 0.018 0.012 0.033 0.008 0.025 1978 0.010 0.004 0.015 0.004 0.011 1977 0.07 0.03 0.14 0.02 0.12 1976 0.25 0.27 0.81 0.05 0.76 1975 0.07 0.06 0.10 0.04 0.06 1974 0.07 0.02 0.09 0.04 0.05 (PRE.0 TIONAL) No DATA - --- --- -
INDICATOR STANDARD Fish S.imples MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM c* 00 af*f/q (vot) DEVIATION RANCE 1983 <tto ___ ___ __ ___
1982 0.003 0.001 0.005 0.002 0.003 1981 o.002 oNLY oNE DATA POINT 1980 0.006 0.005 0.013 0.003 0.010 1979 0.019 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.03 19 78 0.013 0.006 0.025 0.004 0.021 1977 0.07 0.05 0.24 0.03 0.21 1976 0.28 o.48 2.20 0.05 2.15 1975 0.08 0.03 c.t3 0.02 o.ti 1974 0.23 0.69 2.30 0.01 2.29 IPRE OkR ATION All o.23 0.17 0.51 0.30 0.21 118
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL Fish Saples " l MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANCE Cs-137 pCi/g (wet) DEV ail 0N 1983 0.050 0.009 0.060 0.040 0.020 1982 0.047 0.009 0.055 0.027 0.028 1981 0.043 0.016 0.062 0.028 0.034 1980 0.059 0.032 0.110 0.029 0.081 1979 0.04 0.01 0.06 0.03 0.03 1978 0.09 0.05 0.20 0.04 0.16 1977 0.13 ONI.Y ONE DATA POINT 1976 0.12 ONLY ONE DATA POINT 1975 m _ _ _ _
1974 0.43 0.37 0.94 0.09 0.85 (PRE.0 T10NAO NO DATA - - --- -
1 INDICATOR STANDARD Fish Suples MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE Cs-137 oC1/e Neti DEVIATION 1983 0.050 0.009 0.060 0.030 0.030 1982 0.050 0.008 0.064 0.034 0.030 1981 0.061 0.021 0.10 0.027 0.o71 1980 0.061 0.029 0.100 0.030 0.070 1979 0.10 0.14 0.55 0.02 l 0.53 1978 0.08 0.02 0.10 0.03 0.07 1977 0.29 0.21 0.79 l 0.13 0.66 )
1976 1.4 1.67 3.90 0.50 3.40 10 1.38 0.22 1.70 1.10 n.40 1974 0.57 0.82 l 4.40 0.0a 4.12 (PRE.0 fR 710N AL) 0.06 0.04 0.13 0.01 0.12 l
110 l _ _ - .-
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL STANDARD
- Lake Water Gross Beta MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE pCi/1 DEVIATION 1983 2.98 1.74- 7.92 1.47 6.45 1982 2.4 0.43 3.2 1.8 1.4
- 1981 3.24 1.27 5.8 1.9 3.9 1980 2.60 0.50 3.48 1.87 1.61
, 1979 3.05 0.85 4.80 2.10 2.70 1978 3.55 1.58 6.10 0.50 5.60 1977 10.9 14.5 49.3 2.50 46.8 J
1976 42.48 50.62 189.00 4.90 184.10 1975 45.33 52.79 160.00 1.00 159.00 l 1974 4.85 0.07 4.90 4.80 0.10 IPRE 0 TIONAL) No DATA -- -- -- -
1 INDICATOR i
l STANDARD Lake Water Gross Beta MEAN DEVIATION MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANCE
.f* 4 # 1 l 1983 3.34 1.59 7.90 0.57 7.33 l 1982 2.7 0.73 4.7 1.3 3.4 1
1081 2.98 1.19 5.4 1.2 4.2 1980 3.10 0.63 5.10 2.35 2.75 1979 3.24 1.06 6.30 2.00 4.30 1978 4.53 2.62 11.10 0.60 10.50 1977 15.80 21.00 87.00 1.00 86.00 )
1976 41.76 55.23 192.00 1.10 190.90 1975 18.24 17.08 80.00 0.60 79.40 1974 l 31.71 20.22 60.00 6.30 s1.70 (PRE.0kRfil0NAL) NO DATA --- --- --- ---
120
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL I STANDARD 1.ake water MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE Sr-89 pCi/1 DEVIATION 4
1983 <tto -- - -- --
i i 1982 (LLD -- -- --- -
i 1981 <ttD --- -- -- -
1980 1.4 0.07 1.4 1.3 0.1 1 1979 0.70 0.14 0.80 0.60 0.20 j 1978 <st --- -- -- -
)
- 1977 <st --- _ --- ---
j 1976
<st _-- --- --- ---
1975 l <st. --- --- --- ---
j 1974 NO DATA -- --- -- --
(PRE.0 TIONAL) No DATA -- --- --- -
.1 lNDICATOR ll I
STANDARD i
take Water MEAN DEVIATION MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE j %-80 #f /t 1
1983 < tt.n --- --- --- ---
i, 10 I2 0.61 ONLY oNE DATA POINT I
10II o.78 ONtY ONE DATA POTNT
! 1980 o.7o oNty ONE DATA pornr i i
1979 <tto --- -- -- --
! 1978 o.7o 0.10 0.80 0.60 0.20 i
l 1977 < st, --- --- ---
1976 <gt __ _- _- __-
1975 l
o.3o ony on nimi porvr 1974 go 9373 __- __- _ _ . __-
(PRt.0 TIONAli NO DATA --- --- --- ---
121
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL STANDARD take Water MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANCE Sr-90 oC1/1 DEVIATION 1983 0.89 0.08 0.97 0.82 0.15 1982 2.04 2.18 5.30 0.75 4.55 1981 0.68 0.176 0.868 0.484 0.384 1980 1.10 0.00 1.10 1.10 0.00 1979 0.80 0.26 1.10 0.60 0.50 1978 <st ___ ___ ___ ___
1977 <st ___ ___ ___ ___
1976 <gt __ __ __ __
1975
<st ___ ___ ___ ___
1974 3g gg73 __ __ ,_ __
(PRE 0 TIONAO NO DATA --- --- - --
IN DIC ATO R STANDARD take Water MEAN DEVIATION MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANCE c .an -m n 1983 0.83 0.21 1.10 0.60 0.50 1982 1.oa 0.88 3.07 0.40 2.67 1981 n,74 o,og o.gos o.397 c.20s 1980 1.00 0.20 1.20 0.en o.40 ,
l 1979 0.84 0.34 1.30 0.40 0.90 1978 0.80 0.30 t.10 0.40 0.70 1977 1.00 osty ost cATA PotsT 1976
<gt __ __ , , _ _ __
1975
<st -- -- - -
1974 yo 3373 ___ _ _ , ___ . . . .
(PRE 0fkil0NAD No DATA --- --- -- - - -
122
i HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL Lake Water STANDARD EAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE Tritium pCi/1 DEVIATION ,
1983 250.0 21.8 280 230 50 l
1982 165.0 94.7 307 112 195 1981 293.3 49.3 357 211 146 l 1980 257.3 38.5 290 211 79 l 1979 258.7 73.7 308 174 134 1978 303.8 127.5 490 215 275 1977 407.5 97.4 530 300 230 l 1976 651.7 251.0 929 440 489 1
1975 362.5 72.8 414 311 103 l 1974 <st. --- --- --- --
(PRE 0 T10NAO NO DATA - -- --- --
i INDICATOR i STANDARD Lske water MEAN MAXIMUM Tritium pCi/1 DEVIATION MINIMUM RANGE l
, 1983 317.0 116.9 560 190 370 1982 641.0 891.1 2780 194 2586 1981 258.3 76.9 388 183 205 j 1980 263.0 95.4 457 150 307 l 1979 234.0 40.7 286 176 110 i
1978 389.4 119.9 560 253 307 l
1977 450.0 67.2 530 380 150 1976 513.0 l 250.3 889 297 592 1975 334.8 132.5 482 124 358 1974 440.0 84.9 500 380 120 (PRE 0 ER T10N AD NO DATA - -- -- --
123
- - , - , - - - - . _ , , . - - , - - , . . . . , - - +--n., , -n - ,. - . - , . . -
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTR01.
Air Particulate MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANCE Gross Beta pCi/:n 3 DEV ATION 1983 0.024 0.009 0.085 0.007 0.078 1982 0.033 0.012 0.078 0.011 0.067 1981 0.165 0.135 0.549 0.016 0.533 1980 0.056 0.04 0.291 0.009 0.282 1979 0.077 0.086 0.703 0.010 0.693 1978 0.14 0.13 0.66 0.01 0.650 1977 0.07 0.03 0.140 0.016 0.124 1976 0.051 0.031 0.240 0.004 0.236 1975 0.085 0.060 0.294 0.008 0.286 1974 0.121 0.104 0.808 0.001 0.807 1969 (PRE-OPER ATION At) 0.334 0.097 0.540 0.130 0.410 INDICATOR STANDARD Air Particulate MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANCE DEVIATION croes 9 eta eCi/m3 1983 0.023 0.009 0.062 0.003
_ 0.059 1982 0.031 0.012 0.113 0.001 0.112 1981 0.151 0.128 0.528 0.004 0.s24 1980 0.045 0.03 0.207 0.20s Ogo2 1979 0.058 0.06 0.271 0.001 0.270 1978 0.10 0.09 0.34 0.01 0.33 1977 0.106 0.07 0.326 0.002 0.324 1976 0.047 0.032 0.191 0.002 0.189 1975 0.067 0.055 0.456 0.001 '0.455 1974 0.111 0.114 0. ass o.001 0.9s2 1969 (PRE 0PERATIONAL) 0.320 0.090 0.520 0.130 0.390 l
124
.1
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL _
Environmental n.o a quarterly STANDARD
, Reading mrem / Standard Month MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE Offsite* DEVIATION 1983 5.54 0.364- 7.17 4.21 2.96 1982 5.12 0.691 6.95 3.79 3.16 1981 4.72 0.685 6.63 3.24 3.39 1980 4.57 0.614 6.06 3.12 2.94 1979 REPORTED AS HREM/QTR PRIOR TO 1980 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1969 (PRE 0PERATIONAL) l INDICATOR Environmental TLD's Quarterly STANDARD
-Reading mrem / Standard Month MEAN DEVIATION MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE
~ ,,,e u,...
1983 6.23 0.91 8.97 5.03 3.94 8
5.82 1.24 9.13 3.87 5.26 1981 s.24 c.73 7.4s 4.09 3.36
- 1980 DATA NoT COMPARABI.E DUE TO CHANGES 1979 IN TLD
- LOCATIONS 1978 1977 1976 i 1975 l 1974 l
1969 (PRE 0PERATIONALI
- Sss Clarification on Environmental Sample Statistical Analysis Table.Section III.
125
HISTORlCAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL STANDARD Milk Samples MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE Sr-90 eCi/1 DEVIATION 1983 1.91 0.50- 2.60 1.00 1.60 1982 2.96 1.20 4.20 0.93 3.28 1981 4.85 1.91 8.00 2.41 5.59 1980 3.33 0.9 4.3 1.8 2.5 1979 4.44 1.33 5.80 1.70 4.10 1978 5.88 2.04 9.00 3.00 6.00 1977 NO DATA -- -- - -
1976 30 3373 ___ __ __ _
1975 NO DATA - -- -- --
1974 30 gg73 __ ___ ___ __
1969 (PRE OPERATIONAL) NO DATA -- -- -
INDICATOR STANDARD Milk Samples MEAN DEVIATION MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE e _on -ci n 1983 2.81 0.80 5.05 1.00 4.05 1982 4.60 2.29 9.76 0.76 9.00 1981 4.60 2.45 10.70 -
1.12. o.sa 1980 4.3 2.6 11.0 1.1 9.9 1979 4.84 2.12 9.00 0.70 8.30 1978 5.93 1.81 10.00 2.50 7.50 1977 6.07 3.50 15.00 2.00 '13.00 1976 7.16 3.41. 14.80 1.50 13.30 1975 4,31 3,11 33,gn ,,,n 11, n 1974 s.66 2.so 14.on 1.no n .no 1969 (PRE-OPER A T10N All No DATA --- - -- !
126 '
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL ;
1 STANDARD Milk Samples MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE DEVIATION Cs-137 9C1/1 1983 <LLD -- -- --- ---
1982 <LLD - -- --
1981 7.0 ONLY ONE DATA POINT 1980 <ttD -- -- - --
l 19 79 3.73 0.29 3.9 3.4 0.5 1978 5.83 1.98 7.8 2.4 5.4 1977 NO c0NTROL DATA PRIOR TO 1978 1976 1975 -
1974 1969 (PRE OPERATIONAD NO DATA -- --- --- ---
l 1
i INDICATOR l
STANDARD Milk Samples MEAN DEVIATION MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE es 117 vi /1 1983 3,to outy out 3x7x 30737 1982 6.26 4.41 18.0 3.1 14.9 j 1981 7,37 5,gs 29.n c., ,& v i 1980 9,7 4,9 21,o an 3y_n 1979 9,4 g,o 40,o ,7.,
2.7 ,
1978 9,9 7,1 33,o go 4 3.4 1977 17,1 3,9 22,o 11 n -13.n 1976 7,3 3,7 13 ,, 4n o ,,
1975 1 20.6 7.s 16.n 6n 'n n 1974 26.1 in.s 61 n 5, n ta n 1969 (PRE OPER ATION AL) NO DATA --- -- --- --
127
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL STANDARD Milk samples MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE I-131 pC1/1 DEVIATION 1983 <LLD - - --- --
1982 <LLD --- -- - -- 1 1981 <LLD - -- -- ---
1980 1.41 ONLY ONE DATA POINT 1979 <LLD - -- --- ---
1978 <xDL --- -- --- -
1977 No DATA - - -- -
1976 30 og7A __ ___ __ ___
1975 No DATA - -- - --
1974 30 og73 __ __ ___ __
1969 (PRE OPERATIONAD No DATA -- --- -- --
INDICATOR STANDARD Milk Samples MEAN DEVIATION MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE T 131 nCi/1 1983 <tLD --- --- - ---
1982 <ttD --- -- --- -
1981 <tt3 ___ ___ ___ ___
1980 4.9 4.23 8.80 0.40 8.40 1979 < I.I.D --- --- --- -
1978 o.19 ONLY ONE DATA POINT 1977 0.14 0.22 c.20 -0.40 0.62 1976 3.20 7.81 45.00 0.02 44.98 1975 0.37 0.60 2.99 o.of 2.o8 1974 1.23 0.44 2.00 c.70 1.30 1969 (PRE 0PER AT10N AD No DATA -- -- --
128
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL STANDARD Human Food Crops MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE Cs-137 pC1/g (wet) Produce DEVIATION 1983 <tLD --- - -- --
l 1982 <LLD --- -- -- --
1981 <tLD --- - -- -
1980 <ttD -- -- -- -
1979 NO CONTROL DATA PRIOR TO 1980 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1969 (PRE-OPERATIONAO l
INDICATOR STANDARD Human Food Crops MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE DEVIATION c=-137 oci/c (veti Produce 1983 <tLD -- - -- --
1982 <tto _ __ __ __
l 1981 <tta ___ ___ __ __
1980 O.033 2.26 0.06 0.004 0.056 l 1979 <LLD -- -- -- --
1978 o.01 oaty ogg og7x 3o137 1977 <xnt __ __ __ __
l 1976 <gt __ __ _ _
1975
< Mot --- -- ---
1974
- 0. u2 0.09 o.34 0.04 o.30 _
1969 (PRE-OPER A TION All NO DATA - --- ---
l 129 l
l
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA l CONTROL STANDARD Human Food Crops EAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE I-131 pCi/g (wet) Produce DEVIATION 1983 <LLD - -- ---
1982 <LLD -- --- -- --
l 1981 <LLD - -- -
1980 <tLD -- --- --
19 79 NO CONTROL DATA PRIOR TO 1980 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1969 (PRE-0PERATIONAO INDICATOR l
STANDARD Human Food Crops MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE DEVIATION I-131 ref/e (vet) Treduce 1983 <tto _ ___ ___ ___
1982 <tta ___ __ ___ __
1981 <ttn ___ ___ ___
1980 <ttu __ ___ __ __
1979 <tta - __ __ ___
1978 <st ___ ___ __ ___
1977 <st ___ __ __
1976 <gt __ ___ __ ___
1975 <gt 1974 30 9473 __ ___
L 1969 (PRE-0PER ATION AL) NO DATA -- - --- i 130
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL STANDARD Meat MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE Cs-137 pC1/g (wet) DEVIATION I
1983 <LLD --
1982 <LLD -- --- -- -
1981 0.021 0.005 0.024 0.017 0.007 1980 0.01 oNLY ONE DATA POINT 1979 No CONTROL DATA PRIOR To 1980 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1969 (PRE OPERATIONAL)
INDICATOR STANDARD Meat MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE DEVIATION Cs-137 eCi/e (vet) 1983 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.01 0.03 1982 0.034 0.026 0.08 0.02 0.06 l l i l 1981 0.036 0.021 0.068 0.02, o.oss i 1
1980 0.02 0.013 0.042 0.009 o.o,, i 1979 0.03 0.021 0.07 0.01 0.06 I
- 1978 0.021 0.011 0.04 0.013 0.027 1977 <MDt. -- -- __
1976 <gt __ __ __
1975 g,1g g,gg g,1g g_,n n gn 1974 gg 3373 __
l 1969 (PRE-0PER A TION AL) No DATA - -- --
l 131 I
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL STANDARD Eggs MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE Cs-137 pC1/g (wet) DEVIATION 1983 <tLD - - -- ---
1982 <LLD -- -- -- ---
1981 <LLD - --- --- ---
1980 <tto --- --- -- --
1979 NO CONTROL DATA PRIOR TO 1980 1978 1977 1976 1975 1974 1969 (PRF 0PERATIONAD IN DIC ATOR STANDARD Eggs MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE DEVIATION ce_117 er4/e (ved 1983 <tto --- --- --- ---
1982 <tt3 ___ __ ---
1981 <tto -- -- ---
1980 <tto --- --- --- -
1979 <ttn -__ ___ __- __
1978 <st __ -__ --- ---
1977 <st __ -__ ___ --_
1976 <gt __ _ __,_ ___
1975 <gt _ __ __ __
i 1974 30 9373 ___ __ --
1969 (PRE-OPER A T10N All NO DATA -- 1 - -- --
l 132
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL f3bbkEs(dry) M DEV ATION EE EU EE 1983 0.67 0.49 1.46 0.20 1.26 1982 NO SAMPLES REQUIRED IN 1982 1981 NO SAMPLES REQUIRED IN 1981 ,
1980 1.20 0.91 2.90 0.41 2.49
}g79 NO SAMPLES REQUIRED IN 1979 1978 NO SAMPLES REQUIRED IN 1978 1977 1.17 0.48 2.00 0.70 1.30 1976 NO DATA -- -- --
1975 '1.07 0.21 1.30 0.90 0.40 1974 NO DATA - -- -- -
NO DATA -- -- --- -
(PRE-0 TIONAL) l INDICATOR STANDARD Soil Samples MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE Cs-137 pCi/g (dry) DEVIATION 1983 0.42 0.41 1.19 0.07 1.12 1982 NO SAMPLES REQUIRED IN 1982 1981 NO SAMPLES REQUIRED IN 1981 1980 1.26 0.61 2.1 0.29 1.81 1979 NO SAMPLES REQUIRED IN 1979 1978 NO SAMPLES REQUIRED IN 1978 1977 1.03 0.62 2.00 0.30 1.70 1976 NO DATA - -- -- -
1975 NO DATA -- - --
1974 1.03 1.18 2.80 0.40 2.40
' NO DATA - - - --
(PRE OPER TIONAL) 133
HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA CONTROL STANDARD Soil Samples MEAN MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE Sr-90 pCi/g (dry) DEVIATION 1983 0.18 0.09 0.32 0.10 0.22 1982 NO SAMPLES REQUIRED IN 1982 1981 NO SAMPLES REQUIRED IN 1981 1980 0.063 0.065 0.19 0.008 0.182 1979 NO SAMPLES BEQUIRED IN 1979 1978 NO SAMPLES REQUIRED IN 1978 1977 0.21 0.07 0.29 0.13 0.16 1976 gg gi73 __ __ ___ ___
1975 0.13 0.10 0.26 0.04 0.22 1974 30 3373 __ __ __ __
1969 (PRE OPERATIONAD NO DATA - -- -- --
IN DIC ATO R STANDARD Soil Samples MEAN DEVIATION MAXIMUM MINIMUM RANGE
- s. en .,et/, um 1983 0.18 0.18 0.47 0.03 0.44 1982 NO SAMPLES REOUIRED IN 1982 1981 NO SAMPLES REOUTRED TN 1OR1 1980 0.074 0.052 0.140 0.008 0.132 1979 NO SAMPLES REOUIRED IN 1979 1978 NO SAMPLES REQUIRED IN 1978 1977 0.40 0.18 c.65 0.17 0.48 1976 3g gg7, _ , , _ __
1975 30 gg73 _ __ ___
1974 0.27 0.06 o 'A o 71 0 11 1969 (PRE OPER AT10N AO NO DATA - --- ---
l 134
ais u um l l VII l
l FIGURES AND MAPS
l l
l l VII FIGURES AND MAPS i
- 1. DATA GRAPHS !
This section includes graphic representation of selected sample results.
For graphic representation, results less than the MDL or LLD were considered to be at the MDL or LLD level of activity. MDL and LLD values were indicated where possible.
- 2. SAMPLE LOCATIONS Sample locations referenced as letters and numbers on analysis results tables are plotted on maps.
t
{
l 135
r;q s;'
~
/;{
3
',. i f -
= - !
.w , gr s " ,1/ I 'E
- ,t
' ~
/ s ( W, 1.f g/,. b i *
'. i O $U ,- #
!!5:
b [g$e q [i A
' e b.Ik,s#il
/Fj
' q
/ i si ,! . ,
'b w t
% i
' ~I' [ Mgj Q ,j,Ll!
i Q g MQg6lx e
1
};
ya.nI
, 11
- v. v vj3%w h t.
o i d' t-i< j #.
a , .' .
y x -
s,;'= I M f g,5 m 9 d* ;,1
- c. r u c
3 q
I 1- '
., 5 il m
1og: . -
e \Y >
- /s"&m f-i <R . w.
u' \
di
= . fy h -
1 e
a pill t
i L i
.: 2 ,,
..a, u3r . ..
~.
, HIE Ig 3 3<
%a .iG.
} k y $15 l'
E 5 . -
c s
!
- igi ih.i} El5 !
~
3 O !# - /
$ [k k 5.!j ,
,/ '
'8' "
i; #1 .i 11}11111j 1 ** ((! $? $ $ r %h' k , g
=
f\\a li, # v v1., .
$,G
% ,, *bm
'sN_,. 1 9 15 }=
3(9J/- 1 136 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - -
y a p . f - s
-)
, . .~. : c . \.
% ji 's -m ,
/ \
[ gjl l ** - [ , SI
^
.5 T ' - // j
#= *
/
l l l
!,p
- !i @ .
hi. 2 A j
= g ,
[ w ..-
$ 3 g lsf g9 'H T,
' ' (, g j
, =
15: /, j e
/
g s p.* c . _ c:
, j - -s / * '! ;
* \ ~
h'/ l
. ,. /
u gg..
$r e ,1, i s
=/ -
.)4/i(g4d 1 , c*f - ,
! 3 ~ :
= +,
i
< [1
. j pg g tjj 4-*-9 i
*/
1 f f in JJ jg .,*
/ -* '
3 j' 4 'l l ,..# - l g I l s ,j>a N .*, - - - . si . [ it .
" Z '- k '
g{ i < h g OO O a 3I gg O ..' s
= o l
I p n . 8 I = z=q y e m. ,
. g . ..
' ~
l
, 9.
. e N, ,F .. .A..jj .....
! [ C'O I @ g*$l db
( d +q p 8
- x. ,, i q'-
'Y i$l -
.-137
[ FIGURE 2 I.. OFFSITZ MONITORDIG { / e STATION LOCATIONS { 8 [ .*** .**
- C .'
e MONITOR STATION i.
/ .. .. **
I O u it.Es
,. ,,.. - g A : /
m~k i..
\ f.... '. ' .
0 gg.y.Eg* '* ' PULASKI T gt , 0 +<OSWEGO > J....... / '. '" " ' p.h , i f,s l
-,. \.
b
, .. # ~yi /
i
$ MEXICO D1
.. . ~. g
- e :. .
* . .V
- F 1 E .
b og7A i I
- t. age
~ - :. --
....=,..
+n 1.. 000
*,,......***..........*"*r=;**....
...'***'Q*
- #4AMtS A,9tT2psTRsts muCLEAA P0wCR Pta r
' LJ
**
- NINC MILg peggy
. NUCLEAR gTATien a 4 8.2s2.000 t -
,.* i PROPERTY LINE O m ge00 ,
p
\ 30 ALE =9 t ET 4
. \
LAxtvigw \ CN* SITE R AOICLOGICAL MONITOMING
$ CNISTams MONIT04tNS $TAfl0MS STATICN S Monsfontm4 STAft0NS LOC &ft0 Ar I- 2.000 FT. mA018 FROM STACMS l l t
138
FIGURE 3 LAKE ONTARIO oa Site suviaonuturAi. STArion S
, AND TLD LOCATIoHS T ABLES 1-5 AND 9-14 JAMES A. fliZPAIRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANI Ma
""""P" 827
#29 828 W47 MarispnsMak 11823 8
Sunset flay Nu L su l ENERGY INFORMAll0N CENTER 831 -_ t- _ [, 861A ggg t pg
' Switchy II : W ;
o- 3
,f
, #48 A
> ,D1 83 ' l** c ff I#24h f, no,m A c ,7 :. : ..
Meiewolugical 02 I4 O Tower . F 860 I,! F K #26 A fil SS^# b 515 (,
= .i : .
ll . j Transmis- a Lhms i o .! .
#+ I cARA M0llMK STATE POWER AUlit0A I .,
~
- l i; '
5 i! ', i :I , A =TLD LOCATION '.,
.{.j .
G = ENVIRONMENTAL STATION ll ji uin, w Lycoming ,,
\.
~
i p .- ,
4 s ;~ _ .. a
}e { h N$bd,., J '&bsed h,b ,N5. . .%[ My_'
= u M_ltMy. s'f, f,,Y
&., ~l , , . . .
? ~-
l r ffI(' Wh f* ' h7 h e =i! .; a w p @e; r 4 1 a u t g r,, i 1 rw=,RG .c y c .,s 6f n 1: 1 i. ip N' E r*7 %j #)i /
=
. hit:0,.LL l v,a
~
1 ! y cg, ,) . r;r w?f v.w
. ,q~,
~
. ~ og
' v-2 je,3g,.qu .
.. r
[ 9 W
-:: jn
'[k.), ,! v. ; *
; m -
.L jl 4 s_
I i- \; [h j$ %
.,1 m w,tos ,,v r ; a l m, s .T avu n
n.] = , _ j s [ 1
!f lihu ,
A N e .ye
. 3 d : ,:. M, i. op ;k f
- 33g!
it bl A. p". y e .m p; w a L 7 7cJ-[- at g 1 98 i %d -en'+s kW Ehh Ix A kn % y..m;.\ mw.~ h 5* s ; BW . =a uu .~ ~
~
140
m- *
]e # $
L? w . -r e , 4, N;,d l an. y. I'Ih2. Si.
.~ . . ,x ~m i
$v .,
g l v %. M wis,- TMD 'N ' rati - .t .
<I "'Ijsp .n :!fl(pY b x . w n
^
'l'l l n .q , Qn :. -/'j s %-6<Al j 7T p "" ,
V
~
~
s ne A t ~ . ,n;9
.n +p = .eex
, . s ea
. f L 5: ik , g. , w 1 e
/
=
5 3 & a.- i 1*a ms f W; t
,1
/
y T-epi _@i. Ml 'l
- li g g (,tp ',I;j vo
- )a cv .c e +, ;,)m,%!
?. p' :
, :~
'l b; #.t> 4) a rq .] ,y s.
.. /
, , 1 h .f$9 d. 'p 7 :, -
'3,J
{a((, fl [ . t g A' (Yc7, q qr" g aa, U 0 v( , a' [, Ml.i'Si
!n.!!;yliIl,
, a
- d4[4w 3:, f
.\ -
- i -
i pup 1
.titi, y,i Mg m,. -> , -*
4 o il t
~". . e P l-g pl . !!F iilia 3e 1),f 11 3;
- "M ny
- h. 53hl! a N. -
} -
.W 8 gky
!H E I '9 $ h k 'Pi3MQ 1 pl '# !@.t B2 2;rw m- ._ ; . .- . w . _ ,, ..
. . 141
Z st E z 5 I . 2
. ;E g =
x E E,
=
l
= e
- t
*- .. -+-- * ]
i
. \
* . . % ' 'N . M -- -= w,-.0, gj
. b. N[k' a 6 9 ;, 'l i m ;( 5 ~ 'q # M 1 cc a
u - 2A n.. n-j w,. 4 \ fj y ' . a % .,* Mi-Q-c.f.J'
- c. V og h,l '
~ W 6. ,,
- D "
lM l! %
..i
- N
~.
E
\*r '
*p i m
6
- e es T i i.l. .o,
, .1 y
- =
- c n ts
{ ' ,. [,' L \ j
- -----------m--------------- _
FIGURE 7 Composition of Bottom Sediment Determined by Visual Examination at Benthic Sampling Stations in the Vicinity of Nine Mile Point,1978 Depth Contour (ft) Transect Description
- Comments 10 NMPW 100% bedrock NMPP 70% boulders, 20% rubble,10% gravel Some algae on rocks FITZ 80% boulders,10% gravel,10% sand Some algae NMPE 70% boulders, 20% gravel,10% sand Some algae 20 NMPW 50% bedrock, 50% rubble NMPP 50% boulders, 30% rubble, 20% gravel All lying on bedrock FITZ 50% boulders, 20% rubble, 20% gravel, 10% sand NMPE 40% bedrock, 30% boulders,- 25% gravel, 5% sand 30 NMPW 100% bedrock Some rubble NMPP 100% bedrock Some boulders FITZ 80% bedrock Some sand NMPE 100% bedrock Some rubble and sand 40 NMPW 50% bedrock, 30% sand, 20% rubble NMPP 80% boulders, 20% bedrock FITZ 50% bedrock, 30% rubble, 20% boulders, NMPE 100% bedrock Some scattered sand 60 NMPW 100% bedrock NMPP 80% boulders,10% rubble,10% gravel FITZ - 80% bedrock, 20% boulders Some rubble NMPE 80% bedrock, 20% rubble Some sand
- Description based on USEPA (1973) field evaluation method for categorizing soils.
143
FIGURE 8 PERIPHYTON SRMPLES
- Co-60 JRF ENVIRONMENTAL LRB W-- = CONTROL 10.0- -10.0 9.0- - 9. 0 z z o m 8.0- - 8. 0 o s
~H H t-cx" M 7.0- - 7.0 c x
l-- z w-(" 8 . 0-F- o
- 6.0 w o
z zo S 5.0- - 5. 0 oZ o o 4.0- - 4.0 3.0- - 3.0 2.0- - 2.0 1.0- - 1.0 0.0- *---+---*--'- 'e-- ---+--- --- - 0.0 4 i I i 4 e i I i i v in CD N CD CD G - N CT) N N N N N N CD 03 Q3 03 CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD
~ .-e ~ w ~ ~ ~ ~ .-e m SRMPLE PERIOD (YERR)
CONTROL VRLUES 1974 TO 1979 RRE.MDL's 1988 TO 1983 RRE LLD's q I 803 - . . .......
FIGURE 9
. ERIPHYTON SRMPLES u Cs-137 JRF ENVIRONMENTAL LAB
-*-- = CONTROL
- - = INDICRTOR 10^ 02=: =10^ 02 RTMOSPHERIC NUCLEAR ~
! TEST 10/16/80 z z O n
/
~
O, H / H H $ 10^ 01=, ,=10^ 01l- c ce m E E m 3 t~ Cn - 3, - H'mc- @\ -
/\ - \
05 -
/ \
UU h 10^ 00 5 P i 5 10^ 00 _ ,/ 4 _
~
l + ~_
/ \ * -
l s
/\
10^-01=_ * 's s ,/ \, ,
,* =10^-01 E s \ C
_ s y,- s ss , , y,# _ s 10^-02 i i i i i i i i i i c 10^-02 V 10 C.D N 03 (7) G -* N M N N N N N N CD (D CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD SRMPLE PERIOD (YERR) CCNTROL VALUES 1975 &'19?? ARE MEL's I J 145
FIGURE 10 PERIPHYTON SAMPLES
- Ce-144 JRF ENVIRONMENTRL LAB 3.0- ,___ _ con 7,ou
-3 . 0 2.8- _ zgoreg70, 4.8 Z
RTMOSPHERIC NUCLERR Z o 2.4- TEST 18 18 8e -243' y C 2.2- -2.2 y $ 3 -2. 0 % d $
- 2.0- -1.86 d 6N 1.8-M U 1.6- -1.6 M o'i o a 1.4- -1. 4 o o
1.2- -1.2 1.0- -1.0 0.8- A
/ \
-0.8 0.6- gs ,/ \
-0.6 0.4- 's % / \ -0.4
/ \
0.2- 'y ___ / \
-0.2 0.0- - - -0.0 t i i i t i i i i i v LO C.D N CD CD CD ~ N CY)
N N N N N N CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD 01 CD CD CD CD SRMPLE PERIOD (YERR) NO CONTROL DRTR FOR 1974 & 1975 CONTROL YERRS 1978 RRE NDL's 1980 , 1983 RRE LLD's INDICATOR YERRS 1975,1978,1973 RRE MDL's 1980 , 1983 RRE LLD's 146 .. . . - - - . . . . . . . , ., .._c. . . _ - _ _ . - - - . . . . -
FIGURE 11 MOLLUSK SAMPLES
- Co-60 JRF ENVIRCNMENTRL LRB
--it- - CONTROL
- - = INDICATOR 1.8- -1.8 z z o m 1.6- -1.6 Ho m H
. s i E y 1.4- - 1. 4 x$ x-w s* 1.2- -1.2 $ w s-N o 1.0- -1.0 N o U U 0.8- -0.8 0.6- -0.6 0.4- -0.4 0.2- . m -0.2 0.0- ---+---*- E---4 -0.0 I I I 6 I I i t i i v LD C.D N CD CD G -* C\J CY) N N N N N N CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD. CD CD
.-. .-. .-. ~ .-. .-. ~ ~ .-. ,-.
SRMPLE PERIOD (YERR) NO CONTROL DATR FOR 1974-1976 NO INDICRTOR DATR FOR 1975 CCNTROL YERRS 1977-1979 RRE MDL's: 1980-1983 RRE LLD's INDICATOR YERR 1977 IS MDL 147
l FIGURE 12 ; I 1 MOLLUSK SRMPLES .
- Mn-54 l llY ENVIRONMENTRL LRB
-*- = CONTROL
]
-: = INDICATOR 3.3- -3.3 3.0- -3.0 $ 2.7- -2.7 5-s $ 2.4-H -2. 4 H $
EZ EZ H "a3 2.1- -2.1 t- % ON ON , o z Go-1.8- -1.8 2o Go-o 1.5-o u -1.5 o i 1.2- -1.2 l 0.9- -0.9 0.6- -0.6 0.3- -0.3 O.0- -+---+---*---4---+---* -0.0 i i i I i i i .t 1 i I l 7 LO f.D N CD CD C5) - N CY) N N N N N N CD CD CD CD CD U) CD CD CD 03 CD CD CD CD
.-. .-. ~ .e w .-. - e .
SAMPLE PERIOD (YERR). NO CONTROL DATR FOR 1974,1975,1976 CONTROL YEARS 1977-1979 RRE MDL's: 1988-1903 RRE LLD's-INDICRTOR YEARS 1977,1979 RRE MDL's 148
l FIGURE 13 MOLLUSK SRMPLES
- Sr-90 JRF ENVIRONMENTAL LRB I
J
--w-- = CONTROL 1.0- -+- - zNDICRTOR -1.0 0.9- . -0.9 z z o m 0.8- -0.8 so m s
$g$ 0.7- -0.7$h, v m m h{0.6- -0.6 h 7 S 0.5- -0.5 o o 0.4- -0.4
~
0.3- -0.3 0.2- Ns -
-0:.2 0.1- 's,w: ---nt: .
4' -0. I ' ,
.'M ..p-- Ji' _
s 0.0- ' '
-0.O I i i i i i i i v in C.D N CD -CD G .-* (M rr) 4 N N N N N N CD CD - CD CD >
CD CD CD CD CD CD .CD. (T) , . CD L CD ' " 0-
~
~ .-< ~ .-e .-e m .
. , ~ ~ ;~
SAMPLE PERIOD. ' '
~
^
D (YERR) J. , . '
, . . ' ;,i " -l NO CONTROL DRTR FOR YERRS 1974-1976 !(
t'
/ :. ,
e
- f g Y ,.
.* M '
) a .
..l.
_ _ - _- _ - _J___ __ _ _ . _ _ _ - -- _ L : -
l f .: FIGURE 14 BOTTOM SEDIMENT
- Co-60 JRF DWIRONMENTAL LRB
-*-- = CONTROL
-*- = INDICATOR 2,25- -2.25 m z 5 ,.,. 2 . 0 0 -- -2.20 o m h1.75- -1.75 h Z ? 1.50-w'
-1.50 w' zF fk1.25-u
-1.25 uh k 1.00- -1.00 0.75- y/ \'
-0.75 i
O.50- / s -0.50
/ \
/
0.25- i
-0.25 k--- +--4---& -j 0.00-
* - + - - -*/ -0.00 1 1 a i i i i i t i v in C.D N CD CD Q -* N C7 N N 0- N N N (D CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD m ~ ~ ,-. ~ ,-. .-. .-. .-< .-.
SRMPLE PERIOD (YERR) CONTROL DATR FOR YEARS 1975-76,1978-79 RRE HDL's: 1980-83 RRE LLD's 150
FIGURE 15 BOTTOM SEDIMENT
- Cs-137 JRF ENVIRONMENTRL LRB
--*-- = CONTROL
-+- = INDICRTOR _
2.25- -2.25 z z o m 2.00- -2.00 o m F >- p >- {"$1.75- -1.75 g $ s H "~ i z ' 1.50- -1.50 z s l u ,, u u 1.25-
-1.25hk o
1.00- -1.00 0.75- -0.75
?~~~,, .
0.50- / ' -
-0.50
'g '
l -+ , ,
' A's
\ '
0.25- ,/ y -0.25
- N,/
0.00- # -0.00
=
i . i i i "i i .i i i T LD C.O N CD CD Q ~ N M N N N N N N CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD
,-. ~ ~ ~ ~ .-, .-. - ~ ~
SAMPLE PERIOD (YEAR) CONTROL DRTR FOR 1976 IS MDL
'151
FIGURE 16 FISH SPMPLES
@ Cs-137 JRF ENVIRONMENTAL LR3
--*-- = CONTROL 2.50- -+- - INDICATOR ~2.50 2.25- -2.25 z
5 m 2.00- -2.00 so m
~. m r r~
i- - c
- 1.75- -1.75 c& y ac b
u' C" 1.50- -1.50 $ mw{ . E o 1.25- -1.25 Eo Y_2. o u 1.00- -1.00 0.75- -0.75 0.50- *.
-0.50 0.25- N -0.25
\
*,e #a--s..
% F
~~=M D ~~~*l ~~"
0.00- -0.00 i i . . . i i , i i T LD (.D N O O Q -4 OJ M N N N N N N CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD (D
,--. .-. .-. .-. - - ~ .-4 .-. ~
SAMPLE PERIOD (YEAR) CONTROL DATR FOR 1975 IS MDL; 1981 IS LLD 1 1 1 152
FIGURE -17 l FISH SAMPLES
- Sr-90 JRF ENVIRONMENTRL LRB
-*- = CONTROL 0.50- -+- - INDICRTOR -0.50 0.45- -0.45 z z o m 0.40- -0.40 so m s & W c2 $ 0.35- -0.35 2c s fm H m
y s* 0.30- -0.30.z { E 0.25- # -0.25 oN k ' o ,s o ei o 0.20- / \
\'
-0.20 l
0.15- l -0.15 l 0.10- -0.10 0.05- -0.05 0.00-W% -
.__x_-
-0.00 i i -i i i i i i i e v in m N m m co W cu m N N N N N N m m m. m m m m m m m m m m m W W *==6 ==0 W W g=4 W W ,==.g SRMPLE PERIOD (YEAR)
CONTROL DATR FOR 1981 & iS83 RRE LLD
.INDICRTOR DRTR FOR 1983 IS LLD
-153-
FIGURE 18 LRKE HRTER
- GROSS BETR JAF ENVIRONMENTAL LRB
--*-- = CONTROL 10^ 03: -+- - inn 1cAToR 210^ 03 z
z o - o H H H H m- m-mx xx H- 10^ 02: 210^ 02 ZU H - ZU - w o. w o. : : o o _ z a
,f-~~ o o % U o - ,
f' M/!
\
\
10^ 01: _ ,l \s s
- 10^ 01
\s
- l :
x \ s
* ~ % .. 3 A 10^ 00 i i i i i i i i i i 10^ 00 e to e N Co Cn ca - cu m N N N N N N CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD
- .-. - ~ .-. - .-. .-. ~ ,-
SRMPLE PERIOD (YERR) 1 154 -
FIGURE 19 LRKE WATER 4
- GROSS BETR I JRF ENVIRONMENTAL LRB
--c-- = CONTROL
-j- = JRF INLET
..n.. - NMP INLET 8.0- ei n -8.0 7.5- ',, :.
-7.5 7.0- i :. -7.0
$ 6.5- n!=I - I '. .
-6. 5 $p.4 g4 s 6,0- .
i : . -6. 0 s c . . . e-oc N 5.5- J .,i : -5. 5 oc s-N s- .i . z o 5 0-w o.
-5 0 w Z o_
U M a 4.5- .
', : . -4.5 v9 8 4.0- 'ki
-4.0 8 3.5- i : n. a -3.5 3.0-i . . /\ x ..n 1
n<./n.' / -Nr -3.0 s . 2.5- b- ;D'~~ 4 -2.5 i . , t: _ 2.0- , . / -2.0 j. 1.5- c,q' .t$ ;
- -1.5 1.0- - ; -1.0 N
0.5- -0.5 0.0 . i i i i i i i i i i i i 0.0
'C - N M T in CD IN CD CD Q - C\1 :-
SRMPLE PERIOD (MONTHS 1983) CONTROL VRLUES c FOR MONTH 12 IS LLD INDICATOR VRLUES n FOR MONTH 10 IS LLD INDICRTOR VRLUES j FOR MONTHS 10 & 12 RRE LLD 155
FIGURE 20 RIR PARTICULRTE
- GROSS BETR RCTIVITY 3RF ENVIRONMENTAL LRB RTMOSPHERIC NUCLERR -*- - CONTROL 0.20- tests is7s a tsee :- - INDICRTOR -0.20 0.18- -0,18 z z 3 0.16- X -0.16 S Hm ,' 'i Hm c< cc m e 0.14-
- l ', -0.14 ml--<e H%
z- l\
, s ,
i i z~ w o 0.12-o o-s ,/ \ s
,! i i
-0.12 ow o_o z \
, s
, i z
8 0.10- N l i ,I ', -0.10 8
\
* ,/ \s ,
l 0.08- N g ' , -0.08
\ ks !
s ,/ s , s 0.06- \/ -0.06 0.04- -0.04 k.', i 0.02- -0.02 0.00 . i i i i i i i i , i 0.00 v tn to N to Cn co - cu m N N N N N N CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD 01 CD CD CD 01
~ .-< .-< .-e w .-< .-e m -< .-<
SRMPLE PERIOD (YERR) 156
I 8ZowZwEnsoZ
.o u s h M 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0
~i
- Ni
- Mi MY E N
vi l V LI 3 Di RR R C Di BO FR N Ni M E OR C Di N T SI S C R L SR ( Di W A ~Q, BP E M ~~i E P EA F W I K L .Ni e TR G 1 S E Mi RT U R 5 7 1 P ~ vi t I E 9 E - AC 2 R ~.Oi C
+*
1 8 I .Di CU 3
) O ~ CNi A -
TL D ~ Di 4-C
== IA
~ Di IC NO VT DN mGi IT IE CR T mi AO mNi TL O Y R
mMi mTi mLOi C moi. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 8ZoWZnEwsoZ
.a u N h m
8zuwzH@Fsoz - oU NhM 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 NNi y, NCDi NCDi , E N MGi . V LI J M'i RR R BO FR ( MNi MMi Mv, S MlDi g N M E N T R L OR SI SR W R M MWi BP E P MNi ER F E C I K L MDi TR G U S E MCDi RT 1 5 8 1 9 8 3
)
P vGi E vi R I vNi , O vMi
+*
RC CU TL I R E 2 2 D vvi =- IA vtDi IC VT m MO vCOi DN IT IE vNi CR T vCOi AO TL Y O vCDi R s tGi D L Di LNi D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 8zoWzFEH oz - aUN[M
FIGURE 23 RIR PRRTICULRTE COMPOSITE
$ Co-60 3RV ENVIRONMENTAL LAB
--*-- = CONTROL
-+- = INDICATOR ,
0.9- -0.9 m Z C [ 0.8-N
-0.8 o N!
g U a 0.7- -0.7 Eg Ua Z 7 w 0.6- -0.6 W 7 G Y
@w o G
_ 0.5- l -0.5 o ; i 0.4- / -0.4
/ \
h ./
'l 0.3- / \
/ -0.3
'~~~N ~y ' ,?', j 0.1- * -0.1 0.0 i i i i i i i i i i i i 0.0
~ N m W LD LO % CD CD G ~-* N
~ ~ ,-.
SRMPLE-PERIOD (MONTHS 1983) CONTROL MONTHS 1-4,6,8-11 RRE LLD's INDICRTOR MONTHS 1-4,7,8,10,11 RRE LLD's 159
CONCENTRRTION pCi/m^3 e e e e e I I I I I i e e e e e w a w m - I 1 1 I IIlli I I I I IIl[I 1 I I I 1Illi I I I IIlill 1974- 4 m . 1975- csg l o aam D g 1976- g l n H I -
' m 2; gg n
; x 1977- in o 1 m n T ,- tm m
;;j -< 5 1978- r 0D 5 l Om s
- E
- 9 ,
O WH
- m 1979- ,# O HH g
]
U m$ v H HO o 1980- 7 l x Iii
+= 07 RC
- ta p-1981- ,* II Q o
= l A 1982- j@ m 85!
1983- 5 ap 8 i i i i Illit i i FFl i s il i i i i lilii i i i i 11111 e e e e e 1 1 I I l e e 'e e e w a w ~ - CONCENTRATION nIi/m^l
FIGURE 25 RIR PRRTICULATE COMPOSITE
- 3RV Cs-137 ENVIRONMENTRL l LRB 1.0- -1.0
--*- = CONTROL
- - - INDICRTOR 0.9- -0.9 m z m
[ 0.8-N
-0.8 o N[
g U o. 0.7- -0.7 Eg Ucz z 7 w 0.6- -0.6 w 7 G Mu O G ,; 0.5- -0.5 o j 0.4- -0.4 0.3- -0.3 x 0.2- -0.2 0.1- -0.1 0.0 i i i i i i i i i i i i 0.0
- N cr) v LD C.O !\ CD CD G ~ N
~ ~ ~
SRMPLE PERIOD CMONTHS 1983) CONTROL MONTHS 1,4,7-12 RRE LLD's INDICATOR MONTHS 1,5,9-12 PRE LLD's 161
FIGURE 26 RIR PARTICULRTE
- COMPOSITE 3RV ENVIRONMENTRL LRB Cs-137 10^-01: =10^-01
- --*- = CONTROL =
-+- = INDICRTOR -
RTMOSPHERIC NUCLERR - Z
~
TEST 1980 Z o o pm 10^-02: 3 10^-02 [ g I< : : I< T e _ _ me I-- N - F- N , Z- _ "s - Z-wu - wU oc o o_ - Z Z N,*N 8 10^-03: s
=10^-03
=
8 10^-04: =10^-04 10^-05 i i i i i i i i i i 10^-05 e in c.o N Co cn ca - cu m N N N N N N CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD Cn CD CD SRMPLE PERIOD (YERR) NO DATR FOR YERRS PRIOR TO 1977 162 _ - _ . _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ - = _ _ _ _ _ _ -.
FIGURE 27 MILK SAMPLES
- Cs-137 JRF ENVIRONMENTAL LRB
--*-- = CONTROL
-*~~ ~ **"* "' "
30.0- -30.0 27.0- -27.0 z z S 24.0- -24.0 $
$ RTMOSPHERIC NUCLERR -
imN 1 s .- 21.0- TcSTS ts7s a 1see -21.0 m N r .-
' zo zo
!Wo o- 18.0- -18.0 Wo o-z z 8 15.0- -15.0 8 12.0- -12.0 9.0- - 9.0
/#'s s,
- 6.0- *, - 6.0 s s s a
's
,W 3.0- - 3. 0 0.0 i i i i i i i i i i 0.0 v in CD N CI) CD CD - N (v)
N N N N N N CI) CD CI) CZ) l CD 01 CD CD CD 0) U3 CD 01 CD SRMPLE PERIOD (YERR) NO CONTROL DRTR FOR YEARS 1974-1977 CONTROL DRTR FOR YEARS 1998,1992-93 RRE LLD's 163
FIGURE 28 MILK SRMPLES
- Cs-137 3RV ENVIRONMENTRL LRB 20.0- -20.0
*--- = CONTROL 440
+ = INDICRTORe16 18.0- .. 4... - INDICATOR 44 -{@,@
-- $ -- = INDICATORt45 z z o 16.0- -16.0 so
~
w I-~ E 14.0- -14.0 @ws
+\ z-z-
w o 12.0- -12.0 oaw u o a. z z 8 10.0- -10.0 8 8.0- ,& - 8. 0
, ----4s'ssA
/- , ^g s s '
6.0- # ' ,'~sg: ' ' s s
- 6. 0
,/ ,
s 3,4 4.0- I[ '4 - 4. 0 2.0- - 2.0 0.0 i i i i i i i i 0.0 tn t.o ~ cn en o ,~ cu SRMPLE PERIOD CMONTHS 1983) REFER TO TABLE +17 FOR EXRCT DRTR VALUES AND LLD OCCURRENCES
)
164
FIGURE 29 MILK SRMPLES
- Cs-137 JRF ENVIRONMENTAL LRB
--*--- = CONTROL 940 5 - INDICRTOR65 20.0- .. 7... = INDICRToR,7 -20.0
--4-- = INDICATOR 650
--$-- = INDICRTOR655 18.0- -18.0 z z o 18.0- -18.0 so s
f-- f-- E f-- s 14.0- -14.0 f-E N-z- z-w u o. o 12.0- -12.0 oW o_U z z 8 10.0- -10.0 8 8.0- ,7 .
,,4 - 8. 0 6.0- k.,V < .
-- t ;d _,
7 - 6. B
' ~ ~ g' .. . .
7:V
- 4.0- *
. I $ $ a - 4. 0 2.0- - 2. 0 0.0 i i i i i i i i 0.0 in m N m m cc ~ cu
.-< ~ ~
SAMPLE PERIOD (MONTHS 1983) REFER TO TABLE 417 FOR EXRCT DRTR VALUES AND LLD OCCURRENCES 165
FIGURE 30 MILK SAMPLES
- I-131 ENVIRONMENTRL LRB
[ [ OR RTMOSPHERIC NUCLERR 5.0- -5 . 0 1 4.5- -4.5 { 3 4.0-- -4. 0 $
- r. -
c mJ oc N 3 . :_3 - - 3 . 5 m _N r .- r_ .- zo zo W u o- 3 . 0-
-3. 0 W o S z z 8 2.5- -2.5 8 2.0- -2.0 1.5- , -1.5
/\
1.0- / \, -1.0
/ \
0.5-
' f 'g
;; t- t
-0.5 0.0 i i i i i i i i i i 0.0 v in C.D N G3 01 G -* N fr3 N N N N N N G3 G3 CD G3 Cn 03 03 03 03 01 03 03 (T) 0)
.-< .-. -< < ~ -< e< .-. . -e SRMPLE PERIOD (YERR)
NO CONTROL DRTH FOR 1974-1977 i CONTROL DRTR FOR 1978-79 RRE MDL's: 1981-03 RRE LLD's INDICATOR DATR FOR 1979 IS MDL: 1991-93 RRE LLD's 166
FIGURE 31 i MILK SAMPLES
- Sr-90 JRF ENVIRONMENTRL LRB I 10.0- RTMOSeNERze NuCLERR -*-- - CONTROL -10.O TESTS 1976 & 1980 -; = INDICRTOR 9.0- - 9. 0 '
z z i 3 8.0- . - 8.0 S w w c- c-mN 7.0- - 7.0 m N
- r .- r .-
zo zu c w o. 6.0- - 6.0 W u a-lo z s z O 5.0- '\ , , -5.08 k ,' \
\ '
4.0 4.0- s, e
/ 's -
s g g 3.0- 's - 3.0
's 2.0- N -
2.0 1.0- - 1.0 0.0 i i i , i i , i i i O.0 e in m N m m cm - cu m s s s s s s m m m m ! m m m m m m m m m m l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - - - - - SRMPLE PERIOD (YERR) NO CONTROL DRTR FOR YEARS 1974-1977 4 167
, g .-
James A. FitsPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Po. Box 41' Lycomog, New York 13093 - 315 342.3840
- > NewYorkPower : l%" '" :,
& Authority March 28, 1984 JAFP-84-0338 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region 1 631 Park Avenue King Of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Attention: Thomas E. Murley Regional Administrator
SUBJECT:
JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT RADIO-LOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT FACIL-ITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-59, DOCKET #50-333 Gentlemen: In accordance with the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Guide 10.1, we submit the 1983 Annual Environmen-tal Operating Report, Part B: Radiological Report. Distribu-tion for this report is in accordance with Regulatory Guide 10.1. Very truly yours, CAM:JAS:jaa CORBIN A. McNEILL, JR. Enclosure (1) CC: Document Control Desk (USNRC) (18) J. Blake (NYPA/WPO) J. P. Bayne (NYPA/WPO) R. Burns (NYPA/WPO) J. Kelly (NYPA/WPO) J. Toennies (NMPC) E. Leach (NMPC) E. Mulcahey B. Gorman J. A. Solini RES File Library Doument Control Center CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
?
f [b til}}