JAFP-97-0162, New York Power Authority Radiological Environ Operating Rept Jan-Dec 1996 for James a Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant

New York Power Authority Radiological Environ Operating Rept Jan-Dec 1996 for James a Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant

ML20138G959
Person / Time
Site:	FitzPatrick
Issue date:	12/31/1996
From:	Michael Colomb POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK
To:	Miller H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
References
JAFP-97-0162, JAFP-97-162, NUDOCS 9705070021
Download: ML20138G959 (219)

Text

b J:mes A. FitzPatrick Nucte:r PIw:t Plint d b P.O. Box 41 Lycoming, New York 13093 315 342-3840 A NewYo.rkPower mcnoeu. coioms 4# Authonty sne exec e omce, April 29,1997  !

JAFP-97-0162 l l

United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region 1  !

457 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Attention: Hubert J. Miller Regional Administrator

SUBJECT:

JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT FACILITY Gentlemen:

Enclosed please find the 1996 Radioloeical Environmental Operatine Report which covers the operating period of January 1,1996 through December 31,1996. This report is submitted in accordance with the requirements of Amendment 93, Section 7.3.d of the James A.

FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Technical Specifications. Distribution for this report is in accordance with the Regulatory Guide 10.1, Revision 4.

Very truly yours, MICHAEL J. COLOMB MJC: g Enclosures xc: EDocument Contaul Center Desk (USNRC)'(18)* l JAF NRC Resident Inspector l

J. W. Blake (NYPA/WPO)

J. J. Kelly (NYPA/WPO) I l

J. Knubel (NYPA/WPO) hs \

C. Merritt (NMPC)

CAC Committee (Town of New Haven)

CAC Committee (Town of Scriba)

W. Berzins A. McKeen RES File 0 C 0'

' 1 ,,, .

, A,. ,.. ,y % w.g.,ya w w4 p x.

g,. , ya. ~,,,fl G:

. , 7 ,;

~

%y;;:, , j '

>'r

.., .c e ,  ;.

4 ,

.. Y , ' ) *.k )fhh 1 'Y l

' ' ? YY.f l A j fy'}fffQ;jfQQ  ?) ,

py@R$$pp. f.g:)f'.@? y, x , /

,a _p

.Y$ .'Q, "I f?yg t f. *[$[ j

.k n- .;

,, \

\

E7d N EEJj- W .; ,

N '

y g

/ \ 'T

\

q[uxu:. >3,6}O:

- xy .

s s 1

g' f-

< g 3<Ty

,g<

. g[

' ,1 -

F g

l ,

,.Wi i >

(?f y y x e :x +

w mga  ;, n 'q, p. g lW Y - N a  %

\ go ']

Q &g 1 # L . s ,9l " y (

pgyt4 M W e J> e A S -

s -

' f:f;[ i ':);sz l:y w^ .,

j. 7

' uM ~ '? q

," m,b 4. ..'

a%"

a n ::p; ,

A t

s n

,, s - i 7_. 3 ,- ,

~

{. a A b

[i gf t

%gg , 4 4

'q g

~ *

\ _

o , .b i \

A r.t h 3 W' t Y ay [a' v-+. a;3 p c. ,y4 -.

n u e";

w

&ll)g,dMT6:,:?%. ?s,i..tA..

A w ;- + ,W & : n +; y'

\ e.f ** MN -

g . .

A;tf m

( .

gr agi f sw

- ,_ m .; w . . n-g" - [*

, jpi.,Iyk 'j'h . c[. mh'h !

6 l k*

[*.* ] [kg p g., , e. a ... .- m .

_.t -

, ,, . 3 ,,, _

~'

L. . . ;*h, *

, ( ,...t

6. j e ... . . r.y , --

3

%mQyQ3g@mm;yj..,

< m.mm g

em , ghb %g

)

l l

• g 9

.. , f ,

M, y .rq e9 p MIIDk  :

fi i 0 es[-

a c l e_ a r g {, ggggggf~ , .

4

,t . : :t .

.; . . . , z ,: y g ;

. >: ........',,.;..,,L

.u l

.v yyq_-u n y

9.,9 m n if>g

.m Q. ' ,i

[t '

3.

~

- ,_,~,;': . .-

( ;. : y 3 ,._v b m ,y h

g' ' ,[ *\p.i s,-. .,, .. e . fa 1*\^ '

p

.Mc p",,.g j 'a.

>>.,o.,- 3 f

+ .. . . - ,3 r F

,c- ..,>.a -

,;[ , ; < >

N

. ~ . . . . ) .' a ? .ON .ic,kp Ye .i . Mh;N;[pphk

• q ~ <

r;.; ;: ; [. .?_..p ,' ,;9:g" s p Q .['m y 3 ,

u p g~ ,>,' G ' ,

. : p.5l &.Yj ti b }*  ;

z' ;..

. b ' '

• Ghp ., % , @ - + v

(, -

,y .,x f,s 3

. , . . - o- yx.+

..  ;; , W t  ; k k (s

.1..%,s m.y m

e. . ; ..su . . n.w;  : g. w9 x.

.,e w-

/

' - t; l _, h t

.. + .. . y v.sw [,; jQ;?

). 4 y,vG g; g T b ) i ' , ,; .

Ts / JRf > > -

<;).r 0.. .l,;)

.- , t

~

_ N w,.y~;gn -w $w.lhiff  % m ., v;/ c

/x -

gy- ,

y c

Q

.}>. 34.. [v,p  % w's .g ^'t.

,A 't <

f _

_. G A Di s F [ ' .[N \ '

(p " gOW ;Al[ gyN< j; $. ; .I ,1 ,

q s

~

9  ;. n g.,2 ..

. . 7 3

,,e ',-l -

4 . .,

% . , ,:MAM -

8 Y , ,

gy t. -o 4 ,

@ f( R

[ y

' $',7 01; k ( ,

u ,

% N' N

'yy .

m ^'

. : c. , . "\

E .

y

. y hy s\

nlg  % x

• h ,

g/ 0

\

k 4 r =

', y \

p 2; -u m . N at g e m , y "

A' m m^ a n

'\ .A f,if.s g & g % e h f S k. y. e - - - . .

a

~ ,,

x ' . "

gMgg.gTQ. Te% (. Y

,ma g- __ _q j @$-

_ . , , . . W ws..

p~. - -

w s .

,y:n,,,

rh 9

k,h6 g g emp3a4%L ' dc ;d ,f 4 o .- # ~

n:,.;.sa w

.jLatQ.-A s-~ q:gf-t i >t = :p n e . 7~

g

~; g &4nN, Ls ,

wYorKRowe18M3S4MEr Z2 M utheiify +& WW~tcW .xgu y Efi~

4.s yy_q_ m~;w%q s qq . _. __

p em max &e_km.p..pym mgmm% gs mej .

.a

=e e J l

l NEW YORK POWER AUTIIORITY ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT JANUARY 1,1996 - DECEMBER 31,1996 FOR JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-59 DOCKET NUMBER 50-333

.y l

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

l-1

2.0 INTRODUCTION

2-1 2.1 Program History 2-1 2.2 Site Description 2-1 2.3 Program Objectives 2-2 i

3.0 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 3-1 3.1 Sample Collection Methodology 3-7 3.2 Analyses Performed 3-13 3.3 Sample Location Maps and Sample Location Reference Tables 3-14 3.4 Land Use Census 3-24 3.5 Changes to the REMP Program 3-25 3.6 Deviation and Exceptions to the Program 3-26 3.7 Statistical Methodology 3-27 3.8 Compliance with Required Lower Limits of Detection (LLD) 3-32 4.0 SAMPLE

SUMMARY

TABLES IN BRANCII TECIINICAL 4-1 POSITION FORMAT 5.0 DATA EVALUATION AND DISCUSSION 5-1 5.1 Aquatic Program 5-7 5.2 Terrestrial Program 5-24 5.3 Conclusion 5-53 5.4 References 5-55 i

1 i

l 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS '

(Continued) l Pace ,

l 6.0 REPORT PERIOD ANALYTICAL RESULTS TABLES 6-1 1 l

l 7.0 IIISTORICAL DATA TABLES 7-1 l 8.0 GRAPIIICAL PRESENTATIONS 8-1 9.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE / QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM 9-1 l

9.1 Program Description 9-1 I 9.2 Program Schedule 9-2 l

9.3 Program Results Summary 9-3 l

9.4 Nonconformity Reviews 9-4 9.5 References 9-5 ii I

LIST OF TABLES Pace Table 3.0-1 Required Sample Collection and Analysis 3-2 Table 3.3-1 Environmental Sample Locations 3-20 Table 3.8-1 Detection Capabilities For Environmental Sample Analysis, 3-33 Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) i Table 61 Shoreline Sediment Sampling Results 6-2  :

Table 6-2 Fish Sampling Results 6-3 i

Table 6-3 Surface Water Composite Results, Tritium 6-6 Table 6-4 Surface Water Composite Results, Gamma Isotopic 6-7 l Table 6-5 Off-site Airborne Pa:ticulate Filter Results, Gross Beta 6-12 Table 6-6 On-site Airborne Particulate Filter Results, Gross Beta 6-14 Table 6-7 Off-site Airborne 1-131 Results 6-16 Table 6-8 On-site Airborne 1-131 Results 6-18 Table 6-9 Particulate Composite Results, Gamma Isotopic 6-20 Table 6-10 Thermoluminescent Dosimeter Results 6-35 Table 6-11 Milk Results, I-131 & Gamma Isotopic 6-39 Table 6-12 Milk Animal Census Results 6-42 Table 6-13 Food Product Results, Gamma Isotopic 6-44 Table 6-14 1996 Residence Census 6-45 Table 9-1 Gross Beta, Tritium, Iodine & Gamma Analysis of Air, Water, 9-6 Milk, Soil, Filter & Food Products Table 9-2 Analytical Precision Values 9-21 Table 9-3 Actual Analytical Values Used ti EPA 9-22 Table 9-4 Assumptions Needed to Use the EPA Acceptance Criteria 9-23 Methodology i

l l

iii i

.r . ---r -----y .,r,. ,.w.,y _ . , .,. . _ , - __ _ . . _ . . _ _ . __ , - . _ _ _ - , - .

,_7

I LIST OF FIGURES l Pace ;

Figure 3.3-1 New York State Map 3-15 i Figure 3.3-2 Off-site Environmental Station and TLD Location Map 3-16 Figure 3.3-3 On-site Environmental Station and TLD Location Map 3-17 Figure 3.3-4 Milk Animal Census. Milk Sample Location and Surface 3-18 Water Sample Location Map  !

Figure 3.3-5 Nearest Residence, Food Product, Shoreline Sediment, 3-19 Fish Sample, Location Map Figure 8.1 Graph - Fish (Cs-137) 8-2 Figure 8.2 Graph - Surface Water Tritium 8-3 Figure 8.3 Graph - Airborne Particulate Gross Beta, Annual 8-4 Figure 8.4 Graph - Airborne Paniculate Grass Beta, Weeks 1-26 (1996) 8-5 Figure 8.5 Graph - Airborne Particulate Gross Beta, Weeks 27-52 (1996) 8-6 Figure 8.6 Graph - Airborne Paniculate Composite (Co-60) 8-7 Figure 8.7 Graph - Airborne Particulate Composite (Cs-137) 8-8 Figure 8.8 Graph - Airborne Radiodine (I-131) 8-9 Figure 8.9 Graph - Milk (Cs-137), Annual 8-10 Figure 8.10 Graph - Milk (1-131) 8-11 Figure 8.11 Graph - TLD Data 8-12 iv

i 1.0 EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

1 The Annual Radiological Esivironmental Operating Report is published pursuant to l' Section 7.3.d of the Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications (RETS). The RETS require that the results from the Annual Radiological Environmental Monitoring l Program (REMP) be provided to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. i This report describes the REMP program and its implementation as required by Technical Specifications. It also contains the analytical results, data evaluation, dose evaluation, and data trends for each environmental sample media. Also included are results of the land use census, historical data and the Environmental Laboratory's performance in the Quality Assurance Intercomparison Program required by Technical 1

Specifications.

The REMP is implemented to measure radioactivity in the aquatic and the terrestrial l pathways. The aquatic pathways include Lake Ontario fish, water, and lake shore  ;

sediment. Measurement results of the samples representing these pathways contained I only natural background radionuclides or low concentrations of Cs-137 which are the l result of past atmospheric nuclear testing. The 1996 results were consistent with the previous five year historical data.

l Terrestrial pathways were also monitored and included airbome particulate and radioiodine, milk, food products and direct radiation. Analysis of all terrestrial radiation pathways demonstrated that there has been no detectable increased radiation levels as a result of plant operation. Again, the 1996 results are consistent with the l previous five year historical results and exhibit no adverse trends.

In summary, the analytical results from the 1996 Environmental Monitoring Program demonstrate that the routine operation of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant had no significant or measurable radiological impact on the environment. No elevated radiation levels were detected in the off-site environment as a result of the hydrogen injection rates implemented at the plant during 1996. The measured concentrations of radionuclides in the off-site environment surrounding the JAFNPP are not increasing as a result of plant operation. The 1996 report continues to document a significant downward trend in the concentration of radionuclides in the environment created from past weapons testing, in particular, fish and airborne particulate activity. The results of the program demonstrate that the operation of the plant did not result in a measurable dose of any significance to the general population, above natural l background levels.

I l-1

i

2.0 INTRODUCTION

This report is submitted in accordance with Section 7.3.d of the Radiological Ef0uent i Technical Specifications (RETS) to DPR-59, Docket 50-333. I 2.1 PROGRAM IIISTORY Environmental monitoring of the Nine Mile Point site by various state and private utilities has been on-going since 1964, five years prior to any reactor operations. In 1968, the Niagara Mohawk Power Company began the required preoperational environmental site testing program. This pre-operational data serves as a reference point to compare later data obtained duang reactor operation. In 1969, the Nine Mile Point Unit I reactor, a 620 Men 'tt Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) began full power operation. In 1975, the J , A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, owned and operated by the New York Power Authority, began full power operation. This 810 Megawatt BWR occupies the east sector of the Nine Mile Point site, approximately j 1/2 mile from Nine Mile Point Unit 1. In 1985, the individual station Effluent l Technical Specifications were standardized to the current Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications, much of which is common to both plants. Data generated by the Radiological Environmental Program is shared, but each utility reviews and publishes their own annual report. In 1988, The Nine Mile Point Unit 2 reactor, also owned and operated by Niagara Mohawk, began full power operation. This 1100 Megawatt BWR is located between Unit I and FitzPatrick.

In summary, three Boiling Water Reactors, which generate 2530 Megawatts, have operated collectively at the Nine Mile site since 1988. A large mass of environmental data from the exposure pathways have been collected and analyzed to determine the effect from reactor operations.

2.2 SITE DESCRIPTION The Nine Mile Point site is located on the southeastern shore of Lake Ontario approximately seven miles east of the Oswego River and the City of Oswego.

l Syracuse, the nearest metropolitan area, is located 36 miles to the south. The reactors and support building occupy a small shoreline portion of the 700 acre site, which is partially wooded. The land, soil of glacial deposits, rises gently from the lake in all directions. Oswego County is a rural environment, with about 34% of the land devoted to agriculture.

2-1 l

2.3 PROGRAM OBJECTIVES The objectives of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program are to:

1. Measure and evaluate the effects of plant operation on the environs and to ,

verify the effectiveness of the controls on radioactive material sources.

I i

1

2. Monitor natural radiation levels in the environs of the JAFNPP site.  !

3. Demonstrate compliance with the various environmental conditions and requirements of applicable state and federal regulatory agencies including l Technical Specifications and 40 CFR Part 190.

4. Provide information by which the general public can evaluate the environmental aspects of nuclear power using unbiased data.

5. Satisfy the community interest regarding the impact of the power plants on the environment. ,

i l

l i 2-2

3.0 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION To achieve the objectives listed in Section 2.3, an extensive sampling and analysis program is conducted every year. The JAFNPP Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) consists of sampling and analysis of various media that include:

o Shoreline Sediment o Fish o Surface Waters o Air o Milk o Food Products In addition, direct radiation measurements are performed using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). These sampling programs are outlined in Table 3.0-1. The JAFNPP REMP sampling locations are selected and verified by an annual land use census. The accuracy and precision of the program is assured by participation in an independent interlaboratory comparison program which meets the requirements of JAFNPP Technical Specifications, section 6.3. In addition to the participation in the intercomparison program, quarterly sample splits are routinely provided to the New York State Department of Health for cross checking purposes.

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 Stations. The site staff is assisted by a contracted environmental engineering company, EA Science and Technology, Inc. (EA).

3-1

TABLE 3.0-1 OPERATIONAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM REQUIRED SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Exposure Sampling and Pathway Collect 1 Type and Frequency and/or Sample Number of Samples (a) and Locations Frequency a) of Analysis AIRBORNE Radioiodine Samples from 5 locations: Continuous sam- Radioiodine Canisters:

and ple operation Analyze weekly for I-131.

Particulates a. 3 samples from off-site locations in dit- with sample col-ferent sectors of the highest calculated lection weekly Particulate Samoles:

site average D/Q (based on all licensed or as required site reactors). by dust loading, Gross beta following radioactivity filter changelb) whichever is composite (by location) y b. 1 sample from the vicinity of a community more frequent. for gamma isotopic

" having the highest calculated site aver- quarterly (as a minimum).  ;

age D/Q (based on all licensed site re-actors). '

c. I sample from a cor. trol location 9 to 20 miles distant ga winddirectiont0gintheleastprevalent .

Direct Radiation (e) 32 stations with two or more dosimeters Quarterly Gamma dose monthly or placed as follows: An inner ring of stations quarterly.

in the general area of the site boundary and an outer ring in the 4 to 5 mile range from .

the site with a station in each of the land based sectors of each ring. There are 16 '

land based sectors in the inner ring, and 8 land based sectors in the outer ring. The  :

balance of the stations (8) are placed in special interest areas such as population centers, nearby residences, schools, and in 2 or 3 areas to serve as control stations.

TABLE 3.0-1 (Continued)

OPERATIONAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM REQUIRED SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Exposure Sampling and Pathway Type and Frequency and/or Sample Number of Samples (a) and Locations Collectior)a)

Frequencyt of Analysis WATERBORNE Surface (f) a. 1 sample upstream. Composite sam- Gamma isotopic analysis ple over one monthly. Composite for

b. I sample from the si month periodC 9). Tritig) analysis quar--

coolingwaterintakeg)smostdownstream terly .

Sediment from 1 sample from a downstream area with existing Twice per year. Gamma isotopic)

Shoreline or potential recreational value. semiannually (c ,analysis I

w as l

INGESTION Samales from milk animals in 3 locations Twice per month, Gamma isotopic and I-131 Milk a.

analysis twice per month witlin 3.5 miles distant having the high- April through est calculated site average D/Q. If December (sam- when milk animals are '

there are none, then 1 sample from milk ples will be on pasture (April through collected in December): monthly (Jan-animals in each of 3 areas 3.5 to 5.0 uary throuch March), if miles distant having the highest calcu- January through lated site average D/Q ()gsed on all March if I-131 required (c7, licensed site reactors)ll> . is detected in -

November and

b. 1 sample from milk animals at a control December of the ,

location (9 to 20 miles distan preceding year). .

lessprevalentwinddirection){dgndina h

TABLE 3.0-1 (Continued)

OPERATIONAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM REQUIRED SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Exposure Sampling and Pathway Collecti Type and Frequency and/or Sample Ntaber of Samples (a) and Locations Frequency a) of Analysis FISH

a. I sample of each of 2 commerically or Twice per year. Gamma isotopic (c) analysis recreationally important species in the of edible portions.

vicinity of a site discharge point.

b. 1 sample of each of 2. species (some as in a. above or of a species with similar feeding habits) from an area a miles distant from the site (d)t least 5, w

i FOOD PRODUCTS

a. In lieu of the garden cenus as specified Once during Gamma isotopic (c) in 6.2. samples of at least 3 different harvest season. analysis of edible kinds of broad leaf vegetation (such as portions. (Isotopic

! vegetables) grown nearest each of two to include I-131).

i different off-site locations of highest predicted site average D/Q (based on all licensed site Reactors).

One (1) sample of each of the similar broad leaf vegetation grown at least 9.3

miles distant in a le prevalent l wind direction sector b

. . - - - - ~ . . - - . - .

j NOTES FOR TABLE 3.0-1 (a) It is recognized that, at times, it may not be possible or practical to obtain samples of the media of choice at the most desired location or time. In these instances l

suitable alternative media and locations may be chosen for the particular pathway l

in question. Actual locations (distance and directions) from the site shall be  !

l I provided in the Annuai Radiological Environmental Operating Report. Calculated '

site averaged D/Q values and meteorological parameters are based on historical data i (specified in the ODCM) for all licensed site reactors.

(b) Particulate sample filters should be analyzed for gross beta 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> or more after sampling to allow for radon and thorium daughter decay. If gross beta activity in i i

air is greater than 10 times a historical yearly mean of control samples, gamma j isotopic analysis shall be performed on the individual samples. I i

l (c) Gamma isotopic analysis means the identification and quantification of gamma j emitting radionuclides that may be attributable to the effluents from the plant.  !

(d) The purpose of these samples is to obtain background information. If it is not practical to establish control locations in accordance with the distance and wind direction criteria, other sites which provide valid background data may be substituted.

(e) One or more instruments, such as a pressurized ion chamber, for measuring and recording dose rate continuously may be used in place of, or in addition to, integrating dosimeters. For the purpose of this table, a thermoluminescent dosimeter may be considered to be one phosphor and two or more phosphors in a pocket may be considered as two or more dosimeters. Film badges shall not be used for measuring direct radiation.

(f) The " upstream sample" shall be taken at a distance beyond significant influence of l the discharge. The " downstream sample" shall be taken in an area beyond. but near,

! the mixing zone, if practical.

3-5

NOTES FOR TAlllE 3.0-1 (Continued)

(g) Composite samples should be collected with equipment (or equivalent) which is capable of collecting an aliquot at time intervals which are very short (e.g., hourly) relative to the compositing period (e.g., monthly) in order to assure that a representative sample is obtained.

(h) A milk sampling location, as required in Table 1, is defined as a location having at least 10 milking cows present at a designated milk sampic location. It has been found from past experience, and as a result of conferring with local farmers, that a minimum of 10 milking cows is necessary to guarantee an adequate supply of milk twice per month for analytical purposes. Locations with less than 10 milking cows are usually utilized for breeding purposes, which eliminates a stable supply of milk for samples as a result of suckling calves and periods when the adult animals are dry. In the event that 3 milk sample locations cannot meet the requirement for 10 milking cows, then a sample location having less than 10 milking cows can be used if an adequate supply of milk can reasonably and reliably be obtained based on communications with the farmer.

3-6 i

l l

3.1 SAMPLE COLLECTION METIIODOLOGY 1

3.1.1 SURFACE WATER l

l Surface water samples are taken from the respective inlet canals of the JAFNPP and the Niagara Mohawk Oswego Steam Station (OSS) located in the City of Oswego. The FitzPatrick Facility draws water from Lake Ontario on a continuous basis. This is used for the "down-current" or indicator sampling point for the Nine Mile Point Site. The OSS inlet canal removes water from Lake Ontario at a point approximately 7.6 miles west of the site. This "up-current" location is considered a control location because of the distance from the site as well as its location relative to prevailing lake current directions and flow pattern of the nearby Oswego River.

Samples from the JAFNPP are composited using automatic sampling equipment which discharges into a compositing tank or bottles. Samples are collected monthly from the compositor and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides. Samples from the OSS are also obtained using automatic sampling equipment and collected in a holding tank. Representative samples from this location are obtained weekly and are composited to fomt a monthly composite sample. The monthly samples are analyzed for v mma emitting radionuclides.

A portion of the monthly samples from each of the locations is saved and composited to form quarterly composite samples, which are analyzed for tritium.

l In addition to the sample results for the JAFNPP and Oswego Steam Station l collection sites, data are presented for the Nine Mile Point Unit I and Unit 2 facility inlet canal samples and for samples from the City of Oswego drinking water supply. The latter three locations are not required by the Technical Specifications. These locations are optional sample points which are collected and analyzed to enhance the surface water sampling program.

j Monthly composite samples from these three locations are analyzed for gamma emitters and quarterly composite samples are analyzed for tritium.

Surface water sample locations are shown in Section 3.3 on Figure 3.3-4.

3-7 t

l 3.1.2 AIR PARTICULATE / IODINE l 1

The air sampling stations required by the Radiological Effluent Technical l Specifications (RETS) are located in the general area of the site boundary.

The sampling stations are sited within a distance of 0.2 miles of the site boundary in sectors with the highest calculated meteorological deposition factors (D/Q) based on historical meteorological data. These stations (R-1, ,

R-2, and R-3) are located in the east, east-southeast, and southeast sectors as measured from the center of the NMPNS Unit 2 reactor building. The I RETS also require that a founh air sampling station be located in the l vicinity of a year round community having the highest calculated dispersion ,

1 factor (D/Q) based on historical meteorological data. This station is located in the southeast sector and is designated as location R-4. A fifth station required by the RETS is a control location, designated as station R-5. l Station R-5 is located 16.4 miles from the site in the east nonheast meteorological sector.

In addition to the IGTS required locations, there are ten additional sampling j stations. Six of these sampling stations are located within the site boundary  !

and are designated as on-site stations Dl, G, H, I, J, and K. These locations are within the site boundary of the JAFNPP and NMPNS. One air sampling station is located off-site in the southwest sector in the vicinity of the City of Oswego and is designated as station G off-site. Three remaining air sampling stations are located in the ESE, SSE, and S sectors and range in distance from 7.2 to 9.0 miles. These are designated as off-site stations n2, E and F respectively.

Each station collects airborne particulates using glass fiber filters (47 millimeter diameter) and radiciodine using charcoal cartridges (2 x 1 inch).

The samplers nm continuously and the charcoal cartridges and particulate filters are changed on a weekly basis. Sample volume is determined by use of calibrated gas flow meters located at the sample discharge. Gross beta analysis is perfonned on each particulate filter. Charcoal cartridges are analyzed for radiciodine using gamma spectral analysis.

The particulate filters are composited monthly by location and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides.

3-8

I Air sampling stations are shown in Section 3.3, Figures 3.3-2 and 3.3-3.

)

3.1.3 MILK I i

Milk samples are routinely collected from five farms during the year. These fanns included four indicator locations and one control location. Samples are collected twice per month, April through December, and each sample is )

analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides and I-131. Samples are collected in January, Febmary and March in the event that 1-131 is detected I in November and December of the preceding year.

The selection of milk sample locations is based on maximum deposition calculations (D/Q). Deposition values are generated using average historical meteorological data for the site. The Technical Specifications require three sample locations within 5.0 miles of the site with the highest calculated deposition value. During 1996 there were no milk sample locations within l 5.0 miles that were suitable for sampling based on production capabilities.

There were, however, five optional locations beyond five miles that were sampled as the routine milk sampling program.

The Technical Specifications also require that a sample be collected from a location greater than ten miles from the site and in a less prevalent wind direction. This location is in the seuthwest sector and serves as the control location.

Milk samples are collected in polyethylene bottles from a bulk storage tank at each sampled farm. Before the sarnple is drawn, the tank contents are agitated to assure a homogenous mixture of milk and butterfat. Two gallons are collected from each indicator and control location during the first half and second half of each month. The samples are chilled, preserved and shipped fresh to the analytical laboratory within thirty-six hours of collection in insulated shipping containers.

The milk sample locations are found in Section 3.3 in Figure 3.3-4. (Refer to Table 3.3-1, Section 3.3 for location designations and descriptions).

3-9

3.1.4 FOOD PRODUCTS (VEGETATION)

Food products are collected once per year during the late summer harvest season. A minimum of three different kinds of broad leaf vegetation (edible  ;

or inedible) are collected from two different indicator garden locations.

l Sample locations are selected from gardens identified in the annual census that have the highest estimated deposition values (D/Q) based on historical l site meteorological data. Control samples are also collected from available locations greater than 9.3 miles distance from the site in a less prevalent wind direction. Control samples are of the same or similar type of vegetation when available.

Food product samples are analyzed for gamma emitters using gamma isotopic analysis.

Food product locations are shown in Section 3.3 on Figure 3.3-5. ,

l 3.1.5 FISII SAMPLES Samples of available fish species are selected from the Nine Mile Point l Aquatic Ecology Study which monitors lake fish populations. Fish samples are collected twice per year, once in the spring and again in die fall.

Indicator samples are collected from a combination of the four on-site sample transects located off shore from the site. One set of control samples are at an off-site sample transect located off shore 8 - 10 miles west of the

site. Available species are selected using the following guidelines

a) Samples are composed of 0.5 to I kilogram of the edible portion only.

I A maximum of three species per location is used.

i b) Samples composed of more than 1 kilogram of.a single species from the j i

same location are divided into samples of 1 kilogram each. A maximum of three samples per species per location is used. Sample weights include only the edible portions.

c) Samples are limited to edible and or sport species when available.

3-10

Selected fish samples are frozen immediately after collection and segregated by species and location. Samples are shipped frozen in insulated containers for analysis. Edible portions of each sample are analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides. Fish collection locations are shown in Section 3.3 on Figure 3.3-5.  !

)

3.1.6 SIlORELINE SEDIMENTS '

t One kilogram of shoreline sediment is collected at one area of existing or l potential recreational value. One sample is also collected from a location beyond the influence of the site. Samples are collected as surface scrapings to a depth of approximately 1 inch. The samples are placed in plastic bags, sealed and shipped to the lab for analysis. Sediment samples are analyzed >

for gamma emitting radionuclides. '

i i

Shoreline sediment locations are shown in Section 3.3 on Figure 3.3-5. l l

3.1.7 TLD (DIRECT RADIATION)

Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) are used to measure direct radiation (gamma dose) in the environment. TLDs are supplied and processed quarterly by the J.A. FitzPatrick N.P.P. Environmental Laboratory. The laboratory utilizes a Panasonic based system using UD-814 dosimeters.

Each dosimeter contains three calcium sulfate elements and one lithium borate element. Two dosimeters are placed at each monitoring location.

Five different region around the site are evaluated using environmental  ;

TLDs.  !

o On-site areas (areas within the site boundary not required by the '

RETS) o Site boundary area in each of the sixteen meteorological sectors o An outer ring of TLDs (located fow to five miles from the site in the eight land based meteorological sectors) 3-11

o Special interest TLDs (located at sites of high population density and use) o Control TLDs located at sites beyond significant influence of the ,

site Special interest TLDs are located at or near large industrial sites, schools, or nearby towns or communities. Control TLDs are located to the southwest, south and east-northeast of the site at distances of 12.6 to 19.8 miles.

TLDs used for the 1996 program were constructed of rectangular teflon wafers impregnated with 25 percent CaSO4:Dy phosphor. Badges are sealed in polyethylene packages to ensure dosimeter integrity. TLD packages were placed in open webbed plastic holders and attached to supporting structures, such as utility poles.

Environmental TLD locations are shown in Section 3.3 on Figures 3.3-2 and 3.3-3.

l l

l l

l l

l l

3-12 I

3.2 ANALYSES PERFORMED '

s i

The mapity of environmental sample analyses are performed by the James A.

i FitzPatrick Environmental Laboratory (JAFEL). Tritium and surface water I-131 analysis were performed by Teledyne Brown Engineering Environmental Services.

The following samples are analyzed at the JAFEL

l o Air Particulate Filter - gross beta 1

o Air Particulate Filter Composites - gamma spectral analysis 4

a l

o Airbome Radiciodine - gamma spectral analysis 1

J o Surface Water Monthly Composites - gamma spectral analysis t 4

j o Fish - gamma spectral analysis j o Shoreline Sediment - gamma spectral analysis 1

4

o Milk - gamma spectral analysis and I-131 j o Direct Radiation - Thermoluminescent Dosimeters (TLDs)

I o Special Samples (soil, food products, bottom sediment, etc.) - gamma spectral analysis  ;

i .

) Quality assurance samples are analyzed in-house and by Teledyne Brown

{ Engineering N.J. and Teledyne Brown Engineering Midwest.  !

i

\

l.

4 1 8

i j '

a l 4

8 3-13 i

i

3.3 SAMPLE LOCATION MAPS Section 3.3 includes maps illustrating sample locations. Sample locations referenced as letters and numbers on the report period data tables are consistent with designations plotted on the maps.

This section also contains an environmental sample location reference table (Table 3.3-1). This table contains the following information:

o Sample Medium o Location designation, (this column contains the key for the sample location and is consistent with the designation on the sample location maps and on the sample results data tables).

o Location description o Degrees and distance of the sample location from the site.

3.3.1 LIST OF FIGURES o Figure 3.3 New York State Map o Figure 3.3 Off-site Environmental Station and TI.D Location Map o Figure 3.3 On-site Environmental Station and TLD Location Map o Figure 3.3 Milk Animal Census, Milk Sample Location and Surface Water Sample Location Map o Figure 3.3 Nearest Resident, Food Product, Shoreline Sediment, Fish Sample Location Map 3-14 I

1 l

FIGURE 3.3-1 NEW YORK STATE MAP

-r - . - _. . ..an. ;#

ea d.w.",. ,A,--e y e s g4dd m-4 $.iy.

, ' es

,yau.. .

.e-+1,* sur og.s@.wJg,r.p.f.."gid,dh4.3'A"pMMWh g

,,..g . . g s.. .

,_.;!. .i ., . ' .-

%. ....t+. A s , _.w.m ,

6 '_,9 ' ^

g

^ /.#gg*

9.,' r 'w ~ e,.-

CANADA ' -

k 1

, .. a wd 7.h h

-e A

.. w . ' a+ur 4%

,-}'b r-e' fg' Iw.

4

' ' ' . ' . ' ' . - ^ .n

my*

4' i'.'-

r. *m' '-w +w'..w'<-

~

,.wc q,a, ,q,

. i ~ 3 7 . s.Y.w.,..

J- .

r. --. e. .<. . . = - p.s. . . . .

s-s,1..<

3( .s.e-(.- 4 '"48,' ' .W' k J. :P8.-4.rWu$ rted g8we,.4 .mits t,w

..b.,,5..,

,2

, g. .M[.

~

e

. w.h . a .a. , 1 .--

, .d .

~,m

-.g .

.- = . .4.ia.o.4kg.m . f-'evie. '***Mre,a

."V 4 e.- .wi.6 sg4.e.

6.*%.

,.8 k .g 4)

.->~

. y _.. _ :. - . = , . ,

NNEWzYORK= - . ,

-.$  :. 2 ,af .;, ._ x._ .~,. .

e u  %,.,- ernarmouese -

- . . L9 wen .

.+ ' -

w. . -;,.-.. - -

.7. .. ..

.g. r.. _ .. . . . - - . . -u..-

.m.

g~

. = .

. ~ . , ,

. ~, _ - . .

. ...g 4 -r4 w.

_ge+. _ . . - . ..,.

, , ,, ...,_.g....

..- - -.... ~e ,a 'i..~

m .

. A .. A en.w.

g t 3

. ' .t 4 . - . - . . .. .

4 .mv.-i

, , .,_ ,". _ , . _ . , ,-_.m_ -...n- . _.' ._*-

,a. . .- . , _ . - , s ..v 5 I a.

- _ .. ,_" .i - .- '.d,, _ . _ .

..._.. ..m., . _

...-.m -

--- g*

-.',l.-'

, -g.*d fe..,_

er i... e.,ae .st.,e, g4 da y.4 p.

,, i j ,

4,.

Arsggg._'3gi.g,.,4. .

, , s,it ._. _c...,.,i.e.

p, 3

7,-,ce,_._..--_.-_.q,

. ..~

. . W '

3-

_-j+4'.

p.,..... . -.- .g a,.,.. , . . ,

r

=

- , _ - . .r'. ~ ,,e,

_.....ya 6 ..

. ' , -.s, p.. ; , t , L .e.

_$( , <_. _i _- ~..,_...-g.+

,,t

, s , .

' l

.m ,

-._i.m.-

~

.-.~

n ...rurAmA ' a. L::_:1.h 1.' - i

,-, ... .~,

m..,.. . . . . . _. s. . A.-.,

)

Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 1 - y a, l 4 ds Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 2 #

James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant i

4 nie Janssy  ;

• - l NEW YOM CITY ~

v. \

I l

E.__.__. -

( 0

~

W 7

p

,~

/

O5WEGO COUNTY j gak{

New York J i

FIGURE 3.3-2 - - -- .

OFF-SITE ENVIRONMENTAL STATION -

AND TLD LOCATIONS T KEY:

LAKE

~ Y O ENVIRONMENTAL STATION 4 j

• ~ a.,

eTLDLOCATION ONTARIO e I. .

~

SCALE OF MILES *

• 3 u

~~ g EM EM M '*

=:=,

I' SM y $ "

,/ %_

C =r:fl' ~ "

=::=

Of *

,'~ ~.:.

3' J O '

fx

%- ._n.--.=:..

.. %s .,'T, W" m %%\

( ,., i ) b

/ ,,-

y )) ])? [c y)+ }% ) Q,Q spyw c ,_y"y* .q~ .4 m Mr "f  !> = .

. ~

sw oswEc ,,u gr-i ~ ' , d.r r. k s-* .an 1

-)M

r:  %- --

W  ! 7

-. y ""f g' ~,

If 'n .s_ ['"'1

- l - i e

_ t %"x gg i c '-<

'(

_. J .,.:- .

O> ~~ , . % -  ! *y8 ^

"6

),

. =9 .Gi }

U = - ):

z(r j' n

s cx: a,r . ,:,. -

y .,

m

'? 1 sI .y:~ J ft y '(e[mQs e; .:ag 8 g yL A A

~

e D' $.

__l L.

y Q

rf(%:i ((

~

r

=:::::,3 h K[hgM'*

o rw =. wn t..r;ns 4L _'}J}(- y

,,~w'

/ ). f f.p:' Q- y ao 3 g\

, - z

~% . N

-g N i, .. g.. J. g .wg%, , vx\.,sA \ ._ /. E g c 1

s .a, <.

s e~_ -

i '

1._

.. s _

r[= $ m g A1

]4[' r; r%h y .i p .l h  !

- - c; i,

, r,1 rk V;4g/ ) Q 3 =~ [

• L g Q

.I^O/ i

~ & g y"ls ,

m w by. b, . T=yl 7  ;=r ,7

,3 _.g .,g$A..-

"d b~N. S, ~q~p)!.'

h;/g.% _c- (.Em %L.=11.,"

__v , ~%d(s.%

esp %k _a, wq g g h 4

) /

h 2 .

J'kyD% h

- ,l y a g h, *.g'yfm m._

y, nf\$

a 9-3

• x f'c y f ij f l kg t -r- '

-a--/u ij %A. ,a 6 _.f.gr;--3s 2 2 m3 - g

,g. ,g 4 [n.

._ v s

_\4x_As y Q1 --q),"' c~ N-

,  % :k - f : . n -- _. ,.e.r

-fs% u_%,;_ _ I L ) N,[.= i:.;., <_"aN d ,,__( %Y

A 5*

e g

• %lf +

I rs . r:17pirarex i ' Powrra p v 4i;E SUNSET BAY

== C tw acy ccurca gga

*lk 2 70 *- - - - W- ,,,

, t;.,+- --- - --

jE----- - 90*

CENTER no -.

wremoorem - .

1. 114 l x i* .

" "I i 3 II rowen = p cyng's; -

1 41 l

i \ $

!'. c ' s ~r

• • 4  ! l 1 6 N, n gu[ .

/ ,

, [,[ !i 1 .

M yome

-m ,

l e/v s g cf ii .

l ',

/

/

. ThANSMI' SION

'INE

' h A !MOHAW j , /

g  !! o R '

l q  :

( ( <l E

'q g

/

g

1. e% .,

~

/

c a

a i AIN / .

d  %

ITCH . , I ARD l ' . , ,l '

j y ,4

' i 4 ii l $ / .

.. - 3 .

'suku/unux/un//xu/un//u/uu ',

~ i AN i!

11

, 1 i i h

FIGURE 3.3-3 d/  :: . l

I .

ON-SITE ENVIRONMENTAL STATION AND TLD LOCATIONS 4 5!

l h s

. . i ywo ao .

t ycm. 2 KEY: .:* I80* \

O ENVIR0 MENTAL STATION r

hTLDLOCATION .,

l

h,. -

O5WEGO COUNTY New York .w '-

j a.

FIGURE 3.3 4 lb' MILK ANIMAL CENSUS, MILK SAMPLE AND SURFACE WATER SAMPi.E LOCATIONS KEY-' v LAKE CMILKANIMALCENSUS ~

10mi'~~%

9MILKsAMPLE ONTAR/O OSURFACEWATER --

( 1

.mm . . m. _ .NEe

- . ~~.-.

• mm ., ,

".~;;- :.

--<o.,,,, g  %

s

==

J6 S4 7y  %

p"' ._ _ ___.

, T, .

g,d'y", Q J ') .-p.

y/ gi'; {$

ry b

- g .

Whex u,

u d.

v p. gs + ( + $ d y v es I . . .% ~4 ,4  % ee s WhyMpy f . M_ x s*5 s m _

c .m. s - %

00 * .--h

=. ..

'h.ll-.fk5iid

~

u l

h '

n

' s- i A ~?h pia j j+ .-N- Y9 W i

i  %.i N J

1. yft sw.5; h y n n.~n y a ;p'4- y,n=..j f f.,3% g St- yx=.p g{ n' .

a~ [1 m 4 .4%

.~ .-

'. i- ,

~ ..w

' e. -

4 ,

, +um. y>~7 ,@l f3,. .,

,a mM;9 er  :%~ .

=gr s s

' :=-

t kb k'

" ~

.. i g-[SW b $

\E h[ p}

bc  % , C[ji L p;p. p "' <

a- .u h.i_ awr m w. .

- v~ .

, 4 ' '3s

< r 2 ,  ;=/

p*ijj m..l ; +.. . .,

Li -

[fJ .7 ) .e 9,>-

T61

..J h '

3' g' i,

@e <r a

/ b >H %y , q

,1 3):~lg2, _ , V.b = p' _

c. x

.d$ '  %  %

w n.[

• YMr d %

\ t 4

, l.fWt M

f5 runob g_myr I-N D:j

( ,

e q3

- N, g

~ .- . ~, b -

)-c s- s

.,b w a:1 g a ,

.I

., (

h '""" q  ;

J

.t,.n; g g g

y.

g 5.g..p..3m m7 ~

Agm _.

9._

= ;. =~, %

. ,=j m, 1

,,c. ..

,[q,-

n d

s c i i

-- J ^

67)." ,

3,

'q, ffy I L=d%, k l T

m .h;

[ ; h- . ,g' x.

.M ~; .- .xqu x Y g: ',f...h.,!$:

gg- ,\,

\' 4 l-DEPARTMENT 01 FUSUC WORKS v =

mae or ;Q OSWEGO COUNTY New York _

FIGURE 3.3-5 .

f NEAREST RESIDENCE, FOOD PRODUCT, FISH AND SHORELINE SEDIMENT SAMPLE LOCATIONS ,

KEY: ORE,5IDENCE-NMP I, A K E OFISH gRESIDENCE-JAF

$ SHORELINE SEDIMENT

$FD0DPRODUCT g gr TARIO

..h

='--Q

.cau or mus

, . .s =: _ s, m..,,.

[ $.*** " '

u.m. m , g  %

j a s";,_, ._,,_.-

i ._7.z";.",l_%. e. .

c.

)% T, .

/

WSW

==

E"y. x s

y t

.yR$fl LWR osw oi. ;.. - ,4 1, i =9{ L

\-~ g Q

yAg% y&

4 2

,,,s

-agh- -

1

...-..e -L4 f ca.x ;,,y -1, , . i l4 j i . d -

-~

m r i =. m.- q 4 Q f.h % Q.s..p= b f$e- q JA 1

gg f

kk b b,k dy N f~~ f D as- i' ;g m/L>g. s, m a(

n "j1%e gm[*bh.1W%~~tQ'

..._.C - ' ~sI' J' Q d & hw %4 %jL

~~

~

f' 1j

• m

=

7 N J 4 4 5 d  % /

t"%[/*}

eg' e n 1 w a. ,>  ?  ; 3 {w s

g,.Tf 9

'p y .

e f!

4_, c .

3*- .g %ywqy4M_ A= .

e, -

+ .r2

~

f[m

\

a% [w T( t Q g-- j % C , c *i / 4 -), = a,E...vgS g ? W, a

%n m z 1s o.Nb._q  % y_s%

, A .;.r.

, _a.,t< s\ .,.)p .

pum.e t $- -

g.,

w s. ,

b-~ ~

{~.sly 4 A.m y .L.  : wart- ,

x T A $

&8 :,NNy3 e

-^ - (

f u fm

'\ w..

Ag 1 q_ \ \ y a l Le ;s s b. p r,! =%( . \1. J.,..,-Q -

.J N- ( \ ~f] g... . i 1

? c. % ._ , pu k,y;;) g

&,,- .,. n. ,M\,",-r~sQ m0 1 3_1. a_,. 2-u --- ) .

1

( " W*

.....w-  %- \ ,

.s.

g. -

u-.-

l,.g .

l

~

. C. - '

TABLE 3.3-1 ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS SAMPLE- LOCATION' ..

MEDIUM DESIGNATION LOCATION DESCRIPTION

• DEGREES?ANDTDISTANCECIE.

Shoreline 05* Sunset Bay 80 at 1.5 miles Sediment 06 Langs Beach. Control 230 at 5.8 miles Fish 02* Nine Mile Point Transect 315* at 0.3 miles 03* FitzPatrick Transect 55 at 0.6 miles 00* Oswego Transect 235* at 6.2 miles Surface Water 03* FitzPatrick Inlet 70 at 0.5 miles 08* Oswego Steam Station 235 at 7.6 miles 09 Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Inlet 302 at 0.3 miles w 10 Oswego City Water 235 at 7.8 miles g 11 Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Inlet 341 at 0.1 miles Air R-1* R-1 Station. Nine Mile Pt. Rd. 88 at 1.8 miles Radiciodine R-2* R-2 Station. Lake Road 104 at 1.1 miles and R-3* R-3 Station. Co. Rt. 29 132* at 1.5 miles Particulates R-4* R-4 Station. Co. Rt. 29 143 at 1.8 miles R-5* R-5 Station. Montario Point Rd. 42 at 16.4 miles D1 D1 On-site Station. On-site 69 at 1.5 miles D2 D2 Off-site Station. Co. Rt. 64 117 at 9.0 miles E E Off-site Station. Co. Rt. 4 160 at 7.2 miles F F Off-site Station. Dutch Ridge Rd. 190 at 7.7 miles G G On-site Station. On-site 250 at 0.7 miles H H On-site Station. On-site 70 at 0.8 miles I I On-site Station. On-site 98* at 0.8 miles J J On-site Station. On-site 110 at 0.9 miles K K On-site Station. On-site 132 at 0.5 miles G G Off-site Station. St. Paul St. 225 at 5.3 miles

• Technical Specification location (1) Based on Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Reactor Centerline

TABLE 3.3-1 (continued)

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS SAMPLE .. LOCATION

' LOCATION!DESCRIPTIONh . DEGREES AND DISTANCECl)l HEDIUM DESIGNATION' Thermo- 3 D1 On-site Station 69 at 0.2 miles luminescent 4 D2 On-site Station 140 at 0.4 miles Dosimeters 5 E On-site Station 175 at 0.4 miles (TLDs) 6 F On-site Station 210 at 0.5 miles 7* G On-site Station 250 at 0.7 miles 8 R-5 Off-site Station 42 at 16.4 miles 9 D1 Off-site Location 80 at 11.4 miles 10 D2 Off-site Location 117 at 9.0 mile; 11 E Off-site Location 160 at 7.2 miles 12 F Off-site Location 190 at 7.7 miles 13 G Off-site Location 225 at 5.3 miles 14* SW Oswego - Control 226 at 12.6 miles m 15* West Site Boundary 237 at 0.9 miles 6 18* Energy Information Center 265 at 0.4 miles

~

19 East Site Boundary 81 at 1.3 miles 23* H On-site Station. On-site 70 at 0.8 miles 24 I On-site Station. On-site 98 at 0.8 miles 25 J On-site Station. On-site 110 at 0.9 miles 26 K On-site Station. On-site 132 at 0.5 miles 27 North Fence. JAFNPP 60 at 0.4 miles 28 North Fence. JAFNPP 68 at 0.5 miles 29 North Fence. JAFNPP 65 at 0.5 miles 30 North Fence. JAFNPP 57* at 0.4 miles 31 North Fence. NMP-1 276 at 0.2 miles 39 North Fence. NMP-1 292 at 0.2 miles 47 North Fence. JAFNPP 69 at 0.6 miles 49* Phoenix NY - Control 170 at 19.8 miles 51 Oswego Steam Station. East 233 at 7.4 miles 52 Oswego Elementary School East 227 at 5.8 miles

• Technical Specification location (1) Based on Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Centerline

TABLE 3.3-1 (Continued)

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS SAMPLE  : LOCATIONT -.

MEDIUM' ' DESIGNATION' ILOCATION DESCRIPTIONI 2 DEGREES'ANDlDISTANCE(1)z: =

Thermo- 53 Fulton High School 183 at 13.7 miles luminescent 54 Mexico High School 115 at 9.3 miles Dosimeters 55 Pulaski Gas Substation Route 5 75 at 13.0 miles (TLDs) 56* New Haven Elementary School 123 at 5.3 miles 58* County Route 1 and Alcan 220 at 3.1 miles 75* North Fence, NMP-2 5 at 0.1 miles 76* North Fence NMP-2 25 at 0.1 miles 77* North Fence NMP-2 45 at 0.2 miles 78* East Boundary, JAFNPP 90 at 1.0 miles 79* County Route 29 115 at 1.1 miles 80* County Route 29 133 at 1.4 miles 81* Miner Road 159 at 1.6 miles u 82* Miner Road 181* at 1.6 miles 6

" 83* Lakeview Road 200 at 1.2 miles 84* Lakeview Road 225 at 1.1 miles 85* North Fence NMP-1 294 at 0.2 miles 86* North Fence. NMP-1 315 at 0.1 miles 87* North Fence NMP-1 341 at 0.1 miles 88* Hickory Grove Road 97 at 4.5 miles 89* Leavitt Road 111 at 4.1 miles 90* Route 104 and Keefe Road 135 at 4.2 miles 91* County Route 51A 156 at 4.8 miles 92* Maiden Lane Road 183 at 4.4 miles 93* County Route 53 205 at 4.4 miles 94* Co. Rt. 1 & Kocher Road (Co. Rt.63) 223 at 4.7 miles 95* Lakeshore Camp Site 237 at 4.1 miles 96* Creamery Road 199 at 3.6 miles 97* County Route 29 143* at 1.8 miles 98* Lake Road 101 at 1.2 miles

• Technical Specification location (1) Based on Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Centerline

l TABLE 3.3-1 (continued)

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS

~ SAMPLE- i LOCATION;- . . .

MEDIUM lDESIGNATIONf 1 LOCATION DESCRIPTION? iDEGREES 3ND DISTANCEU)1 Thermo- 99 Nine Mile Point Road 88 at 1.8 miles luminescent 100 County Route 29 and Lake Road 104 at 1.1 miles Dosimeters 101 County Route 29 132* at 1.5 miles (TLDs) 102 Oswego County Airport 175 at 11.9 miles 103 Energy Information Center, East 267 at 0.4 miles 104 Parkhurst Road 102 at 1.4 miles 105 Lakeview Road 198 at 1.4 miles 106 Shoreline Cove. East of NMP-1 274 at 0.3 miles 107 Shoreline Cove, East of NMP-1 272 at 0.3 miles 108 Lake Road 104 at 1.1 miles 109 Lake Road 103 at 1.1 miles 111 Sterling-Control 214 at 21.8 miles 112 Emergency Off-site Facility Env. Lab 179 at 11.9 miles m

A, 113 Baldwinsville-Control 170 at 24.7 miles Cows Milk 50 Indicator Location 93 at 9.1 miles 55 Indicator Location 95 at 9.0 miles 60 Indicator Location 90 at 9.5 miles 4 Indicator Location 113 at 7.8 miles 73* Control Location 234 at 13.2 miles K* Indicator Location 90 at 1.7 miles Food Products L Indicator Location 112 at 1.9 miles J Indicator Location 112 at 1.9 miles S Indicator Location 98 at 1.7 miles R* Indicator Location 100 at 1.9 miles M* Control Location 225 at 15.6 miles

• Technical Specification location (1) Based on Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Centerline

3.4 LAND USE CENSUS Technical Specifications require that a milch animal census and a residence census be conducted armually.

The milch animal census is an estimation of the number of cows and goats within an approxunate ten mile radius of the Nine Mile Point site. The census is done once per year in the summer. It is conducted by sending questionnaires to previous milch animal owners, and by road surveys to locate any possible new owners. In the event that questionnaires are not answered, the owners are contacted by telephone or in person. The Oswego County Cooperative Extension Service was also contacted to provide any additional information.

The residence census is conducted each year to identify the closest residence in each of the 22.5 degree meteorological sectors out to a distance of five miles. A residence, for the purposes of this census, is a residence that is occupied on a part time basis (such as a summer camp), or on a full time, year round basis. Several of the site meteorological sectors are over Lake Ontario, therefore. there are only eight sectors over land where residences are located within five miles.

In addition to the milch animal and residence census, a garden census is performed.

The census is conducted each year to identify the gardens near the site that are to be used for the collection of food product samples. The results of the garden census are not provided in this report. The results are used only to identify appropriate sample locations. The garden census is not required by the Technical Specifications if broadleaf vegetson sampling and analysis is performed.

3-24

l i

3.5 CIIANGES TO TIIE REMP PROGRAM 1

l 3.5.1 The following change was implemented during the 1996 sampling program.

l A. Food product location J was added to the program during 1996. This is a new location which was added due to its higher D/Q. Location J is an optional location that was added to provide for a sample from a l

second meteorological sector. i B. Food product location Q was not utilized by the sampling program during 1996 because of the higher disposition (D/Q) potential of other locations.

l l

3-25

3.6 DEVIATION AND EXCEPTIONS TO TIIE PROGRAM Exceptions to the 1996 sample program concem those samples or monitoring requirements which are required by the Technical SpeciHcations. This section addresses the reponing requirements of Section 6.1.a of the RETS.

The following are deviations from the program specined by the Technical Specifications:

A. Air radiciodine and particulate sampling required by the Technical Specifications o The air sampling pump at the R-4 off-site Environmental Sampling Station was inoperable for approximately 31 hours3.587963e-4 days <br />0.00861 hours <br />5.125661e-5 weeks <br />1.17955e-5 months <br />. The loss of power at the Environmental Air Sampling Station was the result of an electrical trip of the ground fault interrupter (GFI) circuit in the sampling station.

The air sample pump was out of service from 01/29/96 (06:00 hrs) to 01/30/96 (13:00 hrs). The GFI circuit breaker was replaced with a non-GFI circuit breaker.

o The air sampling pump at the R-5 off-site Environmental Sampling Station wes inoperable for approximately 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />. The loss of power at the Environmental Air Sampling Station was the result of a scheduled power outage by the local utility. The air sample pump was out of service from 08/20/96 (09:00 hrs) to 08/20/96 (12:00 hrs).

B. Direct Radiation Measurements i

o Thermoluminescent Dosimeter (TLD) No. 76 was found to be missing during the fourth quarter 1996 change-out. TLD No. 76 is located on the north security fence at Nine Mile Point Unit 2 (25 @ 0.1 miles).

TLD No. 76 is part of the Technical SpeciDeation TLD program. the lost TLD was the result of vandalism and was replaced.

No other Technical Speci6 cation program TLDs were lost during 1996. One optional TLD was found to be missing during the 1996 program. The occurrences of lost or missing TLD's during the 1996 program was minimal. Overall, 2 dosimeter sets l were lost during 1996 which is a recovery rate of greater than 99.3% in an effort l to reduce possible TLD losses, Niagara Mohawk procedure "TLD Preparation and Collection", S-ENVSP-4.1 was revised. S-ENVSP-4.1 now requires an inventory of the TLD set after collection. Tu change was implemented to ensure that TLD's are not lost during the collection process.

l 3-26

I 3.7 STATISTICAL METilODOLOGY ,

There are a number of statistical calculation methodologies used in evaluating the

• data from the environmental monitoring program. These methodologies include j

determination of standard deviation, the mean and associated error for the mean and the lower limit of detection (LLD).  :

3.7.1 ESTIMATION OF TIIE MEAN AND STANDARD DEVIATION The mean, (5), and standard deviation, (s), were used in the reduction of the data generated by the sampling and analysis of the various media in the i JAFNPP Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP). The  ;

following equations were utilized to compute the mean (i) and the standard deviation (s): i A. Mean n

__X=. X'.

i=1 N

where, S = estimate of the mean.

i = individual sample, i.

N, n = total number of samples with positive indications.

Xi = value for sample i above the lower limit of detection.

B. Standard Deviation 1/2 n

s_

{ (X; - X)2 t=1 (N-1) 3-27 w

where, X = mean for the values of X s = standard deviation for the sample population.

3.7.2 ESTIMATION OF TIIE MEAN AND TIIE ESTIMATED ERROR FOR TIIE MEAN In accordance with program policy, two recounts of samples are performed when the initial count indicates the presence of a plant related radionuclide(s). When a radionuclide is positively identified in two or more counts, the analytical result for the radionuclide is reported as the mean of the positive detections and the associated propagated error for that mean.

In cases where more than one positive sample result is available, the mean of the sample results and the estimated error for the mean are reported in the Annual Report.

The following equations were utilized to estimate the mean (5) and the associated propagated error.

l \

A. Mean  :

n ,

b X=i=1 X'.

l l

N where, S = estimate of the mean.

l i = individual sample, i.

N,n = total number of samples with positive indications.

X, = value for sample i above the lower limit of detection, i

l 3-28 ,

1 4 - r-

l l

l i

13. Error of the Mean (Reference 18) )

\

\

i l/2 n

ERROR MEAN = {

i =1 (ERROR)2 N

where, l l

ERROR MEAN = prepagated error 1 i = individual sample ERROR = 1 sigma

• error of the individual analysis N, n = number of samples with positive indications l

• Sigma (c)

Sigma is the greek letter used to represent the mathematical term Standard Deviation.

Standard Deviation is a measure of dispersion from the arithmetic mean of a set of numbers. l l

l l

I 3-29

3.7.3 LOWER LIMIT OF DETECTION (LLD)

The LLD is the predetermined concentration or activity level used to establish a detection limit for the analytical procedures.

The LLDs are specified by the Technical Specifications for radionuclides in specific media and are determined by taking into account the overall measurement methods. The equation used to calculate the LLD is:

i 4.66 s,  ;

LLD = l (E) (V) (2.22) (Y) exp (-Aat)  !

Where:

LLD is the a priori lower limit of detection, as defined above (in picocurie per unit mass or volume); l s3 is the standard deviation of the background counting rate or of the ,

counting rate of a blank sample, as appropriate (in counts per minute);

i E is the counting efficiency (in counts per disintegration); '

i V is the sample size (in units of mass or volume);

f i

2.22 is the number of disintegrations per minute per picoeurie;  !

I Y is the fractional radiochemical yield (when applicable);

l l

X is the radioactive decay constant for the particular radionuclide;  !

At is the elapsed time between sample collection (or end of the sample l collection period) and time of counting. l l

3-30 i

l The RETS LLD formula assumes that:

o The counting times for the sample and background are equal.

o The count rate of the background is approximately equal to the count rate of the sample.

In the RETS program, LLDs are used to ensure that minimum acceptable detection capabilities are met with specified statistical confidence levels (95% detection probability with 5% probability of falsely concluding that a blank observation represents a "real" signal). Table 3.8-1 lists the RETS program required LLDs for specific media and radionuclides as specified by the NRC. The LLDs actually achieved are routinely much lower than those specified by the RETS.

i I

3-31

3.8 COMPLIANCE WITII REQUIRED LOWER LIMITS OF DETECTION (LLD)

Table 6.1-3 of the Radiological Effluent Technical Specification (RETS) specifies j I

the detection capabilities for environmental sample analysis (see Report Table 3.8-1).

Section 7.3.d of the RETS requires that a discussion of all analyses for which the required LLDs specified were not routinely achieved be included in the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report. Section 3.8 is provided pursuant to this requirement.

3.8.1 All sample analyses performed in 1996, required by the IGTS, achieved the Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) specified by RETS Table 6.1-3.

l l

F 1

I i

I 3-32

TABLE 3.8-1 REQUIRED DETECTION CAPABILITIES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE ANALYSIS LOWER LIMIT OF DETECTION (LLD)  ;

i Water Airborne Particulate Fish Milk Food Products Sediment  !

Analysis (pCi/l) or Gases (pCi/m ) (pCi/kg wet) (pCi/1) (pCi/kg, wet) (pCi/kg, dry) I gross beta 4 0.01 i i

H-3 3,000 Mn-54 15 130 I Fe-59 30 260 l Y  !

O Co-58.60 15 130 ,

3 Zn-65 30 260 t

Zr/Nb-95 15 I-131 15(o) 0.07 1 60 ,

t Cs-134 15 0.05 130 15 60 150 t Cs-137 18 0.06 150 18 80 180 l Ba/La-140 15 15 l

l (a) No drinking water pathway exists at the Nine Mile Point Site under normal operating conditions due to the

direction and distance of the nearest drinking water intake. Therefore, an LLD value of 15 pCi/ liter is used.

i t

- . . - . - . - ~ - - . - . _ - . .-.

l 4.0 SAMPLE

SUMMARY

TABLES IN BRANCH TECIINICAL POSITION FORMAT All sample data is summarized in table form. The tables are titled " Radiological Monitoring Program Annual Summary" and use the following format as specified in the NRC Branch Technical Position:

Column 1 Sample medium. I 2 Type and number of analyses perfonned.

3 Required Lower Limits of Detection (LLD), see Section 3.8, Table 3.8-1.

This' wording indicates that inclusive data is based on 4.66 s (sigma) of background (see Section 3.7).

4 The mean and range of the positive measured values of the indicator locations.

l 5 The mean, range, and location of the highest indicator annual mean.  ;

Location designations are keyed to Table 3.3-1 in Section 3.3.

6 The mean and range of the positive measured values of the control locations.

7 The number of nonroutine reports sent to the Nuclear Regulatory Conunission.

I NOTE: Only positive measured values are used in statistical calculations.

4-1

RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-333 OSWEGO COUNTY, STATE OF NEW YORK JANUARY - DECEMBER 1996 Location (b) cf Control Type and Indicator Locations: Highest Annual Mean: Locacion: Number.cf Medium Number of .

Mean fa) Locations E. Mean fa)' M_33n fa) Nonroutine (units) Analysis . LLD Range Designation Range. Range Reports.:

Surface H-3 (8) : 3000 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 (Lake) Water (pCi/ liter) GSA (24):

Mn-54 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 Fe-59 30 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 Co-58 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 Co-60 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 Zh-65 30 <LLD <LLD <LLD U Zr-95 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 Nb-95 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 I-131 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 Cs-134 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 Cs-137 18 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 Ba/La-140 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0

y RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

l JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-333 OSWEGO COUNTY, STATE OF NEW YORK JANUARY - DECEMBER 1996 Location (b) of Control Type and Indicator Locations: Highest Annual Means Location: Number of Medium Ntamber of j Mean - (a). Locations & Mean (a) Mean (a) Nonroutine Analysis LLD '

Range. Designation Range Range Reports (units)

Shoreline ggg (4 ) ,

! Sediment (PCi/g-dry) 0.15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 Ca-134 0.16 (2/2) No. 5 0.16 (2/2) <LLD 0 Cs-137 0.18 0.15 - 0.17 1.5 0 80' O.15 - 0.17

^ *

/g-wet)

^ <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 Mn-54 0.13 3

<LLD <LLD <LLD 0 Fe-59 0.26

<LLD <LLD <LLD 0 Co-58 0.13

<LLD <LLD 0 Co-60 0.13 <LLD

<LLD <LLD 0 Zn-65 0.26 <LLD

<LLD <LLD 0 Cs-134 0.13 <LLD (2/9) 0.020 (2/9) 0 Cs-137 0.15 0.020 (2/18) No. 02 0.020 0.016 - 0.025 0.3 0 315' O.016 - 0.025 0.018-0.022 r ucts

<LLD <LLD 0 (PCi/g-wet) I-131 0.06 <LLD

<LLD <LLD <LLD. O Cs-134 0.06

<LLD <LLD 0 Cs-137 0.08 <LLD

RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-333 OSWEGO COUNTY, STATE OF NEW YORK JANUARY - DECEMBER 1996 Location (b) of Control Type and Indicator Locations: Highest Annual Mean: Location: Number of Medium Ntumber of Mean (a) Locations & Mean f al . Mean (a) Nonroutine (units) Analysis LLD Range Designation Range Range Reports Milk (f) GSA (90):

(pci/ liter)

Cs-134 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 Cs-137 18 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 b Ba/La-140 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 I-131(90): 1 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0

l RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

l JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-333 OSWEGO COUNTY, STATE OF NEW YORK JANUARY - DECEMBER 1996 i

Location (b) of Control Type and Indicator Locations: Highest Annual Mean: Location: Number of' Medium Number of Mean (a) Locations & Mean (a)_ Mean - (a) Nonroutine Analysis LLD Range Designation Range Range Reports (units)

G.B. (2 60) : 0.01 0.013 (208/208) R-1 0.013 (52/52) 0.014 (52/52) O

( Air 0.008 - 0.023 Particulate 0.006 - 0.025 1.8 @ 88* 0.007 - 0.025 and <LLD 0 Radiciodine I-131(260): 0.07 <LLD <LLD (d)

(pci/m')

GSA (60):

A dn 0 0.05 <LLD <LLD <LLD Cs-134 t

<LLD <LLD 0 Cs-137 0.06 <LLD TLD Gamma 4.2 (8/8) 0 i 4.7 (119/119) (c) No. 85 8.0 (4/4) (e)

(mrem per Dose (127): N/A 7.1 - 9.0 3.4 - 5.6 standard 3.2 - 9.1 0.2 @ 294*

month) t

ANNUAL StHiARY TABLE NOTES

• =

Data for the Annual Summary Tables is based on RETS required sampics only.

N/A = Not applicable.

(a) =

Fraction of detectable measurement to total measurement.

(b) =

Location is distance in miles, and direction in compass degrees. Location numbers keyed to Table 3.3-1 and results table location designation numbers.

(c) = Indicator TLD locations are: #7, 23, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93,

$ 94,95,96,97,98,15,18. 56, and 58. Control TLDs are all TLDs located beyond the influence of the site

(#14, 49).

(d) = Indicator samples from environmental stations R1 off-site, R2 off-site, R3 off-site, and R4 off-site.

Control samples are samples from R5 off-site environmental station.

(c) = This dose is not representative of doses to a member of the public since this area is located near the north I shoreline which is in close proximity to the generating facility and is not accessible to members of the public (see Section 5.2.4, TLDs).

(f) = The RETS criteria for indicator milk sample locations includes locations within 5.0 miles of the site.

There are no milk sample locations within 5.0 miles of the site. Therefore, milk samples are collected from locations greater than 5,d miles from the site based on the location D/Q values.

i 5.0 DATA EVALUATION AND DISCUSSION A. Introduction Each year the results of the Annual Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program are evaluated considering natural processes in the environment and the collection of past environmental radiological data. A number of factors are  !

considered in the course of evaluating and interpreting the Annual Environmental Radiological Data. This interpretation can be made using several methods including trend analysis, population dose estimates, risk estimates to the general population based on significance of environmental concentrations, effectiveness of plant emuent controls and specific research areas. The report not only presents the data collected during the 1996 sample program but also assesses the significance of radionuclides detected in the environment. It is important to note that detection of a radionuclide is not, of itself, an indication of environmental significance. Evaluation of the impact of the radionuclide in terms of potential increased dose to man, in relation to natural background, is necessary to deterrnine the true significance of any detection.

B. Units of Measure Some of the units of measure used in this report are explained below.

Radioactivin' is the number of atoms in a material that decay per unit of time.

Each time an atom decays, radiation is emitted. The curie (Ci) is the unit used to describe the activity of a material and indicates the rate at which the atoms are decaying. One curie of activity indicates the decay of 37 billion atoms per second.

Smaller units of the curie are used in this report. Two common units are the microcurie ( Ci), one millionth of a curie, and the picocurie (pCi), one trillionth of a curie. The picoeurie is the unit of radiation that is most used in j this report. The mass, or weight, of radioactive material which would result in one curie of activity depends on the disintegration rate. For example, one gram of radium-226 contains one curie of activity, but it would require about 1.5 million grams of natural uranium to equal one curie. Radium-226 is more radioactive than natural uranium on a weight or mass basis. l l

5-1

C. Dose / Dose to Man The dose or dose equivalent, simply put, is the amount of ionizing energy deposited or absorbed in living tissue. The amount of energy deposited or ionization caused is dependent on the type of radiation. For example, alpha radiation can cause dense localized ionization that can be up to 20 times the amount ofionization for the same energy imparted as from gamma or x-rays.

Therefore, a quality factor must be applied to account for the difTerent ionizing capabilities of various types of radiation. When the quality factor is multiplied by the absorbed dose, the result is the dose equivalent which is an estimate of the possible biological damage resulting from exposure to any type ofionizing radiation. The dose equivalent is measured in rem (roentgen equivalent man).

In terms of environmental radiation, the rem is a large unit. Therefore, a smaller unit, the millirem (mrem) is often used. One millirem is equal to 1/1000 of a rem.

The dose to man refers to the dose or dose equivalent that is received by members of the general public at or beyond the site boundary. The dose is calculated based on measured concentrations of radioactive material measured in the environment. The primary pathways that contribute to the dose to man are the inhalation pathway, the ingestion pathway and direct radiation.

D. Discussion There are four separate groups of radionuclides that were measured in the environment in the media analyzed for the 1996 sampling program. The first of these groups consists of those radionuclides that are naturally occurring.

The environment contains a significant inventory of naturally occuning radioactive elements. The components of natural or background radiation include the decay of radioactive elements in the earth's crust, a steady stream ofhigh-energy particles from space called cosmic radiation, naturally-occurring radioactive isotopes in the human body like potassium-40, medical procedures, man-made phosphate fertilizers (phosphates and uranium are ollen found together in nature), and even household items like televisions. In the United States, a person's average annual exposure from background radiation is 360 mrem, as illustrated on the following Background Radiation Chart.

5-2 l

Background Radiation l l

l l

1 ALL SOURCES MAN MADE j RADIATION EXPOSURE SOURCES l 360 mrem /yr l MEDICAL X RAYS 11%

RADON 65%

INTERNAL s m, y EMITTER $ 11%

TERRESTIAL s%

NUCLEAR MEDICINE 4%

ODUCTS3%

COSMIC 8%

m e== se em o a.

Pe==== w t=== seie= o==si N MAN-MADE 18%

Olher d 1%

ww.mase ha is o se en yf ,,,,,, ;,';

, i Many radionuclides are present in the environment due to sources such as cosmic radiation and fallout from nuclear weapons testing. These radionuclides  !

are expected to be present in many of the environmental samples collected in the vicinity of the Nine Mile Point Site. Some of the radionuclides normally present include:

i o tritium, present as a result of the interaction of cosmic radiation with the upper atmosphere.

o beryllium-7, present as a result of the interaction of cosmic radiation with the upper atmosphere.

o potassium-40, radium-226, naturally occurring radionuclide normally found in humans and throughout the environment, and  ;

o fallout radionuclides from nuclear weapons testing, including tritium,  !

l cesium-137, strontium-89, and strontium-90. These radionuclides may also be released in minute amounts from the nuclear facilities.

1 5-3 1

l 1

Beryllium-7 and potassium-40 are especially common in REMP samples.

Since they are naturally occurring and are abundant, positive results for these radionuclides are discussed in some cases in Section 5.0 of this repon. The data on primary naturally occurring radionuclides are included in Section 6.0, Results Tables. Comparisons of program samples to natural background radiation are made throughout this section to help put program results into perspective and to aid the reader in determining what, if any, significant impact is demonstrated by the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) results.

The second group of radionuclides that were detected are a result of the detonation of thermonuclear devices in the earth's atmosphere. Atmospheric nuclear testing during the early 1950s produced a measurable inventory of radionuclides presently found in the lower atmosphere as well as in ecological systems. In 1963 an Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty was signed. Since the treaty, the global inventory of man-made radioactivity in the environment has been greatly reduced through the decay of shon lived radionuclides and the removal of radionuclides from the food chain by such natural processes as weathering and sedimentation. This process is referred to in this report as ecological cycling. Since 1963, several atmospheric weapons tests have been conducted by the People's Republic of China. In each case, the usual radionuclides associated with nuclear detonations were detected for several months following the test and then after a peak detection period, diminished to a point where most could not be detected. Although reduced in frequency, atmospheric testing continued into the 1980's. The resulting fallout or deposition from these most recent tests has influenced the background radiation in the vicinity of the site and was evident in many of the sample media analyzed over the years. The highest concentrations were noted in samples collected for the 1981 Environmental Surveillance Program. Cs-137 was the major byproduct of this testing and is still detected in a number of environmental media.

A third group of radionuclides was detected as a result of the Chemobyl accident which occurred in the Soviet Union in April 1986. The resulting fallout or deposition from this accident influenced the background radiation in the vicinity of the site and was easily detected in many of the sample media 5-4

I l

l analyzed during 1986. Quantities of Nb-95, Ru-103, Ru-106,1-131, La-140, Cs-134, and Cs-137 were detected in air particulate samples during May and June of 1986. Milk samples collected and analyzed after April,1986 contained measurable concentrations of I-131 and Cs-137. The presence of these radionuclides was a direct result of fallout from the Chemobyl accident.

The fourth group of radionuclides that may be detected in the environment are those that are related to nuclear power technology. These radionuclides are the byproduct of the operation of light water reactors. These byproduct radionuclides are the same as those produced in atmospheric weapons testing and found in the Chemobyl fallout. This commonality makes an evaluation of the source of these radionuclides that may be detected in environmental samples difficult to determine. During 1996,11-3 and Cs-137 were the only potentially plant-related radionuclides detected in the RETS samples. l A number of factors most be considered in performing radiological sample data evaluation and interpretation. The evaluation is made at several levels including trend analysis and dose to man. An attempt has been made not only to report the data collected during 1996, but also to assess the significance of the radionuclides detected in the environment as compared to natural and other man-made radiation sources. It is important to note that detected concentrations of radionuclides in the local environment, resulting from mans technology, are very small and are of no or little significance from an environmental or dose to man perspective.

The 1987 per capita dose was determined to be 360 mrem per year from all sources, as noted in NCRP Report No. 93 (Reference 17), This average dose includes such exposure sources as natural radiation, occupational exposure, weapons testing, consumer products and nuclear medicine. The 1987 per capita dose rate due to natural sources was 300 mrem per year. The per capita radiation dose from nuclear power production nation wide is less than one mrem per year (Reference 10).

l The natural background gamma radiation in the environs of the Nine Mile 1

l Point Site, resulting from radionuclides in the atmosphere and in the ground, i

accounts for approximately 60 - 65 mrem per year. This dose is a result of 5-5

l i

radionuclides of cosmic origin (for example, Be-7), of a primordial origin (Ra-226, K-40, and Th-232) and, to a much smaller extent, of a man-made origin from weapons testing. A dose of 60 mrem per year, as a background dose, is significantly greater than any possible doses as a result of routine operations at the site during 1996.

The results for each sample medium are discussed in detail in Section 5.0.

This includes a summary of the results, the estimated environmental impact, ,

i a detailed review of any relevant detections with a dose to man estimate where appropriate, and an analysis of possible long term and short term trends.

In the routine implementation of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, additional or optional environmental pathway media are sampled and analyzed. These samples are obtained to monitor the secondary pathways and to maintain the analytical data base established in 1975 when the plant began commercial operation. These additional samples include; aquatic vegetation ,

(cladophora), bottom sediment, mollusk, milk (Sr-90), meat, poultry and soil samples. In addition to the optional sample media, additional locations are l sampled and analyzed for those pathways required by Technical Specifications.

These additional sample locations are obtained to ensure that a variety of environmental pathways are monitored in a comprehensive manner. Data from additional sample locations that are associated with the required Technical Specification sample media are included in the data presentation and evaluation. When additional locations are included, the use of this data will be specifically noted in Section 5.0.

Section 6.0 contains the analytical results for the sample media addressed in this report. Tables are provided for each required sample medium analyzed during the 1996 program.

Section 7.0, titled IUSTORICAL DATA, contains statistics from previous years environmental sampling. The process of determining the impact of plant operation on the environment includes the evaluation of past analytical data, to determine if trends are discernable. As state-of-the-art detection capabilities improve, data comparison is difficult in some cases. For example, Lower Limits of Detections (LLDs) have improved significantly since 1969 due to technological advances in laboratory procedures and analytical equipment.

5-6

5.1 AQUATIC PROGRAM The aquatic program consists of samples from three environmental pathways. These pathways are:

o Shoreline Sediment o Fish o Surface Waters Section 6.0, Tables 6.1 through 6.4 represent the analytical results for the aquatic samples collected for the 1996 sampling period.

l l

l 1

l 5-7 1

l 5.1.1 SilORELINE SEDIMENT RESULTS I A. Results Summary

)

l Shoreline sediment samples were obtained in April and October of 1996 at one off-site control location (near Oswego Harbor) and at one indicator location which is an area east of the site considered to have recreational value. A total of four sediment samples were collected for the 1996 sample program, two indicator and two control. Cs-137 was detected in the two samples taken at Sunset Beach which is the indicator location. The Cs-137 concentrations ranged from a minimum of 0.15 pCi/g to a maximum of 0.17 pCi/g. The mean concentration for the two samples was 0.16 pCi/g. Cs-137 was not detected at the control location during 1996, however, it has been detected intermittently in the past i (1979,1980,1982 and 1993). Historical Cs-137 concentrations at the I control location have ranged from 0.03 to 0.22 pCilg (dry). The source of the Cs-137 detected in the indicator shoreline sediment is considered f

to be the result of fallout from atmospheric nuclear weapons testing and j not from operations at the site. The mean concentration of Cs-137 i measured in the 1996 indicator samples is consistent with concentrations I from the previous five years (1991 - 1995) which ranged from 13 to 32  !

pCi/g (dry). The results for the 1996 control location were <LLD, No  !

other plant related radionuclides were detected in the 1996 shorehne sediment samples.

i The calculated potential whole body and skin doses which may result from the measured Cs-137 concentrations are extremely small and are i insignificant when compared to natural background doses.  !

i i

5-8 i l

J

B. Data Evaluation and Discussion Shoreline sediment samples are routinely collected twice per year from the shoreline of Lake Ontario. Samples are collected from one indicator location (Sunset Beach), and one control location (Lang's Beach). The first sample collection was made in April 1996 at both the indicator and control locations. The second shoreline sample collection was made in October 1996, again at both the indicator and the control locations. The results of these sample collections are presented in Section 6.0, Table 1.

Several radionuclides were detected in sediment samples using gamma spectral analysis.

In addition to Cs-137, three naturally occurring radionuclides were detected. K-40 was detected at both the control location and indicator location. The results ranged from 17.3 pCi/g (dry) to 18.4 pCi/g (dry) at the indicator location, and 15.6 pCi/g (dry) to 17.9 pCi/g (dry) at the control location. Concentrations of AcTh-228 and Ra-226, which are naturally occurring, were also detected at both indicator and control locations.

Cs-137 was detected in the indicator samples collected for the 1996 program. The mean concentration for these two samples was 0.16 pCi/g (dry). The presence of Cs-137 in the shoreline sediment is the result of atmospheric weapons testing. The primary source of the Cs-137 present in the environment is the atmospheric testing of nuclear weapons. Cs- ,

137 and C3-134 are both produced in fission reactors and were introduced into the environment from the accident at Chernobyl. Cs-137 l is found in weapons test fallout. Detected concentrations of Cs-137, which may be the result of plant operations (e.g., recent releases),  ;

should be accompanied by Cs-134 and other activation products (i.e., )

Co-60). An absence of such corroborating Cs-134 concentrations would indicate that the presence of Cs-137 in these samples is not distinguishable from the existing background and is attributed primarily j to weapons testing and resulting residual environmental concentrations. j This assessment is further substantiated by the presence of Cs-137 in the 1993 control sample and other environmental media. As noted in both current and historical data. l 59

1 1

l \

The absence of Cs-137 in the control samples is attributed to the differences in the sediment types between the two sample locations. )

Few shoreline regions west of the site contain fine sediment and/or sand which would be representative of the indicator location. It is difficult to obtain control samples which are comparable in physical and ,

chemical characteristics to the indicator samples. Other factors, which include changing lake level and shoreline erosion, further complicate attempts at consistency in shoreline sediment sampling. Recent soil I samples from locations beyond any expected influence from the site, have contained levels of Cs-137 equal to or greater than the concentrations found in 1996 shoreline sediment. The Cs-137 is commonly found in soil samples and is attributed to weapons testing fallout. Therefore, most shoreline samples containing soil or sediment would also contain Cs-137.

C. Dose Evaluation The radiological impact of Cs-137 measured in the shoreline sediment can be evaluated on the basis of dose to man. In the case of shoreline sediments, the critical pathway is direct radiation to the whole body and skin. Using the parameters provided in Regulatory Guide 1.109, the potential dose to man in mrem per year can be calculated. The following regulatory guide values were used in calculating the dose to man:

o A teenager spends 67 hours7.75463e-4 days <br />0.0186 hours <br />1.107804e-4 weeks <br />2.54935e-5 months <br /> per year at the beach area or on the shoreline.

o The sediment has a mass of 40 kg/m2 (dry) to a depth of 2.5 cm.

o The shoreline width factor is 0.3.

o The maximum measured concentration of 0.17 pCi/g (dry) remains constant for the year.

Using these conservative parameters, the potential dose to the maximum exposed individual (teenager) would be 0.0006 mrem / year to the whole body and 0.0007 mrem / year to the skin. This calculated dose is very 5-10

small and is insignincant when compared to the natural background annual exposure of approximately 60 mrem.

D. Data Trends The average Cs-137 concentrations in the shoreline sediment indicator samples for 1996 was 0.16 pCi/g, which is lower then the concentrations measured in 1989 - 1990 and 1993 - 1994. The mean values for 1989 -

1990 were both 0.29 pCi/g. The mean concentrations measured in 1993 and 1994 were 0.32 pCi/g and 0.22 pCi/g respectively.

The presence of Cs-137 in the 1993 control sample was the first positive measurement at the control location since sediment sampling was implemented in 1985. Cs-137 was not detected in the control sample in the 1996 samples.

A review of indicator and control sample results for 1985 - 1988 indicate only naturally occurring radionuclides present in shoreline sediment. The period from 1989 - 1996 shows the presence of Cs-137 in the indicator samples. The five year data base shows an emergence of Cs-137 concentrations in 1989 which continues through 1996. The trend since 1989 shows a reduction in Cs-137 concentrations over the four year period to the concentration of 0.13 pCi/g measured in 1992.

The 1993 sample showed an increase in Cs-137 concentration to 0.32 pCi/g followed by a reduction in concentration to 0.22 pCi/g in 1994 and a further reduction in 1995 to 0.15 pCi/g. The overall five year trend for Cs-137 concentrations in shoreline sediment is steady with the small variations in concentrations from year to year attributable to statistical and sample variations. The concentrations in Cs-137 in the sediment samples are consistent with other sample locations in New York State sampled and analyzed by the New York State Depanment of Health (Reference 19).

Shoreline sediment sampling commenced in 1985. Prior to 1985, no data was available for long term trend analysis.

Tables 1 and 2 in Section 7.0 illustrate historical environmental data for shoreline sediment samples.

5-11

5.1.2 FISII SAMPLE RESULTS A. Results Summary A total of 30 fish samples were collected for the 1996 sample program.

Analysis of the 1996 fish samples showed detectable concentrations of radionuclides related to past weapons testing and natural origins (naturally occurring). With exception of 1995, the 1996 mean results (control and indication combined) are the lowest measured concentration of Cs-137 measured in fish since operation of the FitzPatrick Plant began in 1976. Small concentrations of Cs-137 were detected in approximately 13% of the total fish samples collected from both the on-site and off-site locations. This percentage is down from the previous year which had positive detections in 19% and down significantly from 1994 when 37% of the samples showed Cs-137 concentrations. The ratio of samples having positive detections to total samples collected was higher for the control samples (20%) than for the indicator samples (10%). Detectable concentrations of K-40, a naturally occurring radionuclide, were found in all fish samples collected for the 1996 program. No other radionuclides were detected in the 1996 fish samples.

The detectable levels of Cs-137 in the fish samples are small. The control and indicator mean concentration values were equal at 0.02 pCi/g. These low levels of Cs-137 represent no significant dose to man or impact on the environment. As noted above, the measured concentrations of Cs-137 in the fish samples are the result of fallout from past weapons testing. Comparable concentrations of Cs-137 are routinely found in samples of ener aquatic media such as shoreline sediment, bottom sediment and aquatic vegetation. The potential whole body and critical organ doses calculated as a result of fish consumption by humans are extremely small. The dose that could result from the Cs-137 in fish is considered background exposure because of the sources of the Cs-137.

The fish sample results demonstrate that plant operations at the Nine Mile Point Site have no measurable radiological environmental impact on the upper levels of the Lake Ontario food chain. The 1996 results 5-12

continue to show a long term downward trend in fish Cs-137 concentrations with concentrations stabilizing over the last 9 - 10 years.

The mean indicator Cs-137 concentration for 1994,1995 and 1996 were the lowest measured concentrations since the beginning of the surveillance program 20 years ago (1974).

B. Data Evaluation and Discussion Fish collections were made utilizing gill nets at one location greater than five miles from the site (Oswego liarbor area), and at two locations in tl'e vicinity of the lake discharges for the Nine Mile Point Unit #1 (#02),

and the James A. FitzPatrick (#03) generating facilities. The Oswego Ilarbor samples serted as control samples while the NMP (#02) and JAF (#03) samples served as indicator samples. All samples were analyzed for gamma emitters. Table 6-2 shows individual results for all the samples in units of pCi/g (wet).

The spring fish collection was made up of twelve individual samples

)

representing four separate species. Lake trout, white sucker, smallmouth bass and brown trout were collected from all three sample locations. l The total fall fish collection was comprised of eighteen individual samples representing six individual species. Brown trout, smallmouth bass, lake trout, white sucker, walleye and salmon samples were collected at the indicator sampling locations (NMP and JAF). At the control location (Oswego liarbor), white sucker, brown trout, lake trout, chinook salmon and smallmouth bass were collected.

Cs-137 was not detected in any of the eight indicator samples collected during the spring. Cs-137 was detected in one sample of lake trout collected from the control location with a measured concentration of 0.014 pCi/g (wet). l 5-13

i I

In the fall collection, Cs-137 was detected in three of the eighteen samples collected from both the control (1 of 6 samples) and indicator )

(2 of 12 samples) locations. Control samples showed a mean Cs-137 concentration that was slightly higher than the indicator sample mean.

The mean annual concentrations for both the indicator and control results were equal at 0.02 pCi/g (wet). The Cs-137 concentrations at the indicator locations ranged from 0.016 to 0.025 pCi/g (wet) and the control samples single detection was 0.022 pCi/g (wet).

The following graph presents the average Cs-137 concentrations for the 4

fish species analyzed for 1996. Brown trout samples yielded the highest average Cs-137 concentration for the control location and smallmouth

)

bass samples yielded the highest Cs-137 concentration for the indicator location.

I l

l JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P.

FISH Cs.137 1996 0 83 3 INDICATOR DCONTROL e or

{...

< LLO. no positive cetectons LAME 1 ROUT SMAL M TE DROWN WALLE YE SALMON K-40 was detected in all of the spring and fall samples collected. K-40 is a naturally occurring radionuclide, and is not related to power plant

, operations. Ra-226, also naturally occurring, was found at varying levels at both the indicator and control locations. No other radionuclides were detected in the fish samples.

5-14

C. Dose Evaluation Some Lake Ontario fish species may be considered an important food source due to the local sport fishing industry. Therefore, these fish become an integral part of the human food chain. Based on the importance of fish in the local diet a conservative estimate of potential dose to man can be calculated. Assuming that an adult consu:nes 21.0 kg of fish per year and a teen consumes 16 kg of fish per year (Regulatory Guide 1.109 maximum exposed age group) and the fish consumed contains an average Cs-137 concentration of 0.02 pCi/g (wet)

(annual mean result for both indicator and control samples for 1996), the adult whole body dose received would be 0.03 mrem per year. The organ of interest for Cs-137 is the teen liver which would receive a calculated dose of 0.048 mrem per year. The Cs-137 whole body and organ doses are conservative potential doses associated with consuming fish species from the Nine Mile Point area which are represented by both the indicator and control samples. Due to the long half life of Cs-137, no radiological decay is assumed for the calculation of doses.

In summary, the potential whole body and organ doses observed as a result of consumption of fish are small. The dose to man received from both the indicator and control sample groups is considered to be background. The dose to man from operation of the plants at Nine Mile Point via the fish pathway is of no significance.

i 5-15

D. Data Trends l Results for the previous five years (1991 through 1995) have shown a consistently stable downward trend for Cs-137 levels in control and indicator samples. During the period of 1988 through 1993, control and indicator mean results were consistent with a small rise in 1990. The 1994 through 1996 results are the lowest Cs-137 concentrations measured over the 20 year existence of the sampling program. The graph below illustrates the mean Cs-137 concentrations for 1996 and 1990 through 1995.

JAMES A FITZPATR8CE kFf. j C-1 FW Co-taf VLM g.. _ I The long term trend shows that mean concentrations of Cs-137 for indicator samples has decreased from a maximum concentration of 1.4 pCi/g (wet) in 1976 to a minimum level of 0.019 pCi/g (wet) measured in 1994 and 1995. Control sample Cs-137 results have also decreased from a maximum level of 1.2 pCi/g (wet) in 1976 to a minimum level of 0.019 pCi/g (wet) in 1995. The 1996 concentrations showed a very small increase of 0.001 pCi/g (wet) over the 1995 results.

l 5-16

- - -u- ._>

l 1

The general decreasing long term trend for Cs-137, illustrated in the l graph below, is most probably a result of the cesium becoming unavailable to the ecosystem as it becomes tied up with soils and sediments and radiological decay. The concentrations of Cs-137 detected since 1976 in fish are a result of weapons testing fallout. The general downward trend in concentrations will continue as a function of additional ecological cycling and nuclear decay. There was no apparent effect from the 1986 C1ernobyl Nuclear Plant accident during 1986 relative to Cs-137 results in fish samples although an effect may have been detected during the period of 1987 through 1990 since both indicator and control location mean results increased slightly. ,

l Il JAMES A. FITZPATRicK N.P.P.

Fish Cs.137  !

to eINCkA b i aCONTROL 1

{ ..

, mE_Lsun.as= - ___

i i i i i i i iiIIIIIIIi!IIII!

m.

J The 1996 mean Cs-137 indicator concentration of 0.02 pCi/g (wet) shows a decrease in concentration from 1976 by a factor of 70. Control sample results have decreased from a maxirnum level of 1.2 pCi/g (wet) i m 1976 to a level of 0.02 pCi/g (wet) in 1996. Fish results for the 1996 l

control samples show a decrease in concentration by a factor of approximately 47 when compared to preoperational data (1974) and by a facter of about 60 compared to 1976.

1 5-17 l

Tables 7-3 and 7-4 in Section 7.0 show historical environmental sample data for fish. Full size reproductions of the fish result graphs are found .

in Section 8.0.

i i

1 5-18

1 l

l l

5.1.3 SURFACE WATER (LAKE)

A. Results Summary The Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications (IETS) require that monthly surface water samples be taken from the respective inlet water supply of the James A. FitzPatrick N.P.P. and Niagara Mohawk's Oswego Steam Station. In conjunction with the RETS samples, three additional Lake Ontario surface water locations are sampled and analyzed. These additional locations are the Oswego City Water Intake, the NMP Unit #1 Intake and the NMP Unit #2, Intake. Gamma spectral analysis was performed on 24 monthly composite samples from the IETS locations and on 36 monthly composite samples from the additional sample locations. The results of the gamma spectral analysis show that only naturally occurring radionuclides were detected in sampiec from the five locations (60 samples) collected for the 1996 Sampling Program. 'The two naturally occurring radionuclides are K-40 and Ra-226 and are not related to operations of the plant. Monthly composite samples show no presence or buildup of plant related gamma emitting isotopes in the waters of Lake Ontario as a result of the l operation of the plant.

Quarterly composite samples collected from the same locations are l analyzed for tritium. Twenty tritium samples were collected and analyzed in 1996, only one sample showed a positive tritium concentration. The 1996 annual mean tritium LLD concentration for the Oswego Steam Station inlet (control location) was <l85 pCi/1. There were no positive detections of tritium at the control sample location during 1996. Annual mean LLD concentration for the JAF inlet, which serves as the indicator location, was <l85 pCi/l as there were no positive detections of tritium at the .iAF sample location in 1996.

Tritium results for 1996 show only one positive detection of tritium at the Nine Mile Point sample location with z. sample result of 160 pCill.

Results of the twelve Nine Mile Point samples collected showed only one positive detection of tritium. Surface water sample results demonstrate that there is no measurable radiological impact on the surface waters of Lake Ontario from tritium concentrations based on the 5-19

I levels measured. The measured concentration for the Nine Mib Point sample was within the normal statistical variations for naturally l occurring tritium in surface water. The levels of tritium are routinely variable within the range of 200 - 500 pCi/1. The tritium results for 1996 are consistent with previously measured lake concentrations and resulted in fewer positive detections than in previous years.

l B. Data Evaluation and Discussion Gamma spectral analysis was performed on monthly composite samples from five Lake Ontario sampling locations. K-40 and Ra-226 were detected in samples from the five locations over the course of the 1996 sampling program. Both of these radionuclides are naturally occurring and are not plant related.

K-40 was detected consistently in both of the Technical Specification required intake canals. The James A. FitzPatrick inlet canal samples and Oswego Steam Station samples showed K-40 was detected in all l

twelve monthly samples. Ra-226 was also de'.ected intermittently in both locations required by Technical Specifications and at the other I

optional sample locations.

l Tritium samples are quarterly samples that are a composite of the appropriate monthly samples. Tritium was not detected in samples taken at the two locations required by Technical Specifications. Tritium concentration for The James A. FitzPatrick inlet canal samples showed LLD range of <l50 pCi/l to <230 pCi/1. The Technical Specification control location (Oswego Steam Station inlet canal) showed the same j range of LLD values.

Tritium was detected in one of the twelve optional lake samples taken.

The tritium results for this single sample was 160 pCi/ liter. The positive tritium concentrations were measured in the second quarter Nine Mile Point inlet canal.

Samples collected from the Oswego City water supply exhibit tritium concentrations in the range of <l50 pCi/l to <230 pCill.

5-20

A summary of tritium results for the 1996 sample program is listed

below

Sample Tritium Concentration pCi/ liter Location Minimum Maximum Mean (Annuall JAF Inlet <l50 <230 <l85 Oswego Steam Inlet <l50 <230 <185 NMP #1 Inlet <l50 1601100* 160i100*

NMP #2 Inlet <l50 <240 <188 City Water Intake <l50 <230 <185

• Single positive detection C. Dose Evaluation The Oswego Steam Station is considered a control location because of j its distance from the site and the influence oflake current patterns and current patterns from the Oswego River located nearby. The cunent l patterns distinguish the Oswego Steam Station intake and the near by i Oswego City water intake as an "up-current" sampling point and the JAFNPP inlet canal as a "down-current" sampling point. The Nine Mile Point Site is located such that it would not have a radiological impact i on Oswego drinking water supply. The Oswego City water intake is located west of the Oswego Steam Station inlet placing it upstream from the Nine Mile Point Site. The tritium concentrations measured in these upstream or control locations are representative of background levels present in Lake Ontario.

The radiological impact of background levels of tritium in water to i members of the public is insignificant. This can be illustrated by calculating a dose to the whole body and maximum organ. Using Regulatory Guide 1.109 methodology, ingestion of water (5101/yr) at the Nine Mile Point inlet sample location (160 pCi/l) would result in a dose of 0.017 mrem to the child whole body and 0.017 mrem to the child liver (critical age group / organ). Drinking water sampled in Oswego is drawn frorn Lake Ontario at a location more distant than the control location. Doses from tritium at this location would be 0.0192 mrem to the child whole body and 0.0192 mrem to the child liver based 5-21

I I

l on the LLD value of <l85 pCi/1. Doses received as a result of water ingestion are approximately the same regardless of the location. Doses l from all water sampled are considered background doses and are negligible compared to the 300 mrem annual dose considered to be I background.

D. Data Trends There are no data trends for gamma emitters such as Cs-137 and Co-60  !

as historically these radionuclides are not detected in lake water samples.

Tritium results for the 199619ke water samples were consistent with i results from the previous five years for both the indicator and control locations but showed fewer number of positive detections for tritium.

During the previous five year period the maximum indicator and control j concentrations were measured in 1990 and 1991 respectively. The mean l tritium concentrations for the period of 1990 - 1994 range from 188 pCi/l to 290 pCill for the control and 220 pCill to 310 pCi/l for the j indicator locations. The mean 1996 tritium concentrations for the  !

I control was <l85 pCi/l and <l85 pCi/l for the indicator. The 1996 data is consistent with results measured since 1990 with no distinct trend. l The results are consistent with normal background concentrations which l

will vary from year to year.

Mean tritium results of the control location (Oswego Steam Station) cannot be evaluated with regard to long term historical data since sampling was only initiated at this location in 1985.

Some idea of the variability of historical control sample data can be obtained by a review of previous data from the City of Oswego drinking water samples. These drinking water samples are likely to be representative of the current control location because of the effects of the distance, predominant lake currents, and the discharge of the Oswego River. The Oswego City water intake is located in the same vicinity as the Oswego Steam Station inlet though offshore. The maximum annual mean concentration of city water was found in 1976 (652 pCi/l) and the minimum in 1982 (165 pCill).

5-22

The following graph illustrates the concentrations of tritium measured in Lake Ontario over the past 22 years at both an indicator and control location.

JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P.

SURFACE WATER-TRfTIUM alNDICATOR 5

1976 1984: Oswego City water Control este em 19851995 : Oswego Steam Station Control one

~

i

• < nD see Powe=e Detecean

, I i

-l_

m. -

.m .m .m .n .a .- => . .- -. ..-m. . .- m. im Annual mean tritium results from previous city water samples from 1980 to 1996 show that the tritium concentrations have fluctuated over the years with no clear trend. The highest concentrations for the indicator location were detected in 1982 and 1985. Prior to 1996, the maximum annual mean concentration was found in 1982 (641 pCi/ liter) and the minimum in 1994 (220 pCi/ liter). Results for the period of 1982 through 1989 shows that the indicator samples were higher than the control samples. This trend reversed itselfin 1990 and retumed in 1991 through 1993. In 1996, the indicator location and control location showed less than detectable concentrations which are representative of the routine fluctuation measured in background tritium concentration.

l l

5-23

I l

5.2 TERRESTRIAL PROGRAM .

i The terrestrial program consists of samples from four environmental pathways. j These pathways are:  ;

l l 0 - Airborne particulate and radioiodine l o Direct radiation o Milk 1

o Food Products Tables 6-5 through 6-14 represent the analytical results for the terrestrial samples l 1 i

! collected for the 1996 reporting period.  !

i l

1 i

l l 1

1 l

l l

i 1

5-24

1 l

3 5.2.1 AIR PARTICULATEGROSS BETA -

a j A. Results Summary i

Weekly, air samples were collected and analyzed for gross beta i

' particulate activity. For the 1996 program, a total of 52 samples were collected from the control location R-5 and 208 samples were collected from the indicator locations R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4. These five locations are required by the Technical Specifications. Additional air sampling locations are maintained and discussed under Section 5.2.1.B below.  !

The mean concentration of the control location, R-5, was'0.014 pCi/m '

for 1996.

3 The mean concentration for the indicator locations was 0.013 ,

pCi/m for 1996. The mean indicator and control results are essentially j equal and clearly demonstrate that there are no increased airborne I radioactivity levels in the general vicinity of the site. These results are among the lowest mean gross beta concentrations measured to date smce  !

the inception of the site Environmental Monitoring Program in 1969.

The consistency of these low concentrctions over the past seven years i may indicate that the natural baseline gross beta activity has been  !

reached. It is possible that the manmade radionuclide contribution to  !

t the natural background from atmospheric weapons testing can no longer  !

t be detected above the background concentrations of naturally occurring '

beta emitting radionuclides.  ;

B. . Data Evaluation and Discussion  :

Ten air sampling locations are maintained in addition to those required  !

by the Technical Specifications. The air monitoring system consists of rix f on-site and nine off-site locations which are sampled weekly for gross (

beta particulate activity. A total of 780 analyses were performed. Five I of the nine off-site locations are required by Technical Specifications.

l These locations are R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 and R-5. R-5 is a control l location required by the Technical Specifications and is located beyond l any local influence from the site. In addition, optional off-site and on-site air sample locations are maintained from which weekly samples are collected. The optional off-site locations are designated as D-2, E, F, and G. The optional on-site locations are designated as D-1, G, H I, J and K.

5-25 1

l l

1 l

Gross beta analysis requires that the samples are counted no sooner than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> after collection. This allows for the decay of short half-life i naturally occurring radionuclides, therefore increasing the sensitivity of the analysis for plant related radionuclides.

Tables 6-5 and 6-6 in Section 6.0 present the weekly gross beta activity results for the off-site and on-site stations.

The average annual gross beta indicator concentrations for the indicator stations (R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4) was 0.013 pCi/m' The off-site station (R-5) annual mean concentration was 0.014 pCi/m2 . The minimum, maximum and average gross beta results for sample locations required by Technical Specifications were:

Concentration nCi/m 2  ;

Imcation* Minimum Maximum Average R-1 0.007 0.025 0.013 R-2 0.007 0.024 0.013 R-3 0.007 0.023 0.013 R-4 0.006 0.021 0.013 R-5 (control) 0.009 0.023 0.014

• Locations required by Technical Specifications 5-26 l

1

-_ . ._._ ~ ._ - - _ - ... . . - . - . . . . - . . - . . . . . . . _ - . . . - - - . _ . - . . - .

ustrated in the ap i belosv

__==- l

.u=~

,g, j , . . . . .... ,,..,, ,.,,,. .,,.....

.. ! = 3l = = "-

_._..s....

aCONTROL 5-27

l The small fluctuations observed in the gross beta activity over the year can be attributed to changes in the environment, especially seasonal changes. The concentrations of naturally occurring radionuclides in the lower levels of the atmosphere directly above land are affected by time related processes such as wind direction, precipitation, snow cover, soil temperature and soil moisture content.

Co Dose Evaluation Dose calculations are not performed based on gross beta concentrations.

Dose to man as a result of radioactivity in air is calculated using the specific radionuclide and the associated dose factor. See Section 5.2.2.C for dose calculations from air concentrations. The dose received by man from air gross beta concentration is a component of the natural background.

De Data Trends With the exception of the 1986 sample data, which was effected by the Chemobyl accident, the general trend in air particulate gross beta activity has been one of decreasing activity since 1981.

JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P.

AIR PARTICULATE b ILTER(.iROSS BETA

.m t.se .e peeguormaans Ones iff4 Pro _ _ Den k JM

, , . {sINDICATOR a CONTROL l l

4 -

l

.. _ _ _ l

. lEEE Enumannuma i i sisiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii 5-28

i The trend for the previous five years represents a base line concentration or natural background level for gross beta concentrations. This trend is '

very stable with minor fluctuations due to natural variations. The )

change in concentrations over the period of 1990 through 1996 is very small. This is illustrated by the following graph.

JAMES A. FITZPATRfCK N.P.P. i AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA l

1 :== l

.m

=i E E E s E g _

g _

g _

g _ -

5 s

N e

N a

5 a

5 s

3 a

a

. - 5 - 5 _ 5 _ 5 G _ 5 _ 5-M

=

3

=

5 a

5-

=

5

=

5 E

5

=

5 M M E = 5 E_

YEAR The air particulate gross beta indicator results for 1996 are a factor of l 24 less than the concentrations measured in 1969.1969 concentrations are considered to be preoperational results for the site. For the operational period of 1975 - 1996, the mean annual gross beta concentration at the control station (R-5) has decreased from a maximum concentration of 0.165 pCi/m2 in 1981 to a minimum of 0.012 pCi/m3 in 1992. The mean annual concentrations for the indicator stations for this same time period ranged from a maximum of 0.151 pCi/m' in 1981 to a minimum of 0.013 pCi/m' in 1992. For both the indicator stations and control stations, the gross beta concentration during 1974 to 1982 fluctuated as a result of fallout from the detonation of thermonuclear weapons in the atmosphere. The mean annual results for the years 1983,1984,1985,1987 and 1988 from both the indicator and control locations have been similar and ranged from 0.018 to 0.026 pCi/m'. This level of activity appears to be near baseline range. The 5-29

I l

2 1986 annual mean result was 0.039 pCi/m for both the indicator and control stations. This concentration is almost two times higher than 1983-1985 and 1987-1992 levels, and is attributed to fallout from the Chemobyl accident.

Historical data and graphic representations of air particulate gross beta activity are presented in Sections 7.0 and 8.0, respectively.

5-30 j

5.2.2 MONTIILY PARTICULATE COMPOSITES (GAMMA EMITTERS)

A. Results Summary ,

t i

No plant related radionuclides were detected in any of the air particulate Dlter samples collected from the required Technical SpeciHcations sampling locations. These stations are located near the site boundary i and off-site.  ;

The gamma analysis results for the monthly composite samples routinely  :

showed positive detections of Be-7, K-40, Ra-226, and AcTh-228. Each i of these radionuclides is naturally occurring.

Be-7 was detected in all the monthly composite samples for the  !

indicator and control locations. K-40, Ru-226 and AcTh-228 were l found intermittently in the monthly composite samples from all I locations.

B. Data Evaluation Discussion l

3 Ten additional air sampling locations are maintained in addition to the Sve required by Technical Specifications. Composite air Siter sampl;s are assembled for each of the fifteen sampling locations. Each of the j four weekly air particulate samples for the month are assembled by l location to form monthly composite samples. The monthly composite samples required by Technical Speci0 cations are R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, and R-5. Other sample locations not required by the Technical Specincations for which analytical results have been provided include six on-site locations and four off-site locations. The analytical results for all air particulate Elter composites in 1996 showed no detected levels of plant related radionuclides for the inhalation pathway. The results of all monthly composite samples are presented in Section 6.0, Table 6-9.

I i

5-31

J 1

l C. Dose Evaluation 1

The air paniculate sampling program demonstrated no off-site dose to man from this pathway as a result of operations of the plant. No plant I related radianuclides were detected at any of the sampling locations located at or beyond the site baundary. ,

)

D. Data Trends  ;

1 No plant related radionuclides were detected during 1996 at the off-site air monitoring locations.

The five year data base of air particulate composite analysis shows that l

there is no buildup or presence of plant related radionaclides in i paniculate form in the atmosphere around the site. Co-60 was detected in each of the years from 1977 through 1984 at both the indicator and control locations, with the exception of 1980 when Co-60 was not detected at the control location. The presence of Co-60 in the air samples collected during these years was the result of atmospheric weapons testing. The maximum yearly mean concentration detected during this period was in 1977 when the mean for the indicator results was 0.0179 pCi/m'. The mean control value for this same year was 0.0172 pCi/m'. The Co-60 in the air particulate samples trended downward during the 1977 through 1984 period to a low mean 2

concentration of 0.0008 pCi/m at the control location. Co-60 has not been detected in any of the required air particulate samples since 1985.

This general downward trend and eventual elimination of Co-60 in the air samples is illustrated in the following graph.

5-32

a k

JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P.

AJR PARTEULATE FETIR Ce4.

..i.

..e.

m W4DCATOR

~

.c m Trot a

4 I -

. J Am IE E 5 5 i i ii! l ! ! l ! ! ! l ! ! ! I i YEAR Historical data show that Cs-137 is the fission product radionuclide most frequently detected in the air particulate filter composites. Cs-137 was ,

detected in each of the years from 1977 through 1983 at both the contol  !

and indicator sampling locations. The maximum concentrations for this i i

period were measured in 1977 with a mean indicator concentration of 0.0043 pCi/m' and the corresponding control concentration of 0.0034 pCi/m'. After 1977, the Cs-137 concentration showed a reduction by a factor of approximately two and remained constant through 1981. In 1982, a second reduction in Cs-137 concentration was measured followed by a further reduction in concentration in 1983. Cs-137 was not detected during 1984 and 1985 in any of the indicator or control air particulate composite samples. l For the period,1986 to 1991, Cs-137 was detected only in 1986 due to l

the fallout from the Chemobyl accident. The 1986 mean concentration of Cs-137 for the control location was 0.0193 pCi/m 3. The mean 2

concentration of Cs-137 for the indicator location was 0.0183 pCi/m for the sample period. This overall reduction in Cs-137 results since 1977 5-33

is attributed to nuclear decay and ecological cycling of Cs-137 initially produced as a result of weapons testing. The decrease in air particulate Cs-137 concentrations since 1977 is clearly illustrated on the following graph of historical data.

JAMES A. RTZPATRICK N.P.P. l AIR PARTICULATE FILTER COMPOSITE C.-137

"-~ ~

. -tor

~

• LLO No Posewe Detecton , ggy gg g .., __

. 305 . , _ _ _ _ _ _ , __. _ . . _ -

.E5 - - - - - - , - - - - - - - - .

.- .- ,,,.,,,r.,......--

. $b b h ---

I E E i i I i i ! ! 1 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

In the 1986 samples, a number of other radionuclides were detected in addition to Cs-137. The isotopes, Zr-95, Ce-141, Nb-95, I-131, Cc-144, Mn-54, Ru-103, Ru-106, Ba-140 were all detected. These isotopes were measured in air particulate composite samples as a result of the fallout from the Chernobyl accident. After 1986, no plant related or fallout radionuclides were detected in any of the off-site air particulate composite samples. A review of the past five year's data for air particulate filter composites indicates no plant related radiological impact on the environment. All the historical positive detections of fission product radionuclides were associated with atmospheric weapons testing or the Chernobyl accident.

Current air particulate filter composite results cannot be compared to preoperational data as none exists prior to 1977.

5-34

IIistorical data for air particulate results are presented in Section 7.0, Tables 7-11 and 7-12. Full page graphic presentation of air particulate ,

composite Co-60 and Cs-137 concentrations are presented in Section 8.0.  !

i 5-35 r-- v 7

l l

5.2.3 AIRHORNE RADIOIODINE (I-131) q l

A. Results Summary [

l 1

Iodine 131 was not detected in any of the 780 samples analyzed for the .

1996 program. No radioiodine has been detected off-site since 1986 when measurable levels ofI-131 were found as a result of fallout from the Chemobyl accident.

H. Data Evaluation and Discussion Airbome radiciodine is monitored at the fifteen air sampling stations also used to collect air particulate samples. There are nine off-site I

locations, five of which are required by Technical Specifications. The off-site locations required by Technical Specifications are designated as R-1, R-2, R-3. R-4 and R-5. R-5 is a control station located beyond any local influence from the plant. Ten air sampling locations are maintained in addition to those required by Technical Specifications.

]

Six of these stations, D-1, G, H,1, J and K, are located on-site. D-2, E, j F and G are the optional stations located off-site. l 1

Samples are collected using activated charcoal cartridges. They are analyzed weekly for I-131. The analytical data for radiciodine are presented in Section 6.0, Table 6-7 and 6-8.

C. Dose Evaluation The I-131 airbome sampling program demonstrated no dose to man due to the operation of the plant. No radiciodine was detected in any sampling location.

D. Data Trends  !

l No radiciodine has been detected at air sampling locations required by j Technical Specifications since 1987.

5-36

The prior five years of data show no positive detection ofI-131. This demonstrates that there is no measurable environmental impact or positive trend for iodine buildup due to plant operations during the period from 1990 through 1994. 1-131 was detected twice over the last ten year period, in 1986 and 1987. The 1986 detection was the result of the Chernobyl accident and the 1987 detection was the result of plant operations.

Iodine - 131 (I-131) has been detected in the past at control locations.

During 1976, the mean off-site 1-131 concentration averaged 0.604 pCi/m'. 1977 showed an I-131 concentration that decreased to 0.323 pCi/m' and for 1978 the concentration decreased by a factor of ten to 0.032 pCi/m'. During 1979 - 1981 and 1983 - 1985, I-131 was not detected at the control locations. I-131 was detected once at the control location during 1982 at a concentration of 0.039 pCi/m'. I-131 was detected at the on-site locations in 1980 through 1983,1986 and 1987.

The mean concentrations ranged from 0.013 pCi/m' in 1980 to 0.119 pCi/m' in 1986. The maximum I-131 concentration of 0.119 pCi/m' was the result of the Chemobyl accident. I-131 was detected in a total of 75 weekly samples collected during the 1986 sample program. The concentrations detected in 1986 ranged from a minimum of 0.023 pCi/m' to a maximum of 0.36 pCi/m3 . Each positive detection ofI-131 in 1986 was a direct result of the Chernobyl Nuclear accident.  ;

Preoperational data for 1-131 in air is limited. Results from 1974 showed no positive measurement ofI-131. Current data, which showed no measured concentrations of I-131 are consistent with the 1969 and 1974 preoperational data.

A graphic presentation of airbome radioiodine is presented in Section 8.0.  !

I i

5-37

)

l 5.2.4 DIRECT RADIATION i TilERMOLUMINESCENT DOSIMETERS (TI.D)

A. Results Summary 71 TLD locations are used to measure direct radiation levels in the j environment. The dosimeters are collected and read each quarter. The 1996 results are consistent with those observed in 1995 and previous years. TLD results are evaluated by organizing the locations into five special groups by geographic location relative to the site. The five groups are on-site, site boundary, off-site, special interest and controls.

A summary of the measured exposure in each group is as follows:

Dose in mrem per standard month )

Location Groups Minimum Maximum Mean On-site indicators 3.1 32.6 6.4 Site boundary

• 3.2 5.3 4.1 Off-site indicators

• 3.3 5.5 4.1 Special interest

• 3.2 5.1 4.2 i

Controls

• 3.4 5.6 4.2

• Location required by Technical Specifications  !

The highest dose rate measured at a location required by Technical Specification was 9.1 mrem per standard month. This TLD, (No. 77)  !

represents the site boundary maximum dose. Location No. 77 is in the i t

I WNW sector along the lake shore and is in close proximity to the NMP Unit #1 plant. The TLD locations along the lake shore close to the plants are influenced by the rad waste building and rad waste shipping activities. These environmental dose are not representative of doses measured at the remaining site boundary locations. The remaining TLD locations which are located away from the plant are comparable to levels measured at the control locations.

l l

5-38 i

l l

- .. . .-. __.- _ _ _ _\

Overall, the environmental direct radiation measurement results for 1996 showed no indication ofincreased direct radiation above background at or beyond the site boundary. This is demonstrated by the net site boundary dose rate. The 1996 results demonstrate that hydrogen injection rate for hydrogen water chemistry, utilized during 1996, has not increased the site boundary dose rate or the dose to the general public above natural background.

Quarter Site Boundary

• Control

• Net Site Boundary Dose

• 1 3.7 3.6 0.1 2 4.5 4.8 -0.3 3 3.8 3.7 0.1 4 4.6 4.7 -0.1

• Dose in mrem per s'andard month B. Data Evaluation and Discussion Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) are used to measure direct radiation (gamma dose) in the environment. The TLDs used during 1996 were Panasonic UD-814 dosimeters.

71 environmental TLDs were collected and read on a quarterly basis during the sample year. The location results are an average of six independent readings per quarter at each location and are reported in mrem per standard month (See Section 6.0, Table 6-10).

The majority of the locations required by the Technical Specifications for 1996 were initiated in 1985 as a result of the issuance of new Technical Specifications by the NRC. Therefore,1996 results can only be compared to 1985 - 1995 results. Some locations, including a number required by the Technical Specifications (i.e., numbers 7,14,15,18, 23, 49, 56, and 58), can be compared to earlier results as these TLDs were established prior to 1985.

5-39

i 1

l On-site TLDs are located at special interest areas within the site boundary.

With the exception of location numbers 7 and 23, these locations are not j required by the Technical Specifications. Locations 7 and 23 are located near the generating facilities at previous or existing on-site air sampling stations i l

and are used to evaluate meteorological sectors that do not extend beyond the site boundary. TLDs located at the on-site environmental monitoring stations include numbers 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 23, 24, 25 and 26. The results for these locations are consistent with the previous year results. The 1996 results ranged from 3.1 to 32.6 mrem per standard month. Other on-site special interest TLDs are located near the north shoreline of the Nine Mile Point Unit 1, Unit 2 and JAF facilities. They are in close proximity to radwaste facilities and the Unit I reactor building. These locations include numbers 27,28,29, 30,31,39 and 47. Results for these TLDs during 1996 were widely variable and ranged from 4.1 to 68.1 mrem per standard month as a result of activities  ;

at the radwaste facilities and the operating modes of the generating plants. The i results for 1996 are consistent with the ranges of variability noted in 1995 with a small increase in the maximum dose noted in 1996.

Additional on-site TLD locations are located near the on-site Energy Center and the associated northeast shoreline. These locations include numbers 18, 103,106 and 107. TLDs 103,106, and 107 are located cast of the Energy Center and west of the Unit I facility. TLD number 18 is located on the west side of the Energy Center. Results for this group ranged from 4.1 - 6.4 mrem 4 per standard month for 1996 and were consistent with the 1995 results.

Site boundary TLDs are required by the Technical Specifications and are located in the approximate area of the site boundary with one in each of the l sixteen 221/2 degree meteorological sectors. These TLDs include numbers '

75, 76, 77, 23., 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 7,18, 85, 86 and 87. TLD numbers l 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 7 and 18 showed results that were consistent with control TLD results and ranged from 3.2 to 5.3 mrem per standard month.

Site boundary TLDs during 1996 were consistent with 1985 - 1995 results.

TLD numbers 75,76,77,23,85,86, and 87 showed results that ranged up to three times the results of control TLDs. These results ranged from 4.7 - 9.1 mrem per standard month. TLDs in this latter group are located near the lake 5-40

shoreline (approximately 100 feet from the shoreline), but are also located in close proximity to the reactor building and radwaste facilities of NMP Unit

1. 1 and NMP Unit r/2 r.nd the radwaste facilities of the FitzPatrick plant.

4 l A net site boundary dose can be estimated using site boundary TLD results '

I and control TLD results. Results from TLDs located at the site boundary in land based sectors (excluding TLDs near the generating facilities and facing Lake Ontario) are compared to control TLD results. The site boundary TLDs include numbers 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 7 and 18. Control TLDs include numbers 8,14,49,1i1 and 113. Net site boundary doses for each quarter in  ;

mrem per standard month are as follows:

Ouarter Net Site Boundary Dose

• 1 +0.0 2 -0.6 3 -0.1 4 +0.2

• Dose in mrem per standard month Site boundary TLD numbers 75, 76, 77, 23, 85, 86, and 87 were excluded from the net site boundary dose calculation since these TLDs are not representative of doses at areas where a member of the public may be located.

These areas are near the north shoreline, which are in close proximity to the l generating facilities, and are not accessible to members of the public.

The third group of environmental TLDs is located four to five miles from the site in each of the eight land based 22.5 degree meteorological sectors. These locations are required by the Technical Specifications. At this distance, badges are not present in eight of the sixteen meteorological sectors which are located over Lake Ontario.

I l

l 5-41

1 l

Results for this group of TLDs during 1996 showed a range of 3.2 to 5.3 mrem per standard month. The range of results is caused by differences in j naturally occurring physical conditions and the varying concentrations of naturally occurring radionuclides in the ground at each of the locations. These results are consistent with control TLD results during 1996 and with the 1986 ,

- 1995 results. These TLDs were established in 1985 and include numbers 88, I 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94 and 95.

The fourth group of environmental TLDs is located near the site boundary and j at special interest areas. Included in this group are monitoring locations at j industrial sites, schools, nearby communities, off-site air sampling stations, the I closest residence to the site, and the off-site environmental laboratory. Many of these TLDs are required by the Technical Specifications. The remaining locations for this group are optional. This group of locations includes numbers 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15, 19, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 58, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100,101,102,108 and 109. TLD numbers 108 and 109 are locations that 1 were established during 1988 and were added to assist in the evaluation of the I nearest residence. In 1996, results ranged from 3.9 to 5.6 mrem per standard l month for locations 108 and 109. All of the TLD results from this group were within the general variation of the control TLDs. Results during 1996 were consistent with the results for previous years.

The fifth category of TLDs is used to measure the dose rate at the control locations. These TLDs are required by the Technical Specifications and include numbers 14 and 49. Optional control locations are numbers 8,111 and 113. Location number 111 was added to the program during 1988 to )

expand the data base for control measurements. Results for all control locations from 1996 ranged from 3.4 to 5.6 mrem per standard month.

Results from 1996 were consistent with previous years results.

l l 5-42

C. Dose Evaluation TLDs located at the site boundary averaged 3.5 mrem per standard month (No. 7,18, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82 83, 84).

TLDs placed at the special interest locations averaged 4.2 mrem per standard month.

The control TLD results averaged 4.3 mrem per standard month in 1996 (No.

8,14,49,111,113).

The measured mean dose rate in the proximity of the closest resident was 4.5 mrem per standard month (No.108 and 109), which is consistent with the control measurements.

The mean annual dose for each of the geographic location categories demonstrates that there is no statistical difference in the annual dose a function of distance from the site. The TLD program verifies that operations at the site do not measurably contribute to the levels of direct radiation present in the off-site environment.

D. Data Trends A comparison of historical TLD results can be made using the different categories of measurement locations. These include site boundary TLDs in each meteorological sector (16 locations), TLDs located off-site in each land based sector at a distance of four to five miles (8 locations), badges located at special interest areas (6 locations) and TLDs located at control locations (5 locations). As noted previously, many of the present TLD locations became effective in 1985 and these results can only be evaluated for 1985 - 1992.

TLDs located at the site boundary averaged 6.1 mrem per standard month during 1987.

During 1990,1991,1992,1993,1994,1995 and 1996 site boundary dose rates averaged 4.8, 4.8, 4.2, 4.3, 4.0, 4.4 and 3.5 mrem per standard month, respectively. As noted previously, this group of TLDs exhibits fluctuating results because several of these TLDs are located in close i

5-43 '

i

-- - .- ~ - - _ .- - - _. -

l l

proximity to the generating facilities and are influenced by operational modes.

An increase was noted during 1986, although such an increase was noted for all TLDs including the control locations. During 1996, site boundary measurements averaged 4.1 mrem per standard month, which is less than the mean for the previous five years.

TLDs located off-site at a distance of four to five miles from the site in each  ;

4 of the land based meteorological sectors (off-site sectors) averaged 5.2 mrem )

per standard month during 1987. During the previous five years,1991 through 1995, the annual off-site sector dose rates averaged 4.7, 4.1, 4.5, 4.0 1 and 4.3 mrem per standard month, respectively. Results for the group averaged 4.3 mrem standard month over the five year period. The 1996 mean

]

dose of 4.2 mrem per standard month is consistent with the previous five year mean and each individual yearly mean.  ;

Special interest locations averaged 4.3 mrem per standard month over the previous five years. The 1996 results for these locations averaged 4.2 mrem per standard month. This is consistent with the previous five year average of

4.3 mrem per standard month, j

The last group of TLD locations required by the Technical Specifications is the control group. This group (No. 8,14,49,111 and 113) utilizes locations i

positioned well beyond the site. Results from 1986 for the control group averaged 6.3 mrem per standard month. During 1987, this same group of TLDs averaged 5.4 mrem per standard month. A marked increase was noted in the second quarter of 1986. The increase may have been a result of the Chernobyl accident. Results for 1991,1992,1993 and 1994 and 1995

averaged 4.7,4.1,4.4,4.1 and 4.4 mrem per standard month, respectively with

a five year mean of 4.3. Results for 1996 averaged 4.3 mrem per standard l month which is identical to the previous five year mean. The five year mean results for the controls (4.3 mrem per standard month) are nearly identical to l the 1996 off-site sector TLD results (4.2 mrem per standard month), as would be expected, i

j l

5-44

The 1996 TLD program results, when compared to the previous five years and preoperational data, show no significant trends relative to increased dose rates in the environment.

Tables 7-15 and 7-16 show the historical environmental sample data for environmental TLDs. A graph of historical TLD data is presented in Section 8.0.

i l

I l

l i

)

l 1

5-45 l

l 1

5.2.5 hilLK A. Results Summary A total of 90 analyses was performed on the 45 milk samples collected and analyzed for the 1996 sample program. Each sample was analyzed for radionuclides using gamma spectroscopy and an iodine extraction procedure.

There were no plant related radionuclides detected in the indicator or control milk samples collected as part of the 1996 program. Naturally occurring K-40 was detected in both indicator and control samples at levels consistent with previous years results. The 1996 results continue to demonstrate that routine operation of the FitzPatrick Plant has no contribution to the " dose to the public" from the cow / milk pathway or the " radiological" environment.

B. Data Evaluation and Discussion Milk samples were collected from four indicator locations and one control location. Technical Specifications require that three sample locations be within live miles of the site. Based on the milk animal census, there were no adequate milk sample locations within five miles of the site in 1996. Samples were collected from five farms located beyond the five mile requirement to ensure the monitoring of this important pathway. The four indicator locations ranged from 5.5 to 9.5 miles from the site. The control samples were collected from a farm 13.2 miles from the site and in a low frequency wind sector (upwind). With the exception of the control location, each of the reported locations has been sampled since 1989. The geographical location of each location is listed below:

1 Location No. Direction From Site Direction (Miles) l 50 E 9.1 55 E 9.0 60 E 9.5 4 ESE 7.8 73 Control SW 13.2 I 5-46

Samples were collected at locations 50,55,60,4 and 73 from April through December, during the first and second half of each month. 1-131 was not detected in samples collected during November and December of 1995. As a result, additional samples were not required for January through March of 1996 as stipulated in the Technical Specifications.

Each sample is analyzed for gamma emitters using gamma spectral analysis.

The I-131 analysis is performed using resin extraction followed by spectral analysis for each sample. I-131 analytical results and sample analysis results for gamma emitters are provided in Section 6.0, Table 6-11.

Iodine-131 was not detected in any indicator or control samples analyzed during 1996. All I-131 milk results were reported as lower limits of detection (LLD). The LLD results for all samples ranged from <0.26 to <0.57 pCi/ liter.

K-40 was the most abundant radionuclide detected in milk samples collected in 1996. K-40 is a naturally occurring radionuclide and is found in many of the environmental media sampled. K-40 was detected in every indicator and control sample. The K-40 concentration for all samples ranged from 1320 to 2280 pCi/ liter. Ra-226 was detected intermittently in the milk samples and is a naturally occurring radionuclide. During 1996, Cs-137 was not detected in any indicator or control milk samples.

C. Dose Evaluation The calculated dose as a result of plant effluents is not evaluated due to the fact that no plant related radionuclides were detected.

The dose to man from naturally occurring concentrations of K-40 in milk and other environmental media can be calculated. This calculation illustrates that the dose received due to exposure from plant effluents is negligible as compared to the dose received from naturally occurring radionuclides.

Significant levels of K-40 have been measured in environmental samples. A 70 kilogram (154 pound) adult contains approximately 0.1 microcuries of K-40 as a result of normal life functions (inhalation, consumption, etc.). The dose to bone tissue is about 20 mrem per year (Eisenbud) as a result of internally deposited naturally occurring K-40, 5-47

i D. Data Trends ,

1996 results showed no man-made radionuclides detected in milk samples analyzed as part of the environmental surveillance program. In the past ten l years, Cs-137 was detected in 1986 and 1987. The mean Cs-137 indicator activities for those years were 8.6 and 7.4 pCi/ liter, respectively. 1-131 was ,

measured in milk samples in 1986 with a mean concentration of 13.6 pCi/ liter. l This activity was a result of the Chemobyl accident.

From 1976 to 1985, Cs-137 and I-131 were intermittently detected. Cs-137 was detected in a 1983 milk sample with a concentration of 5.1 pCi/ liter. In 1980, I-131 was detected at the indicator and control locations with mean concentrations of 4.9 and 1.4 pCi/ liter, respectively. The Cs-137 and I-131 activity is attributed to Chinese atmospheric thermonuclear weapons testing. i The comparison of 1996 data to historical results over the operating life of the plant and preoperational data (1974) show that Cs-137 and 1-131 levels have decreased significantly since 1974. The levels of Cs-137 and 1-131 detected prior to the plant going into commercial operation were the result of activities not related to power production at the site.

1listorical data and a graphic presentation of milk sample results for Cs-137 and I-131 are presented in Section 7.0, Tables 7-17 and 7-18 and in Section 8.0, respectively.

1 i

l I

5-48

l, 5.2.6 FOOD PRODUCTS (VEGETATION) i 1

A. Results Summary l

There were no plant related radionuclides detected in the 23 food product ,

samples collected and analyzed for the 1996 program. Cs-137, a ubiquitous environmental radionuclide, was not detected in the 1996 sample set. ,

Although not detected in 1996 samples, a review of post environmental data shows that Cs-137 has been detected intermittently during the years of 1980 -

1995.

Detectable levels of naturally occurring K-40 were measured in all control and indicator samples collected for the 1996 program. Be-7, a second naturally fi occurring radionuclide, was detected in 17 of the 23 samples collected. These results are consistent with the levels measured in 1995 and previous years. 'l The results of the 1996 sampling program demonstrate that the dose to man from the garden pathway is insignificant and the contribution from the operation of the FitzPatrick plant, if any, is below the limits of detection.

B. Data Analysis and Discussion Food product samples were collected from five indicator locations and one control location. The collection of annual food product samples became a requirement as a result of Technical Specification Amendment 127 in 1985.

The indicator locations are represented by nearby gardens in areas of highest D/Q (deposition factor) values based on historical meteorology and an annual garden census. The control location was a garden 15 miles away in a predominately upwind direction.

Food product samples collected during 1996, included kale, swiss chard and collards. These sample types are considered edible broadleaf vegetables.

Where broadleaf vegetables were not available, non-edible broadleaf vegetation was collected. Non-edible vegetation consisting of squash leaves, bean leaves, grape leaves, pepper leaves, beet leaves, cucumber leaves and tomatoes were collected for the 1996 program. The leaves of these plants were sampled as representative of broadleaf vegetation. Samples were collected during the late-summer / fall harvest season. Each sample was 5-49

analyzed for gamma emitters using gamma spectroscopy. No plant related radionuclides were detected in the 1996 samples. )

Naturally occurring Be-7, K-40, Ra-226 and AcTh-228 were detected in food product samples. The concentration of Be-7 in vegetation samples ranged from 0.22 to 1.70 pCi/g (wet). The concentration of K-40 in indicator and control samples ranged from 1.74 pCi/g (wet) and 8.37 pCi/g (wet). Ra-226 and AcTh-228 were detected intermittently in the samples. The results for naturally occurring radionuclides are consistent with those of prior years. j Analytical results for food products are found in Section 6.0, Table 6-13. l C. Dose Evaluation 1

The food product sampling results showed no dose to man from this pathway as a result of operation of the plant. No plant related radionuclides were detected in the samples collected.

D. Data Trends There were no man-made radionuclide (Cs-137) detected in broadleaf edible and non-edible vegetation samples analyzed in 1996. Food product results for the last five years demonstrate that there is no measurable deposition or build-up of plant related radionuclides in the garden food products in the environs near the site.

1 In the previous five year period, Cs-137 was detected in three of those years. I Cs-137 has been detected in seven separate years since operation began at the FitzPatrick Power Plant. These historical Cs-137 concentrations ranged from a maximum level of 0.047 pCi/g (wet) in 1985 to a minimum level of 0.01 pCi/g (wet) in 1994. The concentration of Cs-137 measured in the previous two years are the lowest detectable levels measured since pre-operation sample results. The maximum Cs-137 concentration was detected in 1974 at a concentration of 0.142 pCi/g (wet). There are no discernable trends indicating the presence of plant related radionuclides in food product vegetation samples.

Ilistorical data and graphic presentations of food product results are presented in Section 7.0, Tables 7-19 and 7-20, and in Section 8.0.

5-50

5.2.7 LAND USE CENSUS RESULTS A. Results Summary Technical Specifications require that an annual land use census be perfonned to identify potential new locations for milk sampling and for calculating the dose to man from plant effluents. In 1996 a milk animal census, a nearest resident census and a garden survey were performed.

No changes were required to milk sampling indicator or control locations in 1996 based on the 1996 milk animal census.

The results of the closest residence census conducted in 1996 required no change to the Off-site Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) closest resident dose calculation reference location.

A garden census, not required by Technical Specifications, is performed to identify appropriate garden sampling locations and dose calculation receptors.

Garden samples were collected from those locations listed in Table H-1 of the ODCM and identified in the census as active for 1996. See Table 3.3-1 for l 1996 sampling locations. l l

B. Data Evaluation and Discussion A land use census is conducted each year to determine the utilization ofland in the vicinity of the site. The land use census actually consists of two types of census. A milk animal census is conducted to identify all milk animals l within a distance of 10 miles from the site. The census, covering areas out to a distance of 10 miles, exceeds the 5 mile distance required by the Technical Specifications. A resident census is designed to identify the nearest resident in each meteorological sector out to a distance of five miles.

The milk animal census is an estimation of the number of cows and goats within an approximate ten mile radius of the Nine Mile Point Site. The annual census is conducted during the first half of the grazing season by sending questionnaires to previous milk animal owners and also by road 5-51

1 surveys to locate any possible new locations. In the event the questionnaires  ;

are not answered, the owners are contacted by telephone or in person. The local county agricultural agency is also contacted as a further source of information conceming new milk animal locations in the vicinity of the site.

The number of milk animals estimated by the 1996 census to within an approximate 10 mile radius of the site was 998 cows and 17 goats. This is an increase of 30 cows and an increase of 10 goats from 1995. No new milk locations were identified during the 1996 census. Most of the goats enumerated on the census were milking goats. However, any milk production  !

was utilized by the owners and was not available for the sampling program.

The locations identified as a result of the milk animal census are illustrated on a map in Section 3.3, Figure 3.3-4. i The results of the milk animal census are found in Section 6.0, Table 6-12.

The second type of census is a residence census. The census is conducted using a road to identify the closest residence within 5 miles in each of the i 22.5 degree land based meteorological sectors. There are only eight sectors over land where residences are located within 5 miles. The water sectors include: N, NNE, NE, ENE, W, WNW, NW and NNW. The results of the residence census, showing the applicable sectors and degrees and distance of each of the nearest residence, are found in Section 6.0, Table 6-14.

The nearest resident locations are illustrated on a map in Section 3.3, Figure 3.3-5.  ;

I I

I l

5-52

l l

5.3 CONCLUSION

The REMP is a continuous program implemented to detennine the radiological impact of JAFNPP operations on the local environment. The program is designed to be sensitive to and detect small changes in the radiological environment surrounding the site.

The results of the 1996 Radiological Environmental Surveillance Program continues to clearly demonstrate that there is no significant short term or chronic long term detrimental impact on the environment in the vicinity of the Nine Mile Point site. The releases from the plant to the environment contribute no measurable radiation exposures to the general public as demonstrated by the assessment of environmental media collected and analyzed as pan of the ongoing environmental program. No increase in radiation levels in the environment beyond the site boundary were detected as a result of the hydrogen water chemistry program conducted in 1996. The major radiological impact on the environment remains the result of atmospheric weapons testing in the early 1980s and the 1986 accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant. Both of these source terms have contributed to the ubiquitous inventory of Cs-137. The results for the 1996 sample program demonstrate that the concentrations of manmade radionuclides continue to decline since the last major source term in 1986. This reduction in environmental background concentrations will allow for the site environmental program to become more sensitive to the measurable impact of plant operations on the environment. l l

I Samples representing food sources consumed at higher trophic levels, such as fish, tuod products and milk, were reviewed closely to detennine any possible impact to the

environment or to man. In addition, all the program data were reviewed for possible short I and long term historical trends. No measurable environmental impact or trends could be determined to exist from radionuclide deposition as a result of power operations at the site.

Doses as a result of naturally occurring radionuclides such as K-40 and Ra-226, contributed the vast majority of the total annual dose to members of the general public.

During 1996, Cs-137 was the one fission product radionuclide detected in any of the sample media collected. These positive samples were Lake Ontario fish and they contained essentially equal concentrations of Cs-137 at the control and indicator locations.

The probable source of this radionuclide in the fish samples is past weapons testing. The impact, expressed as a dose to man, is minimal. The maximum potential dose to man calculated from the results of the 1996 program was from the fish pathway. The l

5-53 j

calculated dose from fish consumption was estimated to be 0.03 mrem whole body (adult) and 0.048 mrem to the critical organ (liver). The long term doses to man as a result of j man-made radiation can mainly be attributed to the Chemobyl accident and past atmospheric weapons testing. Doses received from man-made sources in the environment 1 are very small when compared to the doses from naturally occurring sources of ).

radioactivity, j I

The contribution to the off-site whole body dose as a result of plant operations is extremely small when compared to the dose contribution from natural background levels and sources other than the plant. Whole body dose in Oswego County due to all natural 1

sources is approximately 50-60 mrem per individual per year as demonstrated by control l

environmental TLDs. The fraction of the annual dose to man attributable to site operation '

remains insignificant.

l From the collective results of the 1996 Radiological Environmental Surveillance Program, it can be concluded that the levels and variation of radioactivity in the environmental samples were as expected for the lake shore environment of the site. No unusual radiological characteristics were measured or observed in the local environment.

l 1

1 5-54

i

5.4 REFERENCES

1. Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications, Appendix B to Facility Operating i License No. DPR-59 For James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, New York Power Authority, Docket No. 50-333, Amendment 127.

s

2. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.109, " Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluent for the Purpose  :

of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix 1", October,1977.

3. Eichholz, G., Environmental Aspects of Nuclear Power. First Edition, Ann Arbor -

Science Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan,1976.

l

4. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP),  ;

Environmental Radiation Measurements. NCRP Report No. 50,1976. )

5. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), Natural Backcround Radiation in the United States. NCRP Report No. 45,1975.

6. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), Cesium-137 from the Environment to Man: Metabolism and Dose. NCRP Report No. 52, 1977.

7. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), Radiation Exposure from Consumer Products and Miscellaneous Sources. NCRP Report No. I 56,1977.

8. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 4.8, " Environmental Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants", December 1975.

9. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Branch Technical Position to Regulatory Guide 4.8, "An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program",

November,1979.

10. Eisenbud, Merril, Environmental Radioactivity. Third Edition, Academic Press, New York, New York,1987, i

5-55

-- - . . =-

)

r

11. Francis, C. W., Radiostrontium Movement in Soils and Untake in Plants. l 1

Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S.  !

Department of Energy,1978.

12. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), Radiation Exposure from Consumer Products and Miscellaneous 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 Environment:

Assessment of Dose to Man m 1979. l

15. U.S. Department of licalth and Human Services, Preparedness and Resnonse in Radiation Accidents. National Center of Devices and Radiological licalth,  ;

Rockville, MD 20857, August,1983.

16. Kathren, Ronald E., RADIOACTIVITY IN THE ENVIRONMENT: SOURCES. l I DISTRIBUTION. AND SURVEILLANCE. First Edition, liarwood Academic Press, New York, NY,1984.

17. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP), lonizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States, NCRP Report No. 93, I 1987

18. Knoll, G., Radiation Detection and Measurement. Second Edition, John Wiley &

Sons, New York, New York,1989.

5-56 4 l

l l

6.0 REPORT PERIOD ANALYTICAL RESULTS TABLES 6.1 Environmental sample data is summarized in table format. Tables are provided for select sample media and coniain data based on actual values obtained over the year. These values are comprised of both positive values and LLD values where applicable.

6.2 The LLD is the smallest concentration of radioactive material in a sample that will be detected with 95% probability and with 5% probability of falsely concluding that a blank observation represents a "real" signal (see Section 3.7.3 for detailed explanation).

6.3 When the initial count of a sample indicates the presence of radioactivity, two recounts are normally performed. When a radionuclide is positively identified in two or more counts, the analytical results for that radionuclide is reported as the mean of the positive detections and the associated error for that mean (see Section 3.7.2 for methodology).

6.4 Many of the tables are footnoted with the term " Plant Radionuclides". Plant related radionuclides are radionuclies that are produced in the reactor as a result of plant operation either through the activation or fission process.

r 1

i i

i 6-1 1

TABLE 6-1 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMIlTERS IN SHORELINE SEDIMENT SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of pCi/g (dry) i 1 Sigma CODE NEN K-40 Co-60 Cs-134 Cs-137 Zn-65 OTliERS**

m Sunset Beach 04/96 18.410.34 <0.060 <0.041 0.1510.011 <0.099 <LLD e (05) i

" 10/96 17.310.40 <0.049 <0.031 0.17i0.014 <0.076 <LLD Lang's Beach 04/96 17.9 0.45 <0.036 <0.036 <0.035 <0.064 <LLD (06, Control) 10/96 15.610.41 <0.031 <0.025 <0.033 <0.053 <LLD

• Corresponds to sample locations noted on the maps in Section 3.3.

" Plant Related Isotopes

TABLE 6-2 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN FISH SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of pCi/g (wet) i 1 Sigma DATE TYPE K-40 Mn-54 Co-58 Fe-59 Co-60 Zn-65 Cs-134 Cs-137 OTHERS*

FITZPATRICK 06/11/96 Lake Trout 4.1810.20 <0.022 <0.026 <0.066 <0.024 <0.059 <0.018 <0.018 <LLD 06/12/96 Smallmouth Bass 3.3410.23 <0.032 <0.033 <0.090 <0.032 <0.064 <0.026 <0.029 <LLD 06/12/96 White Sucker 4.75i0.21 <0.020 <0.026 <0.068 <0.022 <0.058 <0.022 <0.018 <LLD 06/18/96 Brown Trout 2.59 0.16 <0.022 <0.018 <0.051 <0.019 <0.044 <0.019 <0.018 <LLD 10/02/96 White Sucker 4.57 0.22 <0.024 <0.028 <0.069 <0.023 <0.064 <0.023 <0.019 <LLD 10/02/96 Smallmouth Bass 3.77i0.25 <0.30 <0.036 <0.100 <0.031 <0.077 <0.032 <0.028 <LLD 10/02/96 Chinook Salmon 9.88i0.15 <0.032 <0.037 <0.094 <0.034 <0.057 <0.031 <0.031 <LLD

<0.022 <0.056 <0.018 <0.053 <0.01E c0.020 <LLD 10/08/96 Lake Trout #1 3.07 0.20 <0.18

<0.022 <0.019 <LLD 10/08/96 Lake Trout #2 2.5310.17 <0.018 <0.023 <0.055 <0.023 <0.045 11.010.28 <0.032 <0.033 <0.070 <0.027 <0.052 <0.021 <0.028 <LLD 10/08/96 Walleye

• Plant Related Radionuclides

TABLE 6-2 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN FISH SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of pCi/g (wet) 1 Sigma DATE TYPE K-40 Hn-54 Co-58 Fe-59 Co-60 Zn-65 Cs-134 Cs-137 OTHERS*

NINE MILE POINT 06/04/96 Lake Trout 3.0110.22 <0.036 <0.043 <0.11 <0.035 <0.074 <0.028 <0.026 <LLD 06/04/96 Brown Trout 4.8110.21 <0.020 <0.036 <0.078 <0.021 <0.058 <0.020 <0.020 <LLD 06/04/96 Smallmouth Bass 2.9910.19 <0.020 <0.023 <0.058 <0.022 <0.051 <0.015 <0.018 <LLD 06/18/96 White Sucker 8.40i0.22 <0.024 <0.026 <0.057 <0.022 <0.041 <0.018 <0.024 <LLD 09/25/96 Smallmouth Bass 6.2910.13 <0.024 <0.031 <0.083 <0.020 <0.067 <0.024 0.025i0.006 <LLD 09/25/96 Walleye 4.38i0.14 <0.030 <0.038 <0.103 <0.032 <0.076 <0.029 <0.028 <LLD 09/26/96 White Sucker 4.7710.24 <0.028 <0.034 <0.095 <0.029 <0.057 <0.032 <0.026 <LLD 09/26/96 Brown Trout 4.57*0.24 <0.028 <0.033 <0.084 <0.028 <0.065 <0.026 <0.021 <LLD 10/08/96 Lake Trout #1 3.33i0.11 <0.021 <0.029 <0.055 <0.025 <0.052 <0.021 0.01610.005 <LLD 10/08/96 Lake Trout #2 4.1010.30 <0.038 <0.044 <0.113 <0.037 <0.103 <0.035 <0.040 <LLD

• Plant Related Radionuclides

TABLE 6-2 (continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN FISH SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of pCi/g (wet) 1 Sigma DATE IYPE K-40 Hn-54 Co-58 Fe-59 Co-60 Zn-65 Cs-134 Cs-137 OTHEPS*

l OSWEGO HARBOR (Control) 06/07/96 White Sucker 4.2910.23 <0.030 <0.033 <0.077 <0.034 <0.064 <0.030 <0.023 <LLD 06/07/96 Lake Trout 4.86i0.12 <0.021 <0.026 <0.080 <0.022 <0.039 <0.021 0.01810.010 <LLD' 06/07/96 Brown Trout 8.1310.22 <0.025 <0.030 <0.075 <0.024 <0.051 <0.018 <0.022 <LLD 06/07/96 Smallmouth 4.0210.25 <0.036 <0.040 <0.089 <0.027 <0.079 <0.030 <0.029 <LLD y Bass l White Sucker 9.6410.26 <0.031 <0.036 <0.096 <0.028 <0.049 <0.020 <0.026 <LLD 09/17/96 Lake Trout #1 3.0510.16 <0.018 <0.026 <0.066 <0.020 <0.046 <0.016 <0.016 <LLD 09/17/96 i Lake Trout #2 3.9510.26 <0.036 <0.041 <0.113 <0.036 <0.079 <0.032 <0.030 <LLD 09/17/96 i

Brown Trout 4.4910.12 <0.024 <0.031 <0.081 <0.024 <0.061 <0.022 0.02210.005 <LLD 09/17/96 09/17/96 Smallmouth 3.8910.24 <0.029 <0.038 <0.098 <0.033 <0.062 <0.031 <0.026 <LLD Bass 09/17/96 Chinook <0.025 <LLD 9.76i0.25 <0.029 <0.034 <0.091 <0.026 <0.044 <0.017 i Salmon

• Plant Related Radionuclides

i i TABLE 6-3 l

CONCENTPATIONS OF TRITIUM IN SURFACE WATER

! (QUARTERLY COMPOSITE SAMPLES)

Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 1 Sigma l

)STATIONiCODE iPERIOD! jDATEs, I:

LSITIUM{

FITZPATRICK* First Quarter 12/29/95 - 04/01/96 <230 (03 INLET) Second Quarter 04/01/96 - 06/28/96 <150 Third Quarter 06/28/96 - 09/30/96 <170 Fourth Quarter 09/30/96 - 12/31/96 <190 OSWEGO STEAM

• First Quarter 12/29/95 - 04/01/96 <230 STATION Second Quarter 04/01/96 - 06/28/96 <150 (08 CONTROL) Third Quarter 06/28/96 - 09/30/96 <170 Fourth Quarter 09/30/96 - 12/31/96 <190

?-

NINE MILE First Quarter 12/29/95 - 04/01/96 <220 POINT UNIT 1** Second Quarter 04/01/96 - 06/28/96 160i100 (09. INLET) Third Quarter 06/28/96 - 09/30/96 <170 Fourth Quarter 09/30/96 - 12/31/96 <190 NINE MILE First Quarter 12/29/95 - 04/01/96 <240 POINT UNIT 2** Second Quarter 04/01/96 - 06/28/96 <150 (11. INLET) Third Quarter 06/28/96 - 09/30/96 <170 Fourth Quarter 09/30/96 - 12/31/96 <190 OSWEGO CITY ** First Quarter 12/29/95 - 04/01/96 <230 WATER (10) Second Quarter 04/01/96 - 06/28/96 <150 Third Quarter 06/28/96 - 09/30/96 <170 Fourth Quarter 09/30/96 - 12/31/96 <190

• Samples required by Technical Specifications

• • Optional samples Oswego City Water samples are composites of twice per week grab samples

I TABLE 6-4 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 1 Sigma OSWEGO STEAM STATION * (08. CONTROL)**

NUCLIDE JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE I-131 <0.59 <0.30 <0.35 <0.80 <0.48 <1.00 Cs-134 <1.77 <2.58 <2.77 <2.21 <1.71 <4.72 Cs-137 <2.89 <2.31 <2.81 <3.24 <2.24 <4.84 Zr-95 <5.50 <4.87 <5.11 <5.68 <5.88 <9.37 Nb-95 <3.51 <3.60 <3.60 <3.97 <3.47 <6.44 Co-58 <2.92 <3.16 <3.24 <3.35 <2.96 <5.71 Mn-54 <2.93 <2.56 <3.37 <2.79 <2.86 <5.39 Fe-59 <7.40 <6.51 <6.88 <7.45 <6.71 <11.6 Zn-65 <6.94 <6.48 <6.99 <6.01 <5.89 <11.0 Co-60 <2.98 <2.97 <3.05 <2.86 <3.10 <5.22 m

4 K-40 64.5i11.1 43.9i11.0 216i17.3 728i22.7 47.819.76 184124.3 Ba/La-140 <7.03 <7.52 <6.40 <5.41 <9.12 <12.2 JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER NUCLIDE

<1.00 <0.29 <0.60 <0.50 <0.56 <0.46 I-131 <3.32 Cs-134 <2.63 <4.60 <4.49 <4.99 <4.60

<2.72 <4.13 <3.84 <4.22 <4.33 <3.47 Cs-137

<6.16 <6.41 <7.29 <8.08 <7.86 <7.49 Zr-95 <4.98

<3.54 <4.91 <4.72 <4.94 <5.03 Nb-95 <4.96

<3.21 <3.97 <4.69 <4.71 <3.95 Co-58 <4.16

<2.54 <4.00 <4.35 <3.75 <4.22 Mn-54 <11.7

<7.46 <9.05 <9.35 <9.44 <8.95 Fe-59 <9.44 <10.5 Zn-65 <7.28 <8.30 <8.91 <9.54

<4.80 <5.09 <4.18 <4.34 <4.43 Co-60 <2.87 210i22.2

<29.8 222i22 205i22 245i22.2 221i22.2 K-40 <10.1 <11.3

<9.29 <9.35 <9.88 <10.5 Ba/La-140

• Sam required by Technical Specifications.om e hefarce nerd r6rdt fdhe sris__fR ktetign_3.3_._ __ _ __ ____________ ____ __ ______

"""ples _____ _

, TABLE 6-4 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 1 Sigma FITZPATRICK* (03, INLET)**

NUCLIDE JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE I-131 <0.66 <0.30 <0.35 <0.70 <0.44 <1.00 Cs-134 <2.79 <3.14 <2.50 <2.56 <2.03 <4.58 Cs-137 <2.93 <2.78 <2.59 <2.61 <2.73 <3.76 Zr-95 <6.67 <5.24 <5.65 <6.23 <5.19 <6.85 Nb-95 <4.07 <3.50 <3.62 <4.26 <3.94 <4.48 Co-58 <3.51 <3.22 <3.56 <2.84 <3.31 <4.08 Mn-54 <2.88 <3.04 <2.95 <2.81 <2.64 <4.22 Fe-59 <6.57 <7.20 <7.01 <7.07 <7.01 <9.35 Zn-65 <6.50 <7.49 <6.33 <7.50 <4.19 <10.7 Co-60 <2.86 <2.80 <2.70 <3.62 <2.71 <4.58

$ K-40 222117.9 206il7 <37.3 45.7i11.4 702i20.3 181i20.6 Ba/La-140 <8.21 <7.85 <8.21 <8.38 <7.02 <10.4 NUCLIDE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER I-131 <1.00 <0.31 <0.50 <0.70 <0.46 <0.38 Cs-134 <2.48 <4.08 <1.97 <2.48 <3.04 <2.44 Cs-137 <2.56 <3.60 <2.48 <3.51 <2.65 <2.11 Zr-95 <4.83 <7.46 <5.08 <6.47 <5.11 <5.32 Nb-95 <3.35 <4.50 <3.04 <4.18 <3.33 <3.35 Co-58 <2.91 <4.43 <2.62 <3.63 <3.06 <3.07 Mn-54 <2.20 <3.57 <2.41 <3.44 <2.72 <2.63 Fe-59 <5.98 <9.23 <6.53 <7.16 <8.22 <7.12 Zn-65 <6.55 <8.26 <6.34 <5.08 <6.10 <5.89 Co-60 <3.07 <3.83 <1.96 <3.22 <2.65 <3.06 K-40 34.2*11.7 191i19 57.6110.7 88.8125.4 280116.3 49.8110.7 Ba/La-140 <6.15 <11.2 <6.62 <6.23 <7.81 <8.03

• Samples required by Technical Specifications.

• • Corresponds to sample locations noted on the maps in Section 3.3.

TABLE 6-4 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 1 Sigma NINE MILE POINT UNIT 1* (09. INLET)**

NUCLIDE JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE I-131 <12.4 <6.67 <14.7 <12.9 <8.18 <9.72 Cs-134 <5.40 <2.58 <4.07 <4.51 <2.69 <2.23 Cs-137 <4.31 <2.83 <4.42 <4.06 <2.86 <2.48 Zr-95 <9.73 <6.07 <8.74 <7.98 <5.55 <5.46 Nb-95 <5.91 <3.29 <5.78 <5.34 <3.20 <3.71 Co-58 <5.50 <2.96 <5.12 <4.37 <3.31 <2.55 Mn-54 <5.06 <2.81 <4.91 <4.05 <2.83 <2.53 Fe-59 <13.1 <7.02 <9.20 <10.0 <7.74 <6.36 Zn-65 <11.4 <6.48 <9.82 <8.81 <6.02 <5.58 Co-60 <6.43 <3.04 <3.88 <5.01 <3.05 <2.80

? K-40 165i24.5 46.9111.0 18.4119.5 205120.6 259118.4 43.9 10.7

• <10.1 <8.19 <10.5 Ba/La-140 <12.2 <8.53 <13.7 NUCLIDE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER I-131 <8.57 <6.44 <7.97 <7.48 <11.1 <7.48 Cs-134 <2.98 <1.74 <2.93 <1.94 <2.29 <2.35 Cs-137 <2.81 <2.23 <2.72 <2.25 <3.16 <2.25 Zr-95 <5.04 <4.56 <4.57 <4.45 <6.45 <4.86

<3.26 <3.03 <3.36 <3.02 <4.47 <3.13 Nb-95

<3.15 <3.05 <3.40 <2.71 <3.69 <2.96 Co-58

<3.03 <2.47 <2.67 <2.54 <3.49 <2.65 Mn-54

<7.82 <6.18 <8.12 <6.47 <7.66 <3.83 Fe-59

<6.12 <6.48 <6.69 <6.62 <5.34 <6.81 Zn-65 <3.19 Co-60 <3.13 <3.07 <3.13 <2.80 <2.95 >

191i16.3 40.0111.7 168i16 53.7*11.7 81.8*24.2 47.8 10.7 K-40 <8.36

<6.98 <6.80 <9.33 <6.34 Ba/La-140 <7.03 l

• Optional sample location. Samples not required by Technical Specifications.

• • Correspnds to sample locations noted on the maps in Section 3.3.

TABLE 6-4 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 1 Sigma NINE MILE POINT UNIT 2* (11 INLET)**

NUCLIDE JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE I-131 <9.41 <10.3 <13.2 <14.6 <11.5 <7.59 Cs-134 <2.11 <3.07 <2.07 <4.96 <4.94 <2.17 Cs-137 <2.99 <3.24 <3.17 <5.16 <3.79 <2.07 Zr-95 <6.35 <5.90 <6.20 <8.87 <7.98 <5.17 Nb-95 <4.18 <4.01 <4.24 <5.31 <4.94 <3.19 Co-58 <3.57 <3.67 <3.36 <5.23 <4.03 <2.72 Mn-54 <3.39 <3.27 <3.22 <5.73 <4.48 <2.70 Fe-59 <6.68 <7.34 <7.67 <11.4 <9.35 <4.90 Zn-65 <7.30 <5.43 <6.15 <11.3 <9.71 <6.12

, Co-60 <2.74 <2.98 <2.95 <5.10 <4.73 <2.55

.'- K-40 239i18.9 858i25 695i22.1 208i26.3 245122.2 55.7*10.7 Ba/La-140 <8.68 <6.18 <6.92 <13.2 <8.99 <7.63 NUCLIDE JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER I-131 <12.7 <8.56 <6.91 <8.92 <12.0 <7.35 Cs-134 <4.21 <3.27 <2.27 <2.39 <4.54 <2.54 Cs-137 <4.32 <3.01 <2.04 <2.78 <3.81 <2.67 Zr-95 <9.26 <5.39 <5.02 <5.91 <7.75 <6.30 Nb-95 <5.38 <3.46 <2.80 <3.81 <5.10 <3.71 Co-58 <4.91 <3.32 <2.88 <3.36 <4.54 <3.10 Mn-54 <4.83 <2.94 <2.42 <3.25 <4.41 <2.93 Fe-59 <10.7 <7.90 <5.95 <8.27 <9.17 <7.25 Zn-65 <9.92 <6.01 <6.60 <6.20 <8.84 <6.32 Co-60 <4 62 <2.88 <2.62 <3.07 <4.18 <3.58 K-40 205122.6 212t16 50.8110.7 204117.3 230122.2 25.4i11.4 Ba/La-140 <12.8 <7.71 <8.39 <7.35 <10.1 <8.03

• Optional sample location. Samples not required by Technical Specifications.

• • Corresponds to sample locations noted on the maps in Section 3.3.

TABLE 6-4 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 1 Sigma OSWEGO CITY WATER * (10)**

NUCLIDE JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE I-131 <10.2 <10.3 <9.47 <11.4 <10.7 <8.61 Cs-134 <3.10 <2.37 <2.38 <2.13 <2.40 <2.54 Cs-137 <3.21 <2.35 <2.33 <2.93 <2.66 <2.70 Zr-95 <4.62 <5.43 <5.17 <5.89 <5.07 <6.20 Nb-95 <2.99 <3.66 <3.72 <4.05 <3.62 <3.17 Co-58 <3.06 <3.44 <3.00 <3.10 <3.32 <3.36 Mn-54 <2.63 <2.69 <2.82 <2.95 <3.21 <2.31 Fe-59 <7.20 <6.23 <4.75 <7.26 <7.61 <8.60 Zn-65 <6.93 <6.13 <6.21 <6.04 <7.11 <4.74 Co-60 <3.10 <3.20 <3.07 <3.02 <3.40 <2.82 m*

K-40 59.4t11.1 44.9i10.7 50.8110.7 812123.3 202il7.3 36.8t11.4

~

Ba/La-140 <7.81 <9.57 <8.25 <6.34 <8.87 <10.9 JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER NUCLIDE I-131 <13.1 <5.30 <7.22 <7.17 <13.9 <12.4 Cs-134 <4.97 <2.56 <2.41 <2.61 <4.74 <2.89 Cs-137 <5.26 <2.80 <2.22 <2.83 <3.58 <4.35

<9.26 <5.79 <5.82 <6.31 <7.91 <8.44 Zr-95

<5.34 <3.72 <3.70 <3.88 <5.23 <5.38 Nb-95

<6.15 <3.11 <2.86 <3.04 <4.46 <5.32 Co-58

<5.06 <2.94 <2.67 <2.76 <4.52 <4.60 Mn-54

<13.1 <6.75 <7.72 <7.85 <10.6 <9.80 Fe-59 <10.4

<11.9 <6.07 <6.49 <7.12 <9.71 Zn-65 <4.35

<4.99 <2.81 <3.14 <2.55 <4.43 Co-60 222120.8 164i24.3 38.0111.4 40.6i12.7 <33.7 233122.2 K-40 <12.8

<10.7 <7.74 <7.62 <8.96 <8.40 Ba/La-140

• Optional sample location. Samples not required by Technical Specifications.

• • CmHmsgsnds to sample locations noted on the maps in Section 3.3.

i I

~~~~~~~~~--~~~~~-----~~--

I- 8888888888888888888888888 O, . $5Y55555555555555555

-omnm@

nn--- nommm-wwooSoo-5d$55 6m nnon ococococcococo- c oooo-oo o-e-o e

oodoooooooooooooooooooooo ooo

-~~~~------~~~~~~~~~-----

ooooooooooooooooeceeeeeee 1 CooooooCooooooooo.ocococco w c+1 o+1o+1M o+1 M cm-mm@ c c o M M @ is cococco e o+t+t+1+t l

41 44 +# +1 +1 +1 41 %_ $ $

O. w-wn@ @

nn--- -m----- -wmsnmme-nnmem o om 1 ocococoooooooooo- o ooooo-o-o ooo g

z ococodooooooooooooooooooe O

w oC ooOC oCCCC OOoCoC oCococco

<W coooooooooooooooooooooooo coooooooooooooooooooooooo m O +t+t+1+3 +t +4 44 +f +4 44 n

NN w w v o o m o- m e e+1+1+1+144 w@ m - +1+4+1 nneem +1 +1

+1+14144+4 emom f y a

ooooooooooooooo--

---N -------

oo ooo---o-o ooooo s

doddddoddad6dododdoodedda m a

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

t < L eoooeeceoooooo~~~~~~~-----

o c o c o c o o o o o o o o 8. E. cocococco oceeooooo wE o

L o

_e ooo$ooooooooooooooooooo$

+i +a w 0nmmm@ w +t u

-~~~~~o----~~o

+i+i+1 nnwmm-@ men m +1 w +# u +1+#+i+i w w +i+1 n-~~o-E-n

. @ N, o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o- o o o-oooo -o-o g p W

g dddddddddddddddeddddddddd J +I a e

• E w ---------------

ooooooeceeeococ- oo ece------ eoooe L

';

Q c5 ooooooooooooooooooooooooo dodd LD. - O z Nwun ,c nu m  %'+imdmed+t edw n ud,%' du S' dwS'

,anmd,M' dodo e-m cuew muu W m 2 O~

W .

~~~~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~

o "cc~ o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o~ o~ ~ m e - S - eooo~m~ e n$'o d o o~ od l

W J

g

<C g4 F g ooooooooooooooooooooooooo Q3 n o ::> 0 NU

• as H o L -------------------------

P EH O " L ocE.eccococcoE.o8.cocoE.oeo8."o co cooococco C coco coo g 4 o oooooooooooo@oooooooo@coe.

w +1+1+1+1+t+i+6+t+1+1+1 44+t+i+t+t+1+tu +t +t c

-o@ 4WTNem@ N -

Q g Q. nn-----o----OvmNeemnom@ - o-O -O- - - o-o

~ m F C o c o c c o C C o o C o c o C o C. C C o c o C o.

l ww g ooooooooooooooooooooooooo z@

M OM & -------------------------

OM 1 ococoocococooooooooooccoo M cO 1 ocooCoo *

• 9

• C C l

s g o ooooooooooooooooooooooooo .o 1

4Q m

+t +1 +t +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 44 +4 +1 44 +1 +1 +1 +1 44 44 +4 +1 +1 +1 44 Gnmv@~------------e

~ bN-M@ momveo-mmNom6mb Q

J g

8 c o o o o o o o. c o ? ? o ? o o. o. o. g o.---ooo C. ? o. ? o. $

O 4 ooooooooooooooooooo. oococo g a

W M M

E 1 -

C z L o E.cococoCococooococoooo C ocoeocooococcooecoccobo S o

M o cooooooooooooooooooooooo.C

+1 +1 +1+1+4 +1+t +1 +1 +1 +1 +4 +4 44 +t +1 44 +t +t +t +t +t +t +1 +1 wvmmcmvemb o

.C C

m N nn------- movb-Nom-Nemmbb O

> ocooocooqqqqogoo

~ ~ ~ - ---o--o-coe G g g g

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o,c o,o,o,q q o,o,q ooooooooo H

W #

M m

---

8 o

b 888888888888888o888888888 3 H

55,5.55555,55555555555555555 nn------ W-m-Om On@ @ omee-----e-i N

a ooooooooooooooooo--

d66ddddddd6dddddddd660$$$

ooo oo-o-o ooo S

M C

O O

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ ~

kkkkkkkkkbkDkkkkkkkkkkkkk m@ o@ menmnmsnecmenn-en-mm Ea WO h-~GR-UCRetCREOUQRecCRetd C ~

nhnnmmmmvwwwnmmmme oooooooooooooooooooooo@ ooo E

m l

l 1 6-12

' ~

- wm N N --- N N - -%  % g CoC oOCCCC gocCoCoccoC oCoC oco O -se-e-no-m-N,,w,,

: : :: - ease- **'23as-----s-a-mmmm-se,Neom@

93  :  ::-

- -*--------o - - * -o ------

Q t

CO.O.O.99009099"9 ooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 9"99"909 9"99 0.99CC COOOoC C oceCCoCoC oO C C C ocoOO O oooooooooooooooCOoO C oCC ooco ddddddddddddddddddddddddddd

+1 +1 +4 44 44 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 44 +4 +1 +4 44 +1 +4 +1 +1 44 +4 +4 +4 44 +1 +1 +1 O m@ eb-vmmMb@ cmobmNvvoevN@ -@ @

s- - o=-----------==------==---====

1 9 C 9 9 0 0. g o o o o o o,q q o g e o o o c o,c o c o g coooooooooooooooooooooooeco z

O

~ --~~~~~~~------------------

eCoccoCoeCCoccocCC C ooc C occo l L ococococococcocoooooooooooo 1 H<H w ococoeococcoooooooooooooooo

+1+1+144+1+1+4+1+1 +1+1 +4 44 +1 +1 44 44 +1+1+1+4+1 - - +4 - +t M O N--b-m-wb ememovmmembem-N eee a --------- --C- ----=-C o---o--

W 0 9 9 9 9 9 0 9 9 0 9 9 9 0.9 9 9 0.O.9 o.9 9 0 c 9 0 ococococococcocoooooooooooo l

. --------------------------- ,I 1 < 1 L

cococooooooooooooooooecoooo wE O o C. c o c o o c o. C o c o c o o C C. c o c c o o o o. c o ocooooooooooooooooooooooooo

+t +4 +t 44 41 +4 +4 +1 +4 +1 Q

_ N--WMMW eeMbN=mNNvm@ Cev-@

44 +1 +1 +1 44 +1 44 +4 44 +1 +1 +4 44 +4 44 +1 M MC N --- ---- - N - --N ON ---------o-N g m- 6 o $e w n #

l 5cO fm bU2 o

p

- - 6.----------

-nNs-m-wwmmNsNbmwmnmNwwwob e d6 o

pw QQ -------------------c------N S m5 H E p< &  ::::::::::::::::::::::::::

m < ,0 >o 8

NU -O  % - --------------------------

e am H 1 oceoceeoceeoooooooooooooooo w z%

r-o" s  :..: --: 2 : :..: : ,s9 : : : : : : :.1 : : : : : : s--: ---,--

g <(

N -wm-Nmmmbweee@ m,m-@ m,m@ nwa d Q. ------------N - - - - --oo---o--

m p ococcocooocococococcoccoooo g g g ecooooooooooooooooooooooooo h" h Om + -_---_---_--_---_---_--_-_m mm 1 ococoeocococoeocooococococo eO g g 1

o coooooooooooooooooooooooooo

. **. E

+1 +1 44 44 +1 +1 +1 +4 44 +1 44 +1 +1 +1 44 +1 +1 44 44 +4 +4 +1 +1 44 +4 44 +4 .o 4Q m meMM--W mm@ memo @ 44N@ me@ N m@ mm--o----o-- E J g t e C - eO.-O- C- o.

O - -C.- O- c- O ooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

- -S-O- O. - k9 0999 k 9 9 0. O. k O. O. e o

.g i

4 e G

W U ---------------------------

r 1 L ococoooooooooooS.ooooooooooo

c. c o c o.c o c c o o. o c o *c

• CoooocooCCC o

z *********** I O

e O *ecmbNbmbb@

+i*-*-*44 * -* +i

• ve@

• +i* Mbmo-N@

• *- *- *+4*iCN 44 - -- +i + +i +i +i 44 - +i - - - 44 NNM m@

- ,e g

g N o ow -- - - - --o-o-----

g o, o c o e, q o o q q o, o, q q q o, 9 9 , c, q o, q o, q C,

- - - -c--

g g a

oooooooooooooooooooooooocoo W m Y z

---

o 1 eooooooccCocoeococcoooooooo .5 i C C.C C C o C.C o c o c o C C C C C.C o C C o C o o C ocooooooooooooooooooooooooo D

e o +t+1+1 +t+1 +4 +4 +1+1 +1+1 +1 +1 +1 +4 +1 44 +1 +4 +t+1+1+1+d +1 +1 +l 0 b

--@ m---mmmmecovvN N M-@ mH@ - 6b----o------

M - - o--------cN - - - ,

8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C

• O. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. O C g cocococooococcooooooooooooo .

g C 8 5 *

$.$E*EEEEEEEEEE E mE*$ E EEEEEE $

w ee-Bo=mormer,EEE*$

ee -

~eececeeeeee

- em eee=AA eme@ -

o e -a Wo bbAb b kAMememmocece ooooooooooooo--------------

- - - A N E m

M e

6-13

- t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t

0000000000000000000000000 i 0000000000000000000000000

- S 0000000000000000000000000

- 1 N 1111111i111ii1i111i1i11 9354981 06942841 2291 31 4998

- O 221 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 01 1 1 1 000 0000000000000000000000000 K

0000000000000000000000000 E 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 T

I 0000000000000000000000000 S

0000000000000000000000000 S- 00o0000000000000000000000 N i i ii1111iii111111i i i i 1ii

. O N 952591 4554738523390201 808 I O 221 1 1 21 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 01 1 1 1 01 0 T 0000000000000000000000000 A J 0000000000000000000000000 T

S E .

T I

S E 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 A T 0000000000000000000000000 N I 0000000000000000000000000 OM G S

0000000000oo0o000000o0000 i i 1i1 11i1ii1ii1 1iiii1ii

- - I N 5863045470726722208222087 S O 221 1 221 1 1 21 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 01 1 1 1 00 S 1 0000000000000000000000000 E I 0000000000000000000000000 L

P i

M

. 6 A /m E S T i E

- I C N 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 S E T p O I T

I 0000000000000000000000000 0000000000000000000000000 E F LA TY AT S 0000000000000000000000000 i 1iiiii111i111i11111i1i1 L A U I N 46535028486954201 9920391 6

/ C V CO J 221 1 1 21 01 1 1 01 1 1 1 1 001 1 1 01 0 B I O 0000000000000000000000000 P I A T T M T R C L H 0000000000000000000000000

- N A A P A

. E T N E R B E 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 T 0000000000000000000000000 O S I 0000000000000000000 000000 B S S 00000000000o0o00000000000 R O I - i1ii1111i11iiii11i11i1111 A RG N O

636600328881 850221 0293099 221 1 221 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 01 1 00 L 0000000000000000000000000 A G 000000000000000C000000000 T

N E

M N

O E 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 R T I 0000000000000000000000000 I 0000000000000000000000000 V S o000000000000000000000000 N -

E N i 1 111iiiii11i11ii1i111 O 776278384682721 208801 0887 221 1 1 1 1 01 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 001 1 1 000 0000000000000000000000000 1

D 0000000000000000000000000 D

N 6666666666666666666666666 EE 9999999999999999999999999

/////// / / / / / / / / / / / / / / ////

T 852 9529641 851 852 963073074 KA 01

/ / 2201

/ / //1/ 201/ / /1 /2001

/ / /2201

/ / / 2/ 201

/ // 1////

2 ED 1 1 1 1 22 2233334444455556666 E 0000000000000000000000000 W

I mI

~~~~~~m m - ~~~~~~~~~~mm m ~ ~ mm -

cococococcooooooooooooooooo ocoocoooooooooooooooooooooo .

2 l O

ddddddddddddddddddddddddddd M M M M M M 44 M M M M M M 44 M M M M M M M M M M M M +1 s omNo-NmmbbememmbNm em owmN-bN g ~~m -~~m - ~ ~ ~om ow ~ m m m m ~~~nm m n CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC 1 ococococococococococooococo '

~ ~ m mmm m ~ ~ ~ ~ m ~~m ~ ~ m m m m m m m m m m ocococococococococoocococco ococcococococooocococococco ,

Z e 1 4 e--emm m,eme-em,,enmnme>me,m l l 1 l l l O q

~ m m ~ ~~~ ~ n-nunom ~ m ~ ~ ~ m m m em ~ m h

q CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC ocococococococococococococo m

W

~ ~~~~~

b w w w w ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ m mm ~ m um ~ ~

D coccoAmccooooooooooooooooooo

< Z CCCCChCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC bEo 9 $ $ e-~D,mxxweeememumm

$ $ $ ^< $ $ M M M M M M ?i M M M M M M ?l M M M ?i ?i e -

m em

~~m um ~~~~~m ummemxm nom m ~ ~ ~ mm m e nm ~ n W cocco ooooooooooooooooooooo g {c ddddd ddddddddddddddddddddd W J +l 3 a C

e u W k*nE C & w ~U W ~ 2 ~~m mm ~~~~~~~m~~ m m w m ~ ~~m mm ~ ~

o cooocococococooocococococco OM O Z cocoooooooooooooooooooooooo w < 5O- h *,<0 9. $~,own,,wwmemm-nc,mmeenennem

$ $ $ $ $ $ $ ?iM M M M M M M M ?iM M M M ?i fiM M M Q su> O g m m m ~ ~ ~ ~~~m mon ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m m - ~ ~ nn - -

N - CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC

@ gHh a ddddddddddddddddddddddddddd y Z <

J L 4 m wH

< Z W w ~m m m um m - m - ~ ~ m m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m m m m m - - m h 2 ocococcooocococcccoccococco OO Z CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC 2

~0 9 M M M M M $i M M M M M M M M M, ?i enn,nmmmme-nmo x ?,i mmn-x,enwn

?i M ?i M M M M ?l Mi M 4x g

~m m m ~ m m - ~ nnw~ m m CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC

-~m m m m m m nm m n y

4 cococococococcococcoccoccoo b

W Z ,

Z l O ~~m - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ m - ~~m u m m m m m m e ococococcococococococococco coooooooooooooooooooooooooo M g i

> O ddddddddddddddddddddddddddd Z e N+1 m

+1 o+1e+1o+1m+1b +1m +1m+1b +1 m +1o c+1~+1,1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1 44 + ,+1+1+1+1+1 W e w m ~ ~ m m m m m m m onum e m m m m m m m m m m n mmmmNom moco p

Q 999999999999999999999999999 ococococococcoooooooooooooo O

Z ececeweceweecececoccececoce W RRRRRRRRERRRRERR,RRE,RRRERERE

-xmnamnwemwemen ~ w nxmnmemo C kkCDDkCCDkkCDDkCDDkCCDkkCDD roronzememmmemoeoom m m m unann ococcoccococcom m m m m m m m m mm m m 1

1 6-15 l

TABLE 6-7 l NMP/JAF SITE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARC0AL CARTRIDGE SAMPLES - 0FF-SITE STATIONS l-131 ACTIVITY pCi/m i1 SIGMA LOCARON WEEK END R-1* R-2* R-3* R-4* R-5* D-2 E F G DATE OFF-SITE OFF-SITE OFF-SITE OFF-SITE OFF-SIR OFF-SIE OFF-SITE OFF-SITE OFF-SIE i

l 01/09/96 <0.012 <0.013 <0.010 <0.012 <0.009 <0.015 <0.008 <0.015 <0.012 01/16/96 <0.009 <0.013 <0.009 <0.012 <0.011 <0.013 <0.009 <0.014 <0.009 l 01/23/96 <0.014 <0.009 <0.015 <0.013 <0.010 <0.011 <0.016 <0.009 <0.017 j 01/30/96 <0.014 <0.011 <0.012 <0.019 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.017 <0.012 02/06/96 <0.013 <0.014 <0.012 <0.013 <0.010 <0.014 <0.015 <0.011 <0.014 02/13/96 <0.010 <0.009 <0.008 <0.013 <0.012 <0.012 <0.013 <0.010 <0.011 02/20/96 <0.009 <0.011 <0.015 <0.014 <0.011 <0.009 <0.009 <0.014 <0.016 02/27/96 <0.012 <0.012 <0.016 <0.012 <0.007 <0.012 <0.011 <0.020 <0.018 03/05/96 <0.010 <0.012 <0.009 <0.015 <0.015 <0.010 <0.014 <0.010 <0.011 03/12/96 <0.013 <0.010 <0.010 + 015 <0.016 <0.009 <0.010 <0.011 <0.012 03/19/96 <0.010 <0.012 <0.008 <0.t)14 <0.011 <0.011 <0.012 <0.010 <0.015 03/26/96 <0.012 <0.012 <0.009 <0.013 <0.012 <0.013 <0.012 <0.007 <0.013 04/02/96 <0.012 <0.014 <0.007 <0.013 <0.015 <0.018 <0.013 <0.014 <0.015 04/09/96 <0.010 <0.013 <0.016 <0.011 <0.016 <0.018 <0.014 <0.011 <0.017 04/16/96 <0.009 <0.013 <0.008 <0.013 <0.010 <0.n' 4 <0.012 <0.011 <0.010 04/23/96 <0.012 <0.007 <0.013 <0.016 <0.014 <0. i <0.010 <0.015 <0.017 04/30/96 <0.008 <0.010 <0.007 <0.016 <0.013 <0.0J9 <0.014 <0.009 <0.013 05/07/96 <0.008 <0.010 <0.009 <0.012 <0.012 <0.017 <0.008 <0.012 <0.009 05/14/96 <0.011 <0.011 <0.015 <0.013 <0.015 <0.010 <0.014 <0.014 <D.013 05/21/96 <0.008 <0.019 <0.008 <0.011 <0.008 <0.016 <0.018 <0.010 <0.012 05/28/96 <0.011 <0.009 <0.016 <0.013 <0.014 <0.012 <0.009 <3.007 <0.011 06/04/96 <0.007 <0.013 <0.015 <0.016 <0.006 <0.016 <0.013 <0.014 <0.008 06/11/96 <0.009 <0.007 <0.015 <0.009 <0.007 <0.008 <0.011 <0.017 <0.009 06/18/96 <0.010 <0.014 <0.009 <0.012 <0.010 <0.008 <0.010 <0.011 <0.014 06/25/96 <0.010 <0.009 <0.009 <0.013 <0.016 <0.015 <0.008 <0.011 <0.008

• Sample locations required by Technical Specifications

TABLE 6-7 (Continued)

NMP/JAF SITE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARC0AL CARTRIDGE SAMPLES - 0FF-SITE STATIONS l-131 ACTIVITY pCi/m i 1 SIGMA LOCATION WEL END R-1* R-2* R-3* R-4* R-5* D-2 E F G' DATE OFF-SITE OFF-SITE OFF-SITE OFF-SITE OFF-SITE OFF-SITE OFF-SITE OFF-SITE OFF-SITE 07/02/96 <0.009 <0.008 <0.008 <0.013 <0.015 <0.009 <0.010 <0.010 <0.013 07/09/96 <0.010 <0.016 <0.009 <0.011 <0.013 <0.014 <0.007 <0.011 <0.009 07/16/96 <0.013 <0.011 <0.009 <0.014 <0.011 <0.011 <0.014 <0.010 <0.015 .

07/23/96 <0.008 <0.010 <0.008 <0.009 <0.011 <0.008 <0.013 <4.011 <0.011 07/30/96 <0.009 <0.010 <0.016 <0.006 <0.009 <0.008 <0.008 0.010 <0.012 08/06/96 <0.008 <0.013 <0.012 <0.008 <0.015 <0.014 <0.010 s.018 <0.012 08/13/96 <0.007 <0.012 <0.009 <0.013 <0.010 <0.011 <0.009 <0.013 <0.009 08/20/96 <0.008 <0.012 <0.006 <0.014 <0.015 <0.009 <0.010 <0.010 <0.014 08/27/96 <0.011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.012 <0.010 <0.009 <0.016 <0.014 <0.014

<0.013 <0.012 <0.011 <0.014 <0.013 <0.016

$ 09/03/96 <0.011 <0.013 <0.011

<0.018 09/10/96 <0.009 <0.017 <0.013 <0.014 <0.006 <0.012 <0.012 <0.011

<0.009 <0.010 <0.016 <0.013 <0.009 <0.009 <0.017 <0.019 <0.012 09/17/96

<0.012 <0.010 <0.016 <0.008 <0.009 <0.007 <0.014 <0.016 <0.011 09/24/96

<0.008 <0.013 <0.013 <0.014 <0.009 <0.012 <0.010 <0.012 <0.013 10/01/96

<0.013 <0.010 <0.014 <0.016 <0.008 <0.009 <0.011 <0.015 <0.012 10/08/96

<0.016 <0.012 <0.015 <0.011 <0.013 <0.012 <0.020 <0.011 10/15/96 <0.013

<0.013 <0.012 <0.007 <0.012 <0.008 <0.015 <0.012 <0.0!4 <0.009 10/22/96

<0.012 <0.010 <0.014 <0.013 <0.016 <0.010 <0.012 <0.007 10/29/96 <0.008

<0.008 <0.015 <0.014 <0.015 <0.012 <0.010 <0.016 <0.015 11/05/96 <0.010

<0.007 <0.013 <0.010 ' <0.008 <0.010 <0.005 <0.016 <0.012 I1/12/96 <0.009

<0.008 <0.013 <0.009 <0.007 <0.014 <0.010 <0.014 <0.007 11/19/96 <0.010

<0.013 <0.013 <0.013 <0.010 <0.011 <0.015 <0.010 11/26/96 <0.008 <0.011

<0.010 <0.016 <0.010 <0.013 <0.013 <0.011 <0.013 12/03/96 <0.011 <0.008

<0.010 <0.006 12/10/96 <0.010 <0.010 <0.008 <0.017 <0.613  ::0.008 <0.011

<0.012 ls

<0.014 <0.011 <0.014 <0.007 <0.012 <0.013 <0.010 12/ 4/96 <0.013

<0.011 <0.011 <0.014 <0.010 <0.012 <0.011 12/23/96 <0.011 <0.011 <0.015

<0.015 <0.012 <0.013 <0.010 <0.010 <0.014 12/30/96 <0.007 <0.009 <0.004

- - - - - --- o r+,r.4hamerame Str4hibr9 @g;n0[hy-So_ns __

TABLE 6-8 NMP/JAF SITE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARC0AL CARTRIDGE SAMPLES - ON-SITE STATIONS l-131 ACTIVITY pCi/m 1 SIGMA LOCATION WEEK ENDING DATE D1 ON-SITE G ON-SITE H ON-SITE I ON-SITE J ON-SITE K ON-SITE 01/08/96 <0.009 <0.012 <0.009 <0.015 <0.016 <0.013 01/15/96 <0.011 <0.012 <0.020 <0.022 <0.011 <0.010 01/22/96 <0.009 <0.014 <0.010 <0.014 <0.011 <0.010 01/29/96 <0.015 <0.011 <0.016 <0.012 <0.009 <0.012 02/05/96 <0.016 <0.011 <0.008 <0.013 <0.011 <0.007 02/12/96 <0.014 <0.010 <0.010 <0.012 <0.012 <0.007 02/20/96 <0.009 <0.011 <0.008 <0.014 <0.013 <0.013 2 02/26/96 <0.010 <0.012 <0.018 <0.006 <0.012 <0.016 g 03/04/96 <0.010 <0.012 <0.011 <0.011 <0.012 <0.014 03/11/96 <0.008 <0.010 <0.009 <0.013 <0.016 <0.008 03/18/96 <0.013 <0.008 <0.014 <0.014 <0.012 <0.005 03/25/96 <0.009 <0.010 <0.015 <0.012 <0.017 <0.010 04/01/96 <0.014 <0.008 <0.012 <0.016 <0.011 <0.008 04/08/96 <0.008 <0.012 <0.008 <0.014 0.009 <0.010 04/15/96 <0.010 <0.014 <0.015 <0.016 <0.008 <0.011 04/22/96 <0.011 <0.014 <0.009 <0.015 <0.016 <0.017 04/29/96 <0.010 <0.014 <0.008 <0.011 <0.011 <0.005 05/06/96 <0.012 <0.010 <0.014 <0.015 <0.012 <0.013 05/13/96 <0.008 <0.013 <0.011 <0.011 <0.010 <0.011 05/20/96 <0.014 <0.015 <0.014 <0.018 <0.009 <0.008 05/28/96 <0.010 <0.012 <0.008 <0.009 <0.011 <0.015 06/03/96 <0.011 <0.014 <0.017 <0.012 <0.010 <0.014 06/10/96 <0.007 <0.014 <0.016 <0.015 <0.010 <0.007 06/17/96 <0.012 <0.010 <0.015 <0.018 <0.013 <0.010 06/24/96 <0.008 <0.017 <0.008 <0.017 <0.013 <0.010

TABLE 6-8 (Continued)

NMP/JAF SITE ENVIRONMENTAL CHARC0AL CARTRIDGE SAMPLES - ON SITE STATIONS I-131 ACTIVITY pCi/m i1 SIGMA LOCATION WEEK ENDING DATE D1 ON-SITE G ON-SITE H ON-SITE I ON-SITE J ON-SITE K-ON-SITE'

<0.010 <0.012 <0.008 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 07/01/96

<0.010 <0.010 <0.018 <0.017 <0.016 <0.010 l 07/08/96

<0.014 <0.011 <0.012 <0.014 <0.013 <0.012 07/15/96

<0.012 <0.008 <0.016 <0.012 <0.013 <0.008 07/22/96

<0.012 <0.014 <0.010 <0.014 <0.016 <0 015 07/29/96

<0.009 <0.007 <0.008 No Result <0.015 <0.021 08/05/96

<0.011 <0.011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.007 <0.012 08/12/96

<0.011 <0.011 <0.014 <0.010 <0.015 <0.013 08/19/96

<0.010 <0.011 <0.018 <0.015 <0.008 <0.008 m 08/26/96

<0.010 <0.006 <0.017 <0.014 <0.011 <0.015 S 09/03/96

<0.011 <0.010 <0.020 <0.017 <0.013 <0.010 09/09/96

<0.012 <0.010 <0.016 <0.007 <0.009 <0.013 09/16/96

<0.010 <0.015 <0.014 <0.021 <0.014 <0.009 09/23/96

<0.014 <0.013 <0.010 <0.017 <0.013 <0.019 09/30/96

<0.011 <0.008 <0.009 <0.012 <0.009 10/07/96 <0.007

<0.014 <0.012 <0.010 <0.011 <0.014 10/14/96 <0.010

<0.009 <0.015 <0.011 <0.019 <0.010 10/21/96 <0.111

<0.013 <0.010 <0.015 <0.010 <0.014 10/28/96 <0.014

<0.009 <0.016 <0.009 <0.009 <0.012 11/04/96 <0.010

<0.024 <0.014 <0.008 <0.016 <0.014 11/12/96 <0.025

<0.009 <0.009 <0.013 <0.013 <0.007 I1/18/96 <0.007

<0.012 <0.016 <0.012 <0.010 <0.016 11/25/96 <0.014

<0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.010 <0.009 12/02/96 <0.007

<0.010 <0.012 <0.008 <0.011 <0.015 12/09/96 <0.009

<0.014 <0.014 <0.016 <0.013 <0.018 12/16/96 <0.014

<0.012 <0.010 <0.012 <0.016 <0.018 12/23/96 <0.008

<0.011 <0.008 <0.010 <0.012 <0.006 12/30/96 <0.008

TABLE 6-9 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of 10' pCi/m' 1 Sigma R1 0FF-SITE COMPOSITE

• NUCLIDES JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE Be-7 80.717.12 80.8i7.4 10417.04 87.817.65 98.2i7.2 59.316.03 Zn-65 <3.07 <3.42 <2.50 <3.15 <2.14 <2.57 Cs-134 <1.22 <1.52 <0.87 <1.13 <0.74 <0.98 Cs-137 <1.24 <1.04 <1.01 <1.00 <0.92 <1.26 Zr-95 <2.01 <2.50 <2.08 <2.48 <1.91 <2.24 Nb-95 <1.37 <1.91 <1.45 <1.63 <1.52 <1.42 Co-58 <1.26 <0.95 <1.37 <1.67 <1.15 <1.09

$ Mn-54 <1.24 <1.50 <0.95 <1.31 <0.86 <1.04 o Co-60 <1.39 <1.52 <1.32 <1.34 <1.01 <0.92 K-40 <15.7 33.7i7.2 36.516.23 6.5414.36 6.41i4.0 <17.3 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD NUCLIDES JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER Be-7 93.5i7.16 87.li7.30 78.615.88 74.0i6.04 55.315.53 38.415.55 Zn-65 <2.45 <2.71 <2.31 <2.76 <2.54 <2.95 Cs-134 <1.05 <0.94 <0.94 <0.90 <1.19 <1.10 Cs-137 <1.02 <1.11 <0.89 <0.72 <0.77 <0.98 Zr-95 <1.65 <1.95 <2.03 <2.12 <2.25 <2.23 Nb-95 <1.41 <1.29 <1.59 <1.44 <0.86 <1.42 Co-58 <1.12 <1.22 <1.02 <1.05 <0.99 <1.28 Mn-54 <1.05 <1.11 <0.75 <0.85 <1.13 <0.92 Co-60 <1.47 <1.27 <1.24 <0.73 <1.52 <1.13 K-40 <12.7 32.816.38 <11.7 9.73i4.42 27016.00 40.916.67 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

• Sample Location Required by Technical Specifications.

t Plant Related Radionuclides.

TABLE 6-9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of 10 'pCi/m' i 1 Sigma R2 0FF-SITE COMPOSITE

• NUCLIDES JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH .APPIL MAY JUNE Be-7 71.616.57 72.3i6.7 93.914.32 102i7.56 109i7.04 53.7i7.32 Zn-65 <3.32 <1.88 <3.85 <2.37 <2.08 <3.64 Cs-134 <1.00 <0.95 <1.20 <1.17 <0.70 <1.39 Cs-137 <1.38 <0.96 <0.79 <0.92 <0.74 <1.40 '

Zr-95 <2.82 <1.95 <2.19 <2.47 <1.93 <2.60 Nb-95 <1.78 <1.91 <1.80 <1.44 <0.85 <1.79 Co-58 <1.90 <0.90 <1.60 <1.31 <1.03 <1.87

? Mn-54 <1.20 <0.84 <1.19 <1.29 <0.71 <1.16 ,

S Co-60 <1.39 <1.15 <1.50 <1.38 <0.66 <1.87 K-40 210i13.0 <12.8 25.414.08 44.0t7.51 <9.98 21.617.20

<LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD Otherst <LLD JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER-NUCLIDES Be-7 88.717.59 101 7.79 69.9i8.41 61.115.89 57.815.07 28.li4.85

<2.71 <2.64 <2.74 <2.37 <2.11 <2.28 Zn-65

<1.26 <0.85 <1.34 <1.31 <0.56 <0.83 Cs-134

<1.19 <0.85 <1.33 <0.98 <0.84 <0.99 Cs-137 <2.44

<2.47 <2.97 <2.83 <1.92 <1.85 Zr-95 <1.12

<1.69 <1.50 <2.23 <1.64 <1.20 Nb-95 <1.01

<1.18 <1.02 <1.68 <0.99 <0.83 Co-58 <0.97

<1.13 <1.06 <1.56 <0.88 <0.96 Mn-54 <1.34

<1.29 <1.06 <1.88 <0.75 <1.05 Co-60 10.0 4.46 25.217.35 <10.6 24.717.71 41.317.86 <9.42 K-40 <LLD <LLD

<LLD <LLD <LLD Otherst <LLD i

• Sample Location Required by Technical Specifications.

t Plant Related Radionuclides.

TABLE 6-9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of 10-'pCi/m3 i 1 Sigma R3 0FF-SITE COMPOSITE

• NUCLIDES JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE Be-7 79.417.40 69.816.7 92.816.40 98.9i7.77 101i7.29 52.915.98 Zn-65 <3.37 <1.90 <2.93 <2.32 <2.61 <2.66 Cs-134 <1.24 <1.03 <0.79 <0.91 <0.97 <1.09 Cs-137 <0.89 <0.99 <1.08 <0.73 <0.88 <1.06 Zr-95 <2.55 <2.66 <2.52 <2.63 <2.29 <1.73 Nb-95 <1.65 <1.20 <1.69 <1.76 <1.49 <1.23 Co-58 <1.19 <1.34 <1.48 <1.24 <1.16 <1.27

$ Mn-54 <1.31 <1.06 <1.19 <1.11 <0.95 <1.03

" Co-60 <1.44 <1.14 <1.46 <1.20 <0.94 <1.28 K-40 53.2t7.92 <16.1 12218.63 <10.0 28.3i6.2 29.5i7.13 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD t

NUCLIDES JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER-Be-7 71.816.82 10819.91 71.516.20 65.3i5.89 57.li5.05 29.7i7.25 Zn-65 <3.43 <3.02 <2.07 <2.44 <1.79 <4.36 Cs-134 <0.90 <1.42 <0.88 <0.70 <0.87 <1.61 Cs-137 <0.64 <1.24 <1.05 <0.94 <0.68 <1.61 Zr-95 <1.98 <3.41 <2.56 <2.61 <1.70 <2.77 Nb-95 <1.45 <1.70 <1.40 <1.40 <1.04 <2.16  !

Co-58 <1.01 <2.66 <1.38 <1.08 <1.04 <2.61 Mn-54 <0.92 <1.48 <1.20 <1.01 <0.84 <1.50 Co-60 <1.44 <3.02 <1.48 <1.17 <0.97 <1.91 K-40 9.57i5.98 43.2i9.59 36.317.48 <11.0 <11.4 36.li8.60 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD o Sample Location Required by Technical Specifications.

t Plant Related Radionuclides.

l

TABLE 6-9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of 10pCi/m' i 1 Sigma R4 0FF-SITE COMPOSITE

• FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE-NUCLIDES JANUARY 70.016.31 75.9i6.6 99.0i7.99 72.918.61 101i6.49 77.316.72 Be-7 <3.16

<3.58 <2.96 <3.11 <4.09 <1.45 Zn-65 <0.72 <1.07 Cs-134 <1.06 <1.12 <0.96 <1.23

<1.22 <1.00 <0.88 <1.44 <0.68 <0.78 Cs-137 <1.87

<1.91 <2.76 <2.31 <3.23 <1.77 Zr-95 <1.61 <1.76 Nb-95 <1.47 <1.55 <1.52 <1.70

<1.48 <1.37 <1.84 <0.82 <1.22 Co-58 <1.36

<1.43 <1.76 <1.41 <1.07 <1.05

? Mn-54 <0.95 <1.29

<1.06 <1.27 <1.46 <1.38 <1.10 S Co-60 <10.5 <14.4 K-40 <1.48 34.4i7.5 <13.7 20.816.40

<LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD Otherst <LLD <LLD SEPTEMBER OctuBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER-NUCLIDES JULY AUGUST 10819.06 78.3*7.37 69.8 8.24 46.314.84 42.015.19 Be-7 84.318.98 <1.87 <2.21

<3.51 <4.63 <3.95 <4.68 Zn-65 <1.73 <0.75 <0.80 Cs-134 <1.49 <1.24 <1.12

<0.84 <1.44 <0.75 <1.09 Cs-137 <1.09 <1.28 <2.08

<3.25 <3.34 <2.95 <1.49 Zr-95 <2.84 <1.31 <1.33

<2.59 <2.15 <1.75 <1.64 Nb-95 <2.15 <1.11 <0.59

<2.02 <1.91 <1.64 Co-58 <1.73 <0.91 <0.98

<1.74 <1.63 <1.12 Mn-54 <1.57 <1.05 <1.16

<2.72 <2.04 <1.32 Co-60 31.5i7.87 22.615.26 7.93i3.96 27.716.51 48.5i8.32 28.916.87 K-40 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD Otherst <LLD <LLD o Sample Location Required by Technical Specifications.

_ _ _ _ _ _ L P_lsnt Rela _ted Radionuclides. _ _

TABLE 6-9 (Continued) l l CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES 0F JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1996

Results in Units of 10pCi/m' 1 Sigma I

R5 0FF-SITE COMPOSITE (CONTROL)*

NUCLIDES JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE Be-7 72.li6.44 69.216.4 114i7.25 81.317.64 105i6.74 68.6 6.49 Zn-65 <3.17 <2.88 <1.77 <3.71 <2.01 <3.03 Cs-134 <1.10 <0.94 <0.60 <1.32 <0.71 <1.22 Cs-137 <1.15 <0.79 <0.74 <1.43 <0.51 <1.05 Zr-95 <1.78 <2.03 <1.65 <2.37 <1.24 <2.43 Nb-95 <1.25 <1.46 <1.33 <2.08 <1.19 <1.30 Co-58 <0.98 <1.45 <1.02 <1.58 <0.90 <1.27

? Mn-54 <0.87 <0.62 <0.75 <1.24 <0.77 <1.26 M Co-60 <0.67 <0.97 <0.62 <1.50 <1.08 <1.11 K-40 <10.4 <12.1 <8.17 30.5i7.96 10.8t3.1 40.lt7.19 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD NUCLIDES JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER Be-7 107i7.94 111i8.27 89.7i6.90 79.317.17 81.4t7.30 36.015.93 Zn-65 <3.20 <2.41 <1.97 <2.95 <1.90 <2.76 Cs-134 <0.96 <1.04 <0.68 <1.30 <0.93 <1.14 Cs-137 <0.73 <1.12 <0.94 <1.37 <1.12 <0.92 Zr-95 <2.15 <2.22 <2.25 <2.34 <2.38 <2.38 Nb-95 <1.66 <1.49 <1.39 <1.68 <1.82 <1.31 Co-58 <1.19 <1.51 <1.06 <1.38 <1.21 <1.16 Mn-54 <1.07 <1.02 <0.98 <1.05 <1.36 <1.11 Co-60 <1.16 <0.92 <0.91 <1.90 <1.65 <0.72 K-40 10.614.82 9.7214.86 <12.8 51.719.04 31.417.24 25.7i5.93 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

• Sample Location Required by Technical Specifications.

t Plant Related Radionuclides.

TABLE 6-9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of 10' pCi/nr i 1 Sigma D2 0FF-SITE COMPOSITE

• NUCLIDES JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE Be-7 73.3i6.50 66.9 6.8 89.216.66 89.9i7.41 124t7.55 58.516.10 Zn-65 <2.98 <4.21 <1.66 <2.38 <2.56 <2.13 Cs-134 <1.37 <1.38 <0.88 <1.06 <0.91 <1.02 Cs-137 <1.42 <1.50 <0.47 <0.95 <0.71 <0.57 Zr-95 <2.86 <2.93 <2.13 <2.27 <2.01 <2.81 Nb-95 <1.98 <2.14 <1.29 <1.47 <1.42 <1.64 Co-58 <1.54 <1.89 <0.95 <1.43 <1.04 <1.13 m Mn-54 <1.47 <1.40 <0.89 <0.92 <1.16 <1.17 s Co-60 <1.33 <1.38 <1.18 <1.17 <1.12 <0.82  ;

K-40 186i11.9 167112 <9.96 <15.7 24.3i5.2 <12.6 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD NUCLIDES JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER- OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBERL ,

Be-7 95.017.70 95.3i8.39 86.7i8.95 64.416.37 56.215.84 38.415.11 Zn-65 <2.53 <2.35 <3.10 <2.76 <2.99 <2.62 Cs-134 <0.91 <1.18 <1.49 <0.98 <1.09 <1.04 Cs-137 <0.97 <0.94 <1.41 <1.40 <1.03 <0.91 Zr-95 <2.28 <1.92 <2.28 <2.81 <2.12 <2.57 Nb-95 <1.87 <1.68 <2.28 <1.80 <1.74 <2.01 Co-58 <0.92 <1.46 <2.10 <1.63 <1.24 <1.04 Mn-54 <1.07 <1.22 <1.80 <1.52 <1.13 <0.84 Co-60 <0.71 <1.97 <2.46 <1.57 <1.25 <1.28 K-40 <15.9 37.717.33 <19.0 164 11.3 33.816.34 <15.4 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD I

• Optional Sample Location. N_ot Required by Technical Specifications.

l t Plant Related Radionuclides. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ - - _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ - -_

TABLE 6-9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of 10-'pCi/m 1 Sigma E OFF-SITE COMPOSITE

• NUCLIDES JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY- JUNE 8e-7 88.019.01 90.919.1 11119.22 87.3i7.72 111i7.23 75.0i8.19 Zn-65 <4.46 <3.80 <2.36 <3.78 <2.38 <3.77 Cs-134 <1.29 <1.86 <0.90 <1.28 <0.76 <0.87 Cs-137 <1.32 <1.34 <1.10 <1.07 <0.73 <1.00 Zr-95 <4.06 <3.69 <1.79 <2.59 <1.67 <3.05 Nb-95 <2.15 <1.78 <2.44 <1.35 <1.34 <2.22 Co-58 <1.54 <2.25 <1.25 <1.33 <0.84 <1.63

? Mn-54 <0.93 <2.06 <1.32 <1.48 <0.82 <1.54 E Co-60 <2.10 <2.03 <1.28 <1.28 <0.80 <1.35 K-40 29.916.65 18.418.4 36.0i7.71 45.5i7.58 <8.31 <19.5 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD NUCLIDES JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCIDBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER Be-7 10319.46 103i7.81 56.016.93 63.015.77 56.514.93 38.7i5.87 Zn-65 <4.45 <3.11 <4.55 <2.04 <1.77 <3.31 Cs-134 <1.55 <0.90 <1.57 <1.03 <0.62 <1.27 Cs-137 <1.65 <1.07 <1.40 <0.96 <0.80 <1.30 Zr-95 <2.36 <2.46 <2.96 <2.17 <1.47 <2.71 Nb-95 <2.35 <1.82 <2.02 <1.39 <1.26 <1.94 Co-58 <1.86 <1.37 <1.65 <1.49 <0.85 <1.61 Mn-54 <0.98 <1.35 <1.46 <1.15 <0.89 <1.68 Co-60 <1.40 <0.91 <1.89 <1.53 <1.01 <1.62 K-40 17.316.30 12.514.56 38.818.32 37.2i7.24 12.314.61 <18.1 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

• Optional Sample Locationc Not Required by Technical Specifications.

t Plant Related Radionuclides.

TABLE 6-9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of 10' pCi/m 1 Sigma F 0FF-SITE COMPOSITE

• NUCLIDES JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE Be-7 58.315.78 63.Si6.8 112 8.16 92.619.41 91.8t7.3 72.9 7.11 Zn-65 <2.79 <3.16 <3.13 <4.38 <2.41 <2.22 Cs-134 <1.09 <1.10 <1.06 <1.34 <1.00 <1.47 Cs-137 <0.92 <0.97 <1.13 <1.56 <0.87 <1.47 Zr-95 <2.33 <1.91 <2.48 <4.25 <1.71 <3.21 Nb-95 <1.69 <1.20 <1.70 <2.27 <1.14 <2.07 Co-58 <1.24 <1.25 <1.40 <2.19 <1.27 <1.34

? Mn-54 <1.18 <1.20 <1.41 <1.24 <1.22 <1.39 O Co-60 <1.41 <1.67 <1.11 <2.29 <1.32 <2.09 K-40 <11.0 10.314.1 33.516.94 24.216.91 29.li6.2 32.7i7.10

<LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD Otherst <LLD ,

JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER' DECEMBER NUCLIDES Be-7 89.4i7.33 113i10.2 61.516.42 75.6i7.01 55.5i5.59 37.0i6.17

<2.13 <4.66 <2.24 <3.53 <2.39 <2.98 Zn-65 <1.35 Cs-134 <1.21 <1.26 <0.92 <0.95 <0.98

<1.12 <1.53 <0.97 <0.81 <0.92 <1.12 Cs-137 <2.51

<2.38 <2.96 <2.02 <2.24 <2.02 Zr-95 <1.52 <1.81 Nb-95 <1.36 <2.32 <2.26 <1.67

<0.98 <2.31 <1.18 <1.35 <1.04 <1.35 Co-58 <1.41

<1.03 <1.33 <0.88 <0.79 <0.98 Mn-54 <2.16

<1.13 <1.82 <1.58 <1.30 <1.34 Co-60 39.118.10 32.116.42 31.118.19 <8.96 <10.6 26.715.16 K-40 <LLD <LLD

<LLD <LLD <LLD l Otherst <LLD

• Optional Sa le Location. Not Required by Technical Specifications.

t Plant Relat Radionuclides. _- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _

TABLE 6-9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES l OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of 10~'pCi/m3 11 Sigma G OFF-SITE COMPOSITE

• NUCLIDES JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH AP'IL R MAY JUNE Be-7 65.3i7.03 74.717.3 85.216.'31 94.li7.57 94.5i7.6 69.315.89 Zn-65 <3.18 <3.90 <2.88 <3.37 <3.31 <2.58 Cs-134 <1.15 <1.48 <0.89 <1.25 <0.82 <0.96 Cs-137 <1.23 <1.13 <1.13 <1.15 <1.01 <0.77 Zr-95 <2.17 <2.89 <2.56 <2.42 <2.56 <1.54 Nb-95 <1.86 <1.62 <1.79 <1.63 <1.51 <1.28 Co-58 <1.17 <1.11 <1.20 <1.39 <1.68 <1.14

? Mn-54 <1.63 <1.40 <0.96 <1.15 <1.20 <0.79 E Co-60 <0.82 <1.16 <1.30 <1.38 <0.90 <0.83 K-40 54.419.07 39.418.1 154i9.58 <17.7 <15.1 <13.5 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD NUCLIDES JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER- DECEMBER:

Be-7 7.14i3.57 81.0i7.66 73.416.40 56.617.01 55.614.92 34.9i4.73 Zn-65 <2.13 <3.49 <1.99 <2.92 <1.9E <2.36 Cs-134 <0.84 <1.44 <1.11 <1.48 <0.72 <0.94 Cs-137 <0.83 <1.03 <0.86 <1.17 <0.52 <0.74 Zr-95 <2.19 <2.47 <1.77 <2.98 <1.58 <2.16 Nb-95 <1.50 <1.81 <1.64 <1.22 <1.24 <1.22 Co-58 <1.21 <1.45 <0.79 <1.90 <0.73 <0.85 Mn-54 <0.88 <1.36 <0.89 <1.28 <0.59 <1.00 Co-60 <1.09 <1.72 <0.95 <1.81 <1.01 <1.01 K-40 7.1413.57 18.816.27 11.614.46 43.5i8.69 <8.91 <7.99 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

• Optional Sample Location. Hot Required by Technical Specifications.

t Plant Related Radionuclides.

TABLE 6-9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of 10' pCi/m' i 1 Sigma D1 ON-SITE COMPOSITE

• NUCLIDES JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL - HAY JUNE Be-7 79.717.06 86.317.5 10417.19 92.5i8.35 110i7.7 73.416.63 Zn-65 <3.23 <2.51 <2.03 <3.39 <2.97 <2.93 Cs-134 <1.49 <0.98 <0.83 <1.40 <0.88 <1.14 Cs-137 <1.11 <0.98 <0.73 <0.99 <0.89 <0.86 Zr-95 <2.72 <1.79 <1.85 <2.97 <2.15 <1.86 Nb-95 <1.84 <1.73 <1.39 <1.90 <1.36 <1.09 Co-58 <1.21 <1.13 <0.88 <2.16 <1.09 <1.44

? Mn-54 <0.98 <1.01 <0.72 <0.95 <0.98 <1.12 W Co-60 <0.70 <1.69 <1.00 <1.53 <0.65 <1.49 K-40 23.215.54 12.3i3.7 <9.14 21.516.13 20.015.3 <9.42

<LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD Otherst <LLD <LLD AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEPEER NUCLIDES JULY Be-7 84.216.81 10416.83 84.6i5.97 90.8i7.06 56.014.90 39.814.42

<3.27 <1.99 <4.20 <3.02 <2.41 <2.24 Zn-65

<0.84 <0.87 <1.56 <1.13 <0.67 <0.96 Cs-134

<0.90 <0.64 <1.09 <1.14 <0.66 <0.66 Cs-137

<2.42 <1.67 <3.96 <2.62 <1.36 <1.67 Zr-95 <1.16 <1.14 Nb-95 <1.74 <1.45 <2.92 <1.38

<1.03 <1.94 <1.63 <0.93 <0.86 Co-58 <1.24

<0.89 <1.57 <1.27 <0.96 <0.90 Mn-54 <1.00

<0.85 <2.29 <1.05 <0.99 <1.18 Co-60 <1.13

<10.9 15.2i4.00 <15.7 10.2i4.09 <10.6 7.56i3.36 K-40 <LLD <LLD

<LLD <LLD <LLD Otherst <LLD

• Optional Sample Location: Not Required by Technical (p:Litications.

t Plant Related Radionuclides. _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____ _ _ . _ __ _

TABLE 6-9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of 10 pCi/m' i 1 Sigma G ON-SITE COMPOSITE

• NUCLIDES JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE Be-7 94.3i7.78 82.918.8 12517.33 99.518.10 97.2i6.9 68.618.23 Zn-65 <2.78 <4.32 <2.68 <3.74 <2.54 <4.65 Cs-134 <0.97 <1.25 <0.97 <1.42 <0.94 <1.38 Cs-137 <1.36 <1.39 <0.74 <1.04 <0.67 <1.55 Zr-95 <2.35 <2.77 <1.59 <3.35 <1.95 <4.15 Nb-95 <1.74 <2.09 <1.48 <2.08 <1.31 <2.02 Co-58 <1.62 <1.63 <1.06 <1.74 <0.97 <2.02 P Mn-54 <0.85 <1.67 <1.09 <1.22 <0.65 <2.03 a Co-60 <1.01 <1.40 <0.93 <1.81 <1.13 <2.54 K-40 44.2i7.73 32.3 8.1 36.916.56 29.5i7.02 <10.8 31.518.29 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD NUCLIDES JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER Be-7 11018.07 91.616.80 85.318.47 92.0i7.11 58.115.21 51.4i5.86 Zn-65 <3.26 <2.71 <3.10 <3.56 <2.33 <2.95 Cs-134 <0.99 <0.87 <1.48 <1.01 <0.86 <1.05 Cs-137 <1.06 <0.66 <1.68 <1.19 <0.77 <0.69 Zr-95 <2.37 <1.94 <4.14 <2.10 <1.37 <2.62 Nb-95 <1.91 <1.51 <2.10 <1.52 <1.34 <1.49 Co-58 <1.67 <1.22 <1.90 <1.18 <0.97 <1.21 Mn-54 <1.24 <0.81 <0.86 <1.19 <1.12 <1.12 Co-60 <1.43 <0.77 <1.78 <1.10 <0.91 <1.64 K-40 53.018.84 31.315.91 <14.2 45.li8.20 22.414.81 36.0i7.00 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

• Optional Sample Location. Liot Required by Technical Specifications.

t Plant Related Radionuclides.

TABLE 6-9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of 10pCi/m i 1 Sigma H ON-SITE COMPOSITE

• NUCLIDES JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE _

Be-7 88.3i7.02 68.916.2 10414.37 95.117.15 112i6.80 69.116.41 Zn-65 <3.21 <2.32 <2.16 <3.91 <3.15 <3.42

<0.79 <1.01 <0.90 <0.93 <0.76 <1.02 Cs-134

<0.53 <0.78 <0.93 <1.61 <1.09 <1.41 Cs-137

<2.38 <1.69 <1.82 <2.74 <2.35 <2.96 Zr-95 <2.30 Nb-95 <1.40 <1.38 <1.16 <2.08 <1.81

<1.37 <1.21 <0.94 <1.29 <1.13 <1.61 Co-58 <1.35

? Mn-54 <0.64 <0.96 <0.94 <1.21 <1.05 5 <0.48 <1.25 <0.86 <1.52 <1.02 <1.63 Co-60 17.2ill.7

<16.2 <12.4 <10.1 159i11.5 11818.61 K-40 <LLD

<LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD Otherst <LLD AUGUST SEPTEMBER OGIUBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER NUCLIDES JULY 77.716.33 72.8i8.43 68.716.41 65.7i5.68 53.815.38 Be-7 90.727.34 <3.17

<3.03 <2.09 <4.33 <1.56 <1.81 Zn-65 <0.77 <0.98

<0.85 <0.73 <1.49 <0.99 Cs-134 <0.54 <0.89

<0.88 <0.62 <1.23 <0.94 Cs-137 <1.92 <2.11

<2.89 <2.32 <2.46 <2.01 Zr-95 <1.67 <1.41 <1.58 Nb-95 <1.90 <1.37 <1.92

<0.60 <1.35 <1.05 <1.12 <1.34 Co-58 <1.14 <1.17

<0.90 <1.67 <1.01 <0.83 Mn-54 <1.20 <1.44

<0.96 <2.06 <1.43 <0.56 Co-60 <1.21 <12.2

<11.2 35.817.17 7.73i2.90 <10.8 K-40 <12.7 <LLD <LLD

<LLD <LLD <LLD g Otherst <LLD- ,

o Optional Sample Location. Nqt Required by Technical Specifications.

t Plant Related Radionuclides.

TABLE 6-9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of 10' pCi/m t 1 Sigma I ON-SITE COMPOSITE

• NUCLIDES JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE Be-7 75.6i7.6 93.618.1 92.5i7.71 112i10.4 11219.19 66.816.57 Zn-65 <3.72 <3.64 <3.53 <4.17 <3.19 <2.34 Cs-134 <1.13 <1.59 <1.26 <1.82 <1.38 <1.01 Cs-137 <1.72 <1.27 <1.04 <1.28 <1.51 <0.85 Zr-95 <3.79 <2.95 <2.05 <3.27 <2.25 <2.27 Nb-95 <2.42 <1.40 <1.55 <1.70 <1.97 <1.64 Co-58 <2.08 <1.63 <1.53 <2.05 <1.43 <11.1

? Mn-54 <1.49 <1.02 <1.53 <2.15 <1.46 <1.05 O Co-60 <1.69 <1.56 <1.53 <2.31 <2.09 <1.55 K-40 233i14.8 33.8i8.5 34.3i7.09 24.518.76 <9.86 7.70i3.85 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD NUCLIDES JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER Be-7 97.li7.68 90.819.01 87.li7.22 62.6 7.59 47.6i6.42 40.816.06 Zn-65 <3.16 <3.75 <3.48 <4.53 <3.09 <2.00 Cs-134 <1.15 <1.58 <1.28 <0.96 <1.12 <1.23 Cs-137 <0.92 <1.52 <0.98 <1.22 <1.33 <0.94 Zr-95 <2.55 <3.58 <3.04 <2.43 <2.19 <2.82 Nb-95 <2.02 <2.34 <2.19 <1.48 <1.88 <2.18 Co-58 <1.33 <2.62 <1.24 <1.74 <1.38 <1.53 Mn-54 <1.20 <1.35 <1.11 <1.67 <1.09 <1.65 Co-60 <1.21 <1.35 <1.52 <2.01 <1.48 <1.95 K-40 <12.9 24.9i7.79 <14.0 32.6i7.76 22.016.12 43.619.26 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

• Optional Sample Location. Not Required by Technical Specifications.

t Plant Related Radionuclides.

i TABLE 6-9 (Continued) l CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1996 l

Results in Units of 10-'pci/m' i 1 Sigma J ON-SITE COMPOSITE

• l NUCLIDES JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE Be-7 88.5t7.46 83.116.6 111i7.70 109i7.83 119i7.72 73.7i6.47 Zn-65 <2.57 <2.18 <2.38 <3.52 <2.12 <2.87 Cs-134 <1.31 <1.25 <0.94 <1.16 <1.03 <1.07 Cs-137 <1.18 <1.33 <0.84 <1.04 <0.77 <0.79 Zr-95 <2.75 <2.65 <2.38 <2.21 <1.38 <2.29 Nb-95 <1.65 <1.86 <1.80 <1.79 <1.05 <1.96 Co-58 <1.48 <1.26 <0.89 <1.68 <1.11 <1.39

? <1.25 <1.48 <0.76 <0.98 <0.73 <1.14 Mn-54 O <1.18 <1.78 <1.17 <1.16 <0.92 <1.45 Co-60 K-40 40.3i7.83 155i11.5 <10.6 44.5i7.60 39.7i6.05 <11.3

<LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD Otherst <LLD AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER' NUCLIDES JULY 110i10.3 70.9i7.60 80.7i7.55 65.5t7.47 58.916.66 38.2t7.08 ,

Be-7 <4.45

<4.36 <3.28 <3.37 <4.16 <3.35 Zn-65 <1.55

<1.86 <1.27 <1.20 <1.73 <1.17 Cs-134 <1.50

<1.67 <1.10 <1.10 <1.32 <1.08 Cs-137 <1.96 <3.72

<2.90 <2.48 <2.19 <2.74 Zr-95 <1.87 <2.11

<2.21 <1.42 <1.89 <2.22 Nb-95 <1.22 <2.55

<2.33 <1.01 <1.34 <1.68 Co-58 <1.32 <1.22

<1.84 <1.17 <1.01 <1.15 Mn-54 <1.33 <2.18

<7.43 <1.13 <1.31 <1.92 Co-60 26.2i7.15 25.li8.35 K-40 25.7i8.57 38.216.95 <14.1 31.5t7.16

<LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD Otherst <LLD <LLD

• Optional Sample Location. No_t Required by Technical Specifications.

t Plant Related Radionuclides. - - _ - - - . ___- __-____ - - _ - - __ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _

TABLE 6-9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1996 Results in Units of 10' pCi/m i 1 Sigma K ON-SITE COMPOSITE

• NUCLIDES JANUuRY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL .MAY. JUNE ,

Be-7 78.016.71 81.716.6 11917.34 108i7.36 12717.89 69.4*7.08 Zn-65 <3.11 <3.45 <1.42 <3.49 <0.99 <2.71 Cs-134 <0.99 <1.40 <0.89 <1.34 <0.86 <1.20 Cs-137 <0.84 <1.26 <0.86 <1.13 <0.80 <1.11 Zr-95 <2.49 <3.00 <1.62 <2.88 <1.11 <2.30 Nb-95 <1.31 <2.05 <1.27 <2.01 <1.39 <1.02 Co-58 <1.32 <1.65 <0.82 <1.30 <0.76 <1.30

? Mn-54 <1.02 <1.42 <0.93 <1.44 <0.85 <1.21 E Co-60 <1.86 <1.26 <1.15 <1.43 <1.01 <1.33 K-40 8.30t4.74 199112 <8.28 146i10.6 <10.9 38.317.24 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD NUCLIDES JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER Be-7 100i7.61 82.416.19 80.9i7.40 57.6i6.32 51.7i6.82 44.9i5.61 Zn-65 <3.23 <2.44 <2.63 <2.72 <3.32 <2.11 Cs-134 <0.89 <0.73 <1.01 <1.05 <1.16 <1.05 Cs-137 <1.18 <0.66 <1.15 <1.20 <1.31 <0.94 Zr-95 <2.20 <1.81 <2.13 <2.68 <2.50 <1.55 Nb-95 <1.35 <1.50 <1.91 <1.98 <1.71 <1.16 Co-58 <1.25 <1.08 <1.53 <1.69 <1.38 <1.19 Mn-54 <1.12 <1.18 <1.16 <1.62 <1.35 <1.29 Co-60 <1.34 <0.99 <4.58 <1.71 <1.55 <1.28 K-40 39.5t7.28 <9.24 34.7*7.60 193112.5 32.5 7.79 <10.5 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

• Optional Sample Location. Not Required by Technical Specifications.

t Plant Related Radionuclides.

1 i

i TABLE 6-10 DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS (1996)

Results in Units of mrem /std. Month 1 Sigma STATION FIRST SECOND TlilRD FOURTH LOCATION (DI AN AND NUMBER QUARTER WARTTR QUARTER QUARTER DIRECfION)**

3 D1 On-site 20.4il.2 32.6tl.1 20.911.0 14.7i0.8 0.2 miles @ 69 f 3.8i0.3 6.0i0.3 4.5i0.2 5.7i0.4 0.4 miles @ 140 l 4 D2 On-site 5 E On-site 4.010.2 5.010.3 4.0i0.2 5.li0.2 0.4 miles @ 175 6 F On-site 3.110.1 4.010.2 3.610.3 4.310.3 0.5 miles @ 210 7* G On-site 3.2i0.2 3.9i0.3 3.2i0.1 4.210.3 0.7 miles @ 250 8* R-5 Off-site Control 4.0i0.1 5.510.6 4.6i0.2 *** 16.4 miles @ 42 9 D1 Off-site 3.5i0.2 4.8i0.4 3.5 0.1 4.4i0.1 11.4 miles @ 80*

10 D2 Off-site 3.410.1 4.510.4 3.610.2 4.6i0.3 9.0 miles @ 117 11 E Off-site 3.310.3 4.410.2 3.6i0.2 4.8 0.3 7.2 miles @ 160 12 F Off-site 3.4i0.5 4.310.3 3.810.1 4.6i0.1 7.7 miles @ 190 13 G Off-site 3.510.1 4.6i0.4 3.7i0.1 4.810.1 5.3 miles @ 225

c. 14* DeMass Rd., SW Oswego-Control 3.710.1 5.6i0.6 4.0i0.1 5.li0.3 12.6 miles @ 226 15* Pole 66. W. Boundary-Bible Camp 3.310.1 4.010.2 3.2i0.1 4.410.3 0.9 miles @ 237*

18* Energy Info. Center-Lamp Post SW 4.110.1 4.9i0.3 4.210.1 5.li0.4 0.4 miles @ 265 19 East Boundary-JAF, Pole 9 4.010.2 4.710.2 4.2i0.2 5.4 0.4 1.3 miles @ 81 23* H On-site 4.7i0.3 6.li0.1 4.810.1 5.7i0.1 0.8 miles @ 70 I On-site 4.0i0.3 5.010.4 4.3i0.3 5.2 0.2 0.8 miles @ 98 24 3.8i0.2 4.910.3 4.2i0.2 5.010.3 0.9 miles @ 110 25 J On-site 3.9i0.3 4.7i0.1 0.5 miles @ 132 26 K On-site 3.810.3 4.510.1 N. Fence, N. of Switchyard, JAF 34.412.4 57.8i2.8 28.110.6 21.3i0.8 0.4 miles @ 60 27 0.5 miles @ 68 28 N. Light Pole, N. of Screenhouse, 39.6i3.3 59.918.6 28.612.2 30.6*1.1 JAF 0.5 miles @ 65 N. Fence, N. of W. Side 41.1+3.3 68.115.2 30.513.1 26.912.2 29 0.4 miles @ 57 30 N. Fence (NW) JAF 18.111.9 29.3i2.4 16.010.2 12.811.0 5.710.3 7.110.3 5.7i0.1 7.6i0.3 0.2 miles @ 276 31 N. Fence (NW) NMP-1 0.2 miles @ 292*

39 N. Fence, Rad. Waste-NMP-1 6.810.5 8.810.6 7.710.3 8.5i0.3 8.810.8 13.410.9 7.5i0.6 7.4i0.7 0.6 miles @ 69 47 N. Fence, (NE) JAF 19.8 miles @ 170*

Phoenix, NY-Control 3.410.5 4.110.2 3.410.2 4.3i0.3 49* 4.5i0.2 4.010.2 4.7i0.3 7.4 miles @ 233 51 Liberty & Bronson Sts.. E of OSS 3.610.2 4.2i0.2 4.4f0.2 3.7i0.2 4.6i0.0 5.8 miles @ 227 52 East 12th & Cayuga Sts., Oswego School

TABLE 6-10 (continued)

DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS (1996)

Results in Units of mrem /std. Month i 1 Sigma STATION FIRST SECOND THIRD FOURTH

'#IN NVIEER l I

@ARTER @ARTER WARTER WARTER (hRECT **

53 Broadwell & Chestnut Sts. - 4.010.2 5.0f0.3 4.li0.2 4.910.2 13.7 miles @ 183 Fulton H.S.

54 Liberty St. & Co. Rt. 16 - 3.7i0.2 4.3i0.4 3.7i0.2 4.7 0.3 9.3 miles @ 115*

Hexico H.S.

55 Gas Substation Co. Rt. 5-Pulaski 3.5i0.1 4.510.2 4.6 0.3 4.510.4 13.0 miles @ 75*

56* Rt. 104-New Haven SCH.(SE Corner) 3.610.1 4.7*0.4 3.9 0.2 4.9 0.2 5.3 miles 0 123 58* Co. Rt. lA-Alcan (E. of E. 3.510.3 4.5i0.1 3.9i0.2 5.110.4 3.1 miles @ 220" Entrance Rd.)

75* Unit 2. N. Fence, N. of Reactor 5.510.2 7.2i0.3 6.li0.0 7.0i0.4 0.1 miles @ 5 Bldg.

76* Unit 2, N. Fence, N. of Change 5.310.3 6.510.4 5.310.2 *** 0.1 miles @ 25

? House M 77* Unit 2. N. Fence, N. of Pipe Bldg. 6.210.3 9.110.5 6.710.3 7.110.5 0.2 miles @ 45 78* JAF, E. of E. Old Lay Down Area 4.310.4 5.1*0.3 4.210.2 5.3i0.3 1.0 miles @ 90*

79* Co. Rt. 29 Pole #63, 0.2 mi . S. 3.510.3 4.li0.1 3.6i0.1 4.5i0.2 1.1 miles @ 115 of Lake Rd.

80* Co. Rt. 29. Pole #54, 0.7 mi . S. 3.6i0.2 4.410.4 3.910.2 4.910.0 1.4 miles @ 133 of Lake Rd.

81* Hiner Rd. , Pole #16, 0.5 mi . W. 3.610.1 4.3i0.3 3.510.3 4.610.4 1.6 miles @ 159 of Rt. 29 82* Hiner Rd. , Pole #1 1/2,1.1 mi . 3.510.2 4.610.5 3.710.1 4.810.1 1.6 miles @ 181 W. of Rt. 29 83* Lakeview Rd., Tree 0.45 mi. N. of 3.710.2 4.510.3 3.810.2 4.910.2 1.2 miles @ 200 Miner Rd.

84* Lakeview Rd., N., Pole #6117, 3.610.1 4.7i0.3 3.710.1 4.8i0.1 1.1 miles @ 225 200 ft. N. of Lake Rd.

85* Unit 1 N. Fence, N. of W. Side 7.110.1 8.910.8 7.210.4 9.010.3 0.2 miles @ 294 of Screen House 86* Unit 2 N. Fence, N. of W. Side 6.110.4 7.4i0.3 6.410.9 7.0i0.3 0.1 miles @ 315 of Screen House _

TABLE 6-10 (Continued)

DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS (1996)

Results in Units of mrem /std. Month i 1 Sigma FIRST SECOND THIRD FOURTH

'#IE STATION L IM WARER E

NUMBER WARTER WARTER WARTER (h ON **

87* Unit 2, N. Fence, N. of E. Side 6.0i0.3 7.710.4 5.910.4 6.810.1 0.1 miles @ 341 of Screen House 88* Hickory Grove Rd. , Pole #2. 0.6 3.Si0.1 5.0i0.3 4.110.3 4.710.2 4.8 miles @ 97 mi. N. of Rt.1 89* Leavitt Rd. , Pole #16. 0.4 mi . S. 3.710.1 4.810.2 4.2i0.2 4.810.2 4.1 miles @ 111 of Rt. 1 90* Rt. 104, Pole #300, 150 Ft. E. 3.510.3 4.310.3 3.810.2 4.6 0.1 4.2 miles @ 135 -

of Keefe Rd.

91* Rt. 51A, Pole #59, 0.8 mi . W. 3.210.2 4.410.3 3.7i0.2 4.6i0.2 4.8 miles @ 156 of Rt. 51 92* Maiden Lane Rd., Power Pole. 0.6 3.510.2 5.010.3 4.410.2 5.310.2 4.4 miles @ 183 e mi . S. of Rt.104 0 93* Rt. 53. Pole 1-1,120 ft. S. 3.810.1 4.5i0.4 3.810.2 4.6i0.3 4.4 miles @ 205 of Rt. 104 94* Rt. 1. Pole #82, 250 ft. E. of 3.8i0.2 4.810.1 3.6i0.1 4.6i0.2 4.7 miles @ 223 Kocher Rd. (Co. Rt. #63) 95* Lakeshore Camp Site, from Alcan 3.510.2 4.910.4 3.510.2 4.310.3 4.1 miles @ 237 W. access Rd. , Pole #21,1.2 mi .

N. of Rt. 1 96* Creamery Rd., 0.3 mi. S. of 3.810.2 4.510.2 3.910.2 4.610.4 3.6 miles @ 199 Middle Rd., Pole 1 1/2 Rt. 29. Pole #50, 200 ft. N. of 3.810.1 4.2i0.2 3.610.1 4.410.2 1.8 miles @ 143 97*

Miner Rd.

Lake Rd. , Pole #145, 0.15 mi . 4.110.1 5.310.4 4.0f0.1 4.910.0 1.2 miles @ 101 98*

E. of Rt. 29 4.810.2 1.8 miles @ 88*

99 NMP Rd., 0.4 mi. N. of Lake Rd., 3.810.2 5.6 0.4 3.910.2 Env. Station R1 Off-site 4.6i0.4 1.1 miles @ 104 100 Rt. 29 and Lake Rd., Env. Station 3.7i0.3 5.610.6 3.810.2 R2 Off-site 4.2i0.2 1.5 miles @ 132 101 Rt. 29, 0.7 mi. S. of Lake Rd., 3.610.3 4.4 0.2 3.6i0.3 Env. Station R3 Off-site

TABLE 6-10 (Continued)

DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS (1996)

Results in Units of mrem /std. Month i 1 Sigma l STATION LOCATION neER ' c" FIRST SECOND THIRD FOURTH QUARTER QUARTER QUARTER QUARTER Ihfhhhg 102 EOF /Env. Lab, Oswego Co. Airport 3.6i0.2 4.810.3 3.8i0.2 4.5i0.3 11.9 miles @ 175  !

(Fulton Airport, Rt.176) E.

Driveway Lamp Post 103 EIC. East Garage Rd., Lamp Post R3 4.110.2 5.810.4 4.2i0.2 4.910.3 0.4 miles @ 267 Off-site 104 Parkhurst Road, Pole #148 1/2-A, 3.6i0.2 4.910.4 3.910.3 4.4i0.1 1.4 miles @ 102 0.1 miles South of Lake Rd.

105 Lakeview Rd., Pole #6125, 0.6 mi. 4.2i0.7 5.2i0.4 4.3i0.1 4.410.1 1.4 miles @ 198*

e South of Lake Road a 106 Shoreline Cove, West of NMP-1, 4.410.1 6.410.4 4.610.3 5.310.3 0.3 miles @ 274 Tree on West Edge 107 Shoreline Cove, West of NMP-1 4.610.3 6.li0.5 4.6i0.2 5.310.2 0.3 miles @ 272*

108 Lake Road, Pole #142, 300 ft. East 4.110.2 5.6i0.3 4.li0.1 5.0i0.1 1.1 miles @ 104*

of Rt. 29 S.

109 Tree North of Lake Road. 300 ft. 3.910.0 4.910.4 3.9i0.2 4.7i0.4 1.1 miles @ 103*

East of Route 29 N.

111 Sterling. NY - 3.710.3 5.210.3 3.9i0.2 4.310.1 26.4 miles @ 166 112 EOF /Env. Lab. Oswego Co. Airport i i i i 11.9 miles @ 175 113 Control. Baldwinsville, NY 3.810.1 5.210.5 3.7i0.1 4.710.2 21.8 miles @ 214

• Technical Specification Location

• • Direction and distance based on NMP-2 reactor centerline and sixteen 22.5 degree sector grid.

o** TLD lost in field '

)

TABLE 6-11 ]

CONCENTRATIONS OF 10 DINE-131 AND GAMMA EMITTERS IN MILK ,

Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 1 Sigma SAMPLE LOCATION NO. 60 l C0 ON I-131 K-40 Cs 134 Cs-137 Ba/La 40 OT11ERS*

03/31/96 <0.33 1710171 <5.38 <5.27 <8.36 LLD 04/22/96 <0.26 1540168 <5.44 <5.10 <5.78 LLD 05/06/96 <0.28 1670189 <7.27 <7.48 <7.26 LLD ,

05/20/96 <0.39 1420192 <8.88 <7.82 <10.0 LLD l 06/03/96 <0.30 1480171 <4.04 <5.64 <9.20 LLD 06/17/96 <0.56 1520i65 <4.13 <4.24 <5.15 LLD 07/08/96 <0.27 2160160 <3.78 <5.87 <5.20 LLD 07/22/96 <0.52 1570168 <5.32 <4.73 <6.17 LLD 08/05/96 <0.48 1410171 <2.36 <5.15 <9.06 LLD 08/19/96 <0.28 1440171 <4.91 <5.35 <6.97 LLD 1 09/09/96 <0.34 1490i97 <9.05 <8.48 <6.79 LLD 09/23/96 <0.51 1570168 <5.12 <4.73 <5.89 LLD 10/07/96 <0.29 1440163 <4.40 <4.29 <5.36 LLD 10/21/96 <0.46 1580185 <8.39 <8.03 <7.81 LLD 11/04/96 <0.45 1680185 <5.68 <7.39 <6.15 LLD 11/18/96 <0.47 1460197 <9.38 <8.71 <11.1 LLD 12/02/96 <0.49 1570168 <4.98 <4.53 <5.33 LLD 12/18/96 <0.33 1530197 <8.38 <9.95 <12.5 LLD SAW LE LOCATION NO. 55 COL ION I-131 K-40 Cs-134 Cs-137 Ba/La 40 OTTERS

• 04/01/96 <0.37 2210162 <3.78 <5.58 <5.45 LLD 04/22/96 <0.36 1650185 <6.13 <7.00 <9.73 LLD 05/06/96 <0.35 1620 68 <5.75 <4.84 <5.56 LLD 05/20/96 <0.29 1600168 <4.16 <4.46 <7.44 LLD 06/03/96 <0.50 1540168 <5.33 <4.73 <7.07 LLD 06/17/96 <0.29 1510165 <5.44 <4.99 <5.34 LLD 07/08/96 <0.38 1420165 <4.66 <4.87 <7.00 LLD 07/22/96 <0.29 1620197 <9.26 <8.47 <11.7 LLD 08/05/96 <0.31 1530197 <8.03 <9.94 <10.3 LLD 08/19/96 <0.38 1790171 <5.32 <5.22 <5.91 LLD 09/09/96 <0.38 1450162 <4.89 <4.73 <7.29 LLD 09/23/96 <0.34 1520192 <6.54 <9.66 <11.0 LLD 10/07/96 <0.37 1530197 <8.40 <8.32 <13.4 LLD 10/21/96 <0.43 1340168 <4.66 <5.64 <5.27 LLD 11/04/96 <0.44 1410192 <10.0 <8.64 <12.1 LLD 11/18/96 <0.34 1590185 <5.83 <7.85 <8.05 LLD 12/02/96 <0.57 1580174 <4.91 <4.82 <9.34 LLD 12/18/96 <0.28 1490171 <3.93 <4.92 <4.95 LLD 6-39

l l

TABLE 6-11 (Continued)

CONCENTRATIONS OF 10 DINE-131 AND GAMMA EMITTERS IN MILK i

Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 1 Sigma i SAMPLE LOCATION NO. 50 l

lM ION I-131 K-40 Cs-134 Cs-137 Ba/La 40 OTHERS*

04/01/96 <0.33 1700197 <8.60 <10.1 <9.37 LLD i 04/22/96 <0.31 1450162 <4.99 <5.00 <6.07 LLD 05/06/96 <0.28 1510165 <4.16 <4.78 <4.72 LLD 1

05/20/96 <0.52 1410162 <5.37 <4.30 <7 79 LLD l i 06/03/96 <0.47 1510165 <4.31 <4.78 <6.57 LLD j 06/17/96 <0.52 2190161 <3.65 <5.18 <5.41 LLD

! 07/08/96 <0.33 1440192 <8.61 <8.57 <9.76 LLD i 07/22/96 <0.34 1520174 <5.12 <5.54 <7.87 LLD 08/05/96 <0.37 1560168 <5.39 <5.42 <5.73 LLD 08/19/96 <0.33 1470165 <4.26 <4.67 <5.37 LLD 09/09/96 <0.52 1390192 <8.85 <10.2 <6.39 LLD 09/23/96 <0.32 1420163 <4.21 <4.17 <5.38 LLD 10/07/96 <0.34 1430171 <5.06 <5.82 <6.68 LLD 10/21/96 <0.47 1520168 <3.84 <5.27 <7.74 LLD 11/04/96 <0.35 1490165 <3.47 <4.17 <6.04 LLD 11/18/96 <0.31 1480192 <9.45 <9.66 <10.4 LLD 12/02/96 <0.28 1470165 <4.44 <4.48 <6.45 LLD 12/18/96 <0.30 1460152 <3.78 <4.04 <14.6 LLD SAWLE LOCATION NO. 4 I M ION 1-131 K-40 Cs-134 Cs-137 Ba/La-40 OTHERS*

04/01/96 <0.51 1470165 <4.82 <4.26 <5.97 LLD 04/21/96 <0.46 1380171 <4.98 <6.50 <7.00 LLD i 05/05/96 <0.50 1500171 <5.06 <4.71 <7.21 LLD 05/19/96 <0.49 1520185 <8.67 <7.29 <3.50 LLD 06/03/96 <0.52 1540197 <9.36 <9.09 <12.8 LLD 06/17/96 <0.35 1430192 <9.14 <8.48 <9.29 LLD 07/08/96 <0.51 1430171 <4.83 <4.93 <8.74 LLD 07/22/96 <0.38 1510181 <4.62 <8.21 <9.63 LLD 08/05/96 <0.36 1520165 <4.55 <4.87 <7.48 LLD 08/19/96 <0.50 16731102 <8.71 <9.38 <9.36 LLD 09/09/96 <0.29 1380171 <5.28 <6.25 <7.70 LLD 09/23/96 <0.36 1520181 <8.65 <7.25 <8.53 LLD 10/07/96 <0.40 1580168 <5.69 <5.04 <6.46 LLD 10/21/96 <0.27 1400165 <4.30 <4.49 <4.16 LLD 11/04/96 <0.51 1590168 <3.84 <5.10 <4.74 LLD 11/18/96 <0.45 1550174 <5.83 <5.44 <7.75 LLD 12/02/96 <0.37 2250163 <5.37 <5.56 <5.46 LLD 12/17/96 <0.46 1350171 <5.21 <4.80 <5.72 LLD 6-40

J TABLE 6-11 (Continued) ]

CONCENTRATIONS OF 10 DINE-131 AND GAMMA EMITTERS IN MILK Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 1 Sigma l l

{ SAMPLE LOCATION N0. 73 (Control)

COLLE ION I-131 K 40 Cs-134 Cs-137 Ba/La-40 OTHERS*

04/01/96 <0.53 1320i68 <4.31 <5.91 <5.94 LLD 04/22/96 <0.48 2280162 <3.68 <5.38 <4.05 LLD 05/06/96 <0.51 2260162 <3.96 <5.74 <5.88 LLD 05/20/96 <0.31 2250162 <4.29 <5.81 <4.59 LLD

~

06/03/96 <0.37 1500181 <7.06 <6.79 <7.55 LLD 06/17/96 <0.45 1440171 <4.03 <4.93 <5.31 LLD 07/08/96 <0.47 1370162 <4.99 <4.67 <7.64 LLD 07/22/96 <0.53 1540 68 <3.72 <4.46 <6.16 LLD 08/05/96 <0.32 1420171 <4.91 <5.83 <6.98 LLD ,

08/19/96 <0.48 1680185 <8.30 <7.91 <6.91 LLD  !

09/09/96 <0.47 1560185 <8.74 <7.00 <8.99 LLD 09/23/96 <0.48 1420171 c4.03 <5.64 <6.62 LLD 10/07/96 <0.50 1570185 <8.73 <7.48 <7.31 LLD 10/21/96 <0.30 1470163 <4.58 <4.67 <4.66 LLD 11/04/96 <0.28 1320162 c4.49 <4.32 <5.11 LLD 11/18/96 <0.28 1520185 <9.44 <7.10 <8.03 LLD 12/02/96 <0.27 1560168 <5.32 <5.10 <6.97 LLD 12/17/96 <0.44 1560168 <4.84 <4.66 <5.59 LLD I

1 l

, 6-41

17M3LE 6-12 MILK ANIMAL CENSUS 1996 NUMBER TOWN OR AREA (a) NUMBER CENSUS MAPCI ONDEGREES

) (2) DISTANCE (2) 0F MILK ANIMALS Scriba 16* 190 5.9 miles NONE 3 190 4.5 NONE 62 183 6.7 12G (2) 63 185 8.0 30C l 74 194 6.5 NONE I 26 114 1.5 ND New Haven 9 95 5.2 40C 4* 113 7.8 106C 10 130 2.6 NONE 5 146 7.2 NONE 7* 107 5.5 NONE 64 107 7.9 52C Mexico 72t 98 9.9 40C 12 107 11.5 22C 14 120 9.8 56C l 17 115 10.2 1C 19 132 10.5 35C 60* 90 9.5 40C 50* 93 8.2 160C 55* 95 9.2 60C 21 112 10.5 80C 49 88 7.9 SG 68 108 11.6 70C Richland 22 85 10.2 52C Pulaski 23 92 10.5 60C 6-42

J TABLE 6-12 (Continued)

MILK ANIMAL CENSUS 1996 NUMBER TOWN OR AREA (a) NUMBER CENSUS MAPCION DEGREES

) (2) DISTANCE (2) 0F MILK ANIMALS Sterling 73** 234 13.2 miles 38C l

Volney 25 182 9.5 NONE 70 147 9.4 30C 66 156 7.8 74C l MILKING ANIMAL TOTALS: 1046 Cows (including control locations) 0 Goats l MILKING ANIMAL TOTALS: 1008 Cows I (excluding control locations) 0 Goats  ;

l C = Cows G = Goats

• = Milk sample location

• • = Milk sample control location i ND = Did not wish to participate in the survey (1) = References Section 3.3 (2) = Based on Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Reactor Centerline NONE = No cows or goats at that location. Location was a previous location with cows and/or goats.

(a) = Census performed out to a distance of approximately ten miles.

(b) = As of August 2, 1993 a new control location was added to the REMP.

6-43

TABLE 6-13 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN VARIOUS FOOD PRODUCTS Results in Units of pCi/g (wet) i 1 Sigma COLLECTION SAMPLE SITE DATE DESCRIPTION Be-7 K-40 I-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 Zn-65 SQUASH LEAVES 0.83i0.033 2.9410.080 <0.007 <0.005 <0.006 <0.020 J 9/96 PEPPER LEAVES 0.22i0.025 6.17i0.120 <0.015 <0.007 <0.006 <0.022 T0 MAT 0ES <0.048 1.7410.061 <0.010 <0.004 <0.006 <0.014 CUCUMBER LEAVES <0.064 4.6810.106 <0.027 <0.007 <0.007 <0.024 PEPPER LEAVES 0.6810.033 5.6210.130 <0.007 <0.005 <0.007 <0.023 K* 9/96 SQUASH LEAVES 1.1410.053 2.5210.110 <0.014 <0.011 <0.012 <0.031 TOMATOES <0.051 2.2310.074 <0.007 <0.008 <0.006 <0.018 PEPPER LEAVES 0.2610.027 5.38i0.130 <0.015 <0.006 <0.007 <0.021 o L 9/96 SQUASH LEAVES 0.81010.042 2.59i0.105 <0.011 <0.009 <0.009 <0.025 '

h BEAN LEAVES 0.4110.010 3.98i0.080 <0.020 <0.007 <0.009 <0.026 COLLARDS 0.17410.027 3.5110.099 <0.012 <0.008 <0.007 <0.021 R* 9/96 SWISS CHARD 0.124i0.021 4.9110.010 <0.008 <0.006 <0.006 <0.020 KALE 0.102i0.025 4.1310.100 <0.016 <0.005 <0.007 <0.022 SQUASH LEAVES 1.02i0.10 3.9610.234 <0.026 <0.026 <0.029 <0.064 S 9/96 PEPPER LEAVES 0.9310.09 8.5610.271 <0.030 <0.031 <0.026 <0.074 TOMATOES <0.062 2.4510.091 <0.084 <0.009 <0.007 <0.019 CUCUMBER LEAVES 1.7010.056 1.8810.080 <0.008 <0.006 <0.009 <0.024 PEPPER LEAVES 0.02810.040 7.97i0.170 <0.013 <0.011 <0.011 <0.030 SQUASH LEAVES 0.4910.030 3.6310.100 <0.013 <0.004 <0.007 <0.022 M* 9/96 GRAPE LEAVES 0.67i0.035 2.3010.080 <0.016 <0.005 <0.007 <0.020 (CONTROL) BEET LEAVES 0.09610.036 8.3710.190 <0.027 <0.012 <0.013 <0.040 TOMATOES <0.066 2.2410.080 <0.011 <0.005 <0.007 <0.022 t CUCUMBER LEAVES 0.99i0.059 3.26i0.130 <0.024 <0.008 <0.012 <0.033 NOTE: Other Plant Related Radionuclides <LLD -

• Samples required by TecNical Specifications

TABLE 6-14 j 1996 RESIDENCE CENSUS I HAP METER 0 LOGICAL  !

LOCATION DESIGNATION (b) SECTOR DEGREES ( DISTANCE)

w N - -

1

w NNE - -

w NE - -

w ENE - -

Sunset Bay A E 82 0.9 miles Lake Road B ESE 119 0.7 miles Parkhurst Road C SE 127 1.2 miles County Route 29 D SSE 149 1.2 miles

, Miner Road E S 173 1.6 miles

Lakeview Road F SSW 210 1.7 miles l

Lakeview Road G SW 233 1.5 miles Bible Camp Retreat H WSW 249 1.3 miles w W - -

w WNW - -

W NW - -

w NNW - -

w This meteorological sector is over Lake Ontario. There are no residences within three miles.

"' Based on J.A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Reactor Centerline.

• See the maps in Section 3.3.

6-45

7.0 IIISTORICAL DATA TABLES Sample Statistics from Previous Environmental Sampline The mean, minimum value and maximum value 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 i MONITORING REPORT FOR NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER l CORPORATION NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION. )

NOVEMBER.1970. l

2. Sample data listed as 1974 and 1978 through 1993 was taken from the respective environmental operating reports for Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station and James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant.

3. Only measured values were used for statistical calculations.

4. The term MDL was used prior to 1979 to represent the concept of Lower Limit of Detection (LLD). MDL = Minimum Detectable Level.

l 1

l 7-1 l

TABLE 7-1 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA SH0 RELINE SEDIMENT Results in pCi/g (dry)

LOCATION: CONTROL

• Isotope Cs-134 Cs-137 Co-60 Ycar Hin. Max. Mean Hin. Hax. Mean Hin. Max. Mean 1969t ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

, 1974t ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

1975t ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

1980 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

1981 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

1982 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

1983 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

1984 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

1985 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1986 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.027 0.027 0.027 <LLD <LLD <LLD j 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD l

1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD l

1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

• Langs Beach beyond influence of the site in a westerly direction.

No data. Sample not required until f.ew technical specifications implemented in 1985.

t 1969 data is considered to be pre operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre operational for the JAFNPP.

7-2

j TABLE 7-2 l HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA SH0 RELINE SEDIMENT Results in pCi/g (dry)

LOCATION: INDICATOR

• Isotope Cs-134 Cs-137 Co-60 Year Hin. Max. Mean Hin. Max. Mean Hin. Max. Mean 1969t ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

1974t ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

1975t ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

1980 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

1981 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

1982 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

1983 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

1984 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **

1985 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1986 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD i 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.25 0.32 0.29 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.28 0.30 0.29 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.12 0.14 0.13 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.12 0.14 0.13 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.18 0.46 0.32 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.06 0.37 0.22 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.14 0.15 0.15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.15 0.17 0.16 <LLD <LLD <LLD

• Sunset Beach - closest off-site location with recreational value.

• • No data. Sample not required until new technical specifications implemented in 1985.

t 1969 data is considered to be pre operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre operational for the JAFNPP.

7-3

TABLE 7-3 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA ,

FISH Results in pCi/g (wet)

LOCATION: CONTROL

• Isotope Cs-137 Year Hin. Max. Mean 1969t No Data No Data No Data 1974t 0.94 0.94 0.94 l 1975t <MDL <MDL <MDL i 1976 1.2 1.2 1.2 1980 0.029 0.110 0.059 1981 0.028 0.062 0.043 1982 0.027 0.055 0.047 1983 0.040 0.060 0.050 1984 0.015 0.038 0.032 1985 0.026 0.047 0.034 1986 0.021 0.032 0.025 1987 0.017 0.040 0.031 1988 0.023 0.053 0.034 1989 0.028 0.043 0.034 l 1990 0.033 0.079 0.045 l 1991 0.021 0.034 0.029 l 1992 0.019 0.026 0.022 1993 0.030 0.036 0.033 l 1994 0.014 0.031 0.022 1995 0.017 0.023 0.019 1996 0.018 0.022 0.020 i

o Control location was at an area beyond the influence of the site (westerly direction).

9 1969 data is considered to be p.'e-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is ,

considered to be pre operational for the JAFNPP.

7-4

TABLE 7-4 5 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA FISH Results in pCi/g (wet)

LOCATION: INDICATOR * (NMP/JAF)

Isotope Cs-137 Year Hin. Max. Mean 1969t 0.01 0.13 0.06 1974t 0.08 4.40 0.57 l 1975t 1.10 1.70 1.38 1976 0.50 3.90 1.4 1980 0.030 0.100 0.061 1981 0.027 0.10 0.061 1982 0.034 0.064 0.050 1983 0.030 0.060 0.050 1984 0.033 0.061 0.043 1985 0.018 0.045 0.030 1986 0.009 0.051 0.028 1987 0.024 0.063 0.033 1988 0.022 0.054 0.032 1989 0.020 0.044 0.034 1990 0.027 0.093 0.040 1991 0.018 0.045 0.029 1992 0.014 0.030 0.024 1993 0.018 0.035 0.028 1994 0.015 0.023 0.019 1995 0.016 0.022 0.019 1996 0.016 0.025 0.020 Indicator locations are in the general area of the NMP-1 and J.A. FitzPatrick cooling j water discharge structures, t 1969 data is considered to be pre operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP.

7-5 i

TABLE 7-5 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA SURFACE WATER Results in pCi/ liter LOCATION: CONTROL t l

sotope Cs-137 Co-60 j l

Year Hin. Max. Mean Hin. Max. Mean 1969tt 1974tt 1975tt 1980 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1981 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1.4 1.4 1.4 1982 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1983 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1985 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1986 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD o No gamma analysis performed (not required).

9 Location was the City of Oswego Water Supply for 1969 - 1984 and the Oswego Steam Station inlet canal for 1985 - 1996.

tt 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre operational for the JAFNPP.

7-6

TABLE 7-6

~

HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA l

SURFACE WATER Results in pCi/ liter i LOCATION: INDICATOR t l

Isotope Cs-137 Co-60 Year Hin. Max. Mean Hin. l Max. Hetn 1969tt * * * * *

• 1974tt * * * * *

• 1975tt * * * * *

• 1980 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1981 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1982 0.43 0.43 0.43 1.6 2.4 1.9

! 1983 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

! 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

1985 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD l 1986 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD l 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD o

No gama analysis performed (not required).

9 Indicator location was the NMP 1 Inlet Canal for the period 1969 1973, and the JAF Inlet Canal for 1974 - 1996.

9t 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre operational for the JAFNPP.

7-7

i TABLE 7-7 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA l

SURFACE WATER TRITIUM l Results in pCi/ liter ,

i LOCATION: CONTROL

• Isotope Tritium Year Hin. Max. Mean 1969t No Data No Data No Data i 1974t <MDL <MDL <MDL i 1975t 311 414 362 ,

1980 211 290 257 1981 211 357 293 i l

1982 112 307 165 1983 230 280 250 1984 190 220 205 1985 230 430 288 l 1986 250 550 373 1987 140 270 210 1988 240 460 320 1989 143 217 186 1990 260 320 290 1991 180 200 190 1992 190 310 243 1993 160 230 188 1994 250 250 250 1995 230 230 230 l 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD i l

l l

' o Control location is the City of Oswego, drinking water 4 r 1969 - 1984 and the Oswego Steam Station inlet canal for 1985 1996.

l t 1969 data is considered to be pre operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data l 1s considered to be pre operational for the JAFNPP.

7-8

.)

TABLE 7-8 l HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA 1 SURFACE WATER TRITIUM f

Results in pCi/ liter e

LOCATION: INDICATOR

• Isotope Tritium Year Hin. Max. Mean 1969t No P;La No Data No Data 1974t 380 500 440 1975t 124 482 335 l 1

l 1980 150 457 263 1981 183 388 258 1982 194 2780 641 l I

1983 190 560 317 1984 110 370 282 1985 250 1200** 530 1986 260 500 380 1987 160 410 322 1988 430 480 460 1989 135 288 225 1 1990 220 290 250 1991 250 390 310 l

1992 240 300 273 1993 200 280 242 1994 180 260 220 1995 320 320 320 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD

• Indicator location was the NMP-1 Inlet Canal during the period 1969 1973, and the JAF Inlet Canal for 1974-1996.

! ** Suspect sample contamination. Recollected samples showed normal levels of tritium, t 1969 data is considered to be pre operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP.

I 7-9

TABLE 7-9 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA Results in pCi/m' LOCATION: -CONTROL

• Isotope Gross Beta Year Hin. Max. Mean 1969t 0.130 0.540 0.334 l 1974t 0.001 0.808 0.121 1975t 0.008 0.294 0.085 1980 0.009 0.291 0.056 1981 0.016 0.549 0.165 1982 0.011 0.078 0.033 1983 0.007 0.085 0.024 1984 0.013 0.051 0.026 1985 0.013 0.043 0.024 1986 0.008 0.272 0.039 1987 0.009 0.037 0.021 1988 0.008 0.039 0.018 1989 0.007 0.039 0.017 1990 0.003 0.027 0.013 1991 0.007 0.028 0.014 1992 0.006 0.020 0.012 1993 0.007 0.022 0.013 1994 0.008 0.025 0.015 1995 0.006 0.023 0.014 1996 0.008 0.023 0.014 o Locations used for 1977 - 1984 were C off site. D1 off site, D2 off site. E off site.

F off site, and G off-site. Control location R-5 off-site was used for 1985 - 1996 (formerly C off site location),

t 1969 data is considered to be pre operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre operational for the JAFNPP.

7-10

TABLE 7-10 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA l

AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA Results in pCi/m' l LOCATION: INDICATOR *

)

Isotope Gross Beta 1 Year Hin. Max. Mean 1969t 0.130 0.520 0.320 l 1974t 0.003 0.885 0.058 1 1975t 0.001 0.456 0.067 .

)

1980 0.002 0.207 0.045 1981 0.004 0.528 0.151 1982 0.001 0.113 0.031 1983 0.003 0.062 0.023 1984 0.001 0.058 0.025 1985 0.001 0.044 0.021 1986 0.007 0.289 0.039 1987 0.009 0.040 0.021 1988 0.007 0.040 0.018 1989 0.007 0.041 0.017 1990 0.006 0.023 0.014 l 1991 0.006 0.033 0.015 1992 0.005 0.024 0.013 l 1993 0.005 0.023 0.014 1994 0.006 0.024 0.015 1995 0.004 0.031 0.014 1996 0.006 0.025 0.013

• Locations used for 1969 - 1973 were D1 on site. D2 on site. E on site. F on site and G on-site. Locations used for 1974 - 1984 were D1 on-site. D2 on-site. E on-site.

F on site. G on-site. H on site. I on site. J on-site and K on site, as applicable.

1985 - 1996 locations were R-1 off-site. R-2 off-site. R-3 off-site. and R 4 off site.

t 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP.

l 7-11 '

TABLE 7-11 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA AIR PARTICULATES Results in pCi/m LOCATION: CONTROL **

Isotope Cs-137 Co-60 Ycar Hin. Max. Mean Hin. Max. Mean 1969t * * * * *

• 1974t * * * * *

• 1975t * * * * *

• 1980 0.0015 0.0018 0.0016 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1981 0.0003 0.0042 0.0017 0.0003 0.0012 0.0008 1982 0.0002 0.0009 0.0004 0.0004 0.0007 0.0006 1983 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0007 0.0007 0.0007 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.0004 0.0012 0.0008 1985 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1986 0.0075 0.0311 0.0193 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD i 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD l 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

'

• No data available (not required prior to 1977).

• • Locations included composites of off-site air monitoring locations for 1977 - 1984.

Sample location included only R-5 air monitoring location for 1985 1996.

t 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre operational for the JAFNPP.

7-12

M

, TABLE 7-12 l HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMFLE DATA )

AIR PARTICULATES s

3 Results in pCi/m l LOCATION: INDICATOR ** I Isotope Cs-137 Co-60 Year Hin. Max. Mean Hin. Max. Mean 1969t * * * * *

• 1974t * * * * *

• 1975t * * * * *

• j 1980 0.0005 0.0019 0.0011 0.0016 0.0016 0.0016  !

1981 0.0002 0.0045 0.0014 0.0002 0.0017 0.0006 1982 0.0001 0.0006 0.0004 0.0003 0.0010 0.0005 l 1983 0.0002 0.0003 0.0002 0.0003 0.0017 0.0007 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.0007 0.0017 0.0012

)

1985 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1986 0.0069 0.0364 0.0183 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD l 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD ,

1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

• No data available (not required prior to 1977).

• • Locations included composites of on site air monitoring locations for 1977 - 1984.

Sample locations included R 1 through R 4 air monitoring locations for 1985 - 1996, t 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP.

7-13

TABLE 7-13 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA AIR RADI0 IODINE Results in pCi/m'

~

LOCATION: CONTROL

• Isotope Iodine-131 Year Hin. Max. Mean 1969t ** ** **

1974t ** ** **

1975t <MDL <MDL <MDL 1980 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1981 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1982 0.039 0.039 0.039 l 1983 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1985 <LLD <LLD <LLD ,

1986 0.041 0.332 0.151 l 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD l 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD o Locations D1 off-site D2 off site, E off-site. F off-site and G off-site used for 1976 1984. Location R 5 off site used for 1985 - 1996.

• No results I 131 analysis not required.

t 1969 data is considered to be pre operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre operational for the JAFNPP.

7-14

J TABLE 7-14 )

HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA

]

AIR RADI0 IODINE Results in pCi/m3 ]

LOCATION: INDICATOR

• I l

Isotope Iodine-131 Year Hin. Max. Mean 1969t ** ** **

1974t 1975t 0.25 0.30 0.28 1980 0.013 0.013 0.013 1981 0.016 0.042 0.029 1982 0.002 0.042 0.016 1983 0.022 0.035 0.028 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD l 1985 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1986 0.023 0.360 0.119 1987 0.011 0.018 0.014 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD l

• Locations used for 1976 1984 were D1 on-site. D2 on-site. E on site.

F on-site. G on site. H on-site. I on site J on-site and K on-site, as applicable. 1 Locations used for 1985 - 1996 were R-1 off site. R-2 off-site. R-3 off-site. and R-4 off-site.

• • No results I-131 analysis not required, t 1969 data is considered to be pre operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is l considered to be pre operational for the JAFNPP.

I' 7-15

TABLE 7-15A HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA l

ENVIRONMENTAL TLD Results in mrem / standard month LOCATION: CONTROL **

Year Hin. ~~

Max.

Mean-1 Preopt * *

• 1974t 2.7 8.9 5.6 1975t 4.8 6.0 5.5 1980 3.8 5.8 4.9 1981 3.5 5.9 4.8 l 1982 3.8 6.1 5.1 1983 4.9 7.2 5.8 1984 4.7 8.2 6.2 1985 4.5 7.6 5.6 1986 5.3 7.5 6.3 i 1987 4.6 6.6 5.4 1988 4.4 6.8 5.6 1989 2.9 6.4 4.7 1990 3.7 6.0 4.7 1991 3.8 5.8 4.7 1992 2.6 5.1 4.1 1993 3.4 5.7 4.4 1994 3.1 5.0 4.1 1995 3.4 5.7 4.4

! 1996 3.4 5.6 4.3 o Data not available.

• TLD #8, 14, 49. 111 established 1985. TLD #113 established 1992.

! 9 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP.

l l

l 7-16

]

TABLE 7-15B )

HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA

]

ENVIRONMENTAL TLD Results in mrem per standard month

]

LOCATION: RETS CONTROL **

Year Hin. Max. Mean Preopt * *

• 1974t 2.7 8.9 5.6 1975t 4.8 6.0 5.5 1980 3.8 5.8 4.9 1981 3.5 5.9 4.8 1982 3.8 6.1 5.1 1983 4.9 7.2 5.8 1984 4.7 8.2 6.2 1985 4.4 6.8 5.4 i 1986 5.5 7.2 6.3 1987 4.6 5.8 5.2 1988 4.8 6.8 5.4 1989 2.9 6.4 4.1 l 1990 3.7 6.0 4.8 1991 3.8 5.3 4.6 1992 2.6 4.7 3.9 1993 3.4 5.3 4.4 1994 3.1 4.6 3.9 1995 3.4 4.9 4.2 1996 3.4 5.6 4.2

• Data not available.

• • TLD #14 and 49 (RETS Control Locations),

t 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site, 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP.

7-17

TABLE 7-16A HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA ENVIRONMENTAL TLD Results in mrem per standard month LOCATION: SITE BOUNDARY **

Year Hin. Max. Mean Preopt * *

• 1974t * *

• 1975t * *

• 1980 * *

• 1981 * *

• 1982 * *

• 1983 * *

• 1984 * *

• 1985 4.9(4.1) 5.9(12.6) 5.3(6.2) 1986 5.4(4.4) 6.8(18.7) 5.9(7.0) 1987 4.7(4.4) 5.9(14.3) 5.3(6.1) 1988 5.0(3.4) 6.1(17.9) 5.4(6.4) 1989 4.5(2.8) 5.2(15.4) 4.8(5.9) 1990 4.5(3.6) 5.4(14.9) 4.8(6.4) 1991 4.3(3.2) 5.5(16.7) 4.8(6.0) 1992 3.7(3.2) 4.6(10.4) 4.2(5.1) 1993 3.8(3.3) 4.8(11.7) 4.3(5.4) 1994 2.8(2.8) 4.9(12.4) 4.0(5.2) 1995 3.5(3.5) 5.1(9.6) 4.4(5.4) 1996 3.2(3.2) 5.3(9.1) 4.1(5.2) o Data not available (not required prior to 1985).

• TLD locations initiated in 1985 as required by the New Technical Specifications.

Includes TLD numbers 7.18. 78 84 (1985-1996). Several of the site boundary TLDs are in close proximity to site operational buildings not generally accessible to the public, and are not representative of the site boundary dose. These locations do not include historical data statistics.

? 1969 data is considered to be pre operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP.

( ) Several of the site boundary TLDs. numbers 23,75.76.77.85.86 and 87 are in close proximity to site buildings not generally accessible to the public. These recorded doses are not representative of the site boundary dose. The statistics for all the Site Boundary TLDs are noted in the parenthesis.

7-18

TABLE 7-16B 5 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA 1 ENVIRONMENTAL TLD Results in mrem per standard month LOCATION: 0FF-SITE SECTORS ** 1 Year Hin. Max. Mean Preopt 1974t l 1975t 1980 1981  ;

1982 f

1983 1984 1985 4.0 7.1 5.0 1986 4.6 8.6 6.0 )

1987 4.3 6.0 5.2 1988 3.8 7.0 5.3 1989 2.5 6.8 4.9 1990 3.6 6.3 4.7 1991 3.6 5.8 4.7 1992 2.9 5.0 4.1 1993 3.4 6.3 4.5 1994 3.0 5.1 4.0 1995 3.2 5.2 4.3 1996 3.2 5.3 4.2

• Data not available (not required prior to 1985).

• • TLD locations initiated in 1985 as required by the New Technical Specifications.

Includes TLD numbers 88. 89. 90, 91. 92. 93, 94 and 95.

t 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre operational for the JAFNPP.

7-19

TABLE 7-16C HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA ENVIRONMENTAL TLD Results in mrem per standard month LOCATION: SPECIAL INTEREST **

Year Hin. Max. Mean Preopt * *

• 1974t * *

• 1975t * *

• 1980 * *

• 1981 * *

• 1982 * *

• 1983 * *

• 1984 * *

• 1985 3.9 6.8 5.3 1986 4.8 8.2 6.1 1987 3.5 6.0 5.1 1988 3.9 6.6 5.3 1989 2.1 6.4 4.9 1990 3.2 6.3 4.8 1991 2.9 5.6 4.4 1992 3.0 4.8 4.1 1993 3.2 5.8 4.5 1994 2.9 4.8 4.1 I 1995 3.6 4.8 4.2 l 1996 3.2 5.1 4.2  :

1 o l Data not available (not required prior to 1985).

)

• TLD locations initiated in 1985 as required by the New Technical Specifications.

Includes TLD numbers 15. 56, 58, 96, 97 and 98. which are located near -

critical residences and populated areas near the site. I 1

9 1969 data is considered to be pre operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre operational for the JAFNPP. )

7 20

J TABLE 7-16D i MISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA ENVIRONMENTAL TLD Results in mrem per standard month 1 LOCATION: ON-SITE INDICATOR **

Year Hin. Max. Mean Preopt * *

• 1974t 3.1 10.6 5.7 )

1975t 4.6 16.0 7.3 1980 3.9 12.0 5.3 1981 4.1 11.8 5.8 1982 3.9 13.0 6.3 1983 5.0 16.5 6.9 1984 4.6 13.2 7.0 1985 4.7 15.9 6.3 1986 4.7 16.1 7.0 1987 4.0 11.4 5.8 1988 4.4 11.9 6.0 l

1989 2.7 13.1 6.0 1990 3.6 12.9 5.5 1991 3.2 11.6 5.4 1992 3.2 5.6 4.3 1993 3.1 13.6 5.2 j 1994 2.8 14.3 5.1 1995 3.5 28.6 6.2 1996 3.1 32.6 6.4

• No data available.

• • Includes TLD numbers 3. 4. 5. 6 and 7 (1970 1973). Includes TLD numbers 3. 4

5. 6. 7. 23, 24. 25 and 26 (1974 - 1996). Locations are existing or previous on-site environmental air monitoring locations.

t 1969 data is considered to be pre operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP.

7-21

1 l

i TABLE 7-16E I HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA ENVIRONMENTAL TLD Results in mrem per standard month LOCATION: OFF-SITE INDICATOR **

Year Hin. Max. Mean Preopt * *

• 1974t 2.4 8.9 5.3 1975t 4.5 7.1 5.5 1980 3.1 5.8 4.6 1981 3.6 5.9 4.7 1982 4.0 6.2 5.2 1983 4.6 7.2 5.6 1984 4.6 8.2 6.1 1985 4.6 7.7 5.5 1986 5.0 7.6 6.1 1987 4.4 6.6 5.2 1988 4.2 6.6 5.4 1989 2.8 6.4 4.6 1990 3.8 6.1 4.8 1991 3.4 5.8 4.5 1992 3.1 5.2 4.1 1993 3.2 5.7 5.0 1994 3.0 5.1 4.1 1995 3.9 5.7 4.4 1996 3.3 5.5 4.1 o No data available.

l

• Includes TLD numbers 8, 9,10,11.12 and 13 (off-site environmental air monitoring locations).

9 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre operational for the JAFNPP.

l 7-22

TABLE 7-17 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA MILK Results in pCi/ liter  !

LOCATION: CONTROL **

Isotope Cs-137 I-131 Year Hin. Max. Mean Hin. Max. Mean 1969t * * * * *

• l 1974t * * * * *

• 1975t * * * * *

• 1980 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1.4 1.4 1.4 1981 7.0 7.0 7.0 <LLD <LLD <LLD l 1982 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1983 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD l 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1985 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1986 5.3 12.4 8.4 0.8 29.0 13.6 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <

1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD l 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

• No data available (sample not required).

• • Location used was an available milk sample location in a least prevalent wind direction greater than ten miles from the site.

t 1969 data is considered to be pre operational for the site, 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP.

7-23

l TABLE 7-18 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE MILK Results in pCi/ liter LOCATION: INDICATOR

• Isotope Cs-137 I-131 Year Hin. Max. Mean Hin. Hax. Mean 1969t ** ** ** ** ** **

1974f 1.6 39 10.5 0.70 2.00 1.23 1975t 6.0 22 16 0.01 2.99 0.37 1980 4.0 21.0 9.7 0.4 8.8 4.9 1981 4.3 29.0 7.6 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1982 3.1 18.0 6.3 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1983 5.1 5.1 5.1 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1985 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1986 6.1 11.1 8.6 0.3 30.0 5.2 1987 5.5 9.4 7.4 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 10.0 10.0 10.0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1

1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD l 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1

0 Locations sampled were available downwind locations within ten miles with high deposition potential.

• No data available (control samples not required).

9 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is l considered to be pre operational for the JAFNPP.

7-24 l

M TABLE 7-19 '

HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA FOOD PRODUCTS tt Results in pCi/g (wet)

LOCATION: CON 1ROL

• l Isotope Cs-137 Year Hin. Max. Mean 1969t ** ** **

1974t ** ** **

1975t ** ** **

1980 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1 1981 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1982 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1 1983 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1985 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1986 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 0.008 0.008 0.008 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD Locations was an available food product sample location in a least prevalent wind direction greater than ten miles from the site.

• • No data available (control samples not required).

t 1969 data is considered to be pre operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP.

tt Data comprised of broadleaf and non broadleaf vegetaion (1980-1984). Data comprised of broadleaf vegetation on13 (1985 1996).

7-25

TABLE 7-20 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA FOOD PRODUCTS tt Results in pCi/g (wet)

LOCATION: INDICATOR

• Isotope Cs-137 I

Year Hin. Max. Mean l

1969t ** ** **

1974t 0.04 0.34 0.142 1975t <MDL <MDL <MDL l 1980 0.004 0.060 0.033 1981 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1982 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1983 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1985 0.047 0.047 0.047 1986 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 0.008 0.008 0.008 1989 0.011 0.011 0.011 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 0.039 0.039 0.039 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 0.006 0.012 0.010 1995 0.011 0.012 0.012 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD l 0 Indicator locations were available downwind locations within ten miles of the site and with high deposition potential.

" No data available (control samples not required).

t 1969 data is considered to be pre operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre operational for the JAFNPP.

l tt Data comprised of broadleaf and non-broadleaf vegetaion (1976-1984). Data comprised I of broadleaf vegetation only (1985-1996).

7-26

i 8.0 GRAPIIICAL PRESENTATIONS

l. DATA GRAPHS  !

This section iniludes graphic representation of selected sample results.  !

For graphic representation, results reported as MDL or LLD were considered  !

to be at the "zero" level of activity. MDL and LLD results were indicated j where possible.

2. SAMPLE LOCATIONS Sample location results specified as " indicator" and " control" on the graphs can be referenced back to Section 3.3 for specific locations.

i 8-1 i

i 1

6991 5991 4991 S 3991 9a h l2991 em 1991 0991 9891 8891 7

1 7 7891 l  ?

6891

$w .

oc l 2 3 O" 5891 h

5 7 C 3 m e

~ 2 2 4891 y 3891 E

,,g 2891 1 1891 0891 c

R j E 9791 R

l

$ 8791 a i

^  !

l

M, 7791 Z ' ' 6791 I I I I I  !

5791 l I I I I

' 4791 6

a h

a L.

6 6 h b O

• O O O O

)tew( mg/iCp 8-2

I l

O

" i ,

o m

33 i n i n in i n gj m I i nn tikiliini llil geg o

9 l z

g innunnnna ronno i nni 3993 1 i g ni nnn in n

,3 i

3 9891

,. l U*[ """""'"' 7891 zd l l l Rs 'EEEEEEEEEEEEE ='

a w ~-oc 1 i i hm mp S c

E 5891 l l

$3 489' O I I mm 1 I EC

>m c

I

'""u nnuinmuutnununnammunonnunniniannunninunon.nu tmmm 2891 i i i

1891 i I 1 a - Ml

s s <

o E

, - , I

.h 8791 '

<x 5 l l l Qm

.z <

19 .E I I l l

$ O I!!!!!!'!!H!!!E!!!!!!!!I!!!!!!!!!!!!!!li!!IIIIII!!!I'"'"'""'"""'"'"!!!I!!! 6791

i t I f{

wm

$ i 5791

! l l

'I""U"""""!""""""""""'"""'""""""'"["""'"" 4791 o

b b b b b b b b b L/iCp 8-E

JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P.

AIR PARTICULATE FILTER-GROSS BETA Figure 8.3 0.35 i 0.3 1969: Sde Pre-operational Data 1974: Pre-operational Data for JAF 1980. Atmospheric Nuclear Test BINDICATOR ECONTROL 0 25 - - -

02 - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

00 L 2 0.15 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- - -

0.1 - --- -

Il 0 05 -

-ll Ennasumm.... --

year 4

I l JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P.

AIR PARTICULATE FILTER- GROSS BETA

v I

l Figure 8.4 0 030 i.

0 025 -- -- - -- - - ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

l l--+-INDICATOR CONTROL l 0 020 - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --

Y v.

- - - - - - - - - - - -- "'-~~--'-~~ "

0 015 -- -- - -

s ,

i t

i  !

~ - - - - - - - ' - - - - - ' - ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ - ' -- --~~ - - - - '

0.010 - - - - - - -- - -

l 0000 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 VEEK#

l

i 2

5 1

- - 5

- 0 5

9

- 4

- 8

-- 4

- 7

~

~

4 6

R L -

4 O -

TO -

AR CT -

I N -- - -

5 4

DO -

NC I

- 4 4

0 3

4 A

T - 2 P. E -

4 P. B -

N S -

1 4

S K O C R 0 4 #

I R G- - K T R 5 E E

A E T

8 9 W 3

P L er Z I F u -

T I

ig 8 3

F E T

F -

A A -

7 L 3 S U -

E C I

M T - 6 3

R -

A A -

J P -

5

- 3 R

I -

A --

4

- 3 3

3 2

3 1

3 0

- 3 9

2

_ 8 2

7 t

2 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 3 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

?s1 Ym ll l

t JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P.

i AIR PARTICULATE FILTER Co-60 Figure 8.6 0.02 0.018 -

• No Positive Detection < LLD '

O.016 --

IRINDICATOR faCONTROL p O.012 --

4 es -

j O.01 W

0.008 --

i O.006 .

0904 . - - - - -- - - - -

0.002 - -

0

R I s a' a  :  :  : : a a S S S a

S S a

S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S m

JAMES A FITZPATRICK N.P.P.

AIR PARTICULATE FILTER COMPOSITE Cs-137 Figure 8.7 0.025

• No Pos#tive Detection < LLD 1986- Chemobyl Accident MINDICATOR ECONTROL 0 02 0 015 h

bo. I 0 01 0 005

{

o e

Eddd__

e e a a a = = = = = = =

I

?  ?  ?  ?  ? a a a a a  : a

?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ? ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?  ?

JAMES A FITZPATRICK N.P.P.

AIR-RADIOIODINE l-131 Figure 8.8 07

• No Positive Detection <LLD 06 1986: Chernobyl Accident MINDICATOR aCONTROL os - - - - - -

04 oc $

o &

CL 03 -

E -

B k

R 02 -g -

t E

F 0.1 - -

. .a J a

.s k -

s a a a s s e e t e e a a a a s  : a a = = a S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S YEAR

JAMES A FITZPATRICK N.P.P.

Figure 8.9 25

• No Positive Detection < LLD 20 WINDICATOR ECONTROL 1s. ---

J b 1986: Chernobyl Accident 10 -- -- -

1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 YEAR

l e

o S

L O e R e S

T N

O e S

C e E

R S O

T A

C I

e S

e D

N I

l B e e bS e

e S e

e bS o

P e o

S e

P e N1 o e

S K 3 1 C

I l

l bS RE 0 1

TN 8 e

o ADe I

e

$S P Or ZI u TOi Fg e

I o

bS I

FD o A e S

AR e S K L o

S EI e MM A

e e

bS J

b S D

L L

e e

S n

g t n n -

i e o S t

s d it e ic c t

c e ic A t e -

h r

e ty D - - S b

p o e -

s o n r i v -

m t h e it s 0- 4l S A C o

: P 0 6 8 o 8

9 1

9 1

N -

" $S

~

kS 0 8 6 , 2 0 8 6 4 2 0 2 1 1 3 1 1 L

mhC eC l l  ! lll

James A. FitzPatrick N.P.P.

,, Fi or .N 9 -- -.

1974-1984 Contro Data o it2 CONTROL a SITE BOUNDARY BOFFSITEl

=

19 1

__ illillEli .

a _ - -_

l YYY_A N-_?N_II_I- N____

1 -

i 9.0

~

QA/QC PROGRAM i

j 9.1 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION i

One facet of the JAFNNP Environmental Laboratory Quality Assurance Program was the routine participation in the Intercomparison Program conducted by the U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA). The EPA Interlaboratory Comparison Program was discontinued effective December 31, 1995. As a result, all NRC licenses were required to replace the EPA program with an Interlaboratory Cross Check Program that is equivalent to that program. To fulfill the Technical Specification requirement for an Interlaboratory Comparison Program, the JAF Environmental Laboratory has engaged the services of two independent laboratories

, to provide cross check samples. The two laboratories are Analytics Commercial

Laboratory in Atlanta Georgia and the U.S. Department Of Energy's Environmental Measurement Laboratory (EML) in New York City. The Analytics supplied  ;

program was effective starting with the first quarter 1996 (March) and the EML l' program became effective in the third quader 1996 (September).

Analytics supplies sample media as blind sample spikes which contain known levels of radioactivity. These samples are prepared and analyzed using standard laboratory procedures. The results are submitted to Analytics which issues a statistical summary report. The JAFNPP Environmental Laboratory used the EPA acceptance criteria methodology for evaluating the laboratories performance for Analytics' sample results. A Normalized Deviation from the Known Value (NDKV) for each sample set was calculated. JAFNPP Environmental Laboratory results between -3 and 3 NDKV were considered to be acceptable. Table 9-2 lists the guidelines used by the EPA for evaluating laboratory performance for specific nuclides. Table 9-3 lists the actual values used by the EPA for gamma emitters from 1989 to 1995 and for gross beta-filters for 1994 and 1995. These values were assumed for this section.

Additional radionuclides and media were analyzed this year as pan of the JAFNNP Environmental Laboratory Quality Assurance Program. Additional assumptions were needed for these radionuclides and media in order to use the EPA acceptance criteria methodology. These are listed in Table 9-4.

9-1

EML supplies sample media as blind sample spikes which contain known levels of radioactivity. These samples are analyzed using standard laboratory procedures.

The results are submitted to the Environmental Measurements Laboratory for statistical evaluation.

< j The participants' analytical performance is evaluated by EML based on the historical analytical capabilities for individual analyte / matrix pairs. The criteria for acceptable performance, "A", has been chosen to be between the 15th and 85th percentile of the cumulative normalized distribution, which can be viewed as the middle 70% of all historic measurements. The acceptable with warning criteria, "W", is between the 5th and 15th percentile and between the 85th and 95th percentile. In other words, the middle 90% of all reported values are acceptable, while the other 5th-15th (10%)

and 85th-95th percentiles (10%) are in the waming area. The not acceptable criteria, "N", is established at less than the 5th percentile and greater than the 95th percentile, that is, the outer 10% of the historical data.

9.2 PROGRAM SCIIEDULE MEDIA ANALYSIS ANALYTICS EML TOTAL Water Gross Beta 0 1 1 Water Tritium 1 1 2 Water 1-131 2 0 2 Water Mixed Gamma 2 1 3 Air Gross Beta 2 1 3 Air I-131 2 0 2 Air Mixed Gamma 2 1 3 Milk 1-131 2 0 2 Milk Mixed Gamma 2 0 2 Soil Mixed Gamma l 1 2 Vegetation Mixed Gamma 0 1 1 TOTAL 16 7 23 Note: EML provided only the second set of annual samples because JAF became a client in the second half of 1996.

9-2

\ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

9.3 PROGRAM RESULTS

SUMMARY

The Interlaboratory Cross Check Program results are provided on Table 9-1.

9.3.1 ANALYTICS QA SAMPLES Sixteen QA blind samples were received as part of Analytics' 1996 QA program. These samples required 68 isotopic analyses and 2 gross beta analyses. These samples represented five sample media. Acceptance criteria were calculated for each isotopic analysis (see Table 9-2 through 9-4). The Normalized Deviation from the Known Value (NDKV) was calculated for the JAF Environmental Laboratory results relative to the "known" or reference value. With the exception of a single gamma analysis of Fe-59 in Soil for QA sample 96-06A, all results reported by the JAF Environmental Laboratory were acceptable. Acceptable results fall within the range of +3 NDKV and -3 NDKV.

9.3.2 ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS LABORATORY (EML)

SAMPLES The JAF Environmental Laboratory received four matrix samples prepared by the Environmental Measurement Laboratory (EML), a division of the Department of Energy. These samples were analyzed for gross beta, tritium and gamma emitting radionuclides as appropriate. The average results were reported to EML. Using five years worth of historical analytical data, the EML determined performance results using the following percentile criteria.

Result Cumulative Normalized Distribution Acceptable 15 % - 85 %

Acceptable with Warning 5% - 15% or 85% - 95%

Not Acceptable <5% or >95%

9-3

The JAF Environmental Laboratory results are as follows:

Total Acceptable Matrix Analyses Acceptable with Wamine Not Accentable Air 8 8 0 0 i Soil 2 0 2 0 Vegetation 2 0 2 0 Water 5 5 0 0 Evaluation 17 76.5 % 23.5 % 0.0%

The soil and vegetation results were evaluated as being acceptable, but within the waming range. These results were biased because of a difference in the sample matrix supplied and the JAF Environmental Laboratory calibration matrix. These results do not represent a laboratory deficiency or systematic error.

9.3.3 TELEDYNE BROWN ENGINEEltlNG QA SAMPLES Teledyne Brown Engineering (TBE) provides the analysis of tritium in water samples for the JAFEL and it's clients. During 1996 TBE participated in an interlaboratory cross check program with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), EML and Analytic, Inc. All analytical results for tritium analysis in water for each of the three programs were acceptable as reported by Teledyne.

9.4 NONCONFORMITY REVIEWS 9.4.1 ANALYTICS INC. BLIND SAMPLES The Fe-59 analytical results for soil sample 96-06A had a calculated NDKV of 6.11, which placed the results outside the acceptable limits. The nonconfomiity for Fe-59 was a result of the low level of Fe-59 activity provided in the blind sample. The Fe-59 concentration of 0.17 pCilgm was near the routine detection limit of the analysis. One of the three analyses which made up the reported mean result was higher than the remaining two, which biased the mean high. Seven other isotopes were present in the sample. The mean results for the other seven isotopes were within the +3 to -3 NDKV range and hence acceptable. This nonconformity does not indicate a laboratory systematic error.

9-4 i _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

9.4.2 EML BLIND SAMPLE NONCONFORMITY There were no nonconformities identified in the analyses of the sample provided under the EML program.

There were two sample analyses which resulted in an " acceptable with waming" evaluation. These were results for soil and vegetation samples requiring analysis for gamma emitters. Each of these samples contained Cs-137 and Co-60. The bias in the sample results was the result of density differences between the EML sample matrix and the JAF Environmental Laboratory calibration standards.

The soil isotopic results were in the range of 28% - 30% higher than EML known value. This is attributable to a difference in sample density compared to the calibration source density. The density of the EML sample was 0.20 gm/cc compared to the calibration source density of 1.33 gm/cc.

This difference in density resulted in a sample analysis which is biased high.

A similar evaluation can make for the vegetation results. The density of the EML sample was 0.30 gm/cc compared to the laboratory calibration source density of 1.15 gm/cc. Again, this difference in density provided a sample result which is biased high.

Neither of these sample result evaluations represent laboratory systematic error.

9.5 REFERENCES

9.5.1 Environmental Measurements Laboratory Semi Annual Report of the Depanment of Environmental Management Quality Assessment Program.

January 1997, EML-587.

9-5

TABLE 9-1 INTERCOMPARISON STUDY PROGRAM Gross Beta Analysis of Air Particulate Filters (pCi/ filter)

JAF ENV JAF REFERENCE DATE ID NUMBER MEDIUM ANALYSIS RESULT LABORATORY

• NDKV (1) (2) (3) 06/96 QA 96 05A AIR GB 29.710.6 27 1 0.52 30.010.6 30.010.6 12/96 QA 96 12A AIR GB 77.711.5 77.0 3.9 -0.26 74.511.5 75.011.5 (1) Results reported as activity 1 1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity i 3 sigma.

(3) NDKV is the Normalized Deviation from Known Value as determined using the EPA Methodology.

Values within the range of +3 and -3 indicate acceptable results. See Section 9.1 for NDKV di;russion.

(*) Samples provided by Analytics, Inc.

9-6

\ - _ _ _ _ _ _

TABLE 9-1 (continued)

INTERCOMPARISON STUDY PROGRAM Tritium Analysis of Water (pCi/ liter)  ;

i JAF ENV JAF REFERENCE DATE ID NUMBER MEDIUM ANALYSIS RESULT LABORATORY

• NDKV (1) (2) (3)  ;

03/96 QA 96-03A WATER H-3 3359 107 2982i149 1.76 1 3355i107 33231107 (1) Results reported as activity i 1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity i 3 sigma.

(3) NDKV is the Normalized Deviation from Known Value as determined using the EPA Methodology.

Values within the range of +3 and -3 indicate acceptable results. See Section 9.1 for NDKV l discussion.

(0) Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.

I i

9-7

TABLE 9-1 (Continued)

INTERCOMPARISON ST1]DY PROGRN4 Iodine Analysis of Water. Air and Milk ,

JAF ENV JAF REFERENCE DATE ID NUMBER MEDIUM ANALYSIS RESULT LABORATORY

• NDKV (1) (2) (3) 06/96 QA 96-04A AIR I-131 83i5 8314 -0.63 71i12 pCi/ filter 87f13 06/96 QA 96-07A MILK I-131 1013 15il -1.18 10i3 pCi/ liter 07/96 QA 96-08A WATER I-131 4311 4512 -0.87 40i3 pCi/ liter 43 1 09/96 QA 96-09A MILK I-131 24i6 24 1 0.0 17 7 pCi/ liter 29 7 09/96 QA 96-11A AIR I-131 55 7 6013 -1.15 5016 pCi/ filter 6412 12/96 QA 96-13A WATER I-131 4314 3912 -0.29 4216 pCi/ liter 30 4 (1) Results reported as activity i 1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity 3 sigma.

(3) NDKV is the Normalized Deviation from Known Value as determined using the EPA Methodology.

Values within the range of +3 and -3 indicate acceptable results. See Section 9.1 for NDKV discussion.

(*) Sample provided by Analytics. Inc.

9-8

TABLE 9-1 (Continued) l INTERCOMPARIS0N STUDY PROGRAM Gamma Analysis Water (pCi/ liter)

JAF ENV JAF REFERENCE DATE ID NUMBER MEDIUM ANALYSIS RESULT LABORATORY *' NDKV (1) (2) (3) 03/96 OA 96-01A WATER Ce-141 71113 8814 0.87 99111 109i17 Cr-51 256f77 322i16 1.34 330i63 3051102 Cs-134 6014 5813 -1.73 5514 5014 Cs-137 6617 6413 -1.08 5617 58i6 Co 58 38i9 4812

-0.87 4817 4217 Mn 54 3015 3112 3915 3117 Fe-59 89i13 8314 83i13 97117 1.25  ;

Zn 65 131115 9715 86112 94112 0.0 Co-60 8215 7614 74i5 7115 (1) Results reported as activity i 1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity i 3 sigma.

(3) NDKV is the Normalized Deviation from Known Value as determined using the EPA Methodology.

Values within the range of +3 and 3 indicate acceptable results. See Section 9.1 for NDKV discussion.

(0) Sample provided by Analytics. Inc.

99

TABLE 9-1 (Continued)

INTERCOMPARISON STUDY PROGRAM Gamma Analysis Water (pCi/ liter)

JAF ENV JAF REFERENCE DATE ID NUMBER MEDIUM ANALYSIS RESULT LABORATORY

• NDKV (1) (2) (3) 12/96 QA 96-13A WATER Ce-141 28316 272114 0.57 284 8 277 6 Cr-51 218123 209110 -0.99 182131 191126 Cs-134 16613 17219 -0.81 16214 ,

16313 Cs-137 18615 191110 -0.73 18516 17715 Co-58 114 4 11916

-0.15 11715 12314 Mn-54 22015 202110 22116 21615 1.73 Fe-59 5815 4812 61 6 5615 0.0 Zn 65 9616 9115 8818 0.64 Co 60 114i3 108i5 112 4 11113 (1) Results reported as activity i 1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity 3 sigma.

(3) NDKV is the Normalized Deviation from Known Value as determined using the EPA Methodology.

Values within the range of +3 and -3 indicate acceptable results. See Section 9.1 for NDKV discussion.

(*) Sample provided by Analytics. Inc.

1 9-] O

l TABLE 9-1 (Continued)

INTERCOMPARISON STUDY PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Air Particulate Filters (pCi/ filter)

JAF ENV JAF REFERENCE DATE ID NUMBER MEDIUM ANALYSIS RESULT LABORATORY

• NDKV (1) (2) (3) 03/96 QA 96-02A FILTER Ce-141 158i39 17019 -1.02 163131 159i40 Cs-134 9616 11216 -2.63 10115 8915 Cs-137 10718 12316 -1.27 12117 11416 Co-58 72117 9315 -1.56 87 13 92115 Mn-54 7219 6113 0.17 5216 63f7 Fe-59 132162 16218 0.0 161144 192153 Zn-65 211127 18819 1.38 191117 207118 Co 60 14419 148f7 0.47 13617 15216 (1) Results reported as activity i 1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity i 3 sigma.

(3) NDKV is the Normalized Deviation from Known Value as determined using the EPA Methodology.

' Values within the range of +3 and 3 indicate acceptable results. See Section 9.1 for NDKV discussion.

(0) Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.

9-11

TABLE 9-1 (continued)

INTERCOMPARISON STUDY PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Air Particulate Filters (pCi/ filter)

JAF ENV JAF REFERENCE i

DATE ID NUMBER MEDIUM ANALYSIS RESULT LABORATORY

• NDKV (1) (2) (3) 09/96 QA 96 10A FILTER Ce-141 301117 287114 0.60 314fl9 276i16 Cr-51 429186 438122 -1.03 346199 460177 Cs 134 183 9 200i10 -1.82 170111 185t9 Cs-137 174112 152 8 1.60

, 168t14 157112 Co-58 146114 11816 0.59 108 12 111112 Mn 54 191 15 162f8 2.57 185i15 183113

~

Fe-59 27 15 3412 0.0 40124 LLD Zn-65 72i16 63t3 2.77 74i16 91117 Co-60 106f9 10315 0.84 110111 10819 (1) Results reported as activity i 1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity 3 sigma.

(3) NDKV is the Normalized Deviation from Known Value as determined using the EPA Methodology.

Values within the range of +3 and -3 indicate acceptable results. See Section 9.1 for NDKV discussion.

(*) Sample provided by Analytics. Inc.

9-12

l TABLE 9-1 (Continued)

INTERCOMPARISON STUDY PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Milk (pCicliter)

JAF ENV JAF REFERENCE DATE ID NUMBER MEDIUM ANALYSIS RESULT LABORATORY

• NDKV (1) (2) (3) 06/96 QA 96-07A MILK Ce-141 20916 215111 0.07 22214 Cr-51 593128 563i28 0.45 569118 Cs 134 15712 16618 -0.85 15511 Cs-137 398t4 410121 -0.24 40713 Co-58 91i3 9315 0.0 9412 Mn-54 30914 300il5 0.71 321t2 Fe-59 8015 77 4 0.71 83f3 Zn-65 5714 5813 0.28 6212 Co-60 8112 8414 -0.14 8611 (1) Results reported as activity i 1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity i 3 sigma.

(3) NDKV is the Normalized Deviation from Known Value as determined using the EPA Methodology.

Values within the range of +3 and -3 indicate acceptable results. See Sectiori 9.1 for NDKV discussion.

(0) Sample provided by Analytics. Inc.

9-13

TABLE 9-1 (continued) ,

INTERCOMPARISON STUDY PROGRAM ,

Gamma Analysis of Milk (pCi/ liter)

JAF ENV JAF REFERENCE DATE ID NUMBER MEDIUM ANALYSIS RESULT LABORATORY

• NDKV (1) (2) (3) l 09/96 QA 96 09A MILK Ce-141 320110 318116 0.0 l 323115 '

312114 Cr 51 579145 486124 2.00 557i41 489163 i

Cs-134 20015 222 11 -0.86 1 21717 l 21715 .

2 Cs-137 15216 16918 1.13 l 152f7 1 l

17016 Co-58 12919 13117 0.0 12916 13616 Mn-54 19417 18019 0.67 18518 ,

18216 l Fe-59 3418 37i2 0.52 51114 3418 Zn-65 90i10 7014 1.39 6718 7619 Co-60 106i6 114 6 0.0 1 117i5 11814 Y

(1) Results reported as activity i 1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity i 3 sigma.

(3) NDKV is the Normalized Deviation from Known Value as determined using the EPA Methodology. Values within the range of +3 and 3 indicate acceptable results. See Section 9.1 for NDKV discussion.

(0) Sample provided by Analytics. Inc.

9-14

TABLE 9-1 (Continued)

INTERCOMPARISON STUDY PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Soil (pCi/gm)

JAF ENV JAF REFERENCE DATE ID NUMBER MEDIUM ANALYSIS RESULT LABC'lATORY* NDKV  ;

(1) (2) (3) 06/96 QA 96 06A S0ll Ce-141 0.52i0.08 0.4710.02 0.49 0.44i0.07 0.5210.08 Cr 51 0.8510.37 1.2210.06 2.17 1.0310.55 1.1010.43 Cs 134 0.36 0.03 0.3610.02 0.64 0.3410.04 0.31i0.03 Cs-137 0.9810.11 0.8910.04 0.91 0.9610.05 0.95i0.07 Co 58 0.1910.05 0.2010.01 0.58 0.2010.04 0.25i0.04 Mn 54 0.84i0.11 0.65f0.03 0.71 0.6810.06 0.56 0.06 Fe-59 0.3210.08 0.1710.01 6.11 0.2210.08 0.2410.06 Co-60 0.2410.07 0.1810.01 0.0 0.14f0.03 0.1610.02 (1) Results reported as activity i 1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity i 3 sigma.

(3) NDKV is the Normalized Deviation from Known Value as determined using the EPA Methodology.

Values within the range of +3 and -3 indicate acceptable results. See Section 9.1 "or NDKV discussion.

(c) Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.

9-15

TABLE 9-1 (co,tinued) ,

INTERCOMPARISON STlDY PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Soil. Water and Vegetation JAF ENV JAt~ REFERENCE REFERENCE DATE ID NUMBER MEDIUM ANALYSIS RESULT LABORATORY

• RATIO (1) l (2) (3) 1 09/96 QA 96-01E SOIL Cs 137 2021128 1550 22.2 1.30. W I Co-60 3.75 0.75 2.92 0.21 1.28 W Bq/Kg 1

09/96 QA 96-04E VEGETATION Cs 137 267 5 190 7.0 1.41 W Co-60 14.6 0.7 10.9 0.7 1.34. W Bq/Kg 09/96 QA 96-07E WATER Cs-137 82.5 7.7 89.511.36 1.03, A 90.2 7.7 104.3 7.7 Mn 54 61.1 5.0 60.5 0.6 0.99 A 53.3 5.0 65.1 5.0 Co 60 63.2 4.5 61.1 0.7 1.01. A 59.214.5 63.6 4.5 Bq/ liter i

1 (1) Results reported as activity 1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity 1 sigma.

(3) Reference Ratio = Reported /EML.

(*) Sample provided by Environmental Measurements Lab. Dept. of Energy. l (A) Evaluation Results. Acceptable. (

l (W) Evaluation Results. Acceptable with Warning.

l l

9-16 l 1

l 1

TABLE 9-1 (continued)

INTERCOMPARISON STUDY PROGRAM Gamma Analysis Air Particulate Filters (Bq/ filter) I JAF ENV JAF REFERENCE REFERENCE I DATE ID NUMBER MEDIUM ANALYSIS RESULT l.ABORATORY* RATIO (1) (2) (3) 09/96 QA 96 03E FILTER Mn-54 6.010.4 6.3510.27 0.92, A 5.810.4 6.210.4 5.910.4 5.310.4 Co 57 12.710.6 14.810.8 0.86, A 12.510.6 l 13.710.6 12.410.6 12.510.6 Co-60 7.510.3 8.6410.43 0.91. A 8.410.3 7.810.3 l 7.710.3 7.810.6 Ru-106 9.011.4 10.811.1 0.91 A 9.111.4 11.411.4 11.111.4 8.411.4 Sb-125 9.8 0.3 10.810.5 0.88, A 9.2i0.3 9.710.3 9.510.3 9.110.3 Cs-134 9.310.5 10.8i0.4 0.86. A 9.810.5 9.710.5 9.710.5 8.810.5 Cs-137 7.010.2 8.5210.37 0.83, A 6.910.2 i 7.410.2 7.110.2 6.810.2 (1) Results reported as activity 11 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity i 1 sigma.

(3) Reference Ratio = Reported /EML.

(*) Sample provided by Environmental Measurements Lab. Dept. of Energy.

(A) Evaluation Results. Acceptable.

9-17

J TABLE 9-1 (continued) ]

INTERCOMPARISON STUDY PROGRAM ,

1 Gross l' eta Analysis of Air (Bq/ filter) l JAF ENV  ! JAF REFERENCE REFERENCE DATE ID NUMBER MEDIUM ANALYSIS RESULT LABORATORY

• RATIO l (1) (2) (3) 09/96 QA 96 02 AIR GB 0.5610.03 0.5010.05 1.1 A 0.5510.03 0.5310.03

- A (1) Results reported as activity i 1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity i 1 sigma.

(3) Reference Ratio = Reported /EML.

(c) Sample provided by Environmental Measurements Lab. Dept. of Energy.

(A) Evaluation Results. Acceptable.

9-18

TABLE 9-1 (continued)

INTERCOMPARISON STUDY PROGRAM Gross Beta Analysis of Water (Bq/ filter)

JAF ENV JAF REFERENCE REFERENCE IDATEID NUMBER MEDIUM ANALYSIS RESULT LABORATORY

• RATIO

(1) (2) (3) k 09/96 QA 96-06E WATER GB 522i16 540154 0.92, A 492116 481i16 (1) Results reported as activity i i sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity 1 1 sigma.

(3) Reference Ratio = Reported /EML.

(0) Sample provided by Environmental Measurements Lab. Dept. of Energy.

(A) Evaluation Results. Acceptable.

9-19

TABLE 9-1 (Continued) )

l INTERCOMPARISON STUDY PROGRAM s Tritium Analysis of Water (Bq/ filter)

L

, JAF ENV JAF REFERENCE REFERENCE DATE ID NUMBER MEDIUM ANALYSIS RESULT LABORATORY

• RATIO (1) (2) (3) l 09/96 QA 96 05E WATER H-3 60314 587158 1.04 A 610 4 611 4 (1) Results reported as activity i 1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity i 1 sigma.

(3) Reference Ratio = Reported /EML.

(0) Sample provided by Environmental Measurements Lab Dept. of Energy.

(A) Evaluation Results Acceptable.

l i

1 9 20 l

TABLE 9-2 Analytical Precision Values Used for Evaluating Laboratory Performance for Specific Nuclides l

ONE STANDARD DEVIATION ANALYSIS ACTIVITY LEVEL FOR SINGLE DETERMINATION

• Gama Emitters Co-60 5 to 100 pCi/ liter or kg 5 pCi/ liter Zn-65 i Cs 134 >100 pCi/ liter or kg 5% of known value  !

Cs-137 l 1

• Gross Beta Filter $100 pCi/ Filter 5 pCi/ Filter

>100 pCi/ Filter 5% of known value Tritium Water <4,000 pCi/ liter 1 std dev. (pCi/ liter) =

"33 (170)(known)

>4,000 pCi/ liter 10% of known value Iodine 131 Water 555 pCi/ liter 6 pCi/ liter

>55 pCi/ liter 10% of known value Milk 555 pCi/ liter 6 pCi/ liter

>55 pCi/ liter 10% of known value l(9 Table 3 of the EPA document. " Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory Intercomparisons Studies Progam" lists the analytical precision values used for judging laboratory performance for gamma emitters and gross beta-filters as what is listed above. The actual values used by the l EPA for gamma emitters from 1989 to 1995 and for gross beta filters for 1994 and 1995 are I

given in Table 9-3.

9-21 1

TABLE 9-3 Actual Analytical Values Used by the EPA for Evaluating Laboratory Performance for Specific Nuclides ONE STANDARD DEVIATION ANALYSIS ACTIVITY LEVEL FOR SINGLE DETERMINATION I Gama Emitters Water - Co-60 5 to 60 pCi/ liter 5 pCi/ liter Zn-65 Cs 134 >60 pCi/ liter 10% of known value Cs 137 Filter - Cs-137 5 to 60 pCi/ Filter 5 pCi/ Filter Milk - Cs 137 5 to 60 pCi/ liter 5 pCi/ liter Gross Beta Filter $100 pCi/ Filter 10 pCi/ Filter I

9-22

1 I

TABLE 9-4 Assumptions Needed to Use the EPA Acceptance Criteria Methodology for Additional Radionuclides and Media l

i ONE STANDARD DEVIATION ANALYSIS ACTIVITY LEVEL FOR SINGLE DETERMINATION Gama Emitters Water - Ce-141.Cr-51 10 to 100 pCi/ liter 10 pCi/ liter Co-58, Mn 54 >100 pCi/ liter 10% of known value Fe-59 Filter - Ce-141,Cr-51 10 to 100 pCi/ Filter 10 pCi/ Filter Co-58, Mn-54 >100 pCi/ Filter 10% of known value Fe-59, Co 60 Zn-65 Cs-134 Cs-137 5 to 60 pCi/ Filter 5 pCi/ Filter

>60 pCi/ Filter 10% of known value  ;

Milk - Ce-141.Cr-51 10 to 100 pCi/ liter 10 pCi/ liter Co-58, Mn-54 >100 pCi/ liter 10% of known value l Fe-59, Co-60 Zn-65 Cs 134 Milk - C.s-137 5 to 60 pCi/ liter 5 pCi/ liter l >60 pCi/ liter 10% of known value Soil - Ce-141.Cr-51 15 to 100 pCi/kg 15 pCi/kg Co-58 Mn-54 >100 pCi/kg 15% of known value Fe-59, Co-60 Zn-65, Cs 134 Cs-137 Iodine 131 Cartridge 555 pCi/ cartridge 6 pCi/ cartridge

>55 pCi/ cartridge 10% of known value r

9-23 l