ML061780554
| ML061780554 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 01/17/2006 |
| From: | Brian Mcdermott NRC Region 1 |
| To: | Rice T State of NY, Dept of Environmental Conservation |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2006-0140 | |
| Download: ML061780554 (11) | |
Text
0(Ia I~ IVIOUeIiI I ui - kaIjaH ienul Ice _ii UI InIuial I tll It OpkIIL r-UU-t-UUI/ I iaiiui issues - nuutuie upuate I iiurs ii itt i..u pml y
rayu From:
Brian McDermott To:
Adam Stiebeling; Alela Salame-Alfie; Barbara Youngberg; C.J. Miller; Daniel Greeley; Dominick Greene; Geri Shapiro; Jack Spath; James Baranski; Jeff Tkacs; Linda Puglisi; Paul Eddy; Peter Feroe; Robert Bondi; Sandy Galef; Steve Gross; Tim Rice; Tony Sutton Date:
Tue, Jan 17, 2006 9:16 AM
Subject:
Conference Call on Indian Point Spent Fuel Pool/Tritium Issues - Routine Update Thurs 1/19 3:30 pm On Thursday January 19, 2006, at 3:30 p.m. there will be a routine update on the Indian Point spent fuel pool and tritium issues.
Date: 1/19/06 Time: 3:30 p.m. - 4:30 p.m.
Toll Free Phone Number: 1-800-638-8081 Pass Code:
(Alternate Number: 301-231-5539)
If multiple individuals from your organization plan to participate in the conference call, please call from a common location when possible.
The briefing is being provided for the representatives of federal, State, and local government officials.
Please do not distribute the telephone conference information to individuals other than the intended participants.
Brian J. McDermott, Chief, Projects Branch 2 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Region I 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Work: 610-337-5233 CCell: :
Fax:
610-337-5349 bim @nrc.gov CC:
Don Leach; John Boska; John White; Kathy McMullin; Raeann Shane; Richard Barkley information In this record was deleted in accordance witb the Freedom of information Act, exemptions-FOlA-
.11 WELL LOCATION REPRESENTATION I,
1*--
I 0
i 70' FHF
' 0.
U-2U-BLDG.
1,;"
47...
L
- YARD
! *SUPERHEATERI
.ADMINISTRATION BLDG
_';O...
.° %,
MWW 41 MW 43 MW 45 MAM W-/cm 5wt
-I I"
r
) MW440 U-3 MW4 4 7[
TRANSFORMER I YARD I
I U.2 TURBINE BLDG.
,ISCHARGE CANAL U-i TURBINE BLDG I
L DISCHARGE U-3 TURBINE BLDG.
CANAL _
S A
C ERVICEI DMIN OMPLEX MW 38 I
LWCA ~
~
S -
~
I
, r-- I I
- ~
p.-..
T UWAC LI I ~
L.
I II*....
w MW 52 IS AT THE EDGE OF THE PA BOUNDRY I
'-iii I.
DISCHARGE CANAL (MONITORED)
MW-48 U-2 INTAKE STRUCTURE f
l I I
U-1 INTAKE STRUCTURE I
I I
U-3 INTAKE STRUCTURE
~F1 HUDSON RIVER Map for discussion purposes only 3/2/06
-..11WELL LOCATION REPRESENTATION U.
BLDG.
U-2
-TRANSFORMER 0
WO i YARD L __ASORER0fw l
- =1.
P 70'FHF 7W FHF u
I 0.
MW420" SUPERHEATERI ADMINISTRATION BLDG I
2, 0..
MW S
I MW4S
,*o~rM "4
M RAN45 O RMER CTW C AWA40 0I
(
- i MW 48
- 1,*-,*
(MOANSFORMER)IM4 I
I fSC~HARGE I
U-2 TURBINE BLDG.
CA-A TURBINE BLDG1
- A0 S MW 38
Monitoring Wells.*Test Results March.2,.200 March 2, 2006 ID WDate Monitoring Wells or MW-11l 2/7/06 MW-30 2/7/06-*
MW-31 2/7/06 MW-32 2/7/06 MW-33 2/7/06 MW-34 2/7/06 MW-35 2/7/06 MW-36 2/10/06 MW-37 2/7/06 MW-38 2/8106 1218/06 12/8/06 MW-48 2/8/06 2/8106
.Off Site Locations 214/06 2/4/06 2/4/06 Location
,Site Transformer Yard
ýSFB,"
- *djacent to SFB.
SFB Alley Way Sample Results Tritium (pCi/L) 238,000 511,000 33,100 17,700 214,000 174,000 84,500 47,500*
.30,000 rransformer Yard transformer Yard Transformer Yard
ý P2 Turbine building IP2 Turbine Building South perimeter near JP3 Entergy (Teledyne)
ND
(<346)
MDA New York Statel 701 Entergy (Fitzpatricki 985 lab)]
ISouth perimeter Entergy' ND New York State 250 Algonquin ND Gypsum Plant ND Trap Rock Quarry i
ND MW-111 Samples Analyzed for Sr-90 10/29/05 Entergy Sr-90 10/21105{ vew York State-Sr-90' ND 3
ND= No detectable activity
- = test result taken at 41' of a multi-level monitoring well. Test results from other depths were lower.
ATTACHMENT 1 Indian Point Analytical Results Comparison Sample ID Radionuclide NRC Result Indian Pt. Result Comparison State of New York (microCuries per (microCuries per (Licensee Result Compared to Result milliliter) milliliter)
NRC Result)
(microCuries per milliliter)
Unit 1 Sphere Foundation Co-58
(-5+_24)E-10
<8E-8 Not Detected/No Comparison Sample not Split with Drain Sump 10/19/2005 Co-60
(-8+/-23)E-10
<8E-8 Not Detected/No Comparison New York Cs-1 34
.(-1.9+/-2.3)E-9
<1 E-7 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-137 (9+/-22)E-10
<1 E-7 Not Detected/No Comparison H-3 (5.7+/-2.6)E-7 (8.53+/-?)E-7 Agreement Sr-90
(-0.2+/-1_.2)E-9 Not Analyzed Not Detected/No Comparison Unit 1 West Spent Fuel Co-58
(-5+/-18)E-7
<2E-6 Not Detected/No Comparison Sample not Split with Pool Co-60 (2.98+/-0.35)E-5 (3.76+/-0.32)E-5 Agreement New York 10/20/2005 Cs-134 (2+/-14)E-7
<2E-6 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-137 (6.74_-0.22)E-3 (8.13+/-0.04)E-3 Agreement H-3 (4.18+/-0.72)E-4 (4.16+/-?)E-41 No Comparison (3.27+/-?)E-42 No Comparison Sr-90 (1.300+/-0.035)E-4 Not Analyzed No Comparison Unit 2 Spent Fuel Pool Co-58 (3.46_+0.16)E-4 (3.33+/-0.0.06)E-4 Agreement Sample not Split with 10/21/2005 Co-60 (7.95+/-0.28)E-4 (7.99+/-0.08)E-4 Agreement New York Cs-1 34 (8.57+/--0.31)E-4 (1.031 --0.0.008)E-3 Agreement Cs-1 37 (1.3199+/-0.046)E-3 (1.586+/-0.012)E-3 Agreement H-3 (2.929+/-0.083)E-2 (2.52+/-?)E-23 No Comparison Sr-90 (5.87-_0.24)E-6 Not Analyzed No Comparison
ATTACHMENT 1 (Page 2 of 7)
Sample ID Radionuclide NRC Result Indian Pt. Result Comparison State of New York (microCuries per (microCuries per (Licensee Result Compared to Result milliliter) milliliter)
NRC Result)
(microCuries per milliliter)
Unit 2 Spent Fuel Pool Co-58 (2.4+/-3.4)E-9
<5E-8 Not Detected/No Comparison Sample not Split with Wall Leak Co-60 (4.56+/-0.49)E-8
<8E-8 No Comparison New York 10/24/2005 Cs-134 (2.64+/-0.12)E-7 (3.6_-0.8)E-7 Disagreement Cs-1 37 (4.88_+0.15)E-6 (4.73_-0.24)E-6 Agreement H-3 (2.208+/-0.047)E-2 (2.19+/-?)E-2 Agreement Sr-90 (3.70+/-0.12)E-7 Not Analyzed No Comparison Unit 1 North Curtain Drain Co-58
(-1.4+/-1.8)E-9 Sample not Split with Composite Co-60 (0.0+/-2.1)E-9 New York 10/21/2005 Cs-134
(-6+/-19)E-10 Cs-1 37 (4.48+/-0.42)E-8 H-3 (1.425+/-0.053)E-5 Sr-90 (9.97+/-0.42)E-8 Not Analyzed No Comparison Monitoring Well Co-58 (2.7+/-4.3)E-9
<5E-944 Not Detected/No Comparison Sample not Split with MW-111 Co-60 (3.5+/-3.1)E-9
<2E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison New York 9/29/2005 Cs-1 34
(-5+/-39)E-10
<4E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-1 37
(-9+/-29)E-10
<4E-94 Not DetectedfNo Comparison H-3 (2.168+/-0.028)E-4 (2.07+/-?)E-4 Agreement (2.1166+/-0.008)E-44 Agreement Sr-90 (1.4+/-1.2)E-9 Not Analyzed Not Detected/No Comparison
ATTACHMENT 1 (Page 3 of 7)
Sample ID Radionuclide NRC Result Indian Pt. Result Comparison State of New York (microCuries per (microCuries per (Licensee Result Compared to Result milliliter) milliliter)
NRC Result)
(microCuries per milliliter)m Monitoring Well Co-58
(-7+/-23)E-10
<6E-84 Not Detected/No Comparison Sample not Split with MW-1 11 Co-60 (1.8+/-2.2)E-9
<4E-84 Not Detected/No Comparison New York 10/14/2005 Cs-1 34 (1.9-.2.2)E-9
<4E-84 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-137
(-2.1+/-3.6)E-9
<5E-84 Not Detected/No Comparison H-3 (7.29+/-0.41)E-6 (6.82+/-?)E-6 Agreement Sr-90 (1.1+/-1.3)E-9 Not Analyzed Not Detected/No Comparison Monitoring Well Co-58
(-1.5+/-3.7)E-9
<3E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison MW-38 Co-60 (0.3+/-3.3)E-9
<3E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison 12/8/2005 Cs-1 34 (4.4+/-3.3)E-9
<3E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-1 37
(-0.7+/-3.0)E-9
<3E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison H-3 (7.4+/-1.3)E-7 (9.8-+2.9)E-7 4 Agreement (7.0+/-1.2)E-7 Sr-90 (0.4+/-1.2)E-9
<1.25E-85 Not Detected/No Comparison Monitoring Well Co-58
(-0.2+/-3.1)E-9
<3E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison MW-1 01 Co-60 (2.5+/-3.6)E-9
<4E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison 12/8/2005 Cs-134 (1.8+/-3.4)E-9
<3E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-1 37
(-1.4+/-5.3)E-9
<3E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison H-3 (0.7+/-1.2)E-7 (2.7+/-2.8)E-74 Not Detected/No Comparison
<5E-8 Sr-90 (0.2+/-1.1)E-9
<1.25E-81 Not Detected/No Comparison
ATTACHMENT 1 (Page 4 of 7) r, NRC Result Indian Pt. Result Comparison State of New York (microCuries per (microCuries per (Licensee Result Compared to Result milliliter) milliliter)
NRC Result)
(microCuries per milliliter)
Monitoring Well MW-105 12/8/2005 Co-58 Co-60 Cs-1 34 Cs-137 H-3 Sr-90
- (1.5+/-3.3)E-9 (1.5+/-3.3)E-9
, (0.4+/-3.5)E-9 (0.4-+2.9)E-9
(-0.1+/-1.2)E-7
(-0.2+/-1.2)E-9
<.4E-9 4
<4E-9"
<4E-9 4
<~4E_0 4 (2.2+/-2.7)E_7 4
<1.93E-85 Not Detected/No Comparison Not Detected/No Comparison Not Detected/No Comparison Not Detected/No Comparison Not Detected/No Comparison Not Detected/No Comparison (1.0_-0.9)E-7 Monitoring Well Co-58 (1.7+/-2.7)E-9
<3E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison MW-107 Co-60
(-0.2+/-2.6)E-9
<4E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison 12/8/2005 Cs-1 34 (2.5+_2.8)E-9
<5E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-137
(-1.1+/-2.4)E-9
<3E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison H-3 (1.3+/-1.2)E-7 (1.3+/-2.7)E-74 Not Detected/No Comparison
<5E-8 Sr-90 (0.8+/-1.2)E-9
<1.33E-8' Not Detected/No Comparison Lefarge Gypsum Co-58
(-2.8+/-3.2)E-9
<4E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison Plant Well #1 Co-60 (0.8+/-3.9)E-9
<4E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison 12/6/2005 Cs-134 (0.3+/-3.6)E-9
<4E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-1 37 (0.2+/-3.5)E-9
<4E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison H-3 (0.4+/-1.2)E-7 (0.8+/-2.7)E-74 Not Detected/No Comparison
<5E-8 Sr-90 (1.2+/-1-.1)E-9
<1.48E-8' Not Detected/No Comparison
ATTACHMENT 1 (Page 5 of 7)
Indian Pt. Result Comparison State of New York (microCuries per (Licensee Result Compared to Result milliliter)
NRC Result)
(microCuries per milliliter)
I 9
9 Lefarge Gypsum Plant Well #3 12/6/2005 Co-58 Co-60 Cs-1 34 Cs-1 37 H-3 Sr-90 (0.4-+2.5)E-9 (0.3+/-3.1)E-9 (3.8+/-2.8)E-9
(-0.8+/-4.4)E-9 (0.2+/-1.2)E-7 (0.1+/-1.0)E-9
<3E-94
<3E-9 4
<3E-9 4
<4E-9 4
(1.1+/-2.7)E-7 4
<1.36E-8 5
Not Detected/No Comparison Not Detected/No Comparison Not Detected/No Comparison Not Detected/No Comparison Not Detected/No Comparison Not Detected/No Comparison
<5E-8 Trap Rock Quarry Co-58 (0.4+/-1.7)E-9
<3E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison
<0.9E-9 11/30/2005 Co-60
(-0.1-+2.1)E-9
<2E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison
<0.5E-9 Cs-1 34
(-0.4+/-1,.8)E-9
<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison
<1.2E-9 Cs-137 (0.6+/-1.6)E-9
<2E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison
<1.1 E-9 H-3 (0.4+/-1.2)E-7
(-1.2+_2.7)E-7 4 Not Detected/No Comparison (9+/-6)E-8 Sr-90 (0.9+/-1.0)E-9
<2.07E-85 Not Detected/No Comparison
<4E-10
ATTACHMENT 1 (Page 6 of 7)
Indian Pt. Result Comparison State of New York (microCuries per (Licensee Result Compared to Result milliliter)
NRC Result)
(microCuries per Algonquin Outfall 11/30/2005 Co-58 Co-60 Cs-1 34 Cs-1 37 H-3 Sr-90 (1.1+/-2.3)E-9
(-0.5+/-2.2)E-9 (0.5+/-2.4)E-9
(-1.6_,2.2)E-9 (0.3+/-1.2)E-7 (0.3+/-1.O)E-9
<4E-94
<5E-94
<4E-94
<3E-9 4 (0.6+2.8)E-7 4
<2.07E-8-5 Not Detected/No Comparison Not Detected/No Comparison Not Detected/No Comparison Not Detected/No Comparison Not Detected/No Comparison Not Detected/No Comparison
<1.5E-9
<1.4E-9
<1.7E-9
<1.5E-9
<6E-8 (7+/-4) E-1 0 Fifth Street Well Co-58 (0.9+/-+2.2)E-9
<3E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison
<1.8E-9 11/30/2005 Co-60 (0.8+/-2.6)E-9
<3E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison
<1.9E-9 Cs-134
(-0.1+/-2.1)E-9
<3E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison
<1.9E-9 Cs-1 37
(-0.6+/-2.1)E-9
<3E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison
<1.9E-9 H-3
(-0.7+/-1.2)E-7
(-0.7+/-2.7)E-74 Not Detected/No Comparison
<6E-8 Sr-90 (0.4+/-1.0)E-9
<1.26E-85 Not Detected/No Comparison (8+/-7)E-10
ATTACHMENT 1 (Page 7 of 7)
Sample ID Radionuclide NRC Result Indian Pt. Result Comparison State of New York (microCuries per (microCuries per (Licensee Result Compared to Result milliliter) milliliter)
NRC Result)
(microCuries per milliliter)
Gypsum Plant Stream Co-58 (0.0-10.9)E-9
<3E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison
<2E-9 11/30/2005 Co-60 (0.1_+/-1.8)E-9
<4E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison
<1.7E-9 Cs-1 34 (0.1-+2.1)E-9
<3E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison
<1.9E-9 Cs-1 37
(-0.3_+/-1.7)E-9
<3E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison
<1.7E-9 H-3 (0.1+/-1.2)E-7 (0.6:.2..8)E-7 4 Not Detected/No Comparison
<6E-8 Sr-90 (0.5+/-1.0)E-9
<1.52E-85 Not Detected/No Comparison (8+/-4)E-10 1.Result from a sample taken on 09/08/2005. Therefore, not a split sample, but presented for information only.
2.Result from a sample taken on 09/29/2005. Therefore, not a split sample, but presented for information only.
3.Result from a sample taken on 10/10/2005. Therefore, not a split sample, but presented for information only.
4.Indian Point offsite environmental laboratory result.
5.Indian Point offsite commercial contract laboratory result.
Note: reported uncertainties for NRC and New York State represent the 95% confidence interval based on total propogated uncertainties. Indian Point uncertainties represent the 95% confidence interval, based on counting uncertainty.